Monthly Archives: March 2014

SRI Religion V religion

Posted on by
2

Yesterday, the afternoon news carried a story about a banner being unfurled on a Melbourne billboard. My interest was initially piqued by the large picture at the centre of this banner. Here, being spread out for everyone to see was a picture of Jesus patting a dinosaur. Only after turning up the volume and having time to read the banner did I realise that this was actually a protest against Christianity.

The fist wavers (Psalm 2) were at it again. This time they were out to have SRI (Special Religious Instruction) banned from Victorian schools. For most of us, we realise that these campaigns are not new. Equally, we are aware that with the decline of Christianity, these demands are going to become common place and vociferous.

The truly disturbing aspect of this story was in listening to the ignorance and drivel of those demanding that SRI cease. Those familiar with our writings will be aware that we often speak of worldviews. This story is one more example of why we need to understand what a worldview is and the importance they play. (See here, and here, as examples.)

One of those interviewed stated, in essence, ‘that religion had no place in our schools.’ Interesting! What would they call Secularism, Humanism, or Evolution? In regard to Evolution, its own proponents acknowledge it as a religion. So what this person was really demanding, in our world of Tolerance and Equality, was that the Christian religion be excluded from our schools. They do not want all religions banned; only that religion which shows that they are idol worshippers.

Another example concerned a lady who stated that “the children go from a science class (read – absolute rational fact) to the SRI class (read – absolute irrational myth) where they are told that dinosaurs do not exist.” I have added the words in parentheses in order to highlight the intention of her words. Again, it is important to see the contrast. This woman is happy to subject our children to the religion of Evolution and to its god, science; but she is quite unwilling for our children to be subject to the Christian religion and the One Living and True God!

Equally, note the disparagement present when it is claimed, without substantiation, that these children would be taught that dinosaurs do not exist, simply because they are being taught by Christians.

At this point it is fundamentally important that we come to terms with how a worldview shapes a person’s outlook.  Here, we see that those interviewed had imbibed the fallacious belief that a religion is equivalent to an organised system of belief rooted in a god. As such, these people typically take aim at Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. Is Animism not a religion because it posits no belief in a god and has no system? Are Eastern religions in fact non-religions because, though organised, they strictly do not believe in a god (Buddhism rejects the notion of God as external; Hinduism has multiple gods, but they are all attempts at representing Brahman, the ultimate god that is beyond knowing)?

The answer is, of course, No! These are all religions. They are so precisely because a religion does not need of necessity to posit a belief in god, be organised, or, for that matter, codified. The essence of religion, like the exploration in Physics, looks for the god-particle, but it does not need necessarily to look for a god, personal or otherwise. In our day, the god-particle or god-idea can be reduced to searching for the essence of being or be the “central directedness [of a person] … toward the real or presumed ultimate source of meaning or authority.”[1]

The Christian has a religion based in God’s revelation. It is a religion “directed” to God as the absolute source of being. From this central tenet, the Christian’s worldview branches out to embrace and interpret all other fields and spheres. What needs to be seen here is that the same mechanics are at work in other ideals. God and revelation may be substituted, but there are still similar touchstones to be found. For example, the Rationalist seeks being / source / authority in the mind. The mind becomes as God and the mind’s projections become as revelation. At this point, he engages his worldview. The Evolutionist seeks being / source / authority in time and chance. The Humanist seeks these things in Man (capitalised, for Man becomes god). The Secularist seeks these things anywhere but in a God / god that cannot be manipulated.

So it is that, like the more comprehensive worldview, all men have a religion.

An anecdote I like to use in these situations is as follows: Many years back, I went with a farmer friend, a fellow Christian, to pick up some goods from another farm. Whilst there, it was disclosed that we were Christians. The owner of the farm trotted out the hackneyed, “Do not care for religion as it has caused so many wars!” Of course, this is offered as the final statement on religion and the conversation is supposed to end with respect and contemplative silence. Well, you should have seen the look on this guys face when I sympathetically agreed with his statement. I then went on to list the atrocities committed in those religious wars instigated by Hitler, Idi Amin, Pol Pot, Stalin and so on. Suffice it to say, his mouth was agape.

You see, all too often, Christians are not taught adequately about worldviews / religion and how to expose a person’s basic premise for understanding. Consequently, when they run into statements like those mentioned in this article, they are stumped. They have no answer. They are immediately on the back foot and usually end up relying on a subjective and erroneous retort. Ask yourself, honestly, ‘How many times have you had “the Crusades!”, or “religion (Christianity in particular) causes war!”, or , “if God is love, how can he send people to Hell?” type statements or questions cast in your way in order to silence your proclamation of Christianity?’ How did you respond?

My plea here is that Christians might be taught and be willing to learn about worldviews. Every accusation that can be thrown at the Christian can be thrown back manifold to the opponents of Christ. Ban SRI! Why? Crusades. Hmmm. How many died during the Crusades? Too many, yes! So we throw out Christianity. What, then, of Evolution? What is its death toll? One hundred thousand babies a year in Australia. Fifty million babies in the US since Roe v Wade! According to the World Counter for abortions, we have murdered 9 million babies so far this year alone.[2] I am not really sure that the Crusades came close![3]

We might even go so far as to ask a more mainline question, namely, “How many lives are lost to Evolution through despair, injustice, lawlessness, non-accountability, Racism, and the other evils that flow from mantras such as “survival of the fittest”? Unlike Christianity, where death is an intruder and life is the norm, Evolution posits that life can only exist through death. Thus, Evolution exalts death and its devotees desire to mask this obvious truth because they do not want it known that their religion is worse than the one they are seeking to abolish.

In the end, it is important for Christians to realise that the debate is never about the questions: Will we have religion? Will we have law? Will we have government? Will we have morals? or Will / Should religion be taught in schools? The debate is summarised in the question, “Whose religion, law, government, and morals will we adopt and have taught in our schools?

Thus, those unfurling this banner were not objecting to religion, but firing salvos in a distinctly religious battle. They were protesting against our God only in order to exalt their god.


[1] B.J. van der Walt, Culture, Worldview and Religion ; (2000) 11.

[2] http://www.worldometers.info/abortions/

[3] Wikipedia suggests between 1 million and 3 million. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_and_anthropogenic_disasters_by_death_toll.

The Evangelism of Despair: Preachers v Laity (Pt 2)

Posted on by
6

The Revolution outlined in Part 1 is important for our understanding. We must see the cause and effect of ungodliness in the Family and in the Church. In both instances, the solution to an apparent failing of one party was to either rebel against or subjugate the other party. At no point were the Scriptures studied or Biblical counsel brought to the fore.

The consequence of this Revolution has been nothing short of needless destruction and the ultimate failure to reach the stated goal. Why? Precisely because it is Humanism!

To illustrate the issue, let us look at one further example from Feminism. As we know, “Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus.” So what! This is Biblical. God tells us that there are differences (Male / Female) in our similarity (Man). However, God also tells us that we are better and more potent as a team (Marriage). Humanism, in the form of Feminism, recognised the differences, but their response was to start a war between the sexes.  Rather than see the potential of the two combined in compatibility, they chose a fight to the death.

The same is true of evangelism. God’s plan was never one or other; us or them; laity against Officer. God’s plan emphasised both! Throughout Scripture God had both Witness (laity) and Proclamation (Elders / Prophets / Apostles). Sadly, this point is missed because the Dodgy Theology Brigade have rent the Scriptures and once again insisted that the New Testament is brand new, full of differences, rather than complete by means of consistency.

When we look to both Testaments, we see that God appointed his commissioned to speak and act. These were those who rightly and properly held office. They are God’s officers and to them belong both the right and obligation to speak authoritatively from God and in His Name. This is not something, contrary to Church Growth, that belongs to all Christians. It is a particular call to hold an authoritative office within God’s Church.

Thus, in the Old Testament, we have kings, priests, judges, and prophets. In the New Testament, we have prophets, apostles, and preachers.

Alongside of these, there have always been those who make up the Church. Their job is to be a consistent witness to the truth of what the commissioned proclaim. What point is there for the proclaimer to state anything, if he has no tangible proof to back his claims? Therefore, the consistent living and obedience of God’s people has always been of manifest importance as a witness in support of the authoritative proclamation.

When the preacher says, “If the Son shall set you free, you shall be free indeed;” we testify, stating that “we are freed prisoners.” When the preacher says, “God sent His Son into the world to save sinners”; we shout together, “and such were we, but we have been washed and sanctified”. When the world looks to us, they should see this explicit demonstration of freedom and of righteousness, which confirms and witnesses to the preached word.

Through our role as living epistles, we have the power to witness and show forth the radiance of the glory of Jesus Christ. This is potent. It is a genuine tool in the hands of God. Sadly, though, the moderns have despised this because they seek for themselves the more prestigious position of proclaimer.

In God’s order, He has appointed His men to preach. Equally, in God’s order, He has appointed us all to live! The proclamation is witnessed to and verified by obedient living. Both must exist in harmony. Unlike the previous articles, you are not being asked to make a choice of one or other. Today, you are being asked to accept both as God’s means of mission in the world. You are being asked to respect God’s design and to not covet positions to which you have not been called or adopt methods that God has not ordained. The analogy is again one taken from your homes. Fathers, do not act as children. Wives, do not usurp your husbands. Children, be children and do not seek to rule. Fulfil your God-appointed roles!

My plea is this: Preachers, understand your God-given role. Take His commission to heart. Climb back into your pulpits and begin to thunder with the voice of authority. Laity, go home! Husbands, love your wives; wives, respect your husband’s; children, obey your parents; families, honour God – and thereby shine and redound to the absolute glory of God. Preachers, call the lost; edify the saint. Laity, learn righteous and radiate Christ in all of life. Together, testify that Jesus Christ is the Son of God come in the flesh!

The true power of transformation can only be unleashed when God’ people work in unity by self-consciously fulfilling their respective calls. Anything else is, fluff, bubble, smoke and mirrors – it is usurpation; it is unholy!

“Thy word I have treasured in my heart, that I may not sin against Thee.” Psalm 119:11

“For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.” 1 John 5:3

The Evangelism of Despair: Preachers v Laity

Posted on by
3

Who is to evangelise? Now there is a sticky question. One which is sure to create great debate, but only if we ignore Scripture!

The issue of evangelism has, unfortunately, been side-tracked by modern worldly perspectives. The common idea is that ministers had evangelism all to themselves while the laity (for want of a better term) sat around and listened to the sermonising of the pulpiteers waiting for the Rapture. These ministers were seen as “glory hounds” with their fancy robes and ecclesiastical paraphernalia. As the world agitated more and more against authority, it was only a matter of time before the rumblings reached the pew – adequately aided by the State education of the pew sitters.

Then came the revolution! Books like “Liberating the Laity” hit the stands and were devoured. The phraseology changed. “Laity” became a term that was to be spurned. All were now said to be ‘ministers’. This change was even justified on the Biblical grounds that the Bible speaks about the “priesthood of all believers”. The poor, oppressed laity were finally unchained, freed, and let loose on the world. They were encouraged to find and explore new avenues of mission. They were encouraged to make up the rules as they went along. Finally, people with real vigour and passion were enabled and empowered to venture forth and save the lost, leaving the ecclesiastical bombasts to their pontificating.

Where has the Revolution taken us? What did this Revolution achieve?

To be perfectly blunt, it achieved nothing more than to destroy the Church, its worship, and its witness. The reason for this boils down to one important fact: this movement was not from God! It was one more example of Humanism being rushed by the baptismal and then press-ganged into the service of the Church.

Having had the rampant Humanistic doctrine of Individualism taught to them for decades, the laity were simply glad to be free so as to scratch their itching feet. They cared not whether this movement was Biblical. I doubt that any really stopped to ask the question. The laity were free at last from the chains of a draconian ecclesiastical system. Now they were free to express the desires of the individualist that had been lurking in the shadows of their heart.

This happening parallels the destruction of the family through Feminism. Men had, to some extent, dropped the ball as head. As per Scripture’s prophecy (Genesis 3:16), women simply sought the opportunity and the excuse to step up and take on the mantle. Again, few stopped long enough, if at all, to question the Biblical warrant. All they knew was that they finally had an opportunity to give expression to their desire.

The commonality in this process is important. First, the authority figure gave up on their task. Husbands and Elders ceased to understand their roles as Covenant heads and directors of Godliness. They failed to teach those under their care the importance of the Biblical order and role. Consequently, they failed to teach the basis for their authority and the necessary role and attitude of submission. Their servant-leadership disintegrated and the associated requirements of Biblical submission followed suit. Men became administrators; they bankrolled projects and organised community, but they were no longer holders of an office of authority.

The result of this was that Family and Church began to wander. They became aimless. As the Word of God ceased to speak with volume and clarity and its serene voice dwindled, so the raucous voice of Humanism grew louder and louder until it could be ignored no longer. As the Biblical model crumbled, a shift in leadership was imminent. Thus it was that Humanism stepped into the void and grasped the helm.

The result was Revolution; Familial and Ecclesiastical Revolution!

Understand this well. Do not dismiss its importance!

What is seen here is a Biblical picture too oft repeated. When trouble and crises came, the institutions of God did not turn back to their Biblical roots and to the wisdom of their God. No, they turned for counsel to the spurious one called, the World!

What does this have to do with Evangelism? Enter Part 2.

The Evangelism of Despair: Proclamation v Invitation

Posted on by
8

In our last instalment, we looked at the post-fall estate of man and concluded that the Biblical picture of man is that he is “dead in trespass and sin”. As such, the idea of speaking about “seekers”, as one example, is incongruous with Biblical revelation. In this article, we will look at another incongruity.

Throughout the 50’s and 60’s, people became used to hearing about the invitation to come to Christ. This was popularised by men such as Billy Graham. This language is seen in the following sentence: “According to his staff, more than 3.2 million people have responded to the invitation at Billy Graham Crusades to accept Jesus Christ as their personal savior.” Consequently, this term was popularised and made its way into the psyche and vocabulary of Christendom.

Once more, the truly pertinent question is, “Does this term reflect the Scriptural position?”

Once more, we must answer, “No, it does not!”

If man is dead, then it stands to reason that he can neither seek nor respond to an invitation. Please, put this to the test. Go to your local cemetery and place an invitation on each tomb inviting the occupant to attend your next soirée. Now the safest way to do this is to make sure that you add an RSVP to the invitation. That way, if I am wrong, said soirée will not be ruined! However, you will not do this because, in principle, you know that I am right. The dead do not seek. The dead do not respond to invitations.

This brings us to the salient point. Salvation is and always has been a sovereign, authoritative, act on the part of God. Consequently, Scripture is oblivious to the terminology of invitation, but replete with the language of proclamation.

To start, consider the OT usage of “Thus says the Lord!” God did not just, “throw it out there”. He did not give the “Ten Discussion Starters!” or the “Ten Suggestions”, as some have termed it. Yahweh did not reveal His “opinion” in the form of “guidelines”. No! Yahweh revealed His Word and His Word was Law! This is the “Judges decision. It is final. No correspondence shall be entered in to.”

Jonah did not invite Nineveh to repent. He proclaimed Yahweh’s proclamation of Judgement (Jonah 3:2). Ezekiel did not invite the dry bones to knit themselves together. He prophesied the command of Yahweh, “Hear!” (Ezekiel 37:4) Moses did not invite Pharaoh to release Israel.  Moses commanded Pharaoh to release Israel. Moses made proclamation to Pharaoh in the Name of Yahweh.

When we enter the NT, the language and method does not change. The Biblical approach can be viewed in the events surrounding Lazarus. He was dead. Helpless. Lifeless. Jesus did not simply invite Lazarus, “to pop on out” of his tomb at his first convenience. Rather, in a succinct summons, Lazarus was ordered from the tomb (John 11:43).

Thus, it is that in the NT we see preachers (having semblance to the prophets) appointed to proclaim the authoritative message of the fullness of the Kingdom (Matthew 10:7; 11:1). People were not being invited with a ‘take it or leave it message’; rather they were being summoned or commanded with regard to an authoritative announcement. The heralds went forth in the name of the King!

For us the lesson should be clear. Is it not time that we stopped playing futile games with people’s souls? The only possibility of salvation, according to normal means, comes through the authoritative proclamation or declaration of God’s commissioned mouthpieces. Rather than invite, our Preachers and Evangelists should proclaim and summon.

It is time the mouthpieces remembered their ambassadorial roles, girded up their loins, and spoke with the authority of the Great King. Theirs is the glorious privilege of calling dead men to life. If they lose confidence and belief in their calling and are persuaded to remain quiet, then the tombs shall remain full. Others may seek to replace them and engage in the practice of placing invites on tombs, but it will avail naught.

Dead men must be summoned by the voice of Christ, not invited by the words of men!

Part 5