God’s World
In thinking about and discussing the idea of changing the world, it is important, as with any discussion and debate, that we do not set as opposites things that are not opposite, or mutually exclusive. It is not a case of either preaching for personal salvation or contributing to changes in society. We can and should do both. As I have often said, I agree with Howard Snyder who saw personal salvation as central in God’s redeeming purpose and world transformation at the circumference. Why does it have to be either, or?
There are other reasons for Christians being involved in world change. It seems to me as I consider some of the terrible suffering that is going on in the world - for example, in Baghdad or in Darfur right now - then it is simply an act of Christian love and compassion to at least want to contribute towards minimising such suffering.
Yesterday I suggested that a reason for getting involved is that this world is God’s world. Here’s a great quote from Abraham Kuyper about that:
‘There is not one inch in the entire area of human life about which Christ, who is Sovereign of all, does not cry out "Mine!"’
May 10th, 2006 @ 5:58 pm
Hi Trevor
Blessings in His Name
Yes, I agree wholeheartly with what you’re saying, I feel as God gave us, two hands, when we bring salvation with one hand, and feed the hungry with the other
May 10th, 2006 @ 8:21 pm
Thanks for posting Kuyper.
In line with with his century-old challenge, we
envision the dominion mandate of Genesis 1:26-28, the Great Commission (Matt. 28:18-20), and the success of both by the authority of Christ, and the power of His Holy Spirit, residing in His temple, the church.
Amen, until “… the times of restoration of all things, …” (Acts 3:18-21), thus fully illuminating
Christ’s Kingdom!
On the other hand, the dispensationalists among us –the pessimillennialists — do not believe this eshatalogical truth, this mandate for victory. Why do their false teachings predominate in Christian culture, thus rendering Christ’s body relatively impotent in the world around us?
They reject His law, His power, His faith, and His promise of victory, in history, in all spheres of His creation; focusing instead on their escape, their imminent “rapture.”
Feed the poor and pass out tracts on the way out … is the essence of warped worldview.
Shall we pray for Holy-Ghost oncology to excise this malignant cancer?
Hallelujah, for the annointed scalpel!
May 11th, 2006 @ 10:31 am
Frank - I think those prayers will be answered! The greatest challenge to dispensational thinking is that fact that many who hold to that position are Spirit-filled believers.
Many Christians who are “theoretically” dispensationalist, and therefore isolationist, are in practice no such thing as the Spirit within them compells them to act out the love of God in far wider ways than a narrow interpretation of preaching the gospel.
The success of the gospel and the growth of the Church as she is empowered by the Holy Spirit will, I believe, be ultimately what exposes the error of a dispensational world-view. God is sovereign and his Spirit is at work all over the world - the truth will out!
May 11th, 2006 @ 5:25 pm
Frank Kellam:
In line with with his century-old challenge, we
envision the dominion mandate of Genesis 1:26-28, the Great Commission (Matt. 28:18-20), and the success of both by the authority of Christ, and the power of His Holy Spirit, residing in His temple, the church.
Amen, until “… the times of restoration of all things, …” (Acts 3:18-21), thus fully illuminating
Christ’s Kingdom!
On the other hand, the dispensationalists among us –the pessimillennialists — do not believe this eshatalogical truth, this mandate for victory. Why do their false teachings predominate in Christian culture, thus rendering Christ’s body relatively impotent in the world around us?
Mark Robins:
Well here we go one pessi-mellennialist to one posi-restorationist! When Jesus gave this commission in Matt 28 there weren’t many, if any that took this to mean, “convert the nations”! But to make converts in the nations, (a good lexicon will show you that there is no “of” in “of all the nations”). Do you believe that everyone is going to be saved as in the heresy of universalism? Or are some folk going to reject Christ (there I go being pessimistic again just like Jesus!) Seeing you promote Eugene Patterson’s version on this blog maybe you ought to see what he says about Matt 28: 18-20. Oh by the way have you taken dominion of the fish and the birds yet?! Is Jesus really staying in heaven until WE get the victory? Well if He is we‘re doing a pretty bad job of it! There’s more Mosques being opened now than Christian places of worship, maybe there’s not enough naming and claiming going on at your end!
Frank Kellam:
They reject His law, His power, His faith, and His promise of victory, in history, in all spheres of His creation; focusing instead on their escape, their imminent “rapture.”
Mark Robins:
Obey His law, maybe not to the letter, but certainly the spirit, which is to love ones neighbour as one’s self. Reject His power, well maybe I don’t go around claiming this that and the other, and certainly I haven’t managed to throw any thunderbolts out of my hands, but the power to live a holy life, yea I’m getting there, not perfect but running the race. I do agree with you though that some folk have a “bunker” type mentality; and that is wrong, but you can’t tar everyone with the same brush. Most believe that we should share the Gospel as Jesus did, telling people to count the cost before they place their faith In Christ, unlike what I see going on in most fellowships, making a great show-time out of their worship with great music bands and the like (and I’m not against music). Only to find a new fellowship has opened up with a better show and music down the road, and half the congregation has moved there, (don’t tell me it doesn’t happen, I’ve seen it first hand!) The show has taken precedence over the word, and that is wrong.
Alpha courses and seeker friendly services to water down and compromise the truth of the Gospel, which has ultimately filled the church buildings with tares! Jesus had thousands crowding around him when he was feeding five thousand, raising the dead etc. But then followed with a message of true commitment which scared everyone away, not as the as some do; going out into the streets and sing a few songs, tell everyone come to Jesus and you’ll be the head and not the tail, get monetary wealth with your salvation, the one hundred fold return and all the rest of the garbage! Jesus would be the last person these type of churches would want in their evangelistic outreaches; and Alpha courses and the like. For the record I know not everyone in these type churches believes to that extreme, but some do (I know because I was in one for 15 years till I found true spirituality and reality).
Frank Kellam:
Feed the poor and pass out tracts on the way out … is the essence of warped worldview.
Mark Robins:
Passing out tracts and feeding the poor I never new I was so warped! Well I guess we are all on our way out (the death rate I believe is 100%), And of course our Lord was totally against care of the poor and sharing His Word! I’ll have to change my ways, get a guitar and sing love songs to the lost, or maybe invite them to a nice little informal non religious meal, and be careful not mention that negative word “hell”! Tell them everything is going to get better and better as time goes by, with the Christians taken the Kingdom for Jesus, surely they can see it already!!! We mustn’t scare them away with the end is nigh like Noah, which by the way Jesus said it was going to be like before His return unless you’re a preterist.
Frank Kellam:
Shall we pray for Holy-Ghost oncology to excise this malignant cancer?
Hallelujah, for the annointed scalpel!
Mark Robins:
Yes brother, bless you as well, you need to find out the names associated with pre-mill dispensationalism, I’m sure Jonathan Edwards for one would welcome being called a malignant cancer! There is no doubt that eschatology is a huge subject, and I for one always believed in the maxim of Augustine: “In essentials unity, non-essentials liberty, and all else charity (love)”. But I guess there’s little of that coming from a King’s kid superior believer like you.
It’s a shame the tone of this thread is so belligerent, but I guess somebody’s spoiling for a fight.
Many Blessings (sincerely).
Mark Robins.
May 11th, 2006 @ 7:22 pm
Thank you once again for allowing my comment.
RE: Mr Frank Kellam’s comment. Go ye therefore into all the world and trick them into the Kingdom of Heaven with hospitality, affection and entertainment. Is that the Great Commission? Did the Lord Jesus tempt His followers two thousand years ago with promises of bread and fish to drop by and hear His Sermon on the Mount? Did he gather singers to wail from the hillside in order to lure them in for a little Good News? NO, the Bible says “It pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to saved them that believe” 1 cor 1:21
May 11th, 2006 @ 11:43 pm
I have to say I can’t stand ______-bashing! It seems to me that it is much more productive to affirm the truths of God than to attack a “group”. I would be surprised if Frank was attacking “dispensationalists” themselves, as opposed to theology he thinks is false, but Frank, I think the language you used was probably counter-productive, especially judging by the reactions of Mark and Elwyn. I think it is better to build a consensus through focused disagreements, as opposed to more generalised ones. Of course above everything else it is important that we remember to show the grace and love of God through our posts, which is easy to say!
Having got that expressed, I would like to comment on something Elwyn said;
Looking at your comment it seems there is some exaggeration: Should we really avoid being nice to people in case they think we are trying to trick them? I can’t believe that you would really suggest we avoid hospitality and affection, would you agree that instead they should be paired with devotion to God and his Word? Of course our Lord did indeed feed those who came to see him, on at least two occasions, but the key thing is that it was not advertising, it was generosity.(Unless of course you believe that the only reason he did his miracles was as a sign, in which case it was pretty close to advertising!)
This I think is the point at which charity, preaching, seeking social justice and a whole host of other things meet is this; we have something to give!
We freely give because we freely received, and so what you believe God has given you will decide how you give.
On a different note, we are told not to throw our pearls before swine, but we are also taught to preach the gospel to every creature! So then, do we save the “best bits” of the gospel for ourselves and avoid preaching them? I’d say not, and I’m sure you would agree, I’d say we show people the value of this gospel so they won’t be as ignorant, and we can do this by remaining aware of who we are preaching to, and by giving them living examples of what is preached. Does that mean we hire in singers and jugglers? Not at all, but is someone wants to “wail” about the glory of God, I’d say let them,
And finally Elwyn, I appreciate your commenting. As you can see, I find it very thought provoking!
May 12th, 2006 @ 2:18 pm
Well said, Joshua.
I believe one thing that really stifles true debate is to caricature those with whom you disagree and simply dismiss them on the basis of your own caricature. Let us be clear about where we disagree with each other, recognise that none of us have all the answers and have a genuine desire to learn more without being apologetic about our convictions. And gentlemen, let’s have more grace please!
May 12th, 2006 @ 6:54 pm
First I have to say that I’m sorry that I reacted in the way that I did, I can see genuine love and grace conveyed by Joshua, God always forgives the repentant and so I extend that grace myself. I hope I read Frank incorrectly and this was not an attack, I think we have to realise there is only one church and we are all in it, I know we can be passionate about the beliefs we hold and can get hot under the collar. One of the biggest problems I see with any debate is knowing what one believes, I personally don’t hold all the tenets of dispensationalism so I wouldn’t call myself a dispensationalist, I wouldn’t call myself a Calvinist, Armenian, or a Restorationist, but I do see that all of these denominations, movements, or whatever you call them as holding truths (I don’t know if I’m offending anyone by calling them Restorationists please let me know if I am). If you want to call me a mellennialist then fine because I believe in a millennium, if you want to call me dispensationalist because I believe that scriptures teach some dispensations then fine, if you want to call me a Restorationist because I believe that God is going to restore all things then fine, at least you know where I stand, although I wouldn’t call myself an extremist in any of these areas. There is always the fringe who go to the extreme, as I am sure you are aware.
For me finding the balance is the important point, friendly debate I have found very useful, no one should be trying to win points, only when we find that we are wrong we should be willing to submit to the Word, who is Jesus after all. I placed my faith in Christ and the first fellowship I ever new was a Restorationist fellowship where I stayed for 15 years. I left amicably with my Elders blessings, and we are still friends. OK, we don’t see eye to eye on certain points but they are not what I would call essential points. We can still call each other brothers in the Lord.
I remember reading a book by William Barclay, I know he holds some strange teachings, but he made this comment: “you can never be sure of a doctrine you hold until you’ve defended it from attack”. Now I don’t want to attack anybody, but the principle of friendly debate is I have found very productive. The Bible I believe encourages it 1 Peter 3:15. I think the underlying principle still stands in the area of debate between believers. We dare not become closed in like the JW’s who treat all literature outside of their organisation as pornography, there is after all only one truth, I may be wrong, or you maybe wrong, or maybe we’re both wrong! Surely the truth is worth looking for.
Blessings
Mark Robins.
May 14th, 2006 @ 7:53 pm
I forgive you, Mark. Also, as a matter of courtesy, I’ll answer your questions:
1.) No, I am not a unviversalist.
2.) No, I am not a disciple of Eugene Patterson (sic),
if you meant “Peterson.” I know no Patterson, first name, Eugene.
Regarding two of your references, these responses are offered to correct an assertion and an idea:
1.) Jonathan Edwards was not a premillennial dispensationalist. He lived acentury before the
system was conceived.
2.) It is my conviction that Augustine would not have considered these eschtalogical, ethical and sovereignty issues “non-essential” — surely not for
leaders and men of the covenant. He debated and wrote
of them continually.
No “belligerence” intended, brother. Grace to you!
May 14th, 2006 @ 10:39 pm
Dear Frank,
Check out my statement I never said you were a follower of “Eugene H. Peterson” I just said that this blog promoted him. I didn’t intend that as a demeaning remark against Eugene. His work can be useful for some, although I am not a proponent of his.
As for Jonathan Edwards your are right about him not being a Pre-mill dispensationalist in fact he’s a Calvinist. But your are wrong about him living a century before the system was conceived. It was actually John Edwards (1637–1716) who was a leading advocate in dispensational thinking some 30 years before Jonathan Edwards. According to the Moody handbook of theology, Of course I would say that it is in fact taught in scripture and therefore a lot older.
As for Eschatology being a non-essential doctrine, I am not saying that it’s not important, but it’s not essential to ones salvation, and as such we should be able to call one another brothers in Christ.
Sincerely
Mark Robins.
May 15th, 2006 @ 5:13 am
Dear Mark,
How did considering one another “brothers in Christ”
creep into this discussion? None of my comments has introduced either “brotherhood” or soteriology in the context of eschatology, generally, or premillennial
dispensationalism, in particular. Neither have I attacked brothers personally, only their epistemology.
By way, the latter premil variety — not just
“dispensationlism” — is the doctrine in question, in case that wasn’t clear earlier. All historical references point to John Nelson Darby as its originator and developer, starting in 1827, followed by many others, e.g., C.I. Scofield, Charles Ryrie, Dallas Seminary, Thomas Ice, Tim LeHaye, Hal Lindsey, etc., etc., through other present-day leaders.
Moreover, your second “Mr. Edwards” (1637-1716)preceded the origins of all of what I wrote about in the first instance, though he may well be catalogued as a “dispensationlist,” but not a pre-trib rapture
advocate, which emerged with Darby.
I would not rely on the Moody reference because D.L. Moody, its early sponsor, was himself a premil-dispensationalist. No surprise that his disciples continue to reach back in history in their usually-futile efforts to find obscure support for a system that is beginning to unravel, thank God! It has been a cancer in the body of Christ for too long, as I posted earlier.
To amplify more specifically:
In addition to its “pessimillennialism,” some of its other malignant features include a.) Christian Zionism re the nation-sate of Isreal, b.) the church age as a finite historical parenthesis, during which souls are saved, but the general culture gradually and finally collapses, pre-”rapture,” c.) rampant Arminianism, d.) God’s moral law rejected in favor of legal positivism, e.) the Temple to be rebuilt, and Christ will reign in Jerusalem for a 1,000 years, f.) clear discontinuity between the Old and New Covenants, and g.) nearly all apocalyptic prophecy, e.g., Daniel, Matthew 24, Revelation believed to be futurist, yet to be fulfilled.
All of the preceding, I submit, are in clear conflict with orthodoxy, i.e., with covenantal, creedal, and confessional Christianity.
As the apostle Paul instructed: “Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables. But you be watchful in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry.” (2 Tim. 2: 2-5). Amen.
Cheers to all, for a prosperous and joyful week, in Christ victorious,
Frank
May 16th, 2006 @ 8:10 pm
I respect Trevor’s ruling, so this is for Frank.
I quite like you Frank, you are certaintly not luke warm,you fight hard I’ll give you that, I’ve learnt alot from your comments.
My joy in the Lord is that He has forgiven me a vile, horrible sinner. He has accepted me as I am, and His promise is I’m going to heaven one day where He will wipe away my tears. Everything else is up to Him, “what ever Lord.”
I talk to people every day about His wonderful Gospel, I tell them the Good news that they can be saved from going to Hell a place of unspeakable horror. I explain the wonderful gift of His Salvation with the hope that they will turn to Him and Him alone and repent of their sins and seek His forgiveness on their kness.
I hope you won’t be the one who picks my clothes up in Trafalgar Square ( and for the record I’ll be down the Gurnos shops )because that means you will be left behind!
Thank you for reminding me that I am on the winning side. The absolute sovereignty of God and His ultimate purpose to destroy all forms of Evil will come to pass.
I will make one observation if I may, It’s just my opinion. Your Restoration teaching seems to require a higher education and is quite intellectual. I thank God that a common sinner such as me is able to understand the Gospel. “The simplicity that is in Christ”
Apparently I have been marked as a Dispensationalist and I don’t fully understand or know what they believe.
So with a twinkle in my eye or should I say ” In the twinkling of an eye” may God bless you my friend and brother in the Lord. I’ll finish this interesting exchange with the God.
Behold I come quickly! Be ye also ready,for in such an hour as ye think not, the Son of man cometh, For the Lord himself shall descend from Heaven, and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then, we which are alive and remain, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air; And so shall we ever be with the Lord!
So to you and Joshua and to the Christians that read Trevor’s blogs everywhere, who fear God, love the Truth, and love each other and God in the truth
I wish you all my very best.
Elwyn Jones.
May 17th, 2006 @ 4:57 am
Dear Elwyn,
Some three decades ago in the social chaos of the ’70s, I was far more “intellectual” than I am today, at 75. In those days I was convinced that “the end was near.” All “the signs” were there; and all of my favotite pop-dispy authors seemed to have the verses to confirm our escape reservations and papers
for the immminent rapture.
After sitting under the preaching of Bryn Jones and company a few years later, however, my worldview began
to change, by Word and Spirit, not by natural genes,
brainpower or formal education. I was drawn ever closer to King Jesus and His comprehensive ministry of
restoration — of all creation, that is — of His Kingdom on earth as it is in heaven — beginning in me, in this life, not the next.
I could write much more of the faith, grace, joy and blessings; but suffice it to say that the past quarter century has been a great trip, and I am grateful to God and His church, beyond human words!
I even praise Him for the swamps, pubs and pig stys in which I existed before He beckoned me home!
Blessings to you, eternally, Elwyn, in His abundance; and thank you for your patience with me in this discussion.
Frank
May 28th, 2006 @ 1:01 pm
Hi Elwyn, Hi Frank, Hi Mark, im pleased that i know you all. Frank taught at CDT when i was there, Mark and I used to go to the same church (he also introduced me to Jurassic Park!) and Elwyn is the Father of one of my best Friends, Neil. You’re all seemingly seasoned in your word and idea’s but guys, there’s a brutal debate going on through the stream of blogs going around. Do any of you people know the term ‘give up the right to be right’ or the more simple ‘let it go’? I come from a joyful place today, and allthough i am younger than you guys i am like Timothy, undispised for i am young. I believe in a good escatology because it does do something to the way you live your daily lives, at least it should. Without vision the people cast off restraint, and a vision of the ‘end’ (or is it the beginning) keeps us all focused and assured of whatever our idea of these times will be. My opinion will only be given when asked on these escatoligical debates. Peace out.