Tag Archives: Jesus

Atheists on Christianity

You know, I was just watching some videos of atheists firing all their best shots at Christians and the belief that there is a God. One such video that you could watch on YouTube is of a debate put on by ABC. The Christians were Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron, but I can’t (or don’t care to) remember the names of the others. If there was anything more evident than anything else, it was the snarky, condescending, teenager-ish, even (may I dare say) “b***hy” attitudes of the atheists.  Typical of people that hate being told what to do (just like juveniles that argues about everything, even when they know they’re wrong).  It really just made me sad.

Then I looked down at my shirt…

At this moment I am wearing a T-shirt that shows all of the more common, recognizable religious symbols of the world. In the middle is a cross, the symbol of Christianity. What a stark contrast to all the others is the cross. A symbol of death for crimes not committed. A symbol that used to stand for shame, but now for the One who bore our shame. He didn’t have to, you know. What other symbol represents that?  What other symbol offers forgiveness from the very One that suffered unjustly?  What other symbol cries out, “Agape!

Atheism and all of its relatives are on the march, emboldened and encouraged by a world that wants to have it their own way. They are vicious and brash.  They have a chip on their shoulder because of all that “sinner” stuff, you see.  “Even if there is a God, who are you Christians to say you have the only way,” they ask.  But you know what, this isn’t Burger King, “this is my Father’s world.” His rules apply. He will have the final say. And, just like my shirt says, “every knee shall bow, and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of the Father.”

Just say’n.  What say ye?

1 Comment

Filed under General Observations, Uncategorized, World View

The Other Side of a Coined Phrase

You can talk all you want about what we’re NOT supposed to do, but we DO it all the time.  Who hasn’t seen the video of the panel of judges that were totally awestruck, not to mentioned very embarrassed, when Susan Boyle began to sing?  Judging by her looks, this was not supposed to be a superstar singer.  The whole crowd was guilty of  thinking the same thing…”What is this ugly woman doing on stage?”  Subconsciously they were thinking, “Only beautiful people can sing beautifully.”  Oh, how wrong they were!

I have heard it said all my life, “Don’t judge a book by its cover.”  Since I have done some research, that would mean I would have to be younger than 70, because that phrase wasn’t even coined until the mid 1940’s.  Anyway, I have been taught, as most people have, that we are not supposed to make assumptions about people simply on the basis of appearances.  As a matter of fact, long before “don’t judge a book by its cover” was coined, Benjamin Franklin said, “Don’t judge men’s wealth or godliness by their Sunday appearance.”  We all know that we shouldn’t judge a man’s character by his appearance (or even by the color of his skin, as Martin L. King, Jr. would have said).  But with all that said,

I can’t help but think that there is another side to this coin (coined phrase, that is).

While it may be true that we shouldn’t come to a conclusion about someone based solely on appearance,  how many books would you pick up and open if on the outside there was nothing describing the inside?  How much money is spent these days on cover design, I wonder.  Go to any bookseller and browse any isle and tell me what you find.  Are any of the books simply bound with only the title and the author printed on front?  Probably not.  Every kind of trick imaginable is employed to catch your eye and cause you to open the cover to see what is inside.  Now, not every cover will appeal to every reader, but the author will know ahead of time what type of audience he is trying to reach, therefore he will have a cover designed to appeal to the reader that will most likely buy the book.  How foolish would the writer be if he spent thousands of dollars for a design that appealed to the wrong crowd?  Even more, what would be the purpose of writing a book that had a cover which said nothing hinting of the content?

The other side to this “book-judging” coin is that even though we should not pre-judge a book by what is on the cover, the cover should give us some clues to what is on the inside.

For example, take a look at the title of the book to the right.  If you were to pick this book up at a book store, you would assume that on the inside there should be at least a hundred recipes, correct?  Really, the title of the book should give you confidence that inside resides the answer to all those questions you’ve had recently about how long you should roast a kangaroo tenderloin.  Shouldn’t it?  It says “How to Cook Everything.”   Well, by dang, I would assume, based on the cover, there should be, by my judgement, a kangaroo recipe in there somewhere.  I don’t know if there is or not, but do you see my point?  If you say you’re something, or if you want to give a certain impression, then be what you say you are, or kangaroo eaters are going to be disappointed.

Now, Jesus did say in Matthew 7:1,  “Judge not, that ye be not judged.”  He also said,  “Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment” (John 7:24).  The problem is that when we say that we should not judge a book by its cover, we imply that we can NEVER make ANY judgment based on what we see.  Seriously, how practical is that?  Jesus never said that we could never make righteous judgments.  As a matter of fact, consider these words of Jesus as found in Matthew 7, verses 15-20:

“Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.”

We are not supposed to come to any rash, prejudiced conclusions about people.  That is a fact.  We have no way of knowing whether a nice, fluffy sheep is a wolf, or not.  By outward appearances alone, all we can determine is that if it looks like a sheep and sounds like a sheep, it must be a sheep….until it starts to act like a sheep-eating wolf.  Then, when a sheep starts baring fangs at us, it is safe to judge, and there is no sin to be added to our account.

Righteous judgment, as Jesus mentioned in John 7:24, CAN be made if it is in reference to the fruit being inspected.  The fruit of a wolf is different than a sheep.  But here’s the point:

If a sheep claims to be a sheep, it should act like a sheep, not a wolf!

What is on the cover of a book SHOULD tell what is on the inside.  What we look like on the cover SHOULD make others want to read what is inside.  What we look like on the outside SHOULD mirror the message of the Author’s Word.  As believers in Christ, we claim to be something special.  We have the imprint of our Saviour written on our binding.  Jesus has a reputation as an Author, and what is inside our covers should not bring shame to His writing ability.  It may be wrong to judge a book by its cover, but it is equally wrong to claim to be a book that you’re not.

2 Comments

Filed under Christian Living, General Observations, legalism, World View

The Doctrine of Separation Examined

There are so many destructive teachings that are simply corruptions of actual truth.  One of those is the doctrine of separation.  Practiced within the more independent and fundamental sects of Christianity, this doctrine is mainly derived from 2 Corinthians 6:17, ” Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you…” The idea is that if one group does not agree with another in all areas, then association is considered sinful, or at least liberal.

I personally believe that this has been taken way too far within the body of Christ.

A few Sundays ago I was at a church where a missionary was speaking.  I really enjoyed hearing what he had to say.  What disappointed me was what was on his prayer card.  Listed on the back, in his statement of beliefs, was the “doctrine of separation.”  However, during the message that he preached, he spoke of how it was good to be able to talk to a Charistmatic believer in Mongolia.  He spoke of how it was good, in a land that so few missionaries frequented, to find anyone to talk to that was a Christian.  But when it came to working together, that was a different story.

Years ago, in 1992, I was given the opportunity to travel to Romania for a month.  Long story short, in order to do some first-time evangelical work in a small village, two other young guys and myself were priviledged to hire a young interpreter to help us.  Actually, he was helping a Pentecostal church group rebuilding grain silos during the day.  Because he was free in the evening, he helped us.  He even helped us make friends with the Pentecostal group.  We didn’t have services together, but we did get to have friendly contact.  Ultimately, because of this unplanned cooperation (the Church of God folk paid the interpreter for us) around 80 souls came to accept Christ as their Saviour in one week.

When I got back to the U.S., thoughts crossed my mind about how Baptist missionaries could develope ways to work together with other Christian missionaries in third-world countries, especially where the work was great.  Pooling local resources and manpower for mutual benefit seemed something totally logical to me; but not to BIMI, the mission agency with which I had traveled.  Unlike Southern Baptist missionaries, independent Baptist missionaries have to raise their own funds to reach the field and to stay there.  To me it seemed that being able to work with other Christians to accomplish like goals was a no-brainer, but not according to the doctrine of separation which BIMI held true to, as do most independent Baptists with which I have been aquainted.

The belief that Christians cannot work together, worship together, or evangelize together to reach a common desired goal is crazy.  There are areas that make Baptists (of which I am) different from other denominations, and rightfully so.  These differences, however, are more often than not of little eternal significance.  Baptists believe in baptism by submersion, for instance, while Presbyterians normally do not.  Is that worth saying that when it comes to winning the lost for Christ that we must remain separate in all things?  Even if a friend of mine is a five-point Calvinist, does that mean that I can’t walk down a street with him as we both preach salvation through Jesus alone?  I like what article XIV of the 2000 edition of theBaptist Faith and Message has to say on the subject:

Members of New Testament churches should cooperate with one another in carrying forward the missionary, educational, and benevolent ministries for the extention of Christ’s Kingdom.  Christian unity in the New Testament sense is spiritual harmony and voluntary cooperation for common ends by various groups of Christ’s people.  Cooperation is desirable between the various Christian denominations, when the end to be attained is itself justified, and when such cooperation involves no violation of conscience or compromise of loyalty to Christ and His Word as revealed in the New Testament.”

When it comes to the legalists and the Pharisaical crowd that promotes separation to the extent of mutual exclusion, finger pointing and self-glorification (i.e., “I am right with God and you are not, because you don’t believe the same as me.”), maybe isolation isn’t that bad.  More people than not, I truly believe, think that working together for the greater good of the Kingdom is biblical.  Only a small minority of so-called “fundamentalists” within the Christian faith feel otherwise.  However, the problem is not so much that we believe that working together is good as long as there is no compromise, it’s getting us to actually DO it.  Let the “separatists” stay separate if they wish, but let the rest of us unite where possible to form a true Nation of Christians, the body of Christ.

Say what you will about the “herd mentality,” but it is the loners that the lions and wolves look for first.  There truly is strength in unity.

5 Comments

Filed under baptist, Christian Living, Christian Unity, Independent Baptist, legalism, Southern Baptist, Uncategorized