New Baby, Eschatology, and a Book Contest

What on on Earth could a new baby, eschatology, and a book contest have in common?

Let's see if I can tie them all together...

As I write this, my wife is pregnant with our fourth child (our 3rd son) and she's in the early stages of labor. She's already experiencing minor "birth pangs" so our child's arrival is immanent. In fact, the doctor has said that if the baby isn't here by Monday morning, they will be taking her in for an induction procedure.

To celebrate the arrival of my 4th child. I want to give away a book called The Day And The Hour by Francis X. Gumerlock. This book contains hundreds of false predictions of dates for the Rapture and Christ's 2nd Coming, myriad speculations of the identity of the Antichrist and the Beast of Revelation, as well as a host of other eschatological tomfoolery that has been taught within the church by prophecy prognosticators of the past and present.

The chapters chronicle the details century by century. Of course, when the reader gets to the 20th century he will encounter the cream of the date setting crop with the rise of Dispensational Premillennial eschatology.

How can you win a copy of this book?

I will mail a brand new copy of The Day and the Hour to whoever guesses the exact weight of my new son, or comes the closest to the correct weight. It's simple as that!

You may leave your guesses in the comment box or email them to me at rhettswhips at yahoo dot com. Whatever method you choose to use, just be sure I there's a way for me to get in touch with you if you should happen to guess correctly.

Keep this in mind: Our smallest child weighed 7 lbs 12 ounces at birth and the largest was 9 lbs, 9 ounces. So I think the safest bet would be to stay above 7 lbs.

You've got to hurry if you want to have a chance:

The contest ends when the baby is born, so get your guesses in soon!

Surely he comes quickly!!

(If you are a Dispensationalist, you might have interpreted that the "immanent" arrival of my next son means that the baby could arrive within the next 5 minutes or in the next 5000 years, but I assure you, he really is coming quickly so get your guesses in ASAP!)

Green Pond Baptist Church: Articles of Faith and Principles

Today I am featuring the founding Articles of Faith and Principles of the Green Pond Baptist Church in Polk County, FL. This church was organized in 1894 and a few of my ancestors had a hand in it. This church is historically the home church of most of the people on my mother's side of the family. None of my immediate family is active in the church at this time.

Green Pond Baptist Church Articles of Faith

1. We believe in one true God, The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Equal in ever divine perfection.
2. We believe the Bible was written by men divinely inspired and is a perfect Treasure of Heavenly instruction. That it reveals the principles by which God will judge us.
3. We believe in a converted and regenerated church membership.
4. We believe that Baptism by immersion is the only Baptism of the New Testament and believers are the only ones it should be applied to.
5. We believe the Lord's Supper is a Church and not a Kingdom ordinance and none but believers Baptized are entitled to it.
6. We believe that the blessings of salvation are made free to all people, through the Gospel. That nothing prevents the Salvation of the Greatest Sinner on earth, only his own voluntary refusal to submit to the Lord Jesus Christ.

The Principles of Green Pond Baptist Church

1. The Church is designed to be composed of regenerate persons, who have professed Faith in Christ and have been baptized (immersed).
2. The New Testament is the only rule of Faith and Practice
3. The entire Separation of Church and State.
4. Civil and Religious Liberty be granted to all people.Church Government.
5. The Brethren and Sister[s] Rule and Not Preachers.

These Articles and Principles come from the 110th anniversary (2004 Homecoming Service) booklet I received when I visited the church a few years ago during a trip to Florida. The church is SBC, but in the booklet, it says it was organized under the "Missionary Baptist Denomination."

Here is an article about an event held at Green Pond in 2006. The cowboy holding the Bible in the article is a Deacon named Dale "Shorty" Boyette. Shorty is a friend of the family, a godly man, and a real honest-to-goodness Florida Cowboy!

Creeds, Confessions, and Catechisms

I recently began featuring historic Creeds, Confessions, and Catechisms on this blog each Sunday. This video explains the reasons why they are still important to the church today:



(H.T.:Old Truth)

This related article at Old Truth is also worth checking out.

First Baptist Church: Articles of Faith

As I stated yesterday, I am going to dedicate my Sunday posts to historic Creeds, Confessions, and Catechisms. While I'll probably focus most of my attention on denominational confessions and ecumenical creeds, I decided to begin this series by featuring the founding articles of the First Baptist Church of Metter, GA. (SBC) where I now worship and serve the church's Youth Director.

1. We believe there is one, and only one true and living God. He subsists in three persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit- and yet the three are one God.


2. We believe the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments in the Word of God are given by inspiration, and is the only rule of faith and practice.


3. We believe in the fall of Adam, in the consequent corruption of human nature, and the inability of man to recover himself from his lost estate.


4. We believe God from eternity loved His people, and before the world began chose them in Christ to grace and glory. The effectual calling, justification and glorification of each is infallibly secured through an eternal covenant between the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.


5. We believe that sinners are justified before God only by the righteousness of Christ, wrought out in the vicarious atonement for sin and imputed to them through faith.


6. We believe that the Spirit and power of God will effectually call the elect and will support, sustain and keep them through faith, so they will persevere to the end, and not be lost.


7. We believe that a visible church is a congregation of baptized believers in Jesus Christ who enjoy Christian fellowship one with another, having associated themselves together to maintain public worship and Godly discipline agreeable to the rules of the Gospel.


8. We believe that Jesus Christ is the great Head of the Church and the only law-giver, but that the administration of the laws on earth is vested in the church itself, an equal share of the administration being the privilege of each member, and that discipline is intended for the purity of the church, and for the reclaiming members who may be disorderly in principle or practice, and should be faithfully kept up for the glory of God.


9. We believe that Baptism and the Lord's Supper are ordinances of Jesus Christ are are to be continued until His second coming.


10. We believe that Baptism and Immersion are equivalent terms, and that none but baptized church members have right to commune at the Lord's Table.


11. We believe that good works are the fruits of faith; they will follow justification and are evidence of a gracious state.


12. We believe there will be a resurrection of the dead, and a general judgment and the happiness of the righteous and the punishment of the wicked will be everlasting.
    
    

The preceding articles of faith have been transcribed from a booklet commemorating the church's 100 year anniversary. The church was organized on July 15, 1900.

Modalism: The Last Volley of 2007

Before we get out of 2007, I want to fire my last volley into the ghastly beast which is the Modalist heresy.

I doubt it will be enough to put the monster out of it's misery, but I hope that my posts on the topic will have alerted some of my readers to the fact that this heresy is dangerous and not in keeping with the orthodox understanding of the Godhead.

For the uninitiated, Modalism or "Oneness" theology is that theology concerning the Godhead that denies the historical orthodox teaching that there is one true God who exists in three distinct Persons revealed in Scripture as the Father, the Son, and The Holy Spirit.

Modalists believe the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit to be "manifestations" of the one true God whom they understand to be Jesus Christ alone. They see God as one in person, but manifesting himself in three forms. Their view can be illustrated with water, which can be in the form of a solid, liquid, or gas at different times. You may be familiar with this illustration as it is often used in ignorance by Trinitarians to explain the Trinity. Ironically, the water, ice, steam, illustration actually explains the Modalistic view of God -not the Trinitarian view!

To the Modalist, Jesus Christ isn't the Eternally begotten Son of the Father. Instead, they teach that Jesus is the Father, Jesus is the Son, and Jesus is the Holy Spirit: just in different modes or manifestations and appearing as each at different times. While they do not deny Jesus is God, what they do teach is just as bad because they actually deny the existence of the persons of God the Father and God the Holy Spirit. Forms of this heresy can be traced all the way back to the middle of the third century A.D.

Modalists focus on the "oneness" of God. They see Trinitarian theology as teaching that there are three Gods, but this not the case. Trinitarians are not Tri-theists. We fully affirm that God is one God. Dr James P. Boyce explains:

"The doctrine of the Trinity is not opposed to the unity of God, but only enables us to form just conceptions as to that unity. It presents to us three Persons who are not three gods, but one God, and, as will hereafter be seen, shows us that the unity of God is to be found in his nature or essence and not in the personal relations in that essence, so that there is but one divine nature or essence, one being, one god, although there are three persons subsisting therein, who, by virtue of that subsistence, are each God.

We are not led by this doctrine of the unity of God, therefore, to adopt the Arian notion that the Father is Supreme God and the Son only a divine being in a subordinate sense. Nor is it proper to accept the Sabellian notion, that God is one person, manifesting himself sometimes as Father, sometimes as Son, and sometimes as Holy Ghost. 'Neither does it at all teach tritheistic unity by which these are really three gods, but considered one because they have the same nature, just as three men may be said to be one because of the same human nature.' See Gill, vol. 1, pp. 183, 184 from which this is condensed." (J. P. Boyce, Abstract of Systematic Theology, pp. 60-61)

Modalists also reject the words "Trinity" or "Person" as being unbiblical. They bolster their disdain for these words by pointing out that thee terms are not found in Scripture. To that point, I concede that these theological terms do not appear in the Bible. However, we must ask the question: Does the absence of these words in the Bible make them invalid for use in formulating theology? I shall allow John Calvin to answer the charges:

"Now, although the heretics rail at the word "person," or certain squeamish men cry out against admitting a term fashioned by the human mind, they cannot shake our conviction that three are spoken of, each of which is entirely God, yet that there is not more than one God. What wickedness, then, it is to disapprove of words that explain nothing else than what is attested and sealed by Scripture!" (Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 1:13:3)

In our day, the Modalist heresy is taught primarily by the United Pentecostal Church International (UPCI) or other so-called "Apostolic" churches". Though forms of Modalism have been around for centuries, the UPCI doesn't trace their teaching back quite so far. The following quote has been cited as coming from the Forward of a statement of faith that was published by the United Pentecostal Church International:

"In the year 1914 came the revelation on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. The pivotal doctrines of the absolute deity of Jesus Christ and baptism in his name became tenets of faith. God marvelously confirmed our message as the Gospel was preached in its fullness. The power which was hidden in the name of Jesus began to be revealed."

The quote is a clear declaration that what the UPCI teaches is actually a new "revelation", and not what the Bible or the Church throughout history has taught. Christians who don't affirm the closure of the Canon may not have a problem with such "new revelations", but as someone who is serious about affirming the closure of the Canon and the sufficiency of Scripture, I find this quote and their supposed afflatus to be about as authoritative as last week's grocery list.


When it comes to the "new revelations" proclaimed by cults and heretics, I fully agree with Charles Spurgeon who once preached:

"Do not think that the Spirit of God has come or ever will come among us to teach to us a new gospel or something other than is written in the Scriptures. Men come to me with their fudges and fancies, and tell me that they were revealed to them by the Holy Spirit. I abhor their blasphemous impertinence, and refuse to listen to them for a minute." (C. H. Spurgeon, The Indwelling and Outflowing of The Holy Spirit, Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit Vol. 28, No. 1662)

Mr. Spurgeon hits the nail on the head here. These "revelations" in which the UPCI and other cults look to in order to justify their aberrant and/or heretical teachings were never inspired by the Holy Spirit. God didn't inspire them, nor did He confirm them. Somebody is lying and I promise you it isn't God! One must beg the question, if the UPCI revelations are so important, and indeed vital to salvation as some of them claim, why did God wait until 1914 to reveal it?

The current UPCI website states something rather interesting:

"The UPCI holds a fundamental view of the Bible: 'The Bible is the only God-given authority which man possesses; therefore all doctrine, faith, hope, and all instructions for the church must be based upon and harmonize with the Bible' (Manual of the United Pentecostal Church, 19). The Bible is the Word of God, and therefore inerrant and infallible. The UPCI rejects all extra biblical revelations and writings, and views church creeds and articles of faith only as the thinking of men."

How ironic..! Here we have a group that embraces a heretical doctrine that was "revealed" to them in 1914, over and against the dominate Christian understanding of the Godhead for the last 2000 years, and now they want us to believe that the Bible is their sole authority?! Even if they do hold to that position now, they are still interpreting the Bible through the lens of the 1914 revelation!

In addition to Modalism, the UPCI teaches that in order for a person to be justified and saved, repentance and faith are not enough. They also teach that a person must be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ (alone) and that speaking in tongues is necessary for salvation. Nowhere does the Bible teach that speaking in tongues is necessary for Salvation: orthodox Pentecostals disagree with the UCPI on this as well. This is faith + works theology pure and simple. It's what the Apostle Paul calls "another gospel." Therefore, even if we remove the Modalist heresy from the picture entirely, we still have more than enough Scriptural justification to "let them be accursed" because of their position on baptism and tongues! (See Gal 1:9)

Heresies such as Modalism and works salvation are bound to find a fertile ground in the evangelical world today. We live in a generation that has largely cast off the historic creeds and confessions of orthodox faith. Mention the words "creed," "confession," or "catechism" in some churches and you'll be tossed out on your head! Instead of trying to glean from the history of Christianity, many have cast aside the wisdom of the past generations thinking they have no need of it.

Our generation can be likened unto a young man who inherits the family business and decides to cast off everything his ancestors learned in order to run the business his own way. Within a short time the business is in utter bankruptcy. By ignoring the wisdom and learning of his fathers and setting out to do everything his own way, the young man reaps the fruit of his obstinacy. The UPCI and it's heretical doctrines are the tragic legacy of an era where many people cast off all historic creeds, confessions, and traditions thinking they were ridding themselves of past errors, and ironically, some ended up heaping onto themselves the worst kinds of heresies through new "revelations" and poor scholarship.

In conclusion, please do not think I am out here trying to anathematize people over theologically insignificant issues. Quite the contrary! The denial of the Trinity is about as serious as it gets and I'm trying to sound the alarm! I'm calling upon all who believe in justification by faith and the Doctrine of the Trinity to rise up! Pray up! Get in the Scriptures! Put away Your Best Life Now and break out some dusty old theological volumes and try to understand why these doctrines have been so important for so many centuries!

For more information on this subject, Matt Slick has a lots of of information and refutations at Carm.org.

The Athanasian Creed

In my continuing quest to expose the errors of Modalism, I thought it might be profitable to post the Athanasian Creed.

Unfortunately, creeds, confessions, and catechisms have fallen on hard times in our day, but I believe there is much we can learn from these historic writings as well as from men whom God raised up in centuries past.

The Athanasian Creed was written sometime in the 4th or 5th Centuries. Though the creed is named after Athanasius (a great defender of the Doctrine of the Trinity and the Divinity of Christ), it's very probable that he wasn't the author. This creed is a wonderful definition of the orthodox Trinitarian understanding of the Godhead as well as the Divinity of Christ.

Please note: The word "catholic" in the creed should be understood as meaning "universal" and not a reference to Roman Catholicism.

The Athanasian Creed

1. Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith;

2. Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.

3. And the catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity;

4. Neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance.

5. For there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Spirit.

6. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit is all one, the glory equal, the majesty coeternal.

7. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Spirit.

8. The Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, and the Holy Spirit uncreated.

9. The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Spirit incomprehensible.

10. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Spirit eternal.

11. And yet they are not three eternals but one eternal.

12. As also there are not three uncreated nor three incomprehensible, but one uncreated and one incomprehensible.

13. So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Spirit almighty.

14. And yet they are not three almighties, but one almighty.

15. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God;

16. And yet they are not three Gods, but one God.

17. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Spirit Lord;

18. And yet they are not three Lords but one Lord.

19. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord;

20. So are we forbidden by the catholic religion to say; There are three Gods or three Lords.

21. The Father is made of none, neither created nor begotten.

22. The Son is of the Father alone; not made nor created, but begotten.

23. The Holy Spirit is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.

24. So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Spirit, not three Holy Spirits.

25. And in this Trinity none is afore or after another; none is greater or less than another.

26. But the whole three persons are coeternal, and coequal.

27. So that in all things, as aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped.

28. He therefore that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity.

29. Furthermore it is necessary to everlasting salvation that he also believe rightly the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.

30. For the right faith is that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and man.

31. God of the substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and man of substance of His mother, born in the world.

32. Perfect God and perfect man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting.

33. Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, and inferior to the Father as touching His manhood.

34. Who, although He is God and man, yet He is not two, but one Christ.

35. One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking of that manhood into God.

36. One altogether, not by confusion of substance, but by unity of person.

37. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and man is one Christ;

38. Who suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, rose again the third day from the dead;

39. He ascended into heaven, He sits on the right hand of the Father, God, Almighty;

40. From thence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead.

41. At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies;

42. and shall give account of their own works.

43. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting and they that have done evil into everlasting fire.

44. This is the catholic faith, which except a man believe faithfully he cannot be saved.


(photo: Athanasius, from Wikipedia.)

Against Modalism...

In this latest installment on the popular heresy known as Modalism, I am linking to a some resources and articles, as well as quoting a few theologians who have written against the heresy. It is my hope that more people will be alerted about this growing threat to Christian orthodoxy.

(Now, I realize some readers will see this as a heresy hunt or a witch trial. If that's the case, I can only reply that it's sort of a family tradition. Ironically, my 10th great-grandfather was the Rev. John Jones, a Puritan minister born in England who migrated to the American Colonies and was later involved in the 1654 witch trial of Goody Knapp in Connecticut!)

Below are a links and quotes that I hope will be helpful to understanding why the Doctrine of the Trinity is so important to a correct understanding of Theology Proper -as well as redemption:

• First off, I want to recommend a book by Dr. James R. White. It's called The Forgotten Trinity. I have not read it yet, but I understand that it's an excellent treatment of the subject. It's definitely on my short list of books to be read in the near future.


• In this article by Dr. Michael J. Svigel of Dallas Seminary, we learn that all too often, even those who claim to be Trinitarians pray, sing, and illustrate the Godhead in ways that are more Modalistic than Trinitarian.


• Reclaiming the Mind Ministries has some great theological video sessions concerning the Trinity and early heresies concerning the Triune nature of God. I encourage everyone to watch Part 1 & Part 2 of a session that deals with early heresies in the church concerning the Godhead. (See especially part 2 as it deals with the Modalistic heresy from the beginning)


• In this lengthy article, James R. White explains why he "loves the Trinity." He also deals with the theological fall-out and issues surrounding the denial of the Trinity. Christians in our day may not fully realize it, but Dr. White is correct when he writes, "without the Trinity, you have no gospel." If you don't read anything else I've posted, please read this!

Let us now consider a verse of Scripture written by the prophet Isaiah and the comments of the Baptist theologian John Gill concerning it:

"Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord GOD and his Spirit, hath sent me." -Isaiah 48:16 KJV

"Here is a glorious testimony of a trinity of Persons in the Godhead; Christ the Son of God is sent in human nature, and as Mediator. Jehovah the Father and the Spirit are the senders of him; and so is a proof of the mission, commission, and authority of Christ, who came not of himself, but was sent of God, (John 8:42), it may be rendered, "and now the Lord God hath sent me and his Spirit"; both were sent of God, and in this order; first, Christ, to be the Redeemer and Saviour; and then the Spirit, to be the Convincer and Comforter; (see John 14:26). " (from John Gill's Commentary on the whole Bible)

Wayne Grudem also has some valuable incite that goes to the very heart of why I believe this heresy is so dangerous:

"The fatal shortcoming of modalism is the fact that it must deny the personal relationships within the Trinity that appear in so many places in Scripture (or it must affirm that these were simply an illusion and not real). Thus, it must deny three separate persons at the baptism of Jesus, where the Father speaks from heaven and the Spirit descends on Jesus like a dove. And it must say that all those instances where Jesus is praying to the Father are an illusion or a charade. The idea of the Son or the Spirit interceding for us before God the Father is lost. Finally, modalism ultimately loses the heart of the doctrine of the atonement - that is, the idea that God sent his Son in our place, and that the Son bore the wrath of the Father in our place, and that the Father, representing the interest of the Trinity, saw the suffering of Christ and was satisfied (Isa 53:11)." (from Grudem's Systematic Theology ch. 14)

John MacArthur has this to say concerning the Modalist heresy:

"...I think it’s very important for us today to be aware of the fact that we need to uphold the doctrine of the Trinity. I am amazed at how much the Unity Movement has moved into Christianity. It’s really shocking. For example, the largest Pentecostal organization in the world is called the United Pentecostal Church and they deny the Trinity. ...Now beloved to deny the existence of the Trinity is a very serious cardinal error in theology. You are either denying the existence of God the Father, denying the unique existence of the Son, or you are denying the unique existence of the Holy Spirit. And to deny any of those, in my mind, is the ultimate in heresy." (From Q&A session) SOURCE

Indeed in addition to being horrible theology, Modalism makes a mockery of the Bible. Robert Lewis Dabney summed it up well in this statement from his Systematic Theology:

"...if these personal names, of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, meant no more than three influences or energies, or three phases of action of the same person, or three forms of one substance, is it not incredible that all these properties of personality, choosing, loving, hating, sending and being sent, understanding, acting, should be asserted of them? It would be the wildest abuse of language ever dreamed of." (from ch. 16 of Dabney's Systematic Theology)

Once again, I wish to express that my intention in putting the spot light on the Modalist heresy is to alert my fellow Christians to the fact that it's a growing problem. The Doctrine of the Trinity is a central tenet of the Christian faith and must be taught and defended.

When I was a child, sometimes I would tell my (late) father that I needed a new bike (or something else) because the one I had was "old". His reply to me was always, "son, if you don't take care of what you have already, how can I believe you'll take care of a newer one if I get it for you?"

Likewise in our day, lots of Christians seem to be constantly seeking new light or new revelation from God. The sad reality is that the majority of modern evangelicals haven't tried to understand the revelation God has given them already; nor those truths in which our Christian forefathers contended for -often with their very lives.

Like greedy children, many Christians want something new from the Father, all the while neglecting (and in some cases despising) that in which He has entrusted to them already.

May God raise up a generation of Christians in our day who will contend for and teach the historic and orthodox understanding of the Godhead.

Post Tenebras, Lux!

(All pictures from and linked back to wikipedia)

Building Bridges: Southern Baptists and Calvinism

Many of you are probably aware of the Nov. 26-28 Building Bridges conference held at the Lifeway Ridgecrest Conference Center in North Carolina. This was a historic meeting that discussed Calvinism and it's role in the Southern Baptist Convention. From the accounts I have read, this meeting was a huge success.

All the messages are freely available here and I really hope that folks on both sides of the theological divide will take time to listen to the sermons. I've saved the messages to my computer and I'm listening through them now. So far both sides have (for the most part) presented their case maturely and with a spirit of Christian charity.

Soli Deo Gloria!

Perseverance: Not a License to Sin!

Another helpful clip from the Amazing Grace DVD.



Hopefully you will see that true Calvinists are not teaching the modern version of "Once Saved Always Saved" -that a Christian is free to live like the devil and have hope of Heaven. It's also worth noting the similarities of the Arminian and Roman Catholic teachings on this issue.

Communism, Common Property, and Coming Judgment

Several years ago, I was flipping through the television channels and I landed on TBN. There stood Paul Crouch telling how he went to China (to try to get permission to broadcast) and told leaders in Beijing that early Christians were "Communists" because they sold all their processions and had everything in common. He remarked how the Chinese leaders were very interested in that revelation. Mr. Crouch was referring to passages in Act 4 and 5 where we see the early church in Jerusalem selling all their property and laying it at the feet of the Apostles:

Now the full number of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one said that any of the things that belonged to him was his own, but they had everything in common. And with great power the apostles were giving their testimony to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great grace was upon them all. There was not a needy person among them, for as many as were owners of lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold and laid it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need. (Acts 4:32-35 ESV)

Even though, in my opinion, Paul Crouch isn't qualified to be a spokesman for Christianity, what he said about the early church bothered me. At first glance, it looked as if he had a point. I really began to wonder, were the Apostles and members of the early church Communists? If not, why did they do this? Should we do the same today? Some have advanced this theory. In fact, according to a Catholic Traditionalist named Patrick Odou, (in this article) certain authors have used Acts 4:32-35 to support Distributism and other Socialist notions.

Unless I missed something, I don't see anything in the Bible about Christians selling everything and having common property in other cities. Could there been some other underlying reason for the saints in Jerusalem do this? If so, what would it be? I've thought about it for a while and I now believe the behaviour of the Jerusalem Christians may have had quite a bit to do with the judgment Christ warned would be poured out on Jerusalem within their generation:

But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, and let those who are inside the city depart, and let not those who are out in the country enter it, for these are days of vengeance, to fulfill all that is written. (Luke 21:20-22 ESV)

History records that our Lord's words were fulfilled in A.D. 70. when the Romans sacked Jerusalem and leveled the Holy Temple. An estimated 1 million Jews were slaughtered. However, those who were Christians heeded Christ's words and fled for the hills during a brief withdraw of the Roman armies. Because the Christian Jews fled the city, it has been said that not one Christian was killed during the Roman siege.

Think about it... If you knew -for certain- that your city would be totally leveled and everyone killed within your lifetime (see Luke 21:32), wouldn't you be making preparations to leave? I don't know about you, but I certainly wouldn't be worrying about buying more real estate, adding onto my house, or investing my money in municipal bonds!

They knew judgment was coming, therefore they began liquidating their assets. Their love for one another was their motivation for pooling their assets -instead of each taking his money and moving to another town. By selling off everything, they were able to care for the poor and needy among them and had nothing tying them to the city when the Day of Vengeance finally arrived.

I was actually surprised to find that I'm not the only one holding to this theory. In the aforementioned article by Patrick Odou, Odou quotes St. Thomas Aquinas who held a similar view:

“Now, the first way, that is, for all to live in common on the proceeds of possessions that are sold, is one which will work, but not for a long time. So, the Apostles instituted this way of living for the faithful in Jerusalem, because they foresaw through the Holy Spirit that they would not remain together for long in Jerusalem, both because of the persecutions to come from the Jews and because of the imminent destruction of the city and its people. As a result, it was not necessary to provide for the faithful, except for a short time. Consequently, when they went out to other peoples, among whom the Church was to be established and to continue to endure, there is no account of their establishing this mode of living” (Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles, Book 3, Part 2, chap. 135, 2, p. 182)

In conclusion, you can't use the Bible to support any Communistic or Socialist agenda. Paul Crouch was wrong to tell the Chinese officials that the early Christians were Communists, though he may have scored a few points with them on his broadcasting proposal.. Paul Crouch -like many in our day- does not understand the eschatological significance of the destruction of Jerusalem. The saints at Jerusalem were not Communists: they simply believed Christ's warnings about the judgment to come!

Soli Deo Gloria!

Rational, Reasonable, Atheism!

Preterist Perspective

How "literal" do you take Matthew 24?

The two articles below deal with Dispensationalist claims that Preterists are not interpreting this passage literally.

Trimming & Cooking the Prophetic Parts of the Bible

Dispensationalism’s Interpretive Inconsistencies

Roswell, Flying Saucers, and Cold War Weapons Programs

Last night on Larry King, they were discussing the Roswell incident and UFOs.

First of all, I must confess that my wife and I have seen a "UFO" in the night sky on several occasions. It performed maneuvers in the air that looked to be impossible for a conventional aircraft, and then streaked out of sight. I'm not saying it was something from another world, but it was something flying in the sky that I could not identify...

Seeing as though Hunter Army Airfield is to my east and Robbins Air Force base is to my west, I believe that whatever it was, it was probably something that belongs to the United States Government and not to the Klingon High Command!

Folks, I hate to spoil the fun, but the probability of an extra-terrestrial life form finding something so interesting about our planet that it felt compelled to traverse the vast expanse of space to pay us a visit (even from the nearest star to our solar system) is laughable at best.

Here's the deal: the US government has duped the public into looking to the stars to explain weird lights in the sky when, in actuality, what has been seen is nothing more than super secret military aircraft being tested. I am of the opinion that the whole Roswell incident -right down to all the "insiders" who frequently come forward to tell about the conspiracy to cover up the existence of UFOs- is part of an elaborate (and highly successful) PSYOPS mission to cover up secret U.S. weapons projects.


Remember the F-117 nighthawk? The aircraft was designed in the 1970s, first flew in 1981, yet very few people knew a thing about it until Operation Desert Storm in 1991! How many times do you reckon it was mislabeled as a "UFO" by some alien crazed civilian? (What do you think people thought when they saw the B-2 Spirit?!!)

Do you want to see proof of REAL flying saucers??

Here it is!

Here's some more!

Here's a real life "Klingon Bird of Prey!"

The x-45 has probably been called a "UFO" a few times as well!

Yes, flying saucers and "UFOs" exist, but they belong to the U.S. Air Force. If you believe the government is covering up evidence of UFOs and extraterrestrials, you've been duped, and that's exactly what they've wanted all along...

(photos from wikipedia)

States' Rights? I Don't Think So!

As an Southerner who's ancestors fought valiantly against Lincoln's "Grand Army of the Republic", I still believe in "States' Rights." Though it may sound like treason to say it, I believe that if any one of the 50 States in the Union decided that they no longer wanted to be a part of the United States, they ought have the right to seceed peacefully and go their seperate way. The South was brutally conquered and subjected to years of terrible military occupation (Reconstruction) because of their decision to do just that.

Though I support States' Rights, my support of these rights is not absolute. I do not believe in Statism. There are some things that no State has the right to stick it's nose in, and one of those things is how a parent wants their children educated about homosexuality!

In Maryland, the State Education Board has determined that a parent's right to control the upbringing of a child is, "...not absolute. It must bend to the State's duty to educate its citizens."

This determination was made so that Maryland could push ahead with a controversial sex-education program that teaches a favorable view of homosexuality and will not allow for views to be taught that oppose the sinful lifestyle.

Just another one of many reasons to consider educating children at home with curriculum that teaches a solid Biblical worldview!

To see the Washington Post article on this: click here.

For the American Family News Network article: click here.


Historical Trivia:

Before the Civil War, Maryland was a "slave state." Lincoln feared it would seceed and leave Washington D.C. in Confederate Territory. Therefore he declared martial law and had the mayor of Baltimore and Maryland State Legislators imprisioned! For more myth-busting info: click here!

John MacArthur, Israel, Calvinism, and Postmillennialism: Part II and III

More evidence that Postmillennialists have not kicked the Jewish people to the curb in regards to Bible prophecy -and unlike Dispensationalists, Postmillennialists do not teach that two-thirds of the Jews will have to be slaughtered before the promises are fulfilled!!

Part Two

Part Three

The Eschatology of R.L. Dabney

To my sheer delight, the Father's Day gift I received this year was a copy of R.L. Dabney's Systematic Theology. Dabney was a theologian in the Southern Presbyterian Church. He served in the Confederate Army as Chief-of-Staff to General Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson. No less a theologian than A. A. Hodge refereed to Dabney as "the best teacher of theology in the United States, if not the world."

Seeing how my last couple of posts have been on Eschatology, I would like to share with you some of Dabney's Eschatological thoughts.


The following comes from pp. 837 and 838 of Dabney's Systematic Theology:


"That doctrine which we hold, and which we assert to be the Apostolic and Church doctrine, teaches, just as much as the pre–Adventists, the literal and personal second advent of Christ, and we hold, with the Apostolic Christians, that it is, next to heaven, the dearest and most glorious of the believer’s hopes: as bringing the epoch of his full deliverance from death, and full introduction into the society of his adored Saviour. This hope of a literal second advent we base on such Scriptures as these: Acts 1:11: 3:20, 21; Heb. 9:28; 1 Thess. 4:15, 16; Phil. 3:20; Matt. 26:64, etc., etc.

Before this second advent, the following events must have occurred. The development and secular overthrow of Antichrist, (2 Thess. 2:3 to 9; Dan. 7:24–26; Rev. 17:, 18:) which is the Papacy. The proclamation of the Gospel to all nations, and the general triumph of Christianity over all false religions, in all nations. (Ps. 72:8–11; Is. 2:2–4; Dan. 2:44, 45; 7:14; Matt. 28:19, 20; Rom. 11:12, 15, 25; Mark 13:10; Matt. 24:14). The general and national return of the Jews to the Christian Church. (Rom. 11:25, 26). And then a partial relapse from this state of high prosperity, into unbelief and sin. (Rev. 20:7, 8). During this partial decline, at a time unexpected to formal Christians and the profane, and not to be expressly foreknown by any true saint on earth, the second Advent of Christ will take place, in the manner described in 1 Thess. It will be immediately followed by the resurrection of all the dead, the redeemed dead taking the precedence. Then the generation of men living at the time will be changed (without dying) into their immortal bodies, the world will undergo its great change by fire, the general judgment will be held; and last, the saved and the lost will severally depart to their final abodes, the former to be forever with the Lord, the latter with Satan and his angels."





In case you were wondering, Dabney was a Postmillennialist!

John MacArthur, Israel, and Postmillennialism

An interesting article by Gary DeMar concerning the Postmillennialist view of Israel's future in Prophecy.

(Being a recent convert to Postmillennial eschatology -and a guy who also has a desire to see Jews convert to Christ- I found this article very interesting indeed!)

Tribute to Robert E. Lee

Earlier this year, I was honored to receive my SCV camp's highest honor: the "Robert Edward Lee Confederate of The Year" award. I am humbled that the officers and men of my camp felt I deserved this award; though I can only say that I am but a faint shadow of the man I admire as one of my greatest heroes...

It has been 200 years since the birth of this great General. So what is it about Robert E. Lee that so many Southerners still revere? Contrary to popular revisionist history, this man did not fight that terrible war to keep a race of people under the bondage of slavery. He fought not for money, land, or power. He fought not because he was a traitor, nay, rather he fought because he was a true American patriot and would not raise his sword against his fellow Virginians.

What I admire most about the General is that he was a man of virtue; he was first and foremost a Christian. It is also apparent that General Lee was a not a "Sunday morning Christian" like we are so accustomed to seeing in our day. He lived out his faith in both his public and private life. Even the arrangement of the stars on Lee's headquarters flag (above right) is said to have been designed by Lee's wife in a pattern that symbolized the Ark of The Covenant!

In a day when many young Americans idolize people who's only claim to fame is the ability to dunk a basketball, or sing godless lyrics into a microphone; I believe now more than ever we need to hold up men such as Robert E. Lee as examples of what true heroes ought to be.

In closing would like to encourage you to listen to the message below by Pastor John Weaver. In this message, Pastor Weaver discusses the character of General Lee. I believe it will give you a greater appreciation for this man whom I so dearly admire.





Also, please see this Washington Times article about Robert E. Lee.

Money, Banking and the Federal Reserve Video

Have you ever noticed that your nice crisp one dollar bill buys less and less every year?

Once upon a time, a dollar could buy an acre of land outside Orlando Florida, but now it won't buy a 20 ounce Coke at a gas station. In the video below, you will learn some economic history, the reasons why our economic system is broken, and what it will take to fix it.

The video is really long, but I found it very interesting and educational!



I found this video posted on the Puritanism Today Blog.

I Confess: I'm a "Cultist" too!

"A cultist is one who has a strong belief in the Bible and the Second Coming of Christ; who frequently attends Bible studies; who has a high level of financial giving to a Christian cause; who homes schools for their children; who has accumulated survival foods and has a strong belief in the Second Amendment; and who distrusts big government. Any of these may qualify a person as a cultist but certainly more than one of these would cause us to look at this person as a threat and his family as being a risk that qualifies for government interference."

- Janet Reno, [Clinton era] Attorney General of the United States. June 26, 1999.

(Printed in the SLRC "Update" Vol 10, Number 2, March 2007)