Saturday, March 9, 2019

WHY YOU SHOULD BE READING PULPIT & PEN EVERY SINGLE DAY


Reverend Jordan Hall, known online (and possibly with friends) as JD Hall, is the head of a website called Pulpit & Pen. Additionally, he is the Pastor of Fellowship Baptist Church in Sydney, Montana which associates with, as they state, “other like-minded churches in North Dakota, Montana, Saskatchewan, and across the country.” Hall is Baptist Reformed in his theology which is a general category with varieties among this sect.


If I could ascribe to Hall a single characteristic, I would attribute to him a Lutheresque spirit, as in Martin Luther, the theologian of course. Some readers might be annoyed with this elevated attribution which is an intended compliment, on the whole but a recognition, also, of a temperament which has its weaknesses, as well, which are more possibly more obvious than shortcomings in passive personalities whose imperfections are surreptitious in their existence hence, lending themselves to less immediate scrutiny but often, can be far more damaging.


Why?


Why do I say that you should be reading and watching Pulpit & Pen every day? Well, it certainly isn’t because I have suddenly become a Calvinist, because obviously I am not one (nor am I an Arminian, to those of you who have not succeeded in growing past binary theological labeling). And it definitely isn’t because JD Hall is a thing of beauty to behold. In fact, one might call his dog-face a manly dog-face, still yet, this feature might be a blessing in disguise since you won’t forget his face and it grows on you. Nor do I insist on a diet of Pulpit & Pen because Hall is always delicate and comfy since, in the midst of Hall taking out the trash, now and then every man or woman with the courage to do so knows, it’s tough, dirty and something the weak-minded avoid altogether. So if you faint easily, you’ve been warned.


I tell my readers this because JD Hall, and his contributors such as Seth Dunn, are almost single-handedly leading the way in a rescue attempt of conservative Evangelicalism and especially the Southern Baptist Convention but certainly beyond, to all concerned CE’s and even Fundamentalists (CE/F, if you will), from the ravages of social justice gospelism being touted by groups such as The Gospel Coalition which is, in truth, Marxist ideology that has infiltrated CE/F theology and mutated into an alluring framework into which many leaders such as Tim Keller (TGC) Al Mohler (SBC), Russell Moore (SBC) and of course, John Piper (Reformed Baptist) have deposited their theology and that is now being conformed to the structure imposed by their newly adopted hull.
 

Daily, the work at Pulpit & Pen is filling the void of places where 100 men once stood and that is not an exaggeration. Day in and day out, they tirelessly vet offerings and influence of ministries around the world that they may guard the little sheep from the least to the most damning of errors. This is hard, unappreciative and alienating (it shouldn’t be, but it is) toil.


His most recent willingness to confront close ministerial friends and models


Most people in this world are fragile, maybe that is why we are called sheep. It takes a unique person with the rare temperament to slay the dragons because inevitably, one must come upon the babies of dragons, which must be killed, too. Unfortunately, however, the infirmed populace who loves to see the dragon have his head cut off, also wants the knights own head the moment he touches the baby dragons because baby dragons are so precious though, they will only grow to kill and destroy later. UGH.


So who wants to sign up for this task? JD Hall did and does so, with his crew, not only on your behalf but on behalf of our Lord, Christ Jesus. This bring me to one of more recent campaigns.


John MacArthur is one of Hall’s ministerial and theological examplars. He has set a pattern which JD has sought to incorporate into his own theology and practice. Phil Johnson, MacArthur’s editor, apparently became a ministerial companion, if not personal friend, of Hall’s. More recently and with regard to both the Dallas Statement on Social Justice and the hosting of social justice theology enablers at a conference by MacArthur, there has been a turn in the compatibility of Hall and the GTY crew.


I bring this up for a reason. Most men simply will not touch men and ministries which were primary sources of their admiration and imitation during their theological/ecclesiastical formative years. They simply cannot bear to be grieved by such confrontations which there is a warranted rebuttal to be given, especially publicly. JD Hall, however, isn’t that man. He is driven by his convictions, no prisoners allowed so far. Thus, Hall has been open and frank in his disagreement and disappointment with regard to the apparent absence of discernment and consistency by John MacArthur and Johnson on these matters and has not held back, going over his objections, point by point.


It’s not getting better, my friends


The state of CE/F isn’t getting better, it’s degrading, rapidly. Yes, there are still faithful segments but the overall condition of conservative Evangelicalism and Fundamentalism, is in frankly, scary. The major influencers among the Southern Baptists which have control of the helm, are now left of center, having embraced Marxist critical-race ideology and have incorporated Race-based Special Interest theology into their body of doctrine resulting in the horrendous practices of non-stop virtue signaling and a damning of the church with a myriad of nonsensical, toxic and malignant theology and practice.


As I close I want to simply go through the blog headlines from Pulpit & Pen and list a number of issues they are tackling where giants once braved to fight but now, only the mice mostly gather, biting and gnawing on the few, such as P&P, who now fill the ranks which are depleted by way of cowardice or other self-aggrandizing mental flatulence excuse making:
























Where are they?


“Where oh where has my Underdog gone, where or where can he be?” You might be surprised that I am advocating for Pulpit  & Pen seeing that I took to task in a most excoriating way some years ago, the Pyromaniacs blog which did tackle many of the same issues but don’t be fooled. Pyro was far inferior and quickly devolved into a spa for the narcissistic bathing of a handful of people. P&P, while driven by a strong personality which may, from time to time get in its own way, has both matured and steered clear of investing in egotistical comment wars and rather, has endowed itself with constant attention to the issues, themselves.


But aside from mentioning the long dormant Pyro’s blog which has come to life again more recently, the question is, where are they? Where are the men in ministry willing to protect the vulnerable and mostly, stupid sheep, from the hordes of liars, fable-tellers, theological thugs and thieves? There was a day when such garbage wouldn’t dare be delivered as any kind of substance on the door of any decent Evangelical but lo’ and behold, now it’s at the top of the daily lunch menu glad-handedly peddled and pushed by the Men in Black and White
.

Finally


JD Hall, I am convinced, is mostly objected to, if not despised, not because of his mistakes along the way or his inevitable shortcomings of any man and ministry but because of his precision in revealing the hypocrisy and corruption in the church today. His anecdotal missteps and foibles are simply an excuse to attempt to erase the man and his message by those who have a great deal to hide.


I am not a Calvinist. JD Hall probably wouldn’t even say complimentary things about many of my theological leanings in that regard and likely, I would be on his Arminian list (again, I am not one). I really do not care, he’s still telling the truth on so many things which matter that you should be reading and watching Pulpit & Pen every day.

Monday, February 12, 2018

A STRANGE THING HAPPENED ON THE WAY TO THE HOLOCAUST

Have you ever researched your views and position on the Holocaust? I recommend you do not if you are not the kind of person able to be challenged by some startling facts.

This is not to say there were not internment camps, nor is it to say even more precisely, that Jews were not the primary target of the internment/work camps by the Nazi party leadership but it is to say, that the videos to which I will link, are ambitious and formidable in some of the things they present which demonstrate valid disputes of the official narrative of 6 millions Jews being exterminated.

Why are people imprisoned simply for expressing disagreement in some countries? While it is ludicrous more importantly, it is indicative of someone or some group wanting so desperately to control the narrative of an event which speaks of deception, not honesty.

Also, why are those who ask questions not referred to as skeptics but "deniers" and other forms of defamation?

Let me be clear, I am not a denier nor a revisionist, I am a factualist. Give me the facts. It is requisite that one be willing to entertain ideas which are not their own and with which there may be controversy, even outright error claimed by experts.

This isn't to make one a fool rather, it is to enable that person to come to the truth.

In my mind, for example, I ask if God is real. Does God exist? I entertain the idea he does not so that I may answer that question. There is no fear in that if I am interested in the truth and in this case, I always find God not only exists but is immutably eternal and revealed so in the Bible. If I never entertain this idea then when it seizes me, because such doubt seizes us all at some point, I may find myself running from the answer and not to it seeing I have never been on this road.

I am going to post some videos from YouTube. Watch them. They all pose difficult questions. 

Some of the issues with the narrative of 6 million Jews being exterminated which I have observed in these Holocaust rebuttals are:

  • The various so-called gas chamber rooms were completely incompatible with Zyclon B usage for exterminating people based on design. 
  • The exaggerated claims of oven capacity and rate of burning corpses.
  • The lack of bodies or any remains or their artifacts on the acreage of the camps at which the claims of extermination are made (*not all camps were alleged exterminations camps, it is accepted by Holocaust defenders that not all camps were for extermination). The sheer numbers would require, even from the burning of bodies, volumes of human ashes and remains which are simply not found on the property, anywhere. The bodies seen in films are those who starved in the last year and were subject to disease in which they died. 
  • The significantly reduced number of those who died in Poland in the camps from 4 million to a bit over 1 million link here, Holocaust Dead Drop To 2.8 Million.  
  •  
So, here are the video links for your consideration:


Excellent 10 minute primer on the main issues from Thomas Dalton, PhD



David Cole in Auschwitz


Interview with Catholic Bishop Richard Williamson

Remember, I am only interested in facts. If you watch only one, watch the first and then feel free to offer commentary. Thank you and may God be glorified by the truth.

Monday, January 15, 2018

1 JOHN 1:9 – WHY DO I REQUIRE MORE FORGIVENESS OF SINS IF ALL MY SINS WERE FORGIVEN WHEN I BELIEVED ON CHRIST AS MY SAVIOR? THE DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE JUDICIAL AND PERSONAL FORGIVENESS OF GOD



Today, I was reminded of a post at The Gospel Coalition on 1 John 1:9, when I read an article at Detroit Baptists Theological Seminary’s blog by Bill Combs, Th.D., which you may read here. Thus, I am prompted to provide what I believe will be a clarifying view of the 1 John 1:9 issue which numerous Christians have with regard to the matter of the further forgiveness of sins by God for the believer after one is supposed to have been forgiven at the point of salvation of all of their sins – past, present, and future.

Combs, in his blog post, cited the unmitigated disaster at The Gospel Coalition article here, where he quotes the author connecting this passage to our justification or the forgiveness of sins (again, which is supposed to be all sins, past, present, and future) when we are saved:

He says, at one point, “God commands us to confess our sins as we sin (1 John 1:9). This command not only apples to our initial justification, but as the context of 1 John makes clear, confession is ongoing for Christians.” Later he adds: “Such an experience [confession of our sins] is not a new justification but a renewed application of our justification.” It is a mistake to tie the confession of our sins to our justification.
Consequently he adds:
What is strangely missing in the author’s whole discussion of the problem is the word sanctification. It is the believer’s sanctification, not justification, that demands confession of our individual sins. 1 John 1:9, which clearly requires believers to confess their sins, has absolutely nothing to do with our justification, but is an essential aspect of our sanctification. All of our sins—past, present, and future—are forgiven as far as our position in Christ is concerned—justification. But God is still working to perfect us in this life—progressive sanctification. And our progress in holiness and our daily communion with our Father require what I have called elsewhere a “sin-confessing attitude.” We must, as Paul says in Romans 8:13, “put to death the misdeeds of the body,” and dealing with our sins requires so to confess and repent of our sins on a daily basis if we are to make progress in holiness.
It simply confuses the question under discussions to attempt to explain the requirement of 1 John 1:9 by relating it to justification. Confession of our sins is a matter of sanctification, pure and simple.
So here is where I hop on the train. Let me say that the qualified statement above by Combs is generally a good one but there is a more finessed explanation which I am convinced, in practical terms, will significantly aid the Christian in his/her understanding, believing and applying its truth. In closing, Dr. Combs offers a Biblical policy which is my springboard. As we observed, Combs stated that “confession of our sins is a matter of sanctification”. As the advocate for those contending with this issue and seeking resolution I ask, just exactly, how does confession of our sin result in our sanctification?

To answer that I want to deal with the distinction and then the implication along with the necessary predicate of 1 John 1:9 (the thing upon which 1 John 1:9 exits).


Justification – The Satisfaction of God’s Justice

The moment you believe the gospel, God’s justice is satisfied with respect to your sins (this is but one of many wonderful things which occur when you believe the gospel but we are narrowing our treatment to the aspect to the forgiveness of our sins). The Apostle Paul writes in Colossians 1:13:

13 For He rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son, 14 in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.
Paul similarly qualifies this in Ephesians, chapter one:
7 In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses,
Finally, in Romans 3:21-24, Paul instructs:
21 But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction; 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus;
So what is the problem? If we have been justified and forgiven by God the Father, through and in Christ, why is there a need for more forgiveness?

In answering that question, DBTS’s Bill Combs, rightly distinguishes between forgiveness for justification and that of sanctification. In my effort, which you might view as an augmenting piece, I will differentiate the two kinds of forgiveness not with respect to their results, justification and sanctification, but with respect to the nature of the forgiveness or the position of that forgiveness. And to save you the agony of further teasing, permit me to provide the classifications and then continue with this essay.

The Two Kinds of Divine Forgiveness in the Bible

The fundamental difference of these two types of forgiveness is that the first - forgiveness for justification, is judicial and the second – forgiveness for sanctification, is personal. Before going any further and in case anyone raises this issue, we must note that our Savior, himself, made the distinction abundantly clear in the foot washing episode in his dialog with Peter where he responds to Simon Peter’s uninformed declaration that the Savior would not stoop so low as to wash his feet. Our Lord says in response to this in John 13:10a:

10 Jesus answered, “Those who have had a bath need only to wash their feet; their whole body is clean.
Sometimes people get the idea that Jesus the Savior did not discriminate between forgiveness (cleansing) for justification and forgiveness (cleansing) for fellowship. Here, we have this exact communication in the metaphor of washing.

Salvation is a Matter of the Divine Judiciary

I am not here to belabor the point of our justifications since most readers get that but I do wish to provide a well-qualified reference to it for due diligence’s sake and frankly, its role as a juxtaposing one with regard to forgiveness for sanctification. In the Epistle to the Romans Paul uses categorical judicial language because our salvation is, in fact, a matter of satisfying the justice of God. Paul ultimately declares, in Rom 5:1:

1 Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,
This is a court rendering, a judicial disposition based on the work of Christ. God is the Judge and his role as Judge is not only eternal but is re-emphasized in the book of Revelation at the Great White Throne Judgment (Rev. 20:11), where those without divine justification in Christ, attempting to rely on some form of self-justification instead, are cast into what the Bible describes as a lake of fire, forever, as the reward or recompense for self-justification.

Grasping the basics of justification is the easy part, it seems (again, with Christians primarily in view as the audience). Most Evangelical Christians generally get that all their sins, past, present and future, are forgiven.


So what is forgiveness as it relates to sanctification, why is this so difficult? It is, possibly because of the language used and something missing in many essays on the matter.

In order to move to that point we have to note that from our justification, many things happen. One of those things, no small thing, is that we are adopted into the family of God. After Paul establishes his arguments for our justification in Romans, he then moves onto the many things received as a result of our justification, one of which takes us from being estranged to God to having his Spirit come to live within us and our being adopted as sons into his family. Here is the Apostle writing in the 8th chapter of Romans:
1 Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.”… 16 The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God, 17 and if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him so that we may also be glorified with Him.
The Crux of the Distinction between the Two Kinds of Forgiveness

As this point we now have a relationship with God as his children when we are in Christ through our coming to believe on Christ as Savior. Our contact with God, now secured in and through Christ, is no longer one of a legal matter which needs to be resolved, that is - a judicial issue, since that problem has been resolved rather, our contact with God is now one of relationship (still based, however, on that legal rendering) and that relationship is codified with absolution in referring to us as being adopted into the family of God and so forth. It is now a personal relationship we have with God and more precisely, a familial one with God as our father.


Until you are born again, God is not your father. Hence, when you are born again via faith in Christ, the matter of alienation from God is resolved. It has been ruled you are his child through the merit of Christ which you received by faith in the gospel. He now responds to you as your father, always and forever, even in divine discipline. Thus, this changes - categorically - God’s forgiveness toward us after our new birth into his family.


This is Key to Keep in Mind as we go to 1 John which we will now do.


I John 1:3-10 with commentary

3 what we have seen and heard we proclaim to you also, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ. 4 These things we write, so that our joy may be made complete.
The context is immediately revealed, one of fellowship. Fellowship refers to spiritual communion or walking together which is relational in context. The basis of that fellowship is being born again via faith thus, the writer offers both the gospel for salvation and post-salvational principles of spiritual commune with God and with one another or as is called, fellowship (koinonia).
5 This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all. 6 If we say that we have fellowship with Him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth;
Again, we have the context of relationship with respect to how we commune with God. If someone says he is in commune or fellowship with God but are practicing some form of sin, he is lying. This means he is refusing to admit that something he is doing is sinful when it clearly is, while claiming fellowship with God. This says nothing about salvation but about the nature of fellowship. God never walks in darkness and for us to deliberately walk in darkness means that we cannot or may not rightly claim to be in fellowship.

And when the expression, walk in darkness, is used, it refers to a Christian unrepentantly living contrary to the clear revelation of Scripture, i.e., in sin. This is not referring to the various struggles each believer may have with regard to his or her sin patterns whose product (thought, word and deed sins) are regularly confessed but those sinful thoughts, words and deeds which the believer knowingly refuses to confess and refuses to seek the empowerment of the Spirit, over that sin. Yes, you may fail many times but it is the acknowledgment of that sin as sin, which is done via confession to God, that is what is at issue, here.

7 but if we walk in the Light as He Himself is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin.
Here we have the fullness of our salvation and its fellowship. When we have not sinned and are ordering our world as it should be via the revelation of God and the empowerment of the Spirit, not only are we in fellowship with God but with one another (assuming, of course, the other is in fellowship with God). It is automatic.

The expression, “and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin”, should be understood with its grammatical properties of a present, active, and indicative verb which means it keeps on cleansing us from all sin. In other words, our justification is without end.

8 If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us.
John now switches emphasis and tells us that if we claim to never sin, we are not telling ourselves the truth hence, the truth (sound doctrine) is not present in us. But if we do homologeo our sins (that means to name them, specifically, to God) what does God do? He not only forgives those sins but all unrighteousness or sins of which we have forgotten or are unaware.

This is the foot washing referred to by Jesus when teaching Peter about post-salvational sins. When you confess your sins to God the Father, who is washing your feet at that moment? God the Father does this for us, when we confess our sins.


What is this Forgiveness, then?


Remember the context, it is relational. Here, John is writing about individual sins we commit which must be admitted to God the Father. John is building a thought process and gives us the crescendo, if you will, at this point.


In verse 7, where John referred to Christ continually cleansing us from all sin, John used the singular form of the noun for the word, sin, which referred to our ongoing and endless justification. But in verse 9, John uses the plural form for the word, sin. The implication is unmistakable. This second reference is an accounting or inventory of particular sins which we admit to God the Father.


It is at this juncture that our individual acts of sin are at hand and it is because while Christ’s blood continues to provide ongoing justification, it does not provide ongoing fellowship, only the justification for that potential fellowship with God.

 
Hence, if we are to be in fellowship with God or partnering with him, it requires we be honest with God the Father when we sin because when we sin, we enter into darkness (out of fellowship) and the only way to leave that darkness is to confess that sin to God the Father thus, returning to fellowship with God.


And if we do confess our sins, the Scriptures say God is faithful and just, which means he always will do this without exception and it is justified since we have been made clean via Christ and are now God’s children. And what is he faithful and just to do if we confess? He is faithful to forgive us the sin we confess and better yet, also forgive thoughts, word and deeds which we are either too ignorant to understand are sinful or sins we have forgotten and cannot remember at that time (though later it may come to mind via the enlightenment of the Holy Spirit and then, those past sins need to be confessed, which has happened to me on more than one occasion, sometimes years later).


Ultimately, what you should understand this forgiveness as, is one which is a personal forgiveness from God based on your relationship. In other words, you and God are friends, so to speak. You offend your friend (he is much more but to make the point clear I will simplify since fundamentally, this is how it does work) by sinning. Just like any other person with whom you have a relationship with, in order to return to genuine commune or fellowship, you must admit to that person your offense and from that, he or she may forgive you, enabling you both to return to fellowship (and in God's case, he always forgives).


Conclusion – Forgiveness for Sanctification


So back to Bill Combs and his reference to this kind of forgiveness being for our sanctification. The way in which this forgiveness is for our sanctification is that it is the means, the vehicle, or the conduit through which we maintain fellowship with God.


Remember, when we refuse to admit we have sinned, when we have, we lie and then are walking in darkness. This means we are no longer being filled with God’s Spirit and are out of fellowship with God. This makes it impossible to mature, spiritually, which is the means by which we experience personal or practical sanctification.


So, understand. Forgiveness for salvation is judicial and forgiveness after you are saved has nothing to do with judicial or what is called, forensic forgiveness. This other kind of forgiveness from God is relational, it is personal forgiveness by God, that is, righteous person (God the Father) to righteous person (the redeemed saint) instead of Judge to sinner. May God bless this essay.