The Eight Most Important Christian Truths – Part 1

S. Lewis Johnson Message of the Week

DIVINE REVELATION IN SCRIPTURE
Dr. S. Lewis Johnson conducts an eight part series of study on the essential concepts of Christianity.  In this first study, the doctrine and necessity of revealed truth from God is discussed.

Scripture Reference: Psalm 19:1-4

Click here to listen to Part 1 of an 8-week series: Divine Revelation in Scripture

Transcript Excerpt:

Now today, I want to begin a series of messages on what I have entitled, somewhat reluctantly, “The Eight Most Important Christian Truths.”  Obviously, there will be difference of opinion over what are the most important Christian truths, and surely, there are some very important Christian truths that I will not have a chance to say anything about in this series, but this is my idea of the eight most important Christian truths.

And the subject for today is “Divine Revelation in Scripture.”  So, just as a basis of the general topic “Divine Revelation in Scripture,” I want to read for a Scripture reading Psalm 19 verse 1 through verse 14.  For those of you who are very familiar with this well-known psalm, you know that it is a psalm which speaks of the twofold revelation of God, his revelation in nature, general revelation, and his revelation in the Scripture, special revelation.  So let us keep that in mind as we read through this great psalm.

Using New Media to Impact the Next Generation of Christian Leaders

Podcast: Download (8.9MB)

Guest Host: John Stonestreet, executive director, Summit Ministries
Guest: Randall Niles, AllAboutGod.com

Facebook, Twitter, Google, etc, etc. The #1 source of information for the 21st century is the internet. Guest Randall Niles, founder of www.allaboutgod.com discusses how the internet can be used to communicate the Gospel to questioners. Learn how Randall is impacting thousands by building a “wall of truth,” placing Christian answers to people’s deepest questions where they can find it. Read more

Passing the Baton to the Next Generation of Christian Leaders

Podcast: Download (8.9MB)

Guest Host: John Stonestreet, executive director, Summit Ministries
Guest: Jeff Myers, author and speaker

What if life isn’t a sprint or even a marathon? What if it’s a relay race? Throughout Scripture the faithfulness of a generation is tested not the by their faithfulness, but by the faithfulness of the next generation. In this hour, Dr. Jeff Myers of Bryan College and Passing the Baton International discusses why and how we can be hopeful about the future leaders despite all of the bad news we hear. What’s this generation like? Who’s at fault for this? What can be done?

Why I Am Not Signing The Manhattan Declaration – David Wheaton

The recent release of the Manhattan Declaration has generated a lot of interest in Christian circles and even in the secular media.  The framers and prominent signatories of the document are representatives of the three major prongs of the professing Christian church: Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and Evangelical Protestant.  As of Wednesday, November 25th, the Declaration had over 100,000 signatures and this is sure to rise in the coming days and weeks.

What is the Declaration about?  You should click on the above link and read more of it but here is the opening section:

“Christians, when they have lived up to the highest ideals of their faith, have defended the weak and vulnerable and worked tirelessly to protect and strengthen vital institutions of civil society, beginning with the family.

We are Orthodox, Catholic, and evangelical Christians who have united at this hour to reaffirm fundamental truths about justice and the common good, and to call upon our fellow citizens, believers and non-believers alike, to join us in defending them. These truths are:

1. the sanctity of human life
2. the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife
3. the rights of conscience and religious liberty.

Inasmuch as these truths are foundational to human dignity and the well-being of society, they are inviolable and non-negotiable. Because they are increasingly under assault from powerful forces in our culture, we are compelled today to speak out forcefully in their defense, and to commit ourselves to honoring them fully no matter what pressures are brought upon us and our institutions to abandon or compromise them. We make this commitment not as partisans of any political group but as followers of Jesus Christ, the crucified and risen Lord, who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.” 

I wholeheartedly support the three points listed above and do what I can to advocate for them.  But I have decided not to sign the Manhattan Declaration.  Why?  Because there is an even more important issue than these three that I believe gets confused by the Declaration … the gospel message itself.

Catholics, Orthodox, and Evangelicals have many significant differences in doctrine but there is one critical difference on the all-important, eternity-determining question of justification: By what means is sinful man reconciled to God?

The divide on this issue between Roman Catholics and Orthodox (who believe that man is justified before God through a process of faith in Jesus Christ plus the keeping of church sacraments and traditions) and theologically conservative Evangelicals (who believe that man is justified by God’s grace through repentance of sin and faith in Christ’s work on the cross) is historic, well-documented, and … mutually exclusive.

And that’s the problem with the Declaration for me.  The implied Christian brotherhood between Catholic, Orthodox, and Evangelical woven throughout the document leaves the impression of “different churches, but same family and destination.”

Chuck Colson, the main Evangelical involved in crafting the document, says as much in his column today,

“As I hope you know by now, last Friday, 20-some Christian leaders stood before the microphones at the National Press Club in Washington, DC. Fox News, CNN, ABC News, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post and more were there with cameras and microphones.

There, we announced the release of the Manhattan Declaration. And we proclaimed to the church—and put our nation’s leaders on notice—that we would protect the sanctity of life, that we would uphold the sacredness of marriage as a holy union between one man and one woman, and that we would defend religious freedom for all people.

There, in front of all those cameras and lights, Christian leaders lovingly, winsomely, and firmly took a stand. I will never forget the picture. I stood between Archbishop Wuerl of Washington and Cardinal Rigali, Archbishop of Philadelphia. I looked over at Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, Jim Daly of Focus on the Family, and Ron Sider, president of Evangelicals for Social Action.

To my left was the brilliant Bishop Harry Jackson, a man who has mobilized African American churches in the District to oppose gay “marriage.” And there was Fr. Chad Hatfield, chancellor of St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Seminary. I was missing only one man, my dear friend, the late Richard Neuhaus.

It was a foretaste of what we’re all going to see in heaven, when those of us who can truly trust the Bible, who love Christ with all our hearts, minds, and souls, are re-united in the presence of our gracious and loving God.” [underline emphasis mine]

Chuck Colson is an intelligent and caring man but claiming common eternal destiny in heaven for these Orthodox, Catholic, and Evangelical leaders fails the test of simple logic.  Either one is justified by faith alone in Christ or one is not.  How else can Ephesians 2:8-9 and Romans 4:4-5 and the many other Scriptural passages like them be interpreted?

“For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast” (Ephesians 2:8-9).

“Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due.  But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness…” (Romans 4:4-5)

Clarity of the gospel is of primary importance.  While I greatly respect many of those who have signed The Manhattan Declaration like Albert Mohler and James Dobson, I do not see in Scripture any precedent for joining in common spiritual cause with other Christian religions who hold to a “different gospel” (see Galatians 1:6-10).  Jesus Christ, His apostles, and the other writers of the New Testament never formed nor advocated forming a coalition with other religious leaders of their day, like the Pharisees or Sadducees, to push back against some moral failing of society or government.  Neither should biblical Christians today.

Wouldn’t it better to form a coalition with those who are united on the definition of the most critical issue — the gospel — so that important work on the sanctity of life, traditional marriage, and freedom of conscience can be pursued without confusion … and with soul-saving effect?

=====================

Further reading on this topic…

Why They Did Not Sign:

• John MacArthur

• RC Sproul

• Alistair Begg

• Michael Horton

• Tim Challies

Why They Did Sign:

• Chuck Colson

• Albert Mohler

• Ligon Duncan

The Manhattan Declaration – Revisited (Tim Challies)

Last week saw the release of The Manhattan Declaration, a document crafted by Chuck Colson, Robert George and Timothy George and signed by a long list of Evangelical, Catholic and Orthodox leaders. I have not been able to gauge the interest in the Declaration or whether it has had an immediate impact. But I have seen a bit of buzz about it through the Christian blogosphere. Today I want to address it, even if only briefly.

Here is a brief description of the document:

Christians, when they have lived up to the highest ideals of their faith, have defended the weak and vulnerable and worked tirelessly to protect and strengthen vital institutions of civil society, beginning with the family.

We are Orthodox, Catholic, and evangelical Christians who have united at this hour to reaffirm fundamental truths about justice and the common good, and to call upon our fellow citizens, believers and non-believers alike, to join us in defending them. These truths are:

1. the sanctity of human life
2. the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife
3. the rights of conscience and religious liberty.

Inasmuch as these truths are foundational to human dignity and the well-being of society, they are inviolable and non-negotiable. Because they are increasingly under assault from powerful forces in our culture, we are compelled today to speak out forcefully in their defense, and to commit ourselves to honoring them fully no matter what pressures are brought upon us and our institutions to abandon or compromise them. We make this commitment not as partisans of any political group but as followers of Jesus Christ, the crucified and risen Lord, who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

It is, then, a declaration on these crucial issues of the sanctity of life, the sanctity of marriage and the sanctity of religious liberty. Among the more notable signatories, at least to readers of this site, is Dr. Albert Mohler, President of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Unfortunately a portion of The Manhattan Declaration site is down now so I cannot refer to the list of signatories to reference other names.

Some Evangelicals have chosen to decline signing the Declaration on the basis that it is a joint statement by Evangelicals, Catholics and Orthodox leaders. I am among those whose conscience will not give me freedom to add my name to the 100,000+ who have already signed.

Rather than write a lengthy defense of my refusal, I thought I would direct you to some useful articles.

John MacArthur offers this explanation as to why he will not sign. “It assumes from the start that all signatories are fellow Christians whose only differences have to do with the fact that they represent distinct ‘communities.’ Points of disagreement are tacitly acknowledged but are described as ‘historic lines of ecclesial differences’ rather than fundamental conflicts of doctrine and conviction with regard to the gospel and the question of which teachings are essential to authentic Christianity. … [It would] relegate the very essence of gospel truth to the level of a secondary issue. That is the wrong way—perhaps the very worst way—for evangelicals to address the moral and political crises of our time.”

James White writes “There is no question that all believers need to think seriously about the issues raised by this declaration. But what is the only solution to these issues? Is the solution to be found in presenting a unified front that implicitly says ‘the gospel does not unite us, but that is not important enough to divide us’? I do not think so. What is the only power given to the church to change hearts and minds? United political power? Or the gospel that is trampled under foot by every Roman Catholic priest when he ‘re-presents’ the sacrifice of Christ upon the Roman altar, pretending to be a priest, an ‘alter Christus’? Am I glad when a Roman clergyman calls abortion murder? Of course. But it exhibits a real confusion, and not a small amount of cowardice, it seems, to stop identifying the man’s false gospel and false teaching simply because you are glad to have a few more on the ‘right’ side of a vitally important social issue.”

Frank Turk also declines, saying “It assumes a big tent for the definition of what it means to be a ‘believer’, assumes that law is greater than grace in reforming the hearts of men, and provides moral reasoning that those who are unbelievers have no reason to accept — because they are unbelievers. And in making these three items “especially troubling” in the ‘whole scope of Christian moral concern’, it overlooks that the key solution to these moral concerns is the renovation of the human heart by supernatural means established by the death and resurrection of Christ.”

To varying degrees I agree with each of these critiques though on the whole my thoughts line up mostly closely with John MacArthur’s. In my view, this line says it all: “Going back to the earliest days of the church, Christians have refused to compromise their proclamation of the gospel.” It is good to speak of the gospel, but what does the term mean if used by Protestants, Catholics and Orthodox? Each has their own understanding of the term—the term that stands at the very heart of the faith. I just cannot see past this issue.

I see that there is much more to lose than to gain in joining together across these denominational boundaries. I would not and could not sign it.

EU Creates Historic & Undemocratic New Post – “President of Europe”

On Thursday, I was sitting in a hotel room in Turkey watching the live press conference in which the European Union made an “historic” decision to create a “President of Europe.” They chose Belgium Prime Minister Herman van Rompuy over Britain’s Tony Blair. If you’re thinking, “van who?”, don’t worry — you’re not alone. In one of the most undemocratic developments in recent history, the new leader of a half-billion Europeans is a name only 12% of them have even heard of. He was chosen unanimously by a council of other EU leaders, not by popular vote, and will take office January 1, 2010. Now that I’m home, I’m contemplating how quickly an unknown can rise to a position of great power. All this comes quickly on the heels of the historic passage of the EU “Lisbon Treaty” earlier this month. Noted the New York Times: “A landmark agreement aimed at giving the European Union a global stature on par with major powers like the United States and China cleared its last major hurdle on Tuesday….The treaty’s supporters contended that it was vital because the union’s rulebook was drawn up before the bloc began to expand, taking in 12 new nations since 2004. Its critics, however, contend that the document encroaches on national sovereignty and threatens to turn the European Union into a monolithic superstate.” We are watching the emergence of an increasingly unified and powerful Roman empire continue unabated, just as Bible prophesy tells us to expect in the “last days.”

Immediate implication of the move: van Rompuy’s “election/selection” will accelerate Turkey’s dramatic shift from NATO ally to ally of Iran, Syria and Russia. Why? Van Rompuy is an avowed opponent of Turkish entrance into the EU and the Turks are furious.

Some U.S. and European analysts are horrified by the selection of van Rompuy, ridiculing him as a bland dolt and claiming EU bureaucrats missed a great opportunity to select Blair and make the new presidential post truly a global game-changer. Such analysts are missing the point. EU leaders didn’t bumble into this appointment. They are determined to create an unrivaled superpower. They are determined to create the world’s most powerful political position in the presidency. But they want an EU-fanatic, not a British lone ranger. I’d never heard of van Rompuy until Thursday, but I have no doubt the EU leaders who chose him unanimously knew exactly what they were doing. I expect this guy to be a problem for the U.S., for freedom, and for Israel. Time will tell for certain.

Worth noting are some early press analyses of van Rompuy — not exactly favorable:

• The London Telegraph says, “Herman Van Rompuy’s quirky exterior conceals a ruthless political operator who will stop at nothing to get his way as president of the European Union.” Excerpts: “The ‘ideal candidate,’ said Nicolas Sarkozy, the French President, for bring “consensus and cohesion” to a fractious EU of 27 member states. In reality, and behind his harmless, eccentric and literary persona, Mr Van Rompuy, 62, is a sharp political operator who is not above using dirty tricks to stymie his opponents. Europe’s leaders may find to their cost that the man they chose to chair their EU summits possesses dark arts that will be turned against anyone, such as an incoming Conservative prime minister, who challenges the Brussels consensus. Last year, six months before becoming prime minister, he abused his position as speaker of the Belgian parliament to cancel a politically inconvenient debate. To make doubly sure that MPs would be silenced, he had the locks on the plenary chamber’s doors changed so deputies could not get into their own parliament. The tactic was described by opposition MPs as a ‘coup d’etat.’ On another occasion, Mr Van Rompuy did not turn up in his office for a week to avoid opening a letter from opposition MPs demanding a debate. His skill as camouflaging himself as essentially harmless disarmed Gordon Brown who dropped British concerns over his federalist politics to allow him into the EU President post. Mr Van Rompuy is a supporter of the creation of an EU federal state, with its own anthem, flag and with powers to collect taxes on car fuel or financial transactions from Europe’s citizens.”
• The U.K. Independent quotes a colleague of van Rompuy who says, “He… operates in the shadows.”
• Time magazine calls van Rompuy’s rise to power a case of “the bland leading the bland,” notes that 11 months ago, even few in Belgium knew who he was
• But the European Voice notes he is a “shrewd political operator” who outfoxed Tony Blair for the top post
• Sky News: Blair loses out to Rompuy as EU president
• Lady Ashton to Replace Solana as EU foreign policy chief

A Christian Response to America’s New Civil War (Part 2)

Podcast: Download (8.9MB)

Guest: Robert Knight, Coral Ridge Ministries

You might remember Part 1 of our interview back on September 26, 2009 with Robert Knight, senior writer for Coral Ridge Ministries, about the many and varied issues threatening traditional America that have been foisted upon us by the radical change-agents who occupy the political halls of power.

We talked about the growing attack on the life of the unborn child (“it’s a woman’s choice”) and the elderly Read more

Organized Religion: Take It or Leave It?

Podcast: Download (8.9MB)

Guest: Kevin DeYoung, author, Why We Love The Church

TRANSCRIPT

You’ve probably heard someone say — or said yourself — one of the following about the church: “I don’t need to go to church to be spiritual” or “Religion is corrupted when it gets organized by humans” or “I was hurt by a church and would never go back.”

There’s no question that there is a smoldering animosity towards “organized religion” Read more

Jonah – The Old Testament Cousin of John 3:16

S. Lewis Johnson Message of the Week

Jonah 4 God’s compassion is most clearly evidenced in the person and work of Jesus Christ, but where is this characteristic manifest in the Old Testament? Listen as Dr. S. Lewis Johnson discusses the unparalleled compassion of God in his exposition of Jonah’s fourth chapter.

Click here to listen: Jonah – The Old-Testament Cousin of John 3:16
Part 5 of a 5-weeks series on Jonah

What Happens When Our Debts Aren’t Forgiven?

Podcast: Download (8.9MB)

Guest: Dr. David Noebel, president, Summit Ministries

We hear mind-boggling numbers almost everyday about the amount of debt in which America has spent herself.  Government “stimulus” and bailouts, health care “reform”, and individual debt that all adds up to trillions of dollars in debt has become the norm in this country.

Whatever happened to staying out of debt and living within one means? Read more

Next Page »