Lessons from Herman Cain: The Blood of Christ Cleanses My Conscience to Serve God

I have enjoyed the recent articles by Cal Thomas and Al Mohler regarding Herman Cain's suspension of his Presidential campaign. Both men make excellent points. In my readings yesterday, however, I was most moved by the words of a dead preacher named Charles Spurgeon. In a message he preached in 1857 from the book of Hebrews, he described three fools. The first is the wounded soldier on the battlefield who queries the medic about the weapon that wounded him rather than the physician's ability to save him. The second fool is the ship's captain in the midst of a horrible storm who goes below deck to read the encyoclopedia about the source and nature of Atlantic winds rather than working feverishly on deck to save his ship. The third fool is the immoral man who spends his time blaming others for his predicament rather than looking to God for his healing. Spurgeon, in his beautiful and eloquent way, points out that people who think themselves sophisticated will argue about the origins of the universe, the sources of evil, and other intricate questions, while neglecting the certain truth that we are all sinners in need of healing. Jesus Christ shed His blood to heal us. The Bible says emphatically and certainly that "without the shedding of (Christ's) blood, there is no forgiveness of sins" (Hebrews 9:22), which stated positively means "through the shedding of (Christ's) blood there is forgiveness of sins."  We all have the nature of Herman Cain. We all have the nature of Jerry Sandusky. We all have a natural tendency toward sin. We all have suffered and caused wounds as the result of our words, our actions, our lifestyles, our decisions, our lusts--our sins. The problem is we "trifle with subtleties while we neglect certainties."  We argue with others over why we are the way we are, why we have done what we have done, why we find ourselves in the position we are in. We argue about the source of the winds rather fight to their dissipation. We analyze the weapons that have shot us rather than look for the cure for our wounds. The promise of God is profound: "The blood of Christ shall cleanse your consience from dead works to serve the living God" (Hebrews 9:14). One of these days I would love to hear someone humiliated by public exposure of their sin say something like the following:

"I am guilty. I have been inappropriate with women. I have broken the vows of my marriage. I have sinned against God and my wife. The only healing I can find is in the shed blood of Jesus Christ who died for me. This much is certain: My conscience can only be cleansed by Christ's shed blood. By faith I have turned to Him, and I am now beginning to experience that cleansing within my conscience. That does not mean I will not bear the consequences of my sin in this life or that I (or others) will not bear scars brought by my sins. What my faith in Christ means is that He alone can cleanse my conscience. I must not live my life trying to atone for my mistakes by making you promises. I have no claim on God's future goodness and forgiveness (or yours) by my commitment to reform. I am only cleansed and guaranteed God's forgiveness by the sacrifice of Christ who died for sinners like me. The humiliation brought me by the public exposure of my sin is healthy, for it has reminded me why Christ died. Now, in an ever increasing gratefulness for His cleansing, I am growing in my desire to serve Him. I am a man being changed by the grace of God from the inside out, and if you will be patient with me, I think you will see in the future I will not be the same man tomorrow that I was yesterday. If you find you cannot place your trust in a man whose conduct has been like mine, I will understand, and simply remind you, that one's faith is always misplaced when found in men and not in God."

Theological Grace Must Become Practical Grace Or It Is Actually No Grace at All

Yesterday morning I took as a text Hebrews 7:25 where it is said, "He (Christ) is able to save them to the uttermost that come to God by Him." I pointed out that the KJV word "uttermost" is far superior to the actual meaning of the Greek word panteles than "forever," which is the word chosen by the NIV and NAS translators. It is true that God saves us forever, but the teaching of this verse is that Christ saves us to the "uttermost"--which means "completely" or "totally" or "fully."

The million dollar question is "Christ saves us from 'what' to the uttermost?' I pointed out that Christ saves us from "being 'cut off' from the goodness of God." This is the teaching of Romans 11:22 where the Bible says "Behold the goodness and severity of God" and proceeds to identify in the very next verse the people who continue in God's goodness (those who are in Christ) and then identifies the people who are "cut off" from God's goodness (those who are not in Christ). Being cut off from God's goodness is a very severe thing to experience (thus, the imperative "Behold [contemplate] God's severity"). There is a popular saying that "God is good all the time and all the time God is good." This saying contains only partial truth; God is good all the time to those "who come to Him by Christ." Those who refuse Christ are 'cut off' from God's goodness. By the way, to be "cut off" from the goodness of God is the biblical definition of hell. Hell is not Dante's version of a sadomasochist Creator who tortures sinners. Hell, or rather 'the biblical hell,' is a prison where lawbreakers are 'cut off' from the Creator's goodness.

Jesus Christ delivers (saves) those who trust Him from the severe danger of being cut off from God's goodness.

I cautioned everyone yesterday not to consider God's goodness only in terms of health, wealth and other material or temporal blessings. These things are good and definitely comprise some of the blessings that come from God ('for it is God who gives you the power to have wealth'), but these things are not God's greatest blessings. A rich, healthy, powerful man can be 'cut off' from experiencing God's goodness spiritually, emotionally, and psychologically. The internal knowledge that God is good to you eternally is far superior to the temporal experience of material blessings externally. A believer in Christ can have cancer, lose a job, or experience family difficulties and still be confident that they are smack dab in the middle of God's goodness. Christ delivers us from ever being, in any form or fashion, cut off from God's goodness, no matter how things seem around us.

Sunday Night's Experience of Pain

Twelve hours after preaching that message three times Sunday morning, I am asked to give a death notification to a family in our community. A man in his fifties, a husband and a father, died suddenly of a heart attack. His daughter, a woman in her twenties with two children of her own, heard the news that her father had died from my lips and fell apart emotionally, psychologically and physically. My heart went out to this young lady. She and her husband were recently separated. She had also lost her job as an aid at a hospital this past month, and was without work herself. When I found her to give her the news of her father's death, she was in the process of moving out of her rundown rental home because she and her two kids had been evicted. Her oldest child is autistic and the pressures of her current situation compounded by the shocking news of her father's death caused her to collapse on the front porch. Struggling to breathe, she rasped, "I can't handle this.. I can't handle this..."

I realized at that moment that the message I had preached that morning was completely useless to this young lady. Don't misunderstand; the message of God's grace in Jesus Christ is not useless. It was useless to this young lady at that moment. Theological grace must become practical grace or there is actually no grace at all. Not knowing the truth, it was impossible for her to experience the truth.

On the other hand, there are some who hear the truth at church, but don't put it into practice. Unless we hear the truth of God's grace in Christ, accept it, and then apply the truth in real life situations, biblical truth is just something we learn in Sunday School and church. We preachers have a tendency to spend too much time in the classroom and not enough time in the homes of our students.

Fortunately for both me and this young lady, her grandfather--the very father of the man who had just died--was soon on the porch, offering his warm embrace, gentle comfort, and strong, reassuring words to his granddaughter. The message of God's grace in Christ has made a difference in this man's life. He not only hears it every Sunday, he believes it and applies it ... as evidenced by his reaction to the news of the death of his only son. I overheard him say to his granddaughter, "Sweetheart, this is part of God's plan for us. We can trust Him."

I left that porch questioning my ministry for all the right reasons. Do I understand the mess that many people are in or have made of their lives? Do I truly comprehend the pressures of life? Is Sunday morning more than just a Bible lesson? Could I honestly react to the news of my son dying prematurely in the same manner as the father I had just observed? Is the goodness of God in Christ, particularly when circumstances seem so dark and painful, as easily relayed upon as I make it?

I went to bed thankful for my church member who displayed for me that unless one's theology of grace is actually lived out grace becomes just a word people use in songs and sermons on Sunday.

The Death of Christ Is Pleasing to the Father

In our age of radical skepticism within intellectual establishments regarding the death of Jesus Christ at Calvary, and the absolute abandonment by many of the concept of substitutionary atonement, it would be helpful for every Christian to be reminded of why the sufferings of Christ at Calvary are deemed so important from a biblical perspective.

I received an email from someone who read my blog regarding my time in jail in Mexico, and he wrote that "I was captivated by the story until you started speaking of the conversion of your cell mate." Then, the writer said, "your emphasis on Christ and the the prisoner's 'conversion' to faith in Christ caused me to lose all interest."

I appreciate my pen partner's honesty. Unfortunately, the gentleman who wrote me that letter is at odds with His Creator. In short, he has insulted God. He has called unlovely what God calls lovely. It is like someone ridiculing an artist's masterpiece. You may enjoy the freedom to share your opinion, but don't expect to be friends with the artist. In like manner, God gives every man the freedom to ridicule the death of His Son, but don't expect God to be friends with the person who finds tasteless what God finds incredibly delightful. Let me show you what I mean.

Hebrews 2:10 says, "For it was fitting for Him (God), for whom are all things, and through whom are all things, in bringing many sons to glory, to perfect the Captain of their salvation (Jesus) through sufferings."  This verse says that the sufferings of Christ at Calvary were "fitting for" God (NAS) or "becoming to" God (KJV).

The little phrase "fitting for Him" (NAS) translates the Greek phrase eprepen autoi. Without going into the interesting etymology of the word "eprepen," it is sufficient to illustrate the use of this rare biblical word with modern illustrations using the English translation.

To say something is "fitting" or "becoming" to a person means that it represents what the person likes, or who a person is. For example, my wife Rachelle is a very classy lady. She has her hair cut (see picture above) in a very "fitting" or "becoming" style for her, at least in my opinion.

The Bible says that it was "fitting" or "becoming" for God that the Son, Jesus Christ, would be made perfect through His sufferings at the cross. The cross represents the gracious character of God, in that He sent His Son Christ to suffer all the legal penalties of God's law, for His people, in order that Jesus might be the Captain of our salvation and bring "man sons to glory (heaven)." In other words, God is very well pleased with the the sufferings of Christ at Calvary. It is something beautiful for Him. The substitutionary death of Jesus Christ at Calvary is "fitting" and "becoming" to God.

To ridicule the need for the death of Christ, or to abandon the concept of atonement as a relic of a tasteless or crude religion, or to find the sufferings of Christ at Calvary irrelevant to faith in God is to mock the very thing that God finds "fitting," "becoming," and beautiful.

It would be similar to you insulting my classy wife by making fun of her hair cut. The difference is the consequence for anyone insulting God by rejecting the cross at Calvary, the very thing that represents His character and He considers intensely beautiful, is far more severe than any insult of my wife.  When you reject Calvary, you insult God.

What Sends a Person to Hell and Takes a Person to Heaven? It's Not What You Might Think

The answer most evangelicals give to the question that frames the title of this post is "Faith in Jesus Christ takes a person to heaven and a lack of faith in Jesus Christ sends a person to hell."

That answer is technically incorrect. A person is sent to hell or is taken to heaven based upon whether or not God considers them absolutely morally perfect in character and deed.

For example, listen to the Apostle Paul in Romans 2:7: "To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life." The phrase "persistence in doing good" is interesting. It's difficult to see in English the verb tenses of Greek. Paul's grammar refers to a continual, perfect conduct that includes right inner motives (i.e. "glory and honor" for God). In short, eternal life is the reward for absolute moral perfection while living on earth. The first three chapters of Romans is drilling into the minds of people that nobody, even the Jews zealous for obedience to the law, consistently, perpetually and perfectly obey God.

Be Ye Perfect!

God's demand for moral perfection is consistent with the words of Jesus in Matthew 5:48: "Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect." It is often said by preachers that "perfect"in this verse cannot mean "moral perfection," but rather "completeness." Not true. The demand of a holy God upon His Creation, specifically for those He created in His image, is absolute moral perfection. Without a perfect holiness and righteousness "no one will see the Lord."

Where do we find this standard of moral perfection? God stamps within the heart of each of us an understanding of morality. Theologians call this "natural law." One may go to the darkest locales in the most uncivilized parts of this world and find the most basic moral codes (i.e. "don't murder, don't steal, etc..."), but as in all societies, compliance to natural law is incomplete and corrupt.  God has written His standard in the hearts and minds of all men, but all men choose to transgress that standard (Romans 1).  It is the violation of this natural law--going contrary to conscience and the inner witness of what is right--that sends a person to hell. What's worse, because the standard of God is both inward and outward moral perfection (i.e. "motives, thoughts and deeds"), just desiring to murder someone (i.e. "hate") sends a person to eternal judgment. That corrupt desire of hate is contrary to original design of God for man.

Sin Against the Creator Sends One to Hell

Let me state the above principle as simply as possible: What sends a person to hell is NOT the rejection of Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior but one's own sin against His Creator. God will send you to eternal judgment if you live a morally imperfect life, inconsistent with His character and His image which are stamped in you. But He is a also a just and equitable God. He will also give eternal life to any human who actively,  continually and perfectly lives a life consistent with the character of God (Romans 2:7).

At various times throughtout history, particularly with the nation of Israel,  the transcendent God condescended to man and codiefied His standard (i.e. "law") in order to further reveal mans' moral corruption. The ancients spoke of moral perfection as "light" and the lack of moral perfection as "darkness." The Bible is clear that the world is dark and God is "light." Jesus of Nazareth,  the incarnate God ("Emmanuel") come to earth, has "no darkness at all" (I John 1:5).  In these last days God has spoken to us through His Son, revealing the ultimate standard of moral righteousness. We see God's moral perfection in the person and conduct of Jesus Christ. Our sin, what the Bible calls "transgression against the law of God," is living a life that is inconsistent with the character, motives, and actions of Jesus Christ. The Son is the fullest revelation of God's standard of moral perfection. Christ came to "fulfill" the work of the Father on our behalf. We are imperfect people in need of a Savior. We are "transgressors" and "sinners" because our disobedience to God is real and personal. Christ's presence on earth gives greater light to the character of God and further condemns those who are not as they ought to be.

God will one day judge each and every sinner for living life short of His moral standard of perfection. Ancient theologians believed the only humans excluded from this impending "day of God's wrath" are those who die as "infants or imbeciles." The latter word is definitely not appropriate in today's world, but what the old theologians meant was "God's judgment will fall on every single sinner except those who die in a state of infancy and imbecility." The 2000 Baptist Faith and Message affirms this ancient belief by declaring: "Through the temptation of Satan man transgressed the command of God, and fell from his original innocence whereby his posterity inherit a nature and an environment inclined toward sin. Therefore, as soon as they are capable of moral action, they become transgressors and are under condemnation." (Article III Man).

Hell Is the End of Willing Sinners

The point seems clear. God sends people to hell because of their own volitional sin. Though creation and the universe fell into a state of imperfection because of Adam's sin, and though humans are born in a state of imperfection because of Adam's sin, and though babies who die in infancy have received the penalty of physical death because of Adam's sin, God sends to eternal judgment only those who have personally and volitionally violated His moral standard.

That's pretty doggone bad news. Why? Because there is no single human being--not the Pope, not the Virgin Mary, not Mother Teresa, not Billy Graham, not anyone--who has ever lived a continuous morally perfect life. All have sinned and fallen short of God's standard and God's glory. We are all destined for hell because of our personal sins.

God Need Save Nobody

If God never intervened to save sinners He would remain just, holy, righteous and all the other attributes that you could ever think of that speak of His moral perfection. In other words, He would remain God. Sending sinners to hell is not the devil's work. It is the work of a holy, righteous God. Pharoah will be in hell because he disobeyed God. I deserve hell because I have imperfectly kept the standard of God's morality. Hell is not Dante's inferno. It is the withdrawal of God's gracious hand. It is total and complete darkness and isolation from people and from God as a punishment for moral imperfection. Those who loved darkness will be turned over to darkness. Though God is present in hell, He is present as Judge, and the punishment and righteous vengeance toward lawbreakers will be meted out righteously. "God will give to each person according to what he has done" (Romans 2:6). There will be various degrees of punishment in hell. The child sexual abuser will be punished far greater than the person who lived his life caring for children. For this reason, the person who is morally imperfect ought to be as good of a person morally as possible, for it is a "fearful and dreadful thing to fall into the hands of a living God" (Hebrews 10:31).

God's Blessing Are Reserved for Those With Absolute Moral Perfection

But what about heaven? What takes us there? Again, the only thing that takes you to heaven is complete, perfect morality and righteousness in thought, deed and character. You must be perfect. You can have no blemish on your record in regards to God's standard. There can be no sin. Your life must have been lived for the glory and honor of God. Every single thing you have done on this earth must be unselfish, peformed in love for the good of others and glory of God, and morally unblemished. What takes you to heaven is absolute perfection in compliance with God's standard of what is right (righteousness).

You don't have this perfect morality. I don't have this perfect righteousness. Nobody does. "There is no one who is righteous, no not one." Only God has perfect righteousness. Man lost his moral perfection when he rebelled against God by living contrary to His standard of moral perfection. For us to be taken to heaven, we need God. That's why the good news is so good. God came to earth (Emmanuel) and lived the perfect life required. He then promised to give all the blessings that come with perfect righteousness to anyone who will trust HIS RIGHTEOUSNESS TO TAKE THEM TO HEAVEN. When the righteousness of Christ is credited to the account of the believer through faith, God treats that believer as perfectly righteous. It's why the ancients used to say "God sees no sin in His people" judicially. It's why the Bible calls believers "saints." We have a perfect righteousness that is not our own, but comes from God, and is received by faith.

Listen to the Apostle Paul: "Whatever was to my profit I now consider loss. What is more I consider everything a loss compared to the surpassing greatness of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things. I consider them rubbish, that I may gain Christ and be found in Him, not having a righteousness that comes from (my obedience) to the law, but a righteousness that comes from God and is found by faith in Jesus Christ" (Philippians 3:8-11).

The Great Transaction

I tell people that when one trusts the person and work of Jesus Christ, a great transaction takes place. God has given to Christ all the righteous judgment due my sin, and God has given to me all the blessings due the righteousness and obedience of Christ through His moral perfection in relation to the law of God. My faith in Christ makes me a "co-heir" of Christ. The rewards I receive for eternity, whatever they may be, are all the result of the perfect obedience of Jesus Christ on my behalf.

Heaven is different from hell in one regard. What I receive in hell I have earned. What I receive in heaven Christ has earned.

So, let's answer the question of the title of this post - "What sends a person to hell and takes a person to heaven?

Imperfect obedience to God's moral standard sends a person to hell.
Perfect obedience to God's moral standard takes person to heaven.

The Importance of a Christ-Centered Gospel

Until we Southern Baptists learn to teach people that absolute perfect righteousness takes a person to heaven, we will be prone to the error of telling people that "their decision" or "their commitment to God" or "their walk down an aisle" takes them to heaven. That kind of error is prevalent in Southern Baptist evangelism, and in my next post I will show how prevalent that has become.

What takes a person to heaven is the perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ. What takes a person to heaven is not election, not faith, not commitment, not anything but the perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ. Everything else has its place, but the perfect and absolute moral perfection of Jesus Christ is one's ticket to heaven. Reject the only Savior God gave to obtain a perfect righteousness in the place of undeserving sinners, then you will answer to God for your own moral imperfections.

That's the gospel truth.

If a Man Believes a Lie It Will Not Be Long Until a Man Lives a Lie

"No doctrine is so calculated to preserve a man from sin as the doctrine of the grace of God. Those who have called it a licentious doctrine did not know anything at all about it. Poor ignorant things, they little knew that their own vile stuff was the most licentious doctrine under heaven. If they knew the grace of God in truth, they would soon see that there was no preservative from lying like a knowledge that we are elect of God from the foundation of the world. There is nothing like a belief in my eternal perseverance, and the immutability of my Father’s affection, which can keep me near to him from a motive of simple gratitude. Nothing makes a man so virtuous as belief of truth. A lying doctrine will soon beget a lying practice. A man cannot have an erroneous belief without by-and-bye having an erroneous life. I believe the one thing naturally begets the other. Keep near God’s truth; keep near his word; keep the head right, and especially keep your heart right with regard to truth, and your feet will not go far astray."

Charles Spurgeon, The Holy Spirit--The Great Teacher

Moralism and Legalism Are Not the True Gospel of God's Grace and Love in Jesus Christ

My mother will periodically send me a devotion that has made an impact on her. The other day she forwarded to all her children the following devotion that precisely defines my theology and forms the substance of what I proclaim to others. I am intentionally holding off on giving the author of this devotion the credit he deserves until people have had a chance to read it and comment on it. However, before I move to another written post at Grace and Truth to You, I will give full credit and a commendation of the author.

The bold letters are my own emphasis. After the devotional, I will make a few brief comments of my own. As always, I am not trying to convince people that I possess the truth (though I believe I do), because there is always the possibility that I could be wrong. I base my beliefs on the inerrant Word of God, but I am not of the opinion that my interpretations and opinions are always correct. And, even though I believe the doctrine in this devotion is the heart of true Christianity, I give allowance for other Christians to disagree and point out my error. Here goes:

God always entices us through love.

Most of us were taught that God would love us if and when we change. In fact, God loves you so that you can change.

What empowers change, what makes you desirous of change is the experience of love. It is that inherent experience of love that becomes the engine of change. If the mystics say that one way, they say it a thousand ways.

But because most of our common religion has not been at the mystical level, we’ve been given an inferior message—that God loves me “when” I change (“moralism”). What that does is put it back on you. You’re back to “navel gazing” and you never succeed at that level.

You are never holy enough, pure enough, refined enough, or loving enough.

Whereas, when you fall into God’s mercy, when you fall into God’s great generosity, you find, seemingly from nowhere, this capacity to change.

No one is more surprised than you are. You know it is a gift.

It is because I believe God's love effectual produces change in undeserving sinners that I hold to the doctrine of particular atonement. In other words, the love of God in Christ Jesus effectually and eternally saves the sinners for whom Christ died.

It is the moralist and the legalist who must make salvation something other than the love of God in Christ Jesus. Our convention and churches are filled with moralists who try to convince sinner they must do something to get God to love them. The love of God for sinners arises from His heart like an artesian spring, it is never pulled from his heart by the pump of human effort.

If I believed that Christ died for every sinner that has ever lived, or ever will live, then I would by necessity believe in universalism. The atonement is too powerful, the grace of God too efficacious, and the love of God too omnipotent to not produce the change His love brings to sinners. I believe the Bible teaches that God has chosen to bypass a few sinners and has sovereignly chosen not to give to them His effectual, saving grace. You may ask, "For what reason would God choose to leave sinners in their sin if it was within His power to deliver them?" Or, "Why would God not give to every sinner His transforming love since it is His love that transforms sinners?"  I respond: "Who am I to answer for God for His eternal purposes?" (see Romans 9). I can only conjecture  that God has mercy on whom he will have mercy and He hardens whom he will harden for the praise of the glory of His justice. In short, His people wouldn't appreciate the grace and mercy they have received unless they knew His justice and righteousness as revealed in the punishment of reprobate sinners.

The Bible clearly teaches that some sinners will experience the righteous judgment of God in hell. It's their fault that they experience God's judgment because it is their volitional sin that brings to them the wise and judicial justice of heaven. God declares that He takes no pleasure in their punishment, but He punishes unredeemed sinners to reveal His attribute of justice. On the other hand, there is a vast, innumerable company of sinners from every tribe, every nation, every kindred and every tongue upon whom God has set His love through Christ Jesus--in short, the world. I believe these elect are saved by the eternal love of God, and as we experience His love, we are transformed by His grace.

Again, whether you agree with me or not is of no concern to me. But if you believe the tenets of the above devotion to be true, your only option is to be a universalist or a particular redemptionist.

Otherwise, you become you fall into the spiritual quicksand of moralism and legalism.

In His Grace,

Wade Burleson

P.S. The devotion is by Catholic writer and Christian apologist Richard Rohr.

My New Book: Hardball Religion II -- A Sequel

Today I received an anonymous email from someone calling himself "Nomen Nescio." The play on words in the pseuodonym is cute (see the background for Nescio, a Latin word that means "I don't know"). When I read the content of the email I started out laughing. I'm used to personal attacks. I have been called an alcoholic, an addict, a liberal, a Christ-denier, and all other kinds of names by those who consider me an enemy. It comes with the territory. I neither resent the attacks nor feel any desire to defend myself.

But at the very end of the email, when two of my children were mentioned, I stopped laughing. Again, I am used to such ungodly tactics, but I'm not sure my children are. For this reason, after the email, which is reproduced below in its entirety, I would like to take the personal privilege of writing a few words directly to Charis and Boe--both of whom read their dad's blog. Others might enjoy what I have to say to them. For example, the Muslim who has composed videos that reveal the discrepancies in Dr. Ergun Caner's background has asked me why Christians are vehemently attacking him personally. Maybe he can receive some encouragement and comfort from my heartfelt words to my family. The anonymous email, with no salutation or closing, begins below:

________________________

This decision requires immediate attention. Your continued attacks on people in the SBC have reached a point where a certain group have decided to say to you enough is enough.We leaders in the SBC will not allow you to continue. We desire your recovery from your issues. But cease you must from continued attacks.

Here is the decision you have, if you can call it one:

1. Close your blog and stop all attacks including your father and church member. You are done! or

2. This group will release to the press and your church information we have obtained involving your careless sin and attempts to cover up such activity while attacking others.

Need proof?

Casinos! Other addictions! Why your daughter is not at Baylor! Your sons Marine issue! Enough? It is your call. At least we have the Grace and Truth to give you a "chance" for restoration.

_____________________________



Dear Charis and Boe,

"I hope by now, at your ages of 23 and 20 respectively, that you understand what real Christianity is all about. Mom and Dad have tried to show you that Christianity is a living, vital and joyful relationship with our Risen Savior, Jesus Christ. It's about being real, unconditionally loving those around us, and wrestling through various problems that arise as we seek to live well in a fallen world. Christ is our Hope, the God of all grace, and the reason our lives are so truly enjoyable.

Unfortunately, the two of you have been pulled into the hardball politics of the Southern Baptist Convention. I am not quite sure the rationale for bringing you into personal attacks against me, but your grandfather believes, and I must agree, that it is simply an attempt to hurt me. Of course, it won't work. Mom and Dad are incredibly proud of the two of you, and we know precisely why the Lord altered your future plans. We know that what is implied in the email is not true, but that is not real issue at hand.

The reason I am writing to you is not to defend, but to try to help you with one of the hardest things we Christians are ever called to do. I am asking you to forgive those who attack us personally because they don't like what your dad represents. Honestly, I've reached the place where personal attacks don't affect me, but the attacks on you is a new minefield through which I must carefully navigate as well.

Dysfunctional people, those who are not right with Christ, try to bully, intimidate and threaten others in order to get their way. I hope you have learned by now that when your dad experiences such hardball tactics it only steels his resolve to do the right thing. However, I never want my heart to become hard, cold or bitter because of such personal attacks. So far, God has been good to answer my prayer. Now that you have joined me in the arena of hardball religion, I am asking you to seek the same kind of grace required to be able to see through the personal attacks and know that true Christianity is much, much different than what is often represented in the Southern Baptist Convention.

Love you both,


Dad

I Believe Is Not the Same Thing as I Know

My goal in this post is to spark within the reader a thought process that leads to greater fellowship and dialogue among Christians with different beliefs. It is expected that this post will cause reactions within some, but it is written with the simple goal of fostering beneficial responses. For the purpose of illustration I will be open and honest about what I personally believe. My fellowship and relationship with you, at least in my mind, is not dependent upon our mutual beliefs. Rather I am your brother in Christ because of our personal, intimate and experiential knowledge of God - which we hold in common. In other words, my fellowship with you is based upon what we both know, not what we believe.

When we read the New Testament we find that the Apostles John, Paul, James and others made a clear distinction between belief and knowledge. There were just a few things which they "knew" and were absolutely persuaded about by God. The best synopsis of this knowledge is found in Paul's letter to young Timothy when he said,

Nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed" (II Timothy 1:12).

In short, I know what Paul knows. I know God is God and I am not. I know that God is able, and I am incapable. I know that the salvation of my soul is due to His love for me as revealed in the work of His Son on my behalf. These things I know.

But I believe so much more.

The atheist, agnostic and avoider of Christ would deny that I could even "know" the above. They say that at most, what Paul told Timothy he "knew," and what I declare to know, is a matter of faith, not knowledge. To some degree the atheist would be correct. The writer of Hebrews says, "And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him." (Hebrews 11:6).

But on the other hand, the atheist is simply missing the key blessing of coming to God through faith in Jesus Christ - the knowledge that God actually exists. Those who seek God will meet God, and will be rewarded with an intimate relationship with their Creator through Jesus Christ our Lord. The atheist has no "gnosis" or personal knowledge of this one true God. Therefore, the intellectually honest atheist can only say, "Atheism is my BELIEF that the most probable number of Gods is zero, and this has a fairly high probability." He is a man of belief. His belief has also led him to a personal and experiential knowledge - there is no God. He knows this as his reality, because the atheist hasn't met God. Yet the prophet declares, "Prepare to meet thy God."

As for us, we would say we know there is a God, for we have met Him. We were trapped in our own failures and inabilities when we heard the good news. We came to faith in the God who made provision for us through His Son, Jesus the Anointed One. Having trusted Him, we have found God true, faithful and able - just like Paul told Timothy.

I know this to be true!

But, again, I believe so much more.

In my ministry I live what I know and I teach what I believe. I teach what I believe with passion. I teach what I believe with conviction. But there is a difference between knowing and believing. My brothers and sisters in Christ who know God can "believe" differently than I and we shall continue in fellowship, for our fellowship is around the Person we know, not the things we believe.

Illustrations of that Which I Believe

(1). I believe Jesus died for a particular people - God's 'elect,' or Christ's 'bride,' or His 'church,' or 'believers,' or however else one wishes to describe the people from every nation, tribe, kindred and tongue who have an inheritance in heaven.

But I don't know Jesus died just for the elect. I have a friend, Paul Young, who believes Jesus died for every single human being who has ever lived, those in hell and in heaven, and as a result, he is a hopeful universalist - holding out hope that somehow, someway, someday, Jesus will empty hell and all of the universe will be redeemed because everyone will see the glory of the Son who actually redeemed them.

I teach what I believe (particular redemption), but I don't "know" that what I believe about particular redemption is true - one day I will find out. My belief in particular redemption is not shaken by those who oppose it. My belief in particular redemption does not form my identity. My fellowship with other believers is not defined by our mutual faith in particular redemption. I don't know that particular redemption is true - but I believe it. I just happen to know that what binds me with others is our mutual knowledge of God through faith in Jesus Christ.

(2). I believe that the earth is a young earth - but I don't know that the earth is young. When I teach through Genesis expositionally, as I have done three times, I teach that God created the earth at most 10,000 years ago - because that is what i believe. However, I don't "know" that God created the earth 10,000 years ago.

I wasn't there.

The Scriptures can be interpreted in various ways regarding the age of the earth. My belief in a young earth is not threatened by those brothers in Christ who believe in an old earth. My fellowship with those who know God through Jesus Christ is not limited to those who believe in a young earth. I am firm in my personal belief in a young earth, but I am honest enough to say I don't "know" the earth is young. One of these days I will "know."

We have teachers in our church who believe in a young earth, we have teachers in our church who believe in an old earth. They are free to teach whatever they believe, they are simply reminded to acknowledge that what they teach is a matter of faith.

(3). I believe that most, if not all, of the prophecies of Scripture have been fulfilled - I am what some would call a partial preterist. Preterism is from the Latin word meaning "having been fulfilled." I believe the prophecies of Revelation were fulfilled in 70 A.D., thus I believe in an early dating of the writing of Revelation. I believe the prophecies of Jesus in Matthew 24 were fulfilled in 70 A.D - within a generation of when they were given. I believe that the prophecies of Daniel were fulfilled through Alexander the Great, the birth of Jesus, and the destruction of Jerusalem.

But I don't "know" that the prophecies of Scripture have all been fulfilled completely. I teach what I believe about eschatology and allow others in our church to teach what they believe about eschatology. In fact, I have taught all four major eschatological positions (premillenialism, amillienialism, post-millenialism, preterism) to the people of Emmanuel - and then I asked them to choose what they believe.

Our fellowship is around our personal knowledge of Christ, not our mutual beliefs in other matters.

(4). I believe that God made women equal to men in authority - and so I see the prophetesses in Scripture prophesying, Priscilla teaching Apollo theology, Deborah reigning over Israel and judging God's people, and I have no problem with women teaching men today, or women holding positions of authority over men today, or believing women are gifted by the Spirit of God just the same as the Spirit gifts men today. Sure, there are different roles for men and women (women give birth, men don't), but the idea that a woman cannot have equal "authority to a man" is completely foreign to my understanding of the Bible and the purposes of God.

But here is where it gets sticky. Unlike my belief in a young earth, particular redemption, and partial preterism, belief in the equality of women has a corresponding action with it - it affects how the believer in gender equality treats women. Am I open for women to be in positions of spiritual leadership? Yes. Can women teach the Bible to men in our church? Yes, and they do. Do I believe women can teach Hebrew to future preachers? Yes.

Again, my view of equality is not based on experience, but on what I believe Scripture teaches. But my interpretation of Scripture is also consistent with my experience. So in some aspects I am like the apostle Paul when he said I am "fully persuaded" by God. My belief has become my personal knowledge.

Could I be wrong? Of course. God may not have given to women equal authority or equal spiritual abilities to men. If that is the case, then my interpretation of Scripture is leading me to place women in a very compromising, uncomfortable and possibly untenable positions. But, again, my actual experience has been just the opposite. Every teacher, every leader, every proclaimer of Jesus Christ who happens to be female seems to me to be just as capable and equal to men.

By the way, it is my desire to maintain fellowship and relationship with my brothers and sisters in Christ who disagree with me on this belief. But I have found that sometimes it is difficult for other Christians to fellowship with me around differing beliefs that lead to opposite, and uncomfortable actions. In other words, one can debate ecclesiology, eschatology, creation, and atonement - but serve the Lord's supper to a non-church member in front of a Landmarker, or put a woman as a teacher to men in front of a patriarch, or do something else that corresponds to, and is consistent with, your Christian beliefs, then the fireworks begin. That is, unless Christians understand the difference between believing something and knowing something.

Our church has been trained to be comfortable fellowshipping with various Christians that have differing beliefs, and in many instances, fellowshipping with Christians whose beliefs have led them to actions or activities that some in our church would refrain from participating in. There is in our church, for lack of a better word, soul freedom.

I freely confess that it would be difficult for me to be a part of a church where men treated women as inferior, or where men were allowed to speak down to women as if they were children, or where women were taught that their places in life were reserved to be a servants to the men. Yet, in no form or fashion would I ever urge a Convention to disfellowship from, or cease to cooperate with, a patriarchal church. Patriarchs are simply living out their beliefs, and they are our brothers and sisters in Christ. We just believe differently than they.

(5). I believe that God is absolutely sovereign - and not one atom, not one molecule, not one event, not one person, not one devil is allowed to move or act without his permission, prohibition, persuasion, or providence. There is nothing that is hidden from God or too hard for God. He does as He pleases, always as He pleases, only as He pleases. His purposes shall be fulfilled, and he shall accomplish everything according to His purposes.

But I could be wrong. God could not know the future because the things of the future do not yet exist and thus are not knowable, as Greg Boyd teaches. God could be dependent upon the will of man as Arminius taught.

But I teach what I believe, so I teach He is sovereign over all things, even the will of man and the future events of the world.

But it doesn't bother me to fellowship with someone who knows God but believes differently regarding His providence. One of these days I am hopeful that those of us who have very specific beliefs will come to the place where we are neither threatened by, nor seek to separate from, those Christians who believe differently than we.

There are so many other illustrations that could be given to show the difference between what we believe and what we know, but I think you get the point.



In His Grace,


Wade

Dr. J.L. Dagg: Unable to Teach at SWBTS?

Dr. John Leadley (J.L.) Dagg (1794-1884) was the first Southern Baptist systematic theologian to be widely read and accepted by Southern Baptists as a whole. J.L. Dagg pastored the Fifth Baptist Church in Philadelphia for ten years (1825-1834) and would later serve as President of Mercer University in Penfield, Georgia (1844-1854). Mercer enjoyed tremendous growth and recognition during Dagg's presidency, eventually moving to its current location in Macon, Georgia.

Dagg's writing career as a theologian had more influence on Southern Baptists in the 19th Century than any other Southern Baptist. His Manual of Theology (1857), Treatise of Church Order (1858), Elements of Moral Science (1859), and Evidences of Christianity (1869) all continue to stand testament to Dagg's theological acumen and breadth of biblical understanding. The Southern Baptist Convention in 1879, just five years before Dagg's death, passed a unanimous motion (when is the last time that has happened?) that requested the "venerable J.L. Dagg (to) write a catechism . . . . containing the substance of the Christian religion" for the benefit of future Southern Baptists.

Southern Baptists held Dr. J.L. Dagg in high esteem. This is the same Dr. Dagg that had no hesitation to write that Christ atoned for the sins of the elect only. Dr. Dagg firmly believed and taught that Christ died as a Substitute for His people alone. The Father, according to Dagg, has chosen and loved from eternity a certain number of sinners from every tribe, nation and tongue (the world) and given these ungodly sinners to His Son to redeem. Dr. Dagg taught that the Bible promises that Christ will effectually and perfectly accomplish His intended work, and not one of the elect would - or could - ever be lost. Salvation is of the Lord. Thus, Dr. Dagg would never say to every single human being "Christ died for your sins," because he didn't believe Christ died for every single human being. Christ died as a substitute and atoned for the sins of the elect only. The evidence of God's love and saving grace is the sinner's brokenness and repentance over sin and a willingness to place personal faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord. Dr. Dagg wrote in Manual of Theology, Book 7, Chapter 4, "Doctrine Concerning Divine Grace:"

The supposition that Christ bore the sins of the whole human race is attended with much difficulty. Multitudes died in impenitence before he came into the world, and were suffering for their sins in the other world, while he was hanging on the cross. How could he be a substitute for these, and suffer the penalty for their sins, when they were suffering it in their own persons? And if he endured the penalty for the sins of all who have since died, or shall hereafter die in impenitence, how shall they be required to satisfy justice a second time by personal suffering?

J.L. Dagg had earlier set forth the Scriptures that indicate Christ died for particular sinners, those that God chose from eternity to redeem and sanctify for the praise of His grace.

The Scriptures teach that the Son of God, in coming into the world and laying down his life, had the salvation of a peculiar people in view: "Thou shalt call his name Jesus, for he shall save his people from their sins."[Matt. i. 21] "The good Shepherd giveth his life for the sheep."[John x. 11] "Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the Church, and gave himself for it, that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that he might present it to himself a glorious church."[Eph. v. 25-27] The Scriptures also teach that the expectation of the Redeemer will be fully realized, and that not one of all whom the Father gave him will fail to be saved: "He shall see his seed. He shall see of the travail of his soul and be satisfied."[Isaiah liii. 10, 11] "All that the Father giveth me, shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out." "And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day."[John vi. 37, 39] "Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am."[John xvii. 24]

For those who would want the reason why God would redeem a certain specified number of sinners through Christ for the praise of His grace and determine to righteously judge other sinners outside of Christ for the praise of His glorious justice, Dagg would offer:

Those who are not included in the election of grace, are called, in Scripture, "the rest,"[Rom. xi. 7] and vessels of wrath."[Rom. ix. 22] Why they are not included, we are as unable to explain as why the others are included; and we are therefore compelled to refer the matter to the sovereignty of God, who, beyond all doubt, acts herein most wisely and righteously, though he has not explained to us the reasons of his procedure. His absolute sovereignty, is the discrimination which he makes, is expressed by Paul in these words: "He hath mercy on whom he will have mercy; and whom he will he hardeneth."[Rom. ix. 18]

Dr. Dagg believed, as have tens of thousands of Southern Baptists throughout our Convention's history, that those for whom Christ will be effectually redeemed, because Christ saved them through His work of atonement. In other words, it is the work of Christ that saves - not faith. Faith only evidences we have part and portion in the work of Christ. As Dr. Dagg so eloquently states:

In Rom. v.11, the only place in the New Testament where the word atonement occurs, the Greek word for which it stands, is the same that is rendered reconciling--reconciliation, in other places.[Rom. xi. 15; 2 Cor. v. 18, 19] The reconciliation is not between God and sin in the abstract, for such a reconciliation is impossible. It is a reconciliation of persons; and such a reconciliation as secures eternal salvation. "If, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God, by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life."[Rom. v. 10] In Paul's view, all those for whom Christ's death made reconciliation or atonement, will certainly be saved; and therefore atonement cannot be universal, unless salvation be universal. It is possible to use the word atonement in such a sense, as to render the question respecting the extent of the atonement one of mere definition: but it is best to use the words of Scripture in the Scripture sense.

I read the incredibly precise and biblically saturated doctrine of grace articulated by Dr. Dagg and am blessed. But then I read statements from our current leaders at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary like the following:

"Southwestern will not build a school in the future around anybody who could not look anybody in the world in the eyes and say, "Christ died for your sins." Paige Patterson, President of SWBTS, February 5, 2009

“A consistent five-point Calvinist cannot look a congregation in the eyes or even a single sinner in the eye and say: “Christ died for you.” What they have to say to be consistent with their own theology is “Christ died for sinners.” Since Christ did not die for the non-elect, and since the five-point Calvinist does not know who the elect are, it is simply not possible in a preaching or witnessing situation to say to them directly “Christ died for you.” Dr. David Allen, Dean of SWBTS School of Theology, SWBTS Center for Theological Research, November 2008.

In light of the extraordinary narrowing of the doctrinal parameters of the Southern Baptist Convention in the last 15 years, a narrowing that has led to an emphasis on Landmark, independent, Fundamental ecclesiology and soteriology - which by its very nature leads to separation from those who disagree - I can't help but ask the following question:

Would Dr. John Leadley Dagg be able to hold a faculty position within the school of theology at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in 2009?

I have absolutely no problem with SWBTS having Landmark, independent, Fundamental separatists as faculty members, particularly since this is the ideology of the President. My problem is the notion that one is not truly a Southern Baptist deserving of ministry unless you happen to be ideologically in conformity with them.

Thousands of Southern Baptists are not, and neither was Dr. Dagg.

In His Grace,

Wade