Ten Shekels and a Shirt

I was in Africa recently on a short term mission, and this really resonated with me, so I wanted to share with you.

Excerpt: Ten Shekels and a Shirt; by Paris Reidhead

If you'll ask me why I went to Africa, I'll tell you I went primarily to improve on the justice of God. I didn't think it was right for anybody to go to Hell without a chance to be saved. So I went to give poor sinners a chance to go to heaven. Now I haven't put it in so many words, but if you'll analyze what I just told you do you know what it is? Humanism. That I was simply using the provisions of Jesus Christ as a means to improve upon human conditions of suffering and misery. And when I went to Africa, I discovered that they weren't poor, ignorant, little heathen running around in the woods looking for someone to tell them how to go to heaven. That they were MONSTERS OF INIQUITY!!! THEY WERE LIVING IN UTTER AND TOTAL DEFIANCE OF FAR MORE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD THEN I EVER DREAMED THEY HAD!

They deserved Hell! Because they utterly refused to walk in the light of their conscience, and light of the law written upon their heart, and the testimony of nature, and the truth they knew! And when I found that out I assure you I was so angry with God that on one occasion in prayer I told Him it was a mighty ..... little thing He'd done, sending me out there to reach these people that were waiting to be told how to go to heaven. When I got there I found out they knew about heaven, and didn't want to go there, and that they loved their sin and wanted to stay in it.

I went out there motivated by humanism. I'd seen pictures of lepers, I'd seen pictures of ulcers, I'd seen pictures of native funerals, and I didn't want my fellow human beings to suffer in Hell eternally after such a miserable existence on earth. But it was there in Africa that God began to tear THROUGH THE OVERLAY OF THIS HUMANISM! And it was that day in my bedroom with the door locked that I wrestled with God. For here was I, coming to grips with the fact that the people I thought were ignorant and wanted to know how to go to heaven and were saying "Someone come teach us", actually didn't want to take time to talk with me or anybody else. They had no interest in the Bible and no interest in Christ, and they loved their sin and wanted to continue in it. And I was to that place at that time where I felt the whole thing was a sham and a mockery, and I had been sold a bill of goods! And I wanted to come home.

There alone in my bedroom AS I FACED GOD HONESTLY WITH WHAT MY HEART FELT, it seemed to me I heard Him say, "Yes, will not the Judge of all the earth do right? The Heathen are lost. And they're going to go to Hell, not because they haven't heard the gospel. They're going to go to Hell because they are sinners, WHO LOVE THEIR SIN! And because they deserve Hell. BUT, I didn't send you out there for them. I didn't send you out there for their sakes." And I heard as clearly as I've ever heard, though it wasn't with physical voice but it was the echo of truth of the ages finding its' way into an open heart. I heard God say to my heart that day something like this, "I didn't send you to Africa for the sake of the heathen, I sent you to Africa for My sake. They deserved Hell! But I LOVE THEM!!! AND I ENDURED THE AGONIES OF HELL FOR THEM!!! I DIDN'T SEND YOU OUT THERE FOR THEM!!! I SENT YOU OUT THERE FOR ME! DO I NOT DESERVE THE REWARD OF MY SUFFERING? DON'T I DESERVE THOSE FOR WHOM I DIED?"

Find the full sermon below:

How Great is our God

~Silly Things~

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~Silly Things~
God so often I walk trying to do it my way
this only tends to lead me astray
I try and try this or that
Thinking that I am the big cat
Each thing I do ends up a mess
Because it's not something you have blessed
Lord teach me to daily trust in you
That these silly things I bid adieu
Lord your ways have always been
Perfect, and seamless from beginning to end
~Sidney Driver

The New Tolerance and Christianity

I have been noticing an interesting trend in our country the past several years. First, the definition of the word tolerance has changed. It has went from meaning one believing that everyone has the right to hold to their view regardless of whether they agree with it or not to one affirming that all views must be valid. In fact, now, even if one recognizes one's right to hold to a certain view, if they declare that view wrong or invalid they become labeled as intolerant. As Bob Dylan once sang, "the times they are a-changin.'" Second, what is even more interesting about this new tolerance espoused today, is that it appears that two of its primary targets are Christians and Christianity. Allow me to point out some examples that demonstrate this.

The CEO of popular restaurant chain, Chic-Fil-A, makes a statement that expresses his position on marriage that has been the church's understanding of the sacred union based on the Bible for the past 2,000 years. The next thing you know, people are talking about how intolerant he is and are calling for a boycott. Some companies decide against supporting the restaurant chain because of the view of it's CEO. Most laughable of all has to be the mayor of Boston publicly refusing to allow a Chic-Fil-A restaurant to be in his city due to the CEO's statement violating it's stance as an "open city," a "city at the forefront of inclusion." What he must have meant to say was that Boston serves as an "open city" and "at the forefront of inclusion" for those who agree with what the mayor considers appropriate and that they are actually "closed" and "exclude" those they do not agree with. Ironically, in the name of tolerance they cannot tolerate the CEO's position!

In the last inaugural ceremony for President Obama, evangelical pastor Louie Giglo was originally invited to give the benediction for the service. However, after some sleuth work uncovered that he had preached a sermon about 15 years ago or so stating that homosexuality is a sin, he was quickly pressured to back out of the invitation with the White House issuing an apology due to them not knowing his views on human sexuality. (Though what would you expect from an evangelical pastor who holds to the Bible as God's inspired, inerrant, and authoritative Word?) Controversy also surrounded Pastor Rick Warren when he was asked to give the benediction for President Obama's inaugural ceremony for his first term. People cited his views on homosexuality (which are the same as Giglo) and his biblical position on the exclusivity of the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation. They just could not tolerate these views. Yet both Giglo and Warren were the ones being described as intolerant for their views! Interestingly enough, little was said about Obama also choosing Gene Robinson, the first openly gay bishop in the Episcopal denomination. He believes that his view is right and that Warren and Giglo's are wrong. Yet the same ones who were concerned about Warren's views upsetting others didn't seem to mind Robinson's.

And to note a more local case, we can look to the stir that has been caused in Connellsville, PA when a Jr. High School was sued to remove a 10 Commandments monument that had been on the school grounds for about 55 years. Why the lawsuit in the first place? Someone complained about it. I guess it must have offended them. However, removing it appears to have offended several others within the small community as 10 Commandments signs now can be found all over Connellsville and the surrounding Mt. Pleasant area where I live. Plus, several complaints have arose over taking it down or moving it. If this really is about being cautious concerning offending anyone, then what about the many offended over taking it down? What about their rights? This new tolerance certainly appears to be very "one-sided."

To make any statement about homosexuality being a sin and so-called "same-sex marriage" to be against God's created plan for the family leads to being called names such as "bigot" and the accusation that one is discriminating against homosexuals. However, these people either fail to understand what "discrimination" is or they have redefined it since by such name calling and accusations they actually discriminate against the Christians who hold to such views. Talk about a double standard!

Now none of this should surprise Christians. After all, Jesus did warn us about this. He said, If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you (John 15:19). Those who bear Christ's name will also be ridiculed as He was on this earth. If they persecuted me, they will persecute you also (John 15:20). I often wonder if this new tolerance might be the start of the persecution of Christ's true followers in America. Regardless, we need to continue to preach the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ unashamedly while it may be labeled intolerant and our freedoms to do so may become more and more limited. Many are heading to Hell and need to hear the good news!

In Christ,
Lee Smith
Soli Deo Gloria!!!

The Bible on Homosexuality: Revised and Updated Edition

About three years ago when I had just graduated seminary and had more free time on my hands than I knew what to do with, I did an intense study concerning the Bible's teaching about homosexuality. At the time, the denomination in which I served was debating the issue and I thought that I would write a paper to educate those who might have been confused about what God said about the issue. Turns out that God has a lot to say about homosexuality and so called "same-sex marriage." With the current two cases being heard by the US Supreme Court and many discussions pertaining to the issue ensuing I thought that I would take some time to "update" and "revise" that paper. My hope is to help people understand what Scripture says concerning this topic so that they have the proper perspective. The link to the paper can be found here: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B1LkenNmEG_dY2tFOEQ4dnh0d0E/edit?usp=sharing

God bless!

In Christ,
Lee
Soli Deo Gloria!

Do Not Abandon the Gospel!

I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed! ~Galatians 1:6-9

Paul begins his letter to the church of Galatia in a way that is different than any of the other letters that we have which he wrote. If you look at his letters to the churches at Rome, Corinth, Ephesus, Philippi, Colossae, Thessalonica, and even to the individuals of Timothy, Titus, and Philemon, you will notice a consistent pattern that is not followed in this letter. Normally Paul starts his letters praising God for the recipients to which he writes, expressing his thanksgiving for them, and acknowledging his prayers on their behalf. However, after a very brief greeting, without any hesitation, he addresses an issue he has heard about in the church of Galatia. The issue is so important that the apostle does not even have time to share his usual common commendations and courtesies. What issue could be so pressing? Neglecting the true gospel message to follow a false counterfeit.

The problem plaguing this church was that a group known as the “Judaizers” insisted that the Gentiles (non Jews) who had, by God’s grace, come to faith in Christ, be circumcised as prescribed by the Old Testament law to actually be saved. Thus, salvation became based not solely on what Christ has DONE experiencing God’s wrath by dying in the place of those who trust in Him on the cross but also on something that one must DO. This could be described as a different gospel which serves as a distortion of the gospel of Christ (vv. 6-7). In fact, Paul says that this serves as no gospel or good news at all. The true gospel of Christ is that one is saved by God’s wrath that they deserve for their sins through their faith ALONE in Christ ALONE to save them. Not in anything they have done or can do but only on what Christ has done on their behalf and them placing their only hope in Him and His death and resurrection to be saved. As Paul reminds the Galatians of this true gospel: a man is not justified by the works of the law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; since by the works of the law no flesh will be justified (2:16). God only declares a sinner to be righteous who has placed their trust in Christ to save them through His death and resurrection, not those who think they might be good enough or do a substantial amount of good deeds to earn God’s favor. The Galatians were abandoning the truth of this gospel and being enticed by the teachings of these Judaizers that the act of being circumcised served as a condition of being saved.

Paul views distortions of the gospel of grace as being so serious that he rebukes those who proclaim them with some of the strongest words available. He states that if anyone, even an angel from heaven or himself, preaches a gospel different than the one found preached by the apostles and recorded in Scripture, that he is to be accursed (v. 8). The Greek word for accursed basically communicates the idea of being devoted to destruction and brought under a curse. And he not only says this once but twice (v. 9). A false gospel is no laughing matter or something that one can cast a blind eye towards. After all, one’s eternal destiny depends on their reception to the true articulation of the gospel.

Several “Judaizers” exist today. They may not be demanding the necessity of people to get circumcised in order to be saved but they distort the gospel by teaching that one must DO something in order for God to save them. The truth of the gospel lies in the facts of what Christ has DONE to save those who by faith look to Him alone as their hope and basis to stand before a holy God who cannot tolerate sin. The moment that someone places the focus on you for your salvation instead of pointing to Christ and His life, death, and resurrection as what saves, they have distorted the gospel of Christ and presented another gospel which really isn’t good news at all. Let’s make sure that we do not make the same mistake as the Galatians and desert Christ by following any of the false gospels that are so prevalent today. Repent of your sins and place your trust in Christ ALONE to save you, not in anything you do.

Love in Christ,
Pastor Lee
Soli Deo Gloria!

Creation Controversies

It appears that everything in the Bible promotes controversy. Man with his natural tendency of hatred towards God strives to question everything that He says in His Word. Much like the serpent in the garden, many ridicule, "Did God really say that?" Perhaps no other book of the Bible creates as much controversy as the book of Genesis; especially the first eleven chapters. Scholars and laymen alike have attempted to cast doubt on several things which serve as foundational to the entire Bible, our understanding of God and ourselves, and the very history of redemption. I have already looked at one of these issues with The Necessity of A Literal Adam. As I have begun to lead my Sunday School class in a study of the book of Genesis, I continue to encounter other issues that have spawned no small amount of controversy. However, as I take the time to examine the text closely (as any serious Bible student should do), I find no reason for such controversy. This can be seen in several of the controversies surrounding the creation account in Genesis 1. The length of a day, the issue of evolution, and the so-called discrepancies between chapter 1 and chapter 2 are all easily answered within the text itself.

The Duration of A Day
One issue that has come up regarding the creation account in Genesis concerns the idea of just how long were the six days of creation. Some have suggested that the term day refers to a period of a great amount or age of time since the Hebrew word for day does sometimes refer to a period or age of time such as the day of the LORD. Others have argued that it means 1,000 years based on 2 Peter 3:8. Interestingly, while many modern day scholars and students want to view these days as a much lengthier period of time, several of the church fathers and theologians such as Augustine actually shorten them. In fact, they believed that God created the heavens and the earth in an instant since He stood outside of time.

This mess can be solved just by looking at the text itself. Moses does not leave us hanging as to what he means by the term day in Genesis 1. In fact, he even defines it for us. We are told that each day is categorized by there was evening and there was morning (vv. 5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31). For the Hebrews which would first read this account, what do you suppose would come to mind with the phrase there was evening and there was morning to define a day? The literal 24 hour day that they were accustomed to of course, where there was evening and morning, and another day began with the next evening. (The Hebrews and Jews calculated their days from evening to evening.)And if that itself is not enough to prove that day here means what we commonly understand day to indicate today (pun not intended . . . this time at least), then just look at Exodus 20:11. In giving the command to keep the Sabbath, Moses points back to the account given in Genesis 1 as its basis. For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Now to be consistent here, we have to understand Moses to mean the same thing with day in v. 11 as he does throughout Genesis 1 which he refers and in vv. 9-10. If Moses meant 1,000 years with the term day in Genesis 1, this means that he also means that in Exodus 20:11, which means that he also meant that in vv. 9-10. This would indicate then that this commandment states that the Hebrews should work 6,000 years and then rest on the 7,000th year. He has to refer to a literal 24 hour day in all three cases. Otherwise we are faced with something absurd that does not make sense and that does not fit the context at all. So a day, understood from the text itself, refers to a literal 24 hours.

Enter Evolution
Another controversy we find concerning Genesis 1 deals with the THEORY of evolution. (Notice that I highlight that it is a THEORY and not a fact. It has NEVER been proven. The so-called "missing links" are still missing. Questions as to why monkeys still exist after man supposedly evolved from them have yet to be answered.) Genesis 1 does not allow the possibility of macroevolution at all. Genesis clearly states that God made the animals according to their kinds (vv. 21, 24-25). He did not make them according to one kind that evolved into another kind and so on. Furthermore, the author delineates between the species. He explains that God made the fish of the sea and the birds of the air on day five (vv. 20-21) and then the livestock and creeping things and beasts of the earth on day six (vv. 24-25). It does not say that God made the great sea creatures which grew legs and wings to become the beasts of the earth or the birds. Instead, He created each species separately and distinctly. Adam is shown not to have been created from the changing of a monkey but instead out of the dust of the ground itself (Genesis 2:7). In fact, the Hebrew name, Adam, comes from the same root of the Hebrew word for ground, adamah. God formed Adam from the adamah, not from any other creature. There is no way to harmonize the idea of Darwinian evolution with the account of creation we find in Genesis.

Dueling Double?
Several have claimed that we actually find two contradictory accounts of the creation narrative side by side in the book of Genesis. They postulate that Genesis 2:4-25 serves as a separate account of creation that we just read in Genesis 1:1-2:3. Some have even went so far as to argue that this indicates multiply authorship of the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Bible) instead of the sole author being Moses. As we have noticed with the other two controversies surrounding the creation account in Genesis, a closer examination of the text reveals there to be no problem here at all. The reason for the numerous differences between these two chapters actually stems from them not being the same account. In fact, the author never claims them to be.

Genesis 2:4 actually begins a new section in the book. This is indicated to us by the phrase, This is the account of/These are the generations of _____________. (The Hebrew word used here is toledoth, meaning origins or generations.) Such a phrase occurs in the book a total of 11 times and appears to divide the work into 11 sections. Thus, the first section of the book would serve as the Prologue or Introduction (1:1-2:3), this section would run from 2:4-4:26, the third section would be 5:1-6:8; the fourth 6:9-9:29; the fifth 10:1-11:9; the sixth 11:10-26; the seventh 11:27-25:11; eighth 25:12-18; ninth 25:19-35:29; tenth 36:1-37:1; and eleventh 37:2-50:26. Just a cursory reading of these first two sections in succession should indicate that their context is very different. Genesis 1:1-2:3 gives the overview of God's creation of the heavens and the earth in six days and His resting or ceasing from work on the seventh day. Genesis 2:4-4:26 focuses on the creation of humanity specifically, his start in the Garden of Eden, his fall and degeneration into sin, and the hope found in the seed of Seth. It does not present itself as being a separate or additional account of creation at all. In fact, it serves to fill us in on some details pertaining to the creation of man itself and his start.

Now the question remains concerning the supposed difference in the order of creation in comparing the two sections. Those who have viewed this as double like to point out that the order of what was created here is different. In chapter 1 plants and animals were created before man while here in chapter 2 it is man first and then the animals. However, we must realize again that chapter 2 does not give us an account of the creation of the entire heavens and the earth but only man and his start in the garden. Genesis 1:1-2:3 certainly is chronological as indicated in the progression of the days (day 1 followed by day 2 followed by day 3 and so on) while Genesis 2:4 is topical with man as the center. Everything is described in relation to man. Moses already informed us on the order of God's creation. Now he wants to provide us with more details concerning the crown of God's creation, man. Also, we need to keep in mind that chapter 1 refers to the entire heavens and the earth where here we are focused on one garden within this earth; a place called Eden (2:8). The Garden of Eden serves as the scene from 2:8 until 3:24 when man is kicked out of the garden due to his sin. In fact, the plants that are mentioned are those specific to this garden (2:9). It is not referring to the creation of all the plants of the earth. Thus, this does not reverse the order of the plants being created before man that we read about in chapter 1. So what about 2:18-19 which appears to indicate that God created the animals after His creation of man? The biblical text says no such thing. The Hebrew form of the verb for make in v. 19 is what is called a waw consecutive imperfect, which should be translated as a past tense. It is often used for the "past tense narrative sequence." A good translation of the verse would be something to the effect of out of the ground the LORD God formed [or] had formed every beast of the field and every bird of the sky. Read properly, no contradiction can be found between the two chapters.

Such controversies are only controversial because of a failure to actually examine what the text of Scripture says. When studying Scripture we must labor to understand what the author originally intended to say. This takes time and work! But if we are concerned about what God has to say to us, then it should be a "labor of love" for us. Let's not continue to make such mistakes but study to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has not need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15).

In Christ,
Lee
Soli Deo Gloria!!!