National Review Blogger Endorses FBC Radio

Mike Poterma, blogging at National Review, says this about FBC Radio, from Foundations Bible College:

“If You’re Looking for Christmas Music that emphasizes the “Christ” in Christmas, please consider tuning in to one of my favorite Internet radio stations, FBC Radio, broadcasting out of Foundations Bible College, a fundamentalist academy in Dunn, N.C. The station specializes not in Southern Gospel music or other music forms that are currently popular in conservative U.S. Protestantism, but in classic English hymns and sacred music from the Western classical repertoire. I’ve been looking for an opportunity to praise Foundations Bible College for this wonderful act of cultural conservation, and what better time than the Christmas season? I think many, many NRO readers will enjoy this station as much as I do.”

This is a good excuse to plug my broadcast on FBC Radio, the Pilgrim Way Broadcast, Mondays at 9:45 AM and PM Eastern. Give FBC Radio a listen- no Southern Gospel, Christian rock or rap and no Christian Contemporary Music. They play genuine Christian music.

Thoughts on Romans 9- Part 2

Continued, from my Pilgrim Way Commentary on Romans:

Paul’s Burden For Israel 9:1-3

9:1 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost,

“I speak the truth…I lie not” A most solemn oath, about as strong of an oath as a Christian can make, even calling upon Christ to witness it and verify it. Paul makes as strong a statement as he can to demonstrate that what he is about to say regarding his burden for Israel is true and is not just a put-on or a lot of pious hot-air. He will speak in a deliberate way in what he has to say.

“my conscience bearing me witness” It is when the conscience is under the control of the Holy Spirit does it become a reliable guide, not otherwise since then it may very well be defiled by sin. But Paul had a clear conscience which allowed him to say what he is about to say truthfully. These were the same Jews who tried to kill him, who persecuted his brethren, who blasphemed his Lord continually and who were implacable against his gospel. Their hate towards him and Christ knew no bounds. Yet Paul could still pray for them and desire their salvation, even if it had to involve his own damnation. Paul harbored no resentment against his persecutors. Not only were these Jews against Christ but they were also against Paul personally and would have killed Paul as they did his Master. Forty of them bound themselves under a great curse to eat no food or drink no water until they had tasted Paul’s blood. This is what Christianity does in the heart- it makes you love for and pray for your enemies who would like to see you dead. Can you pray for an enemy? Can you pray for those who despitefully use you? A Spirit-filled Christian can- and will do these things.

Would we be able to pray for our “kinsmen after the flesh” as Paul prayed for his? Can we pray for our fellow Americans (or for whatever ethnic group we belong), knowing how wicked most of them are and how against the gospel they may be? Can we have a burden for our own, for those in our own house, for our own wicked family members who may have done us great injury?

9:2 That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart.

This is what constitutes a burden for someone’s salvation, when that person (or in this context, nation) is on your heart continually and you can think of nothing else. This is the paradox of the Christian- he has a continual sorrow in his heart for the lost whom he loves while at the same time enjoying the great joy which accompanies salvation.

“continual sorrow” Paul’s burden for the Jews was no “fly by night” thing or just some emotional distress that came around whenever he sat in a missions conference. It was continual with him, a constant companion that dogged every waking hour. It was a permanent fixture with him and made up his spiritual fiber.

9:3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:

“wish” is in the imperfect tense. Paul had started wishing this at some undisclosed time in the past and he was still wishing this, as he had not yet stopped, as his burden had not yet been fulfilled.

“accursed” Strong’s #331 anathema, a gift given by vow or in fulfillment of a promise, and given up or devoted to destruction for God’s sake, given up to the curse and destruction, accursed. It answers to the Hebrew “cherem”, which the Septuagint translates by it, and means either a thing or person separated from its former state or condition, and devoted to destruction. In this sense it is used, Deuteronomy 7:25, 26; Joshua 6:17, 18; 7:12. It denotes an indissoluble vow. Paul was willing to give of himself as a sacrifice devoted to utter destruction and condemnation if it would result in Israel’s salvation. In the fullest sense, Paul was willing to go to hell for his countrymen if it would result in their salvation. Of course, it would not, as Paul was a sinner with his own sins and a sinner cannot pay the sin debt for another sinner since he also has a debt of his own that would first have to be discharged- impossible except through the blood of Christ. There is therefore no way anyone could claim that Paul was anti-Semitic in any of his writings. But what Paul wished for himself is what Jesus has already done for the nation of Israel on the cross! Paul realizes he must be patient for the salvation of Israel, as it will not happen in his lifetime, although he wishes he would be alive to witness it.

The commentators tend to water this down to something like “separated from Christ” rather than “accursed from Christ”. They have difficulty understanding such a burden because few of them have probably ever felt anything even a tenth as intense for someone’s conversion. No, we will keep the strength and force of these words. Paul was willing to go to hell on behalf of the Jews if it would have led to their salvation.

“I could wish myself accursed…” This may sound like pious dribble but Paul says in 9:1 “My conscience bears me witness in the Holy Ghost”. Paul’s burden was genuine and that was one of the secrets as to why God used Paul the way he did. And very few Christians understand this kind of burden. Paul here is showing his willingness to be cursed for Israel, but not its necessity. But could Paul use any stronger words to express his crushing burden for the salvation of his people?

“I could wish myself accursed…” Compare with what Moses said in Exodus 32:32 “…blot me out of thy book!” Moses would have understood something about Paul’s burden for Israel.

“my kinsmen” Although a Christian, Paul, a former Jew religiously, still considered himself Jewish, at least racially.

1. Israel’s Position- “my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh” 9:3
2. Israel’s Privilege- “Who are Israelites…and the service of God and the promises” 9:4
3. Israel’s Pedigree- “whose are the fathers” 9:5 (Ian Paisley, An Exposition of the Epistle to the Romans, page144).

Thoughts on Romans 9- Part 1

To offer an alternative to the Calvinistic/Reformed interpretations of Romans 9, I’ll post thoughts and selections from my commentary on Romans 9, which is written from a Biblicist, that is, non-Calvinist and non-Arminian presupposition.

“The thrust of the Romans 9 is why God chose, or elected, Israel, over all the other nations of the earth. Paul is dealing with national and racial election, not personal and individual election to salvation. Trying to read personal election to salvation into Romans 9 will lead to theological errors and confusion. Doctrines relating to Calvinist understandings of “unconditional election to salvation” do not belong to Romans 9 as Paul is dealing with Israel and her election as God’s covenant people, not to personal election to New Testament salvation. There are no “proof texts” to support the Calvinist idea of “unconditional election” in Romans 9. Calvinists seem to imagine that Romans 9-11 present an “unanswerable” presentation and defense of their theological system but that is obviously not the case. Spurgeon, in his Commenting and Commentaries, while reviewing commentaries on Romans, complained about non-Calvinists dealing with these chapters and lamented as to why non-Calvinists just couldn’t leave these chapters alone. That is the height of spiritual arrogance to think that only Calvinists were qualified to comment on these chapters, or upon any portions of the Bible! Naturally, we will not allow ourselves to be intimidated by such attitudes. Anyone, from any theological system (or those who claim no theological system!) are at divine liberty to expound these verses, as much as any Calvinist is.
There really is such a thing as “The Jewish Problem” but not in the way Adolph Hitler or the anti-Semites define it. The “problem” is “What do we do with Israel in the overall plan and economy of God? What is their present condition and what does the future hold for them?”

More to come…

Fundamentalism Loses Another Soldier

Word is that Dr. E. Robert Jordan, founder of Calvary Baptist Church and Calvary Baptist Theological Seminary, both in Lansdale PA, has been promoted to glory.

I never met Dr. Jordan but I used to listen to his “Message From Calvary” program when it played on WOEL-FM in Elkton, Maryland and always appreciated it. I heard several taped messages and immediately I could discern the spiritual strength that he had. Many stories I’ve heard about him also reflect a strength of conviction that I admired as a young preacher.

I have a ring-bound book in my library (I’d have to check the date of publication) where Dr. Jordan strongly pled for the King James Bible, something else that I also appreciate.

I seriously considered attending Calvary Baptist Theological Seminary after I finished my undergraduate work in 1988, mainly because it was only an hour away, but the Lord had me attend Foundations Theological Seminary in Dunn, North Carolina instead.

What’s left of the Fundamentalist movement finds itself much poorer today but his legacy will live on and we hope it will not be forgotten.

More Idiocy from the World Council of Churches

Linky- WCC Urges Church to Ring Their Bells For Global Warming

I suppose if I didn’t preach the gospel, teach the Bible, support missions or was concerned about seeing people saved, I would need to do something or get involved with something in order to justify my paycheck..

A Good Commentary Format

I have two unique commentaries in my library, The Gospel of Luke, Expository and Homiletical by W. H. Van Doren and Studies in Romans by Thomas Robinson. What makes these commentaries unique is their format. They are not traditional commentaries that are set up as a wordy prose of the text. Instead, these commentaries give “bare bones” phrases on each verse and often, on individual words. These are “suggestive” commentaries as the material is not designed to allow a preacher to copy the material verbatim but the entries are thoughts, insights and ideas designed to stimulate thought. From the forward in Robinson’s commentary, “The Van Doren’s series of suggestive commentaries is undoubtedly unique in style. They are not verse-by-verse commentaries but word-for-word commentaries. They do not provide so much exegetical reasoning, nor do they often provide so much as a complete English sentence!”

After the “suggestive thoughts” on each verse, critical footnotes are then given which contain a lot of useful information.

Van Doren wrote commentaries in this style on Luke and John, both are also on Google Books. You can also find the Robinson commentary on Romans on Google Books.

I like this style of commentary because you don’t have to wade through paragraphs of wordy expositions, looking for useful material. You can easily scan the Van Doren and Robinson commentaries to find what you are looking for. It also forces you to put meat on these bones instead of allowing the commentator do all of your work for you.

I would recommend that you add these commentaries to your library as soon as you can.

John Calvin or Menno Simons?

I still have trouble understanding why some Baptists have such a love affair with John Calvin, the Reformation and Reformed Theology, seeing none of these are linked with Baptist history or heritage. Calvin had no love for the Baptists, nor did the Reformers (with the exception of Erasmus). In my readings, I would think that Baptists would be better served with looking toward men like Menno Simons and groups like the Reformation-era Anabaptists, the Mennonites and the Brethren groups.

Comparing Menno Simons with John Calvin reveals a world of difference and theological attitudes.

1. Menno never persecuted anyone while Calvin did.
2. Menno never had anyone put to death while Calvin did.
3. Menno was every bit a scholar as was Calvin.
4. Menno held to religious liberty while Calvin did not.
5. Menno opposed state churches while Calvin didn’t.
6. Menno made a cleaner break with Rome than Calvin did.
7. Menno suffered more persecution than Calvin did (Calvin faced some early in his life, before he came under the protection of a state church, an advantage Menno never had).
8. The Mennonites are much closer to modern Baptists than are the Protestants.

Baptists really should look toward Menno, and the Brethren/Anabaptist/Brethren groups rather than the Reformed Protestants for our inspiration and historical instruction. After all, we are all related theologically, while the same cannot be said of any Baptist relationship with the Calvinistic branch of the Reformation.

I have really come to appreciate the Mennonite/Brethren groups more over the years as a genuine Pilgrim/Remnant movement in church history. Naturally, they have their problems today (who doesn’t?) and no human theological group is perfect. I am well familiar with Menno’s struggles over some issues of Christology. But Calvin had many theological errors as well, such as his teachings of predestination and election, so neither man was perfect theologically. But what a world of difference in reading Calvin and Menno Simons! Menno is not forever quoting Augustine and his language is more more Christian than is Calvin’s. Calvin could almost sound like Peter Ruckman in attacking his enemies. Menno displayed a much better Christian spirit in his life and writings.

Part of my appreciation of the Mennonite/Brethren groups may come from a close geographic association I have with them. There is a sizable Mennonite and Amish population here in central Delaware and I spend a lot of time in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. I’ve always believed that the true “Bible Belt” in the United States is not “down south” but runs from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania to near Philadelphia, through southern Pennsylvania, where there is a higher percentage of these Baptistic groups. Mennonites and the Brethren are my spiritual “cousins” and I can have a much deeper affinity with them than I could every hope to have with Martin Luther or John Calvin.

Adventures Among the Uninsured III

The bills are now starting to roll in from my wife’s gall-bladder surgery:
Emergency room- $2300
Doctors (two bills) $3800 for both

The surgeon did knock of $1000 off her bill since my wife was uninsured. She mentioned that self-pays are usually billed at higher rates than those with insurance. I was surprised as I assumed the opposite might be true, since there would be no insurance company to “gouge”.

We haven’t received any bills from the hospital itself or from the radiologists, which is where the bulk of the billing would come from.

Our medical sharing plan has already sent us their claim forms and as soon as we receive all the bills, we will submit our needs to them.

Reformation Day- So What?

One truth of Church History is that Baptists are not Protestants. We pre-dated the Reformation due to our association with the Donatists, Waldensians and other groups. This goes for our spiritual cousins, the Mennonites and Anabaptists. Baptists have nothing to do with Luther, Calvin and the rest of the bunch. Since most Protestants of that era hated Baptist people and even persecuted them (how many Anabaptists were martyred by Protestants?), why should Baptist people “celebrate” Reformation Day? It is a day for the Lutherans, Presbyterians, Episcopalians, Methodists, etc, not Baptists. Whenever a Baptist identifies as a Protestant, he forgets his grand and glorious heritage that has very little to do with the Reformers.

Of course, the Reformers were only partially “reformed” as they maintain many Roman Catholic doctrines and practices, including infant baptism, baptism by pouring or sprinkling, state churches, persecution, among others. They went so far, then they stopped when they achieved some degree of political power and independence. Only the non-Reformed Baptists were totally separated from Rome in doctrine and practice. Only the Baptists can be said to be truly “reformed” as only the Baptists made the clean and total break from Rome early on (as early as the 3rd century). The current idol of neo-fundamentalism, John Calvin, worshipped at the foot of the Roman Catholic Augustine, persecuted his theological opponents, ran Geneva like a Soviet gulag and did nothing to advance the ideals of religious freedom. Why celebrate that?

Even I Wouldn’t Burn an ESV…

A North Carolina pastor to have an old-fashioned book burning, modern Bible Versions included

Um, no.

Now I’m as staunch a King James Bible defender as there is and I’ve been very critical on the modern version glut as well. But even an ESV or an NIV has enough truth in it for it to have some value. As D. A. Waite noted, after his exhaustive research, the critical text versions agree with the King James about 93% of the time on average. I know 93% isn’t good enough to use (it has to be 100%, or as close as we can get) when dealing with souls and the truth, but there are more rational ways to express your opposition to modern versions than this.

This pastor has given the enemies of the King James great occasion to blaspheme. Most anti-King James/pro-modern version bloggers jump on this as an excuse to pull out their broad brush and paint every traditional text supporter as no better than this pastor. Such assertions are a violation of the Ninth Commandment, regarding bearing false witness and these men have great need to repent. I have yet to meet or read about any genuine, rational King James man who would go this far or support this nonsense.

As for Rick Warren and Billy Graham, well, let them take care of themselves. If their God is God, then He would certainly plead for them on His behalf.