So many times in my discussions I encountered individuals who can dish out the criticism, yet can't take any in return. Criticism is not a bad, improper or sinful thing to do, rather it's an effective way to test things such as concepts, ideas, testimonies, etc while establishing a well rounded defense of what is being criticized. So, why is it that a Christian can be so upset if one were to criticize their position?
I'll use an example from my own discussions with others. Just recently I was talking to a new friend I had met via Internet. We were chatting through text over what Calvinism is, what historical Arminianism is, who's an Arminian, what this pastor believes, what that pastor believes and the problems with what they believe. We were basically criticizing the positions of other individuals. Eventually, because we did not know each other very well, we began asking what each of us believed, specifically soteriologically. This individual refused to take the label of Calvinist or Arminian and in addition, claimed that he/she did not agree/disagree with either side.
Now, as obvious as this is, that one cannot take this middle of the road position without contradicting themselves, this person felt comfortable in that position. To say that one cannot really know what the Bible says and we shouldn't argue about it and let it divide the body of Christ, is in essence compromise, surrendering the sufficiency of Scripture and perhaps even a fear that taking a stand will push away friends and take away popularity. I mean, it may even radically change how we think and do everything, plus I don't want to seem dogmatic because that's the exact reason people leave the church. There are people out there that are so compromising that they choose the middle of the road position on nearly everything, just to be pleasing to the greatest amount of people within the audience of their agenda.
For example, to stand on the side of Calvinism would radically change how one thinks and does evangelism. We can trust that God is in control of who will be saved, and that we should just preach the gospel to the lost, do our best, trust in God and His Word. Now, if we were to stand on the Arminian side, our method would play out very differently. We would think it were up to us to save them, that we have to convince them apart from a work of God. God can't do it, so we have to do it. God really plays no part because He's already been trying His best to save them. And after all, God does know who will and will not be saved.
After much was said concerning free will, unconditional election, what a choice is, etc, the individual became upset and apparently perceived my words as impatient and sarcastic. I explained that I am a very laid back person, no harm was intended, and text can often times be misinterpreted. Although I had explained myself and they had said they understood, I came to find out the very next day that I was removed and blocked from his/her Facebook page (we met via Facebook). Whether or not this person got upset that I challenged their position and pointed out inconsistencies, or if they simply thought I was rude, this personifies the attitude many have when confronted with the doctrines of grace. They want to preserve free will, yet maintain a sovereign God, so the beast they create is a god that is contradicting, decrees his own unhappiness and that is not in control of evil.
I say all that to say this; there is still much fighting to be done on the battlefront of soteriology and one of our greatest weapons is Biblical criticism. The answer seems very simple, yet this is how we win the war. We go to God's Word and we talk about it. Although we may already seem to do that, we can no longer use the worldly tactics of clashing verse against verse, argument against argument. We need to destroy the arguments, examine the verses and cut straight to the center of the argument.
Criticism will push forward our battlefront and will unite the church. It will weed out heresy, inconsistency and error. The visible church will again have a sound mind and be able to defend herself much more effectively against the current popular enemies, atheism and Islam. Eventually, the church will be on the assault, changing the culture, government and community.
In conclusion, as much more should be, could be, and will be said on the subject, we must have a vision and a will. We have to get out of the mentality that all of our plans are pointless because Jesus will be coming back very soon and that it's hopeless to even try. Where is the belief that Jesus is Lord? Where is the trust that God's Word is powerful? Where is the confidence that the Christian worldview is THE worldview that explains how everything works? Why are we so ashamed to take a stand for doctrinal truth? Why must we feel a need to appeal to the times and culture, instead of letting the gospel change both?
Thursday, December 29, 2011
Friday, December 16, 2011
Christopher Hitchens and a Defense of Imprecatory Prayer
What are we to say about the passing of this lost soul, assuming that God did not regenerate him before his death? Should we mourn that he is gone? Should we pay tribute to his intellect, reasoning and desire to seek whether or not God really does exist? Could we say that Christopher Hitchens was just following the evidence wherever it lead him, and he had just not gotten there yet? Did God want Christopher Hitchens to burn in hell?
The Bible gives us two answers to the passing of wicked men like Mr. Hitchens. Rejoice in his destruction and use his death as an evangelistic tool. Yes, we are to rejoice in the justice of God on unrepentant sinners. Yes, we will use his death, in unrepentant sin, to warn others of where they will spend eternity if they do not flee to Christ. I know that it may seem unethical or harsh to some, to have such an attitude of rejoicing over the death of one in hell, yet this is the exact attitude that the Bible tells us to have. It is a part of imprecatory prayer.
Prayer is not just a means of asking for the salvation of others, food for us, blessings on our lives and family, it is also a means of asking God to punish the wicked.
Ps 139:19-22
"O that You would slay the wicked, O God;
Depart from me, therefore, men of bloodshed.
20 For they speak against You wickedly,
And Your enemies take Your name in vain.
21 Do I not hate those who hate You, O Lord?
And do I not loathe those who rise up against You?
22 I hate them with the utmost hatred;
They have become my enemies."
NASU
When we pray, we should not only pray for salvation of some, but also the destruction of some, if that is God's will. I pray like this, "God either save them or destroy them.". We can see here that David hated his enemies and it was not sin. David hated his enemies with a righteous, perfect hatred, not a sinful, self-centered hatred that leads to murder. In other Psalms and books such as Jeremiah and Exodus, the people of God have always prayed for God's anger and wrath to be poured out on their enemies. Some may say, "Well that's the Old Testament and Jesus would have never done such a thing, for He said to pray for our enemies", which is exactly my point, He did say to pray for them. We see this in the Gospel of John,
"John 15:25
"But they have done this to fulfill the word that is written in their Law, 'THEY HATED ME WITHOUT A CAUSE.'"
NASU
This is a direct quote from Psalm 69, which if we read the entire thing, we would see verses like these,
"Ps 69:22-28
22 May their table before them become a snare;
And when they are in peace, may it become a trap.
23 May their eyes grow dim so that they cannot see,
And make their loins shake continually.
24 Pour out Your indignation on them,
And may Your burning anger overtake them.
25 May their camp be desolate;
May none dwell in their tents.
26 For they have persecuted him whom You Yourself have smitten,
And they tell of the pain of those whom You have wounded.
27 Add iniquity to their iniquity,
And may they not come into Your righteousness.
28 May they be blotted out of the book of life
And may they not be recorded with the righteous."
NASU
This entire Psalm is about Christ and His crucifixion, but we see in the near conclusion of the Psalm, a prayer of imprecation, a desire for their destruction. So, we can find even in the NT the continuity of imprecatory prayer.
Now what does this have to do with Christopher Hitchens? Well, the rejoicing of his destruction is a part of this same righteous attitude. Let me conclude with this Psalm, and it is important that we read it in it's entirety.
"Psalm 58
1 Do you indeed speak righteousness, O gods?
Do you judge uprightly, O sons of men?
2 No, in heart you work unrighteousness;
On earth you weigh out the violence of your hands.
3 The wicked are estranged from the womb;
These who speak lies go astray from birth.
4 They have venom like the venom of a serpent;
Like a deaf cobra that stops up its ear,
5 So that it does not hear the voice of charmers,
Or a skillful caster of spells.
6 O God, shatter their teeth in their mouth;
Break out the fangs of the young lions, O Lord.
7 Let them flow away like water that runs off;
When he aims his arrows, let them be as headless shafts.
8 Let them be as a snail which melts away as it goes along,
Like the miscarriages of a woman which never see the sun.
9 Before your pots can feel the fire of thorns
He will sweep them away with a whirlwind, the green and the burning alike.
10 The righteous will rejoice when he sees the vengeance;
He will wash his feet in the blood of the wicked.
11 And men will say, "Surely there is a reward for the righteous;
Surely there is a God who judges on earth!""
NASU
So I exhort everyone who is lost and railing against God, as Mr. Hitchens devoted his life to doing, to be reconciled to God and to turn from your rebellion against God. We should desire that all should come to Christ to be saved, just as Paul has shown us in Romans 9, yet we also desire that God be a just God.
For further study, I recommend this book.
For further study, I recommend this book.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)