Boyd, Oh Boyd

I am often amazed, surprisingly so, at the re-defining of the Christian faith. There are those within the so-called evangelical world that are dissatisfied with what the Bible requires of believers. So much so, that they plainly negate what the bible teaches and re-define basic biblical concepts in-order to create what they feel is a better and improved ‘Christianity’. Here we have a prime example:  Believing Is Not Enough is the name of the article. Instead of dealing with what the author of the article writes, since it’s a reiteration of the quoted content, I’ll be looking at the content he’s quoting that produced this post. The passages are taken from a book by Greg Boyd entitled Present Perfect. Greg Boyd is a proponent of Open Theism and Annihilationism. So, we are not dealing with an orthodox believer by any means, yet, a response is warranted because said article is an attack on the Christian faith.

Greg Boyd writes:

“I’ve observed that we in the West—especially Christians—tend to attach great importance to what we believe. We treat beliefs almost as though they have magical power, as though merely believing something makes it so. For instance, many assume that believing Jesus is Lord of their life magically makes him Lord. This is undoubtedly why so many evangelical churches place so much significance on getting people to believe in Jesus and why so much is made of the moment sinners raise their hand or go to the altar to profess their faith in Jesus. This one-time event, it is often assumed, makes Jesus Lord of their life forever.”

Response: Boyd says that just because we  believe Jesus is Lord of our life doesn’t make him Lord.  We don’t make Jesus Lord of our lives, Jesus is already Lord. There is no making Jesus anything. The only difference is that some confess Him as Lord and others do not, but confessing in the affirmative doesn’t grant Him the crown, that crown is self-appointed. The one thing Boyd correctly attacks is the idea of raising one’s hand, after a repetition of the sinner’s prayer (I assume) or going to the altar, as if that physical act seals the deal.

He continues:

“The truth is, merely believing Jesus is Lord no more makes him Lord of my life than believing Kim Jong-[un] is the leader of North Korea makes me his follower. For Kim Jong-un to be my leader, I would need to submit my life to him and become a citizen of North Korea. So too, for Jesus to be my Lord, I need to submit my life to him and become a citizen of his Kingdom.”

Response: Again, we reject the idea that we can make Jesus anything, but notice the words– Merely believing. Here’s what the bible says about believing Jesus is Lord:

Because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. – Romans 10:9

Oh, how difficult salvation is for some.  According to Boyd we need to submit our lives to Jesus before we become citizens of his kingdom, but the bible says that all we need to do is believe in our hearts and confess with our mouths. You see, the submitting is a therefore of our believing. We believe, therefore, we will submit. We don’t submit to enter into the kingdom, that would be another gospel.

He finishes by saying:

“The important question, therefore, is not what you believe. The important question is what you decide to do, moment-by-moment, on the basis of what you believe”

Response and conclusion: The words of the Lord Jesus come to mind when he asks Peter– Who do you say that I am? Who Peter believed Jesus to be was important  essential. What we believe about the Lord Jesus Christ is everything. What you decide to do will be determined by what you believe. And, you will not decide to do the right things, moment-by-moment, if you do not believe the right things.

But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name. (John 20:31)

– awretchsaved

Eating From Your Own Plate

An emotion, for the sake of this post, we will define as ” a mental state that arises spontaneously”. Emotions play a huge part in our feel good society. We are indirectly taught that “if it feels good, it must be right”. However, “negative” emotions, any sensation that is related to guilt or shame, we should stay away from. While that seems like perfectly “good” human nature, it isn’t what’s actually good for us. Human nature, is corrupt, and fallen. Therefore, what feels good, isn’t necessarily good for us. It may feel good to go sleeping around with your next door neighbor, but the actual consequences that it brings upon your home and family, not so good. It may feel good to keep flirting with that woman in the office, but Proverbs tell us to stay away from such a woman (Proverbs 7). There are an infinite amount of scenarios we can make up, but it should be noted that these upheavals cannot be trusted.

What then is the quick fix to this dilemma? How do I make sure I’m only eating from the plate designated to me? The bad news is there’s no quick fix; the good news is there is a solution. “Theology is the road to holiness” once wrote Gordon H. Clark. What he meant by that is this:

The study of God, properly done, will bring about a life that moves away from all God tells us to move away from, and more towards what God tells us He takes pleasure in. This road is not easy. It make take hours of your day. It may require you to sleep a little later. The football game may just have to wait.  It may take months, and even then yet, mortification will not be done. But the result is a life not based on emotions that change from minute to minute, but a life firmed upon the stable, never changing, truth of God’s word.

Dr. Gordon H. Clark Recounts A Story On Emotions And Conversion

‘”I remember one year when I preached quite a number of sermons in a rescue mission. Nearly always there was a certain man with a red face seated about two-thirds of the way to the back of the room. He always, I think always, cried at the preaching of the Gospel. But I have no reason to think that my evangelism preaching was successful in the sense of bringing him to Christ. I also remember an example of personal work. In this case the person shed no tears, nor experienced any emotions so far as I could detect. Nor did I make any impassioned appeal, as “evangelistic” in the hillbilly, stomping, shouting sense. But the observable conduct of the convert over a period of fifteen years now, so far as any man can judge another, testifies to a genuine conversion. This conduct includes faithful attendance at a bible believing church, teaching Sunday School classes, attempting to win family and friends, and witnessing in hostile environments  All with as little emotion and as much effectiveness can be reasonably expected.” – Gordon H. Clark- (What Is The Christian Life) 

Masculinizing Women

This week Defense Secretary Leon Panetta officially lifted a ban that withheld women from serving in combat. This decision repealed a 1994 combat directive that prohibited women from doing so. If you’ve been paying attention, this didn’t come out of left field. Last year the Pentagon opened fourteen thousand jobs to female soldiers. Bringing women a tiny closer to combat roles. Shortly after, the ACLU and four military women filed a law suit against the Department of Defense for discriminating against women by barring them from combat roles. Military women were arguing that men have the ability to move forward in their careers and make more benjamins, while they’re fighting for the breadcrumbs that fall from the table. Its a good point. After all, last I checked, they do wear the same uniform and fight for the same country. So, where’s the dilemma?

Let’s unravel this. I’m not one of those (and say this with the most Southern accent you can muster)– A woman belongs in the kitchen, and that’s the only place she belongs, sort of dude. I can’t say I would be parading if my daughter or girlfriend (both of which I don’t have) gave me the news that she wanted to join the military (I do have a niece, so that works). Surely, any normal man would rather envision them in black business attire, landing some landmark financial win or saving lives in the operating room. But never, unless your last name is Panetta, would I guess that you would envision them dodging bullets at the sound of foreign shrieks.

For me, a woman in a military uniform strapped with an M16 is ok, but a product of a fallen world. I don’t think for one nano second that Americans really fathom what this all means. Can you imagine the feedback from the American people when female bodies are returning in massive numbers from overseas? Don’t misunderstand, it’s heart wrenching when a young man returns in a body bag. Though, the idea is something civilizations have generally settled with. But there is something unnaturally wicked about a young girl returning in one.

Ryan Smith, an Iraq war veteran has written an insightful piece into the reality that awaits women in combat.

Here is an excerpt:

We rode into war crammed in the back of amphibious assault vehicles. They are designed to hold roughly 15 Marines snugly; due to maintenance issues, by the end of the invasion we had as many as 25 men stuffed into the back. Marines were forced to sit, in full gear, on each other’s laps and in contorted positions for hours on end. That was the least of our problems.

The invasion was a blitzkrieg. The goal was to move as fast to Baghdad as possible. The column would not stop for a lance corporal, sergeant, lieutenant, or even a company commander to go to the restroom. Sometimes we spent over 48 hours on the move without exiting the vehicles. We were forced to urinate in empty water bottles inches from our comrades.

Many Marines developed dysentery from the complete lack of sanitary conditions. When an uncontrollable urge hit a Marine, he would be forced to stand, as best he could, hold an MRE bag up to his rear, and defecate inches from his seated comrade’s face.

Is the idea of a young woman in the mix of this something were okay with? Which suggestively leads to my next point, the invisible war There is a rape problem in the military. And it’s ugly, that at the forefront of the Pentagon’s to do list, the top issue is not this. Expect nothing more but the numbers to double, as young women are thrown in with the lions, while Panetta and his department boasts of its progressiveness.

Women are being masculinized and men are being sissified. Women are wearing the uniforms, while men imagine they’re in-front of their game consoles. This goes far beyond the military. This has to do with men, taking on their daily roles of men, and not whining about it.