How many times have you read the Bible?

An article I wrote for the local paper:

As a Christian, we believe that the Bible teaches justification by faith alone through the perfect, complete work of Christ Jesus, through his death, burial and resurrection. Through faith in Christ alone the Christian knows and experiences the forgiveness of sin and the hope of eternal life with Christ. Being brought into newness of life, it is important for the believer to grow in their walk with God by constantly being in the Word. But how many Christians make time for daily Bible reading? And if asked by an outsider to the faith, "So, if the Bible is the central book of your faith, how many times have you read it, cover to cover?", could you give an answer other than just a shrug and a response of, "Well, I've read a lot of it..."

The Bible is the perfect, inspired word of God, and as 2 Tim. 3:16 teaches, "All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness". The love and study of the Scriptures should be essential for the believer, and Christians should strive to read the Bible in its entirety if they haven't.

"But I never have time. I've got work, and this, and that, etc." Well, what I'd like to offer here is a suggestion of how busy people can include daily Bible reading, that the believer "may be competent, equipped for every good work" (2 Tim. 3:17)

Since so many people are always on the go, “listening” can be a good option for working through the Bible. A good step is to invest in a cheap MP3 player (and NOT a phone, since anything that will ring, beep, chirp, or otherwise distract you isn't going to help...)

A cheap, simple MP3 player I've been happy with is the Philips GoGear Vibe 4 MP3 player. No bells and whistles, but works fine, and can hold most all of the spoken Bible. I've seen it around $15-20 online. It comes with ear buds, but if you don't like those you can pick up a cheap headset at Walmart for $5.

Next step, get a FREE download of the audio Bible. There are a number of translations available online free. I'm partial to the ESV translation as I believe it's a sound translation of the Greek and straight-forward English. You can download it free from here: http://www.esvaudiobible.com. For those who like the KJV translation, here's a site to download the MP3's: http://www.harvesttimechurchoftyler.org/freemp3bible.htm

There are many other resources, and if you prefer to skip the download, you could go to a place like LifeWay and buy the MP3s of the Bible and transfer them to the MP3 player from your computer that way too.

Finally, download a Bible reading checklist and print this up, to mark off what you've listened to. There are plenty of these online, but here's a simple example: http://www.marshillchurch.org/files/misc/Bible_Reading_Checklist.pdf

Now, when you're working around the house, cooking, gardening, riding your bike, etc, just put on the MP3 player and you're ready to go. If you prefer to listen to the player while driving, you can get a mini-jack port at the Walmart electronics department and hook this to your car stereo aux port.

Also, as you study the Bible, if you find passages that you want to understand better or that could use elaboration, there are many good commentaries. I would recommend Matthew Henry's Commentary. He was a puritan who wrote a concise commentary overview of the entire Bible. You can use the commentary for free here to look up passages: http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/matthew-henry-complete/

Keep yourself in the Word, and be blessed with growing in an understanding of God's inspired word.

"Christianity and Liberalism" by J. Gresham Machen

J. Gresham's "Christianity and Liberalism" addresses the topic of heretical, revisionist teachings and the damaging effect these bring within Christian churches. By 'liberal' Machen isn't referring to political liberalism but rather the introduction of revisionist, distorted views of the Scripture, such as questioning Biblical innerancy and the historicity of the Scripture. What's remarkable is that Machen wrote this back in the 1920's, but all of the liberal heresies that he addresses are just as much alive and well today. It isn't uncommon to find the pastor at a supposedly "Christian" church that denies important Biblical truths such as the virgin birth or even the resurrection of Jesus Christ. I'm reminded of a message I heard recently from pastor Phil Johnson, in which he rightly observed that the greatest threat to Christianity today isn't the raving atheist on the street, but rather the internal corruption of liberal teachers from within the church itself (the quote comes from Johnson message on the topic of pastoral shepherding, that's available here)

Machen draws the clear distinction between "Christianity" and "liberalism", identifying there is no such thing as liberal Christianity, but rather there is orthodox, confessionally-centered Biblical Christianity, at the core of which is gospel-centered faith in repentance and belief in the resurrected savior Christ Jesus, and any supposedly “christian” religious approach that detracts from that, or throws doubts into the historical claims of the Bible, particularly those that undermine the fundamental, historical tenants of Christianity, Machen rightly distinguishes as something other than Christianity, as another religion.

Machen addresses numerous liberal arguments made about the historicity of Scripture, miracles, teachings such as of the "universal fatherhood of God", attacks on the Pauline epistles, the work and person of Christ, the importance of doctrinal standards in the church, etc. It's a fascinating and relevant read for laypeople. Consider Machen's closing remarks, "There are congregations, even in the present age of conflict, that are really gathered around the table of the crucified Lord; there are pastors that are pastors indeed. But such congregations, in many cities, are difficult to find. Weary with the conflicts of the world, one goes into the Church to seek refreshment for the soul. And what does one find? Alas, too often, one finds only the turmoil of the world. The preacher comes forward, not out of a secret place of meditation and power, not with the authority of God's Word permeating his message, not with human wisdom pushed far into the background by the glory of the Cross, but with human opinions about the social problems of the hour or easy solutions of the vast problem of sin. Such is the sermon... Thus the warfare of the world has entered even into the house of God, And sad indeed is the heart of the man who has come seeking peace." (p. 179-180)

Reading Machen should spawn good questions for all Christians, and one should not be afraid to bring these up with your pastor. Ask the pastor/elders if the church is confessionally-centered, if it adheres to the historical creeds (such as the Apostles creed/Nicean creed) and the truths defined therein. Ask the pastor if the church adheres to the inerrant authority of the word of God. Ask if the church believes in and teaches the miracles of Christ, and especially the resurrection. If you don't get clear answers on any of these, then give careful consideration if you're actually a part of a Christian church, or instead within a liberal false-church that actually has no part of the true body of Christ.

"Christianity and Liberalism" is available at most online bookstores, but since it's in the public domain its also freely available electronically at sites like this.

You can also hear a free MP3 recording of the book here: http://reformedaudio.org/machen.html

For another example of the detrimental damages done by liberalism in the Christian church, also check out the recent testimony of a German Christian named Anita Kupferman and her exposure to “higher critical methodology” in some of German “theological” schools (her testimony can be read in HeartCry magazine, available for free here)

2010 Fall Anabaptist Identity Conference

I was recently listening to a number of messages from the 2010 Fall Anabaptist Identity Conference, which offers a large number of downloadable MP3s.  The message that I just listened to was Believer's Baptism - A Fundamental in the Separation of Church and State, which prevented a solid Scriptural defense of believer's baptism (although how any paedobapist can profess to defend this practice from Scripture is totally beyond me...)


Anyhow, from the message you see how the Anabaptists draw a strong distinction of church and state (which considering my growing disillusionment with all things political, this is something I'm finding more and more easier to agree with.)  And on the topic of a state church, you can't have a true state church without infant baptism, compromising the requirements of membership in order to just bring more people into the church.  On church and state, the question is asked: if all society is in the church, then where is the world, of which we are to be separate?


The church is to teach of the intention of making disciples.  Who should be baptized?  Disciples.  We are commanded to teach all nations, a command observed everywhere, and our message is not to change until the end of the age.  We should not teach based on assumptions or traditions, but on the Word of God.


Where in Scripture has Christ commanded infant baptism?  He hasn't.  Scripture says to repent and be baptized.  Unless there is genuine repentance, no baptism.  Paedobaptists will sometimes misquote Matt. 19:14, of “Let the little children come to me and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven", saying that Jesus here is allowing children into the kingdom of heaven via infant baptism.  But if this passage is about infant baptism, and the disciples were familiar with this, then why did they object to the children going to Jesus?  There is a distinction between "blessing" and "baptism".  Additionally, how could they be baptized into the kingdom, if according to v.14 the kingdom already belongs to them?


Paedobaptists also misapply Col. 2:11, "In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature, not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ," in drawing an incorrect association with circumcision and baptism.  Water baptism was never intended to replace circumcision, and while circumcision was done by the hands of men, baptism is about internal change, and operation of God alone.  And if this parallel is to be drawn, it is notable that Abraham was circumcised AFTER his faith, not before.  Additionally, appeals to traditions, in addition to being a fallacy of special pleading, run into a difficulty when you find traditions such as described in the Didache.  Are infants really supposed to fast two days prior to baptism?


Believer's baptism is making a covenant before men, and being willing to give up everything (as the early radicals were when they defied the infant baptism traditions of the state church.)  Infant baptism, on the other hand, includes sinners by design.

John G. Payton Biography

Here's a link to an excellent message about the life of John G. Payton. What's so noteworthy about Payton's life isn't just his own remarkable mission work to the New Hebrides, but the details of the powerful Christian walk that John's father James had. Per the message, James never felt a specific calling into the ministry and did not intrude into it, but he Biblically guided his own children with a tremendous amount of prayer for them, and a message like this really speaks especially to fathers specifically as to the impact that your shepherding and guidance has on the life of your own children.

Money Matters and Christian Giving - Pastor Michael Phillips

Pastor Michael Phillips, in this series on money, offers and sound and practical overview of how the believer should approach money matters. This message linked below is from the section of this series on giving, and his teaching on this matter is excellent.

The Minister's Prayer Life - Paul Washer

I've listened to a number of Paul Washer's mp3 messages before and find him to be a fascinating and convicting teacher. Granted, there is an exuberance that can sometimes distract, but the passion with which Washer teaches on concepts such as the importance and vibrancy of prayer are deeply convicting. This message especially is one worth checking out.

This was one part that really struck me: "Today there is not battle fought in this pulpit. It was fought this morning at five o'clock. It was fought in prayer. It is won in prayer. The thing is done in prayer."

Pastor Washer will make note in this message of his lack of seminary/expository experience while building on the importance of prayer - not as a rote activity but a solid component of the life of every believer. "You know, I hear it very common today even among ministers. They say, 'Well, I don’t really have a specific time of prayer. I just kind of pray all the time.'  I do not believe that because I have learned that practicing the presence of God and practicing prayer, it is a learned discipline. It comes from tarrying with your God. What else would you want to do? What other greater privilege has been granted you than to tarry with God, to worship him, to cry out to him, to commune with him?"

Michael Phillips - History of the Anabaptists

Pastor Michael Phillips offers a nice overview in this MP3 of the Anabaptist movement, both the origin and early history of this group as well as an exploration of some of their key teachings. Speaking as an "anabaptist" (one twice baptized - once the wrong way as a little devil of a baby, once the right way as a professing believer) I really admire the convictions of the early believers who took a stand for their convictions, often with their lives sacrificed as a result.

Pastor Phillips talks about Conrad Grebel, a student of Zwingli in the 16th century. Zwingli was assailing the catholic mass at that time, as something not found in Scripture. Grebel took that a step further and applied that same reasoning logically to infant baptism as well. What is fascinating is that Zwingli privately agreed, yet hypocritically he publically supported paedobaptism. And sadly at that time it was the city council that stood in judgment over the matter, with Zwingli's backing, when truthfully Christ is the only head of the church. Grebel was arrested, imprisoned, but ultimately able to flee and continue to spread the word. The message also continues into details about Felix Manz and also Michael Sattler, the later who faced a brutal torture and execution simply because he taught and believed in the Scripturally-correct mode of baptism.

While the anabaptists were not without faults theologically, one of the interesting points made by Pastor Phillips is that, while there will be Judases in baptist churches, these are NOT ones that are deliberately brought in, whereas in the paedobaptising congregations, as he puts it in the message, the practice was that of "sprinkled water on the heads of little devils and brought into the church". Strong, true, but accurate.

Luke 6:46

While having coffee at the cafe in the local United Methodist church, at the sanctuary entrance they have a large display (with expensive-looking video and music, etc) to solicit for various questions about who they think God is, questions about the faith, etc, with a bunch of verses listed on sheets of paper with space provided so that you can "sketch or write you(sic) answer on this page." What's amusing about these questions is that one of the verses is Luke 6:46:
“Why do you call me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ and do not do what I say?"

For a United Methodist church, with its generally wonky theology, I thought that this is quite ironic that they would choose this particular Luke text as a question.

(Strangely, the wireless internet connection wasn't working today at the UM church cafe, but this wasn't a big deal since I wanted to work on some C# coding with a book that I've been studying, plus I packed along my MP3 player to listen to a Mark Dever 9Marks interview, so all is well. I think the UM staff is on to me and shut it off just for my sake... :)

Also ironically is that in this interview I'm listening to with David Wells they've been discussing the state of the culture and how America is what could be considered predominantly "spiritual" and how this puts the Christian message in a much different context - closer to the Nchurch as it was in the context of Acts. That "spiritual" direction describes a lot of how it feels walking through in this UM church - spiritual flavoring but no high-view of scripture, no Scripturally-sound doctrine, etc.

They do have a nice cafe though with half-decent coffee.  Just would have been nice had the WiFi been working...

Westminster Shorter Catechism MP3s

Link to the Westminster Shorter Catechism on MP3. The divines are an exceptional way to study and retain the key doctrines of the Christian faith, and are mostly accurate (with exceptions like #95 which is just flat wrong.)

What a Father Looks for in a Suitor - Voddie Baucham

Excellent sermonaudio message by Dr. Voddie Baucham speaking at Mount Zion Bible church. The message is packed with solid instructional teaching on Christian characteristics that a father needs to look for in a suitor, but beyond just this, gives guidance for daughters in terms of what they should look for, as well as for son in terms of what they should be. I think Voddie is right on with this, as it is just dangerous to just send our children out into the world, with a worldly philosophy of, "they are 18, so 'leave and cleave' and send them out into the world", leaving it to them to find a mate without parental guidance in finding a suitor - and not just seeing out characteristics such as "handsome" or "witty", but rather be an individual with a heart for Christ and passion for nurturing his wife and guiding her sanctification, in addition to a commitment to shepherding their children's hearts as well. Excellent and timely teaching.

Sproul on Paedobaptism

Here's a part of R. C. Sprouls message at Christ Fellowship church...

"I think it's a sin (you can quote me) not to baptize your children. God was going to kill Moses for not circumcising his son. It was a very serious matter to administer the sign of the covenant to believers and to their infants and nowhere in Biblical content is that principle of corporate solidarity ever, ever abrogated and, so I think we are making a huge mistake when we exclude the children of believers from the sing of the covenant. Alright, and so I think it's a serious matter. Because I want to make sure, with the administration of the sacraments, that we're doing what is pleasing to God, so I think its pleasing to God to baptize infants of believers. My friends in the Baptist community believe its displeasing to God to do that. Both sides want to do what is pleasing to God, and what I do believe is that I don't think that we should break fellowship over that issue. Because there's not an explicit teaching in the New Testament that says you must baptize the children of believers, nor is there an explicit prohibition. In the NT it stays that you may not baptize the children of believers, so you have to rest your case on inferences drawn from narratives and from other texts of the Bible, and any time a doctrine is left to the development by inferences you're open to all kinds of mistakes. So it any kind of doctrine should provoke patience and tolerations with other its something like that."

I didn't have a transcript so I just jotted down a few pages of his comments and transcribed them here.  And while I do greatly respect Dr. Sproul for all his teaching and ministry, I think he's completely wrong on labeling willing paedobaptism as a sin.  With no clear commandment given anywhere in Scripture to baptize infants, and instead drawing on (fairly weak) inferences from Scripture, how could failure to follow the ordinance of baptism by sprinkling unrepentant babies be considered "sin"?  I really wish that, since this Q&A session took place at a Baptist church, at least someone there had taken issue with this.  Well, considering his age and his health, its enough of a blessing that he still travels and shares from his collective learning, and I still marvel when I read his works online or in Tabletalk.

When discussing baptism with my Dad I like the argument (among many, many other arguments) of the "desert island exegete" - a non-believer who, sitting on the beach one day, finds a Bible that washes on the shore in his own language.  Picking it up, he reads it and, finishing the Gospel of John is convicted of his sins and of his need for a savior and repents and believes.  Sharing his faith with others, they soon start a small Acts-style worship service together.  Now strictly from the Bible alone, would those islanders really conceive of the practice of baptism as being rightly administered by sprinkling water on the bald head of an angry, unrepentant baby, who's parent's may or may not even be genuine believers?  I find that really doubtful.  And while the analogy might be a little bit of a stretch, it's not beyond the realm of possibility:  I've heard the Gideons speak when they visit the church, and they will talk about being at rope's end, ready to end their life in a hotel room when they discover a Gideon's Bible and, upon reading it, are convicted by the Holy Spirit and repent and believe.  So anything is possible.

Anyhow, below are links to both parts of Sproul's Q&A.  Really great material.  The baptism discussion takes place in the second part.

Why We Don’t Evangelize - Mark Dever

Why We Don’t Evangelize

The Book of Esther - Chris Anderson

Overview of the book of Esther by pastor Chris Anderson - basically just a message I discovered while browsing on SermonAudio and enjoyed (I love sermonaduio... there's just so much there to explore.)

What I found helpful about this message is how Pastor Anderson sets the context historically of what's going on with Israel, and how Persia defeated Babylon and the Medes and Persians are in control at this point. Israel is in captivity to Persia, yet at the point of this book Israel is given the opportunity to return to their own land. Problem is, the land has been decimated and Jerusalem is in ruins. Another interesting detail is how Isaiah 45 prophecies about Cyrus, well in advance of the events of the book of Esther.

I thought this MP3 message, roughly a half hour, gave a solid overview of the background and message of the book of Esther.

Finding Christ Between the Testaments

Fascinating message by Dr. John Barnett on the Intertestamental Period (the 400 years between Malachi and Matthew.)  The message of this silent period is that the Jews were victorious when they were obedient to the Word and defeated when they fell away from the Word.  The intertestamental period also presents the timeframe when the four main religious groups of Christ's day (the Essenes, Pharisees, Sadducees and Zealots) came into development, and also gives more background into the very dark and violent times of the life of people like Joseph, Mary, Simeon, Anna, Elizabeth and Zacharius, etc.

Dr. Barnett discusses how Daniel (in Dan. 11) prophesied about Alexander and the four kingdoms (prophetic words that were indeed fulfilled), as well as a little more background into the some of the Apocryphal books.  Although for Protestants we can sometimes be a little quick to dismiss the Apocrypha as non-canonical "Catholic" books, even though these are not cannon they do offer some interesting insight into the dark times between the testaments, including details of events such as the Maccabean revolt.


Some of the Apocryphal works, such as the Ezras books, need to be taken with a grain of salt:  per Dr. Barnett, I Ezras is basically just a copy of the Old Testament book of Ezra with extra stuff added in about "don't mistreat the Jews".  II Ezra's is a "flaming apocalyptic" with various inaccurate prophecies.  Its noteworthy that Jesus nor any of the New Testament ever make mention of the Apocrypha.  Rome clings to these, primarily because of fringy passages like 2 Maccabees 12:43, that talk abotu how Judas Macabees, when his soldiers died, shacked them up and made a sacrifice for them.  The entire Catholic system of purgatory was built around this one verse.

Dr. Barnett gives an excellent overview of this Intertestamental Period, and it helps give an little more background into the lives of those in Luke's gospel and the rough, violent time that they were coming out of.

A bland Romans/Galatians commentary

I've been recently flipping through a somewhat bland commentary on Romans and Galatians by a handful of different commentators, and wanted to jot down a few thoughts.  This isn't an overly good commentary, but some of the images and illustrations are interesting.  The book strays away from being a substantial or satisfying systematic theology, but rather offers a glossy surface overview of these two books, with the occasional Arminian flavoring (I noticed that two of the writers were associated with Fuller Theological Seminary, and its interesting [providential] that I was just listening to a Mark Dever interview with Wayne Grudem talking about his experience with Fuller and the downward slide of how this particular school moved away from Biblical inerrancy.  As another completely unrelated note, Grudem also mentioned the site on The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, which I did not know about previously but which looks to be a wealth of good information, so I'm going to add this to my Delicious links and check it out later.  Here's the link to the Grudem interview)

Anyhow, not much more to say about this Romans/Galatians Zondervan commentary.  Not sure how or why I got this, but to summarize: the content isn't overly deep (sidebar blurs about the "Global warming"issue?) the theology is a little wonky, but the images are interesting.

Polity (and Baptism) in the Local Church with Mark Devers

Recently listened to Mark Dever of 9Marks deliver an excellent message on the topic of church polity, what what caught my notice the most was his closing comments on the topic of baptism, that literally capped off the last final moments of the message.  I'm jotting a few notes down here because I think Pastor Dever is right on about this.

Dever identifies how there is no teaching of infant baptism in the new testament, nor are there any parallels of it to circumcision in the new testament.  The Apostle Paul denies the connection in Colossians 2, and rather parallels spiritual circumsicion to physical baptism, with the idea being that when you are born again you are to be baptized.

There is no mention of baptizing infants in the Didache, and there is no record of infant baptism in the first or second century.  By the third century there are a few disputed cases, but by the end of the third century the baptisms are Rome-style "saving" baptisms.  Until the time of Zwingli and Calvin, there is no infant baptism articulated that is not saving.

Dever's presented a summary that the oldest opinion would be that of believers baptism, the second oldest opinion that of the "saving" baptisms of the Greek Orthodox and Roman Catholics, and the third oldest  being 1,000 years later with the reformers.

In Romans 6 Paul is assuming that all those who have the new life have been baptized (again, being born again then baptized).  There is an implies acceptance of the cognitive gospel prior to baptism.

Here's the link to the message:  Polity in the Local Church with Mark Dever

Free Audio Bible Download | Faith Comes By Hearing

Free Audio Bible Download | Faith Comes By Hearing

Another fun description for Paedobaptists (from W. R. Downing of Free Grace Baptist Church)

I was listening to an excellent message W. R. Downing on a sermonaudio message from Free Grace Baptist, on the subject of Zacchaeus, but somewhat off-topic, the opening of the sermon (I'm guessing this was some sort of bridge conversation from the previous class) has Pastor Downing describing a term for paedobaptists as "Paedokefalosrhantizo" (forgive the spelling - still learning some of the Greek nuinaces):

paedo - infant
kefalos - the head
rhantizo - sprinkles

I like this. I need to remember this next time I chat with one of my Presbyterian friends... :)

Exodus 20:7

Here's a link to a sermon by Phil Johnson on the third commandment, and the usage of God's name with good taste and Biblical propriety.  In the message, Pastor Johnson talks about how using God's name lightly destroys reverence for what is holy and pure, and when you use God's name lightly or make jokes about Christ, what is reflected is a lack of fear for God and a defiance against the third commandment.

When you call yourself a "Christian", you are taking the name of the Lord and using it for yourself, and while there is nothing wrong with this, you need to ACT the way that Christ would have acted in order to be using the name correctly.  In the commandment, don't "take" the name of God talks about don't pick up/lift it up/use it in some form or fashion. To do it in vain means to do it in a purposeless, hollow way.  If you aren't actually speaking to God, or specifically referencing his name, you should not use it.

The commandment also branches out into flippant usage of swearing, not profanity, but expressions like "I swear on a stack of Bibles", etc. Jesus confronted the Pharisee's should avoid flippant oaths, and passages like James 5:12 that speak about "Do not swear" but let your "yes be yes", yet at the same time, there are places for solemn oaths (marriage, or oaths made to God.) All oaths are solumn promises in which we call God to be our witness.
 
God's name can also be used in vain in our thoughts and deeds.  To pray wrongly (superficial praying, or praying for the wrong thing) can also be seen as a misuse of the third commandment.  If you stand in corporate prayer in the church but instead just flip through the bulletin or think other thoughts, this is a form of taking the Lord's name in vain.  Singing praise songs without meaning the words, or thinking about something else, is misusing God's name. 
 
Even if praying carelessly or meaninglessly over a meal, the Lord's name is being misused.  Simply reciting Jesus' name at the end of the prayer doesn't make it more effective.  Prayer in Jesus name means praying for that which he approves, that is consistent with his character.

Wayne Grudem - Systematic Theology - MP3s

Here's a link to a treasure trove of Dr. Grudem's lessons in the Christian Essentials class, taken from his book, Systematic Theology. Grudem is fantastic and his systematic theology is a wealth of good information. This is another one of those sites where it can be handy to have an install of DownThemAll! to download all of the MP3s and load them into your MP3 player.