Tuesday, January 29, 2008


Proverbs 17:14 The beginning of strife is as when one letteth out water: therefore leave off contention before it be meddled with.

What did you really hope to accomplish by throwing that rock at the wasp's nest? It would have been better had that question been asked BEFORE the rock left your hand. There is always a motive. But every motive does not always have as its end the goal of honoring Christ.

Thursday, January 24, 2008


A person who worries about things that have not happened would make a very poor banker. Instead of waiting until a savings account was opened to begin attributing interest earned where due, the banker would add interest to an unopened account because of what the depositor might invest. In no time at all, the banker would be broke and destitute.

Worry is like that. Worry is interest paid on an account not yet invested. And to compound the problem, the amount may never even be invested or it might only be a fraction of what was thought that would be. And yet, so many people live their lives on what might be instead of what is and will be.

Worry in its self accomplishes nothing. Well, that is if you do not consider a stomach ulcer, heart problems, increased cholesterol, sleepless nights, headaches and fatigue as anything. Worry does not change events. Worry neither increases nor decreases the likelihood that an event will or will not occur. Maybe we can then define worry as payment on a bill not received.

What then is the cure for worry? Very simple. Get so enamored with seeking God and His righteousness that you do not have time to contemplate what tomorrow holds. Put another way, stare so long into the sun(Son, Jesus, the True Light) that the things of this earth around you grow fainter and fainter.

Matthew 6:33-34 But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you. Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.(KJV)

Monday, January 14, 2008


I can remember when I was younger watching the Duracell commercial on the television which featured the then prominent actor, Robert Conrad. In the commercial, he was to be exhibit the tough guy image by placing a battery on his shoulder and daring you to knock it off. I still remember my wish that somebody would. I would love to have seen his reaction.

Today, we live in a highly charged, antennae saturated, overly sensitive society. Political correctness has run so far amok and reached such a volume that some are reluctant to speak because someone else may be offended by something said in spite of the fact that no offense is intended to be communicated. However this post is not being written to address those that offend when they speak but rather to address those who are offended by everything they hear.

Let me start this then by saying that if profanity offends you, in addition to calling/writing the advertisers of movies that contain such, you need to only turn your TV off. It is that simple. Do not watch the movie/program. Now I do not like profanity. I learned quite a while back that profanity is the attempt of a feeble mind trying to express itself forcefully. When I hear profanity being used, I acknowledge to myself that the person speaking the profanity lacks the moral integrity and virtue that the Spirit of Christ would seek to instill in such a person. While not restricted to only profanity, when the Scripture says that we should not let any corrupt words proceed from our mouths, profanity is included. Other people are offended by suspected racists comments. Others still are offended by what we would call sexists comments. This list could get extremely long but we dare not forget the socio-economic comments that some would find offensive and extreme.

In each of these situations, the hearer is wearing their particular ideology like a battery on their shoulder just daring and waiting for anyone to knock it off. Have we, as Christians, forgotten what Jesus came for? He came not to condemn the world but that the world through him might be saved. As his ambassadors, we have the same calling. We are to be a people that seek reconciliation rather than the condemnation of another. Rather than be offended by a person's speech, what I hear is a soul that needs the work of the Holy Spirit. And might it just be that through me and a humble spirit on my part, that God might reach said offender. When I am easily offended, I lift myself up rather than Christ. Rather than seeing a sin darkened heart when I am offended, I see the red of my pride that I believe is so worthy of respect. If a person respects not Jesus Christ, how in the world can I expect that they would respect me? And if their life is lived in such a way that it can be said of them they respect and follow Christ, perhaps, just perhaps that the words they uttered that you found so offensive were in no way intended or meant to be offensive but were interpreted that way through the battery that was being displayed on your shoulder.

Passing laws in our country have done nothing to change the heart of man. Laws may restrain the actions of man but they do no have the ability to do what only the Gospel of Jesus Christ can do, change the heart. As an ambassador of Christ then, I am to ultimately be concerned about the hearts of man. Just because their actions have been restrained does not mean the issue has been settled. In fact, it is extreme naivety to think that restraint has changed the heart. Sometimes, restraint actually enrages the heart and the opposite of what is best happens. As Christians, we should be ready to dialogue about our Savior and the power afforded by him to make the changes that we so desire. Can we forget about ourselves long enough to see that at least on our part, Christ is lifted up? Is there enough integrity within our own hearts to make sure that Jesus Christ is offended before we are? Need we be reminded that all sin is actually against Christ though it may be aimed at man?

Why would what I have said offend anybody? It is precisely because it would seem that I am giving the offender a free ride. It would seem that I am placing the responsibility on the offended rather than the offender. Absolutely not. Rather, I am bringing back into the equation that which is so often neglected or disregarded. Is my display of being offended bringing dishonor to the cross and work of Jesus Christ? It does become necessary to confront such a one who would bring forth corrupt speech but that is the subject of another post. Rather, this one is to deal with the hearts of those who cry foul so easy when they are offended.

Genesis 21:25-30 has an interesting correlation for this subject. Abraham was wronged/offended by the actions of another and instead of pitching a fit, Abraham gave the offender gifts as a sign that he, Abraham, had been wronged. Boy, would this turn our court system for civil suits on its head or what? But, that can be the subject of some other post as well. My point, what does the behavior of crying foul so swiftly and easily say about the condition of the heart of the one who is crying foul?

While this may not float so well in the world's eyes, it ought to sail rather smoothly on the ocean of Christianity. Shouldn't it?

Wednesday, January 9, 2008


I'm preaching through the Gospel according to John and a particular passage jumped out at me like at no other time before. Here it is:

John 8:24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am, ye shall die in your sins.

This one verse can turn one's entire view of the atonement on its end. I, as well as many of you, have been taught, listened to many sermons, read many books and studied about the atonement and its extent. What does this verse say about the atonement.

At the cross, where Jesus laid down his life, a price was paid. A debt was paid. A punishment was endured. A transaction was made. However, the legal effects of this sacrifice, as pertaining to a sinners guilt before God, only become real or transacted at the moment that the sinner/guilty believes in Jesus, the great I Am. Unbelief, the refusal to accept Jesus as God in the flesh(and thus his teachings), results in one being judged guilty and sent to eternal punishment for their own sins. Mark 16:16 (for those of you who have not cut it from your texts) reinforces this concept that, "the wrath of God remains upon them that believe not."(Henry, vol5, pg 989)

What happens at salvation then is this. Jesus does not die again every time someone believes for the Scriptures plainly teach that Jesus died once. But, at the moment someone believes, the price that Jesus paid is applied to the debt, sin, of the believing. Not before, not some second blessing later but at the moment of belief.

Jesus did not universally pay a debt that rendered all men sinless. At the cross, Jesus paid the debt for those who had died in belief. Hebrews 11 has a list of many, though it is not exclusive to them alone as being the only ones who died in belief. But the forward application of the cross only takes place when a person "believes" in Jesus as the great I Am. At the cross then, the payment was "actual" for those before the Christ, and is "potential" for those coming after the Christ. It is kind of like the miracle of II Kings 4:1-6. As long as there are vessels to be filled, the oil will keep pouring and will not stay until there are no more vessels to fill. The blood of Jesus shed at the cross, like such, will keep paying the sin debts of those who believe until there remains no more to believe. The cross, like the pot of oil, has great potential to fill many. But its application stops once there are no more who believe.

Who then can be saved? Whosoever will, let him come. For Jesus' payment will be applied to your debt at the moment salvation is graced upon you. But know this, refusal to have faith in Jesus, the great I Am, and you will die in your sins and YOU will eternally pay your debt of sin. It is not enough to know his teachings. It is not enough to believe he is a prophet. It is not enough to believe he was a good man. He must be received, by faith, as the Christ, the Messiah, the Lamb of God. If there is an empty vessel, there is oil to fill it.

Monday, January 7, 2008


These things ought not be so!

If you have no frame of reference to which I allude, you are more blessed than you realize.

Have mercy on us and flood us with you peace. Grace us with wisdom, patience and forgiveness toward others. Help us to decrease that you might increase.


Wednesday, January 2, 2008


HERE is an article of just recent that ought to get your eyes a rolling. With Christmas being past and only a few hundred days until it returns, there is much time to consider what the Archbishop has to say. Now I realize that there is much about the birth of Jesus that we do not know. What time of night, how many shepherds there were, seems to have been anything but silent for the shepherds, how many wise men there were and exactly when, date and time, they showed up are a few questions that are batted around to which we do not have an absolute biblical answer. But when one begins to cast doubt upon what the Word actually records, now it is time to scrap. Two points wherein the Archbishop showed his true reasoning behind bringing any of this up anyway are:

1. He actually denies the account of Matthew 2:9 by saying that "stars just don’t behave like that". Well, Matthew records that this one did. Perhaps the Archbishop thinks that Matthew was just recording legend, folklore, myth? In his feeble attempt to set the record straight about the Christmas celebration, he ends up with all four wheels in the ditch. To deny the very truth recorded by Matthew based upon his understanding of earth science rather than faith in God and the truth of His word is bound to eventually resurface in the doubting of other portions of the Word of God.

2. He actually calls the virgin birth of Jesus a "hurdle" over which new Christians did not need to concern themselves with in order to be "signed up". I can only assume that by being "signed up" he is referring to salvation. If that be the case, he believes it but it isn't necessary for others to believe in the virgin birth in order to be saved. If Jesus was not virgin born then he was simply the offspring of Joseph and Mary, which would make Jesus a mere mortal and not Immanuel. If Jesus was not virgin born then his death secured nothing for the salvation of others much less his own. If Jesus was not virgin born, the the idea of the resurrection is absolutely ludicrous unless we deny other Scriptures about death and the afterlife. If Jesus was not virgin born, then what exactly is the calling of the Archbishop? Is it a call to a man-made organization? For there truly is no church if Jesus was not born of a virgin. Deny the virgin birth and you invalidate the entire New Testament.

May God have mercy upon this man and may the Holy Spirit show him the error of his way.


If you did not get the opportunity to watch Sunday's show with Tim Russert(Most SB preachers/church goers are at church I think), you can still watch the interview with Huckabee HERE. That link also gives you the opportunity to read the entire transcript which I have done. I prefer the transcript because then I can pause and ponder the statements that are made without missing what comes next. Here is my take on one issue from that interview.


I am not sure what time during the interview this was but it is on page 6 of the transcript. Huckabee was asked about a statement that was penned in his 1998 book, "Kids Who Kill". In that statement, homosexuality was listed as an "institutionally supported aberration" along with pedophilia, sadomasochism and necrophilia. Huckabee, when pressed by Russert, demonstrated what it truly means to be a politician. Rather than AFFIRMING or even denying his previous statement from his book, Huckabee AVOIDS addressing the quote. Can we expect more of the same from Huckabee if he were elected to the White House? Strangely, Huckabee expects that BECAUSE he is a "Southern Baptist Evangelical" that he will automatically secure the support of other "Southern Baptist Evangelicals". HERE, in response to the action of Land to support Thompson, Huckabee said, "They make 'electability' their criterion." Let me point out the obvious. Huckabee, I contend, must have sensed that affirming the quote from his book on homosexuality would affect HIS OWN ELECTABILITY and so he avoided, if not abandoned, his belief that homosexuality is an "institutionally supported aberration". Huckabee appears to have abandoned his ordination at that moment for electability, or more commonly called, politically expedient behavior. HERE, Huckabee, in an appeal for "Southern Baptist Evangelical" votes also stated, "But I am a true soldier for the cause. If my own abandon me on the battlefield, it will have a chilling effect."

An ordained minister abandoning his beliefs and morals for electability have a chilling effect on me.

Tuesday, January 1, 2008


May the year 2008 be a blessed year for you and may your faith and love for the Lord Jesus Christ grow abundantly.