What do you believe, really?

YOU ARE ENTERing THE


So, Ever wanted to know how well you know what you believe?

Click here and take the test.

Tell me what you found out. You may find out you did not know your own faith as well as you thought..


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Thoughts on Hell

Hell is a hot topic these days. Rob bells book "love's wins" has raised some eyebrows by raising some unsettling questions. I have to agree with him that proclaiming a "if you don't want to go to hell get saved" kind of gospel is far below what we are called to proclaim. While I understand and somewhat agree with a healthy does of silence is good in the intellectual places where our ignorance and God righteous judge mingle. Mystery has it's place as does humility, and truth. In a book i am now reading called "holiness: it's nature, hinderance,difficulties and root, by J. C. Ryle an Anglican bishop from the 1800, I found a passage on he'll that struck me as profound and powerful in showing the necessity of the traditional view. Bishop Ryle's balance of honest, tough-love and compassionate, pastoral care gives such a hard truth a humble and honest presentation. (I have added a short bio on Ryle after the quote)

Ryle writes:
I feel constrained to speak freely to my readers on the subject of hell.... I believe the time is come when it is a positive duty to speak plainly about the reality and eternity of hell. A flood of false doctrine has lately broken in upon us. Men are beginning to tell us that God is too merciful to punish souls forever, that there is a love of God lower even than hell, and that all mankind, however wicked and ungodly some of them may be, will sooner or later be saved. We are invited to leave the old paths of apostolic Christianity. We are told that the views of our fathers about hell, and the devil, and punishment, are obsolete and old–fashioned. We are to embrace what is called a "kinder theology" and treat hell as a pagan fable or a bugbear to frighten children and fools. Against such false teaching I desire, for one, to protest. Painful, sorrowful, distressing as the controversy may be, we must not blink it or refuse to look the subject in the face. I, for one, am resolved to maintain the old position, and to assert the reality and eternity of hell.

Believe me, this is no mere speculative question. It is not to be classed with disputes about liturgies and church government. It is not to be ranked with mysterious problems, like the meaning of Ezekiel’s temple or the symbols of Revelation. It is a question which lies at the very foundation of the whole gospel. The moral attributes of God, His justice, His holiness, His purity, are all involved in it. The necessity of personal faith in Christ, and the sanctification of the Spirit, are all at stake. Once let the old doctrine about hell be overthrown, and the whole system of Christianity is unsettled, unscrewed, unpinned and thrown into disorder.

Believe me, the question is not one in which we are obliged to fall back on the theories and inventions of man. The Scripture has spoken plainly and fully on the subject of hell. I hold it to be impossible to deal honestly with the Bible and to avoid the conclusions to which it will lead us on this point. If words mean anything, there is such a place as hell. If texts are to be interpreted fairly, there are those who will be cast into it. If language has any sense belonging to it, hell is forever. I believe that the man who finds arguments for evading the evidence of the Bible on this question has arrived at a state of mind in which reasoning is useless. For my own part, it seems just as easy to argue that we do not exist, as to argue that the Bible does not teach the reality and eternity of hell.

Settle it firmly in your mind that the same Bible which teaches that God in mercy and compassion sent Christ to die for sinners does also teach that God hates sin and must, from His very nature, punish all who cleave to sin or refuse the salvation He has provided. The very same chapter which declares, "God so loved the world," declares also, that "the wrath of God abides" on the unbeliever (John 3:16, 36). The very same gospel which is launched into the earth with the blessed tidings, "He that believes and is baptized shall be saved," proclaims in the same breath, "He that believes not shall be damned" (Mark 16:16).

Settle it firmly in your mind that God has given us proof upon proof in the Bible that He will punish the hardened and unbelieving and that He can take vengeance on His enemies, as well as show mercy on the penitent. The drowning of the old world by the flood, the burning of Sodom and Gomorrah, the overthrow of Pharaoh and all his host in the Red Sea, the judgment on Korah, Dathan and Abiram, the utter destruction of the seven nations of Canaan—all teach the same dreadful truth. They are all given to us as beacons and signs and warnings, that we may not provoke God. They are all meant to lift up the corner of the curtain which hangs over things to come and to remind us that there is such a thing as the wrath of God. They all tell us plainly that "the wicked shall be turned into hell" (Ps. 9:17).

Settle it firmly in your mind that the Lord Jesus Christ Himself has spoken most plainly about the reality and eternity of hell. The parable of the rich man and Lazarus contains things which should make men tremble. But it does not stand alone. No lips have used so many words to express the awfulness of hell, as the lips of Him who spoke as never man spoke, and who said, "The word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father’s which sent Me" (John 14:24). Hell, hell fire, the damnation of hell, eternal damnation, the resurrection of damnation, everlasting fire, the place of torment, destruction, outer darkness, the worm that never dies, the fire that is not quenched, the place of weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth, everlasting punishment—these, these are the words which the Lord Jesus Christ Himself employs. Away with the miserable nonsense which people talk in this day, who tell us that the ministers of the gospel should never speak of hell! They only show their own ignorance, or their own dishonesty, when they talk in such a manner. No man can honestly read the four Gospels and fail to see that he who would follow the example of Christ must speak of hell.

Settle it, lastly, in your mind that the comforting ideas which the Scripture gives us of heaven are at an end, if we once deny the reality or eternity of hell. Is there no future separate abode for those who die wicked and ungodly? Are all men after death to be mingled together in one confused multitude? Why, then, heaven will be no heaven at all! It is utterly impossible for two to dwell happily together except they be agreed. Is there to be a time when the term of hell and punishment will be over? Are the wicked after ages of misery to be admitted into heaven? Why, then, the need of the sanctification of the Spirit is cast aside and despised! I read that men can be sanctified and made meet for heaven on earth; I read nothing of any sanctification in hell. Away with such baseless and unscriptural theories! The eternity of hell is as clearly affirmed in the Bible as the eternity of heaven. Once allow that hell is not eternal, and you may as well say that God and heaven are not eternal. The same Greek word which is used in the expression "everlasting punishment" is the word that is used by the Lord Jesus in the expression "life eternal," and by Paul, in the expression "everlasting God" (Matt. 25:46; Rom. 16:26).

I know that all this sounds dreadful in many ears. I do not wonder. But the only question we have to settle is this: "Is it scriptural?" Is it true? I maintain firmly that it is so; and I maintain that professing Christians ought to be often reminded that they may be lost and go to hell.

I know that it is easy to deny all plain teaching about hell and to make it odious by invidious names. I have often heard of "narrow–minded views," and "old–fashioned notions," and "brimstone theology," and the like. I have often been told that "broad" views are wanted in the present day. I wish to be as broad as the Bible, neither less nor more. I say that he is the narrow–minded theologian who pares down such parts of the Bible as the natural heart dislikes and rejects any portion of the counsel of God.

God knows that I never speak of hell without pain and sorrow. I would gladly offer the salvation of the gospel to the very chief of sinners. I would willingly say to the vilest and most profligate of mankind on his deathbed, "Repent, and believe on Jesus, and you shall be saved." But God forbid that I should ever keep back from mortal man that Scripture reveals a hell as well as heaven and that the gospel teaches that men may be lost as well as saved. The watchman who keeps silence when he sees a fire is guilty of gross neglect; the doctor who tells us we are getting well when we are dying is a false friend; and the minister who keeps back hell from his people in his sermons is neither a faithful nor a charitable man.

Where is the charity of keeping back any portion of God’s truth? He is the kindest friend who tells me the whole extent of my danger. Where is the use of hiding the future from the impenitent and the ungodly? Surely it is like helping the devil if we do not tell them plainly that, "The soul that sins shall surely die." Who knows but the wretched carelessness of many baptized people arises from this, that they have never been told plainly of hell? Who can tell but thousands might be converted if ministers would urge them more faithfully to flee from the wrath to come? Verily, I fear we are many of us guilty in this matter; there is a morbid tenderness among us which is not the tenderness of Christ. We have spoken of mercy, but not of judgment; we have preached many sermons about heaven, but few about hell; we have been carried away by the wretched fear of being thought "low, vulgar and fanatical." We have forgotten that He who judges us is the Lord and that the man who teaches the same doctrine that Christ taught cannot be wrong.

If you would ever be a healthy scriptural Christian, I entreat you to give hell a place in your theology. Establish it in your mind as a fixed principle that God is a God of judgment, as well as of mercy, and that the same everlasting counsels which laid the foundation of the bliss of heaven have also laid the foundation of the misery of hell. Keep in full view of your mind that all who die unpardoned and unrenewed are utterly unfit for the presence of God and must be lost forever. They are not capable of enjoying heaven; they could not be happy there. They must go to their own place: and that place is hell. Oh, it is a great thing in these days of unbelief to believe the whole Bible!


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Bio of J. C. Ryle
John Charles Ryle was born at Macclesfield and was educated at Eton and at Christ Church, Oxford. He was a fine athlete who rowed and played Cricket for Oxford, where he was top of his class and gained a degree in Greats (history of ideas) and was offered a college fellowship (teaching position) which he declined. The son of a wealthy banker, he was destined for a career in politics before answering a call to ordained ministry.

He was spiritually awakened in 1838 while hearing Ephesians 2 read in church. He was ordained by Bishop Sumner at Winchester in 1842. For the next thirty years He faithfully shepherded several churches throughout England. In 1880, at age 64, he became the first bishop of Liverpool, at the recommendation of Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli. He retired in 1900 at age 83 and died later the same year.

Ryle was a strong supporter of the evangelical school and a critic of Ritualism. Among his longer works is his most famous, Expository Thoughts on the Gospels (7 vols, 1856-69). His works for the general public are collection of sermons and works like "holiness" from which the quite is pulled.






- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Why "why" is an the central ethical question

It may even be held that [the intellect] is the true self of each, inasmuch as it is the dominant and better part; and therefore it would be a strange thing if a man should choose to live not his own life but the life of some other than himself. Moreover . . . that which is best and most pleasant for each creature is that which is proper to the nature of each; accordingly the life of the intellect is the best and the pleasantest life for man, inasmuch as the intellect more than anything else is man.

Aristotle Nicomachean Ethics 1178a2-7, trans. H. Rackham.


A World without a Why

It is, perhaps, a truism to state that in twentieth century philosophy it is by no means certain that there is any discernible purpose to human life. From Nietzsche’s mere “will to power”1 which find purpose in conquest, to Lyotard’s “incredulity toward metanarratives,”2 which drops all ultimate to particulars and strips reality to a bare canvas, and with many points in between there has been a reluctance to find over arching meaning.3 Western culture supported by philosophical positivism, a technological society and the dogmatic adherence to a scientific body of knowledge, has provided humanity with ample answers to the “how” with little guidance for the “who,” the “what,” or the “why.” We have massive amount of a “reductionistic” information yet knowing “how” a natural process works gives little if any, light to the questions of “what” or “why” the natural process is rather than is not. Modern philosophy and science avoided the questions of being in of a meaningful universe and cleaning their hands of metaphysical issues by reducing them to personal preference, presuppositions and improvable beliefs.

Being “Fit” and the "why" in the world

The philosopher Alasdair Macintyre has made it fashionable for some to utilize again the age-old Aristotelian perspective about human life as having a telos, a purpose.4 If we agree, as Aristotle taught, that life is lived toward a telos - that human life is at its best in the light of that telos - then we might suggest, again with Aristotle, that the aim of human life is eudaimonia; a word that means “well-being, wholeness, blessedness, happiness.” The word is rich, yet problematic. Before diving to deeply into it a few clarifying points must be made. The necessity of a world of order and syncopation is implied when you talk of eudemonia as a concept. Eudaimonia is a concept that focuses on the moral agent or in Hieddgier terms a being-in-the-world. Eudemonia is “fittedness” in the cosmos. Thus, human telos implies an objective world in the necessity of a fit-able place for man in the world of moment and often-unintelligible order. Man does not create meaning but finds a certain “fit” in the world. So Eudemonia is a subjective understanding of the content of a moral self in an objective world of order and choices.

Eudaimonia as aim for personal growth

The cultural use of happiness as personal satisfaction and fulfillment may pervert our understanding of eudaimonia. Though often translated “happiness,” the word is far more full than mere “feelings of being happy”. Eudaimonia is comparable to the Hebrew idea of shalom, or perhaps the English word “flourishing.”5 The modern misunderstanding of eudaimonia is the result of a sallow hedonism that is common to western culture. There are, of course, philosophically sophisticated versions of hedonism which cannot be dismissed lightly and do have great insights into the nature of humanity as a wanting creature. Yet If we steer eudaimonia away from the shallow hedonism prevalent today and toward the richer meaning, then it is arguable that the idea of a human telos, would be a helpful for both psychologists, pastoral theologians and ethicist interested in regaining a intellectual world endued with significance, human life grained more than just functional worth and personal action guided by a value directed purpose.

Human telos is understood along a paradigm: the temporal and eternal. The first is understood as the value paradigm where man’s action is judged in light of its proximity to the eternal. Thus it can be said that in light of a human telos - human action gains meaning and ethical value-direction.

When, pastors, or psychologist advise other they should have eudaimonia is view. Working to move people toward this state of eudaimonia. In this way, Eudaimonia is a worldview that is formed thought guided character development. I have termed Eudaimonia as a “mental well-being” more for alliterative purposes than because of a focus only on the mind. Aristotle’s eudaimonia is well-being in the most rounded sense: body and soul; feeling, thinking, sensing; the entirety of human personality, in whatever way we might perceive its complexity.

Harmony, Syncopation and the Glory of God

This is not a new idea but proposed in the Christian tradition as a life lived for the glory of God, an idea set out by the apostle Paul, explicated by st. Augustine and systematically described by St. Aquinas. For the Christian, eudemonia is found in God as the ultimate good. This faith tradition holds that eudemonia, as an end in itself is at best Moral selfishness, and at worst shallow hedonism. God is for the Christian, the foundation of all flourishing, the source of life and shalom. Further, God is the realization of human bliss, fundamental source of human enjoyment and the end to which all things where created. With this in mind, MacIntyre, defines eudaimonia as “the state of being well and doing well in being well, of a man’s [sic] being well favored himself and in relation to the divine.”6 Thus for the Christian eudemonia is the character traits and essential nature of a mature Christian that lives in harmony with and movement towards the telos of all creation, the glory of God. For those in the Christian tradition it allows eudaimonia to be understood as a holistic worldview that is rooted in the character of the individual. An individual enters and engages in a world that finds its temporal and eternal movements towards the glory of God. Thus in seeking God in all of life we seek a harmony of “fittedness” with the movement of the natural law and syncopation of our hearts with the glory of God.

Footnotes

1 Friedrich Nietzsche, The Will to Power (Vintage, 1968).

2 The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, translated by Geoff Bennington and Brian
Massumi, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota press, 1979, 1984, p xxiv. See also his Postmodern Fables, translated by George Van Den Abbeele, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota press, 1993, 1997.

3 This was classically stated by Paul Tillich in The Courage To Be ((New Haven: Yale University
Press, 1952), 35, 41, 47, 57, 61-63, terming the twentieth century as “the age of anxiety.”

4 See for example, Nancey Murphy, Brad J. Kallenburg, and Mark Thiessen Nation (eds.) Virtues and Practices in the Christian Tradition: Christian Ethics After MacIntyre (Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 1997).

5 There is a good introductory discussion both eudaimonia and telos in Christian philosophy in Stanley Grenz The Moral Quest: Foundations of Christian Ethics, (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1997)70- 72,75-76, 172-173.

6 Alasdair MacIntyre, After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory (London: Duckworth, 1981, 1985), 148.

The King is

Do you have five minutes - well let me introduce you to ~My KING~



The heart of a christian can not contain the hope, love and trust that overflows its banks when we look at our King. He is with us, one of us, more than us and all of us could not contain all he is! Praise Be to our King!

Reformed charismatic?

Since no one read this thing anyway I thought i would get.. well ... less conspicuous. So today I wish to rant on a little known segment of the christian church, a enigmatic little group called reformed charismatics, or Pentecostal Calvinists or Empowered Evangelicals - Whatever the labels? they are people of a paradoxical conviction, ones that believe in living in the tension of Spirit & Truth .

A Reformed charismatic? what is it? Have they found a cure? Is it contactable through interaction with an infected person? Today i will answer only the first question. if I answer the others I may curse... alot! So with my hostility in check... we can continue.

What is a reformed charismatic? First, My no matter what they are they are a christain. So we do not wish to make them anything less. Second, to understand them we must look at the two words seperately.

What is reformed?
Reformed for the most part is a type of theological position. For the most part it means.

• They Holds to the Five Solas of the reformation (They are five doctrinal point on salvation in response to the synergism of Mid evil catholicism.
  
• # 1 Sola scriptura ("by Scripture alone")
  
• # 2 Sola fide ("by faith alone")
• # 3 Sola gratia ("by grace alone")
• # 4 Solus Christus ("Christ alone")
• # 5 Soli Deo gloria ("glory to God alone")
  

• They have a High view of God’s sovereignty.
• They hold to the doctrines of grace. Thus holding to Calvinism in its Modified and classical forms. .
• They hold to covenant theology (both traditional and new covenant theological systems). . . the belief that the great covenants of Scripture are the frame of Scripture and see those covenants as the means by which God interacts with and accomplishes His purposes.
• They holds the idea that the Great Commission is taken seriously. .thus affirming the primacy of missions.
• They hold to the necessity to seek a distinctly Christian worldview that permeates all of life.

What is charismatic?

Two points of belief will give the answer to this question.

1. They hold a distinct Pneumatology

To that end, They hold to a theological position called - Theological Continuationism. This position is the biblical grounded belief that the miraculous and not-so miraculous gifts are normative for all, thus the gifts have continued in uninterrupted operation since Pentecost. that is to say, the gifts of the Holy Spirit have continued to this present age.

• The Spirit’s primary work is to reveal the reality and presence of Christ for the glory of Christ.
• The Spirit’s empowering work among believers is broad in its dimensions.
• The Spirit’s empowering work among believers is intended to be ongoing and continuous.
• The Spirit’s empowering work among believers has as its focus personal sanctification, spiritual illumination, service for mutual edification, and evangelistic witness.
• The Spirit’s empowering work among believers should include a discernibly dynamic dimension.
• The Spirit’s empowering work among believers includes all the gifts of the Holy Spirit at work in the church of the first century.
• The gifts of the Holy Spirit are vital for the mission of the church and are to be earnestly desired and practiced.

The more controversial gifts and signs include such things as:

• Prophecy, the gifts of tongues
• Discerning of spirits - Special insight into the spiritual side of reality including person’s motives and purposes, demonic activity, Holy Spirit’s spontaneous work.
• Miracles, (otherwise-) impossible strings of 'coincidences',
• Healings,
• Exorcisms,
• Any other 'power' activities in which God exercises power over the order of nature, the mind, and the human body, often through other people.

2. They often have a distinctive way they express there faith.

The Key Mark of a charismatic - The belief that His [God’s] reality is real.
The application of this belief is seeking the imamate reality and presence of God. Charismatic Christians believe that the presence of God can be experienced in a supernatural way by believers, usually during times of intense spiritual reflection (such as during a worship service, a small group meeting or personal prayer). Worship thus becomes is an important element in this belief.


Wonder twins power unite! FORM of Reformed charismatic

The reform charismatic (RC for short) would say that the point of intersection is in the place of worldview. The necessity to seek a distinctly Christian worldview that permeates all of life implies a worldview where God is powerful, big and gracious giving. Where such giving, is also in the forms of gifts and interactions with his people in a mystical yet rational way from within the community of faith and for the greater good of humanity. Ok so when the two collide the first issue is scriptural sufficiency and a good RC (not roman catholic) will understand sufficiency in a formative way. That is scripture forms worldview. Scripture is a body of knowledge that all other knowledge is to be understood by – therefore it is a knowledge tradition. For a RC to operate in the gifts and power of God is to empirically validate the sufficiency of scripture in doing what it says we can do.

Well what will it looks like. I will answer that with examples movements today being “reformed charismatics” The following groups are charismatic, although some of them would describe themselves as non-denominational. These are some of the best examples.

• Sovereign Grace Ministries – a movement lead by CJ Mahanoy.
• Newfrontiers - UK movment lead by Terry Virgo
• The Vineyard – a movment stated by john wimber
• Calvary Chapel
• Every Nation
• Christian City Churches
• Alliance of Renewal Churches

And Yes I’m one of them…

I have thought about it with tears and the future is before you [reader] in this blog. It is only the past revisited – Here I stand.