Baptist historical documents on the web

Some online Baptist history documents resources, in “random order”:

Missions
Works by, about or associated with William Carey
A Public Address to the Baptist Society by Daniel Parker
Thoughts on Missions by John Taylor (1819)
Black Rock Address (1832)

Origins
Did They Dip? by John T. Christian
A Welsh Succession of Primitive Baptist Faith and Practice by Michael N. Ivey
A Critique of the English Separatist Descent Theory in Baptist Historiography by Philip R. Bryan
A Vindication of the Continued Succession of the Primitive Church of Jesus Christ (Now Scandalously Termed AnaBaptists) From the Apostles to the Present Time by John Spittlehouse & John More
Anabaptist Primary Documents
Critical Issues Relating to the Origin of the Baptists by Philip R. Bryan
The Kiffin Manuscript (c. 1640)

Geographical
History of Landmark Baptists of California
Baptist Annals of Oregon

Faith and Practice
Notes on the Principles and Practices of Baptist Churches by Francis Wayland
Remarks on Church Discipline by Daniel Parker
What is it to Eat and Drink Unworthily? by J. R. Graves
Baptized In The Spirit by B. H. Carroll
The Anabaptist View of the Church by T. D. Williams
A Short Treatise Concerning a True and Orderly Gospel Church (1743)

Miscellaneous
The Old School Particular Baptist Library
History of Clear Creek Church, and Campbellism Exposed by John Taylor
Exposition of the Views of Baptists, Relative to the Coloured Population in the United States by Richard Furman
The writings of the late Elder John Leland: including some events in his life (Google books)
The writings of the late Elder John Leland: including some events in his life (Archive.org)
The McPherson-Bogard Debate on “Miraculous Divine Healing”
From “Funnymentalist” to friend: the evolving relationship of Ben M. Bogard and J. Frank Norris
Plan of Union between Separate Baptists and Regular Baptists (1801)
Baptist History Homepage

Three-fold church cord

A three-fold cord is not easily broken (Cf. Ecclesiastes 4:12). Three strong strands of the woven church cord are:

1. Orthodoxy – right belief
Believing the Bible and being faithful to its doctrines of the faith is a requirement of God's people. Who can say he loves God and not believe & keep His words? The word of God is given by inspiration of God (II Tim 3:16-17). The faithful Christian believes it and studies to show himself approved of God (II Tim 2:15). All doctrines and teachings are brought to its mirror to see whether these things are so (Acts 17:11).

2. Orthopraxy – right practice
The work of the church is summed up in what is best known as the Great Commission (Matt. 28:18-20). This summary is displayed fully in the New Testament in the recorded outworkings of the Holy Spirit through His church. New Testament Christianity means New Testament practice (I Cor. 11:2; 14:33). The faithful representing of Christ and the gospel to the world is faithful to the Word of God in the New Testament, which is our only rule of faith and practice (Acts 20:2027-28; II Tim. 4:2).

3. Orthokardy – right heart
If the heart of the matter is not right, our doctrine and practice is merely a noisy racket that is annoying and unappealing (I Cor. 13:1-3). A supreme evidence of genuine Christianity is the love of brothers and sisters in Christ (John 13:35; I John 3:14). The “local church” (gathered congregation) is not just an important doctrine -- it is a functioning reality. The true heart of love spills out in committed fellowship for and blessed unity with one another.

Too often we try to make the cord with one strand, or two at the most. May God help us not weave amiss.

[Note: “orthokardy” suggested by Francis Shaeffer's “orthokardia of community” via Trevin Wax.]

Readings on Abortion

The posting of links does not constitute an endorsement of the blogs linked, and not necessarily even agreement with the posts linked.

“Abortion is as American as Apple Pie” — The Culture of Death Finds a Voice
A Non-Religious Argument Against Abortion
Map: Record Number of State Abortion Laws in 2011
Marking Four Decades of Abortion Politics
The Case Against Abortion: Abortion Techniques
True Story of a Baby Saved from Abortion

Readings about infants and children

The posting of links does not constitute an endorsement of the blogs linked, and not necessarily even agreement with the posts linked.

These readings offer a wide variety of subjects and opinions on the subjects of infant salvation, infant baptism, child baptism and so forth. Read them with thoughtfulness and reflection, an open mind and a Berean spirit.

How Are Our Children Saved?
How do you discern the conversion of a child?
Infant salvation
John The Baptist: Saved in the Womb?
Letter to a friend about Matt 19.14 and infant salvation
On Calvinism and Infant Salvation: A Brief Proposal
On Calvinism and Infant Salvation: A Brief Proposal, II
Romanian Forum: On the Baptism of Small Children
Should We Baptize Small Children?
The Age of Accountability
The Age (or State) of Accountability
The Baptism of Children
What happens to Infants and Children Who Die?

The Astonishing Savior from McInnis

HE is an “astonishing SAVIOR” because HE:

Despised the “righteous” (i.e.; in their own eyes) and companied with sinners. (Cf. Matt. 9:10-13)
Gained HIS greatest victory by dying. (Cf. Col. 2:14-15)
Was wounded in the house of HIS friends and died to save HIS enemies (i.e.; in their own minds). (Cf. Rom. 5:7-10)
Embraced death and destroyed it in one fell swoop. (I Pet. 1:3)

Excerpts from "The Astonishing Savior" by Mike McInnis | Grace Gazette, Volume X, Issue 4

Question for President's Day

Why is the current president called the 44th President of the United States if only 43 men have served this country as President?

Five senses of our Saviour

The Lord who made our bodies gave us five senses for function and pleasure. With our eyes we see. With our ears we hear. With our nose we smell. With our tongue we taste. With our hands we feel. The senses keep us from danger, direct us to good, and enrich our lives. We see and feel and move in the physical realm. Through these "gates" we experience life. In the corresponding spiritual realm, by five spiritual senses we experience God.

Hear. The senses function in the living and are silent in death. Only God can speak so that the dead can hear. John 5:25, John 11, John 10:16,27
Taste. There is no comparable experience to describe what we taste. If we have not tasted a thing, no amount of descriptions can mediate that knowledge to us. Taste and you will see His fruit is sweet. Psalm 34:8, Song 2:3
Smell. The sacrifice of Christ is a sweet smelling offering to God, and also becomes such to those who trust in Him. Ephesians 5:2, Song 1:3, II Cor. 2:14, Job 27:3
Touch. God is not far from all that wish to feel for Him. There is power in His touch. Acts 17:27, Luke 6:19, Mark 3:10, 5:30-31
See. He is the light, and gives sight to the blind that they may see Him. Oh, that we might see Jesus only! John 9:5-7, Psalm 119:18, Matt. 17:8, Heb. 12:14

May our spiritual senses be heightened to take in a blessed experience of God, that we might know Him.

O, taste and see, o, taste and see,
The Lord is good, is good to me;
His taste is rich, flavor divine:
Sweeter than honey, stronger than wine.
O, taste and see, the Lord is good:
Thirst-quenching drink; soul-building food.
His food sustains me from the first;
Drinking from His well, I never thirst.

Readings on politics and politicians

The posting of links does not constitute an endorsement of the blogs linked, and not necessarily even agreement with the posts linked.

Evangelical Leader Dr. Jim Linzey Appeals to Americans to Support Ron Paul for President in 2012
Newt Gingrich & Evangelicals: Strange Bedfellows
The Third Party Interest: Religion on the Campaign Trail
Which GOP candidate gets the Baptist vote?
Why I Am Not A Libertarian
Why Ron Paul?
Why this Southern Baptist Cannot Support Mitt Romney for President
10 reasons religious conservatives love Rick Santorum

Everlasting Father by Royce Smith

I understand the reluctance of some to accept the phrase the everlasting father (Isa. 9:6) in reference to our Lord Jesus Christ because it seems to confound Him with God the Father. Does the fact God is called Spirit in John 4:24 confound Him with the Holy Spirit who is often called the Spirit? Or must we confine the reference in John 4:24 to the Holy Spirit because this name might confound the persons of the Father and Holy Spirit?

Let me cite two passages which refer to our Lord Jesus Christ as having children. Psalm 45:16 quotes the Father as saying to our Lord Jesus Christ, "Instead of thy fathers shall be thy children, whom thou mayest make princes in all the earth." Hebrews 2:13 quotes our Lord Jesus Christ as saying, "And again I will put my trust in him, and again, Behold I and the children which God hath given me." The phrase "Behold, I and the children which God hath given me" is a quotation from the Hebrew text of Isaiah 8:18. Now, if our Lord Jesus Christ has children given to Him, then He must be a Father to them. Since they were given to Him in the everlasting covenant, wouldn't He be an everlasting Father? In my simple way of thinking, it seems better to interpret the phrase everlasting Father of our Lord Jesus on the basis of the statements in Psalm 45:16, Hebrews 2:13, and Isaiah 8:18 than to cast doubt on the validity of the Hebrew text. -- By Royce Smith, Bethel Baptist Church, Choctaw, OK

After that he may drink wine

The Nazarite vow is often mentioned as an example for abstinence today, because of its restriction of drinking wine and strong drink. The entire context of the Nazarite is a separation while under his vow from things that were otherwise allowable. In addition to wine and strong drink, the Nazarite was prohibited from grapes, raisins, grape juice (“liquor of the grape”, KJV), grape vinegar – in fact any product of the grapevine (“nothing that is made of the vine tree”, KJV). Separation from “all things grape” was not the only restriction, however. The Nazarite must not cut his hair but rather allow his locks to grow. He also could not touch a dead body, even an immediate member of his family. (Under the law even a priest could become unclean for the death of an immediate family member.) The Nazarite would fulfill the number of days of his vow (apparently determined by the one making the vow), make the proper offerings, “and after that the Nazarite may drink wine.” Here “may drink wine” is a figure of speech, a synecdoche in which “wine” stands for being released from the entire vow. Being released, they may drink wine, strong drink and the liquor of grapes; eat grapes, raisins, and other products of the grapevine. Restrictions concerning hair and dead bodies default to the regular customs prior the vow.

That the Nazarite was commanded to abstain from the consumption of wine and strong drink while under his vow shows that he normally drank (or could drink) these products. After the vow is completed the Nazarite “may drink wine.” This is clear to the casual observer (and the not so casual!). It allows for the use of wine as a beverage. The Nazarite vow is devastating to the case for prohibition, unless one can prove that wine and strong drink do not here stand for a fermented beverage of the vine tree. Interestingly, in his exhaustive work on wine in the Old Testament, Robert Teachout tries to blunt the effect of this by translating wine (yayin) as “grape juice” in Numbers 6:20: “and afterward the Nazirite may drink grape juice.” Unless the release is only to “drink grape juice” the effort is nullified. The statement represents the fulfillment of the vow and return to normalcy. Teachout translates “wine and strong drink” (yayin and shekar) as “intoxicating wine” in verse 3. Is the Nazarite only released to drink grape juice, while remaining under all the other restrictions of the vow, or does Numbers 6:20 mean the Nazarite is released from the restrictions of the entire vow after its duration ends and offerings are made? The answer is obvious, and should give pause to the abstentionist and prohibitionist.

Readings on Christians and Controversy

The posting of links does not constitute an endorsement of the blogs linked, and not necessarily even agreement with the posts linked.

Contentious Christians: How should we handle controversy?
Exposing False Doctrine
Is It Right: To Judge, To Expose Error, & To Call Names?
Is there a Biblical warrant to engage in debates with non-believers
No Truth Without Love, No Love Without Truth
Why point out attacks on truth?
Yes, Christians Need to Debate

A Murderous Game

“We favor safe, helpful athletics in our schools, but to say the least, our Christian colleges are going far astray when they lend their influence to the training of boys to kick and trample their fellow students to death. We are against the murderous game (football), root and branch...If some of our over-enthusiastic youths that attend Baylor are bound to test their kicking abilities, let them cross legs with a burro. It will be fully as civilized and much less dangerous.”

J. B. Cranfill in The Baptist Standard, 1899

I wonder what Cranfill would think about a Baylor student winning the Heisman trophy; or churches turning out their services to watch a Super football game?? Now I’ve been known to watch a game or two, and even root against the dark side. But I think our old-fogey Baptist fathers had a point or two that we need to consider as well.

New Research on the Fall of the United States

Dear Dr. Jones,

I pledge you my great respect for your exhaustive history of Europe. As you know, the most recent research in which I have been involved is the fall of the United States of America. We have known for several years that is was overtaken in February 2014, but recent excavations in New Jersey have revealed why. It fell during the celebration of the Suprabolus festival, at the end of two weeks of worship of the god of Ball. Suprabolus was a winter festival begun in the last century of U.S. history to celebrate the god of pleasure. I expect future studies will reveal that Ball was a derivative of the Canaanite deity Baal. By the time of the country's fall, the U.S. was wholly given over to these idolatrous practices. It is hard to pinpoint exact dates, because the country began to number its calendar to coincide with the Suprabolus Festival. The United States government banned all holy days of its Christian past and reorganized its calendar around the major festivals of the pleasure deity.

The location of the Suprabolus festival moved from year to year, each annual mecca sold to the highest bidder. Travel, except festival related, was suspended the day of the main worship. Worship services were beamed to every corner of the nation for those unable to physically attend. Everything shut down. Lesser deities (sometimes called "role-models") played before Ball while worshipers cheered, jeered, screamed, drank themselves silly, and otherwise worked themselves into an emotional frenzy. Rioting in the streets was commonplace, and human sacrifice was occasionally practiced. Corruption of government, lack of work ethic, immorality and such like were not the true reasons for America's fall, but merely symptoms of a decadent people who were lovers of Pleasures more than lovers of God!

Please purchase and read my upcoming book, Suprabolus: the beginning of the end of the United States of America. Only my theory can accurately explain why that, after years of fending off terrorism, on a cold day in February three construction workers from Los Angeles overthrew an entire nation.

Sincerest regards,
Barrius Hyperbole, Th.D.

The proper use of perfume, and other quotes

"Compliments are like perfume; you can smell them, just don’t drink them." -- late SBC pastor Adrian Rogers

"As the providence of God greatly appeared in favour of Israel, by causing a dread to fall on their enemies, that they durst not sally out of the city and attack them; so it showed great faith in Joshua, and the Israelites, to administer circumcision at this time, just as they were landed in an enemy's country; and when the waters of Jordan were returned, and there was no going back, and if they could, as they were not in a condition to fight, so not to flee." -- English Baptist John Gill, from his commentary on Joshua 5

"What indeed has Athens to do with Jerusalem? What has the Academy to do with the Church? What have heretics to do with Christians? Our instruction comes from the porch of Solomon, who had himself taught that the Lord should be sought in simplicity of heart. Away with all attempts to produce a Stoic, Platonic, and dialectic Christianity! We want no curious disputation after possessing Christ Jesus, no inquisition after receiving the gospel! When we believe, we desire no further belief. For this is our first article of faith, that there is nothing which we ought to believe besides." -- Tertullian, Heretics, 7 (Stevenson, 166-167)

"If there is a fence and you don’t know its purpose, don’t just assume there isn’t one and tear it down. Find out what the fence is intended to accomplish. You might see it needs to stay." -- Jerry Vines

"The greatest criminals are religious criminals." -- Baptist preacher J.B. Moody

"The gospel preacher is not a 'spiritual obstetrician' appointed to supervise the new birth." -- Iain Murray

In the News

The breast-cancer charity Susan G. Komen for the Cure withdrew funding for breast-cancer screenings at Planned Parenthood. This created a large furor among PP supporters. The truth of the matter is that this is the right decision for the Komen foundation. Planned Parenthood is the U.S.'s largest abortion provider and any other arenas they enter are miniscule attempts at legitimacy in those areas. According to Americans United for Life President Charmaine Yoest, Planned Parenthood doesn't actually do mammograms. Apparently they only act as a "middleman". American politicians, decrying the Komen Foundation's politicizing of women's health care, forcefully took to politicizing the issue themselves. Today the Foundation quickly reversed their right decision with a wrong one, bowing to lots of pressure. Sad.

Doctors from the University of California at San Francisco study are claiming that "sugar is as damaging and addictive as alcohol or tobacco." They suggest we begin taxing "added sugar". Another inanimate thing will quickly go from neutral according to how it is used to evil, if we bow to peer pressure once again. I'm sure the politicians will love this study. Most of them have never met a tax they didn't like. Sad again.

The "gospel" in the stars

I first encountered the spurious idea of "the gospel in the stars" several years ago on the Baptist Board. The presenter of the idea there was also co-author of the internet article Signs in the Stars. Once in awhile others mention the subject and question it. So I thought I'd post this statement on the matter.

After reading Signs in the Stars by Lambert Dolphin, Malcolm Bowden, Barry Setterfield and Helen Fryman, I felt strongly that this "Gospel in the Stars" idea is based on finding something outside the Bible and then looking for proof-texts in the Bible to prop it up. "Surely" we must know that since God named the stars and gave them for signs, since the constellations and Zodiac are mentioned in the Bible, and since the wise men followed a star, and so forth, then it follows that God has written the story of Jesus Christ in the Zodiac!? However you approach it, there is a long road of "ifs" to tread to reach the destination.

After looking over the totality of the references given, it is my understanding that the weight of their argument rests on Genesis 15 coupled with Galatians 3, and Psalm 19 coupled with Romans 10.

According to this theory, since Abram was told to count the stars, and Paul said the seed was Christ, then it "must" follow that God wrote the gospel in the stars.!?

Genesis 15:1-6 - After these things the word of the LORD came unto Abram in a vision, saying, Fear not, Abram: I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward. And Abram said, Lord GOD, what wilt thou give me, seeing I go childless, and the steward of my house is this Eliezer of Damascus? And Abram said, Behold, to me thou hast given no seed: and, lo, one born in my house is mine heir. And, behold, the word of the LORD came unto him, saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir. And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be. And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness.

Galatians 3:5-18 - He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham. And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham. For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto. Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect. For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.

There are several incorrect assumptions and some left out information. It is noted in the section "God’s Promise to Abraham" on the linked page that we must be very careful to separate two incidents where God speaks of the stars to Abraham (Gen. Chapters 15 & 22). Nevertheless, the author was not careful to address some other things (or was careful not to). It is mentioned that God preached the gospel to Abraham (Gal. 3:8), and then Gal. 3:6 is given to build the context for the star discussion being Genesis 15 only. Yet the reference of Galatians 3:8 to Genesis 12:3 (which stands between in the discussion) is skipped over: "And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed." [cf. Gen. 12:3 - "...in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed."] So God preaching the gospel to Abraham is not associated chronologically by Paul with Gen. 15, but with Gen. 12. Also, Paul does not bring up the fact that the seed is singular to address some imagined gospel in the stars, but to explain God’s covenant with Abraham and to explain how the promise is by faith and not law. The inheritance was by confirmed in Christ, some 400 years before the law was given, and the law cannot cancel it. The point of the promise to the seed (singular) Christ does not contradict the fact that Abraham would have an innumerable seed, but in fact shows how it is fulfilled spiritually. In the seed Christ there is a great multitude which no man can number, of all nations, tongues and people.

Galatians 3:26-29 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

When one plugs the gospel in the stars idea back into Genesis 15:5, it comes out something like this: "And God brought Abram outside and said, Look up in the sky and tell the story of the zodiac, if you’re able to tell it: and God said to him, So shall Christ be. And Abram believed what God told him about Christ in the stars; and God counted it to him for righteousness."

There are a number of problems with this. It is interesting that the "gospel in the stars" theorists point out that words for constellations and the zodiac are mentioned in the Bible, but fail to point out they are not used here. Here God told Abram to look at the stars (kokab). Constellations are stars, but stars are not necessarily constellations. There is a difference in the Hebrews words translated "count" (or "number" in the KJV). But any assumption that "caphar" cannot mean to number or count as in making a census is incorrect. And "manah" (used in Genesis 13) can mean "tell".

Genesis 12:3 - And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed. 13:16 - And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth: so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed also be numbered. 15:5 - And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be. 17:16 - And I will bless her, and give thee a son also of her: yea, I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of people shall be of her. 22:17 - That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;

Hebrews 11:12 - Therefore sprang there even of one, and him as good as dead, so many as the stars of the sky in multitude, and as the sand which is by the sea shore innumerable.

Psalm 19:1-6 - The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge. There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard. Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun, Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race. His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.

Romans 10:12-21 - For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world. But I say, Did not Israel know? First Moses saith, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation I will anger you. But Esaias is very bold, and saith, I was found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me. But to Israel he saith, All day long I have stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people.

While some may think the Psalm/Romans reference is so explicit that there is no getting around that this is a rather direct reference to the Gospel being written in the signs of the zodiac, that interpretation actually contradicts some obvious things about the passage.

The "gospel in the stars" is told or taught and passed down from generation to generation, therefore only available to those who have been taught it. But whatever the Psalmist and Paul speak of is universal.

It is universal geographically (through all the earth), but it is my understanding that all the constellations are not visible from all places in the world. Whether they are or not, the "gospel in the stars" has not been passed down to every single individual through all the earth who has ever lived. Such is historical nonsense.

It is universal chronologically (Day unto day...and night unto night), but the "gospel in the stars" is limited by time – the time it takes to tell it and pass it on chronologically from generation to generation (or fail to pass it on). [I would also note that the so-called "gospel in the stars" is only visible at night time.]

World Book @ Nasa states, "Some constellations can be seen only during certain seasons due to the earth's annual revolution around the sun. The part of the sky visible at night at a particular place gradually changes as the earth moves around the sun. Also, observers at different latitudes see different parts of the sky. An observer at the equator can view all the constellations during the course of a year, but an observer at the North or the South Pole can see only a single hemisphere of constellations."

It is universal, according to context, to all people of all times, while – even if true – the "gospel in the stars" is limited to only those of whatever time and geography who have been told it.

Anyone who believes the Genesis creation account will not be surprised that some forms of the truth have survived in different cultures, since we all descended from Adam (and later, Noah). Nevertheless, the "gospel in the stars" as presented on the above linked page neither came from Adam nor existed in all different cultures. I don't buy it.

New singing location in Nacogdoches

We will be singing Sacred Harp in Nacogdoches on Monday night February 6th, from 6:30 pm to 8:30 pm. We will sing this month in a new location, Westminster Presbyterian Church at 903 North Street. North St. is the main north/south street through the heart of Nacogdoches. The church building is located on the corner of North and Powers Streets and there is a stoplight at that intersection. Turn west onto Powers and then park in the big lot behind the church. Singing will be in the fellowship hall – Westminster Hall. The fellowship hall is up the sidewalk and stairs from the parking lot, next to the iron fence and trash cans. Singing will be from the Cooper and Denson Revisions of The Sacred Harp.

For a map and directions, click HERE.

Y'all come!

Readings around blogdom

The posting of links does not constitute an endorsement of the blogs linked, and not necessarily even agreement with the posts linked.

Advice for Bloggers 25 Tips for Bloggers: Established, New, and Pondering
Does Calvinism Make God a “Moral Monster”?
Filled with the Spirit: Reading Acts in Light of Luke
How to Defend Pro-Life Views in 5 Minutes
The Design Argument in a Little Under Four Minutes
Why the Genealogy of Jesus Matters

Coming to Consensus

In his article Congregational Government is from Satan, James MacDonald asserts that congregational voting is not biblical. Certainly he is correct if we are looking in the New Testament for the traditional motion & second, all in favor and the majority rules; Robert's Rules of Order and all that. But does congregational participation have to look like that? Can it take some other form and that form be found in the Bible? If so, then this strike against congregationalism falls. Does "voting" (congregational decision-making) exist in some other form? Consider the following examples and whether there is "a shred of biblical evidence".

Acts chapter 1. The Lord has ascended to heaven. The church is waiting in an upper room. Peter, a leader and an apostle, posits replacing the suicidal Judas with one who has been with them from the baptism of John. "They" -- the men and brethren to whom he was speaking, the 120 disciples, appointed two to set before God, and "they" (the same group) gave forth their lots. The lot was cast into the lap, and the disposing of it was by God.

Acts chapter 6. A problem had arisen concerning fair distribution to the Grecian widows. The apostles called the multitude (church/congregation) together. They were exhorted to select seven men to appoint over this distribution to see that it was done equably. The "whole multitude" was pleased and they came to an agreement together, choosing seven men to set before the apostles.

Acts chapter 10. Peter was sent of God to preach at the house of Cornelius, a Gentile. He had to be convinced through a vision to go. As he preached the Holy Spirit fell on the hearers, demonstrating God's approval. Though an apostle with authority to baptize, Peter still sought the consensus of those he brought with him, asking, "Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized..."

Acts chapter 13. The church at Antioch is unified in sending Paul and Barnabas to wherever God called them. They receive the message of the Holy Spirit and act upon it together. They send them forth with spiritual, moral and (sometimes) material support.

Acts chapter 15. First we find a church in Antioch disturbed by a doctrinal deviation. Yet by consensus they send Paul, Barnabas and others to Jerusalem, and even provided for their journey ("brought them on their way"). The church at Jerusalem came together to consider what certain brethren who went out from them (v. 24) were teaching in other places regarding salvation and circumcision. Paul and Barnabas were present from Antioch and testified of Lord's work among the Gentiles. Peter recounted his calling to preach to the Gentiles at Cornelius's house. James offered his counsel. Together "with the whole church" a solution was reached and a statement made.

I Corinthians chapter 5. A wicked act of fornication is reported in the church, and Paul exhorts them to put away this wicked person from their congregation, to be done by consensus "when ye are gathered together." (Cf. Matt. 18:17; II Cor. 2:6-8)

Congregational consensus is found in these places, a process of coming together in agreement by effective communication. Consensus decision-making fits well with the New Testament concepts of unity and one-anothering, regenerate church membership, servant leadership, individual accountability, the church as a body of gifted members, as well as the use of the word "ekklesia," a called-out assembly. The workings of New Testament congregations confirm the example of "congregational government" (i.e. congregational involvement in decision making). This must be understood within its context. Christ in the head of the church, and the church is governed by Him mediated through His word, which is inspired, profitable, and sufficient for faith and practice. The elders are the preachers and teachers of the word, and the church should judge "whether those things are so (Cf. I Cor. 14:23,27-31; Gal. 1:3-10)." In modern practice, congregationalism is sometimes extreme and at odds with the biblical revelation. But extremism should be corrected to the center of God's word, without going to some other extreme.

Within the purview of the congregation we find them involved in exercising discipline (I Cor. 5:3-5), selecting officers (Acts 1:23; 6:5), providing doctrinal and practical clarification (Acts 15:22-29), sending messengers (cf. Acts 11:22; 15:2,22), affirming the call of God (cf. Acts 13:1-3) and receiving Christian itinerants, ministers and members (II John 10; Acts 9:26; Rom. 16:1-2; Gal. 6:1). Sometimes congregations use their idea of "congregationalism" to step outside their purview (or to just revel in the flesh), such as usurping the role of the Spirit in sending His ministers. The churches did not tell Paul and others where to preach. They acknowledged and affirmed the call of God and left them to be guided by the Spirit. They did not tell the apostles and elders what to preach. They preached the Word, the whole counsel of God (Acts 20:2027-28; II Tim. 4:2). They did not tell them how to preach -- they are to teach doctrine, reprove, rebuke, exhort. A congregation has no right to step into the sphere of what the Spirit and Word directs (though they are to use discernment of what is being preached).

There is no need to defend modern practice. Let us abide by New Testament example. Congregationalism that ignores godly leadership, biblical exhortation, wise counsel, and the office of the eldership is only a distant cousin to what is found in the inspired revelation. Church government that consigns congregational consensus to the devil is no cousin at all. A church government model that puts its authority in the "staff" (many of which are not biblical offices) is a model of practicality and expediency rather than orthodoxy and orthopraxy.

Some verses are claimed to be at odds with what the New Testament congregations practiced, and so nullify the practice. That is bad interpretation. James and others may think that it is impossible to reconcile congregational decision making with scriptures like Hebrews 13:17 ("Obey them that have the rule over you"). Au contraire. The scriptures reconcile them whether we can figure it out or not. They never needed reconciling! The "at odds" is in our interpretation, not the Bible. The scriptures indicate that those thus commanded also participated in the decision-making process. Go thou, and do likewise.

Readings from Blogdom

The posting of links does not constitute an endorsement of the blogs linked, and not necessarily even agreement with the posts linked.

A Forgotten Text? Why is that, I wonder?
Congregational Government is From Satan*
Does Jesus Hate Religion?
Grace, the Gospel, and Role Expectations in Titus 2
How to Build Unity in Your Church

*Note: My intention is generally to post these links without comment, but be forewarned that this post might make you angry. Nevertheless, it has some points that need to be thought about.

The Nazarite Vow

Similarities between Nazarites and priests (cf. esp. Numbers 6 and Leviticus 21) 

Nazarite	Similarity	Priest
Num. 6:2	Separated unto God	Lev. 22:2, Num. 8:14, Deut. 10:8
Num. 6:3-4	Restrictions on their drink	Lev. 10:9
Num. 6:5	Restrictions on their head	Lev. 10:6, 21:5,10
Num. 6:6-9	Restrictions on their touch	Lev. 21:1-4, 11
Num. 6:8	Holy unto the Lord	Lev. 21:6

These similarities gave me these thoughts – not exegesis of scripture, but meditations. The first thought that came to me was priesthood of believers. The priesthood of believers as we know it is a New Testament revelation, as First Peter 2:9 and other passages. Obviously the Nazarites were not priests, but persons under a vow to the Lord. But in their vow and separation they had a little taste of the priestly separation to the Lord. Perhaps that foreshadows a priesthood of all believers?

The Nazarite separated from all products of the grapevine, whereas the priests separated only from wine and strong drink while serving as priests. But both would experience the separation from wine and strong drink. The separation of the Nazarite has strong connections to the previous nomadic lifestyle of their fathers Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, as well as their wandering in the wilderness (note Jer. 35 for another connection of the nomadic lifestyle and abstinence from wine). The wandering in the wilderness calls to mind the sustaining power of God when He provided for them through those years though they had “not eaten bread, neither have you drunk wine or strong drink.” (Deut. 29:6) Israel’s existence and prosperity was intimately associated with the grapevine, where every man would dwell “under his vine and under his fig tree” (cf. Micah 4:4 and I Kings 4:25). It was “a land of corn and wine, a land of bread and vineyards” (II Kings 18:32). Figuratively the Nazarite gave up his identity, existence and sustenance to God. Projecting forward we might see that New Testament identity, existence and sustenance in our behavior under the power of the Holy Spirit: “And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit” (Eph. 5:18).

For the period of his vow and separation, the Nazarite could put no razor to the hair of his head, but rather had to allow it to grow. This separated him from the public norm, long hair on women and cut hair on men. The priest did not bear the same restriction as the Nazarite, but had some restrictions regarding his hair and bread. The high priest was to cover his head (Lev. 21:10). The lack of attention to the hair (and especially the beard) could be a sign of trouble or affliction (II Sam. 19:24). The Nazarite bore the reproach of God, as he separated himself from customary grooming. If “a man have long hair” and “it is a shame unto him” (I Cor. 11:14), then there is a sense of bearing shame. May we likewise “go forth” bearing our Lord’s reproach.

Both the priests and the Nazarites were restricted in touching the dead. Touching the dead resulted in ceremonial uncleanness. The priests in service could only become unclean for their very closely kin (father, mother, etc.). The high priest could not at all, neither could the Nazarite during the time of the separation of his vow. This reminds us of putting God first – above father, mother, sister, brother – letting the dead bury the dead and taking up our cross and following Him.

Praise God, our high priest Jesus Christ has touched the dead and made us spiritually alive!

Both the priest and the Nazarite was separated unto God. They were called unto holiness. As spiritual “Nazarites” and a priesthood of believers, let us “come out from among them” and be separate. Let us not touch the unclean thing. Sanctify yourselves therefore, and be ye holy: for I am the LORD your God. (Lev. 20:7).

But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy... I Peter 1:15

Readings around blogdom

The posting of links does not constitute an endorsement of the blogs linked, and not necessarily even agreement with the posts linked.

Divine Sovereignty & Human Responsibility
How Christians are rethinking Abortion and Gay Marriage
Is Debating the Finer Points of Theology Important?
Rethinking Baptism: Part 1
Rethinking Baptism: Part 2

Joseph's bones

Hebrews 11:22 By faith Joseph, when he died, made mention of the departing of the children of Israel; and gave commandment concerning his bones.

When my meditating mind wanders to the great faith chapter of the Bible -- Hebrews 11 -- it is likely to survey the "highlights". Perhaps Abel, who offered a more excellent sacrifice than Cain. Enoch, who did not die. Or Abraham who when called by God went out, though not knowing where he went, or offered up his son Isaac. There's Moses, who chose to suffer the affliction of the people of God rather than the pleasures of sin and Pharaoh's house. But how often do I meditate on a man and his bones?

The man perhaps best known for his coat of many colors lived to the age of 110. In his dying day he gave a curious commandment concerning his bones. The Bible says it was an act of faith.

Joseph was the son of Jacob and Rachel, and first saw the light of day in the land of Haran while Jacob was serving Laban as payment for marrying his daughters. His father came into the land of Canaan, where Joseph lived with his family until he was 17 years old. Because of the preference of Jacob for this son of his preferred bride, the brothers of Joseph sold him into slavery. This resulted in his descent into Egypt, first in bondage as a slave, and then in bondage as a prisoner. Through the providence of God, when Joseph was 30 years old, he was not only released from prison but also exalted to second ruler in Egypt, only beneath the Pharaoh himself. By his God-given wisdom he saved the people of Egypt and strengthened their position among the surrounding nations. After a time in which Joseph's separation from his father and brethren exceeded the length of time he had lived with them, they were reunited. During a world-wide famine, the entire people of Israel (Jacob) came to dwell in Egypt. The days of the lives of Jacob and Joseph (and beyond), they lived and grew and prospered there.

God sent Joseph to Egypt as his ambassador (Gen 45:7-8). Joseph lived all his adult life in Egypt. He got his wife in Egypt. He raised his sons in Egypt. He was respected in Egypt. When he died at age 110, he had spent about 93 years there -- 80 of them as a ruler. Yet when he was dying, he took an oath of his family "ye shall carry up my bones from here." Yes, bury me in a place I know by faith and not by sight!

Soon after his demise, there arose a king that knew not Joseph. Though this king knew not Joseph, when God delivered His people from Egypt the people remembered Joseph! Moses removed his bones, his coffin, for the exodus from Egypt to the promised land. Though many an Israelite fell in the wilderness, their bones to mingle with the dust and sands of the places their feet trod, Joseph's bones continued on, steady, hasting toward the goal. When God had given rest to the people of God in the land of Canaan, Joseph's bones were laid to rest in a piece of land Jacob had bought in Shechem, completing the arduous journey from Canaan to Egypt and back again.

By his commandment, Joseph identified himself with God's people rather than the people of Egypt. 93 years in Egypt and he had not forgotten where he came from! He was "of the stock of Israel, an Hebrew of the Hebrews". He had not forgotten God's covenant with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and that was his birthright. Joseph had no superstitious regard for the place of burial. Like Moses, by the grace of God he chose Israel over Egypt and would be identified forever thus.

By his commandment, Joseph signified his faith in God's promise. He reminded the people of Jacob, "God will surely visit you." Some of the younger members of the family had never lived in Canaan. Yet their promise lay in the land of promise, not in Egypt. Joseph had no doubt. What God had promised he was able also to perform.

Advertisements

"BIBLE BELIEVING." This is easy to say, hard to practice. We almost laugh when we see this on numerous church signs. No one ever says, "Here, we DO NOT believe the Bible." That would be too blatant. We had rather craftily say that we do believe it. But, again, is not this false advertising? Does a church have to say that it believes the Bible? Come on. True church = Bible believing! Don't we prove this by what we teach and how we live? Ever seen any restaurant advertise that they have "Bad Food Here"? They may indeed have such, but they always advertise, "Good Food Here." The truthfulness of the statement is only in the eating! So it is with a church. Labels and names mean absolutely nothing. The proof is in the teaching, experience, and practice of the Christian people themselves, not in any thing they advertise. See I John 2:3-6 for "proofs" of true Christian love and character. -- From Deception AKA False Advertisements, by W. F. Bell (October 13, 2006)

Readings around Blogdom

The posting of links does not constitute an endorsement of the blogs linked, and not necessarily even agreement with the posts linked.

Are We Required to Attend Church on Sunday?
Editorial On Abusing Matthew 18
Speaking of Preaching...
The return to religion
The United States Eugenics Movement: Outrage and What We Can Learn

Good read -- Primetime Propaganda

Here's a book you should read. Ben Shapiro takes on (and exposes) the Hollywood establishment in his book Primetime Propaganda: The True Hollywood Story of How the Left Took Over Your TV.

Promotional blurb:
"In this thoroughly researched and detailed history of the television industry, conservative columnist and author Ben Shapiro argues that left-leaning entertainment kingpins in Los Angeles and New York have leveraged—and continue to use—their positions and power to push liberal messages and promote the Democratic Party while actively discriminating against their opponents on the right. According to Shapiro, television isn't just about entertainment—it's an attempt to convince Americans that the social, economic, and foreign policy shaped by leftism is morally righteous."

A lot of grass roots folks talk about bias in the media. Most often they mean news coverage. But it is there in most every bit of "entertainment" that is available.

How does the Bible define drunkenness?

The thoughts on this post began with a pastor asking the question, "Would you mind telling me how I as a pastor can know when a member of my flock is guilty of drunkenness?" The Bible-believing Christian must answer this the same way regardless of his or her position on drinking in moderation or abstention. Go to the Bible and find out what it says about drunkenness. We won't find a fine dividing line that we can determine with a breathalyzer. That is a secular and legal approach. In our state we legally define that point with blood alcohol level -- 0.08 blood alcohol concentration (at least while driving).1 BUT the question now before us is how the Bible, our rule of faith and practice, defines it. There we will find guidance. Inspired, inerrant guidance at that!

Please consider the following points from Scripture.

There is a point at which one passes from "drinking wine" to drunkenness; that is, these are two different states. For examples, Genesis 9:21 "And he drank of the wine, and was drunken..." Deuteronomy 29:19 "And it come to pass, when he heareth the words of this curse, that he bless himself in his heart, saying, I shall have peace, though I walk in the imagination of mine heart, to add drunkenness to thirst:"

The Bible speaks of "drunken" but also of an exceeding state of that: 1 Samuel 25:36 "And Abigail came to Nabal; and, behold, he held a feast in his house, like the feast of a king; and Nabal's heart was merry within him, for he was very drunken" The "very drunken" state is most obvious, but drunken might not be quite as readily observable.

Certain actions, states or physical signs are often associated with drunkenness in the Bible, such as staggering, shaking and vomiting. Psalm 107:27 They reel to and fro, and stagger like a drunken man, and are at their wit's end. (Cf. Jer. 23:9, Isa. 19:14; Prov. 23:29). [We understand other things can also cause these signs, such as sickness.]

Actions or states unrelated to alcohol sometimes are mistaken for drunkenness. 1 Samuel 1:13 "Now Hannah, she spake in her heart; only her lips moved, but her voice was not heard: therefore Eli thought she had been drunken." (Cf. Acts 2:15)

Drunkenness is associated with loss of control of one's senses or actions. Sometimes "loss of control" can be in a good way -- being controlled by the Spirit. Ephesians 5:18 "And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit;" There are also other figures in the Bible that speak of being "drunk" on something other than wine/strong drink that seem to generally share the meaning of not being in control or possession of one's faculties. (Cf. Job 12:24-25; Lam. 4:21; Rev. 17:2)

Drunkenness is caused by an excess of wine. Compare Eph. 5:18 and I Peter 4:3. For the time past of our life may suffice us to have wrought the will of the Gentiles, when we walked in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of wine, revellings, banquetings, and abominable idolatries:

This may be simplistic. Perhaps it does not draw as exact a line as you may want. But looking at these verses are a starting place for a BIBLICAL definition of drunkenness.

1. I'm not sure if it is proper to say this defines drunkenness legally so much as to say it is the point where driving becomes illegal. For example, I don't think BAC has anything to do with "public intoxication" in Texas, which appears to be at a law officer's discretion.

Readings around Blogdom, Dec 2011

I haven't been posting as frequently of late. I am often online researching and reading, and have decided to start a regular posting of links to things I've read, called "Readings around Blogdom" (in some cases they may not be from blogs). Please consider the following. The posting of links do not constitute an endorsement of the blogs linked, and not necessarily even agreement with the posts linked. Here's the first installment.

Baptist Identity or Evangelical Anonymity? Part II:
Personal Implications of the Incarnation
Implications of the Incarnation (Part 2)
The Book of Books: What Literature Owes the Bible
The Gospel and Baptist Identity Series
Top 10 Theology Stories of 2011
What Bothers Me About Worship Leaders

Thou shalt call His name Jesus

Matthew 1:21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.

The God name, Matthew 1:25
The saving name, Acts 2:21, 4:12; I John 1:12
The giving name, John 14:14, 15:16
The exalted name, Philippians 2:
The excellent name, Hebrews 1:4
The healing name, Acts 3:6, 4:10
The baptism name, Acts 19:5
The only name, Acts 4:12

Take the name of Jesus with you
There is a name I love to hear, I love to sing its worth
How sweet the name of Jesus sounds in a believer's ear
All hail the power of Jesus name, let angels prostate fall
Blessed be the name of the Lord

Jesus! dear Name, how sweet it sounds!
Replete with balm for all our wounds:
His Word declares His grace is free,
Come, needy sinner, "Come and see."

He left the shining courts on high,
Came to our world to bleed and die;
Jesus the Lord hung on a tree,
Come, thoughtless sinner, "Come and see."

Your sins did pierce His bleeding heart,
Till death had done its dreadful part;
His boundless love extends to thee,
Come, trembling sinner, "Come and see."

His blood can cleanse the foulest stain,
Can make the vilest sinner clean;
This fountain open stands for thee,
Come, guilty sinner, "Come and see."

Isaac Watts, (1674-1748).

Interesting Christmas quote

THIS is the season of the year when, whether we wish it or not, we are compelled to think of the birth of Christ. I hold it to be one of the greatest absurdities under heaven to think that there is any religion in keeping Christmas-day. There are no probabilities whatever that our Saviour Jesus Christ was born on that day, and the observance of it is purely of Popish origin; doubtless those who are Catholics have a right to hallow it, but I do not see how consistent Protestants can account it in the least sacred. However, I wish there were ten or a dozen Christmas-days in the year; for there is work enough in the world, and a little more rest would not hurt labouring people. Christmas-day is really a boon to us; particularly as it enables us to assemble round the family hearth and meet our friends once more. Still, although we do not fall exactly in the track of other people, I see no harm in thinking of the incarnation and birth of the Lord Jesus. We do not wish to be classed with those

"Who with more care keep holiday
The wrong, than others the right way."

The old Puritans made a parade of work on Christmas-day, just to show that they protested against the observance of it. But we believe they entered that protest so completely, that we are willing, as their descendants, to take the good accidentally conferred by the day, and leave its superstitions to the superstitious.

From "The Incarnation and Birth of Christ" by Charles H. Spurgeon, Dec. 23, 1855

Christ of 40 days

There are many interesting 40 day experiences in the Bible. Moses was on the mount with God for forty days. The spies searched the land of Canaan forty days. Goliath challenged Israel for forty days. Elijah at angels' food that provided him with strength for forty days. Jonah's prophecy of judgement gave Nineveh forty days.

There are two forty day experiences in the life of our Lord.

Mark 1:13 And he (Jesus) was there in the wilderness forty days, tempted of Satan; and was with the wild beasts; and the angels ministered unto him.

The first forty day experience is seen at the beginning of Jesus's ministry, following His baptism. It was a period of temptation and testing that ended in triumph over Satan.

Acts 1:3 To whom also he (Jesus) shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:

The second forty day experience is seen at the end of Jesus's earthly ministry -- it followed the greatest triumph of all. Jesus died on the cross for sins, finishing redemption and dismissing His spirit. He lay in the grave three days and three nights, then rose triumphant over death and the grave. After His resurrection Jesus was seen for forty days before ascending back into heaven. It was a period of confirmation of His triumph, giving notice that He was alive. It was a period that provided historical witnesses to this historical truth, as well as comfort to the disciples and upbuilding of their faith.

The forty days are sorts of bookends at the beginning and end of Jesus's earthly ministry. ¡Like some languages other than English, they provide exclamation marks of triumph on the mighty work of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ!

Clarke and Holmes on the decree of God

“The decree of God is that whereby God hath from eternity set down with himself whatsoever shall come to pass in time. Eph. i. 2. All things with their causes, effects, circumstances and manner of being, are determined by God. Acts ii. 23, Acts iv. 28. This decree is most wise; Rom. xi. 33; most just; Rom. ix. 13-14; eternal; Eph. i. 4-5, II Thess. ii. 13; necessary; Psa. xxxiii. 2, Prov. xix. 21; unchangeable; Heb. xi. 17; most free; Rom. ix. 13; and the cause of all good; Jam. i. 17; but not of any sin; I John i. 5. The special decree of God concerning angels and men is called predestination. Rom. viii. 30.” -- Introductory to articles of faith evidently written by John Clarke and Obadiah Holmes for the baptized church of Christ in Newport, Rhode Island. I’m not sure when this was written, but sometime before Clarke’s death in 1676. Typed as recorded in John Clarke (1609-1676) Pioneer in American Medicine, Democratic Ideals, and Champion of Religious Liberty, by Louis Franklin Asher, p. 117; This is a clear expression of what the English and American Particular Baptist believed regarding predestination.

Praise the Savior

Praise the Savior, all ye nations,
Praise Him, all ye hosts above;
Shout, with joyful acclamation,
His divine, victorious love.
With my substance will I honor
My Redeemer and my Lord;
Were ten thousand worlds my manor,
All were nothing to His Word:
While the heralds of salvation
His abounding grace proclaim,
Let His friends, of every station,
Gladly join to spread His fame.
Benjamin Francis (1734-1799)

Happy Thanksgiving

I hope you had a Happy Thanksgiving day yesterday. It is by the Lord's mercies we are not consumed. His compassions do not fail.

Abounding Compassion of God; or, Mercy in the Midst of Judgment

My soul, repeat his praise,
Whose mercies are so great,
Whose anger is so slow to rise,
So ready to abate.

God will not always chide;
And when his strokes are felt,
His strokes are fewer than our crimes,
And lighter than our guilt.

High as the heav'ns are raised
Above the ground we tread,
So far the riches of his grace
Our highest thoughts exceed.

His power subdues our sins,
And his forgiving love
Far as the east is from the west
Doth all our guilt remove.

The pity of the Lord,
To those that fear his name,
Is such as tender parents feel;
He knows our feeble frame.

He knows we are but dust,
Scattered with every breath;
His anger, like a rising wind,
Can send us swift to death.

Our days are as the grass,
Or like the morning flower;
If one sharp blast sweep o'er the field
It withers in an hour.

But thy compassions, Lord,
To endless years endure;
And children's children ever find
Thy words of promise sure.
-- Isaac Watts, 1719

We need Jesus

"We need Jesus; He doesn't need us...By the way people talk about ministry today, you would think that the success of the Kingdom turns on us -- that God is passively waiting for us to get on with things...Ministry is not your gift to Him. It is His gift to you." -- In "The Sanctification of Ministry Failure" by Art Azurdia

"Patriotic" Millionaires

Patriotic Millionaires for Fiscal Strength are begging a congressional super-committee to raise their taxes. Ha! I say, have at it. Raise the taxes on every member of Patriotic Millionaires for Fiscal Strength! Leave everybody else alone.

I'm no millionaire; not even a thousand-aire. I'm a just-getting-by-aire. But on a more serious note this sticks in my craw for at least two reasons. One, to call themselves "patriotic" millionaires because they want more taxes has a subtle implication that those who don't want more taxes aren't patriotic. I'd be interested to know how many of these "patriotic" millionaires are taking every deduction and credit that the IRS allows. All of them, I'd bet. This fades into number two. If they want to support the government so much, let them go ahead and start sending in donations. Why wait for a slowing moving government to send a bill. Go ahead. There's nothing stopping you! Even my little weak mind knows there's more to your agenda than patriotism.

Personhood

On Tuesday Nov. the 8th the Personhood Amendment in Mississippi was defeated at the polls by a 58 to 42 percent margin. This amendment would have defined the term 'person' or 'persons' to include 'every human being from the moment of fertilization'. I had not followed this closely, but had expected this would pass in Mississippi. I'm not sure what happened.

God writes straight with crooked lines

Her life with Him was full of signs
That God writes straight with crooked lines.
Dark clouds can hide the rising sun,
And all seem lost, when all be won!

[From a poem written in 1969 by Jeremiah Denton, while a prisoner of war in Vietnam]

Lord, save me

When Peter was about to sink beneath the violent waves of old Galilee, he cried out, "Lord, save me." (Matthew 14:30) We could learn a lot from Peter's plea.

Peter's prayer was brief and to the point. "Lord, save me." Only three words. Some people believe they will be heard because of much speaking, and for a pretense make long prayers. Yet, the model prayer can be recited in about thirty seconds. Jesus's prayer in John 17 can be read in about four minutes. Solomon's prayer of dedication of the temple in I Kings 8 can be read in six minutes, and is probably the longest prayer recorded in the Bible. This is not to say long prayer is never desirable. On one occasion Jesus asked his disciples, "Could ye not pray with me one hour?" But the length itself does not tune a prayer to God's ears.

Peter's prayer was directed to The One who could help. "Lord." LORD, save me. He didn't cry out "Lord, save me" in hopes that James and John would throw him a life preserver. Some who don't really believe in God nevertheless speak highly of prayer, whether hypocritically or ignorantly. But prayer for prayer's sake is of no benefit. Prayer is "to God". He that cometh to God must believe that He is.

Peter's prayer was urgent. "He cried." With the hymn writer, we and Peter might agree, "Do not turn away thy face, Mine's an URGENT pressing case!" All formality was left off and Peter got right to what he wanted. When prayers are urgent, we pray right where we are. It's good and right to come to the house of prayer, and to meet God in our prayer "closets". But if we ought to pray without ceasing, pray always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and so forth, then any place we ought to be ought to be a place of prayer. "Where’er they seek Thee Thou art found, And every place is hallowed ground."

Peter's prayer was personal. "Lord, save ME." We should pray for others. Give US this day OUR daily bread, etc. But sometimes we perhaps think we are pious by asking for others and not ourselves. But our personal prayers for our personal needs actually acknowledge our dependence on God. Lord, save me, I can't save myself! ("Every prayer is an acknowledgement of our weakness and dependence . Who would ask that of another which he thinketh to be in his own power?" -- Thomas Manton)

Peter's prayer was answered. "...immediately Jesus stretched forth his hand, and caught him." The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much. No doubt it was fervent. "Near-death" experiences create fervency. But all our prayers should be fervent. If any man ask anything according to His will God hears. Peter's need was heard. He was saved.

This is not to say that we should apply this all as some kind of cold formula for answered prayer. We Americans like our "12-steps", methods and formulas. But, "Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need." (And be thankful the Holy Spirit helps our infirmities in prayer.)

Jesu, my Savior, Brother, Friend,
On Whom I cast my every care,
On Whom for all things I depend,
Inspire, and then accept, my prayer.

The scope of biblical commands

Excerpts below originally posted by Scott Ransom on the Baptist Board. I found them interesting.

"...a few guiding hermeneutical principles for determining the scope of biblical commands.

"Interpret imperatives in light of their literary genre. A specific context may contain both timeless and temporary forms... The principle of

"Use of imperatives of the Bible is enduring for us if:
*it is addressed to an enduring audience
*it is based on a permanent relationship
*it is repeated, especially transculturally
*it is supported by prescriptive, and not merely descriptive, passages
*it is supported without abusing its literary genre
*it is taught as principle, not merely a manifestation of a principle"

Thoughts?

Cowper & Newton hymns

JERICHO; Or, The waters healed.
2Ki 2:19-22

Though Jericho pleasantly stood,
And looked like a promising soil;
The harvest produced little food,
To answer the husbandman's toil.
The water some property had,
Which poisonous proved to the ground;
The springs were corrupted and bad,
The streams spread a barrenness round.

But soon by the cruse and the salt,
Prepared by Elisha's command,
The water was cured of its fault,
And plenty enriched the land:
An emblem sure this of the grace
On fruitless dead sinners bestowed;
For man is in Jericho's case,
Till cured by the mercy of God.

How noble a creature he seems!
What knowledge, invention and skill!
How large and extensive his schemes!
How much can he do if he will!
His zeal to be learned and wise,
Will yield to no limits or bars;
He measures the earth and the skies,
And numbers and marshals the stars.

Yet still he is barren of good;
In vain are his talents and art;
For sin has infected his blood,
And poisoned the streams of his heart:
Though cockatrice eggs he can hatch,
Is 54:5
Or, spider-like, cobwebs can weave;
'Tis madness to labor and watch
For what will destroy or deceive.

But grace, like the salt in the cruse,
When cast in the spring of the soul;
A wonderful change will produce,
Diffusing new life through the whole:
The wilderness blooms like a rose,
The heart which was vile and abhorred;
Now fruitful and beautiful grows,
The garden and joy of the Lord.

John Newton (1725-1807) Olney Hymns, 1779

The covenant.
Ezek 36:25-28

The Lord proclaims His grace abroad!
"Behold, I change your hearts of stone;
Each shall renounce his idol god,
And serve, henceforth, the Lord alone.

"My grace, a flowing stream, proceeds
To wash your filthiness away;
Ye shall abhor your former deeds,
And learn My statutes to obey.

"My truth the great design ensures,
I give Myself away to you;
You shall be Mine, I will be yours,
Your God unalterably true.

"Yet not unsought or unimplored,
The plenteous grace I shall confer;
No-your whole hearts shall seek the Lord,
I'll put a praying spirit there.

"From the first breath of life divine
Down to the last expiring hour,
The gracious work shall all be Mine,
Begun and ended in My pow'r."

William Cowper (1731-1800) Olney Hymns, 1779

The Contemplation of God

Excerpt from the Shreveport Grace Church bulletin:

“Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God” (1 John 3:1)

God’s love is –

Eternal – it is without beginning and end. (Jer 31:3)

Sovereign – it is without external influence. (Eph 1:4)

Immutable –it is without change. (Rom 8:35)

Gracious – it is without condition. (Jn 3:16)

By T. David Simpson

Manna

MANNA. Ex 16:18

Manna to Israel well supplied
The want of other bread;
While God is able to provide,
His people shall be fed.

(Thus though the corn and wine should fail,
And creature-streams be dry;
The prayer of faith will still prevail,
For blessings from on high.)

Of his kind care how sweet a proof!
It suited every taste;
Who gathered most, had just enough,
Enough, who gathered least.

'Tis thus our gracious Lord provides
Our comforts and our cares;
His own unerring hand provides,
And gives us each our shares.

He knows how much the weak can bear,
And helps them when they cry;
The strongest have no strength to spare,
For such he'll strongly try.

Daily they saw the Manna come,
And cover all the ground;
But what they tried to keep at home,
Corrupted soon was found.

Vain their attempt to store it up,
This was to tempt the Lord;
Israel must live by faith and hope,
And not upon a hoard.

John Newton (1725-1807)
Olney Hymns, 1779

Pulpit Freedom Sunday

I heard on the radio that today is "Pulpit Freedom Sunday". I looked it up, and this is part of the Alliance Defense Fund's Pulpit Initiative started in 2008. Its stated goal is the repeal of the 1954 "Johnson amendment" to the tax code. Johnson was a crafty fellow who snuck this in to keep certain charitable organizations from supporting his opponent. The idea behind the amendment is that organizations granted tax exemption should not intervene in political campaigns: "all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office." This applies to all 501(c)(3) organizations, whether or not they are churches.

The "Johnson amendment" is supported by organizations such as the ACLU and Americans United for Separation of Church and State, who in turn oppose "Pulpit Freedom Sunday".

The ADF hopes that by pastors violating the tax code, it will lead to a lawsuit/lawsuits which we eventually overturn the "Johnson amendment" as unconstitutional. Interestingly, the group supporting preachers not being told by the government what to preach tells preachers what to preach on "Pulpit Freedom Sunday"! This is, of course, necessary for them to get in a proper violation in order to get sued. On the other hand, Americans United for the Separation of Church & State are trolling for violations so they can report to the IRS and get those perpetrators' tax exemptions revoked. Yes, they apparently "think a lot" of each church's religious freedoms!?

The way I see it, there is a lot of misinformation all around. First, some churches and preachers have misunderstood that the discussion of moral issues such as abortion and homosexuality are prohibited. Thus far, the violation of this tax code has only been applied to indorsing candidates and parties, and not to taking sides on moral issues. Herein is the rub. Some churches believe that taking a stand against a certain candidate IS a moral issue.

Two things I see:

1. The legal side. Freedom of speech is clearly constitutional. But is it a constitutional freedom to be exempt from taxes? I'm no constitutional scholar and can't answer that question. Apparently for the first 175 years or so, our country thought it was or had not thought about it at all. In 1954 that changed, largely due to a clever politician. My take is that any preacher and church who feels strongly enough about this should do what they feel is right, and if they lose the tax exemption do what they believe is right regardless.

2. The biblical side. What are we called to do? Are we called to preach the gospel or get into politics? Will politics and government change our world for the better, or will Jesus Christ, the gospel and the Word of God? We are called to preach -- which includes moral issues -- but often we exchange our birthright of preaching for a mess of political porridge.

From the legal/constitutional angle, I favor preachers and churches being free from the tax code and free to preach what they believe, even where it intersects politics and even where I disagree with them.

From the biblical angle, we have plenty to preach and teach from the Word of God to keep us busy for the rest of lives without entering the political arena of parties and candidates. If we faithfully preach this we will have touched on every angle of every issue, for the Word of God throughly furnishes us unto all good works.