Does the Church Need Confessions and Creeds?

Why does the church need confessions and creeds? Isn’t the Scripture sufficient on its own? Is there a deficiency in the Scriptures that necessitates them being supplemented by man-made confessions?

And if the church needs confessions, etc, ought these to be clearly "founded upon and agreeable to the Word of God"? One thing is clear: confessions that exhibit a partisan orientation cannot be definition be "founded upon and agreeable to the Word of God." One good criterion on which to assess any confession of faith is to look at what it teaches regarding the very heart of the Christian Gospel – the Atonement. If God’s provision for the salvation of mankind is denied, either explicitly or implicitly, then it is not true to God’s revealed will in Scripture. Sadly, the Westminster Confession of Faith and its offspring fall into this category, whereas the Three Forms of Unity, The Belgic Confession, The Heidelberg Catechism and the Canons of Dordt, do not. Therefore these are to be preferred as confessions of one’s belief and of the belief of the churches to those documents that deny Christ’s all-sufficient sacrifice for the sin of the world.[1] If a confession is in error here, then the teaching of its (usual) first chapter On Scripture has been undermined. What follows such an opening chapter must be demonstrably true to its statements, and any questionable doctrines must either be removed from the confession or emended in line with Scripture.

---

[1]   Jn.1:29; 3:16; 1 Jn.2:2.

Bethany and Westbank Children's Homes

In light of current news in Northern Ireland, the following post by Michael Copeland MLA has taken on a relevance that cannot be missed.  Please read this and then ask questions of the churches to which you belong, if they were involved in supporting such homes of abuse.

Michael Stewart Copeland updated his status: "We welcome moves to include Westbank Orphanage, Greystones, in inquiries into institutional abuse in Northern Ireland. Children from Westbank were trafficked illegally over the border and placed with unregistered foster carers. Children in the home and in fostering arrangements suffered physical, emotional and/or sexual abuse. The orphanage was unique in that children were hardly if ever adopted. Some 'children' remained in the home into their early thirties. The orphanage appears to have operated without proper supervision from the 1950s until it closed in 1998. In 2011 residential records were removed from the PACT counselling service by the Trustees of Westbank in Bray Gospel Hall. Children whose mothers were from Northern Ireland gave birth in Dublin's Bethany Home, Rathgar, before being transferred to Westbank Home. Bethany Home should, therefore, also be included in the NI process. 219 Bethany children are buried in unmarked graves in Mount Jerome Cemetery in Dublin, while many who survived suffered lifelong illnesses and/or were sent into dysfunctional and abusive situations (including Westbank). Derek Leinster is one of those children. The state sanctioned neglect and death in Bethany when the Deputy Chief Medical Adviser, who was investigating reported abuse, stated in his report, 'It is well known that illegitimate children are delicate and marasmic'. ('Marasmic' is another word for starving). Mothers of three of the undersigned had children born in the Bethany Home. Sydney in 1964 and Colm in 1967 were sent to Westbank. They were sent back and forth over the border, sometimes on fundraising trips to perform for church groups. Sydney's mother was from Northern Ireland. Three of her children were sent to Westbank, one of whom was born in Bethany. Colm's mother gave birth to two children in Bethany who were sent to Westbank. As it was policy in Westbank, children were not told their siblings were also there. A number of religious denominations large and small, from the Church of Ireland to Presbyterians, Methodists, Free Presbyterians, Baptists, Plymouth Brethren, gospel halls, and the Orange Order, were involved in directing unmarried mothers to, and/or raising funds for, Bethany and Westbank. This diffuse association makes it possible for churches to deny specific responsibility for what went on in institutions run by evangelical Christians. Leaders of the CofI, Presbyterian and Methodist congregations twice met privately to discuss Bethany, but did not issue a statement. The Minister for Justice, Alan Shatter, has given written commitments to TDs and MLAs from the Democratic Unionist Party, the Unionist Party, the Labour Party and from Sinn Fein, to do something, sometime, about demands of former Bethany children for official recognition and for justice. Bethany and Westbank operated in the Republic of Ireland. Perhaps an inquiry into their activities will begin in Belfast while Justice delays in Dublin."

Set Up a New Reformed Evangelical Church

In an earlier post, I suggested that those evangelicals who are more loyal to the church than they are to the Gospel are prepared to stand idly by and watch fellow-evangelicals being slaughtered by the church and not lift a hand to help them.  Shame on them all!

I read recently of how this exact thing goes on within the Scottish Presbyterian churches. The writer echoed my viewpoint when he said that he watched in horror as evangelicals were being hung out to dry by their evangelical colleagues. At times they were instrumental in betraying evangelicals, and stood there watching what was happening but doing nothing about it.

He referred to a divinity student in the Presbytery of Glasgow whose views on women's ordination were reported to Presbytery. Not one evangelical supported him and he was forced to leave. Another evangelical in another Presbytery was accused of being a 'troublemaker' in relation to the same issue, and rather than being given the support of his fellow evangelicals, found himself ostracised and he too had to leave. A third situation involved a young minister who confronted a ruling elder about an inappropriate (sinful and unbiblical) relationship he was having. This came to Presbytery and neither the Presbytery nor the evangelical ministers in it supported him, and he too was told to keep quiet about this, or to leave the ministry. He left.

It seems that evangelicals in today's churches are rather more like evan-jelly-cals than Bible believing Christians; the emphasis here is on the jelly. Ministers within the established denominations have no reason to believe that when hardy comes to hardy, they can be sure of the support of fellow-evangelicals at Presbytery or Assembly levels. These evangelicals are first and foremost churchmen rather than Gospel-men; that means that you just cannot trust them to support biblical standards either in morals or in doctrine.

Where are soundly evangelical ministers to go to who want to minister the Word of God and preach the everlasting Gospel of redeeming grace? Answer? It is impossible to say. Presbyterianism, in all its shades and varieties, is painted in the same colours. Every minister's pre-occupation is to protect himself and secure his job. Ministers within the Presbyterian Church in Ireland, some of them, live in fear of getting on the wrong side of church authorities. This was the response I got when I asked why ministers will not support their brother evangelicals. They are living in fear of the church hierarchy, and they know that they have the power of life and death over their ministries. These men have taken real power into their own hands, and, my, they are prepared to use it - but only against evangelicals whose congregations do not want their preaching. They will not lift a hand to discipline or remove liberals and ecumenicals, and other time-servers, those who keep in with the authorities. 

Surely the time has now come for reformed evangelicals to come together and set up a new Christian church. The unfaithfulness of the current churches is depressing. When evangelical ministers are being abused by and within their congregations and then dismissed by their Presbyteries working in conjunction with the powerful Judicial Commission. This cannot go on indefinitely. "The people who know their God shall be strong, and carry out great exploits. (Dan.11:32). Now is the time for action. Think of Luther and Calvin, Cranmer and Latimer, men who knew their God and who did great things for Him. 

Ministers Who Are Friends With ‘the enemies of the truth.'

Oh, pity the ministers, and there are not a few of them, who are friends with ‘the enemies of the truth.’  Those who keep in with those whom they know to be in the wrong – colleagues, elders, church members, church leaders, other faiths, etc – have compromised themselves thereby. They keep in with those who can make life difficult for them, possibly even have them removed from the ministry, or from life. These ‘turkeys’ keep in with the ‘enemies of the truth’ because their motivation and mission is self-preservation at all costs.

Calvin could not be more different.  He counsels the five young ministerial students of Lyons who were facing death for the faith in terms not unlike these:

‘But you, my young brother ministers, you are not pursuing your own ideas however lofty they might be. You are pursuing the truths of eternity, the truths of salvation, the truths of God’s glory in the world. Your calling is not a ‘trivial pursuit.’  You are on the most exalted mission and highest calling that any man can receive. You are ministers of the Gospel, no more and no less. That’s who and what you are!  And these ‘enemies of the truth’ are doing this to men Whom God has personally chosen, called, saved and set apart for the Gospel.’ 

And because Calvin is raising the position of the five very high, he is also saying that he would not be in the shoes of the ‘enemies of the truth’ for all the tea in China. They are trifling with things and people they know not of, and with the God Who is Almighty, just, holy and altogether righteous. They know not what they do, or its consequences.

495th Anniversary Of The Great Protestant Reformation

31st October each year marks an event that was to usher in fundamental changes in Europe's political, social, economic and religious history.  When a young monk wanted a public discussion about the abuse of indulgences in and by the church, he nailed a notice with the issues to be discussed in the door of Wittenberg Cathedral.  Hence started a series of events that would have world-wide repercussions, and that brought liberty from darkness and superstition to many beleaguered people right across Europe.

Dr Martin Luther was the young monk who initiated, under God, the Protestant Reformation in Europe.  He was concerned initially about the abuse of indulgences which the poor bought under the pretext that in so doing their loved one's soul would get a quicker release from purgatory.

Dr Martin Luther (1483-1546)

Beyond doubt, Luther dominated the Reformation.  At age 17 he entered Erfurt University, Germany's most important seat of learning. It was here that the centre of conflict between the Renaissance humanists and those known as scholastics was located.  These scholastics were expert at combining medieval philosophy and theology.  In the Faculty of Philosophy, Luther studied law and theology in addition to philosophy.  At this time he also read widely in the classical authors, especially Cicero and Virgil, gaining his Master's degree four years after entering the university in 1505.

It was then that Luther rejected the world and all it had to offer.  He experienced  the first great event in his life after being struck by a lightning bolt, which was for him a kind of conversion experience, though clearly not of the truly evangelical kind. Crying out to St. Anne, he promised to become a monk.  He felt that God was in everything and found it impossible to reconcile his faith with his worldly ambitions. He was plagued with an overwhelming sense of guilt, fear and terror. The one thing he wanted - and most people who experience this kind of turmoil - was to be rid of his guilt; so he joined the Augustinian Order of monks where he would be protected from the distractions of the world and find the true pathway to heaven. Poor old Luther fasted and prayed and inflicted pain on himself using scourges; but to no avail.  The peace of God eluded him and his doubts remained unabated. 

Luther was a keen biblical scholar and one day while at his books he opened his Bible at random and the page that was before him had the words of Rom.1:17, "For the justice of God is revealed from faith to faith in that it is written, for the just shall live by faith."  Others assert that it was while he was teaching his students from Paul's letter to the Romans that the light of the truth dawned upon him, and he was savingly converted to Christ. 

The import of this verse gripped him like a vice and refused to let him go.  But more later.  In 1512, he returned to Wittenberg and all he wanted to do was to preach the Gospel and teach the Scriptures in the University. He ignored the scholasticism of his day and focused on the humanities.  He wasn't particularly unhappy to be a monk in his church, but with the passage of time, ecclesiastical politics were working and senior churchmen were hatching plans to make themselves important and wealthy by telling to poor that if they wanted the early release from purgatory of their deceased loved-ones, they had better buy indulgences from the Pope.  These were documents that the Pope sold to the faithful and that will shorten the time for loved-ones to spend in purgatory.  One senior cleric, Albert of Hohenzollern, got very wealthy through the religious scam and the construction  of the basilica of St. Peter's in Rome was done by the other half.

This religious scam and abuse of the poor could not go on unchallenged, so on 31st October 1517,  on the even of All Saints Day, and according to Philip Melanchthon (1497-1560) ( a friend of Luther's and a professor of Greek at the university) Luther nailed a copy of his 95 theses to the door of the Castle Church at Wittenberg.

The die was cast and the storm was coming.  Luther wanted to dispute these 95 statements which focused on the prevalence of indulgences. The date chosen by Luther was significant because all of Wittenberg was crowded with peasants and pilgrims who had come to honour the consecration of the church there.  The interest was such that the theses had to be translated from the Latin into German so that the people could read them.  Once printed, the document spread throughout Germany like wildfire.  The printing press was a God-send for Luther at that time and the message was spread far and wide. 

Rome's agent in Wittenberg was Johann Tetzel, a Dominican friar, whose job it was to raise money for the building of St Peter's.  By attacking indulgences, Luther was in reality attacking the entire theology and structure of the Church of that day.  He was claiming that salvation was received by faith in Christ alone, thus abolishing the need for the church, priests, sacraments, confession to a priest, penance, the lot.  This made the otherwise indispensable church dispensable so far as salvation was concerned.  What a challenged Luther presented to Rome!  Salvation was received by faith, not by good works of any kind.

Thank God for a man like Dr Martin Luther.

THE WORD IS NOT ENOUGH!

THE WORD IS NOT ENOUGH!

D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, "What is an Evangelical?" Banner of Truth Trust: Edinburgh, 1992.

While we thank God for the great work of Christ in the past, e.g, the Reformation and other minor reformations, not even this work was complete because the reformation of the church according to the Word of God is or ought to be an ongoing task semper reformanda.  This is why we must not be "slaves to them", he says.  "This is the way to develop a kind of scholasticism and an arid intellectualism," (p.36).  These twin evils grow out of exaggerated adoration for past achievements, and not least in confession writing.  "It is as important to define the evangelical as being against a form of Protestantism or even reformed scholasticism, as it is that we should define the evangelical by contrast with those who are heterodox in their practice and their belief, " (p.34).  So DML-J was not impressed with scholasticism because he could see clearly the results of such an approach to theology. 

He preaches: "The devil has wrought havoc in the Church in general, as well as in individual lives, many times throughout the centuries by producing a kind of scholasticism," (p. 156).  The evangelical, he argues, is not interested in Protestant scholasticism (56).  The danger of this is clear to be seen, he contends, and results in the eventual denial of the Gospel.  Owen has clearly imbibed Aristotelian philosophy and presented this content and methodology in his theological formulations regarding the death of Christ.  His undoubted influence on the composition of the Westminster formularies is acknowledged, and was a prominent participant as deliberations proceeded.

The trouble with Roman Catholicism and with those who follow a similar methodology is that they say they believe the Bible when in fact a different authority carries more weight and influence.  The trouble with the schoolmen, both ancient and modern, is that they tend to add Aristotelian philosophy to their belief in the Bible.  Or, they arrive at their interpretation of the Bible via Aristotelian philosophy.  The result is that they interpret the message of the Bible in Aristotelian philosophical terms.  Further, the Gospel message is hidden under this sophistry. This is seen when the atonement is 'interpreted' and preached by those influenced by the schoolmen.  It was this battle that Luther fought, and won. 

"...the [Roman Catholic] church was not so much tied to the teaching of the Scripture as to the teaching of Aristotle and other Greek philosophers," therefore she got herself into difficulties that led to her denying what is truth and fact. (77).  The effect of this is to force the interpretation of Scripture through the Aristotelian sieve.  The teaching magisterium becomes the final authority of the church and every other moral or dogmatic viewpoint must find its support in that official didactic.

This is also an issue for reformed Christians to consider, whatever their denominational affiliation.  It is especially true in Presbyterian and Congregational churches but Baptist churches are not immune from this malady, according to Dr Geoffrey Thomas in a conversation with the author in February 2012.  This problem is especially pertinent where men take their theology and ecclesiology seriously.  Their concern is for “the Ark of God,” the Church, and the purity of her doctrine, a commendable policy to take. 

However, in their (proper) desire for purity of doctrine, two things tend to occur; first, the confessional standard tends to replace, in practice, the Scriptures as the church’s supreme and sole authority in all matters of faith and practice; and second, the situation tends to degenerate into religious formalism, as happens in some Presbyterian churches. 

If a church believes that by tying its officers (teaching and ruling elders) to a confessional form they are thereby protecting the purity of the church, they are badly mistaken.  Having a doctrinal standard by which to identify what a church believes is right and proper; but when this man-made document replaces the Scriptures as “the only infallible rule of faith and practice,” and is used to bind men’s consciences to every “jot and tittle” of its content, Scripture is de facto demoted to the category of a subordinate standard within that church. 

Churches must take care not to adopt confessional standards that are not demonstrably biblical in content, emphasis and balance.  Sub-biblical confessions must never be made to bind men’s consciences, therefore the whole issue of subscription must be re-opened and subjected to thoroughgoing discussion and debate with a view to demonstrating that the Scriptures are the only, full and final authority of any given church or denomination.  To bind men’s consciences to anything other than the Word of God is open to serious opposition. 

Casual Christianity?

Does such a thing exist?  Well, sadly, it does; and is growing by the day.  It is the kind of Christianity that takes everything with decreasing seriousness so that those involved in this religion have a 'good time.'  Our appearance in the Lord's house is like going to the seaside for the afternoon.  Our presentation in the pulpit is akin to going to a sporting event.  The language we use is all lovey-dovey, and the way we present ourselves before the Lord is as casual as going to the cinema.

Christian faith seems for a great many professors of religion to be no more than an add-on, similar to the kind of thing you can buy for your mobile phone.  You add this religion on to your otherwise very full life without allowing it to push out the more important things in your life.  It's another accessory like ear-rings, and flesh piercing things.

It's an evangelical app.  It is something you take up that authenticates you as a believer, and keeps you in with the right people. 

But it must never become so big a thing that it demands attendance at both services on a Sunday, or that you are a Christian at work as well as at church.  It must not be allowed to affect how you do your business, for example.  Once that begins to happen, religion is becoming fanatical; and we can't have that, can we?

No, what is wanted and desired today is a Christianity that is casual enough to look like the real thing yet sufficiently informal to allow you to so as you please.

But is that biblical Christianity?

Christ Wants His Church Back!

As a result of the Fall of mankind into sin (Gen.3), men have worked very hard to ruin, destroy and spoil Christ's church on earth, and make her their own.  You hear the cry from church Christians, "It's my church," or "It's our church."  When they say this very often they mean that they run and control it, and no one else.  Now Christ wants her back as His only Bride.

Sinners have reaped havoc on Christ's Bride, aided and abetted by Satan, the great adversary of the Church.  This unholy collaboration of man and Satan has left the church where she is today - loveless, unholy, powerless, unattractive, not useful or 'fit for purpose,' repellent, and almost dead spiritually.  Together man and Satan have made her into a disgraceful thing, a thing of reproach, and something God is ready to disown.  She has become self-willed, stubborn, rebellious, disobedient, and wayward.  She has committed spiritual adultery by running after other gods which are no gods, by cavorting with them and by submitting herself to them, and allowing them to do whatever they wanted to and with her.  She has no want of suiters and lovers.  She has gone after them shamelessly and has committed adultery with them in broad daylight.

Men like a church like that, do they not?  One they can control and run after for their own pleasure.  They have treated her as a man treats a prostitute - use her to get from her what fills their own lusts and inordinate desires.  But they do not love her as she deserves to be loved; nor do they cherish her or give themselves for her well-being.  They use her - for the baptism of children, to get their young people into full church membership and to come to the Lord's Table, to ensure that their children are married in church despite their having been living together for some time prior to the marriage, and have their deceased relatives given a proper burial.  So long as they get all these things and services, they are content.  They just use the church for their own ends.

But someone might object, "But Christ never lost His church!  She always belonged to Him.  Is that not what the word 'church' means - belonging to the Lord?" Fair point.  But what we must accept is that men, when they got their sinful hands on the church, wrested her from Him so far as the doing of His will is concerned.  Why have the churches of Asia Minor been put out of existence so soon after John wrote his letters to those seven churches?  Why is the true Christian church no longer visible and working in Rome, Ephesus, Corinth, Thessaloniki, Collossae, Phillippi, Galatia, etc?  Because men wrested her from her Lord and destroyed her.

What a warning this is to us today.  Oh, how careful we must be as to how we behave within the church of Jesus Christ.  How careful that we by our endeavours, push Christ off His rightful place within the church and replace Him with man-made institutions.

Christ wants His church back.  She does not belong to you.  She never belonged for you.  She belongs to Christ; He bought her with His own blood.  She is His prize possession.  Whatever possessed you to take her from Him?  He wants her back and He will get her back and woe betide the man who tries to hold on to what does not belong to him? 

Children-focused Ecumenism

In Portstewart this afternoon (Friday 10th August 2012), a group of young children, The New Irish Youth 2012, held a performance at the band stand at the Crescent.  When I came along, they were singing "Jesus Loves Me."  Initially, I thought this was a CSSM group where children are taught the truths of the Gospel.

But it wasn't.  When I approached one of the leaders, I discovered that this was a children's ecumenical group that was supported by the ecumenical churches, and which sought to teach them that there was no difference between any of them.  These were children from all the churches and none who were being brought together to minimise if not obliterate doctrinal difference those who were from the Christian faith and those who were from liberal Protestant and Roman churches, and from no church background at all.

I explained that the mainline churches in Northern Ireland had tried to pursue ecumenism through the adult members of the church and failed; then they focused on the young people, and again that came to nothing.  Now the ecumenical churches are focusing their attention on the school children, sending their emissaries into the schools to teach them something which is no Gospel at all (Gal.1). 

Did you ever see anything so deceitful as that?  I remember writing an article many years ago to a church magazine highlighting an event that was designed to entrap young people into the ecumenical snare.  I exposed what was happening, and at one of the church's Board meeting, my article was waved about by an irate minister, and younger ministers were warned not to have anything to do with me.

Ecumenists are basically deceitful people; they twist Scripture, taking it out of its context, and make it mean whatever suits their own nefarious purpose best.  People need to be warned about the encroachment of such people, for clearly they do not have the spiritual and eternal well-being of their children at heart.  Their religion is syncretistic, that is, a hodge-podge of religions and religious ideas whether true or false does not matter.  The mixture of liberal Protestantism and Romanism and Nothingism does not make it a Christian event, far from it.

Again, I urge great alertness amongst parents regarding this matter.  These people are deceitful.  And when evangelicals become enmeshed with them, they, too, become deceitful.  I have seen this very thing this week.  Christian people are taken in by high profile 'evangelicals' who are leading many astray. 

Tied in with this, no doubt, is the new political ecumenism that rules Northern Ireland.  This ecumenism amongst vulnerable and impressionable children is what they can and will support.

These are terrible times in which we are living.  Paul told us that this would come to pass.  The 'itching ear brigade' is still with us; and they gather around them teachers who will tell them what their itching ears want to hear (2 Tim.4:3).  They cannot endure sound doctrine.  Truth does not matter.

Window-dressing.

One of the practices of dysfunctional people, families, communities, churches, nations, etc, is to engage in 'window dressing.'  It is the attempt to paint the best possible picture of a person or a situation.  It ignores the obvious wrongs in that person and situation, and uses all kinds of verbal gymnastics to re-frame the description that you wish to portray or promote.

Take the police as an example.  How they spare no efforts to sell a public service that is just a little bit short of being perfect so that the leadership can be applauded as worthy of honour.  How great are the police we adore!

Or take politics as another.  Politicians employ the best "spin doctors" aka communications directors to demonstrate the great successes their employers have had in the political realm.  The country never was better, the economy is growing, crime is down, young people are getting jobs, and look at our success in the Olympics.  How great are the politicians we adore!

Take a look at the churches too when you're at it.  Was they ever a time in recent history that churches were so pathetic, so apathetic, so unfaithful to the Lord and His saving Gospel!  Listen to church leaders when they give their annual reports - the church is in very good heart, they tell us.  The Gospel is being preached, prayer meetings are being held, new members are being welcomed into church membership, so many baptisms have been carried out, and so on.

But in all these situations, this is mere 'window dressing.'  And who is it that engages in such theatrics?  Dysfunctional people, organisations, societies and churches.  If your church does this kind of thing, then be assured that it is fundamentally dysfunctional.  It is certainly not what it appears to be or claims to be.

What is needed? First, for a deep humility that will lead to honest acknowledgement of sin and disobedience to the Lord's Word.  Without this, there will be no remedy.  In Nehemiah's day (Ch.9), the people, in humility, acknowledged their rebellion against the living God.  Second, true heartfelt confession of sin that brings guilt must follow.  Until we have acknowledged sin, there is nothing to confess.  Third, the church must identify the rubbish that has accumulated and get rid of it - all!  This could be in the form of worldliness masquerading as being contemporary; it might be the receiving into church membership notoriously godless individuals who make a credible profession of faith to elders who may or may not know them; it could even be attitude of mind and heart that our church is better than all the others; or it could be the "what's in it for me" mindset where members take everything they can get from the church and more, yet contribute nothing to it.  This must be removed because the channels for receiving blessing from the Lord are obviously being cluttered up.

Fourth, there must be deep heartfelt repentance that breaks every stubborn and wilful heart.  Repentance includes, at least, a turning away from that which has been acknowledged as wrong and sinful.  It is also a turning to the gracious Lord Who has been so patient with you.  The church, as church, is not above divine judgement, a fact that is often forgotten by the window dressing church leaders.  Churches that have compromised themselves with theological liberalism must also repent of this sin; but they must not stop short at repentance - that would be too easy and utterly ineffective.  They must then put into action those actions that are necessary to rid the churches of such a poison.  Also, they must remove from their congregations every semblance of commitment to unbiblical ecumenism.  Alas, this very kind of ecumenism is being actively promoted by evangelicals who are held in high esteem by the gullible.  The church must distance themselves from every hint of these and all other varieties of worldliness.

Then, fifthly, and finally, there must be renewed commitment to biblical, as opposed to merely confessional, Christianity; if there is to be confessional religion, that confession must reflect accurately the teaching of the Word of God.  Perhaps this might well call for a covenant renewal of dedication to the Lord and His work - which is by definition wider than commitment to any denominational work.  A new commitment to Christ and His Gospel will be in order.

But be assured of this.  Those churches that engage in window dressing will not do any of these things, because they that are righteous have no need of a physician.  Something to think about, eh?

Betrayal from the Inside.

The book of Nehemiah teaches us that as well as opposition to the work AND WORKER of God emanating from external sources, it often comes also from the inside, from within the organisation or church where the servant of Christ labours.  We expect the external threats and attacks, but we should not be ignorant of similar and often more vicuous attacks coming from within the Lord's professing church.  The Psalmist speaks of this, our Lord Jesus Christ experienced it, and His servants down the years also know what such betrayal from the inside is like.

My own familiar friend with whom I supper lifted up his hand against me.  He was a member of the external family of God, I worked with him, trusted him, enjoyed his company; but when the time was right, opportune, he moved against me and betrayed me.

What makes it worse is when the betrayer admits that that is precisely what he has done!  And calls in a witness to confirm that that is what he had done. 

When Nehemiah's enemies failed to bring the world of God to a standstill, the people of God, Judah, tried a different tactic, called the antagonists to the house of God and sought a peace agreement.  Thank God Nehemiah did not concede to such a devilish ploy, for that would have ruined the work of God.

How is it that churchmen are always keen to enter into peace terms with the avowed enemies of the Gospel, just because they are churchmen?  Why is it that they refuse to be Gospel-men when church issues arise?  When the very existence of the Gospel in a congregation is at stake, they refuse to be Gospel men, but descend into becoming again churchmen.

Gospel ministers need to be extremely alert as to what is really going on within their congregations.  This is difficult but a close walk with God will mean that God will share His secrets with His servants.  He will give them the discernment to know and identify what is afoot.  His colleagues will accuse him of all kinds of things, such as, being a conspiracy theorist, or being paranoid, of being psychologically unstable.  The rumour-mongerers will be at work all the time, trying to discredit the servant of Christ.

God will fight for them, and they will witness strange things happening amongst the enemies.  But GOD WILL WIN because GOD MUST WIN.

Confessionitis

It is almost suffocating how committed some evangelical ministers to man's word rather than to God's Word.  In liberal denominations, attempts are still being made to hold fellow ministers, not to God's unchanging Word and Gospel, but to man's fallible and imperfect words in confessions, etc.  Confessions appear to take up the time of church ministers who believe that if he can get his colleagues to adhere to the words of man, and thereby be orthodox, they will then be faithful to Scripture.  How facile an approach!

These are the men who at their ordination to the Christian ministry confessed the Scriptures to be the Supreme standard by which every other doctrine is to be assessed.  They also said that all and every man-made document is merely a subordinate standard; such are useful as guides but they are not infallible. 

Therefore to try to get ministers to stick more closely to the confession of faith in a bid to get them to stick more closely to the Scriptures is a much longer route to true orthodoxy than to get them to go straight to Scripture and try to ensure faithfulness to its teaching. 

Fallen mankind is always prone to find and take the longest route to a particular destination than to take the most direct route there.  Souls are perishing while ministers fiddle about with inconsequential matters.  Get men to the Gospel and insist that they preach it with passion and faithfulness, and many of the churches problems will then have been solved.

Subordinate standards, while useful, are just that - subordinate standards. But the Holy Scriptures are the SUPREME STANDARD for all matters of faith and practice.  Let it be so in deed and in fact.

Serving Two Masters?

The meeting this morning at Keswick at Portstewart emphasised that "No man can serve two masters."  It is either Christ or mammon (money).
Yet this impossibility is being attempted on a massive scale within conservative evangelicalism.  Some Christians try to have it both ways.  But it cannot be done successfully without dire spiritual consequences.
But this principle is attacked in a much more subtle way, and with the very same consequences.  Ministers and other Christians and also church members are trying to ride both horses - the Gospel and the church.  But no man can serve two masters - so said Jesus then and He still says it now.  Ministers have to choose whom it is they will serve unreservedly. 
And it does not seem to matter what the church does, says, thinks or believes, Christian men will still serve her best interests before those of the Gospel.
Why is this?  Answer: the Gospel costs, but the church recognises and rewards.  Faithfulness to the Gospel demands sacrifice, but faithfulness to the Church gets you a DD.  Serving the church gets you on to all kinds of influential boards and committees, but serving the Gospel is guaranteed to block any such appointment.  Serving the Gospel will lead inexorably to a Cross, but serving the church will get you promoted.
It ought to be that Gospel men are welcome within the Christian church, but that is not necessarily the case.  Especially in theologically mixed and compromised denominations, they are only tolerated because they give their first allegiance in practice to the church in which they serve.  With a Chairman's position up for grabs, who in his (or her) right mind will jeopardise that! 
There is great need for an in-depth re-appraisal of our priorities as Christians and as Christian ministers, an in-depth re-appraisal that will bring the ministry and church back to the Bible, not just to the embracing of an orthodox theology (important that that is), but to a living and vital relationship with Christ that will not be ruptured even by the church and her demands.

Which Are The Dangerous Churches?

Which is the more dangerous church of the two - the mixed church or the apostate church?  Obviously the first because with the apostate church you know exactly what you are dealing with, but with mixed churches you do not always know what they believe.  One minister preaches a clear Gospel yet his neighbour tells nothing but man-made stories, reads well-constructed essays or delivers application-free Bible studies.  One man believes it is wrong to baptise the children of unbelieving church members, but his colleague in the same denomination will baptise anything that passes mirror test.  You what the mirror test is, don't you?  You place a mirror underneath the nostrils of a baby and if mist appears on the mirror, you baptise it.

The mixed church gives the impression that it holds to Biblical faith and religion, and makes no bones about it; but when you assess what is being taught, you discover something quite different.  You will find theological compromise and unfaithfulness to the Gospel; virtually no standards for church membership; accept people who show no interest whatever in the Gospel or in spiritual things; and on and on the list could go.

Churches that are theologically and spiritually mixed will find willing defenders within its orthodox ministers and elders.  To them the Gospel of salvation is at best secondary to the church itself.  They glory in the fact that their church is a "broad church" that accepts unbelievers into membership and also into the eldership, including the ministry.

Denominational people see the church as being confined to their "own kind," hence the resentment when a member leaves their church and goes elsewhere.  They need their churches to be thoroughly mixed in membership because they know they could not depend on Christian members giving well enough to keep the doors open.

The greatest challenge to the true church of Christ on earth are those churches that defend the right of unbelievers, some of whom are notoriously godless, being given the right of full church membership and their infants being given the full privileges of church membership.

Dr J. Edwin Orr and Revival

Dr J. Edwin Orr taught that if revival is to flower, certain things must happen:

"Little by little, the church loses its grip on essential things, becomes a social club, goes to sleep or flies off at a tangent. All over the world we find sleeping churches, and all round them are the gospel-starved masses. Instead of performing the first thing of importance, evangelising the masses, they are engaged in a bewildering variety of pastimes--anything but the real thing."

Let me take these points in order: Has the church today lost "its grip on essential things"?  Is the Gospel of God being proclaimed every Lord's day from every pulpit established for the preaching of the Gospel?  Is there passion and a sense of urgency in the preaching that marked a previous generation of preachers?  


Or has the church degenerated into "a social club"?  Is it now the kind of organisation that is only interested in men's well-being in this world, and not so much in their eternal souls?  Does it try to cater for every 'special interest group' within its jurisdiction?  Does it break up its congregations into ages and gender groups, rather than having the entire church involved in all church activities?


Has the church today gone to "sleep"?  I don't think there can be any doubt that this is a fair description of many churches today - they are asleep while their members and community goes to hell without the only Saviour of the world, Jesus Christ.  Is she so inebriated by notions of her own self-importance and by her seeking to be applauded and honoured by the godless world that she sees no dangers anywhere that should cause concern to the Church of Christ?


Is it true that the church in many of her manifestations worldwide has flown "off at a tangent" and has become involved in politics, social action, an organiser of charitable activities; has she been taken down the road paved by godless philosophers without even realising it?


Dr Orr is correct: "All over the world we find sleeping churches."  How utterly sad!  And how unacceptable!  Who has cast the spell upon them that has created this situation?  Satan.  The church has allowed Satan to become a church member!  He is welcome in very many churches around the globe.  He presents himself as "an angel of light," and very often has a good 'profession of faith' which the church elders accept without question.  Preachers who have been brought under his power and influence are lulling their congregations to sleep with empty sermons, pious platitudes and sloppy sentimentalism.  The churches are asleep.

So intent are ministers and churches to keep strictly within their pre-determined parish boundaries that evangelism of the masses is a non-starter.  As Dr Orr rightly asserts,"all around them are gospel-starved masses."  Multitudes are on the broad road that leads to destruction.  Why?  Because they have not been told the Gospel in a way that grips them and 'nails them to their pews' as they listen.  They might have listened to carefully Bible studies, but these are not, I repeat, are not sermons. The masses are not being evangelised and the sheep are not being fed because the church is intent in and dedicated to amusing the goats.  They are happier to have loads of good, and not so good, pagans, in their membership because that keeps the money rolling in, than to tell them the unadulterated truth of the Gospel. 


Churches today have programmes of all kinds to entertain the goats, but not so much activity that will turn goats into sheep, as William Still of Aberdeen once said.  She has lost her vocation and Ichabod has been written over her.  Even the so-called pure churches are facing the same problems today.  Their members do not want the Gospel preached in their church - that's for mission halls and street corners, not the church.


Dr Edwin Orr is totally correct.  There must be immediate and radical change in every church if they are to meet the challenges of "this present evil age," (Gal.1:4).


But the biggest question of all is, Is she up to it?


O CHURCH OF CHRIST, AWAKE!

Gospel Churches To Be Closed by UK Government!

Does that headline surprise you?  Do you think you will never see such on the front pages of our most cherished daily's?

Gospel churches can only expect government at every level to turn on those churches with a ferocity that has been unmatched for many centuries in the UK.

Since government is essentially anti-God, the church of Jesus Christ is not safe in our land.  Steps have been taken to evict Gospel churches from local government premises because those churches apply the Gospel to every situation, especially the religious.  Government has been successful so far, and the only churches that will be safe are those that government uses for state ceremonies and those that do not take the Gospel seriously. 

But those churches that preach a radical message - which is what the Gospel message is - will be systematically shut down by British politicians and agents who have been given the powers to do so.  This is on its way.

And the motivation?  Government must protect Islam at all costs, no matter what happens to the true Christian churches and Gospel ministers.  This false religion cannot be criticised in any regard, but the Christian faith can be opposed, ridiculed and laughed at by government funded organisations such as the BBC.  Our universities which receive massive government funding are supported to undermine and ridicule the Christian faith, but they are not allowed to subject Islam to academic scrutiny.

What our government protects will be the means of closing down, not all that call themselves 'churches,' but Gospel churches.  Islam means 'submission;' that religion is well on its way to bring UK democracy into submission to its immoral laws and unethical religion and its practices (for example, female mutilation).

Yes, the true Christian faith can be vilified at will, and government will turn an accommodating blind eye to that.  But it will not tolerate the exposure of Islam from any quarter - all offenders will be dutifully punished.  Writs of zero tolerance of truth exposing error are now in place, and are being operated.  Laws have been passed which not only murder the unborn in their mother's wombs, but which protect the worst promoters of barbarity ever seen. 

And decent people are not allowed to open their mouths and expose such wrong doing.  Christian ministers are this very day in the UK being warned about their preaching of the Gospel.  They are not to shine the light of Gospel truth on those who clearly do not want it, but who urgently need it.  One Gospel minister in England whom I know has been so victimised and warned not to apply the Gospel to certain erroneous and horrendous situations.  Another minister has been warned by colleagues not to preach a clear Gospel message or he will be removed.  Yet another is being persecuted so badly that the church is doing all it can to remove him from his charge.  Another Gospel minister is deliberately barred from servicing on church oversight committees.  One of those ministers who bar him uses language that is rather coarse and unbecoming a minister.

The fight for the Gospel goes on relentlessly.  Reformed evangelicals need to stand together and support each other - that is, evangelicals who are not primarily "church men."  Non-churchmen evangelicals must rally behind each other across the denominations and show their support for the evangelical cause and for evangelical ministers. 

The state in encroaching steadily, and has engaged the internal help and facilitation of churchmen-evangelicals - they already have the support of non- and anti-evangelical ministers.  The track record of such good men is not good in this regard, preferring rather to keep their heads down and follow the guidance of the hymn - "you in your small corner and I in mine." 

But this has to change and change immediately before it is too late. 

Ungodly Church Leadership Protected.

I find it extremely disheartening and also extremely encouraging when I hear of Gospel ministers being vilified for their Gospel stance in their dead, liberal congregations.  Disheartened because in connexional churches where mutual support ought to be seen as clear as day, but isn't; yet encouraged because these men are taking the Gospel into congregations where it has not been preached with any clarity in the past.

Unbelievers have been allowed to remain unbelievers who are under God's heaven-revealed wrath simply because they are church members.  They have been allowed to remain in their sin yet serve as church elders; they can maintain their sinful lifestyles, yet hold their office.  And no one can say a word about it.

Very often, these are the very people who oppose the Gospel and do all they can to prevent the Gospel having definite influence within the congregation.  Elders can continue to live with their girlfriends, and retain their office.  Elders can blaspheme the Lord's precious Name, yet serve as spiritual leaders within their church.  Elders can use the foulest of language imaginable, yet be kept in office.  Notorious womanisers are allowed to hold church office because no one is to bring a charge against an elder without very good cause, and womanising is not a good cause to bring such an allegation.  Foul language and blasphemy is not a good reason to report elders to their line managers/supervisors because the moral tone within today's church accepts such a perversion. 

Do church elders, by whatever name, have licence to frequent prostitutes in England under the guise of business travel, and be kept on?  It seems so, because a distinction is drawn between one's public and one's private lives.  It's none of our business to tell a man how to live his life, they say.

The reason?  Once an elder, always an elder.  Such men cannot, even with the most charitable attitude possible, be regarded as regenerate men, can they?  These are ungodly men who love darkness rather than light, and whose motivation in life is to extinguish that light wherever it shines.

Given that Gospel ministers are expected to regard such rascals as godly and spiritual men, and work with them in the spiritual oversight of the congregation, is it any wonder that their Gospel preaching is opposed with all the might and main of these church apostates?  But because they are elders, regularly called and ordained, their opposition to the Gospel must be given as much weight as the minister's Gospel stand.

Is that ridiculous or what?  Does that please God?  Is the Lord who brought us honoured by such spiritual cowardice?  These church men might even be found praying for revival and reformation within the church; yet they are guaranteeing that such will be further away than ever, but is urgently needed, and God will send it despite their worst efforts at preventing it.  These churchmen are keeping and protecting ungodly church leadership within the very church they say they love.  These men would bring the great men of the past - the Calvinists of Europe, the Huguenots, the Covenanters, the Puritans, the Welsh and English Methodist Fathers of the eighteenth century, and their faithful successors - to shame and indescribable embarrassment were they to return to this time and see what is happening.

May God have mercy on us in these dreadful days of apostasy and corruption.

Church first, no matter what!

Because a minister claims to be reformed and evangelical, one would expect that such a man is primarily a Gospel man.  One would expect that man to stand foursquare with and for the Gospel and with Gospel ministers.  The "one another-ness" of mutuality should kick in automatically, and the persecution a brother is receiving should be 'nipped in the bud' by church officials who are reformed evangelicals.

Sadly that is not the case.  I have been told of a Gospel minister who described his evangelical and reformed colleagues as 'smiling assassins' - they are nice to your face (sometimes) but when your back is turned, they drive in the knife.    

You would also imagine that a Gospel minister would recognise Satanic opposition when it is directed against another Gospel minister, and oppose that opposition, not him.  But no. 

And the reason?  The church is paramount in importance in the minds of these church ministers, NOT the Gospel.  They have become what one very highly respected and experienced church elder, now with the Lord, called 'scheming ecclesiastics' or 'ecclesiastical politicians.'  They are there in the churches today!

I used to be gravely annoyed as a young minister when I saw the older men who were not as clear on what it means to be a Gospel minister as they used to be, degenerating into 'church' evangelicals rather than Gospel evangelicals, which effectively means that they have been neutered so far as any evangelical witness or stand is concerned within the wider church.  When they preach, they still maintain a clear evangelical position; but when it comes to supporting a persecuted brother evangelical, they become church men rather than Gospel men.

How hypocritical and pathetic such men are!  How unreliable! They are as dependable as Egypt was in Israel's history.  They are evangelicals in the pulpit, but degenerate churchmen when dealing with the persecution of Gospel ministers.  These men will not upset the ecclesiastical apple-cart.  These men are not what they appear to be when in pulpits.

Let us take on to our hearts and pray for those ministers known to us who are being persecuted for their stand for the Gospel.  Ask the Lord to defend and protect them day and daily.  Ask Him to vanquish all His and our enemies.  Plead with the Lord of the Church to uphold His servants and to throw into confusion all those who oppose the establishment of the Gospel in liberal congregations.  Thank God for those good men and their wives who stand for the Gospel in every situation, and who apply Gospel principles to every circumstance - individual and church. 

Life's Ironies.

Why is it that some of the worst rascals in the world have never been in trouble with the law?  How do the most vicious criminals the world knows have no police record?  Strange, but true.

Then some of the best people in the world have gained for themselves a police record, often through no fault of their own.

But in whose company would you rather be - the former or the latter?  And which of them would you want to rule in the church? 

Well, give me the latter any day.  Why?  Because knowing some of the worst rascals around to be utterly destructive of spiritual priorities and holding office within their local churches and denominations, they are very bad company who corrupt everything good.

The churches know that these people have no spiritual life in them that comes from Christ, given their utter opposition to the Gospel.  Yet they protect and retain them in office.  These people have mouths like cesspools, which express hearts like dunghills.  They hate Christ with a passion as measured by the blasphemous way they speak of Him.  They have rejected the Gospel continually and still do.  They are highly involved in their churches, even where an evangelical minister preaches.

But one must ask how it is that unregenerate officer-bearers within local churches can sit under preaching that makes no inroads to their souls?  Do ministers not carry out a spiritual audit of fellow-elders to ascertain their true spiritual standing?  A man may be a Christian and yet unfit to be an elder; but an unconverted man is clearly unfit to be an elder because he does not even satisfy the most basic qualification for eldership - being a Christian.  Therefore he is not fit to be a church member.

Here, a distinction must be made between a man being a church member and his being a Christain.  Church laws only require a man to be a church member, regardless of whether or not he is a Christain.  This view is held in defiance of the New Testament teaching.

For the church to be reformed, ministers must take spiritual issues much more seriously than they do.  It is way beyond time for a radical spiritual audit to be carried out into the spiritual standing of every member and office-bearer, including ministers, within the church.

A TALE OF TWO REIGNS

Contrary to the general public’s uninformed exuberance (reinforced by a strange and popular sycophantic media), many of us are more than a little ambivalent about the Jubilee celebrations. Sadly, the well-based accusation of Her Majesty’s betrayal of her Coronation Oath is not only food for occasional sober reflection. The facts flashing all over the internet are too stubborn to be noted then politely ignored.

Of course, with the four-day euphoria yet to die down, it is difficult for people who prefer fantasy to engage with reality. Indeed, the fanfares, ceremonial pomp and public jubilation bear no relation to the current state of the United Kingdom. Consider this: the reign of Queen Elizabeth I (1558-1603) saw national, cultural,
political, economic, social, moral and—as its inspirational source—spiritual progress from a superstitious, dark and brutal medievalism to something far more civilized (despite undeniable lingering defects). On the other hand, the reign of Queen Elizabeth II has witnessed the opposite: national, cultural, political, economic,
social, moral and spiritual decline.

While Her Majesty is worthy of universal affection as a person—indeed has any monarch been so greatly loved?—it remains to be said that she has reigned not merely as a figure-head over the most disastrous and unprecedented period of political, moral and spiritual decline in our nation’s history. If Her Majesty’s
governments have been in the driving seat, is she not complicit through the Royal Assent in the nation’s numerous wrong turnings?

This being so, today's rejoicing should have included a large degree of repentance. In his eulogy, the Archbishop was predictably 'PC'. Failing to proclaim the comforts and challenges of the gracious, saving kingship of our Lord Jesus Christ, he failed to provide a prophetic note at this time of national crisis. While the hymns harked back to the best days of English, Scottish and Welsh Protestant Christianity, the moral
and social values they represent have long since been jettisoned from our British culture.

The Prime Minister, David Cameron read from Chapter 12 of Paul’s Letter to the Romans. In view of the appalling secularism currently driving the Government’s legislative programme, did he not have a twinge of conscience when he read ‘Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind’ (v. 2)? These words give impetus and meaning to the distinctive Christian values inculcated by the Apostle Paul in the rest of the chapter. In short, secularism is ruining us.

Paul’s Christianity—expounded so powerfully in the early chapters of Romans—is the only antidote for our numerous national ills.

May God have mercy upon us.

God save the Queen! God save the United Kingdom! God save the Commonwealth!  God save the world!
Dr Alan C. Clifford