We have an altar

“We have an altar”

     Yesterday I watched a 30 minute YouTube video narrated by Ryan Reeves, a professor at Gordon Conwell seminary, on the history of Pentecostalism.[1] The relatively unbiased and historical narrative on the rise of Pentecostalism in the 20^th century was spot on. Having lived in the Los Angeles area since 1973, and being a student of the growth of Pentecostalism and the charismatic movement in this hotbed of Christian heterodoxy, I learned nothing new from this excellent video. Still, I was reminded of some things I had previously unearthed.

     Dr. Reeves capably pointed out how much Pentecostalism and later the charismatic movement has influenced every other part of Christendom, from Roman Catholicism on the one hand to the Baptists on the other hand. Though Reeves did not explicitly say it in his video presentation, I have observed the encroachment of Pentecostalism and the charismatic movement upon the independent fundamental Baptists for almost 50 years. Additionally, I am an avid reader of Baptist history in the 17^th, 18^th, and 19^th centuries.

     The result of my reading has left me very dissatisfied with the notion by so many of my colleagues that they practice traditional Christianity and are committed adherents to the “old paths.” Excuse me, but nothing that began in the 20^th century and was never before practiced routinely throughout Christian history can possibly be an “old path.”

     My eschatology can be described as pre-millennial and pre-tribulational. My evangelism can be characterized as Classical Baptist,[2] since it is the approach that was not only used by George Whitfield, John and Charles Wesley, and Jonathan Edwards, who were not Baptists, but also by the innumerable men who came to Christ during the first great awakening and adopted Baptist convictions and practices, men like Isaac Backus, the Marshalls, and J. L. Dagg.

     The modern missions movement began when Particular Baptists from England, who embraced a Covenant Theology eschatology, started to engage in foreign missions church planting. William Carey did not hold to the same eschatology that I embrace. Neither did David Brainerd, a missionary to the Indians in New England. Neither did Adoniram Judson, the American who went to Burma. Neither did Hudson Taylor, the famous missionary to China and founder of the China Inland Mission.

     I was always told, and I have read in my first Bible school texts, that my view of eschatology figured so prominently in my evangelistic motivation and concern that no one who embraced a different eschatology could be as highly motivated to reach the lost with the gospel as “our group.” I have not found that to be the case in real life. The 19^th-century missionaries who penetrated so many continents and unreached ethnic groups were typically post-millennial or amillennial in their eschatology. During my lifetime, I have become terrific friends with two men, one from an African tribe in the Sahara and one from Asia, both of whom are amillennial. Yet, they are the most committed and energetic personal evangelists I have ever known.

     Both men are passionate to reach the lost, one in a 98% Muslim African nation and the other in a country dominated by Hinduism and Buddhism while maintaining solid Baptist convictions and practices without in any way being mealymouthed about their identity as Baptists. May I also point out that I am not going wobbly concerning my eschatology? I point out that it is not my experience from observation or from reading Baptist history that one’s eschatology dramatically impacts his passion for reaching the lost. The issue is far simpler than the complexities of eschatology, in my opinion. It boils down to obedience to the Great Commission and a Spirit-given love for the lost.

     Allow me also to circle back to this matter of “old paths.” Earlier I pointed out that no practice that had its origin in the 19^th century, and came into extensive use in the 20^th century, can be described as an “old path.” Yet there are many uninformed and misinformed pastors and Baptist church people who are convinced that referring to steps that lead from the auditorium floor to the platform as an altar is somehow preserving an “old path.”

     Recognizing that centuries passed before Christians began meeting in buildings that were built for and dedicated to assembled worship, and that many more centuries passed before such buildings had more than dirt floors, the notion of steps at one end of the auditorium that lead to a platform upon which the pastor speaks as he is delivering his sermon is appropriately described as “an altar,” is ludicrous in the extreme. Some church auditoriums do not refer to the steps leading up to the platform as “an old-fashioned altar,” but have something akin to a banister that they call “an altar,” or benches supplied with tissue boxes for criers that they refer to as “an altar.”

     Excuse me, but this is nuts. And it is nuts for two reasons: First, it is nuts because gospel preaching churches did not have any such thing for 1800 years that they referred to as an “altar.” Only Roman Catholic churches had altars, and then Greek Orthodox churches, and then Anglican churches, and then Protestant churches. Baptist churches have never had altars throughout history! Therefore, unless our Baptist forebears were wrong, there was no need to introduce in the 19^th or the 20^th century what was missing for 18 previous centuries.

     Additionally, there is a biblical reason why Baptist churches never had an “old-fashioned altar” until they began to diminish the importance of the Lord Jesus Christ in the thinking of their people, replacing a consideration of the glorified Savior with a piece of furniture. Blasphemous, if you ask me. Why so? Because the writer of Hebrews tells us, in Hebrews 13.10, that “we have an altar.” The venerable Baptist commentator James A. Haldane not only concisely but correctly writes about this verse, “The Jewish sacrifices were offered upon the altar. Now we have an altar, by which is evidently meant Christ. He is at once the altar, the sacrifice, and the Priest.”[3]

     I think it is about time Baptist pastors display a willingness to rethink specific issues. I am not suggesting the rethinking of my position on eschatology. As I read through George N. H. Peters’ great work, “The Theocratic Kingdom,” my views related to eschatology seem to be more firmly established. What I am thinking about is a willingness to make claims that cannot be substantiated either by history or by the Word of God.

     On one hand, I have never noticed in God’s Word, and have never read anything in Baptist history, that would suggest a man’s eschatology influences his evangelistic zeal. That, in my opinion, has more to do with one’s willingness to obey his Savior.

     The other thing I think pastors ought to be willing to rethink is this notion of urging repentant Christians and sinners to come to an “altar” which is a piece of furniture when what we ought to be doing is calling sinners to come to the altar we have, which is on prominent display in the Word of God, which is not a piece of furniture, but which is the glorified, exalted, and enthroned Jesus Christ, the Lord. Urging people to come to Him, you cannot go wrong.

---

[1] https://youtu.be/LzT3pRu2FkY

[2] https://classicalbaptist.press/

[3] James A. Haldane, An Exposition Of The Epistle To The Hebrews, (Springfield, Missouri: Particular Baptist Press, Second Edition 2002), page 389.

Working Out At The Gym

I was excited to receive notification last week that my gym had developed a smart phone app for me to download. I downloaded the app and discovered that my gym was not yet open for business, but planned to open on July 5. Imagine how excited I was to use the app to make an appointment to work out with a select few today at 11:00 AM.

As I stood in line, maintaining social distancing from others also in line, it was apparent that the front door was locked, prohibiting entrance into the facility before 11:00 o’clock sharp. I stood in line with my mask on and noticed the sign on the front door insisting that those working out wear both mask and latex gloves while exercising inside. I imagined that this was for the purpose of maintaining a rather sterile environment for the protection of others. I had no latex gloves with me and expected, correctly it turned out, that my gym would provide the latex gloves.

The door was then opened, and entrance was allowed for each person who could display on a cell phone the proper “no contact app display” proving my identity and my reservation to work out. I passed through the door and stood at the welcome desk, asking for latex gloves. The attendant ran to the back office and brought out a box of latex gloves that fit the hands of every woman who wanted to work out and that fit the hands of the men with great difficulty.

As I put on my latex gloves while walking upstairs to the weight room it dawned on me that the very act of putting on the latex gloves rendered the latex gloves no longer sterile. It is impossible to put on latex gloves without touching the latex gloves on the outside. Wearing latex gloves benefits the wearer but no one else. Thus, when one works out by touching the barbells, the kettle balls, the dumbbells, and the various exercise machines, every surface a customer touches is immediately contaminated. The next time I come into the gym, reusing the latex gloves they gave me, my gloves will be even more contaminated. Of course, they know that. It doesn’t matter. The whole point of gloves and mask to exercise is to calm the fears of the uninformed, the misinformed, and the frightened.

As I began to work out, I noticed especially the young men in the facility. The big guys, the muscular guys, the fit fellows, immediately took their masks off and mostly took their latex gloves off. They ignored the warning over the loudspeaker. Thus, the guys who were serious weightlifters were not about to encumber themselves with stupid and ineffective masks or latex gloves that interfered with a good grip. They did not care about any Karens who might be in the room. I laughed as I observed it all, and was particularly amused by the very conscientious (and not very muscular) mask wearers and latex glove wearers.

Notice my picture with masks on and latex gloves on. Don’t I look positively ridiculous? What a stupid way to approach vigorous exercise, by interfering with your breathing and encumbering a good grip.

The owner of this facility cannot be a moron. He cannot be an idiot. There is no possible way he would have reopened this facility without consulting sterilization experts and, more importantly, attorneys. This whole exercise in sterilization futility is not for the purpose of minimizing the likelihood of CCP Virus spreading, but to minimize the gym’s liability exposure when someone who has recently been to the gym catches the CCP Virus from an immediate family member. You can’t sue family, but you can blame the fitness center. That is what this is all about.

It’s the same with restaurants and churches. You cannot go into a restaurant without having a mask on. The establishment will not allow any patron to enter without a mask of any kind. Methinks a cheesecloth mask would be acceptable to most eateries. However, once you go in and sit down at your table, removing the mask is not only optional, it is necessary. Who can drink a beverage or eat food while wearing a mask? So why is a mask required to enter the restaurant? Purely for the purpose of reassuring the uninformed, the misinformed, and the timid.

This causes me to reflect upon church services yesterday. Our church has been conducting services throughout the pandemic lockdown because I am a Baptist pastor and we are a Baptist church. Baptists believe (or claim to believe) in soul liberty. Soul liberty prohibits me from denying other Christians the right to exercise their God-given liberty to gather for worship. Thus, Baptist pastors who close their auditoriums because of a government edict and deny their individual congregants the opportunity to exercise their God-given liberties as free moral agents, are not really acting much like Baptists at all.

I am also reminded of the thoughts that frequently ran through my mind throughout this pandemic lockdown, which affected most churches but which did not affect the church I pastor at all. Where were the leaders among the Baptists during the mandatory lockdown? Where were those with the courage of a lion, who annually conduct leadership seminars that young and gullible Baptist preachers pay money to attend, when the government was demanding that they shutter their auditoriums, and they meekly and timidly complied with those unscriptural, illegal, and obviously unconstitutional demands?

Where in the Bible does it say that someone wearing a white smock, with a stethoscope draped around his neck, is an authority figure whose demands and commands must be obeyed? Where in the Bible does it say that someone occupying a position of authority in government, whether he wears a uniform or not, is an authority figure whose demands and commands must be obeyed even when he directly violates the U.S. Constitution? And where did the legacy of Baptist civil disobedience in the face of outrageous infringements upon our God-given duties and privileges to worship and serve God fly off to when this CCP Virus pandemic came along?

Someone might express a concern that going to church during a pandemic might be dangerous. However, throughout most of Christian history over these last 2000 years it has been dangerous for God’s people to gather for worship, with the danger being far more violent than a sub microscopic virus. Courage is required to live the Christian life. Liberty is granted by God to His children so that we might individually exercise wisdom and caution in proportion to the danger, to our age, and to our individual susceptibilities to illness. But this notion of an entire nation’s population being locked down before we get sick is positively ludicrous.

I know a few Baptist pastors who have exercised wisdom by not calling attention to themselves, while continuing to conduct their church services. I applaud them. I say bravo. Those men remind me of the Baptist pastors of days gone by, the kinds of men that Patrick Henry used to defend in courts of law in the Commonwealth of Virginia for their defiance of government mandates that they restrict the exercise of their religious liberties.

I have no problem with the privately owned business requiring masks and latex gloves. I know that masks and latex gloves accomplish virtually nothing, besides calming the misinformed, the uninformed, and the timid. But, for God’s sake, and for Christ’s sake, I call upon Baptist pastors everywhere to ignore the leadership advice of those big boys who have been silent for the last 90 days, and start paying more attention to the conduct of men like the apostle Paul and the apostle Peter.