The Bridge To Nowhere Good

 

Some benefits accrue to longevity and activity in the Gospel ministry. If God blesses you with longevity and activity, you can sometimes observe events of significance. Following is but one example. 

On a phone call yesterday with a colleague in the Gospel ministry, I related to him events that I saw unfolding in 1999. He recommended that I record my observations for posterity, and this is that record. 

Several weeks ago, I had the privilege of attending a conference hosted by Pastor Christian Torres, who serves the Riverside Baptist Church in Riverside, California. He hosted a two-day conference conducted by a longtime friend, Dr. David C. Innes, the Hamilton Square Baptist Church pastor in San Francisco, California.

 Dr. Innes presented “What Is A Fundamentalist? A Seminar Focusing on Biblical Fundamentalism.” Notes for the study and a plastic business card with an embedded thumb drive containing many PDF documents were handed out. It was the most beneficial treatment of biblical fundamentalism I have ever read, heard, or experienced. I recommend contacting Dr. Innes or going to the Church website (www.HamiltonSquare.org) to obtain the material, schedule a seminar, or learn where the seminar is presented nearby. It is time well invested. 

After the seminar, I ordered David Beale’s latest book, Christian Fundamentalism in America: The Story of the Rest from 1857 to 2020.” I have a voracious reading appetite, so I am surprised halfway through Dr. Beale’s book by the surprises he has in store for the reader. I anticipate writing a review that will include my recommendation that every Baptist pastor, including every Gospel minister who self-identifies as an evangelical, take the time to read this well-researched book.

 To borrow the phrase from the notorious Jen Psaki, let me “circle back” to yesterday’s telephone conversation with Dr. Innes’s seminar and Dr. Beale’s book on my mind. During yesterday’s telecon, I mentioned Jerry Falwell’s controversy with the Teletubbies in 1999 and his arrival to speak at a fundamental Baptist pastors conference in San Diego. The man I was talking to reminded me that he also preached at that same conference.

 The messages were outstanding. What was most memorable to me about that conference was the presented music pageant, which reminded me of a ritualistic Greek Orthodox liturgy. I had recently attended a Greek Orthodox funeral, and the similarities were jarring to me, so much so that I recall mentioning it to a pastor sitting near me.

 Months later, I attended another fundamental Baptist pastors conference in the Denver, Colorado, area. The music program presented the night the keynote speaker delivered his address was a pageant that once more reminded me of a ritualistic Greek Orthodox liturgy. For those unfamiliar with fundamental Baptists, we are not much given over to anything like a liturgy, and our spiritual lineage eschews formalism. Yet, there I sat, for the second time in four months, watching a large fundamental Baptist Church performing a ritualistic Greek Orthodox style music pageant for those in attendance.

 Advance several months again, with me now attending a Southwide Baptist Fellowship meeting at the once-famous Highland Park Baptist Church in Chattanooga, Tennessee, a distinctively fundamental Baptist pastors meeting. The essential difference between the pastors who gathered in Chattanooga and those who had gathered in San Diego and Denver would be their alma maters and the looming personality of the late J. Frank Norris. Norris did not figure in any way in the spiritual ancestry of the fundamental Baptist preachers gathered in Chattanooga, as he had figured in the spiritual lineage of the fundamental Baptist preachers in San Diego and Denver.

 Lo and behold, guess what I witnessed that evening before the featured speaker’s message? You guessed it. The Highland Park Baptist Church featured a music pageant almost identical to the two ritualistic Greek Orthodox-style pageants I watched in San Diego and Denver. Not that the skill of the musicians or singers lacked in any way. As previously, there was no issue with the quality of the program. All three were produced and performed with skill and evident commitment to excellence. The problem for me was the question of where this ritualistic Greek Orthodox style pageantry came from.

 After the service concluded, I sought out and introduced myself to the music director of the Highland Park Baptist Church. He was most gracious. I mentioned to him that the pageant presented that evening was most interesting. He interpreted my comment as a compliment. I then asked him where it came from, referring to the spectacle. 

With glee, he said, “I got it at Jerry Falwell’s Super Conference. Isn’t it great? Jerry got it from Jim Cymbala’s wife at the Brooklyn Tabernacle. She said she got it from the Greek Orthodox Church.”

 There you have it. Ritualistic Greek Orthodox style pageantry was embraced by a Pentecostal Church and passed on to fundamental Baptist Churches via Jerry Falwell’s Super Conference. If you think that demonstrates nothing and portends nothing, you are admitting to possessing the spiritual discernment of a flat rock. Jerry’s Super Conference was a bridge, a bridge to nowhere good. Only the pragmatist would value a ritualistic liturgy borrowed by fundamental Baptists from a Greek Orthodox Church, paying no heed whatsoever to the centuries-old anti-Christian theological system that produced that liturgy.

Today's missed opportunity.

One would think that after being a Christian for 47 years, and after being a Gospel minister for 46 years, I would not have completely missed a golden opportunity presented to me in the Providence of God. But I did. 

I went to my scheduled teeth cleaning appointment this morning, earlier than I like to do anything on a Monday morning following a Sunday in which I preached two sermons. But I made it to the appointment on time, not at all happy about having to wear a mask. I hate wearing masks and hope that someday our society can put this insanity aside. 

I put on my mask, walked through the door, approached the front desk, and signed in before sitting down. A couple of minutes later one of the dental assistants called my name and asked me to follow her. On the way to having my teeth x-rayed before the cleaning session, she asked me, “And how was your weekend?” 

My response to that nice young lady was, “Fine.” As soon as the word came out of my mouth and she turned to walk away from me I knew that I had missed a golden opportunity. It is tragic to miss such a golden opportunity as was afforded me in the Providence of God. I rebuked myself for telling her that I was fine. 

For many years I have preached to the congregation where I serve that most spiritual behavior is planned. While it is possible to act and react in a spiritual way to a spontaneous or otherwise unplanned event or situation, I am one who does not think quickly on his feet. For me to say the right thing or do the right thing I have to plan to do so. Perhaps not so much with other Christians, but for me spiritual behavior has to be planned. 

One plans to do right. Then one does right repeatedly. Eventually, one does right habitually. And finally, doing right becomes a part of one’s character. I am convinced that is a major part of sanctification. 

Who would have thought, after these many years of being a Christian, that I would not have anticipated being greeted by someone in the dentist’s office? I anticipated nothing walking into that office. I was quite thoughtless, or I would have planned to say something of consequence and importance to whoever spoke to me. I am disappointed with my dullness and failure to anticipate. 

What might I have said? What could I have said? What should I have said? I might have, could have, or should have said any number of things. What I did say was “Fine.”  Upon reflection, I wish I would have answered her differently. When she asked, “How was your weekend?” I wish that I had said, “My weekend was significant. Thank you for asking.”  Or perhaps ,”My weekend was important. Thank you for asking.”  Or something other than “Fine.” What I could have or should have said might have led to a witnessing opportunity. Saying “Fine” ended the conversation before it started.  

So, I will mark this down as yet another lesson in the Lord’s classroom of life for me. It is never too late to learn. It is never too late to grow. It is never too late to prepare to do something spiritual. Don’t you know, I will be ready the next time someone asks me how my weekend was.

“The Works And Letters Of Cleve Brantley,” a book review.

Gary Long and Terry Wolever were my friends. Gary was the pastor of the Sovereign Grace Baptist Church in Springfield, Missouri, and Terry was a faithful member of that Church. Additionally, they were the heart and soul of the Particular Baptist Press, which operates out of the basement of the Church. I have dozens of valued books from Particular Baptist Press that I have purchased and read over the years. 

Terry was promoted to glory in 2020, and Gary was promoted to glory several months ago. They were two of the most faithful and kindest Christian men I have ever known. This book was in its final stages of preparation before printing when God took Terry home. The book had been out about six or seven months when God took Gary home. Though I was not a member of their families, a friend for an exceptionally long time, or even a very close friend living so far away, I loved those men, and their passing has left a void. I admired and loved them both. 

I never knew Cleve Brantley, but brother long and I discussed his work on this book before publication.

Cleve Brantley was a Baptist pastor who was profoundly faithful, an excellent writer, and a man of considered and strong opinions. I imagine that he and I would not have agreed on everything, but we would have agreed on the essential things and respected each other’s differences. 

By most contemporary pastors’ reckonings, Cleve Brantley was not a successful Gospel minister. However, by God’s reckoning as revealed in Scripture, Cleve Brantley was an astonishingly successful Gospel minister, and that by the grace of God. First a Christian, then a Bible student, he was also a pastor and a writer/poet. 

I commend this book to every believer in Christ who is between third-base and home plate in the baseball game of life. I promise that you will not agree with everything Cleve Brantley wrote. I do promise that you will be profoundly moved by the depth of his devotion to God, his commitment to the integrity of Scripture, and the quality and profundity of his articles, poems, and letters. 

My approach was to read just a few pages a day. So it took me months to get through the 412 pages. But the book moved me. Cleve Brantley, now in heaven for 33 years, has become my cherished and beloved friend, my colleague in the Gospel ministry through this book. You will benefit from reading this book. 

( https://www.pbpress.org )

This installment is titled “The History & Theology of Calvinism” by Curt Daniel, Chapter Thirty-Six, Unconditional Election.

This chapter has nine subdivisions. 

Many years ago, a much-admired pastor and Bible college professor insisted that the doctrine of election should never be taught to young Christians. I find that sentiment amusing in light of the Apostle Paul’s first inspired epistle, written to believers only weeks old in the faith, reading, “Knowing, brethren beloved, your election of God,” in First Thessalonians 1.4. 

“We now come to the second point of Calvinism. It logically follows from the first. If man is totally depraved and unable to obey God, then he needs salvation. God chose to whom He would give salvation. It also flows from the doctrine of absolute divine sovereignty. God sovereignly and freely elected some sinners to be saved and predestined them to be saved at the right time. It is clearly and repeatedly taught in Scripture. But some preachers skip over it or misunderstand it. Many Christians have never heard a sermon on it. Others are not interested. They seem to be more interested in political elections than divine election.” 

The Biblical Terminology. The Greek verb eklego and its related forms is found 22 times in the New Testament. The noun form of the word, eklektos, is found 22 times, of which 17 refer to salvation. A related word is ekloge, found seven times. Proorizo is translated predestined in Romans 8:29–30 and Ephesians 1:5 and 11. Hairgomai is in 2 Thessalonians 2:13. “The doctrine of election is based on these and other words yet is not dependent merely on specific words but how they and others are used contextually and theologically.” 

Election in Other Areas. Two paragraphs. “There are instances in which election refers to something other than salvation.” 

Election and Salvation. Four paragraphs. “Some non-Calvinists argue that election is never to salvation, only to service. They overlook three explicit verses in particular: 1 Thessalonians 5:9; 2 Thessalonians 2:13; 2 Timothy 2:10.” “The second point of Calvinism deals with this aspect of election. Note that it is election to salvation. Election is not salvation itself but the divine plan that prepares salvation for those who are chosen by God. They were chosen in eternity but saved in time. God foreordained both the subjects and method of salvation – indeed, all the details of this holy blessing (2 Thessalonians 2:13; 1 Peter 1:1–2).” 

Election Is Eternal. Five paragraphs. “God elected the elect in eternity, not in time. Consider the following:

• ·       ‘He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world’ (Ephesians 1:4).
• ·       ‘God chose you from the beginning’ (2 Thessalonians 2:13).
• ·       ‘Who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began’ (2 Timothy 1:9).
• ·       ‘Eternal life which God, who cannot lie, promised before time began’ (Titus 1:2).” 

A Definite Number of Elect. Three paragraphs. 

Personal Election. Four paragraphs. “Election is individual and personal.” 

Election is Irrevocable. Three paragraphs. “God will not, and men cannot, change the election.” 

A Mutual Election. Three paragraphs. “George Whitfield called it a mutual choice. First, Christ chose His bride in the eternal marriage covenant. Then when He saves us, we choose Him to be our heavenly husband. Richard Sibbes, the great English Puritan, put it like this: ‘He chose us, loved us, knows us, and therefore we choose, love, and know him.’ We choose because we have been chosen. Or as 1 John 4:19 puts it: ‘We love Him because He first loved us.’ The order is vital. Arminianism reverses it.” 

Conclusion. Four paragraphs. “Since God did the electing all by Himself, He met all the conditions. Hence, we call it unconditional election. It is unconditional on the elect. Salvation, to be sure, is conditional on faith and repentance, but God gives us those gifts and meets the conditions through us. But since election occurred in eternity past before we were even created, God alone could and did meet all conditions of election.” 

This installment is titled “The History & Theology of Calvinism” by Curt Daniel, Chapter Thirty-Five, Total Depravity and Human Responsibility

This chapter has seven subdivisions. 

This is another chapter that is worth the price of the book, providing a wonderful discussion of issues many Christians and pastors have strong feelings about but typically are unwilling to discuss openly and without fear of recrimination. 

“Earlier we looked at the relation of divine sovereignty and human responsibility. Both are true. Now we look at the relation of total depravity and human responsibility. Both are true. Yet it is not always easy to explain these sets. But we dare not deny any of these doctrines, for they are all biblical. The state of the question is: If man is totally depraved and morally unable to obey God, how then can he be held accountable to God?” 

The Arminian Theory. Six paragraphs. “Dave Hunt sums up the Arminian theory: ‘one cannot be held responsible for what one cannot do.’ A. W. Tozer also sets it forth with an adjunct: ‘if man’s will is not free to do evil, it is not free to do good! The freedom of human will is necessary to the concept of morality. This is why I have not accepted the doctrine that our Lord Jesus Christ could not have sinned.’” Until reading this I had not known that Tozer denied the impeccability of Christ. I will never be able to read him again without this sad truth coming to mind. 

The Myth of Moral Neutrality. Six paragraphs. “Pelagianism and Arminianism presume that one must be morally neutral to be responsible… But Calvinists reply that Scripture never says anyone is morally neutral.” “The Arminian theory sometimes appeals to Philippians 1:21 – 24, in which Paul cannot decide which option he prefers and is therefore neutral. But this is an incorrect interpretation. For one, it is talking about a Christian, not a neutral non-Christian. Also, Paul is not really neutral. He explicitly says he prefers to go to heaven, not stay on earth. But he submits to God’s will in the matter. This resembles Christ’s prayer in Gethsemane, ‘Not My will, but Yours, be done” (Luke 22:42). Neither Paul nor Christ were morally neutral.” 

Degrees of Responsibility. Three paragraphs. Degrees of responsibility are recognized and discussed. 

The Law of Human Inability. Two paragraphs. John Gill, Martin Luther, Francis Turretin, and Christopher Love are cited. 

Inability Does Not Negate Responsibility. Five paragraphs. The author’s comments include two analogies used by Arthur Pink, an excerpt from the Heidelberg Catechism, references to John Calvin and Jonathan Edwards, and the condemnation of false prophets found in Second Peter 2:14. 

Addressing the Unconverted. Three paragraphs. The author strongly criticizes Hyper-Calvinism. 

Conclusion. “Man is morally responsible to God but morally unable to obey or believe. God is just to punish him. But God is also merciful and grants moral ability to those he has chosen. This leads us to the great biblical doctrine of election."

Book Review: “The History & Theology of Calvinism” by Curt Daniel, Chapter Thirty-Four, The Bondage of the Will.

 This chapter has nine subdivisions.

 Do we have free will? “The debate is not new. Augustine wrote Grace and Free Will. Martin Luther’s most important book was The Bondage of the Will. Calvin produced a treatise called The Bondage and Liberation of the Will. Perhaps the most important Reformed work has been Jonathan Edwards’ A Careful and Strict Inquiry into the Modern Prevailing Notions of that Freedom of Will, Which is Supposed to Be Essential to Moral Agency, Virtue and Vice, Reward and Punishment, Praise and Blame, usually shortened to The Freedom of the Will. Calvinism is virtually alone in denying that we have free will as popularly understood.”

 This reviewer finds it perplexing that so many individuals who embrace strong opinions about the issue of free will arrive at those strong opinions without the benefit of much Bible study or the humility that is displayed by reading credible men of God. Alas, this habit is unlikely to change this side of eternity.

 The Bondage of the Will. Four paragraphs. The author’s position is summarized in the Westminster Confession:

 Man, by his fall into a state of sin, hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation; so as, a natural man, being altogether averse from that good, and dead in sin, is not able, by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto (9:3).

 “Pelagianism says we are born totally free. Arminianism says we have a weak but free will. Calvinism says we have a will that is in inescapable bondage to sin until it is freed by Christ in salvation. We do not merely deny that an unregenerate sinner can will to do good but not do good. We assert that he is morally unable even to Will good at all. He is unable to be willing and unwilling to be able. The womb of his heart is barren and unable to give birth to any holy thought, word, or deed. He never has holy motives or desires but only sinful affections.”

 Slaves of Sin. Four paragraphs. Making mention of John 8:34, 2 Peter 2:19, Romans 6:16 – 22, and John 8:32, 36, the author cites Augustine and Zwingli. “Augustine asked, ‘If then they are slaves to sin, why do they boast of free choice?’ Zwingli tied it in with original sin: ‘A slave can beget nothing but a slave.’”

 Slaves of Satan. Five paragraphs. “Worse than that, man is a slave of the Devil. He was born a slave, lives his whole life in satanic bondage, and will die a slave. Sin is the Devil’s chain that keeps us in bondage, and each sin we commit is a link we add every time we disobey God. The chain gets longer and stronger every second.” “Each man is either a slave to God or the Evil One. He serves one or the other – not neither and not both.” “This is not an excuse for the sinner. He cannot blame the devil as Eve did. He is a willing slave. Satan keeps him in a blind slave like the Philistines did to Samson. Jonathan Edwards commented, you can’t see that you are under slavery now because of your blindness which is one effect of your servitude.”

 The Inability of the Will. Three paragraphs. “Fallen man is not only depraved, he is deprived. He lacks the ability to will good…. Man is unable in all areas of true spirituality.”

 Moral Inability. Five paragraphs. “Some Reformed theologians, such as Jonathan Edwards and A. W. Pink, differentiate between natural ability and moral ability.” He then discusses moral inability.

 The Sad State of Spiritual Slavery. Two paragraphs.

 The Myth of Free Will. Seven paragraphs. “It is no surprise that non-reformed opponents reject this analysis. Arminianism in particular vehemently defends free will.”

 It is the reviewer’s position that Arminianism has more to do with the espousal of free will than any notion, however correct, of “eternal security.”

 Conclusion. Four paragraphs.

The California Recall & the General Milley Revelation

I am so relieved that my last Sunday morning message included this comment near the end: 

I have repeatedly mentioned to you in sermons a book written by the late W. Graham Scroggie titled, The Unfolding Drama Of Redemption: The Bible As A Whole. It is a delightful Bible commentary that examines the entire Bible, explaining it like the grand drama that it is. Essential to any drama is what is called the protagonist, from a Greek word protos, meaning first, and agonistes, meaning actor. Webster defines it, “Protagonist, in the drama, the leading character or actor in a play, novel, or story, about whom the action centers; hence, a person who plays a leading or active part.” 

Events of late make it all the more necessary for the child of God to remember and take comfort in the preeminence of Christ. There was the debacle in Kabul, Afghanistan several weeks ago, the overwhelming rejection of the effort to recall California Gov. Gavin Newsome yesterday, and the revelation out of Washington DC from Bob Woodward’s soon to be released book that General Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, engaged in two direct yet unauthorized conversations with the commanding officer of the People’s Liberation Army of China.

Where does that leave the child of God? How does the believer react to these extraordinary circumstances and revelations? We are left where we have always been as Christians, safely in the Savior’s hands. Our reaction to the circumstances that we see around us ought to be, stay the course. Continue to look unto Jesus, the Author and finisher of our faith. I am so thankful my God is the God of all comfort.