More Christian Music

 My brother and I are still playing around with that AI music generating software, Udio. It can generate excellent tunes and really puts emotion into the voices. It truly is amazing what God has allowed humans to do.

I figured I'd put out a few more songs we were able to 'direct' (and in Tim's case, write). 

First, one of my absolute favorites, my brother Tim did this one, and unlike myself, he writes the lyrics completely himself. This one actually made me cry...

O Heavenly Father, Make Us Like Thee!

You can view the lyrics and download the MP3 or Wave file here: https://www.udio.com/songs/rcJrrJTqABKtrnga2JSeF7

And next is one that I 'directed'. I am HORRIBLE with poetry, rhyming n' making lines have rhythm.  So I utilize Chat GPT for the lyrics, though I don't just generate them and take them as is, I make it generate a lot of prompts and several versions of the lyrics. Then I go back through and revise each verse, switching out words, chunks of the verses and/or prompting new lines to get to the concepts I'm looking for.  

This song was inspired by a quote I had taken from one of my Uncle Rick's sermons a while back, and I include concepts that my dad has given in his sermon's over the years. Oh, and they've implemented a new feature that allows you do make a video with the 'lyrics' embedded, though they sometimes don't keep up very well. The song I posted above didn't have them embedded but the rest do: 

Toward Holiness

https://www.udio.com/songs/vWe7W2bxmggrksWW6K5ka7

Keep This next one is based on an excerpt from one of my dad's sermons on Romans 7:

Complete in His Redemption

https://www.udio.com/songs/vyp6F6NFgdqCVbTSuv1XGh

Here's another one of Tim's, based on Hebrews 5:

Be Now Mature

https://www.udio.com/songs/xxRhUR7BZD55c6a8SFWMTq

And Finally, one more of Tim's based on Hebrews 6:

Better Things For You

https://www.udio.com/songs/caDnmfnmDTX1AZVKNzaPwg

We're working on a bunch of Christmas songs too. I'm planning on posting many of them in a month or so.  Though they're available already on our profile pages, so if you're in the Christmas mood already, I've been compiling them in a playlist: https://www.udio.com/playlists/fSBXAAaXvBNiNs7sHaMhu7

Anyway, this software is still very fun and amazing. It is not longer free. Well, it is kind of, but you only get a very limited amount of generations and features to play with. But it's not very expensive and I find it worth it, the standard plan, which is what I use, is $10 a month. 

Shepherds For Sale by Megan Basham

  

Shepherds For Sale, as one would expect, is not an uplifting read, but it's very insightful.  Each chapter gives details about how so many church leaders are turning away from the Bible as their sole authority of faith and practice and instead turning to the 'moral' 'causes of the world.  

I really liked how Basham did this, giving facts in  journalistic way and yet giving Biblically based commentary/critiques throughout.  I wasn't sure how to write this review (or 'tome' as it turned out to be!) as this book is a little more unique from any book I've read before, as it has a lot of 'data' as it were, a lot of documenting of the downfall of church leaders. So I'll write it a bit different and go chapter by chapter:

CLIMATE CHANGE: Pastors have accepted the idea of climate change as one of the things they are obligated to warn their people about. Some of them are doing it under the guise of it's being "Creation Care" or something of the sort. And some are even making it out to be a "part of the Gospel".  That, of course, is absolutely false. But many church leaders have bought into concepts like that. I really liked that Basham went on to explain what the Gospel actually is.  

I also liked how she pointed out that there is another side to all of this supposed 'creation care' and that it isn't necessarily as 'caring' as it appears.  Actually, it could be argued that it is causing harm to people in poorer countries. And she gives examples of this, showing how other developing countries have made deals to implement climate protecting measures in exchange for certain things and they end up halting the progress toward wealth and prosperity and causing the reverse of prosperity in their countries.

This earth is temporal, not eternal. We should not live for it. As Romans 8 says, The earth is not getting better, right now it is in bondage to corruption, decay, and was apparently put into that bondage by God Himself.  It is waiting, not for mankind to care for it correctly, but rather, it is waiting for the "revealing of the sons of God"(vs.19), waiting for the day when Christ will come again along with His people who are already with Him in Heaven, on that day He will also rescue His people who are still on earth, rescuing their fleshly bodies from their bondage to sin and corruption. On that day He will also set the creation itself free from its bondage to corruption. But even after this, even after the thousand year reign of Christ, apparently He is going to torch the earth and make a new Heaven and a new earth (Rev 21:1).

ILLEGAL IMMEGRATION

This topic has been promoted with similar, seemingly Biblical, disguises.  In this case, welcoming illegal immigrants under the banner of "welcoming the stranger". And yet, our country does welcome the stranger, and has welcomed the stranger. But does this mean that Christians should push for our government to welcome any and every stranger into the country we live in? Basham shows that actually, this mindset is actually harming the citizens and legal immigrants who already live here.  A government report given in 2018 "showed that between 2010 and 2015, illegal migrants who were incarcerated were responsible for the deaths of 33,000 people. Simple back-of-the-envelope math suggests that the total over the last thirteen ears could easily top 85,000." And they're not just losing their lives, they're losing jobs too, and human trafficking over our border has also risen.  Sure, we Christians could risk losing our lives, jobs..etc. But where is our love for the lost, natural born citizens of our country? Do we not care what happens to them?

Basham points out that "'Of course, believers are to preach Christ crucified to all, no matter how they arrived here. Of course, we should provide for those in real need, no matter how the needy came to cross our path. But 'welcome the stranger' was Christ's command to his followers to personally emulate the Good Samaritan. To insist that it was meant to be used as a blanket immigration policy is spiritual manipulation that cheapens its meaning…" 

Which leads to some thoughts that came to mind while reading this book.  There seems to be this thought, in the minds of many Christians, that any given country, especially one based on Judeo Christian principles, should act as if it were an individual Christian toward other nations and even toward its own people. If that makes any sense. Let me explain some more:

When you look at what the Bible says about government leaders, even though government leaders are set up by God, both collectively and individually, the leaders of a country apparently do NOT have to act as an individual Christian is supposed to act. A Christian is supposed to love his enemies, turn the other cheek and return good for evil. The leaders of a country are given a sword, to punish evildoers (Romans 13). An individual Christian should not make people who do wrong against him terrified of him, and  they are not allowed to punish, or take vengeance on those who hurt them,  but one could make the case that, apparently, governments rightfully do so (Romans 13:3-4), and not only that, the leaders of governments are God's avengers, agents, as it were, of His wrath "on the one who practices evil".

 So yes, vengeance is God's, not ours as individual Christians, but part of how He carries out His own vengeance is through government leaders. (Can the government misuse their authority, yes, but that's not what we're looking at here). One could also make the case that governments are not to love their enemies, but rather to protect the people over whom God gave them charge, which may involve military conflicts with other countries, and yes, even borders to keep potential enemies from entering their country. As Basham notes, "Scripture does not require us to sacrifice national sovereignty. In fact, Acts 17:26 tells us that God 'marked out [our] appointed times in history and the boundaries of [our] lands.' The Lord is not opposed to borders; He invented them."

HIJACKING THE PRO LIFE MOVEMENT

Oddly enough, Basham shows that even Christian antiabortion movements are being affected by a more liberal stance.  The concept of not taking innocent life is one of the most basic truths, the 6th commandment. And yet she shows that there are some 'Christian' movements who think that one shouldn't be so vigilant in standing against it, and some professing Christians who seem to be questioning whether we should even be against it at all.  

I liked her argument to those professing Christians who (bizarrely)thought that one should vote for Clinton or Biden rather than Trump, (largely because of Trump, "Let's be clear, no one cast a ballot for Trump because he committed adultery….Nor was the legal protection of adultery or lechery a feature of the Trump campaign's platform.  In contrast, Clinton and Biden did promise voters that electing them would allow the butchery to continue. They did make it a part of their platforms, and a significant number of voters cast ballots for them based on those promises. Given this, which vote is more morally uncompromising for the Christian - the one that places power in the hands of those who promise to allow the innocent to be put to death or the open that vests power in those who promise to make a way to rescue the innocent?"

CHRISTIAN MEDIA AND THE MONEY MEN

And then, of course, there Christian publications that are headed down…or solidly on, the liberal path. Basham demonstrates examples of these and the mindsets of the various people promoting them.

GRACIOUS DIALOGUE

Wow. Covid-19. Those were weird years. I remember seeing some of the arguments that Basham cites. "Love Your Neighbor" in particular. As if the only way to love one's neighbor was to avoid your Christian brethren when they were sick or rather, just avoid them all together because both of you might get sick or be carriers of covid. It's frightening to think that this all seems to laud the actions of those who, on the judgment day, Christ condemns  for not caring for other Christians,  "[I was] sick, and in prison, and you did not visit Me.’"(Matt 25:43). 

As Basham shows, many presented the Covid restrictions as a matter of obedience to Jesus. But she argues that there were practical and Biblical arguments against them, including Hebrews 10:25.  It is a very fascinating and sobering chapter to see detailed many of the various manipulation of the facts and the Scripture that went on during those days.

 To add more of my own argument, even if it WERE an extremely, very deadly serious sickness, don't Christians believe in the sovereignty of God? He is ultimately in control of who gets sick and who doesn't. And He's not just over sickness, He controls our life and death, whether sick or not.  And if early Christians (and many present day ones)were willing to risk their lives (and the lives of their unbelieving family members and acquaintances because of association) by meeting together to hear the Word of God (in spite of government command), to fellowship and care for one another, shouldn't we do the same in the face of deadly disease? Risking our own potential death and even the potential death of our unbelieving relatives and acquaintances? Wouldn't we want to be one of those to whom Christ says, "I was sick and you visited me?"(Matt 25:36) And when you think about it, the covid restrictions also hindered other loving acts toward "the least of these, my brethren", like giving a cup of water to them, or food, or clothes…etc.  This truly was a case of "We must obey God rather than men"(Acts 5:29). 

CRITICAL RACE PROPHETS

Critical race theory is also infiltrating churches, and Basham sums it up well when she says, "Where Christianity teaches that mankind's greatest need is salvation from his sin, CRT teaches that it is power over his oppressors. The two groups in CRT are not, as in the Bible, sinners and saints, but victims and oppressors. CRT encourages collective grievance in the first group and collective guilt in the second, without ever dealing with the individual heart. Rather than embracing unity through Christ, it encourages division through ethnicity".

We expect the world to hold grudges and be racist and put up dividing lines, but not the church!

Christ tore down the dividing wall between ethnicities (Ephesians 2:11-18). But Churches are putting a new dividing wall up.  They are teaching a different Gospel, namely, that, we are not "One new man", but rather, in Christ, THERE ARE Jews, Greeks, People of Color, White People…etc. And so we should treat each other, not as brothers and sisters, but as divided peoples, some of whom did not have ALL their sins atoned for by Christ. They act as though there are certain sins that Christ did not wipe off of the slate and therefore we need to make each other atone for them on their own (as if they could do that). They are basically teaching a doctrine of unforgiveness. That is not the Gospel and it is not Christlike. 

Even IF people do treat me badly because of my ethnicity or the color of my skin, I'm supposed to love my enemy (Matt 5:44) and do good to those who hate me(Luke 6:27). I don't want to spend my life focused on the sins of others when my own sins have been eternally forgiven by such a gracious God.  I want my enemies to have this forgiveness too.

And then when churches try to force a DEI type of qualification for their ministers, that is unbiblical as well. In one instance Basham brings up how a potential DEI hire for a church leader position was disqualified because he didn't meet the criteria for having pastored a huge congregation or had experience with a large budget.  My dad(a pastor), who has been listening to this book in audiobook form, lamented that that wasn't right either. He pointed out that the main thing people should be looking for in a pastor is whether his goal will be to prepare the people in a congregation to stand before the judgement seat of Christ. Should he be a good studier and know the Word of God? Absolutely. Should he be chosen because of his ethnicity? No. But neither should be chosen or rejected because of his administration skills and his knowledge of how to handle a large budget. The job of a pastor is to feed the sheep. 

#ME TOO, #CHURCHTOO, AND AN APOCALYSPE

I actually skipped chunks of this as I didn't want to read the details of the accusations of sexual assault n' stuff like that. I do like how Basham brings it back to, not necessarily just being the man's fault but that the woman being equally culpable in many instances. And the fact that any woman consented to sex outside of marriage, and then was  abused physically or emotionally doesn't then acquit her of any sin or culpability. If she wasn't married to him but still  initially consented, then it was sin too.  

Basham points out Christ's dealing with women who had sinned, He doesn't let them off the hook or say it was the man's fault but rather, "He acknowledges these women's transgressions and forgives them, because though the men with whom they transgress have sinned as well, those are not the hearts Jesus is concerned with at the moment. He is concerned with freeing the women from their burden of guilt for THEIR sinful acts, which could only happen if He and the women acknowledge that sin."  And she ultimately emphasizes the need for one to focus on their own sins, turning "Metoo" into a whole different connotation.

NONE DARE CALL IT SIN

And finally, the LGBTQ+ mindset is entering the church, as, not sin, but just a part of one's core identity that one cannot change, even as a Christian.  Basham does a very good job here, basically pointing out that churches who think that God saves LGBTQ people without changing them are denying the command for Christians to put off the old man and put on the new (Eph 4:22-24) That they are essentially denying the "rebirth" that happens at salvation. They don't believe that people need to be born again, to be new creations. 

It's not loving to say the opposite, that God doesn't think you need to change but saves you WITH your sin not FROM it. It is not Christlike love to tell someone a lie. As my dad says, the people who claim that God saves you WITH your sin are "hugging people straight to Hell ". And that is about as cruel as you can get.

I appreciated this account that Basham gives: "Becket Cook is no pastor, no celebrated theologian, but he is a former Hollywood production designer who became a Christian and repented of his former homosexuality….He explained in an interview with The Gospel Coalition that he would never call himself a 'gay Christian' because his former gay identity has been crucified with Christ: 'Why in the world would I use a sinful adjective-gay-to describe my new identity in Christ? I wouldn't and I don't.'"

I also really liked how she pointed out that, unlike the liberal churches who are sending out 'activists', true churches are simply following the Biblical command, even if it goes against reason. "While theologically conservative churches might conversely say they would like to see every affirming church embrace biblical standards on sexuality, gender, and marriage, they're not training activists to infiltrate affirming denominations in order to transform them from within. Instead, again and again, they have done what the Bible commands us to do when we find heresy and immorality in our midst: they have warned and , when those warnings were not heeded, they have separated (Matthew 18:15-17, 2 Thessalonians 3:14, 1 Corinthians 5:9-10)"

And so to conclude my (rather strange) review. This book was very enlightening, showing that things are all messed up in many churches nowadays. Biblical truths, like the 6th commandment, and the destiny of thieves,  homosexuals, idolators…etc. that the Bible warns about  are denied, all while at the same time, concepts that are not necessarily sin, but are grey areas, like HOW one should take care of the creation, Or 'Love your neighbor, get the vaccine'! are being promoted as essential truths despite not being rooted in the Bible. They are in the category of Romans 14 where Paul tells the Romans how to deal with scruples, a.k.a. grey areas, to let each individual be convinced in his own mind but don't judge each other in these matters.

Overall, it's a sobering read. It really seem that we may already be extremely close to the great "apostasy" that must happen before the Day of the Lord (2 Thess 2:3).

Many thanks to the folks at Harper Collins Publishers for sending me a free review copy of this book! My review did not have to be favorable.

One of the places where you may purchase this book:  Amazon.com

The Problem With Self Control - Rick Lambert

 "Self is a fleshly weapon. It's useless in spiritual battles." I really liked this study that Rick Lambert (author of Polycarp: A Destroyer of Our gods) is doing on 'self control', that the term is actually translated incorrectly in our Bibles and that there is a better term that captures the meaning of the original greek word better.  He is working on a book that will deal with this concept (among other things). In this talk, he is doing a test run to try to get his explanation of the concept perfected.

Your Old Testament Sermon Needs to Get Saved - By David King

 

I've known something about the "Christocentric" hermeneutic for many years now.  I need to admit up front that I've always disagreed with it in theory, but have never really fully formulated why I disagree with it.  I saw 'Your Old Testament Sermon Needs to Get Saved' by David King and figured that it would be good chance to read the whole argument for Christocentrism in preaching and think it through more thoroughly.  

One of the main arguments that King makes for a Christocentric interpretation of everything is the Lordship of Jesus.  "We start with the simple but sweeping confession: Jesus is Lord. Take a second to ponder the weight of that three word sentence.  Could there be a more persuasive argument for preaching Christ from the Old Testament? If Jesus is Lord, then He is Lord over the Old Testament - and Lord over our Old Testament sermons, too." At first, it was hard to figure out how to reply to such an argument. A lot of the arguments in the book are similar to the one above in that they seem to be made up of 'gotcha' questions and statements, such that you feel wrong disagreeing with them.  Here are some other snippets:  

"do you believe that there are portions of the Old Testament that have nothing to do with Jesus?" 

"If Christ is the final word from God, then all previous words lead to Him"

"Everything about the Old Testament flows to and through Jesus."

 These arguments are too vague. Take for instance the first one, that Jesus is Lord.  Of course Jesus is Lord! But what does that entail? One could use a similar argument to say that since He is Lord over everything then He is Lord of any secular book too, such as Moby Dick. Should we preach Christ from Moby Dick?  Should we preach him from Star Wars?

And then of course you have the "Emmaus road" argument, "And beginning from Moses and from all the prophets, he interpreted to them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself."(Luk 24:27 ASV) I've always read that to mean that Jesus pointed out that the Scriptures had clearly prophesied about Him, and that He went through the Scriptures and showed them the particular places that prophesied of Himself, not that He showed them that He was in (or the point of) EVERY SINGLE THING written in them. King also uses what Christ said later that night to try to further his point: "These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled."(24:44-47). I have always read "everything written about me" as a clarification, that all of the prophecies of Christ in those books must be fulfilled, not that those books were prophesying about Him in everything they said. I've never read those passages as if they said, "Everything in the Law of Moses, the prophets and Psalms was speaking of Me." Or "He showed them that everything that the prophets wrote, and everything written in the Scriptures concerned Himself."  I see "the things concerning Himself" and "everything written about me" as narrowing the focus to particular passages, not encompassing everything in the law, prophets and Psalms. 

Next, the author says that "the apostles adopted a broad prophetic understanding of the Old Testament". The illustrative verse used for this section is Matthew's pointing out the fulfillment of a prophecy in Hosea, "Out of Egypt have I called my Son", in Mary and Joseph taking Jesus and coming back to Israel after having gone to Egypt in obedience to God's command to Joseph to flee there. Many commentators have thought that Matthew was viewing "Israel" as a type of Christ because the statement before "out of Egypt I called My Son" says,"When Israel was a child, then I loved him" (Hosea 11:1).  I don't see that Matthew absolutely has to be viewed as interpreting a passage about Israel by applying it to Christ - one could make the case that the juvenile Israel who was loved is not the same as the Son who was called from out of Egypt.  Especially since Matthew only specifically states that the return of Mary, Joseph and Jesus from Egypt was fulfilled by the particular statement "out of Egypt I called My Son" and he doesn't mention that it fulfills the statement about God loving Israel when Israel was a child. 

King states that,"Christ can be proclaimed from old Testament texts in a manner that pushes the boundaries of our own prophetic understanding. Matthew wasn't mistaken." I agree, Matthew wasn't mistaken but I don't see that he was necessarily pushing the boundaries, and I would probably argue the same about any other prophecy. I think that more, perhaps all, of the "Messianic prophecies" are more explicitly speaking of Christ than many people assume. Many seem to think that some of the Old Testament texts quoted in the New are not explicitly speaking of Christ but had a 'secondary fulfillment' in Christ, that they had 'double' fulfillments. I think that a case can be made for assuming that any Old Testament texts that are said, in the New Testament, to be speaking of Christ are direct prophecies of Christ and  that we need to align our understanding and study of those texts around that assumption. Even Christ called his Jewish disciples fools and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets had spoken(Luke 24:25), I rather think that heavily implies that the prophecies that spoke of Him were very plain, very obvious. 

King thinks that if Christ is not preached in every sermon, then you are preaching a "synagogue sermon", not a Christian sermon.  "…. you must consider whether the Father means for His Son to be preached as an appendix to the sermon rather than as the heart. Until the conclusion, such sermons are suitable for the synagogue." He seems to think that 2 Timothy 3:15-17 (Are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is breathe out by God and is profitable for teaching…") supports his point.  "To be just a tad provocative, Paul isn't saying that all Scripture is profitable for making us competent Jews. He's saying that all Scripture is profitable for making us competent Christians. And we don't have to infer that this is what Paul means - he states it plainly. The sacred writings, he says, are able to make us wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus."  Why would we assume that the Scriptures are only profitable (and wise for salvation) for Christians if you preach Christ from every text, rather than preach what the text says?

 What if a pastor is preaching through the book of Ezra, and on this particular Sunday he is in Ezra chapter one and he doesn't preach Christ as THE POINT of these texts. Rather, after exegeting the text, he applies it by talking about how God's promises and prophecies always come to pass, and he goes on to emphasize the greatness of God, and how every single detail of His prophecies come to pass; he reminds the people that later down the line every detail about the Messiah and His salvation would happen exactly as foretold but he doesn't focus on this, he just mentions it, and moves back to talking about how God does exactly what He says, how God is sovereign even over our salvation, reminding this Christian congregation that they ought never to doubt God, they should always trust Him.  Was that not training in righteousness? Or was it not because the pastor applied the text by focusing upon God's sovereignty rather than on Jesus Christ and His redemptive work? 

 Even if one does believe that one should preach Christ from every text, King warns that one can preach too much of Christ or too little of Him, you can also do it in a "kooky" way (finding Christ in the wood of Noah's ark, that the wood symbolizes the cross).   "The path between the text and Christ is not found in a twister hermeneutic. Our goal instead is to understand how the text is fulfilled in Jesus." I don't understand. Why would finding Christ in the wood of Noah's ark be wrong? The more you see of Christ the better, right? Here's another excerpt from the book which might help you understand my confusion: "Jesus drives an interpretive stake in the ground by in asserting that all the Old testament is fulfilled in Him. In other words, Jesus changes how we read the Old Testament. Not just parts of the Old Testament, but all of it is fulfilled in Him! Every dot and iota of every passage - every jot and tittle…..Jesus' fulfillment language here clearly goes beyond obvious messianic promises and prophecies and patterns. It includes everything!……Jesus is the goal of every detail in the Bible."  I don't understand, based on arguments like this, how you could go wrong with connecting Christ to every single thing in the Old Testament. 

King says that, "Failing to preach Christ from the Old Testament is a serious problem. It's exegetically and theologically wrong. It dishonors Jesus as the fulfillment of Scripture and the centerpiece of salvation history.  It leads people astray by perpetuating a Christless notion of Old Testament and, worse, by inadvertently directing them to rely on God, or even themselves apart from Christ."  I don't understand these statements. I don't think I know of any pastor  who promotes the idea that Christ was never spoken of or referred to in the Old Testament. Nor do I understand how they would rely on God or themselves apart from Christ. I have actually noticed that "seeing Christ" and focusing on Him has become THE MOST important thing in some Christians' goals over and above God's plain revelation in any given text (even over and above revelation coming directly from Christ Himself). What a text truly says becomes irrelevant as long as someone's view of Christ is built up, as long as Christ is magnified, it doesn't really seem to matter what the any given text actually says. 

Let me critique one more thing in particular. The author uses Jeremiah 29:11 as an example of how to preach Christ from any given text. "…God's plans for the welfare of exiled Israel is a prophetic promise. Since all the promises of God find their Yes in Christ (2 Cor 1:20), you must locate the fulfillment of this verse not in modern-day Israel, or America, or in any other nation-state but in Jesus and, by extension, those who are united to Jesus through faith. Whether Israeli, or Palestinian, American…..a person receives the benefits of Jeremiah 29:11 only in Christ."  I agree that one mustn't locate the fulfillment in modern day Israel (as if it were already fulfilled) or America, or any other nation-state. But I do believe that the fulfillment, whether past or future, will have happened to Jews, the ethnic descendants of Jacob, and not to Gentiles.  A few verses later on seem to explain what the fulfillment of this verse would look like (after Israel has called upon the Lord with all their heart): "And I will be found of you, saith Jehovah, and I will turn again your captivity, and I will gather you from all the nations, and from all the places whither I have driven you, saith Jehovah; and I will bring you again unto the place whence I caused you to be carried away captive."(Jer 29:14 ASV)     

The people of Israel were promised that they would be gathered from all the lands and brought back to Israel when they seek the Lord wholeheartedly.  The promise to return them to the land is repeated many times in the Old Testament (Deut. 30,Ezek 37,36,39, 39,  Jeremiah 23: 1-8, Amos 9…etc.).  But of course, the Israelites cannot seek God with their whole heart on their own, apart from His grace. Because of their innate inability to make themselves seek Him, will what God repeatedly told Israel through the prophets about their being brought back to the land permanently never come true? That's absurd! The days are coming when those prophecies will be fulfilled. Though many individual people of all ethnicities are the beneficiaries of the New Covenant at present, one day God is going to establish the New Covenant with Israel as a nation (Jeremiah32:36-44, 31:31-37)). God clarifies in His prophecies through the prophet Ezekiel that He is not going to act favorably toward them because they have all of a sudden changed and are now seeking Him, Oh no! there is no indication that they have changed themselves for the better. Rather, God says that He will act Himself, not doing it for their sake but for His holy name, He will create in them the required conditions of the fulfillment of the promise to bring them back to the land of Israel: "A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you; and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep mine ordinances, and do them. And ye shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; and ye shall be my people, and I will be your God."(Eze 36:26-28 ASV)  He also said this through the prophet Jeremiah: "Behold, I will gather them from all the countries to which I drove them in my anger and my wrath and in great indignation. I will bring them back to this place, and I will make them dwell in safety. And they shall be my people, and I will be their God. I will give them one heart and one way, that they may fear me forever, for their own good and the good of their children after them. I will make with them an everlasting covenant, that I will not turn away from doing good to them. And I will put the fear of me in their hearts, that they may not turn from me. I will rejoice in doing them good, and I will plant them in this land in faithfulness, with all my heart and all my soul. 'For thus says the LORD: Just as I have brought all this great disaster upon this people, so I will bring upon them all the good that I promise them.'"(Jer 32:37-42 ESV) Even in the more famous New Covenant prophecy in Jeremiah 31, after having promised to make a New Covenant with Israel, God emphasizes that ethnic Israel will always be a nation before Him, that He will not fully cast them off despite all that they had done.

And thus Paul(Romans 9-12) explains to the Roman Christians that God is still going to do what He promised to the Jews as a people, and that Christian Gentiles shouldn't become arrogant toward the Jews, emphasizing that God will one day save the whole nation of Israel, through Christ's salvatory work just as He saves us individually through that work (11:26-27): "And in this way all Israel will be saved, as it is written, 'The Deliverer will come from Zion, he will banish ungodliness from Jacob'; 'and this will be my covenant with them when I take away their sins.'" (Rom 11:26-27 ESV) And I say all of that to make the point that I don't believe that one can make a true biblical case that Christian Gentiles are ultimately the ones addressed in that particular promise in Jeremiah 29, and also to note that many Christians seem to have already arrived at what Paul warned against: them becoming arrogant toward the Jews (Rom 11:25-36), as though God is fully done with the ethnic descendants of Jacob as a people and that He has replaced them with the 'true Israel': the church.  

This is quite long so I had better wrap up.  My last argument against a christocentric hermeneutic is that Jesus Himself didn't preach Himself from every Old Testament text. For instance, in Matthew 24:15, Jesus spoke of Daniel's prophecy of the Abomination of Desolation, He didn't preach Himself from that text, He told the people what to do when it came to pass. When you see the abomination, run! He demonstrated that He didn't read it as a symbol of something spiritual, or of Himself in some way, but rather as a particular thing that would happen in the future that they were supposed to be watching out for.  I don't see how anyone is dishonoring God and not respecting Christ's Lordship by preaching what the text says, obeying God's will, submitting to His sovereignty, obeying Jesus' commands, mimicking good examples of faith, believing all of the prophecies (including Christ's Revelation to the churches about things to come) and even just by reading the historical accounts and 'seeing' what God ordained to happen in the past.  What does Jesus command? Do it. Where did Jesus look and point to? The Father. So should we. Jesus honored the Scriptures, preaching them as though they meant what they said, pointing out that people were not understanding their plain meaning, not their hidden meaning. We don't want to be guilty of the same.

Many thanks to the folks at Moody Publishers for sending me a free review copy of this book! (My review did not have to be favorable)

This book may be purchased at Amazon.com

Quote of the Day

 The good news is that demonstration of what God is accomplishing in spite of me.  It makes it the best news possible because it doesn't depend upon my right response. Even after Jesus told Peter he was going to deny Him, if faith then was built on his (Peter's) response, then he failed in faith! But Jesus had already told them, before He admonished them regarding "don't let your hearts be troubled", 'You're going to do this' (to deny Him, to forsake Him), 'this is going to happen, He didn't say "you might", He didn't say "you might".  "You will!" That's the beauty of the Gospel! We're troubled in every way! And yet God is still doing His work! We doubt Him, and God is doing His work, we may even deny Him and yet God is still doing His work , in us, through us, for us - bringing us to that glorious conclusion that "this is what I've (God has) done." And so we go in faith to the Word, and that Word builds that faith. We don't  go with our faith to the Word, we go with the faith given to us by the Spirit of God to the Word and that (faith) is built and developed

- Rick Lambert

(Author of Polycarp: A destroyer of our gods)

From his sermon: Love's Message

Quote of the Day

 Speaking on James 1:14: 

Temptation finds its strength and source from within ourselves. The brutal truth of our sin, personal sinning, is that it is all in and of ourselves - not only can't God be blamed, but no other (person or thing) can be blamed - it is sad to realize how many still trust the validity of their 'blame shifting' and then add an extra 'perimeter fence' of protection by no longer identifying sin as sin - sinners are encouraged by other sinners to find shelter in their being a victim.

The process is ls illustrated by James as being , first, each person being tempted (tested to prove slavery to sin) by their own desire/lust (ἐπιθυμίας - passions, inner cravings and inclinations) - this process of temptation first "lures" (NASB has "carried away") - "lure" is a better descriptive word since it was used of luring a fish with bait and visuals. 

Then they are "enticed" (another hunting/fishing term) and so are trapped and ensnared - there is an attraction, leading to exploration, ending in entrapment (hooked) - these lusts then become the trap itself (prison, unhookable hook).

 

This can be pictured as if there are internal counselors working to achieve an inner desire - the counselor of feelings begins to prod us for attention for some "needed relief" or fulfillment, followed closely by the advisor of reason (not considering that feelings has paid-off/bribed or blackmailed reason by its relentlessness and insistence) - the advisor of reason is then accompanied by the scholar of memory, vividly portraying past yielding, only showing photos of the "good times" - with all such counsel, we play along (disregarding the Holy Spirit) and so the manager of decision, believing all needed research has been dutifully done, signs-off to action (sin). 

So rather than being a victim of the external influences to sin, we discover we are instigators, working with even the enemies from without to conquer any convicting and motivating work of God within us - the "conspiracy" ends up being us.

- Don Lambert

From his sermon series on James

You can find more quotes on my quotes blog: snickerdoodlesquotes.blogspot.com

Getting Over Yourself - By Dean Inserra

It's been a while since I've seen a book I wanted to review.  I was looking at the Moody Publishers Newsroom website and the title of this book caught my eye:  Getting Over Yourself: Trading Believe-In-Yourself Religion for Christ-Centered Christianity.  

If I remember correctly, when I was looking at the preview of the book online the chapter titles were a big part of what convinced me that this would be a good read, Here's a little sample of them:

1.LOSERVILLE : Is Christianity for the Cool, Trendy, and Successful?

4. HASHTAG FILTER: The Promise of a Socially Approved Life

5. THIS IS SO BORING: The New Prosperity Cardinal Sin of Settling For The Mundane

I love the title of Chapter 5, it's so true! The living a mundane life really does seem to be a sin in our age. It really looked like this guy had a lot of the same thoughts my dad (a pastor) has had on the state of modern 'Christianity', so I ordered the book.

Of course, it turned out that the chapter titles weren't the only interesting thing; their content is also interesting. Inserra does a lot of Biblical critiquing of modern popular Christianity.  But the critique often hits close to home, many of his chapters are   quite convicting and yet oddly comforting in that they are reminders that the Christian life is supposed to be hard, and that dying to self really will be painful. Here's an excerpt from one:

"Jesus told His disciples, 'If anyone wants to follow after me, let him deny himself, take up his cross daily, and follow me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life because of me will save it' (Luke 9:23-24). Jesus is calling  HIs disciples to attend a daily funeral for their own ambitions and pride. The cross was not a piece of jewelry in New Testament times. It wasn't a living room decoration carved nicely to fit on the mantel. There weren't crosses hanging in any place of worship. A cross meant one thing: death. It was a curse to hang on one, to receive capital punishment in a gruesome manner for crimes committed. It would be the equivalent of being told to pick up your lethal injection or electric chair. For Jesus to tell His followers to carry their crosses (prior to HIs own death, which would probably have shed light on the metaphor) meant a call to die to themselves. This probably sounded insane, but is much better than the alternative given in the next verse: 'For what does it benefit someone if he gains the whole world, and yet loses or forfeits himself?' (Luke 9:25)"

One little statement in the book I found particularly thought provoking: "Our problem is when we're trying to use Christianity to be a better version of ourselves rather than a more accurate reflection of Him…" That truly fits more with our having become a new creature (not just bettered creatures), in Christ, and turns the focus away from having our own talents used by God and level sets our gaze toward whatever work God has for us, whether it utilized our talents or not.  After all, God will probably often put us in positions that we are not naturally talented at/fit for to show His power in us.  

As I mentioned, my dad is a pastor, and he has done lots of counseling over the years.  At one point, I found a section of this book particularly startling in its correlation to what I know dad has experienced over the years in counselling wives in troubled marriages.  My mom can attest to it as she accompanies him in these counseling sessions. Inserra's list of what wives will say: "'I feel like I settled' 'What if I married the wrong person?'….. 'I just feel like I need to focus on myself for a while…. And then the famous line: 'I believe that God just wants to be happy.'" fits exactly what mom and dad have heard from unhappy wives. As the author laments: "The life God has given you, and (in the case of marriage and parenthood) has directly called you to, becomes a symbol for all that is keeping you from a 'truly' fulfilling life." This is all in the chapter about the sin of mundaneness. Our idea of the Christian life seems to be that of a life of self service, and self glorification rather than the service of God and others. In the book it's noted that: "Contentment is a borderline curse word in pop-Christianity, because not pursuing or desiring something 'better' is seen as settling for less than God's best……Ironically, the discontented life is one that is actually settling for less than God's best….The yellow brick road to God's best life for us is one of contentment in Christ, obedience to Christ, fulfillment in Christ."

Now, I need to mention that there were a couple of things in the book that I didn't think were particularly Biblical, but the only one that I feel the need to address is where Inserra talks about running into someone who had left the church he's the  pastor of, this woman had left because she had begun a same-sex relationship and knew that the church stood with God's Word against those types of relationship. He seems to indicate to her that she didn't have to leave - apparently she still would have been welcome to attend the worship services and Bible studies.  That concession really surprised me because of Biblical instructions like in the Apostle Paul's first letter to the Corinthians where he tells them not to associate with professing Christians who are living in unrepentant sexual immorality:  "I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. 'Purge the evil person from among you.'(1Co 5:9-13 ESV) Of course, if a fellow Christian sins, we don't immediately kick them out of the church, we try to restore them first (Gal 6:1, James 5:19-20, Titus 3:9-11…etc), but if they are persistent and will not repent, we must separate, and perhaps God will use the separation to lead them to repentance (2 Thess 3:14).

But for the most part Inserra seems very Biblically focused. To reiterate what he demonstrates and critiques clearly in the book: modern 'Christianity' is obsessed with self.  I especially see it in memes on Facebook,  like those depicting a girl saying to the Devil, "I am the storm" (how arrogant!).  Others brag about being princesses because we're daughters of the King, but their intent (at least from my perspective) seems to be aimed at making people treat us like Princesses. It has been lamentable to see the focus of Christianity trending toward self, rather than God.  We worship our worship, worship our devotion to God, and worship our own 'potential'. This book is a breath of fresh air.   It was refreshing to read a book written from a Biblical perspective that reiterates the Bible's focus on God, not on ourselves. I'll end with one more quote from the book: "It's clear that God is fully satisfied with Jesus.  Am I?"

Many thanks to the folks at Moody Publishers Newsroom for the free review copy of this book (my review did not have to be favorable).

My Rating: 5 out of 5 stars

*****

This book may be purchased at Christianbook.com and Amazon.com