Counterfeit Gospels - Treven Wax

"Don't confuse the gospel with the effects of the Gospel." writes Trevin Wax. Elsewhere he notes that, "…Christianity is not a scheme of morality, nor a plan for social and political change, and organizations which propose improvements along such lines are only 'tinkering with the problems.  We may be made better men, but before we can face God we must be new men."  So many churches today don't believe that the Gospel, as given in God's Word, is right for today. They think that it needs to be updated to fit our culture.  Wax does a good job of analyzing the various counterfeit gospels of our day: the Therapeutic Gospel, the Activist Gospel, the Churchless Gospel…etc. he shows how many of these take one fact of the Gospel and preach it, mostly disembodied from the other essential truths that make up the Gospel.  These people are, 'missing the mark' of the complete Gospel', which description, ironically, is one of the definitions of sin.   

"Christians and non-Christians are often drawn to counterfeit gospels.  Even those of us who have walked with the Lord for many years may be inclined to accept cheap imitations of the truth.  Why?  Because they are easy. They cost us less."  And one might add, "they build up our church attendance".  A small section, in the chapter on the "Churchless Gospel", caught my interest in particular.  Discussed is the idea of some Christians who think that we should model ourselves on the practices of the early churches as the early churches would have obviously been more pure, more godly than ours.  To these people Wax poses the question, "Which early church do you want to be like?  Corinth?  The church took pride in a man's incestuous relationship.  Meanwhile, the worship gatherings were not being done decently and in order.  Galatia?  Paul was shocked to see that his church so quickly abandoned the gospel…" 

I didn't like the reformed/amillennial bent of the book, the sacraments, true Israel…etc. are brought up.  This is also evident where Christ is talked about, speaking of evangelizing, "Just talk about Jesus!......Jesus is not merely a means to an end, such as 'heaven,' 'a purposeful life,' or 'peace through trials.'  Jesus is the end."  What about God the Father?  Christ has reconciled us to the Father, we have "access by one Sprit unto the Father, " - Ephesians 2:16-19, "Therefore, brethren, since we have confidence to enter the holy place by the blood of Jesus, by a anew and living way which He inaugurated for us through the veil…"( Hebrews 10:19-22 NASB)See also, "Heb. 7:25, 2:10.  Also, I did not particularly care for all of the movie references in the book, they seemed out of place, quite unnecessary.   

But I do like the book overall.  It is an interesting overview and critique of the futile attempts to improve the perfect Gospel revealed in God's Word. And now, to wrap this up, as usual, I'll end with one last quote from the book,  "We must make clear that grace accepts us where we are, but that it never leaves us there." 

Thanks to MoodyPublishers for sending me a free review copy of this book! (My review did not have to be favorable)

The Founders' Key - By Larry Arnn

This book was a very educational read for me, helping me understand more about our government as a representative republic.   In this book, Mr. Arnn explains why the Founders constituted the Constitution the way the way they did. 

Apparently there are people who think that the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are contradictory.  One declares freedom while the other institutes rules/law.  Larry Arnn demonstrates that this is not the case, that the documents are actually complementary.  The Declaration is not pro-anarchy, it is actually pro-government; it is not anti-government but pro-good government.  America's founding fathers broke off from England, not because they desired to be free of government, but  because they believed that they were not being governed rightly by England.  The Declaration declares how the government in England abused it's authority.   Rebuking the bad government of England it declares what good government looks like/it's purpose.  As Arnn says of the Declaration's rebuke of England "The violations of these key features of government are among the particular causes of the Revolution.  One might say, in short, that every government must be so constituted as to prevent these evils…The American Revolution is not justified by the fact that government is an alien force.  The truth is the opposite:  the Revolution is justified by the fact that government is necessary.  The King has sometimes failed to provide it, and other times he has provided it in ways that subvert the purpose of government."

Arnn explains how our government works, how our constitution  protects the rights declared in the Declaration of Independence.  The Constitution was carefully thought out, and was not forced upon the American people in defiance of their declared independence.  They chose it, having been persuaded that the form of Government it provides was the best government to promote and protect their liberty, and the liberty of their posterity.  It does this by not giving the government to any one man, or to the people as a whole without any restraints. "Representative government places ultimate authority outside the government, which restrains both the government and the governed.  In such a system, citizens have endless opportunity to talk, but they may act only on certain occasions.  They are encouraged, therefore, to think, and to think together, before they act.  The same restraints operate inside the government to encourage statesmen and citizens to the same habits."

In his critique of the progressive/modern view of government, Arnn mentions how our definition of 'equal' has changed.  Instead of viewing all mankind as being BORN equal, people now say that a person is not 'equal' UNTIL they have certain things, like healthcare.  Thus people are promoting the inequality of humanity, and thus they demand more and more government control to force other people to give them what they think they deserve.  They want benefits, not liberty.  

There are a few things I didn't like/agree with Arnn in,(mainly a few statements and illustrations he makes) about the book, but it is easy to skim over those and get to the 'meat'.  To some up my review, I'll say that Arnn does a good job of explaining what Tocqueville observed: "in America, man never obeys man but justice or law." 

 I received this book as a complimentary copy from BookSneeze® in exchange for my review(which does not have to be favorable).

 

Hitler's Cross by Erwin Lutzer

Why did Valkyrie and so many other plans to assassinate Hitler fail?  Was it because Satan had the upper hand over God? Was God powerless to stop it?  "When Mr. Clinton was elected president in 1992, I heard a Christian preacher say, 'God had nothing to do with the election of this president, the people made the choice!'  I found that statement incredible for several reasons.  First, I wonder what that teacher would have said if a president had been elected who was distinctively Christian and consciously committed to ruling with biblical principles.  Would he have said that that president had been raised up by God for this hour of American history?  To put it differently: Is God only involved when righteous leaders are installed and uninvolved when a leader is something less than distinctively Christian, or even evil?"  Of course, the answer to this is that God is always involved, otherwise He is not God.  This is something I like about Lutzer's book Hitler's Cross.  He reminds us that Hitler's ascension to power was not an accident, was not outside of God's power.  Lutzer reminds us of Romans 13: "...there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God."   Satan himself is not outside the realm of God's sovereignty, every move he makes is in perfect harmony with God's plan.  To quote Lutzer, Satan will always prove to be an "eternal loser".  It's the same with Hitler, Hitler could not make a move without God's allowing him to do so.  Speaking of God's sovereignty in even evil things that take place, the author comments:"Some prefer to call it His 'permissive will,' but it is His will nevertheless.  He directs all things to their appointed end." Lutzer comments: "Those Christians in Nazi Germany who believed that evil was triumphing because God was too weak to stem the tide could find no hope in their distress."  Lutzer also points out that Hitler seemed to be one of Satan's candidates for being the Antichrist.  Hitler  "boasted that just as Christ's birth had changed the calendar so his victory over the Jews would be the beginning of a new age.  'What Christ began,' he said, 'I will complete.'  In a speech just days after becoming chancellor, he parodied the Lord's prayer, promising that under him a new 'kingdom would come on earth and that his would be 'the power and the glory.  Amen.' …..."When he predicted that the Third Reich would last a thousand years, it was a typical instance of how Satan often overreaches; he cannot predict the future with accuracy because he cannot control it."

It was fascinating to me what the Nazis did to try to gain over the professing Christians in Germany.   At first  Hitler tried to pass himself off as a good Catholic, and even worked against some of his colleagues who were trying destroy the church too soon.  Much of Germany was religious at the time, the Lutheran church was connected with the state, obeying one's ruler and his rules was very much a matter of course, even a matter of religion.  This seems to have been one of the professing Christians excuses for why they did not go against Nazi ideals.  Instead of wiping out the church, the plan was to infiltrate Christianity,  politicize it (more than it already was), change it's doctrines bit by bit until true Christianity vanished altogether.  The Aryan Paragraph required Christian Jews to worship separately from Christian Aryans, Pastors were eventually required to swear an oath to Hitler, Nazis even planned that Hitler's Mein Kampf would take the place of the Bible in the churches.   The official church in Germany  became the 'Reich church' .

Reich Bishop Ludwig Muller

Lutzer points out that there were Christians who were against and who worked against the Nazification of Christianity, even at the cost of being sent to consecration camps and thence death.  Refusing to take the oath of loyalty to as the head of the Pastors, they declared that  God's word was their authority, and they also declaring that Jews and Christians are one in Christ, therefore there should be no racial discrimination in the church of God. By separating themselves from the official church(now the Reich church) and the so called 'German Christians' they were not apostatizing from the church, rather they were declaring the political Reich church apostate. These were Christians who had already been practicing dying to self in lesser things "If we can't be loyal to Christ in the small decisions, how can we expect to be loyal when our faith might cost us something very precious? Only when we see value in the lesser sacrifice will we be willing to be faithful in the greater one."  Some of these Christians went so far as to join the attempts to assassinate Hitler and set up a new government. 

Lutzer sees that there are parallels between what led to Germanys being Nazified and things in America today.   After world war I the Germans had a short lived Republic, they gave up this Republic for a dictator because the economy under the Republic was very bad.  Under Hitler's regime "Workers now had job security, a health service, cheap holiday schemes; if freedom meant starvation, then slavery was preferable."  They gave up freedom for temporary safety.  Which is something that America may be headed toward if we do not hold to our constitution.  Lutzer makes us think, what will we do if things become like they were in Nazi Germany, what are we doing now?  What decisions are we making now in our Christian life, what do we truly hold as valuable? 

I'll end with one of my favorite quotes from Lutzer's book:"Conscientious objectors have for centuries disobeyed the state, believing that no Christian can participate in killing, even in a time of war.  Every Christian must draw that line in accordance with his or her own convictions.  But if we say that we will always obey the state, the state becomes our God.  We can render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's only when we have rendered every thing we have to God."