Wednesday, December 14, 2016

David Jeremiah Admits Celebration of Discipline Promotes New Age Practices

This is in response to an article that appeared in the most recent Lighthouse Trails newsletter: David Jeremiah Admits Richard Foster's Celebration of Discipline Promotes New Age Practices (Please read here).

Sadness. Things that were said to be "outside"— way outside—are now inside, very much inside. It is apparent that New Age philosophy and practice is beginning to make successful forays into the Conservative Anabaptist fortress through the Trojan horse of Contemplative Mysticism—the Spiritual Disciplines.

Indeed, we as followers of Christ are to seek that which is spiritual, and live a disciplined life in accordance with the New Testament, diligent in the study of God's Word and persistent in prayer. However, the infrastructure of the "Spiritual Disciplines" is not constructed from the building blocks of the Christian Scriptures, but from the stuff of ancient paganism, resurrected in earlier centuries by popish monks and today by their emergent modern mystic and New Age counterparts.

Richard Foster
One illustration of this infiltration is the use and promotion of the book "Celebration of Discipline" in Amish/Mennonite churches and organizations. One such institution who promotes and sells this book with no word of caution is Faith Builders Educational Programs (FB), located in Guys Mills, Pennsylvania. The book was written by Quaker and mystic Richard Foster. The book is listed on the website of a local Christian store owned by a Mennonite bishop, and has also been used in group book studies by conservative Mennonites here in Southern Ontario.

Does this mean everything taught by FB is tainted? Absolutely not! But when will be stand back, and notice and recognize teachings and practices that do not line up with Scripture? When will we do something decisive in order to keep pure our precious doctrine? When will we finally understand that error loves to cloak itself behind the plainest vestures and the most honorable displays? If we desire to have schools that will teach sound doctrine to our youth, why not pay a closer look at their curriculum and keep them accountable in meekness and love?

A while ago, someone asked Lighthouse Trails (LT) if they were aware of any influence from contemplative mysticism at Faith Builders. LT replied: "I think all you have to do is visit the website of Faith Builders publishing arm, and you will see some of their persuasions. Here is an example: https://christianlearning.org/books/discipleship/prayer.html. They have Richard Foster and Madame Guyon. I think if you take a close look at this school, you may find some serious concerns."

People, the night is far spent. The day is just about to break. Cast off the works of darkness. Put on the armor of light! (Romans 13:12).

Now you know. Share with others.

Thursday, October 27, 2016

Be Strong in the Grace

Some of my thoughts from devotions this morning—2 Timothy 1:19.

"Be strong in the grace..."

It's a curious phrase. Can we possess God's grace and not be deriving strength from it? Apparently so. It's up to us, at least to a degree, to engage the power of the grace given to us. "Be strong", then, is a command to take hold of that enabling power, and put effort into using it, so that it can flow through us.

Be strong in the grace today!

Sunday, July 3, 2016

Are We to Keep Both Covenants?

The New Covenant is often called the New Testament, and is rightly compared to the last will and testament of one departing from this life. "For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth" (Hebrews 9:16, 17). The Mosaic Law was thus in force only until the death of Christ. All His lifetime on earth, Jesus lived as a Jew, but, being full of the Spirit of God, He taught, exemplified, and instituted New Testament doctrine. When a will is made and duly authorized, it is not in force until the death of the maker. If he makes a new will, however, and dies, it is the latter will which is binding, and the first then has no legal force at all. Thus, when God in Christ brought a new will and sealed it with His own blood, it became binding, and the first then became of no legal status in His sight, despite the fact that it was "holy, and just, and good" (Romans 7:12). To try to keep both is to recognize neither the passing of the Old Law nor the legal force of the New.

Romans is still stronger in its wording. It compares one who would be under two covenants to a woman who has two living husbands, declaring such to be an adulteress, she being married to another man. "Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead" (Romans 7:4). Being under two covenants would constitute adultery in the spiritual sense.

Some maintain that this refers to keeping the "Ceremonial Law" and not the "Moral Law." The Scriptures make no such artificial division, the moral concepts of the Old Law being superseded by those of the New, just as the ceremonies are also done away. We are to be "dead" to the Law. (Romans 7:1-4). But what Law? The "Ceremonial Law" only? Notice the context: the discourse is continuous, and verse 7 identifies this Law with the Ten Commandments: "I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet."

Again, in 2 Corinthians 3, where the glory of the Old Covenant is described as being "done away" - what portion of the Law is being referred to? Is it not that which was "written and graven in stones," associated with the glory emanating from the countenance of Moses on Mount Sinai? This again is unmistakably the Ten Commandments, indicating that the entire Old Covenant is included in that which is superseded by the New.

Most important is the fact that this New Will of God is associated with the experience of regeneration. Without it, even the Old Covenant, which was on a lower spiritual plane, was not kept. It was "a yoke . . . which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear"(Acts 15:10). But the blood of Christ cleanses the conscience, which the Law could not do (Hebrews 9:13, 14). Our entire viewpoint is altered: the mind is renewed (Titus 3:5), as we are transformed by the Spirit of Christ. In this sense, the New Law is "written in our hearts," and we are empowered to keep the everlasting covenant to the glory of Christ our Saviour.

The tragedy of "Christendom" (including Fundamentalism) is that, almost two thousand years after the birth of Christ, it still does not realize that the Covenant of Christ is complete and perfect without the Old Law, which has passed away. Its haziness on the two covenants is responsible for much of the glaring inconsistency that robs us of the power and testimony of the New Covenant. In any real crisis, the carnal and the worldly will thumb back to the Old Testament to justify their position on carnal warfare, divorce and remarriage, worldly adornment and attire, and conformity to the world in general. This is the challenge that we meet today. May we have a true church - a New Testament body of believers.

—by G. Richard Culp
Tract 11E12
Rod and Staff Publishers Inc.

Sunday, May 15, 2016

Let's Start from the Beginning

                In an age of exploration and fascinating scientific discoveries, Anabaptist Christians are asking questions of current importance that require honest and satisfying biblical answers. “How old is the earth?”[i] “Could the Universe be billions of years old?” “Is our society’s view of origins compatible with Genesis 1?” I myself have wondered whether the Bible really treats this subject with enough clarity as to preclude an “old earth” view of origins. I would like to invite you to look at three lines of evidence I found in God’s Word that convinced me that our Universe was directly created by God in only six days in its entirety, and without any time gaps at the Foundation of the earth


                But first, I would like to provide some quick facts on a view that has only become popular among mainstream Christianity since the beginning of the 19th Century[ii]: Old Earth Creationism. It is a view I believe is beginning to be considered and adopted by some conservative Anabaptists as we speak. What is Old Earth creationism?
·         Old Earth creationism[iii] is a general term that covers gap creationism[iv], progressive creationism[v], and evolutionary creationism[vi].
·         Christians[vii] who are Old Earth creationists (OECs), as well as their humanist counterparts, generally believe Planet Earth is as old as 4.5 billion years, and the Universe, 14 billion years.
·         Belief in Old Earth creationism leads to the acceptance of death before the Fall of man, which in turn leads to the idea that the Flood of Noah’s time likely wasn’t global.
·         Not all OECs believe in the Big Bang or in evolutionary creationism.
·         Not all OECs disbelieve the literal six 24-hour-day Creation.

I. Was the “raw” Universe created outside the Creation week?
                Gap creationists believe that the foundation or framework of the universe was created at a point in a very distant past. The creation of this cosmic framework is separated from Day One of the Creation week by a gap of billions of years. Some also believe that the original world eventually was destroyed by a cataclysm called Lucifer’s Flood, and out of the resulting chaos (cosmic wasteland) God made the world we know today.
                But in light of what the Bible says, could the earth, sun, moon and stars have been created millions of years before Day One of the Creation week? To my knowledge, there are only three passages in the Bible that speak to this. The first one, of course, is found in Genesis 1:1:
                              
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

                Perhaps, we could say this verse does not specify whether heaven and earth were completely finished at the time of creation. But it does tell us that there was a beginning, and that heaven and earth did not exist before this Beginning. This would seem unnecessary to mention, but do keep it in mind for later.
                The next passage is found in Exodus 31:17:

It [the Sabbath] is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.

                This passage provides an important detail: “in six days”. What happened within six days? The LORD made heaven and earth. By this we know without a doubt that the whole Universe was made within the six days of Creation.
                The last clue is found earlier, in Exodus Chapter 20, verse 11:

For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

                This verse is more explicit than the previous one. It provides additional details regarding what was made within the six days of Creation. Heaven and earth, including all it contains, were made by the LORD at the very beginning, within the six days of Creation, and not before. Some have suggested a distinction between the verb “create” and “make”. They claim that God created the Universe and Planet Earth at a point in time in the distant past, and billions of years later, He made “all that in them is”. But this passage breaks down the argument, because it says that God not only made the contents of the universe within six days, He also made heaven and earth during the same period. It seems abundantly clear that the Beginning and the six-day Creation week are one and the same.

II. Was the Creation of the Universe complete at the Beginning?
                I suppose something most conservative Anabaptists take for granted is that the creation of the Universe was initiated and completed between Day One and Day Six of the creation week. However, it’s interesting to note that the logic of Old Earth creationism, especially gap creationism, requires the initiation of Creation to occur before the Beginning. How so? When one believes there was a gap between the initiation of the Universe and the making of “all that in them is”, one is forced to believe that divine creative activities were occurring long before the Beginning, since, as we saw above, the Beginning and the six-day creation week are synonymous. In order to be certain of the possibility of a cosmic gap, I suppose one would need to look for a biblical warrant for a first Beginning and a second Beginning, which I have not been able to find.
                Another view among gap creationists involves the idea of day-ages. Each day of the creation week may represent a period of millions or billions of years.
                When we search the Bible, we find two passages that speak to this:
                              
From the beginning of creation God made them male and female. Mark 10:6
He which made them at the beginning made them male and female. Matthew 19:4

It couldn’t have been said clearer: Humankind was made at the Beginning of creation, not billions of years later. The biblical fact that humans were made on the last day of creation leads us to believe that the last day of Creation must also be considered as the Beginning. If Jesus called Day Six “the Beginning”, would it be reasonable to say that the Bible allows room for millions of years between Day One and Day Six, while placing both days equally at the Beginning? And how reasonable is it to believe that the Beginning took millions or billions of years to begin?

III. Was the Beginning at the Foundation of the earth?
                 Let’s look at the subject from another angle. Could there have been a gap of billions of years between the Foundation of the earth and the Beginning? Did God’s creative work continue billions of years after He laid the foundations of Planet Earth?
                I have found four passages in Scripture that speak about the foundation of the earth or the world. The first one is Isaiah 40:21:

Hath it not been told you from the beginning? Have ye not understood from the foundations of the earth?
               
                Not a strong argument, but it does seem to imply that humans, able to hear and understand, existed from the Beginning as well as from the Foundations of the earth. Could this possibly mean they are both the exact same events?
                The second verse tells us about Abel, the first martyred prophet:
                              
That the blood of the prophets, which was shed from the foundation of the world may be required of this generation; from the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias. Luke 11:50, 51

               
                This passage explains that the blood of the prophets was shed from the foundation of the world[viii]. Abel, Adam’s second son, lived only several years after the creation of his parents. Apparently, he lived and died so close to the Beginning that even he was said to have lived at the Foundation of the world. Would it be reasonable to think that there was a gap of millions of years between the Foundation and the completion of Creation at the Beginning?
                The third verse is more specific:
               
The works were finished from the foundation of the world…and God did rest the seventh day from all his works. Hebrews 4:3, 4

                God rested on the seventh day from all His creative works, because his creative activities were indeed completed at the very foundation of the world.
                And finally, a passage that seems to be a direct answer to our question, “Was the Beginning at the Foundation of the earth?”
               
                               Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth. Hebrews 1:10
 
                After seeing all this biblical evidence for myself, I had to wonder whether the controversy between traditional creationism and Old Earth creationism is a matter of opinion or a matter of belief. Does it really matter whether God created the world within six 24-hour days or across billions of years?
                The three lines of arguments I have found in Scripture have given me abundant and satisfying evidence that the Bible does teach that our Universe was directly created by God in only six days in its entirety, and without any time gaps at the Foundation of the earth. If God had not recorded any of this, then I would be willing to accept that none of it is important to our understanding of God. But since He did, and He did it in a very careful and detailed fashion, I find that recent Creation is a truth worthy of universal acceptance and belief among Christians everywhere. To me, the controversy between Young Earth and Old Earth creationism seems to be more a matter of belief in the veracity and authority of God’s Word than of personal opinion or lack of biblical clarity.
-E.S. Gutwein





Endnotes:
[i] I have not taken the time to explain how the Bible teaches a 6,000 year-old Earth, but check out the following link for an explanation: http://creation.com/6000-years.
[ii] Stephen Lawell, The Gap Theory (Echoes of Eden, 2008), p. 13.
[iv] “Simply stated, the gap theory is the idea that a long period of time transpired between God’s initial creation in Genesis 1:1 when He ‘created the heaven and the earth’ and Genesis 1:2 when the earth was ‘without form and void’” (The Gap Theory, p. 7).
[v] “Progressive creationism…is the belief that God created new forms of life gradually over a period of hundreds of millions of years” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_creationism).
[vi] “Theistic evolution, theistic evolutionism, or evolutionary creationism are views that regard religious teachings about God as compatible with modern scientific understanding about biological evolution….Supporters of theistic evolution generally harmonize evolutionary thought with belief in God, rejecting the conflict thesis regarding the relationship between religion and science – they hold that religious teachings about creation and scientific theories of evolution need not contradict each other.” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution).
[vii] To clarify, this essay employs the term “Christian” in a general way for nominal and faithful believers indistinctively.
[viii] The term “world” (Gr. cosmos) in the New Testament refers to several things including the universe, the inhabitants of the earth, and Planet Earth itself. While the term “world” is broader than “earth”, it certainly includes Planet Earth.

Tuesday, February 9, 2016

Joint Spiritual Efforts with Other Denominations


These thoughts are not meant to promote animosity or cause hateful feelings toward believers from other denominations. It is simply an outline of what we believe the Bible teaches on joint spiritual ventures, or what is sometimes called “ecumenical efforts”. We as Anabaptists believe the Bible doctrine of separation, but may have not always understood well what our relationship to other denominations should be.

1. Ecumenical programs constitute a type of unequal yoke. “Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?” (2 Corinthians 6:14).
The Bible also says, “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed” (Galatians 1:8). And again, “As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed”  (Galatians 1:9).
Is it right to join hands in spiritual ministry with believers who condone murder by abortion, divorce and remarriage, female leadership over men, non-resistance, and other things clearly stated in Scripture?.

2. Joining hands as a matter of course with Christians from other denominations or religions in religious ministry is a sign of ecumenicalism and a slide towards apostasy. We don’t condemn them to hell, neither do we deny that many of them are sincere. God will be the final judge at the end of time, but we are not allowed to join hands with them now. Many Anabaptist Christians are losing or have completely lost this concept. Will we stand up and be an example to them?

3. We are told to not have company with them, and to admonish them. “If any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed. Yet count him not as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother” (2 Thessalonians 3:14-15).
            “If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness….from such withdraw thyself” (1 Timothy 6:3, 5).

4. Take a look at Jehoshaphat’s ecumenical compromise with Ahab. “Now Jehoshaphat had riches and honour in abundance, and joined affinity with Ahab…..And Ahab king of Israel said unto Jehoshaphat king of Judah, Wilt thou go with me to Ramothgilead? And he answered him, I am as thou art, and my people as thy people; and we will be with thee in the war” (2 Chronicles 18:1, 3).
            Do we need to “enquire at the word of Lord” (verse 4) to know this is wrong? Jehoshaphat did it anyway, and this is what God told him: “These have no master; let them return therefore every man to his house in peace” (verse 16). God has always been displeased when His children made alliances with Gentiles, whether Jews or New Testament Christians.

5. We are commanded to come out from among the system of the world and of false religion, and be separate from them. “And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues” (Revelation 18:4; 2 Corinthians 6:17).
            Do we want to be implicated?

6. When we join hands with people of other beliefs in an affiliated way, we compromise and stain our testimony and our message. When we join in religious ministry with Christians of other faiths and denominations, we begin to compromise our own faith and ministry.
For example, at our programs we warn about eternal judgment, but if our friends from other denominations teach there is no eternal lake of fire, how can we give a clear effective message from the stage? We teach that we live under Christ’s New Testament Law, but if they teach we are also under a portion of the Old Testament Law, how can we freely teach what the Bible says in Galatians 5:4, that “Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the [Old Testament] law; ye are fallen from grace.” We teach the Bible is the final and complete revelation from God, but if they teach that it is not, and that we can fully trust the writings of other “inspired” men or women, how can we begin to put our ministries together on the same level, on the same stage?


            Compromise is a crucial underlying principle in all ecumenical efforts. The common denominator is sought, and sharing any disagreeing view is severely looked down on. Is it possible to be a pure and bright light when it must be hid under a bushel?


Note: This is a shorter version of an article meant to accompany a statement made by New Heights Quartet on their blog in regards to an ecumenical event organized by a group of Anabaptist believers in Goshen, Indiana. The organizing committee of this Acappella Gospel Sing invited a Seventh-Day Adventist quartet to present a program this year's (2016) event.

Saturday, February 6, 2016

A Question from an Atheist


    A Christian and an atheist were having a conversation about their different beliefs. At one point the atheist asks the Christian a question:
    “Why do you say that your God is so perfect? He made a Universe so distant and vast, but put humans in a tiny planet that looks like a pinhead compared to the whole Universe.”
    “Let me give you an example,” replied the Christian. “Imagine an old painter arranging his canvas. Brush in hand, he paints a sun above the mountains, a bird flying in the air, a few fluffy clouds over there, some trees on the earth, a stream here, a stone there, and a colorful hot air balloon in the center of the sky. Finally, he makes three dots in a corner at the bottom of the picture, and makes a tiny black ant.
    “Now,” continued the Christian, “we may ask ourselves, ‘Why would he have made such a beautiful hot air balloon in the sky when the ant can’t even reach it and enjoy the ride?’ The fact is that the painter did not paint the hot air balloon for the ant, nor the ant for the balloon, nor even the picture for the ant. The painter simply painted everything for himself.”

    “Likewise, the Universe was not created for man (though he certainly may enjoy some of it), nor was man created for himself. Special as he may be to God, he was made to be a small part of all Creation. The Creator made everything for Himself. It doesn’t matter if man cannot enjoy the sight of all the beautiful fish and creatures at the bottom of the sea. It doesn’t matter if he can’t see bacteria or the surface of Pluto with his naked eye. Everything was made to bring glory to the Creator.”
-E.S. Gutwein