After years of ecumenical influences, America has resultantly become a nation of virtual Christianity.  Evangelicalism, having been turned on its head, has become a kind of meaningless label for a movement that only survives as a miniscule minority.  Here is a sad but interesting article regarding America’s most popular views about who will inhabit heaven:

By CHARLES M. BLOW

Published: December 26, 2008, The New York Times

In June, the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life published a controversial survey in which 70 percent of Americans said that they believed religions other than theirs could lead to eternal life.  This threw evangelicals into a tizzy. After all, the Bible makes it clear that heaven is a velvet-roped V.I.P. area reserved for Christians. Jesus said so: “I am the way, the truth and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” But the survey suggested that Americans just weren’t buying that.

The evangelicals complained that people must not have understood the question. The respondents couldn’t actually believe what they were saying, could they?

So in August, Pew asked the question again. (They released the results last week.) Sixty-five percent of respondents said — again — that other religions could lead to eternal life. But this time, to clear up any confusion, Pew asked them to specify which religions. The respondents essentially said all of them.

And they didn’t stop there. Nearly half also thought that atheists could go to heaven — dragged there kicking and screaming, no doubt — and most thought that people with no religious faith also could go.

What on earth does this mean?

One very plausible explanation is that Americans just want good things to come to good people, regardless of their faith. As Alan Segal, a professor of religion at Barnard College told me: “We are a multicultural society, and people expect this American life to continue the same way in heaven.” He explained that in our society, we meet so many good people of different faiths that it’s hard for us to imagine God letting them go to hell. In fact, in the most recent survey, Pew asked people what they thought determined whether a person would achieve eternal life. Nearly as many Christians said you could achieve eternal life by just being a good person as said that you had to believe in Jesus.

Also, many Christians apparently view their didactic text as flexible. According to Pew’s August survey, only 39 percent of Christians believe that the Bible is the literal word of God, and 18 percent think that it’s just a book written by men and not the word of God at all. In fact, on the question in the Pew survey about what it would take to achieve eternal life, only 1 percent of Christians said living life in accordance with the Bible.

Now, there remains the possibility that some of those polled may not have understood the implications of their answers. As John Green, a senior fellow at the Pew Forum, said, “The capacity of ignorance to influence survey outcomes should never be underestimated.” But I don’t think that they are ignorant about this most basic tenet of their faith. I think that they are choosing to ignore it … for goodness sake.

This is an interesting read.  If anything, I might conclude that the numbers may still be a bit generous regarding those who profess Christ and hold to inerrancy with true conviction.  It is a sad state of affairs – but the whole of our culture has come to believe in the religion of Bailoutism (or if you prefer, Ba’aloutism).  This is the religion of helpless victimization, non-responsibility, and the expectation that no matter how indifferent or rebellious a man may be, he can expect to be rescued in the end – simply because the entire universe owes it to him.  

Sadly, we’ve been here before (Ecclesiastes 1:10-11), and won’t see the end of it until Christ returns to judge the living and the dead.

Throughout my life as a youth I had no better regard for Christmas than an alcoholic might have for a cheap bottle of booze.  For me, the only value of Christmas consisted of the food, free time, cash, and toys that I received during this festal season.  Of course, all of these base impulses of mine were well concealed beneath the veneer of my freckled smile and youthful charm.  I merely endured the holiday formalities so as to anticipate the morning of the 25th – and this I did with the pained anxiety of an addict.  As I look back on those days, I now realize that I never saw the depth of my blindness, and my utter lack of regard for much of anything else other than my own desires.  I do recall one Christmas morning where my hedonism had reached its peak.  In particular, I remember making an extra effort to detect the “goods” that I expected to receive that year.  To do this, I would carefully inspect the bags and packages as they were ushered into our house, and I even tried to probe my parents for information with the earnestness of a military tribunal.  I was so sure that I would be buried alive in a treasure trove of goods, unlike any other Christmas in the past, and this only intensified my anticipation for payday on the 25th. 

To my horror, it was the most meager gift exchange in the history of our family. 

I will never forget the dark feelings of resentment that I had for such an anticlimactic morning.  Sadly, instead of feeling rebuked for my selfishness, my overactive mind yielded a never ending supply of thoughts which justified my narcissism.  The smiles and thanks that I offered to my parents that morning only masked the darker reality from within – I wasn’t thankful at all.

In many ways, this is a picture of the natural man who does not give thanks to the very One who showers mankind with the daily gifts of His beneficence and kindness (Romans 1:21).  This is even true when it comes to the Father’s matchless gift of His beloved Son – Jesus Christ.  Frankly speaking, the natural man looks at the manger scene with contempt and disappointment – whether he might be a secularist or a religionist.  Now the secularist will reveal his contempt unhesitatingly; but the religionist is rather deceitful with his ingratitude.  Many religious people feign appreciation for God’s greatest gift to the world, but their real view of the manger scene is one which belies its true value.  How often do I hear men speak of God’s “gift” in terms which seem to emphasize the world’s supposed worthiness.  Such preachers portend a deity who is so focused on mankind’s value and need that he seems to be indifferent to his own justice and glory.  I have heard some preachers say – “If you were the only person on earth, God would still send His Son to die for you.”  Despite the better intentions of this expression, many offer this teaching with the following connotation: God gives His gifts based upon the value and worthiness of the recipient.  Now if this were truly the case, then we ought to refrain from calling Christ “God’s gift” to mankind and instead refer to Him as “God’s payment” to a worthy world.  In a paradigm of thinking such as this, it is as though God owed us the person and work of Jesus Christ.

This is the best that the religionist can do – in the bondage and slavery of his own heart and mind he can only transform the 1st Advent celebration into a payday; but the reality is that God owes us nothing.  He doesn’t owe us the next breath nor is He indebted to give us our next heartbeat.  He doesn’t owe us fruitful seasons, human joy, or even the glory of the Heavens above; and He certainly doesn’t owe us eternal bliss and forgiveness through the sacrifice of His Beloved Son.  The incarnation, perfect life, crucifixion, and resurrection of the Son of God was nothing less than an unmerited gift offered freely to a very unworthy and thankless people (John 3:16).  If one wishes to bloviate about the matter of what God owes us – then let him remember this: God does owe mankind His just and eternal judgment (John 3:18, 36).  Those who believe that they deserve a payday will in some sense get what they were looking for, but it won’t be what they were expecting.  In short, all religionists are like selfish little children huddled around the festal tree, seeing the gifts that are offered as being that which they deserve as good and worthy people.

Let me now end with a second Advent tale.  In 1982 I was in the military and was thousands of miles away from family.  I barely had two pennies to rub together, and the Christmas tree that I had was nothing more than a pine branch taped to a cardboard platform – it was all quite tacky at best.  From the world’s perspective it would all seem quite pathetic, and yet for myself it was the best 1st Advent celebration that I had ever celebrated in my life, because it was my first Christmas celebrated as a Christian.  It was the first time in my life that I realized that God had graciously refrained from giving me what I actually deserved and instead gave me the precious and undeserved gift of salvation through faith in the One who was crucified for my sin.  For the genuine Christian, the celebration of the 1st Advent of Christ is not merely an annual event – it is a perpetual remembrance and celebration of that gift which no man deserves.

Update:  With video –

It was recently reported that Grace Community Church, in Jacksonville Florida, is going through quite a trial right now.  Foxnews.com reported that GCC is in the midst of a church discipline matter – the story became national news as of last night (story here).  We can thank the Lord for the church’s resolve in this matter.  On the other hand, it is quite odd that the person being disciplined has expressed such regret over the publicity of her case – and yet she is the one (it is reported) who disclosed the matter to foxnews in the first place.  This is, no doubt, a rather tangled matter – but we do pray that God’s glory would be revealed through the faithful perseverance of his people…

Isaiah 3:10

11 Woe to the wicked! It will go badly with him,

For what he deserves will be done to him.

12 O My people!

Their oppressors are children,

And women rule over them.

O My people! Those who guide you lead you astray

and confuse the direction of your paths.

Some time ago I changed my voter registration to that of Independent as I came to realize that the Republican party no longer represented me very much at all.  Since then I have become more and more convinced of the importance of such a choice.  I certainly don’t mention this in order to sway others to do the same – I only mention it here in order to point out my growing vehemence towards the shallow politics of our nation.  My differences with both the Republican and Democratic parties are not principally found in the matters of taxation, fiscal discipline, or even energy policy; my profound differences are found in the matters pertaining to “family values” – something that has been reduced to a meaningless campaign slogan, used only for political expediency in too many cases.  The way in which our family values have been systematically destroyed in our nation are as follows:

• The definitions of marriage and marital fidelity have been degraded severely.
• The concept of the roles of men and women have been all but decimated, thanks to the rise of feminism and the prevalence of emasculated men.
• As a result of these problems, the valuation of children has degraded in our overall culture.

As to this final problem, most Republicans will pridefully deny any wrong-doing, while pointing out the opposing party’s devotion to a woman’s “freedom of choice” (i.e. the right to murder unborn children).  While I can agree that the Democratic party has excelled in this matter of devaluing the rights of children, I must also remind Republicans that they have no right to cast the first stone.  If anything, there is a more insidious denigration of children among Republicans these days, and it has to do with their exceeding devotion to feminism.  Many who would term themselves as “conservatives” these days, show themselves to be quite liberal when it comes to the biblical definitions of fatherhood and motherhood.  If anything, through the advancement of feminism (which has resulted in the systematic destruction of motherhood), the children of our nation are being being abandoned as virtual orphans.  Left to themselves, their classmates, teachers, televisions, video games, and ipods, the children of this generation are being raised within a cesspool of materialism, selfishness, and familial anarchy.  Even those trace elements of “motherhood” found within our culture are still being systematically crushed beneath the well lubricated machine of political correctness and identity politics.  Consider the following clip from ABC News: 

Why is it that male politicians have not been questioned about “who is taking care of the children” at home?  Because this nation, which once held to a form of Judeo-Christian values, understood that men were to lead and provide for their homes, while mothers nurtured and cared for their children.  In other words, there once was a day when fatherhood and motherhood meant much more than sexual reproduction.  Sadly, many conservatives have excelled in this degradation – in some ways transcending the efforts of contemporary liberals.  Our most recent illustration of this point has been seen in John McCain’s appointment of Sarah Palin, the Governor of Alaska.  We are supposed to believe that appointing a woman to this office is a good thing.  After all, the glass ceiling that kept mothers in their home, and out of the public workplace, is being utterly shattered by feminists like Geraldine Ferraro, Hillary Clinton, and…Sarah Palin:

Sarah Palin:  “I think — I think as well today of two other women who came before me in national elections.  I can’t begin this great effort without honoring the achievements of Geraldine Ferraro in 1984…(APPLAUSE)… and of course Senator Hillary Clinton, who showed such determination and grace in her presidential campaign. (APPLAUSE)  It was rightly noted in Denver this week that Hillary left 18 million cracks in the highest, hardest glass ceiling in America…(APPLAUSE)… but it turns out the women of America aren’t finished yet and we can shatter that glass ceiling once and for all.”

Palin’s Acceptance speech, Aug. 29th, Dayton Ohio

Like many other feminists of our day, Palin has broken through the glass barrier of motherhood indeed, and with a vengeance.  Having served two terms as Mayor (Wasilla), and now as the governor of Alaska – she has certainly proven to us all that women can break free from the shackles of motherhood.  Unfortunately, what she has also proven is that mothers who forsake the importance of nurturing children in the home often reveal the dark consequences of their choices.  Sadly, it has been reported today that her unmarried 17 year old daughter, Bristol, is pregnant.  I would add to this unfortunate news the fact that Sarah Palin made a questionable gamble when her fifth child was born in April of this year.  At 8 months into her pregnancy, she began to leak amniotic fluid; and yet despite this she proceeded to give a speech thirty minutes later at a Texas energy symposium.  Afterwards, rather than checking into a hospital for her soon to be born Downs Syndrome child, she proceeded to take an 8 hour commercial flight back to Alaska, despite the obvious risks associated with such a choice.  While we still know very little about Sarah Palin, what is known about her choices as a mother is quite troubling. However, we must remember that children are not obstacles to a greater agenda; they are precious gifts (Psalm 127) who require the loving guardianship of a father who will lead in the home, and the caring nurture of a mother who is most eager to devote time to her family. 

Let me say that for some of you who care more about a better energy policy, or lower gas prices, just remember this: there are things that are much more important, such as God’s institution of marriage and family; the value of human life; and the importance of nurturing children who are called precious gifts from God Himself.   If you feel a competition between these matters, then you ought to consider whether or not you too have fallen into the trap of materialism and pragmatism.  We all have a need to guard the higher priorities against the onslaught of the lesser.

Finally, lest anyone might seek to confound my overall point in this post, remember that the greater culpability in this story is found, not with Sarah or Bristol Palin, but with the one whom God has ordained to manage the Palin household – Mr. Todd Palin (Genesis 18:19, Eph. 5:22-33, 1 Peter 3:7).  I tremble at the thought that our nation may very well deserve the consequences of the actions and inactions of this “First Dude” of Alaska, thereby leaving us all the more as one nation under feminism (Is. 3:10).  

Update:  Here is an interesting interview with Voddie Baucham concerning the matter of Palin’s nomination.  Be sure to advance to 1:00 in the video – the interview doesn’t begin until then.

What exactly would we do without the mainstream media?

And for the much awaited prize – let the 2008 Gaffe-Fest begin:  “President Joe Biden” and “Barak America,” respectively:

Sometimes reality is stranger than fiction.

A Wordle is a graphical "word cloud" which gives greater prominence to words that appear most frequently.  In a sense, it is an artistic way of seeing what is emphasized in any piece of literature.  Hence, I decided to throw the full text of All Nations Under God in there, and the picture above is the result.

Wordle link credit: David Kjos & image is courtesy of Wordle Net.

1 John has been a rich preaching and devotional experience for me.  Despite its small size, it is a massive treasure chest full of God’s riches regarding the truths of salvation, preservation, and sanctification.  Now that I am coming to the close of this wonderful epistle, I find that John provides a very interesting instruction regarding prayer.

1 John 5:13-16: 

13 These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God.

14 Now this is the confidence that we have in Him, that if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us.

15 And if we know that He hears us, whatever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we have asked of Him.

16 If anyone sees his brother sinning a sin which does not lead to death, he will ask, and He will give him life for those who commit sin not leading to death. There is sin leading to death. I do not say that he should pray about that.

17 All unrighteousness is sin, and there is sin not leading to death.

18 We know that whoever is born of God does not sin; but He who has been born of God keeps him, and the wicked one does not touch him.

This text has presented some long-standing challenges for expositors throughout the years.  When surveying commentaries on this subject, I find that too many fail to address the broader context of verses 16 & 17; as well I find that not enough expositors delve into the text very well, and as a result some will merely assume that John is speaking of physical death and life without explaining why they think that this is so.  However, one must wonder what John would mean if he is indeed speaking in physical terms alone: “If anyone sees his brother committing a sin not leading to [physical] death, he shall ask and God will for him give [physical] life to those who commit sin not leading to [physical] death.”   Why would a Christian pray for physical life for someone who is not sinning unto physical death?  It should be evident that John’s symmetry of thought is in fact spiritual, as Simon Kistemaker points out in his analysis of 1 John 5:16-17:

“What is the meaning of the word death?  In addition to 5:16, where it occurs three times, the word appears twice in 3:14: ‘We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love our brothers.  Anyone who does not love remains in death.’  John is not thinking of physical death.  Rather, he is referring to spiritual death.  He contrasts death with eternal life (3:15) to set apart the believer, who possesses this life, from the person who denies that Jesus is the Son of God (2:22-23) and who hates the believer (3:13).” New Testament Commentary, 1 John.

I agree with Kistemaker that the notion of spiritual death/life is much more in keeping with John’s overall theme in the epistle, and it is in closer keeping with the Apostle’s immediate development concerning assurance and prayer:

1 John 5:13-16: 

13 These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God.

14 Now this is the confidence that we have in Him, that if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us.

15 And if we know that He hears us, whatever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we have asked of Him.

16 If anyone sees his brother sinning a sin which does not lead to death, he will ask, and He will give him life for those who commit sin not leading to death. There is sin leading to death. I do not say that he should pray about that.

17 All unrighteousness is sin, and there is sin not leading to death.

18 We know that whoever is born of God does not sin; but He who has been born of God keeps him, and the wicked one does not touch him.

As Christians, we have a real hope (v. 13) in view of our faith in the One who keeps us and preserves us from the evil one (v. 18).  Because of this, we have a real assurance (v.13), confidence (v.14), and knowledge (v.15) because we know that the Lord hears our every petition, the greatest of which was our petition for the mercy of forgiveness and salvation, and therefore we are assured that He secures us in the Beloved One, Jesus Christ.  These contextual considerations are, frankly speaking, unavoidable.  I would suggest that anyone who approaches verses 16-17, apart from such a context, would be in great danger of missing the Apostle’s broader point.   Ultimately, John is teaching believers how they ought to pray for other brethren (v. 16a.  “If anyone sees his brother committing sin…”).  Therefore, when Christians sin, it must be remembered that such sin is not unto apostasy, or spiritual death (eternal condemnation).  Thus, John’s mention of “sin unto death” is designed to establish an important contrast between the child of God and the reprobate.  Calvin secures this same important observation:

Calvin (Commentaries, 1 John 5:16):  “There is a sin unto death. I have already said that the sin to which there is no hope of pardon left, is thus called. But it may be asked, what this is; for it must be very atrocious, when God thus so severely punishes it. It may be gathered from the context, that it is not, as they say, a partial fall, or a transgression of a single commandment, but apostasy, by which men wholly alienate themselves from God. For the Apostle afterwards adds, that the children of God do not sin, that is, that they do not forsake God, and wholly surrender themselves to Satan, to be his slaves. Such a defection, it is no wonder that it is mortal;* for God never thus deprives his own people of the grace of the Spirit; but they ever retain some spark of true religion. They must then be reprobate and given up to destruction, who thus fall away so as to have no fear of God.”

Calvin is correct, I believe, when he reveals John’s polarity of thought.  Believers do not forsake God (sin unto death), and thus their sins, though still grievous, can never lead to apostasy.  When we consider the application of John’s teaching about prayer, coupled with his description of the believer’s true assurance in Christ, we find that John is giving us an instruction on prayer which curbs judgementalism – which is a fitting capstone to an epistle that is filled with critical tests for assurance:

Calvin (Commentaries, 1 John 5:16):  “The Apostle in the meantime exhorts us to be mutually solicitous for the salvation of one another; and he would also have us to regard the falls of the brethren as stimulants to prayer. And surely it is an iron hardness to be touched with no pity, when we see souls redeemed by Christ’s blood going to ruin. But he shows that there is at hand a remedy, by which brethren can aid brethren.”

The entire epistle of 1 John is indeed filled with several tests that are useful for evaluating fruit in the lives of the children of God and the children of the devil.  These lists are needful, but in the wrong hands they can be used as an instrument of cold judgementalism.  If we know that we are praying for a brother (which is the premise of John’s instruction), then we ought to pray in the proper context of a believer’s need.  As Christians, our need is the abundance of Christ’s life and power in order to overcome sin.  It is this spiritual life that all Christians possess in regeneration and in our progressive sanctification, and it is this life which dwells in us through the person of the Holy Spirit.  However, when we sin, we quench the Spirit (1 Thess. 5:19), thereby diminishing the influence and vitality of life (zoe) within us. But remember, thought the vitality of spiritual life may be partially quenched at times, through sin, the believer never sins unto spiritual death via apostasy.  This, no doubt, is why John says: 

1 John 5:16c:  There is sin leading to death. I do not say that he should pray about that.

What might seem to be an obscure statement within some interpretive constructs, is readily clarified in view of John’s description of the believer’s security.  When we are praying for a true brother who is struggling over sin (v.16a), we are not to judge them harshly by praying for them as though they were an apostate.  Again, Calvin hits the nail on the head when he observes the Apostle’s call to compassionate petition: 

Calvin (Commentaries, 1 John 5:16):  “And when the Apostle recommends sympathy to us, he at the same time reminds us how much we ought to avoid the cruelty of condemning our brethren, or an extreme rigor in despairing of their salvation.”

The epistle of 1 John does in fact give us a vast list of tests for evaluating fruit.  Such lists are needful in order to evaluate potential self-deception; the reality of false brethren; as well as the deceptions of false teachers.  However, if we were to treat this list of tests without personal evaluation and humility, we could become like the Pharisees who went about testing others with a cold spirit of judgementalism, pride, and arrogance.  I believe that it is no wonder that John gives us this important and humbling call to prayer for others – remembering that we all struggle and battle with sin on a daily basis (1 John 1:8-10). 

*Note:  Calvin’s use of the expression “mortal sin” is in reference to his earlier discussion of Rome’s view of venial and mortal sin.  Mortal sin is a reference to sins which lead to eternal condemnation.  Calvin rebukes Rome’s distinction of venial (i.e., tolerable sins) and mortal (i.e., intolerable sins) by reminding the reader, that all sin is intolerable in the eyes of God and is therefore mortal (worthy of eternal condemnation); therefore, if it were not for Christ’s shed blood and salvation in the life of any sinner, all would sin unto death.