Archives For Evangelicalism

SanctificationAs you are likely familiar with, there has been a fairly large-scale discussion taking place recently within evangelicalism surrounding the doctrine of sanctification. And that’s demonstrated that there is widespread confusion about what the doctrine of sanctification is, how it relates to our justification, and how God’s role and man’s role work alongside one another.

But if there’s a doctrine that we can’t afford to be confused about, it’s the doctrine of sanctification. And I say that because it’s where we all live. We all live in between the time of our past justification and our future glorification—in the present pursuit of Christlikeness. And so we need to get this right. If we are concerned to conduct ourselves in a manner worthy of the Gospel (Phil 1:27), if we desire to please the Lord in all respects (Col 1:10), if it’s our ambition to put the sanctifying power of Christ on display, then we need to be clear on how we go about growing in holiness.

So over the next few days, I want to look into what Scripture has to say about these issues, with the hope that I might be able to add something helpful to the discussion, and to help us align our thoughts with the biblical teaching on the matter.

Continue Reading…

Robust discussion has resurfaced these past few weeks regarding the law-gospel issue and the relationship of sanctification with justification, being fueled, in part, by Tullian Tchividjian’s removal from TGC’s blogdom. In light of that, the Cripplegate is reposting an article from last year on identifying common legalism misconceptions.

The “L” word. It’s one of the ugliest of all words: legalism. Defined as the idea that we can earn right standing with God, it does violence to the glorious gospel of Christ. It says, “No, sorry, it’s not enough,” to the substitutionary atoning work of Christ. It confuses the way to forgiveness, it tarnishes the gospel of grace, it lays up heavy burdens that no one can carry, it crushes hope, and fuels despair. It declares that man possesses finesse to propitiate the just wrath of God due our sin. For that, legalism is deadly and must be opposed at every level. Paul called it another gospel whose proponents are condemned (Gal 1:8-9).

Consequently, labeling something/one legalistic ought to be done with caution. To bring the charge is to say that this thing or person is in danger of propagating an unsavable system and trampling the cross of Christ. So if we label something legalistic, we better thoroughly understand the gospel, the definition of legalism, and what exactly is happening with what we are labeling as legalistic. Otherwise, we are sinning by erroneously labeling something in opposition to the cross of Jesus Christ.

Even so, the legalism card often gets overplayed. More and more I’ve interacted with Christians humbly and faithfully working out their salvation with fear and trembling, only to have the legalism card slapped on them. As such, they’re being fallaciously warned about legalism boogeymen. There are many I’ve heard of lurking in Christendom.

Looking Under BedHere are 5 all-too-common legalism boogeymen we need to shoo away:

Continue Reading…

The company that made Courageous, October Baby, and FireProof released a new movie this month: Mom’s Night Out. I don’t often review movies, but I wanted to write about this one because of how it got slammed by main-stream reviewers as sexist and condescending. The truth is, the movie is anything but and those reviews really serve as a reminder of how disconnected the entertainment culture is from a Christian world view.

MNO_wp1_widescreenEach of Provident Film’s releases is better than the one before, and this movie is no exception. It is the first of their films to use a cast of already familiar secular actors (such as Sean Astin from The Lord of the Rings trilogy and Trace Adkins from Lincoln Lawyer, who join a few of the regulars from other Provident movies) as well as a soundtrack filled with popular secular songs. It is well written, well acted, and easily the most produced of Provident’s films so far.   Continue Reading…

Authentic Fire is Dr. Michael Brown’s book-length response to John MacArthur’s Strange Fire conference. Because of the importance of this debate, TheCripplegate is using every Thursday to respond chapter-by-chapter to Authentic Fire. You can find an overview of this debate, as well as links to the reviews for each chapter by clicking here.

Chapter 3 Summary

Michael Brown

Dr. Brown opens up the chapter juxtaposing the carefulness with which John MacArthur prepares his sermons against the carelessness with which he speaks about the Charismatic Movement, and wonders how one can make sense of the dichotomy and suggests that John MacArthur has a blind spot in his theology.  Dr. Brown makes four statements designed to point out the blind spot:

Statement #1.In recent history, no other movement has done more to damage the cause of the gospel, to distort the truth, and to smother the articulation of sound doctrine. . . . The Charismatic Movement as such has made no contribution to biblical clarity, no contribution to interpretation, no contribution to sound doctrine” (Kindle Locations 888-890).

burning-church

Dr. Brown suggests that charismatic scholars don’t make contributions to theology as charismatics, but rather as Christians (just like cessationists) and suggests that one can no more separate a charismatic from their charismatic beliefs than one can separate someone from their shadow.

Dr. Brown then offers forth examples of charismatic contributions to Christian doctrine/practice in Oswald Chambers, A.W. Tozer, Gordon Fee, Craig Keener, Ben Witherington, N.T. Wright, Peter H. Davids, Max Turner, Graham Twelftree, Jeffery Niehaus, J.P. Moreland, Wayne Grudem, R.T. Kendall, J. Rodman Williams, Sam Storms, and himself. Continue Reading…

Foxe's_Book

In light of Jesse’s post yesterday …

Fox’s Book of Martyrs is a must read for every Christian. Written by John Fox over 350 years ago, it catalogs the lives of hundreds of believers who, throughout church history, were willing to give their lives for the cause of Christ. When it comes to contagious courage, I can think of no greater testimony than reading about those who embraced their Lord to the point of embracing death.

One such account concerns the lives of Jerome Russell and Alexander Kennedy, two English Protestants who took a daring stand for what they believed. Because of their biblically-sound doctrine, the pair was arrested and imprisoned. Kennedy was only eighteen years old. After some time, the two men were brought before religious officials for questioning. Russell, being older, gave an articulate defense, usI ing the Scriptures to support his belief in salvation through faith alone. Yet, in spite of the evidence, the men’s accusers prevailed and Russell and Kennedy were deemed heretics.

In keeping with the jurisprudence of the times, they were condemned to death—their sentence to be carried out the following day. Early the next morning, Russell and Kennedy were led from their prison cells to the place of execution. They could have denied their Lord, right then and there, and been spared. But when Kennedy, being but a young man, began to display signs of fear, Russell quickly encouraged him to stand firm: Continue Reading…

Meriam Yehya Ibrahim is married, 27-years-old, mother to a 20-month old son, 8-months pregnant, and last week was sentenced to death for being a Christian.   Continue Reading…

Authentic Fire is Dr. Michael Brown’s book-length response to John MacArthur’s Strange Fire conference. Because of the importance of this debate, TheCripplegate is using every Thursday to respond chapter-by-chapter to Authentic Fire. You can find an overview of this debate, as well as links to the reviews for each chapter by clicking here.

af

Lyndon and myself are offering a chapter-by-chapter review of Authentic Fire, Dr. Michael Brown’s rebuttal book against Strange Fire. So far Lyndon has reviewed the preface and the first chapter. Today, I come to the second chapter.

Rejecting the Strange Fire, Embracing the Authentic Fire

Chapter Summary

In the second chapter of his book, Authentic Fire, Dr. Michael Brown addresses the charge that charismatic and Pentecostal Christians never police their own ranks. He acknowledges that there are many, many terrible things done in the name of the Holy Spirit, especially by leaders on so-called “Christian” TV, [AF, 13]. He also acknowledges that virtually all of the abuses seen on TV take place in charismatic circles and that is inexcusable [AF, 38]. But such outlandish things do not represent the core of the charismatic movement and they certainly have not gone without severe criticism from charismatic leaders.

In order to prove his point, Brown lists a number of leading men from within Pentecostal and charismatic churches who have decried for years those terrible abuses propagated by TV preachers. For instance, David Wilkerson, Gordon Fee, Jim Cymbala, John Wimber, Lee Grady, Jack Hayford, and Derek Prince.  All of those men have been vocal critics against the prosperity Gospel, fund raising manipulation, and wild behavior that characterizes much of what is called “Christian TV.” Continue Reading…

Dead Germans.

They are the subject of a lecture I give every spring in my church history classes: a brief overview of German theologians from the 19th and early-20th centuries.

It’s kind of a depressing lecture to deliver — the sad tale of skepticism intersecting with scholarship; a dismal depiction of the disaster unleashed by unrestrained doubt and disbelief.

Despite standing in the shadow of the Reformation, many German Protestant theologians abandoned the historic truth claims of biblical Christianity due to the mounting popularity of Enlightenment rationalism. In so doing, they shipwrecked their own souls while simultaneously devastating the faith of millions of others.

Higher critics, such as Johann Eichhorn and David Strauss, denied the inspiration and inerrancy of the Bible. Moses didn’t write the Pentateuch, they claimed; nor did Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John write the four gospels. To make matters worse, they suggested that the Jesus of the Bible is not the same as the real Jesus of history. In their “quest to find the historical Jesus,” the critics created a “Jesus” of their own imaginations — essentially reducing him to a nice guy who couldn’t do any miracles, never claimed to be God, and was largely misunderstood by first-century Judaism. Continue Reading…

z222981615Autocracy, totalitarianism, despotism. The words alone make us cringe. History is littered with tragic abuse of peoples and cultures at the hands of tyrannical coercion. One need not travel far on a historical timeline for evidences of autocratic control over people. Dictatorial agendas have played out in much abuse under controlling leaders. And sadly, the church is not exempt. Heavy-handed church leadership does its far share of damage too.

However, our human nature can tend towards overreaction. We can label things “controlling” which are not. Loving shepherding can be mislabeled dictating. Administering Christ’s care can be confused as controlling. Biblical discipleship can be accused of despotism. Encouragement can be falsely called exploitation. And these are not insignificant accusations. But too often, these serious allegations are lobbed at faithful, loving Christians administering needed care to one another, thus they are erroneously cautioned of controlling boogeymen. But these boogeymen have outstayed their welcome among God’s people and in the church, and for that reason, they need to be shooed away.

Here are 8 controlling boogeymen we need to shoo away:

Continue Reading…

Inerrancy and the Prophetic WordLast week, Nate drew attention to the 2015 Shepherds’ Conference Summit, which will be devoted to understanding and defending the doctrine of the inerrancy of Scripture. As we anticipate much conversation related to inerrancy to take place between now and then, I thought it would be helpful to post the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, originally published in 1978, in its entirety.

The CSBI has been a key point of reference in the inerrancy debate, clearly spelling out what its signers believed about the integrity and authority of Scripture, and why they believed “inerrancy” was a necessary designation to use.  Among the original signers were  James Montgomery Boice, John Frame, John Gerstner, Carl F. H. Henry, D. James Kennedy, John MacArthur, Roger Nicole, J. I. Packer, R. C. Sproul, and John Wenham. (A complete list of the signatories is available here.) The statement also was the frame of reference for the recent book, Five Views on Biblical Inerrancy.

Given its great importance to the discussion, I’m surprised at how many people I’ve spoken to about this issue who have heard of the statement but have never actually read it. For this reason, I’ve reproduced the statement in its entirety, which includes a preface, a summary statement, articles of affirmation and denial, and an exposition explaining the framers’ intent. It’s an extremely edifying read, and includes some things that many might be surprised to see. Let us know what you think in the comment thread!

*     *     *     *     *     *

Continue Reading…