Tag: doctrine

Posted in Bible Doctrine

Faith-based view of the Bible

Posted on by James

A faith-based view of the Bible is a principal conviction of my life, and while most Christians would claim that their beliefs about the Bible are based on faith, often they are not. The two goals of this post are to explain the position of a faith-based view of the Bible and to expose its opposition.

Explaining the Position of a Faith-based View

So what exactly is a faith-based view of the Bible? That one’s beliefs about the Bible are based on faith in (i.e. believing) what the Bible says about Itself. Allow these congruent examples of faith-based beliefs to clarify:

  • Faith-based view of the CREATION:
    I believe God created everything in 6 days… because that’s what the Bible says. It is recorded Genesis & confirmed in the New Testament (Mark 10:6-8. Hebrews 1:10. 2 Peter 3:4) Although there are many Creationist scientists; Henry Morris has fantastic books; and Answers in Genesis has compelling thoughts about science… I believe in creation by FAITH (i.e. trusting what the Bible says).
    Hebrews 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

  • Faith-based view of the FLOOD:
    I believe God destroyed life with a worldwide flood, sparing only the people and animals on the Ark… because that’s what the Bible says. Again, it is recorded in Genesis & confirmed by in the New Testament (Luke 17:26-27. Hebrews 11:7. 2 Peter 2:5). I don’t believe in the flood because every culture has an account of a cataclysmic flood, because archaeology may have found parts of the Ark, or because historians conclude that contemporaneous technology could have constructed an Ark compatible with Scripture; those things are interesting, but I believe in the flood by FAITH (i.e. trusting what the Bible says).
  • Faith-based view of the RESURRECTION:
    I believe that Jesus physically rose from the dead… because that’s what the Bible says (Mark 9:31. Mark 16:6. Acts 17:31), not because they found an empty tomb that they believe was Jesus’, not based of the writings of Josephus, and not dependent on shroud of Turin. I believe in the resurrection by FAITH (i.e. trusting what the Bible says).

Accordingly, a faith-based view of the Bible demands that one’s beliefs about the Bible are defined by the Bible Itself.

There are certain things I don’t understand about Creation, the Flood, and the resurrection (physics, chemistry, biology). Likewise, there are certain things I don’t understand concerning God’s Word – how did they decide which books to go in the Bible, when to add sections that were only in a few manuscripts, or which word to choose – but in all cases, I believe in spite of my questions.
2 Corinthians 5:7 (For we walk by faith, not by sight:)

I suggest that the foundational issue of faith is critical to how a believer approaches every doctrine… including the Word of God itself.
Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

Exposing the Opposition of a Faith-based View

Many Christians carry a faith-based view of the creation, the flood, the resurrection and salvation. If asked, “What do you believe about Heaven, Hell and salvation?” they would immediately refer to Bible verses to express their beliefs – because FAITH in the Bible is the basis for their beliefs on those subjects. But when asked about Scripture Itself (what they claim is the basis for all their beliefs), they automatically refer (and defer) to extra-biblical sources, and this immediate response exposes the authority & basis for their beliefs. Consider these faulty sources that are common for beliefs about the Bible:

  • Manuscript Science – how many; how old; how complete; where they were located; who possessed them; what kind of condition they’re in.
    But the man of God should forsake science to keep the Scriptures that are committed to him.

    1 Timothy 6:20-21 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: Which some professing have erred concerning the faith…
    Observe the warning that science will cause men to err from the faith. Science is the enemy of faith.

  • Secular Philosophy – the lines/origins of manuscripts; minority vs majority texts; Textual Criticism.
    But the man of God should be established in the faith (i.e. trusting in God’s Word).

    Colossians 2:7-8 Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving. Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
    Observe the warning that while faith will establish the believer, philosophy will spoil the believer. Secular philosophy is the enemy of faith.

  • Human Wisdom – the education, beliefs & morals of the translators; readability of versions; recommendation from a professor or pastor; popularity.
    But the man of God should stand in faith of God’s Word.

    1 Corinthians 2:4-5 And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power: That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.
    Observe that man’s wisdom is a faulty foundation for our beliefs. Human wisdom is the enemy of faith.

  • Traditional Fables – which version is older; which version we’ve always used; which version did a favorite theologian use.
    But the man of God should be nourished up & edified in the words of faith & doctrine.

    1 Timothy 1:4 Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.
    1 Timothy 4:6-7 If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained. But refuse profane and old wives’ fables, and exercise thyself rather unto godliness.
    Observe that traditional fables yield questions not spiritual growth.

  • Worldly Cares – possibility for human error; pragmatic fear of congregational acceptance.
    But the man of God should trust that God will provide and should subject his fears to faith.
    Matthew 6:30 & Matthew 16:8 reveal that worrying about God’s provision is a lack of faith.
    Matthew 8:26 and Matthew 14:31 reveal that fear of circumstances is a lack of faith.
    Observe that worldly cares focus on man’s abilities (and inabilities) not God’s ability. Worldly cares are the enemy of faith.

**NOTE – All these are intriguing and valuable subjects – BUT NEVER should they take priority, precedence, or power over what the Bible says about Itself.

If one of these is your answer to what you believe about the Bible, I suggest you search out what the Bible says about Itself and allow that to define your beliefs. This is merely the foundational view/ approach to the Bible. Dedicate yourself to discovering what God says about His Word.

 

Posted in Bible Doctrine, Ministry

Who runs the church – Part 2

Posted on by James

I recently wrote on the subject of church authority. You can read the entire post here. The essence was: God designed the church to be led by a team of elders (AKA pastors), with one leader of leaders. The post was supplemented with a warning against a common distortion of Elder Rule – the malpractice of labeling non-pastors as elders. 

From that post I received some astute (and kind) questions concerning the definition of “ordained elder.” First, I want to mention that I appreciate feedback – especially of the courteous variety. The two primary questions are “How do you define an ORDAINED ELDER?” and “Would Presbyterian Ruling Elders qualify as ORDAINED ELDERS?” In this post I intend to address these two questions and clarify the definition of ordained elder. 

 

How do you define an ordained elder?

The Bible uses the term ELDER synonymously and interchangeably with SHEPHERD/PASTOR (1 Peter 5:1-4) and BISHOP (Titus 1:5-7). Elder, Pastor, and Bishop are terms for the same office (this is not surprising as the Father, the Son, the Holy Ghost, Israel, the church, and the Scriptures each hold several monikers).  There can be no Biblical ELDER who is not also a PASTOR and BISHOP. In cases where a church has elders who are not given the governing authority or teaching authority or ministerial authority, that church dangerously distorted the title and office of ELDER.

Additionally, it is beneficial to consider the Biblical description of the calling & ministry of an ELDER. A Biblical ELDER must:

  • Be called by the Spirit through a driving desire for ministry. 
  • Be ordained by the church planter and/or existing group of elders of the local church (i.e. presbytery). No church elder in Scripture was ordained or ratified by a denomination, association, or central church. 
  • Be primarily occupied with the ministry of the Word and prayer. Not just tasked with administrative boards, policies, councils, and committees but tasked with watching for the souls of the members, with protecting the flock from false doctrine, and with correcting sin in the church body.

 An ELDER’s calling & ministry must be consistent with the Scriptural description of the office. When a church gives the title of ELDER to men with no calling or with only operational responsibilities, that church has misplaced the title of ELDER.

 

Would Presbyterian Ruling Elders qualify as ordained elders?

The inquirer hails from a Presbyterian (PCA specifically) church where Elders must be men, meet the character requirements of 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1, and be examined and trained. Being in no way an authority on that brand of Presbyterian ecclesiology, I read the denomination’s Book of Church Order. While somewhat more Scriptural than some Presbyterian variants, I conclude that PCA differ markedly from the Biblical office of Elders.  

The PCA acknowledges that Elder, Pastor, & Bishop are synonymous, yet it still creates two distinct orders of elders – also called Teaching Elders and Ruling Elders. More than a mere difference in their area of leadership, the PCA also sets up two orders that are substantially different from each other. While some suggest (inconclusively) that 1 Timothy 5:17 implies some elders are not teaching elders, there is no Biblical ground for a lower order of elders who have different callings, ordination or authority. 

  • Teaching Elders are gifted and called to ministry by the Holy Spirit. PCA recognizes no such gifting or call for Ruling Elders.
  • The “Presbytery” (by which they mean denominational district leaders not the leadership of the local church) is comprised of all Teaching Elders and only a fraction of Ruling Elders.
  • Teaching Elders are ordained, installed, and removed by the “Presbytery” (denominational district leaders); Ruling Elders are controlled by local churches.
  • If there is no Teaching Elder in a local church, and no “Stated Supply” (substitute) can be found, the “Presbytery” (denominational district leaders) may authorize a Ruling Elder to have limited pastoral service (that of Teaching Elder)… BUT for no longer than a year.

The answer to “Would Presbyterian Ruling Elders qualify as ordained elders?” is no – because neither the churches nor the Elders themselves see them as Pastors. They are seen as many Baptist deacons are seen – decision-making laymen… but not Pastors.  The Biblical model of church polity vests authority not in a central church, denomination or association but in the elders of an autonomous local church – whether they are vocational, bi-vocational or tentmakers.

 

Why does it matter?

First, allow me to say that I rejoice to hear about people who have been born again and are serving our Lord Jesus, and I have no animosity toward churches of another denomination or church polity. With that said, God has clearly vested church authority in a team of pastors (elders); Dangers exist in usurping authority from the place where God entrusted it – whether that be placing it in the hands of a congregational vote, deacons, a single pastor, or board of “elders” who aren’t really pastors.

But most important to me, I want to be faithful to establish the authority of our church plant in the most Biblical way possible. This church is Christ’s body; He’s the Lord; He’s the Chief Shepherd. I cede all my plans to His design.

Posted in Bible Doctrine

The Virgin Birth – Does it really matter?

Posted on by James

A controversy is brewing this Christmas, and this time it’s not about me forgetting to buy someone a Christmas gift. This controversy concerns Andy Stanley’s teaching on the virgin birth; the mega-pastor’s popularity often makes him a target – sometimes for good reason, sometimes not. Does it matter whether the virgin birth is factually accurate? Does it matter if a person believes in the virgin birth?

Is the Virgin Birth critical to Christianity? – YES!

Christianity does not hinge on the truth or even the stories about the birth of Jesus, it really hinges on the resurrection of Jesus. – Andy Stanley

Andy Stanley defends his approach by asserting that the bodily Resurrection of Christ is the prime doctrine of Christianity and the virgin birth is extraneous. The Resurrection is indeed fundamental, but contrary to Stanley’s opinion, the virgin birth is also critical to Christianity.

Christmas is the celebration of the truth that distinguishes true Christianity from every other religion in the world. Every religion demands that man works up to achieve a higher plain or heaven; Christianity declares that God came down to man to give eternal life. It’s completely unique – that the Creator would be made like His creation; that the Almighty would be made a weak baby; that the Lord of all would be made a servant.

Without the virgin birth, Jesus was not begotten of God, not the Son of God, and not divine. Therefore without the virgin birth, Christianity is false. Furthermore, because Jesus was born of the seed of the woman (Genesis 3:15. Galatians 4:4), he did not inherit the sin nature of Adam (Romans 5:12-14). The virgin birth is THE reason why Jesus could be our spotless sacrificial Lamb.

To be fair, Stanley professes to believe the virgin birth, but his pick-and-choose theology is a growing trend in Western Churchianity. While it is wise to acknowledge cultural views & doubts, it would be foolish to discard Biblical doctrine because it lacks popularity. Much of Christianity strives to stay relevant in our Post-Christian culture by permitting men to embrace truths they find attractive and dispose of truths that require faith or submission. It is analogous to a wife striving to keep her marriage by permitting her husband to have affairs. Make no mistake; Jesus is not desperate. He preferred a few fully devoted followers over multitudes who just wanted to see miracles. He prefers a few of genuine faith than multitudes that selectively believe.

 

Is the Virgin Birth critical for salvation? NO… and YES!

One blogger compares Andy’s approach to Paul’s secular apologetic method at Mars Hill (Acts 17:16-34). There is undoubtedly Scriptural merit in using secular views to reach secular people (1 Corinthians 9:20-24), but there’s a tremendous difference between Paul using secular views that validate NT truths and Stanley validating secular views that disparage NT truths.

Can a person come to saving faith in Christ without believing the virgin birth? That’s a tough question. One can certainly be saved while IGNORANT of the virgin birth, but can he be saved while REJECTING the virgin birth? A better question would be, “Does the person believe that Jesus was God in flesh?” The answer will clearly define who has genuine faith in Christ (1 John 4:2-3). Jesus made validating His deity the focus of His ministry and accepting His deity as the subject of faith. It is first part of the great mystery of godliness (1 Timothy 3:16). And Paul’s quintessential verse on salvation requires BOTH belief in Christ’s deity & His resurrection (Romans 10:9). 

 

Your Thoughts:

  • Has the virgin birth been a difficult doctrine for you?
  • Where is the balance of teaching the Word of God and not putting the cart before the horse?
  • What dangers have you seen in dismissing or presenting too much doctrine?
Posted in Bible Doctrine

The New Testament Canon

Posted on by James

Who decided which writings would be part of the New Testament Canon? What criteria was used in that determination? When was the list of New Testament books compiled? The truth might surprise you, as many of the classical answers conflict with history and with Scripture itself. A singular post cannot adequately address those questions, and honestly… neither can the totality of my understanding on the subject. 

Our church’s expository study of 1 Timothy shed light on the answers. In 1 Timothy 5:18, Paul quotes two texts of Scripture, the latter of which is most pertinent to this subject:

“For the scripture saith… The labourer is worthy of his reward.”

The quote is from Luke 10:7, which was likely penned just 2 years before Paul wrote 1 Timothy. By defining Luke’s gospel as “scripture,” Paul demonstrates a remarkable truth – the apostles and the early church discerned (by Divine power) which writings were given by inspiration. This truth is verified by Peter recognizing Paul’s epistles as “scripture” (2 Peter 3:15-16) and is illustrated by the churches being ordered to pass epistles to other churches (Colossians 4:16. 1 Thessalonians 5:27).

The truth is substantiated by documents like the Muratorian Fragment (a list of the writings observed by an early church, including all the New Testament besides Hebrews, James, 1, Peter, 2 Peter, and 3 John and dated just 75 years from the writing of Revelation) and the Peshitta (Syriac Bible produced less than 100 years from the writing of Revelation includes all but 2 Peter, 2 John 3 John, Jude, Revelation).

In short, it is undeniably clear that God gave His Word by inspiration and that He preserved His Word clearly. The more one studies the New Testament Canon, the more conspicuous God’s hand is in the velocity and precision of the acceptance of the Scriptures. You have every reason to trust that ALL Scripture is given by inspiration of God and that EVERY word of God is pure. Read it. Study it. Meditate on it. Love it. Obey it. Rejoice in it. Teach it.