Paul's Passing Thoughts

“Lifeway” Publishers Now Serving Antinomian Koolaid to Our Youth: Part 1

Posted in Uncategorized by Paul M. Dohse Sr. on June 24, 2011

Just yesterday, a youth leader from the Southern Baptist church Susan and I attend brought me a copy of a recent edition of “EC,” a magazine published for teens by Lifeway Publishers. By way of description, their website says the following:

“LifeWay Christian Resources was originally created as the Sunday School Board of the Southern Baptist Convention in 1891. As a denominational publisher, LifeWay provides resources for use in Southern Baptist churches and for the general public. LifeWay publications include curriculum study materials, ministry periodicals, personal growth materials, leisure-reading periodicals, multimedia and Internet resources, and books.”

The leader also brought me a copy of “Life Focus,” the student learning guide for teens. He also suggested that while both were saturated with contemplative spirituality, the student guide was much more nuanced than the magazine because the student guide would involve participation by adult leaders. It wouldn’t surprise me. For purposes of introducing this problem to our church, I will be writing a series on the one edition presented to me which has almost all the tenets of New Calvinism, Gospel  Sanctification, New Covenant Theology, Sonship Theology, etc.

I will get the ball rolling in this first part by addressing a concept from page 49 of the July 2011 edition of EC. Don’t get discouraged if this first part is hard to understand—I will have more time to better articulate in the following parts. It states the following to our youth:

“You know you love Christ, and you know how He is calling you to live—and you obey from the heart. That means that the reason you’re obedient to God isn’t because you think you have to, that being “good” will earn you His favor, or that the way to live the Christian life is to follow a bunch of rules. It means that you obey Christ’s commands out of love, recognizing who He is and what He has done for you. When you understand the cost Christ paid to set you free from sin and the depth of His love for you, you simply can’t pursue a life characterized by sin.”

Where to even start? This statement, though nuanced, and as the youth leader also suggested; speaks of the sanctification process in a justifying way, is fraught with error and a twisting of phraseology. Notice that the sanctification concept of “making it our goal to please Him” (2Cor. 5:9) is twisted into the concept of earning God’s favor for salvation by trying to be “good” (the implication is perfection, which we know will not happen until glorification). Of course, the error plays on the fact that most Christians, especially youth, do not know the difference between justification, sanctification, and glorification. Hence, trying to please God in sanctification is synonymous with trying to earn His favor for justification.

Then the most disturbing statement: “….or [notice “or”:other than; what?] that the way to live the Christian life is to follow a bunch of rules.” Notice how Christ’s mandate to put all that He has said into “practice” (Matt.7:26,27) is reworded as “a bunch of rules.” Clearly, the statement doesn’t qualify what “rules” are being talked about (the Psalms calls God’s word “rules” in many places), and the qualification thereof in the following sentences insinuates that obedience “from the heart” comes from one thing and one thing only: a deeper and deeper appreciation of what Christ did for us on the cross.

And that is what I am going to focus on here in the first part. This is the same contemplative spiritually presently overrunning the American church like a giant Tsunami. It holds that obedience flows naturally from a gushy, romantic like love that is produced from our gratitude for what Christ did for us on the cross, and is propagated by highly acclaimed teachers such as Francis Chan, John Piper, and Michael Horton. Supposedly, disobedience is always the result of lack in a “deeper and deeper” understanding of the gospel, who Christ is as a “real person” (whatever that means), and the depth of His love for us, as seen in the EC quotation:

“It means that you obey Christ’s commands out of love, (= the following) recognizing who He is and what He has done for you. When you understand the cost Christ paid to set you free from sin and the depth of His love for you, you simply can’t pursue a life characterized by sin.”

Of course, this assumes that Christ wanted Peter, who witnessed what Christ did firsthand, to qualify his love for Him this way: Do you love me? Then always contemplate what I did this week. Do you love me? Then study my personhood. Do you love me? Then figure out how much I love you. And by the way, teach my sheep to do the same thing.

Francis Chan, in his highly acclaimed book “Crazy Love,” compares this love to what it feels like when we fall in love with a girlfriend: “Because when you’re wildly in love with someone, it changes everything” (back cover forward: “Crazy Love”). Throughout the book, like his good friend John Piper, the legitimacy of love toward God is determined by feelings only. Francis Chan writes in the same aforementioned book on page 110: “When we work for Christ out of obligation, it feels like work. But when we truly love Christ, our work is a manifestation of that love, and it feels like love” So much for the Evangelical battle cry of past years: “Love is a verb.” Completely absent in Chan’s book is the concept of love that beseeches God Almighty for a passing of the cup of suffering if it be His will while sweating great drops of blood. On page 100, he says Christ was his grandmother’s “lover.” On page 101, Chan eludes to the New Covenant Theology concept of God’s law being replaced with a single law of love that is always accompanied by giddy, romantic feelings: “When we love, we’re free! We don’t have to worry about a burdensome load of commands, because when we are loving, we can’t sin. Do you feel free in your Christian life?” Notice: Chan’s standard for loving obedience in the Christian life is clearly; “Do you feel free in your Christian life?”

Michael Horton puts this in systematic theological terms with the following formula: Gratitude > Doxology > Obedience. I will now conclude this first post of the series with an excerpt from another article written to answer a reader’s question concerning this theological formula:

So, help me understand. I pulled the following quote from an article published in Modern Reformation, posted here, http://www.ouruf.org/d/cvt_sanctification.pdf. Why are you so against this way of thinking about the Christian life. If I am not motivated to obey the commands of scripture by the fact that I am already justified, then what would you suggest should be my motivation?

“I began to see that we stand before God today as righteous as we ever will be, even in heaven, because he has clothed us with the righteousness of his Son. Therefore, I don’t have to perform to be accepted by God. Now I am free to obey him and serve him because I am already accepted in Christ (see Rom. 8:1). My driving motivation now is not guilt but gratitude.”

And my answer:

Great question. One: Modern Reformation (MR) presents “gratitude” as the primary motivation for obedience to the exclusion of almost everything else. Second point under One: supposedly, our gratitude is increased by pondering / contemplating / meditating on the “gospel” or works of Christ which results in obedience that is qualified as acceptable before God because it is accompanied by joy, and a willing spirit. This is exactly what John Piper believes also; the moral character of obedience is ALWAYS determined by joy. Both of these points are indicative of Quietist, contemplative spirituality that Matt mentioned in the comment section of the other post.

Two: “I began to see that we stand before God today as righteous as we ever will be, even in heaven, because he has clothed us with the righteousness of his Son.” This is true, but MR believes that any attempt on our part to apply that righteousness horizontally is to take away from Christ’ righteousness that has been granted to us. This error is very subtle and is clothed in truth. We are not only righteous positionally, but we are also enabled to be righteous practically. It is up to us to “put on” the righteousness we have been given and to “put off” the remnant of sin left in our mortal bodies (Eph 4:20-24). This process will be EXPERIENCED IN A MYRIAD OF WAYS and will use a wide range of spiritual weapons granted to us, NOT JUST an endeavoring to be thankful for what Christ has done for us. In fact, making use of our complete arsenal is what will lead to deeper gratitude, not the limitation thereof. Paul said to put on the “full armor of God.”

But now let me hasten to reference what I said above (“MR believes that any attempt on our part to apply that righteousness horizontally is to take away from Christ’ righteousness that has been granted to us.”): On page 62 of “Christless Christianity” M. Horton says that spiritual growth only takes place when we, like unbelievers as well, “encounter the gospel afresh.” In other words, contemplation on the gospel is the only thing that produces spiritual growth. Furthermore, this eliminates the purpose of instruction from use of the Scriptures because the Spirit only works “through the gospel.” This is known as the “Christocentric” or Gospel-centric hermeneutic. Also, on pages 189-191 of the same book, Horton propagates the idea that corporate worship is strictly a contemplative affair and that we are a valley of dead bones coming to receive life through the corporate presentation of the gospel and sacraments. Of course, this is a blatant contradiction of Hebrews 10:23-25. In addition, on pages 117-119, Horton says that any attempt on our part to be a testimony with our good works (as Christians) is an attempt to “be the gospel” rather than presenting the gospel. In other words, our own efforts in evangelism is an attempt t to replace the works of Christ with our works. Of course, this is a blatant contradiction to Matthew 5:16 and 1Peter 3:1,2.

Three: “Therefore, I don’t have to perform to be accepted by God.” No, not for justification, but we need to dependently perform in sanctification in order to “PLEASE God” (2Cor 5:9). Note 2Cor 5:9 carefully–for crying out loud, it will even be our goal in heaven to please Him–except we will be unhindered by the flesh, but it will be no less us obeying Him than now, just more, and too perfection. Christ will not be obeying for us in heaven while we please Him there because we will be “like Him.” Neither does He obey for us now, though no doubt, we need to depend on His strength and knowledge to do so, but we are definitely WORKING with God (1Cor 3:9 1Thess 3:2). But Horton believes that justification and sanctification are the same thing. Therefore, any effort to be “accepted”(a salvation concept) by Him in sanctification (a misnomer) equals an effort to be justified by Him as well. This is very subtle and deceptive. However, he states plainly on page 62 in “Christless Christianity” that any effort to grow spiritually apart from contemplation on the gospel will result “in the LOSS of BOTH.” Both what? Answer: both justification and sanctification; ie, your lost!

Four: The Bible designates several other motivations for obedience other than gratitude. Let’s start with MR’s use of guilt because they / Horton know that our society has been conditioned to view guilt as an ill motivation or bad thing. “My driving motivation now is not guilt but gratitude.” This statement insinuates that the sum of sanctification is either / or. Not so. The apostle Paul instructed Timothy to “Keep a clear conscience before God” (1Tim 1:5, 1:19, 3:9, 4:2, 2Tim 1:3). Clearly, one of the goals in sanctification is the consideration and motivation to KEEP a clear conscience. Secondly, under Four, fear of discipline is used to motivate (Acts 5:10-16 1Thess 4:6 1Tim 5:20). Thirdly, the awesome motivation to discipline self to prevent the Lord’s discipline. What a wonderful motivation / promise from our Lord! (1Cor 11:27-32). Fourthly, we are motivated by being promised blessings IN (a preposition) the DOING, (James 1:25) not IN CONTEMPLATION.

Fifthly, God motivates us to good works via REWARDS. Really, hundreds of verses could be cited to make this point, but I will mention Matthew 6:6. Also note that contemplation is not the cure for hypocritical prayer in the context of Jesus’ counsel here, but the practice of private prayer. I will stop here as the biblical points that could be cited on this are endless, but let me say that I am very concerned with contemplation replacing biblical instruction in regard to helping Christians with serious life problems, and being complete before the Lord, lacking nothing (2Timothy 3:16).

Five: MR fails to recognize the all important biblical concept of self-sacrifice. Often, our faith will drag ourselves kicking and screaming into obedience in order to please God; and the belief that blessings will be our reward, though delayed for the time-being. Joy does not always walk with obedience at every moment. In fact, faith often does not care about self at all, but rather takes pleasure in the fact that God is pleased regardless of how we feel at the time. Here, beating our bodies into subjection and self-death is the motivation / goal. Do we always seek to please God because we are mindful of his sacrifice? Or is it our love for Him that is many faceted with gratitude included?

Six: Gratitude alone does not bring us near to God; “adding” to our faith does (2Peter 1:5-11).

Bottom line: The MR quote above is fraught with deception. Contemplative spirituality is a roadway to destruction.

paul

Chan, Carson, Piper, Tchividjian Versus the Holy Spirit On “Rules”

Posted in Uncategorized by Paul M. Dohse Sr. on May 2, 2011

Here is what the brain-trust of Sonship theology says about “rules”:

Francis Chan: “To change our hearts, what we value, what we risk, how we act, we don’t need more guilt or more rules, we just need to be in love with God. Because when you’re wildly in love with someone, it changes everything.”

DA Carson: “In this broken world, it is not easy to promote holiness without succumbing to mere moralism; it is not easy to fight worldliness without giving in to a life that is constrained by mere rules.”

John Piper: “So the key to living the Christian life – the key to bearing fruit for God – the key to a Christ-exalting life of love and sacrifice – is to die to the law and be joined not to a list of rules, but to a Person, to the risen Christ. The pathway to love is the path of a personal, Spirit-dependent,  all-satisfying relationship with the risen Christ, not the resolve to keep the commandments.”

Tullian Tchividjian: “A taste of wild grace is the best catalyst for real work in our lives: not guilt, not fear, not another list of rules.”

What the Holy Spirit says as translated by the foursome’s Bible of Choice, the ESV:

Psalm 18:22
For all his rules were before me, and his statutes I did not put away from me.

Psalm 19:9
the fear of the LORD is clean, enduring forever; the rules of the LORD are true, and righteous altogether.

Psalm 89:30
If his children forsake my law and do not walk according to my rules,

Psalm 119:7
I will praise you with an upright heart, when I learn your righteous rules.

Psalm 119:13
With my lips I declare all the rules of your mouth.

Psalm 119:20
My soul is consumed with longing for your rules at all times.

Psalm 119:30
I have chosen the way of faithfulness; I set your rules before me.

Psalm 119:39
Turn away the reproach that I dread, for your rules are good.

Psalm 119:43
And take not the word of truth utterly out of my mouth, for my hope is in your rules.

Psalm 119:52
When I think of your rules from of old, I take comfort, O LORD.

Psalm 119:62
At midnight I rise to praise you, because of your righteous rules.

Psalm 119:75
I know, O LORD, that your rules are righteous, and that in faithfulness you have afflicted me.

Psalm 119:102
I do not turn aside from your rules, for you have taught me.

Psalm 119:106
I have sworn an oath and confirmed it, to keep your righteous rules.

Psalm 119:108
Accept my freewill offerings of praise, O LORD, and teach me your rules.

Psalm 119:137
Righteous are you, O LORD, and right are your rules.

Psalm 119:156
Great is your mercy, O LORD; give me life according to your rules.

Psalm 119:160
The sum of your word is truth, and every one of your righteous rules endures forever.

Psalm 119:164
Seven times a day I praise you for your righteous rules.

Psalm 119:175
Let my soul live and praise you, and let your rules help me.

Psalm 147:20
He has not dealt thus with any other nation; they do not know his rules. Praise the LORD!

paul

Comment By “Anodos” Is Indicative Of Sonship’s Dark Spirit

Posted in Uncategorized by Paul M. Dohse Sr. on May 1, 2011

All false doctrine has its consequences. It’s difficult to write about what one encounters personally with those who propagate Sonship Theology and its offspring, Gospel Sanctification, but a recent comment by “Anodos” on the Tchividjian post is telling. He commented as follows:

“The Pharisees had their doctrine nailed down – they had studied scriptures and worked on it for hundreds of years. Jesus was crucified over a doctrinal issue. The Pharisees’ understanding of that doctrine was correct, but they did not know their God even when He stood face to face with them.

Why?

You have your orthodoxy all worked out, but your spirit is the same as the Pharisee. The next time you stand face to face with Christ, the tables will be turned.  It will be He who says, “I do not know you, depart from me you worker of iniquity.”

Repent.  Humble yourself and admit that you might not know all that you think you know. Come to Jesus and ask Him to reveal Himself to you. He will come to those who are spiritually impoverished, to those who are broken hearted and mourn.

Jesus is not a fact. He is a person. Eternal life is not knowing about Jesus, it is knowing Jesus. Your entrance into heaven will not be based on your works or your doctrine, but on whether Jesus knows you.  This is a relationship, not a quiz.”

This statement is very, very Sonshippy, and characteristic of the mentality among Sonship’s Koolaid drinking faithful. First, we see the misrepresentation of the Pharisees as a device for promoting their false doctrine. Supposedly, the Pharisees were really, really good at keeping the law and had a laser focus on correct doctrine, but missed the whole point of salvation which has nothing to do with truth, and everything to do with knowing Christ as a “person.” Only problem is—that’s not true.

Anodos’ contention that the Pharisees had Jesus crucified over correct doctrine is a classic GS proposition, but doesn’t square with what Scripture states. Just imagine how intimidating this is to those who are under it; your best intentions in regard to following the truth could result in you being a Pharisee without realizing it. Moreover, since a relationship with Christ has nothing to do with the truth (“Jesus is not a fact. He is a person”), you wouldn’t dare go to the Scriptures and make your own assessment because that is truth-based / doctrine oriented. Therefore, you must be able ascertain what the Scriptures are teaching you about Jesus’ personhood for relationship purposes, and not knowledge. Since you wouldn’t normally try that at home—yep, you guessed it—better depend on those who are really, really good with the Redemptive-Historical Hermeneutic. Do you think that I am insinuating that GS doctrine (which is based on Jesus as a “person [a no-brainer]—not a cognitive concept that we apply to life.” [Paul Tripp]) relegates GS followers to a Pope-like dependence on their leaders for understanding the Scriptures? Absolutely.

The fact is: the Pharisees were the sultans of false doctrine and lawlessness. All of the trials leading up to Jesus’ execution were completely unlawful. Jesus made it clear that they changed the law and replaced it with their traditions. In fact, Jesus accused them of nullifying the law and making it “void” (Matthew 15:16). Since law (Scripture: see Matthew 5:18) determines doctrine, the Pharisees didn’t have correct doctrine. Obviously.

Hence, the idea heard constantly among the GS crowd: those who form their beliefs from biblical facts make the same mistake the Pharisees supposedly made. I have heard this from GS leaders firsthand. Only the gospel, as seen in the Scriptures, is “Spirit”; “facts” are the “letter” of the law –not the Spirit. Therefore, supposedly, the “letter kills, but the Spirit gives life,” and they cite 2Corinthians 3:6 accordingly. Can I emphasize enough how dangerous this teaching is?

Secondly, this is postmodern thought. The following are statements by John MacArthur Jr. in “Truth War” concerning the Emergent Church and Postmodern thought. See if you can detect the parallels between GS hermeneutics / Anodos’ comments, and what MacArthur writes as follows:

“Uncertainty is the new truth. Doubt and skepticism have been canonized as a form of humility” (page 16).

“Even some professing Christians nowadays argue along these lines: ‘If truth is personal, it cannot be propositional. If truth is embodied in the person of Christ [my emphasis], then the form of a proposition can’t possibly express authentic truth. That is why most of Scripture is told to us in narrative form-as a story-not as a set of propositions” (Page 14, emphasis added).

 “Propositions force us to face facts and either affirm or deny them, and that kind of clarity simply does not play well in a postmodern culture” (Page 16).

Quoting John Armstrong, a proponent of the Emerging Church: “Theology must be a humble human attempt to ‘hear him’ – never about rational [again, my emphasis] approaches to text” (page 21).

Thirdly, Anodos displays a common propensity among GS advocates to proclaim dissenters as unregenerate. Notice that Anodos, like most GS advocates, base this on my exegetical view of Scripture. Anodos might note in the verse that he uses to condemn me that the word for “iniquity” is “anomia” which means “anti-law” (negative article “a” and “nomia” [law]). That sounds more like the GS crowd than me.

Lastly, Anodos’ comment is indicative of GS/Sonship’s inadequacy in presenting the gospel. “Come to Jesus and ask Him to reveal Himself to you,” is not how one gets saved. I was involved in a situation where I was asked to counsel an individual who was living in unspeakable sin. Later, we became disassociated with each other when he started counseling with a GS / Sonship “elder.” Some time later, I was informed that the counselee spent hours on his knees begging God to save him, and to no avail. Why? Apparently, the counselee had been taught by the GS counselor that before he could be saved, God had to show him his salvation as a “treasure chest of joy.”

Anodos, that’s why you and your GS cohorts are wicked false teachers. And frankly, I don’t care if your names are Anodos, John Piper, Tim Keller, David Powlison, Paul Tripp, Francis Chan, etc, etc, etc. I don’t care how well any of you speak, how well you dress, how many followers you have, or even how good you smell. Your vile doctrine is ruining people’s lives and I will contend against it until God gives me my last breath.

paul

 

They Just Had To Have Their Own Bible But….

Posted in Uncategorized by Paul M. Dohse Sr. on April 22, 2011

….some things are just better left alone. The GS movement has been busily running about setting up there own spiritual infrastructure for some time now, and apparently, they wanted their own, unique Bible as well. The Bible of choice for the Sonship / GS faithful is the ESV, published in the very contemporary year of 2001. In the advertisement posted at the end of this article—featuring the who’s who of GS doctrine, Francis Chan says: “I’ve loved using the ESV translation because [it’s the GS thing to do] I trust the scholarship [emphasis mine] behind it and the accuracy [emphasis mine] of the interpretation.” Hmmmm: he’s wrong about Jesus being our Beverly Hills 90210 boyfriend—could he be wrong about the ESV as well?

The GS tsunami of the past ten years has fooled some into thinking that the ESV should be “The Bible of the future—ideal for public worship and private reading.” And apparently, not if Mark L. Strauss has anything to do with it. He recently wrote:

“So I like the ESV. I am writing this article, however, because I have heard a number of Christian leaders claim that the ESV is the ‘Bible of the future’—ideal for public worship and private reading, appropriate for adults, youth and children. This puzzles me, since the ESV seems to me to be overly literal—full of archaisms, awkward language, obscure idioms, irregular word order, and a great deal of ‘Biblish.’ Biblish is produced when the translator tries to reproduce the form of the Greek or Hebrew without due consideration for how people actually write or speak. The ESV, like other formal equivalent versions (RSV; NASB;NKJV; NRSV), is a good supplement to versions that use normal English, but is not suitable as a standard Bible for the church. This is because the ESV too often fails the test of  standard English.”

His entire review can be read here: http://bible-translation.110mb.com/improvingesv.pdf , but I will post the snafu’s documented by Strauss that even made me blush, and at times, laugh:

[Begin Strauss excerpt] For example, the ESV (following the RSV) originally rendered Gen. 30:35, “But that day Laban removed the male goats that were striped …and put them in charge of his sons.”It is remarkable that Laban had so much confidence in his goats! This gaffe was pointed out and a second printing of the ESV corrected it, taking authority away from Laban’s goats: “… and put them in the charge of his sons.” Here are a few more “oops” translations that I have found in the ESV.

 

“Grinding Together”?!

 

Luke 17:35 ESV “There will be two women grinding together. One will be taken and the other left.”

Comment: In contemporary English, “grinding together” suggests seductive dancing or something worse. (Perhaps both should have been taken for judgment!) Most versions clarify that this means grinding “grain,” “meal” or “flour” (cf. TNIV, NIV, NLT, HCSB, NET, NRSV, REB, etc.)

Rock badgers are people too!

 

Prov. 30:26 ESV “the ants are a people not strong, yet they provide their food in the summer; rock badgers are a people not mighty, yet they make their homes in the cliffs;”

Comment: In addition to the tortured word order, the ESV’s use of “people” is very strange. We sometimes joke that animals are people too, but surely ants and rock badgers are “creatures” or “species,” not people.

 

Nice legs!

 

Ps. 147:10 ESV “His delight is not in the strength of the horse, nor his pleasure in the legs of a man,”

Comment: Taking pleasure in a man’s legs will surely leave readers chuckling. TNIV reads “in the power of human legs”; NET has “by the warrior’s strong legs.”

 

Such clean teeth!

 

Amos 4:6 ESV “I gave you cleanness of teeth in all your cities”

Comment: It sounds like God is distributing toothbrushes to the Israelites. The Hebrew idiom means they had nothing to eat. The TNIV reads “I gave you empty stomachs,”; HCSB: “I gave you absolutely nothing to eat.” NET: “I gave you no food to eat.”

 

Trembling loins?

 

Psalm 69:23 ESV Let their eyes be darkened, so that they cannot see, and make their loins tremble continually.

Comment: This translation will surely send twitters through the junior high group. Trembling loins sounds like someone has to go to the bathroom.

 

“Double-tongued” deacons?

 

1 Tim. 3:8 ESV Deacons likewise must be dignified, not double-tongued, not addicted to much wine, not greedy for dishonest gain

Comment: Sounds like a mock “Indian-speak” (with forked-tongue) or some strange alien creature. The Greek is dilogoi (etymologically, “two words/messages”), which means “insincere,” “lacking integrity,” “hypocritical,” or even “two-faced” (NET; GW).

 

Keep that faith to yourself!

 

Rom. 14:22 ESV The faith that you have, keep between yourself and God.

Comment: The ESV seems to be discouraging believers from sharing their faith. But the word pistis here refers to personal convictions about food and drink, not about saving faith.6 TNIV So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. REB If you have some firm conviction, keep it between yourself and God.

Showing off the flesh

 

Gal. 6:12 ESV It is those who want to make a good showing in the flesh who would force you to be circumcised….

Comment: “A good showing in the flesh” sounds like a bikini contest.

 

Ruth the mother of Boaz?

 

Ruth 4:14-15 ESV Then the women said to Naomi, “Blessed be the LORD, Who has not left you this day without a redeemer, and may his name be Renowned in Israel! He shall be to you a restorer of life and a nourisher of your old age, for your daughter-in-law who loves you, who is more to you than seven sons, has given birth to him.”

Comment: The only antecedent to “him” is Boaz. It sounds like Ruth gave birth to her husband Boaz.

Planting ears?

 

Psalm 94:9 ESV He who planted the ear, does he not hear? He who formed the eye, does he not see?

Comment: “Planting an ear” sounds like an agricultural metaphor. The Hebrew nata in this context means “formed,” or “fashioned.” TNIV Does he who fashioned the ear not hear?…NET Does the one who makes the human ear not hear?

 

Watch out for falling lots!

 

Acts 1:26 ESV And they cast lots for them, and the lot fell on Matthias…

Comment: One hopes Matthias was not hurt when the lot fell on him. The TNIV has “the lot fell to Matthias.” The NET has “the one chosen was Matthias.”

 

Israel’s gender confusion

 

Hosea 8:14 ESV For Israel has forgotten his Maker and built palaces, and Judah has multiplied fortified cities; so I will send a fire upon his cities, and it shall devour her strongholds.

Comment: Readers will probably wonder why he gets the cities and she gets the strongholds.

 

Comforted or not?

 

Acts 20:12 ESV And they took the youth away alive, and were not a little comforted.

Comment: “Not a little comforted” sounds like they were not comforted in the least by Eutychus’ recovery. The meaning of course is the opposite, that they were greatly comforted. TNIV: …and were greatly comforted.

REB: …greatly relieved that he was alive.

 

A man without a city

Acts 21:39 ESV Paul replied, “I am a Jew, from Tarsus in Cilicia, a citizen of no obscure city.”

Comment: Paul sounds like a man without a city. TNIV is only slightly better (“a citizen of no ordinary city”). NLT captures the sense: “Tarsus in Cilicia, which is an important city.”

Oh man!

Rom. 2:1 ESV Therefore you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges.

Comment: In contemporary English, “Oh man!” is an exclamation, not a vocative. It sounds like Paul is saying, “Oh man, are you in trouble!” which of course is something like what he means (!), but not what the ESV intended. Even a literal version like the NASB recognizes the potential misunderstanding of the vocative, translating, “Therefore you have no excuse, everyone of you who passes judgment.”



On The 114th Day of 2011 My True Love Gave to Me The Gospel Again

Posted in Uncategorized by Paul M. Dohse Sr. on April 20, 2011

I guess this is confession time for me. It’s no big secret among those who know me well that I believe there is a death by gospel going on in the contemporary church. We get the gospel in almost every song we hear on CD / radio during the week. We get the gospel in almost every sermon heard on the radio / PC during the week. Then on Sunday—more gospel. Then the holidays come—more gospel with pomp and circumstance. For instance, it’s not enough that the song, “The Twelve Days Of Christmas”

( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelve_Days_of_Christmas ) is symbolic of twelve different truths found in the Bible

( http://www.carols.org.uk/the_twelve_days_of_christmas.htm ); hundreds have written their own “true” version making all twelve verses about the gospel

( http://lyricsplayground.com/alpha/songs/xmas/therealtwelvedaysofchristmas.shtml ).

Yes, every verse of a song, like the Bible, must be about the gospel. I look forward to the inevitable, “The 365 days of the Gospel” that will certainly be written by someone, and we are all sure that the church will be the better for it. And since Christ is no longer the King of kings and Lord of lords, the “my true love” part refers to Christ who is now, according to spiritual brainiacs like Francis Chan, our boyfriend and “lover.” Undoubtedly, the 114th day of 2011, Easter Sunday, will be no different. Furthermore, as I have sarcastically predicted before, and I will say again, the days of serving the Lord’s Table and re-baptizing every Sunday in Evangelical churches will eventually become reality as well.

Total gospel overload. Meanwhile, Christians suffer in the torture chamber some call “home.” Someone shared a situation with me last week concerning a sister (let’s call her “Maggie”) who is a member of a “thriving” church that emphasizes the gospel. They are what many call, “gospel centered.” Errrrrr, amen brother. Her husband, who is well respected in said church, has a pornography addiction. But praise ____: they hear the gospel every Sunday!

So, what’s my grip? Well, certainly NOT with the gospel (it means “good news”), but rather what most Christians have come to believe the gospel is: the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ ONLY. There is more to the gospel than that—the gospel is also good news about how we masterfully apply the word of God to our lives. Maggie needs some good news. Will she get it at church? I doubt it. The apostle Paul said Christians are called to peace, and Maggie isn’t finding much, even after here husband has heard 365 different versions of the gospel minus “anything we would do.” After all, “it’s not about anything we do, but what Christ has done.” Is that workin’ for Maggie? I doubt it.

Let me not write a book, but simply state my case. When Christ began his ministry, he went about proclaiming “the gospel” (Matt 4:23). What was that gospel? Our question is answered shortly thereafter in Matt 5:1-7:29; that section of Scripture is commonly known as the Sermon on the Mount. His death, burial, and resurrection is nowhere to be found in that sermon. The sermon is about our role in having life, and having it more abundantly. Certainly, without the works of Christ, there is no good news of the kingdom. But once we are in, Maggie should get more good news—Christ has some news concerning what he wants her to do about the circumstance she finds herself in. He will tell her: how to think about the problem; what attitude to have about the problem; how to pray about the problem; how other Christians should help her; what God himself promises to do about the problem; and lastly, what God expects her to do about the problem. And as a result of this information, Maggie not only finds a future hope, but a present hope. Christ came that we may not only have life more abundantly at the resurrection, but NOW also. Besides, the Maggie’s of the world make poor evangelist. Homes that can’t withstand the storms of life make poor shelter for a lamp (Matt 5:14 and Matt 7:24-27).

The gospel is cross centered indeed—but it is also problem centered. Um, in case anybody hasn’t noticed, the gospel addresses a problem: SIN. But then it addresses all of the other problems caused by sin—there’s a need for that, just in case no one has noticed. And also, just in case anybody missed it, Epahraditus didn’t almost die because Christ was doing everything for him.

paul