Life and Death: meditations on the restoration of all things

Over the past couple of weeks my family has experienced a rollercoaster of emotions. Two weeks ago this Friday we welcomed our 3rd child (Ashlyn Grace) into the world, and a week ago this Saturday we lost my father-in-law who went home to be with Jesus. On one hand, we have experienced the joy of new life. On the other hand, we have experienced the sadness and grief of death. And as I have reflected these past few days on these events I a reminded that is precisely what we are seeing taking place all around us. When one studies the narrative of Scripture, two main themes emerge: “new birth” and the “curse of death.”

“Curse of Death”: Since the Fall of humanity, all of mankind has been born in sin and died as a result. After the sin of Adam and Eve God places a curse upon them and the creation (Genesis 3) and the pattern of Scripture after that is we are “born” and then we “die” (Genesis 5). After all the wages of sin is death (Romans 5) and the entire creation has been subjected to futility (Romans 8). The imagery that Paul uses to explain this curse is “birth pains” an experience that is blazed into my mind after two weeks ago. Our first two deliveries went fairly smooth, this one did not. I will spare you the details, but this husband/father got caught up in the intensity of the moment. The anticipation got stronger, the pains of birth (at least for my wife) continued to mount, and I longed for it to be over and see our new gift of life.

Yet I could not help but think that this is exactly what all of God's children are experiencing. Paul writes in Romans 8:22, "We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth." Jesus said in Matthew 24:8, speaking of the tribulation, "All these are the beginning of birth pains." There is absolutely nothing joyful about the “birthing process” outside of the fact that we know what is coming is “new life.”

So as I watched my wife suffer the pains of childbirth, I also became aware of the birth pains I see all around me. A father-in-law dying of cancer, a church member with an alcoholic family, hurricanes that destroy cities in a matter of moments, a family that holds grudges and refuses to forgive, a body that grows older and older by the day, a father who decides to just walk away from his family, a baby who dies at an early age, nations that rage, and people who think life is all about them...oh how I long for NEW BIRTH!! Not just for a baby, but for a fallen world! As we see numerous birth pains all around us we know that there is nothing joyful about it, other than the fact that you know it’s pointing you to new life, a future resurrection that is kept by the power of God in Christ (1 Peter 1:3-7).

“New Birth”: Most Christians have been taught to believe that the “ultimate” future is heaven. This is not, however, what Scripture teaches. Our future hope is a new creation, a city that comes down rather than us going up (see Rev 21). The separation of the spirit and body is not according to the original design of God (Genesis 1-2) and while to be absent form the body is to be present with the Lord, a future resurrection in a restored creation is the new birth we are all longing for.

Not only is new birth the ultimate future reality for those who are in Christ, the promise of this new life is tasted of through genuine conversion now. The transformation we see in our lives as we come by faith to a resurrected Messiah is a transformation of death to life, of cursed to blessed, of slave to free. This theme is all over the biblical narrative. Ezekiel speaks of a day when we will be washed with water, which Jesus shares with Nicodemus when he tells him you must be “born again” (John 3). Jeremiah speaks of a covenant when we will have a heart of flesh and “know the Lord” (Jer 31). Paul uses this imagery in 2 Corinthians 5:17 when he says that if you are “in Christ” you are a “new creation.” In other words, what we are longing for eternally, namely a new birth, we are able to experience the first fruit of now “in Christ.” After all, the narrative of Scripture boils down to whether or not you are “in Adam” and dead or “in Christ” and alive (see 1 Corinthians 15).

What my family has experienced in a 1 week time frame is the very same experience we are all facing if we will just look around. There are images of new birth and images of death all around us and each one is saying something to us about a future reality and a future hope.

We waited, and the day finally came when our little girl was born into the world. What a wonderful day that was! After all new birth is a beautiful thing.

We waited, for the day when my father-in-law would take his last breath. And as we laid his body to rest today in a grave that will one day be opened with a trumpet shout, I am reminded that we must all wait for a day when the skies will be opened and our Savior will return to make all things new. What a wonderful day that will be! After all new birth is a beautiful thing.

Awaiting the Restoration of all things,
Pastor Wes

Speaking in Tongues (a reflection on the Great Debate 2)

We had another great evening last night as we hosted our second “Great Debate” at TBC. Our topic was on the gift of speaking in tongues. We were blessed to have Pastor Ron Strack from Meadowbrook Community church in Champaign, IL representing the Charismatic viewpoint, Dr. Alan Phillips Jr. from Bloomington, IL representing the Open but Cautious view, and Dr. Mark Coppenger from Evanston, IL representing the Cessationist view. These three men handled themselves with class, humility, and gave challenging insights to God’s Word. I am deeply grateful to each of these men for their contributions to our event.

My post is not to rehash the discussion from last night, but to provide some additional thoughts on the issue of speaking in tongues. As moderator, I did my best to remain neutral. As pastor, I want to add some thoughts regarding the issue.

The Church: A Theological Framework

In Ephesians, the Apostle Paul uses specific language to describe the Church. He describes the Church as, “God's household, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone" (2:19-20). This is a very important description in my mind. Paul recognizes that the “chief” cornerstone is the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross and his resurrection so that “no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ” (1 Cor 3:11; 15:3-4).

The next building stage is the work of the Apostles and prophets, not because the work of Christ is insufficient, but in order to carry out the mission Jesus gave His followers (Matthew 28). Therefore, the Apostles have a unique role in spreading a revelatory Word in the mission of Christ as He builds His church (Matthew 16). So the finished work of Christ is joined with the Apostolic witness, which was to provide revelatory, infallible witness through the Holy Spirit that would bring about sacred Scripture and the spread of the gospel to the nations.

Just as Christ would not be on earth permanently, neither would the Apostles (the office or the gifts associated with it as I will argue later). How do we know that the Apostolic office was temporary? First of all, to be an Apostle you had to be an eye-witness of Jesus Christ (Acts 1:21-26 and 1 Corinthians 9:1). Secondly, Paul viewed himself as the final Apostle (1 Corinthians 15:7-9). Thirdly, (and yes I realize this is an argument from silence) we never hear of the office again. Timothy, Paul’s son in the faith, is never viewed as having Apostolic authority but rather is encouraged by his “father-in-the-faith” to study the Scriptures “which are able to make you wise” and “rightly handle the word of truth.”

The Apostolic Age: Signs and Wonders

In addition to the office and role of Apostle, Jesus said that “signs and wonders” would accompany the spreading of the gospel, which is in the context of the Apostolic witness moving forward.

And these signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up serpents with their hands; and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover.” (Mark 16:17-18)

One should first note that there is a lot of discussion as whether or not these verses are in the original manuscripts. That said, Jesus says that these signs will accompany the spreading of the gospel (“those who believe”). Therefore, they are intended demonstrate the authenticity of the gospel. One of these signs is “glossolalia” which Jesus described as “new” languages. "New" meaning unknown to the speaker. Therefore, as the gospel is going forward one of the signs that will accompany it will be the ability to speak in languages “unknown” by the speaker. This interpretation is enhanced and supported in how the story unfolds in the book of Acts.

And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance. (Acts 2:4)

In Acts 2, the Spirit comes down and fills the Apostles and they began to speak in other tongues (glossolalia) just as Jesus had said and just as the prophet Joel had prophesied (Joel 2). Peter himself refers to this in Acts 2. Yet Jesus mentioned that these signs would serve so that people “would believe.” This is why through the gift of tongues and the proclamation of the gospel (Acts 2) Peter concludes that it was to “let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified (vs. 32)." In other words, this event was to show the Jews that Jesus was who he said he was (proclamation of the gospel).

Some important facts:

1. It is clear in this passage that the gift of tongues was a known language because the response of those who heard it was "are not all these who are speaking Galileans? And how is it that we hear, each of us in his own native language? (vs. 8-9) What was amazing was that these speakers were speaking in a language they did not previous know.

2. The content of the message was concerning the gospel of Jesus Christ so as to prepare their hearts to come to faith in Christ. So the miracle of the gift was to draw attention to the gospel.

3. Only existing believers received this gift and there is no evidence that new converts received such a gift after coming to faith in Christ. The gift they received was the Holy Spirit Himself. (2:38)

This event continued at other times in the book of Acts.

Acts 10:46—what happened in Acts 2 to the Jews, happened again to the Gentiles in Acts 10. God manifested Himself again for the Gentiles. Once again the purpose of the gift was to verify that the Father was active in saving people (now to the Gentiles) by sending His Son and Spirit.

Acts 19:6—the experience of Jews and Gentiles is now occurring for the followers of John the Baptist. This is the third and final time in the book of Acts. In all cases the gift is public, communicates the gospel, and verifies who Jesus is for three different groups.

Also, there are instances of the coming of the Holy Spirit without any record of speaking in tongues (Acts 2:41-42, 8:12, 9:17-19).

Other comments from the book of Acts

Many Continuationists have concluded that “being filled with the Spirit” resulted in speaking in tongues, prophesying, and/or performing miracles. However, in all of the verses that speak about “being filled with the Spirit” not a single one mentions speaking in tongues. Rather in all of these occasions the individuals spoke the word with boldness. Therefore, to be filled with the Spirit should refer more to bold evangelism rather than speaking in tongues. (4:8,31; 13:9,52)

The Apostle Paul and the Corinthian church

Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away, For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. (1 Cor 13:8-10)

Paul is writing to an extremely unhealthy and fractured church that was caught up in paganism and therefore he must reeducate them on the proper place of tongues. Unlike the churches in Jerusalem and Ephesus, the use of tongues in Corinth was unintelligible and had caused division. Paul does confirm that speaking in tongues is a spiritual gift (though among the least 14:1) though it is not possessed by every Christian (12:30).

What is very clear from this passage is that tongues and prophecies will pass away or cease, so cessationism is true on some level. The point Paul wants to make here is to compare love (eternal) to gifts (passing). Now two important questions emerge: why tongue and prophecies and when do they cease?

Why tongues and prophecies? It’s simple. For Paul, tongues (when interpreted and under control) and prophecy work together because they are revelatory gifts (14:1-7). In fact, I would suggest that tongues, used properly, are a mode of prophecy. So these gifts are used together to bring revelation (see 14:14-19) in that it bypasses the intellect of the speaker and comes through the Holy Spirit.

When do they cease? Paul here is discussing present knowledge (which is partial) and future knowledge (which will be complete) when we see Christ (when the perfect comes). Many cessationists have argued that what Paul means here is the closing of the canon, or Bible. Continuationists would argue that the perfect is the Second Coming of Christ and therefore these gifts will continue until then.

Most likely, Paul does mean here the Second Coming and not the closed canon (because it assumes that Scripture is only sufficient when completed). However, just because it refers to the Second Coming does not prove a continuation of tongues/prophecies/etc. With this emphasis on partial knowledge, prophecy and tongues are no doubt singled out. But the time of their cessation is not the concern Paul has here. His stress is on the duration, until Christ returns, of our present, limited knowledge. So this passage does not teach that prophecy and tongues (revelatory gifts) will continue until the Second Coming, but only that they will pass. Complete knowledge will occur at the Second Coming.

2 For since the message declared by angels proved to be reliable, and every transgression or disobedience received a just retribution, 3 how shall we escape if we neglect such a great salvation? It was declared at first by the Lord, and it was attested to us by those who heard, 4 while God also bore witness by signs and wonders and various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will. (Heb 2:2-4)

Notice once again the progression of revelation: “declared by the Lord,” and then “attested to us by those who heard” [Apostles] by the witness of “signs and wonders and various miracles and gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will.” The phrase “bore witness” is a present participle and therefore some argue that these “signs and wonders” continued on.

The participle, however, is a genitive absolute which means it must be linked to the main verb (“attested”) which is an aorist verb. Therefore, the “signs” happened in the past. In other words, at the time the Apostles “attested” the signs “bore witness.” So these verses are strong evidence that signs and wonders were connected with the witness of the Apostles. In addition, (though again an argument from silence) if the signs and wonders where happening for the author’s audience all he had to do was refer to the “signs and wonders” happening in their presence. Rather, he referred back to the “signs and wonders” associated with the Apostolic ministry. These verses further prove that the gifts of the Holy Spirit served to authenticate the gospel message during the early church.

Final Comments on Continuationism

First, passages such as Eph 5:18-20, 6:18 and 1 Thessalonians 5:19, and Jude 20 are often used to suggest the modern practices of speaking in tongues. However, glossolalia is never mentioned. Therefore, I do not believe these passages speak to the gift of tongues.

Second, based on what I see in Scripture (as detailed above) I personally have a hard time recognizing a correlation between the modern practice of tongue speaking and the biblical form as expressed during the Apostolic age.

Third, (I realize this is an arguement from history and not Scripture) it is hard for me to understand how outside of Montanus and a few of his followers in the later part of the second century, the emphasis on glossolalia was silent until the 19th century with the birth of Pentecostalism. If the gift of tongues is so foundational to the body of Christ, why was it silent for so long? Just a curiosity more than a dogmatic statement.

Theological Triage: keeping the main thing the main thing

In closing, I must admit that while I have biblical convictions regarding the gift of speaking in tongues, I would not want to break Christian fellowship over the issue. There are much more imporant topics (in relation to the gospel) that we cannot compromise on, namely the exclusivity of the gospel, the baptism of believers by immersion, the virgin birth, the inspiration and authority of Scripture, and many others. Though we may disagree on the timing of the cessation of tongues, I would join with my charismatic brothers and sisters in defense of the gospel of Jesus Christ any day. For one Day, we’ll all be speaking the same language!


Pastor Wes

Book Review: Crazy Love

While I was gone to the Southern Baptist Convention a few weeks ago I was able to catch up on some reading. One of the books I read was Crazy Love by Francis Chan. The book is excellent in that it challenges you to go beyond the status quo of Christianity and hunger for an authentic faith that is deeply in love with God.

Chan touches on a lot of important themes in the book. He talks about how our passion for God starts with seeing God for who He is. Most Christians get stuck in the status quo because their God is too small. Chan challenges us to think big about God, which will in turn cause us to be amazed at the fact that we get to have a relationship with Him.

He also devotes an entire chapter to lukewarm Christianity. We all know that we are not supposed to have that kind of faith, but we don't always know what lukewarm faith looks like. Chan (with Scripture references) lists the following descriptions of lukewarm faith:

1. They attend church regularly because they believe that is "what good Christians do."
2. Give money, as long as it doesn't threaten their standard of living.
3. Care more about being saved from the penalty of sin, rather than actually being saved from sin. As a result, they don't geniunely hate sin they just don't want God to punish them for it.
4. Are moved by stories about people who do radical things for Christ, but assume that is just for "extreme" Christians.
5. Rarely share their faith with their neighbors, coworkers, or friends becaues they do not want to be rejected.
6. Gauge their own morality be comparing themselves to the secular world.
7. Jesus is "a part" of their lives.
8. Love others, but not as much as they do themselves. They spend most of their time with people who are just like them.
9. Think about life on earth much more than they do about eternity in heaven.
10. Will do whatever it takes to keep themselves from feeling guilty.
11. Like playing it safe, in fact they even structure their life so that they don't have to live faith.
12. Probably drink and swear less than average, but besides that, they really aren't very different from your typical unbeliever.

I don't know about you, but those are penetrating statements. I think most of the Christians in American can find at least a few of those that relate to their own walk with Christ. May we seek each day to learn what it truly means to take up a cross and follow Him.

One last helpful part of the book is when Chan gives real examples of people lived with a crazy love for God. So often we think that such committment is only for those in the Bible and that no one in the real world lives that way. He shares examples of members in his own congregation and many others to help the reader see that this is the life God has called all of us to live not just a few elite Christians.

I would encourage you to read this book and let God use it to minister to you as you seek to love Him more than ever before.

Pastor Wes

Why I’m proud to be a Southern Baptist: an overview of the Great Commission Resurgence from the 2010 Southern Baptist Convention.

Last week I attended the Southern Baptist Convention in Orlando, FL. One of the major topics of debate was the Great Commission Resurgence (GCR) recommended by the Great Commission Task Force of the SBC. Since I realize that many of you will be unaware of what was recommended and approved, I will summarized the major propositions and then give you my feedback.


Proposition #1: Adopt a new mission statement.
“As a convention of churches, our missional vision is to present the Gospel of Jesus Christ to every person in the world and to make disciples of all the nations.”

Proposition #2: Adopt Core values, as a Convention, which should define what we do and how we act. The core values were the following:

•CHRIST-LIKENESS: We depend on the transforming power of the Holy Spirit, the Word of God, and prayer to make us more like Jesus Christ.
•TRUTH: We stand together in the truth of God’s inerrant Word, celebrating the faith once for all delivered to the saints.
•UNITY: We work together in love for the sake of the Gospel.
•RELATIONSHIPS: We consider others more important than ourselves.
•TRUST: We tell one another the truth in love and do what we say we will do.
•FUTURE: We value Southern Baptists of all generations and embrace our responsibility to pass this charge to a rising generation in every age, faithful until Jesus comes.
•LOCAL CHURCH: We believe the local church is given the authority, power, and responsibility to present the Gospel of Jesus Christ to every person in the world
•KINGDOM: We join other Christ-followers for the Gospel, the Kingdom of Christ, and the glory of God.

Proposition #3: Encourage Cooperative Program giving and other Great Commission giving.

Proposition #4: Refocus the North American Mission Board by focusing more on church planting, particular in more populated regions and areas beyond the southern states, and to slowly withdraw for current partnerships.

Proposition #5: Free up the International Mission Board to be able to focus on international people within the United States (which removes a previously held limitation).

Proposition #6: Promote the Cooperative Program more effectively and stress the importance of biblical stewardship.

Proposition #7: Increase the giving from the Executive Committee to the International Mission Board from 50% to 51%.


The Urgency of the Great Commission Resurgence

The following is from the report given by the GCR task force. If you are a Christian and these numbers do not lead you to weep, pray, and give, your heart has become calloused to the plan and purposes of God!

There are almost 7 billion human inhabitants of planet Earth. At the most generous estimate, somewhere around 1 billion are believing Christians. That means that over 6billion people are lost, without Christ, and thus without hope. Of these 6 billion, over 3.5 billion have never heard the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Over 6,000 people groups are without any Christian witness. There is no way that Southern Baptists can make real progress toward reaching these unreached people groups unless we experience a genuine Great Commission Resurgence. We must see a tidal wave of evangelistic and missionary passion, or the numbers of unreached people groups will only grow, and lostness will spread.

In North America, evangelical Christians are falling behind the level of population growth. Put simply, we are failing to reach new immigrant populations, the teeming millions in urban areas, and a generation of youth and young adults who are living in a time of vast change and confused worldviews. Lostness is not only our concern when it is found across oceans – it must be our concern when it is across the street. North America represents a vast continent of lostness, where millions still have never heard the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and where many communities and ethnic groups are woefully underserved by Gospel churches.

In our own congregations, we see falling rates of baptism and other signs of concern. In 2008, Southern Baptist churches baptized more than 33,000 fewer people than in 1950 – and that was with more than 17,000 additional churches. Baptism rates among teenagers have fallen dramatically, and many young people become disengaged with the church soon after graduation from high school. In 2008 we baptized only 75,000 teenagers. In 1972, we baptized 140,000. Why?

Research conducted by LifeWay Research on the Millennial generation and research by Thom Rainer on previous generations indicate that every American generation from early in the twentieth century forward has been less evangelized than generations before. Tracing generational patterns from the World War II generation to the Millennials, the estimated number of Christians has fallen from 65 percent to 15 percent. Churches in America are losing ground with each successive generation.

We desperately need to reach our communities for Christ – and this starts with our own young people. Furthermore, we must see this generation of young Baptists take their places on the front lines of the Great Commission Resurgence. Humanly speaking, that is our only hope for a bold advance of the Gospel in the coming generation.

My Thoughts on the GCR and the future direction of the SBC

I have been Southern Baptist all my life. I have developed a deep appreciation for our heritage, our theological conviction, and our unwavering commitment to take the gospel to the nations. This is why I am Southern Baptist. I, as a young Southern Baptist pastor, have grown concerned over the past few years with the amount of money given to administration and pet programs at the expense of missions. I realize that healthy levels of administrative positions are needed to make organizations function, and leadership is critical for any convention. However, over the past several years more and more missionaries have been turned away while more and more money is spent on local programs.

When a Southern Baptist church gives to the Cooperative Program around 60% (it varies by state) of that money goes to the state convention while 40% goes to the national convention. The national convention then divides that 40% up between the International Mission Board, the North American Mission Board, the six seminaries, and other agencies. While I am pro-state and local associations, there is a far greater need (in my opinion) that more money being going to send missionaries to places where the gospel is not known and churches are not established.

While I realize it is controversial to some, this committed Southern Baptist longs to see a day when local/state conventions, while still healthy and able to function, are trimmed down in such a way that more international missionaries are sent to the field. This means reprioritizing our convention, our churches, and our lives!

So why do I place my full support behind the GCR?

1.I think these changes mean that our best days are still ahead of us as we, as a convention, focus more than ever before on reaching the nations for Christ.

2.The GCR continues to emphasize the need for “cooperative” giving through the Cooperative Program. This is a foundational tie that holds Southern Baptists together.

3.We are simplifying! Just as the church has become over-programmed, we as a convention have become over-programmed and must get back to the simple goal (which should be reflected in our convention structure) of reaching people for Jesus.

4.The GCR focus on church planting. To be the largest Protestant denomination, we should be leading the way church planting around the world.

5.The GCR focuses on places beyond the South. While I am a Southern boy at heart, I live and pastor in a pioneer state (IL). We must reach the major cities and other populated areas in places other than the Southeastern region of our country.

I will close by giving some food for thought. To be honest, I have not thought through all of the following recommendations, but they are worth our consideration. The following recommendations are from our newly elected SBC president Bryant Wright who will serve in 2011. Dr Wright suggests:

1.That each state strive to keep no more than 25-30 percent of the CP funds in state. Funds staying in state currently range from 43-86 percent (see documentation here). The local church should be the primary vehicle in carrying out state and local missions.

2.That at least 50 percent of the CP funds from our local churches go to the International Mission Board (IMB) vs. the present average of approximately 16 percent. How can we keep saying that supporting the CP is supporting missions when only about 16 percent of the funds go to the IMB?

3.That we increase the percentage of funds directed to the North American Mission Board (NAMB) to help us reach our nation for Christ, with a primary focus on church planting – especially in unreached areas.

4.That we dramatically increase the percentage of CP funds going to our seminaries that are training thousands of men and women who will lead the way in carrying out the Great Commission. The called in this younger generation have a passionate love for Christ and are willing to go to the hard places.

Wright admits, “this is a major change that would need to be implemented over 3-5 years to allow the state conventions to adjust in their planning. But implementation toward this goal needs to begin immediately.”

Much more could (and probably should) be said about the GCR and the future of the SBC. While we still have our problems and will still face many challenges, today is a great day to be apart of what God is doing through Southern Baptists.

For the sake of the nations,

Pastor Wes

Jesus was a communist (and other things you can conclude if you take the Bible out of context).

Back on March 22, 2010, an opinion article was written in the Herald & Review about how the Bible supports the recent health care reform. The author, in the context of a commentary on Glenn Beck, mentioned that Jesus was a communist or at least advocated for the communist ideology. After all, “the Apostles who spread the Christian faith to the Gentiles certainly thought so.”

The author goes on to quote Acts 4:32 that “the community of believers was of one heart and mind, and no one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they had every thing in common.” According to the author, this verse presents a problem for “real Christians” who want to take the Bible “literal.”

If right-winged Christians, according to the author, ignore this verse they are engaging in a “Wikipedia-style project to rewrite the New Testament.” The author concludes by saying that “at least I don’t have to rewrite the Bible to support passage of health care reform.”

Wow! There are so many exegetical, hermeneutical, and theological problems with this statement I don’t even know where to begin. Before I make a brief comment, let me say upfront that my desire in responding is NOT political, it is theological and biblical. I am not trying to defend any political party, I am defending the Bible when it is taken out of context and used to advance a political agenda (particular one the Bible doesn’t support).

That said, the author makes a major error by taking what is true of the Christian community (i.e. the sharing of possessions), which is done voluntarily and upon a common confession of Jesus Christ, and tries to make it normative for an entire government. In other words, it is beyond the bounds biblically to take what Christians are to do because they belong to one another in Christ (Romans 12:4-5) and argue that it should be legislated for all Americans. Such a view is an impossible exegetical jump.

Since Christians in the early church voluntarily gathered on Sunday for worship would the author support worship-reform, whereby legislating all Americans to be in church on Sunday or face penalty? For some reason I don’t see that reform passing.

In doing this, the author is guilty of the very same thing she accused “right-wing, biblical literalists” of doing when she accuses them of being “selective in their Bible readings.” By pulling this verse out of context and arguing that it encourages some form of communism is to be most selective indeed. Why, even Wikipedia has higher standards that that!

Pastor Wes

Where do babies go when they die? Biblical Reflections on the death of the little ones.

I know of very few issues that have been harder to deal with in ministry than the death of a baby and the unbelievable grief experienced by the parents. I do not write this article out of personal experience and therefore am not trying to act as though I know what others who have gone through such a tragedy may feel. Rather, I write this article because I am asked often about what happens to babies when they die and want people to be biblically informed in handling these situations.

When approaching an issue like this it is easy to run to emotional responses or human logic for the sake of comfort, though many times void of truth. It is easy to be sentimental rather than biblical. This is dangerous and unhealthy because one should not “hope something is true” but rather “know something is true” based upon the authority of Scripture. Therefore, before I share what I believe the Bible teaches concerning infant salvation, let me first expose some of the false beliefs that many have embraced.

False Belief #1: Babies go to heaven because they are innocent (Pelagianism).

I have heard many who hold to an age of accountability [a term that I am not a fan of, nor use] share that they believe that children are “innocent” until they reach a certain age. Then at a certain age they become accountable for sin. This is far from a biblical understanding of original sin and is, in fact, an early church heresy known as Pelagianism [the belief that human beings are born morally innocent].

The biblical reality is that no one is born innocent [minus Jesus], no not one! No one is righteous (Rom 3), we are by nature children of wrath (Eph 2), and we are born in sin (Psalm 51). [Other Scriptures: 1 Kings 8:46, Psalm 143:2, 1 Jn 1:8, Psalm 58:3] So regardless about what one believes about the salvation of infants, one cannot biblically argue that babies are innocent.

False Belief #2: Babies go to heaven because everyone goes to heaven (Universalism).

Though not as common in evangelical circles, there are certainly some who would say that because God is a loving God he would not send anyone to hell, particular babies. Of course this is a false view of God’s love. God’s love is not expressed in his willingness to overlook sin and accept everybody, but in his willingness to offer his own Son so that by faith we can enter into a right relationship with God.
The Bible is clear that not everyone will go to heaven (in fact the majority won’t).

Jesus said, “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life and only a few find it” (Matthew 7:13-14).
There are many other texts [Matthew 13:37-42, Luke 16, 2 Thess 1:9, Rev 20] that teach against universalism, namely the idea that all will go to heaven.

So one cannot make the argument that babies go to heaven because “God is so loving he would never do something like that.”

False Belief #3: Babies go to heaven if they are “baptized” as infants (Paedo-baptism).

Some would argue that babies who have been sprinkled go to heaven because “baptism” removes original sin. (I place baptism here in “” because I would argue that baptism is only a believer by immersion and therefore “infant baptism” is a contradiction in terms, but that’s for another article )

Luther believed that baptism “worketh forgiveness of sins, delivers from death and the devil,” Catholicism teaches that “by baptism one enters into the kingdom of God and into the sphere of the saving work of Christ.” Even Augustine believed that paedo-baptism released the baby from original sin [I have written a length article on Augustine’s view of baptism if you are interested].

The problem here is that the Bible teaches that “entering the Kingdom of God” or “being forgiven of sin” is something that is conditioned upon faith and union with Christ. “For God so loved the world…and whoever believes will not perish (John 3:16).” “Whoever believes in him will have eternal life (John 6:35).” “If you confess with you mouth and believe in your heart (Rom 10:17).” In fact, the entire book of Galatians is an argument that those who inherit the blessings of Abraham are those who like Abraham believe in the promised seed (Gal 3). [See also John 3:3, Titus 3:5]

In light of this, all baptisms in Scripture are believers who are immersed. Therefore, in my opinion, the issue of infant “baptism” is no biblical solution at all and does not assure the baby of heaven. In fact, such a process can give false hope to parents who assume that “because their baby was ‘baptized’” he or she is secure. Such an approach bypasses the clear biblical teaching of personal faith in union with the death and resurrection of our Lord Christ.

False Belief #4: Babies go to heaven because they are given the opportunity to believe after they die.

I will not expound on this for there is simply no biblical evidence to warrant such a belief. A relationship with Jesus Christ is a prerequisite for heaven, not something that follows it. This position was held by Gregory of Nyssa, who claimed that all, regardless of age, would have an opportunity to believe after death. The Bible simple does not teach such a belief.

What I believe the Bible teaches concerning babies going to heaven.

I have tried to be biblically faithful to this point, demonstrating that all are born in sin, all must have faith in Christ for the forgiveness of sin, and only in Jesus Christ can that forgiveness be realized. It would seem then that I would be arguing against the salvation of infants. However, such a conclusion would be invalid.

In addition to the previously mentioned claims, the Bible also teaches that the judgment of God will be based upon the “deeds done in the body" (2 Cor 5:10, Matthew 16:27). In other words, we are born in sin and as we grow will act out in rebellion towards God because of the sinful, depraved nature inherited in Adam. When we are exposed to the General Revelation of God (law of God in our hearts and God revealed in creation) we will suppress the truth and live for our own desires (see Romans 1-3 for more on this).

So you have two parts here: 1) Humans are born sinful, 2) Humans will act in rebellion towards God because of that sin when exposed to the General Revelation of God. Therefore, as Paul states, man is “without excuse" (Rom 1:20). Babies (and mentally handicapped), however, never make it to step 2. In other words, they never advance to the stage where they act out in rebellion against the General Revelation of God. They simple do not have the cognitive or moral capacities to do so.

This does not mean that they are born innocent; they simple never act on their guilt. [The emphasis on the rejection of the General Revelation of God is key here because in my view this is what separates babies from those who live in other countries and have never heard the gospel. They, unlike babies, have rejected the General Revelation of God and are without excuse, subjecting them to the judgment of God.]

Though we are born in Adam’s sin, we must answer for our own personal, willful acts of rebellion towards God, something that infants have not done. As a result, I would argue that babies/infants do not face the condemning judgment of God. In light of Luke 18:16 where Jesus says, “Permit the children to come to Me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these” I believe that babies are objects of the mercy of Christ, purchased through the cross of Christ, therefore avoiding the condemning Judgment of Christ.

So in summary, are babies born in sin? Yes. Do they act on that sin? No. As a result, they are received into heaven through the atoning work of Christ.
I must add that if babies do face the judgment of God, God is not for a moment unjust. We must always remember that God is but nature just and therefore we have absolutely no right as the clay to tell the Potter how He is to act. So the justice of God is not in question, regardless of the outcome.

When we deal with the death of infants we do not run to false beliefs, unbiblical claims, or mere sentimental appeals, for none of these can offer us hope. For our hope must be rooted in the word of God and the work of our Christ, the One who gave His life for the old…and the young.

Pastor Wes

The Platonic Captivity of the Church: thinking biblically about the human body

I often reflect on the things I was taught, whether intentionally or unintentionally, growing up in the local church. I vividly remember pastors, revival speakers, or traveling evangelists, most of whom were significantly overweight, preaching against smoking, drinking, or sexual immorality because after all the body is “the temple of the Holy Spirit.” I’ve always found that a rather odd contradiction. Make no mistake about it, the Scripture does teach that our bodies are a temple of the Holy Spirit because we have been united to the True Temple, the Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, what we do with our bodies has everything to do with Christ.

Yet, these same preachers, preaching for the body in this life, were preaching against the body in the life to come. Death was the final end for the human body, at least in how it was described. In preaching the funeral I would hear them dismiss the body and give encouragement that the “true person”, namely the person’s soul, is now in heaven with the Lord. To me, this was a contradiction, namely why preach for the body (“you are the temple of the HS”) in this life, when the body is really not that important when you die (“it is just a container/shell of the true person”)?

My conclusion has led me to see that many in the church do not understand what the Scripture teaches concerning the human body. We view our bodies as an instrument of our own desire, with little regard for what the Creator of our bodies has to say concerning it. We have, unfortunately, viewed the Christian life as though it was only spiritual and that all that really matters is that we go to be with the Lord when we die. I think the Bible rejects both of these statements.

Most of our views on the body are more influenced by Plato, the early Greek philosopher in the 5th century B.C., and Gnosticism, an early church heresy, than the Bible. Plato taught that the human being was made up of two separate parts, the physical (body) and the spiritual (soul). The physical world was viewed as evil, while the spiritual world was viewed as good. (Kind of sounds like most funerals I’ve been to).

Plato adopted this view and argued that the soul of a human being existed in the highest heavens, though currently trapped in a body, which he viewed as a prison. Salvation, according to Plato, was the release of the soul from the evil body. [If you are interested in learning more of the background here, Google the “Orphic myth” for the teachings of Greek mythology]

The early church was influenced by Platonic thought. There arose two major heresies in the early church concerning the body/soul relationship. One was Docetism (the body of Christ was only an illusion) and Gnosticism (the heavenly soul was imprisoned in the sinful body). As a result, the focus on “spiritual” things became a priority. It is clear to see how the earlier Platonic view caused such heresies to arise in the early church and how many of the implications of these teachings still linger in our churches.

Yet, there were many Christians in the early church who rejected such a notion of the body (1 John 4:1-3). They did so for the following reasons…

1) God’s creation of a physical universe, which was pronounced as very good.
2) The physical incarnation of Jesus Christ.
3) The clear interaction of the soul/mind and the body.
4) Sin can take place in the soul, not just body.
5) The necessity of a physically resurrected Christ
6) The promise of a future bodily resurrection of believers.
7) The future restoration of a physical universe.

So how do we know when we are being more Platonic than Biblical concerning the body?

1) When you view the body as something to be disposed of upon death.
2) When you view the body as something meaningless and insignificant.
3) When you view death as a glorious end, rather than the future resurrection of the body.
4) When you do not take care of your body, which is an instrument of worship (Rom 12).
5) When you view the Christian life as primarily “spiritual” in nature.

Let me give you a few general statements concerning what the Bible teaches concerning our bodies.

1) We were created as embodied creatures (body and spirit) as a part of God’s glorious physical creation, of which God, when he had finished His work, described as very good. (Genesis 1:26-31, 2:7, 2:18-3:1, Psalm 139:13-16) We find in these passages that God created us as a gender, as sexual beings, with a vocational purpose, and many other implications (Too many to cover in this article).

2) As a result of the fall, our physical bodies, along with the physical creation are in need of sanctification (1 Thes 5:23, Romans 8) [clothing of the body in Genesis, not letting sin reign in our body in Romans 5-6, etc]. Our bodies are not to be a slave to anything ungodly, which is a part of the sanctification process (1 Cor 6:12-20).

3) As a result of the fall, our physical bodies will die. Though this is a tragic reality, the body is to be honored in view of the complete creation of God (2 Cor 6:19-20).

4) Even though the body will die, our future hope is not our spirit with the Lord in heaven (2 Cor 5:6-10) but a future bodily resurrection (1 Thes 4:13-18, 1 Cor 15) in the restoration of the physical creation (Revelation 21).

This topic may be foreign to may of you, as it was me for many years, mostly because we have been taught that the Christian life is what we do “spiritually.” However, as believers in the Lord Jesus Christ we need to think biblically about the body. Issues concerning the human body are all around us from cremation vs. burial, how we approach funerals, issues of cloning, transplants, abortion, euthanasia, reproductive technologies, stem cell research, dietary and other health related issues, and much more. How is a Christian to respond to this issues?
When is the last time you’ve stop to think how your body is being used as an instrument of praise, which it was created to be? As the Apostle Paul writes in Romans 12, “I appeal to you, therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice.” This is, after all, a “rational” act of worship given God’s overall redemptive work.

May we as Christians take care of our bodies now, honor our bodies upon our death, and look forward to the day when our bodies will come out of the grave, just as One did 2000 years ago.

Pastor Wes