The Gift of Sola Scriptura. More Relevant Luther as he Echos Christ.

John 10:35 If he called them gods unto whom the Word of God came and the Scripture cannot be broken. This is the Word of The Lord!

These words came from Christs mouth to not know Scripture as Word of God but submit it to rationalism is a sin and loss to the believer.The Bible when it is looked at as only law and absent of Gospel destroys the faith in Christ. Discourage those who call on Christ's name because there is no gospel that is preached.  The Scripture is the source of all knowledge for Godliness and goodnes saith the apostle 2 Peter 1-3. This is sufficient for the believer. Our Lord also speaks of rules that are taught by men making God's Word of no effect Mark 7:13. Not all tradition is bad however, but tradition should be substantiated by Scripture or it is just one taught by men and not God.

Luther states this well here," There is no Christian faith which is not based on the Word of God and  the Word of God we find in the Scriptures, and in the Scriptures only . The Fathers can err. Traditions are human. Whether they convey to me the truth. I cannot know unless I see that their content is confirmed by the Scriptures.

 I was speaking with a friend of mine the other day and he is involved in the typical run of the mill "McChurch that have given the Church in America and elsewhere a black eye. This is because they are not really sure of what they believe and take Scripture out of context. Often times instead of letting the Scriptures interpret thmeselves they read into them. Thus there is Scripture alone that is violated by poor exegesis.

On the otherhand, there are those who say that Scripture needs to be interpreted for them by prelates,popes,bishops etc. These people in these positions have invented all sorts of clever ceremony and things that must be done to work your way to righteousness. In some cases those who belong to these congregations of the Christian faith have been required to submit to the officials who very well could be preaching something contrary to Christian Doctrine ( i.e.  Papal Submission and Indulgences). But for those who want to follow traditions alone and the words of someone like Martin Luther are not good enough or insufficient. I will include a statement from St Epiphanius and St.Augustine:

We can tell the solution of any question not through our own reasonings but from what follows from the Scriptures.
What more can I teach you, than what we read in the Apostle? For Holy Scripture sets a rule to our teaching, that we dare not “be wise more than it behooves to be wise,” but be wise, as he says, “unto soberness, according as unto each God has allotted the measure of faith.”



(Panarion 65, as quoted in Examination of the Council of Trent I, p. 153)

In essence what the Church Fathers are saying is that it is not feeling or reasons of the individual that are reliable but the Scriptures. Also it is not traditions that validate the Scriptures but rather the Scripture that serves as the validation for any tradition. If none of these things are inScripture how can we believe it? In this case, and in many others St. Epiphanius and St. Augustine are correct an like all of the Fathers are human and can error.

Beatification of John Paul II

 We are all saints! The faith was once and for all delivered to the saints. Paul is not referring to the so called beatified who were sinners such like us. In the case of those who call on Christ although we are sinners we are also saints because of our Savior's blood. Guess what I was not beatified by the papacy and like John Paul II who allowed pedophiles and rapists to thrive under his so called "sheperding" I am not sinless. Enough on this it so easy to concentrate on the negative. What is the real issue with beatification well the Augsburg Confession puts it this way." Concerning the cult of the saints they teach that saints may be remembered in order that we imitate their faith and good works, according to our calling . Thus the emperor can imitate  the example of David in waging war to drive the Turks from our native land. For both of them are kings . However, Scripture does not teach calling on the saints or pleading with them for help from them. For it sets before us Christ alone as mediator , atoning sacrafice , high priest , and intercessor. He is also to be called upon, and he has promised thatour prayers will be heard. Furthermore, he strongly approves this worship most of all namely , that he be called upon in all afflictions( 1 John 2:1) But if anyone does sin we have an advocate with the Father.

All things are ours in Christ!

SO

What's Wrong With This Position IV. The Reason for my posting on the Emergent Theologians.

 I suppose some who come by this blog wonder where I am really coming from and why I have made this my first post. Well the emergent phenomenon is not happening at my church and God willing it won't. But it has happened in the LCMS with Leonard Sweet coming to LCMS symposiums and events. Much of what Mr. Sweet , Mr. Williard and others do is through the use of language reduce the effectiveness of the Gospel and appeal strictly to works based righteousness. These folk also diminish the truth about Jesus Christ and his true saving power. What is most sad are those people who actually think they are escaping the Vatican and discovering something deeper. What these people don't realise is they are joining Rome in errors by endorsing Lectio Divina, CSM( Contemplative Spiritual Mysticism) and other things. The emergent conversation believes all is negotiable so in the end we have despair or seek to become our own god. These folk are guilty of neglecting the office of the pastorate by refusing to condemn sin and doubting God's Word and questioning it. Notice the small "g" you are not God even if you think you are. I think back to the First Commandment, You shall have no other Gods. What does it mean to have no other Gods. It means that we should fear love and trust God above all things. This according to Luther's Small Catechism. Or Matthew 5:19 Anyone who breaks the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven. So to conclude this introduction my reason to the lies of this movement and it's theologians is a labor of love and concern for not only those of the LCMS but also Christians of other bodies.


 "They believe there is a God and they need to check in with him. But they don't have any sense that he is an active agent in their lives. As a result, they don't become disciples of Jesus. They consume his merits and the services of the church. … Discipleship is no essential part of Christianity today.

 The essential part of Christianity is not discipleship it is the death and resurrection of Christ for your sins. Christ is for us and does desire us to consume his merits and commands us for our own good as well. We only need to go to the Book of Matthew at the last supper he says,in Matthew 26:26-27 Take eat this is my body, verse 27 Then he took the cup gave thanks and offered it to them and said Drink from it all of you this is my blood which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.  He also tells us to do this in rememberance of me in Luke 22:19 .The desire to perform any sort of good work is from God working through us. Faith produces fruit. Apart from Christ we produce no good fruit. The fruits come from faith not from some perceived other action called "Discipleship" merely going to church, hearing God's Word and partaking of the Sacrament ,reading my Bible, and the sharing of my faith  when the opportunities arrive; is my vocation as a Christian or what some might call discipleship. Discipleship, should not be a forced exercise for the bretheren to perform and made a burden. The burden was already assumed by Christ and therefore should be a joy for us. To tell people about Christ is not a chore and not an exercise for us to do and be acceptable to God. We are made acceptable through Christ's precious blood and live a life of thanks because of it.  I think "Discipleship" is being used in this context as Works Based activities and smacks a little bit of works based righteousness. The part that is really annoying is the legalism .That as pastor he is judging the faith and life of those he serves based on what he sees when congregants come to church and hear God's Word. Pastor's know that there are definitely times where they don't see results in their preaching but it does not mean that there are not results for what is said on Sunday morning. I have always been told that we cannot judge our fellow man's heart and definitely cannot tell their measure of faith. But to say that I have to practice a "Discipleship Program" to be an acceptable Christian is ridiculous. If one does not see another's "good works"( Works that are done by God through the believer and with fear of God) does not mean that they do not exist. It is rather unfair to judge the faith of parishoners because one does not see them working in a soup kitchen or belonging to a supposed ministry( a term used liberally in non denominational circles.) and unpastorly to think that your parishoners are not living lives of faith and service. Is this about the pastor or those he serves? It isn't supposed to be about the pastor but those he serves. If those who come to hear the Word and Receive the Sacrament come on Sundays then the pastor is doing his job and should not second guess his parishoners living out lives of faith and service. Certainly there are some who don't live lives of faith and service, but the loss of some is not the loss of Christian Vocation for others.

Whats wrong with this position III?

 The discussion of the 2006 article The Divine Conspirator continues. We find out the type of reasoning being used by emergents to undermine the Christian Faith and transform it into a world of Christian Liberalism absent Christ.

Talbot School of Theology distinguished professor of philosophy J. P. Moreland says that three of Talbot's five philosophy professors were Willard's students. He says Willard models the integration of philosophy, the life of the spirit, and mature discipleship, and that they are attempting to emulate his approach at Talbot.

All of the more reason to question what the evangelical movement is now pushing. Since the "McChurch" is no longer the bastion of Christianity that it once was. This would of course be the bastion according to "Secular America". To be honest I want to know how superogative Good Works and a Law without Gospel is Good News. This is what the emergents are pushing and it is gradually invading denominational and non denominational Christianity. Instead of worrying about things like numbers perhaps we should worry about doctrine. I have heard that Moreland is an outstanding defender of the faith but it is a little disturbing for a Christian institution such as Talbot and moreland himself thinking what Willard is doing is good. After all Willard made a statement that does not assure that Jesus Christ saved us by his death.

He says he recognized that "even though we want to say salvation is by grace and that anyone can be saved, behaving in certain ways simply is inconsistent with having eternal life."

 Is that so? Apparently he forgot about Romans 7:14-25 and this is from the Apostle Paul.V.14. For we know that the Law is spiritual; but I am carnal, sold under sin. V.15. For that which I do I allow not; for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. V.16. if, then, I do that which I would not, I consent unto the Law that it is good. V.17. Now, then, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. .18. For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) dwelleth no good thing; for to will is present with me, but how to perform that which is good I find not. V.19. For the good that I would I do not; but the evil which I would not, that I do. V.20. Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. V.21. I find, then, a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me. V.22. For I delight in the Law of God after the inward man; v.23. but I see another law in my members, warring against the Law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. V.24. O wretched man that I am! Who shall deliver me from the body of this death? V.25. I thank God through Jesus Christ, our Lord So, then, with the mind I myself serve the Law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin.
Mr. Willard, I would like to ask you if Paul who admits being sinful did not inherit the eternal life promised? He definitely did! I cannot tell you how many times I daily perform and live according to God's Law and that is why I need the saving death of Jesus Christ for my sins and to trust in Him for that forgiveness. If Willard does not think that Christ was sufficient for his sins then he is damned.

 Lets add a little Luther from theses 25 of the Disputation Against the Scholastics. Man is by nature unable to want God to be God. Indeed he himself wants to be God, and does not want God to be God.

How about a little Gospel Encouragement also from Luther. Theses 84 from Disputation Against the Scholastics. The good law and that in which one lives is the love of God spread abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit.
Willard recalls giving his Baptist Sunday school teachers a "very bad time" as a young teenager. He didn't think it made sense that you "got saved" and were "stuck with it."
 He does not understand that you can commit apostasy. As a matter of fact, he already has come close in previous statements. It is not once saved always saved. Faith must be grown.



Willard's influence has sometimes led to radical changes at churches. Oak Hills Church in Folsom, California, was running along smoothly according to the Willow Creek model throughout the 1990s. Senior pastor Kent Carlson says that after a period of rapid growth, the church leadership finally had "time to think." The leaders read a book that essentially said consumerism was a mainstay of American culture, so if the church couldn't beat the culture, it might as well join it. Carlson says, "This was a distasteful concept to us." At the same time, senior co-pastor Mike Lueken was taking a course taught by Willard at Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, California.


 So the growth of this church was really what their church was all about. It was kind of like a Macy's Marketing Strategy and the next gimmick. They had fears that the church ewas no longer going to grow so instead of truly rethinking by trashing the Willow Creek concept and going to Scripture and Confession. We get one step closer to associating with heretical teachings. Not that Bill Hybels does not have issues he definitely does . I believe the Apostle Paul said something about not being taken captive by hollow and deceptive philosophy that is dependent on the principles of men rather than on Christ. Colossians 2:8 states,
Beware lest any man spoil you through false and vain deceit after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world,  and not after Christ. I believe Jesus puts it best in Matthew 4:4 Man does not live on bread alone but every word that proceedeth from the mouth of God. This is why these current churches are not appealing to anyone because many see what they actually are empty shells without any "transendence".
I will continue with part IV.

What's Wrong With This Position Part II


A consequence of Willard's academic honesty is his unwillingness to state who's in and who's out spiritually, which bothers critics who worry that he is a universalist. He says he doesn't believe anyone will be saved except by Jesus, but he adds, "How that works out, probably no one knows."

Let's see Dallas Willard does not know how anyone will be saved or "how that works out". But, he only believes that people will be saved by Jesus. He is either to much or to little of the philosopher he is supposed to be. He might as well be saying that Jesus paid for everyones sins but his death may not be sufficient to save anybody; therefore we can't trust Jesus when he says in John 6:44 No man can come to me , except which the Father hath sent me draw him an I will raise him up at the last day. KJV. My question is how can one trust false prophets? My only guess is this is what itchy ears want to hear or the continuing Biblical Illiteracy continues. I will wager it is both.

He teeters on the edge of openness theology, saying God can choose not to know the future if he wants to, but he doesn't go as far as many openness adherents, whose views he believes "slip into process theology."

This is another problem. Unless, I'm mistaken God is unchanging and has given us a future that he has revealed in Jesus. God reveals the coming of his Son in Genesis 3:15 and the prophecy is fulfilled in Matthew 1:18. We do not know all things about God but the things that we need to know he has revealed to us in the Scriptures. Since God has not revealed all things about himself it is wrong to make assumptions out of a man's thoughts as those assumptions would be telling falsehoods about God as man does not know what he is talking about. What we need to know God and salvation through Christ are located in one place the Bible. This is the beauty of Scripture Alone; the very principle "emergents" are trying to destroy.

Do you believe Jesus can come up to you and listen to you?" He had been wondering about this ever since Willard told him that it was indeed possible. Moreland assured him that, in his own unique way, Willard had spoken the truth. The student later gave his life to Christ.



Jesus hears the prayer of the righteous and draws those outside Him to Him if they are willing to refrain from rejecting the truth. I wonder what the student's real question was that Moreland gave him such an emotions based answer. I hope that the student does not suddenly get disappointed if he suddenly begins to ask Christ to name it and Claim it for him. I think a more upfront and honest answer could have been given to the young man. By the way, we do not give our lives to Christ see John 6:44 again. With God I hope that this guy continues in the faith and distances himself from Willard's false teaching and enthusiasm. Jesus will come up to me and listen to me one day at His Glorious Return on the Judgment Seat. But the last I heard that the Lord hears the prayers of the righteous and allows rain to fall on both the righteous and unrighteous.

More Later!

What is wrong with this position?

Happy New Year ! I think there is no better way than to begin the year than with a post on the spiritual formation movement. So Dallas Willard is a great place to start. Much of what Willard and the gang are propogating is reducing the effectiveness of the Gospel and not acting accordingly as pastors because they are telling souls to trust in their own sins. This post and the next few are directed at an older article on Christianity Today from 2006. The title is A Divine Conspirator Dallas Willard is on a quiet quest to subvert nominal Christianity. Early on the article is when things start to get disturbing and make us think that it is no wonder Christianity is teetering. The Christian Church will always be threatened and will not fall but damage being done by this false teacher and others is troubling.

The article speaks of how Willard as a young man was concerned that he was abysmally ignorant of God and the soul. He then decides to study philosophy because he believed that the philosophers were trying to answer the same questions. So what problems do we have here?

Well a reliance on philosophers to answer supernatural questions is a gross error. 1 Corinthians 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them. Because they are spiritually discerned. KJV
When we want to learn more from God we go to his Word. We do not consult Kierkegaard,Hegel, and certainly not Neitzche.I am not sure if I spelled it right I will look it up later.

Second his reliance on philosophers for the answering of this question can do nothing more than destroy faith because of dependence on such philosophies. The apostle again tells us in Colossians 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. KJV

This way of looking at the Christian faith humanizes and diminishes what the Christian faith is all about. I will continue in the next post.