By Oswald Chambers

If I am being poured out as a drink offering on the sacrifice and service of your faith, I am glad and rejoice with you all—Philippians 2:17

Are you willing to sacrifice yourself for the work of another believer—to pour out your life sacrificially for the ministry and faith of others? Or do you say, “I am not willing to be poured out right now, and I don’t want God to tell me how to serve Him. I want to choose the place of my own sacrifice. And I want to have certain people watching me and saying, ’Well done.’ “

It is one thing to follow God’s way of service if you are regarded as a hero, but quite another thing if the road marked out for you by God requires becoming a “doormat” under other people’s feet. God’s purpose may be to teach you to say, “I know how to be abased . . .” (Philippians 4:12). Are you ready to be sacrificed like that? Are you ready to be less than a mere drop in the bucket—to be so totally insignificant that no one remembers you even if they think of those you served? Are you willing to give and be poured out until you are used up and exhausted—not seeking to be ministered to, but to minister? Some saints cannot do menial work while maintaining a saintly attitude, because they feel such service is beneath their dignity.

*********************

I am already being poured out as a drink offering . . . —2 Timothy 4:6

Are you ready to be poured out as an offering? It is an act of your will, not your emotions. Tell God you are ready to be offered as a sacrifice for Him. Then accept the consequences as they come, without any complaints, in spite of what God may send your way. God sends you through a crisis in private, where no other person can help you. From the outside your life may appear to be the same, but the difference is taking place in your will. Once you have experienced the crisis in your will, you will take no thought of the cost when it begins to affect you externally. If you don’t deal with God on the level of your will first, the result will be only to arouse sympathy for yourself.

“Bind the sacrifice with cords to the horns of the altar” (Psalm 118:27). You must be willing to be placed on the altar and go through the fire; willing to experience what the altar represents-burning, purification, and separation for only one purpose-the elimination of every desire and affection not grounded in or directed toward God. But you don’t eliminate it, God does. You “bind the sacrifice . . . to the horns of the altar” and see to it that you don’t wallow in self-pity once the fire begins. After you have gone through the fire, there will be nothing that will be able to trouble or depress you. When another crisis arises, you will realize that things cannot touch you as they used to do. What fire lies ahead in your life?

Tell God you are ready to be poured out as an offering, and God will prove Himself to be all you ever dreamed He would be.

Baptist Speak Out Against Mormonism

Christ-followers emerge from Mormon area

By Adam Miller / Baptist Press

Friday, February 26, 2010  

PROVO, Utah (BP)–Drive an hour south of Salt Lake City down Interstate 5 and you enter a different world, says North American Mission Board missionary Mickie Kelly.

“People think I’m exaggerating when I tell them the kinds of things that go on here,” said Kelly, a church planter in Payson, Utah, near Provo. “The spiritual darkness is like a blanket that you wear every day.”

Around the well-kept homes and clean-cut families of Payson, a spiritual drawstring tightens under the influence of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS).

“Salt Lake City is 47 percent LDS,” Kelly said. But, he added, the number doubles to 95 percent for Provo, which is home to the LDS-funded Brigham Young University and the LDS Missionary Training Center.

“People have left Salt Lake to move here and get away from the infidel, non-members, or Gentiles as we might be called,” Kelly said. “In Utah County, the culture is Mormon — every news channel, every billboard, everything they do is done to promote the church.”

Originally from Oklahoma, Kelly and his wife Lorenda planted a church in Idaho, where they first experienced the grip the LDS has on its members.

“Out here it costs someone to come to Christ. It doesn’t just cost them a trip to the lake or a couple of beer drinking buddies or a card game,” Kelly said. “It costs them everything. They lose their families, they lose their homes, they lose their businesses, and so really at the same time that you invite someone to come to Christ you’re thinking, ‘Do I need to start a refugee ministry?’”

The Kellys say Utah is a daunting place to plant a church, but God has been faithful to bring several residents out of the LDS and into the Kellys’ new work — Crossings Church.

“I often pray asking God to take the word I’ve spoken and just seal it in their hearts, wake them up at night, don’t let them sleep for weeks until they get real with God,” Kelly said. “This whole thing is a testimony to God’s sovereignty. Prayer has taken on a whole new meaning to me. It’s my strategy.”

From front porch conversations at night to chats at the local Wal-mart, the Kellys are making the true Christ known and people are receiving Him. Crossings Church has grown from three members to nearly 80 in Sunday attendance.

Within the first few months of their arrival, the Kellys realized they were in another country with its own culture, customs and way of receiving outsiders. Within the first week, the couple was able to share Christ with 10 LDS members who had come to their house during the evening to ask them why they were there.

“Many of them were hearing for that first time that Jesus wasn’t just a man like them,” Kelly said.

And there were people like Aaron Vickery, a former high-ranking, lifelong member of the LDS whose family had fallen to pieces and who knew the LDS teaching was wrong.

“I knew what they believed was wrong, but I didn’t know what to believe,” Vickery said. “Mickie heard about me when he was in Idaho and when he moved down here he called me up.”

After several months, Kelly and Vickery spent all night talking about the Gospel. By morning Vickery had accepted Christ and wanted to join the church, which, at the time, met in Kelly’s basement.

“It took me a long time. We’d been through Bible studies, and week after week these spoke right to me,” Vickery said. “I finally decided it was time to accept the Lord.”

For many in the area, it’s still a long shot to get them on the front steps of a Christian church, but Kelly keeps praying and making Christ known.

“The whole thing makes me say ‘Wow,’” Kelly said. “It’s been the hardest thing I’ve ever done because you can’t just go invite people to church. It’s all been through prayer and conversations and watching God grow the church. It’s been a ‘wow’ just to see Him move.”

Adam Miller writes for the North American Mission Board. To view a video about Mickie Kelly and other missionary and chaplain ministries through NAMB and its state partners, visit www.namb.net and click on the “Missionary Focus” gallery.

 

Southern Baptist Convention warns Christians about teachings of Mormonism

Apapepress

February 15, 2007

By Allie Martin

Rob Bowman with the North American Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) says Christians need to be aware that the beliefs of the Mormon Church are inconsistent with biblical Christianity. As one Mormon candidate launches his White House bid, the Southern Baptist official is urging Christians to take advantage of materials his denomination offers that teach the truth about Mormonism.

As former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney officially announced his presidential candidacy this week, a cover story in USA Today looked at the beliefs of the Mormon Church, formally known as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Rob Bowman, manager of the apologetics and interfaith evangelism department of the SBC’s North American Mission Board (NAMB), thinks Christians would be wise to take an even closer look at the Mormons, lest any be deceived about the nature and tenets of that religious group. He says although the Mormon Church wages an expensive public relations campaign, using terms familiar to appeal to evangelicals, the core teachings of the church do not line up with scripture and are inconsistent with evangelical Christianity.

For this reason, Bowman says the SBC has for decades offered, through its various entities, information resources focusing on the Mormon Church. Many of these resources detail the differences between Christian and Mormon beliefs — of which there are many, the NAMB official observes.

For example, Bowman notes, “In 15 short years, [Mormon Church founder] Joseph Smith went from being a thoroughgoing monotheist, a believer in one god, to a thoroughgoing polytheist, teaching the existence of many gods.” Also, he points out, the Latter-day Saints teach that humans can achieve godhood by joining the church and taking part in specific deeds and ceremonies.

Such divergent beliefs are among the reasons, the NAMB official asserts, why Christians must know the Bible, so as not to be fooled by non-biblical Mormon teachings. As for the Mormon Church members themselves, he adds, “Our concern is that they don’t really know the God of the Bible. So we’re concerned for their salvation.”

The concern of Bible-believing Christians is that Mormons do not know the real Jesus of scripture, Bowman explains. The SBC’s desire, he says, is not only to see evangelicals learn about the differences between Mormonism and Christianity but also to see Mormons come to know Jesus and have an authentic relationship with Him.

Evangelical Theologian: Bottom Line is Mormons are not Christians

Michelle Vu

Christian Post Reporter

July 27 2007

Mormons believe in a false gospel and are not Christians, concluded one of the nation’s preeminent evangelicals in what appeared to be the close of an online debate over Mormonism.

 “Here is the bottom line. As an Evangelical Christian – a Christian who holds to the ‘traditional Christian orthodoxy’ of the Church – I do not believe that Mormonism leads to salvation,” wrote Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr., president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, on Wednesday evening.

“To the contrary, I believe that it is a false gospel that, however sincere and kind its adherents may be, leads to eternal death rather than to eternal life,” he stated.

Mohler’s response is part of an ongoing “blog dialogue” sponsored by the Web site Beliefnet.com. Since June 28, the evangelical scholar and prominent Mormon science-fiction writer Orson Scott Card have been debating whether Mormons can be considered Christians.

During the course of the debate, Card focused on whether Mormons are moral people, good citizens and why Mormon presidential candidate Mitt Romney should be supported by evangelicals. He emphasized that Mormons share many of the same values as evangelical Christians and believe Jesus Christ is the only path to salvation.

However, Mohler noted that whether a Mormon has similar moral values to evangelical Christians is beside the point because Beliefnet.com had asked whether Mormons can be considered Christians based on traditional Christian orthodoxy.

“It appears that we are not really discussing the same question,” noted Mohler in his latest blog response.

“The debate has never been about whether Mormons are good Americans or would make good neighbors,” he wrote.

“I dare say that most American Evangelicals and traditional Roman Catholics would find more in common with Mormons in terms of child-rearing, sexual morality, the protection of marriage and family, and a host of other issues, than they would with liberal Catholics or liberal Protestants,” acknowledged Mohler.

But Mormonism from its beginning has rejected traditional Christian orthodoxy, which is part of the core Mormon identity, pointed out the highly-respected theologian. The subtitle of The Book of Mormon is “Another Testament of Jesus Christ.”

“A ‘testament,’ that is, other than that accepted by the historic Christian churches,” Mohler highlighted.

Mohler – who is often seen on “Larry King Live” and other popular news show representing the Christian voice – concluded that Mormonism is not just another form of Christianity and is incompatible with “traditional Christian orthodoxy.”

Mormon defender Card readily agrees with Mohler that Mormons do not fit into the Christian category as defined by traditional Christian orthodoxy. However, he argues that Mormons should be considered “nontraditional Christians.”

“Despite our deep differences of belief over the nature of God and his plans for his children, we recognize that those who believe in the other Christian faiths have taken a giant step closer to fulfilling the intentions of our Lord,” wrote Card on Thursday. “They are, in heart and mind, Christians.”

He further added, “We ask only the same favor in return. Let’s take that word ‘traditional’ and make use of it. Instead of saying that we are ‘not Christian’…let us agree that Mormons are ‘nontraditional Christians.’”

Card looked back on Christian history when Protestant Christian denominations were not accepted as part of the traditional church according to the Catholic viewpoint, and was even condemned guilty of heresy.

He concluded: “Call us ‘nontraditional Christians’ and continue to encourage your communicants not to believe our doctrines. We’ll happily continue to call you ‘traditional Christians’ and teach people why they should believe our doctrines.”

The Mormon defender ended by calling for unity in a world where Christians are persecuted and expressed appreciation that Dr. Mohler affirmed that Mormons should be equally considered for American public offices regardless of theological difference.

Basic beliefs of Mormons explained

By Mike Licona

NAMB, Director, Apologetics and Interfaith Evangelism

Updated Monday, April 07, 2008

Mormonism started in 1830 with 24-year-old year old Joseph Smith Jr. According to Smith, he had several experiences, during which God, Jesus, and the angel Moroni gave him instructions. Part of the instructions was to dig up some gold plates buried by the angel Moroni around A.D. 400 on a hill just outside of Smith’s town of Palmyra, New York. Smith dug up the plates, claimed they were written in “Reformed Egyptian,” and that God had given him the ability to translate them. This translation became known as the Book of Mormon, an account of the ancient inhabitants of North America between 600 B.C. and A.D. 400.

Mormons have four sources of authority: the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Pearl of Great Price, and Doctrine and Covenants. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has become one of the fastest-growing religions in the world. The church owns Brigham Young University.

Mormon beliefs are fundamentally different from biblical Christianity.

1. God. Once a human as we are now, and progressed to become God. He is one of many gods.

2. Man. Has the ability to progress and become a god just as Jehovah did.

3. Marriage. Polygamy is no longer advocated, although it once was encouraged.

4. Jesus. The son of God, but not part of the Godhead. Mormons do not believe in the Trinity.

Mormons are very sincere about their faith. Conversations with Mormon missionaries promise to be cordial. Mormon scholars, such as those at Brigham Young University, are well aware of the challenges which face Mormonism.

What do Mormons tell you when they visit?

When Mormons visit you, they usually will not focus on the doctrines previously mentioned. In fact, they probably will not even bring them up during the first few meetings. Instead they will seek to find common ground with you on many of the doctrines Christians believe. For example, they may begin by saying that God revealed the Old Testament through Moses and the prophets. Then Jesus came, was crucified and resurrected. His disciples wrote books and letters that became the New Testament. We all agree on these facts.

Then the differences begin. They will tell you that before Jesus’ ascension into heaven, He appeared to the inhabitants of North America and gave them the gospel as well. His message and the history of these inhabitants from 600 B.C. to A.D. 400 are recorded in the Book of Mormon.

Furthermore, they will tell you that since the apostles were not replaced when they were killed, the Church went into apostasy. In other words, it abandoned the true faith, and consequently, a restoration was necessary. Mormons believe that God chose Joseph Smith to bring that restoration; therefore, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the true Church.

How to answer Mormons

Mormons are well equipped to answer many of the issues Christians bring to their attention and have answers adequate to silence the average critic. The Mormon missionaries who come to your door are cordial and will listen to what you have to say. Enjoy the opportunity to share your faith with them, but be prepared by having good answers. Although there are many issues, which you may bring to the Mormons’ attention, focus on four that are of primary importance:

A. The Bible is reliable. Mormons claim that the Bible has been corrupted over the years as evidenced by the many different translations. How do we know that the Bible we have today is the same as it was 2,000 years ago? The original words of the Bible have been preserved with remarkable purity and that its accuracy has been confirmed by both history and archaeology. Variances among English translations do not call into question the preservation of the Bible over the years. Until you have shown this to a Mormon, it is useless to point out that some Mormon doctrines differ from the Bible. They will only respond that the Bible is unreliable.

B. There is no archaeological confirmation of the Book of Mormon. While the spade of the archaeologist has confirmed many places and peoples mentioned in the Bible, it has not been at all favorable to the Book of Mormon. Although Mormons will confidently assert that archaeology has confirmed the Book of Mormon’s accuracy time and time again, professional archaeologists have arrived at quite a different conclusion.

C. The Book of Abraham is a fraud. The Book of Abraham is one of the books in the Pearl of Great Price, one of Mormonism’s scriptures. Joseph Smith purchased some ancient Egyptian papyri and claimed it was an original book penned by Abraham himself while in Egypt. He translated it allegedly by the same gift, which God had given him to translate the Book of Mormon. Professional Egyptologists have translated the papyri since their rediscovery in 1967. Their translations bear no resemblance to Smith’s translation, exposing him as a charlatan.

D. Evidence for Mormonism? Mormons are convinced that Mormonism is true because the inward testimony of God tells them so. If you are going to be effective when talking to Mormons, it is crucial that you address this issue. Otherwise, no amount of solid evidence, which testifies against Mormonism, will be of help to them.

(EDITOR’S NOTE – The North American Mission Board’s apologetics web site, www.4truth.net, carries much more information about many brands of religion.

Romney’s LDS faith makes him a ‘cult’ member, Texas pastor says

By Peggy Fletcher Stack
The Salt Lake Tribune

09/26/2008

   WASHINGTON – Evangelicals who believe the country needs a Christian in the White House but promoted Mitt Romney’s candidacy during the Republican primaries were hypocrites, according to a Texas pastor.

    Romney, a Mormon, is not a Christian, the Rev. Robert Jeffress said, but a member of a “cult.”

    “I believe we should always support a Christian over a non-Christian,” Jeffress, pastor of First Baptist Church of Dallas, told a packed audience of journalists at last weekend’s Religion Newswriters Association (RNA) annual meeting. “The value of electing a Christian goes beyond public policies. . . . Christians are uniquely favored by God, [while] Mormons, Hindus and Muslims worship a false god. The eternal consequences outweigh political ones. It is worse to legitimize a faith that would lead people to a separation from God.”

    Jeffress made his remarks during a luncheon debate with Jay Sekulow, chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), a law firm and educational organization that focuses on religious-liberty issues. The DeMoss Group, a Christian public-relations firm in Duluth, Ga., sponsored the event.

    Sekulow, who also disagrees with Mormon theology but supported Romney’s candidacy, argued he would rather have a president who promoted a conservative political agenda than one who shared his doctrinal positions. 

“Jimmy Carter ran as a born-again Christian,” Sekulow reasoned, “but his presidency did nothing for the issues I care about.”

    Mark DeMoss, the company’s president, opened the session by describing his decision to lead Romney’s outreach to conservative Christians. DeMoss said he had come to admire Romney, despite their theological differences, but was amazed at the vehement opposition to the Mormon’s candidacy among Evangelicals.

    “When making the choice of candidate for president, I don’t care how different the person’s theology is from mine, just like I don’t care about my doctor’s theology or the guy’s who built my house or the architect’s,” DeMoss said in an interview this week. “I’m challenging people who would oppose a Mormon because he’s a Mormon, but I’m also challenging people who would instantly embrace a Southern Baptist because he’s a Southern Baptist. Both conclusions are bad.”

    DeMoss said he doesn’t mind when people come to different conclusions about which candidate to support, but hopes as least “they’re thinking.”

    The lively debate seemed to prove his point.

    “It was one of the more spirited lunch discussions we’ve ever had at RNA,” said RNA president Kevin Eckstrom, who noted that the journalist organization did not organize the event. “A lot of people were uncomfortable with what Dr. Jeffress said about Mormons, but what we were hoping for was something provocative that would get people talking, and certainly this did it.”

    Many reporters said they had never heard the word “cult,” which Jeffress repeatedly called the LDS Church, used so “freely and recklessly,” said Eckstrom, editor of Religion News Service in Washington, D.C. But Jeffress used the same word to describe “Catholics, Hindus, Buddhists and virtually everyone else.”

    It was useful for reporters to be aware of such strident views, Eckstrom said, because they are “completely mainstream in a lot of evangelical quarters.”

    First Baptist of Dallas “is not a backwater pulpit somewhere. It is a major church in Texas and in Southern Baptist circles,” Eckstrom said. “It’s a huge institution and a lot of followers. He’s not just spouting these opinions for himself but proud of the fact that he was going back to his congregation and declare every other religion was wrong, and at least 10,000 people hear this position every week.”

    The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints insists that it is a Christian faith, though not a traditional brand of Christianity. LDS officials today declined to comment on Jeffress’ statements until they see a transcript of the remarks, spokeswoman Kim Farah said.

New Website Launched!

Please check out my new website:  www.TheLightAndTruth.com

Check back often.  Updates will be posted very often.

Illegal Emigration: A simple evaluation

** NOTE ** this is not original content, but really “lands the plane” regarding the ongoing debate in our country.

JOE vs. JOSE

You have two families: “Joe Legal” and “Jose Illegal”. Both families have two parents, two children, and live in California .

Joe Legal works in construction, has a Social Security Number and makes $25.00 per hour with taxes deducted.

Jose Illegal also works in construction, has NO Social Security Number, and gets paid $15.00 cash “under the table”.

Ready? Now pay attention….

Joe Legal: $25.00 per hour x 40 hours = $1000.00 per week, or $52,000.00 per year. Now take 30% away for state and federal tax; Joe Legal now has $31,231.00.

Jose Illegal: $15.00 per hour x 40 hours = $600.00 per week, or $31,200.0 0 per year.Jose Illegal pays no taxes. Jose Illegal now has $31,200.00.

Joe Legal pays medical and dental insurance with limited coverage for his family at $600.00 per month, or $7,200.00 per year. Joe Legal now has $24,031.00.

Jose Illegal has full medical and dental coverage through the state and local clinics and emergency hospitals at a cost of $0.00 per year. Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00.

Joe Legal makes too much money and is not eligible for food stamps or welfare. Joe Legal pays $500.00 per month for food, or $6,000.00 per year. Joe Legal now has $18,031.00.

Jose Illegal has no documented income and is eligible for food stamps, WIC and welfare. Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00.

Joe Legal pays rent of $1,200.00 per month, or $14,400.00 per year. Joe Legal now has 9,631 .00.

Jose Illegal receives a $500.00 per month Federal Rent Subsidy. Jose Illegal pays out that $500.00 per month, or $6,000.00 per year. Jose Illegal still has $ 31,200.00.

Joe Legal pays $200.00 per month, or $2,400.00 for car insurance. Some of that is uninsured motorist insurance. Joe Legal now has $7,231.00.

Jose Illegal says, “We don’t need no stinkin’ insurance!” and still has $31,200.00.

Joe Legal has to make his $7,231.00 stretch to pay utilities, gasoline, etc..

Jose Illegal has to make his $31,200.00 stretch to pay utilities, gasoline, and what he sends out of the country every month..

Joe Legal now works overtime on Saturdays or gets a part time job after work.

Jose Illegal has nights and weekends off to enjoy with his family.

Joe Legal’s and Jose Illegal’s children both attend the same elementary school. Joe Legalpays for his children’s lunches, while Jose Illegal’s children get a government sponsored lunch. Jose Illegal’s children have an after school ESL program. Joe Legal’s children go home.

Now, when they reach college age, Joe Legal’s kids may not get into a State School and may not qualify for scholarships, grants or other tuition help, even though Joe has been paying for State Schools through his taxes, while Jose Illegal’s kids “go to the head of the class” because they are a minority.

Joe Legal and Jose Illegal both enjoy the same police and fire services, but Joe paid for them and Jose did not pay.

Government Run Health Care

So…. a health care plan was passed that was written by a committee whose chairman says he doesn’t understand it…..passed by a Congress that exempts themselves from it……to be signed by a president who smokes…..with funding administered by a treasury chief who didn’t pay his taxes……..all to be overseen by a……… surgeon general who is obese….. and financed by a country that’s broke. SERIOUSLY!!

Weeping

Today, I want to write briefly about a ver special Hebrew word that is translated weepeth in the King James Version of the Bible.  In Psalm 126:6, the writer makes a powerful observation.  He writes, “He that goeth forth and weepeth, bearing precious seed, shall doubtless come again with rejoicing, bringing his sheaves with him.”  The word translated weepeth is the Hebrew word bakah.  The word literally means to weep bitterly, or to embrace someone and weep upon them.

For years I have proposed that my church members read their Bible daily and spend quality time in prayer every day.  Do you know what you’re doing in the morning when you have a quiet time?  Weeding your garden.  You’re weeding the garden of your mind, so that the good seed of the Word of God can multiply.  In essence, your prayers are the means by which we embrace unbelievers that we might weep for their salvation.

But that is certainly not enough.  The next step is to plant the seed (share Christ with them) and cultivate His harvest. And, when you go out to win souls, water the crop with your tears.  Read how the Lord’s heart broke over the people He longed to embrace and love unto Himself (see John 17).  Learn this same sort of compassion in the garden God has given you to harvest for His kingdom.

Fellowship

Below are some insights into a Greek word I was studying recently.  The word is koinonia (koi no NEE ah): “Fellowship.”

When people are harvested into God’s family, they are brought into precious fellowship, called koinonia.  The Greeks used the word to describe a business partnership, a close friendship, a communal society and even a marriage.  It meant a sharing of life and intimate companionship.

As members of Christ’s body, we have fellowship with God and with one another.  But this fellowship is not just inward; it must also be outward.  Koinonia means “sharing your faith” (Phil. 1:5).  Kononia is reaching out to draw others into fellowship in God’s family.

Vote!

George Washing was the first president of the United States of America.  He was also a devout Christian.  During his life, he was renowned for his fervent prayer life.  It was this faith in Christ by Washington and others who would follow that set our great nation on the road to prosperity and greatness.  I have discovered a prayer offered by George Washington each Monday morning of his presidency.  I found it in Tim LaHaye’s book, Faith of our Founding Fathers.

“O eternal and everlasting God, I presume to present myself this morning before Thy Divine Majesty, beseeching Thee to accept of my humble and hearty thanks.  Daily frame me more and more into the likeness of Thy Son, Jesus Christ, that living in Thy fear, and dying in Thy favor, I may in Thy appointed time attain the resurrection of the just unto eternal life.  Bless my family, friends and kindred, and unite us all in praising and glorifying Thee in all our works.  Amen”

God answered Washington’s prayers because they were directly in line with the Word of God and the Will of God.  God blessed our nation because of the prayers of humble men of God, like Washington, who acted on the principles and precepts of the Word of God.  History books are replete with stories of once great nations that crumbled because of their rejection of God and His Holy Word.

When you go to the polls, remember the Lord and His Word.  Vote based not upon the will of union bosses, commercials, or yard signs.  Vote according to your Christian values.  The issues are broad: Homosexual marriage, abortion on demand, out of control government spending, embryonic stem cell research, and nominations of justices to the Supreme Court of the United States just to name a few.  Be an informed Christian citizen.  Vote.

2010 “30 Book” Challenge

Upon graduation from seminary, I committed myself to continue in the discipline of reading books that would keep me sharp in the ministry, edify me, and challenge my theological assumptions.  This has served me well.  It has kept me exposed to literature outside of my denominational sphere.  I have thus far completed:

Your Spiritual Gifts Can Help Your Church Grow by C. Peter Wagner

Why Revival Tarries by Leonard Ravenhill.

I have issued a challenge to the members of Lakeland Baptist Church in Lewisville, Texas to read at least 30 books in 2010.  As such, I will be periodically posting books that I am currently making my way through.  My discipline is such that I typically have 5-6 books going at all times.  I make it through some of the “lighter” books very quickly, while other “heavier” works require a bit more attention and time.  If you are an avid reader and would like to be part of this challenge, please post comments to this blog letting me know what you are reading.  If you discover a book that you consider a “must read” for all of us, please e-mail me a brief book review.  I will edit and post these on my blog for others to read.  As an aside, the books that you read do NOT have to be theological or doctrinal in nature.  If you comes across some great fictional books, pass it on.  Just keep in mind that this is a Christian “club” (for lack of a better word).

The books that I am currently working through are:
Holy In Christ, by Andrew Murray.

Captured by Grace: No one is beyond the reach of a loving God, by David Jeremiah.

Jonathan Edwards: America’s Evangelical, by Philip F. Gura

Why I Am Baptist , by Tom J. Nettles & Russell D. More

Thinking for a Change, by John C. Maxwell

Accountable Leadership, by Paul Chaffee

As a daily devotion, I am using:
Tozer on Leadership: A 366 Day Devotional, Compiled by Ron Eggert

One Speaking in Tongues: My Perspective As A Southern Baptist

At His ascension, the Lord Jesus Christ bestowed upon believers certain ministry tools that were to be used for the propagation of the Gospel, and the edification of the church.  These tools are sometimes called ta pneumatica (1 Cor 12:1).  Other times they are called ta charismata (1 Cor 12:4).  Yet in another places they are simply called doma (Eph 4:8), or “gift(s)” of the Holy Spirit.

Some have called for a renewed focus on spiritual gifts as a means of church growth.  The rationale is that if pastors & laity are exercising their God-given spiritual gifts to carry out the tasks of ministry, burn-out will be minimized and God will be glorified.  Conversely, if pastors & laity are forced to specialize in areas for which God has not equipped them, the results can be disastrous.  Gilbert writes, “Ignorance of spiritual gifts may be the major cause of much of the discouragement, insecurity, frustration and guilt that plagues many Christians, thereby holding back the effectiveness and growth of the church” (Gilbert 1987, 143).

While all of the gifts of the Holy Spirit are innately miraculous, we contend that the so-called “Charismatic” or “sign” gifts had a unique purpose: to give credibility to the apostles, that is, to let the people know that these men spoke the truth of God.  Once the apostolic period came to a close and the Word of God was inscripturated, the sign gifts were no longer needed and subsequently ceased.  Those gifts included prophecy (revelatory prophecy), miracles, healings (including raising the dead), tongues, and interpretation of tongues.

The Gift of tongues was a divinely bestowed supernatural ability to speak in a human language that had not been learned by the one speaking. According to the Apostle Paul, when believers exercised the gift of tongues in church, they were to speak one at a time, and only two or three were to speak in a given service (1 Cor. 14:27). Furthermore, when tongues were spoken in the church, they were to be interpreted by someone with the gift of interpretation so that the others might be edified by the God-given message (1 Cor. 14:5, 13, 27). In this way, tongues did not serve as a private prayer language, but rather—like all spiritual gifts—as a means by which one might serve and edify the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:7; 1 Pet. 4:10).

Along with the gift came very specific guidelines regarding the use of tongues.  The first guideline is in 1 Corinthians. 14:27, “If anyone speaks in a tongue, two—or at the most three—should speak.”  What is the maximum number of people who can speak in tongues in a service?  Three!  I have seen this violated time and time again by those of the charismatic persuasion.  This is a clear violation of clear command of Scripture.

The second guideline is also in verse 27, “One at a time.”  The speakers should talk in order, one at a time.  This guideline is also routinely violated.

The third guideline, also in verse 27, says, “Someone must interpret.”  The word interpret means the ability to decipher a foreign language.  Paul continues in verse 28, “If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God.”  There must be interpretation of tongues.  I have seen this principle violated over and over again.

The fourth guideline occurs in verse 34: “Women should remain silent in the churches.”  Paul does not say that women cannot pray or speak in the church service.  This would certainly contradict what he taught in 1 Cor. 11 about women praying and prophesying in the church.  Obviously, this statement must be interpreted in the context in which it is found.  He is emphatically stating that women cannot speak in tongues in the church.

Tongues “Will Cease”
After pointing out the Primacy of Love (vv. 1-3) and the Perfection of Love (vv. 4-7), Paul now asserts the Permanence of Love (vv. 8-13).  In 1 Corinthians 13:8 Paul made an interesting, almost startling, statement: “Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away.” In the expression “love never fails,” the Greek word piptō which is translated “fails” means “to decay” or “to be abolished.” Paul was not saying that love is invincible or that it cannot be rejected. He was saying that love is eternal—that it will be applicable forever and will never be passé. Tongues, however, “will cease.” The Greek verb katargeō used in 1 Corinthians 13:8 means “to cease permanently,” and implies that when tongues ceased, they would never start up again.

As one might suspect, the theological world is not lacking of opinions regarding speaking in tongues and other “miraculous gifts”.  Each author offers up their individual understanding of biblical text surrounding the ongoing or cessation of the “miraculous” spiritual gifts.  Depending on their individual view point, most make the same basic arguments for or against.  Ferguson, however, cuts through a great deal of the rhetoric and observes, “The issue at stake here is the sufficiency of Scripture for the directing of the church and the individual.  God’s revelation has always been sufficient for each stage of redemptive revelation.  The climax of redemption in Christ was accompanied by a correspondingly sufficient revelation in the Scriptures, so that the principle of scriptural sufficiency which Paul describes (2 Tim 3:16-17), while rooted in the Old Testament, now includes both Testaments” (Ferguson 1996, 231).  He goes on to conclude, “They now contain everything we need God to tell us for salvation, for trusting him perfectly, and for obeying him perfectly” (Ferguson 1996, 231).

The logical ends to the arguments for cessation are ultimately tied to the sufficiency of the Scripture.  The cessationist argues that no additional revelation is needed by the church or individual to know God better.  Conversely, they argue, it is illumination that is needed in our day—not extra-biblical revelation.  Hence, the Reformation doctrine of sola Scriptura was developed.

Grudem also makes a strong stand for the supremacy of the Scripture rather than the glorification of the so-called “miraculous” or “sign gifts” of the Spirit.  He contends that Scripture must have a place of primacy in our hearts and lives.  He further contends that we must “read them, believe them, memorize them, love them, and cherish them as the very words of our Creator speaking to us” (Grudem 2000, 49).  He continues with this theme by asserting that everything that is given to us and all of our teaching must be judged and brought under the authority of Scripture.  Furthermore, he contends, “no other gift or teaching or writing should ever be allowed to compete with them [the words of Scripture] for absolute priority in our lives” (Grudem 2000, 49).

The Gift of Tongues
Here is the question that this passage poses for the contemporary charismatic movement: if tongues were supposed to cease, has that already happened, or is it yet future?  Charismatic believers insist that none of the gifts have ceased yet, so the cessation of tongues is yet future. Most non-charismatics insist that tongues have already ceased, passing away with the apostolic age. Who is right?  It should be noted that 1 Corinthians 13:8 itself does not say when tongues were to cease.  Although 1 Corinthians 13:9-10 teaches that prophecy and knowledge will cease when the “perfect” (i.e., the eternal state) comes, the language of the passage—particularly the middle voice of the Greek verb translated “will cease”—puts tongues in a category apart from these gifts. Paul writes that while prophecy and knowledge will be “done away” (passive voice) by “the perfect,” the gift of tongues “will cease” in and of itself (middle voice) prior to the time that “the perfect” arrives. When did this cessation of tongues take place? The evidence of Scripture and history indicate that tongues ceased in the apostolic age.

Evidence from Scripture
What biblical or theological evidence is there that tongues have ceased? First, the gift of tongues was a miraculous, revelatory gift, and the age of miracles and revelation ended with the apostles. The last recorded miracles in the New Testament occurred around A.D. 58, with the healings on the island of Malta (Acts 28:7-10). From A.D. 58 to 96, when John finished the book of Revelation, no miracle is recorded.

Miracle gifts like tongues and healing are mentioned only in 1 Corinthians, an early epistle.  Two later epistles, Ephesians and Romans, both discuss gifts of the Spirit at length—but no mention is made of the miraculous gifts. By that time miracles were already looked on as something in the past (Heb. 2:3-4). Apostolic authority and the apostolic message needed no further confirmation. Before the first century ended, the entire New Testament had been written and was circulating through the churches.

The revelatory gifts had ceased to serve any purpose. And when the apostolic age ended with the death of the Apostle John, the signs that identified the apostles had already become moot (cf. 2 Cor. 12:12).

Second, tongues were intended as a sign to unbelieving Israel (1 Cor. 14:21-22; cf. Is. 28:11-12). They signified that God had begun a new work that encompassed the Gentiles. The Lord would now speak to all nations in all languages. The barriers were down. And so the gift of languages symbolized not only the curse of God on a disobedient nation, but also the blessing of God on the whole world.

Tongues were therefore a sign of transition between the Old and New Covenants. With the establishment of the church, a new day had dawned for the people of God. God would speak in all languages. But once the period of transition was past, the sign was no longer necessary.

Third, the gift of tongues was inferior to other gifts. It was given primarily as a sign (1 Cor. 14:22) and was also easily misused to edify self (1 Cor. 14:4). The church meets for the edification of the body, not self-gratification or personal experience-seeking. Therefore, tongues had limited usefulness in the church, and so it was never intended to be a permanent gift.

The Evidence from History
The evidence of history also indicates that tongues have ceased. It is significant that tongues are mentioned only in the earliest books of the New Testament. Paul wrote at least twelve epistles after 1 Corinthians and never mentioned tongues again. Peter never mentioned tongues; James never mentioned tongues; John never mentioned tongues; neither did Jude. Tongues appeared only briefly in Acts and 1 Corinthians as the new message of the gospel was being spread. But once the church was established, tongues were gone.  They stopped. The later books of the NewTestament do not mention tongues again, and neither did anyone in the post-apostolic age.

The utter silence of the early church fathers cannot and should not be lightly dismissed.  These writers represent a wide geographical area.  Each of them wrote doctrinally and purposefully, and often with corrective emphasis.  Had the phenomenon of speaking in tongues been a normal manifestation continued from New Testament times, they would certainly have mentioned it.  I have catalogued a few who are worthy of mention:

• Justin Martyr (c. 100-167) was a widely traveled teacher.  He makes no mention of tongues.
• Irenaeus (c. 130-195), bishop of Lyons in Gaul and one of the most distinguished teachers of the Ante-Nicene church, criticized a heretical group called the Montanists for their unhealthy stress on visions, emotional prophetism and speaking in all kinds of languages.  Eusebius also criticized this group for their “irregular ecstasy, raving, and speaking, and uttering strange things…”  His strongly criticism regarding their utterances centered specifically around their proclamations that were contrary to the teaching of Christ and the Scripture.
• Tertullian (c. 155-202) of North Africa mentions tongues, but merely as an apostolic manifestation, not as a phenomenon of his day.
• Origen (c. 185-254) was a prolific author, yet in all of his voluminous writings gave no hint that tongues were a normal manifestation in his day or that the signs and manifestations of the early church had continued in his day.
• Chrysostom and Augustine—the greatest theologians of the eastern and western churches—considered tongues obsolete. Writing in the fourth century, Chrysostom stated categorically that tongues had ceased by his time and described the gift as an obscure practice.  Augustine referred to tongues as a sign that was adapted to the apostolic age. In fact, during the first five hundred years of the church, the only people who claimed to have spoken in tongues were followers of Montanus, who was branded as a heretic.

The Middle Ages offer no evidence that the apostolic gift of tongues was meant to be perpetuated in the church.

The Reformation period gives no evidence of the continuance of speaking in tongues in the church.  Actually, the phenomenon played no part whatsoever in this far-reaching movement.  This is extremely significant in the light of the nature of the Reformation.  In such a back-to-the-Bible emphasis as the era witnessed, there is no intimation that the doctrine of speaking in tongues had any ministry in the continuing stream of God’s work or in the Holy Spirit’s operation in that day.

The next time any significant tongues-speaking movement arose within Christianity was in the late seventeenth century. A group of militant Protestants in the Cevennes region of southern France began to prophecy, experience visions, and speak in tongues. The group, sometimes called the Cevennol prophets, is remembered for its political and military activities, not its spiritual legacy. Most of their prophecies went unfulfilled. They were rabidly anti-Roman Catholic, and advocated the use of armed force against the Roman Catholic church. Many of them were consequently persecuted and killed by Rome.

At the other end of the spectrum, the Jansenists, a group of Roman Catholic loyalists who opposed the Reformers’ teaching on justification by faith, also claimed to be able to speak in tongues in the 1700s.

Then in the early nineteenth century, Scottish Presbyterian pastor Edward Irving and members of his congregation practiced speaking in tongues and prophesying. Irvingite prophets often contradicted each other, their prophecies failed to come to pass, and their meetings were characterized by wild excesses. The movement was further discredited when some of their prophets admitted to falsifying prophecies and others even attributed their “giftedness” to evil spirits. This group eventually became the Catholic Apostolic Church, which taught many false doctrines, embracing several Roman Catholic doctrines and creating twelve apostolic offices. In March of 1833 Irving was deposed from the ministry of the Church of Scotland by the Presbytery of Annan on the charge of heresy.

In the development of Christianity in America, speaking in tongues had no place at all.  Our Pilgrim fathers, Puritan leaders, Baptist preachers, Presbyterian divines, and Methodists laymen did not at all indulge in this practice.  Even in the times of great revival that periodically swept the country in the days of expanding frontiers, believers did not feel led by the Spirit to engage in miraculous prophecies, healings, tongues, interpretations of tongues, and other miraculous manifestations.  Multitudes were genuinely convicted of sin, converted, and filled with the Spirit, but did not make the claims that Charismatics do today.

Theologian Merrill Unger points out that it is important to note the manifestation of tongues on the eve of the modern charismatic revival, two groups must be credited for early occurrences, namely, the Mormons of Joseph Smith and the Shakers.  Joseph Smith espoused tongues, prophecies, visions, and revelations.  The Book of Mormon was the result.  To him, tongues signaled the reception of the Holy Spirit, which furnished the entrée for his visions.  The character of these revelations and the demonic nature of Mormonism sufficiently demonstrate the dangers of this procedure.

The Shakers were an American sect with Quaker roots that flourished in the mid-1700s. “Mother” Ann Lee, founder of the sect, regarded herself as the female equivalent of Jesus Christ. She claimed to be able to speak in seventy-two languages. Oddly, the Shakers also believed sexual intercourse was sinful, even within the confines of marriage.  They spoke in tongues and were widely known for their hilarious dancing and high-pitched singing in a trancelike state.

A revival of speaking in tongues swept across America early in the twentieth century.  This movement had its beginnings earlier, but histories of tongues movements do not go back much before the last quarter of the nineteenth century.  In 1897 a Holiness convention was held in New England by “gift people.”  In 1900 the Bethel Bible School was opened in Topeka, Kansas, by Charles F. Parham, who taught that tongues and healing ought to be exercised in the church.  Soon tarrying meeting and sessions for “praying for the Spirit,” seeking one’s Pentecost,” and so forth, became commonplace.  W.J. Seymour took up with the idea of a Pentecostal blessing and started the Azuza Street Assembly in Los Angeles in 1906.  In 1908 one of this group, G.B. Cashwell, brought Pentecostalism into the Church of God.  When he preached at the annual convention of the group in Cleveland, Tennessee, its leader H.A. Tomlinson, received the so-called “baptism,” allegedly evidenced by tongues.  This resulted in numerous independent Churches of God becoming the principle exponents of a “second blessing” idea of sanctification climaxed by speaking in tongues.

All of those supposed manifestations of tongues were identified with groups that were heretical, fanatical, or otherwise unorthodox. The judgment of biblically orthodox believers who were their contemporaries was that all those groups were aberrations. Surely that should also be the assessment of any Christian who is concerned with truth. Thus, we conclude that from the end of the apostolic era to the beginning of the twentieth century there were no genuine occurrences of the New Testament gift of tongues. They had ceased, as the Holy Spirit said they would (1 Cor. 13:8).  The modern tongues movement is no more sanctioned by the Word of God than previous sporadic outbursts of tongues in church history.  The resurgence of speaking in tongues is not so much evidence of a “latter rain” as it is a doctrinal fog.  It has accomplished little more than producing much confusion, division, carnality, and immaturity in the church. 

What modern church history has taught us is that there is no substitute for faith and obedience to the Word of God.  To attempt to build ones life on the shifting sands of human experience and emotions will only produce a life unable to withstand the storms.  It pays to keep God’s Word first.