Dobson's Attack on Obama

James Dobson leveled his guns on Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama this week accusing the Illinois senator of "deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible to support his own worldview and confused theology." Now there are a number of evangelical Christians who have given themselves over to the notion that Mr. Obama is a sinister figure with a secret agenda to set back American democracy and dilute our public understanding of the Christian faith. Dobson's comments are cut from that cloth.

I don't want to bias anyone, but I would encourage you to read Senator Obama's 2006 speech to the Call to Renewal conference for yourself and then listen to Mr. Dobson's...uh...reaction. Here are the links, then I'll make a few simple, indirect remarks...but you decide for yourself...

Link to Obama's Call to Renewal speech here...

Link to Dobson's response on his radio show, from OnePlace.com here...you'll have to first listen to a brief tribute to the late Tim Russert, the sterling NBC News political commentator and former host of Meet the Press.

Brief Comments

• First of all, the Call to Renewal is not a liberal church organization as implied by some. Jim Wallis, it's founder, is a social activist but also an evangelical. Moreover, though there are several liberal minded "Christians" who have signed on to the Call, there is a strong evangelical presence led by none other then J.I. Packer [do you think he knows his Bible?] and Steve Haynes of InterVarsity Christian Fellowship.


• The biggest concern I have with Dobson's comments is that it reveals that bias and prejudice can really distort our ability to follow common and plain reason. This is not only a threat to the American democratic experiment, but also serves as a major obstacle to reform efforts in the Church by raising the standard of biblical authority with clarity. If we can't read the bible (or a speech) and see the same thing...though we might disagree with the value of what is read...the hope for a sense of community among diversity is hopeless...


• Since, I don't think Dobson is a slow thinker, I can only believe that his politics has caused him to miss what is a fair and honest statement on the realities of cultural and religious plurality in the context of American democracy.

Enough from me...you read, listen, then decide...

"Reformed" vs. "Evangelical": Why I tend to use the latter

For those who know them by name, I say to you that I love the Doctrines of Grace and believe they are a correct summary of the gospel...I stand unwaveringly with the 5 Solas, and embrace the Reformed Tradition as my own, two of my favorite web sites are Desiring God and Monergism ... YET I prefer to use the term "evangelical" when discussing the church and targeting a community in need of Reformation.

I share this for those who perceive my frequent use of the term evangelical as a kind of side step around the rigors of Calvinism or a lack of confusion about Reformed Theology. In fact, I chose RTS for seminary study specifically for its reformed faculty and tradition: I confess John Frame has risen toward the top of my scholarly heroes list, and in fact when I finish blogging today, I will return to reading the Westminster Confession of Faith for my Intro to Theological Studies Class, where Richard Pratt is simply thrilling me!!

But you're not going to see a lot of Reformed language at the forefront of my postings because...

• I agree with Richard Pratt that we have to continue to review and revise our theological categories, and I think one way to do that is to jettison well-worn labels which in their effort to short-cut dialogue can either obfuscate it or worse...erect barriers!


• The reform need in the church, in particular the African American church, is less about particular doctrines...at least initially...and is more about a rediscovery of biblical clarity: sound and true interpretation, along with the formulation of proper theological principles which then pour into godly and holy living. I think we lead with scripture and arrive at doctrine, as opposed to beginning with doctrine and then extracting from the bible the evidence to support our heard-as-controversy positions.

Hopefully, that makes sense...and primarily for those who might be confused or concerned by more frequent use of the "evangelical" label instead of "reformed"...

:-)

Want help in achieving biblically centered thinking, add this to your library...

I can hardly wait to plumb the depths of Brother Carter's excellent work, you can read about it here, and for those who have not posted to my blog before, are not members of Living Faith, and are not employees of BST, I will send this book to the first of you who asks for a copy of this provocative work. Simply send your mailing address to my email, dwilliamson1965@yahoo.com, and this book will be on its way to you this week!

Does Ignorance Trump Accountability?

I received several email responses to last week's post, but I wanted to respond to two of them because I believe they summarize the heart of the evangelical instinct, and provides the impetus for a where a more Reformed hermeneutic would help the church provide a cogent and consistent message about the necessity of faith in Christ for personal redemption. These comments were made by my good friends Mark and Barry, shown as responses to the previous post, and each are faithful to a good reading of scripture...though I humbly believe they've fallen a bit short.

Mark: General Revelation & Spiritual Accountability
Two very provocative points were made in Mark's response, specifically concerning the sufficiency of general revelation and what some call "concurrent dispensations", i.e. that the Lord deals with those who have been exposed to the gospel based on their acceptance or denial of it, and for those who are ignorant of it, based on their moral conformity to the law and the judgment of their conscience. Let's first deal with the sufficiency of general revelation.

We should be clear that NO revelation, general or special, is sufficient to save without the regenerative work of the Holy Spirit. Lionel has begun an interesting discussion on a related thought in his blog, but it is important to underscore that even when God's requirements are clearly enumerated in the law beyond general revelation, our hearts are incapable of responding in an obedient and righteous way: Romans 3:20, 8:3-4; Ephesians 2:1-3.

Further, Paul states rather clearly that gentiles outside the gospel message "have no hope" (Ephesians 2:12 & 1 Thess 4:13), and it is fairly clear from the biblical witness that the natural religious impulses of the pagan heart and mind are toward idolatry and the exaltation of lusts. This is a byproduct of a sinful heart and occurs 100% of the time. I think the challenge for those who seek to make ignorance a defense against accountability is to deal with the sin problem of those who have not heard of Christ: are their sins forgiven apart from direct faith in Christ? The real question is, however: is there a regenerative work of the Holy Spirit apart from the message of the Lordship and work of Christ?

Biblically, I believe there is not. But, I am not ashamed to confess a fear of God in this and yet I know He knows my motive is only for integrity to His word as revealed. Our God is a consuming fire and the eternal destiny of souls is among the gravest concerns in all the universe, and only He has the authority to make these pronouncements...and I believe He has spoken accordingly in his revealed word. This is also why I believe the missological and evangelistic mandate is of great importance...Lord, please forgive my not making it the highest priority of each day!

On to Mark's second point...

Concurrent dispensation: The Lord judges those who know the truth by that standard, and those who don't know the truth are judged by their conscience. Probably the most commonly cited passage that supports Mark's point is Romans 2:12-16. Many, I believe, are misled in this text because they connect Paul's parenthetical statement in verses 14 & 15 to the last sentence in this paragraph in verse 16. But it is really verses 12 & 13 that are connected to 16 which really establishes that accountability DOES exist outside the revelation of law (all who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law). Verses 14 & 15 in this passage do not mean that the conscience of those who don't have the law is capable of leading them to righteousness, but that the conscience serves the function the law does for those who have received it, namely the highlighting of sin. Neither law nor conscience has the power to overcome sin's effect on the human heart...nor the human condition!

Paul makes an interesting point to the people of Athens in Acts 17:30 - In the past God overlooked...ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. Is this repentance possible without the preaching of the word of Christ? Some might suggest that God worked in this vein in OT times before the incarnation, i.e. that he worked among non-Jewish gentiles outside the old covenant and direct influence of the law, e.g. Nebuchednezzar (Daniel 4:37) and Neco of Egypt (2 Chr 35:21), and that he can do the same thing among those who have not heard of Christ.

Touche; God can do and does what he wants...who can stay his hand? (But no one would suggest that God is random or capricious!) However, should the fact that Enoch walked with God, never tasting death, or that Elijah was carried away in a chariot fire give us reason to suggest that death is likely to miss some today? Should the fact that there will be one generation that will be alive when Christ returns and accordingly not experience death, nullify the truth of the biblical statement: man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment(NIV)?

Biblically at least, it is clear that humanity has inherited condemnation from Adam, Romans 5:12-21. Another good friend has suggested that a God of perfect love would not condemn humanity for the actions of an elder brother. But, we all die because of the actions of that elder brother...moreover, we should not forget that we are made righteous, not by our own actions, but by the righteousness of a different elder brother, namely Jesus Christ.

Barry: The Soul Who Sins Shall Die
This statement from Ezekiel 18:20 reminds us that "generational sin" is not a curse as some suggest it is, a son will not be condemned for the sins of his father. I believe the core message here, this side of the fall, is that each of us are individually accountable before God. We are not in the same state that Adam was in, who was completely morally innocent before God. David said very clearly in Psalm 51:5 - Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me...this tells us that our sin situation is pervasive and precedes any choice on our part. We are not sinners because of bad choices, but make bad choices because we are sinful...

Closing Thoughts...
What strikes me about the responses to this question is the hearts and minds that produced these and others that I heard: all of them were from individuals who have hearts for God and love for the saints. None of them would argue against the core message of the gospel...intentionally. However, I believe that in many ways that the lessons of the European Reformation are being lost on the church today, namely that a reliance on convention and intuitive reason apart from the guiding light of scripture will lead the church into confessional compromise. The fact that most good Christians will allow that salvation is possible apart from faith in Christ, under any contemporary circumstance, suggests that much of what the bible teaches about the bad news portion of the gospel is lost on the church today.

It is no surprise that most public preaching and teaching centers on the practical urgencies of individual life circumstances...making the Lord sovereign over them (a good thing) instead of the larger soteriological imperative: imploring natural born sinners to embrace God's merciful act of love or remain the object of his judicious wrath. Here is an experiment to attempt today: read Jonathan Edwards' Sinners in the Hands of Angry God to a congregation and judge the response...

Are these people lost?

The National Indian Foundation in Brazil published this picture on its web site on May 29th as evidence that this tribe exists and that the dangers of illegal logging may drive these and other marginally-contacted peoples into extinction. The tribe shown here is thought to have had no direct exposure to the modern world prior to this feaful and alien encounter with a helicopter.

There are literally hundreds of uncontacted or marginally contacted people groups living in what can only be described as an aboriginal state, organized as hunter-gatherer societies, most with no form of agriculture and some, such as the unwelcoming and violent Sentinelese off the cost of India, even lack the know-how to produce fire, instead relying on lightning strikes to provide this helpful "technology"!

The concern of anthropologists is that inevitable extinction awaits these tribesmen in the wake of extensive contact with outsiders who will certainly bring disease which these people, living in prolonged isolation, undoubtedly lack the immunity to resist. But there is a more basic and plaguing question that confronts the Christian community, one that gets at the heart of the Christian mission and very basic doctrine: are these people lost?

Let me begin by saying that no one can speak with absolute certainty about any individual's eternal destiny, fingering a person for heaven's pleasures or hell's horrors...even those shown in the picture above prompting our saying "lost" is beyond the scope and authority of the church and any pastor, theologian, or writer. BUT, can we biblically answer important questions concerning the basis of condemnation and the imperative for evangelization and missions? More simply: why are people lost and is evangelism necessary [or hurtful!]...as far as the Bible is concerned? Let's take these two very briefly and attempt a simple and concise anwer on each of them.

Why Are People Lost?
Fundamentally, the bible does not teach that people are lost BECAUSE they reject Christ as savior. It is not the act of rejecting Christ that results in one being lost, the Lord's response to Nicodemus in John 3:17-18 helps us tremendously on this:

• 3:17 - For God did not send his son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.

We can easily and incorrectly draw from this that Christ does not bring a "judging" mindset to the world but only a tolerant, accepting approach in dealing with us. If we aren't careful we can somehow draw from this that we should not speak to the worldy patterns and conduct that warrant condemnation; sinful conduct and sin-loving hearts can and must be condemned, and Christ showed us this by example (Sermon on the Mount, dealing with Pharisees, etc.). But what this passage is stating is that Christ does not introduce condemnation into the world, but that God actually injects salvation into the world through Christ. The next verse makes this even clearer:

• 3:18 - Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.

This is similar to what the Lord said in John 8:24, that if his hearers did not believe in him that they would die in [their] sins. We must remember that bibically, condemnation does not occur because of anything that we did or do, but is something that we inherit from Adam, Paul helps us here in Romans 5:18 & 19 -

• ...as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men...through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners...

So no one is lost because they reject Christ...nor is anyone not lost if they have never heard of Christ; if one is a descendent of Adam then that one is a sinner deserving God's righteous condemnation. This is a harsh and stern truth, and we have our ultimate patriarch to thank for this...but except one be oustide of Adam's descent and curse, then Adam's condemnation remains on any human being ever born. We are a condemned race; please contemplate this grave reality.

Is Evangelism Necessary [or hurtful]?

Of course evangelism is not hurtful, I only ask this because many suggest that an individual can only rightly be condemned if they've heard of God's "offer" of salvation, otherwise it would be patently unfair to hold them to the impossible standard of needing to know of Christ in order to be saved. It is often said, will any be able to stand before God in the day of judgment and say "Lord, I didn't know about Christ, why would you judge me for something I didn't know about?!" Yet, what we see in the Bible is that all those who are sinners [born in sin] actually merit God's just condemnation. Again, this is a hard truth, but it is a biblical one.

If ignorance of Christ excuses one from accountability before God, then indeed evangelism and missions would bring eternal risk to some who had not heard of God's "offer", as it is often referred to. However, biblically we have every reason to believe that evangelism and missions are necessary if one is to escape the condemnation that has come to the world because of Adam's disobedience.

Again, Paul helps us in Romans 10:13-15 -

• Everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved. How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? And how can they preach unless they are sent?

Hearing the gospel is necessary for salvation...nowhere do we see, at least in scripture, that eternal life is attainable outside of a knowing and active relationship with Jesus Christ. We are told that many know and reject, and still others fake it...but there is no biblical latitude provided that salvation is somehow applied to those ignorant of either their need for salvation or its availability. I welcome any insights from those who think differently, because this is not a point to be argued, but simply a doctrine for us to be clear on. So, I stand ready to hear from brothers or sisters who have greater insight and biblical clarity on this...

• Aside: The Lord does make it clear in Luke 12:48 that the one who does not know but does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows.... I think we see a principle of mercy here that the Lord gives to the ignorant, but I don't think it means they are saved only that their punishment is less harsh. It should be clear that only God knows what this means in actuality. Eternal life is his gracious gift and eternal condemnation is a right only he has as the righteous judge of "the great and the small"...only let us live up to what we know and be true to scripture with integrity.

Why does this matter?

First of all, this is not a hypothetical, these tribes exist and we need to pray fervently that the gospel reaches them, indeed I sincerely hope missionary organizations are contemplating ways to reach them without putting these people and their small societies at the risk of extinction

Secondly, this is important for clarity sake even as we evangelize in our own communities, especially in an increasingly culturally pluralistic society. For example, we are hard-pressed to say that muslim women living in Pakistan are knowingly "rejecting" Christ when because of their muslim heritage they have a completely different understanding as to who he is; I frankly don't see their situation as being any different from the uncontacted Indians of South America...this is why many missionaries are risking their lives to do missions in muslim countries, so the people in those lands can receive a true understanding about Christ, his lordship and God's plan of salvation.

Lastly, we must maintain a biblical basis for what we believe as Christians, especially when so much of what we hold to in the church today is of a spurious biblical basis. As mentioned in my previous posting, the beginnings of a Reformation movement in the African American church must rest on a rediscovery of the bible and its core message...and then living by the same! We have some work to do in this effort, but it's necessary and will return to us many dividends of God-glorifying living, Christ-exalting preaching, and true Christian fellowship across all cultures and peoples who comprise the wonderfully mosaic body of Jesus Christ. To him be the glory!

Getting back in stride...

My apologies for my absenteeism the past couple of weeks! I had a few personal things and work items to conspire to throw me off track. First let me say to those who have been praying, my Mom is doing much better now and we think the Lord has brought her out of some scary episodes which we now know were hypoglycemic attacks. Those who are diabetics will know how scary these can be. Anyhow, your prayers are greatly appreciated, and please continue to pray that she will follow her doctor's guidance, eat and rest well, and continue to allow the Lord to use her for the glory of his great name!

Lord willing, I will continue the posting series on Reformation in the African American Church this week, after I make a brief statement about the significance of Barak Obama's success to a strategy for achievement in the black community. After the posts on Reformation, I'd like to begin a series of posts on the doctrine of "endurance" and the warning passages in scripture, using Schreiner's and Canneday's excellent book "The Race Set Before Us" as a guide.

Hopefully the post above on uncontacted people groups and the necessity of evangelization will help stir us to an increasing desire for doctrinal clarity on our core beliefs.

Keep fighting for Christ's glory in your life!

What is Reformation for the African American Church? An Introduction

Well, first of all my wife has informed me that the actual readership of this blog is diverse, if at the same time small...the latter being my own observation and humble acknowledgement. But her main point was that I should not assume that we all have a shared understanding of the meaning of "reformation" as it pertains to the church. This led to the further realization that many of the core terms for "reformation" should be carefully explained with biblical support and clarity, and using very simple language. So, since she's as wise as she is beautiful (here seen dining in her favorite city: London), we'll yield to that counsel.

What is meant by Reformation in the African American Church?
At it's core, "reformation" is a rediscovery of the bible, it's fundamental teaching and it's full disclosure about God, grace, Christ's person and his work, and by extension the mission of the church. The main tenets of this biblical rediscovery is the centrality of God, the supreme value of his glory, the preeminence of Christ in ampliying God's glory through grace, and that we stand before God as the trophies of grace...receiving all of its benefits. In a major way, Reformation means placing God in Christ at the real center of all our preaching, teaching, singing, witnessing, working, etc.

But how do we get there, how is Reformation in the African American church achieved within actual local congregations? I would like to suggest 3 pillars of reformation that are needed for the African American church to walk in the fullness (Eph 4:13) that Christ has called her into:

1. Biblical literacy and interpretation
2. Discipleship and devotion to Christ
3. Awareness of congregation, community, national, and global needs.

I will address the first item very briefly now, and then save the second two to be addressed over the weekend.

Quick Aside: I feel it necessary to briefly address the obvious question: why target these items to the Black Church when they are all well enough relevant to all Christians everywhere? This is a good question and I'm aware of Lionel, Thabiti, Quincy A. Jones and Xavier speaking to this item in other places, and I agree with some of what has been shared and I disagree with others, but let me just say the following as a "defense" for why this is targeted toward the African American church community:

• This is not intended to exclude but to aim. For example, when we talk about problems with the "American" church we don't mean that it is ONLY the American church, or that it pertains to ALL American churches, but only that there is a pattern to problems within the American Christian community. I give this as an example because no one ever gets upset about discussing the "American" church but feathers often get ruffled for some when you mention the "Black Church". I give this example just to say "hey, we do this kind of thing all the time and I'm not trying to exclude one group (say, non-Black Churches) or condemn another one (like, all Black Churches)...cool?


• There is such a thing as a Black Church community, tradition and set of associations that feels like a community and a world. Many of us grew up in it and still worhship and serve Christ in that context. This is the typical weekly church experience of many. No one should feel as if it's racist or Afro-centric, it's simply a way of speaking about a particular reality: the Black Church. Make sense?


• So any and all should feel free to assess this from their own cultural experience, whether it is multicultural and integrated, or largely ethno-centric...both of which can glorify Christ fully. Now, back to our main point...

1. Biblical Literacy and Interpretation

There are a lot of preachers who lift up the bible as symbollicaly and who never really deal with its contents. Joel Osteen is the best example, launching every sermon with his trademark "verse" about the bible and then loosely connecting scripture to his recurring themese of positive thinking and personal uplift. Why is it that many believers even in bible-teaching churches fall under the spell of this worldly sheen? Why is it that when biblically grounded pastors retire or are called home to the Lord, younger mammon-obsessed men come aboard with the congregation totally unawares about the dangerous new worldly teaching? Why do many respond to truth and error with the same zeal?

After Christ-centered preaching, our congregations needs to be taught how to read and properly interpet scripture, i.e. let the bible speak for itself and don't run it through the filter of what you think you already know. Let the bible be our guides...but again, it is necessary to teach people HOW to read scripture in context. We often talk about the importance of contextual bible reading, but I think more importantly we need to teach and show how it's done.

Biblical interpretation is always trying, but I would suggest not as difficult as it has to be...if we can rely more directly on what the biblcal texts actually say. As an example, many people struggle with the doctrine of election not because the bible teaches it in an obtuse way or that it's difficult to understand, but it is largely because people refuse to believe what the bible says about it! A word of advice to a Reformed-minded pastor called to takr over a new congregation: Teach your congregants how to read and understand the bible.

This gets to a second point: I'm not convinced our most common Bible study models are effective for actually learning what the Bible says...I know I often don't feel I am as effective as I need to be while conducting Bible studies. The model I typically use is an outline of a text, with questions thrown out to the class for feedback and discussion. I think this can be very fruitful, I've done it for years, but what about the following instead:

• A lecture approach that allows the teacher to get out with clarity the context of a passage, it's meaning, connecting it to parallel passages and bringing our clear application; kind of a sermonette but with cool analysis and presentation. Then this would be followed by an extended period of group thoughtful examination of the text and what was presented and of course more meditation on application.


• An advanced approch where there is really more of a group study where each participant opens their bible and there is a searching and discussion for meaning. Relevant and challenging questions are noted, and the group explores the answers together. This should be less of the teacher "giving the answer" and more of the group "searching for the answer"...with the results of answers being captured with an effort to arrive at group consensus. It is important for churches, especially leadership, to strive for agreement on major doctrinal and practical themes, I believe unity in doctrinal thought is achieved by working for it through the labor of group study. It is so important that we recognize that doctrinal unity is only achievable and preservable when there is a shared understanding...not just a shared confession, or even merely a shared hearing.

This weekend's posts:

• 2nd two pillars for reformation
• I need to complete the posting of my sermon notes from a few weeks ago...Sorry!
• I will be preaching this weekend, Lord willing, and will post a BRIEF summary and the audio under the theme: Christ, Our Model

Prayer Needs

• My Mom is still battling health issues, please pray for her
• Our congregation has several members who are battling health concerns as well (Erni, Brenda, Juneirene, and others...please pray for them
• Lenny: I believe the Lord still wants to use you mightily...remember Moses was 80?! We need your service...and I don't mean in the kitchen...[Romans 12:1-2]
• Pastors Dennie, Burrows, and Anthony Carter and his new Church Plant
• The Reformation!!!