Came across this quote a week ago or so:
“We do tend to reduce the Gospel to moral living and the American way of life. Even those of us in the church act as if God is powerless and we have to do everything for Him. The early church knew a supernatural God who didn’t always do things the way they thought He ought to. Maybe we should look to and rely more on Him and less on ourselves.”
“Old self” is dead, having been crucified once-for-all with Christ.
“New self” is the new life we now have in Christ: new heart, new mind, new spirit, and the Holy Spirit.
Forever forgiven.
Saved (made a new creation, through new birth in Christ) once-for-all in Christ’s once-for-all sacrifice and eternal priesthood.
All sin(s) forgiven; full fellowship now; no longer slaves to the reign of Sin (original Sin, Adam’s); now held captive by the reigning Lord of Life.
Forever are we reconciled…this is something we will reckon with daily.
As a people with new hearts/minds under a New Cov’t, we are therefore now bearing a new image (identity) that actually shapes our self awareness as Saints (no longer Sinners, in the NC sense).
A glance at the origins of Islam:
[found here: http://bibleprobe.com/muhammad.htm]
WHO IS ALLAH?
|
|
When Muhammad was born in Mecca, each Arab tribe in Mecca had their own deity. There was a large black meteor found in the desert which many Arabs believed was sent to them by astral deities. This rock was placed in the southeast corner of the cube-shaped structure in Mecca. The arabs knew this rock as the Ka’ba, which means stone. The black rock’s diameter is about 12 inches. It is reddish black in color, and has red and yellow particles.During this time before Islam this stone was part of the shrine to worship of a chief male god (among over 350 other gods) who was known as Hubal. The black meteor stone was said to symbolize a nature god known as al-Hajar al-Aswad. Hubal was an oracular deity whose statue — in human form and made of red carneol — stood in the Ka’ba until Muhammad destroyed it. The Kaba is about 50 feet high, and the walls are about 40 feet long. The facade contains the door, which starts at 7 feet off the ground, and faces N.E.. To enter the Kaba, a ladder must be used. Also built in the eastern corner, is another stone called “lucky”. This stone is only touched, not kissed. Pagans called out the names of their pagan gods as they circled the Kaba the same as Muslims do today, calling out Allah’s name. Early Meccan Pagans also ran between the nearby hills. Muhammad authorized Muslims to do that in the Quran, and Muhammad probably ran between the hills himself. So, even before Muhammad pagans were worshipping this black stone in the Kaba. Are we surprised that although Muhammad proclaimed only one God, he continued to participate in idol worship at this pagan shrine (Kaba); and Muslims still do idol worship there today? The black stone of Ka’aba is nothing but a holdover within Islam, from pre-Islamic paganism.
There is evidence that black stones were commonly worshipped in the Arab world. In 190 A.D. Clement of Alexandria mentioned that “the Arabs worship stone”. He was alluding to the black stone of Dusares at Petra. In the 2nd century, Maximus Tyrius wrote; “The Arabians pay homage to I know not what god, which they represent by a quadrangular stone”. Maximus was speaking of the Kaaba (Ka’ba) that contains the Black Stone.
The Qurash (aka: Quraish) tribe which Muhammad belonged to was in charge of idol worship at the Ka’ba Shrine. The chief god of Muhammad’s tribe was one of the three sister goddesses called al-Uzza, the youngest of the three daughters of the pre-Islamic Allah and the patron goddess of Mecca. Her name means “the mighty one”. The other two were named “al-Lat and “al-Manat”. It was only by chance that a fortune teller counseled Muhammad’s grandfather against sacrificing Muhammad’s father to this al-Uzza pagan diety. The head of these pagan, animalistic deities was “Al-llah”. It is believed that “al-llah” in Muhammad’s time before Islam referred to a vague moon god and that Muhammad believed that al-Uzza was a daughter of this “al-llah”.
The Qurash tribe’s Allah corresponded to the god Bel, which is another name of the Assyrio-Babylonian gods En-lil and Marduk. It has the same meaning as Baal. The Arabic today translates the word Allah as “God”. Muhammad’s father’s name was Abd Allāh ibn ‘Abd al-Mullalib. “Abd-Allah” means slave of Allah. When Muhammad says there is only one god – Allah – now you have an idea what his background / thinking was; and who this Allah actually is.
Among all the programs I’ve heard about Islam, this one by the folks at the White Horse Inn is probably at the very top: Christianity Confronts Islam
Muslim scholar and former professor of Shari’ah law, Sam Solomon, helps answer questions like:
What is the meaning of Jihad?
Is Islam really a religion of peace?
What does the Koran say about terrorism?
There is little doubt in my mind that our (and our children’s) days will continue to be filled with conversation and (mis-) information about what Islam is and how/why it functions in the manner it does. This program helps provide a sieve whereby we can begin to sift through the glut of so-called information thrown our way.
A sample of what’s discussed in this program:
MORE OF MY CONVERSATION OVER ON FACEBOOK:
Hello, XXXXX! Honestly, at some level, I appreciate all three things you mention, knowing that on a *superficial level* they might be the only options in our making some kind of *temporary fix.* But, they would be just that, temporary at best, leaving the ‘heart’ of the problem untouched.
With any good treatment of standard physical ailments there needs to be a good ‘diagnosis’ first before a sound ‘prognosis’ can be had. Without identifying THE root cause…we just end up tracking down dead-end streets, only to find ourselves in an ongoing search for better answers, or just giving up in frustration. Nor will things get any better by our being ‘led’ by *emotions* (how we “feel” about this or that), for oftentimes they actually impair our understanding of what’s really going on. We depend then on the facts, moving hopefully from thinking well about the symptoms to grasping well a corresponding course of action.
Therefore, it is imperative that we get to *heart* of the problem! Anything less won’t due. Anything other is superficial.
In the course of our looking at this scenario (drunk-of-a-husband/nag-of-a-wife), I’ve made the observation that the *heart* of the problem is…one’s first-birth problem…an inborn-identity-crisis. To attempt to “fix” this *heart* problem by placing band-aids (i.e., tough-love, “self-love”, boundaries, etc.) on the outside is nothing short of bad medicine.
Again, I agree, there comes times when one has to “step back” (a.k.a, tough-love/boundaries), but these are mere external measures. What remains untouched is the *heart* problem; the root problem that bore all the bad fruit. No medicine, no talk-therapy, no manipulation will make the internal fix. Regardless of whether it is alcohol, drugs, sex, money, work, leisure, etc. that is in the picture, all of it remains very much external. All the so-called “abuse” is a mere symptom.
And, I agree, there is something to be said about so-called “self-destructing” or “self-loathing.” They are real, yes. However, I don’t believe they in themselves are the *heart* problem, but again, only another way of speaking of the symptoms.
It might help if we ask questions like: Why is this person in an apparent state of self-loathing? Could it be that they are merely feeling “sorry” for themselves? Could it be that they are so disappointed in themselves and others for this reason or that? Could it be that they began with too high of an opinion (expectation) of themselves, that they deserve this or that, but things didn’t turn out the way they thought they must?! Could it be that they simply can’t bear with reality (things not going “our” way)? Couldn’t it be they want control (of themselves, others, circumstances, etc.), but sulk (seek to suppress reality) when they realize it just ain’t so? Could it be they are fearful and/or prideful when faced with the “control” question…they aren’t ultimately in control? Could it be they can’t live sober (face-to-face with reality) so they mask (protect!) who they really are?
Granted, all of our inner-trouble speaks of a need for a proper self-image, but our wrongly *identifying* THE problem only creates more problems; all of which are a response that DEMANDS that others see us as we want to see ourselves. And yet, we are afraid to face the harsh reality that we ALL are but human, not all that different, and have a BIG problem. Nothing is ultimately fixed; the game goes on and on.
In sum, it’s always an *identity-problem.* We’re born with it. We struggle with it. We mask it. We dress it up. We dress it down. But, it always remains the same inside, an *identity-crisis.* Our jobs, our cars/houses, our marriages, our children, our bank accounts, our 401K’s, our parents, our friends, our hopes, our dreams, our talk-talk-talk, our experience(s), our education, our mere-religion, our country, our name, our so-called goodness, our looks, our stuff! are never THE solution, nor are they THE problem. Our-selves! Ourselves, our inner-self, our soul, this is where the problem lies and where the solution must be applied. Anything less is artificial, a mere masking of that inner reality of soul.
So as for this notion of “self-love”…I find it never to be a remedy but always a reality (natural), regardless of how distorted it becomes, we have by birth a distorted preoccupation with ourselves.
What’s ultimately needed then? Love from Above (vertical)! Not from within (internal) or without (horizontal). This is the source of everyone’s identity-crisis. We are born with broken hearts, suffering from a distorted self-love. We need a transplant! Not a pace-maker. We can’t perform it, nor can our friends and family, but only One.
[CONVERSATION HAD WITH FRIENDS ON FACEBOOK]
Right on, XXXXX. The Gospel about Jesus Christ (i.e., born to die, perfect living, willful dying, triumph over death, raised to the Seat of Glory) is the sole truth that sets people free.
Of course, this truth also says something about the condition of people (whose sin(s) He must bear, once-for-all!). He did for sinners (those born in a state of sin) what they couldn’t do for themselves due to their captivity/incapacity in this State.
The question remains: What does the Gospel-truth (about Christ) free us unto, here and now? Is it just a “get-out-of-Jail-free card?” Or does the ‘once-for-all forgiveness’ and ‘eternal-life-given’ — that Christ accomplished and applies — actually change the lives (mind and actions) of believers/be-livers ? Or again, does their existence (being) continue to conform to their environment (earth)?
An answer: We definitely have reason to rejoice, in the Truth about Christ ‘for us’ (Bethlehem, Palestine, Calvary, MT-Tomb, Zion) and ‘in us’ (born-again, new creation, new heart, mind of Christ, etc).
And no doubt, there’s a calling upon us to wisely communicate these truths, in the milieu of everyday life (as we walk and talk). We don’t need a special invitation (or meeting) in order to do this. There are, of course, times when a door of opportunity is wide-open, providing a time and place for us to speak directly to Gospel-truths. However, more often than not, we bear witness to Christ crucified and risen in our everyday lives. Most of the circumstances (environment) of our lives will be like that of those who have YET to genuinely believe (trust and rejoice) in the redemptive work of Christ Jesus. And yet, there is truly something different at the core (heart) of one who is genuinely a disciple, of which outsiders ought to be able to catch a glimpse.
As people get to know us, existentially, they will be faced with ‘something-of-the-reality’ of what is the engine (Christ crucified and risen) that drives our lives, regardless of things being similar circumstantially on the outside. There typically is a problem in the “thinking” of believers though, which results in their “living” stunted lives.
Why are we “living” stunted lives? I believe it begins with our having stunted “minds”. We possess too small of an understanding of the nature of being a Christian. In other words, we are having an identity-crisis, in failing to grasp the realities of what it means that “Christ is in us” and how this can genuinely impact our lives, to His glory and our neighbors good.
Problem is…most “believers” wrestle more with their “environment” (where in the world they are; what in the world is the world doing) and miss the need to begin and continue with a sound understanding of our “existence” in Christ and He in us. Meaning, most “believers” are distracted by “environment” and fail to comprehend “existence” (their new identity in Christ/Christ living in them). Thus, we can go on living out this identity-crisis and in so doing mis-communicate the truth regarding Christ ‘for us’ and ‘in us’.
So then, we are first and above all “accountable” to believe rightly, and then we can hope to live rightly, before God and toward our neighbor.
ONCE AGAIN, FURTHER THOUGHTS SHARED WITH A FRIEND ON FACEBOOK:
Hello again, XXXXXX. Appreciate your input here.
You’re right, the choices are tough. When things unravel we’re left with options that aren’t all that pleasant, unfortunately. Too often in comes down to making moves that just minimize the fallout. And as you say…some of this ends up in the hands of the one (husband or wife) that is probably least able to see some of the more obvious things for what they are, which has to do with how things got all out of whack to begin with.
One of the dangers in the scenario that we’ve been discussing is that the one who seeks to “protect” the children, etc. may well be missing their own inner-brokenness; the very brokenness that led them to embrace such a relationship at the beginning. In cases like this, it would be all too easy to place all blame upon the “other” and miss (or be unwilling to accept) one’s own faults. Again, we are talking here about a particular situation—a typical one—where both spouses are living out an “identity crisis.” Of course there are exceptions to the ‘shoe fitting’ well upon the foot of either spouse.
Further, I am trying to keep in mind, as I think through all this, that, these are not troubles found in marriages only. As we can see, a scenario like this one has a way of readily spilling over into the lives of the children. They (like their parents) are struggling with a ‘first birth’ condition (identity crisis), on top of which the parents (perhaps one or both) have piled further trouble in the way they nurture the child. All of which, tends to result in the child-now-adult perpetuating many of the same responses they saw demonstrated by their parents.
So, now the child-now-adult ends up re-enacting the foolish ways of their parents, not realizing the root cause is not ultimately their parents but their very own ‘first birth’ condition (identity crisis).
Everyone involved in this scenario has missed this basic problem…identity problem. Everyone in this scenario ends up perpetuating this one problem, fleshing it out in this way or that.
We could go on and on here observing how THE problem applies to EVERY single relationship, not just marriage, and not just the parent-child one. Suffice to say, all too often we would rather hide our troubles than face them squarely, and then perhaps find ourselves in a position to really help whomever, without treating them like they were beneath us somehow, without acting like their Lord (master) or Savior (martyr).
FURTHER THOUGHTS SHARED WITH A FRIEND ON FACEBOOK:
I hear you, XXXXXX, and understand the commonly held belief that we are to begin with “loving oneself.” The challenge is that, in reality, it doesn’t bear out. Let’s take the drunk-of-a-husband for instance; his problem is that he BEGINS & ENDS with himself, clearly loving himself and his own ways, over his wife, children, etc.
The drunk-of-a-husband demonstrates the destructiveness of “self-love” and its inability to reach the pinnacle of genuinely “loving-others.” He is trapped in his self-love. He continues to put hope in himself and/or his using the bottle, which gives a temporal sense of relief that eventually gives way to the harsh reality of how problematic it is to “love-himself-as-is.”
Meanwhile, his nag-of-a-wife continues to grow bitter and more self-righteous, all of which demonstrates the problem of her ongoing “self-love.” She loves the idea of having to be the one to “fix everything,” as if she is the savior of her husband. And watch her closely, because she doesn’t stop with him…she ends up doing the same thing to her children, which leads them to run off; and she also does it to her closest friends who either learn how to maintain a safe distance or hide.
“Self-love” is the broken-condition with which we are born. Self-love = holding as a standard our own interests, at the expense of others. In the scenario before us, the husband and wife are both selfish, self-RIGHT-eo-US! The selfish disposition and response of both spouses merely perpetuates the problem. Unwittingly, they continue to feed off one another, which leads toward devouring one another. And all the while…they assume it is the other spouse who’s doing them wrong.
All the while, a solution is in the opposite direction from loving oneself! It’s found in one or both spouses having a self-LESS disposition. A NEW disposition of self-less-ness is impossible to come by when we consider that this is not how we are first born. And to make matters worse, we’re instructed from our earliest days that self-love (our first born state) is the way to go. Thus, the problem–our nature (first born state)–is compounded by the nurture (earliest instructions) we receive.
***Please note: I understand the wife here could (should!) be genuinely concerned for her drunk-of-a-husband (or substitute any other vise he’s gripped by…porn, drugs, illicit sex, money, authority, entertainment, etc). Her problem, in this case-study, is that she sees herself as better (morally or otherwise) and wiser than him, and that his ultimate hope is in HER or at least doing things HER way. When, in fact, the problem lies much deeper within his soul, just as it does in hers. Until she can be released from the bondage of her own self-righteousness, etc, she’s of little or no help to him, but is only apt to make things worse. Once she is released from her first born state, she might then at some point be able to come in humility and patience to his side, helping him as a friend (neighbor) and not as lord and savior. For the latter is never the place of anyone of us, but One.
A FEW OF MY THOUGHTS, FROM A CONVERSATION OVER ON FACEBOOK:
“It seems to be the case though, that, what we have here is a classic alcoholic husband and rescuing wife, both who are enslaved within a system (mindset/heart-disposition) whose components complement each other all too well.
One typical configuration, of enslavement, is seen in the husband’s combined mis-use of alcohol mixed with a ruling and enslaving love of pleasure. An escapist pursuit of:
1) a false hope from the pains and frustrations of life;
2) playing the angry and self-righteous judge of his wife’s clinging and dependent ways;
3) the self-crucifying of his periodic remorse;
4) a trust in man which seeks personal validation through acceptance by his bar companions; etc.
Then we have the reciprocal pattern in the wife’s rescuing behavior, a combination of:
1) playing the martyred savior of her husband and family;
2) playing the proud and self-righteous judge of her husband’s iniquity;
3) a trust in man which overvalues the opinions of her friends;
4) a fear of man which generates an inordinate desire for a male’s love and affection as crucial to her survival; etc.
The internal enslavement of both (and consequent behavior, thoughts, and emotions) makes sense within their system of identity. The enslavement of soul is sometimes modeled, taught, and encouraged by the other person(s) involved:
1) her nagging and his anger mirror and magnify each other;
2) his bar buddies and her girl friends reinforce their respective self-righteousness and self-pity.
The outworking of enslavement is sometimes reactive and sometimes compensatory to the other person:
1) he reacts to her nagging with drinking, and
2) she reacts to his drinking by trying to rescue and to change him.
Sadly, the children are swept up in this, later playing either the master (like the husband) and/or the messiah/martyr (like the wife). It gets real ugly when a person grows up playing out both roles! Either way, the ‘once-child-now-adult’ is having to face the crisis they were born with:
1) who they ultimately are; and
2) who they were nurtured by (who their parents, etc. were).
Yet, even those with the best of parents can/do readily find themselves caught up in the same mess, and in this case the parents aren’t even part of the blame, nor is anyone else with whom they interact, necessarily. Why? Because they (like all people!) are born (nature) with an identity crisis. Left to themselves, each and every person has the same fundamental problem: an inherent identity crisis (= alienation from One greater then themselves).
Too often what we receive from others, particularly as adults, is nothing more than a “negative-feedback loop.” Meaning, we are likely seeing a reflection of our own folly even if it comes back at us as an opposite behavior/disposition.
As we push they pull, and vice versa.
[Note: the core principles here are gleaned from an article about idolatry by David Powlison.]
Another good program over at the White Horse Inn, featuring William Willimon: Faulty Translations
Willimon sees “Christianity is kind of like a foreign language that one is not born with,” which sadly “many preachers today are attempting to “translate” …into familiar and comfortable terms that people are used to, but the result, he argues, is that things get “lost in translation.””
Willimon points out the following:
1) The Gospel is not to be translated as Therapy.
2) The Gospel is not another Commodity.
3) The Gospel is not another Life-Style Choice.
4) The Gospel is not something you are born with.
5) The Gospel is not User-Friendly.
6) The Gospel does not make sense to/in this World.
7) The Gospel creates a different world, with a different focus (i.e., Cross-eyed).
8) The Gospel creates a counter-culture.
9) The Gospel can make Life a bit more difficult.
10) The Gospel is not a word about Glory (God’s making all things glorious now).
11) The Gospel is a word of Grace (God’s condescension to sinners).
Willimon suggests asking this one question:
“When listening to a sermon, would Christ need to be CRUCIFIED in order to make this sermon work?”
Meaning, if the sermon works without Christ’s birth/godly-life/death/burial/raising/reigning, then, the sermon is not Christian. It may be informational and/or ethical, but to be fails to be CHRISTIAN (rooted in the New Covenant!) by not preaching Him (1Cor.1.23; 2 Cor.1.19; 2Cor.4.5; Col.1.28; 1Tim.3.16).
Answer by St. John’s (abbreviated):
We are God’s children now…and hoping in Him…purifies us;
…believing in his Son Jesus Christ…is obedience. (1Jn 3:2,3,23)
We live through Him…believing the love that God has for us
…having confidence for the day of judgment
…having no fear in love…for His perfect love casts out fear.
We love because He first loved us in Christ. (1Jn 4:9,16-19)
We overcome the world, [flesh and devil]…by being born of God.
The victory? Our faith…believing that Jesus is the Son of God! (1Jn 5:4-5)
So then: Whoever has the Son has Life! (1Jn 5:12)
We are from God! Not as those living under the power of the evil one. (1Jn 5:19)
My confidence: Having faith in Christ, we know ourselves to be alive toward God and neighbor, governed by the Rule of His Spirit, even now. (mjm)
Something I posted over at Andrew Fuller Study Center:
—————
Clark says: “Baptists were not recognized as Reformed. Why not? Because paedobaptism was regarded as essential to the Reformed faith.”
Okay. And why should I care if this notion of “REFORMED” faith is something I fit into as Clark says I should? Brothers, let Clark have his playpen-understanding of “REFORMED”. Let him kick and scream that we are “have-not’s”. Let him have his corner. Let him make more of “REFORMED” than the essence of Christianity…Christ crucified, our only boast.
Of course we are thankful for the Gospel-awakening that took place during Reformational times. We’d be arrogant if we didn’t appreciate and learn from the unveiling of the Gospel in those days. However, shame on us (!) if we fail to keep our focus upon Christ alone, boasting about Him!
Let’s bear with our brother, Clark, who sees us as misfits, stepchildren, stillborns. He will bear (even so now) the consequence of clinging more tightly to a debatable doctrine, than he does us in Christ.
Let’s bear our brother up in prayer before the Father of all believers.
(((PS…Clark’ demeanor reminds me of my own when I’m peeved at those I once stood with, whom I once thought well of, but afterward see them as betraying me in this way or that.)))
AMAZON BOOK REVIEW: The Naked Gospel
[The following is my own book review. mjm]
Please, listen closely to all reviews that deem this book as faulty! And, note well, how, what Farley is teaching bears upon the criticisms by others about this book. Some will say: “The book is off-track!” This is exactly right…The Naked Gospel is far from the garden-variety preaching/teaching we all have been subject to within much of the church.
The Gospel remains a stumbling block for all those who would seek life apart from and not in Christ Jesus, himself.
Our default mode: LAW!
Thank you, Andrew, for laboring to bring to light the Truth of the Gospel…Jesus is Our righteousness, Our life, Our rest, Our Lord! And as Lord…he literally RULES in the lives of those who believe (take Him at his word, that, He is Life!).
I have lived long enough (within the realm of works-righteousness) and alongside others who do the same to see the truth of Scripture confirmed that man is incurably self-righteous (even when it appears “godly”).
Chief Problem: IDOLATRY!
As Christians, we exercise some of the most blatant forms of IDOLATRY. That is, mingling grace (God’s image-making) and works (Our image-making). Failing to give up on our own “image-making” project (fashioning ourselves into God’s image), while missing how it is that God in Christ (the expresses image of God) goes about making us into His image.
Every IMPERATIVE of Scripture is FULFILLED in Christ.
Ultimately, every IMPERATIVE of Scripture is DESCRIPTIVE of the work of Christ “for” and “in” us.
Man is innately most comfortable in his own image-making…being as God.
For those who can’t readily swallow naked (non-sugar-coated!) Gospel-Truth (even as a Believer!)…there remains a degree of blindness and deafness to the REALITIES of Christ as fulfillment of all shadows (The Law). We become what we behold! Blind, deaf, and dumb? Or, seeing, hearing, and praising?
Farley’s work here is a great beginning to our continuing to unpack the essence of Christ crucified and risen, the New Creation.
Rev 11:17 We give thanks to you, Lord God Almighty, who is and who was, for you have taken your great power and begun to reign.
This alone is reason enough for disciples of Christ to give thanks and take comfort! His power to ultimately change all things and authority to rule over all things is wondrous, indeed.
Unfortunately, how His present reign is manifest is missed or distorted, leaving genuine followers of Christ mistaken and/or confused about their involvement in His kingdom.
A very worthwhile sermon by Mr. Gordon on the principal meaning of ALL Scripture.
T. David Gordon: What Scripture Principally Teaches…Christ Crucified!
