Blog | Reproach of Men

Who Do You Worship?

In the Scripture it is made very clear that worship is to be directed to the LORD God and Him alone. Nowhere in scripture are we given to understand that worshiping anything, or anyone else is acceptable in the sight of God. The passages that state this are succinct and to the point, and are as follows:

And God spake all these words, saying, I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments. (Exodus 20:1-5)

Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father. Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews. But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. (John 4:21-23)

And he (the angel) saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God. And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy. (Revelation 19:9-10)

To be certain, it cannot get much, if any, plainer than the above. This being the case, what are we to make of the following:

1. Queen of Peace, pray for us!

On the feast of your Immaculate Conception,
I come to venerate you, O Mary,
at the foot of this effigy, which from Piazza di Spagna
allows your maternal gaze to extend over this ancient, and for me very dear, city of Rome.

I have come here, this evening, to render you the homage of my sincere devotion.
It is a gesture in which I am joined in this Piazza by innumerable Romans,
whose affection has always accompanied me
in all the years of my service to the See of Peter.
I am here with them to start on the path
toward the one hundred fiftieth anniversary
of the dogma that we celebrate today with filial joy.

2. Queen of Peace, pray for us!

We turn our gaze to you with intense trepidation,
we take recourse to you with insistent trust
in these times marked by not a few uncertainties and fears
over the present and future fate of our planet.
To you, the first of humanity redeemed by Christ,
finally liberated from the slavery of evil and sin,
we raise a heartfelt and confident supplication:
Listen to the cry of pain of the victims of war
and of so many forms of violence
that bloody the earth.
Dispel the darkness of sadness and solitude,
of hatred and vengeance,
Open the minds and hearts of all to trust and forgiveness!

3. Queen of Peace, pray for us!

Mother of mercy and of hope,
obtain for the men and women of the third millennium
the precious gift of peace:
peace in hearts and in families,
in communities and among peoples;
peace especially for those nations
where every day combating and dying continue.

Help every human being, and all races and cultures,
to encounter and accept Jesus,
who came on earth in the mystery of Christmas
to give us “his” peace.

Mary, Queen of Peace,
give us Christ, true peace of the world!

Delievered by Pope John Paul on 8 December, 2003

Do the words venerate, homage and devotion mean anything? Yes, they certainly do, and they are all synonyms for worship. I don’t care what one chooses to call it, worship is worship, regardless of the label applied to it.

This puts the Pope in direct violation of the clear and express command of the LORD God, Who the Pope claims to serve. Moreover, this is not an isolated incident, but is well known despite the denials of some Catholic apologists. In fact the following excerpts from the Catechism of the Catholic Church show plainly the worship of May as a equal with Christ:

969 “This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation . . . . Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix.”

970 “Mary’s function as mother of men in no way obscures or diminishes this unique mediation of Christ, but rather shows its power. But the Blessed Virgin’s salutary influence on men . . . flows forth from the superabundance of the merits of Christ, rests on his mediation, depends entirely on it, and draws all its power from it.” “No creature could ever be counted along with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer; but just as the priesthood of Christ is shared in various ways both by his ministers and the faithful, and as the one goodness of God is radiated in different ways among his creatures, so also the unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude but rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which is but a sharing in this one source.”

* II. DEVOTION TO THE BLESSED VIRGIN

971 “All generations will call me blessed”: “The Church’s devotion to the Blessed Virgin is intrinsic to Christian worship.” The Church rightly honors “the Blessed Virgin with special devotion. From the most ancient times the Blessed Virgin has been honored with the title of ‘Mother of God,’ to whose protection the faithful fly in all their dangers and needs. . . . This very special devotion . . . differs essentially from the adoration which is given to the incarnate Word and equally to the Father and the Holy Spirit, and greatly fosters this adoration.” The liturgical feasts dedicated to the Mother of God and Marian prayer, such as the rosary, an “epitome of the whole Gospel,” express this devotion to the Virgin Mary.

I have to ask, if Mary was so special, why then did the Lord Jesus Himself make the following statement when His mother and brethren came to get Him one day?

While he yet talked to the people, behold, his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him. Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee. But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother. (Matthew 12:46-50)

Or, answer her in the way he did at the wedding feast of Cana?

And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there: And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage. And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come. (John 2:1-3)

Or even at age 12, where the Lord Jesus Christ had to remind Mary and Joseph that He was to be about His Father’s business?

And it came to pass, that after three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions. And all that heard him were astonished at his understanding and answers. And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing. And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father’s business? And they understood not the saying which he spake unto them. And he went down with them, and came to Nazareth, and was subject unto them: but his mother kept all these sayings in her heart. (Luke 2:46-51)

No, plainly, to the Lord Jesus Christ, other than the fact that Mary physically bore Him, as far as He was concerned, she was no different than anyone else on the earth — a sinner who needed the salvation He provided on the cross. Mary was not to be worshiped, and the Lord Jesus Christ did not accord her that honor, nor did He direct anything to be done through Mary. Instead, His instruction to the Samaritan woman at the well stands pre-eminent, and in perfect accord with the rest of Scripture — worship God, and God alone.

Anything else is blasphemy and idolatry.

Losing the War

Everybody knows that an individual or a nation does not, or should not set about to lose a war — right? It ought to be ingrained in everyone involved in a life or death struggle; that we do not conduct ourselves in such a way as to guarantee dying. This should be reasonable, understood, accepted, and the norm. After all, why would we want to commit suicide, both individually and nationally?

Yet we are. As a nation, the United States of America is doing an excellent job of aiding and abetting its own destruction. Does America have enemies? Certainly she does, and those enemies understand more about how to fight and win wars against a nation and society than Americans do. Back in the late 1950’s a former FBI agent wrote a book titled The Naked Communist, ((This is not an endorsement of his religious views. Mr. Skousen was a Mormon and that doctrine is about as wrong as it gets. However, his personal doctrine does not invalidate what he investigated and found out.)) in which he asserted there existed a strategy by the communists for destroying America from within. In his book, he detailed 45 current goals as of the late 1950’s, and in subsequent editions those goals never changed.

Now, one would think that the goals outlined would cover such things as infrastructure, logistical support organizations, government entities, etc. However, they did not. There were some foreign policy goals, a few goals applied specifically to law enforcement, but primarily the goals addressed societal issues and mores. Some of the societal goals outlined are listed below:

20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policy-making positions.
21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV and motion pictures.
22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to “eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.”
23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. “Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art.”
24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and free press.
25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio and TV.
26. Present homo-sexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”
38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand or treat.
40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents. ((The Naked Communist, W. Cleon Skousen, Published 1958, Eleventh Edition 1962, pp. 258-262))

Well now, that certainly doesn’t seem like much of a way to take down a nation, does it? Actually, it is very much a way to destroy a nation. It will take a while longer than shooting war would, but no nation that has walked the path America is on has ever survived. The reason for this is quite plain in Scripture — the LORD God judged them for their wickedness:

Moreover thou shalt not lie carnally with thy neighbour’s wife, to defile thyself with her. And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, ((The modern day equivalent to this is abortion. Whereas in ancient time they sacrificed to an idol, today the sacrifice is made to the god of self. The unborn child is killed for the convenience of the parents. After all, having a baby in the house severely crimps the party lifestyle and brings considerable responsibility. Moreover, neglect of a child brings child abuse charges and possibly prison. How much easier it is to kill it before it is born and the law acquiesces to the murder.)) neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I am the LORD. Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. ((And they claim the Scripture doesn’t condemn homosexuality! Yeah . . . right. Whatever lie is convenient.)) Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion. Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you: And the land is defiled: therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself vomiteth out her inhabitants. Ye shall therefore keep my statutes and my judgments, and shall not commit any of these abominations; neither any of your own nation, nor any stranger that sojourneth among you: (For all these abominations have the men of the land done, which were before you, and the land is defiled;) That the land spue not you out also, when ye defile it, as it spued out the nations that were before you. (Leviticus 18:20-28)

Even as the LORD God judged the ancient nations, He judges nations today. If we are at all honest with ourselves, we must admit that we have either engaged in, or condoned all things the LORD condemns in both Leviticus, chapter 18 and Deuteronomy, chapter 18. Thus, without ever realizing it, America’s enemies hit upon a workable, effective strategy for the destruction of America. However, this strategy is not new, and they are not the first to use it.

In Numbers, chapters 22 through 25, the incident of Balak calling Balaam to curse Israel is recorded and the results of that event are made known. In chapter 25, we find that Israel departs from the LORD and the following is the result:

And Israel abode in Shittim, and the people began to commit whoredom with the daughters of Moab. And they called the people unto the sacrifices of their gods: and the people did eat, and bowed down to their gods. And Israel joined himself unto Baalpeor: and the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel. And the LORD said unto Moses, Take all the heads of the people, and hang them up before the LORD against the sun, that the fierce anger of the LORD may be turned away from Israel. And Moses said unto the judges of Israel, Slay ye every one his men that were joined unto Baalpeor. (Numbers 25:1-5)

However, we are not immediately told why they began to do this. It is not until chapter 31 that we find that Balaam, though he had no choice but to bless Israel, found a way to get money from Balak by telling him how to cause Israel to transgress so the LORD God would curse them.

And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive? Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against the LORD in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the LORD. (Numbers 31:15-16)

This also is repeated in a warning to the church at Pergamos in Revelation, chapter 2:

But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication. (Revelation 2:14)

So it is that the very same strategy that Balaam taught Balak and the children of Moab to use against Israel, is being used against the United States of America. But how is it that the communists would adopt a strategy that comes from the Scripture when they don’t even believe in God?

It is quite simple actually. You see, whether we believe in God or not is irrelevant to His existence. God exists no matter what. The spiritual world exists also despite what men believe. Moreover, in that spiritual world exists a creature who is opposed to all that God is and has done — Satan.

We seem not to understand that Satan hates man, as man is created in the image of God. Moreover, we also do not seem to understand that Satan is utterly deceitful and easily deceives man. In fact, this is the very thing that makes the atheist the perfect tool for the Devil. The communists do not even comprehend that they are being used of Satan, and the strategy they understand as a workable strategy for the destruction of the United States, comes straight from the Devil. After all, the Devil knows exactly what things a nation and society can engage in that are sure and certain to bring the wrath of God upon that nation.

The sad part of this is that we here in America have this information freely available to us, and we won’t even consult it to understand what is going on. We bemoan the state of our society, but cannot seem to understand why. We should, the answer has been there all along. Worse yet, when we say we understand what is happening, we still engage in, or condone the very things that bring the wrath of God upon us.

We are losing the war. Are we just to proud to repent?

What Constitutes Worship?

There are many answers to the above question. Some are correct, some have elements of truth to them, and other answers one would receive are simply in error. Of course, it is this way with every subject from Scripture one might bring up. However, we would expect the answer from the head of a theological school to be more exact, and accurate than the average person. We certainly would expect their answer to be more centered around service to God than politics. Unfortunately, this is not the case, and it is certainly not restricted to the individual that came to my attention late last week. Now, to be fair, the subject at hand was not worship, but the addressing of the subject intruded into the arena of what constitutes worship, and the individual drew no distinctions.

Before getting going on this, it is only fair to give a brief background of the individual so their qualifications can be duly noted and kept in mind. The following is extracted from the brief bio posted with her column at the Newsweek/Washington Post website, Faith section:

Rev. Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite is president of Chicago Theological Seminary and senior fellow at the Center for American Progress. She has been a professor of theology at the seminary for 20 years and director of its graduate degree center for five years. Her area of expertise is contextual theologies of liberation, specializing in issues of violence and violation. An ordained minister of the United Church of Christ since 1974, the “On Faith” panelist is the author or editor of thirteen books and has been a translator for two translations of the Bible. ((http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/susan_brooks_thistlethwaite/2008/03/is_nothing_sacred.html))

I won’t even get into all that is in error in the writeup. Not that it is not her history. It is. It is that her endeavors run so counter to the express commandments of God. Perhaps that is why it never impinged upon her conscience to address the issue of “note takers” during the time of the sermon somewhat differently. Some quotes of what she wrote follow:

“A member of Trinity United Church of Christ, the church once led by Rev. Dr. Jeremiah Wright and where Senator Obama is a member, told me there are “spies” among them in the pews, strangers who take notes during the service and try to record the message.
Check it out for yourself. Go to the Trinity UCC website, select “Why The Black Church Won’t Shut Up!”, and listen to Rev. Otis Moss politely ask that there be “no recording equipment.” He repeats over and over, “We are in worship. We are in worship.” When visitors are asked to stand, you can see those with paper and pencil in hand. Are these folks members of the press or political operatives? Impossible to know if they don’t, as Rev. Moss requests, sign in.
This is what happens when politics intrudes into the sanctuary of the church, a sacred space.”

“Challenging your pastor’s freedom in the pulpit is bad. Spying on people at prayer is reprehensible.
Is this what the assaults of the past decades on the wall of separation between church and state has led us to? Is there no such thing as sacred space anymore?”

“A church is sacred space and to violate that space by engaging in “Swift-boat” type distortions and even spying is un-American. This is not us, this is not the bedrock principle of our founders and those leaders we have most respected. Our churches and our faith commitments are out of bounds in the tumult of political contests.”

“Let us pull back from this disastrous course of mixing religion and politics before we destroy something so unique and precious it has been the envy of the whole world.” ((ibid))

Notice something odd about her response to the issue at hand? In reading all the comments about her column, I noticed something missing there as well. What is it? It is the acknowledgement of a major component of worship — learning. Now, it is not necessary to take notes to learn, but it sure helps retain what was spoken. Moreover, we have the express invitation of the Lord Jesus Christ to learn of Him.

Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light. (Matthew 11:28-30)

You know, when you don’t care about someone or something, you don’t bother learning about them, or it — at all. To me, it is telling that Hannah of ancient Israel knew far more of what the LORD God is about than the head of a theological school.

Talk no more so exceeding proudly; let not arrogancy come out of your mouth: for the LORD is a God of knowledge, and by him actions are weighed. (I Samuel 2:3)

Somehow I don’t think the Lord Jesus Christ would have been at all upset if someone had sat in front of Him taking notes while he preached and taught. What mattered to the LORD was the heart of the person, and their desire to learn of God. After all, since He was preaching the truth, He had no concerns about what they wanted to do with His words, as He knew the effect the words would have upon them.

The Pharisees heard that the people murmured such things concerning him; and the Pharisees and the chief priests sent officers to take him. (John 7:32)

So there was a division among the people because of him. And some of them would have taken him; but no man laid hands on him. Then came the officers to the chief priests and Pharisees; and they said unto them, Why have ye not brought him? The officers answered, Never man spake like this man. (John 7:43-45)

No, the Lord Jesus Christ spoke openly because He knew the time was not yet, and He knew that it was necessary that the word be preached openly. Moreover, since the LORD God is a God of knowledge, it is essential that people learn. I don’t see the Lord being displeased with this at all.

Knowing this, we can come forward to our day and time and understand that if people have to take notes, or record the message to recall what was said later, then there ought be no problem with that. If one preaches expressly from the Scripture, then all that need be done in defense of what was said is point to chapter and verse, and show that the Bible does indeed say that.

The problem here is that worship, and what constitutes worship is not at all understood. When someone is a “fan” of an actor, or performer, they try to learn everything they can about that person. If someone is a fanatic about golf, fishing or guns, we find that they always take notes, record, or otherwise preserve a record of the things said about the subject they worship. We also find they are devoted to their particular interest, almost to the exclusion of everything else. It is like some popular television shows — there are some who can never get enough information about a particular show (Star Trek and M.A.S.H. come to mind), and they record or otherwise obtain every scrap of information they can about the series.

Funny how that is not the case when people come into the house of God. Instead, they are discouraged from taking notes and recording the preaching, and are told they need to have a “worshipful” attitude. It makes one really wonder why doesn’t it?

You know, we needn’t worry what man will do with the words spoken from the pulpit. No, we need to be concerned about what God has determined about the words spoken from the pulpit.

Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5:19)

O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things. But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned. (Matthew 12:34-37)

Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite misses the point.

Being Sure

In the Scripture we are told that no doctrine is of any private interpretation, which means that all valid doctrines are established by several different passages and verses that are all contextually addressing the same issue in the same way. Now, unlike other books, the Bible does not address its doctrines one after another in a list or subject fashion. Rather, the doctrines of Scripture are scattered throughout the Book of books and are found by patient study and being led of the Holy Ghost to a right understanding. Of course, this does require that one come to the Scripture without seeking to prove their own doctrine, but willing to be instructed of the LORD concerning His doctrines. When we come with certain preconceived ideas (Don’t we all have those?), we must be willing to change them when the evidence of Scripture disproves those ideas.

So when it comes to the concept that we are capable of guaranteeing our future behavior, or that we will “tell the whole truth, and nothing but the truth,” the vast majority of “Christendom” holds to the idea that it is okay to declare that one can fulfill a future commitment, or swear that they will tell the truth, upon pain of condemnation by God. However, I never see Scripture supporting this position. What I do see from a lot of folks is an excusing away of the passage from the sermon on the mount, and no real explanation as to why the words do not say what they plainly state.

Perhaps if we examine what the Scripture does state about guaranteeing future behavior, and guaranteeing our words, we might have a better understanding of what our real condition is. Moreover, we might get a little more humble about how wonderful we think we are as individuals. We also might gain a better understanding of why it is the LORD made certain it was declared in His word:

Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD. (Jeremiah 17:5)

Now this is certainly one of those statements that nobody wants to hear. Moreover, when it is brought up, everybody runs the other way. Nonetheless, the LORD stated it, and we must deal with it, understand why He stated it, and what it has to do with guaranteeing our future behavior. Of course, we could begin anywhere in Scripture, but since the LORD gave us a book that is from man’s perspective, it would be good to begin there.

In Ecclesiastes everything is examined from the view of “under the sun,” which is man’s view of things. In this book, we are informed that running one’s mouth without choosing words carefully will net one trouble – particularly in the house of God:

Keep thy foot when thou goest to the house of God, and be more ready to hear, than to give the sacrifice of fools: for they consider not that they do evil. Be not rash with thy mouth, and let not thine heart be hasty to utter any thing before God: for God is in heaven, and thou upon earth: therefore let thy words be few. For a dream cometh through the multitude of business; and a fool’s voice is known by multitude of words.
When thou vowest a vow unto God, defer not to pay it; for he hath no pleasure in fools: pay that which thou hast vowed. Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay. Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin; neither say thou before the angel, that it was an error: wherefore should God be angry at thy voice, and destroy the work of thine hands? For in the multitude of dreams and many words there are also divers vanities: but fear thou God. (Ecclesiastes 5:1-7)

If we note, the passage speaks to three things of consequence to us:

1. Being rash, or hasty with one’s words in the house of God.
2. The multitude of dreams and words will net trouble, and are vanity.
3. If you vow, pay; otherwise do not vow. It is actually wiser to not vow at all, than vow and not carry through with the promise.

The first two items shouldn’t be a problem for anyone to understand, and generally aren’t. However, the last one generates considerable controversy in certain Christian circles. In understanding why this is, we should note that a vow is the same a swearing that one will fulfill a promise, either in word or deed. Which means that people are going to look at you funny if you refuse to swear in court, or upon entrance in government service. (By the way, just how many government officials have broken their oaths of office?) Whether people consider one odd or not, is not the issue here. What is the issue is why we should, or should not swear, and what God does in response to someone swearing an oath – whether they are His child or not. However, to confirm or deny this doctrine, we need to go further, which brings us to the Gospel of Matthew and the words of the Lord Jesus Christ:

Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths: But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God’s throne: Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King. Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil. (Matthew 5:33-37)

Plainly, the Lord stated here that one should not swear at all – period. He gives a couple of examples of things we have no power to control, and tells us that if we have no power to control these things, we certainly ought not swear concerning future words and deeds. This is briefly confirmed in James, chapter five:

But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation. (James 5:12)

Here, in a nutshell is the very same thing the Lord Jesus Christ stated, and is also a further confirmation of what is stated in Ecclesiastes. However, he adds a reminder of something that we ought to be doing anyway, as it should be our wont to do so: when we speak – let it be the truth and stand by it.

Now, despite all that is addressed in the books of Moses concerning vows and oaths, it is plain that the Lord Jesus Christ set that aside and confirmed the statement in Ecclesiastes which reads:

Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay. Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin; neither say thou before the angel, that it was an error: wherefore should God be angry at thy voice, and destroy the work of thine hands? (Ecclesiastes 5:5-6)

Why is this, and what does this have to do with Jeremiah 17:5?

The “why” of this is bound up in who we are as individuals of the race of man. Simply put, we are fallen, sinful, wicked creatures who cannot determine what will happen five minutes from now, let alone tomorrow. Moreover, since we are in a fallen state, our minds, and thus our memories work perfectly, right?

No?

Why not?

Regardless of whether it is physical or spiritual limitation, it is entirely true that every last one of us has a faulty memory. We forget details, sequences of events, names, etc. Moreover, we have no power to control the events of the future. All we can do is determine what we want to do, and set about to accomplish that. Nevertheless, all our plans can be swept away by unforseen events over which we have no control.

Hence, to declare that we are sure and certain to the point of swearing we will say or do something in the future, even five minutes into the future, is to say that we have a measure of control that we do not have. It is to depend upon ourselves, instead of upon the LORD. We are reminded of this in James as well:

Go to now, ye that say, To day or to morrow we will go into such a city, and continue there a year, and buy and sell, and get gain: Whereas ye know not what shall be on the morrow. For what is your life? It is even a vapour, that appeareth for a little time, and then vanisheth away. (James 4:13-14)

Since these things are the case, we are reminded that our attitude is to be:

For that ye ought to say, If the Lord will, we shall live, and do this, or that. (James 4:15)

So what does this have to do with “trusting in man?”

Everything. To clarify, a couple of questions are in order:

1. Are you certain that you want to depend upon yourself for the events of the future?
2. Are you certain you want to depend upon your memory to the extent of “so help me God?”

I don’t know about anyone else, but I have seen to many things never get finished because something happened to the person who set about to accomplish the task. Events beyond our control happen all the time, and to one extent or another, they hinder or stop the things we wish to do. As pertaining to swearing to tell the truth; men may not catch the factual errors of your recall, but the LORD God does. To swear that one can tell “ . . .the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So help me God.” is to declare that one actually knows the whole truth in the first place, and that one’s memory is perfect. Are you that sure of yourself?

If you are that sure and certain, then bring about your own salvation by your own efforts. If you are that good, you don’t need Christ.

Unbelievable

There are some things in this world that I simply have great difficulty getting an handle on. Primarily this pertains to the thoughts of men and their subsequent actions when confronted with ultimatums. I wish this were not so perplexing, but it is, and the Scripture records examples of decisions made by men that can only be described one of two ways: insane or stupid.

One such example is Cain and his response to the LORD God when his offering was rejected:

And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD. And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering: But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.
And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen? If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.
And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him. (Genesis 4:3-8)

Here we have the infamous story of Cain’s response to rejection, and subsequent instruction on how to be accepted by the LORD. It seems pretty simple and straightforward. After all, all that is required of Cain is to do the sacrifice in the way the LORD instructed and it will be accepted, and all will be well. In fact, it is so simple that we could describe it as “do what you are told.”

The problem is, Cain didn’t.

Okay, simply being disobedient would be bad enough if what you desire is acceptance of the LORD. But Cain made it much worse than that. Instead of leaving Abel alone and going off to himself and living his own life, Cain decided (for whatever reason) to get rid of his brother – by killing him.

Yep, this fixes everything. Now Cain doesn’t have to see his brother’s sacrifice accepted anymore and his rejected. Nope, that situation won’t happen ever again. Problem solved, right?

Not hardly. Actually, (and I know we all know this) Cain’s decision and subsequent action insured his problem would get worse – and it did. Now Cain is a murderer, and an outcast, sought by his relatives for the murder of one of their own. Cain also proved that he is not to be trusted. Moreover, the Scripture records that Cain’s destiny was an eternity in torment.

For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one another. Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother’s righteous. (I John 3:11-12)

Perhaps the reference above gives us an understanding of why Cain was so bent on not turning and simply doing what he should have. The statement “Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one,” tells us that Cain followed after the Devil, and did the Devil’s bidding. Cain was as unmerciful as the Devil, and like the Devil, hated the right things Abel did. You know, even though that is the case, it still doesn’t make sense to “resolve” the issue by murdering your brother. Of course, the rebellion of Lucifer doesn’t make sense either.

Yet, this is not the only instance where individuals were given the clear choice of turning or being destroyed, and the response was utterly senseless.

Now therefore go to, speak to the men of Judah, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, saying, Thus saith the LORD; Behold, I frame evil against you, and devise a device against you: return ye now every one from his evil way, and make your ways and your doings good. And they said, There is no hope: but we will walk after our own devices, and we will every one do the imagination of his evil heart. (Jeremiah 18:11-12)

Turn, or be destroyed – the choice is yours.

There is no hope.

Good grief. Every time I read the passage I am floored by the total unwillingness to even consider turning and doing what is right. You know, I can understand standing up and fighting for what you know for certain is the truth. But the men of Judah and Jerusalem knew what they were doing was not in accordance with the law. They knew they were in violation of the Covenant. Yet, they insisted on doing it anyway – even when plainly warned that destruction would come if they did not immediately repent.

Instead, their answer was: There is no hope.

Yes there is. All you have to do is turn.

There is no hope!

Unbelievable. A total unwillingness to repent and turn away from evil, and thus turn away the judgement of God. Total unwillingness. Not even a smidgen of desire to repent and turn. Nope, that option, even though held out by the LORD God, is not even on the table for discussion.

Un…stinking…believable.

Perhaps I should not be so surprised. After all, in America we are experiencing some events that can only be ascribed to the judgement of God on us for our wickedness. Yet, there are many (vast majority actually) who simply refuse to believe what the Scripture states about God’s judgement. The really sad part of this whole affair is that a whole lot of them wear the label of “Christian” and go to church, and proclaim “Christ” and partake of some of the most wicked things one will ever see. The hopelessness of the situation really is apparent when you see them walk around in totally immodest clothing (virtually naked), and they swear up and down that they “serve God,” all the while dressed in pants so tight they had to be painted on, halter tops and various other articles of “clothing” that only passes for a “covering.” Oh, and engage them in conversation and see how frequently they reference ungodly and profane television programs, movies and music. Yes, their interest lies some other place than the Bible. Yet, they serve God. Just ask them.

I wonder what Jeremiah would think about America. Knowing America’s heritage and the overwhelming focus in early America on the things of God (albeit imperfectly), there really is a contrast between then and now, and it has nothing to do with technology. However, it has everything to do with the hearts of the people – especially those who claim Christ.

America, you are being warned: Repent or be destroyed. I wonder if your response will be as incredulous as the men of Judah and Jerusalem:

There is no hope: but we will walk after our own devices, and we will every one do the imagination of his evil heart.

How utterly unbelievable and senseless.

A Wrong Heart – A Final Look

Though there are many things that can be focused on concerning the deviation from, and misuse of Scripture of Pastor Wright in his sermons, there is one last thing I would like to point out as it is largely misunderstood, and misapplied by “Christian” leaders, to the detriment of those under their influence, and to the Gospel of Christ.

In looking at this, we must first be ever reminded that the reason the Gospel exists is because man has absolutely no capacity to make himself righteous in any degree whatsoever. This will ever remain true as righteousness is an absolute quality that one either has in totality, or not at all. We must also remember that the standard of righteousness is the LORD God Himself, Who is infinitely righteous. The result of this is the utter condemnation of man as we are by nature evil, and we cannot change our nature by our own efforts. Thus the solution the LORD God offers us, is salvation in the Lord Jesus Christ and His blood that was shed for our atonement.

However, throughout man’s history on this earth, man has ever sought to find a way to make himself righteous in the sight of God outside of Christ, and in so doing, prove himself to be equal with his Creator. Typically, man does this by perverting the gospel into a system of works for salvation. However, there are systems of belief that ignore God altogether, and seek to find peace and righteousness through a means other than justification before God. Humanism is one such system.

Now, this is not to say that Humanism came into existence within the last 300 years or so. Actually, humanism has existed under one label or another for several millennia. Recently, humanism found organized expression under the label of communism. Central to the belief of humanism and communism is the idea that man can improve himself, by his own efforts. In communism, this ideal is known as the “new communist man” that is freed from the chains of religion, tradition and superstition. The communists believe, like all humanists have, that once man reaches this condition, there will be peace throughout the earth. However, there cannot be any opposition to this ideal, as that would create conditions that would drag humanity into conflict again. Hence, “peace” is preached, and war is railed against.

As I noted in previous posts, there is a definitive link between Pastor Wright, the UCC and communism. Moreover, that the “Christianity” preached by Pastor Wright and the UCC is nothing more than decorative wrapping for the socialism (communism) they advocate. Even so it is with the advocation of “peace.” The following is a partial transcript from CNN’s Anderson Cooper Blog, in which contributor Roland Martin presents a favorable view of what Wright stated on April 13, 2003:

“Wright’s scriptural focus was Luke 19:37-44 (reading from the New Revised Standard Version).
In this sermon, Wright spoke about the military rule during biblical days, led by Pontius Pilate. It was clear, through his language, such as “occupying military brigade” that he was making an analogy to the war in Iraq.
“War does not make for peace,” he said. “Fighting for peace is like raping for virginity.”
“War does not make for peace. War only makes for escalating violence and a mindset to pay the enemy back by any means necessary,” he said.” ((The G___ ____ America Sermon))

Now, I looked at Luke 9:37-44, in both the King James Version, and the New Revised Standard Version, and what the entrance of Christ into Jerusalem has to do with the rant against government (specifically the American government) that Wright engaged in is beyond me. While it is true that the Lord spoke of Jerusalem’s coming destruction, it had nothing to do with government, and everything to do with the Jews rejection of their covenant with the LORD God. As I have noted previously, this is frequently the case with those who have another agenda besides serving the LORD God and preaching the Gospel of Christ.

Nonetheless, Pastor Wright then makes the comments about “war” and how it is that war cannot solve problems, and cannot bring peace. If we understand the implication of this, we will understand that it also is a condemnation of anyone who engages in war. Anyone who has a warrior mentality, or warrior spirit about then is condemned as they will engage in war as a necessary, though unpleasant endeavor.

This is dangerous ground to walk on. Scripturally, for one to take this position, without immediately qualifying it, is to stand in opposition to the LORD God Himself. Why? Because one takes it upon themselves to rebuke the LORD:

Then sang Moses and the children of Israel this song unto the LORD, and spake, saying, I will sing unto the LORD, for he hath triumphed gloriously: the horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea. The LORD is my strength and song, and he is become my salvation: he is my God, and I will prepare him an habitation; my father’s God, and I will exalt him. The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name. (Exodus 15:1-3)

Moreover, it is to rebuke the servant of the LORD, a man after God’s own heart: King David.

And Saul said unto his servants, Provide me now a man that can play well, and bring him to me. Then answered one of the servants, and said, Behold, I have seen a son of Jesse the Bethlehemite, that is cunning in playing, and a mighty valiant man, and a man of war, and prudent in matters, and a comely person, and the LORD is with him. Wherefore Saul sent messengers unto Jesse, and said, Send me David thy son, which is with the sheep. (I Samuel 16:17-19)

Notice, that the Scripture plainly records the testimony of David, even before he took the throne of Israel and before he killed Goliath the Gittite: that David was a “man of war” and “the LORD is with him.” How could the LORD be pleased with David, if the LORD Himself were not a man of war as Moses testified? Plainly, He would not be.

Now, I know that many will point to the New Testament and declare that the LORD God of the Old is not the same as Christ of the New. However, I must strongly disagree with that position as the New Testament only provides confirmation of the statements made in the Old. After all, the LORD God of the Old Testament is the same LORD God in the New. In fact, quite frequently, the LORD spoken of in the Old Testament is none other that Christ Himself. Nonetheless, let’s look at what the New Testament declares:

And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS. (Revelation 19:11-16)

Plainly, the acknowledgement that the leader of Heaven’s army is called “The Word of God” positively identifies Him as none other than the Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God. Notice also that out of Christ’s mouth “goeth a sharp sword, that he should smite the nations:” which is to say that He will engage them in war, and they shall be smitten and fall by the words that proceed out of His mouth. Of course, verse 21, of the chapter does clearly state that:

And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh. (Revelation 19:21)

Now, rather than leave a skewed impression of the Lord Jesus Christ, the only ordained Savior of the world, a little context is in order. The LORD is a man of war, but He did not start this war. Nevertheless, he will end it. No, Satan, who used to be called Lucifer, started this war when he rebelled against the LORD and attempted to take the throne of God. In Isaiah, chapter 14, and Ezekiel, chapter 28, we are told of Lucifer’s rebellion in which, as a covering cherub, he decided that his high position serving God wasn’t good enough, and he determined that he ought to rule. Sadly, he deceived a third of the angelic host, and they followed him in his rebellion. The LORD’s response to this should not be unexpected – He rose to battle.

However, the LORD does not fight the way we fight, and He was not going to change His plan of creation simply because His creatures exercised their free will and rebelled. Thus, Satan brought his war against God to this earth and conquered Adam. As a result, all the race of man are embroiled in this war as well, and all wars of this world are but shadows and illustrations of the real war Satan launched against God.

Due to this, we might as well give up on man ever creating peace by his own efforts. It is pointless and futile, and only someone holding to Humanist doctrine would engage in such thinking. Which is exactly why Pastor Wright makes the claims he does about war. After all, if he supposedly knows the Bible, why doesn’t he know about the above passages? It is because his heart is in the wrong place.

The Sabbath and Sunday

I suppose it was the occasion of Easter that prompted Joe Kovacs of WorldNetDaily to author an article on the issue of Sabbath vs. Sunday. After all, I don’t really know, but it is odd that this particular subject came up in the week before Easter (posted Mar. 16^th). Nevertheless, as a subject and an issue of controversy, what I really find odd is that everyone who holds to Sabbath-keeping, also holds Arminian doctrine. Arminism is the denial of the doctrine of eternal security of the believer; which is to say that salvation, once obtained, can be lost.

Aside from the relation to Arminism, what I found striking about the article (I skimmed it, noting the names mentioned and looking for Scripture references and how they were used) was the total lack of a conclusion. Mr. Kovacs did not come down on one side or the other of the issue. I suppose he was trying to not lose readers, or bridge a gap (ecumenism) or something of that nature. However, I also noted that he also did not allow any particular view to go into any great depth to conclusively prove one way or the other. Lovely.

What I find disturbing about the article is the ammunition it gives atheists to point to the Bible and say: ‘See, it really is contradictory. Even the Christians can’t decide among themselves what the Bible says!’ as if they don’t already have enough ammunition on this point alone.

Nevertheless, the issue is answerable from the Scriptures, if we stick with what the totality of the Scriptures state. I know this as I have researched – well, you know – the Bible. No, I did not go into the history of the Sunday tradition, or the writings of the “Church Fathers” (whoever they are), or the Pope. Instead, I just used the Bible and then wrote an article on it titled “Shall we keep the sabbath?”.

Evaluate it, see what you think. But first a couple of brief rules: Use the Bible, and only the Bible when you evaluate it. Keep your Scripture in context and follow the logic that the LORD God lays down about following the law and how man is justified before God.

I thank God that the Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath.

Validation

Over the last week or so the issue of Pastor Jeremiah Wright’s remarks from the pulpit have dominated the coverage of Barack Obama’s campaign for President. While it has come to light that the controversial remarks of Pastor Wright were quotes from U.S. Ambassador Edward Peck, they were not condemned when Wright used them in his message.

It is well known in advertising that the strongest advertising method existent is personal favorable reference. The next strongest is impersonal favorable mention, and negative mention follows shortly thereafter. The best way to not advertise, or validate something is to not mention it at all. Thus, when someone is referenced in a message, the speaker has basically three options:

1. They can state they agree with the person quoted.

2. They can state they disagree.

3. They can remain silent and let everyone guess.

However, it is implicitly understood: unless you specifically state your level of disagreement with the person you are quoting, it means that you agree with them to a certain extent, even up to and including total agreement. Otherwise, why do you find their statements valuable?

So it is with Pastor Wright and his quotation of Edward Peck. The pastor did not see fit anywhere in the sermon to specifically distance himself from Edward Peck and his statements. Instead, according to a blog that supports Pastor Wright, the Pastor’s comments were:

“We are indignant that the stuff that we have done overseas is brought back into our own front yards. America’s chickens are coming home to roost. Violence begets violence. Hatred begets hatred. And terrorism begets terrorism. A white ambassador said that y’all, not a black militant. Not a reverend who preaches about racism. An ambassador whose eyes are wide open and who is trying to get us to wake up and move away from this dangerous precipice upon which we are now poised. The ambassador said the people we have wounded don’t have the military capability we have. but they do have individuals who are willing to die and take thousands with them. And we need to come to grips with that.” ((http://www.rolandsmartin.com/blog/?p=144))

No, whether America is doing everything right or not, there are some specific things that the ambassador stated that are strictly unscriptural and should have been qualified in some way. Instead, the statement “And we need to come to grips with that.” does indicate an approval of all the statements quoted. However, the greater problem is this: Pastor Wright’s concern was not that Americans are not obedient to the gospel and should be, as that would radically alter this nation for the better. No, Wright’s concern was for “social justice.” The clarion call was for this nation to fight racism, AIDS, provide better healthcare, etc.

“We have got to change the way we have been doing things as a society,” he said. He then said we can’t stop messing over people and thinking they can’t touch us. He then said we may need to declare war on racism, injustice and greed, instead of war on other countries. “Maybe we need to declare war on AIDS. In five minutes the Congress found $40 billion to rebuild New York and the families that died in sudden death, do you think we can find the money to make medicine available for people who are dying a slow death? Maybe we need to declare war on the nation’s healthcare system that leaves the nation’s poor with no health coverage? Maybe we need to declare war on the mishandled educational system and provide quality education for everybody, every citizen, based on their ability to learn, not their ability to pay. This is a time for social transformation.” ((http://www.rolandsmartin.com/blog/?p=144))

As I pointed out in the first post, this is the specific problem with Pastor Wright and the UCC in general. Where, just where in the Bible does it state that we are to focus on social issues? Feeding the poor, caring for the sick, infirmed and elderly are all adjuncts to preaching and teaching the word of God. After all, even a well-fed, healthy person dies, and when they die, if they are not prepared to stand in judgement before God, they end up in Hell – for all eternity. Plainly, unless one is born-again in Christ, through the shed blood of the Lord Jesus Christ, all the “social justice” in the world won’t do them one iota of good.

What we have here is a clear intent to advocate for things that really don’t change hearts, and thus the behavior of men. Rather, it appears that the reason the social issues are used, are for the specific and express purpose of bludgeoning those who appear to be enfranchised and demand that the playing field be leveled. Plainly, this is what Ambassador Peck is about as his name appears prominently in socialist circles. In searching further, it is also plain that the UCC is deeply involved in the socialist movement as well. This comes as no surprise as a blog article from UCCtruths ((http://ucctruths.blogspot.com/2008/03/united-church-of-christ-and-faln.html)) highlights the successful efforts of the United Church of Christ to obtain pardons for two FALN criminals who were convicted of carrying out bombings in New York and Chicago back the late 70’s and early 80’s. The UCC is also deeply involved in the Interfaith Alliance, which is a left-oriented (socialist) political organization wrapping itself in the guise of religion.

The real problem with this whole mess is the deception that continues daily within the UCC about its true intentions. Whether the average UCC member realizes it or not, the leadership of that denomination is really not interested in promoting the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ, what they are interested in is the promotion of Communism, all the while wrapping it in the banner and blanket of Christianity. Otherwise, they (including Pastor Wright) would be far more concerned with the state of men’s souls than they are. I am hard pressed to find anything that solidly preaches the gospel in the writings I have seen. Rather, what I do find is the usage of some (one or two verses) scripture to front a rant about the unfairness in American society, and how the “government” ought to be used to make everything more equal. The evidence of this is plain in the partial transcripts of Pastor Wright’s sermons posted on CNN’s Anderson Cooper Blog: ((The 9-11 Sermon)) ((The G___ ____ America Sermon)) and in the continuing focus of his messages until his retirement.

Unfortunately, Pastor Wright and the UCC are not alone in this endeavor, and neither is it restricted solely to the liberal “churches” and denominations that exist in this country. No, there are a considerable number of conservative, even fundamental, Bible-believing churches that have allowed themselves to be caught up in the political and social issues of the day, much to the detriment of preaching the Gospel. We would all do well to heed the apostle Paul’s stated focus, as it really is the only way any society ever changes for the better. What is amazing is that history does attest to this fact, if only we care to look. What was the apostle Paul’s focus? It’s quite impossible to miss:

And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God. For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified. (I Corinthians 2:1-2)

After all, why validate what you don’t agree with?

A Wrong Heart – A Second Look

In yesterday’s post, I commented on Pastor Jeremiah Wright’s comments concerning America and the attitude he took toward this country and whether it was Biblical or not. Moreover, I commented on the defense of Wright by the President of the UCC, John Thomas, and whether the focus of the UCC was proper and what that focus meant in the context of serving the LORD.

It is apparent that a second look into the whole motivation behind the UCC is warranted as Pastor Wright’s comments, and President John Thomas’ defense of them brings to light very troubling issues in the United Churches of Christ as a denomination. What is telling about the focus of Wright’s comments is that they were not condemning of America because it has turned its back on the LORD God, and forsaken the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. Rather, he condemned America for waging war against those in this world that the majority of Americans see as evil.

“We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye,” Rev. Wright said in a sermon on Sept. 16, 2001.

“We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America’s chickens are coming home to roost,” he told his congregation. ((http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4443788))

Now, knowing something about history, and knowing that America did not start World War II, and in fact resisted being dragged into it; it is apparent that Pastor Wright made his statement divorced from any historical context. Apparently Pastor Wright would have preferred that tens of thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) more die in an invasion of the Japanese home islands, rather than the use of only two weapons that quickly convinced the Emperor of Japan that further resistance would only result in defeat and the senseless loss of life of his subjects. Moreover, the dropping of those particular bombs also broke the idea in Japan that the Emperor was a god to be worshiped.

Knowing this, one must wonder what motivates someone to draw a moral equivalence between America’s use of nuclear weapons on Japan during wartime, and the attacks upon America on September 11, 2001. However, that motivation is laid bare by his follow-on statement which is also quoted above. Whether one really understands everything about the issue of Israel and Palestine, if one has read, understood and believes the Scripture, as Pastor Wright claims he does, then claiming that America supports state-sponsored terrorism against the Palestinians is nothing short of coming straight out of the Devil’s mouth. The only nation that is supposedly “attacking” the Palestinians is Israel, and anyone who knows the facts about the current government in Israel, knows that the Olmert administration virtually sits on its hands as Israeli citizens are subjected to daily rocket attacks. If this happened in any other country in the world, that country would be in the process of wiping their opponents off the face of the earth. No, other than their fight for independence, Israel has shown remarkable restraint in dealing with their neighbors since they became a nation. Moreover, American support of Israel has frequently been contingent upon that demonstration of restraint.

However, that is not what is so demonic about Wright’s claim. Wright’s claim about state terrorism being used against the Palestinians goes beyond the mere issue of Israeli relations with them. As any student of the Scripture knows, the land that Israel possesses, historically belongs to them, given to them by no less than the LORD God Himself. Plainly, by the Scripture, Gaza and the West Bank both belong to Israel, and Israel has every right to claim them, settle them, and govern them. Moreover, the Jews are still God’s chosen people, and He will use them again. Are they out of the will and service of God? Yes, they are. However, that does not mean that anyone and everyone is free to chastise and correct them. No, they belong to God, and God is dealing with them. For anyone to take a position in opposition to Israel, is to side with the Devil and the enemies of God. In this the Scripture is express:

Remember the days of old, consider the years of many generations: ask thy father, and he will shew thee; thy elders, and they will tell thee. When the most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel. For the LORD’S portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance. He found him in a desert land, and in the waste howling wilderness; he led him about, he instructed him, he kept him as the apple of his eye. (Deuteronomy 32:7-10)

For thus saith the LORD of hosts; After the glory hath he sent me unto the nations which spoiled you: for he that toucheth you toucheth the apple of his eye. (Zechariah 2:8)

He sheweth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments unto Israel. He hath not dealt so with any nation: and as for his judgments, they have not known them. Praise ye the LORD. (Psalm 147:19-20)

But thou, Israel, art my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham my friend. Thou whom I have taken from the ends of the earth, and called thee from the chief men thereof, and said unto thee, Thou art my servant; I have chosen thee, and not cast thee away. (Isaiah 41:8-9)

For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed. (Malachi 3:6)

I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying, Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life. But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal. Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. (Romans 11:1-5)

In Revelation, chapter 7, and in Zechariah, chapter 12, we are plainly told that there is coming a day in which Israel will turn and again be used of the LORD God as a witness to this world. In fact, the evidence in Scripture is extensive as it pertains to Israel and the fact that they have an everlasting covenant with God. We are also warned in the New Testament not to boast about our standing with God at the expense of Israel. Thus, the only one that would dare to levy charge against Israel and seek Israel’s destruction is the Devil.

What does this then state about the heart and motivation of Pastor Wright, and John Thomas, President of the UCC who defended him? What does it state about the heart of Barack Obama who dismissed Wright’s statements as merely “It sounds like he was trying to be provocative,”?

I do not know what would satisfy others as sufficient evidence, but for me the above Scriptures are enough to show that anyone who attacks Israel stands against the will of God. However, there is one other passage that plainly demonstrates who has always stood behind the attempted destruction of the Jews throughout their history:

And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars: And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered. And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads. And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born. And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne. And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days. (Revelation 12:1-6)

I don’t pretend to understand all the parallels in the above passage, but I do know the woman parallels Israel, the child is the Lord Jesus Christ, the dragon is Satan, the stars of heaven are angels, and the wilderness is the world. Hence, the meaning is clear. This passage shows who continually seeks the destruction of Israel, and who it is that influences men to rail against the Jews. Are the Jews perfect? No, they are fallen men just like everyone else, and they need the salvation that Christ offers, just like everyone else. But to claim that Yasser Arafat, the PLO, Hamas and others like them are justified in claiming that every Jew needs to be wiped off the face of the earth, and to say that our support of Israel when it responds to those efforts militarily is a reason for God to judge us, is straight out of the heart and mind of the Devil. By extension, to defend someone who makes such statements, is to be more than comfortable with the pronouncements of Satan.

Is America under judgement? Sadly, yes she is. But not because of her support of Israel, or her use of nuclear weapons in wartime, or even her stand against communist influence in South Africa. ((America’s support of South Africa was not because they engaged in apartheid, or that successive administrations hated blacks. Rather, it was due to having little to no choice in who we supported in attempting to stem the spread of communism. At least the South Africa government wasn’t communist, and under those regimes, the gospel could be preached to everyone. Perhaps they weren’t a whole lot better, but they did have some respect for the law. The communists have none at all, and always seek to stop the spread of the gospel.)) America is under judgement because she has forsaken her Maker, the Supreme Judge of the World, and has turned her back upon God, and forsaken the right way in favor of her own way.

Why is it that Pastor Wright couldn’t say those things to his congregation on September 16, 2001? Perhaps, it is because he really isn’t interested in having America turn back to God. Why didn’t President John Thomas soundly condemn the statements of Pastor Wright? Perhaps it is because he actually shares his views. Were I in the United Churches of Christ, I would set about finding a church that is actually interested in serving God, instead of standing against Him.

UPDATE 03/22/08Since I don’t go poking into every corner of the Internet, and I really am not all that interested in politics, I missed the proof of all I stated above. Since this whole controversy broke, people have decided to dig into everything Pastor Wright and TUCC are engaged in. Well, the proof of the above assertion is posted on BizzyBlog’s post concerning a certain “Pastor’s Pages” article from July 22^nd. The Pastor’s Pages for that issue were given over to a known Hamas operative. Nice — and in a “Christian church” at that.

A Wrong Heart

I don’t usually comment on current events, or the antics of the more notable individuals in this society, however, what has come to light of late begs for comment. This is especially true when no one bothers to even find out what the Scripture actually states concerning the statement or event that created such a stir.

In this Presidential campaign there has been a return to some unpleasant ugliness that one would have hoped didn’t exist in America. However, if you know and understand the nature of man, then you know what an impossibility that is. However, aside from the mainstream media’s censorship of Ron Paul on the Republican side, the Democrats have had their circus going to full effect with the “conflict” between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. And now, there is this latest event precipitated by Barack Obama’s pastor, Jeremiah Wright.

Now, Pastor Wright was the pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago and is the man Barack Obama looks to for guidance in spiritual things. This would not be altogether bad, except for two glaring things:

1. The apparent heart and attitude of Pastor Wright.

2. The unscriptural approach to the doctrines of the Lord Jesus Christ.

What brought this to light are some of the statements made by Pastor Wright during his messages delivered from the pulpit. Now, to be certain, the pulpit is not the place for personal opinion. It is the place where one is to expound upon the subjects the Lord has for His people to instruct, to reprove, and to exhort them to serve Him better; and to clarify His doctrines in accordance with His word, which is the Scripture. For one to go beyond that and put words in the mouth of God, or to demand God’s wrath upon a nation is egregiously wrong and tantamount to blasphemy.

The following was reported as direct quotes made by Pastor Wright from the pulpit. I will leave blank the offending portions of the statements made.

“The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing ‘God Bless America.’ No, no, no, G__ ___ America, that’s in the Bible for killing innocent people,” he said in a 2003 sermon. “G__ ____ America for treating our citizens as less than human. G__ ____ America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme.” ((http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4443788))

You know, I don’t find this attitude anywhere, in any of the prophets of the Old Testament, and I certainly do not find this attitude in the Lord Jesus Christ in the New Testament. Remarkably, though the apostle Paul was arrested, beaten, imprisoned unlawfully, I do not find this attitude in him either. Do we find condemnation of the nations of ancient time in the Old Testament? We certainly do. But not with this kind of heart and attitude.

Moreover, no one, but no one, tells the LORD God who He is going to condemn, and who He is going to bless. All we can ever do is ask. We are told expressly to ask for the LORD to bless, but conversely, we are not told to ask for condemnation of someone, or some nation:

Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so? Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect. (Matthew 5:43-48)

What the Lord Jesus Christ instructed on the mount is a far cry from the attitude and heart expressed by Pastor Wright. It does make one wonder who Pastor Wright is following doesn’t it? After all, his attitude is more akin to the attitude expressed by James and John, which was rebuked by the Lord Jesus Christ:

And it came to pass, when the time was come that he should be received up, he stedfastly set his face to go to Jerusalem, And sent messengers before his face: and they went, and entered into a village of the Samaritans, to make ready for him. And they did not receive him, because his face was as though he would go to Jerusalem. And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did? But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them. And they went to another village. (Luke 9:51-56)

Of course, that Pastor Wright should have such an attitude is not surprising as he has turned away from the Gospel of Christ as the focus of his ministry, and replaced it with something else – social justice. In a statement from John Thomas, the General Minister and President of the United Church of Christ, the promotion of “social justice” is prominent:

“But on the gritty streets of Chicago’s south side where Trinity has planted itself, race continues to play favorites in failing urban school systems, unresponsive health care systems, crumbling infrastructure, and meager economic development. Are we to pretend all is well because much is, in fact, better than it used to be? Is it racist to name the racial divides that continue to afflict our nation, and to do so loudly?” ((http://www.ucc.org/news/responding-to-wright.html))

You know, when you abandon the gospel in favor of social justice, don’t expect the LORD to bless, and don’t expect the hearts of individuals to change. When you go further and demand that God condemn a nation, you are of another spirit, which is not of God. It is sad that the President of UCC attempted to paint the prophet Jeremiah with this heart and attitude, and then identify with him in an attempt to justify the words of Pastor Wright. What is missing here is the distinction between acknowledging the judgement levied by the LORD God, and the demanding of God’s judgement upon a nation. Plainly, Pastor Wright would be happy if God judged America and destroyed her. What he seems to have missed is the fact that the LORD God is unhappy with him as well, and Pastor Wright’s anger at America for social injustice may bring about the opposite effect.

Rejoice not when thine enemy falleth, and let not thine heart be glad when he stumbleth: Lest the LORD see it, and it displease him, and he turn away his wrath from him. (Proverbs 24:17-18)

It makes one wonder who is the head of the UCC and Trinity Church of Christ – the Lord Jesus Christ, or the Devil. After all, they are interested in social justice, and not the gospel of Christ.