Big Daddy Dave's

Karl Barth...

2006-07-28T17:11:00.000-05:00

The Life and Theology of Karl Barth
David Manning
Church History
July 16, 2006

Karl Barth was one of the most influential and intelligent minds in all of church history. According to many, he ranks among such men as Augustine, Luther, and Calvin. Even Pope Pius XII called him the most important theologian since Thomas Aquinas.

Karl Barth was born in 1886 and lived until December 10th 1968. He was a Swiss Reformed theologian and a leading thinker in the Neo-Orthodox movement. From 1911 to 1921, Barth was a pastor in Safenwil. After Safenwil, he went on to be professor of theology at Gottingen, Munster and Bonn. In 1935, Barth was forced to leave Germany because he refused to sign allegiance to Adolf Hitler. After departing the country, he became a theology professor in Basel Switzerland.

Originally a theological liberal, Barth’s personal theology made a progressive change to a form of orthodox conservatism as he experienced the horrific realities of human depravity during World War I and was greatly disturbed by the union of his liberal colleagues to Hitler during World War II.

Barth’s theology can be described as Trinitarian and Christocentric in nature, and social in application. He saw no distinction between theology and practice, since to know God is to do His will. Barth sought a return to orthodox theology with an emphasis on the eternal Word – Jesus Christ. He tried to define all of theology through the lense of Christ and the Trinity.

Karl Barth’s theology of election is one of his most notable, and original, positions. According to Barth, God has, from the foundations of the world, elected Jesus Christ as the chosen one. Also from before time, God ordained that humanity should partake of this grace of election in Christ. God ordained that Christ would suffer the rejection of humanity, while humans could benefit from the election of Christ by becoming in Christ through faith in Him. Thus, by being joined to Jesus Christ, humans are then referred to as elect. Barth’s position was that Calvinism and Arminianism were both theologies of Creation, whereas election is a doctrine of Christ. As such, election should always be focused on Jesus, not the creatures that are privileged to be partakers of divine election.

While Karl Barth has been commended by many, there are some within conservative Christianity that still have some reservations about him. This is mostly due to his position on the inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture. Barth saw only Christ as God’s revelation, not Scripture. Jesus is the eternal Word of God. The Bible is written by men and should not be the bedrock of our faith – God’s revelation in Christ should be. While God speaks to us through Scripture, and thus it becomes the word of God to us, Scripture itself is not God’s word. This doctrine has made many conservatives uneasy about endorsing Barth, but on the whole, his theology should be seen as very much in line with orthodox Christianity.

A prolific writer, two of Barth’s most important works are The Epistle to the Romans and Church Dogmatics. The former is his commentary of the book of Romans. The latter is an exhaustive treatise on theology that he wrote over the course of many years. It is the largest set of systematic theology every written. Barth originally intended for Church Dogmatics to be a five volume set divided into many sub-parts, but he died before he could even finish volume four. Since each volume is usually divided into many sub-volumes, we usually count Church Dogmatics to be a thirteen volume set!

Ultimately, Karl Barth has been to the twentieth century what Augustine was to the early church and Luther and Calvin were to the church of the Reformation. His works have been, and will continue to be, some of the most influential and thought provoking writings of students of Christianity everywhere.

Neo-Evangelicalism - A Short Report

2006-07-28T17:07:00.000-05:00

Neo-Evangelicalism
David Manning
Church History
July 16, 2006

My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one … As you sent me into the world, I have sent them into the world (John 17:16, 18).

Ever since Jesus prayed these words, the church has swung, as if on a pendulum, from wholehearted commitment to living them out to complete and total isolation. It seems that second only to church unity, the cultural involvement of the church has been one of the most continuous conflicts throughout its history.

In the early nineteen hundreds, a movement called fundamentalism was started. Fundamentalism was a response to the liberalism developing in the church. It sought the restoration of belief in the miraculous, including the inerrancy of the Scriptures, the virgin birth, the substitutionary death and resurrection of Christ, and the second coming of Christ. Fundamentalism also vehemently opposed evolution.

While this movement was a good thing for theology, it ultimately ended up leading to a reclusive mentality. Fundamentalists ceased to engage the culture and turned inward. Instead of being in the world and protected from the evil one, as Christ prayed, they withdrew from the world to “flee” the evil one.

In the mid-nineteen forties, another movement called Neo-Evangelicalism began developing. This was largely in response to a book written by Carl Henry entitled The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism. In this book, Henry challenged that fundamentalism hit the nail on the head when it came to theology, but totally missed the boat when it came to engaging culture. By becoming separatistic and withdrawing, fundamentalsim no longer spoke to the questions and needs of society. Neo-Evangelicals sought to bring the gospel back into the world that it might have an impact on society.

There were many different paths to bringing this about. One included the return of many conservative individuals back to mainline denominations and teaching institutions. One such example is E.J. Carnell who studied at Westminster but returned to Princeton to argue for theologically conservative positions. It was this re-engagement of society and culture that marked Neo-Evangelicalism.

The church I attend is Covenant Baptist Church of Marengo, Illinois. At Covenant, our approach is near identical to the Neo-Evangelical idea of in but not of. Our mission is to “Bring the love of Jesus Christ into the everyday lives of all people.” Our church maintains a base of theological conservativism. That being said, we also believe in Christian conscience and freedom. We do not regulate behavior where the Scriptures are silent. We do, however, seek to elevate conscience and brotherly love in our actions.

When it comes to culture and society, we engage wholheartedly – so long as we do not partake in sin. It is our desire to reach those within our families, jobs, schools, and neighborhoods with the gospel. We try to bring biblical answers to the questions asked by those in the community around us. In all this, we maintain our theologically conservative base.

The church has had a tough time throughout its history getting this equation right (in but not of). If there were ever a time when I think there is hope for our impact on culture and society, while maintaining sound theology, I believe that time is now.

A Short Review of Three Chapters From the Institutes...

2006-07-28T17:04:00.000-05:00

The Institutes of Christian Religion: A Response to Three Chapters
Church History
David J. Manning
July 9, 2006

The Institutes of Christian Religion, by John Calvin, is one of the most monumental, and influential, works in Christian history. Calvin’s writings stand among those of the early church fathers, Augustine, Aquinas, and Luther. In this short paper, I intend to respond to a few ideas posited by Calvin in three chapters found in The Institutes: chapter fourteen, The Sacraments; chapter fifteen, Baptism; and chapter sixteen, Infant Baptism.

In chapter fourteen, Calvin introduces us to the definition of a sacrament. He says that a sacrament is “God’s witness to us of his favour towards us, by means of an outward sign … From these definitions, we can see that there cannot be a sacrament without a prior promise. The sacrament simply confirms the promise … The sacraments make God’s promises come alive to us, by presenting them in a pictorial, visible form … Of course the believer does not stop short at the visible sign, but rises to the sublime mysteries which lie hidden in the sacrament.” Finally, Calvin states “The sacraments have the same function as God’s Word: they offer Christ to us, and in him, the treasures of grace,” (Lane 253-256)

Having grown up Baptist, I had never had much exposure to teachings on the sacraments, or ordinances as we called them. They were simply memorials or acts of obedience we were to follow. About a year and a half ago, I was challenged to look into the sacraments more deeply. I have since found Calvin’s position on the sacraments (and hence the Reformed position on the sacraments) to make the most sense biblically and historically. Since God’s relationship with humankind has played out historically in the covenants (which have their basis in the suzerainty covenant models) the idea of signs and seals seem to make the most sense. Calvin rightly emphasizes sacraments as physical aspects of spiritual promises. They are not the promises themselves, but they cannot be divorced from the promises either.

In chapter fifteen, Calvin describes baptism as a means to “encourage faith in [Jesus] and also as a way of confessing it before others.” He then goes on to say “Baptism is a sign of cleansing…Those who see baptism only as confession of our faith have missed the main point. Baptism is tied to the promise of forgiveness,” (Lane 256). Calvin also links baptism with “our dying in Christ and new life in him,” (258) Ultimately, baptism is “the sign of initiation by which we are admitted to the fellowship of the Church.”

I wholeheartedly agree. Baptism is more than an act of obedience or an outward profession of an inward faith. It is a sign and seal of God’s covenant promises to us, including forgiveness of sin, regeneration, connection to the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, and the circumcision of the sinful nature. Baptism is less about the Christian and his or her faith and more about God and his promises made to us in the covenant of grace.

Baptism is the rite of conversion or, as I like to refer to it as, the conversion in the flesh. We may experience our conversion spiritually, and receive forgiveness of sins and the spiritual aspects of the covenant, but is not completed until it is done so in the body in baptism. Baptism ratifies the promises made by God in the covenant to us.

Finally, in chapter 16, Calvin discusses infant baptism. As a Baptist, it would be expected for me to have ardent objections at this point. That simply is not the situation. I am convinced that a strong case can be made biblically and historically for infant baptism. I am also convinced that a strong case can be made biblically and historically for believer’s baptism. Ultimately, I choose to remain Baptist for a few reasons: tradition, comfort, and a nagging understanding of Jeremiah 31.

In Jeremiah 31:31-34, God is speaking of the New Covenant he will form with Israel. Members of the New Covenant will not have to teach their neighbors to “know the LORD” because they will all already “know the LORD.” It seems to me that the New Covenant will be made up of believers. That being the case, the initiatory sign and seal of the New Covenant, baptism, should be administered to believers only. Since it is quite difficult to comprehend of infants having saving faith, the church should wait until a credible profession of faith is made before the sign and seal is applied to an individual.

I am quite aware of the fact that paedobaptists do have a response to this position, and I am currently working through it, but at least for now, my understanding of Jeremiah is as previously stated. In that regard, I have to disagree with Calvin on the issue of infant baptism. However, I seek to disagree with him, and with all paedobaptists, in Christian charity and understanding, rather than condemnation and division.

Works Cited
Lane, Tony, and Osborne, Hilary. John Calvin: The Institutes of Christian Religion. The Baker Publishing Group, 1987.

A Short Report On the English Reformation

2006-07-28T17:01:00.000-05:00

Webquest: The English Reformation
Church History
June 25, 2006
David J. Manning

The English Reformation is a perfect example of how God’s hand of providence can turn the sinful actions of one man into a source of good for a great many people. Up until the time of Henry VIII, England had been a Catholic country. At times there were dissenters, but for the most part, England’s religion belonged to Rome. Henry VIII even earned himself the title “Defender of the Faith” from the Pope for writing The Assertion of the Seven Sacraments in opposition to Luther.

Though Henry was a staunch Catholic, he was without a male heir and felt compelled to produce one. His wife Catherine of Aragon had only provided him with a female heir (Mary), which left the king in a quandry. The only way the king could marry another woman, in this case Anne of Boleyn, was to be granted a divorce. Since his wife Catherine was previously married to his older brother Arthur, Henry argued that his marriage should be declared null and he be allowed to marry Anne of Beleyn. The Pope was rather reluctant to grant the request, however, because Charges V, Catherine’s nephew, was emperor of the Holy Roman Empire.

In 1533 Henry VIII appointed Thomas Cranmer Archbishop of Canterbury. The new archbishop swiftly granted Henry his divorce. In 1534 the Act of Supremacy was passed, declaring the king to be the only supreme head of the Church of England, thus solidifying England’s separation from Rome. The Protestants’ hopes were furthered by the religious convictions of Anne, who was a Catholic, but with an eye towards major reform.

Anne of Boleyn was put to death in 1536 for adultery and treason (questionable charges), but the English Reformation continued. Between 1536 and 1539, the English monastaries were dissolved and their properties confiscated. Many of these monastic properties were sold back to church clergy, thus solidifying Protestantism’s hold on England. Doctrinal development was put on hold, however, in 1539 when the Act of Six Articles was issued. This Act essentially halted doctrinal reform, though it would later be repealed under Edward VI.

Doctrinally, the Church of England did not differ much from Catholicism – at least at first. In the beginning, most changes were hierarchial, above what the average church attender would notice. The services were still very Catholic in format, though eventually they were to be performed in English. Also, every church was to be supplied with its own copy of the Scriptures. Eventually, altars, images, and even some stained glass were done away with.

One of the greatest influences on the protestant Church of England was Thomas Cranmer. Cranmer was a member of the White Horse Group (a group, named after a pub in Cambridge, which discussed and debated the various issues of Protestantism). Cranmer was named the first protestant Archbishop of Canterbury. His greatest impact on the church was the Book of Common Prayer – a book of liturgy designed for church worship. Also contained in the book were the 39 Articles – basically a detailed profession of faith.

Henry VIII married Anne of Cleaves in 1540, though the couple did not last long. Henry found her distasteful and almost immediately sought a divorce. Anne of Cleaves was hoped to be one who would push for more protestant reforms, especially from a Lutheran vantage point. This never happened, and Anne eventually converted to Catholicism under the reign of Mary.

In 1540 Henry married Catherine Howard, a Catholic. This slowed reformational progress up a bit, but did not reverse the trends altogether. This marriage lasted about two years after which, in an ironic twist, the queen was put to death for infidelity, the very thing Henry had been guilty of multiple times throughout his reign. Henry was adulterous, immoral, and religiously wanting. He used the church as a tool for his own purposes and left many in his family in disarray. The endless flip flopping between Catholic and protestant tendancies left the common people of England divided and bitter.

In 1547 King Henry VIII died. Edward VI, a firm protestant, became his heir at age ten. Edward reigned until his death in 1553. Soon after, Mary ascended the throne and attempted to return England to its Catholic roots. Her persecution of Protestants, including the burning of over three hundred of them, earned her the title “Bloody Mary.” Two most notable martyrs were Thomas Cranmer and Hugh Latimer (Bishop of Worchester and supporter of Henry’s divorce to Catherine of Aragon). She died in 1558. She was succeeded by her sister Elizabeth, whose forty five year reign became a stabilizing factor in the country, and allowed for Protestantism’s permanent grasp on England.

A Review of the Movie LUTHER

2006-07-28T17:00:00.000-05:00

A Brief Review of the Motion Picture Luther
Church History
June 18, 2006
David J. Manning

In the movie Luther, we are presented with the struggles and victories faced by Martin Luther from the time of his early commitment to the Augustinian order up to the time when the German princes stood up for the Christian faith as expressed in Lutheranism. While the movie focuses mostly on the political and ecclesiological tensions caused by Martin’s teachings, it also portrays his personal and spiritual lives as well.

From the perspective of church historian, I’d have to say the movie was fairly accurate overall. Of course, that asessment is based only on what I have learned from this course thus far. From what I could tell, every major phase in Martin Luther’s life was present in the movie, from his dangerous close call during the lighting storm to the Diet of Worms to his marriage to Katie. In fact, I noticed that much of the dialogue, at least during the Diet of Worms, was taken straight from the historical record itself.

What I found lacking was Martin Luther’s emphasis on salvation by God’s grace through faith alone. Salvation was spoken of as trusting in the goodness and love of God through faith, but we were not presented with an accurate depiction of Luther’s outlook on personal salvation. Even so, I do not believe the producers intentionally tried to edit history so much as their focus was on emphasising the political and ecclesiological ramifications of Luther’s actions and beliefs.

Personally, I found the movie captivating. As one who knew nothing but Lutheranism up through the fourth grade, I was enthralled to visit again the story of the man who shaped my early Christian traditions. I’ve always had a vague mental sketch about his life and beliefs, but up until this course, none of the details had ever been fleshed out. Now I have a curiosity burning, and the movie only added fuel to the fire.

The movie Luther was so good, that I hope to have a chance to watch it again soon. The found the portrayal of Martin Luther’s passion and zeal for the gospel infectious and inspiring. I hope to learn more about him in the very near future.

A Review / Report on the Confessions of St. Augustine

2006-07-28T16:56:00.000-05:00

A Review of The Confessions of St. Augustine
June 19, 2006
Church History
David J. Manning

St. Augustine has been considered by many to be one of the foremost theologians, not only of the early church, but of all ages. One of Augustine’s most famous works is his Confessions. Part autobiography, part prayer, and part theology, Confessions has been a blessing to many throughout church history.

In the early portions of the book, Augustine presents the idea that our hearts were designed for communion with God and are restless until they do so. He then spends much of the rest of the book proving this very point. In great detail, the saint catalogues every major (and in some cases minor) infraction of his early childhood and young adulthood.

One of the great themes I found intriguing and beneficial, was how St. Augustine tied in God’s providence to his own sinfulness. Quite regularly he shows how God used his own follies, sins, and circumstances to mold him into an individual God could use to greatly influence the church. While he spent much time loathing his own sin (and rightly so), Augustine did not get so caught up in it so as to lose sight of the glory and sovereignty of God.

The middle portion of Confessions is spent explaining Augustine’s slow transition from Manicheanism to Catholic Christianity. He attributed this conversion to many sources, including (but not limited to) a growing restlessness with Manicheanism’s teachings, a truer knowledge of Christian doctrines, the preaching of Bishop Ambrose, the internal goading of the Holy Spirit, and especially the prayers of his mother Monica. Ultimately, Augustine’s philosophical arguments were defeated, and he was faced with the fact that his sole source of resistance to the Christian faith was his own love of sin. This disgusted Augustine and grieved him greatly. After being shown just how wretched he had become, St. Augustine converted to Catholic Christianity and became one of the most respected theologians of all time.

The last third of Confessions is dedicated to the discussion of creation and time and various other theological / philosophical oddities. The book is tied together by Augustine’s humble awe, devotion, and love of God in Christ Jesus.

To be honest, I had mixed feelings on The Confessions of St. Augustine. Perhaps because it has been so widely touted as such a great work of history, I found myself disappointed because it did not measure up to my expectations. While the idea of cataloguing, and thus confessing, the sins of one’s life to God is a great idea for devotional practice (I may even need to take up the idea of writing my own version of Confessions), I found Augustine’s endless inventory to be rather mundane and tedious. Sure there were small treasures of theological and devotional thoughts scattered throughout the first third of the book, but ultimately I found the material dry.

The middle third, however, was quite invigorating. Once Augustine began to focus on the events immediately leading up to his conversion, I was hooked. I found his story intriguing, familiar, and inspiring. His argument on never getting around to the research he needed to do in order to properly study Christianity seemed to echo my own life’s sentiments. I have a burning desire to teach, and I am currently off rotation at church. In this downtime, I have felt some sort of impulse or conviction that I should still be teaching through writing (perhaps in blog form for the use of the local church body). I simply have not gotten around to it. The same goes for the deeper Bible study I’ve been intending to do (primarily on the sacraments and Romans). It has simply not been expedient. But to Augustine’s point, it won’t be expedient unless deemed important enough to put forth a disciplined effort. It’s a matter of choice.

While I usually love a good theological challenge, I found the final third of the book to be the most exhausting reading I have done, if not ever, then at least recently. I hate to say it, but I found Augustine’s treatise on creation and time to be boring, tedious, and near painful. I will grant him this favor however: the discussion on the nature of eternity seemed to echo my own primitive thoughts on the matter and thus captured my attention if at least for a brief moment.

I do not discount the quality of his work in the final third of the book, however I just found myself uninterested. I did find one comfort in this portion of the book: it appears I am not the only one who spends his mind’s capitol meditating on the finer points of theology because it simply nags at me until I get it “figured out” (yea right). Unfortunately, that which captivated Augustine’s mind is not what is currently plaguing my own thoughts, thus I found this section of his work tedious. Perhaps in the future my affections will change and I will become enraptured with this section of his work.

Though I did not enjoy all of Confessions, I did find the conversion section quite beneficial, and there were enough nuggets of gold along the way, that I found the book a worthy read overall. I can now truly see why The Confessions of St. Augustine is considered one of the most monumental works in church history.

WOW!

2006-07-28T16:36:00.000-05:00

Wow! It's been three months since I've made a blog entry! All I can bring myself to say is ... wow!

I've certainly had good intentions. I have had, and still do have, bold blogging plans, but time has been a problem. I just recently finished a summer school class on church history through Moody Bible Institute. While normal classes take time, summer school exacerbates the situation. The pace was rather exciting at first, but after four weeks or so, I started to get worn out. Consequently, all those grand writing plans have fallen by the wayside.

I hope to start writing a little more frequently in the near future. I've had a bug in my bones to start a series on Romans. I'm currently trying to work the kinks out of my approach. Until then, I'll try to keep posting on various topics of interest, though they may be random and short (as if I have any sort of readership that cares, let a alone a readership at all!).

I may even post some of the papers I had to write for class. I found it interesting that I had to actually cut out some material from the papers to make them fall under the class guidelines. Consequently, they became more primers than exhaustive tools. Still, someone may find them interesting.

Until then ... D.J.M.

Morning and Evening - April 27th

2006-04-28T22:09:00.000-05:00

The following is the devotional reading for April 27th from C.H. Spurgeon's Morning and Evening - a fabulous devotional by the way. I highly suggest throwing out any fluffy, ear tickling devotional that have been wasting space on your bookshelf and buying a good copy of Morning and Evening. You won't be sorry.

"God, even our own God." - Psalm 67:6

It is strange how little use we make of the spiritual blessings which God gives us, but it is stranger still how little use we make of God Himself. Though He is "our own God," we apply ourselves but little to Him, and ask but little of Him. How seldom do we ask counsel at the hands of the Lord! How often do we go about our business, without seeking His guidance! In our troubles how constantly do we strive to bear our burdens ourselves, instead of casting them upon the Lord, that He may sustain us! This is not because we may not, for the Lord seems to say, "I am thine, soul, come and make use of me as thou wilt; thou mayst freely come to my store, and the oftener the more welcome." It is our won fault if we make not free with the riches of our God. Then, since thou hast such a friend, and He invites thee, draw from Him daily. Never want whilst thou hast a God to go to; never fear or faint whilst thou has God to help thee; go to thy treasure and take whatever thou needest - there is all that thou canst want. Learn the divine skill of making God all things to thee. He can supply thee with all, or , better still, He can be to thee instead of all. Let me urge thee, then, to make use of thy God. Make use of Him in prayer. Go to Him often, because He is thy God. O, wilt thou fail to use so great a privilege? Fly to Him, tell Him all thy wants. Use Him constantly by faith at all times. If some dark providence has beclouded thee, use thy God as a "sun;" if some strong enemy has beset thee, find in Jehovah a "shield," for He is a sun and shield to His people. If thou hast lost thy way in the mazes of life, use Him as a "guide," for He will direct thee. Whatever thou art, and wherever thou art, remember God is just what thou wantest, and just where thou wantest, and that he can do all thou wantest.

The Temptation of Jesus

2006-04-28T19:38:00.000-05:00

Immediately the Spirit drove Him into the wilderness. And He was there in the wilderness forty days, tempted by Satan, and was with the wild beasts; and the angels ministered to Him" (Mark 1:12, 13 NKJV).

Have you ever thought about the temptation of Jesus in the wilderness? I must confess that I don't think of it too often, and even when I do I have a tendency to shrug it off. I am quite familiar with the verse in Hebrews that states "we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin" (Hebrews 4:15 NKJV), but I could never really understand how Jesus could really sympathize with our weaknesses. I mean - he had no sin nature - how hard could it have been for him?

These two verses in Mark speak straight to my flawed thinking. Not only was Jesus physically weakened from fasting, living also under physical threat from wild animals, but he was tempted by the Master of Evil himself. Notice that it is Lucifer, the Father of Lies, who came out to tempt Jesus, not some average, run-of-the-mill demon (if there is such a thing).

I used to think Jesus' temptation couldn't have been to big of a deal since he did not have a fallen nature to contend with. But if I had to choose between facing the internal temptations of my own falleness or the deceptive lies of Lucifer himself - the very temptive force behind humankind's fall - I would choose my own sin nature hands down.

At least the sin nature can be manipulated, controlled, or constrained. Imagine an all out temptation attack from the most experienced deceiver/tempter the universe has ever known. Jesus didn't have to have a sin nature to be able to sympathize, he faced the temptations of Satan! My own feeble, fleshly temptations pale in comparison!

Also, it is important to remember that the intensity of a temptation is directly related to the intensity of the resistance. In other words, one usually experiences relief from temptation after one gives in. If you were to stand fast, however, the temptation will feel stronger because you are fighting/resisting it.

So what does this mean for us?

Jesus truly can sympathize with our weaknesses, and as such, we can "come boldly to the throne of grace" (Hebrews 4:15) for his sympathy is already with us.
He is able to aid us in our temptations (Hebrews 2:18; 4:16). In our time of need, we can ask boldly for mercy and grace to help us with our temptations.
Jesus knows the struggles we go through with sin. He's been there. He had to resist against the greatest temptive force ever known! And in spite of it all, he defeated sin, and through his grace, mercy, power, and strength, so can we!

Tom and Darla

2006-04-27T23:26:00.000-05:00

Awhile back I found this article over at the Bible Bulletin Board. If you've never visited the BBB, you're missing out. It's run by Tony Cappocia. There you'll find transcripts from countless John MacArthur sermons, Question and Answer sessions, and study guides. You'll also find sermons from various other Christian preachers as well.

Anyway, back to this article: It's about a couple named Tom and Darla. One afternoon they decide to live out the "What Would Jesus Do?" standard in their daily lives. This story is basically a modern day equivalent of In His Steps by Sheldon.

Read it and see what you think. If you're not challenged by the end of this story, then you're either already walkng by the "What Would Jesus Do?" standard, or I fear for the health of your soul.

What Would Jesus Do?

by

Tony Capoccia

© Copyright 2003 by Tony Capoccia. This file may be freely copied, printed out, and distributed as
long as copyright and source statements remain intact, and that it is not sold. All rights reserved.

Verses quoted, unless otherwise noted, are taken from the HOLY BIBLE: NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION
©1978 by the New York Bible Society, used by permission of Zondervan Bible Publishers.

This sermon is now available on Audio Cassette or Audio CD at www.gospelgems.com

It is Super Bowl Sunday and Tom and Darla Harper are watching the game together. The Harpers are born-again Christians who have been saved for about five years; they have two young children and live in a middle class neighborhood in central New Jersey. Tom Harper is a salesman at a new-car dealership and his wife Darla is a fashion designer in New York City.

As they are watching the half-time festivities they are talking about the latest political crisis in Israel and the struggle that the President was having in trying to help mediate the situation. Suddenly an ad comes on TV showing some nudity and using some improper language. Tom reaches for the remote control to try to mute the sound and blank out the picture, but it is too late; their children had already seen the ad and heard the language. Tom says, "I've had it with TV." Why can't they clean up their ads? What is a Christian to do? Is there anything safe to watch anymore?"

His wife Darla says, "Well, one thing I know, if Jesus were here He would never have turned on the game in the first place!" Tom replies, "Now wait a minute, there's nothing wrong with football--it can't be a sin to watch it!" "That's not the point," says Darla, "Jesus would not have subjected Himself to the objectionable commercials that He knew were sure to come. Have you ever wondered just how Jesus would live in the 21^stcentury? How would He react to our society and its ways?"

Tom says, "I bet He would live just like the rest of us, watching football, going to church, working on cars, cutting the grass, all the stuff that we do every day."

"No, I don't think so" replies Darla, "Jesus would not behave as most of us do, because He is so Holy. He would live a life of perfection in an imperfect world." "Tom," Darla asks, "Have you ever read that book titled, 'In His Steps'"? It was written in 1900 by Charles Sheldon, and he was trying to paint a picture of what it would be like to live a life of holiness in 1900; that is, living each moment of the day always asking the question, 'What would Jesus do?'"

"No, I haven't read the book," said Tom, "but I bet it was easy to live a life of holiness in the early 1900's, but today, in the 21^st century, it would be nearly impossible!"

Darla replies, "Not really, because God's Word hasn't changed and He still commands us to be holy as He is holy, and to walk as Jesus did. In fact, His Word says, 'The things revealed [by God] belong to us and to our children forever, that we may follow all the words of this law.'" [Deuteronomy 29:29].

Tom then comes up with a surprise suggestion, "Ok, Darla, you seem to be indicating that Christians in the 21st century can still walk in holiness as Jesus did--well, why don't we try it?" Darla was shocked that those words should come from Tom who struggles with his daily walk with Christ. She then says, "OK, I have an idea. The people in the book, 'In His Steps' pledged themselves earnestly and honestly for an entire year not to attempt anything without first asking the question, 'What would Jesus do?' I would like us to try it for just one month! Let's plan to review our progress at the end of each day as we try to walk in holiness." Tom agrees, and then they prayed together to ask God to help them, and to direct them step by step in this new commitment.

They turned off the Super Bowl, deciding that they wouldn't subject themselves to the ungodly commercials. Tom reminds Darla again, "Let's remember that beginning right now, we pledge ourselves to do everything in our daily lives, only after asking the question, 'What would Jesus do?' regardless of what may it may cost us."

Tom looks at his watch and says, "Honey, you know that the Century video store is still open and they have a Christian video section, why don't we go and pick up a couple videos to watch?" “OK,” Darla said, "I think that Jesus would do something like that." Tom and Darla and their children head out to the garage to their minivan. Tom suddenly thinks, "would Jesus do anything special here?" Just then a Scripture goes through his mind, "Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave Himself up for her." [Ephesians 5:25] Tom quickly beats Darla to her door and reaches out and opens the passenger door for her to enter. Darla looks shocked, smiles and says, "What's the occasion? You haven't open my door since before we were married!" Tom says, "Jesus says to love you like He loves the church and I know that He adores the church, so I think Jesus would open the door for His wife."

It is a little late in the evening and Darla notices that each child laid down on the seats for the drive. Darla tells the children to sit up and to "buckle up" and they respond, "But you never made us wear seatbelts before if we didn't want to, why do we have to now?" Darla, thinks of her new pledge, and thinks of the Word of God, then says, "Children, God's Word says, 'Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.'” [Romans 13:1] Surely, Jesus would obey the law of the land, which requires that all occupants wear seatbelts, especially little children. So, children, you need to wear your seatbelts because the law says we have too, and Jesus says that we must obey the law, and if we don't, we sin."

Tom pulls out of the driveway and heads for the freeway. It isn't long before the "beep" of the radar detector goes off to inform him of police radar. As Tom slows back to the speed limit He thinks of Jesus. What would Jesus do? It was against the law to use radar detectors in their state, but Tom had justified it because Darla always pushed it too fast, and had received too many speeding tickets. When he had bought her the detector for Christmas he had rationalized that it was better to break the law by having a detector, than have Darla getting all those tickets and being a bad Christian testimony. Now, it suddenly doesn't make sense anymore, especially in light of what Darla had just shared about obeying the law because God had established it.

"For sure, Jesus would not break the law!" Tom thinks. He looks over to Darla and she looks at him and they both know the detector has got to go. Tom reaches over and turns off the radar detector, unplugs it and gives it to Darla. Darla wraps it up carefully and puts it on the floor. "What do you plan to do with it?" Darla asks. "I was thinking of giving it to your brother; you know he's not a Christian and he's always getting tickets." "Is that what you think Jesus would do with it?" Darla asks. Tom thinks, then says, "No, Jesus would not give it to some one, just so they can sin with it, He would destroy it."

When they arrive home after the video outing, Darla and the kids go into the house while Tom stays in the garage. He takes the radar detector and lays it on his workbench and reaches for his hammer. He thinks to himself, "Why did I have to insist on buying the most expensive model available?" As he raises the hammer he stops and thinks of Jesus, then reaches out for his safety goggles and puts them on saying, "Thank you Jesus." It takes only a couple of blows and the detector is no longer capable of detecting anything. As Tom drops the pieces into the trashcan he thinks of Jesus and says to himself, "I love you Jesus, I love you Jesus."

As Tom is getting ready for bed, there is, as usual, a trail of clothes behind him. For years Darla had reminded him that she wasn't his servant and that he should learn to pick up after himself. Tonight, as Tom is climbing into bed he suddenly looks at his trail of shoes, socks, pants, shirt and thinks, "What would Jesus do?" The Word of God comes to mind, "Husbands . . . be considerate as you live with your wives." [1 Peter 3:7] So Tom jumps out of bed and starts to pick up his clothes.

Meanwhile, Darla starts to become angry when she sees Tom throw his clothes on the floor, but then she thinks of how Jesus would react and she recalls the Biblical truth that Jesus, "Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made Himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant." [Philippians 2:6-7] She also thinks of the Scriptures " . . . serve one another in love." [Galatians 5:13] "Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not men." [Ephesians 6:7]. So as Tom begins to pick up his clothes, Darla says, "Oh Tom Darling, let me help you pick those up."

As they both slip into bed, Tom has his usual desire to "cuddle" and Darla has her usual "headache." It has been this way for the past couple of years because Darla resents Tom's lack of consideration and finds it hard to forgive him for all the "little offenses" he does to her and unconsciously she has taken it out on him in the bedroom. Tonight though she thinks and prays silently, "Lord, what would you do now? Oh, Lord, before you answer, please remember that I am tired and Tom for the most part is an inconsiderate husband." Just then, the Bible verses she had memorized during premarital counseling come to mind, "Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times?" Jesus answered, "I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times." [Matthew 18:21-22] Also, she remembers the verses, "The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife. Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent." [1 Corinthians 7:4-5] She also remembers, "Do not let the sun go down while you are still angry." [Ephesians 4:26] She turns to Tom and says, "Darling, I need to talk to you about some things that have been bothering me for a long time."

The next morning Tom Harper does something different than has been his normal habit pattern--he gets up early. In the past the alarm was always set to go off at 6:30 am, which allowed him just enough time to dress, eat and make it to work on time. But last night Tom thought of Jesus, and what the Bible says about Jesus' early morning habits, "Very early in the morning, while it was still dark, Jesus got up, left the house and went off to a solitary place, where he prayed." [Mark 1:35] So Tom gets up this morning at 5:30 am and goes to his "closet," the basement, and prays to his Lord and reads the Bible. This is refreshing to Tom who had always struggled with finding time in his hectic daily schedule to pray and read.

At about 6:30 am Tom steps into the shower and begins to enjoy the warmth of the water, and thinks briefly, "Well there isn't anything different that Jesus would do in the shower than I do!" Just then the water turns ice cold! Now, Tom's usual response to this very frequent occurrence was to yell at the top of his lungs to Darla "Where did all the hot water go?" He had always blamed his wife, assuming she had just started the washing machine, or the dishwasher. She had never acknowledged his harsh question. But, this morning, as he abruptly pulls back from the icy water, he stops and thinks of how Jesus would respond, and a Scripture comes to mind, "Do everything without complaining or arguing," and "give thanks in all circumstances." [Philippians 2:14; 1 Thessalonians 5:18] So instead of saying anything to Darla, he just prays quietly, "I love You Jesus. Thank You for giving me Darla, and thank You that she's a hard working wife. Help me work this irritation out with her. Amen."

After Tom showers, his usual practice is to shave and comb his hair. Now during this time he usually listens to the radio, choosing Country and Western music or the "oldies." This morning, as he listens to the words being sung he realizes that they normally sing about drinking, drunkenness, adultery, rebellion, and sometimes even use foul language. He thinks of Jesus and what He would listen to, and the Word of God comes to his mind, "Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable - if anything is excellent or praiseworthy--think about such things." [Philippians 4:8] He then turns to a Christian radio station where someone is preaching, and as he listens he hears some false doctrine being proclaimed. He wonders what Jesus would do, again Scriptures flow into his mind, "If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching [of true doctrine], do not take him into your house or welcome him. Anyone who welcomes him shares in his wicked work." [2 John 1:10-11] With a rapid "click" off goes the radio and Tom says, "You're 'outta' here!" Then he calls to Darla, "Honey, do we have any more John MacArthur tapes?" He finishes getting dressed listening to a cassette where the Word of God was being proclaimed in truth, in boldness, and with authority.

Tom comes into the kitchen to have some breakfast. He reaches for the coffeepot and the donuts, his usual fare, but he stops, and remembers his pledge to walk in holiness by asking in each situation, "What would Jesus do?" So he thinks of Scriptures he knows about eating and sure enough the Holy Spirit brings him a couple, "Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body." [1 Corinthians 6:19-20] And also, "Everything is permissible for me"--but not everything is beneficial . . . I will not be mastered by anything." [1 Corinthians 6:12] Tom puts the coffee and the donuts back down, and instead reaches for the skimmed milk, a bowl of "Grape-Nuts," and a grapefruit.

Tom kisses Darla goodbye and says, "Honey, I love you so much! Pray for me today and I will pray for you; this 'walking like Jesus' is really a different way to live! Tom gets into his brand new red, Corvette convertible. Tom thinks about his job; he is a salesman at the largest "Chevy" dealer in the state. He thinks of how he had quickly become their top salesman and earned the right to have any car on the lot as his personal "demo," and he always chose the Corvette because he loved fine cars. He had always loved the way Corvettes "purred" and "rumbled." He had also loved speed.

As he pulls out onto the interstate he quickly goes through the gears, listening to the sweet sound of the engine and the clear whine of the manual transmission. As he reaches 63 mph he hits the cruise button and sits back for the 30-minute drive to work. As a "55 mph" speed limit sign flashes by, Tom begins to think about his speed and the conversation he had had with Darla last night about the radar detector. But he begins to rationalize that he is only "keeping up with traffic"; in fact, even at 63 mph, many cars and trucks were still passing him. Besides, he had once talked with a State Highway Patrolman who said they never gave anyone a ticket for going less than 10 mph over the speed limit. Any officer who did was harassed by the other officers for being too strict. But, finally the Spirit of the Living God breaks through his thoughts and reminds him of what Jesus would do, "Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves." [Romans 13:1-2]

Tom knows that Jesus would never accept "going with the traffic flow," nor would He accept "the opinions of officers who were charged to uphold the law, but were actually changing it." No, He would be obedient to the letter of the law. So Tom, lightly taps the brake pedal and slows to 55, and reengages the cruise control. Suddenly, he realizes that if you try to live a holy life, as Jesus would, then you will be out of sync with the majority of the world, because it seems that everybody on the interstate is passing him--it is almost as if he had put his car into reverse! The big truckers are the worse, as they put their big rigs right on his bumper and flash their lights at the "slowpoke Corvette." Tom pulls over to the far right lane to avoid creating any more problems in the "fast lanes." Just then, a rude driver cuts in front of Tom and almost hits his car. Tom's normal reaction would have been to say something like "You idiot, you fool!" But this time he thinks of Jesus, who said, "I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, 'Raca,' is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell." [Matthew 5:22] So Tom, instead of cursing the inconsiderate driver, simply prays that the Lord will help that driver know the truth of the Word of God and enjoy the salvation from Jesus. And he thanks Jesus for his own salvation.

Tom arrives at work on time and he wonders, since he had driven slower, if the Word of God could be applied here, that, "Those who honor me I will honor." [1 Samuel 2:30] Had Jesus helped him make it to work on time even at the slower speed, by making the traffic flow better and the traffic lights sequence just right? As he walks into his private office (also a "perk" for being the consistent top salesman of this very large dealership) he sits down and grabs the morning newspaper and his usual cup of coffee. "Well," he thinks, "Today, I'm going to pass on the coffee, since caffeine is addictive and I won't be mastered by anything."

It is around eight o'clock when he opens the morning newspaper and he thinks to himself, "Would Jesus read the newspaper at work? Everyone else does it, there aren't any customers here yet, and besides, the owner of the dealership never comes in till around nine-thirty." Even as he thinks this he knows in his heart that the owner would rather have him get caught up on the closeout paperwork from previous sales. And, he knows what Jesus would do, for God's Word says, "Obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but like slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not men." [Ephesians 6:5-7] So Tom puts away the newspaper and reaches into his in-basket.

Just then Mike Smith comes in with his coffee, and sits down and starts to chat with Tom. "Well, what did you think of the Super Bowl game yesterday?" Tom suddenly realized that after He and Darla had had their discussion about walking a holy life in Christ that he never did find out who won the game. So now he faces a decision: does he fake it with Mike, or will he be bold and tell him what happened? Surely, Mike will make fun of him, but the words of Jesus are clear in Tom's mind, "If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his Father's glory with the holy angels." [Mark 8:38]

So Tom says, "I only watched half of the game, because Darla and I were offended by some of the commercials. We turned it off because we knew that it was offensive to Jesus." There, he had said it. Mike smiles and says, "Well, Tom Harper has 'done got religion!' Get a grip Tom; God doesn't care about commercials. He's got bigger fish to fry! Let's change the subject. I heard the funniest joke yesterday about the President." Mike proceeds to tell Tom a joke about the President of the United States that slanders his character and makes fun of his office. Normally Tom would have laughed at the joke, but as Mike is telling it, Tom thinks of Jesus and how He would react to the joke, and the Holy Spirit brings a Scripture to mind, "Do not speak evil about the ruler of your people." [Acts 23:5] So, when Mike is done with his joke, Tom doesn't laugh, but rather changes the subject. Mike gets the message, makes an excuse and leaves.

As Tom begins working, he starts to think about the first sale of the day that will surely soon occur. He begins to think about the techniques he uses in getting people to buy cars. How will they square with what Jesus would do? Before, he had always left his Christianity at home, in that when he got to work he just "did his thing his way" and really didn't apply the Bible to the way he did his job. However, with his new commitment to holiness things might be different. How would Jesus sell new cars to people? Tom knows all the tricks of trying to get the customer into the most expensive car possible, because that means more commission for Tom. But he knows that Jesus would never pressure people into buying more than they could afford. He quickly remembers a Scripture that speaks to that, "Love your neighbor as yourself." [Matthew 19:19]

What about credit then? Tom knows how to get buyers to finance with the dealer, always at the highest interest rate possible. Yet, he knows that Jesus would follow the Word of God which says, "He who increases his wealth by exorbitant interest" "and makes unjust gain from [his] neighbors by extortion." [Proverbs 28:8, Ezekiel 22:12] would face troubles in their lives [discipline or judgment implied]. He knows Jesus would not like the "Bait and Switch" technique which is commonly used at his dealership—the trick where you send out "Mr. Nice Guy" salesman to the newly arrived prospective customer, a salesman who is very friendly and puts no pressure on them--who couldn't be nicer. But "Mr. High Pressure," a slick operator replaces "Mr. Nice Guy" and before the customer knows it, he has just bought a new car at a premium price and given his trade-in to the dealer for practically nothing.

Jesus would clearly not tolerate such deception for the Scriptures clearly state, "Do not deceive one another." [Leviticus 19:11] Tom takes a moment to pray to Jesus and asks for forgiveness for his past behavior, because he was the number one "Mr. High Pressure" at this dealership and had never thought anything about it until today. Tom thinks to himself, "But can you sell cars by just being nice to people and helping them buy what they can afford and no more? What if I do that and I'm not the top salesman any more? I will lose my private office and my Corvette demo, and most likely will have to drive a Chevy Cavalier! Now this whole idea of living like Jesus and walking in holiness was getting costly. Maybe he should call Darla and call this whole thing off--no, she will never accept that."

Meanwhile, Darla has finished breakfast and is getting the children ready for day care. She had thought during breakfast, "What would Jesus have done differently this morning than I have." One conclusion she had reached was that if Jesus were the wife, He would have gotten up earlier and prepared breakfast for Tom and the children, rather then letting them fend for themselves, for the Scriptures state that the godly wife, "Gets up while it is still dark; she provides food for her family." [Proverbs 31:15]. She knows that she is so tired and had to get ready to go to work herself, but she purposes that tomorrow morning she will attempt to get up early and set out a hearty breakfast for her family.

Darla's job as a well-known fashion designer in New York City demands that she wear the latest fashions to work so that the customer can see some of the selections on more than just mannequins. Fortunately, she does not have to buy the dresses she wears for they would be too expensive for their family. This morning, as she looks at her wardrobe she has to ask herself the question, "What would Jesus do?" "Well," she thinks, "For sure he would want me to dress modestly, for the Bible says, "I want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes." [1 Timothy 2:9] Suddenly she feels embarrassed, for she realizes, for the first time, that none of her designer dresses are very modest. They all have low necklines and high hemlines. Why didn't she see that before? She had just thought she was dressing with the style of the day. Now, her pledge to her husband and to Jesus, that she would walk in holiness by doing what Jesus would do no matter the cost, makes her quickly grab her sewing basket to let out the hem in one of the dresses and pin the top closed to raise the neckline to a modest position. As she looks in the mirror she thinks of her boss Leo, and knows that he isn't going to like this. He was always asking for lower necklines and higher hemlines because he says, "That's what the customer wants," (but in reality he was a man filled with lust and everyone knew it). "Oops," she thinks, "Jesus would not have been pleased with my negative thoughts of Leo." She realizes that there is some deep resentment and hatred towards him in her heart, and the Holy Spirit brings to mind a passage of Scripture that says, "Do not hate your brother in your heart." [Leviticus 19:17] Darla remembers that Leo is just a lost man who is blind, who cannot control his sexual appetite and has no understanding of God's truth. So she prays for forgiveness of her attitude towards him and prays for his salvation.

As she hurrys to finish dressing, her five year-old daughter, Jennifer, comes in and says, "Mommy can you tie my shoes?" Darla quickly responds with, "Can't you see that Mommy is busy and doesn't have time--wear your slip-on 'tennies.'" Then Darla thinks, "Would Jesus have said that? No, for He is the One who said, 'Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.' [Matthew 5:42] Surely, all Jennifer wanted was to borrow some of my time." So Darla calls her back and says, "Jennifer, Mommy will be glad to tie your shoes, and they will go better with your outfit than the 'tennies.'"

Darla then starts to fix her hair, which isn't much these days. Leo, her boss, had suggested that she get her long hair cut off because the "in look" was to have short hair, very short. Tom had objected because he loved Darla's long flowing hair, but Darla had yielded to her boss' wishes and not to her husband's. What would Jesus have done? The Word of God says, "Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord." [Ephesians 5:22] All she had had to do was submit to Tom, but she was so stubborn. Now her short hair is a contentious issue with them--Tom likes her in long hair and he even claims that she looks like a boy with her short hair. Darla wonders as she fixes her hair, "Does it really matter how long a woman's hair is?" She thinks of Jesus and asks, "Jesus, what length hair would you wear if you were a woman?" The only Scripture Darla can think of is the one Tom had often quoted to her, "Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering." [1 Corinthians11:14-15] Darla vows to let her hair grow back to restore her glory and to please her husband.

Darla gets her two children in the van and starts off toward the day care center. She remembers that she had forgotten to take her birth control pill, so she reaches in her purse for the case. As she gets it out she thinks of Jesus. What would He do? This was a tough one, for she and Tom had had long discussions about children and the best number to have. They had decided that two would be enough considering their budget, the expense of raising children, and the time demands that more children would require. They had tried to be wise but she realizes that they hadn't prayed about their decision. Now she remembers some verses that she had heard once at a woman's Bible study from a woman that had six children! These verses proved that God is sovereign in the opening and closing of the womb, "The LORD had closed [Peninnah's] womb." [1 Samuel 1:5] Also, When the LORD saw that Leah was not loved, he opened her womb, but Rachel was barren." [Genesis 29:31] "Then God remembered Rachel; he listened to her and opened her womb." [Genesis 30:22]

She remembers verses that gave clear commands about children. God had said to Adam and Eve, "Be fruitful and increase in number." [Genesis 1:22] He had said to Noah and his sons "be fruitful and increase in number; multiply on the earth and increase upon it." [Genesis 9:7] She remembers the verse that explains why God wants Christians to have lots of babies, "Because He was seeking godly offspring." [Malachi 2:15], but she argues with herself in her mind, "What if we can't afford them? Jesus what about all the money for the extra food, clothes and things that they will need (education, medical care, braces, etc.)?" Once more Scripture comes to mind in answer to her last concern: Jesus said, "Do not worry, saying, 'What shall we eat?' or 'What shall we drink?' or 'What shall we wear?' For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well." [Matthew 6:31-33]

Darla tosses the pill to the back of her throat and swallows it, but makes a mental note that she and Tom need to have "a talk" tonight about children, and need to ask God what He wants for their lives. As Darla pulls into the parking lot of the day care center she hears the familiar whine from her two children, who never like to leave their mommy. Darla thinks again of Jesus and what He would do. She is very familiar with verses that speak of a woman staying at home and raising her children. There is the one that says if you don't meet the needs of your immediate family then you have denied the faith and were worse than an unbeliever. [1 Timothy 5:8] "What are the needs of these two little ones, and am I meeting them?" she wonders. She thinks also of the verse that says that a "good deed" of a mother is that of "bringing up children." [1 Timothy 5:10] She thinks to herself, "Who is really bringing up my children: me or the workers at the day care center? Do they really have the time or desire to really show love to my children and to teach them godly principles? My children spend most of their waking hours, every work day, every week, at this day care." Lastly, she thinks of God's direct counsel to young women, "to marry, have children, and to manage their homes." [1 Timothy 5:14] Darla feels uncomfortable leaving her children but she walks them inside, kisses them goodbye and goes back to her car.

As she leaves the day care parking lot to head for the train station, she prays to Jesus that He will give she and Tom wisdom about her job. She remembers a preacher who once said, "That if what we do as Christians is applauded and accepted by the 'world' then most likely it is not applauded or accepted by God!" He said that the world loves working wives and small families, and it seems to look down on homemakers and women with lots of children. Once on the train to New York City, Darla settles down to read a good novel, her usual practice during the 45-minute ride, to the city on the express train. As she finds the place where she left off on Friday, she realizes that Jesus wouldn't read such a book. It was a worldly book full of sinful things under the guise of entertainment; there was murder, drunkenness, adultery and the occasional misuse of God's name. How could she have been entertained by such stuff? She puts the book back in her purse, thinks about it for a moment, then pulls the book out again and reaches over to the trash can, where she drops it in with the other trash.

She then "fishes around" in her purse until she finds her travel Bible and then in the full view of everyone she reads it, something she never would have done before. Today she was walking as Jesus would!

When Darla arrives at work everyone there was quick to notice her recently modified modest dress. There is not a lack of comments, with almost everyone saying the same thing, "Wait until Leo gets a look at you!" As Darla arrives at her desk, her best friend at work, Rachel, comes to her and also comments on her dress. She asks Darla, "Why the sudden change?" Darla thinks of Jesus and how He would answer Rachel; surely He would remind me to " . . . give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have." [1 Peter 3:15] and "If anyone is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his glory and in the glory of the Father and of the holy angels." [Luke 9:26] So Darla looks right at Rachel and says, "Rachel, I have decided to live my life like Jesus would want me too--no more compromises. If Jesus wouldn't do it, then I won't either. Jesus wants women to dress modestly, and I will--no matter what the cost!" Rachel isn't a Christian and usually avoids people who "act religious" so she politely excuses herself and leaves.

Darla gets out her latest fashion designs and notices that they are immodest, so she takes her eraser and makes some needed modifications that surely please Jesus. Darla has never felt better because she has no guilt about the designs. Just then the phone rings and it is the day care center, saying that Jennifer was sick with a fever and had to be picked up as soon as possible. Darla talks with Jennifer and assures her that "someone" will soon come by to pick her up, but Mommy can't leave work right now, because she has to show her latest designs to her boss in thirty minutes. Jennifer keeps crying for her mommy, saying, "I don't want somebody else's mommy to pick me up--I want my mommy to come and get me!" Darla calls her best friend from the church, Janet, who is a homemaker with four children. She is always so sweet and willing to help Darla. Janet is soon on her way to get Jennifer and Little Tommy, and Darla is on her way to Leo's office.

As she gathers up her latest designs, about to walk out of her office, Rachel shows up and asks Darla if she has a minute to help her with a personal problem. Darla says, "Sure," thinking, "I know Jesus would." Rachel has a personal problem in her marriage. She has "fallen out of love" with her husband and is getting interested in another man at work. But she is confused and feels guilty about it all. Since Darla had shared with her this morning about her commitment to Christ, Rachel thinks that Darla may have some answers or guidance to share. Darla takes the opportunity to explain to Rachel the number one reason why marriages fail--because people can't really love until they have first received the love of Christ through His shed blood on the Cross of Calvary. Only then, can a husband and wife treat each other as Christ would, practically guaranteeing married bliss. Rachel is listening intently as Darla shares her faith. Just then in walks Leo, who had overheard part of their conversation.

Leo, said, "Darla, where have you been? You were supposed to be in my office ten minutes ago!" With that Leo storms out without waiting for an answer. Darla says goodbye to Rachel and rushes to Leo's office with her latest drawings (the newly modified ones). As she walks in Leo says, "What did you do to your dress? It looks awful. What are you anyway, some sort of missionary or something?" Darla tries to explain that she is trying to live out her faith, but Leo couldn't care less. "Keep your religious talk to yourself--I'm not interested. Let's see your latest designs." As he looks them over Darla can see his face getting redder and redder. Finally he says, "Darla, what is all this junk? These are not the fashions that our customers would like; these look like uniforms for the Salvation Army!" Darla tells him that she cannot, in all honesty, to herself and to her Lord, design clothes that are not modest. Leo, interrupts and says, "Look, I only care about one thing and that's making money. We make money by designing and selling fashions that people want. If they want immodest clothes then that's their problem, not ours. So if you want to continue to work here, get back to your desk and redo these drawings and make them 'immodest'--do you hear me?"

Darla, who is about to cry, turns to leave but remembers Jennifer; controlling herself she faces Leo and says, "Sir, I have a sick daughter at home and I need to take some family leave to go home and care for her." Leo replies, "All right, go ahead and go home, and while you are at home I want you to think about three things. First, think about our dress standards around here; we dress the way our customers want us to. If they like low necklines and high hemlines then that's what you will wear. Secondly, think about your designs; they also must meet our customer's needs. Lastly, I don't appreciate your sharing your religious beliefs with Rachel. Religion and business don't mix (Now, in reality, Leo said this because he is the man at work that Rachel is interested in and he fears that after Darla's little talk, that Rachel will try to work things out with her husband). Leo finishes with, "When you decide to come back to work, be sure to leave your God at home!"

Darla leaves work and goes home. She prays to Jesus and thanks Him for showing her so clearly what she should do about her job. It is clear that if she is to walk a holy life like Jesus did, then she can't work for that company any longer. As she picks up her children at Janet's house, she shares her day's experiences with Janet. Janet listens and then says that she had felt a special burden that day to pray for Darla, and she promises she would continue to pray for her.

Darla leaves with her children and arrives home where she spends most of the afternoon coloring with them and reading them Bible stories. That night Tom comes home late and after supper they share in detail all they had experienced and learned throughout that day. They both agree that they had learned more about what it meant to be a Christian than they ever imagined. Before this experience they had thought that by going to Sunday School and Morning Services, attending the Wednesday Night Prayer meeting, reading their Bibles nearly every day, praying often, and witnessing to a lost person once in a while—that that was what Christianity was all about. However, after just 24 hours of trying to walk like Jesus did, they saw things differently. They had experienced a cost of Christianity that they had not known existed.

No wonder Jesus had said, "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters -yes, even his own life - he cannot be my disciple. And anyone who does not carry his cross and follow me cannot be my disciple." [Luke 14:26-27] Jesus wants us to count the cost of being a Christian. Walking in holiness is as simple as living each moment in the way that Christ would live it if He were in our shoes, for in fact, He is--"I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me." [Galatians 2:20] Amen.

Written and Added to Bible Bulletin Board's "Sermons and Articles" Collection by:

Tony Capoccia
Bible Bulletin Board
Box 119
Columbus, New Jersey, USA, 08022
Our websites: www.biblebb.com and www.gospelgems.com
Email: tony@biblebb.com
Online since 1986

Consequesnce of a Moral Fall

2006-04-25T18:48:00.000-05:00

The following is an article posted on the Walk in the Word website. It is written by Randy Alcorn. I thought it worthy of every Christians' time to read - especially those of us in leadership:

Consequences of a Moral Fall
- Randy Alcorn

Whenever I feel particularly vulnerable to sexual temptation, I find it helpful to reviewwhat effects my actions could have:

Grieving the Lord who redeemed me.
Dragging His Sacred Name into the mud.
One day having to look Jesus, the Righteous Judge, in the face and give an account ofmy actions.
Following in the footsteps of those people whose immorality forfeited their ministriesand caused me to shudder.
Inflicting untold hurt on (spouse’s name) my best friend and loyal partner.
Losing (spouse’s name) respect and trust.
Hurting my beloved children (names).
Destroying my example and credibility with my children, and nullifying both presentand future efforts to teach them to obey God (“Why listen to a person who betrayedMom/Dad and us?”)
If my blindness should continue or my spouse be unable to forgive, perhaps losing myspouse and my children forever.
Causing shame to my family.
Losing self-respect.
Creating a form of guilt awfully hard to shake. (Even though God would forgive me,would I forgive myself?)
Forming memories and flashbacks that could plague future intimacy with my spouse.
Wasting years of ministry training and experience for a long time, maybepermanently.
Undermining the faithful example and hard work of other Christians in ourcommunity.
Heaping judgment and endless difficulty on the person with whom I committedadultery.
Possibly bearing the physical consequences of such diseases as gonorrhea, syphilis,herpes, and AIDS; perhaps infecting (spouse’s name) or, in the case of AIDS, evencausing his/her death.
Possibly causing pregnancy, with the personal and financial implications

Ortberg Quote

2006-03-28T18:55:00.000-06:00

I found the following quote from John Ortberg's book Everybody's Normal Till You Get to Know Them posted over at BlogRodent. Even being a former Willow Creek attender, I have never heard this one. It's hilarious!

The church where I work videotapes pretty much all of our services, so I have hundreds of messages on tape. Only one of them gets shown repeatedly.

It’s a clip from the beginning of one of our services. A high school worship dance team had just brought the house down to get things started, and I was supposed to transition into some high-energy worship by reading Psalm 150. This was a last-second decision, so I had to read it cold, but with great passion: “Praise the Lord! Praise God in his sanctuary! Praise him in his mighty firmament!” The psalm consists of one command after another to praise, working its way through each instrument of the orchestra. My voice is building in a steady crescendo; by the end of the psalm I practically shout the final line, only mispronouncing one word slightly: “Let everything that has breasts, praise the Lord.”

A moment of silence. The same thought passes through 4,000 brains—did he just say what I think he did? In church? Is this some exciting new translation I can get at the bookstore?

Then everybody in the place just lost it. They laughed so hard for so long I couldn’t say a thing. I finally just walked off the stage, and we went on with the next part of the service.

Eight years I’ve been teaching at that church: of all the passages I’ve exegeted and messages I’ve taught that’s the one moment that gets replayed before conferences and workshops. Over and over.

It’s an amazing truth: being fully right barely brings as much life to other people as simply being human.

2006-03-26T17:28:00.000-06:00

BOOK REVIEW: FOUR VIEWS ON ETERNAL SECURITY
J. Matthew Pinson - General Editor. Zondervan. 0310234395 ISBN.

I recently finished reading Four Views On Eternal Security. I highly recommend this book for just about anyone who has ever wondered about assurance of salvation, eternal security, and/or the perseverance of the saints. In fact, even if you haven't wondered, I still commend this book to you.

Four views are presented: Classic Calvinist, Moderate Calvinist, Reformed Arminian, and Weslyan Arminian. I have never seen such a gracious and clarifying exchange in print! All four contributors did an excellent job presenting their cases and responding to those made by their counterparts. The true beliefs of each position are stated by each, and when one had misunderstood a position, or learned something from another's article, they were humble enough to admit it. Rare is such a thing, even among Christian authors!

While much of the subject matter was not new to me, I often found myself fascinated by the approach these authors would take. For example, Michael Horton argued the Classic Calvinist position from within the framework of Covenant Theology (something he is well known for). Stephen Ashby presented his Reformed Arminian position from the frame work of "in Christ."
So where did I wind up? To be honest, I don't know. For the longest time, I held to some kind of balance between the Classic Calvinist (perseverance of the saints) position, and Norm Geisler's eternal security position (all sins are forgiven - even rejecting Christ). Recently, even before reading this book, I have found myself moving towards some kind of balance between Classic Calvinism and Reformed Arminianism.

Ultimately, I don't beleve we can "lose" our salvation, but I'm beginning to think we just might be able to "reject" it. I greatly appreciate Stephen Ashby's point that salvation is always "in Christ." If we reject Christ, and cease to be "in Christ," then there is no salvation for us anymore since our salvation was always linked to us being "in Christ." Rejecting Christ would be tantamount to insulting the Holy Spirit (Hebrews 10), and one would not be able to be renewed unto repentance again (Hebrews 6 and 10).

Honestly, I haven't made up my mind yet, but regardless, the book was intellectually satisfying, spiritually healthy, challenging, and all around a good read. I highly recommend it.

D.J.M

The Value of Division

2005-10-08T18:43:00.000-05:00

I was thinking today about the value of our divisions. Now, in light of Christ's teaching on unity and oneness among his disciples, you might be wondering how I could possible see any value in the rampant divisions and denominations in the Lord's church.

Usually, the argument in favor of division has to do with theological points. The idea is that because theology is important, it is worth dividing over. While this position is true to extent (and ONLY to an extent), it is not what I have in mind.

In fact, I think the value in our divisions and theological disagreements is that because of them, we are forced to learn how to love each other and work with each other in spite of them. Our internal disagreements provide us with growth opportunities to become more like our Master.

For example, instead of Baptists and Prebyterians dividing over the issues of baptism, the Lord's supper, and liturgical matters, we are presented with an opportunity to find ways to operate as one - just as we truly are in Christ. Is there a way for Baptists and Presbyterians to accept each other in Christian fellowship, membership, or - gasp! - even leadership in spite of our theological differences? Is there not a way to, out of love, move into dialog with each other - concious of the fact that we are brothers and sisters in Christ, rather than opponents? Is there a way to move from that loving dialog into loving fellowship? Is there a way to move from the loving fellowship into loving partnership? Would I be pushing my luck to ask if there was a way for Presbyterians and Baptists to function as one church, with people from both perspectives operating within the local body and even on the leadership team?

I dream of a church that values theology AND unity. When I speak of unity, I'm not talking about unity within a local church group with the occasional softball game with the "frozen chosen" down the street or them crazy Pentacostals accross the tracks. I'm talking about true, one church, one team, one goal unity. Sure we may have different perspectives on some matters of our faith. Baptism, the Lord's Supper, the Holy Spirit - all can be contentious subject matters. But should we not strive to make our oneness in Christ a oneness in practice? Should we not identify the fundamentals of the faith, divide over them, and lovingly dialog over the rest while enjoying fellowship and membership with each other, striving for the common goal of kingdom progression?

Have you ever wondered why God gave us his revelation in Scripture in the form of historical narratives, poetry, apocalyptic literature, and letters as opposed to a straightforward catechism? I think it was so that we would have to learn how to lovingly overcome our differences of position and unite as one in spite of them. I think it was so that we could learn how to value each other over our various theological positions. Again, it's not that I don't think theology is important. After all, what you believe can save you or damn you. I just think that there are some matters that are weightier than others (the authority of Scripture, the Trinity, justification through faith, etc), and that our focus should be to rally around that which is truly major, and lovingly dialogue over the minors in true Christian fellowship

On Baptism Part II

2005-10-08T18:39:00.000-05:00

11In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, 12having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead (Colossians 2:11, 12 ESV).

I've read many arguments for infant baptism recently, and to be honest, I have found many of them to be compelling. One of my favorites is the argument from church history: If infant baptism was not an apostolic practice, but rather one that developed later, than how come there is no real debate over the matter until the time of the Reformation? Examples of infant baptism can be traced to the second and third centuries, however no true argument against the practice in and of itself occurs in the writings of the church fathers. The fathers combated just about every other heresy of the day - from the humanity and deity of Christ to the freedom and falleness of man - but the subject of infant baptism is nowhere to be found. It's off the scope! Now granted, it is an argument from silence, but hey, it's a pretty good argument don't you think?

So here's the deal: what about Colossians 2? If infant baptism is an apostolic reality, then paedobaptists need to deal realistically with this text. I've tried and I've tried to be objective on the subject of baptism (a difficult thing to do considering the fact that I'm a Baptist Deacon). I'm am at the point where I feel sympathetic toward Covenant Baptism (the baptism of infants for a sign of the covenant as opposed to baptismal regeneration for salvation). In fact, if it weren't for Colossians 2:11, 12, I might even change my personal position on the baptism of infants.

Here's the issue: in Colossians 2:12 Paul tells the christians at Colosse that the circumcision of heart, done by Christ, is identified with their burial with Christ in baptism (that is burial in Christ's tomb not the baptismal waters), and that their identification with his resurrection is through their faith in the working of God. Notice that they were buried with Christ in baptism and raised through faith! If the baptism of infants is to be considered apostolic, then how does one get past the fact that Paul here links baptism with faith?

I'd really love to hear your opinions. In fact, I really, really want to hear your opinions. That being said, I have to be honest, I have a thought or two of my own:

(1.) Notice that Paul is speaking to Christians. It is implied here that they are Christians that can actually hear, comprehend, or read what he has written. In other words, Paul is addressing adults here not infants. That being the case, it is completely logical to assume that Paul could converse about faith and baptism in the same breath because everyone who would be hearing this letter read would already have Christian faith. Thus the argument that this text teaches that faith has to be present in order for a baptism to be valid may be moot considering the fact that Paul was speaking to adults who would have already had faith and would have already been baptized. Consider this: if Paul could have addressed the infants in the crowd - a hypothetical of course - perhaps he would not have brought up the issue of faith.

(2.) Unfortunately, argument #1 is rather weak. However, I present to you argument #2: perhaps the picture baptism provides is only of burial with Christ and not of resurrection with Christ. Pehaps baptism is meant to picture the fact that God has placed us into the tomb with Christ - our old man is dead and our sins are washed away because of his death. Then our personal faith would be a picture of our resurrection with Christ - the coming forth of the new man. Thus the baptism of an infant would picture what God will one day do through Christ in circumcising away the sin nature, and the faith Paul speaks of, when he says that we were raised with him from the dead through faith, is what will come later in a child's life when God does the heart-circumcision and the child expresses personal trust in Christ for salvation.

So what are your thoughts? Any? To be honest, I am still unconvinced, though I find the above to be interesting thoughts. I don't want to sound proud of myself, but you've got to admit this is pretty progressive thinking for a Baptist. After all, we don't change! :-) D.J.M.

On Baptism Part I

2005-10-04T18:33:00.000-05:00

Baptism. For something referred to as an "elementary doctrine" (Hebrews 6:1) in the Scriptures, there sure has been a lot of debate about it over the years. Should we pour, sprinkle, or immerse? Should we baptize adults only or include infants? Does baptism save? Is it simply a statement of faith, or does it signify something greater, like the work of God? Does baptism regenerate or is it more of a promise? Is it a promise?
For something that is so "elementary," there sure is a great deal of confusion. Was it always this way? When did the confusion set in? I'd really like to explore this topic, and hopefully get a lot of responses and comments. It seems to me like a healthy subject to discuss, especially if we are to consider it "elementary," and to move on to meatier topics!

Thus we arrive at "On Baptism Part I." I'd like to start by posing a few questions, and in future posts, I would like to explore this even deeper - which will likely bring us to parts II, III, etc. I will also likely be kicking off a parallel discussion on apostasy, especially since it can quite easily tie in so well with our discussion on baptism.

(1.) I am fully convinced that baptism is not so much a statement of our faith as much as it is a statement of the work of God. In Romans 6, Paul places the emphasis on our identification through baptism with the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. He does the same in Colossians 2. That being the case, is baptism to be conditioned upon our faith? In other words, if baptism signifies a sovereign grace act of God, is it permissible to baptize infants, or is it conditioned upon personal expression of faith in Christ? I can see the argument both ways, but the stumbling block for the paedobaptist here is Colossians 2:12 where Paul speaks of being raised from baptism "through faith." For those of you who are paedobaptists, how do you respond to that text?

(2.) Should we allow our differences on baptismal modes, methods, and applications to divide us? That is, should we deny someone membership in a church and the ability to exercise his or her spiritual gifts - especially if they have the gift of teaching - on one's views of infant v. adult baptism and one's preference of mode? Thoughts?

Well, I think that ought to get us started for now. I anxiously await your comments!

D.J.M.