jump to navigation

I Feel June 28, 2007

Posted by Kent Brandenburg in : Discourse , 4 comments Print This Post Print This Post Email This Post Email This Post

How much does it matter how I feel?  The people of Israel were in trouble, Hosea said in 4:6, because of a lack of what?  Knowledge.  I’m sure they had plenty of feelings.  We are sanctified through the truth, not through our feelings.

Have you noticed how exalted feelings have become in determining the will of God?  I think peace is important, but as a byproduct.  We go through all the objective criteria and we have good feelings in the end if everything lines up with the Word of God.

I can’t argue with your feelings.  I’m sure you have them, but they don’t prove anything.  They mean something to you.  I can “feel” sorry about how you “feel.”  I might even say, “I’m sorry you feel that way.”  That probably won’t change how I think about something though.

True Ephesian Love June 25, 2007

Posted by Jeff Voegtlin in : Mix 'n Match , 3 comments Print This Post Print This Post Email This Post Email This Post

Ephesus was the worldwide headquarters for the pagan goddess Artemis or Diana. Artemis was the goddess of love and reproduction. With those attributes she was regarded as a provider of life, therefore anything from any part of life was acceptable as a sacrifice to her. The temple of Diana, in Ephesus, was a shrine to the goddess who lived in all of nature–everywhere there was life. Shrines were built to this goddess all over the known world, but the temple shrine in Ephesus was the greatest. It was believed that Diana (Artemis) was born near there. Subsequently, a large industry of miniture shrine making developed. Craftsmen would build miniatures that devotees could buy and offer in the temple or take home with them. Shrines could be built from many different materials and of many different values. The poor could get a simple wooden shrine; the rich could get costly stone or silver shrines. Demetrius was the chief of the craftsmen in Ephesus when Paul came to their town and told them how the true God of love would save them.

But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, by (grace ye are saved;) And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: That in the ages to come he might show the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus. (Ephesians 2:4-7Open Link in New Window)

Paul prayed that since they were grounded in the love of Christ, the Ephesians would come to know all the love of Christ.

That he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man; That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love, May be able to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height; And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fullness of God. (Ephesians 3:16-19Open Link in New Window)

And he said that this would result in love for others:

With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love; (Ephesians 4:2Open Link in New Window)

But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ: From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love. (Ephesians 4:15-16Open Link in New Window)

And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweetsmelling savor. (Ephesians 5:2Open Link in New Window)

Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; (Ephesians 5:25Open Link in New Window)

Later the Apostle John came to minister in Ephesus. I assume that even though his writings were general in nature, the first recipients of his gospel and letters were likely the Christians in Ephesus. Think about the theme of love drawn from these verses.

A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another. (John 13:34-35Open Link in New Window)

If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in his love. These things have I spoken unto you, that my joy might remain in you, and that your joy might be full. This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. (John 15:10-13Open Link in New Window)

These things I command you, that ye love one another. (John 15:17Open Link in New Window)

And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him. He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked. (1 John 2:3-6Open Link in New Window)

Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. (1 John 2:15-16Open Link in New Window)

In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother. 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. Marvel not, my brethren, if the world hate you. We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death. Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him. Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren. But whoso hath this world’s good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him? My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth. And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him. For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things. Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence toward God. And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight. And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment. And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us. (1 John 3:10-24Open Link in New Window)

Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God. He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love. In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him. Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another. No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us. Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit. And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the world. Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God. And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him. Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as he is, so are we in this world. There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love. We love him, because he first loved us. If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen? And this commandment have we from him, That he who loveth God love his brother also. Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him. By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments. For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous. (1 John 4:7-5Open Link in New Window:3)

And now I beseech thee, lady, not as though I wrote a new commandment unto thee, but that which we had from the beginning, that we love one another. And this is love, that we walk after his commandments. This is the commandment, That, as ye have heard from the beginning, ye should walk in it. (2 John 1:5-6Open Link in New Window)

Finally, John wrote to the Ephesian Christians,

Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love. (Revelation 2:4Open Link in New Window)

This first love was a first in priority. For centuries, the Ephesians worshipped THE goddess of love, but they had been converted and now, their first love was God. They were to love God with all their heart, mind, soul, and strength. This is a love that comes from every aspect of life. No area of life is exempt from needing to be offered up to God. If the first love had been left, it is likely that the second had also.

Now, if you’ve read all the verses, you should have seen how the second love had been taught also–to love your neighbor as yourself.

We are to love our brothers tangibly–not only in word, but also in deed. A lot of fundamentalists talk about love, and talk about how they TRULY love others because they rebuke them, reprove them, correct them, etc. All of that is part of love. How many of you fundamentalists love in DEEDS?

Not All KJVO’s are Created Equal June 22, 2007

Posted by Dave Mallinak in : King James Only , 19 comments Print This Post Print This Post Email This Post Email This Post

Regarding the issue of preservation, on a basic level there are those who believe that God has perfectly preserved His Word, and there are those who believe that God has not.

Those who believe that God has not perfectly preserved His Word typically will say something like this: The Bible is inerrant in the originals, however…the however indicating that copyists and translators and the human element has corrupted the perfection of the originals.

We can divide those who deny perfect preservation into two different camps. On one side are those who deny the inerrancy of Scripture altogether (we call them modernists). Opposed to the modernists, though not entirely separate from them are those who believe that God preserves His Word in a sort of Theistic Evolutionist way, through man discovering new copies and gaining new understanding of Greek, “finding new light through scholarship.” Modern Versions have come from these “Critical Text” promoters.

Opposite these MVO’s (Modern/Multiple Versions Only), we have those who believe in Perfect Preservation (commonly referred to as KJVO’s). The KJVO’s can also be divided into two camps. On the one hand, we have those who believe that God has perfectly preserved His Word in the English Language, which we can call English Preservationists. On the other side, we have those who believe that God has perfectly preserved His Word in the Original Languages. We can call them Original Language Preservationists. Both sides will hold to the King James, and both sides agree that God has perfectly preserved His Word. But the two sides differ on a number of important issues.

I wish I would have understood that division before writing the infamous “Plea for an update…” Having spent a significant amount of time debating for the side of the King James Version, I was a bit taken back by the personal attacks launched against me over that one article. Honestly, I was blindsided by it. I have always known, in the back of my mind, that it wasn’t enough to be King James Only, that one could not simply hold the position, but that he must also “say it” right. One’s membership card will not be adequate. KJVO’s must have two forms of identity and pass the shibboleth. Even as a KJVO, I’ve often felt that a discussion of the issue was like a walk on eggshells. So, I wasn’t surprised that I slipped up. After all, I’ve never been one for tiptoeing.

What surprised me was not the fact that I said the wrong thing. That never surprises me. What surprised me was the massive efforts from busybody pastors (some my friends, some not so friendly) who set the phone lines ablaze all across the country rallying the troops against me. What disappointed me was the efforts of some to stir up strife within my church. What disgusted me was the move of some to cut me off without so much as a trial, let alone any effort to set me straight. I heard about many phone calls that were made about me, but had only one phone call made to me. The pastors who did this should be ashamed. The conduct was frankly ungodly, and I cannot be silent about it. Short of naming names (y’all know who you are) I’ll simply say that I will be more wary of “friendship” in the future.

But that aside, it forced me to give more attention to the differences between the English Language Preservationists and the Original Language Preservationists. I am not an English Language Preservationist. I should be clear about that first. But from my little seat in the bleachers, I am noticing that the English Language Preservationists have done much to damage our cause and to hijack our position. As you read, notice the influence that English Preservationists have had on the King James Only position, and then consider this my attempt to isolate their position and refute it.

English Preservationists

I would not purposely misrepresent the position of anyone, and since I consider those who are English Preservationist to be on our side, I especially do not want to misrepresent theirs. Of course there are a variety of differences even amongst those who are of this persuasion, so I’ll try to recognize that and not spend too much time on the extreme views that are not necessarily shared by all.

I’ve attempted here to identify the basic tenets of this position, boiling down to the essential elements. Forgive me where I have left too much skin hanging on the bones.

1. Basically, the English Preservationist believes that God wrote the King James Bible, in much the same sense that God wrote the Bible. God used men to do the work, but God wrote them both.

2. The English Preservationist believes that the Bible has always been preserved in one form or another throughout New Testament history. However, they also believe that when the King James Bible was written, it was written to preserve Scripture, and that from 1611 on (or for some, from 1769 on), the English version became the standard, and that it is now the place where God is preserving His Word. This is key to understanding the English language position.

3. I don’t know of any English Preservationist who would claim INSPIRATION for the King James Bible (including Ruckman, from what I’m told). Most English Language Preservationists will deny “secondary inspiration” though they believe that the English version is inspired. However, every English Preservationist would say that inerrancy applies to the Version itself.

4. Amongst the English Preservationists, there is some disagreement as to whether any other language could also have their own perfect translation. Some believe that the English translation is the preserved word for all languages. Others believe it to be the preserved word for English, while Spanish or Chinese could have their own preserved word.

5. Some (not a few) English Preservationists believe that with the writing of the King James Version, preservation was perfected. This point also is essential to understanding the English-only position.

Original Language Preservationists (OLP’s)

  1. The OLP’s believe that God preserved jots and tittles (Mt 5:18), and that not one has passed. Thus, God has perfectly preserved His Word.
  2. Therefore, the OLP’s believe that the Word of God is perfectly preserved in the Textus Receptus for the NT, and in the Masoretic Hebrew for the OT.
  • The OLP’s believe that God canonized words through the faithful copying of His people, and that through those words, we have the 66 books of the Bible, which are also canonized.
  • Some will object that among the various copies of the TR, there are numbers of textual variants. And this is true. In fact, there is about 93% agreement amongst the existent copies of the TR. 
  • Those of the CT/eclectic position will argue that because there is about 7% disagreement amongst the copies, therefore we should all study the texts scientifically to determine the “best” reading. Thus, they rely on forensics and science to render the correct reading.
  • The Original Language Preservationists believe that this is an entirely faithless approach, and in addition, that this is disobedient to Scripture. 

3. That brings up the third main fundamental of the OLP. The OLP believes that the church is the pillar and ground of the truth (I Tim 3:15Open Link in New Window), and thus that the local churches throughout NT history have received the Word of God as it is, and have accepted it.

  • Put another way, the local churches (what we refer to as The Church) did not determine what the Word of God is, but rather they gave important testimony to what the Word of God is. They did not set out to scientifically prove, based on evidence, what the “best” word was. Rather, they received and accepted the words as kept by the churches.
  • In other words, throughout New Testament history, the accepted readings were used. That is, up until the last 150 years or so.
  • Again, this was accomplished through the faithful copying of believers throughout the ages.
  • The copies that have survived and have seen widespread usage are the copies that we accept to be the preserved Word of God.

4.  For the Original Language Preservationists, this is where the King James Version enters the scene, and explains why we are King James Only.

When the KJV was written, the English-speaking world had two English Bibles available: the Geneva Bible and the Bishop’s Bible. The English-speaking world was deeply divided between these two Bibles, and the KJV effectively settled the dispute. As evidence, the Geneva and the Bishop’s Bible are museum pieces today. You normally won’t order one from a Christian bookstore or catalogue. But the King James Version is the most widely distributed Bible in the History of the World. Truly, the churches settled on this Bible. It is the “Church Bible.”

In 1894, Scrivener assembled the Textus Receptus used by the King James Version translators into one distinct edition. So, we have the Bible which English-speaking churches have held to for almost 400 years, and we have the underlying Greek and Hebrew editions. We can be sure then that we have the perfectly and Providentially preserved Word of God in the Masoretic Hebrew for the Old Testament, and in Scrivener’s TR for the New Testament.

Reconciling the two positions

Now, when we put the two positions (English Preservation/Original Language Preservation) side-by-side on the ole table, we see clearly that there is a difference between the two. Both accept by faith that God has perfectly preserved His Word. On that we can agree. Both agree that the King James Bible was Providentially given to the churches. We can agree on that as well.

Since I believe firmly in the Sovereignty and Providence of God, I also can loosely agree with the English-only assertion that God wrote the King James Bible. I can agree in this sense and only in this sense… I believe that God was involved in the writing, and that God was guiding these men to choose this word and not that one.

However, I do not believe that God was involved in the writing of the KJV in the same sense that God was involved in the writing of, say, the book of Romans, or of the Psalms, or of Ruth. Did God write the King James Bible? The King James is not inspired in the same sense as Hebrews and James are inspired. The English words are not God-breathed. If I were to make a comparison, I would have to say that God wrote the KJV in the same sense that God wrote the U.S. Constitution. The Providence of God was clearly involved in both, and we see his hand in each. But the U.S. Constitution is not God-breathed, nor does it have the same life in it as the inspired words of Scripture.

I want to be careful here, because I know that this will offend some. I’ll do my best to be void of offense, if the reader will give his best effort to understand what I am arguing here. The words that God-breathed were Greek and Hebrew words. There was no need for God to re-breath those words in English. Nor do I believe that the English words were divinely inspired. Otherwise, God would have given the words in English to begin with.

Along with that, I disagree with the notion that when the King James Bible was written, preservation moved from Greek / Hebrew to English. God promised to preserve jots and tittles (Mt 5:18), not commas and semi-colons (or, perhaps more accurately, not dotted i’s and crossed t’s). Nor is there one verse in all of Scripture that ever indicates that God would preserve the Bible in any language other than the language in which God gave the Bible.

In addition, I disagree with the notion that any further editions of the 1611 would be “changing the Bible” or “re-writing the Bible.” Preservation did not begin in 1611, nor did it reach its final destination that year. Since the closing of the canon, God has been providentially preserving His Word, and God’s Word is preserved. Translations neither add to nor detract from the perfection of Providence.

If God has preserved His Word, then God’s Word is preserved. Translations cannot change that. The issue of Modern Translations is not that it undermines the preservation of God’s Word. It cannot do that. It might undermine our understanding of preservation, but it cannot undo what God has done. Preservation is preservation, and translations are just that. Translations.

I was truly amazed at some of the accusations that were hurled around a few months ago. I have never said that I wanted to “re-write the Bible.” I have never said that I wanted to “change the Bible.” I was not saying that before, and I am not saying that now. I have never called for a new version. I don’t think we should try to get a new version.

When Wycliffe wrote his translation in 1380, he was neither “re-writing” nor “changing” the Bible. He was writing a translation. When Tyndale wrote his in 1525/1530, he was not “re-writing” the Bible. He was not “changing” the Bible. He was writing a translation. In 1611, when the King James Bible was written, these men were not “changing” or “re-writing” the Bible. And when the next edition of the King James Bible was written, the Bible was not changed. To say that I ever argued for “re-writing” or “changing” is a gross slander, and those who perpetrated this lie should be rebuked before all.

Cup of the New Testament June 19, 2007

Posted by Jeff Voegtlin in : Lord's Supper , add a comment Print This Post Print This Post Email This Post Email This Post

And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. ~~Genesis 3:15Open Link in New Window

And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed. ~~Genesis 12:2-3Open Link in New Window

And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. ~~Genesis 17:7Open Link in New Window

Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. ~~Galatians 3:16Open Link in New Window

For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. ~~Romans 10:4Open Link in New Window

That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the Scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. ~~Romans 10:9-12Open Link in New Window

After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. ~~1 Corinthians 11:25Open Link in New Window

The Lord’s Supper should be a thankful celebration of our Substitute’s victory on our behalf. It is a remembrance of the freedom we gained in the New Testament. A Testament sealed with His blood.

How Predator Pastors Escape Detection June 16, 2007

Posted by Dave Mallinak in : The Ministry , 10 comments Print This Post Print This Post Email This Post Email This Post

According to Anna Salter, only about three percent of sex offenses are ever caught. Only about five percent of offenses are ever reported (1). All things considered, there are hundreds, probably more like thousands of sexual predators on the loose. If this is the case among all predators, and I have no reason for doubting these numbers, then one has to think that the number of Pastors or Clergy who have been caught or even reported for such crimes must be even lower. After all, who would believe a pastor to be capable of such crimes? Even with the recent arrests and prosecutions of high profile religious leaders, we still don’t want to believe that a Pastor could or would do a thing like this.

We trust a Pastor. We want to trust a Pastor. We want to believe that if we couldn’t trust anyone else, we could still trust our Pastor. I for one do not wish to undermine this inherent trust that we have in Pastors. For, after all, I am one. But like it or not, there are men who have found that the ministry is the safest place for them to conduct their sexual misconduct. They use the position of trust that they have in a community in order to gain greater access to children.

Unfortunately, we as church members often unwittingly play into their hands. For example, in the case of John Price, the Predator Pastor which we have been exposing on this blog, those on John’s side will normally argue that since he is not in jail, we should be quiet about it. In their defense, let me say that I understand why they think this way. If John was in fact guilty as we claim, then he should be in jail. And I agree. He should be in jail. But should be and would be are two entirely different scenarios. Research will support the argument that in the case of sex offenders, guilt will not normally be reflected by jail time. Is says nothing about ought, and ought does not necessarily follow from is.

Predators escape detection for several common reasons. These reasons are universal among all predators, no matter their status in life, whether a plumber, a doctor, a grocery bagger, or a pastor. But these reasons apply especially to Pastors who prey on children.

Predators escape detection because these crimes, by their very nature, are committed privately. There are no witnesses, besides the victim. The Bible demands two or three witnesses, but that is impossible in this case. That is why, when a predator is arrested, the police will often ask other victims to come forward. If other, separate victims come forward, then the prosecution can collaborate testimony. If not, then it is a case of the victim’s word against the perp’s. And in those cases, a tie goes to the perp.

Predators escape detection because they prey on the vulnerable. Though certainly not unheard of, predators usually steer clear of girls who have a strong and secure relationship with their father. Predators normally work on the insecure, the unprotected, the needy children. Experts tell us that predators will begin grooming a potential victim, often taking months to build a bond with the victim before even attempting any sort of sexual contact. Only when the bond is built does the predator proceed with the abuse. In the case of John Price’s victims, all have confirmed this modus operendi. Price chose girls whose relationship to their father was not strong, telling them that he would be a “father” to them. Then later, as he groomed them for his designs, Price began to tell them that “God made them for this purpose.” “Everyone has some purpose in life,” Price said. “You were made for me.” Then later, after they had fallen prey to his deceptions, Price again used their insecurity and vulnerability against them, promising to embarrass them if they tell, promising his devotion if they will keep silent.

Predators escape detection because their victims suffer from shame and guilt so severely. Often when a victim will not come forward, it is because they feel that they were equally responsible for what happened. They feel ashamed of what they did, ashamed that they enjoyed it. Predators know this. They know that if their victim feels pleasure, if they can get their victim to enjoy the act, then that is insurance for later. Because the shame and guilt will silence the victim. Churches and pastors do little to help this situation. Often, we insist on blaming the victim for what happened. I’d ask all who read here to consider the irony of this. The victim, who is not responsible for the sin, because of the guilt and shame she feels, keeps quiet about what happened, taking the responsibility on herself. Meanwhile, the perpetrator feels no guilt or shame, relying instead on Christian culture to keep his victims from telling. It seems to me that we’ve turned the proper use of conscience on its head. Churches should be teaching diligently where the responsibility lies, and making it clear that victims need to come forward so that they can put away their guilt. But often, we pile the shame on top of the shame, shaming the victim rather than offering comfort and help.

Predators escape detection because their victims fear them. Especially when the predator is the victim’s pastor. Almost universally, once the sexual contact commences, the grooming changes from an emotional bond to a more sinister nature. Predators notoriously make their victims feel important and wanted before contact, and regularly threaten them afterwards. Beforehand, they promise love and affection. Afterwards, they promise exposure and shame. Beforehand, they promise pleasure. Afterwards, they promise pain. Beforehand, they promise friendship and security. Afterwards, they promise physical harm. Predators threaten their victims, once they have committed their crimes. They threaten to expose them, to embarrass them, they threaten that nobody will believe them, they promise to deny everything, and sometimes, they threaten physical harm. Thus, the victim does not come forward.

At this point, it should be noted that “Biblical convictions” will not normally cause a victim to come forward. In a home where the father teaches his children diligently, it certainly is true that the children are less likely to become victims (though this is not unilaterally the case). We certainly could argue that taught children are more likely to come forward if they become the victim. But predators know this as well. They often check out the relationship between parents and children, looking specifically for closeness of communication. Predators are cowards. They avoid situations where they might get caught. Since victims are often weak and insecure to begin with, it is unlikely that their knowledge of God’s Word will motivate them to come forward.

That is not all. Predators often escape detection because of who they are. This is never more true than when a pastor turns predator. We want to trust our pastors. We do not want to believe anything bad about them. And rightfully so. Not wanting to undermine this natural trust we have for people in general, and specifically for pastors, we need to think instead of the demands of justice. Justice requires us to lay aside our feelings about the people involved, and instead to weigh the evidence. In determining who we will believe (and don’t think that predator pastors forget who we are most likely to believe), we must examine the evidence in the case, following Scriptural standards of justice. Since it is unlikely that there will be any witnesses, we must look instead for signs of deceit. Disharmony will sometimes be the best indicator of this. Lies of omission are more common than lies of commission. Deceptions often take the form of deflection. Almost always in a case like this, there will be situations where the predator invaded the victim’s privacy and violated normal standards of behavior. All of these things need to also be considered.

Predators escape detection because they are good liars. When dealing with a potential predator, we must always remember this. Of course, we all know the signs of lying… gaze aversion, shifty eyes, nervousness, shaky voice. So, we figure we will catch it. But we overlook the fact that the liar knows what the signs of lying are, just like you do.
Finally, predators escape detection because we are afraid to believe such a thing about them, because we are afraid to lose their friendship, because we are afraid of confrontation. Don’t think that predators never thought of this one either. They know that we will most likely believe them over a child. Especially if that child has been in trouble, or has a troubled past.

May God give us wisdom in dealing with this problem in the future.

Footnotes:

(1) Anna Salter, Predators, Pedophiles, Rapists, & Other Sex Offenders: Who they are, How they Operate, and How We Can Protect Ourselves and Our Children (New York: Basic Books, 2003), pp. 11-12.

What Do You Think Scripturally of Clarence Sexton Speaking at the National Fundamental Baptist Fellowship Meeting? June 13, 2007

Posted by Kent Brandenburg in : Separation, Standards , 65 comments Print This Post Print This Post Email This Post Email This Post

I don’t know Clarence Sexton. I heard him preach one time. I’ve received his paper for many years. I hope the best for him. However, I’m judging this based upon Scripture. I think it is an appropriate situation for us to consider, analyze, and explore. This is very public, so it doesn’t stand as a whispering campaign and innuendo. We don’t want whispering and innuendo here. Let’s rely on Scripture for our evaluation.

Is the FBF consistent with its historic belief on separation by having Sexton? Is Sexton consistent with his position on separation by fellowshiping with the FBF guys (I realize it is a fellowship of men, not churches)? What does the Bible say about either? I’d like us to discuss this. To do so, let me bring in some thoughts.

Are these two groups really being true to what they believe? I think this is enough to consider with regards to a real-life situation and the teaching of Scripture on the doctrine of separation. If we are not going to apply what we believe here, do we really believe any of what we say we believe about ecclesiastical separation?

Communion June 11, 2007

Posted by Jeff Voegtlin in : Lord's Supper , 11 comments Print This Post Print This Post Email This Post Email This Post

The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?

1 Corinthians 10Open Link in New Window 16

In this verse we see the name I’ve heard most commonly used for the Lord’s Supper: Communion. The word communion carries with it the ideas of fellowship and participation. When we celebrate the Lord’s Supper, we remember Christ’s work on our behalf, and in a sense, fellowship in his sufferings and participate in his death and subsequent victory. His Supper is the communion of the body of Christ.

Now I think it is important that we recognize not only our fellowship with His physical sufferings in some way, but also our fellowship with His body that we can see right now — the church. Communion is the fellowship and participation of the church as it remembers the work of Christ in His death, burial, resurrection and triumphant ascension. This is one reason why we don’t bring communion to people that are not at church. That’s not communion. You have to have an assembly in order to have participation with one another in fellowship.

This is another reason why the Lord’s Supper is necessary for the health of a church. As we partake, we ought to discern the Lord’s body around us. His body that we are a part of. His body that we have mistreated, or slandered, or envied. If we come to His table with these sins in our lives, we should immediately confess and forsake them. We should right them. If we have this understanding of the Lord’s Supper, the more often we partake, the healthier the body will be. This confessing and forsaking is true self-denial, maybe even taking up our cross.

For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord’s death til He come.

The Lord’s Table is His supper celebrated with thanksgiving in communion with other believers because of our fellowship in Christ. We show loyalty to the Lord as we remember His broken body and shed blood, which washes away our sin.

On Predator Pastors June 8, 2007

Posted by Dave Mallinak in : The Ministry , 1 comment so far Print This Post Print This Post Email This Post Email This Post

Some no doubt have followed my postings at another site, dealing with the issue of Predator Pastors in general, and the issue of one Predator Pastor in particular. Recently, I was interviewed by a reporter from the Associated Baptist Press about those articles, and she has written an article that was published here. I wish you would read it, and feel free to comment here at JackHammer. The Baptist Standard has published a series of articles on this issue, which you might find interesting.

Over the course of this month, I hope to write one or (maybe) two articles on this issue, which I will post both here and on my other, not so regular anymore, site. Meanwhile, I trust that God will use these things to help us learn to deal with this important and unfortunate issue.

Can Someone Be Consistent in the Matter of Separation?

Posted by Kent Brandenburg in : Standards , 7 comments Print This Post Print This Post Email This Post Email This Post

Over ten years ago I was talking to Dr. David Jaspers, former president of Maranatha Baptist Bible College, and he said this to me, “Kent, we just can’t be consistent in the matter of separation.”  Do you think that’s true?  Can we not be consistent with Scripture in the matter of separation?

I believe that we can be consistent for several reasons.  First, we have one Bible, which is once and for all delivered to the saints.  Second, Scripture is perspicuous.  God speaks plainly.  We can understand His Word.  He made it comprehensible so we could live it.  Third, God is One Spirit.  The Holy Spirit courses His way through every believer.   The church is His temple.  Fourth, God didn’t say we couldn’t be consistent.  He did tell us that we can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth us.  Whatever God commands, He enables, and all of the Old Testament and every book of the New Testament teaches separation, so the teaching is explicit.

So why aren’t people consistent?  First, pride.  Men want their own way and desire popularity.  Men love themselves more than God.  Second, fear.  Men seek for protection in numbers.   Third, tradition.  Men follow the traditions of men rather than the teachings of God.  Para-church organizations and wrong belief about the church have resulted in a fake unity held together by human reasoning.  Some call it fellowship.  Perversions abound because men ignore separation.

Men can be consistent in the matter of separation.  They just won’t.  I hope you will.

Pourri in our Pot June 2, 2007

Posted by Jack Hammer in : Jack Hammer , 2 comments Print This Post Print This Post Email This Post Email This Post

Having stirred the pot, stuff gets to floatin’ on top. And we can’t have no floaters.

We’ve got a little mixture for y’all this month. A little mish-mash. A little hodgepodge. A little combination. Mystery Stew. Conglomeration Consommé. Mix and Match Minestrone. A wholesome medley of thought, most of which is floating on the surface of the soup (but some of which must be scooped off the bottom of the bucket).

Pot of Soup

From time to time, we’ve got stuff to get off our collective chests, and this happens to be one of those times. So enjoy a month of potpourri (though I doubt we’ll smell sicky-sweet like one of those candles). JACKHAMMERS hammering to the beat of a different stockpot.