Saturday, October 28, 2017

The profile of the Pharisees and Scribes according to Scripture

Based on Matt. 15,23, and Luke 18:9-14

talked about the Scriptures
knew the Scriptures
worshiped God
gave honor to God
asked Jesus questions
fasted twice a week
observed religious holidays and feasts
blind guides
trusted in themselves as righteous
saw themselves as more righteous than others
had contempt for others
went beyond Scripture on tithing
while they honored God with their lips, their hearts were far from Him
worshiped God in vain
taught men's precepts as if biblical doctrine
judged others by their traditions, not Scripture
repeatedly broke the very Law they claimed they knew
listed other's sins while applauding self righteousness before God in prayer
lack of mercy, faithfulness, and justice
no integrity-they swore by things in the temple & on the alter-triaged these things
low view of God and His temple
triaged the law, the temple, the people
dead inside
pretty outside
defiled inside
unclean inside
worried about appearances
worried about maintaining political sway with the peopl
sought John's baptism for pragmatic reasons
impediment to the salvation of others making them twice the sons of devils than they
feared the masses
asked insincere questions of Jesus in order to trap Him
judged Jesus
underhanded to obtain false witness testimony to get Jesus killed-unjust
hated Christ
hated Christ's disciples and apostles
claimed lineage to Abraham as authority
claimed position as authority
worked with their enemies in order to get Jesus killed (pragmatic, political)
no faith in God

Monday, October 16, 2017

God's Word

"Gods Word is to be received with childlike simplicity and not quibbled over: received as a whole, and not merely those parts which appeal to us or accord with our views."

~ Arthur Pink, "The Life of Arthur W. Pink"

Believer's Baptism Is a Test

Obedience to the King's last commands prior to His ascension in Matt. 28:19-20 is the test of whether you bow to His lordship. Believer's baptism isn't an option. It's a command from the King. If a “Christian” refuses to submit to HIS baptism (“baptizo”-immersion of a believer), then he is in unrepentant rebellion against one of the clearest commands in all of Scripture. Such a man cannot therefore, speak with any authority on any other part of Scripture.

Beware of "Jesus Is Calling" Endorsements

Be careful to not follow the endorsements of these celebrity "Christians" (which includes "Baptist pastors" as well as country music stars) because "Jesus Is Calling" is an occultic book. It isn't Jesus who is calling the reader, it's the devil. Do NOT let these "pastors" and others convince you to enter into a yoke with Satan. Listen to the voice of the Shepherd, the Jesus of Scripture, who has already spoken in Scripture.

Heb 1:1  God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways,
Heb 1:2  in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world.
Heb 1:3  And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,

Rev 22:18  I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book;
Rev 22:19  and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book.

Piper: your cross is about your feelings

More man-centered false gospel from Piper:

The reason God gives us a cross is because he wants us to have more joy than our sinful pleasures could ever deliver.
Deny Yourself for Greater Joy
When God calls his people to deny themselves and take up their crosses, he is inviting them to walk along the path of purest pleasure.
Piper turns sanctification and it's goal into being all about our subjective feelings. This more snake oil selling of the heretical "Christian hedonism".
Part 1 - Piper's Journey Into Hedonism
Part 2 -Into the Darkness

Piper also redefines "lostness" as "not merely rebellion against God's authority, but blindness to His beauty."

Desiring "God" Continues The Error of John Piper's Works-Salvation

More error on the doctrine of justification coming from Desiring "God".
If you have a pet sin, you must renounce it at once. Your salvation depends on it.
Only those who have a string of sin’s carcasses behind them will enter into heaven. Only those who “work out [their] own salvation with fear and trembling” knowing that God is working in them “to will and to work for his good pleasure” will be saved (Philippians 2:12–13).
But what about being saved by faith alone? You’re not. You’re justified through faith alone. Final salvation comes through justification and sanctification — both initiated and sustained by God’s grace.
There is a holiness that, if you do not have it, will keep you from seeing the Lord (Hebrews 12:14). “But we ought always to give thanks to God for you, brothers beloved by the Lord, because God chose you as the firstfruits to be saved, through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth” (2 Thessalonians 2:13).
~Greg Morse,Content strategist, (bold, my emphasis; italics original)
While biblical Christianity rejects a lawless Christianity (which is what Piper teaches*), the twisting is slick. There's no "final" salvation or second step. We are saved completely but our glorification (when we are shed of the body of sin and are like Christ when we see Him as He is), is something that comes after we die. We are absolutely commanded to grow into a mature man, to consider our old man dead, etc, but the notion of a final salvation and final justification by works Morse gets from Piper's "Future Grace" and Piper is wrong. The Trinity Foundation dealt with Piper's unbiblical view of Justification here.
In part, The Trinity Foundation's John Robbins' article says:
Piper’s focus, as one can tell from the title, is what he calls “future grace.” The phrases “future grace” and “faith in future grace” appear hundreds, if not thousands, of times in the book. It is a clever propaganda device that has been used many times: Repeat a phase so often that the reader cannot get it out of his mind. But what does Piper mean by the phrase? In fact, what does he mean by “faith”? The answers are revealing. Here are his own words: “....the focus of my trust is what God promised to do for me in the future” (6).

This may not be the central error of Piper’s book, but it comes close. The focus of saving faith is not what God has promised to do for us in the future, but what God has already done for us in Christ. Christians preach and trust only Christ crucified, the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. Christ crucified is the sole focus of Biblical, saving, faith; it is the focus of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, by which we remember the Lord’s death; and it is the focus of worship in Heaven (see Revelation 5), with endless future ages before it. Piper wants to change that focus, from Christ crucified to something else. In attempting to change the focus of our faith, he avoids discussing, although he grudgingly admits, that all the benefits Christians receive from God are because of what Christ has already done on their behalf and in their place.(11) Piper’s admission is grudging, for he wants to argue that our future happiness, benefits, and final salvation depend upon our meeting conditions that God has established for receiving those blessings. In Piper’s Plan of Salvation, despite what Christ said on the cross, “It is not finished.” The be-liever must complete the work of salvation that Christ began. Future grace is conditional, and it is we, not Christ, who must meet those conditions.

Because Piper’s focus is on benefits we may receive in the future, this long and repetitive book omits any discussion of the Satisfaction by Christ of the justice of the Father (although Piper has a great deal to say about our being satisfied); it fails to discuss either Christ’s active or passive obedience; it omits any serious discussion of the imputation of sin and righteousness (imputation is mentioned in passing); it omits any discussion of the law of God; it omits discussion of the covenant of works; it fails to mention Adam and Christ as our legal representatives; and it depreciates the law and justice of God.

End quote. (bold, my emphasis) Robbins goes on to show Piper's penchant for Post-Modernism's slight-of-hand with words. Just as he did with "hedonism" by trying to change it's definition by marrying it to "Christian"--he also  also redefines "lostness" as "not merely rebellion against God's authority, but blindness to His beauty", so he does with "works" (notice his similarity with Romanist theology of "congruent merit"--this isn't the only time Piper shows a Romanist influence on his thinking (no doubt in part thanks to his hero C.S. Lewis):
Piper tells us that future grace is conditional grace, but meeting these conditions is not meritorious: “It is possible to meet a condition for receiving grace and yet not earn the grace. Conditional grace does not mean earned grace” (79). Those acquainted with Romanist theology may recognize here in Piper’s conditions something akin to the Romanist doctrine of congruent merit. Meeting conditions is not an example of condign merit-that is, Real Merit, but it is an example of congruent “merit,” a “merit” that is not really merit.
How does Piper try to evade the charge of teaching salvation by works? Simple: He redefines works. “The term ‘works,’ “ he asseverates, “refers to the warfare of righteousness unempowered by future grace” (220). So, by definition, a person who has “faith in future grace” cannot do any works. His efforts, his labors, his doings are not works, because they are “empowered by faith in future grace,” and therefore his salvation is not and cannot be conditioned on works, but on the “obedience of faith.” Theology is a word game for the Neolegalists.

End quote.

Eph 2:8  For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9  not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.

While the evidence of a saved life is proven in one's increasing sanctification, reflecting Christ more and more, our salvation is not contingent upon our works of righteousness, otherwise it is works salvation. To "ensure" our salvation by works is another way to say one is keeping one's self saved by works righteousness. That's a false gospel. The subtle twisting of the Truth continues to flow from the DG group and people ought to steer clear of it.

*E.S. Williams' video on Piper's antinomianism (which is also in his new book "Christian Hedonism?"):

Friday, October 13, 2017

Piper's Sick Analogy

Titus 1:15  To the pure, all things are pure; but to those who are defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure, but both their mind and their conscience are defiled. 16  They profess to know God, but by their deeds they deny Him, being detestable and disobedient and worthless for any good deed.

If you thought John Piper couldn't get any worse, you're wrong. He continues to morph into the male version of Ann Voskamp.

The most exquisite sexual ecstasies in this age are like a child’s enjoyment of ice cream. There is as much distance between sexual pleasures in this world and the ecstasies of the spiritual body in the age to come as there is between a child’s enjoyment of ice cream and the pleasures of his marriage bed twenty years later.
Childlike ice-cream pleasures are prelude and pointer to adult sexual pleasure. Similarly, sexual pleasure in this age is prelude and pointer to unimaginably greater pleasures of the spiritual body in the age to come.
~John Piper, "Matrimony No More"

He's learned quite a lot from his mentor Mark Driscoll.

The Heart

Image may contain: text
photo source

Friday, October 06, 2017

Friendship Alliances Is What Built T4G and TGC

This is how the Evangelical Machine works. Who you are friends with matter because they will influence you for good or bad. Here, it's for bad. Quote:

At the Gospel Coalition Conference in Chicago last week, I was asked by Stephen Um (during a Panel discussion) and by many others (in private conversations): what is the difference between the Gospel Coalition and Together for the Gospel?

I tried to give a brief response to that during the panel discussion, but more could be said. I will say a few things about that here.

1. T4G is a biennial conference that grew out of a set of (now 8) Gospel friendships. Mark Dever, Al Mohler, C.J. Mahaney and I had all been friends for a number of years (Mark, Al and I have known one another since the 1980s, and Mark introduced Al and me to C.J.). Furthermore, Mark and C.J. had fraternal relationships with and deep appreciation for John Piper, Al had a close friendship with and profound respect for John MacArthur, and I had a good friendship with and had worked alongside R.C. Sproul – though all of us knew, appreciated and gladly worked with each of these brothers. Meanwhile, Thabiti Anyabwile was an elder at Mark’s church and now pastor in Grand Cayman. Mark introduced C.J. and me to him, and then to Al and John Piper. We all get together as often as we can. We so enjoy and spiritually profit from the rather unique fellowship we have (composed as it is of Calvinstic Baptists, Confessional Presbyterians, a Reformed Continuationist and a Reformed-Dispensational Independent who disagree about many things, but agree on many more and share a common concern for central Gospel issues), we thought that there might be a wider Gospel benefit in inviting others to join in on and in extending that friendship. From that root idea grew the T4G conferences.

1. The Gospel Coalition is a biennial conference that grew out of a collaboration that grew into a friendship between Don Carson and Tim Keller. Don was editing a book on worship in which Tim was participating and got to know Tim while visiting NY (having admired Tim’s ministry from afar for some time). The two of them started wondering how they could foster a “network of networks” that would be Gospel-driven, and robustly biblical and theological. They called together about 40 or so folks and began exploring how we could work together for the sake of the Gospel, and how this “network of networks” might speak prophetically to evangelicalism (and to the wider culture) from the center rather than from the margins of evangelicalism (as is so often done today), as well as resource and encourage church leaders, churches and families of churches.

more to follow . . .

End quote. ~T4G

Tuesday, October 03, 2017

John MacArthur Scheduled To Pulpit Fellowship With False Teachers

Yet another event is coming in 2018. This one is with the Gettys. It's "Sing" 2018.

Speakers for Sing! 2018 include Keith Getty, Kristyn Getty, Tim Keller, Ravi Zacharias, John Piper, John MacArthur, Alistair Begg, Ligon Duncan, J.D. Greear, Stuart Townend, Bob Kauflin, Andrew Peterson, Shane and Shane, and many more!

So it seems MacArthur is just another New Calvinist who has no discernment and will pulpit fellowship with false teachers. It makes for money and book selling (another of his sermons is being turned into a book for sale, by Phil Johnson which will come out no doubt, by then--so as with these events, his book may be for sale at the event).

Here is why these men are unprincipled and should be rejected.

Tim Keller.

John Piper.

Ravi Zacharias.

JD Greear.

Because MacArthur pulpit fellowships with these men, he too should be rejected according to 2 John 9-11.

2Jn 1:9  Anyone who goes too far and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God; the one who abides in the teaching, he has both the Father and the Son. 
2Jn 1:10  If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house, and do not give him a greeting; 

2Jn 1:11  for the one who gives him a greeting participates in his evil deeds.

How much more to pulpit fellowship with these men? How about selling their books at the church's bookstore? This is inexcusable.