Devotion and Inner Promptings

A spiritual life based on feelings and inner promptings that is not based on a firm understanding of the Word of God has injured many. Eventually, most find out that what they were really devoted to was not God, but themselves.

Questions for Romans 11: All Israel will be Saved

Today I led a Bible study through Romans chapter 11. Below are the questions we used as we went through the text. In this chapter Paul is speaking of several different groups; National Israel (ethnic Jews), the elect Jews, the elect Gentiles, ethinic Gentiles, all of the elect (both Jews and Gentiles), and all mankind (both Jews and Gentiles). In order to understand this chapter it is important to be constantly asking which group Paul has in mind. If you are up for it, read the chapter and answer these questions. It is a wonderful chapter worth diving into.

Romans 11: 1-6
-What people is Paul referring to when he asks, “Has God’s people been rejected?”
-What is Paul’s answer to this question?
-What group of people is Paul referring to when he speaks of his people whom he "foreknew?"
-What group of people is referred to as the "remnant?"
-Paul says it is “no longer of works.” Has it ever been of works?

Romans 11: 7-16
-What did Israel fail to obtain (see Roman 9:30-32)?
-What did the elect obtain?
-What happened to the rest, and who did it to them?
-What was His purpose in doing that to them?
-What does Israel’s rejection mean for the Gentiles?
-What would Israel’s acceptance mean?

Romans 11: 17-24
-What have the Gentiles been grafted into?
-Why should the Gentiles not boast against the Jews?
-What will happen to the Gentiles if they do not stand fast in the faith?
-What will happen to ethnic Israel if they believe?

Romans 11: 25-27
-What is the mystery that Paul wants us to understand?
-In verse 25, when Paul says “all Israel will be saved,” which group was he referring to.
a. All ethnic Jews who will have ever lived.
b. All the elect (both Jews and Gentiles).
c. A group of ethnic Jews alive in some future generation.

Romans 11: 28-36
-What group of people are the enemies of God for the Gentile’s sake?
-Because of election, what group of people is beloved for the sake of their forefathers?
-What does the fact that God’s calling and gifts are irrevocable have to do with national Israel?
-Who has God consigned to disobedience?
-On whom will God have mercy?
-What is Paul’s point in ending the chapter like he does?

Do You Find the Hard Saying of Our Lord Hard?

If we read a verse like, "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven," and it causes us to reel in pleasure over many false professors of Christianity who will be excluded on the final day, it is time to check our own hearts. C.S. Lewis said it well when he said, "The hard sayings of our Lord are wholesome to those only who find them hard."

Doug

Do You Trust the Bible In the Hands of New Believers?

If you are afraid to hand a new believer a Bible and say read, because you are worried that if you are not there to explain it to them they might end up with theological beliefs contrary to yours, you might be holding to the wrong theological system.

Doug

More Conservative than Scripture (Video)

Being more conservative than Scripture is no more praiseworthy than being more liberal than Scripture.

Doug

Application Without Exegesis: A Destructive Trend

Exegesis is foundational to understand scripture’s application to our lives. The problem is that many in the church want to hear the application without doing the work of the exegete. In many cases this has also been translated into the way many preachers preach. In order to keep congregants happy, they are given large amounts of life application with little if any scriptural content. This puts both the preacher and the congregant in a dangerous position, because now neither the preacher nor the churchgoer is tethered to the text. Two major problems can arise in the life of the church member because of this. First, even if the application of scripture is correct, when it is challenged by those who disagree, the church member is left defenseless when it comes to defending this truth biblically. And second, if the application is not truly derived from scripture, then the church member has been sold some kind self-help scheme as if were a “biblical principle.” And when this self help scheme eventually lets them down, not only will they be disappointed in the church, but they may even start to believe scripture is no longer trustworthy. This is indeed a destructive trend.

-Doug Eaton-

Are You Using God Given Gifts to Sin?

In the book of Hosea, God had strengthened the people and they turned around and used that strength to sin against Him. We do the same thing when we sin.

God Bless,

Doug

"You Follow Calvin? Well, I Follow Christ!"

Some people think that using labels like Calvinism or Arminianism is wrong. After all shouldn't we follow Christ, not men or schools of thought? This video takes a look at these questions.

God Bless,

Doug

Only Those Completely Leperous Can Be Declared Clean

"If men knew themselves, God would heal and pardon them." - Blaise Pascal

God Bless,

Doug

How to Be Irrelevant

Eschatology 101: Repent! The End is (possibly) Near(er)!

Here is the link to the latest Apologetics.com radio show.

Eschatology 101

The show can also be downloaded through the itunes podcast. Simply search for Apologetics.com. in the itunes store (the download is free).

Here is the description of the show as written by my good friend Christopher Neiswonger.
___________________________________

The Apologetics.com Radio Program for Friday night February 6th on KKLA 99.5

Hosted by Christopher Neiswonger with special guests Donald McConnell, Dean of Trinity Law School in Santa Ana CA, Pastor Kent Moorlach of Communion Presbyterian Church of Irvine CA and Doug Eaton College and Career Minister of the 1st Southern Baptist Church of Downey CA.

The other day I was driving by USC and I saw a guy on the street with a sandwich board that said, “Repent! The End is Near!” I’m not the kind to argue with something as authoritative as a sandwich board, but really, this is not the church’s historical position on these things. The sandwich board should have read, “Repent! The end could possibly be near depending upon your hermeneutic and your eschatological position!” But it’s hard to fit all of that on a sandwich board, so, we at apologetics.com are bringing in the experts to show and tell on the end or thereabouts; give or take a millennia.

The Four Big Players Are: The Dispies, the Premies, the Amils, and the Posties.

Dispensational Premillenialism (The newest innovation in eschatology and the current default position in American Evangelicalism, popularized mainly through religious fiction like the “Left Behind” series. Important points include the distinction of Israel and the Church, a series of returns of Christ, the coming of the AntiChrist, The tribulation (pre-mid-or-post), the battle of Armageddon, and the literal thousand-year reign of Christ, on the earth, before the several judgments. Since Dispensationalism seems to be a fading hermeneutic, and it has suffered dozens of failed predictions of the imminent end of the world over the last 50 years, it’s questionable whether this one will survive even with its iconic pop culture status.)

Historic Premillenialism (A position held by many in the early church but carefully avoiding the dispensational understanding of the relationship between Israel and the Church, the nature of the age, and the interpretation of key eschatological texts. With many leaving the Dispensational understanding of scripture for Progressive Dispensational and Reformed understandings of some key texts, Historic Premillenialism is receiving a bit of a revival among those that have a Premillenial expectation without what might be thought of as eccentricities in the Dispensational Premillenial camp.)

Amillenialism (A position that would take much of what Premillenials think to be about the end of the world to be about the historical past (the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. for example) and takes much of what is taken by the church today to be eschatological to be better understood as spiritual in nature. For most Protestants, the system simply has too little practical application and seems overly dismissive of major portions of biblical text.)

Postmillennialism (The current minority position that has at times been the majority position and by far the most influential in early American Christianity. There are two active forms currently vying for the claim to the title postmillennial: the theologically Liberal version that translates eschatological data into a program for social action and tends to be dismissive of any literal reading of the text, and the theologically Conservative version that sees the progress of the gospel in history as being recognizable in tangible effects upon the Church, the State, and the culture writ large; culminating in the return of the King. Though conservative American theologians could have been assumed to postmillennial a couple of hundred years ago, this system has yet to get past the fact that the dominant form of postmillennialism in the last century was identified with Liberalism, and Liberalism being identified with apostasy, causes an instant wariness and lack of credibility in the Evangelical mind.)

How Should We Pray: A Look at the Lord's Prayer

This is a short look at how Christ taught us to pray.

God Has Broken the Teeth of the Ungodly.

This is a short look at Psalm 3.

The Heavens Declare the Glory of God

The heavens declare the glory of God. Psalm 19:1

When we look at the universe, we wonder at this magnificence. We stand in awe as the massive spheres move perfectly in their orbits. We stand in awe at the power of our sun and realize it pales in comparison to many other stars, let alone the vastness of it all.

There is without a doubt a glory declared by the universe that causes us all to marvel, but we must realize that the glory that is declared is not the glory of the universe; it is the glory of God. The experience we are having is true knowledge of His glory. Now we must not misunderstand this, the passage does not say that the universe is God. In fact, it is clearly distinct from him in this passage, but the Glory that we are experiencing is His.

This is where the natural man steps in and attempts to suppress that truth. Many naturalists say it should be enough for us to marvel at this world and all its complexities without any appeal to God. And this is what we should expect since the natural progression from trading the truth of God for a lie is to begin to worship the creation instead of the creator (Rom. 1:26), and this they do by ascribing the glory that belongs to God to the creation itself.

-Doug-

In Defense of Denominations and Denominational Churches

There are many who have trouble with the idea of being part of a local church and do not want anything to do with them, and many people point to denominations as a major culprit, as if they are inherently sinful. The arguments usually start by decrying the “man made” organization that today’s local churches follow. After all, the church is not a building, it is a group of people in a locality, in other words it is an organism not an organization. On top of that you shouldn’t refer to it as “your” church because churches are not something to be possessed, it is something in which we partake.

After these usual semantics are expressed, many times the conversation will turn toward denominations. They will usually be argued against by saying something like, the practice of a denomination is to separate yourself from brothers and sisters through our thoughts and opinions, and Ephesians chapter 4 clearly tells us we are to seek unity. So this separations is a serious problem. On top of that, denominations are regularly contentious with each other over members because they want them all to come to be followers of their particular distinctives. Finally, if you want real clarity on this issue all you need to do is look at 1 Cor. 1 which says…

1Co 1:11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.

1Co 1:12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.

1Co 1:13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?

Doesn’t this passage clearly condemn the very nature of denominations? You can be a follower of the Baptists or the Presbyterians if you want, but not me; I’m a Christ-follower.

Now the first thing we must see, beside a usual miss-characterization of denominational churches, is the self-refuting nature of these accusations. What they are arguing, is that the way churches and denominations are functioning today is wrong and they all need to correct themselves by aligning themselves under the arguers understanding of a local church, because according to them, they follow Christ’s example not man’s. So what they are doing in arguing against someone like myself is trying to convert me to their particular distinctives, along with everyone else with whom they come in contact. But as we all know not everyone will buy into this understanding of the local church which is really and anti-understanding. But some people will, and as they begin to align themselves under this theology they will begin to study under teachers who teach it and listen to preachers who preach it and gather together to take the Lord’s supper and etc. And before you know it, what they have become is the very nature of a denomination. Whether they want to call themselves by a certain name (nomination) or not, or even claim to be not-a-denomination (non-denominational) that is exactly what they have become.

Not only are they organized under their theology of a local church, they are actually trying to get others out of their denominations and come to their not-a-denomination. But if they can do it, why can’t other denominations? But here is the real issue, they are actually more divisive than most regular denominations because most regular denominations are not so concerned with getting everyone to their particular distinctives. They realize that as long as we agree on the essentials we can differ on the secondary doctrine and do not need to get someone to switch churches to be part of a healthy local church. Which happens to be something the person who argues against denominations cannot do. For them, in order for someone to be in a healthy local church, they must get out of a denominational church and become like the anti-denominational people, because denominations are sinful.

So what about Ephesians chapter 4 and First Corinthians chapter one? In Eph 4 it says we should be striving for unity and I believe many denominations agree with this. They (like the arguer) believe they understand what the will of God is and desire that all Christian be united under that truth. And if the arguer can do this why can’t a particular denomination.

To understand the passage in 1 Corinthians 1, we must realize that Paul, Apollos, Peter, and Christ, all taught the same doctrine. So when the people said I am of Paul or Apollos they were not disagreeing over the doctrine. The contention was one of mere personal pride. Some wanted everyone to know that it was Paul who led them to Christ as if that gave them some special clout to hold over other people. Others thought that being of Apollos was something to be proud of because historically and Biblically Apollos was a great orator, so some people thought that made them better than other Christians. Now it is true that some denominations and even some specific churches have these sins associated with them. They have divided because of these sinful contentions, but my point is that the divisions that Paul was addressing are not what typically brought many denominations to fruition. The contentions are usually doctrinal, and Paul took doctrine very seriously. Even to the point of dividing with people he thought were teaching incorrect doctrine.

Now if we read this passage the way I assume the arguer usually attempts to use it (to justify an argument against denominations), we would have to assume that Paul is talking about doctrinal issues. But if this is the case then we would have to assume that Paul and Apollos etc. where all teaching different doctrine and that Paul was telling them to not worry about doctrine, just be united anyway, which is something Paul never said.

What is really interesting about this passage is that Paul mentions that some were saying they were “of Christ” too. As if this gave them some special prestige. After all they didn’t follow the traditions of some teacher. They learned directly from Christ Himself. But if we are reading this as if this applies to denouncing denominations, shouldn’t saying we are of Christ be a good thing? Isn’t it true that we really aren’t of Paul or Apollos but of Christ after all. He is the true head of the Church. But Paul is arguing that even claiming to be of Christ and not of any other teacher etc. can be divisive and sinful. This statement makes it clear that Paul was not saying it is always wrong to gather under certain associations or nominal affiliations, because we should gather under the affiliation of Christ. What we have to keep clear here is that Paul is not speaking of doctrinal differences since they all taught the same thing, but of proud sinful divisions when they all believed the same doctrine. My argument is that denominations by definition do not fit into what Paul was addressing here, even though some denominations and local churches may act this way.

I actually believe that if Paul, Apollos, and Peter had all been teaching different doctrine and only Peter was correct, In that sense it would actually have been commendable to say I am of Peter and not of Paul. Likewise, if the Baptists are right and the Methodists are wrong or vise versa, it would actually good to say I am of one and not the other. Ultimately, it turns out the arguer is being more divisive than most denominations by rejecting them all based on an improper understanding of this passage. If this passage is to be read to fit denominations, the arguer is the one claiming to be of Christ. They are the ones claiming not to follow any teacher or group except Christ and refuse to have any other nominal associations. But remember Paul was condemning the people who where saying they were of Christ too. This is why this passage does not mean what they are using it to say. It is good to be of Christ and also good to be nominally associated with Paul and Apollos in that sense. Because they are right and speak the truth of God, but it is wrong if we use it as a prideful sinful division among these men when Paul, Peter, and Christ are united. It is also true that when a local church uses a denominational status in that way, they are acting sinfully, but most denominational differences deal with secondary doctrinal issues rather than mere prestige and pride.

Different denominations can have the unity and the love that Paul talks about even though they do not agree on all secondary doctrines. They can have this unity and love because they agree on the essentials. The argument that is usually made by those against denominations is that they cannot have true unity unless they agree on everything. But if that is true, it logically follows that the arguer cannot have unity with them either because they do not believe exactly the same thing. Now if they argue that they can have unity with someone who does not believe exactly like them, then all we have to ask is, then why can’t denominations?

Finally, what the arguer in these discussions usually neglects is the nature of truth, because many times the arguer will have some idea that unity is more important than truth, which is itself is a “truth” which they are using to separate themselves from others believers. Instead of arguing that all denominations are wrong, simply because they have nominal affiliations or distinctives that set them apart, the real discussion should be about which one lines up closest with the Word of God.

In conclusion, the idea of denominations is not inherently sinful. If it is always wrong to have associations or some kind of particular doctrinal distinctives, then everyone is wrong because even refusing to hold to a particular doctrinal distinctive is itself a particular doctrinal distinctive.

Doug

The Significance of Palm Sunday in Relation to Passover

When we celebrate Palm Sunday we are celebrating a great event. As we see Jesus ride into Jerusalem on a donkey and allow the people to praise Him as king, there are many things we can learn. But there is one aspect that is fascinating as it deals with Passover. We know that Passover was only four days away which made the day of the Triumphal Entry the tenth day of the month. We can see the significance of this when we read Exodus 12:3, 5-6, which says,...

Speak ye unto all the congregation of Israel, saying, In the tenth day of this month they shall take to them every man a lamb, according to the house of their fathers, a lamb for an house.. . ..Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male of the first year: ye shall take it out from the sheep, or from the goats: And ye shall keep it up until the fourteenth day of the same month: and the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it in the evening.

As Jesus was riding in and the people were crying “Hosanna in the highest,” unbeknownst to them they were selecting the paschal lamb for sacrifice; the one and only sacrifice that can take away sin and cause death to pass over us.

Praise God for His willing Lamb,

Doug

God is Angry with the Wicked Every Day

God judgeth the righteous, and God is angry with the wicked every day. Psa 7:11

They are children of wrath. They are not to be envied, for God is angry with them, is angry with the wicked every day. They are every day doing that which is provoking to him, and he resents it, and treasures it up against the day of wrath. As his mercies are new every morning towards his people, so his anger is new every morning against the wicked, upon the fresh occasions given for it by their renewed transgressions. God is angry with the wicked even in the merriest and most prosperous of their days, even in the days of their devotion; for, if they be suffered to prosper, it is in wrath; if they pray, their very prayers are an abomination. The wrath of God abides upon them (Joh_3:36) and continual additions are made to it.

-Matthew Henry-

The Power of Praise

5. I will speak of the glorious honor of thy majesty, and of thy wondrous works. 6. And men shall speak of the might of thy terrible acts: and I will declare thy greatness. Psalm 145:5-6

There is power in our praise, and the primary reason has to do with the fact that it is the Lord who has worked in our hearts to produce that praise. We being sinful men do not naturally praise God, but when His Holy Spirit does His regenerating work, our spiritually dead souls are resurrected, our blind eyes begin to see, and our spiritually mute mouths begin to speak of the greatness of our God. With this in mind it is not hard to see why there is power in our praise, because God Himself is at work.

The Holy Spirit, who is the Spirit of Truth, is constantly bearing witness of Christ, so it is only natural for a person who has been born of the Spirit to desire to exalt the name of Jesus also. When we begin to extol our Lord, God is working, and when God works, we should take notice of the effects. In Psalm 145 we see an interesting accumulation of praise that can take place when we begin to exalt the Lord. In verse 5 we hear David say, I will speak of God’s wondrous works, then, because of it, we see in verse 6 that others will speak of his awesome deeds resulting in David once again declaring the greatness of our God.

When we begin to praise the Lord, others, within whom the Spirit is working, will hear our praise and begin to join in. As we hear their praise, we become more abundant in our own praise because we see our Lord working in others as well. Then once again as we are praising our God with a more abundant heart, others will see us praising Him and they too will join in which will lift our praise to even greater heights.

Wherever you are and with whatever measure of faith you have at this moment, rejoice in the Lord, for He is great and worthy of our praise. Speak of His glorious honor and majesty, and tell of His wondrous works, for when you do, you do so by the power of the Spirit. Then once you have done so, praise Him again for He has opened your lips. Then continue to bless His name, for we have the gracious privilege of continuing for all eternity. Then look for others to join in and watch as the Lord strengthens your voice. And who knows what the Lord may do with one short moment of exalting God. It may go further than you will ever know in this life. After all, He is still using David’s praise in Psalm 145 to cause others to glorify His name.

I will exalt You my God and King!

Doug Eaton

Great is the Lord!

"Great is the Lord" Psalm 145:3

If "great" here be referred to God as a king, then a great king he is in respect of the breadth of his empire, for all creatures, from the highest angel to the poorest worm, are under him. "Great" for length; for "his kingdom is an everlasting kingdom." "Great" for depth; for he rules even in the hearts of kings, of all men, overrules their thoughts, affections, nothing is hid from him. And "great" again for height; being "a great King above all gods," ruling by his own absolute power and authority; whereas all other kings have their sword from him, and rule by a delegated and vicarious power.

-William Nicholson-

The Letter Kills, But the Spirit Gives Life

The letter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life. (2 Cor. 3:6)

The law of God is holy and just and good; it is inexorable, and we have fallen under its just condemnation. That is at the bottom what Paul means by the "the letter killeth.’ He does not mean that attention to pedantic details shrivels and deadens the soul. No doubt that is true, within certain spheres; it is a useful thought. But it is trivial indeed compared with what Paul means. Something far more majestic, far more terrible, is meant by the Pauline phrase. The letter that Paul means is the dreadful handwriting of ordinances that was against us, and the death with which it kills is the eternal death of those who are forever separated from God.

But that is not all of the text. The letter killeth, Paul says, but the Spirit maketh alive. There is no doubt about what he means by ‘the Spirit.’ He does not mean that spirit of the law as contrasted with the letter; he certainly does not mean the lax interpretation of God’s commands which is dictated by human lust or pride; he certainly does not mean the spirit of man. No real student of Paul has doubted, so far as I know, but that he means the Spirit of God. God’s law brings eternal death because of sin; but God’s Spirit, shed abroad in the heart, brings life. The thing that is written killeth, but the Holy Spirit in the heart gives life.

The contrast runs all through the New Testament. Hopelessness under the law is described in the seventh chapter of Romans. "Oh wretched man that I am! Who shall deliver me from the body of this death?" But this hopelessness is transcended by the gospel. "I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord… For the law of the Spirit of life in Jesus Christ hath made me free from the law of sin and death.’ The law’s sentence of condemnation was borne for us by Christ who suffered in our stead; The handwriting of ordinances which was against us—the dreadful ‘letter’ of which Paul speaks in our text—was nailed to the cross.

-J. Gresham Machen-