Sermon text: How to be a worshiper

Scripture reading: Isaiah 61

I’m here this morning to proclaim freedom. Freedom in the house of God. Freedom for the captives. Liberty for the prisoners. Liberty for you. Liberty for the lost. Liberty for all who are desperate, sick, confused. Let the house be built up, let life return to the ruins. This is the year of the Lord’s favor. There’s good news to be proclaimed. Freedom. Freedom to worship. Praise instead of despair. Everlasting joy. Let gladness fill the church. Let rejoicing be our portion.

This scripture is permeated with hope. It imparts vision and purpose. We also see the principles of worship. That’s what I want to speak about today. I believe worship is one of the key things to living your life in Christ. We are pretty casual about how we talk about worship. We have a “worship time” every Sunday, we have “worship nights,” and we “worship” when we give our offerings. We use this word “worship,” but we really don’t talk about what it is.

Morpheus from The Matrix: “Do you want to know, what, it, is?”

Worship

So what is worship? Why should we worship? How do we worship? What does worship look like?

If you go to Africa and wander into a church, you’re going to be worshiping for several hours, or longer, in a mud brick hut with a thatched roof. If you go into a pentecostal church in South America, they’ll be bouncing off the walls. If you go to a cathedral in England, you’ll find a huge pipe organ, and the congregation will sing a couple of hymns in somber reverence. If you happen to be in Sydney, Australia, you might go to Hillsongs. There will be an impressive light show, a dozen well-produced and carefully choreographed songs expertly performed, and an enthusiastic crowd of worshipers.

There are some churches that regard drums as satanic, and some that regard contemporary worship music as evil. There is a large portion of Christendom wants respectful, reverent worship. If it isn’t a hymn, it isn’t in. 

There is a church for every taste, it seems. And frankly, for the most part it is really a matter of taste. A lot of what we want to see in worship is probably a result of what we grew up with, or what church we were saved in, or what experiences we have had. Worship in the Church today is probably more a cultural expression than it is a Bible–based one.

And that’s not necessarily bad. We have all “shopped around” for churches that suit our tastes. Every person has needs and preferences. Which means there ought to be a variety of churches.

What about us? Within this very congregation there are probably a dozen viewpoints about a proper worship service. Maybe worship to you is quiet contemplation and a whispered “amen.” Others of you are more demonstrative. Some of you are very demonstrative.

Clearly we don’t restrict worship to singing. That much is obvious. So what are all these people doing? What about raising hands, or flags, or shouting, or dancing? Why is all this happening?

It might seem odd if you’re not used to it. Does it go outside your comfort level? Is this really worship? Maybe you don’t know what to do. Should you feel obligated to what everyone else is doing? What should you do if someone is spontaneously singing? What about if the music is going long, or there’s no words, or the wrong words, up on the screen?

What if you don’t like the song, or the mix is bad, or someone plays a wrong note? Why don’t you "feel" it like other people? Are you a bad Christian if you don’t weep or dance when we sing? Should you close your eyes?

I have to confess: I don’t always get it right. One time during worship, I peeked. Once I said amen when I should have said hallelujah and ruined it for everybody.

So maybe it’s a struggle for you. Maybe these things are distracting to you. Or even offensive. Your background is different. Your experiences don’t include shouts of acclamation. Or kneeling. It could be that the whole idea of worship is hard for you. It may be that you aren’t at that place. Or something is going on in your life. What obstacles are preventing you from worshiping?

FB discussion: The second amendment

Dian: True..as part of a "well-regulated militia." Funny how that doesn't seem to be included...nor is the fact that the weapons of multiple destruction were not part of "arms" at that time. Maybe we can moderate the rhetoric a bit Without violating any rights...and maybe we could emphasize the "well-regulated" part of the Second Amendment?

LikeShow more reactions

 · Reply · 12h

Me: "Well regulated" does not mean "passing laws." It means "organized and orderly." The militia consists of "...of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age...". The People can be called upon to defend the country, even if they're not in the military. The militia, then, is the citizenry, who come when called to serve, with their weapons in hand. They are already armed.

LikeShow more reactions

 · Reply · 4h

Nowhere in the New Testament will you find that salvation is about "accepting" Jesus. - Voddie Baucham

This was posted by a FB friend.

Transcript: Nowhere in the New Testament will you find that salvation is about "accepting" Jesus. Nowhere are you called to "accept Jesus" Nowhere in the New Testament will you find that salvation is about "asking Jesus into your heart'. Nowhere in the New Testament are you told to "ask Jesus into your heart". Nowhere, nowhere, nowhere. It's not there. What you are told again and again is to repent and believe.

***

It seems Mr. Baucham is against the use of certain words regarding how to get saved. And he is adamant. Emphatic, even.

This kind of moral certainty causes us to wonder what the motive is. What is Mr. Baucham reacting against? Perhaps he is against the easy-believism that seems to be permeating certain areas of Christendom. We don't know, but we can take his statements at face value and examine them.

Let's see what the Bible says about them.

Accept

So, is it really true that nowhere in the Bible are we told to accept Jesus? Let's review a few Scriptures:

Mk. 4:20 Others, like seed sown on good soil, hear the word, accept it, and produce a crop — thirty, sixty or even a hundred times what was sown.”

"Accept" is (paradechomai), to admit i. e. not to reject, to accept, receive...

Jn. 12:48 There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; that very word which I spoke will condemn him at the last day.

"Accept" is lambanó to believe the testimony... 

Jn. 13:20 ... and whoever accepts me accepts the one who sent me.

"Accept" again is lambanó in this case, to receive what is offered; not to refuse or reject... 

Ac. 2:41 Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day.

"Accept" is apodechomai, to believe... 

Ac. 8:14 When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them.

Ac. 22:17-18 “When I returned to Jerusalem and was praying at the temple, I fell into a trance 18 and saw the Lord speaking. `Quick!’ he said to me. `Leave Jerusalem immediately, because they will not accept your testimony about me.’

1Co. 2:14 The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.

1Ti. 1:15 Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners — of whom I am the worst.

Ja. 1:21 Therefore, get rid of all moral filth and the evil that is so prevalent, and humbly accept the word planted in you, which can save you.

The Anatomical And Physiological Details Of Death By Crucifixion - by Dr. C. Truman Davis

This is a horrifying and difficult read. But you need to read it.

----------------

Crucifixion is the most painful death ever invented by man and is where we get our term “excruciating.” It was reserved primarily for the most vicious of male criminals. Our Lord refused the anesthetic wine which was offered to Him by the Roman soldiers in keeping with His promise recorded in Matthew 26: 29, “And I say to you, I will not drink from henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I shall drink it with you new in the kingdom of My Father.” Our Lord was stripped naked and His clothing divided by the Roman guards. This was in fulfillment of Psalm 21:19, “They parted My garments amongst them; and upon My vesture they cast lots.” The Crucifixion of Jesus guaranteed a horrific, slow, painful death.

Having been nailed the Cross, Our Lord now had an impossible anatomical position to maintain. Jesus’ knees were flexed at about 45 degrees, and He was forced to bear His weight with the muscles of His thigh, which is not an anatomical position which is possible to maintain for more than a few minutes without severe cramp in the muscles of the thigh and calf. Our Lord’s weight was borne on His feet, with nails driven through them. As the strength of the muscles of Our Blessed Lord’s lower limbs tired, the weight of His body had to be transferred to His wrists, His arms, and His shoulders. Within a few minutes of being placed on the Cross, Our Lord’s shoulders were dislocated. Minutes later His elbows and wrists became dislocated. The result of these upper limb dislocations was that His arms were 9 inches longer than normal, as clearly shown on the Shroud of Turin. In addition, prophecy was thus fulfilled in Psalm 21:15, “I am poured out like water; and all my bones are scattered.”

After Our Lord’s wrists, elbows, and shoulders were dislocated, the weight of His body on his upper limbs caused traction forces on the Pectoralis Major muscles of His chest wall. These traction forces caused His rib cage to be pulled upwards and outwards, in a most unnatural state. His chest wall was permanently in a position of maximal respiratory inspiration. In order to exhale, Jesus had to push down on the nails in His feet to raise His body, and allow His rib cage to move downwards and inwards to expire air from His lungs. His lungs were in a resting position of constant maximum inspiration. Crucifixion is a medical catastrophe. The problem was that Our Blessed Lord could not easily push down on the nails in His feet because the muscles of His legs, bent at 45 degrees, were extremely fatigued, in severe cramp, and in an anatomically compromised position.

Why Don’t We See Miracles Like the Apostles Did? - Justin Holcomb

Found here. A generally good explanation, though he leaves out how miracles might apply to the contemporary church.
----------------

Many contemporary Christians feel disconnected from the vibrant, Spirit-filled ministries of the prophets and apostles described in the Bible. In the Old Testament, God seemingly took the people of Israel through miraculous event after miraculous event. In the New Testament, those who watched the ministry of Jesus were seized with amazement at the miracles he performed (Luke 5:25), and the apostles in the early church regularly performed signs and wonders among the people (Acts 5:12).

Yet today, such miraculous events seem rare and, when we do hear reports of miracles, many Christians are skeptical. At the very least, we feel there's something different about the way God worked in the Old and New Testament periods and the way he works today. This raises a valid question: Why don’t we experience today the miracles we read about in the New Testament?

To answer that question, we need to understand not only how God works through providence and common grace, but we must also understand the purpose of miracles in the Bible.

Purpose of Miracles in Scripture

Miracles in Scripture are acts of God that proclaim his sovereign power over creation as well as his commitment to the good of his people. Miracles are often significant because they serve a larger purpose in God’s redemptive plan, testifying to the authenticity of God’s messengers who bring his revelation to humanity. This is one of the primary functions of miracles in the scriptural narratives: “When miracles occur, they give evidence that God is truly at work and so serve to advance the gospel.”[1] Miracles authenticate God’s message and his messengers.

Why did the Tongues at Pentecost not need translation?

Having already considered many criticisms of the gift of tongues, we began thinking about the way they manifest in the NT. We realized that the issue of tongues, as well as interpretations, seems to be a sticking point with both cessationists and charismatics alike, albeit for different reasons.

Tongues as a sign

Our first observation is that all through the book of Acts, the manifestation of tongues required no interpretation, and all of them were languages known to the hearers. The first occurrence is Ac. 2:3-6:

They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. 4 All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them. 5 Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven. 6 When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard them speaking in his own language.

This was the event now known as Pentecost, the inaugural outpouring of the Holy Spirit. A large crowd heard what was happening and gathered to see what this remarkable commotion was about. We note here that many nations were gathered, and they all heard the glories of God in their own language, so there could have been hundreds of languages being spoken. And no interpretation of these tongues was required.

As we continue reading the account, we find the crowd wondering what this meant. Ac. 2:11-21:

 ...we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!” 12 Amazed and perplexed, they asked one another, “What does this mean?” 13 Some, however, made fun of them and said, “They have had too much wine.” 14 Then Peter stood up with the Eleven, raised his voice and addressed the crowd: “Fellow Jews and all of you who live in Jerusalem, let me explain this to you; listen carefully to what I say.15 These men are not drunk, as you suppose. It’s only nine in the morning!

Peter explained why this is happening:

16 No, this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel: 17 “`In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams. 18 Even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days, and they will prophesy. 19 I will show wonders in the heaven above and signs on the earth below, blood and fire and billows of smoke. 20 The sun will be turned to darkness and the moon to blood before the coming of the great and glorious day of the Lord. 21 And everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.’ [Joel 2:28-32]

This event was the fulfillment of a prophecy spoken hundreds of years ago. But it's interesting that on one hand Peter noted the pouring of of the Holy Spirit on all people, yet on the other hand did not actually understand the connection to the gentiles. It took a vision with a sheet descending from heaven for him to learn that the Holy Spirit was intended for more than the Jews. But even that wasn't sufficient for him, for Paul tells us in Galatians chapter 2 that he opposed Peter to his face. Even with an incredible event, and then a later vision, Peter still had to be confronted by Paul about his racism.

But regardless, we have God's purpose for these tongues. They were a sign that salvation is available to all men. A better covenant had arrived, where everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved. This kind of tongues was a specific sign to the apostles that God's purpose was farther reaching than they thought.

We find later that subsequent manifestations of tongues in Acts further demonstrated this concept. Ac. 10:44-47:

While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. 45 The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. 46 For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God. Then Peter said, 47 “Can anyone keep these people from being baptized with water? They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have.”

Interestingly, it's now the gentile believers who were speaking in tongues, not the disciples themselves! And again, no interpretation. The apostles are starting to realize that the move of God is for all, not just the Jews.

Continuationism is NOT a Secondary Issue - Excerpt from part four

Found here. Part one here. Part 2. Part 3.

Our comments in bold.
------------

This is an excerpt from the last of a four part series on why "continuationism" is not a secondary issue. In his four part series, the author does not quote a single Scripture. Not one. He does not present an affirmative biblical case for his beliefs at all. 

His entire presentation of thousands of words consists solely of chronicling the present-day practices of charismatics. As we have noted numerous times previously, this technique has nothing to do with what the Bible says. 

My four criteria for evaluating the claims of cessationists are that their arguments must be

1. Biblically-based
2. Not appeal to contemporary expressions of charismata
3. Not appeal to silence
4. Not appeal to events or practices of history

The excerpt below is troubling. He apparently believes it isn't necessary to quote Scripture. He doesn't even think he needs to make his case at all.
------------

Earth’s overpopulation exasperating (sic) climate change - by Norman A. Bishop

Found here. Our comments in bold.

---------------------

Every social and environmental issue is exacerbated by overpopulation. (Correction: Population. Humans, including Mr. Bishop, pollute by their very existence.)

Fifty years ago, there were 3.4 billion people living. Now that number is 7.6 billion. (That is a growth rate of  about 2% per year, not particularly alarming. And from around the mid 1960s the population growth rate has been steadily dropping to 1.17% in 2017.)

Human population has grown more in the last several decades than in the past three million years. (Well, duh. If you have 10 people and increase them by 10%, then next year you have 11 people. But if you have 100 people and increase them by 10%, the next year you have 110 people. The growth by one additional person is obviously less than the growth by 10 additional people, even though the rate is the same.)

When Did the Gift of Tongues Cease? - by Pastor Dennis Kiszonas

Found here. My comments in bold.

-------------------
In our continuing quest to find a biblical defense of the cessation of the "charismatic" gifts, we turn to this missive by Pastor Kiszonas.

-----------------

No one was more “charismatic” than the Apostle Paul. He wrote to the Corinthian church that “they came behind no other church” when it came to the gifts of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 1:7)—no church had more of the gifts of the Holy Spirit than the Corinthian church, yet Paul says that he spoke in tongues more than all of them (1 Cor. 14:18)!

No one was more charismatic than Paul, yet the Lord revealed to him that those sign gifts (Emphasis added. The author will use the phrase "sign gift" 25 times. It is a pejorative characterization, designed to prejudice the reader with the author's preconceptions. 

The phrase is not found in the Bible.)

were going to cease:

“whether there are prophecies, they will fail; whether there are tongues, they will cease; whether there is knowledge, it will vanish away” (1 Cor. 13:8). 1

Here Paul writes of the gift of tongues, the gift of prophecy and the gift of knowledge (see 1 Cor. 13:1-2) and states that the Lord Jesus had revealed to him (1 Cor. 11:23; 15:3; Gal. 1:11,12) that a time was coming when these sign gifts were going to cease to operate. (Ok, at this point he supplies three Scriptural references, but does not quote them. It is left to us to actually do so:

1 Cor. 11:23 For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread...

1Co. 15:3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures...

Gal. 1:11,12 want you to know, brothers, that the gospel I preached is not something that man made up 12 I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather,
I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.

that a time was coming when these sign gifts were going to cease to operate. (A conclusion irrelevant to the three Scriptures. One might assume that he was supplying these to bolster his point that certain gifts were going to cease. If so, the assumption would be incorrect.

Nevertheless, we agree that these will cease at some point. The debate, of course, is when.)

The question has always been: when? When would these gifts cease?

This study focuses on that question—when did the sign gifts cease? (Argh. "Sign gifts." Will the author answer this central question? We will see.)

Arranging Paul’s letters in the order that he wrote them

(Now comes a long and tangentially related explanation of the chronological arrangement of Paul's letters, for the purpose of demonstrating that the lack of supernatural occurrences mentioned in the later letters means that the supernatural was fading. 

The lack of mention is not an affirmative argument. It is nothing more than an Argument From Silence.

The Power of De-Conversion Stories: How Jen Hatmaker is Trying to Change Minds About the Bible - Michael J. Kruger

Found here. A very good article.

--------------------

When it comes to reaching the “lost,” one of the most tried-and-true methods is the personal conversion story. Whether done privately or publicly, it’s compelling to hear a person’s testimony about how they came to believe in the truth of the Gospel, the truth of the Bible, and embraced the Christian faith. Such testimonies can personalize and soften the message so it is more easily understood and received.

But when it comes to reaching the “found,” there’s an equally effective method—and this is a method to which the evangelical church has paid very little attention. It’s what we might call the de-conversion story.

De-conversion stories are designed not to reach non-Christians but to reach Christians. And their purpose is to convince them that their crusty, backwards, outdated, naïve beliefs are no longer worthy of their assent. Whether done privately or publicly, this is when a person simply gives their testimony of how they once thought like you did and have now seen the light.

Of course, there have always been de-conversion stories available throughout the history of the church—if one would only take the time to dig them up and listen to them. Christianity has never had a shortage of people who were once in the fold and then left, hoping to take with them as many people as possible.

But in recent years these de-conversion stories seem to have taken on a higher profile. Part of this is due, no doubt, to the technology that makes these de-conversion stories more available whether through podcasts, blogs, or other forms of media.

But, it’s also due to the fact that many of those who de-convert have realized a newfound calling to share their testimony with as many people as possible. Rather than just quietly leaving the faith and moving onto other things—something that would have been more common in prior generations—there seems to be a new guard that has made it their life’s ambition to evangelize the found.

Polluting the Prophetic Word: An Analysis of Sam Storms's book, Practicing the Power - TOM NETTLES

Found here. My comments in bold.
---------------------

We have to read half way through the author's presentation before we run across any scriptural documentation for the author's assertions. Then when he finally provides one, it isn't for the purpose of documenting his case, but rather to divert our attention. Subsequent to this, the author contents himself with providing lists of references with only a rare actual quote.

Ultimately, what we find here is the author asserting his position, then babbling on about why Sam Storms is wrong, and finally appealing to his own doctrinal position as proof. That is, "Sam Storms is wrong. Blah, blah,blah. Because the prophetic ceased with the death of the last apostle."

What we need from the author is to not offer his conclusion as evidence. We require him to make the biblical case for the cessation of the prophetic gift. He does not do this.
-------------------