Choosing Who We Vote For

By Bruce Mills

We are now in the height of the political election season. The Democratic Party convention was held this week, and next week is the Republican Party convention. Party platforms have been established and legions of the party faithful are now eagerly attempting to convince the public of the validity of their candidate's positions, in an effort to receive the votes needed to elect the candidate.

The question for Christians is, are there any particular issues that are so important to the Christian faith that a believer should not vote for a politician who holds to a position which does not square with Christian doctrine? Or should political issues be considered as matters which should be kept separate from one's faith?

The answer to these questions centers on the value one places on God's Word and its instructions to us, as well as the hermeneutical approach one takes when interpreting the Scriptures. If God's Word is seen to be the inerrant, infallible, written revelation of God to man, then what it has to say is infinitely important for establishing what one believes about these matters and how that impacts one's life. Its teachings become the driving force behind every belief, every action, and every decision one makes. And if one adopts a literal-historical-grammatical approach to the interpretation of Scripture, he or she will not attempt to allegorize or reinterpret the plain statements of Scripture to mean something which better fits with what that individual might wish the Scripture would say. Instead, the Christian will subjugate his will and desires to that which God's Word teaches.

Therefore, when one uses this two pronged approach and examines moral issues such as abortion and the institution of marriage, we find that the Bible clearly teaches that God is the One who created human life and forms each person in the womb, and that marriage is a union of one man and one woman. No other conclusion can be made if one is consistent in using this approach to the Bible and its interpretation. Therefore, it is clearly a violation of the tenets of the Christian faith for man to decide that God-created human life can be terminated by man's choice, and the God-ordained pattern for marriage can be reconstructed into a homosexual union.

So how should this impact one's political viewpoints and how one votes? The simple answer is that we should view every issue of life through the lens of Scripture, because the Bible provides the only objective, infallible standard for how we interpret these matters. What God has to say about these things is far more important than what any person believes. That means that His standards on every issue of life, particularly moral issues such as abortion and marriage, must become our standards and convictions. And because our convictions drive all that we do, we cannot do anything but support and vote for those who hold to views consistent with God's Word and refuse to support and vote for those who hold contrary positions.

Does this mean that a candidate's positions must square with ours on every issue before we can vote for him or her? No. Only those positions which center on moral issues about which the Bible provides instruction are affected by these principles. Thus, a candidate's position on abortion and gay marriage become "litmus tests" for whether a Christian votes for or against that candidate, whereas, a candidate's approach on national defense or how to stimulate the economy do not necessarily rise to such a level of importance.

This is a very different approach than the world takes, which sees abortion and gay marriage as only impacting a few people; namely, those involved in the situation, whereas issues such as national defense and the economy affect everyone. Thus, most people view those issues as the important issues which should decide how one votes. But believers are called to value God's Word above all else. Therefore, they should consider the topics which it addresses as the most important issues to consider when deciding which candidates to support.

"Free Will" and Evangelism

by Bruce Mills

Most of my Christian friends—other than many of those who attend my church and a few others—are Arminians in their doctrine of salvation. That is to say, they believe that every person has the ability in and of himself to choose to receive Christ as Savior. For the vast majority of them, this viewpoint is based entirely on their own experience in coming to faith in Christ. It is not based on any in-depth study of the doctrine of salvation and the differing viewpoints of James Arminius and John Calvin. For most of them, it is entirely centered on their own human understanding and perspective of salvation, without any effort to understand the critical issues which are involved.

The problem with that kind of thinking is that it simply is not found in Scripture. The Bible constantly portrays man as completely dead in sin, enslaved to sin, and totally unable to choose to do anything other than sin. Man is not merely spiritually sick—he is spiritually dead! He is a religious and moral cadaver. Therefore, man rejects the gospel because it is man’s nature to do so.

So then, no one has “free will” as defined by the Arminians, because a person’s will is the extension and invariable expression of his nature. No creature ever acts in violation of its nature and, therefore, every person willingly chooses to reject the gospel because that is the desire of his heart. No one is free to act or choose contrary to his nature any more than an orange tree is free to produce almonds. Thus, no one seeks to come to Jesus because it is not his nature to come. In fact, it is man’s nature, and therefore his will, to flee from Christ.

So why is it that, when confronted with the gospel, a person may choose to believe the message regarding his lost, sinful condition and God’s forgiveness through Christ’s substitutionary atonement, and then come in repentance and faith to believe? It is only because God, in His sovereign grace, grants that person the faith to believe.

I recently read a wonderful quote from George Whitefield, written back in the 18th century, which illustrates what I have been saying. Whitefield wrote:

“Come, ye dead, Christless, unconverted sinners, come and see the place where they laid the body of the deceased Lazarus; behold him laid out, bound hand and foot with grave-cloaths, locked up and stinking in a dark cave, with a great stone placed on top of it. View him again and again; go nearer to him; be not afraid; smell him. Ah! How he stinketh. Stop there now, pause a while; and whilst thou art gazing upon the corpse of Lazarus, give me leave to tell thee with great plainness, but greater love, that this dead, bound, entombed, stinking carcase, is but a faith representation of thy poor soul in its natural state; for, whether thou believest or not, thy spirit which thou bearest about with thee, sepulchered in flesh and blood, is as literally dead to God, and as truly dead in trespasses and sins, as the body of Lazarus was in the cave. Was he bound hand and foot with grave-cloaths? So art thou bound hand and foot with thy corruptions; and as a stone was laid on the sepulcher, so there is a stone of unbelief upon thy stupid heart. Perhaps thou hast lain in this state, not only four days, but many years, stinking in God’s nostrils. And, what is still more effecting, thou art as unable to raise thyself out of this loathsome, dead state, to a life of righteousness and true holiness, as ever Lazarus was to raise himself from the cave in which he lay so long. Thou mayest try the power of thy own boasted free-will, and the force and energy of moral persuasion and rational arguments (which, without all doubt, have their proper place in religion); but all thy efforts, exerted with never so much vigour, will prove quite fruitless and abortive, till that same Jesus, who said ‘Take away the stone’; and cried, ‘Lazarus, come forth’ also quicken you.”

Why do I think this issue is important? Because we must always remember that while it is our responsibility to proclaim salvation, we must never forget that it is God who saves. God uses our evangelistic efforts as the instrument by which He accomplishes His sovereign purposes in bringing some to salvation, but it is His prerogative to bring about results when the gospel is given. If we ever begin to think that our gospel presentation can be so fine-tuned as to become an incontrovertible convincing argument which will cause individuals to see their sin and then, using their own “free will,” choose to believe and generate within themselves the faith and repentance that are necessary for salvation, the result will be that our methods will quickly degenerate into similarity with those of snake oil salesmen.

J. I. Packer puts it this way. He says that if we regard faith and repentance merely as the product of human effort, “we should regard evangelism as an activity involving a battle of the wills between ourselves and those to whom we go, a battle in which victory depends on our firing off a heavy enough barrage of calculated effects. Thus our philosophy of evangelism would become terrifying similar to the philosophy of brainwashing.”

It is only when we recognize God’s sovereignty in every aspect of salvation, from beginning to end, that we can avoid these errors as we share our faith. No decision for Christ is ever the result of a slick, well-articulated gospel presentation, and no rejection of Christ is ever the result of a stumbling, inept presentation of the gospel. Every person who comes to faith in Christ does so because God has chosen that person in Christ before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:4) and then draws that person in time, giving him the gracious gift of faith to believe. Our duty as Christians is to do our best to share the gospel with everyone we can, using the most effective means available to us, but entrusting the results to our sovereign Lord.

Faith Alone!

by Robert Fraire

Recently I was asked about the "contradiction" in the Bible concerning the sufficiency of faith in the realm of salvation. The question went like this. How can you say that salvation is by faith alone when James 2:20 clearly says otherwise? Or put another way: In James 2:20 and 2:24 we read:

20 But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless?

24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

Yet Romans 3:28-30 reads

For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law ... since indeed God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith is one.

Now on the surface these two passages might seem to be in contradiction. So what are we to do? Do we shrug our shoulders and say it is some sort of mystery? NO, we must not do so. It would be a fatal flaw in the Christian faith if it could be successfully argued that the Bible teaches (in the same manner and sense) both salvation by faith apart from works, and salvation by faith requiring works.

If so basic a tenant of Christianity such as salvation is unclear or self contradictory, then what is the Gospel message? Christianity would be irrational. Unfortunately too many Christians are willing to live with this proposition. We too often don't do the work necessary to find out what the Bible really teaches and instead settle for a "blind faith" that says, "I love Jesus and He loves me, so I'll leave the Bible for those theologians."

That is not our calling. God has given us His word in order for us to read it and put its words into practice. Are you willing to state that God either chose to be unclear when he inspired scripture or was unable to be clear? God forbid.

So let us look at what does the Bible teach concerning faith and works. In this post I will lay out a summary of the Biblical view of Saving Faith and Works. Then is latter posts I will explore many other issues that play into this truth.

The bottom line is that Salvation is an act of God. He chose us (Eph 1), He called us (John 6:44), He regenerated us (John 3). It is this regenerated person with a new nature that is able to truly comprehend the truth of his condition and his need for Jesus Christ. This man understands and believes God (faith). At this point it becomes a reality in time that the man's sin were imputed onto the account of Christ and God imputes Christ's righteousness onto the account of the man (2 Cor 5:21). At this point God declares the man justified, he is now irrevocably "saved" and all without any works (or meritorious actions) on his part. Even the faith he exhibited was due to God's work of regeneration. In this way his faith was a gift of God.

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

So then what does the passage in James mean? Did James get it wrong. Should the book of James be removed from the Bible as some have suggested in the past? No and No.

Looking at the context of James 2 with give us the picture.

James 2:21-23
Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?
You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was perfected; and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "AND ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS RECKONED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS," and he was called the friend of God.

Here James is explaining his terms. He demonstrates that Abraham didn't just profess that he had faith. He, in fact, acted in obedience to God which demonstrated the faith that he already possessed. Abraham would not have been willing to offer Issac on the alter, if his "faith" had been a lie. Those that truly believe in God with act in accordance with that belief. If you claim that you believe in God and then do directly what he commands that you not do then it demonstrates a lock of faith.

In other words in James 2:24 when he makes his conclusion that man is justified by works and not by faith alone. He means that we are justified by True faith. And that faith will in fact lead to us living and doing what God commands. We are not saved be something called "faith" that has no Godly actions associated with it.

This is exactly in harmony with the rest of scripture. Since God has made us new creatures in Him, we act like new creatures that love God and strive to please him.

I pray that you will ponder these truths and not settle for an irrational faith.

Marriage and Divorce

By Bruce Mills

I realize that addressing the subject of marriage and divorce in the limited space of a blog posting is fraught with danger. Volumes have been written on this subject, with countless arguments back and forth regarding whether or not marriage is still a necessary institution, the legitimacy of divorce, and so forth. But still, I think that we as evangelicals need to weigh in on what the Bible has to say about these subjects.

Marriage is being viciously attacked in our society. It is being redefined in ways that no one could ever have imagined 25 years ago. But God’s intention for marriage hasn’t changed since the Garden of Eden.

God created Adam and Eve—not Adam and Edward. He created a couple composed of one man and one woman. In fact, he gives us the Magna Carta of marriage in Gen. 2:24—"For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh."

The Bible does not approve of any other form of marriage—neither polygamy nor homosexual marriage. In fact, God clearly condemned such in Romans 1.

Nor does he approve of couples living together without being married. Over and over in Scripture, God forbids fornication and adultery, but He also gave us an entire book (Song of Solomon) centered on the wonderful blessings of love and sex within marriage.

So Scripture clearly teaches that marriage is sacred beyond what most people imagine, because it is a unique creation of God that serves as a dramatic portrayal of God’s relation to His people, and a display of His glory.

The Bible says that marriage is to be permanent—just as God is continually faithful to us and does not leave us for someone else, He expects us to be faithful to our spouse. In Malachi 2:16, God tells us, “I hate divorce.” And Jesus was explicit about marriage being of divine origin and permanent in nature because in Matt. 19:6, He said, “What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.” He expects that we will honor our commitment and the covenant we make at the time we marry.

At the church in which I serve as an elder, we take marriage and what the Bible has to say about it very seriously. In fact, our church constitution includes this statement:

We believe and teach that the family was the first institution God provided for man (Genesis 2:18-24); that marriage is both a sacred and honorable relationship (Hebrews 13:4; 1 Corinthians 7:2) that is used as a symbol of the union of Christ and His church (Ephesians 5:21-23), and that marriage was designed by God to be a permanent relationship of one man and one woman (Genesis 2:18-24), and that any other form of sexual relationship is a sinful perversion of God’s ordained plan for mankind (Genesis 19:5, 13; 26:8-9; Leviticus 18:1-30; Romans 1:26-29; 1 Corinthians 5:1, 6:9; 1 Thessalonians 4:1-8; Hebrews 13:4).

So we want everyone to know, right up front, what our position is on marriage. In addition, every couple who is going to be married in our church is required to go through several weeks (usually 8-10 weeks) of pre-marital counseling.

And we do our best to help preserve marriage in our church. The counselors in our biblical counseling ministry spend many hours providing marriage counseling to couples who are struggling with difficulties in their marriages. I’ve been told that about 70% of all their counseling deals with problems in marriages.

As to the issue of divorce, let me briefly state my position. I believe that it is clear from the Bible that God does, in very limited circumstances, allow for divorce and remarriage. First, Jesus allowed for such in cases in which one of the marriage partners have been unfaithful and committed adultery with someone else (Matt. 5:32). Second, Paul taught that when an unbelieving spouse leaves a believer because he/she doesn’t want to be around the believer any longer, the believer is no longer obligated to remain married to that person and is free to remarry (1 Cor. 7:15).

But let me also say that even though divorce is a legitimate option in those limited circumstances, it is not always the best option. God gave us the book of Hosea in the Old Testament in which He specifically directed the prophet to marry a prostitute who bore children to him, then left him and went back to the practice of prostitution. And God told him to remain married to her and faithful to her and win her back. And the purpose was to demonstrate God’s faithfulness to Israel despite her unfaithfulness to Him. We are called to follow our Lord’s example, and to do so includes following His example of faithfulness even when others have been unfaithful to us. So God does not command divorce, even in circumstances of unfaithfulness, but He does permit it.

So, because divorce under any circumstances other than those that God permits is a sin, it affects membership in the church. If a believer divorces his/her spouse without legitimate biblical grounds, the church he/she attends should exercise church discipline in that situation. Unfortunately, my own church has had to publicly discipline individuals who were divorcing their spouse without biblical grounds for doing such.

If an individual has been divorced since becoming a believer, wise church leaders will require that person to meet with one of the pastors to discuss the reasons for that divorce and his or her spiritual walk in regard to that divorce before allowing them to join the church. If an individual was divorced prior to salvation, such should not be held against that person, but if he/she has remarried, they should be expected to remain faithful to their spouse as commanded by Scripture.

Divorce also affects the potential of a man serving in the leadership of the church. However, contrary to what many teach, I do not believe that Paul’s instruction regarding elders and deacons is an absolute prohibition that all men who have ever been divorced are prevented from serving in those capacities.

In 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1, where our English Bibles say “the husband of one wife,” the Greek text literally reads “a one-woman man.” It does not specifically say anything about divorce; rather it speaks to the faithfulness of those men to their wives. Paul is teaching that elders and deacons must be men who are faithful to their wife. Just as all the other attributes of an elder and deacon that are listed in those passages are character qualities rather than specific situations, so too, faithfulness to his wife is to be the character of the man.

Now, I should point out that those character qualities are also expected of a man who is a believer. I believe it is incorrect to expect an unbeliever to meet the standards for godly character that God establishes for believers in the church. They are only applied to the man after he is a believer. You can’t go backward and say, “Well, he was divorced ten years before he became a Christian, and we are going to hold that against him even though he has been a believer for several years now.”

I don’t think you can do that anymore than you can say, “Well, he wasn’t very hospitable or he wasn’t very gentle ten years before he became a Christian, so we’re going to hold that against him now when we consider him for elder or deacon.”

The church at which I serve has occasionally, in the past, had some men in leadership who were divorced prior to becoming a Christian, but at the time they entered into a leadership position, they had been believers for many years and demonstrated their faithfulness to their current wife throughout that time, as well as meeting the other qualifications listed in Scripture.

If a church is going to consider such an man for leadership, both his personal and spiritual lives should be examined very carefully, and if he has been divorced, the leaders should particularly examine the details of that situation. That man’s life as a Christian must be above reproach, so the leaders must make sure there is nothing at all involved with the circumstances of his divorce that will bring reproach on the name of Christ or His church.

There is much more that I could write to expand upon almost every point in this post, but most people would become tired of reading and get lost in all the details. For now, this will have to suffice as an overall summary.