Conclusion from Peru and Mexico

ESV Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.

In recent days I have spent time in Lima and Sullana Peru and Mexico City and I have discovered that people by nature are the same. Man has a heart that is inclined to selfishness and idolatry. Sin abounds in the remotest parts of the land because the heart is desperately wicked. Thousands bow before statues of Mary and pray to her hoping for answers. I have seen these people stare hopelessly at Mary icons, Jesus icons, and a host of dead saints who will do nothing for them. I have talked with people who pray to the pope and say that they love him. I talked with one lady who said that she knew that Jesus was the Savior, but she loved the pope. Thousands bow before Santa Muerte (holy death angel) in hopes that she will do whatever they ask her. I have seen people bring money, burning cigarettes, beer, whiskey, chocolate, plants, and flowers to Santa Muerte in hopes of her answers. I have seen these people bowing on their knees on the concrete in the middle of public places to worship their idol. Millions of people come into the Basilica in Mexico City and pay their money, confess their sins, and stare hopelessly at relics in hope that their sins will be pardoned. In America countless thousands are chained to baseball games, football games, material possessions, and whatever else their heart of idols can produce to worship.

My heart has broken in these last weeks because the God of heaven is not honored as he ought to be honored. People worship the things that are created rather than worshiping the Creator. God has been gracious to all mankind and yet mankind has hardened their hearts against a loving God. God brings the rain on the just and unjust. God brings the beautiful sunrises and sunsets upon the just and unjust. God gives good gifts unto all and above all things he has given his Son that those who would believe in him would be saved. However, man has taken the good things of God and perverted them unto idols and turned their attention away from God. I get a feel for Jesus as he overlooked Jerusalem or Paul as he beseeched for God to save Israel. When you accept the reality of the truth of the glory of God is breaks your heart that people would turn away from the great and awesome God of heaven to serve lesser things. Moses was outraged by the golden calf, the prophets passionately preached against idolatry, Jesus was angered that the temple was changed in an idolatrous business, and Paul preached to the idolaters of Mars Hill by telling them of the unknown God.

I arrived back at home wondering how I should respond to all the idolatry that I have beheld in these last three weeks. I wondered how our church here in the states should respond to all of the idolatry in the world. What are the options? First, I suppose we could sit around and hope that people chose to get their life together and stop being idolaters. However, I do not know how that could ever happen apart from them hearing the truth. Second, I suppose we could spend a lifetime studying cultural issues and customs in hope that we could somehow learn to relate to the people of other countries. However, the bible is quite clear that all men are the same. Men are dead in sin, shaped in iniquity, and by nature are the enemies of God. Thirdly, we could pay other people or other agencies to go and do a work for us while we remain comfortably in the states. However, there is no way to insure that there will be doctrinal accuracy or integrity. If we only pay other people to take the gospel we will miss out on all of the benefits of being obedient to the mission of God. Lastly, we could seek where God would have us to do a lasting work and then invest our lives there for the glory of God. The gospel has the power to raise the dead in any culture and we must be willing to take the gospel wherever God would have us take it. It is for sure that our church cannot go to every country and reach every people group, so we must determine where God would have us work and seek to be obedient wherever that is.

It seems that some doors are opening in the Spanish speaking countries below us and perhaps God is beginning to reveal where we are to work. There are some options for work to be partnered with in Peru and there could be a couple of options in Mexico. The need is greater than I can express upon this paper for a biblical gospel to be proclaimed in Peru and Mexico. Oh, that God would glorify his great name in Peru and Mexico by using a small little church in a town that does not exist to proclaim his great gospel amongst a people who desperately need the truth.

I give thanks to the LORD for allowing me the privilege of going to these countries and broadening my horizons. The things that I have seen will be forever engraved upon my heart. I will long remember the pastors that I spent time with in Peru and I will never forget Adolfo who translated for me in Mexico. I will relish the time that I spent with Paul Washer and the others. When I think of church I will forever remember being on top of that mountain in Sullana at that church which had no electricity and no roof. I am convinced that heaven was looking down on that little church on top of that mountain and very few people on earth even know that it exist. Oh, God I pray that the things of this world will continue to grow dim and that God’s people will be caught up in his glorious presence.

Because of the truth: Pastor: J. Randall Easter II Timothy 2:19 "Our God is in heaven and does whatever He pleases."(Ps. 115:3) "He predestined us according to the good pleasure of His will."(Eph. 1:5) Those who have been saved have been saved for His glory and they are being made holy for this is the will of God. Are you being made holy? Spurgeon says, "If your religion does not make you holy it will damn you to hell."

[From: "The Jesuits' Slaves"] ...Brother Mobberly, who served as an overseer on one of the estates, kept an extensive diary giving a bird’s eye view of the tension the Jesuits felt surrounding the issue of slavery. His diary explores the tension between Catholics, an already persecuted group, and the Presbyterians, Baptists, Quakers and Methodists who were outspokenly opposed to slavery.

Wow! I went to law school at a Jesuit university (coincidently about 5 miles from where the Dred Scott decision was handed down) and had no idea about any of this. I guess they had no reason to advertise it. :)

I suppose this was just ANOTHER set of institutional "bad apples" that we are supposed to ignore. For all the supernatural powers claimed by Apostolic clergy, high and above the clergy of other Christian faiths, I would think their overall track record would be much better than it is.

I can't do the issue justice, (ever, really, I ain't that smart) I can't even mount a plausible pretense of doing it justice for a couple of days. I'm booked.

First off, any appeal to "common sense" always gets my attention and leads me to question that thing which the writer says we all know.And, as we "eternalists" (Have I invented a new school?) say, God doesn't "FOREknow", he KNOWS, for all times are "now" to Him (we think.)

I would love your guy to read Whitehead (whom I deplore) because whitehead disagrees with me about eternity and disagrees with your guy that God knows what's going to happen next (though I think Whitehead would give Him the ability to make better guesses than the rest of us.)(Whitehead was WAY too hard for me, and the little I thought I understood, I didn't like.)

The Incarnation thing is about (1.a) what it was that became incarnate, and (1.b) from where, so to speak, he became incarnate, and about (2) how great was the self-emptying that Incarnation, AND (3) that the Incarnation -- the "work of Christ", His whole earthly life from conception to Ascension -- is, inter alia, revelatory. You wanna know Who God is? Look at IHS. You wanna know what omnipotence and bliss are? Look at an infant or a man being tortured to death. Like that.

SO I'm circling around the issue. And what I discern through the darkening vitreous humor of my aging eyes is that somehow in the Love which is the Trinity there is something which to the eyes of human minds looks like yielding. If it were not so, He would not have come among us as a baby and died among us as a victim, immobilized by nails, ropes, and cross.

That's my sketch. I may never be any more articulate about it than that, but that's where I'm trying to head, okay?

I suppose this was just ANOTHER set of institutional "bad apples" that we are supposed to ignore.

Aw shucks. No, do NOT ignore. We should never forget the viciousness of the best of us -- which, when true religion and power combined gave us the crucifixion.

But don't let's leave out the other ones, the ones like Bartolome de las Casas (O.P., koff koff) and those who used whatever they had to protect indigenous peoples and to work against slavery. Wheat AND tares together until the harvest.

What will the Lord of the harvest say when, having already said that wheat and tares should grow together, he hears his workers mocking his field for all the tares in it? Will he not say, "Well, I see the enemy got YOUR attention, and you pay more mind to his interference than to my word."

It's easy to throw darts at an over 2000 year old Church and find so called members who do NOT follow the teachings ,FK.

Does this make you feel superior,Dear Brother?

Should I bring up the countless atrocities done in the name of one's personal interpretation of scripture that came out solo scripture, the foundation of protestantism?

What you should really say to yourself is ..."I am amazed that through all of the persecution and all of the sin committed by some of the sinful members who don't follow Catholic teaching- that the Catholic Church still exists"

The Gates of hell will never prevail against the Catholic Church,just as Christ promised.

***That’s curious. Where does John say that?***

Beside being strewn throughout the book by implication through Jewish notions of God and Christ’s claiming to have those qualities, the most explicit claim by Christ that he was God was when he we told the Jews he was the “I am” of the shema (John 8:58). Why do you suppose they wanted to stone him after he made the claim?

Your entire program against Scripture is the old enlightenment screed that claims one can be neutral in assessing the text by using source, form, and redaction criticism and thus come to the “true” meaning in the text. The Enlightenment edifice came crashing down more than forty years ago and found to be nothing more than a circular argument of academic elites.

***Do you believe that bats are birds? The bible says they are. It must be true. It’s in the bible.***

Is that your best argument against the authority of Scripture? Were the authors of Scripture scientists? The Church has always held that the inspiration of Scripture included both divine and human agency. When God condescended to reveal himself to the Patriarchs, Prophets, and Apostles he did so in a way that those who received the revelation could comprehend according to the categories available to them as they knew the world. Sometimes those revelations were not completely clear to the author themselves but to be revealed over time. Hebrews 11 shows how the many men and women of the Old Testament believed in a promise that may have not been completely understood in all its details yet they knew a better “country” awaited them through the Messiah. Thus revelation was progessive through time and what began as a kernel of knowledge grew to the full revelation in Christ. Because Christ is the full revelation of God there is no need for further revelation although our understanding of that revelation can continue to grow as we look at Scripture with the help of the Holy Spirit and grow in knowledge of what has been revealed.

In conclusion, while the authors may not have been scientists in the way we think of objects and things today that does not make the Scriptures fallible or errant. Different authors revealing God according to their histories gives us a fuller meaning of God that otherwise would limit our understanding. What appears to be contradiction is actually different authors understanding that revelation according to their histories and the emphasis’ that they place on that revelation. Since God is not an object of this world it makes no sense to use empirical methods to try and interpret his revelation.

I am not sure I agree with you that he claimed to be equal to God. The passage you cite (Jn 8:58)where he says (I am, egw eimi) is not the same as the OT passage (Ex 3:14)where God says I am [who/that], I am (hayah hahyah or in Greek Septuagint, Egw eimi w on).

I suggest, the Jews were ready to stone him because they perceived what he was telling a lie, since, if he were God, he could not be seen, and since, no human can live that long.

He didn't say he was equal with God, but simply that he predated Abraham (as many other humans have, except they all died).

In Judaism, it is unthinkable that angels can rebel against God and that man can become God (they don't entertain the idea of God becoming man either). So, one must read John 8:58 in the light of the Jewish mindset and not read into the words that just sound similar.

The Enlightenment edifice came crashing down more than forty years ago and found to be nothing more than a circular argument of academic elites

Oh?

Is that your best argument against the authority of Scripture?

Thus, the Muslims will tell you that their scripture s the true Bible, just as the Jews will claim theirs, and Christians theirs (and there is more than one set of canons among Christians as we all know).

So, don't spout some God-given authority of the scriptures unless you can produce a seal of authenticity, a doubtless warranty that it is authored and even dictated [sic] by God, instead of being arrogated by the self-appointed "mouthpieces of God."

When God condescended to reveal himself to the Patriarchs, Prophets, and Apostles he did so in a way that those who received the revelation could comprehend according to the categories available to them as they knew the world

I very much agree with the latter part of that statement, but not with the first. God condescended Himself to become Man. Being a column of fire or a burning bush is hardly condescension. There is nothing humble about the OT God.

Sometimes those revelations were not completely clear to the author themselves but to be revealed over time

I agree that Patriarchs, Prophets and Apostles were not privy to a complete revelation. I doubt that they ever were. In everything they write, there is a string "bats are birds" element of human limitation.

Hebrews 11 shows how the many men and women of the Old Testament believed in a promise that may have not been completely understood in all its details yet they knew a better “country” awaited them through the Messiah

Part of that is a myth that God promised, and led Jews to the promised land. All historical data suggest that the Hebrews never left Palestine and lived right next to the Canaanites, and were subjected to Rhamses II's son a few decades after the alleged Exodus, without suffering any consequences for humiliating his father. In biblical days, that would have constituted a sure genocide. Never happened.

But people always had hopes, for an opportunity or for a "miracle." Sometimes these hopes are unrealistic but chances are that over a few thousand years they may come close to being fulfilled by random chance alone.

Thus revelation was progessive through time and what began as a kernel of knowledge grew to the full revelation in Christ.

Whether it was progressive or not is a question. Judaism underwent a radical change after the Babylonian and Persian domination. It became messianic, apocalyptic, and dualistic, and its demonology begins to resemble something we are familiar with.

The Jews superstitiously blamed their lack of loyalty to God for their misfortune and convinced themselves that if they embrace the God of Abraham, one more time, they will be "saved" (in an earthly way) form being dominated by others.

So, the messianic myth developed, projecitng a man of superior qualities, a superman indeed, who would be king and savior of Israel (in an earthly way), by conquering all Israel's enemies and establishing peace and showing the gentiles the power of their God.

Up to the time of Babylonian captivity, authors who wrote the book of "Isaiah" (more than one author), looked for mighty kings who would be worshiped by pagans they concquers.

The Hebrew expression for the Kingdom of God simply means the state of Israel, not some heavenly kingdom located in heaven; heavenly in so far as it is supported and established (on earth) by the power of God, through his adopted favorite (son of God, not God the Son), a m mortal human, and a descendant of Judah and King David, a title given to angels and kings and meaning anointed (meshiyah in Hebrew).

Christ is the full revelation of God there is no need for further revelation.

I agree, but that hardly explains the role of St. Paul, or the book entitled "Revelation of John" (aka the Book of Revelation).

although our understanding of that revelation can continue to grow as we look at Scripture with the help of the Holy Spirit and grow in knowledge of what has been revealed

That's possible, but the "help for the Holy Spirit" is a faith-based assumption and should correctly be stated "and we believe with the help of the Holy Spirit," as a matter of faith, rather than as a matter of fact.

In conclusion, while the authors may not have been scientists in the way we think of objects and things today that does not make the Scriptures fallible or errant

So far, it's all fair.

Different authors revealing God according to their histories gives us a fuller meaning of God that otherwise would limit our understanding.

It's all based on copies of copies and on a priori faith. If faith is salvific, then there is no need for scriptures. You don't learn how to believe through the Bible. In order for the Bible to "make sense" you already have to believe. But if you already believe, what are you going to change? Is believing in God not enough?

What appears to be contradiction is actually different authors understanding that revelation according to their histories and the emphasis’ that they place on that revelation

I agree.

Since God is not an object of this world it makes no sense to use empirical methods to try and interpret his revelation.

From an Orthodox point of view, that makes God a supreme mystery and I agree. Those of us who believe that Jesus is both God and Man, we can relate to Him in his human nature and worship/pray to him in his divine nature, as a Holy Trinity, or as each Divine Hypostasis. But never in God's divine nature, which remains unknown and unimaginable, incomprehensible and invisible.

I agree that empirical method cannot prove anything about God or faith. It also can't disprove anything regarding it. But, you the same token, neither can those who believe prove anything by quoting the bible.

So, it seems like works are an integral part of God's plan as you'd call it, and not just "important," but rather essential!.

Yes, they just aren't used/performed to earn salvation.

Again, I will ask you what would it take for you to believe that a NY subway homeless person is Jesus Christ if he said he was and then told you to leave your wife, kids and job and follow him?

I suppose I would expect him to reveal himself to me in the same way that the Father revealed Christ's identity to Peter. PLUS, he would have to explain to me why his appearance can defy the scriptures! :)

Luke 21:25-28 : 25 "There will be signs in the sun, moon and stars. On the earth, nations will be in anguish and perplexity at the roaring and tossing of the sea. 26 Men will faint from terror, apprehensive of what is coming on the world, for the heavenly bodies will be shaken. 27 At that time they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. 28 When these things begin to take place, stand up and lift up your heads, because your redemption is drawing near."

Doesn't sound much like a wino in the subway. :)

FK: "Do you say that you cannot "detect" God simply from your human experience?"

I can honestly answer that if God had not been mentioned from my earliest days, I would have never assumed there was God.

Sure, no one can believe in God without God having touched him first. I guess what I really meant was that since now you are a Christian, does your human experience actively confirm His existence? I would answer absolutely "yes".

FK: "Demons detect God too, but they do not have faith. The eyes and ears are what confirm for believers that the words of scripture are true."

But those who use different scriptures will tell you the same thing. What proof do you have that yours are true? The spiritual "eyes" and "ears?" Don't be ridiculous. Eyes and ears prove nothing.

As you know, my position is that the Bible self-authenticates for believers. If others who follow false faiths say the same type of thing, what is that to us? With the proper God-given presuppositions, Christianity is a fully reasoned faith.

Just because we all say we have faith doesn't prove it. Words prove nothing. They are just words.

While we can't be certain of another's salvation, if words and actions are not "reasonable proof" to you, then what is? Should I assume that none of your clergy have any faith at all because they can't prove it? :)

I am not sure I agree with you that he claimed to be equal to God. The passage you cite (Jn 8:58)where he says (I am, egw eimi) is not the same as the OT passage (Ex 3:14)where God says I am [who/that], I am (hayah hahyah or in Greek Septuagint, Egw eimi w on). I suggest, the Jews were ready to stone him because they perceived what he was telling a lie, since, if he were God, he could not be seen, and since, no human can live that long. He didn't say he was equal with God, but simply that he predated Abraham (as many other humans have, except they all died).

If all he was claiming was that he lived before Abraham and not yet died, nor being equal with God, then I think the Jews would have merely laughed at him (as I am doing at this supposition) or found a nice rubber room for him.

Not being a proffesional exegete I can't comment on the greek grammar involved but for a nice concise summary of some of the arguments involved I refer you to Purpose and Meaning of "Ego Eimi" in the Gospel of John In Reference to the Deity of Christ . Here's a nice sampler of how the author nails those who deny the clear meaning due to faulty presuppositions.

It is not hard to understand why there have been many who have not wished to make the connection that John makes between Jesus and Yahweh. One cannot make this identification outside of a trinitarian understanding of the Gospel itself, as one can certainly not identify Jesus as the Father in John's Gospel, hence, if Jesus is identified as ego eimi in the sense of the Old Testament ani hu, then one is left with two persons sharing the one nature that is God, and this, when it encounters John's discussion of the Holy Spirit, becomes the basis of the doctrine of the Trinity! Indeed, many of the denials of the rather clear usage of ego eimi in John 8:24, 8:58, 13:19 and 18:5-6 find their origin in preconceived theologies 18 that are nearly unitarian, subordinationist, or so enamored with naturalistic rationalism as to be antisuper-natural. An interpreter who is unwilling to dismiss the words of Scripture as simply "tradition" (and hence non-authoritative) or to interpret Scripture in contradiction with itself (as in a violation of strict monotheism in the positing of a being who is quasi-god, mighty, but not "almighty") will be hard pressed to avoid the obvious conclusions of John's presentation. Lest one should find it hard to believe that John would identify the carpenter from Galilee as Yahweh Himself, it might be pointed out that he did just that in John 12:39-41 by quoting from Isaiah's temple vision of Yahweh in Isaiah 6 and then concluding by saying, "These things Isaiah said because he saw His glory and he spoke about Him." The only "Him" in the context is Jesus; hence, for John, Isaiah, when he saw Yahweh on His throne, was in reality seeing the Lord Jesus. John 1:18 says as much as well.

No. It was a "marker" as to which Protestant mindset you follow. The authority of the scriptures, indeed the decision which writings constitute the canon, is a mater of man's beliefs, first and foremost; in other words, based on human authority. As such, they have no intrinsic seal of authenticity other than what men/women in authority make of it (always claiming "higher power"). Thus, the Muslims will tell you that their scripture s the true Bible, just as the Jews will claim theirs, and Christians theirs (and there is more than one set of canons among Christians as we all know). So, don't spout some God-given authority of the scriptures unless you can produce a seal of authenticity, a doubtless warranty that it is authored and even dictated [sic] by God, instead of being arrogated by the self-appointed "mouthpieces of God."

I trust what Scripture says of itself, that it is divine, just like you trust atheistic scholars or the Greek Church. You believe the presuppositions of atheists and mystics. I believe the presupposition of God himself. When I read Scripture I see the face of God and when you read Scripture you see backward fools. Because God speaks in the text he also gives assurance to the faithful to the truth of the text. You, unfortunately, have no trancendent assurance in your finite authorities.

But let me be the first to acknowledge that some here do make Scripture merely a formal authority and the material authority lies in their spirituality. We Reformed folks reject this dichotomy. We stand in a unique position where on the one hand we call the Greeks and Romanists to give up their notions of an ontological Church and its notion of corporate revelation and on the other hand we call out to Evangelicals to reject their individualistic, subjectivistic spirituality that believes parroting the Bible is the same as knowing God and rejecting the corporate creeds and confessions they forget that man's heart is a perpetual forge of idols that needs to be checked by the corporate Church. Reformationals are consciously Trinitarian (not the subordianist type of the Greeks) in knowing God both in the one (Church) and the many (subjectively). Word and Spirit work together with the divinity of Scripture assured through the regenerated conscience always in connection to the Church.

God condescended Himself to become Man. Being a column of fire or a burning bush is hardly condescension.

Revealing himself to the puny categories of the human mind is condescending to the almighty.

Read: I believe the presuppositions of atheistic scholars over the testimony of Scripture.

I've already demonstrated the irrationality of this thinking earlier and you had no reply and yet you continue with these nonsense assertions.

So, the messianic myth developed...

The messianic "myth" developed directly after the Fall when God promised that Eve's descendant would crush Satan.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.