No Such Thing as Good Friday!

By Pastor Steve Feinstein

Did Jesus really die on a Friday? For most of the history of the church, this was assumed and so we have built a structure of holidays such as Good Friday, and Palm Sunday off of this assumption. The question at hand is whether or not the assumption is true. I will answer this in two parts. We need to establish what year Jesus was crucified, and then we need to figure out what weekday Passover was that year. First, in another blog I already established that Jesus’ ministry began in late 26. In early 27, we end up at John 2, which is the first mention of a Passover feast in John’s Gospel. In total John mentions three Passovers (chapters 2, 6, and 13) in his gospel, which makes it the only Gospel useful for figuring out how long Jesus’ ministry was. Passover is an annual feast for the Jews, and the mention of three of them gives us two years (one today, a second one year from now, and the third a year later = 2 years). However, John 5:1 mentions an unnamed feast requiring Jesus to go to Jerusalem. There are only three Jewish feasts that require a trip to Jerusalem, and the only one prominent enough to be mentioned as “the feast” (John 5:1) is Passover. So in John’s Gospel, we have four Passover’s mentioned giving us a ministry of three years and some change (40 days in the wilderness before the first Passover). As a result, if the first Passover mentioned back in John 2, was in the year 27, Jesus’ crucifixion was on Passover in the year 30.

This then brings me to the second part. There is no such thing as Palm Sunday or Good Friday. Jesus did not die on Friday. There are two main reasons. One is Scriptural. Matthew 12:40has Jesus state how long He would be dead for.

Mat 12:40 For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

If Jesus died on Friday evening, He would only be dead for a few hours of Friday, all of Saturday, and then a few hours of Sunday. That is hardly three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. For Jesus to actually be dead for three full days and to then be raised on Sunday, He would have had to die on Wednesday evening. To Jews, the new day starts at sunset, not midnight. So the second the sun sets on Wednesdayevening, the Jews consider it Thursday. This would leave Jesus in the tomb all day and night Thursday, Friday, and Saturday, allowing Him to raise anytime on Sunday (which to us would be Saturday night). Bear in mind that when the women went to the tomb at sunrise, it was already empty. Looking back in history, of the five surrounding years of A.D. 30, the year 30 is the only year that Passover occurred on a Wednesday. We already know that His ministry began in late 26, and a little over three years later was the year 30. Thus Good Friday is an impossibility. If Christ did not die on Friday, then counting back six days to the Triumphal Entry would no longer be on a Sunday (hence Palm Sunday). Instead, we should be celebrating Palm Friday and Good Wednesday, but since the church did not do its homework on the Jewish roots of this all, they got the days all mixed up.

Of course, I know what you are thinking. In Mark 15:42 and Luke 23:54 and John 19:31 it says that they had to hurry to get Jesus off the cross and buried because the Sabbath was about to begin when the sun set. Thus, they could not do any work and had to get the task done. If that is the case, and Sabbath’s are Saturdays, wouldn’t His death be on a Friday? Well, notice something in John 19:31.

Joh 19:31 Since it was the day of Preparation, and so that the bodies would not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken and that they might be taken away.

John tells us this particular Sabbath was a high day. What does that mean? In Leviticus 23, God gives the people ofIsrael all of the rules for their 7 major feasts. In verses 4 through 7 God speaks of regular Sabbaths, Passover, and the Feast of Unleavened Bread. The day after Passover is the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, and the Lord tells them in verse 7 that they are to treat it as a Sabbath. This is to be treated as such, whether it is Saturday or not. This is what Jews refer to as a High Sabbath. In Leviticus 23 there is a High Sabbath assigned to nearly every major feast making it to where they cannot work. What’s the point? It doesn’t matter what day of the week Passover falls on. The next day automatically is a High Sabbath. The Jews can do no work. Furthermore, John just informed us that this Sabbath was “ahigh day.” So Friday is not necessary for the death of Christ. Any day would work since the next day would be a High Sabbath by default. Furthermore, in the year 30 Passover was on a Wednesday instead of a Friday. So there is virtually no chance that Jesus Christ was crucified on a Friday.

There is one more final clue that seals the deal on this. In Mark 16:1 it tells us that after the Sabbath, Mary Magdalene and Mary mother of James bought spices to anoint the body of Jesus. In Luke 23:55-56 it tells us the women went away to prepare the spices, rested on the Sabbath, and then came after the Sabbath to anoint Him (24:1). Apparently we have a contradiction if Christ died on Friday. Mark says they bought the spices after the Sabbath, but Luke tells us they prepared them prior to the Sabbath, rested on the Sabbath, and then showed up on Sunday to anoint Him. If Christ died on Wednesday, Thursday would be the High Sabbath forcing the women to do nothing, but Friday would be a normal day for them to buy and prepare the spices, Saturday would the regular Sabbath for them to rest, and then Sunday they could show up to the tomb. This makes it possible for them to buy the spices after the Sabbath (the High Sabbath), and yet have them prepared before the regular Sabbath. On top of that, it also allows Christ to be dead 3 full days and nights, and matches with when Passover occurred in the year 30. So Jesus died on a Wednesday. God bless.

When Was Christ Born?

By Pastor Stephen Feinstein

Have you ever wondered how it is that theologians and historians figure out things like what year Jesus was born? For example, most of us are quick to say Jesus was born in 4 B.C. But how do we know? Often we read facts like this in books and repeat them to others, but do not know why they are true. How can we 2,000 years later pinpoint a year of Christ’s birth? It is rather simple. We will use a number of methods and they all point to the same time. First, we know that He was born before the death of Herod. Remember, in Matthew 2, Herod sought to kill Jesus, understanding He was the true king of the Jews. Jesus’ family fled to Egypt until Herod died. We know from secular sources that Herod died around April in 4 B.C. So Jesus had to be born prior to that. Of course, the easiest way to arrive at the specific year is from comparing Luke 3:23 with John 2:20. Luke 3:23 tells us what age Jesus was when He began His ministry, and John 2:20 records a statement made by the Pharisees as to how long the Temple was being remodeled for soon after Christ’s ministry had begun.

Luk 3:23 As He began His ministry, Jesus was about 30 years old and was thought to be the son of Joseph, son of Heli,

Joh 2:20 Therefore the Jews said, "This sanctuary took 46 years to build, and will You raise it up in three days?"

So at the time that Jesus had this confrontation with the Jews in John 2, He was 30 years old and the Temple was being worked on for 46 years. The first century Jewish historian Josephus helps clear this up in Antiquity of the Jews Book 15, Chapter 11, verse 1 where he tells us that Herod began the remodeling of the Temple in the 18^th year of his reign. We know from Roman records that his reign began in 38 B.C. Eighteen years later would place us at 20 B.C. and that is when Josephus tells us Herod began the remodeling of the Temple. Count 46 years after that and you end up in late A.D. 26, early 27. So if Jesus’ ministry began in late 26, and He was 30 years old, then subtract His age from 26 A.D. and we end up with a birth year of 4 B.C. There you go. Now you know why we know Jesus was born in 4 B.C. And it just so happens to match with the year that king Herod died. Isn’t it amazing how it all works out? God bless.

Evidence For the Resurrection

By Pastor Steve Feinstein

1Co 15:17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins.

The most crucial point of the gospel is the resurrection of Jesus Christ, because without it the gospel becomes meaningless. Are you ready to give a defense to those who question you for the hope that you have (1 Peter 3:15)? I hope so. Below I will place one possible line of argumentation that I think effectively demonstrates the veracity of Christ's resurrection. Feel free to take and use this information as you please.

Let me tell you quickly what the New Testament tells us. The Jews convinced Pilate to place Roman soldiers as guards of Jesus’ tomb. Tombs of this day were small caves covered by a stone weighing thousands of pounds. On the third day, an angel rolled the tomb back, the Roman soldiers freaked out, and the various Maries showed up and found the tomb empty. Jesus then appeared to them risen, then to the Apostles, then to 500 eyewitnesses all at one time in one place, and then He stuck around for 40 days teaching the Apostles everything they needed to know about the Kingdom of God. In addition to that, Jesus appeared to his half brother James (son of Mary and Joseph), which caused His brother to change from a non-believer to a believer. During the 40 days, He let people touch Him and see Him to make sure He was really there, and He ate with them. After the 40 days, Jesus ascended to heavenawaiting the day fixed by the Father for His return. Since the Jewish leadership could not explain the report of the Roman soldiers, they bribed the guards to say Jesus’ disciples stole the body in the middle of the night. Finally, a few years later, Saul of Tarsus who was on a crusade to destroy the church by killing Christians, claims that Christ blinded him on the road toDamascus, and called him to be an Apostle. So these are tidbits of information given to us. Let us now construct an argument.

The evidence for the resurrection of Jesus Christ is so strong, that only a fool would deny it after considering the weight of the evidence. One only needs to look at early history of the church. Just 50 days after the crucifixion, Peter and the 12 preach Jesus as the Messiah and that He is raised from thedead, and 3,000 Jews convert. A few days later, they heal a lame man in the presence of everyone at the Temple, get arrested and then proclaim the same thing to High Priests. In their preaching they constantly appealed to the fact that crowds in Jerusalem and the priests were eyewitnesses. The only thing the High Priest needed to do was pull the body out of the tomb and show it to everyone. A decomposing Jesus would have ended the faith right then and there. But they could not provide the body because the tomb was empty. So they said the disciples stole the body. Let us be logical. Tombs of this time were caves covered by stones weighting thousands of pounds. This particular stone was guarded by professional Roman soldiers, the most feared warriors in the ancient world. The 11 Apostles (Judas hanged himself) could not have overpowered armed Roman soldiers, and then moved the extremely heavy stone to get Jesus out of there. It is impossible. Furthermore, Pilate would have ordered Jerusalemturned upside down if Roman soldiers were murdered.

Related to this, the women found the clothes left in the tomb. Grave robbers do not steal dead bodies, but instead they steal the clothes on the dead bodies. It is unheard of in history for someone to run off with a dead body, but not the clothes in a situation like this.

Furthermore, study a little psychology. The Apostles scattered and were terrified when Jesus was arrested. The same Peter who boldly proclaimed Jesus risen at Pentecost, just 50 days prior denied Jesus 3 times, and freaked out when a little girl accused him of being a disciple of Jesus. All of the Apostles hid and locked themselves indoors because they feared being arrested due to following Jesus. Yet, 50 days later they were so convinced that Jesus was alive that they would stand in the most populated parts of Jerusalem and proclaim Jesus is risen. They gladly accepted arrests and beatings, but they kept preaching Jesus as risen even when threatened with death. In addition, they did miracles in the streets that the Jewish leaders could not explain, nor deny. In fact, they admitted openly that these men could do miracles. Eventually, every single Apostle except for one went to his death in torturous execution. Here is the psychological question. What could possibly in a 50 day period cause 11 people to go from being scared of little girls accusing them of knowing Jesus, to being bold preachers willing to endure death for the name they denied just a little while earlier. Many people are willing to die for a lie if they believe it is the truth, but no one is willing to die for a lie that they know to be a lie. The Apostles would not endure torture – Peter was crucified – upside down, when all they had to do to end it was say they made the whole thing up. How do you explain such a change, if Christ really did not raise?Peterconstantly addressed his crowd appealing to their knowledge of events as eyewitnesses. Why did no one dispute him? It is because they remembered everything he told them. Paul the apostle in 1 Corinthians 15 said that Christ appeared to 500 people at one time, most of who were still alive when Paul wrote 1 Corinthians. If he was lying, why do we find not one single example of a person in history coming forward to say this wasn’t true? Most of these 500 people also sealed their testimony with their blood. No known witness ever denied Christ. The Roman government would have looked for anything or anyone to disprove the Christian faith, but nothing could be found. None of these witnesses would deny what they saw.

Another thing to consider is Jesus’ half brother James did not believe in Jesus prior to the Resurrection. However, Paul tells us that Christ appeared to him too, and this caused James to go from a person mocking his brother, to being one of the early leaders in the church who worshiped Jesus as God. Josephus records for us how he too died for his belief in the resurrection of Jesus.

Finally we have Paul the Apostle. He wrote so extensively of his conversion experience that secular scholars cannot deny that he saw something drastic that changed his life. He was a rabbi trained under one of the four greatest rabbis in all Jewish history (Rabbon Gamaliel) who advanced among the Jews faster than all others. His entire goal in the life was to stop the spread of Christianity by arresting the Christians and having them executed. He persecuted the church so severely, that nearly all Christians fled Jerusalem in fear of their lives. The Apostles stuck around. Yet, on the way to Damascus, Paul tells us that he was struck with light, and Jesus spoke with him directly letting him know that He really is the Messiah and isrisen. Paul immediately became a Christian, and dedicated the rest of his life to building the church, and influenced the world more than any Jew (other than Jesus). He far surpassed his teacher Gamaliel and confounded the Jews in debate everywhere he went, until finally he too died at the hands Emperor Nero of Rome. What could cause a man in a single day to go from murdering Christians to being their greatest advocate among the Jews and Gentiles? Psychologists have no explanation for this other than something big really did happen to Paul on that road to Damascus.

And finally, we know Christ rose from the dead because the Scriptures say so! They accurately predicted what lineage he would be born from (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Judah, David), what town it would be, when it would be (Dan 9), how He would die (pierced in the hands and feet [Psalm 22]), and that He would not be dead long enough to decompose. If it predicted all of those things to the detail hundreds and sometimes thousands of years ahead of time, then I think it is trustworthy and believable that He would raise from the dead. In fact, there are over 109 distinct prophecies made that Jesus fulfilled literally in His first coming. The odds of one man fulfilling just 8 of the prophecies is the same as covering the entire state of Texas with silver dollars, painting one of them gold, and then having a blindfolded man randomly draw the gold one. How much more so for 109 prophecies. The Bible itself is the greatest evidence for the resurrection of Jesus Christ!

So when you take all of this – the fact of the empty tomb, the failure of the Jews to produce a body, the bold transformation of cowardly apostles into fearless martyrs, the conversion of James and Paul, devout Jews changing the day of worship to Sunday, and the early explosive growth of the church due to witnesses of the resurrection – then the idea that Christ did not raise becomes inconceivable.

Of course, I do not want you to be ignorant. There are some honest non-believers out there that try to deal with the evidence. There are non-believing scholars who have went through ancient documents with a tooth and comb looking for even one ancient text to contradict the New Testament records, and none have been found. Furthermore, they have to deal with the fact that Church boomed to incredible size just two months after the crucifixion. They have to deal with the fact that cowards became bold martyrs, that the Jewish leadership failed to produce a body, no one wrote any records claiming these things were lies, and that the disciples went to their deaths for their belief in Christ’s resurrection. They also, have to deal with the fact that 500 people all saw the same risen Christ at the same time. As a result, they try to come up with alternate explanations other than the resurrection, but you will see that all attempts are futile and quite pathetic. So I will quickly introduce those arguments to you and then show you quickly why they are wrong. In the end, when you see how pathetic these arguments are, you should be strongly encouraged that this is the best the world can do.

The swoon theory says Jesus died, but the cool tomb revived him, and an earthquake moved the stone. Jesus then is supposed to have limped out of there and made appearances to the disciples. Eventually, He then went off in a corner to die of His wounds. This is supposed to account for the empty tomb and the eyewitness accounts. This fails due to the fact that all four Gospels describe Jesus resurrection body as being glorious. Furthermore, He could walk through chained doors, vanish into thin air, eat and drink, and He imparted power to the apostles. Furthermore, how could the swoon theory account for the conversion of Paul? It can’t since it was three years later. Finally, all of the disciples saw the resurrection as something to look forward to. If the swoon theory was true, then Jesus would have been in bad shape with blood randomly squirting out of his wounds as He limped to and fro. Who would call that the blessed hope? This truly is ridiculous.

A book called the “Passover Plot” shows a second view. They think Jesus read the OT and put a plot together to make it look like He fulfilled the prophecies. To pull it off, Jesus instigated Pilate and the Jews into crucifying Him. They claim that he thought he could survive the cross since some people were reported to go 9 days on the cross. After a few hours on the cross, part of the plan was for him to declare thirst, which would be a cue for the disciples to give him something on a sponge to knock him out, but make it look like he died. Later on, he could wake up and appear alive and resurrected. Well the plot backfired when the Roman soldiers killed him anyway with the spear thrust, but they accidentally put him in the wrong tomb. As a result, people remember him saying he was going to rise from the dead, and they believed it when there was an empty tomb. In the end, it was all supposedly an accident. The Gospel accounts certainly disprove this as well. The tomb was well known and the testimony is unanimous that it belonged to Joseph of Arimathea. The Gospel accounts make it clear that Joseph himself took Jesus’ body in the tomb. How is Joseph going to put Jesus in the wrong tomb? You think he would know what tomb belonged him.

Mat 27:57-60 When it was evening, a rich man fromArimathea named Joseph came, who himself had also become a disciple of Jesus. (58) He approached Pilate and asked for Jesus' body. Then Pilate ordered that it be released. (59) So Joseph took the body, wrapped it in clean, fine linen, (60) and placed it in his new tomb, which he had cut into the rock. He left after rolling a great stone against the entrance of the tomb.

A third view (Wrong Tomb Theory) is there are many tombs in the area and they simply went to the wrong one. Once again, the Gospel testimony makes it clear that the tomb was well known and this is documented in all four Gospel accounts. Those who promote this false theory, as well as the Passover Plot, need to offer documented evidence that supports their view. Otherwise it is just speculation. From a purely historical viewpoint, the evidence is staggering. Three accounts were written by eyewitnesses, and Luke’s account was written based on the interviewing of eyewitnesses, and all four agree that Joseph of Arimathea took the body of Jesus and placed it in his tomb, and the disciples knew where that tomb was, as did the Jews, Pilate, and the Roman soldiers. There is not a single ancient text to dispute this. Thus, assuming they went to the wrong tomb without offering a single historical source as evidence is foolish. Also, neither the Passover Plot nor the Wrong Tomb Theory account for eyewitness accounts with the risen Lord.

The fourth view is the dual level of interpretation. On a natural level, Jesus died. On a supernatural level, he underwent a spiritual resurrection. The Jehovah Witnesses hold this view. The idea is that Jesus’ resurrection was a ghost. This is supposed to explain the eyewitness accounts and the conversions of James and Paul, but it does nothing for the empty tomb, and contradicts the Scriptures. The Gospels utterly destroy this view. Jesus ate and drank, and allowed His disciples to touch Him as evidence. He even declares outright that He is not a ghost, but a body of flesh in Luke 24:39.

Luk 24:39 Look at My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself! Touch Me and see, because a ghost does not have flesh and bones as you can see I have."

A fifth view is subjective vision. Allegedly his fanatic followers got carried away and thought they had visions of their master after the death. They hallucinated seeing him because they wanted it to be true so badly. Really? This one is truly pathetic. Jesus appeared on ten different occasions and each time never to the exact same group. Some even doubted, such as Thomas, and only became convinced after touching and eating with Jesus. Furthermore, Jesus’ brother James was not a fanatic follower and was not expecting his brother to be raised, yet it was the fact that Jesus rose that caused James to be a Christian in the first place! Also, Paul records in 1 Corinthians 15:6 that Jesus appeared to over 500 people all at once and many were still alive in his day and could have been interviewed by Paul’s Corinthian audience. Never in history has there ever been recorded a situation where over 500 people all at the same time hallucinated the exact same thing. This theory is simply ridiculous.

In conclusion, I hope this has been quite helpful for you. It shows us one major important truth: The evidence of the resurrection is so infallible, that the best guesses of “honest” nonbelievers is more fantastical than believing in the tooth fairy. So be encouraged in the resurrection of our Lord. Our faith is not in vain, but is a historical and true faith. God bless.

STRUGGLING IN RIGHTEOUSNESS

By Bob Chandler

Psalm 85: 10-13 "Loving kindness and truth have met together; Righteousness and peace have kissed each other. Truth springs from the earth and righteousness looks down from heaven. Indeed, the Lord will give what is good and our land will yield its produce. Righteousness will go before Him, and will make His footsteps into a way."

In regards to each and every believer, I believe that through "election," heralded by God's grace and design, lays the predetermined path by which God's given faith, righteousness and salvation are delivered. Therefore, through election, God's righteousness is both imparted and measured out to us according to his sovereign design in order to establish an order of purpose in our lives, designed by Him to bring all glory and honor to himself.

Through His infinite knowledge concerning the hearts of all mankind, (a) election allows the gift of salvation, through grace and accompanied by faith to establish his holy righteousness within each one of us. This gift of righteousness by God produces peace and effects quietness and confidence forever. (b) I believe that by and through faith, God's righteousness wins out over our own sinful self righteousness which continually provides pridefully induced stumbling blocks that bring about confusion and doubt during our feeble attempts to please God through works.

Today, as I look to some marital relationships within the church, I see a great deal of frustration between couples that may be borne out of self righteousness. Consequently, as a result of such self indulgent and worldly behavior, we are are blindly led to ignore God's holy righteousness that has been granted to us by faith.

Within all of us, there's a constant battle between our sinful desire to embrace our own self righteousness, that promises worldly answers and pleasures, but in reality only produces wrath. (c) While being driven by self righteousness, we remain intent on conducting our lives in "our way," through pride, rather that serving our Lord and Savior in "His way" by faith through grace. (Romans 9.)

All of God's blessings are prayed for, but never fully understood. Therefore, because we are trapped within our earthly shells, our abilities to understand such spiritual gifts from God, such as grace, faith and righteousness are severely limited. When we study God's word and read about these spiritual gifts given to us by God, our anticipation to understand their meanings is genuine, but for the most part it is quickly passed over, due to our limited ability to grasp the full measure of our salvation and the soul reaching changes that are related to it.

During our time in prayer with God, I believe that we should spend more time beseeching Him to clearly manifest His divine gifts within our lives. For too long, Satan has succeeded in dividing churches, marriages and families, by continually manipulating all of them into acts of self righteousness. Sadly, through his insidious manipulations, our enemy has been all too successful in spurring on our sinful natures that produce pride, intimidation, selfishness, fear and uncertainty. We should all remember that God's gift of righteousness is far greater than our own and that each and every day, through our faith in His son Jesus Christ, we are able to cast aside the filthiness found in our self righteousness and instead demonstrate the values found within the gift of God's holy righteousness.

In our attempts to understand and live out God's gift of righteousness, it's important that we remember that the enemy is always on the prowl to deceive us at every turn. While God's version of righteousness carries with it "humility", Satan's version cites within it the act of "pride." During our individual growth in the Lord, we are to humbly remember that we all develop within God's gift of righteousness at different rates and that our walks with Him are determined by Him and Him alone. Therefore, out of our own self righteousness, we should never attempt to judge anyone, or demean any brother or sister in any way if their walk with the Lord doesn't match our own or doesn't measure up to our own selfish expectations or requirements. Any such personal judgment, especially in a marriage, is not only wrong and harmful, but it also demonstrates a lack of faith and a fundamental lack of understanding related to God's grace.

In Ephesians 6:14-16, Paul describes to us the "full armor of God." With the dawning of each day, both Christian husbands and wives are to dutifully put on all of these articles described as God's holy armor in order for them both to remain victorious over any of Satan's attempts to discourage or even defeat them in their commitments to serve God. Along with helping each other to thoughtfully prepare for spiritual battle, I would also remind them both to wisely rest in the knowledge that the perfect fit of God's armor can only come from Him and not by any other measure or intent. While one size of armor may "fit all," both the "all" and the "fit" are both of God's design and therefore they should never be disputed through thoughtless acts of self righteousness. Of course, it goes without saying, that during all of these spiritual preparations and beyond, both husbands and wives should always keep each other in fervent prayer. (d)

We all intend to lead righteous lives that are pleasing to God, but during the time between Monday mornings and Saturday evenings, once again, our tendencies seem to lean more towards doing things "our way," rather than "God's way." On Sunday mornings, our faith is rekindled through hearing the word of God and our spiritual fervor is once again restored. I believe that it's during the time when we're neglecting the word of God, that the enemy can strikes us the hardest through his manipulation of our sinful natures manifested by self righteousness. The ways in which to fend off Satan's attacks are by making concerted efforts to love one another, staying in the word and by remaining committed to a prayer life.

There isn't a day that passes by that we don't all fall short of the Glory of God. Let's all strive to love one another through acts of compassion, patience, humility and forgiveness. (e)

1 Peter 2: 24-25 "He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed. For you were like sheep going astray, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls."

in Christ, Bob

a. 1Kings 8: 39 "Then hear Thou in heaven Thy dwelling place, and forgive and act and render to each according to all his ways, whose heart Thou knowest, for Thou alone dost know the hearts of all the sons of men."

b. Isaiah 32: 16-17 "And the work of righteousness will be peace, And the service of righteousness, quietness and confidence forever."

c. Romans 4:13-15 "For the promise to Abraham or to his descendants that he would be heir of the world was not through the Law, but through the righteousness of faith. For if those who are of the Law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise is nullified; for the Law brings about wrath, but where there is no law, neither is there violation.".

d. 1Thes. 5:16-18 "Rejoice always; pray without ceasing; in everything give thanks; for this is God's will for you in Christ Jesus."

e. 1 John 4: 7-8 "Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God; and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. The one who does not love does not know God, for God is love."

A Matter of Heart

By Pastor Steve

This will be a quick blog. Jesus made it clear that we cannot serve God and money. We cannot have two masters. It is either one or the other. Which do you serve? There is a reason I bring this question up. I remember when Pastor Chris finished up 1 Corinthians, the issue of tithing came up. When it was finished, some people from the congregation (or maybe visitors -- I'm not sure) told him that his presentation of the subject was the first time it was done to where they were not offended. I never gave this statement another thought until a couple of days ago.

Think about the implications of the statement. "You covered the subject of Biblical giving in a way that did not offend me." Why would talking about something as silly as money offend any Christian in the first place? In other words, a pastor can tell you not to have sex outside of marriage, steal from work, gossip, lie, get drunk, or any other matter as it relates to holiness and purity and you wont get offended, but if he brings up Biblical giving he needs to walk on egg shells or you'll get offended. That is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. Holiness and purity is far more important than money. Why is a pastor getting into the business of our lives acceptable, but for some reason we think it is unacceptable for him to tell us what the Bible tells us to do with our money? I'm sorry if you are detecting my anger over this, but it just dawned on me how stupid this is.

Here is the conclusion. If you get offended because a pastor talks about tithes and offerings, but you do not get offended when he talks about sexual purity and tells you how to live, then I dare say you serve money more than God. Paper in your bank account should not be more guarded by your heart than personal holiness. Put God first. Realize that if you are really a Christian, then at the moment of salvation 100% of you belonged to God (not 10%). If so, then don't you dare get mad when somebody points out what God tells you to do with the money He blessed you with in the first place. If you are not willing to part with money when the Lord commands, do not fool yourself into thinking you will part with your life for the Lord. People always rush to say that if the gun were put to their head, they would not deny the Lord. Yet, when the Bible is put to their head and it tells them to tithe, they find it difficult to do. I can promise you that when the bullet is inches from the skull, your life will become 1000 times more precious to you than your wallet. If you struggle with giving from the wallet now, then why do you think you would give your life later?

If this was offensive to any reader, rather than asking me questions, I exhort you to ask yourself why you are offended. I then exhort you to go and find something in Scripture that tells me I am wrong in what I said here and tells you why you are right to be offended. When you are done, I am convinced you'll be on my side of the issue. The Word of God is quite clear. Thanks for taking the time to read this. God bless.

Why Learn History

By Pastor Mo

There is something about reading of true events gone by that can stir the heart like no other. I have always had a love of history and fondly remember it as my favorite subject in school. I see now the importance of it, not just as a pastor, but as a Christian. I feel I have learned just as much doctrine and theology when studying history, as I do when I tackle these subjects head on.

Some of you may be wondering “why are you wasting time learning about other men, and not just studying Jesus and the Scriptures?” and you are correct, there is no greater area of study than Christ and the Scriptures. These should hold such a foundational position on our lives as to never run the risk of being moved for anything. Knowing that the Scriptures are what we base all our belief from and never deviating from them, should free us to study other facets of life in this light.

There is so much to gain from Christian history. It would be rare to have a thought or belief in Scripture that has never come up before, and dealt with by the church. If, somehow, we have stumbled upon an original belief we should tread even slower and many red flags should be popping up. Why has no one else seen this in the Scriptures, in the past?

Our church has a great resource entitled “Ekklesia” which is a 25 class lecture series on Church History, taught by pastor Steve Feinstein. I have taken Church History courses in the past and read many books on the topic, and I found this class to be excellent. There is lots of theology taught, mostly when studying the early Church Fathers.

As of late, one of my favorite ways to study, is to learn about someone else’s life. This is studying through biographies. There are many great books as well as amazing sessions and sermons taught by great men of God. The Bible teaches the importance of holy emulation. We are to emulate men of God, and the only way to do this is to learn about them. What shaped their lives? What they taught on certain Scriptures? What beliefs were they killed for? Along with many other questions. We need to be grounded in what the Bible says about man, and realize they are men just like us, having failed at times.

Desiring God ministries has many of the best biographies I have ever heard. Pastor John Piper delivers these memoirs and biographies with unparalleled enthusiasm and detail. He will make you feel like you actually met the person talked about, while learning about their heartaches and victories. I would really encourage our church body to look into these free resources we have available. I will end with some verses on emulation to draw us closer to God, but never interfere or become the focus of our adoration:

“Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ” (1 Corinthians 11:1).

“Brothers, join in imitating me, and keep your eyes on those who walk according to the example you have in us” (Philippians 3:17).

“What you have learned and received and heard and seen in me—practice these things, and the God of peace will be with you” (Philippians 4:9).

“And you became imitators of us and of the Lord” (1 Thessalonians 1:6).

“[Do] not be sluggish, but imitators of those who through faith and patience inherit the promises” (Hebrews 6:12).

“You, however, have followed my teaching, my conduct, my aim in life, my faith, my patience, my love, my steadfastness” (2 Timothy 3:10).

“Continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it” (2 Timothy 3:14).

“Show yourself in all respects to be a model of good works, and in your teaching show integrity, dignity” (Titus 2:7).

The old Puritan Thomas Brooks comments on holy emulation in The Secret Key to Heaven:

Bad men are wonderfully in love with bad examples.... Oh, that we were as much in love with the examples of good men as others are in love with the examples of bad men.

Shall we love to look upon the pictures of our friends; and shall we not love to look upon the pious examples of those that are the lively and lovely picture of Christ? The pious examples of others should be the mirrors by which we should dress ourselves.

He is the best and wisest Christian...that imitates those Christians that are most imminent in grace.... It is noble to live by the examples of the most eminent saints. (12-13)

A Few Thoughts On Pluralism

By Chaplain (First Lieutenant) Stephen Feinstein

As most of you know, I just recently spent 6 weeks at Ft. Jackson, SC going through the first half of the Chaplain Officer Basic Leadership Course (CHBOLC) for the U.S. Army. I must say that it was a great experience and I learned a lot of things and got to do a lot of things that my civilian counterparts most likely will never get to do. There are definitely some perks to the military.

However, one thing that many may not know is that the Army is probably the most pluralistic subgroup in the United States. Over 40% of its members are minorities, which means a large number of cultures and religions are represented. It is not the same Army of 100 years ago. As a result, chaplains have to provide religious support to a large variety of people. With that stated, I bet those who know me most are scratching their heads right about now. After all, I’m the guy who seems to always be looking for a debate with people of false faiths to set them on the right path and also to protect the flock from their teachings. How could a guy like me ever survive in the Army chaplaincy? This is a good question because the Army chaplaincy holds the official position of pluralism.

Two or three months ago, I would have probably said that I couldn’t handle it and I would have quit the Army. However, I will admit a few of my thoughts have changed on the subject. I think the big mistake comes in definitions. People often see pluralism as being ecumenism, but they are not the same thing. Ecumenism is the idea of all religions (or a particular set of religions) setting aside their differences and affirming the similarities so that they may become one body either in name or generally in practice. Pluralism, in contrast, is the idea of various religious groups working together within a society in peace, maintaining their uniqueness or differences, but showing mutual respect understanding that legally each faith group has the right to exist. I do understand that it is possible to find other definitions for these words, but spending the last six weeks in a fully religiously pluralistic environment and seeing its operations on a day-to-day basis in a totally real operational environment is enough for me to disregard theory and call things as they are in practice. So unless you believe in taking up the sword to purge all non-Christians from America, you are a pluralist to some extent.

In the first century, the Roman Empire was perhaps as religiously diverse (if not more) than the United States is today. Yet, there are many exhortations to be at peace with all men, to work diligently for your earthly masters, and to pray for and obey earthly rulers who were not Christians. The reason being is that our faith is spread by the gospel, not by the sword. The Lord calls His sheep through regeneration, not through forced conversions by men. As a result, the exhortation was to work hard in society, have a good reputation, make few enemies, and to pay your taxes to the pagan empire. The reason for this is clear. It facilitates the preaching of the gospel when people of every faith respect your faith because of the honesty and diligence of its adherents. American pluralism, then, is nothing new for the Christian. Act and live like a Christian, and work in peace with other people and create a good reputation for the church. Preach the gospel in season and out of season. I think the problem today is the church has lost so much credibility because people do not live to Biblical standards. There is nothing more that I hate than seeing a non-believer live a moral life and then look to my right and see a Christian enslaved to sin.

When I was at CHBOLC I was assigned to a Roman Catholic (working to be a priest) as my Battle Buddy (we have to watch out for each other). In my platoon there were Baptists, Pentecostals, Roman Catholics, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Unitarian Universalists, and other smaller Christian groups. It was always interesting when I tried to describe my faith tradition to them. The best I could say was, “I’m a nondenominational Calvinist Dispensationalist.” Fortunately, these people all had masters degrees in their particular faith group and so most of them knew exactly what that meant. Given this environment I enjoyed the most fruitful conversations in religion that I have had in a long time. I tried to get along with most people as I realized fighting them would have made a difficult 6 weeks. I quickly befriended the Baptists and conservative Lutherans and Presbyterians. They became my core group in the first week since we all held to the same essentials.

Yet, as time progressed I befriended some of these other folks who do not hold to my views. The Army environment made it impossible to do otherwise. The Army showed me where pluralism works and where it doesn’t. For example, in the Army we have what is called the Army mission, and successfully accomplishing it takes full teamwork. In those situations, you don’t really care what religion the guy to your left and right are. When I repelled down a 50 foot wall, I did not care if the person holding my rope on the ground for leverage was an imam. When we were doing nighttime land navigation, I did not care if the person doing the pace count was a Lutheran, the compass holder a liberal, the radio man a Pentecostal, and the map reader a Catholic. I simply cared that each person did their part right so we would not get lost in the middle of a forest with dangerous animals living in it. I did not care what religion the person was who had to stick my arm with a needle as we learned to set up IVs in each other, and they did not care that I was a nondenominational Calvinist Dispensationalist. The Russian Orthodox fellow did not worry that I the Calvinist was wrapping his arm in a tourniquet during the testing on Combat Life Saving Skills. Examples of this can go on an on.

My point is simple. In an environment like the Army when your goal is to survive a battle, kill your enemy, and take, secure, and control an area of land, pluralism has to work. You have no choice for it not to work. If there is even one shred of disunity, the entire mission will fall apart. This level of pluralism, in my opinion, can only exist and work in an environment like the Army. One reason for this is the Army specifically defines both the ends and the means to any given situation and you simply have to perform it to their standard. During the missions, we were a united team. During downtime, however, I debated a lot of people. The Greek Orthodox guy gave me the most trouble since he had the entire New Testament memorized in Greek. Of course, I was still victorious. LOL. Also, I was afforded the opportunity to be the first real Calvinist representative that the Catholic and Russian Orthodox guys ever met. I cleared up a lot of issues for them that they were ignorant on, and when it was all said and done they actually respected the theology and practice of the Reformers (to a limited extent of course). At the same time, some of my misconceptions were cleared up. In terms of Roman Catholicism, I only learned a little because I had studied it thoroughly. That showed me that I did a decent job in those studies. However, I was wrong on a whole bunch of things concerning Russian Orthodox. After talking with the farting and cussing Orthodox Army Ranger (hence the constant farting and cussing), I came to the conclusion that Russian Orthodox folks possess salvific faith. I would not say such of the Catholics, although I wish I could. I found it sad that I agreed far more with Catholic and Orthodox positions than I would with Pentecostal ones. It is sad because where the Catholics are in error puts them outside of grace. Perhaps the same could be said of some Pentecostals. I found it kind of interesting though that two men of the schism of 1054 (Orthodox and Catholic) and one man of the schism of 1517 (me as a Calvinist) could be in the same room discussing theology and not want to ring each others’ necks. Only in the Army!

Reflecting back on the six weeks, I must say that I am glad that I met these people. I am glad that I was exposed to the pluralism in the Army environment. I think I now see these other religious folks as real people now. Before, I saw their ideas and theological concepts more, and their existence as actual people less. As a result, I did not care too much for Catholics or liberals but instead had a callous attitude toward them. I still have a callous attitude toward their beliefs, but now I can at least say that I care about them as people. It took this experience for that to happen. I am now more concerned with winning them to Biblical Christianity than I am at winning an argument.

Do I like pluralism? Not really. Do I wish everyone was a Calvinist Dispensationalist? Yes. But am I now more prepared to work for the cause of the true Christ in a pluralistic country? Absolutely! Am I more prepared to become a Th.D scholar someday now that I actually know what the actual positions are of these various groups? I would say so. I am prepared to dialogue in a way that does not get heated, but stays on the point. The Lord certainly used this whole situation for good in my life.

It also made me even more convinced that the mega-church pastors that are teaming up with liberals and Muslims in the name of pluralism to tackle “world problems” are misguided fools. Pluralism will not work on such a macro-scale since Muslims, liberals, and Christians should (if they are sincere in their belief systems) have very different ideas and expectations as to how to solve these “world problems.” The liberals will think AIDS is defeated by condom distribution, the Christian will say by abstinence, and a committed Muslim would say the death penalty for fornication would solve the problem. The only way these groups could ever work together would be to downplay their differences, and focus on their similarities. Go back to the beginning of this blog and notice that doing such is much more in line with ecumenicalism, not pluralism! Furthermore, what kind of Christian can downplay the distinctive traits of Christianity just to have peace with pagans? A true Christian is inseparable from his beliefs, especially if the Holy Spirit is guiding him! I cannot make a decision concerning AIDS apart from what the Bible says. How can these mega-church pastors do such and still call themselves pastors? Finally, tackling world problems gains the church nothing if Muslims and liberals get just as much credit for it. However, if the church acts alone in taking care of systemic sin in the world, then who will the world give the credit to? They will give it to the city brightly lit on the top of the hill that made it happen in the name of Christ.

So in conclusion, I think what is often touted as pluralism today is really ecumenicalism. This is why Christians freak out when they hear the word pluralism. However, if you think logically about it, most of us are pluralistic in a limited manner (such as getting along with coworkers). It is right to be angry at mega-church pastors that sell Christ out for their ecumenicalism. If there was one set of points to all of this rambling that I want any reader to take, it is this: See adherents of other faith groups as real people, and engage in respectful dialogue. Show them why Christ is the only way. Live God-honoring, respectable, and reputable lives before the world. Pluralism is nothing more than God bringing the mission field to us right here at home. Let’s take advantage of this and win people for Christ. If we can win these people here, we will already be familiar with their beliefs as we go to their own countries to try to win more for the gospel. Thanks for taking the time to read this. God bless.

Pastor Stephen Feinstein