Monday, March 21, 2016

Bathrooms, Politics and Christianity

Image Courtesy of: WIKIPEDIA COMMONS

21 March 2016 (Mint Hill, NC) - Several weeks ago the Charlotte City Council voted to mandate that public bathrooms be no longer gender specific.  Without going into explicit details such an ordinance will allow deviancy to become legally, though not morally, normative.  The personal privacy of individuals will be at least compromised.  The worst case, of course, is that the safety and security of individuals will be threatened.  Under the guise of "sexual orientation confusion," deviants will proceed into bathrooms of the opposite sex for less than honorable pursuits.

What should the response be to this by Christians?  

There are two possible responses.  One is to take the historical view of the early church and not engage at all in the political process.  The other is to use whatever biblical allowable means available to challenge this turn to immorality in our community.  We will here explore both options.

The first option, to do nothing, comes from a misapplication of ancient history.  First and second century Christians, according to the Roman philosopher Celsus (image noted above), refused service in the military, did not engage in any kind of empire politics and did not even participate in the running of local municipalities.  The much admired and lamented bro. David Lipscomb held this view for American church members in the 19th century.  With all due respect to our late brother, to apply Roman conditions to American conditions is simply trying to compare apples to oranges.  The "dog just won't hunt."

We should go to the Patristics (the so-called "church fathers") for history but never for theology.  For theology, we go exclusively to the Holy Writ.  Christians never participated with Rome for such a participation would constitute an "unequal yoking."  The reason being of course, is that the early Christians intuitively knew that Rome was the "Beast."  (Revelation 13)

No such designation could ever be applied today to our Nation, to our Declaration and to our Constitution.  Our Republic, like no other, acknowledges that ALL rights descend, not from other men as was the case with Rome, but from God Himself!  In fact, Peter, by inspiration tells us to "honor the king."  (I Peter 2.17)  Just who is our king in the United States?  Our king, to which we give honor, is the Declaration and the Constitution.  We give honor to our king, not by disengaging in the political process, but by embracing the political process!

Therefore, option two is biblically viable for the church today here in America.  So...how does this play out in our time and place?  

*  The biblical truth concerning Christian morality must be heralded continually from our pulpits. Namely, ALL sexual contact outside of marriage between one man and one woman for life is immoral and damnable.

*  Our approach to all parties should be one characterized by "truth in love," never with anger, rancor, threats, shoutings or any other form of personal animosity.  Our approach should be as was Christ's; "...go and sin no more."

*  Our approach must always be within acceptable legal channels such as public hearings, prearranged visits with dignitaries, letters, emails and social media.

*  Should our pleas go unheeded, then we are free to support other candidates for the city council that oppose immorality and support our Constitutional moral order.

*  Finally, Christians should be running to serve on councils, boards and commissions so immorality will no longer raise it's ugly head in our community.

NOTE:

Since I wrote this article the Governor and Legislature of North Carolina have stepped in on the side of decency and morality to overturn the Charlotte City Councils dictatorial bathroom edict.  We thank God for their quick and decisive action.

Having said that, the likelihood of a radical court "overturning" (one cannot "overturn" what is biblical, good, pure right and moral!) this state statute is very great indeed.  The deviant parties are already rumbling about this direction.  The place to have stopped this would have been on the council itself so that there never would have been a vote in the first place.

Monday, December 21, 2015

Christ or "Christ's Mass?"

 
Image Courtesy of: http://commons.wikipedia.org Courtesy U.S. Navy Public Domain Photo
 
Sermon Outline and Video Sermon
 
 
1.       Christmas is a transliteration of “Christ’s Mass”
2.       The “Christ’s Mass” is NOT:
a.       A Celebration of Christ’s birth
b.       A Memorial of His birth
c.       A Remembrance of His birth
3.       What then, IS Christmas?
4.       It is a Trifold celebration of the MASS on a day arbitrarily called Christ’s birthday
5.       Any celebration of the birth of Christ
a.       Is extra-biblical and an addition to the Holy Writ
b.       The date is never mentioned in the Bible
c.       It was never commanded by Christ
d.       It was never observed by the Apostles
e.       It was never practiced by anyone for centuries after the Incarnation
1.       Irenaeus (ca. 130 – 200) - No mention whatsoever
2.       Tertullian (ca. 160 – 225) - No mention whatsoever
3.       Origen (ca. 185 – 264)
a)       Even the chief allegorist of the church mocks Roman birth anniversaries as pagan
4.       Clement of Alexandria (ca. 150 – 215) does speculate on the date of Christ’s birth BUT he dates it, not December 25, but either one of three spring dates; April 20, April 21 or May 20
5.       By the fourth century, the western (Roman) church recognizes the December 25 date while the eastern (Byzantine) church recognizes the January 6 date, the day of the Feast of the Epiphany, the visit of the Magi’s.  the intervening days became known as the “12 days of Xmas.”
6.       The jump between spring to winter took place primarily due to the influence of Augustine of Hippo’s extreme allegory.
1)      Ca. 200, Tertullian calculated the date of the crucifixion was on the 14th of Nisan, March 25 in the Roman calendar.
2)      A contemporary anonymous author published a work entitled ON SOLSITICES AND EQUINOXES which says; “Therefore our Lord was conceived on (March 25) which is the day of the passion of the Lord and of His conception.  For on that day he was conceived on the same He suffered.”
3)      Augustine not only allegorized Scripture, he allegorized history!  This is what he says in ON THE TRINITY (ca. 399 – 419): “For Jesus is believed have been conceived on the 25th of March, which day He also suffered; so the womb of the Virgin, in which He was conceived, where no one of mortals was begotten, corresponds to the new grave in which He was buried, wherein was never man laid, neither before Him or since.  But He was born, according to tradition, upon December the 25th.”
6) Before we can understand Xmas, we must first understand the MASS.
                a. “Ite missa es” – To send out – The final “blessing”
7) Before we can understand the Mass, we must understand the most twisted doctrine ever associated with Xianity – TRANSUBSTANTIATION
                a. The Catholic Church allegorizes the literal and literalizes the metaphorical
                                1. John 6.47ff - The literal eisegesis of this passages is the foundational sand          
                                  of the doctrine of "transubstantiation." 
 
                b. Mark 16.6
                                1. He was crucified, He was dead, He was here, He was laid BUT now He’s Alive
                                2. RCC – He’s still crucified, He’s still dead, He’s still in the grave, He’s not risen.
                c. The Mass re-sacrifices Christ on the cross
                d. The Mass disembodies the Body of Christ
                e. The Priest cannibalizes the remains
                f. The Lord’s Supper – The Living Presence of a Risen Savior - as taught in the Bible
                g. The Mass – a re-sacrifice of the mutilated remains of a dead savior - Per Rome
                h. How?
                                1. The Essence of the bread and wine miraculously change into the literal
                                     body and blood of Christ.
                                2. The Accidents of the literal body and blood of Christ change back
                                     miraculously to appear as bread and wine.
                                3. Words change essence the bread and the wine to the body and blood
                                4. The same words immediately change the accidents of the body and blood into                                      what, by all appearances, is bread and wine.
Bible: I Corinthians 5.7 -8; Hebrews 9.23 - 28 Teach that re-sacrifice of Christ is impossible
Conclusion: Christmas is “Christ’s Mass”  “Christ’s Mass” is a twisted re-sacrifice of Christ, a Christ who is ever dead.   Mark 16.6 proclaims that Christ WAS crucified, dead, and laid in a grave BUT has RISEN and is very much ALIVE!    The "Christ Mass" has no place in the worship of Christ's church!
Sources consulted:
THE HOLY BIBLE
McGowan, Andrew, "How December 25 Became Christmas" in BIBLE REVIEW, December, 2002
Sproul, R. C., "The Mass and Christology" - Reformed Bible Studies & Devotionals (on line) at Ligoneir.org. 



Thy Kingdom Come - The Truth About the Rapture - The Introduction

Thy Kingdom Come The Truth About the Rapture Based Upon the Study Guide of the Same Title by: David R Pharr Lesson #1 – I...