Applied Christianity Solutions

Finally: "We Get It"

2008-05-19T15:22:00.000-07:00

In the past few weeks we have been subjected to a

massive barrage of publicity about the 20 pages and

several thousand words which make up a document

titled "An Evangelical Manifesto." It is essentially

the production of social critic Os Guinness, working

with a "Steering Committee" of nominal Evangelical

individuals, and guided in its promotional aspects

by a professional publicity agent. It is a lengthy

dissertation on Mr. Guinness’ opinion of what it

means to be an Evangelical.

The web site lists a lot of signers . . . some totally

invalid (example: the name of the late Jerry Falwell

was added). In another case the name of the president

of a major theological seminary was listed without

his permission. In short, it isn’t the significant

document it was purported to be.

But now Evangelicals – real Evangelicals – have a

new document to sign. It is called the "We Get It"

Declaration, developed by the Cornwall Alliance for

the Stewardship of Creation, and is a Biblical-based

approach to the theory of Global Warming. It is a

brief document, less than one page in length, and

utilizes just over 150 words. Strong, conservative

Evangelical scholars are among the supporters of

the declaration.

This approach to the rush to acceptance of Al Gore’s

Global Warming theory is welcome and important.

We have experienced in recent days an attempt by

the Religious Left to redefine "Evangelicalism" by

moving it away from its main emphasis on the

power of the Gospel to change lives, and "broaden

its agenda" to include poverty, HIV/AIDS, and the

environment. The ability of the Church of Jesus Christ

to bring about social and cultural change and bring

relief to the poor and suffering is based entirely on the

message of the Gospel. Conservative Evangelicals have

always had a strong commitment to all of those issues

as part of the total Gospel message.

The "We Get It" Declaration may be summarized in

these main points: "God said it ...We get it ...They

need it ...Let’s do it." To read the entire Declaration,

and to add your name as a signer, go to:

www.wegetit.org

More about the author

The Evangelical Viewpoint is pleased to present this

new series of essays by Dr. Jerry Beavan, in which he

offers mature discussions of important elements of

the Christian faith, with the goal of helping Christian

believers to live the Christian life more effectively.

At age 89, he already has a lifetime of experiences in

Christian ministry, as a graduate theologian, as a

professor in college and seminary, and as a world

traveler involved in government relations at high

levels, here in America and around the world. The

late Dr. Jerry Falwell referred to him as "one of

God's giants and modern patriarchs." Dr. Billy

Graham said of him, "Jerry Beavan is the architect

of world evangelism as we know it today." Now

living in "active retirement" on America's Pacific

coast, although physically impaired, he is using his

writing skills, via the internet, to help other believers

gain a better understanding of their Christian faith.

He is the author of several works, including his recent

volume, ""A Handbook of Applied Christianity."

WHO NEEDS ANOTHER "MANIFESTO?"

2008-05-11T13:55:00.000-07:00

Some few "Blogs" ago (March 3, 2008), we touched

on the problem of multi-syllablization of the Gospel

which confronts the Christian cause. Cited were these

examples of present-day verbiage often being used in

religious writings: "westernization ...worldview ...

contextualization ... missiological ... Eurocentric ...

Easternize ... Africanize ... sacredness ... universality

... enculturation ... de-westernization... globalization

... venturesomeness ... self-theologizing. And those

are just a few.

The fact is that the Gospel message can still be stated

in simple, easy-to-understand words of just one or two

syllables. There is no need for complex words to define

or explain God’s gift of salvation through faith in Jesus

Christ, or His Great Commission to share that Gospel

message with the whole world.

Nor do we need another "Manifesto" – defined simply

as "a public declaration of policy."

There have been so many such public declarations of

policy through the years. To recall a few, there was

"The Communist Manifesto" by Karl Marx in 1848;

"The 1890 Manifesto" issued by the President of the

Mormon Church to end pluralistic marriages; "A

Christian Manifesto" by Methodist theologian Edwin

Lewis in 1934; "A Christian Manifesto" by Francis

Schaeffer of l’Abri fame in 1981: "The Unabombers

Mainfesto" by Unabomber Theodore Kazynscki in

1995, and the Manifesto of Presidential Wannabe Ron

Paul, "The Revolution," in 2008.

Now a group of Christians of varying persuasions

have produced another such document, titled "An

Evangelical Manifesto." The 20 page document

was released last week at a press conference in

Washington, DC, managed by one of the "Steering

Committee" members, Larry Ross, who has been

serving as the professional publicity agent for Billy

Graham and Rick Warren. Although denied being a

political document, it deals quite extensively with the

right of Christians to become involved in politics,

and its timed release in the nation’s capitol in the

midst of the most intense national partisan political

struggle in years, makes that denial a bit suspect.

The text had as its principal drafter Os Guinness, best

known as a social critic rather than a theologian, but

included in the Steering Committee are some nominal

Evangelical figures: Timothy George of Beeson

Divinity School, Rich Mouw of Fuller Theological

Seminary and David Neff of Christianity Today; all

of them not only signers of this "Manifesto," but also

signers of the Yale University Divinity School’s vague

response to the Islamist scholars’ letter seeking

cooperation between the Christian faith and Islam.

This "Manifesto" uses 20 pages and several thousand

words to define what "Evangelical" is and what it is

not. One of the first evaluations of it from Warren

Smith, writing in One News Now, included these

words, "It contains, like other documents of this kind,

both virtues and flaws. It’s better than most; worse

than some." Mr. Guinness claimed that it took three

years to draft the document. From his viewpoint it

gave him time to include a major premise from his

recent book, "The Case for Civility," and its convoluted

argument for a "civil public square" versus a "naked"

public square on one side, and a "sacred" public square

on the other side.

The process of obtaining signatures to the document

has begun, and will doubtless continue – to what end

or for what purpose, no one can be absolutely certain.

The need for an accurate appreciation of the true

Evangelical position – Evangelicalism – has been with

us since the late Carl Henry’s definitive work, "The

Uneasy Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism" was

published in 1947. The term "Evangelical" has been

both abused and misused in the intervening years.
It is doubtful that social critic Os Guinness’ 20 page

"Manifesto" with or without a long list of signatories

will accomplish anything to correct this problem.

The true Evangelicals, born-again Christians who have

accepted Jesus’ Great Commission to go, preach and

teach, do not need a further explanation of what He

meant. They will simply continue the ministry in which

the Church of Jesus Christ has been engaged since He

announced its formation in the first century, as it is

recorded in Matthew 16:18.

More about the author

The Evangelical Viewpoint is pleased to present this

new series of essays by Dr. Jerry Beavan, in which he

offers mature discussions of important elements of

the Christian faith, with the goal of helping Christian

believers to live the Christian life more effectively.

At age 89, he already has a lifetime of experiences
in Christian ministry, as a graduate theologian, as
a professor in college and seminary, and as a world

traveler involved in government relations at high

levels, here in America and around the world. The

late Dr. Jerry Falwell referred to him as "one of

God's giants and modern patriarchs." Dr. Billy

Graham said of him, "Jerry Beavan is the architect

of world evangelism as we know it today." Now

living in "active retirement" on America's Pacific

coast, although physically impaired, he is using his

writing skills, via the internet, to help other believers

gain a better understanding of their Christian faith.

He is the author of several works, including his recent

volume, ""A Handbook of Applied Christianity."

Is Our God a "Risk Taking God?"

2008-04-16T14:21:00.000-07:00

The recent ranting of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright,

for 20 years Barack Obama’s pastor, suddenly thrust

their church – Trinity United Church of Christ, a UCC

affiliate -- into the national news. Out of his lengthy

rants the "punch line," so to speak, was Mr. Wright’s

directing his congregation not to say "God Bless

America," but rather "God Damn America."

Feeling it necessary to respond, the UCC went

to the extreme measure of buying a full page ad in –

where else? – the New York Times. They tried to assert

their legitimacy as one of America’s "Main Line" church

denominations, although one of the smallest at just 1.2

million members. UCC was formed in 1957 as the result

of a merger between the Congregational Christian

Church and the Evangelical Reformed Church.

The text of the ad tries to emphasize their history,

tracing their roots to the early American colonists. Among

the "firsts" they brag about are the first foreign missionary

efforts, but that claim is a bit ambiguous since the first

foreign missionary work by American churches was carried

on by the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign

Missions. That organization grew out of the famous

"Haystack Prayer Meeting" by students at Williams College

in 1806. Historians refer to the ABCFM as being

"Congregationalist oriented," but the group’s mission

work involved several denominations, beginning with
thefirst missionaries sent overseas in 1812.

Among other "firsts" which they claim are the

first ordained Afro-American pastor, the first ordained

woman pastor, and the first ordained openly-gay pastor.

It is certainly true that among the Founding Fathers there

were several Congregationalists, but it is a bit of a stretch

to equate the extremely liberal views of the UCC of today

with the doctrinal beliefs of those early Americans.

The closing lines of the ad are worth considering:

"Ours is a risk-taking church, because ours is a risk-

taking God." And then the final words are their current

slogan, "God is still speaking."

"A risk-taking church ... a risk-taking God."

Clever words, perhaps originated by some advertising

agency, but certainly by someone out of touch with the

theological facts concerning our God. "Risk" is defined

in our dictionaries as "the possibility of suffering harm

or loss involving uncertain danger." How - by what

stretch of the mind – can such a concept be attributed

to our God who is omnipotent (all-powerful), and

omniscient (all-wise, all-knowing)? Or to His Church,

the Body and Bride of Christ, the second person of the

Godhead? An all-powerful and all-knowing God cannot

be subject to any risk, nor could He subject His Church

to any risk. The words "risk-taking" cannot in any way

be applied to God or to His Church.

And as for the other clever, advertising agency

phrase, "God is still speaking," yes, of course,
Hespeaks to His own in prayer, and through the

leading of His Holy Spirit, but a deeper meaning of

God’s current speaking is set forth in Hebrews 1:1-2

(NIV), "In the past God spoke to our forefathers

through the prophets at many times and in various

ways, but in these last days He has spoken to us by

His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, and

through whom He made the universe."

It is spiritually obscene when a misguided man,

embittered by his personal perception of racism in this

country, can command so much attention by the news

media to vent his hatred of this nation. . . and when the

religious denomination which he represents unwittingly

admits to having drifted so far from the doctrinal beliefs

held by those whom they claim to be their historical

antecedents in our nation’s earliest days. Those Founding

Fathers, in their written and spoken expressions of their

faith, made it clear that they were establishing this new

nation on historic Judeo-Christian principles. Those

principles have never changed, but America’s reliance

upon them and adherence to them has deteriorated in

the futile pursuit of "progress" and "diversity."

A far more accurate description of our God than

the UCC’s "risk-taking God" are the words of one of

today’s popular worship hymns, "Our God is an awesome

God, He reigns from heaven above, with wisdom, power

and love, our God is an awesome God." (Lyrics: Michael

W. Smith)

More about the author

The Evangelical Viewpoint is pleased to present this

new series of essays by Dr. Jerry Beavan, in which he

offers mature discussions of important elements of

the Christian faith, with the goal of helping Christian

believers to live the Christian life more effectively.

At age 89, he already has a lifetime of experiences in

Christian ministry, as a graduate theologian, as a

professor in college and seminary, and as a world

traveler involved in government relations at high

levels, here in America and around the world. The

late Dr. Jerry Falwell referred to him as "one of

God's giants and modern patriarchs." Dr. Billy

Graham said of him, "Jerry Beavan is the architect

of world evangelism as we know it today." Now

living in "active retirement" on America's Pacific

coast, although physically impaired, he is using his

writing skills, via the internet, to help other believers

gain a better understanding of their Christian faith.

He is the author of several works, including his recent

volume, ""A Handbook of Applied Christianity."

Is there such a thing as a "Noble War?"

2008-03-27T20:42:00.000-07:00

On the five year anniversary (if it may be called that)

of the war in Iraq, President Bush commented on two

significant events – first, the fact that the war in Iraq

had reached the five year point, and second, the fact

that the number of US military deaths had reached

4,000.

In his remarks recognizing those two events, the

president called the war in Iraq, "noble, necessary,

just." He has so often been forced to the defensive

mode by public opinion, domestic and international,

that two benchmarks of this nature, occurring at the

same time, might well have been expected to produce

a strong defensive statement. And that was about as

strong as any such statement could be.

"Just." Possibly. If the only alternative were to allow

Saddam Hussein to remain in despotic power, holding

the people of Iraq in abject subservience, then it was

probably a just war. Saddam Hussein is gone. He has

been captured by American forces, tried and executed

under Iraqi law. But it can be argued that the war goes

on, even after its just cause has been resolved.

"Necessary." Again, possibly so. Iraq, through the

intransigence of Saddam Hussein, had ignored and for

an extended period of time had refused to comply with

the several resolutions of the United Nations. There is

some grounds for the decision that war was the only

way to bring him, and Iraq, into conformity with what

we consider to be the "civilized world."

"Noble." Ah, there’s the major difficulty. How does

"war" – any war – become "noble?" Once war consisted

of two opposing forces fighting to the death with

stones and clubs. Then with spears and arrows. Then

with guns and cannons. Now with air craft equipped

with guided missiles, poison gas and nuclear bombs.

The same "bottom line" applies through the ages –

war is "to the death."

How can it be noble to commit to death the lives of

any nation’s young men – and women? Not often can

the term "noble" be applied to war. In recent years the

genocide in Rwanda comes to mind. 500,000 human

beings slaughtered, while the United Nations and the

rest of the "civilized world" stood by and did nothing.

Four years after that genocide, Bill Clinton, as the

Commander in Chief of the US Armed Forces, issued

what has been called the "Clinton apology" and

acknowledged his failure to deal with the situation in

Rwanda. There was not then, and has never been, a

formal apology for the inaction of the United Nations,

the United States and the rest of the world community.

That might well have been a "noble" war, if it had ever

occurred.

Or the current situation in Darfur in the Sudan, where

in the past few years similar genocide has killed an

estimated 400,000 Sudanese, with 2.5 million suffering

forced displacement. Again, the "civilized world" has

completely failed, and the slaughter continues. Who

will make the acknowledgment of failure, or perhaps

apologize on behalf of the United Nations, or even the

United States? That, too, might have been considered a

"noble" war, had it ever occurred.

There is a deplorable tendency to treat the reports of

military fatalities almost as numbers on the score board

of an athletic contest. But those numbers do exist. They

are real. In Iraq, in 5 years, there have been 4,000 US

military fatalities. How would today’s anti-war protesters

carrying their placards in the streets and spraying fake

blood on their faces, or camping in protest near President

Bush’s home, have coped with what we older Americans

remember of the 300,000 US military deaths in the 4

years of World War II, or the 35,000 US military deaths

in the 3 years of the Korean conflict, or the 50,000 US

military deaths in the 9 years of the Viet Nam war?

Giving one’s life in defense of one’s country is a noble

act, and each US military death should be so respected.

Whether or not a war which resulted in those deaths was

"noble" is something for historians to decide.

As Christians, our source of authority and guidance, the

Bible, is not bereft of mention of warfare – spiritual and

military. In the synoptic gospels – Matthew, Mark and

Luke – Jesus speaks of warfare (military, not spiritual)

prior to the time of His return. "When you hear of wars

and rumors of wars, do not be alarmed ... nation will

rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom ..."

(Mark 13: 7,8 NIV) And Jesus spoke of military war in

defining the responsibility of being His disciples, "Or

suppose a king is about to go to war against another

king. Will he not first sit down and consider whether

he is able with ten thousand men to oppose the one

coming against him with twenty thousand?" And Jesus

even explained diplomacy as a possible solution, "If he

is not able, he will send a delegation while the other is

still a long way off and will ask for terms of peace."

(Luke 14, 31-32 NIV)

But Paul took the concept of military war into the realm

of spiritual conflict, "For though we live in the world,

we do not wage war as the world does. The weapons we

fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the

contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds.

We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets

itself up against the knowledge of God..." (II Cor. 10: 3-5

NIV) And in his letter to Timothy, he advised the younger

man, "Fight the good fight of the faith. Take hold of the

eternal life to which you were called ..." (I Tim. 6: 12 NIV)

For those of us who can only observe from a distance

the conflicts between nations or ideologies, our recourse

must be to pray for Almighty God to guide the decisions

of those in temporal power with respect to the nobility,

necessity and justice of any future military conflict, any

future war.

More about the author

The Evangelical Viewpoint is pleased to present this

new series of essays by Dr. Jerry Beavan, in which he

offers mature discussions of important elements of

the Christian faith, with the goal of helping Christian

believers to live the Christian life more effectively.

At age 89, he already has a lifetime of experiences in

Christian ministry, as a graduate theologian, as a

professor in college and seminary, and as a world

traveler involved in government relations at high

levels, here in America and around the world. The

late Dr. Jerry Falwell referred to him as "one of

God's giants and modern patriarchs." Dr. Billy

Graham said of him, "Jerry Beavan is the architect

of world evangelism as we know it today." Now

living in "active retirement" on America's Pacific

coast, although physically impaired, he is using his

writing skills, via the internet, to help other believers

gain a better understanding of their Christian faith.

He is the author of several works, including his recent

volume, ""A Handbook of Applied Christianity."

What Was He Thinking Of?

2008-03-13T14:47:00.000-07:00

"That was the first question that came to mind

when the story of New York Governor Eliot Spitzer's

involvement with a prostitution ring was reported

in the media. It is a question that arises when other

very fortunate people risk everything for some trivial

satisfaction." That was the comment by Thomas

Sowell, Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution at

Stanford University in California.

It is the question we might ask concerning New Jersey

Governor James McGreevy who sacrificed his political

career for a homosexual fling, or Senator Larry Craig,

who lost his governmental career for an indiscretion

in a public men’s room . . . and the list goes on . . . all

the way to United States President Bill Clinton with

respect to his relations with a young female employee.

Or from the Christian aspect of life, it is the question

we might ask of Ted Haggard, president of the National

Association of Evangelicals, or James Bakker, of PTL

fame, or Jimmy Swaggart who wept copiously over the

loss of his TV evangelism career. Or of scores of priests

of the Roman Catholic church who abandoned their

vows of service to God to indulge in sexual misconduct

with young children.

There is so much to say . . . there is so much which has

already been said. One comes to the general conclusion

that when caught and exposed, the expressions of

regret are perhaps as much for getting caught as for the

action itself. Essentially what they have demonstrated

with respect to their faith, their beliefs, or their promises

to their fellow-men is cynicism and hypocrisy. Neither

has any part in the Christian life.

Many of the news commentators -- the famous "talking

heads" of TV -- are arguing that Mr. Spitzer should not

be severely punished . . . that he has already given up being

the Governor of New York State . . . and their premise is

that adultery is not a federal offense. This fact may not

mean much to them, but while adultery may not be a

federal offense, it is most certainly a God offense. And

that is an offense before a more exacting court than any

federal court, including the U.S. Supreme Court.

For all such situations, political or religious or business

or sports or just ordinary life practices, the Word of

God is clear, definite and unambiguous. "You shalt not

commit adultery." (Exodus 20:14) But there are other

expressions of guidance in His Word, "Trust in the

Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own

understanding; in all your ways acknowledge Him

and He will make your paths straight." (Proverbs

3: 5,6, NIV) Or the corollary, "Do not put your trust

in princes, in mortal men who cannot save... Blessed

is he whose help is the God of Jacob... the Lord who

remains faithful forever." (Psalm 146: 3-6, NIV)

MORE ABOUT THE AUTHOR

The Evangelical Viewpoint is pleased to present this

new series of essays by Dr. Jerry Beavan, in which

he offers mature discussions of important elements

of the Christian faith, with the goal of helping other

Christian believers to live the Christian life more

effectively. At age 89, he already has a lifetime of

experiences in Christian ministry, as a graduate

theologian, as a professor in college and seminary,

and as a world traveler involved in government

relations at high levels, here in America and around

the world. The late Dr. Jerry Falwell referred to him

as "one of God's giants and modern patriarchs." Dr.

Billy Graham said of him, "Jerry Beavan is the

architect of world evangelism as we know it today."

Now living in "active retirement" on America's Pacific

coast, although physically impaired, he is using his

writing skills, via the internet, to help other believers

gain a better understanding of their Christian faith.

He is the author of several works, including his recent

volume, ""A Handbook of Applied Christianity."

Multi-syllablization Of The Gospel

2008-03-03T19:06:00.000-08:00

The Gospel which Jesus told us to go into

all the world and preach to everyone is –

as defined in the Scriptures – a very simple

concept. Just two familiar verses present it

in its totality. "For God so loved the world,

that He gave His only begotten Son, that

whosoever believeth in Him should not

perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

In reply to the question, "What must I do to

be saved?" Paul and Silas said, "Believe on

the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be

saved." (Acts 16:31)

A total of just 35 words, only 7 of which (9 if

you include loved and saved) are composed

of more than one syllable.

And yet today’s popular Christian speakers

and neo-theologians have developed a new

vocabulary which they utilize to confuse the

unwary into believing that in today’s world

the Gospel is a complicated concept.

This week a regular monthly Internet news

bulletin for a Christian evangelism project

used words which remind one of the "Newspeak"

language of George Orwell’s novel "1984." Here

are just a few of the words they used to describe

the task of proclaiming the Gospel today:

westernization ... contextualization ... worldview

... missiological ... easternize ... Africanize ...

sacredness ... de-westernization ... Eurocentric ...

venturesomeness ... universality ...missiologist ...

globalization ... enculturation ...self-theologizing.

But that is enough to convey the idea.

Here is one direct quote from their presentation

which illustrates their viewpoint: "The Christian

faith must be rethought, reformulated and lived

anew in each human culture."

It is strange how sincere, well-meaning Christian

believers can go so far afield from Jesus’ Great

Commission, where He said simply: "Go ye into all

the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature."

(Mark 16:15)

It is also strange that an omniscient God did not

have adequate fore-knowledge of any necessity to

use strange sounding, multi-syllabic words to

explain what He meant. Or that Paul, a quite well

educated man, felt that the simple words, "Believe

on the Lord Jesus Christ" were an adequate answer

to the question men would be asking through the

ages to come.

Let’s drop the pseudo-intellectualism, and go back to

the first century basics and preach the Gospel to all

the world, and tell men they must believe to be saved.

It’s just that simple.

More about the author

The Evangelical Viewpoint is pleased to present this

new series of essays by Dr. Jerry Beavan, in which he

offers mature discussions of important elements of

the Christian faith, with the goal of helping Christian

believers to live the Christian life more effectively.

At age 89, he already has a lifetime of experiences in

Christian ministry, as a graduate theologian, as a

professor in college and seminary, and as a world

traveler involved in government relations at high

levels, here in America and around the world. The

late Dr. Jerry Falwell referred to him as "one of

God's giants and modern patriarchs." Dr. Billy

Graham said of him, "Jerry Beavan is the architect

of world evangelism as we know it today." Now

living in "active retirement" on America's Pacific

coast, although physically impaired, he is using his

writing skills, via the internet, to help other believers

gain a better understanding of their Christian faith.

He is the author of several works, including his recent

volume, ""A Handbook of Applied Christianity."

ONE MONTH TO LIVE

2008-02-25T06:11:00.000-08:00

If you had

ONE MONTH TO LIVE

Those of us who are involved with computers and the

Internet on a regular basis are very much aware of

the “teaser” ads which appear on our screens several

times each day and we are not often fooled by them.

We are offered phenomenal incomes, great vacations,

incredible discounts on prescription prices, trim and

muscular bodies with substantial weight loss, and

fantastic sexual achievements which make the Islamic

promises to suicide bombers pale by comparison.

But this week there was a different one: “What would

you do if you had only one month to live?”

That sounds like a situation in which any Christian

believer would be interested. It was surely worth opening

for careful consideration. And it proved to be an ad for
a new book with that title, “One Month to Live.” It isn’t

an expensive book -- the list of book sellers referenced

in the ad show the regular retail price as $19.99, and it

is already being discounted to as low as $13.59. Then

there is a church program to go along with the book, and

it costs $149. No discounts for that program were listed.

The title is -- at first glance -- an intriguing one, and opens

the mind’s door to thinking about such a concept. For the

Bible centered Christian it is a bit off base for at least two

reasons; First, the new life that God gave us in John 3:16

(and elsewhere in the Scriptures) is permanent -- “eternal”

-- and not divided into various periods, such as up to now,

and then in a “one month to live” period.

And Second, the return of Jesus Christ is imminent --
He can return at any moment . . . there is no allowance
for that “one month to live” interval.

How we should live, from the moment of receiving God’s

gift of salvation, is clearly set forth throughout the New

Testament. Peter, upon whose statement of faith Jesus

said He would build His church, instructs us in I Peter 3:15,

“be ready always, to give an answer to every man that

asketh you a reason for the hope that is in you.” We are to

be ready to witness “always” not just in some 30 day period

before our death.

Paul, whose writings define the Christian life so clearly,

wrote in Ephesians 4:1, “I beseech you that ye walk worthy

of the vocation wherewith ye are called,” and then gave

some examples, including lowliness, meekness, long -
suffering, etc. Paul did not limit our Christian walk to
the month prior to our death, but set forth those examples
as the way our entire Christian life should be lived.

And finally, Jesus spoke to His followers in Matthew 28:19

and Mark 16:15, telling us to “go into all the world and
preach . . . go and teach all nations.” He certainly didn’t
limit His Great Commission to the month before we might
die, but gave it as a permanent instruction for all believers.

How should we live at this moment, and throughout our
life,right up to the moment of His return? In Mark 13: 32,
33,37 Jesus gave us instructions concerning His return:
“of that day and hour, knoweth no man . . . take heed,
watch and pray , for ye know not when the time is . . .
what I say unto you, I say unto all: Watch.”

None of us is ever given the assurance of a month to live,

but each moment should be lived as the Scriptures teach . . .

witnessing and watching . . . preaching and teaching . . .
walkingworthy of our calling before Him.

MORE ABOUT THE AUTHOR

The Evangelical Viewpoint is pleased to present this

new series of essays by Dr. Jerry Beavan, in which he

offers mature discussions of important elements of the

Christian faith, with the goal of helping Christian believers

to live the Christian life more effectively. At age 89, he

already has a lifetime of experiences in Christian ministry,

as a graduate theologian, as a professor in college and

seminary, and as a world traveler involved in government

relations at high levels, here in America and around the

world. The late Dr. Jerry Falwell referred to him as "one
of God's giants and modern patriarchs." Dr. Billy Graham

said of him, "Jerry Beavan is the architect of world

evangelism as we know it today." Now living in "active

retirement" on America's Pacific coast, although physically

impaired, he is using his writing skills, via the internet, to

help other believers gain a better understanding of their

Christian faith. He is the author of several works, including

his recent volume, “A Handbook of Applied Christianity.”

NO WRITERS’ STRIKE FOR PASTORS

2008-02-15T15:47:00.000-08:00

There was great rejoicing, or at least a bit more than

mild rejoicing, this past week when it was announced

that the writers’ strike had been settled and American

show business could get back on its regular schedule.

One of the results of the strike was that the stars of the

late night shows were unable to do their usual 5 or 10

minute opening monologue, and all their one-liners and

conversational bits during their shows were simply not

possible. As a result the nation was entertained by some

re-runs of old shows.

The reason? The writers were on strike and no one was

available to write for the stars those entertaining bits

of conversation which they do so well . . . . and which

for so doing they are paid exorbitant salaries, in the

millions of dollars annually.

But during all this strike period, we have not heard of a

single church which canceled its services because there

was no one to write sermons for the pastor.

Those pastors not only write their own sermons, but they

also keep busy visiting the sick, counseling those in need,

marrying couples starting a new life together, baptizing

newcomers to the Christian faith, and conducting funeral

services for those who have passed away.

And they do all those things at salaries which pale into

insignificance when compared to the amounts those

entertainers receive -- people who couldn’t even perform

without someone to write their material for them.

If you never felt that you had reason to appreciate the life

and ministry of your pastor -- well, you now have a very

graphic reason. Take a moment next Sunday to thank him

for never going on strike, and for being faithful to his calling.

MORE ABOUT THE AUTHOR

The Evangelical Viewpoint is pleased to present this

new series of essays by Dr. Jerry Beavan, in which he

offers mature discussions of important elements of the

Christian faith, with the goal of helping Christian believers

to live the Christian life more effectively. At age 89, he

already has a lifetime of experiences in Christian ministry,

as a graduate theologian, as a professor in college and

seminary, and as a world traveler involved in government

relations at high levels, here in America and around the

world. The late Dr. Jerry Falwell referred to him as "one
of God's giants and modern patriarchs." Dr. Billy Graham

said of him, "Jerry Beavan is the architect of world

evangelism as we know it today." Now living in "active

retirement" on America's Pacific coast, although physically

impaired, he is using his writing skills, via the internet, to

help other believers gain a better understanding of their

Christian faith. He is the author of several works, including

his recent volume, “A Handbook of Applied Christianity.”

ARE THE HISTORICAL CREEDS IMPORTANT

2008-02-06T10:57:00.000-08:00

ARE THE HISTORICAL CREEDS IMPORTANT
TO THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH TODAY?

In Matthew 16:13-18 it is recorded that Jesus was
discussing with His disciples the reaction of the
populace to Him and His ministry, and He asked
who the people were saying He was. There were a
variety of answers, and He pressed the point, asking
who did the disciples think He was, and Peter spoke
up, saying “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living
God.” Peter used the term christos, often translated
as “anointed” or “Messiah.”

In His response, Jesus used a precise choice of words,
and in a voice both tenderly loving and mightily
prophetic, said “thou art Peter (petros) and upon
this rock (petra) I will build my church.” The Greek
word petros means a stone which is easily moved, and
that is the way Peter often acted, while the word petra,
which Jesus used in speaking of Peter’s expression of
faith, means a mass of rock, solid and immoveable.

But beyond the play on words, Peter’s affirmation can
well be considered as the first Christian creed. The
word “creed” does not appear in the Bible, but is
derived from the Latin credere, “to believe” or credo,
“I believe.” Historically, the early Christian creeds were
developed essentially as statements of agreements on
the Trinity and Christology, the study of the person of
Christ. Whereas Peter here called Jesus the “Son of the
living God,” John would later speak of Him as God’s
“only begotten Son.” (John 3:16)

The New Testament provides several examples of
creedal statements of belief: in John 1:49 where
Nathanael confessed to Jesus, “Thou art the Son of
God,” or in Acts 8:37 where the Ethiopian eunuch
confessed to Philip, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the
Son of God.”

Foundational to all of the later creeds was the “Rule
of Faith” from St. Irenaeus of Lyons, who had been a
student of Polycarp, who in turn had been a protégé
of John, the beloved disciple of Jesus. It has a date
of approximately 185 AD, and is amazing in how it
expresses a complete statement of the Christian faith.
Jesus had ministered in the first century, and now
just a century later, Irenaeus, who came to be called
the “father of the church,” sets forth a clear statement
of God‘s plan for His creation, which would become
the foundation for the creeds which centuries later
became enduring definitions of the Christian faith.

Some of those historical creeds are familiar to us
today; in order of their dates of adoption, they are
the Nicene Creed, 4th century; the Athanasian Creed,
5th century, and very likely the best known, the
Apostles Creed, adopted probably in the 6th century.

Perhaps a thousand years later, several more specific
expressions of particular denominational aspects of
the Christian faith were adopted, dating from Martin
Luther’s Catechism and Augsburg Confession about
1530, to the Methodist Articles of Religion in 1800.

Probably the best observation as to the value of the
historic Christian teaching, came from the great
British preacher, evangelist and educator, Charles
Haddon Spurgeon, in a lecture to his students in the
mid 1860’s: “You are not such wiseacres as to think
or say that you can expound the Scripture without
the assistance from the works of divine and learned
men who have labored before you in the field of
exposition … It seems odd that certain men who
talk so much of what the Holy Spirit reveals to
themselves, should think so little of what He has
revealed to others.”

No better summary could be given than this brief
one by J. L. Neve in his volume, Churches and Sects
of Christendom: “Creeds, confessions and covenants
… are the expressions of an experience which the
church of Christ has had in its study of Scripture,
in its search for truth, in its conflict with error.”

To answer the initial question, as to whether the
historical creeds are important to the church today
-- yes, they most certainly are. In a time when the
basics or the fundamentals of the Christian faith
are being abandoned, those creeds, conceived and
adopted in the early centuries of the Christian
church, and thus close to the life and ministry of
Jesus Christ, are important as concise statements
of what actually comprises the Christian faith. And
they have stood the test of time for hundreds of
years, actually for more than a millennium.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

MORE ABOUT THE AUTHOR

The Evangelical Viewpoint is pleased to present this
new series of essays by Dr. Jerry Beavan, in which he
offers mature discussions of important elements of
the Christian faith, with the goal of helping Christian
believers to live the Christian life more effectively.
At age 89, he already has a lifetime of experiences in
Christian ministry, as a graduate theologian, as a
professor in college and seminary, and as a world
traveler involved in government relations at high
levels, here in America and around the world. The
late Dr. Jerry Falwell referred to him as "one of
God's giants and modern patriarchs." Dr. Billy
Graham said of him, "Jerry Beavan is the architect
of world evangelism as we know it today." Now
living in "active retirement" on America's Pacific
coast, although physically impaired, he is using his
writing skills, via the internet, to help other believers
gain a better understanding of their Christian faith.
He is the author of several works, including his recent
volume, “A Handbook of Applied Christianity.”

AVOID THE “ONE WORLD CHURCH” CONCEPT

2008-01-27T20:22:00.000-08:00

AVOID THE “ONE WORLD CHURCH” CONCEPT;

CLING TO THE FUNDAMENTALS OF OUR FAITH

In prophetic portions of the Bible, the concept -- even

the reality -- of a “One World Church” in the future

is clearly set forth. In the reign of the Antichrist it

will have great power, but that is in the prophetic

future. Today Liberals within the Christian community

have become excited about a “One World Church,”

which they are willing --even eager-- to help bring

into being. In this “One World Church” there will be

a unity of worship, but it will not be based upon, nor

will it include any recognition of, the deity of Jesus

Christ, His incarnation as the only begotten Son of God,

or His sacrificial death for the salvation of believers.

That concept is already being promoted today by

those who are willing to sacrifice the basic elements

of the Christian faith to join other religions under the

ecumenical banner of unity.

In mid-October, at the end of the month of Ramadan,

American Christians, as well as fellow Christians all

over the world, were made aware of a letter from 138

Islamic scholars, titled “A Common Word Between

Us and You.” The letter set forth what those scholars

portray as the similarities between Christianity and

Islam. They endowed their concept of unity between

the two religions with profound significance, using

this statement, almost as a threat: “The Future of the

world depends upon peace between Muslims and

Christians.”

Their analysis of this principle was expressed in these

words, “The basis for this peace and understanding

already exists. It is part of the very foundational

principles of both faiths: love of the One God, and

love of the neighbour. These principles are found

over and over again in the sacred texts of Islam and

Christianity. The Unity of God, the necessity of love

for Him, and the necessity of love of the neighbour

is thus the common ground between Islam and

Christianity.”

Almost immediately, the Yale University School of

Divinity responded to the message from the Islamic

scholars in a letter titled, “Loving God And Neighbor.”

Their response appeared in a full page advertisement

in the New York Times on November 18, supported

by the signatures of some 300 religious leaders

representing a broad cross-section of the Liberal

theological viewpoint.

Included, however, were a few signatures from other

individuals who are usually considered to represent

the Conservative, or even the Evangelical viewpoint.

For example: the Provost and President of Wheaton

College; the President and Dean of Fuller Seminary;

the President Emeritus of Gordon Conwell Seminary;

the President and Vice President of the National

Association of Evangelicals (NAE); the Editor in Chief

of Christianity Today publications; and these much

publicized “mega-church” pastors, Robert Schuller of

the Crystal Cathedral, Bill Hybels, of Willow Creek

Congregational Church and Rick Warren, best selling

author and pastor of Saddleback Church.

Of those signatures, Albert Mohler, President of

Southern Baptist Seminary (who did not sign the Yale

response) said that he recognizes that those people

signed the letter as an act of goodwill, but holds that

such an action is unwise for Christians.

“Unwise” may be an extremely mild term. Mohler went

on to say, “”When Christians enter into a conversation,

we must enter the conversation as Christians.” He is

right. What the composers of the Yale response -- and

those who signed it -- failed to understand is that the

Quran which is quoted so freely by the Islamists, in 5:17

states that all who believe in the divinity of Christ are

unbelievers; in 4:171 says Jesus was not crucified; in

9:30 says that those who believe that Jesus is the Son

of God are accursed; in 9:29 mandates war against Jews

and Christians; and in 112:1-4 denies the Trinity, and

that Jesus is God’s Son. It is difficult -- no, impossible --

to enter into a serious dialogue with scholars who hold

firmly and unchangeably to those views.

The Yale response even went so far as to apologize for,

and to ask Allah’s forgiveness for the acts of Christians

during the Crusades -- which is at best a fawning

capitulation to the Muslims for events which took place

more than 500 years before the American Declaration of

Independence was written or signed.

The attention the media has directed to this exchange

of letters is premature and unwarranted. Before any

realistic or substantive discussion with Islamists can

ever take place, the Allah-directed persecution and

slaying of Christians has to be addressed, and the false

assumption that Allah and Jehovah are one and the

same God has to be abandoned by both sides.

Rather than yielding to the Liberal desire for a “One

World Church,” this is a time for Christian believers

to return to a firm adherence to the basic elements

of the Christian faith. In the late 19^th and early 20^th

century these basic elements were promulgated under

the term “fundamentals.” Those who adopted and

emphasized those basics were called “Fundamentalists.”

That movement was instituted as a response to the

growth of an extremely liberal trend in theology called

“Modernism.“ The “fundamentals” were essentially

these basic Christian beliefs: the inerrancy of the
Bible, the virgin birth of Christ, the substitutionary
atonement, the bodily resurrection of Jesus, and the
imminent return of Jesus Christ.

Unfortunately, some “fundamentalists” over-reacted

and became divisive. The term and the concept took

on a not-undeserved derisive connotation. Then in the

mid-20^th century, the distinguished theologian Carl

Henry wrote a definitive treatise titled, “The Uneasy

Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism,” and the

Evangelical movement was born.

Today, in a time when once again there is a liberal move

toward a “One World Church” and an ideological union

with such a diverse religion as Islam, the answer for

American -- and world -- Christians is to return to the

basic elements, the fundamentals , of the Christian faith.

IS EVANGELISM REALLY IMPORTANT?

2008-01-16T07:19:00.000-08:00

The Liberal critics may argue that “evangelism”
or “evangelical” are really not important, because
those words are not found in the Bible, or, as the
“Red Letter Christians” would put it, “Jesus never
used those words.”

That argument makes as much sense -- i.e. none --
as those same Liberal critics insisting that there is
nothing wrong from a Scriptural standpoint about
abortion or homosexuality, because those words are
not found anywhere in the Bible. And, of course, the
“Red Letter Christians” will join in by pointing out
that Jesus never used those words.

Their arguments are so pitiful, and their positions
so untenable that we should probably ignore them,
and hope that they will go away. But they may not
do that, so let’s take just a few minutes to look at the
facts, hoping that there aren’t many still around like
the fabled old lady who said “I’ve already made up
my mind -- don’t confuse me with the facts.”

The word “evangelist” does appear three times in the
New Testament, twice as singular usage, and once as
plural: Acts 21:8, “Philip the evangelist;” 2 Tim. 4:5,
“do the work of an evangelist;” Eph. 4:11, “and some,
evangelists.”

In each of those usages, the Greek word phonetically
is euangelistes meaning “a messenger of good,” denoting
“a preacher of the gospel.” There are in the original
language of the New Testament, two other forms of
that same word: euangelizo, a verb meaning “to preach
good news,” and euangelion, a noun meaning “good news”
or the “gospel.”

Thus the words “evangelism” or “evangelize,” while not
appearing directly in the New Testament, clearly carry
just one meaning: to preach the gospel.

It is interesting that Jesus’ final words before He left this
earth and ascended into heaven, were “Go ye into all the
world and preach the gospel.“ (Mark 16:15) The original
language used here included kerusso, meaning “be a herald”
or “preach” combined with euangelion which means “the
gospel.” Thus the basic meaning of evangelism in
New Testament usage is clearly to preach the gospel.
In recent years, let us say in the Twentieth Century,
debates arose over whether evangelism embodied
simply the preaching of the gospel, or did it imply
a ministry beyond preaching, a follow-through? In
1946 the Archbishop of Canterbury authorized a
Commission and its findings were published in the
volume, “Toward the Conversion of England.“

In that report this definition of evangelism appeared,
and it has stood, unchanged and accepted, for the past
60 years: “To evangelize is so to present Christ Jesus in
the power of the Holy Spirit, that men shall come to
put their trust in God through Him, to accept Him as
their savior, and serve Him as their King in the
fellowship of His Church.”

In even more recent years there have been attempts to
broaden the meaning of evangelism so that it becomes,
for example, working toward a cure for AIDS in Africa,
compassion and justice for the poor, global human rights,
and even promoting the global warming theory. Good
works, from a Scriptural standpoint, are the outworking
of the Christian faith and are not a substitute for it. Taken
to an extreme, for example, Kay Warren, wife of the best
selling author and mega-church pastor Rick Warren,
describes the AIDS program as “the greatest opportunity
for the church to be the church.“

In a recent issue of Christianity Today magazine,
author Mark Dever excerpts a passage from his
book , “The Gospel and Personal Evangelism.”
He outlines “What evangelism Isn’t” and very
clearly sets forth five examples, including The
Imposition of our Beliefs, Personal Testimony,
Social Action and Public Involvement,
Apologetics, and the Results of Evangelism.
He comments: “To be evangelism, he gospel
must be clearly communicated …” Good works
however important or necessary they may seem
to be, are not evangelism.

Paul directed us: “Do the work of an evangelist.”
(2 Tim. 4:5) Jesus commanded us, “Go ye into
all the world and preach the gospel (evangelize)
to every creature.“ (Mark 16:15)