"The Narrow Road": Blogs By Shane Kastler

A Critique of Infant Baptism & A Review of Douglas Wilson’s book: “To a Thousand Generations: Infant Baptism – Covenant Mercy For the People of God”

In his book,  To a Thousand Generations:  Infant Baptism – Covenant Mercy For the People of God, Douglas Wilson, Pastor of Christ Church in Moscow, Idaho attempts to make a Biblical case for infant baptism.  He begins by setting the bar impossibly high when he states:  “we must be content with nothing less than a clear biblical case requiring infant baptism.” (pg. 9, italics in original).  The problem here is obvious.  Wilson is attempting to show that the Bible requires something that it never even mentions.  Infant baptism is never commanded, modeled, suggested, described, displayed, or spoken of in a single verse of Scripture, Old Testament or New.  So any attempt to suggest its “commanded” will require a certain amount of creative exegesis, illogical logic, and massive leaps to inferred assumptions that have no Biblical support.  Even most paedobaptists will admit that the Bible never speaks of infant baptism and the case must be made from assumptions and church history, rather than explicit exegesis.  This utter lack of infant baptism in the Bible has always been the “elephant in the room” for the paedobaptists; and after reading this book one can be assured that the elephant remains, as big and obvious as ever.

Wilson is a former Baptist who has changed his views on several issues, including baptism.  No doubt motivated by the Reformers cry of Semper Reformanda (Always Reforming); Wilson has sought to examine church and life in light of Scripture and humbly (and commendably) seek to make changes accordingly.  But to jettison Believer’s baptism in favor of infant baptism is to reform in the wrong direction.  He’s abandoned the clear Biblical teaching in favor of a church tradition view rooted in Roman Catholicism.  In this book, he takes it a step further by attempting to accomplish the impossible and make a case for the Biblical mandate for infant baptism, when it nowhere exists.

One of the main debates between Reformed Baptists and Presbyterians centers on the understanding of the “Covenant.”  Presbyterians will invariably say that Baptists don’t understand the Covenant; and Baptists will say that Presbyterians don’t understand the New Covenant.  Under the Old Covenant, Israel was a “type” of the elect under the New Covenant.  The sign under the Old Covenant was circumcision, which was required of all Israelite males.  In the New Covenant the sign is baptism which is required (for obedience, not salvation) of all members of the New Covenant.  To receive the sign under the Old Covenant you had to be born.  To receive the sign under the New Covenant you have to be “born again” (John 3:3).  Wilson muddles the two covenants together and argues for the New Covenant sign to be administered to infants, just as the Old Covenant sign was.  But to do this is to miss the typological nature of Old Testament Israel.  All Israelite males received the sign because they were a type of the Elect (i.e., Christians) who likewise receive the sign of the New Covenant.  To force the sign upon an infant in the New Covenant would be akin to taking an unwilling pagan (not a slave or convert) from a nation other than Israel, and forcing circumscision upon them in the Old Covenant.  Such “circumcision” would be pointless and invalid because the recipient is not really a part of “Israel” just as an unregenerate infant is not really a part of the “church” in any genuine sense; and should therefore not receive the New Covenant sign until some sort of evidence exists that they possess saving faith and are indeed a part of the New Covenant.  To say that they are included because of their parent’s faith is to grossly misapply the scriptural passages which speak of “promises to your children.”  And such misapplication occurs throughout this book.

The title for the book comes from Deuteronomy 7:9, “Know therefore that the LORD your God, He is God, the faithful God, who keeps His covenant and His lovingkindness to a thousandth generation with those who love Him and keep His commandments.”  Wilson uses this passage and other similar ones to attempt to show the generational promise of the Covenant.  Of course the promise in this passage speaks to those who “love Him and keep His commandments” which requires regeneration.  In other words the promise is not to those born, but to those “born again.”

Likewise Psalm 103:17-18, which Wilson cites:  “But the lovingkindness of the LORD is from everlasting to everlasting on those who fear Him, and His righteousness to children’s children, To those who keep His covenant and remember His precepts to do them.”  Again notice the promise is to ‘those who fear Him…..those who keep His covenant and remember His precepts to do them.’  That is, obedience, from a pure heart of reverent love for God, which would not describe an infant.

One of the quintessential Old Testament passages describing the New Covenant is found in Jeremiah 34: 33-34:  “But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days,” declares the LORD, “I will put My law within them and on their heart I will write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. They will not teach again, each man his neighbor and each man his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for they will all know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them,” declares the LORD, “for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.”   In the New Covenant, everyone “knows” God, because everyone in the New Covenant is born again by the Spirit, indeed they have the Spirit living within them.  They possess saving faith and have God’s law “within them.”  When we see these people coming out of spiritual death into life in the New Testament we also see them obediently receive the sign of the New Covenant by being baptized….as believers, by immersion.  And not one of these is a sprinkled infant.  The Biblical case for infant baptism is simply non-existent.

Rather than begin with the Scriptures and proceed forth to practice, Wilson begins with Infant baptism then backs his way into the Bible, with many curves and sharp turns by way of creative logic; followed by a couple of quantum leaps over obvious inconsistences to land on a handful of texts that never really mention infant baptism.  Wilson is clearly a very intelligent man and a skilled philosopher and debater.  Indeed one would have to use great philosophical talent to argue for something that exegesis will not prove. 

In a nutshell, Wilson’s argument is this:  although infant baptism is not explicitly mentioned in the New Testament, the covenant sign of circumcision was still practiced and required of Jewish Christians, but not Gentile Christians.  And since Jewish babies were receiving a sign you would also have to administer a sign to Gentile babies to include them in the church as well.  And since circumcision was clearly not required of Gentiles they must have done a different sign, namely infant baptism.

            But the philosophical house of cards Wilson builds is itself based on the incorrect assumption that Jewish Christians were required to circumcise.  Was it required?  Not according to the Apostle Paul, who unleashed a vitriolic, Holy Spirit-inspired diatribe against the very thing Wilson is claiming.  “Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you. And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law. You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace. For we through the Spirit, by faith, are waiting for the hope of righteousness. For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but faith working through love.” (Galatians 5:2-6 NASB)  While Wilson may be right to conclude circumcision was still practiced by some early Jewish Christians; it would be incorrect to say it was required.  And if you remove circumcision as a requirement for Jewish Christians in the early church, then Wilson’s entire house of cards falls because it eliminates his basic premise for requiring infant baptism for Gentile Christians.

With the issue of baptism, we are talking about one of only two ordinances that Jesus instituted in the New Testament.  We are not talking about an obscure text on the validity of snake-handling, or trying to decipher how Endor’s witch conjured up Samuel.  Given the importance of baptism as a perpetual ordinance commanded by Jesus in the Great Commission, one would think the Bible would clearly state how it is to be administered.  Indeed the Bible does.  The word “baptize” means to immerse; and every example of it in Scripture is of a person old enough to profess faith in Christ.  Wilson’s arguments that “baptize” can mean things other than “immerse” is unconvincing, being largely based on the use of “baptize” regarding Spirit baptism, which when compared to water baptism is like comparing apples to oranges.  If infant baptism was meant, and certainly if it’s required, then why is the New Testament completely silent about it?  Why is there not one single example of it?  Why is there no commandment for it?  Why is it that the only way to justify it is to lurch into a long, confusing dalliance on the nuances of Covenant Theology coupled with examples from extra-Biblical sources from church history?  Again, this is a church ordinance.  Why is the Bible utterly silent on its application to infants?

            Certainly, Christian parents are to love and nurture their children; raising them up in the fear and admonition of the Lord.  No Christian parent can look at Scripture and deny their responsibility to raise their children to be godly.  But it is no insult to a child to withhold from them an ordinance that Scripture doesn’t say to administer to them.  It would be equally fallacious to somehow see a child with Christian parents as being any way “in covenant” with God more than a child with non-Christian parents.  While there’s no denying the advantage to being raised by godly parents in a Christian home, the child of Christians is just as depraved and unregenerate as the child of pagans.  And both will remain that way apart from the regenerating, electing, grace of God.  An electing grace, I might add, that is unconditional, as Wilson knows full well and teaches (as a Calvinist).

            I’ll conclude by saying Douglas Wilson is obviously a very intelligent man, whom I have no doubt loves the Lord greatly.  In many areas I would stand in complete agreement with him and I have in the past enjoyed and been edified by some of his writings.  His well-known debate with Christopher Hitchens (‘Collision’) is a stellar example of Van Tillian Presuppositional apologetics at work.  His adherence to the five points of Calvinism would further make him a theological comrade.  And his apparent disdain for the anti-intellectualism so prevalent in many Baptist circles would find a hearty agreement with me.  But he also seems to be given to extreme positions on this, and other issues (i.e., Federal Vision theology).  If one quickly breezes through this book they may come away saying, “he must be right” although they’ll likely have a headache trying to follow the logic.  But if one reads the book slowly and actually looks up the cited Bible verses to read them in context, one will see that more often than not the verses were not used by the Biblical writers to say what Wilson is expounding.  Perhaps Wilson is hoping the reader will simply take his word for it and be dazzled (confused?) by his skills for argumentation, rather than study this issue more deeply.  Whatever his motivation, the reality is that the argument for infant baptism falls flat in this book; and it will always fall flat with any book that purports to prove, from Scripture, that infant baptism is required.  It’s not required.  It’s not taught.  It’s not modeled.  It’s not even mentioned in passing.  Believer’s baptism is all of the above, and therefore the “elephant” of Biblical silence unfailingly remains in the room for all paedobaptists, and Believer’s baptism should remain (and will hopefully abound) based on clear, Biblical teaching.

BOOK REVIEW: "Memoirs of An Ordinary Pastor: The Life & Reflections of Tom Carson" By D.A. Carson

Unfortunately, the ministry is not exempt from self-seeking glory hounds who long for attention and strive to climb denominational ladders.  Even among the truly faithful, God assigns some to large churches with many resources….and he assign others to labor in obscurity with few sheep to his charge.  Those with worldly eyes immediately see the “mega-church” pastor as successful and the “mini-church” pastor as a failure.  But thankfully, pastors (indeed all Christians) stand or fall based upon the judgments of the Lord Jesus Christ, rather than the judgments of the world.  And Jesus judges by a different standard.  Ultimately Jesus commends faithfulness over flair, perseverance over pomp, and service over stardom.  Believe it or not, in this world of pastors seeking superstar status, Jesus loves the “ordinary pastor” who slaves away for His master amid ridicule, mockery, and persecution.  Such a man was Tom Carson.

            In the book:  “Memoirs of an Ordinary Pastor:  The Life and Reflections of Tom Carson”, D.A. Carson tells the story of his dad, who faithfully served as a Baptist missionary/pastor in 20^th century French Quebec Canada; a place which was overwhelmingly Roman Catholic.  Through those hard years of ministry, Tom and a handful of others faithfully preached the gospel in the midst of much spiritual darkness, with very little visible fruit to show.  A normal Sunday might have 20-30 people in attendance.  A good Sunday (which was rare) might have 40.  For many years the Carson family lived in the same building in which they ministered.  The kitchen and bedrooms would double as Sunday School classes.  Tom and his devoted wife Marg would disciple the men and women they led to Christ.  And they would sacrifice much to get the gospel to Quebec.

            Ironically, out of this obscure Baptist household would arise one of the greatest New Testament scholars of our day.  D.A. Carson (Ph.D. - Cambridge University) serves as Professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School in Deerfield, Illinois.  In addition to this, he has lectured and preached in over 70 countries throughout his life.  I first heard him when he delivered a series of lectures at my alma mater, Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in 2000.  What you immediately discover upon hearing Carson speak is that he is no “ivory tower” intellectual who is removed from the messiness of pastoral ministry.  While his diction and grammar are erudite, his messages frequently cut to the heart.  I have been richly blessed by his preaching, as well as his writings…this book included.

            I would recommend this book for any Christian to read, especially pastors.  We desperately need a Christian America that rejects equating success with numbers.  In truth, God doesn’t grant every Pastor a “mega-church.”  Indeed he grants it to very few.  Most are called to faithfully shepherd their “few sheep.”  Some, desiring to grow at any cost, have chosen to turn the church into a marketplace; polling the unconverted masses upon what they want in a church.  But the church doesn’t belong to the non-Christians…nor does it belong to the Christians.  The church belongs to Christ and if it is to remain a legitimate church it must submit to Him alone and faithfully teach truth; accepting that God may grant you many….or He may grant you few who come and worship among you.  The faithful man of God must be content to persevere, leaving the numerical results to his Lord and Master.  In short, faithfulness equals true success.  Always has…always will.

            Tom Carson was faithful.  According to D.A., Tom was not a fantastic preacher, nor a charismatic personality.  Through his ministry he was given at times to depression and discouragement.  He held himself to an amazingly high standard, then berated himself for falling short.  By the end of his days, he had served both full-time and bi-vocationally; and had done much as a layman watching other men bear the fruit of his labor.  Yet he never bemoaned this.  He rejoiced to see the gospel go forth and the church grow.

            His last several years were spent in nursing his wife through Alzheimer’s disease.  D.A. Carson writes of what a tremendous example he saw in his dad’s care of his mother.  He never complained.  He never lost patience with her.  He nursed her to the end.  Then a few years later, he too went to be with His Lord.

            Tom Carson was a man who would have never been known, were it not for his famous son.  But Tom Carson is the type of minister that should be emulated.  Perhaps by God’s grace, America will see many young pastors who aspire to the faithfulness of a Tom Carson as opposed to the fame of the latest faddish clerical superstar.  Faithfulness is necessary for genuine success.  And what the world calls genuine success doesn’t always include faithfulness. 

            Read this book and be inspired by a normal man….who was yet extraordinary in his devotion to his Lord and his family.  As the title indicates, Tom Carson may have been an “ordinary pastor” – but let us pray that God gives his church many more like him.  Men willing to be considered ordinary, so that Christ might be seen through them as the extraordinary Savior that He is.

BOOK REVIEW: The Blessed Hope: A Biblical Study of the Second Advent and the Rapture By George Eldon Ladd

“We are looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus.” Titus 2:13

Will Christians be raptured prior to the Great Tribulation, as most believe?  Or will Christians endure the Great Tribulation, looking for the Second Coming of Jesus Christ?  What is the “Blessed Hope” of the church today? Is it the escape of tribulation or is it the visible return of Jesus Christ to the earth to redeem His people and judge His enemies? George Eldon Ladd, in The Blessed Hope: A Biblical Study of the Second Advent and the Rapture, argues for the latter, attempting to debunk the theory that the Rapture and the Second Coming of Christ are two distinct events separated by the seven year “Great Tribulation.”

George Eldon Ladd is widely considered one the most influential Bible scholars of the 20^th century. After pastoring two Baptist churches early in his career, he eventually settled in as New Testament professor at Fuller Theological Seminary in California. Throughout his career he sought to engage the broader academic community with Biblical writing that liberal scholars would have to take seriously. He also sought to promote more unity within the conservative, evangelical world.

In Ladd’s day, much like our own, Dispensationalism was the predominant view of the church. In fact, some were so rabidly Dispensational, that they considered any other eschatological (end times) view to be heretical and dangerous. Ladd argues that such a stance is unnecessary and divisive. He gives a brief historical lesson in this book showing that many stalwart Christian defenders of the faith were NOT Dispensational in their theology. Ladd’ s view is that there should be plenty of room for various views, as long as the views are defended from Scripture. Ladd’s personal view is Historic Premillennialism, which is similar to Dispensationalism in that it espouses a literal 1000 year reign of Christ on earth. But it differs from Dispensationalism in that it see’s the rapture occurring at the same time as the Second Coming of Christ, at the END (rather than beginning) of the Great Tribulation.

Regardless of one’s end times viewpoint, it should be noted that Ladd makes a good case for a post-tribulation rapture both from a historical and a Biblical standpoint. Most of the early church fathers appear to have believed in a literal 1000 year reign of Christ (millennialism) and saw the 2^nd coming and rapture as occurring at the same time. Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and Tertullian are some of the church fathers Ladd presents as holding to these views. Perhaps the most significant of these is Irenaeus who was a disciple of Polycarp, who was a disciple of John the Apostle. While it doesn’t guarantee the validity of the Historic Premillennial position, it is intriguing that a Christian who is one generation removed from John the writer of Revelation would hold these views. Furthermore, the apparent acceptance of other church fathers makes the case from history compelling. But, at the end of the day, it’s Scripture that must be the deciding factor in the case. And Ladd’s primary arguments are from Scripture.

Ladd points out that nowhere in Scripture does it explicitly teach that there will be a “pre-tribulational” rapture. First Thessalonians clearly teaches a “rapture” when we shall be gathered together with the Lord in the air. But to suggest that this rapture will occur prior to the Great Tribulation is an inference that is not explicitly stated. The passage states: “For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we shall always be with the Lord.” 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 (NASB)

Ladd’s case is presented throughout that New Testament Christians were not looking to be raptured out of tribulation, but instead the Bible taught Christians to expect tribulation. Given this fact, that Christians throughout the centuries have endured persecution unto death….why would God change this course with the “end times?”

One Scripture that Ladd uses effectively is from 2 Thessalonians 2, where the Thessalonian Christians were afraid they had missed the “Day of the Lord.” “Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him,  that you not be quickly shaken from your composure or be disturbed either by a spirit or a message or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come.  Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction,  who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God.”2 Thessalonians 2:1-4 (NASB)

Paul sets their mind at ease by telling them the “Day of the Lord” won’t occur until the “apostasy” and the “son of destruction” is revealed. Why doesn’t Paul simply tell them to relax about the Day of the Lord since, as Christians, they’ll be raptured before it occurs? Was Paul unaware of a pre-tribulation rapture? That seems unlikely since Paul is the one who wrote the most significant passage on the rapture in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18. Since most scholars are in agreement that the “Day of the Lord” refers to Christ’s coming in judgment at his Second Advent, the passage in 2 Thessalonians seems to give credence to the belief that the Second Coming and the Rapture are simultaneous events that occur at the end of the Great Tribulation.

Another argument that Ladd addresses is the idea of an “any moment” rapture. Those who oppose Historic Premillennialism state that it takes away the idea that Christ could return at “any moment” as taught in Scripture. Ladd points out that the “any moment” passages refer to the outplaying of all the “end times” events that could being at “any moment.” Furthermore, he states that the Dispensational view requires a “nation of Israel” to be in existence before the rapture of Christ. Therefore, those with a Dispensational view couldn’t have held to an “any moment” rapture anyway, until 1948 and the re-emergence of Israel as an actual physical nation.

Regardless of what you “end times” view is, “The Blessed Hope” is a book that Christians should read and examine with an open mind. While you may not agree with all of his conclusions, it would do any Christian well to consider the validity of Ladd’s arguments. Ladd’s hope was that Christians of various camps could debate these issues in Christian love without breaking fellowship. It was also Ladd’s concern that many Christians would one day find themselves unprepared for tribulation because of their blind hope in a pre-tribulation rapture that was unlikely to occur. Ladd makes a good case for his viewpoint, and the wise Christian will prayerfully consider if he’s on the right track regarding future events.

For Crying Out Loud... Just SPANK 'Em!

This past week, Fox News reported a story about a mother who made her son wear a sign saying “I’m a thief and a liar” out in public.  Apparently the 12-year old boy had stolen a cell phone from his aunt and then lied about it.  The mom only asked the boy to apologize which he refused to do.  She didn’t know what else to do…so she resorted to the sign.  He wore the sign for two hours, but still refused to apologize.  As it turns out the kid has been incorrigible for some time, and has not responded to discipline.  While millions of factors play into the causes of his behavior, one thing that must be addressed is the defiance…which starts young.  And the best way to deal with such defiance is by a good, swift swat on the bottom.  Let me elaborate.
    I find it interesting how far some parents will go to avoid doing what the Bible says to do regarding unruly children.  And I find it appalling how brain-dead the so called child raising experts are on this matter.  Oftentimes, even the Christian ones will jump through hoops to avoid Biblical, God-ordained discipline. “Foolishness is bound up in the heart of a child; But the rod of discipline will remove it far from him.” Proverbs 22:15 (NASB)
    I’ll give two examples.  James Dobson and Kevin Lehman.  Both of these Christian experts have given some very reliable and sound advice over the years.  Dobson’s book on Bringing Up Boys is a must read for anyone who has a son.  It’s a shrewd analysis of the current war on boys in our culture, as well as a great encouragement to raise your boys to be men….instead of geldings.
    Kevin Lehman is well known for his “reality discipline” in which you let kids make choices, but you force them to live with those choices.  For example, if Johnny doesn’t want to eat his dinner, he doesn’t have to eat his dinner, but he won’t be allowed to eat anything else until the next meal.  If Johnny’s sister Susie ate her dinner then she might get a bedtime snack.  But Johnny won’t.  He chose to skip dinner and he will have to live with the reality of his choice.  I see some elements of this mindset which can be beneficial as well.  Part of the growing up process means you learn to live with your choices.  And kids need to learn that sooner rather than later.  But Dobson and Lehman both go astray in the area of spanking.
    While both of these men advocate spanking, they say to do it as a “last resort.”  This is foolish and wrong; and I found that out the hard way.  When my son entered his terrible twos, I thought a demon had overtaken him.  He would throw fits and scream and say rude things, etc., etc.  Of course the “experts” tell you this is normal behavior for a two year old, and they’re right.  Normal? Yes.  But should it be acceptable? No.  That’s the part they leave out.
    I took the “spank as a last resort” approach to my family’s peril.  After struggling with endless (and worthless) “time-outs”, lectures, and groundings.  I discovered that a parent’s policy should be the same as George Bush’s.  “We will not negotiate with terrorists.”  Thankfully, I came across a book by Tedd Tripp (yes, that’s how he spells Tedd) called Shepherding a Child’s Heart.  In it, Dr. Tripp uses Scripture, not Psychobabble to guide the parent through the sometimes painful process of child rearing (pun intended).  If your two-year old is defiant, then spanking is not a “last resort” it should he a frontline defense.  Tripp asserts that Scripture’s two main methods for disciplining a child is Communication and the Rod.  And if you embrace one and forget the other, you’re destined for problems.
    Communication is paramount.  Little Johnny must know what he did.  And he must know why it’s wrong.  And he must know how to avoid doing it again.  But reason alone won’t work with a child.  I discovered clearly that children don’t simply learn with words…they must also feel certain consequences for the truth to sink in.
    The Rod is also paramount.  But it must be administered the right way.  If you spank in anger without communicating in love then you’re not teaching the child the full story of redemption.  The Rod without communication will create anger, frustration, and future rebellion.  But Communication without the Rod will not adequately make the point.  And regardless of how great you think your parenting skills of persuasion are…..GOD SAYS to use both tools.  And if you’re too “loving” to use the rod, you might be surprised to the learn that the Bible says you’re behavior isn’t loving at all.  In fact by withholding the rod, you’re hating your child.  “He who withholds his rod hates his son, But he who loves him disciplines him diligently.” (Proverbs 13:24 NASB)
    In his book, Dr. Tripp gave me permission to do, what I KNEW needed to be done, regardless of what the “experts” say.  Andrew needed a spanking.  Andrew needed instruction.  Andrew needed a hug and affirmation that his dad loved him.  Andrew needed to know that his behavior was not only disrespectful to his parents but it was a sin against God.  And Andrew need to know that further defiance would result in the same process.  And ten minutes later, when he once again behaved defiantly, he got another spanking, and another hug.
    The funny thing is that most parents won’t spank.  And if they do, they’ll stop at one.  When sometimes more are needed.  Rome wasn’t built in a day…and children aren’t trained in a day either.  I determined that I would spank Andrew fifty times that week if necessary.  But what I found was that fifty times wasn’t necessary.  It only took a few times of dogged, consistent discipline for him to realize the destruction of his ways and to change.  And then I found thereafter that the spankings weren’t needed as often as they once had been.  He began the process of learning and growing…only because of the reality of discipline and the Rod in his life.
    Don’t think you are doing your kids any favors by withholding the loving administration of the Rod.  Sadly, if you refuse to discipline them today, the criminal justice system will tomorrow.  Often times today, excuses are made for wayward children.  Parents are blamed for not patting Johnny enough on the head….when in reality the parents should be blamed for not swatting Johnny enough on the hind-end.  The fact is that kids need both encouragement and discipline.  They need to be taught justice and grace.  They need Communication and The Rod.  So listen to your so-called “experts” if you wish.  I’ll listen to God.  He knows plenty about raising children.  In fact, he INVENTED children.   
    Dobson wrote another book that has a very accurate title:  “Parenting Isn’t For Cowards.”  This is so true because sometimes parents have to do things they would rather not do, for the sake of their children.  And many factors must be considered when looking at the issue of corporal punishment.  Some kids are too young for it…some kids are too old for it.  Some kids need it often….some kids need it seldom.  Some kids are stronger willed than others and will always push you to the limit.  Other kids are more naturally compliant and respond well to the mere threat of the Rod.  But the Rod must be present for there to be true peace and love in the home.
    Andrew is seven now, and he is growing into a really good kid.  He’s not perfect and still requires discipline.  But when that time comes we deal with it and we move on with our lives.  I don’t hold his mistakes over his head for a week or two by grounding him.  I don’t publicly humiliate him with a sign around his neck.  And I don’t put him in a “time-out” and drag out a worthless process.  (Although I do think time-outs are effective sometimes, when a kid needs to be removed from a heated situation.)  And I certainly don’t spend all day bickering with him and haggling over what his punishment will be.  When I see parents doing this…I always want to say the same thing:  “FOR CRYING OUT LOUD….JUST GIVE HIM A SPANKING!”….AND if he is repentant then give him a hug and tell him you love him.  If he’s still defiant, then give him another spanking.  Eventually, he’ll get tired of it and come around.  In the long run it’s easier on the kid and the parent AND its more effective to just spank them like God says to do, as opposed to dreaming up a million different “creative” punishments that only draw out the problem and ignore the real matter.
    So ignore the experts and do what God says instead.  If you’ll consistently and lovingly show your children communication and the rod…then you’ll probably find that you won’t need to use the latter so much in the future…IF you’re consistent.  Andrew responds well to the Rod.  His sister Savannah seems to respond well to Andrew getting the rod also and usually needs only the threat of the rod.  But I’ve got another one who is now coming of age.  Karissa will be two this week….and you know what??? I think she seems to be more like her brother than her sister.  But we’ll do what we can to bring her around -- because I know what to expect this time...and I'll listen to God from the start, rather than the "experts."
    Love your children.  Teach your children.  Communicate with them and hug them and tell them about Jesus.  And when they are defiant…as ALL sinners will be at times….spank them.  Don’t argue with them all day…just SPANK THEM!  Don’t negotiate with terrorists….just SPANK THEM!  Then hug them and teach them how to avoid spankings in the future.  Whether you want to admit it or not, your children are “fools” by nature.  And whether you want to admit it or not, they are “fools” because they take after their parents (“for all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God” Romans 3:23).  And whether you want to admit it or not….God’s Word is true when it tells us:  “Foolishness is bound up in the heart of a child; But the rod of discipline will remove it far from him.” Proverbs 22:15 (NASB)
………
(P.S.-- I would strongly encourage all parents to read “Shepherding a Child’s Heart” by Tedd Tripp.  Click here for details.)

DVD Review: “The Children of Caesar: The State of American Education, Where it is Headed, & What Your Family Can Do About It!” By Voddie Baucham

  “If you hand your kids over to Caesar to educate…don’t be surprised when they grow up to be Romans.” With this provocative statement, Voddie Baucham begins his 2 part DVD series called: “The Children of Caesar: The State of American Education, Where it is Headed, & What Your Family Can Do About It!”

I’ve been aquatinted with Voddie Baucham’s ministry for over 10 years now, and would say without reservation that he is one of the most powerful voices for Biblical truth our country has. Baucham is somewhat of a rarity: He is a black, Southern Baptist pastor, who was raised by a Hindu, single teenage mother in the projects of South Central Los Angeles. The first time, he heard the gospel was his freshman year of college, where he was converted to Christ and ultimately entered the preaching ministry. He serves as Pastor of the Grace Family Baptist Church in Spring, Texas, where he lives with his wife and 4 children. They are committed homeschoolers, and strong advocates for adoption, having adopted their 2 youngest children. I would strongly encourage anyone with children (or anyone who knows a child) to watch these videos—and at least consider what Baucham says.

Another provocative statement Baucham makes is: “Whoever teaches your child will ultimately be the one who disciples them.” Where does he get such an idea you ask? Jesus Christ. “A pupil is not above his teacher; but everyone, after he has been fully trained, will be like his teacher.” (Luke 6:40 NASB) A scary thought when you consider that God isn’t even allowed to be spoken of….much less taught in the public schools of today. Baucham contends that there is simply no way you can undo the influence that public schools will have over your children when they have them 5 days a week, for 6-8 hours per day.

Baucham also blows apart several myths with statistical fact. He refutes the idea that children are better off with “government certified” teachers, that homeschoolers are lacking in social abilities, and that the federal government should have any say in how you educate your children.

Citing the 10^th amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” In other words, the Federal government has absolutely ZERO Constitutional right to dictate educational requirements to an American citizen. As a sidebar, the 10^th amendment flatly proves that the Federal Department of Education is Unconstitutional and should be abolished post-haste. In fact, you may remember Ronald Reagan ran for President in 1980 promising to do just that. The left-wing liberal educational establishment had a collective “freak out” and Reagan was never able to follow through. But then again, our Federal government currently does numerous things that are Unconstitutional…but too many politicians are pleased with the power to do anything about it.

Baucham states that the reason people so often wonder about the “legality” of homeschooling is because they’ve been duped into thinking they have to have the Federal government’s permission to do anything. “We’ve become a nation of sheep, instead of ‘free men.” Baucham says. We simply follow the crowd and wait for the next order from our Master (i.e., the government.)

Using Deuteronomy 6 as a model, Voddie gives an outline for how God calls us to teach our children. By showing them that all truth is God’s truth, we can teach them how everything in our life relates to God and His Glory.

Voddie Baucham is one of my favorite preachers of our day because he is willing to say things that aren’t popular even if it means he catches some flack. He makes a strong case for homeschooling because that is the system he has adopted. However, he does contend that there are other Godly educational alternatives. But what simply must be fought against is handing our most precious possessions, our children, over to an atheistic, secular state. I remember an old commercial for Rush Limbaugh’s radio show where a woman said: “First he made me mad. Then he made me think. Then…he made sense.” I hope that many will get this DVD series, and let Voddie Baucham, and more importantly the Spirit of God do the same thing.

BOOK REVIEW – “The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War” By Thomas Dilorenzo.

At the height of his influence, many deemed him to be one of the worst tyrants the world had ever seen.  He incarcerated 15,000 of his fellow citizens because they disagreed with his war policy.  He had his army shut down newspapers and destroy the presses for any papers that wrote against him.  He declared martial law and arrested political opponents without a warrant or trial and kept them locked up for years.  His Secretary of State bragged that he could have any citizen jailed “at the snap of a finger.”  He had one Congressman who disagreed with him deported to another country.  Then oversaw a war that led to 620,000 deaths…all within his own country.  When half of the country sought to escape, they were forced to remain in the Nation…..or be slaughtered in mass for seeking liberty.  In essence they were forced to remain citizens at the point of a bayonet.  He ordered cities to be burned.  Farms to be destroyed.  Civilians, including women and children, to be bombed and executed.  He was one of the most hated men in history…..and one of the most beloved.  His name?  Abraham Lincoln.

            If the above paragraph shocked you, then you might consider reading a book entitled The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War, By Thomas Dilorenzo.

            While Lincoln is perhaps not as evil as this book presents, one can’t escape the reality that Lincoln took some very harsh and unnecessary measures during the American Civil War.  Ironically, the majority of Americans in both the North and South were in favor of a peaceful secession in 1860.  The North wanted separated from the South just as bad as the South did from the North.  Yet Lincoln would hear nothing of it.  Dilorenzo makes a rather compelling case for the economic motivations behind the war, given the fact that the South was paying roughly 80% of the Nation’s expenses through tariffs, while the North was reaping the majority of the benefits in terms of bridge and railroad construction.

            Furthermore, in Lincoln’s first inaugural address, he stated clearly that he had no interest in freeing the slaves in the South and had no constitutional right to do so.  When he reversed course and issued the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863, he confided to his cabinet that it was simply a “war measure” meant to spark a slave insurrection in the South.  Though most people don’t realize it, the Emancipation Proclamation only granted freedom to slaves in the South.  Slaves in the North were not granted freedom because their Masters had been loyal to the Union.  William Seward, Lincoln’s Secretary of State bemoaned at the time that the act was worthless having “freed slaves that we no longer have jurisdiction over…while keeping in bondage those slaves that we do.”  Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky, and even parts of Louisiana were under Federal control by 1863, and were thus allowed to keep their slaves.  That seems to be one of those quirks of history that has been forgotten.  Or as Dilorenzo contends….glossed over by the victors.

            Dilorenzo, who is an Economics Professor at Loyola College (Maryland), writes in a very readable style as he makes his case that slavery should have been abolished by compensated emancipation as done in Britain, Brazil, and many other countries during the 1800s.  The forward to the book was written by Dr. Walter Williams, Economics Professor at George Mason University, and frequent fill in host for Rush Limbaugh (and incidentally, an African-American).  Furthermore, he contends that the South should have been allowed to secede peacefully….as our colonial fathers did when faced with an overbearing British taxation system.  Had this happened, Dilorenzo contends that the North would have been forced to change their overbearing tax structure, and eventually North and South would have reunited with a much more solid and efficient government.  But what in fact did happen was the centralization of federal government power to the extent that the Constitution was repeatedly ignored leading to the Federal albatross that exists today.

            The argument between a massive Federal government vs. individual state sovereignty goes back to our founders.  Thomas Jefferson was famous for saying that the government that “governs best is the one that governs least.”  In other words, the Federal government’s job is to protect the citizens and insure they’re given the freedom to purse life, liberty, and happiness.  Jefferson’s primary opponent was Alexander Hamilton, who sought to have a strong Federal government that dictated things to the individual states and the citizens thereof.  Jefferson’s followers fought against this (rightfully so), given the fact that they had just escaped tyrannical government control from Britain during the American Revolution.

            As the course of our Nation progressed, the Hamiltonians, led by Lincoln, eventually gained control and vastly expanded the Federal government during the Civil War.  By 1865 and the end of the Civil War, states right’s had virtually ceased to exist, and the Federal government, which was CREATED BY the states, had become the ruling King of American government.  Ironically, the states had created a monster and now that monster would rule over them for the next 143 years (and counting).

            The great irony in all of this is that the two predominant political parties have swapped sides in the area of government control.  Today, it is the Democrat party that seeks higher taxes and more Federal control over the lives of its citizens.  While the Republicans seek a smaller government with more individual liberty.

            In conclusion, I would heartily recommend the reading of this book.  Its insights into our Nation’s history are illuminating to say the least.  You may not agree with every position taken, but the book does promise to make you think long and hard about governmental and constitutional issues.  And it gives a pretty clear road map for the bureaucratic mess that we find our federal government mired in today.  History kind of has a way, sometimes, of making people seem better (or worse) than they really were.  I suspect this is true of Lincoln as well.  While he had some admirable qualities, he was certainly not above political posturing or deceit, as is documented in this work.  So check out a copy of The Real Lincoln…and prepare to be challenged.

Minneapolis: Why Do Calamities Strike? A 6-Minute Video From John Piper

In the wake of the Minneapolis tragedy, the question will be asked anew, “Why does God allow tragedies like this to happen?” I have dealt with that question in a past blog, which you can read by clicking here. The short answer is that we live in a fallen and sin-cursed world; and tragedies are simply one manifestation of that harsh truth.

John Piper serves as Pastor of the Bethlehem Baptist Church in Minneapolis and has a teaching ministry called Desiring God Ministries. He has written some of the most powerful books every penned on the Glory and Sovereignty of God. Two that I would recommend are Desiring God: Meditations of a Christian Hedonist and The Pleasures of God: Meditations on God’s Delight in Being God. The video team at Desiring God Ministries has posted a short (6 minute) video of the aftermath of the Minneapolis bridge collapse, with a voice over of Piper preaching on why things like this happen. I would highly recommend you watch it if you get a chance. Click here to go to the site, and then click twice on the play arrow when you get there.

This latest tragedy WILL NOT BE THE LAST that our world experiences. Let us hope and pray that multitudes will begin to consider eternal issues and turn to Jesus Christ, lest the next tragedy be their final downfall.

HOW GREAT IS OUR GOD!---A Critique of The Book: "God is Not Great" By Christopher Hitchens

(NOTE: I hope to write a longer and more detailed critique of this book, in the future.  I offer this as a general refutation for those who may be influenced by Hitchens work. Please consider my arugments and take them to heart.  There's a lot of eternal issues riding on this. Also note...for a blog, this is pretty lengthy, so consider yourself warned.)

......

The latest installment of atheistic manifestos hit the shelves on May 1, 2007. God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything (published by Twelve Publishers, a division of Warner Books, New York, NY) by Christopher Hitchens quickly rose to the New York Times bestseller list. Hitchens himself, is a fairly multifaceted individual, serving as a contributing editor to Vanity Fair magazine, as well as a visiting professor of liberal studies at the New School. A native of England, Hitchens immigrated to the United States in 1981, and became a U.S. citizen in April of 2007. He has been known as a philosopher, political commentator, activist, scholar, and lecturer. This book, for the most part, falls under “philosophy” as he debunks religion in general and blames many of society’s ills upon a belief in a non-existent God.

I’ll begin this review by simply describing the physical design of the book. The smallest word on the cover is “god” in tiny, un-capitalized letters. Followed by ever increasing font… “is not GREAT.” Subtitled: “How Religion Poisons Everything.” If you turn the book over, you’ll see these words at the top “Praise for Christopher Hitchens” followed by the fawning reviews he’s received from such unbiased (insert sarcasm here) publications as the London Observer and the Los Angeles Times. The “god” cover and the “praise for Christopher Hitchens” back cover are hardly an accident of irony, but rather a blasphemous exaltation of a man. Which pretty much sums up the book. Take a look inside the back cover and you can read a little bit about Hitchens, and see a photograph, of what looks to be the saddest and most miserable human on the planet. Maybe he just doesn’t like having his picture taken. But have you ever seen a picture of an atheistic philosopher that looked happy? Probably not. If there is no God, and no Heaven, and no Divine standards, then life is fairly pointless, isn’t it? Clearly, there’s no joy in atheism.

I’ve always wondered why atheists are so often violently opposed to God. If they truly believe God doesn’t exist…then why do they appear to be so mad at Him? I’ve never seen diatribe’s against the Easter Bunny or Santa Claus. I have argued elsewhere that deep down, all people are hard wired to believe in God’s existence, and thus atheism is a crime against the very conscience God placed within the emotional/spiritual makeup of all people.  Hitchens clearly has an axe to grind against religion. In the early portions of the book, he describes his upbringing in parochial school England. Speaking kindly of his grammar school teacher, he described her as a Christian who tried to show the children the beauty that exists in God’s world. Of course, Hitchens seems to believe that he intellectually blew past his naïve teacher early on, and adopted a cynical and condescending view of “Mrs. Watts” and her belief in God.

With that said, Hitchens declares that he was raised in a fairly happy environment, with no psychological cause to turn against God. Indeed, the tone of the book seems to simply imply that he’s just way too intelligent to believe in God. (“professing to be wise, they became fools.” Romans 1:22) The fact that Hitchens is obviously intelligent, left me a little surprised at some of his contradictory and simplistic arguments. For example, in defending his atheism, he wrote about many other intellectual atheists that disagreed with him on minor issues. Yet, they remain united in their beliefs (or lack thereof). He’s obviously a big enlightenment fan that values “reason” and “logic” over “faith” and boasted of his atheistic camps “openmindedness” (p. 5). Yeah right! He’s openminded…as long as you agree with him. Otherwise you’re a buffoon. I think we can all claim to share such a hypocritical openmindedness. Can’t we?

Hitchens is willing to admit that some things are beyond our knowing and other things are fascinating to our minds. He states: “If the universe was found to be finite or infinite, either discovery would be equally stupefying and impenetrable to me.” (p. 10) This leads me to wonder if, at the very least, Hitchens might be a closet agnostic rather than atheist. But his admission of things beyond would seem to suggest, at least a chance of a Supreme Being. Yet, he refuses to go there. He bristles at the Christian term “seeker,” and swears that he is not one. But, if there are things beyond his knowledge, then why can’t there be a God…beyond his knowledge?

He concludes chapter one by making a declaration that he desires for religious people to simply leave him alone. “But this, religion is ultimately incapable of doing.” (v. 13) Really? He wants religious people to leave him alone? Then why on earth did he write a book inciting religious peoples deepest held convictions? If you want religious people to leave you alone, then I wouldn’t suggest writing a book subtitled: “How Religion Poisons Everything.”

Chapter 2, entitled, “Religion Kills” begins some of the more simplistic arguments Hitchens espouses. To simplify it to its least common denominator, this is essentially what he says. Ayatollah Khomeini was evil. Ayatollah Khomeini believed in God. Therefore God doesn’t exist. He use equally ridiculous examples for other radical Muslims, Christians, and Jews. Perhaps the most glaring example of this over simplification is his citing Fred Phelps, the Topeka, Kansas "preacher" as an example of Christianity. Phelps has made himself famous by protesting military funerals, homosexuals, and anything else that might draw publicity. Phelps holds beliefs that 99.99999999 percent of Christians would find abhorrent. Yet THIS is Hitchens example. That would be like judging every person of European dissent by what we know of Adolph Hitler. Would Hitchens want us to think all Europeans are like Hitler? Probably not, since he’s European. Then it’s asinine for him to hold Phelps up as an example of Christianity.

The point is this…just because people, even so called religious people, do bad things has nothing to do with whether or not God exists. Surely it has dawned on him that many times people do things that go against God’s moral will. The word for such action is sin…and I would suggest SIN, not Religion poisons everything. Hitchens plethora of examples citing religious people’s errors simply bolsters the belief in the fall of man, rather than the atheistic view of God. Not to mention the fact that Hitchens conveniently ignores heinous crimes committed by atheists. He’s eerily silent about Joseph Stalin, Vladimir Lenin, Karl Marx, Communism, the Soviet Union, and China. Luckily that collective group has never murdered anyone….Right, Christopher?

Another example of simplistic argumentation comes in Hitchens account of 9/11, which was perpetrated by people of a “religion.” Obviously, most would agree that Islamic radicals don’t do much to endear people to God. But, the knee jerk over reaction of throwing the Theistic baby out with the bathwater proves nothing. Hitchens praises the brave folks who confronted their religious zealot captors and caused the fourth plane to plummet in a Pennsylvania field. Bravo for these brave souls who gave their lives to save many others. But if memory serves, one of the heroic ringleaders of this mutiny was Todd Beamer, a devout Christian, and graduate of Wheaton College. Does religion poison everything? Beamer’s religion led him to save many lives. Perhaps even Hitchens, who lives in Washington, D.C.

The rest of Hitchens book makes predictable arguments against various religions. He claims the New Testament is loaded with contradictions (a claim that has been adequately refuted numerous times) concerning the virgin birth, the birthplace of Jesus, the date of Jesus’ birth, etc. He rips the Old Testament as being superstitious and unenlightened. Billy Graham he calls an anti-Semite. Mel Gibson he calls a fascist. Mel Gibson’s father, he calls a thug. Tim LaHaye a monkey. I think you can see the point and tone of the book.

With that said, Hitchens does make some arguments I would agree with. I too would claim the non-existence of the “god” that religions other than Christianity claim to worship. In fact, Jesus Himself stated, “No one comes the Father except by me.” (John 14:6) So, many of Hitchens attacks on radical Islam, Judaism, and Eastern religions are valid. Even some of his attacks on Christians are valid. Indeed no Biblical Christian would defend the crusades, nor a mandatory State religion of Christianity. But with all of that said, the main premise of the book seems to be that since so many people who believe in God are bad….God must not exist. This conclusion is simplistic, irrational, and in fact, crumbles under careful scrutiny.

In the end, Hitchens offers a belief in rationalism and reason. We can be amazed by nature and the cosmos, rather than God. Of course, I would argue (along with Paul) that we can be amazed by GOD, because of nature and the cosmos. (See Romans 1, and Acts 17) Hitchens is obviously a smart man. But it appears equally obvious that he is a cynical, hardened, and in some ways, pompous intellectual. His book will no doubt win some converts to his line of thinking. Any well written book bashing God is sure to garner plenty of press from places like the New York Times. But “well written” and “well argued” are two completely different things. Hitchens is a good writer. But a predictable philosopher. He rejects carte blanche any belief in the supernatural (similar to David Hume), and when one uses this as a starting point, ANY belief is rendered impossible. Christians begin with God as the starting point, then examine Science to see how God works. Hitchens begins with Science and Reason as the starting point, then backs into atheism based on flawed logic. Make no mistake, believing in God does require an ability to accept something unseen, indeed this is the very essence of faith. But God has not left himself without witness in the world He so precisely created. Open you eyes and see the glory of God surrounding you, Christopher! As Francis Schaefer said, “He is there and He is not silent.” My prayer is that Christopher Hitchens’ spiritual eyes will be opened to see what his physical eyes refuses to acknowledge. And that his book will be clearly recognized as the stumbling block it is intended to be.

The Un-mortified “little” Sins That Lead To “BIGGER” Sins

Suppose for a moment you have a terminal disease.  Your body is destined to be destroyed, and your death is imminent……UNLESS……you get up everyday and read the dictionary for one hour in the morning.  Sounds boring, right?  BUT YOUR VERY LIFE DEPENDS UPON IT…….would you do it?  If the doctor says you’re dead in 6 months without it….would you do it?  I think most people would.  It would be hard, it would require a little bit of discipline….but if your life depended on it……it’s a small price to pay.

            There’s another “small” thing your life really does depend on….actually several “small” things…but I’ll just mention two….prayer and Bible study. No, missing a quiet time won’t kill your physical body……but prolonged time away from communion with God through prayer and Bible study will absolutely destroy your spiritual life, and starve your soul.

            This past Sunday, I mentioned a book by John Owen called, The Mortification of Sin.  Owen was a Pastor and Theologian who lived in the 1600’s.  Yes, its an old book…..but, it may be the best book EVER WRITTEN (apart from the Bible) on dealing with sin in your life.  It’s not hard to read, and its not very long…..but it can change your life if you take the time and effort to read it.  I recently heard a Pastor testify to the fact that he would probably NOT be in the ministry today were it not for this book.  The great Bible scholar J.I. Packer has said that no one outside the Bible has affected his life more than John Owen….and no book of Owen’s has affected him more than The Mortification of Sin.  It’s really THAT powerful.  As I read it, I find myself constantly highlighting things Owen says about how to fight sin in your life.  He says things, that I would just never in a million years even think of…..but I’m glad HE did, and I’m glad he wrote them down, so that poor, miserable sinners like me could benefit from them 400 years later.  And one of the things he mentions is this………

            Sometimes the struggles we have with the “bigger” sins, (i.e., the ones that cause us the most anguish and harm) come about in our life because of our guilt in the “smaller” sins.  I’ll give you an example……I’ve never believed that adulterous affairs involving Christians, “just happen.”  I recently heard the tragic account of two families that were very active in a church.  Both husbands, both wives, both sets of kids…..active in church, and devout Christians (or so it seemed).  Now both families are ruined because one husband and one wife decided they love each other (instead of their spouse).  Incidentally, their feelings aren’t really LOVE…they’re really LUST.  But I’m sure they’re blind to that reality, because sin blinds you to the obvious.  Now how does a sin that HUGE happen? One of two ways:  Either, they’re NOT really saved to begin with (which is VERY possible in that situation)….OR there was a prolonged season of spiritual drifting….of straying off the narrow road……of UN-MORTIFIED “smaller” sins that led to the BIGGIE of adultery.  Have you ever thought about the fact that your lack of a “quiet time” tomorrow morning might lead to your having an affair 3 years from now?  That’s what John Owen is writing about.  We neglect the little sins……and then God “hands us over” to the bigger sins.

            Did you get up and start your day in God’s Word this morning?  Your life really does depend upon it.  Are you not a morning person?  Then you BETTER have ended your day in God’s Word.  Not a night person?  Then you BETTER have enjoyed a nice long lunch break with God.  Do you see my point?  If you’re not faithful…..DAILY in God’s Word and prayer…..you’re setting yourself up for BIGGER sins.  Or do you think you’re incapable of BIGGER sins?  Never forget this fact…..the ONLY man ever described as being a man “after God’s own heart” (1 Samuel 13:14) was later guilty of adultery, followed by a murder to cover up his affair. (see 2 Samuel 11-12)  BIG sins don’t “just happen” in a Christian’s life….at least not most of the time.  There’s a progression…..there’s a slippery slope…..There’s a neglect of the “smaller” things….that lead to a tragedy involving the BIGGER things.

            Is there grace with God?  Yes.  Is he “faithful and just” (1 John 1:9) to forgive? Yes.  BUT, will sin destroy your life, if you don’t fight it?  Absolutely.  King David’s life was never the same again.  God forgave him, and still loved him…..but the consequences of David’s sin were horrendous. His family completely fell apart, and he never enjoyed peace in his life again. (see 2 Samuel 12:10-14) 

            The road to “life-ruining sin” begins today….or maybe it begins tomorrow morning….when you choose 30 more minutes of sleep instead of breakfast with Jesus.  Just remember….today you have a choice….you can “discipline thyself for the purpose of godliness” (1 Timothy 4:7) ….or you can take the first step down the road to destruction…..by neglecting the “little” things……but LOOK OUT!  Sin MUCH, MUCH more deadly awaits around the corner.  Will you indulge…..or will you mortify?

….

P.S.---For more on The Mortification of Sin by John Owen, click on these links:

For The Mortification of Sin from CVBBS:

http://www.cvbbs.com/inventory.php?target=indiv&search_back=keywords%3DJohn+Owen%26searchstyle%3Dall%26page%3D2%26session%3Dfaa77508b36a042874feb9500216d7de%26title_keyword%3D%26isbn_keyword%3D%26publisher_keyword%3D%26author_keyword%3D%26sort_by%3D&bookid=5513

...

For The Mortification of Sin from Amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/Mortification-Sin-Puritan-Paperbacks/dp/0851518672/sr=8-1/qid=1163485520/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/103-3776581-8444634?ie=UTF8&s=books

...

For an updated version of The Mortification of Sin along with 2 other Owen works:

http://www.amazon.com/Overcoming-Sin-Temptation-John-Owen/dp/1581346492/sr=8-3/qid=1163485520/ref=sr_1_3/103-3776581-8444634?ie=UTF8&s=books

...

For an article about John Owen:

http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/Biographies/1466_The_Chief_Design_of_My_Life_Mortification_and_Universal_Holiness/