The Squirrel's Nut Cache - 4/9/09

The Nut Cache - a collection of recent things I found interesting, or amusing, or nutworthy.

I’m really glad that she has left a lifestyle of sin and debauchery. Yes, we can take issue with her “mysticism.” And, yes, we wish she'd chosen a more Biblical path. But how can you not be amused by a pole-dancing nun?

Well, what can we say about this? I guess Size Does Matter.

So, what do you do if your pastor just flat out denies that God exists? Well, a church in Norway decided to do nothing, because they didn’t want "a protracted discussion about the meanings of words that in the end will produce little clarity.” Heavens forbid that a church should be clear on the existence of God! (& here's Al Mohler's take on this story.)

This isn’t new, but it is one of the most concise and well thought out articles on the problems of Biblical illiteracy I’ve ever read. I came across it this week while looking for something else, and wanted to share it with you.

It’s nice to know that President Obama is understood across The Pond.

The Rodent Uprising continues. This courageous woodchuck has done his part in propagating the curse. Woodchuck, we applaud your efforts! Carry on!

Don't have time to pray? Life is just to busy? Fred Butler was kind enough to point us to this service...

This just in... More evidence of the thoughfulness and just downright solid convictions of Joel and Victory Osteen. The most pro-abort president we've ever had, and they say, "He's doing a good job..."?!?! Yikes!! I just cringe at the thought that some good-meaning proto-Christian is going to give me a copy of the Osteen Hope for Today Study Bible for my birthday or something. Can you see that sitting on the shelf along side Ryrie and MacArthur? Shudder!!

Is Roman Catholicism Christian? Part 2

Rome and Sola Scriptura

Sola Scriptura -- The teaching that the Scriptures contain all that is necessary for salvation and proper living before God; that scripture alone is the final authority in matters of faith (the content of our belief: i.e. what we believe) and practice (the outworking of our belief: i.e. how we live.)

I’ve got to admit that I’ve been having a little trouble writing this post. Not because it is difficult to show that the Roman Catholic Church denies sola Scriptura, but because it’s too easy. It’s like beating a baby seal; you just feel bad doing it.

Rome’s position is crystal clear. Rome doesn’t deny denying sola Scriptura. In fact, they deny that sola Scriptura is a proper doctrine. Sola Scriptura, Rome says, is not taught in the Bible, and was not taught by the Apostles. So, just what is Rome’s stance on the scriptures?

Rome teaches that, in addition to the scriptures, the Apostles also gave to the bishops “their own position of teaching authority.” Here is the pertinent section from the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

[76] In keeping with the Lord's command, the Gospel was handed on in two ways: - orally "by the apostles who handed on, by the spoken word of their preaching, by the example they gave, by the institutions they established, what they themselves had received - whether from the lips of Christ, from his way of life and his works, or whether they had learned it at the prompting of the Holy Spirit"; - in writing "by those apostles and other men associated with the apostles who, under the inspiration of the same Holy Spirit, committed the message of salvation to writing".

[77] "In order that the full and living Gospel might always be preserved in the Church the apostles left bishops as their successors. They gave them their own position of teaching authority." Indeed, "the apostolic preaching, which is expressed in a special way in the inspired books, was to be preserved in a continuous line of succession until the end of time."

[78] This living transmission, accomplished in the Holy Spirit, is called Tradition, since it is distinct from Sacred Scripture, though closely connected to it. Through Tradition, "the Church, in her doctrine, life and worship, perpetuates and transmits to every generation all that she herself is, all that she believes." "The sayings of the holy Fathers are a witness to the life-giving presence of this Tradition, showing how its riches are poured out in the practice and life of the Church, in her belief and her prayer."

Did you catch that in paragraph 78? All of the church’s doctrine and beliefs result from tradition, not scripture. That’s why, while Protestants say, “the Bible says,” Catholics say, “the Church teaches.” Lip service is given to the Bible, of course, but the Church is the only infallible interpreter of what the Bible really means. That means that what the Church says has more actual authority then what is written in the Bible. Remember, Rome used to burn people alive for the crime of translating the Bible so that people would be able to read it for themselves.

Rome doesn’t teach sola Scriptura. Instead, what Rome teaches is sola Ecclesia: that the Church in the Magesterium (the teaching office of the Pope together with the Bishops) contains all that is necessary for salvation and proper living before God.

So, is Rome right? Does the Bible teach sola Scriptura? Or did God establish an infallible Magesterium to propagate proper belief? If so, why write a book at all?

The first Psalm tells us that it is the “Law of Yahweh,” not the teachings of the Magesterium on which the blessed man meditates “day and night.” Paul told Timothy that it is the inspired Scriptures, not tradition, that is “profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.”

Now, I can’t tell you how many words from Rome I’ve read over the last few days that explain how sola Scriptura is a “false doctrine.” (See this or this, for example.) Many, many words to explain away the clear teaching of God-breathed Scripture.

Here’s how I see the problem with Rome’s “infallible Magesterium.” It isn’t taught anywhere in scripture. Instead, scripture warns repeatedly to be on guard against false teachers. In fact, Paul warns us of false teachers arising from within the leadership of the church herself! So, if the Bible does not teach an infallible Magesterium, but actually teaches that church leadership itself can (and will) contain false teachers, should we not be concerned by those who do teach sola Ecclesia?

Rome denies sola Scriptura at great cost and peril.

Is Roman Catholicism Christian? Part 1: An Introduction

(Update: Yeah, I know I said part 2 would be Tuesday. Sidetracked, sorry.)

So, somebody disagrees with me. So what?

All of us, in our human pride, don’t like it very much when somebody says that we’re wrong about something. You don’t like it, and I don’t like it. But I learned a long time ago the folly of running around defending everything that I say. It is, as they say, like trying to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time, and it annoys the pig.

At the same time, I try to be careful about what I say. I like to do my homework. I endeavor not to label opinion as fact, nor fact as opinion. I want to state, as clearly as I can, what I believe, and why I believe it.

If I do that to the best of my ability, then I’m usually content to let people disagree all they want. I know that no amount of argumentation will change somebody’s mind, if they are unwilling to be convinced otherwise.

But, sometimes, I just can’t let it go. I have no desire to participate in a full-out blog war, but, at the same time, I recognise that one of the primary duties of eldership is to refute error.

Last week, I was taking part in a discussion on Roman Catholicism over at Everyday Mommy’s blog. [Oops, new blog: SolaMom] Here is my remark in its entirety: [The whole thread can be found here]

I think I see where we are talking past each other, and it comes down to this. Is Roman Catholicism a false church that teaches a different Jesus and a different Gospel and a different salvation, or is it just another Christian denomination?

If Roman Catholicism is just another denomination, then I don’t see any problem with iMonk, or anybody else linking to Roman Catholic resources. On my blog, I link to Christian sites that have different takes on baptism, ecclesiology, and eschatology; and yet they are my brothers and sisters in Christ.

But, if Roman Catholicism is a false church, teaching false doctrine, then I do see a problem with a Christian site linking to non-Christian resources. I would not link to Mormon, Jehovah’s Witnesses, or Buddhist sites, except as examples of error. I certainly would not promote them in any way.

So, in which category do I see the Roman Catholic Church?

As long as the Catholic Church denies sola scriptura, sola Christus, and sola fide, then they are not Christian. So, yeah, I guess I’ve got a problem with iMonk linking to Catholic resources.

If that seems overly blunt or harsh to you, I’m sorry. I love Catholics, and I would love to see them come out from under the authority of Rome, and submit to the authority of scripture. The church cannot save you, the Pope cannot save you, Ritual cannot save you, neither the saints nor Mary can save you. Only Jesus Christ can save you, and He does that by Grace through Faith. My prayers are not for Rome, they are for you, the good and faithful Catholic. May God, in His Grace and Mercy, open your eyes.

My comment was quoted by iMonk, at his blog, with the following remarks: [Whole thread is here]

It’s particularly ironic to me that the doctrine police play the sloppiest with the other guys doctrine. I’ve learned this by having my own arrogant know-it-all attitude toward Roman Catholicism corrected dozens and dozens of times (to the point of another kind of irony, but that’s another thread :-))

If you read a typical neo-Reformed, anti-Catholic tirade, you will hear item after item that is patently false.

Note the following from someone named after a small animal in the comment thread yesterday. (I know…I know…let it pass…)

"If Roman Catholicism is just another denomination, then I don’t see any problem with iMonk, or anybody else linking to Roman Catholic resources. On my blog, I link to Christian sites that have different takes on baptism, ecclesiology, and eschatology; and yet they are my brothers and sisters in Christ.

"But, if Roman Catholicism is a false church, teaching false doctrine, then I do see a problem with a Christian site linking to non-Christian resources. I would not link to Mormon, Jehovah’s Witnesses, or Buddhist sites, except as examples of error. I certainly would not promote them in any way.

"So, in which category do I see the Roman Catholic Church?

"As long as the Catholic Church denies sola scriptura, sola Christus, and sola fide, then they are not Christian. So, yeah, I guess I’ve got a problem with iMonk linking to Catholic resources

"If that seems overly blunt or harsh to you, I’m sorry. I love Catholics, and I would love to see them come out from under the authority of Rome, and submit to the authority of scripture. The church cannot save you, the Pope cannot save you, Ritual cannot save you, neither the saints nor Mary can save you. Only Jesus Christ can save you, and He does that by Grace through Faith."

Now how many outright untruths, non-truths and complete distortions are here? Is this the result of reading the CCC? Or asking RCs if this is what they, in fact, teach?

No, it’s the sloppy, toss off, anti-Catholic version of Catholic belief you can get from 50 anti-Catholic websites. It’s not careful. It’s not fair. It’s not accurate. 95% of the neo-Reformed themselves would take issue with some of it.

But what if Catholics tried this with Grace Evangelical Church? What if this level of slapdash misrepresentation is applied to Calvinism? Clear the roads and get the kids out of the streets. There’s a three alarm fire somewhere.

Fair is fair on both sides. Assuming you are right in your conclusions doesn’t mean you get to cheat in the process. Not wanting to do the hard work to know what’s actually believed is no excuse.

Big time irony.

Many of you will have quickly spotted the “he just doesn’t understand/he's misrepresenting” defense.

So, I wondered, just what did I say that was “patently false?” Just what “untruths, non-truths and complete distortions” did I make? I’ll admit, I’ve never been a Roman Catholic, and it’s been a long time since I’ve read the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and even longer since I’ve attended Roman Catholic services, but I’ve done both. And, while I’m no expert, I’m not exactly ignorant of the teachings of the Catholic Church.

So, does the Roman Catholic Church in fact deny sola scriptura, sola fide, and sola Christus?

I believe that it is easy to demonstrate that the Catholic Church does, in fact, deny these doctrines. And I intend to do exactly that in a series of posts, of which this is the introduction. Tomorrow, God willing, we’ll look at Roman Catholicism and sola scriptura.

The End is Near?

I was having an e-mail exchange last night with a dear sister in the mid-west, discussing the current state of the church, and signs of apostasy that we had both noticed were getting worse. In the course of the exchange, she asked me, “Are we sitting right in the midst of "the" apostate church?” Good question; are we?

Now, I’m not a “date setter.” I have no respect for “date setters.” I believe “date setters” have done a lot of damage, both to the cause of Christ as well as to people’s lives, over the years. There can be an unhealthy fascination on the end times, to be sure.

But the Bible does clearly teach that there will be an end. And simply logic says that the end gets closer with every passing hour.

So, how close are we?

I believe that Bible prophecy gives us a fairly detailed look at what things will be like during the Tribulation period. When we look at the world around us, as it is today, and compare it to the descriptions we find in scripture, we can see some trends.

Revelation 13:17 says that only the followers of the Beast will be allowed to participate in the economy. We are nearing a one-world, cashless, economic system. The G20 meeting, which just wrapped up in London, imposes new, global, economic controls, and there was talk of a global currency. Since the advent of debit cards, I hardly every carry cash anymore; and I’m not alone. The only checks we write anymore are for our tithe at church, and the few bills that we don’t pay online. I can certainly see how this is setting the stage for the kind of economic control that the Antichrist will exercise over the earth. If all transactions are electronic, whoever controls the computers controls who can buy and sell.

Revelation 11:1-12 says that the whole world will watch the resurrection and ascension of God’s two witnesses. It is only recently, with satellite communications and with the internet, that this could be taken literally. Whenever something momentous happens in the world today, everybody watches it in real time. When the September 11 attacks occurred, all work stopped at the sawmill I worked at, and everybody gathered around the TVs in the lunchrooms, watching events as they happened some 2000 miles away. We also watched the invasion of Iraq in happen real time.

Paul told Timothy that the times would come when people would turn away from the faith (1 Timothy 4:1, 2 Timothy 4:4-5). Sure, this has been happening since the beginning, but it is happening more rapidly, and is more widespread, today. It is happening so rapidly, now, that it is easily discernable to anyone who wants to look.

Many have seen, and commented on, the downward spiral that the church in America is in. Strong, Bible-believing churches that I have known have fallen on hard times, others have closed. Meanwhile, the Good-time Rock-n-roll Church of What’s Happinin’ Now has had to move into an old warehouse (or sports arena) because they needed more room.

Let’s use the Southern Baptists as an example (since I am one.) In the SBC, we have the Market-driven Warren-esque wing, the experience-driven, quasi-charismatic, Blackaby-esque wing, the ecumenical Finney-Graham-Land-esque wing, the Arminian Landmarkist Vines-Patterson-esque wing, and the growing Calvinist Mohler-Ascol-Dever-esque wing (the last is the only one that I hold much hope for.)

And it isn’t just the church, our society is falling apart. We are losing our freedoms, and ungodliness is becoming more emboldened every day. The political left has long recognized that it is the religious community, generally, and Christians specifically, that stand in the way of their agenda of abortion, homosexual marriage, socialism, and general immorality. How long before there is open persecution of Christians? Look at the hatred that was shown to those who opposed gay marriage in California after the last election. It has been more than 30 years since Ruth Graham said that, if God did not bring judgment upon America, He would need to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah.

But we should not be frightened or worried by the world events that we see; all these things must take place. As Phil Johnson once said, “I’m not a pessimist, I’m a Calvinist.” We must always remember that God is sovereign!

Having said all that, I’m also an historian by training. I know that it has been really bad before. Right before the reformation, there were dark times. God, in his sovereign mercy, gave us Luther and Calvin and Knox. The Great Depression and World War II were dark times, but God brought us through. These are dark times, and we can see them getting darker. But dark times are often needed to strengthen faith. God can always bring revival to America, if it is His will.

But, if the time has grown short, and the end is upon us, we should welcome it. Romans 8 tells us that all of creation looks forward to release from the curse of sin.

Either way, we abide until He comes. So, be of good cheer! Our times are in His hands