Category: The Monday Muse

The Monday Muse: Sin to Break Church Unity Over Millennium?

A recent sermon by Mark Dever has been buzzing around the blogosphere. In his sermon on Revelation 20 and millennial views, Dever makes the bold statement that to break church unity over a difference in millennial view is sin. As transcripted by A.J. Gibson:

I think that millennial views need not be among those doctrines that divide us. . . . I am suggesting that what you believe about the millennium—how you interpret these thousand years—is not something that it is necessary for us to agree upon in order to have a congregation together. The Lord Jesus Christ prayed in John 17:21 that we Christians might be one. Of course all true Christians are one in that we have his Spirit, we share his Spirit, we desire to live out that unity. But that unity is supposed to be evident as a testimony to the world around us. Therefore, I conclude that we should end our cooperations together with other Christians (whether near-ly in a congregation, or more at length in working together in missions and church planting and evangelism and building up the ministry) only with the greatest of care, lest we rend the body of Christ for whose unity he’s prayed and given himself. Therefore, I conclude that it is sin to divide the body of Christ—to divide the body that he prayed would be united. Therefore for us to conclude that we must agree upon a certain view of alcohol, or a certain view of schooling, or a certain view of meat sacrificed to idols, or a certain view of the millennium in order to have fellowship together is, I think, not only unnecessary for the body of Christ, but it is therefore both unwarranted and therefore condemned by scripture. So if you’re a pastor and you’re listening to me, you understand me correctly if you think I’m saying you are in sin if you lead your congregation to have a statement of faith that requires a particular millennial view. I do not understand why that has to be a matter of uniformity in order to have Christian unity in a local congregation.

So let’s get right to the point. Do you agree with Dever? Is it a sin to break church unity over the issue of the millennium?

(HT: Justin Taylor)

The Monday Muse – Onward Christian Soldiers

A little over a week ago Newsweek released an article discussing “the growing controversy over military chaplains using the armed forces to spread the Word.” I have heard that chaplaincy in the military has been forced to take on a more postmodern, pluralistic flavor (though I confess that I know little about military chaplains). Gone are the days when the chaplaincy’s sole convictions are Christian.

The U.S. military Central Command has established a rule called General Order Number One that forbids active-duty troops from “trying to convert people to any religion.” In spite of this rule, the military has encountered a growing “problem” among their chaplains. Some Christian chaplains have continued to be involved in evangelization through Bible initiatives. “The effort is an example of what critics call a growing culture of militarized Christianity in the armed forces.”

It should come to no one’s surprise that Christian ministers serving as chaplains would seek to share the truth of the gospel in the hopes that many would believe and be saved. If the gospel is true and Jesus is the Savior of humanity, doesn’t it make logical sense that people convinced by such things would naturally want to share this news? The impact and influence of the gospel in such desperate situations such as war and conflict should not be underestimated. What hope can a soldier, caught in the line of fire, have unless he believes in Jesus as deliverer from pain, suffering, conflict, and death?

On the flip side, some people would say that the mixing of religion and government via the military can be a dangerous thing. I see the implications of an amicable union to be detrimental to the church more than the government. State sponsored Christianity does not have a good track record. However, Kathryn Joyce also points to the negative aspects of Christian influence on public policy and military actions. The melding of both worlds raises the potential for holy war in the name of God’s will.

That leads me to my question for the week: How should Christian faith and secular government interact with one another? What type of relationship should they have?

The Monday Muse: Federer Greatest Ever?

Federer: Greatest Ever?Well…yesterday was a landmark moment in the history of tennis. Roger Federer finally captured the one major title that had eluded him for so long. He can now call himself French Open champion. I suppose it was only a matter of time. Not only has Federer dominated the sport until recently, he also had reached and lost three straight French Open finals before his victory on Sunday. Had it not been for Nadal, we might be talking about 4 straight French Open titles for Federer. Of course, everyone is talking about Federer’s place in history. The comparison’s with Pete Sampras (not concerning their game or strategy) have existed for years now. However, Federer now can claim two things that Sampras can not: French Open champion and career Grand Slam. In fact, Sampras never got closer than the semifinals at the French Open. With this victory, Federer has already tied Sampras’s record of most major titles in men’s singles. It seems inevitable that Federer will break Pete’s record since he is only 27 and has several years of great tennis left in him. However, Federer now longer dominates the tour like he did a couple of years ago. I think this is good for tennis. Too much winning by one player gets boring. So…let’s go ahead and pose the question that everyone is asking.

Is Roger Federer the greatest men’s tennis player of all time?

I agree with Sampras that it is impossible to compare eras or account for all of the circumstances during a player’s career. That said, Sampras did endorse Federer as the greatest ever. Quite a compliment coming from the man who sits atop the major titles list with Federer. I’m not sure that we’ve ever seen a men’s player dominate over a five year period like Federer has. Laver was a master in his own right. Bjorg was a beast in the short time he played. Connors still holds the record for most tour wins (almost double Federer’s total). But if history judges greatness by major titles, Federer will take the cake when it is all said and done. I’m not quite sure that we’ve seen an all-around game like Federer’s before. He can do it all and do it extremely well. I would have liked to see him and Sampras (in his prime) battle it out. I think Sampras has the type of game that could give Roger fits. In fact, Roger has never really faced a great serve and volley player like Sampras before. Sampras seemed to be the last of the old guard (though I think many players on the tour would greatly benefit from a serve and volley aspect to their game).

So…I say Federer is the best ever based on what we can judge. However, I think Sampras would have been more than formidable. Who knows…we may be having this discussion about Nadal in 5 years.

The Monday Muse: Saving Waters

I’ll keep it short and sweet this week. In Scripture, salvation and baptism have an extremely close relationship to one another. It is quite common to see statements about salvation being accompanied by the charge to be baptized as well. In fact, Mark 16:16 says,Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.” It raises the question:

Does a person have to be baptized to be saved?

It is an important question relating to the Great Commission and how we go about making disciples. So…fire away.

The Monday Muse: Two Natures

In my last post I referred to Romans 7:14-8:4 where Paul discusses the war between two natures. As Christians, we have been born again and given a new nature that replaces the old nature. The process of replacing the old nature doesn’t happen all at once though. Paul makes this point clear when he describes the battle that takes place between the old nature of the flesh and the new nature of the mind. God has given us a new nature on the inside that will then manifest itself on the outside. Yet the new nature is enclosed within a sin-cursed flesh. Where the flesh and its desires held the place of prominence in an individual’s life, the new nature in Christ has become the driving force for the life of a believer. But the old nature won’t go down without a fight. So the two natures engage in a battle for supremacy in the life of a believer.

It has been debated as to whether or not Paul is speaking about a regenerate (saved) or unregenerate (unsaved) individual. Paul seems to refer to his own life since he uses the first person so often (though someone might make the argument that it is a hypothetical example being used to express a concrete truth). But let us assume that Paul is speaking of himself. Is he referring to pre-conversion or post-conversion Paul? Better yet…here’s our question for the week.

In Romans 7:14-8:4, Paul speaks of the conflict between the old and new nature. Is Paul referring to a person prior to conversion (from the perspective of the gospel), a person transitioning toward faith in Christ, or a person who is already a believer?


The Monday Muse

Do you think churches should have regular evaluations of the worship gatherings? Why or why not?

Join the discussion!

Annie’s Music


You can pick up my wife's album on iTunes or Amazon. Interested in booking her for a show? Visit her contact page at www.annielash.com.

Blog Sponsors

Westminster Bookstore

You can support this site by visiting the sponsors above.

Twitter Updates

Latest Comments

Top Categories

Archives