The heart of the man

May 9, 2008 By admin Leave a Comment

The attitudes of men shape their actions, affecting life to the very core of their being; especially within the Christian culture. As one examines the Bible, there are several passages that explain how a true Christian should live. Various paradigms are given: listing do’s and don’ts so that Christians may be able to walk more closely with the Lord. Having been born of a sinful nature, when a person accepts Christ as their personal Savior, they must die to their self. Unfortunately, because Christians are still of the old flesh, they must take up their cross daily as Luke 9:23 states so that they may follow after the Lord. For the enemy disguises himself as an angel of light, seeking to devour any who may have fallen off the path.

Throughout Matthew 5-7, Jesus deals with certain situations that the Christian ought to be aware of and how to deal with them. In His Sermon on the Mount, Jesus talks about judging. Without even the slightest effort, people tend to judge one another. Even throughout history, there have been several situations where judgment decides the future of how people live. Yet, judgment within the Christian culture has progressed throughout history, perpetrating through the first crusades all the way to today’s theological debates.

The church, after being united with the state, used its newly conquered power to oppose Christ and place themselves as the highest authority of Scripture. One example of how the church accomplished the authorization was during the Crusades. While gathering soldiers to fight the crusade, the pope believing that he had the authority over peoples souls, stated that if they fought for the military they would be guaranteed to have salvation. By using this position, the papal position began a downward spiral, which caused the popes that followed after him to state the same judgment. The soldiers that the popes gathered for battle believed in what the pope proclaimed. The transition from the early church to this point in time, showed the transition from man relying on the Bible for truth, to a man’s certain position, deciding what is truth from what is fallacy. No longer did the common folk turn towards the Bible but rather listened to the pope, who they believed understood the Holy Scriptures.

From this alteration of who is to be judge, the view of the church began to change their theological beliefs. The pope in charge began illuminate the picture that the pope was the highest authority on earth. The position of the pope was now connected with the line of the apostles, so that whoever became the pope was linked to the lineage of the apostles, not through blood but through the lineage of teaching. The position gave him the privilege to proclaim whatever he felt the Scriptures said. No longer was there ferventness to read the Scriptures, but an inclination towards the pope’s interpretation. Who would want to interpret the Bible for himself when someone would interpret it for him and proclaim what it says? The right and power that the people gave to the pope allowed him to judge for himself what the interpretation of the scripture meant. By using his own position, the pope began to decrease the use of Scripture by increasing the tradition from the previous pope. Over time the tradition began to increase, amplifying the pope’s judgment’s on the citizens. Infant baptisms, purgatory beliefs, as well as priests playing the mediator within confessionals, began to take part in every day rituals. These doctrines are just a snapshot of the many beliefs that shaped the way the Roman Catholics believed.

Problems in Christianity did not end with the early Catholics.

In today’s culture, the fault of the church lies not with literal excommunication but with division and discord within the fellowship of saints. The problem of judging another believer has transitioned from the pope, to his followers, to the common lay people against one another. Judging can surface between denominations, eschatological theories, views of salvation, baptism, and even by gossipers within the local church. The term “Christian” has drastically changed from “Christ follower” to a name tag that people pull out and wear whenever they have to. Believers suppose, as long as they are underneath the Christian blanket they have the same right to judge as they had when they were unsaved. God, nonetheless, announced that humans are to present their bodies before Him holy and blameless, being transformed in order they may discern what is good and acceptable and perfect in the will of God (Romans 12:1-2) True, Christians still live in the old fleshly body, being tempted by the flesh, but it does not mean there is no way out. In Ephesians 6, the Lord gives Christians a way to fight back; the armor of God. Still, the flesh creeps in, influencing the believers’ action, many times leading them to judge fellow believers. One topic that seems to surface the judging circle within the believers, especially the Southern Baptists is towards Calvinists.

Being at a theological seminary, the discussion on Calvinism never fades. One would presume people would be tired of discussing it in class, but it does not seem to be the case, it is brought up not only during meal times, but also off campus when a group is hanging out. The life of the conversation boils down to Christians “thinking too much for God.” Within the banter, words such as “Jesus hates Calvinists” or “we hate Calvinists and so does God,” are expressed directly towards the Calvinists. Even though the intent of the person speaking is joking, the jokes towards the Calvinist never seem to decrease. Within classes, professors make jokes directed towards the Calvinists in the room. The problem is not necessarily with the joking but with the conversations. There is a time and place for the theological conversation, but when taken out of that place, it turns into a possible judgment on the Calvinist. Bringing up Calvinism is just a paradigm that seems to portray the original intent that is being discussed, judgment. Talking to several Calvinists about the deliberations, the majority of them are shocked with how many discussions are brought up about it. The disheartening part is how much, as Southern Baptists, the judgment towards Calvinists are brought up. Yes, the Calvinists also converse as well about different aspects of the Southern Baptists’ theology that they believe is wrong. But what is the point? The fact that both believe there is only one way to heaven, through Jesus Christ, why should there be so much judgment towards each other? As it is stated in Matthew 7 about judgment, there are plenty of problems with ourselves that judgment with each other should not take place. As Christians, judging is not even entitled to them.

In verses 15-20 it brings to light the proper way to “judge.” Even though Christians can not judge people by their motives, the Christians will know them by their “fruits.” You can not judge the roots, because you can not see them, but you can see the fruits. Therefore, as Christians, there needs to be a bonding with brothers and sisters in Christ, not trying to pick a problem that is in them for there are plenty of problems with ourselves. Since there is a world that needs prayer, in addition to the good news explained to them, there is no point bringing a fell
ow brother in Christ down, all it does is show our own problem, pride.

The only reason I can write this paper is because I deal with it everyday. Everyday my flesh tempts me to judge someone for something stupid, when in reality I have done things worse. One of the biggest things I have learned and continually learning is that judgment ruins friendships, as well as whom God wants you to be. In the sermon on the mount, Jesus deals with judging others quite plainly. Throughout history, it is evident that judging people, believing that you have a better solution for their problem than they have, does equal to pride. Just as pride is evident with the lives of the popes during the crusades, it rolls over being evident in the lives of Christians, especially with myself. It is hard to allow good fruits to grow from your life, but just like any fruit tree that produces good fruit, it takes hard work to grow. Ephesians 4:29 gives a perfect exemplar of the revealing of fruits, especially with judgment. “Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear.” Even though we may be tempted everyday, putting on the armor of God will help produce that good fruit that the Lord declares in Matthew 7.

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With:

Theodicy

May 9, 2008 By admin Leave a Comment

In contemplation of the many theologies of Christianity, one prevalent tension lies in the paradox of how evil may exist in light of a good God, namely the study of theodicy. This complex issue may misguide believers and critics alike if not thoroughly analyzed. Thomas Aquinas as well as Augustine address this issue in addition to those of free will in light of the existence of good and evil as well as suffering.
In the view of Christian theism, God is immutable. In relation to evil, it is addressed how God may cause and/or allow evil to exist. It is understood a pre-eminent mover must put everything into effect. It is then concluded God permits evil to exist but He does not set it into motion. Augustine states merely the absence of good defines evil. So where evil exists, good does not. Also in light of Augustine it is pivotal to address his statement, “ The incorruptible is superior to the corruptible.” In dealings of the paradox of good and evil there must be an understanding of the soul, which could change for the worse through free choice or could be corrupted by sin. It is neither a part of God nor of the same nature as God, but is created by Him, and is far inferior to its Creator.
In regards to free will in light of the tension of good and evil, Thomas Aquinas addresses the issue elegantly. First the actuality of free will is to be addressed. It may be argued that man has no free will at all, but Aquinas points out that if free will were not in existence, exhortations, commands, prohibitions, rewards and punishment would be in vain. As humans we are created as rational beings; in order to be rational we must have free will. In light of salvation, free will is still in existence but not in total effect unless moved and assisted by God. Romans 9:16 states, “So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy.” We see that man has some choice in what he does; therefore, there must be a persistent alternative to God and all that is good for man to truly make a choice to follow. So it may be concluded that man has free will and to choose God it must be moved. By allowing this free will— this choice— God subsequently had to allow evil to enter the world.
In reference to evil, there are many subcategories of wrong. The two most basic are those that are caused by natural processes and actions of humans. Earthquakes, hurricanes and other weather related disasters do not result from morally wrong actions, but exist, kill, wound and harm humanity. Whereas free will is a plausible argument for an explanation of human evils it does not directly account for natural evil. The best explanation of natural evil may be traced back to the fall. All processes and attributes of the universe were in perfection, and in the fall all were perverted in some way. Generally evil is found as necessary because it is the optimal way for God to display His love to His creation. This is true because the world was foundationally formed to display the glory of God in physical form; likewise, all occurrences within it exhibit the glory of God.
Aside from evil in and of itself also there presides the problem of the effects of things evil, namely suffering. William Lane Craig aims to tackle the issues of suffering and evil and explains it as such: “God may permit suffering in our lives to build us or test us, or to build and test others, or to achieve some other overriding end.” In assessing suffering and attempting to pin down a definite cause we begin to put limits on God as to why we are suffering as we are. Romans 8:28 states that all things work together for the good for those that love the Lord and in 1 Peter 4:12 we are told not to be surprised at the ordeal we are suffering, but to know in those sufferings that they produce perseverance and ultimately brings glory to God.
Yet, still to be expounded upon is how God permits evil in human actions. It is understood man has a choice in choosing to act morally, in choosing good or immorally choosing evil. It is possible to state that God may value free will enough to allow humans to commit horrendous acts rather than to prevent them and take away their allowance of free will. Most mainstream Christians believe that in an instance such as this that God will have His justice in the end and punish those who have done evil and show mercy and compassion upon those who have been victimized by evil. This philosophy accepts that God allows evil and free will and although all may not comprehend the evils that occur, one may rest in knowing there will be justice for all in the end.
It is resulted that evil may exist in light of a good God, and that He may use evil as well as good to work together ultimately to the glory of His Name. It is often lost sight of that all that is, has been and will be works together to the chief end of His glory. Because of various utilities such as councils and commands in addition to rewards it may be understood man has free will. In light of free will man is able to choose between good and evil. God allows evil to exist, and it has existed due to the fact evil in and of it itself is merely the absence of good.

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Deep Stuff: The Meaning of Life

May 9, 2008 By admin Leave a Comment

“Life is an effort that deserves a better cause.”
-Karl Krause, Austrian author and journalist (1874-1936)

I don’t even know the guy who said this, but based on this quote I can only assume that he was not a Christian. Isn’t it crazy that everyone is born with this knowledge that there must be more to life…but what? We Christians know what it is.
What is this “cause?” Well, St. Thomas Aquinas says that the first and last cause is God Himself. He says, “man is not to be loved for his own sake, but whatever is in man is to be loved for God’s sake.” In other words, don’t worship the creation. Worship the Creator! We didn’t create ourselves, so why do we love ourselves more than we love God?
Unfortunately, this is exactly what the world does. They look for pleasure and satisfaction in the things of this world. Yes, a lot of things are great, because God created them. But you will never be satisfied with them. We were created for a love much larger. If we can find temporary satisfaction in creation, how much greater will our satisfaction be once we have found Christ? Eternal! So yes, life is an effort that deserves a much greater cause than what the world tries to make it.

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: , ,

Did She Just Say What I Think She Said? …Calvinism!

May 9, 2008 By admin Leave a Comment

Since I know Calvinism is such a hot topic on this campus, I thought I would try to be of some help in clearing up any confusion about Calvinism. (Okay, so maybe I won’t be any help, but these resources will!) And since I’ve already been labeled the class Calvinist, why not be the one to share these awesome articles with you all? So here they are:

God’s Sovereignty and the Human Will
http://www.graceonlinelibrary.org/articles/full.asp?id=110255
(A. W. Pink)
Practical Implications of Calvinism
http://www.graceonlinelibrary.org/articles/full.asp?id=110222
(Albert Martin)
What We Believe About the Five Points of Calvinism
http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/Articles/ByDate/1985/1487_What_We_Believe_About_the_Five_Points_of_Calvinism/
(John Piper)

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: , , ,

Athanasius Essay

May 9, 2008 By admin Leave a Comment

In Cicero’s work entitled On Duties, he names four cardinal virtues that he believes are to be kept above all others. These virtues are: wisdom, justice, courage, and seemliness. He defines wisdom as the learning of truth. He says that it is the “knowledge of everything divine and human.” He holds it in such high regard as to say that there is nothing more “desirable,” “distinguished,” or “worthy of a man.” He believes that everyone should pursue it. Justice, he believes, is the most important of all the virtues. Under this virtue, he speaks of social justice. This, to him, means that no man should harm another unless he has been provoked by injustice. He then goes on to describe justice as the keeping of faith and liberality. He adds that justice defies national boundaries, meaning justice must be extended to aliens and passing travelers in one’s country and not just the citizens of the country. Justice should be practiced by all of mankind toward one another. Courage is defined as greatness of spirit, and seemliness is also known as temperance or moderation.
The early church fathers exemplified Cicero’s four virtues in their lives and their deaths. They were committed to the spread of the Gospel and to stopping heresy. They were very knowledgable of Christian truths and the words spoken by Jesus Christ and the apostles. They meditated on these truths daily to the point where the Gospel was ingrained in their very being. Every breath they took was to the glory of God, and they never backed down from His Word, especially in the face of opposition. They were committed to excellent Christian living, which included justice and moderation. Courage was definitely easy to find in their lives as many of them were martyred for their faith. They stood bold in defense of Jesus Christ and willingly lost their lives for what they knew was the truth. Even those who were not martyred underwent severe persecution. Some were tortured, and others, such as Athanasius, were excommunicated a number of times.
Athanasius lived in Alexandria, Egypt, which at the time was the chief center of learning in the Roman Empire. He was noticed as a young boy by his bishop to have great potential in the Church. One day, the bishop looked out and noticed boys playing together. They were playing “church,” and Athanasius was performing baptisms. When Alexander asked him what exactly he said, it was decided that the young boy had actually performed legitimate baptisms! He grew up under the wing of Bishop Alexander, and when he died, Athanasius took over as Bishop of Alexandria. He went to school in Alexandria, which, as previously stated, had the best education in the empire. He learned not only the fundamental truths of Christianity but also all the other arts that were held in high esteem at the time. In other words, he was well-rounded in his education.
In his youth, a man named Arius broke off from the orthodox church and started preaching Jesus as a created being. Athanasius vehemently opposed this idea and fought long and hard against it. Emperor Constantine ordered a Council to come together at Nicaea to work out some sort of understanding among the Christians. Athanasius was the chief spokesman, and ultimately, the majority of attendants at the council agreed with his view. Thus, they wrote the Nicaean Creed, stating that Jesus Christ was not a created being but was in fact God come in the flesh. Some years later, after Rome acquired a new emperor, there was still unrest among the Arians and the rest of the Christians. The Arians still held to the belief that Jesus was created. Unfortunately for Athanasius, the new emperor sided with the Arians, and because of the former’s neverending arguments against this idea, he was banished from Alexandria. In fact, through the course of his life, Athanasius was banished five times, being called a “trouble-maker.” Nevertheless, he continued to voice his disagreement with this skewed version of Christianity.
As the Bishop of Alexandria, he was to send out an Easter letter every year, telling all the bishops when the exact date for Easter was that year. In these letters he was sure to include his arguments for Christ’s divinity. Because of his unwavering faith and relentless criticism of Arianism and other incorrect ideologies, the phrase “Athanasius contra mundum” or “Athanasius against the world” was coined. Certainly Athanasius was a man of great courage. He stood firm in his beliefs even when it meant being excommunicated for a fifth time. The persecution against him could have been much worse, considering what the earlier Church fathers went through. Even if he had been persecuted in a more violent way, we can be sure that he still would have stood his ground, and that would have given him even more confidence to stand up for the truth.
As stated, Arianism was not the only thing Athanasius openly fought against. His many writings include: On the Incarnation, Against the Heathen, Life of St. Anthony, Love and Self-Control, and On Sickness and Health, to name a few. On the Incarnation basically refutes the arguments of all of the various sects and religions of his time regarding Christ’s divinity, death, and resurrection. He explains how Jesus, as God, had to come in the flesh and literally die to save us sinful humans. There was no other way for our salvation. He refutes the Jews who are still waiting for the Messiah, saying that “no longer…is prophet raised up nor vision revealed among them” because Jesus Christ fulfilled the previous prophecies, thus ending the need for any more. In his other works, he writes on the high virtue of Christian living, the extreme courage of the martyrs, and God’s grace.Athanasius and the rest of the Church fathers really exemplified Cicero’s four virtues of wisdom, justice, courage, and moderation. Cicero held wisdom in high regard, as it is also held high in the Bible. The book of Proverbs begins with thoughts on the subject of wisdom. It says, “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and instruction” (Proverbs 1:7, NKJV). The Church fathers were highly educated, especially in the Biblical texts and words of Jesus and the apostles. They lived their lives dedicated to the spread of the Gospel. They were strong and courageous in the face of death and all danger. They stood their ground and never once backed down from what they knew to be the truth. They knew that the Word is lifesaving, and shying away from it just once could cost an unbelieving listener his life. Athanasius especially stood out among these brave men and women as he fought hard against Arianism. Though he was exiled, he continued to preach the Gospel to everyone who would hear.

Filed Under: Anno Domini, Blog Tagged With: , , ,

Quote

May 9, 2008 By admin Leave a Comment

“For, no one sins because God foreknew that he would sin. In fact, the very reason why a man is undoubtedly responsible for his own sin, when he sins, is because He whose foreknowledge cannot be deceived foresaw, not the man’s fate or fortune or what not, but that the man himself would be responsible for his own sin. No man sins unless it is his choice to sin; and his choice not to sin, that, too, God foresaw.” St. Augustine, City of God

Of this semester, City of God was one of my favorite books. This quote was really good. It shows one, that God knows all things, but two, it shows that we are the ones who sin and are responsible for our sins no matter what. I guess it just gave me a greater understanding of how big God is and the fact that he knew my sin and still died on the cross just blows me away. How unworthy am I for such grace as that. Such knowledge is too wonderful, too great for me to know…

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: ,

S’Mores and Heretics

May 8, 2008 By admin Leave a Comment

St. Athanasius was a prominent Church Father in the Early Church who is credited with the preservation of Orthodox Doctrine. He was a leader and guardian of the Christian faith during the era of the Early Church. The war that occurred between the father of Arianism, Arius and the Orthodox Bishops of the Early Church has forever shaped the Doctrine of Christianity. St. Athanasius was a great protector of the young Church and defended her doctrines from being corrupted by the influence of the Gnostics. Christians have been indebted to the perseverance that St. Athanasius portrayed during the war on Arianism and his aid with the penning of the Nicene Creed.

St. Athanasius was born in Alexandria around 296 AD during the great persecution of the Church. He showed signs of Christian leadership from an early age and was under the instruction of the Bishop of Alexandria, Alexander. Athanasius applied himself to the intense study of Holy Scripture and grew in knowledge of the truth which would be his guide through the spiritual warfare that he would wage throughout his life.

His greatest theological enemy were the Arians, a sect of Gnosticism that was started in Alexandria during the early years of Athanasius’ life. The Arians believed that the first and second persons of the trinity were made of different substances. They also believed that the second person of the trinity, Jesus Christ, was a created being that was totally different and set apart from God the Father. The catholic church (Universal Church) dismissed these teachings as false and heretical. And at the town of Nicaea in 325 AD the final battle for the doctrine of the Trinity would be fought.

All of the bishops from all over the Roman Empire, including the Bishop of Alexandria, Alexander and his young apprentice, Athanasius, came to Nicaea (now modern day Turkey) to decide once and for all what the doctrine of the universal Church should entail. This was at the request of the newly converted Emperor Constantine who wanted unity within his empire. The Counsel of Bishops at Nicaea along with the Emperor formed the Nicene Creed, which stated the unified doctrine of the Church. And in it they condemned the heresies of the Arians by stating that God the Father and Christ the Son are both coeternal and of the same substance and equal. Arius, the leader of the Arians was banished by Emperor Constantine and excommunicated from the Church. (It is legend that St. Nicolas punched the Heretic Arius in the face after his ex-communication!) The troubles of the Church were supposedly resolved, for the present.

Three years after the Counsel of Nicaea, Alexander, Bishop of Alexandria died and was succeeded by Athanasius. During this time Emperor Constantine had succumb to the Arians in order to “keep the peace”. The Emperor commanded Bishop Athanasius to readmit Arius, the leader of the Arians, into the Church. When Athanasius refused, the Emperor called for another counsel to convene and discuss the Nicene Trinitarianism. Athanasius went but quickly discerned from the attendees that it was an unfair fight and fled the city. He was able to gain an audience with the Emperor and when he refused to readmit Arius to the Church he was exiled, which would be the first of many exiles for St. Athanasius.

For the remainder of his life Athanasius would combat the teachings of the Arians verbally and through his writings. As a result, Athanasius was exiled, run out of town, verbally assaulted by the government and made to live a very difficult life. Because of his declaration of war against everyone who held to the teachings of the Arians, Athanasius received a tag at the end of his name to solidify his campaign: Athanasius Contra Mundum, or Athanasius against the world. He lived his life to defend the true doctrine and refused to give in to heresy, no matter the cost. Sadly, Athanasius was never able to see the final defeat of the Arians that he had worked so hard to accomplish. Just eight years after his death the new Emperor Theodosius, a firm believer of orthodox Christianity, called for another counsel, the Counsel of Constantinople, to once and for all lay the heresy of the Arians to rest and proclaim the true Trinitarian Nicene Creed. Even though Athanasius was not physically present at the time when the Nicene Creed was given its final form, his contribution to the Creed that is still used today was exemplified in his life and his war against heresy.

St. Athanasius was a firm believer in orthodox Christianity; he protected and defended the purity of doctrine in the early Church. He, in his work On the Incarnation, made some very important points that refute the Arian heresies concerning the deity of Christ. He was absolutely adamant on the point that Christ was fully God and fully man at the same point in history. While He was born into flesh early in the first century AD, He was also with the Father in eternity past and not a created being. Athanasius insisted that Christ was of the same substance as the Father and equal with Him. Athanasius showed that Christ’s incarnation, miracles, resurrection, and ascension proved His deity; while Christ’s birth, life and death proved His humanity. Athanasius revealed the need for Christ’s incarnation, such as: In order to atone for sinners, He had to become like man and die. Athanasius showed through his work on the Incarnation that Christ is the Creator, Author and Finisher of the Christian faith. These teachings in every way usurped the beliefs of the Gnostic Arians and played a substantial role in Athanasius’ war against heresy.

St. Athanasius believed that his war with the Arian Gnostics to protect the Church was ultimately bringing glory to God. He set an example of steadfastness and an unwillingness to recant doctrine for the sake of unity or cultural relevance. The church today, although it has existed in a totally different society should have the same undying loyalty to sound doctrine. The Post-Modern movement that has been spreading through the church is trying to change the message to fit the culture, just as the Arians were trying to do in the second century. The Church should take the example that Athanasius has given her, and relentlessly defend Biblical Doctrine at all cost. The life of St. Athanasius has given the example that the Church needs to go and combat heresy, protect the doctrine of the church and bring glory to God.

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: ,

Essay

May 8, 2008 By admin Leave a Comment

Essay on the Byzantium Empire. There is a debt we and all of history really owe to Byzantium. Why? Because, they may have not changed the world as much as other empires, like the Roman, and Arab empires, it can be easy to think they did nothing for it. Rather their contribution to the world was that they protected it. Though when I say world I of course mean our European civilization, Byzantium was the protective shield for Europe for a thousand years. Well if that is so why don’t we hear about it more often? I mean think about it, growing up how much did you learn about these peoples? If you were an acute student you might remember that the city was built on Constantine. If you know any more names it would probably be Justinian the Great. Beside that you would probably have to have studied it on your own or have taken the church and empires class to learn any thing more. The reason we don’t remember it as much is one; they didn’t change the world and two; they really don’t have anything to do with our history. Think the Chinese dynasties though they changed their world there so far away we forget about them. Then there’s the Aztec’s though they are very close to us they didn’t change the world so we also forget about them. What I mean by change is do any accomplishments of those civilizations last to affect us to day. In science, art, philosophy, new discoveries, famous rulers, and warfare for greatness in any of these areas or others not named the Byzantium Greeks can’t take credit. They did not change world in that sense, but you might say they changed by persevering it, but I think it describes them better if you say that they protected Europe. Protect Europe, how can you say that when Europe was overrun by barbarians? Yes, and the word barbarians is the key, The Franks may have conquered France, or the Goths Spain, but think who really conquered whom? The languages Europeans speak come from Latin, The God they worshiped wasn’t theirs, but one that was in Europe when they got there. In short though Europe was overrun the ideas of the Roman Empire were able to live on because they were bigger then those of the barbarians. Then who were the Byzantines fighting. To list the major ones; first the Persian, then the Arabs, and last the Turks. These were peoples that had culture and a God, and a way of life that swallowed up all other s that they overran. The closest Western Europe came to facing such a people was when the beat a Mongols who were far from home and tired, and the moors at Tours who also had some of the same problems. The rest were stopped by Byzantium. It was said by some historians that the reason the eastern empire remained in tact was that unlike the western their recourses were protected behind their capitol. Such a statement is hardly historical. In the third century the Persian empire a rose again to fight the Romans and in some cases beat them. From day one of the existence of Byzantium they had to fight these sophisticated peoples. Who had direct access to Anatolia, which was the main supplier of money for the empire. I would say men, except that in the early days of Byzantium thy made the mistake of relying on mercenaries to fight their wars. Later empires would correct this. The people who populated this empire called themselves Romans, but after the first two hundred years the were really Greeks, in language, law, culture, and religion. They also upheld what the Greeks how had come before them had done. That is protected the continent from eastern invaders. The Persians, traditional rivals of the Greeks, came very close came to conquering one of the strongest military cities this world has ever seen, Constantinople. This city had no weakness, if given the right a mount of men, and very had to break into in any situation. Anyway the Persians were beaten, only to be replaced by a foe just as dangerous. The Muslim, Arabs. Quickly they arose but long and strong they remained for two hundred years they were a thorn in the side of the empire. People always act as if were the superior empire. Well in much area’s they were except as far as military goes. Yes they were able to get to the gates of Constantinople several times, but they never breached the walls. In time the Arabs would begin to come apart, but Byzantium remained strong, and once again became the most powerful empire on the earth. Then came the Turks, it is quite easy to blame poor leadership for the rise of the Ottomans, but there had always been weak emperors, who nearly lost the empire. Rather full credit must be given to the Turks for their endurance to be able to survive a near wipe out by Tamerlane. Byzantium would also barley survive being knifed in the back, but they remained just strong enough to hold off the Turks a little longer. In one of the defining moments of history, with only the city left under their control the Byzantium empire fell, and the gate that had protected Europe for a thousand years had been broken. All empires fall, some quickly, a few last for many years. I mentioned only a few of the foes of Byzantium, but they were many, more perhaps then any other empire, had they fallen to any one of these a weak Europe would have been extremely vulnerable to being conquered, and changing our lives today dramatically. They held on however, when everything was against them they would always manage to find a way to prevail. When as last they did fall, it was a stronger and growing Europe that the Turks now had to face, one that though it lost the Balkans, was able to defeat them at Lapanto and Vienna, twice. The Ottoman Empire had two hundred years of Glory, and then began to fall, Byzantium had a thousand. We today are the recipients of their blood that they shed. Christendom and all of western civilization owe a dept to the men and woman Byzantium.

Filed Under: Anno Domini, Blog Tagged With:

Reporting on Christian Jihad

May 8, 2008 By admin Leave a Comment

Christian Jihad by Ergun and Emir Caner.

The crusades. There is something I’ve never studied before. Seriously, in 13 years of school, I have never once been taught about the crusades. Now it wasn’t because of a lack of attention span, I have always loved history, especially world history. The Crusades just were never taught. The medieval times and Irish history always fascinated me for some reason, so movies like Braveheart and Monty Python and the Holy Grail were immediate favorites, but none of these movies or history classes ever explained how terrible the crusades were. These were Christian men, and Christian leaders wiping out other people in the name of Christ!

When I began reading this book I wasn’t sure what to think. I thought Jihad was a Muslim thing? So as I read the beginning story about a man anticipating to sniper someone, my mind immediately thought about terrorists. This is exactly what terrorists in Iraq are doing to our soldiers… However, the revelation of this story blew me away. It was a Christian man in America! This shook me probably more than it should have. I mean, I know there are crazy people out there but Christians don’t do that kind of stuff?! This was just the beginning of all the surprises.

It turns out that the Pope, in a fight for power, declared the crusades in the name of Christ and even promised salvation to anyone who would join in the fight. This made me incredibly irate. Seriously, has this man never read the Bible before?! I thought just trusting in Christ insured your place in heaven? Someone’s theology is off. Anyway, this book was a great eye opener. The Caners did a great job of explaining this part of history. It felt truthful, like they weren’t trying to sugar coat the fact or justify it in anyway. It was just the truth. I would definitely recommend this book and even teach from it in a history class.

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: ,

Essay Assignment

May 8, 2008 By admin Leave a Comment

Since the inception of the Christian church, there have been false teachers seeking to assault and undermine the fundamental beliefs of the faith.  It seems that once one heresy was swatted down, another false teaching rose up to greater prominence.  The early heresies in the first centuries of the church undoubtedly have implications in our modern churches.  Let us examine some of the earliest heresies and their modern implications on Christianity today.  For the sake of space, we will take a look at just three of these false teachings: the Judaizers, Gnosticism, and Arianism.

            False teaching began to creep into the church as early as the ministry times of the Apostle Paul.  The Judaizers were contemporaries of the apostle to came into the Galatia churches stirring up fear and confusion.  They brought in forms of Judaism, claiming that one must be circumcised for salvation.  This obviously infuriated Paul and he countered by condemning them to anathema. Paul said, “But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed.” (Galatians 1:8).  This classic heresy was one of teaching that works was necessary for the earning of salvation.  It has been transferred in different varieties in many different false teachings since that time, but it all contains one poisonous element: an undermining of the exclusively salvific gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.  And isn’t this the major heresy that seems to have infiltrated American Christendom more than any other?  It has been said that there are only two types of religions in this world: those whose salvation plan is works-based and those whose salvation plan is grace-based.  All (ALL!) other major world religions, save for Christianity, are based on works to achieve eternal life, nirvana, euphoria, or whatever else is seen as the supreme good.  As I witness to others, nearly every person I encounter thinks that “being a good person” will achieve eternal life and a spot in heaven.  Even as I talk to churchgoers, they hold to a works-based salvation teaching.  This terrible heresy has even penetrated the doors of many evangelical churches today.  Even if a particular church does not officially hold to this view, we can nearly be sure that there are attendees (sometimes even regular attendees) who adhere to it.  A significant part of this problem lies in the proclamation coming forth from the pastor’s pulpit.  A faithful and regular presentation of the true and glorious gospel of Christ in our evangelical churches will awaken many to the flaws inherent in this false teaching.

            Arianism is another heresy that sprang up from the teachings of Arius, a priest from Alexandria, in the 4th century.  This powerful heresy become very prominent and was arguably the greatest heresy of the early church.  Arianism taught that Jesus was a lesser, created being and thereby undermined the deity of our Lord.  It taught that Christ was the first and greatest creation of the Father and was thus not eternal.  The deity of Christ is strongly supported in the New Testament and the Old.  Moreover, this heresy was rejected and the deity of Jesus was upheld at the Council of Nicaea with the making of the Nicene Creed.  The Watchtower is a modern day cult that subscribes to this deadly heresy.  Jehovah’s Witnesses not only reject the deity of Chris but they also reject belief in the Trinity.  It is interesting to note that this is not a new teaching, but it has been around for more than 1500 years. 

            It has been said that the heresy in Galatians was a form of inci
pient (embryonic) Gnosticism.  Gnosticism taught that there was a secret knowledge to be learnt for salvation.  There were many different groups of Gnostics but many held to this teaching. In a way, this is what the Judaizers in Galatians had been teaching. They were saying, “Yes, that is what Paul taught you, but here is the whole teaching on salvation!”  The secret knowledge was that one must be circumcised also for salvation.  Though this may not be quite an apparent implication, but Gnosticism has also been a catalyst for the innumerable cults and sects that have been formed since the first century until these times.  Usually a cult leader will arise with a unique teaching or a certain twist on what has historically been called orthodox.  This leader is eloquent, charismatic, and seemingly more enlightened than everyone else.  He has a “secret knowledge” that must be attained and followed so he gathers a cult following.  We have all witnessed the danger and tragedies that come out of various cults and sects.  From David Koresh to Jim Jones to more popular to less recognized cults, these groups have all inflicted damage to many lives over the decades.

            Today, now more than ever, there comes a need to stand for the essential fundamentals of the Christian faith.  The authority of Scripture is being assaulted externally by the outside world and internally by false prophets in our churches.  Pastors must preach the word of God and not hesitate to convince, rebuke, exhort, and instruct.  The fear of man leads to bending and compromising the truth of the gospel.  Our pulpits and our people need to proclaim His truth.  Yet all this must be done with a brokenhearted boldness, unashamedly casting down every high and lofty argument that exalts itself against the knowledge of God while displaying an undeniable love and compassion for those caught up in such heresies.

          

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: , ,
« Older Posts
Newer Posts »

Bad Behavior has blocked 52 access attempts in the last 7 days.