The Gospel

From the Archives: Christmas from a Shepherd's Perspective

Adoration of the Shepherds. Gerard van Honthorst, 1622

A little more than 2,000 years ago, “When the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law” (Gal. 4:4, NKJV). It was exactly the right time, as predicted by Daniel (cf. 9:25) and confirmed by Jesus (cf. Luke 19:41-44).

It was also the right place—Bethlehem, six miles south of Jerusalem. Seven hundred years earlier, Micah wrote:

But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah,
Though you are little among the thousands of Judah,
Yet out of you shall come forth to Me
The One to be Ruler in Israel,
Whose goings forth are from of old,
From everlasting. (Mic. 5:2)

The time was right, the place was right, and the circumstances were right. It was not to the high and mighty in Israel that the first coming—the incarnation—of Messiah/Christ was celebrated by “a multitude of the heavenly host” (Luke 2:13) in heaven and on earth. It was to a group of lowly “shepherds living out in the fields, keeping watch over their flock by night” (Luke 2:8).

1957 reads

Maslow, material needs, and the gospel

"Apart from the value of Maslow’s particular understanding of human needs, and the various uses it has been put to in ministry as well as popular contexts, the challenge to rightly relate the temporal and the eternal, the material and the spiritual, is as old as the gospel itself.....the idea that there is some sense in which material needs must be met before spiritual needs can be properly addressed is, indeed, much older than Maslow." - Acton

188 reads

The Statement on Social Justice vs. the Poor?

Reposted from The Cripplegate.

A few months ago “The Statement on Social Justice” was released. Authored by a group of pastors (including John MacArthur, Voddie Baucham, and James White), the statement declares that the modern concepts of intersectionality, radical feminism, and critical race theory run contrary to the Bible’s depiction of justice. Moreover, it argues that the concept of corporate guilt is more at home in the Old Covenant than the new (an excellent post on that here), and that people only inherit guilt for sins they actually commit, not for sins that their ethnic ancestors committed. The main point of the declaration is that the concept of “social justice” is inherently an outcome oriented approach to justice, which is categorically different than the Bible’s concept of justice (which is process oriented).

What is outcome oriented justice? That is the concept that diverse sociological outcomes reflect an existent injustice. The most obvious examples are America’s disparity in education, incarceration rates, and income along racial lines; or South Africa’s disparity in farm ownership along racial lines. Those disparities are unequal outcomes, which reflect a social injustice.

1969 reads

3 Bible Passages to Study with Unbelievers

By Jordan Standridge. Reposted from The Cripplegate.

As time passes, I become more and more convinced that faith comes from hearing and hearing from the Word of God.

No amount of evidence can convince someone about the truth of the Gospel. It is the Word of God, itself, that has the power to save and transform souls.

Because of this conviction, I love walking through Scripture with people whenever they permit me the time. And there are three passages in particular that I am usually drawn to, depending on the type of questions I receive throughout the conversation. So, here are my top three passages to study with unbelievers.

Matthew 5:21-30, 48

This one is especially helpful for people who don’t think their sin is that bad. This is a go-to passage for several reasons. It comes from the Savior’s mouth, Himself. It is designed to show much how deep man’s depravity truly is. And it ultimately places God as the standard that we should reach to, and, by doing so, shatters false religion in pieces.

888 reads

Why the God of the Qur’an Cannot Forgive Sins

Reposted permission, from The Cripple Gate.

Almost every system or religion proposes some sort of love. From systems in the east to the west, they feature some concept of love. Both the Qur’an and the Bible do so. They both teach that God is loving. But, what do they mean by love? And, what is it about the God of the Qur’an and the God of the Bible that renders them loving? Most assertions of love remain in realm of abstract or human-to-human benevolence. How can we tangibly measure love?

Today’s post is our sixth and final part of a series studying various differences between the sacred book of Islam, the Qur’an, and that of the Christianity, the Bible. In part one, we looked at a brief introduction to Quranic Islam, observing the development of the Quranic text. In part two, we noted the major differences between the God of the Qur’an and that of the Bible. Third, we studied nine differences between the Jesus of the Qur’an and the Bible. In part four, we observed the differences between the doctrine of salvation in the Qur’an and the Bible, noticing that the Qur’an teaches a works-based righteousness. Part five covered the difference between the integrity of the Qur’an and the Bible, noting a catastrophic conundrum for Quranic Islam. Finally, we examine the differences between the love of the God of the Bible and that of the Qur’an.

998 reads

Pages