As many people may be well aware, there has always been a tension between faith and works. Is one saved simply by believing in Jesus and repenting of their sins? Or are good works necessary for salvation? Should one be emphasized more than the other? My view can be summed up in a few sentences: True faith and repentance will naturally produce works. Therefore, anyone who claims to have put their faith in Jesus and repented of their sins ought to demonstrate such fruit. If they don’t, their claim of conversion/repentance is suspect at best. Yet, it is possible to do such “good works” without putting one’s faith in Jesus or repenting. Therefore, in the end, the emphasis for salvation should NOT be on works, but on faith and repentance. A few further thoughts/implications in regards to this theory: While it is true that true faith/repentance should produce fruit (and LOTS of it), and if fruit isn’t being produced, one’s conversion/repentance is suspect, we must also be careful not to become picky “fruit inspectors.” Jesus did say that we will know a tree by its fruit, but it’s not our job to determine someone’s salvation based on how much fruit he/she is or isn’t producing. If we have reason for concern over someone’s salvation because we don’t see what we think is adequate fruit to demonstrate such conversion, the best thing we can do is pray. In addition, we must also act based on our convictions. If someone’s life isn’t adding up to what we would expect in a converted life, we must be careful to entrust responsibility or leadership to such a person. It is very likely that the person hasn’t been converted. At best, they are very inconsistent, and not trustworthy. If they are confronted by church leadership on issues where they need to repent, and they refuse to do so, they should be treated as one who has yet to be converted (regardless of whether they have been truly converted or not), according to Scripture. It also seems to me that we can too easily become fixated on fruit. Becoming picky fruit inspectors is one example of such preoccupation. Another example is the emphasis on fruit...

Over the past year, many of my posts in this blog have been devoted to the Gospel. The Gospel (as given to us by Scripture) is the foundation of our faith, according to Ephesians 2:20. The problem is, it is easy to trade the Gospel that is given to us by the apostles and prophets in Scripture for a more contemporary one. We do this oftentimes without even realizing it. This is why it’s so important to keep reading the Bible. “We don’t worship the Bible; we worship Jesus.” This is true, but the Christian faith has been passed down to us from those who “saw and heard these things.” They continually warned us to not listen to others who think they know more or know better than the apostles or prophets of old. Even if they have claimed to receive something directly from Jesus. This has always been a problem, even in Old Testament times. It is easy to stray from what has already been given by God. We learn who Jesus was and is, based on those who actually knew Him and His apostles. As much as the Christian faith is about trusting Jesus and His message, it’s about trusting that those who wrote the Scriptures properly passed down Jesus’ message. As time goes on, however, the Church strays away from the original teachings of the apostles/prophets. It happens to all of us, including me. Recently, I came across an article that was written by Keith Green about thirty years ago. So much of what he said challenges me and confirms much of what I have been processing through for the past year on this blog. As you read the article, you might think, “I thought the Gospel was supposed to be easy to understand–why complicate it?” I don’t think Keith Green is complicating it. Yes, the Gospel is easy to understand, but it is also easy to twist. It is important that we continually re-examine what it is we are teaching others. Are we passing along the Good News from God? Or is it some tabloid gossip that’s coming from less credible sources? If you claim to be a Christian, but feel you cannot trust the...

Thoughts on the book of 1 Thessalonians. Where is the Holy Spirit in my church? That’s a question I’ve asked myself often, for as long as I can remember understanding the purpose and power of the Spirit from Scripture. And I hear many other church people who are hungry for the Spirit in their lives and churches asking the same question. Where is the boldness that’s supposed to come from the Holy Spirit? That’s another similar question. Isn’t the Holy Spirit supposed to make a difference in our lives and in our churches? Why does it seem as though our churches are filled with people who are relatively the same as the non-believers around them? Where is that spiritual “oomph” that’s supposed to be evident in the lives of people who have received the Holy Spirit? Where is the power of the Gospel? Isn’t the Holy Spirit supposed to convict people’s hearts when the Gospel is preached, so that they are forever changed? Why so little transformation going on in our churches (even though 9 of 10 churches use that word in their mission statement)? In 1 Thessalonians 1:5, Paul writes: “For our gospel did not come to you in word only, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction; just as you know what kind of men we proved to be among you for your sake.” I want to see THAT Gospel at work in our churches! Why don’t we see it that often? Ironically, I think the solution to all these questions is: OPPOSITION. We face very little opposition. Even the opposition we might face, we try very hard to avoid it. We are always asking, “Where is the moving of the Holy Spirit that we see in Acts?” But we seldom ask, “Where is the opposition that we see in Acts?” But wait, Tim…we don’t want opposition to the Gospel…we want supernatural display of and reception of the Gospel! This is our very problem, in my opinion. In our efforts to avoid opposition to the Gospel, we distort the Gospel into something more palatable for everyone to receive, so that the masses will respond favorably to it. Of course, we can...

So now what? I find it funny that so much effort is being utilized to convince other Christians that there is indeed a hell. I’ve devoted several blog posts on the issue since leaving my former church. At times, I’ve grown frustrated in this endeavor, since Jesus and Scripture talk very clearly about its existence. I feel like I’ve written more about it than ought to be necessary. I wish we could stop debating its existence and move on to the implications. It’s like continually debating with someone whether there’s a God or not. There is, so let’s move on to what that means for our lives. This morning, I woke up to discover that David Platt (author of the book Radical) gave his take on the Rob Bell / Robbed Hell controversy. (Man, there are so many plays on words to make regarding this controversy, LOL.) Check out his video response here. His response reminded me of the same conclusion I came to myself when faced with people who laughed at me for my convictions regarding the Gospel and the reality of hell. Read it here. Like I said at the conclusion of that post, Christians have three options when it comes to the reality of hell: Reject the idea of hell, because it is too intolerable to believe any longer Somehow convince ourselves that everyone around us going to hell is tolerable Find it intolerable that everyone around us is going to hell, and do something about it Today, I’ll add a fourth option that is very similar to #1: Believe that there is a hell but that very few people are going there (just the “really, really bad” people throughout history that we don’t want to see in heaven). Sadly, that’s the opposite belief that Jesus taught (few are on the narrow road, and many are on the road to destruction). The lack of evangelization in my life is as disconcerting as those who reject the idea of...

With all of the discussion lately about who goes to heaven and who goes to hell, allow me to write some thoughts along these lines based on my recent readings of Romans. (By the way, Romans is one of the most theologically rich books in the Bible–so much has already been written about it, as it’s packed with so much in there. This is just part of what I’ve gleaned from a few parts of it.) According to the Christian faith, what is required for one to receive salvation from God? First, we must look closely at the wording of that question: salvation is something to be received. That means it comes from something/someone other than ourselves. We do not have the possibility of saving ourselves. We don’t save ourselves by deciding to obey God or by professing any creed. Rather, the only way we can be saved is if someone else saves us. We can’t take care of the problem ourselves. So if we can’t save ourselves, who can save us? Can my neighbor? No, because they too need saving just as much as myself. Everyone is in the same predicament. This is an important place to stop and reflect: Everyone is in the same predicament. We must remember this when we consider who goes to heaven and who goes to hell. Every one of us is under the rule of Sin, and as a result, eternal death is our fate. There are not evil people and good people. Under God’s standard of righteousness, there is NO ONE who is righteous, no not one. As a result, no one can be considered righteous–even if from this point on, I never sin again, my record is still blemished. Not only this, but that scenario is not at all possible, as sin is much more than just an act or deed done in isolation. Rather, sin has also changed the nature of who I am as a person. I am totally screwed up. (If you can’t admit this, that’s called pride.) The illustration of someone who has taken heroine is a good illustration of what sin does to us. Once you’ve taken it once, it alters your brain in such...

…as pastors quell Bell who they claim fell and yell that they smell very well what he sells. What the shell? (that’s the only other word I could think of that rhymes) For me, the question is: Where the hell does Rob Bell stand? Hahahaha. A lot of controversy surrounds Rob Bell’s new book, and thanks to friends who have kept me in the loop (I have to rely on them, since I never got into Nooma, his books, or Bell himself), I’ve done my share of thinking about it. Without reading his book, and just judging by the interviews I’ve heard from him since he wrote his latest book, here’s what I conclude Rob Bell believes: If you’re an all-around nice person (i.e. obeying the golden rule, etc.), it doesn’t matter so much whether you believe that Jesus is the “Savior of the world” or not. After all, if you’re being kind to people like Jesus taught, you are actually bringing heaven to earth like Jesus wants you to. In the end, that’s really what matters to Jesus, not your religious affiliation. So don’t worry about all the nice people out there who have never heard of Jesus or all those nice people out there who refuse to believe He’s the savior of the world. They’re nice people–they will have made the world a little more like heaven, showing that they belong to heaven, regardless of their religious affiliation. Those who are not nice to people on earth are trying to make earth more like hell. They won’t succeed, because the power of love is stronger than their efforts. All they will be able to do is make their own life on earth more hellish. If you truly love people, it doesn’t matter what they try to do to make your life hell, they won’t be able to. In the end, those people who are trying to make life on earth more hellish will realize that it was a losing battle. They will then be forced to admit they were wrong and give in to the side of love. Two questions to consider now: Is this really what the Bible teaches? Is this really what Rob Bell teaches?...