The Wild Boar News

Good Evening. A Puritan’s Mind brings you the old time radio program The Wild Boar News Podcast from Sunny South Florida. Welcome, I’m Dr. Matthew McMahon.

What do we find when entering into Roman Catholicism’s “borrowing” of paganism? We find their continued alliance with breaking the regulative principle, and the replacement of true worship, with worshipping that which is unholy. They institute unscriptural burdens such as Lent, fast days, sacred rites that control their kingdom with superstitions and false religion guised in the cloak of “authority” and hide the truth from people to damn them for all eternity. One such deception is their introduction of the “Christian festival of Easter.” Look around and you will see the world-wide acceptance of the chocolate bunny and hardboiled egg. It is harmless, right?

What does one find when looking at the celebration of Easter? The term “Easter” is certainly not Christian, and is of Chalcedonian origin. Easter is nothing else than Astarte, one of the titles of Beltis, the queen of heaven, whose name, as pronounced by the people at Nineveh, was evidently identical with that now in common use today. That name, as found by Layard on the Assyrian monuments, is Ishtar – the devil or Satan. Worship of the devil in this way was introduced to the English people through the Druids who worshipped the devil through nature.

Take a moment and note that Romanism or Druidism for that matter, would not openly say “they are worshipping the devil.” Of course they would deny it. However, the Scripture is exceedingly clear that any doctrine not brought to men through the Triune Godhead, and the Savior Jesus Christ, is a doctrine of demons and therefore, a worshipping of the devil. This certainly applies not only to the contemporary church when it introduces destructive heresies, or twists Paul’s words to their own destruction, as Peters states, but also applies to false religious ideas that pull people away from the one true Savior and only God Jesus Christ. One cannot introduce false religion without partaking of demonic influences and devil worship in that light.
As a result of Druidic worship, and influences that have penetrated into Romanism, contemporary Christendom of almost every flavor still has those influences lingering today in their worship, and their Sunday morning bulletins around the time of Easter. The Druids would worship in lighting a fire in the center circle and each worshipper putting in a “bit of oat-cake in a shepherd's bonnet; they all sit down, and draw blindfold a piece from the bonnet. One piece has been previously blackened, and whoever gets that piece has to jump through the fire in the centre of the circle, and pay a forfeit. This is, in fact, a part of the ancient worship of Baal, and the person on whom the lot fell was previously burnt as a sacrifice.” Scripture deems this “walking through the fire” or “fire sacrifice.” God condemns the practice of making children walk through the fire in Leviticus 18:21, “You shall not give any of your children to offer them to Molech, and so profane the name of your God: I am the LORD.”

Easter, then, traces back through Astarte was also worshipped in ancient times, and that from the name Astarte, whose name in Nineveh was Ishtar, the religious workings during the month of March and April, as now practiced in most of Christendom, are called by the name of Easter. In ancient times the pagans called this time of the year Easter-monath.

Even Socrates, the ancient philosopher, describes the different ways in which Easter was observed in different countries in his time during the fifth century. He states, “Thus much already laid down may seem a sufficient treatise to prove that the celebration of the feast of Easter began everywhere more of custom than by any commandment either of Christ or any Apostle." (Hist. Ecclesiast.) Even Socrates, the pagan philosopher knew Easter was not a Christian doctrine.

Where did people begin worshipping “gods” on Easter? Hislop explains, “The forty days' of fasting during the Romanist Lent was directly borrowed from the worshippers of the Babylonian goddess. Such a Lent of forty days, "in the spring of the year," is still observed by the Yezidis or Pagan Devil-worshippers of Koordistan, who have inherited it from their early masters, the Babylonians. It was held in spring by the Pagan Mexicans, for thus we read in Humboldt, where he gives account of Mexican observances: "Three days after the vernal equinox...began a solemn fast of forty days in honor of the sun." Such a Lent of forty days was observed in Egypt which was held expressly in commemoration of Adonis or Osiris, the great mediatorial god. At the same time, the rape of Proserpine seems to have been commemorated, and in a similar manner; for Julius Firmicus informs us that, for "forty nights" the "wailing for Proserpine" continued; and from Arnobius we learn that the fast which the Pagans observed, called "Castus" or the "sacred" fast, was, by the Christians in his time, believed to have been primarily in imitation of the long fast of Ceres, when for many days she determinedly refused to eat on account of her "excess of sorrow," that is, on account of the loss of her daughter Proserpine, when carried away by Pluto, the god of hell. As the stories of Bacchus, or Adonis and Proserpine, though originally distinct, were made to join on and fit in to one another, so that Bacchus was called Liber, and his wife Ariadne, Libera (which was one of the names of Proserpine), it is highly probable that the forty days' fast of Lent was made in later times to have reference to both. Among the Pagans this Lent seems to have been an indispensable preliminary to the great annual festival in commemoration of the death and resurrection of Tammuz, which was celebrated by alternate weeping and rejoicing, and which, in many countries, was considerably later than the Christian festival, being observed in Palestine and Assyria in June, therefore called the "month of Tammuz"; in Egypt, about the middle of May, and in Britain, sometime in April. To conciliate the Pagans to nominal Christianity, Rome, pursuing its usual policy, took measures to get the Christian and Pagan festivals amalgamated, and, by a complicated but skilful adjustment of the calendar, it was found no difficult matter, in general, to get Paganism and Christianity--now far sunk in idolatry--in this as in so many other things, to shake hands. The instrument in accomplishing this amalgamation was the abbot Dionysius the Little, to whom also we owe it, as modern chronologers have demonstrated, that the date of the Christian era, or of the birth of Christ Himself, was moved FOUR YEARS from the true time. Whether this was done through ignorance or design may be matter of question; but there seems to be no doubt of the fact, that the birth of the Lord Jesus was made full four years later than the truth. This change of the calendar in regard to Easter was attended with momentous consequences. It brought into the Church the grossest corruption and the rankest superstition in connection with the abstinence of Lent. Let anyone only read the atrocities that were commemorated during the "sacred fast" or Pagan Lent, as described by Arnobius and Clemens Alexandrinus, and surely he must blush for the Christianity of those who, with the full knowledge of all these abominations, "went down to Egypt for help" to stir up the languid devotion of the degenerate Church, and who could find no more excellent way to "revive" it, than by borrowing from so polluted a source; the absurdities and abominations connected with which the early Christian writers had held up to scorn. That Christians should ever think of introducing the Pagan abstinence of Lent was a sign of evil; it showed how low they had sunk, and it was also a cause of evil; it inevitably led to deeper degradation. Originally, even in Rome, Lent, with the preceding revelries of the Carnival, was entirely unknown; and even when fasting before the Christian Pasch was held to be necessary, it was by slow steps that, in this respect, it came to conform with the ritual of Paganism. What may have been the period of fasting in the Roman Church before sitting of the Nicene Council does not very clearly appear, but for a considerable period after that Council, we have distinct evidence that it did not exceed three weeks.”

So we have the history of “Easter” and its popular observances today confirm the testimony of history as to its Babylonian character, such as the hot-crossed buns that are so tasty.

The hot cross buns of Good Friday, and the dyed eggs of Easter Sunday, figured in the Chaldean rites just as they do now. The "buns" were used in the worship of the queen of heaven, the goddess Easter, as early as the days of Cecrops, the founder of Athens--that is, 1500 years before the Christian era. Jeremiah 7:18 states, “The children gather wood, the fathers kindle fire, and the women knead dough, to make cakes for the queen of heaven. And they pour out drink offerings to other gods, to provoke me to anger.” Jeremiah uses the word "bun" which is where the concept was derived. The Hebrew word was pronounced Khavan, which in Greek became sometimes Kapan-os. The Hebrew shows how Khvan, pronounced as one syllable, would pass into the Latin panis, "bread," and the second how, in like manner, Khvon would become Bon or Bun. The hot cross buns are not now offered, but eaten, on the festival of Astarte; but this leaves no doubt as to where the original idea came from.

What about the Ishtar Eggs? Where do we get bunnies and eggs in baskets and egg hunts during a Christian holy-day? The origin of the Paschal eggs is just as pagan. The ancient Druids bore an egg, as the sacred emblem of their order. Hislop says, “In the Dionysiaca, or mysteries of Bacchus, as celebrated in Athens, one part of the nocturnal ceremony consisted in the consecration of an egg. The Hindo fables celebrate their mundane egg as of a golden color. The people of Japan make their sacred egg to have been brazen. In China, at this hour, dyed or painted eggs are used on sacred festivals, even as in this country. In ancient times eggs were used in the religious rites of the Egyptians and the Greeks, and were hung up for mystic purposes in their temples. From Egypt these sacred eggs can be distinctly traced to the banks of the Euphrates. The classic poets are full of the fable of the mystic egg of the Babylonians.” Hyginus, the poet states, “An egg of wondrous size is said to have fallen from heaven into the river Euphrates. The fishes rolled it to the bank, where the doves having settled upon it, and hatched it, out came Venus, who afterwards was called the Syrian Goddess"--that is, Astarte, or Easter. So the Easter Egg became one of the symbols of Astarte, and its occult meaning had reference to the ark during the time of the flood, in which the whole human race were shut up, as the chick is enclosed in the egg before it is hatched.
The egg, then, became used as a symbol for the whole world as Noah and his family, after the destruction was the “whole world” floating on the waters of the flood. Hislop states, “The coming of the egg from heaven evidently refers to the preparation of the ark by express appointment of God; and the same thing seems clearly implied in the Egyptian story of the mundane egg which was said to have come out of the mouth of the great god. The doves resting on the egg need no explanation. This, then, was the meaning of the mystic egg in one aspect. As, however, everything that was good or beneficial to mankind was represented in the Chaldean mysteries, as in some way connected with the Babylonian goddess, so the greatest blessing to the human race, which the ark contained in its bosom, was held to be Astarte, who was the great civiliser and benefactor of the world. Though the deified queen, whom Astarte represented, had no actual existence till some centuries after the flood, yet through the doctrine of metempsychosis, which was firmly established in Babylon, it was easy for her worshippers to be made to believe that, in a previous incarnation, she had lived in the Antediluvian world, and passed in safety through the waters of the flood. Now the Romish Church adopted this mystic egg of Astarte, and consecrated it as a symbol of Christ's resurrection. A form of prayer was even appointed to be used in connection with it, Pope Paul V teaching his superstitious votaries thus to pray at Easter this specific prayer, “Bless, O Lord, we beseech thee, this thy creature of eggs, that it may become a wholesome sustenance unto thy servants, eating it in remembrance of our Lord Jesus Christ…” (Scottish Guardian, April, 1844).

That Semiramis, under the name of Astarte, was worshipped not only as an incarnation of the Spirit of God, but as the mother of mankind, we have very clear and satisfactory evidence. There is no doubt that "the Syrian goddess" was Astarte (LAYARD'S Nineveh and its Remains). Now, the Assyrian goddess, or Astarte, is akin to simply worshipping the devil. Astarte is not Jesus Christ, is not the Triune Godhead, is not biblical, but everything that God prohibits. The bunny with its fertility connotations and the ancient pagan festivals that used rabbits as symbols of fertility in Babylonian times or the use of eggs, or the use of candy (which derived from the use of pomegranates and oranges that were also used in ancient times of pagan rituals) is identified as devil worship by any thinking Christian. It is no wonder that the use of the symbol of the dove itself as a Christian symbol did not come from the idea of the Spirit resting as a dove upon Christ during His baptism, but as a representative of the Mother of the gods, in whom that Spirit was said to be incarnate, was celebrated as the originator of some of the useful arts and sciences. And we find very readily in Greek mythology that the character attributed to the Minerva, whose name Athena as a synonym for Beltis, the well known name of the Assyrian goddess. Athena, the Minerva of Athens, is universally known as the "goddess of wisdom," the inventress of arts and sciences.
We have Rome borrowing pagan rituals to change the date of Christ’s entrance into the word by 4 years to compensate amalgamating the celebration of devil worship with Christianity; the adoption of Ishtar, or Astarte, Easter, as a Papist degradation of worship; the violation of the regulative principle in deeming a day to be worshipped as such, the entrance of eggs from Druidic worship, or pomegranates and oranges that turned into chocolate bunnies and Ishtar eggs for a candy basket to give on Easter Sunday, and the Babylonian influences of pagan rituals through every aspect of Easter and we find you, reader, going out this week to apply this all to little Johnny and little Debbie because everyone else is doing it at church.
If you want to be a Papist, then call yourself a Papist, or a Druid, or a Grecian worshipper of the devil. Don’t call yourself Christian by upholding a blatantly obvious demonic holy-day that God abhors. When you partake of such wicked schemes, God’s anger is aroused, and He states in Deuteronomy 32:17, “They sacrificed to demons that were no gods, to gods they had never known.” When you give your child their Easter basket, recall God’s words, and heed the Psalmist in Psalm 106:37, “They sacrificed their sons and their daughters to the demons.” Know that you serve the same blasphemies that Romanism has brought into Christendom, and that the Scriptures rightly warn the covenant people of God that they should abstain from such things and be separate. 1 Timothy 4:1 states, “Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons.” When you worship using the devil’s teachings, you give heed to demonic influences and introduce them to your children. You might say, “Hey, come on. It’s just a chocolate bunny, some jelly beans and a few hardboiled eggs right?” No. It is a giving of your mind, heart and family over to the trinkets of the devil and the worship of his holy-day that has been resurrected and founded on demonic influences and teachings – it is devil worship. If you celebrate Easter, you spit in the face of Jesus Christ who is to be worshipped not on one day in the year on “Resurrection Sunday”, but all the days of all your life – for He is the Redeemer of the Covenant people of God every day.

There is a great difference between the works of the devil and the works of the Triune God. The devil deceives by subtle manipulation (Hey, Easter is not all bad), and the Triune Godhead commands nothing more than perfect obedience to His will and Word (Thou Shalt not worship any other gods, nor shall you worship God according to the commandments of men). The devil wants you to worship Jesus Christ in the manner that demonic teachings lay out Easter. God commands you to worship Him as His Word dictates. Deuteronomy 4:2 states, “You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God that I command you.” The devil is the father of lies and wants you to believe the lie that Easter is a Christian holiday, like Lent and Christmas. But our true Father is in heaven who commands us today, as Acts 17:30-31 states, “to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead," who is Jesus Christ. Talk about that day and wonder, Christian, if you will stand when He appears. There is safety in appearing in the righteousness of Christ on the Day of Judgment. But there is no safety in any degree of comprises for the sake of a few jelly beans.
Post Script – I do not want Christians to be leery of buying a bag of jelly beans or eating a Cadbury Egg. It is not that jelly beans or chocolate bunnies are evil in and of themselves. Buy some jelly beans during the 4th of July and have at them. Make some chocolate bunnies and eat them up during January or September. But do not associate yourself or your family with the Romanist amalgamation of pagan rituals during the March-April time of Lent, Good Friday, Palm Sunday and Easter. Those associations are in direct violation of God’s commands, and those associations overrule your plea to Christian Liberty because God is very clear about His worship. As Revelation 19:10 states, “Worship God.”

This is Dr. Matthew McMahon signing off.

Keep checking back at A Puritan’s Mind –for more on the Gospel, Reformed and Puritan Theology, and more of the Wild Boar, visit www.apuritansmind.com.

Posted by Rich at 11:51 PM | Permalink | Comments

Good Evening. A Puritan’s Mind brings you the old time radio program The Wild Boar News Podcast from Sunny South Florida. Welcome, I’m Dr. Matthew McMahon.

For some reason, contemporary pseudo pastors seem to believe that their main objective is to win souls and grow their church. They win souls by offering an Arminian Gospel, and they grow their church by incorporating those won over into some kind of assimilation into a corporate-like environment. No doubt it works well. Most companies operate by taking new employees, and assimilating them into the structure of the company with specific tasks that will aid the overall streamlined environment. These companies thrive as communication is passed down from the CEO to various departments, that in turn, oversee those departments to the company’s greater good. This is, again, much like many contemporary churches whose pastors abdicate their pastoral responsibility for integration through a man-centered incorporation to their corporate empire. How else can they afford their new Lexus or beachfront summer condo. Numbers means revenue, and revenue means success.

What’s the secret? Small groups. As corporations have departments, contemporary churches have small groups.

What are small groups? Besides being a blatant disregard for the pastoral duties of overseeing the flock personally, and manageably, small groups give mega congregations the ability to divide up (as if Christ desires His church to be divided) and to learn watered down lessons about self-esteem, church ministries, or whatever doctrines a contemporary church deems suitable to “fellowship with the saints.” Leaders of small groups are called “Small Group Champions” or “Lay Leaders”. Such people are chosen by the pastor, or as Christianity Today writer Fred Smith states, that small group champions are “identified” as “promising people” who can “take on” the guidance of a small group. Smith lists 10 requirements for church ceos to identify small group champions, and 4 conclusions that would read well in any article in the business section of the Wall Street Journal or Fast Company Magazine, like: What will this person do to be liked, or can the CEO Pastor provide a suitable environment for this person to succeed? Of course, there was no mention to glorify God, or ability to take on pastoral duties. No, the contemporary church cares little for those things.

In an article called “Confession of a Small-Group Leader” Joe Higginbotham said of himself that his group was successful because “The nonchurchy, spontaneous atmosphere of our group was its most basic appeal.”

The Good News of South Florida Newspaper said that “small groups need to be managed”. Of course they do, much like any corporate department.

This gives rise to the new phenomena of the “church without walls”. Small Groups extending into the world where people, in a non-churchy environment, managed by champion leaders, and chosen on the basis as to whether they will be liked or not, has a trendy kick to it. Realize listener that the feel good church of the future must continue to create trendy applications in order for you, the non-denominational, unchurched attendee feels a sense of belonging that is indiscriminatory. Don’t you feel good about that?

But, as false shepherds continue to propagate such irreverent anti-biblical concepts to abdicate themselves from actually caring for the flock as a flock in expository biblical teaching, and pastoral duties, more and more mainline denominations are picking up bad habits of such abdication because they see that their churches are losing ground to that which is more trendy and popular. In allowing others to take over pastoral responsibility, churches are growing, so they think, erroneously, that it can’t be all bad if growth is inevitable. Growth, they think, in numbers, gives them the ability for their church to do good. But what does that have to do with the glory of Jesus Christ?

True pastors, however, hold to the Bible. The Bible is quite plain on this point. Pastors are not to abandon their flock, or give up their responsibility to preaching and teaching the truth to them.

Ephesians 4:11-12, “And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ.”

Now, many pseudo pastors will whine and wail on this note, and hold steadfast to the corporate principle that their churches are thriving because small group departments are succeeding. But if that’s the case, the best thing that small groups actually do is demonstrate that the pseudo pastor who is leading that church is no pastor at all. The success of the small group over their leadership and preaching of the flock themselves is a true sign that demonstrates their inadequacy to take a leadership role and equip the flock, and further demonstrates that their abdication is a sign that they should have never been behind the pulpit in the first place.

This is Dr. Matthew McMahon signing off.

Posted by Rich at 12:22 AM | Permalink | Comments

Good Evening. A Puritan’s Mind brings you the old time radio program The Wild Boar News Podcast from Sunny South Florida. Welcome, I’m Dr. Matthew McMahon.

Contemplation is the hallmark of the wise. Solomon said, in Proverbs 6:6, “Go to the ant, O sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise.” Consideration or reflection, taking time out to do so, is one of the most godly and important aspects in the Christian life. Without reflection and consideration one would not excel in their sanctification.

In thinking about the New Year, one of the most obvious reflections arises from the familiar figure by which life is compared to a journey, and the different years of life to successive stages in our course. Just as a traveller is reminded, by looking on a mile-stone, that he has left another stage behind him, and that he has one fewer in his journey ahead, so the commencement of another year should awaken the thoughtful reflection, how large a portion of life is already past, and how much less remains for us before we reach our final destination. Were life bounded by a limit which, besides being fixed and certain in itself, was also ascertainable by each of us – could we all count securely on the full tale of forty years – even on that supposition we might be expected to be seriously impressed by the succession of one year after another, each vanishing away, and leaving a smaller number before us? A young person may say, “Twenty years are gone how short they seem in the retrospect! Yet if I travel fifty more, my race is run!” And the man of mature age might say, “More than half of my allotted time is expired, and in less time than I have already spent here on earth, I shall be in eternity.”

Thus, as one stage after another was completed, it is natural to count how many mile-stones have been passed, and to figure out how few remain before us. But how much more natural, and how deeply solemn the thought in the actual circumstances of our case, that we have reached another distinct landmark in our course – we, who “know not what a day may bring forth,” and who are passing on with the assurance that beyond a certain limit, we cannot live.

At the same time we remain in the scope of the constant hazard of an early and unexpected death! The maximum of life is known – the minimum of life no man call tell. It is a journey which may extend to seventy years, or it may terminate in one year. It is a voyage on a flowing stream, whose utmost reach may carry a few onward for seventy years, but it is a stream which has many divergent channels opening at every point into the great ocean of eternity.

Might not the close of one year and the commencement of another be expected, in such circumstances, to suggest the thought that we have really no certainty except in regard to the years that are past and gone? What do we know? We know that those years they are gone forever, and can never return. But what about the future? We know only this, that our years are drawing fast to an end, and that possibly this may be our last year. Every person has one life. Every person has one life in which to roam the earth and make something of themselves in the light of God’s ever piercing eye. We know what years have been passed over, but at any coming moment we may drop down and die. How long is a moment? How many moments do you have left? The commencement of a new year is only a proof that we are nearer, by one long interval, to the end of our journey. We are nearer, by the time that has passed, to heaven or hell. If the last step – the step by which we pass from this life into eternity is so awful that the very thought of it harrows up our feelings, and makes our flesh creep and our blood run cold, should not every step we take in advance towards it be solemn, and should not every year, which brings us nearer to death, leave us more ready to die? And are you so certain, listener, that the moment you step into eternity that you will be safe under and covered by the righteousness of Jesus Christ and His work in redemption for His elect? Are you one of those who contemplates the New Year in light of the work you will do for God, and are you certain that the New Year will shine forth as one which brings you that much closer to your Savior? Certainly, this is something that wise men contemplate.

This is Dr. Matthew McMahon signing off.

Keep checking back at A Puritan’s Mind – the series on Election and Reprobation has just been completed. Go to www.apuritansmind.com and click on “What’s New?” There you will find information on this 9 part lecture series. For more on Reformed and Puritan Theology that honors the Lord Jesus Christ, visit http://www.apuritansmind.com.

Posted by Rich at 12:31 AM | Permalink | Comments

Good Evening. A Puritan’s Mind brings you the old time radio program The Wild Boar News Podcast from Sunny South Florida. Welcome, I’m Dr. Matthew McMahon.

There are many articles and papers written to show that Christmas, and other holidays like Easter, are thoroughly unbiblical, and are intended to sway the Christian community away from practicing such “man-made holy-days.” No doubt the authors of such papers have the best interest of the Christian Church in mind, and are not simply jumping upon the bandwagon of “reformed thought” in order to add another notch to their theological belt. However, when these articles begin to substantiate the claim that Christians should have nothing to do with the holiday of Christmas, the weightiest arguments they bring forth are two fold: 1) The appeal to the pagan roots of idolatry, and 2) the history and witness of the Christian Church.

First, writers appeal to the pagan roots of the holiday as a means to deter Christians from practicing such abominable vestiges even though the 21st century Christmas is not blatantly practicing the same rites as the Babylonians or druids of old once did. For instance, the Christmas tree is set up in some corner of the living room, decorated and lighted, and gifts abound and grow under the tree as December 25th draws near. The appeal is then made to Jeremiah 10:3-4 where idolatry is condemned. It says, “For the customs of the peoples are futile; For one cuts a tree from the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the ax. They decorate it with silver and gold; they fasten it with nails and hammers so that it will not topple.” Here we see idolatry based in the practice of cutting down, setting up, and decorating a tree. Or they quote Jeremiah 2:20, “For of old I have broken your yoke and burst your bonds; And you said, "I will not transgress,' When on every high hill and under every green tree You lay down, playing the harlot.” Here the evergreen tree was used to promote false religion and idolatry. God was angered at the Israelites for their religious syncretism and their participation in these practices. Idolatry is certainly condemned by God and no Christian should ever be disobeying and transgressing the first table of the Law of God (commandments 1-4) by profaning the worship of God with idols.

The second appeal is made to the history of the church and its practices. Surely this is an important note to make, and that petition to such testimony is warranted. We could cite the reformers such as Luther and Calvin, the pastors of Geneva city-state, the Waldensen Confession, the Puritan Divines such as Edmund Calamy, Samuel Rutherford, James Durham, Increase Mather, Thomas Vincent, John Owen, Andrew Clarkson, Ebenezer Erskine, William Wilson, Alexander Moncrieff, James Fisher, John Willison, John Brown, Robert Shaw (and many more), The Westminster Confession, the Directory of Publick worship, The General Assembly of the Church of Scotland and their confession, and various other creeds and confessions. These diligent writers will make it known that the church did not practice this holiday until sometime after the 4th century, and show varied proofs that most opposed the practice altogether, condemning it out rightly. Here we see the siege to discourage the practice and participation of Christmas is usually based on these 2 points.

Before I give my own view, I would like to address the two avenues above which are the usual lines of reasoning in dissuading Christians from partaking in the Christmas holiday.

The first argument is certainly important. Christians are certainly never to participate in idolatrous worship. However, the case against Christmas on this point is not that Christians are out rightly bowing down to a tree and worshipping it, or profaning Christ by setting the Yule log on the fire, or desecrating the glory of God by exchanging gifts with one another. I have never met a Christian who blatantly setup a green tree in their home to practice idolatry. The argument presented in the first point above is not directed by those writers against people who setup idols in their home and bow down to them after supper for family devotions. Rather, the argument stems from the pagan practices which lie behind what Christians do with those Christmas trees, Yule logs, wreaths, etc. in days of old. Scripture everywhere condemns idolatry, but the argument that because something has pagan roots is no argument against Christmas. Why is this? Some may believe I am going to appeal to Romans 14 and the Christian’s liberty with holy days as the argument against this. But that passage does not address the situation rightly, and, as a matter of fact condemns such days. Rather, I appeal to 1 Corinthians 8:1-13. It asserts the following:

Now concerning things offered to idols: We know that we all have knowledge.
Knowledge puffs up, but love edifies. 2And if anyone thinks that he knows
anything, he knows nothing yet as he ought to know. 3But if anyone loves God,
this one is known by Him. 4Therefore concerning the eating of things offered to
idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is no other
God but one. 5For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on
earth (as there are many gods and many lords), 6yet for us there is one God, the
Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ,
through whom are all things, and through whom we live. 7However, there is not in
everyone that knowledge; for some, with consciousness of the idol, until now eat
it as a thing offered to an idol; and their conscience, being weak, is defiled.
8But food does not commend us to God; for neither if we eat are we the better,
nor if we do not eat are we the worse. 9But beware lest somehow this liberty of
yours become a stumbling block to those who are weak. 10For if anyone sees you
who have knowledge eating in an idol's temple, will not the conscience of him
who is weak be emboldened to eat those things offered to idols? 11And because of
your knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died? 12But when
you thus sin against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, you sin
against Christ. 13Therefore, if food makes my brother stumble, I will never
again eat meat, lest I make my brother stumble.

Did Paul have any problem eating meat sacrificed to idols? Not at all. His conscience was clear knowing that food “does not commend us to God”; whether we eat it or not. Trees do not commend us to God, nor do Yule logs, wreaths, or turkey and ham made for the Christmas occasion. These things do not make us better or worse towards God in and of themselves. Paul ate meat that was sacrificed to idols. He abstained from the eating of meat if it would cause those who would bock at the practice to stumble in their faith. Either way, eating or not eating, Paul did not defile his conscience by it. Shall we ask the question, “What went on in ceremonial rites which allowed these meat markets to offer meat sacrificed in this way?” We could go into the abominations of the pagans, their sacrifices, their temple prostitution, their wicked practices with other man-made Gods, in reality worshipping the devil, and the like. We could simply use our imaginations about this and in some cases our imaginations would not be graphic enough to consider what heathen idolatries occurred against the Living God. But Paul ate the meat. Even though the meat had pagan origins, he still ate it. Even though the cow or bull was offered as a sacrifice for devils, slain and drained of its blood, cut up and used in the ceremony, Paul still had no problem eating it. Paul’s determent to eat meat sacrificed to idols was the consideration of a weaker brother. If there was a weaker brother who could not handle, in his own conscience, the thought of eating or practicing such a thing, because Paul was the stronger and more mature Christian, free in Christ to eat what God had made, he still, nevertheless, would have abandoned the practice. He would not have abandoned eating meat sacrificed to idols because of the meat’s pagan origins, but because of his love to the brother in question.

Christmass (yes I spelled it correctly) cannot be condemned because it has pagan origins. Christmas, as pagan as it might be, and as many pagan ideologies it may possess, cannot be condemned because 1000 years ago or 500 years ago or 5 days ago someone bowed down to the tree and committed idolatry with it. (People hang picture frames through their home to display photos, made from wood – should that deter them since they knew it was once a tree, and someone 500 years ago worshipped trees?) The Christian is not bound by such instances if they are not bowing down to it, and their consciences are cleared before Christ because they have studied and thought through the implications and biblical/historical information on the subject, if that was all there was to it.

Secondly, the appeal to men may be helpful, but the opinions of men, no matter how renown they may be, should never be the basis of setting the Christian's conscience. The Christian conscience should be captive by the Word of God alone. However, Christians should always weigh and consider the prominent and distinct men of the church (the gifts of Christ to His chosen people) in difficult areas of theology and doctrine. It is certainly helpful and edifying to the soul to see what the councils, creeds, puritans and magisterial reformers thought. In the case at hand, most of church history is opposed to the involvement of the Christian in the celebration of Christmas. Even the city-state of Geneva in 1546 stated they would reprimand anyone who observed the day, believing it was a retreat to Romanism – the heretical monster they were breaking away from. (“Those who observe the Romish festivals or fasts shall only be reprimanded, unless they remain obstinately rebellious.” - Register of the Company of Pastors (Geneva, 1546)). However, the break from the Roman Catholic Church during the Protestant Reformation is wholly another point to speak about in comparison to the Christmas celebration many desire to invoke today without any reference to the Catholic Church. In any case, the appeal to men cannot bind the conscience of the Christian, as helpful they may be in their exegetical prowess.

At this point you may wondering what my position is. It was needful to state the former arguments and positions before going onto what I believe is the crux of the argument against Christmas and other like “holy-days.” Knowing that one cannot utilize pagan origins, nor the opinions of men (perse), as arguments against the practice of Christmas, what biblical grounds would I have against it?

If Christ was taken out of the picture altogether, XMAS would be acceptable to the Christian. Like Father’s day or Mother’s Day, holidays to exchange gifts and have parties together with family and friends is quite acceptable. The contention that arises is when one places Christ within the Christmass scheme to use it as a day to commemorate and remember His birth, that it becomes a direct violation of the Regulative Principle of worship. Upon the violation of this principle of worship lies the ground by which every Christian should see Christmass as abominable. It is true that extreme debt, excess financial strain, Christmas party debauchery, a-whoring after material wealth, unbridled children demanding certain gifts and throwing tempter tantrums when they are refused them, and the like, also are added into the bag of those things which Christians should oppose during the “jolly season.” However, it is upon the principle of God’s command in worship that Christmas becomes detestable.

I'm all for Frosty the Snowman, Jack Frost, winter wonderlands, chestnuts roasting on an open fire, exchanging presents, eating candy canes, enjoying really good egg-nog, stuffing stocking, watching "Elf" with James Caan and Will Ferrel, or Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer with that classic sung by Burl Ives, as well as all the other holiday festivities. Why? Well, they have nothing, in the way I am explaining here, to do with Jesus Christ and the birth story, or the incarnation. They do not violate, in any way, the Regulative Principle.

It is necessary to explain, briefly, the Regulative Principle of Worship, and then also argue that high thoughts of Christ, or any kind of meditation on Christ, is worship – no matter how short or long that time is. First, the Regulative Principle teaches that worship is construed only by the direct commands of God in His Word. To allow into worship what is not expressly commanded in the Bible, whether that is for a day or for the regular Sunday service, is false worship. It is a worship fabricated by men, and this violates the principles of worship that God has commanded. For instance, if men say that drama or mime is acceptable in worship because God has not expressly commanded that it not be done, they are violating the Regulative Principle. God expresses states what He does command and does not need to expressly forbid what He does not. (That would take volumes.)

Scriptural examples abound for this principle. Genesis 4:3-5 says this, “And in the process of time it came to pass that Cain brought an offering of the fruit of the ground to the LORD. Abel also brought of the firstborn of his flock and of their fat. And the LORD respected Abel and his offering, but He did not respect Cain and his offering. And Cain was very angry, and his countenance fell.” God did not accept what Cain brought, though Cain may have brought it sincerely. Sacrifices were to be of blood, for without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin. Cain’s heart was wrong, and his sacrifice was not what God had commanded of him.

Another example is in Leviticus 10:1-3 which is a cornerstone for the Regulative Principle. It says,

“Then Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, each took his censer and put fire in
it, put incense on it, and offered profane fire before the LORD, which He had
not commanded them. 2So fire went out from the LORD and devoured them, and they died before the LORD. 3And Moses said to Aaron, “This is what the LORD spoke, saying: “By those who come near Me I must be regarded as holy; And before all the people I must be glorified.”” So Aaron held his peace.”

Here Nadab and Abihu offered something (strange fire) on the altar, but God had not expressly forbid them from doing so. God had only told them what they were supposed to do, not what they should not do as well. You may search all through the passage and never find one instance of God forbidding them not to offer this “strange fire.” Here we see God’s mind on the principle. God killed them for disobeying Him though God had not expressly forbidden the practice. This should cause all to stop and think about how we must be careful to know the mind of God on matters of importance such as worship.

Another example is in 2 Samuel 6:3-7,

“So they set the ark of God on a new cart, and brought it out of the house of
Abinadab, which was on the hill; and Uzzah and Ahio, the sons of Abinadab, drove
the new cart. And they brought it out of the house of Abinadab, which was on the
hill, accompanying the ark of God; and Ahio went before the ark. Then David and
all the house of Israel played music before the LORD on all kinds of instruments
of fir wood, on harps, on stringed instruments, on tambourines, on sistrums, and
on cymbals. And when they came to Nachon's threshing floor, Uzzah put out his
hand to the ark of God and took hold of it, for the oxen stumbled. Then the
anger of the LORD was aroused against Uzzah, and God struck him there for his
error; and he died there by the ark of God.”

Uzzah did not want to see the ark of God fall into the mud. It was toppling on the ox cart that they were using to transport it. God had expressly stated that they were to transport the ark with poles, not on an oxcart. Numbers 4:6 and 15 says,

“Then they shall put on it a covering of badger skins, and spread over that a
cloth entirely of blue; and they shall insert its poles…And when Aaron and his
sons have finished covering the sanctuary and all the furnishings of the
sanctuary, when the camp is set to go, then the sons of Kohath shall come to
carry them; but they shall not touch any holy thing, lest they die.”

Uzzah did not use the poles expressly commanded by God; he used an ox cart. 1 Chronicles 15:13-15 states,

“For because you did not do it the first time, the LORD our God broke out
against us, because we did not consult Him about the proper order." So the
priests and the Levites sanctified themselves to bring up the ark of the LORD
God of Israel. And the children of the Levites bore the ark of God on their
shoulders, by its poles, as Moses had commanded according to the word of the
LORD.”

Not only did Uzzah not use what was expressly commanded (the poles), rather, he used what he wanted (the ox cart). His transgression did not stop there.

Uzzah also touched the ark because he did not want the mud to defile the sacred object. But the Lord killed him because the mud was cleaner than Uzzah.

The principle is set in such passages above, and ratified in other passages such as Deuteronomy 4:1-2 which says, “Now, O Israel, listen to the statutes and the judgments which I teach you to observe, that you may live, and go in and possess the land which the LORD God of your fathers is giving you. You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.” Also, Deuteronomy 12:30-32 says, “…take heed to yourself that you are not ensnared to follow them, after they are destroyed from before you, and that you do not inquire after their gods, saying, "How did these nations serve their gods? I also will do likewise.' You shall not worship the LORD your God in that way; for every abomination to the LORD which He hates they have done to their gods; for they burn even their sons and daughters in the fire to their gods. “Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it nor take away from it.” In these verses God is specific to inform the Israelites that they should not add or take away from the law, or sore judgments will come upon them. Two of the more poignant verses are from the lips of Christ and Paul. Jesus said, “These people draw near to Me with their mouth, and honor Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me. And in vain they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men. (Matt. 15:8-9)” When men introduce their own ideas into worship, they have violated the Regulative Principle that Christ has given, even if Christ has not expressly forbidden it. Paul calls this “will-worship” in Colossians 2:23 which states, “These things indeed have an appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion, [translated literally “will-worship”] false humility, and neglect of the body, but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh.” Here we see that self-imposed religion, or the worship of one’s own will, violates the principles God has expressly set, though the Bible may not expressly forbid such practices. Jeroboam did this very thing in 1 Kings 12:32-33, “Jeroboam ordained a feast on the fifteenth day of the eighth month, like the feast that was in Judah, and offered sacrifices on the altar. So he did at Bethel, sacrificing to the calves that he had made. And at Bethel he installed the priests of the high places which he had made. So he made offerings on the altar which he had made at Bethel on the fifteenth day of the eighth month, in the month which he had devised in his own heart. And he ordained a feast for the children of Israel, and offered sacrifices on the altar and burned incense.” God did not command this. Jeroboam took this upon himself to institute. This pertained to worship and violated the Regulative Principle.

Some may appeal here to the feast of Purim in the book of Esther saying that they imposed a time of worship. This is not the case at all. The feast of Purim was not worship. Esther 9:18, 26, and 28 state, “The Feast of Purim: But the Jews who were at Shushan assembled together on the thirteenth day, as well as on the fourteenth; and on the fifteenth of the month they rested, and made it a day of feasting and gladness…So they called these days Purim, after the name Pur. Therefore, because of all the words of this letter, what they had seen concerning this matter, and what had happened to them…that these days should be remembered and kept throughout every generation, every family, every province, and every city, that these days of Purim should not fail to be observed among the Jews, and that the memory of them should not perish among their descendants.” This was not worship. It was a day of feasting. It was a day of gladness, but not an institution of worship like Nadab and Abihu and their strange fire, or Jeroboam and his sacrifices. Some appeal to The Westminster Confession in their statement concerning lawful days of “thanksgiving” in order to appeal to a day of thanksgiving for Christmas. However, The Westminster Confession says the following, “The reading of the Scriptures with godly fear, the sound preaching and conscionable hearing of the Word, in obedience unto God, with understanding, faith, and reverence, singing of psalms with grace in the heart; as also, the due administration and worthy receiving of the sacraments instituted by Christ, are all parts of the ordinary religious worship of God: beside religious oaths, vows, solemn fastings, and thanksgivings upon special occasions, which are, in their several times and seasons, to be used in an holy and religious manner. (WCF Chapter 21, Section 5; They use Esther 9:20-22 as a proof text for “and thanksgivings upon special occasions”, not for worship.) The Westminster Confession makes the distinction between worship which appears in the first part of the paragraph, and then separates other days of spiritual edification by the word “besides.” They are not the same, and appeal to them is unwarranted.

We see then that God has set the Principles by which sinful men may approach him, and any addition or subtraction to that institutes a self-willed worship which is abhorrent to God.

Secondly, we must define whether or not Christmass actually falls under the category of worship. Is setting aside a certain day, once a year to honor Christ’s birth, a violation of the Regulative Principle and worship? Apart from asking this question, the Christian should be the first to realize that giving gifts, Santa Claus, Christmas Trees, Yule Logs and the like, have absolutely nothing to do with the incarnation of Jesus Christ. The closest in any of these is the giving of gifts, but we do not give gifts to Christ as the Magi did (which was for a specific purpose) but rather, we give them to one another. How is this honoring to Christ? I have yet found anyone who can justify any of these things in a lawful connection to Christ and His Word. It just does not exist. Instead, they are following, blindly, the Roman Catholic institution of the Christ-mass. Check your history....

In attaching homage to Jesus Christ and the honoring of His incarnation to Christmas, men are setting apart a solemn day of worship by their own accord. Churches go to great lengths to celebrate “the advent of our Lord”. They light candles, and confer with church tradition to make this a season where they especially remember His birth in the month of December. In doing this they are instituting a day, or series of days of worship (if there are special events ensuing) which are not instituted in Scripture and are additions to God’s prescribed rule of authority. The only day set by God in the Scriptures for solemn worship and remembrance of Christ in any way, is the Lord’s Day or Christian Sabbath. To create another day would violate the Regulative Principle. Men should never impose their ideas of worship on God and believe God will accept them.

Whenever Christians have thoughts of Christ or of God, they are beginning to engage in worship. Jeremiah Burroughs in his book Gospel Worship defines worship simply as “thoughts about God.” The interaction of the mind of man to the mind of God, to think His thoughts after Him, is worship. The opposite of having thoughts of God and worshipping Him, is to suppress and remove God from the thoughts; Psalm 10:4 states, “The wicked in his proud countenance does not seek God; God is in none of his thoughts.” The Christian is to have his thoughts fixed upon God. We are to be living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to Him every minute of every day – but there are also times of public and private worship which take place at God’s command. Colossians 3:2 states, “Set your mind on the things above…” Isaiah 26:3 says that the righteous’ “mind is stayed on You.” Meditating and thoughtfulness about God is worship. Formal worship, gathering together as a body of believers in a church setting to hear preaching and teaching, etc., is commanded of God to His people. Private worship is still worship, though it be done in the home. In either case, creating a day for formal worship, such as Christmas, is a violation of the principles of worship. If one were to take one day a month to meditate on the incarnation in their private devotions, there would be no contention. It is the formalizing of a specific day to honor Christ which is the problem. Public or private worship is still to be regulated by God’s Word and not the imaginations of men’s minds.

One final thought is important to add: If Christmas were wholly biblical, and centered around the worship of Christ, and the glorification and honor of God, why would the world enjoy it? The world loves Christmas. They revel in it. If it were something truly biblical, or something truly edifying to the soul, then they would hate it and would not be able to stand it. Isaiah 53:1-3 states,

“Who has believed our report? And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed? 2For He shall grow up before Him as a tender plant, And as a root out of dry ground. He has no form or comeliness; and when we see Him, there is no beauty
that we should desire Him. 3He is despised and rejected by men.”

The Gospel of Jesus Christ, which the very purpose of the incarnation, is abhorrent to the world – they hate it. They reject the Gospel and despise Jesus. They do not desire nor love Him. But they love the holiday season. Some Christians desire to “reclaim” Christmas and put the “Christ” back in “Christ-mas.” But what the participating Christian has done is taken the world and adapted himself to it. He is to be salt and light, being transformed from the world, not giving into it. Not only does he break the principle of worship set in the Word of God by God Himself, but he also associates himself with the world; he adapts himself to their practices with a “Christian twist.” Moreover, we know that “friendship with the world is enmity toward God.”

It is true, that on account of the Bible’s direct witness to the Regulative Principle, most of the good theologians and pastors of the church throughout history have rejected such practices as participating in Christmas, or Easter, or the like, until we have happened upon our more theologically lazy century. Defining worship and the Regulative principle is of utmost importance, and no Christian should be theologically lazy about what God requires of them. They should study the subject diligently that they would be able to give an answer for the hope that lies in them.

1 John 2:15-17,

“Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world,
the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world--the lust of
the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life--is not of the Father but
is of the world. And the world is passing away, and the lust of it; but he who
does the will of God abides forever.”

This is Dr. Matthew McMahon signing off.

Keep checking back at A Puritan’s Mind – the series on Election and Reprobation has just been completed. Go to www.apuritansmind.com and click on “What’s New?” There you will find information on this 9 part lecture series. For more on Reformed and Puritan Theology that honors the Lord Jesus Christ, visit www.apuritansmind.com.

Posted by Rich at 4:00 AM | Permalink | Comments

Good Evening. A Puritan’s Mind brings you the old time radio program The Wild Boar News Podcast from Sunny South Florida. Welcome, I’m Dr. Matthew McMahon.

Days in history often find themselves the matter or substance of what makes up history. November 23rd, for example, was a day that sparked certain ideas about historical events that occurred on that day from latter years. On November 23, 1889, the first jukebox was installed at the Palais Royal Saloon in San Francisco. On November 23, 1936, the first issue of Life magazine hit the newsstands. The cover photograph, by Margaret Bourke-White, featured the Fort Peck Dam. On Nov. 23, 1943, during World War II, United States forces seized control of the Tarawa and Makin atolls from the Japanese. On November 23, 1980 a series of earthquakes devastated southern Italy, killing some 2,600 people. On November 23, 2004, opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko declared himself the winner of Ukraine's disputed presidential election and took a symbolic oath of office. Now, what newsy event pinpointed November 23rd, 2007 – the day and year in which you live? According to the news, it marked the busiest shopping day of the year, with an overall rising percentage of 7% for shoppers spending money this year as opposed to last year the Day after Thanksgiving.

We are, at this time, in the thrall of Xmas consumerism. According to the nostalgic songs, this holiday season is supposed to be the “most joyous time of the year”, although we find countless Christians trying to keep up with the Jones’ and maxing out their credit cards in order to make the “holiday” special and bright for their families.

It is, today, December 3, 2007. People are thinking and planning what they will buy little Johnny for Christmas, or maybe what to buy for their wife or husband. They are willing to create some holiday magic by buying presents which will be all wrapped up in bows. They have to outdo themselves from last year in order to make this year more special, and they know they cannot rely on Santa. They will have to go out and purchase these gifts one by one, and one by one their credit cards get maxed out.

It is, however, for good cheer that they place themselves in debt. The Reserve Bank of Australia statistics show credit card debt in Australia is now a staggering $41 billion. Experts believe that Americans will spend an average of $800 on Xmas presents alone, which translats into over 100 billion dollars collectively of credit card debt.

God has something to say about credit card wielding Christians who have little sense about debt. Romans 13:8 states, “Owe no one anything except to love one another, for he who loves another has fulfilled the law.” We may be indebted to one another in love, and fulfill the law by loving one another, but we are exhorted to owe no man anything. The Greek “anything” means anything. Any “thing” is not to be owed. It is especially emphatic in the idea that if you continue to support yourself when you owe something to someone else, you are in sin. For example, if you run up your Xmas bill to max out a credit card, and then go out to eat for lunch, that would be sin. Romans 13:8 presses us to consider very importantly that we must be a good steward with our money at the expense of making holiday cheer go around. If we don’t have the money to pay for what we buy, we should not buy it. Yes, that has further implications for all of life, and regular debt that people incur, but during this time of crazy consumerism, one should not be challenged or tempted to keep up with the Joneses. The Joneses don’t care about God’s law. They are those who try and satisfy their own bellies and indulge for the sake of the Stoic maxim, “Eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we die.” That translates into being irresponsibility because of one’s self love. Instead, be indebted to one another in love, instead of in love with Xmas consumerism and the façade of holiday cheer that translates into holiday debt. Don’t make December 3rd a day in history where God records your sin of being in debt to a fault.

This is Dr. Matthew McMahon signing off.

Posted by Rich at 9:06 PM | Permalink | Comments

Good Evening. A Puritan’s Mind brings you the old time radio program The Wild Boar News Podcast from Sunny South Florida. Welcome, I’m Dr. Matthew McMahon.

History cannot be documented simply as chronological events, but the intrusion of God into time to establish His redemptive purposes in and through men. Two epochs in this Spirit’s work point to the greatest revolutions ever documented: the entrance of the Lord of Glory in the fullness of time in the little town of Bethlehem, and the era of the Reformation breaking out of a reign of eclipsing doctrinal darkness and superstition. Christ brought forth the Gospel of God, and the Reformers rescued the Gospel from drowning in a sea of ecclesiastical expedience. Since the Gospel writers, carried along by the Spirit inspired as they were, have given an accurate account of the life of Christ and the early church, in today’s modern age, we ought always to desire to remember our roots, and the reformation.

God does not intrude into time to arrange events, but to begin revolutions that cover over the face of the earth. Revolution is what the Reformation was all about. Can you, listener, say the same about your church? Is your church revolutionary? Would the Reformers think of your church as one partaking in their revolution, or would your pastor and the people that attend to hear him, say that they exist to meet the needs of the emerging culture that the church today exists in?

Though God has His providential hand in the affairs of Alexander the Great as well as the apostle Paul, the greater question that should concern the Christian surrounds the remedy of the fallen soul. To truly document history is to set one’s historical eye upon the Gospel of Christ and its affect on the world.

The Reformation would bring back justification by faith alone, where the popes has set up a capitalistic endeavor to make faith something to be bought, and achieved by works. The indulgence rapidly affected the superstitious that had already been familiar to a submission of their will under the Vicar of Christ on earth. The clergy had become the conduits by which the grace of God, or the favor of the popes, was to be dispensed. The works of bygones saints, even the supererogatory merits of Jesus Christ, could be bought for a price in order to secure the salvation of the buyer, or aid in the release of those already captive to the purging of sin in purgatory. Financial advantage to the Roman Church did not go unnoticed, and purgatory became one of the chief doctrines to validate indulgences in the thirteenth century, and to furnish the livelihood of the Pope.

The Reformation brought man face to face with God rather than having popery “interpose the Church between God and man.” Popery separates men from God and hides the Gospel from them, where the Reformation, through the true Gospel of Jesus Christ and justification by faith alone, will unite men to God. Does your church bring men face to face with the Jesus Christ of the Bible and of the Reformation, or does your pastor meet the needs of the people in his sermons. Does your church hold steadfastly to the doctrines taught by the Reformation, or just those that your church and pastor deem convenient? And what about you, listener? Are you a closet reformist? Or are you a revolutionary?

I can hear you now. You’ve seen the Luther movie. You’d shake your fist and stand your ground amidst opposition. You’d say the same things and borrow the same lines Luther did, right? Would the people in your church, at your work, in your family, amidst your friends say the same things about you? Would they say you are a revolutionary in the same light as the reformation?
Ok, I know, you are no Luther or Calvin. That’s not your place, right? That’s for your pastor to emulate. You are just a simple hard working Christian. You are just trying to get through the day at work, and get through a simple devotion time with your family. You don’t have the time to be a revolutionary.

The Reformation had made its way from the minds of a few men zealous for the truth, to the practical application of the doctrines they represented in the life of the Church. People lived out, upon pain of death, their Christianity. I know, I know, listener, your persecution doesn’t extend that far. We aren’t speaking about when you get a flat tire and feel God is against you today, or when your pool pump breaks. We are talking about, however, the reality behind a true Christianity. You, listener, may not have to worry so much, because, as you already made clear, you are not a revolutionary. You loved to watch the Luther Movie each year, it gets you stoked, but far be it for you to challenge your church on whether or not it really falls in line with the reformation, and with the Gospel they preached.

Here is the difference between your “reformation” ideas and “The Protestant Reformation”: you enjoy the emotional high that a movie brings with ideas that you might hold dear. Would you lose your job for your beliefs? Would your pastor be willing to be thrown out of his church for teaching the Regulative Principle? Would it be OK if your family was divided as a result of the truth of Scripture as long as Christ was being glorified in the truth? If you really embrace the Reformation as a revolutionary, how could these things not happen? True Biblical Reformation, on the other hand, advanced the truth of academic learning and filtered that down into the hand of the laity, regardless of the outcome. It may be that you need not only remember the Reformation in some touching recollection of a scene Hollywood has drummed up with Luther standing at the Diet of Worms, but rather go back and read of the life and deaths of those men and women that held steadfast to being revolutionaries of their time.

In truly remembering the Reformation historically, one has no choice but to practically apply it as a revolutionary today. Is the Reformation just a picture in a book, or a scene from a movie? Or is it real to you, embraced by you, propagated through you and lived out?

Remember the Reformation differently this year. Make it count all year through.

This is Dr. Matthew McMahon signing off.

Keep checking back at A Puritan’s Mind – the series on Election and Reprobation has just been completed. Go to www.apuritansmind.com and click on “What’s New?” There you will find information on this 9 part lecture series. Also in the works is an MP3 series on the Covenant of Grace, and a new book that will be first in a series called “The Writings of A Puritan’s Mind” which will be a compilation of Puritan sermons not yet published. Puritan Publications has already released its latest book, “A Heart for Reformation” which covers how every Christian should desire true biblical reformation. For more on Reformed and Puritan Theology that honors the Lord Jesus Christ, visit www.apuritansmind.com.

Posted by Rich at 2:11 PM | Permalink | Comments

Good Evening. A Puritan’s Mind brings you the old time radio program The Wild Boar News Podcast from Sunny South Florida. Welcome, I’m Dr. Matthew McMahon.

Jeremiah 6:16, “Thus says the LORD: "Stand in the ways and see, And ask for the old paths, where the good way is, And walk in it; Then you will find rest for your souls.”

There are a variety of preachers that strive after reformation out there in the world, many with good intentions. They preach cardinal truths in order to propagate the teachings of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the teachings of the Reformation, as much as they are able. We don’t look down upon such things. God has granted many preachers a mediocrity that they are unable to escape, even to His glory, yet still they desire to preach God’s word and give it a little help. What do I mean?

Let pull a file. Case number 4,324,345. For the establishment of secrecy and non-embarrassment, let’s call this pastoral case number “Pastor Harry.” Pastor Harry knows its Reformation month. October rises up among the months of the year as one in which we remember the recovery of the Gospel from the cloak and darkness of the papists. Hus, Wycliffe, Tyndale, Luther, Calvin, Farel, Corrault, Oecolampadius, Zwingli and others gave themselves over the recovery of the Word of God. Pastor Harry decides to take a reformation sermon, let’s say a sermon from Calvin, and “adapt” it to today’s congregation. After a week’s preparation of taking a good sermon by Calvin and adapting it for the 21st century church, Pastor Harry feels as though he will now be able to take such an exposition of the Word of God and deliver it to his congregation. He ascends the pulpit, and begins with an announcement to read the Scriptures, but first tells his people a story about his childhood, his job, or some other illustrious notation that he believes will hook the hearer. Then he segues into a prayer asking for the Holy Spirit’s help, and then after the “amen”, continues with another illustration.

Next, he announces that the sermon was adapted from Calvin’s works, and he finally, after 10 minutes, reads the Scripture. After a 30 minute unzealous explanation, he uses Calvin’s commentary and application, and then closes, hoping that his congregation would see some of the same truths he did in the passage at hand.

People like this may be zealous for the reformation, and for that credit is due. But the Reformation was founded upon a return to the Word of God, not the help that a 10 minute introduction had on childhood illustrations or talks that hook the listener. The very day such a pastor is to honor, he actually detracts from when he follows that kind of thinking. Instead, he should realize, with the Reformers, that the Word of God does not need any help. What do I mean?

Look at the prophets – when they came a spoke, they said, “Thus says the Lord” and then continued to explain what the Lord said. Not childhood illustrations or clever anecdotes that hook the listener. God’s Word was enough. Calvin began his sermon on the Passion of Christ by quoting the Scripture, and then immediately by saying, after the Scripture was read, “We have already seen in the preceding verses…” etc. In Calvin’s 16th sermon on Pentecost, he quotes Acts 2:1-4 and then begins to explain the passage. In Calvin’s first sermon on the deity of Christ he reads John 1:1-5 and then says “The Word “Gospel” declares how God loved us…” and goes to explain the passage. In his first sermon on Election and Reprobation, Calvin read Genesis 25:12 and then says “We have here to consider the difference…” and then further explains the passage. Luther did the same. Wycliffe did the same. Tyndale did the same. Every republished Puritan work does the same. Those hungry and excited for reformation in this light read the Scriptures first, and then preached what the Scriptures meant, pulled a doctrine from the Scriptures, and then applied those Scriptures. All their time was spent about the Word of God. They trusted that the Word of God was enough.

Now Pastor Harry not only began wrong, but bored his congregation with a so-so sermon. It was not that Pastor Harry bored his congregation; he’s done that before. What is astounding that he bored them with an adapted sermon of Calvin. Calvin’s sermons are not boring. Calvin’s sermons were huge flames of heartfelt power and energy surrounding recovering a glimpsed Gospel. Pastor Harry not only bored his congregation with a so-so message, he could not even copy the reformer well. Such is the state of Christianity with men who stand behind the pulpit and are only wishful in their thinking toward the Reformation. They do not stand upon the Word, and the Word alone, because the Word needs help. It needs to be coddled, and adapted.

Maybe you have experienced this in your own church.

In remembering the reformation and the power behind it, one must see, at least historically if not practically, that all these faithful theologians and preachers were used by God because they stood firmly upon the Word of God and “desired the old paths.”

Remember Jeremiah 6:16 says, “Thus says the LORD: "Stand in the ways and see, And ask for the old paths, where the good way is, And walk in it; Then you will find rest for your souls.” The Scripture does not stop there. Its continues, “But they said, 'We will not walk in it.'”

Such is the case of many pastors who desire reformation today, but are unwilling to be unswerving in their devotion to its principles. Its principles stand firmly on the old paths, on the Word of God alone. Such men are simply bad plagiarists.

This is Dr. Matthew McMahon signing off.

Keep checking back at A Puritan’s Mind – the series on Election and Reprobation has just been completed. Go to www.apuritansmind.com and click on “What’s New?” There you will find information on this 9 part lecture series. Also in the works is an MP3 series on the Covenant of Grace, and a new book that will be first in a series called “The Writings of A Puritan’s Mind” which will be a compilation of Puritan sermons not yet published. Puritan Publications has already released its latest book, “A Heart for Reformation” which covers how every Christian should desire true biblical reformation. For more on Reformed and Puritan Theology that honors the Lord Jesus Christ, visit www.apuritansmind.com.

Posted by Rich at 9:27 AM | Permalink | Comments