Walmart And Local Churches

By Pastor Bruce K. Oyen, First Baptist Church, Spearfish, SD

WALMART AND LOCAL CHURCHES
Many of you who will read this attend Bible-believing churches. That is a good thing. After all, the Bible alone is God’s Book of truth. Here’s what the Lord said about this in John 17, verse 17,when he was praying to the Heavenly Father: “Father…..your Word is truth.” Every Bible-believing local church, small or large, seeks numerical growth. That, too, is a good thing. But what I have observed over the years is that many of the large Bible-believing churches are not large because they have won a lot of new persons to the Lord and then gotten them into their churches. Instead, many of them are large because they have drawn people away from other Bible-believing churches. This might or might not be intentional. But the effect is similar to the effect that Walmart has had on many smaller businesses in many communities. Walmart moves in, and after a period of time, many smaller businesses close down. Whether or not we should excuse this when it comes to a business is open for discussion. But we shouldn’t excuse it when it comes to Bible-believing local churches. It is not an honorable thing to build a Bible-believing church by drawing people away from another Bible-believing church. Not only is it not an honorable thing to do. It is not really an accomplishment to do it. It is simply a transferring of church people from one church to another. And many times those who leave one church for another do so for poor reasons. In some cases it is to make more business contacts. In some cases it is to find daycare for one’s children, or to get handouts of one kind or another. Some persons make how often a church has potluck meals a criterion for whether or not they will stick with a given church. Some persons leave one church for another because they are running from accountability for sinful behavior. A church should seek to grow primarily by winning people to faith in Christ, and by drawing in those who claim to be Christians but who are not plugged into a Bible-believing church. So, Bible-believing churches should make it plain to their regular attendees who they want to get into their churches. It might well mean slower growth than they desire, but it will be the Biblical and honorable way to grow.

Cigarette-smoking Church Attenders

By Pastor Bruce K. Oyen, First Baptist Church, Spearfish, SD
Many years ago, a woman from a different church asked me if we had any cigarette smokers who attended our church. I said, “People who smoke? We have people attending our church with far more serious problems than that!” The woman did not say why she asked that question, but I had a hunch that it was because she had driven by the church building on a day when we had church services and had seen people having a smoke on the property. Or she had seen some of our people around town somewhere having a smoke. I might be wrong, but I also have a hunch that her question was meant to tell me it was not a good thing to have cigarette-smoking church attenders, especially if they smoke on church property, and that something needed to be done about it.

It is not my intention to defend smoking cigarettes, or smoking anything else. But I have told this story to make an important point: a church is not for perfect people, but for imperfect people. That means, a church is for folks just like ourselves. Some church attenders have not yet become Christians, and their attitude and behavior often make that plain. But we want them to become Christians, and so we accept them as they are (within reason, of course) and pray they will accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. If they do believe in him, their attitudes and actions will begin to change for the better. Other church attenders are Christians, but even so they/we are in the process of becoming better Christians. We Christians are still “under construction,” so to speak. We won’t reach perfection until we go to be with the Lord in heaven. Until then, we might have some bad habits to wrestle with, one of which could be smoking cigarettes. And until then, we might, no, we will, struggle with bad attitudes about one thing or another now and then. Maybe even frequently.  It is very easy to condemn someone who smokes while excusing our own bitterness toward someone who has hurt us. But when compared to bitterness, smoking is a very minor matter. Sinful behavior and attitudes must be dealt with in sermons and Bible studies. And sometimes a person must be directly spoken to about correcting these things. But we must make it clear to others that we do not see ourselves as better than they are, but as works in progress. When we do, it will help them understand that we are here to help one another deal with the moral and spiritual struggles we face on a daily basis. When they become convinced of that, they will become a church’s best advertisement that we exist to be a blessing to the community. The result will be that others will seek us out for help. Isn’t that what a Bible-believing church wants to see happen?

Uncle Ivan, The Candy Man

By Pastor Bruce K. Oyen, First Baptist Church, Spearfish, SD

    I was born in Appleton, MN, in 1953. We lived in Appleton, and on two farms, one of which was maybe 20 miles north of Appleton, right next to Drywood Lake. We lived on this farm longer than on the other one, and it is of this farm that I have the most memories. Fortunately, they are all good memories.

One of my memories of those years, now long ago, was of the times when Uncle Ivan and Aunt Hazel would come from California to visit relatives. I think they always came in the summer. They were nice people. But what I remember most about them is that, shortly after they would drive up to our farm house, Uncle Ivan would open the trunk of his fancy Cadillac and hand out treats to any kids present. The treats were not only candy, but also raisins. If memory serves me well, the raisins were in small, paper boxes, just like the ones some stores sell now.

This was Uncle Ivan’s way of befriending kids, and it worked well. But as I look back on those visits from Uncle Ivan and Aunt Hazel, I must admit that I was more interested in the treats he handed out than in him as a person. But, then, that is to be expected from a young  child.
I tell this story to make this point: Some people never grow up. Many teenage boys and grown men only like their girlfriends for the “treats” they get from them. They don’t really care about the person who gives the “treats.” That is why they easily move on from one “treat giver” to another. And isn’t this true of many others who have learned how get handouts from others, whether it is from their relatives, friends, churches in their communities, welfare agencies of one kind and another, and local, state, and federal governments?

But the worst abuse of all is the abuse of God himself. This is due to what is known as “the prosperity Gospel,” which teaches that God wants all his children to be healthy and wealthy, with an emphasis on being wealthy. This false Gospel (false because it is not the Gospel found in the Bible) makes God to be the Divine Uncle Ivan who opens the trunk and hands out treats to anyone who wants them. Of course, the God of the Bible is omniscient, so he knows what motivates a person to seek his blessings. He is also holy, and doesn’t promise to give his blessings to anyone who simply looks to him for a handout.

But isn’t that exactly what the preachers of the prosperity Gospel promote? They want a god (notice I wrote “god” not “God”) who wants to make them happy by giving them multi-million dollar homes, very expensive cars, and, of course, multi-million dollar private jets that will enable them to fly around the world to promote their “ministries.” What they hope most folks don’t know is that their expensive lifestyles are often paid for by donors who can hardly pay their own bills. But these donors often donate because they have been led to believe that by doing so, the Divine Uncle Ivan will open his trunk and make them rich, too. Therefore, greed motivates the preachers of this false Gospel and those who have fallen for it.

Now, consider this: if we want to shut down the prosperity Gospel, all we have to do is convince people that the Bible’s God, the only true God, is not interested in making everyone rich. What he is interested in is people who will love him and worship him for who he is, not for the “treats” he has in the trunk. And the way to convince people of this fact about God is to get them to read God’s Book, the Bible, and to compare its teachings with the prosperity Gospel. If they do so with open minds and open hearts, they will see the prosperity Gospel to be the false and harmful thing that it is. A good place to read about this in the Bible is chapters 5, 6, & 7 of the New Testament’s Gospel of Matthew. Once those chapters have been carefully read, one can move on to other parts of the Bible that speak about the danger and deceptiveness of seeking wealth and other forms of prosperity. An example is 1 Timothy, chapters 5 & 6.

The Bible does not teach there is something inherently wrong with wealth and prosperity. But it does teach that these things can easily sidetrack us from more important things in life, especially a relationship with God through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

Who do we love and worship? The Divine Uncle Ivan, or the Bible’s God?

Baptist Beliefs Compared To The Theology Behind The Authorized (King James) Version

By Pastor Bruce K. Oyen, First Baptist Church, Spearfish, SD

In this post I will present some beliefs common to Bible-believing Baptists and compare them with the theology behind the Authorized (King James) Version of the Bible. To do so, the word “Baptists” will used, with each letter referring to beliefs common to Bible-believing Baptists. But it must be understood that these beliefs are not the private property of those who call themselves Baptists. Many others in the past have held these beliefs, but have not been known as Baptists. Many hold these beliefs now, but do not call themselves Baptists. They often are referred to as baptistic. The Bible does not say we must call ourselves Baptists, and it wrong to insist that the name be used.

“B” stands for the Baptist belief in the authority of the Bible. This means that, because Baptists believe the Bible alone is the infallible Word of God, it, therefore, is the authority upon which our beliefs are based. Did those who produced the King James Version hold this belief? Yes. But some of their beliefs are not truly derived from the Bible. These will be pointed out as this post progresses.

“A” stands for the Baptist belief in the autonomy of the local church. This means Baptists believe the local church is a congregation of Christians that govern their own affairs without having to answer to some person or organization outside of itself for its decisions. It also means that no one and no organization makes decisions for a  local church. Did those who produced the King James Version hold this view. Perhaps in theory, but not in practice, for they were a part of a government-approved church, the Church Of England, which had/has bishops who oversaw/oversee local congregations. Not only did/do their bishops have authority over the local congregations. So also did James I, after whom the King James Version got its name. His role in the Church Of England is clearly stated in “The Epistle Dedicatorie,” found in the front of the 1611 edition of the Authorized (King James) Version.” Another proof that those who produced the King James Version did not truly believe in the autonomy of the local congregation is the fact that the 1611 edition of their translation says in the front that it is “appointed to be read in churches.” This in contrast to the historic Baptist belief that each congregation decides which translation/translations it will use.

“P” stands for the Baptist belief in the priesthood of all believers in Jesus Christ. This means that we believe each Christian has direct access to God the Father through the Lord Jesus Christ. In Christ’s name, they can pray directly to God the Father. In his name, they can ask him for, and receive forgiveness of sins. Did those who produced the King James Version hold this view? Yes. But they also had clergy called “priests,” something foreign to the teaching of the New Testament, and, therefore, not accepted by Bible-believing Baptists.

“T” stands for the Baptist belief in two officers/offices in the local church. These are pastors and deacons. The New Testament also calls the pastors of local churches by two other terms: bishops (meaning overseers) and elders (meaning those who lead by virtue of their age, maturity, and experience). Deacons are the officially elected servants of the local church. Did those who produced the King James Version hold this view? No. They believed in a hierarchical form of church government, with bishops having authority outside of their own congregations.

“I” stands for the Baptist belief in what is called “individual soul liberty.” This means that each person  is directly accountable to God for his or her own beliefs and behavior, and no government, whether political or ecclesiastical, can dictate his or her beliefs. Did those who produced the King James Version hold this view? Only in theory. Historians have proven that King James and his government persecuted those who did not conform to the Church of England.

“S” stands for the Baptist belief that there should be an obvious separation between church and state. It means that there should be no religion or Christian denomination that is the official religion or Christian denomination of a government. Although President Thomas Jefferson rejected Christianity, the Bible, and its doctrines, he understood the importance of the separation of church and state, and advocated it. But did those who produced the King James Version hold this view? No. That is why they were members of the Church Of England, a state church.

The second “t” in the word “Baptists” stands for the Baptist belief in two ordinances of the local church, which are baptism and the Lord’s upper. We believe these are ordinances, not sacraments. This means we believe they symbolically represent important truths about the Lord Jesus Christ and his Gospel. We do not believe baptism is required of one who wants to be saved. Instead, it is required of one who professes to have been saved by believing in the Lord Jesus Christ. We believe the saved should get baptized as a public profession of their faith. It is symbolic of their identification with the crucified, dead, buried, and resurrected Lord. It is symbolic of their commitment to live new lives as followers of Jesus. The Lord’s supper is symbolic of equally important Gospel truths. The bread is symbolic of the Lord’s body which was broken for us sinners. The cup is symbolic of the Lord’s blood, which was shed in payment for the sins of all humanity. Did those who produced the King James Version hold these views? Perhaps a safe answer, based on the thirtynine articles of the Church Of England, is yes and no. Their view of baptism was not Biblical because they believed in the baptism of infants. Infant baptism, even if it is done by the Biblical method, which is immersion, is not taught in the Bible. Infants cannot do what the Bible requires of those who want be baptized. That is, infants cannot believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and make profession of their faith in him. Therefore, they are disqualified from baptism. It is an interesting fact that, though the King James Version, in Acts 8:37 and elsewhere, clearly teaches a profession of faith is required of anyone who wants to be baptized, King James and the translators of the King James Version believed in infant baptism.

The second “s” in the word “Baptists” stands for the Baptist belief in a saved church membership. We require anyone who wants to join our churches to profess to have been saved by believing on the Lord Jesus Christ, and we require that their profession of faith is credible. That is, they must give evidence of being true believers in the Lord. Their lives must show that they have believed in Jesus Christ and have become his followers. We do not assume that everyone who claims to be a Christian, and who has been baptized upon their profession of faith, is a true Christian. Sometimes thy prove to be otherwise. But we do require a credible profession of faith prior to admittance into church membership. Did those who produced the King James Version hold this view? No, for the simple reason that they believed baptism grafts one into the church, and they believed in infant baptism. Therefore, I am compelled to believe they believed in infant church membership. But we must remember that infants cannot believe in Christ, and belief in him is a Scriptural requirement for both baptism and church membership.

I encourage all readers of this post to read the thitynine article of The Church Of England. By doing so, you will learn firsthand the theology behind the Authorized(King James) Version. Here is a link to those articles: http://www.thirtyninearticles.org/basics/. If you are a King James Bible-only Baptist, you will find it very interesting to read the quote from Lancelot Andrews, who was one of the key persons in the production of the Authorized (King James) Version. Read the following from the same source given above:

Anglican Basics

History

Anglicans trace their history and doctrine back to the earliest church and through the first English speaking Christians. The English Reformation (when the Church of England broke away from the Roman Catholic Church) was a pivotal event that resulted in the Anglican Formularies, our statements of belief. See below.

Beliefs and Doctrine

“One Canon (one Bible), two Testaments, three Creeds, four General Councils, five centuries and the series of Fathers in that period determine the boundaries of our faith.”   

~ Bishop Lancelot Andrews (1555-1626)

If you want to learn firsthand what we call the Biblical distinctives of Baptists, they are derived from the pages of the New Testament. I suggest you start with reading the Book of Acts, and proceed from there. You are sure to find these distinctives as you read. It is a fact that many non-Baptists have become Baptists or baptistic simply by open-mindedly reading the New Testament. You can also read my two posts just prior to this one, and articles and books on this subject by other authors .

What follows is the testimony of one man who became a Baptist by reading the New Testament. It is taken with permission from this website: http://www.reformedreader.org.

Reading The Bible Will Make You A Baptist

 

Taken from the Baptist Reporter, October, 1858

To the Editor of the Baptist Reporter.

Dear Sir, — I am a young baptist, and have only seen your Reporter for Jan., 1858. Having recently joined the body, I inquired for one of the publications published by the baptists, and a minister directed me to the Reporter, with which I am quite delighted. It occurred to me that I would mention a few of the objections to believers’ baptism which I met with whilst I was among the Independents. I am a young man, and am occasionally engaged in giving a word of exhortation to my neighbours; but I am what is called a “self-educated man,” for I have had to pick up what little knowledge I have obtained; and therefore I trust you will excuse the imperfections which you may discover in this communication.

When among the Independents, in conversations with my fellow-members, the subject of baptism was at times introduced, when one or another would say, “Well; I do think that the baptists are right, and that their mode of administering the ordinance is scriptural.” “Well,” was my reply, “if you consider that the baptists are right, and that their mode is scriptural, why not join them, and be right too, and observe that which you say is scriptural?” The reply they generally gave was, “Oh, it is so inconvenient; and if we are baptized, we shall be expected to join the baptist body, and then what will our minister and the people say? I do not think it matters much.”

It appeared to me an odd thing for them so to acknowledge their duty, and then give such feeble reasons for declining. I could not but wonder what there could be in believers’ baptism that made the ordinance so objectionable.

I talked with other friends on the matter, but was annoyed by their ignorance. They knew not so much as he who was enquiring. Some said, “Oh, these baptists think all wrong but themselves. Have nothing to do with them.” Others said, “Such a mode would suit a warm climate very well, where the people are in the habit of constantly bathing, but not a cold country like ours.” Others “thought that there was something very indecent about it.” I then spake to a more intelligent class, and they informed me “that Christ only intended the ordinance to be observed by his servants in heathen lands, where Christianity was unknown, so that the converts to the gospel, by that ordinance, might publicly disown and cast off all their old heathenish practices.” Others reminded me, “that if I was going to enquire into such a subject, perhaps I would inform them why Christians do not recline at the table and take the bread and break it into pieces, instead of having it partly cut.”

Such were some of the helps I met with in the path of enquiry, from persons who professed to make the New Testament their rule of practice.

There are many in the Independent and other bodies who can say no more than the above. Why? Because, like those I have already mentioned, they have never thoroughly and impartially examined the subject. Ask them whether they have looked through the New Testament for instances of Infant Baptism; they reply, “No”. Ask them whether they have for evidence of believers’ baptism; they give the same reply.

Dissatisfied with such evasions, I resolved to search the New Testament for myself, with prayer for Divine guidance, and the result was that I became a Baptist.

Rick Warren Describes The One-World Church

The following excellent article was written by David Cloud, who is a Baptist missionary and prolific author on many Biblical subjects. It is used with his permission. It is hoped that you will read it with an open mind, for it shows that a man, in this case the popular Rick Warren, can lead a large church and be well-known around the world as a church growth expert and author, and yet have strayed far from Biblical truth. What is true of Warren is, unfortunately, true of many other church growth experts and authors. After reading David Cloud’s own words, continue to read his quotes from Roman Catholic sources that prove Roman Catholicism has a very unbiblical view of Mary, the mother of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Jan/14/15 06:00

See end of report to Print or Share

The following statement by Southern Baptist pastor Rick Warren is from an interview with Francis Rocca at Vatican City, Nov. 26, 2014, Vatican Television Center, Catholic News Service, posted at:
www.facebook.com/
video.php?v=10152421040155723

“We have far more in common than what divides us. When you talk about Pentecostals, charismatics, evangelicals, fundamentalists, Catholics, Methodists, Baptists, Presbyterians, and on and on and on and on. They would all say, ‘We believe in the Trinity. We believe in the Bible. We believe in the resurrection. We believe salvation is through Jesus Christ.’ These are the big issues.

“Sometimes Protestants think that Catholics worship Mary, like she is another God. That’s not exactly Catholic doctrine. People say, ‘Well, what are the saints all about; what are you praying to the saints?’ And when you understand what they mean by what they are saying, there is a lot more commonality.

“Now, there are still real differences. There is no doubt about that. But the most important thing is if you love Jesus we are on the same team.
“The unity that I believe we will see realistically is not a structural unity, but a unity of mission. And so when it comes to the family, we are co-workers in the field for the protection of what we call the sanctity of life, the sanctity of sex, and the sanctity of marriage. So there is a great commonality, and there is no division on those three.

“Many times people have been beaten down for taking a biblical stance, and they start to feel, ‘Well, maybe I’m out here all by myself.’ No, you’re not. The church is growing in Latin America. The church is growing in Asia. The church is growing in Africa. It’s not growing in North America or Europe, but it is growing everywhere else. So maybe we have this idea that we’re not as influential, but we are far more influential than people realize.”
__________________This is a description of the formation of a one-world church by the pastor of one of the largest congregations in the Southern Baptist Convention, which is widely considered to be a very “conservative” denomination. This is a pastor whose books have sold by the millions and who has been acclaimed as “America’s pastor.” Yet he doesn’t understand the ABC’s of the gospel, salvation, and the church. He understands neither Baptist doctrine nor Catholic doctrine, and it is obvious that he doesn’t care. Understanding doctrine is not a priority. It’s not his agenda.

Rick Warren represents every element that defines the building of the one-world “church” — contemporary worship music, ecumenical social work, downplaying of doctrine, fuzzy doctrinal thinking, contemplative prayer, non-judgmentalism, and treating “critics” as unchristian and dangerous, to mention some of the major ones.

The hour is very late.

“The Immaculate Virgin preserved free from all stain of original sin, was taken up body and soul into heavenly glory, when her earthly life was over, and exalted by the Lord as Queen over all things, that she might be the more fully conformed to her Son, the Lord of lords (cf. Apoc. 19:16) and conqueror of sin and death” (Second Vatican Council, Vatican II Documents, “Dogmatic Constitution on the Church,” chap. 8, I, 52, 53; II, 59, pp. 378, 381- 382).

“As St. Irenaeus says, she being obedient, became the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race. Hence not a few of the early Fathers gladly assert with him in their preaching ‘DEATH THROUGH EVE, LIFE THROUGH MARY’. THIS UNION OF THE MOTHER WITH THE SON IN THE WORK OF SALVATION IS MADE MANIFEST FROM THE TIME OF CHRIST’S VIRGINAL CONCEPTION UP TO HIS DEATH. She cooperated in the work of the Saviour in an altogether singular way to restore supernatural life to souls. As a result, she is our mother in the order of grace. Mary, sharing as she did even on Calvary, had a part even in the once for all acquisition of the great treasury. Now from this common sharing of will and suffering between Christ and Mary, she ‘merited to become most worthily the REPARATRIX [one who makes amends or atonement] for a lost world,’ and therefore, DISPENSATRIX [one who dispenses] of all the gifts which Jesus gained for us by His death and His blood (Second Vatican Council, Vatican II Documents, “Dogmatic Constitution on the Church,” chap. 8, II, 56, pp. 380-381).

“Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but BY HER MANIFOLD INTERCESSION CONTINUES TO BRING US THE GIFTS OF ETERNAL SALVATION. By her maternal charity, she cares for the brethren of her Son, who still journey on earth surrounded by dangers and difficulties, until they are led into their blessed home. Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of ADVOCATE, HELPER, BENEFACTRESS, and MEDIATRIX” (Second Vatican Council, Vatican II Documents, “Dogmatic Constitution on the Church,” chap. 8, II, 62, pp. 382-383).

“Mary has by grace been exalted above all angels and men to a place second only to her Son, as the most holy mother of God who was involved in the mysteries of Christ: she is rightly honoured by a special cult in the Church” (Second Vatican Council, Vatican II Documents, “Dogmatic Constitution on the Church,” chap. 8, IV, The Cult of the Blessed Virgin in the Church, 66, 67, pp. 384-385).

“But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he that cometh preacheth ANOTHER JESUS, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive ANOTHER SPIRIT, which ye have not received, or ANOTHER GOSPEL, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him” (2 Corinthians 11:3-4).

_____

About Way of Life – The name “Way of Life” is from Proverbs 6:23: “For the commandment is a lamp; and the law is light; and reproofs of instruction are the way of life.” The biblical instruction that molds men to God’s will requires reproof. It is not strictly positive. It does not focus on man’s “self-esteem.” It does not avoid controversial or unpopular subjects. It warns as well as comforts. It deals with sin and false teaching in a plain manner. It is reproves, rebukes, exhorts with all longsuffering and doctrine (2 Tim. 4:2). This is what we seek to do through Way of Life Literature. The Way of Life preaching and publishing ministry based in Bethel Baptist Church, London, Ontario, of which Wilbert Unger is the founding Pastor. A mail stop is maintained in Port Huron, Michigan.

Subscribe to these reports by email

Way of Life Literature – http://www.wayoflife.org
copyright 2013 – Way of Life Literature

The Pastor And His Former Pastorates

By Pastor Bruce K. Oyen
First Baptist Church
Spearfish, SD

My theme is “The pastor and his former pastorates.” Before I get into the subject, let me say that I have deliberately referred to the pastor and HIS former pastorates, not HIS or HER former pastorates, for the simple reason that the Bible, the only infallible handbook on such matters, very clearly does not endorse women being pastors. I do not know all the reasons why God calls only men to be pastors, but I do know it is taught in the Bible. And because the Bible is the infallible Word of God, we do not need to know all the reasons for any of its teachings. We just need to accept them and follow them. If you will open-mindedly read what are called “the pastoral letters/epistles,” you will find God’s mind on this subject. Those letters were written by the apostle Paul, and  are his two letters to Timothy and his one letter to Titus. And if you read other parts of the New Testament, such as the Book Acts, you will find that God had only men put into positions of pastoral leadership in local churches.

Now, back to my theme: “The pastor and his former pastorates.” The main point I want to convey on this subject is that pastors must take their hands off their former pastorates. Their role of leadership in a local church ends when their role as pastor ends in that church. They no longer are to be involved in providing leadership to a former pastorate, unless officially asked to do so by the leaders of that church. And even then it must be done very carefully and only  temporarily. But what often happens is that a former pastor has difficulty giving up his role in a church, especially if he had been with a  church for a long time and was well-liked by the people of that church. So, even though it is done with good intentions, he continues to assert some influence on a former pastorate.  His friendships with individuals from a former pastorate do not end when his role in that church ends. Those friends often want to keep him informed of what is now going on in his absence, and seek his advice on church-related matters. Longtime church friends miss his leadership, and might tell him they do not like the changes that have taken place since he left the church. In such situations, it is easy for a former pastor to take sides with those friends, which only makes matters worse.

So, what should a former pastor do in such circumstances? He should tell them that their relationship with one another can never be same as it was when he was their pastor.  He should tell his friends that they should not talk to him about the inner workings of his former pastorate.  He should tell them to talk, instead, to the leaders of the church about their concerns. He should tell them to not stir up controversy in the church by secretly talking to others about their objections to the  new leadership and the changes that have been made in the church. He should tell them that change is inevitable with new leadership. He should tell them to accept change, so long as it does not contradict the Bible’s teachings, or the church’s church covenant and by-laws. In other words, a pastor should help the people from his former church make the transition to new leadership, and to accept harmless change in the church.

The Evangelical Bridge (The Dangerous Mixing Of Evangelical Theology)

By Pastor Bruce K. Oyen and Dr. James P. Steel
First Baptist Church
Spearfish, SD

We live in remarkable days in many ways. One remarkable characteristic of these days  is how evangelical Christians, and no doubt some fundamental ones, too, mix their theological beliefs. It reminds me of what are called “swirl” or “twist” ice cream cones, in which two different flavors are mixed together, such as chocolate and vanilla. I like these kinds of ice cream cones. They are a harmless mixing of two flavors. But this is not a good idea when it comes to mixing theology.

Dr. James P. Steel has done an excellent job of analyzing this unfortunate mixing of evangelical theology. Here is a link to a 25 minute video in which he explains and illustrates it, and in which he states why it is a problem: http://vimeo.com/113934199. You will benefit from watching it.

Bible Prophecies About Apostasy Are Being Fulfilled Now!

By Pastor Bruce K. Oyen
First Baptist Church
Spearfish, SD

Those of us who are avid Bible-readers know that it is a very interesting Book for a number of reasons, the most significant of which is the fact that the Bible is unlike any other book in the world because it is the infallible Word of God. That is why I refer to the Bible as an interesting Book, not an interesting book, using the capital “B” to highlight its uniqueness among books.

Some parts of the Bible are more important than other parts, though the whole Book is the Word of God. The fact that some parts of the Bible are more important than others parts is revealed by the fact that, if we want to help others become believers in the Lord Jesus Christ, we would tell them to read the New Testament’s Gospel of John before reading, for example,  the Old Testament’s book of Nehemiah. And the fact that some parts of the Bible are more important than other parts is also proved by the fact that well-taught Christians know they should become more familiar with the New Testament than with the Old Testament, though both Testaments need to be read and re-read.

One of the reasons to know the New Testament better than the Old Testament is that its prophecies of things to come relate more to the here-and-now than do the Old Testament’s prophecies. The New Testament’s prophecies concerning the here-and-now and the more-distant future are scattered throughout its pages. They are in the Gospels, the Book Of Acts, the letters (also known as the epistles, which is an old word for letters), and the Book Of Revelation, which is the last book of the New Testament.

One of those letters comes right before the Book of Revelation. It is called the letter of Jude, which is only 25 verses long. Even though it is short, it is definitely one of the most relevant parts of the New Testament because of how its contents relates to the daily lives of Christians. Jude’s letter is one of encouragement, teaching, challenge, and prophetic warnings concerning the here-and-now and the future. When we read his letter, we come to the conclusion that some of the Bible’s prophecies are being fulfilled now!

We see this in the fulfillment of Jude’s prophecies concerning the great departure from the Christian faith that is so common in our day. This departure, also known as apostasy from Biblical teaching, is running wild among many denominations that once adhered to Biblical teaching but have forsaken it, and among newer denominations that claim to be Christian, but whose beliefs prove their claim to be an empty one. To be considered Christian, an individual must accept the Bible’s doctrines and morality. And so must a denomination that claims to be Christian.

There are many good studies of the letter of Jude. My favorite is by theologically conservative S. Maxwell Coder. His book is called, “JUDE: The Acts Of The Apostates.” Coder’s book is relatively short, but it examines each verse in Jude’s letter, and is very helpful. One of its strengths is that it shows in no uncertain terms that the apostasy predicted by Jude is now upon us. What follows is a quote of most of the first chapter in Coder’s book. The last two paragraphs, though interesting, are not included simply because they have to do primarily with the structure of the letter. The quote is taken from my copy of the book, which is copyrighted 1958, and which might, therefore, be in the public domain. It is hoped that this quote of most of the first chapter will lead many readers to buy Coder’s book and be blessed by reading it.

The letter of Jude will be found at the end of Coder’s article, and is from the King James Version. it is taken from this website: http://www.biblegateway.com.

Strange And Terrible Words
By S. Maxwell Coder

The beginning of the age of the Church is described in the Acts of the Apostles. The end of the church age is set forth in the Epistle of Jude, which might well be called the Acts of the Apostates. The first book which can properly be said to contain church history describes the deeds and teachings of men of God through whom Christ began to build His church. The last epistle of the New Testament relates the deeds and teaching of evil men who will be living upon the earth as the history of the professing church comes to an end.

Jude is the only book in all God’s Word entirely devoted to the great apostasy which is to come upon Christendom before the Lord Jesus Christ returns. This brief message of twenty-five verses is the vestibule to the Revelation, introducing the Bible student to the apocalyptic judgments unfolded therein.

Without Jude, the prophetic picture which begins with the teachings of Christ in the Gospels and develops throughout the epistles would be incomplete.  Our Lord raised the question: “When the Son of man cometh, will he find faith on the earth?” (Luke 18:18) Paul supplied us with the terminology commonly used by Bible students concerning a falling away from the faith of our fathers in the last days. He called it “the apostasy” (II  Thess. 2:3, marg.). He described it as a departure from the faith (I Tim. 4:1), an unwillingness to endure sound doctrine (II Tim. 4:3). Through the apostle Peter, the Holy Spirit revealed that false teachers would some day appear and bring in “damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them” (II Peter 2:1; 3:3).

Jude brings the teaching of the entire Bible about apostasy to a tremendous climax. He takes us back to the very dawn of human history. We are reminded of apostasy at the gate of Eden and within God’s ancient people Israel. Our thoughts are turned to princes and prophets, to saints and sinners, to eternal fire and everlasting darkness, to the sea and to the stars, to past judgments and future glory. We are taken into the unseen world for a strange and terrible story of the sin of fallen angels, and another of a dispute between Michael the archangel and Satan, whose antagonists who are set over against each other once more in mortal combat in Revelation 12.

It is a remarkable fact that the epistle of Jude has suffered neglect by Bible students and preachers in spite of its wealth of revelation and the tremendous sweep of its subject matter. The great expositor Alexander Maclaren, whose works have been published in seventeen volumes, has given us only three sermons on it. The twenty-five volumes of Biblical studies by Joseph Parker, known as The People’s Bible, contains but a single message on Jude. Only five pages in six thick books are devoted to this epistle in the beloved Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown Critical and Experimental Commentary. Of 844 pages in the great Bible Commentary dealing with Hebrews through Revelation a mere fourteen were set aside for this final epistle of the New Testament. There are twenty-three pages on Jude in the monumental Lange’s Commentary of twenty-five large volumes.

Why should such a rich storehouse of Bible truth have been so seriously neglected? The answer my lie in the fact that Jude deals largely with conditions in the last days. The rising of the present high tide of apostasy within the professing Church has been necessary to call attention to the import of the epistle as a whole. Jude must no longer be considered a mysterious book, offering only two or three verses of value in the ministry of the Word of God.

The possibility that the denial of our holy faith, so widespread in our own generation, may be a prelude to the great apostasy referred to by our Lord (Luke 18:18) should quicken our interest in this final epistle during these momentous times. If the last page of history of the Church is about to be turned, we may expect the Holy Spirit to give us new light on the strange and terrible words and warnings of Jude. A fresh study may awaken us to a solemn realization that it is later than we think, so that we shall pray and work as never before, with the confident expectation of revival within the Body of Christ and an ingathering of many souls before the great and terrible day of the Lord shall come.

The Letter Of Jude As Found In the King James Version

Jude 1 King James Version (KJV)

¹ Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, to them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called:

² Mercy unto you, and peace, and love, be multiplied.

³ Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.

⁴ For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

⁵ I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not.

⁶ And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.

⁷ Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

⁸ Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.

⁹ Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.

¹⁰ But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves.

¹¹ Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core.

¹² These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots;

¹³ Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever.

¹⁴ And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,

¹⁵ To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.

¹⁶ These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men’s persons in admiration because of advantage.

¹⁷ But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ;

¹⁸ How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.

¹⁹ These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit.

²⁰ But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost,

²¹ Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.

²² And of some have compassion, making a difference:

²³ And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh.

²⁴ Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy,

²⁵ To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen.

King James Version (KJV)by Public Domain

What Are Relevant Sermons?

By Pastor Bruce K. Oyen
First Baptist Church
Spearfish, SD

What are relevant sermons? The question comes to mind because one of the things we frequently see in newspaper ads from Bible-believing churches  is the fact that the sermons are relevant. This is a good thing, for that is what sermons should be. But what determines their relevancy? The felt needs of the listeners? Subjects which are of interest to them, whether or not they deal with felt needs? What the speakers know to be going on, or think to be going on, in the minds and lives of those who listen to their sermons? Or is sermon relevancy determined by some other factor or factors?

These questions reveal one thing about sermon relevance: it is always to some degree a subjective thing. By which I mean, no matter how seriously the speaker takes his sermons, no matter how much he prays about his sermons, no matter how much he thinks his sermons on a given day are what are  best for his listeners, the subjects about which he decides to preach may or may not be what they really need to hear at that time. Or, the subject may be exactly what one or a few of his listeners need to hear, but not what is really relevant to the others. The reason is this: only rarely can one sermon speak to the needs of everyone in the congregation, at least when it comes to felt needs or subjects of interest.

But the primary point I want to bring to your attention is that observation has led me to believe that many Bible-believing churches which emphasize the relevancy of their sermons do not address some, and maybe many, Biblical subjects of great importance. And the importance of these subjects makes them always relevant in the sense that listeners need to be well-taught in them. There is great relevance in the theology of the Bible, and the Bible is a profoundly theological book. It is the infallible Word of God, and in it God has revealed the most important themes about which we can think.

Preachers of relevant sermons do well to preach, for example, about personal peace, harmonious relationships, raising children, and how to handle money. But their listeners also need to be fed the meat of God’s Word through sermons on its great theological themes. Sermons on Biblical theology will help Christians grow in personal holiness, protect them from many false doctrines, inform them about God’s future glorious plans for the nation Israel, teach them  Biblical facts concerning the forthcoming new heavens and the new earth, let them know what God’s Word says will happen in these last days of apostasy from the faith, and will, of course, indoctrinate them in many other Biblical truths.

Some persons might not think of these things as being relevant to the Christian life. But we are told in 2nd Timothy 3:16 & 17 that “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.” (New King James Version)

This being true about the Bible, one of the most relevant things a preacher can do is to expound on some of the great theological books of the Bible. These include the pastoral letters, the letter to the Galatians, the letter to the Romans, the 2nd letter of Peter, and the letter of Jude.

Jude’s letter has only 25 verses, but it is a goldmine of truth which Christians today need to be taught because it tells us to “earnestly contend for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints,” meaning all Christians. This letter is very relevant because it warned about the apostasy (departure) from the faith that came through false teachers in Jude’s day, and who had infiltrated churches at that time to spread their apostasy. What took place back then is taking place now. This is a very relevant topic about which to preach. It is not popular, but it is Biblically relevant. Unfortunately, many preachers ignore this subject.

“Fences Make Good Neighbors”

By Pastor Bruce K. Oyen
First Baptist Church
Spearfish, SD

      Back in 2010, my wife and I were considering buying a house, and a realtor helped us with the process.  When I told him that we prefer yards without fences, he said “Fences make good neighbors.” I knew what he meant: a fenced yard makes for less potential conflicts with neighbors because the fence helps keeps everyone in their proper place by preventing neighbors from encroaching on one another’s property.

     Well, churches need spiritual fences, so to speak. They need fences made of commitment to Biblical doctrines and Biblical morality. Such fences will keep those who do not believe in the infallibility of the Bible’s doctrines and its morality from encroaching on a church’s spiritual property. By which I mean, when a church is committed to the Bible as the Word of God, and when it teaches what the Bible teaches on many subjects, those who oppose Biblical teaching will understand that they should not attend such a church. Such persons will understand that their views contradict what a Bible-believing church stands for, and so they need to attend one with which they agree.

     Furthermore, Bible-believing Christians need to be taught that Bible-believing churches need to have spiritual fences that will help protect them from those who do not accept Biblical truth, and  who would, therefore, encroach on their spiritual property in order to influence the Bible-believers to abandon their committment to Biblical truth. We need to understand that Satan sends his agents to Bible-believing churches for that very purpose. They might be very warm and friendly persons, but they are sent by Satan to attack churches from within. Such persons will look for those with whom they can share their unbiblical views concerning doctrines and morals. They might do this right on the church’s property, or by visiting with church-goers away from the church’s property. They will use different means of carrying out their agenda.

      Pastors can help protect their congregations from these Satanic attacks by preaching and teaching the great themes of the Bible. This requires emphasizing what the Bible says on fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith, and what it says about Biblical morality. By this means, the people will become well-taught in sound doctrine and godly living. As pastors do this, they are keeping their church’s fences in good repair. Pastors can also help protect their congregations by being careful to look into what new attendees think on various Biblical subjects. Such persons need to prove themselves to be stable, and committed to Biblical truth, and to not have a hidden agenda. And pastors certainly should not allow new attendees to quickly join the church and to quickly have positions of influence in the church. By doing these things, pastors will help keep problems from developing in the church.

      But it is not only the attacks of Satan’s agents from which churches must be protected.  Even well-meaning, dedicated Christians can be problems to churches. Such persons, though of good character, sometimes have doctrinal views that contradict what a church stands for. And, perhaps without meaning to do so, they can become divisive by attempting to spread their views among the members of the church. Zeal for their views can cloud their good judgment.

       Therefore, unless a Bible-believing church is purposely interdenominational, so long as the fundamentals of the faith are believed, it must not allow diverse doctrines to take root in the church. In other words, the only way for a church to maintain its doctrinal distinctives is by emphasizing those distinctives. People must be taught to attend a church with which they agree on many points. For example, they must be taught to attend a church that supports their view on doctrines such as baptism, the Lord’s supper, Bible translations, eternal security, charismatic gifts, the role of women in the church, Bible prophecy, and church music. When Christians attend churches of like faith, it is much more conducive to church harmony, and their own personal happiness. But if they try to fit in where they don’t belong they can become sources of strife.

            Now, if a well-meaning and dedicated Christian begins to attend a Bible-believing church with which he or she strongly disagrees on some important points, and that man or woman attempts to bring their beliefs into the church, what should be done? The pastors of the church should tell such persons that their views are not compatible with the church’s official views, and that, therefore, they need to keep their views to themselves, or find a church of like faith. For example, I know a  man who adheres to what is called hyper-dispensationalism, which has been popularized by  C. R. Stam. This brother in Christ began attending our church services, and tried to influence one of our deacons and me to accept hyper-dispensationalism. I told him our church does not accept hyper-dispensationalism, and that we do not want it promoted in our church, and that he, therefore, needed to find a church with which he was doctrinally compatible. It took some time for him to accept what I told him, but he has moved on to another church. This is better for him and for us.

      Another important thing to keep in mind is the fact that all Bible study material used in the church, including Bible studies made up by members of a church, must be analyzed by the church’s pastor/pastors and anyone else designated for this job, before the material is allowed to be used at church-sponsored functions. In other words, the church’s leaders must oversee what is being taught. False doctrines and doctrines that contradict a church’s official positions have been brought into  churches by well-meaning members because this oversight has been neglected.

     If you need to get acquainted with the Bible’s emphasis on the importance of sound doctrine and morality, for starters, read through Acts chapter 20, verses 17 – 38, Paul’s letter to the Galatians, the pastoral letters,  1st Peter 5:1 – 4, 2nd Peter, and John’s three letters.

           That realtor was right: “Fences make good neighbors.”