The Power of the Cross

A great song that speaks of the immeasurable glory of the cross.

 

 

We sang this song today at church, It was beautiful!

The Parable of the Sower Explained

In Matthew 13.18-23, Jesus explains "The Parable of the Sower" to His disciples in response to their question regarding why He chose to speak to the crowds in parables. It is evident that the disciples understood what Jesus was trying to convey in the parable. Their receptive hearts to “the secrets of the kingdom of heaven” is a clear example of the fulfilment of the fourth scenario: where the seeds feel on good soil, only because they heard His word and understood it.

Much of the crowd, in comparison to Jesus’ disciples, were dull in their hearts; their eyes and their ears were closed. They were spiritually deprived of the knowledge of the kingdom, and were dead in their sins (Ephesians 2:1) –- This is a good example of an unregenerate state.

God in His sovereignty, uses parables as a sifting tool to call before Him those whom the Father has given unto Him (John 6:44). It is what separated the disciples from the Pharisees who, because of their hardened state, where driven to frustrations because they could simply not make sense of Jesus’ plain parables (John 10:24).

So how are we to know if we belong to Christ? How are we to know if we are part of His flock? Simply by this, we will “understand with [our] heart” (Isaiah 6:10), and we will hear His voice (John 10:27), because we have been drawn to Him by the Father.

In conclusion, among the four scenarios of "The Parable of the Sower", Which one do you associate with when the word of God has been preached to your heart? how do you respond?

• “When anyone hears the word of the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what has been sown in his heart. this is what was sown along the path” (Matthew 13:19).
• “As for what was sown on rocky ground, this is the one who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy, yet he has no root in himself, but endures for a while, and when tribulation or persecution arises on account of the word, immediately he falls away” (Matthew 13:20).
• “As for what was sown among thorns, this is the one who hears the word, but the cares of the world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and it proves unfruitful” (Matthew 13:21).
• “As for what was sown on good soil, this is the one who hears the word and understands it. He indeed bears fruit and yields, in one case a hundredfold, in another sixty, and in another thirty” (Matthew 13:22).

So I encourage you brothers and sisters, examine yourself in light of scripture, for you very well might still be dwelling in that euphoric joy that has absolutely no root. Pray that God may test your fruitfulness, so that you may progress with righteous confidence that He indeed had begun a good work in you, and will indeed complete it (Philippians 1:6).

- CHELMS VARTHOUMLIEN

Stubborn or Strong Conviction by John G. Reisinger

[from - http://www.the-highway.com/stubborn-or-strong_conviction_Reisinger.html]

 

“How do I know when I am being stubborn or when I am being strong in a right conviction?”

 

Other people are stubborn, but I have strong convictions. ‘You may not be prepared to admit the truth of the above, but it is often our attitude when someone differs from us. I am sure you have met some stubborn people, and I hope you have been fortunate enough to meet some good men of strong convictions. The obvious problem is ‘How do I know when I am being stubborn or when I am being strong in a right conviction?’ How does one know the difference? When should we ‘give in’ for the sake of peace and when would it be the sin of compromise? When does standing firm violate the law of love, and when is it essential to the cause of truth? These are difficult questions that every true Christian must face. We who hold the Doctrines of Grace are going to be more and more faced with them.

I am sure we all despise the argumentative dogmatist who wants to argue about every jot and tittle. Every “i” must be dotted just so and every ‘t’ must be crossed in a precise manner or else there is cause for a major war. However, we must never think that every person who refuses to conform to the majority is of this temperament. We must not think it a virtue to accept everything from everybody without question. Many ‘pious’ souls have caused more trouble than the worst of the dogmatists, even if they have never been blamed by others or felt guilty themselves.

The man who will not face problems is the church’s biggest enemy. Vance Havner is right when he says, ‘The appeaser does more harm than the opposer.’ J. C. Ryle is also right when he blames the appeaser for running the church and losing the truth. The appeaser will not attempt to discern the difference between stubbornness and conviction. Why? He thinks it is because he loves God and his fellow men, but such is not really the case. Either he does not care which is right or else he does not have the courage to side with true conviction when he does see it. He loves peace more than anything, but actually his love of peace is fear of getting hurt in a battle. The ‘peace at any price’ gentlemen (and he is almost always the nicest of all gentlemen) will do anything and sacrifice everything to keep from getting involved in a situation that requires choosing a side, defending a position, and making enemies of those who disagree. He is neither stubborn nor a man of strong convictions.

As I write these lines, I think of two different men that I learned to know in very intimate relationships. One was more feared than he was ‘liked.’ He had few, if any, enemies who hated him, but he also had few real friends. Those who really knew him loved him. He was an extremely gentle man, but as firm as steel when it came to the truth of God’s Word. He cared for no man’s applause or approval, but ordered his entire life by the law and gospel. Many professing Christians ridiculed his ‘narrow’ view. He often had the charge of ‘bigot’ come down on his head. He was excluded and shunned by the generation of ‘open minded’ Christians. However, I never once knew him to knowingly violate his conscience or what he believed was his duty in the light of God’s Word in order to be ‘accepted.’

The second fellow was just the opposite. He was ‘liked’ by all but feared by none. His personal life was beyond reproach as far as ‘worldliness’ was concerned. He loved and cared for his family. He was respected by neighbors and friends. He was also a gentle man, but not in the same sense as the other man. The second man was not directly concerned about man’s approval, but he was afraid of man’s disapproval. He lived by one rule, PEACE AT ANY PRICE. He would willingly endure any hardship or abuse without a word. Under no circumstance would he take another person to task or force an issue that might cause hard feelings. He was not excluded and shunned by others, nor was he called narrow-minded and bigoted. It is with sadness that I must say that this man did violate conscience and truth. He sinned, not by doing what he believed was wrong, but by refusing to do what he knew was his duty if he knew such a course of action would cause trouble of any kind.

I remember how I used to pity both of these men. I pitied the first one because he did not seem to enjoy a lot of the ‘good times’ that other people did. He would refuse to participate in anything that was questionable. He felt it wiser to ‘give God and his personal testimony the benefit of any doubt’ than to accept the easy answer that ‘all Christians do this.’ Other things were skipped, not because they were questionable, but simply because there were far more profitable ways to spend either the time or money that would be involved. I think I pitied him most when, knowing his actions would bring him under the scorn of many he loved, he would nonetheless wholeheartedly pursue his duty. But you know, I could never conscientiously try to talk him into changing. Oh, I tried to ‘reason’ with him about some things, but I did not expect him to change. In fact, if I would have been honest, I know I would have been forced to admit that I really hoped he would not listen to me. Looking back I realized I was glad to know that God had some men who would not bend to or for anyone except Himself. I even admired him for things which I did not have the courage to follow myself.

I also pitied the second fellow but not in the same way or for the same reason. I pitied him for the way people took advantage of him. He was such a nice guy that no sacrifice was too great for him to make in order to please people. I think I pitied him far more when, knowing his clear duty in a given situation would force him to take a stand against another person, he would run away from the whole problem. I pitied him when I thought of him looking in the mirror as he shaved, and as he felt the hurt and ache inside that always comes when we betray the truth by silence.

If anyone asks me if I know these two men and what I think of them, the same thing always comes into my mind. I always think of the second man as a nice guy, a real swell fellow. He is one of the nicest fellows I know. I never once thought of the first man as a nice guy. I always think of him as a Godly Christian, a man whose fear and love of God forced you to think about God and His holiness.

I often pray for courage to be like the first man. I have no trouble at all being a ‘nice guy’, but nice guys don’t move men toward God. Nice guys don’t leave behind them a trail of men and women who testify to have seen and felt the power of another world because they saw a living example. No, nice guys leave behind a lot of people who gladly acknowledge, ‘He was a swell fellow.’ I think we should be so wedded to the truth of God’s Word that people will not remember our niceness but our God and truth. Let them even call us stubborn if they want to, but let us so cleave to the truth in doctrine and practice that they are forced to think about God and eternity.

The Altar of Cynicism by John Sartelle

[from - http://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/altar-cynicism/]

People lose their souls to many gods. There are the popular gods like money, sex, and power. But there is one unusual god to which men lose their souls, and maybe that god has seduced more people than any of the more famous or obvious gods that live in our hearts.

Cynicism is the god of the thinking person. Cynicism at first sight is not attractive, and thus, it does not seem seductive or powerful.

It was the god with whom Solomon battled from the beginning of Ecclesiastes to the end. Oh, he spoke of living for money, sex, and power, but what did he conclude? He concluded that they were void of meaning. They were carafes that looked like they were filled with wine, but they contained only colored water. Solomon surveyed all the gods. In fact, he was intimate with each of them. But the one that came the nearest to owning his soul was cynicism. He looked at everything — his money, his power, his work, his brilliance, even his relationships with his wives and friends. He concluded that all of these were useless. There was nothing or no one who delivered what they seemed to promise. These gods that he had loved with all his might went back on their word; they double-crossed his soul. Thus: “Vanity of vanities…all is vanity” (Eccl. 12:8). The Hebrew word translated vanity means empty, transitory, unsatisfactory. His gods were empty and could not satisfy. They could not be trusted.

Last year I read a very powerful book in which the protagonist had everything (money, power, prestige, family, sex), but he “woke up” to discover how empty his life was. So he set out to find a reality that could be trusted. Along the way his wife, parents, and friends all proved unfaithful and untrustworthy. In the end, he sailed out of the harbor into the ocean alone on his boat with no direction. He had lost his soul to cynicism. Every god, every man, every woman, every institution he trusted let him down. But then he, too, had proved to be unfaithful and untrustworthy, because like all of us he had lied, he had failed to deliver when others trusted him. He, himself, had not been faithful. In the end he became cynical. He kept saying, “To hell with it, to hell with it all.”

This is where cynicism takes hold: with our realization that nothing or no one can be totally trusted, and we can’t even point the finger of accusation at others because we ourselves cannot be trusted. We must number ourselves among the unfaithful and untrustworthy. Cynicism is the temple to which we finally come after stopovers at the houses of all the other gods. It is the temple at the end of “temple row.”

At the last, Solomon was saved from his cynicism. Ecclesiastes did not end like the book I read. Solomon did not sail out of the harbor into an endless ocean of emptiness. He did not end his story with the words, “To hell with it, to hell with it all.” He came to the sanctuary of a changeless God — a God who made incredible promises of grace and then kept His word. He came to a God who forgave unfaithful and untrustworthy people. He came to a God who said, “I will be faithful to my covenant with you. I will be faithful even though you have not been faithful to Me.”

Don’t expect more from your deities than they are able to deliver. Money will fail you, pleasure will fail you, power will fail you; friends, wives, husbands, fathers, mothers, and children will fail you. Solomon was right about that. And when they do, many of us are devastated. In our bitterness and resentment we go to the temple of cynicism. But there is a gospel for cynics. There is a gospel that says to us, “Of course, all of these will fail you. Of course, they are unfaithful and untrustworthy, and so are you.” So, in the words of Solomon, let’s hear “the conclusion of the matter.”

Don’t give up; there is one more temple. It is the temple that welcomes the unfaithful and untrustworthy. Above the door are words of grace: “Come, everyone who thirsts, come to the waters; and he who has no money, come, buy and eat! Come, buy wine and milk without money and without price. Why do you spend your money for that which is not bread, and your labor for that which does not satisfy?” (Isa. 55:1–2).

The cynic comes to this temple and finally finds One who will not betray him and who will never fail him. This God has declared that the sun and moon will fall from the sky before His word and promises can be broken. He went to the extreme of sacrificing His own Son to keep His promise, to be faithful to His oath of justice. He has never lied. He has never broken His word. Here is One who is trustworthy. And surprisingly, He has invited the unfaithful and untrustworthy to come and live with Him. The way His creation treated Him, we would expect Him to be cynical. Yet, He speaks grace to the very people who failed Him. Former cynics no longer go about every day saying, “Vanity of vanities…everything is vanity.” They are singing a new song, one about an amazing grace that saves wretches.

And now a very strange thing has happened. These former cynics now give the grace they received to those who have been unfaithful and untrustworthy to them.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From Ligonier Ministries and R.C. Sproul. © Tabletalk magazine. Website: www.ligonier.org/tabletalk. Email: tabletalk@ligonier.org. Toll free: 1-800-435-4343.

Christ The Only Way-R.C. Sproul