Global Warming
The SCOTUS Weighs In

The case of Mass v. EPA (No. 05-1102) presented the Global Warming Gang (GWG) a great photo-op and PR moment. The Court decided that EPA could regulate CO2 as green house gases (GHG). It was largely a procedural case. That is, did the 10 plaintiffs have standing to sue EPA over their not regulating GHG? The question the Court addressed was:

…whether §202(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act authorizes EPA to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles in the event that it forms a "judgment" that such emissions contribute to climate change.

The Court decided that EPA did have that authority. In fact, Justice Stevens for the 5-4 majority held:

In short, EPA has offered no reasoned explanation for its refusal to decide whether greenhouse gases cause or contribute to climate change. Its action was therefore "arbitrary, capricious, ... or otherwise not in accordance with law." 42 U. S. C. §7607(d)(9)(A). We need not and do not reach the question whether on remand EPA must make an endangerment finding, or whether policy concerns can inform EPA's actions in the event that it makes such a finding. Cf. Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U. S. 837, 843-844 (1984). We hold only that EPA must ground its reasons for action or inaction in the statute.

While there is no guarantee that EPA will determine that GHG must be regulated, EPA has the duty to consider doing so according to the Court.

One of the four dissenters, Justice Scalia, pointed out the folly of the Court’s position. EPA is now charged, by Court fiat, with determining whether the accumulation of GHG in the atmosphere is “air pollution” that causes climate change. The petition for rulemaking EPA failed to act on and which lead to this litigation, asked for “regulation of [greenhouse gas] emissions from motor vehicles to reduce the risk of global climate change.” 68 Fed. Register 52927.
EPA in reviewing the petition determined that “problems associated with atmospheric concentrations of CO2”bear little resemblance to what would be called “air pollution”.

As Scalia puts it:

In other words, regulating the buildup of CO2 and other greenhouse gases in the upper reaches of the atmosphere, which is alleged to be causing global climate change, is not akin to regulating the concentration of some substance that is polluting the air.
EPA decided it did not have the authority to regulate GHG under the Clear Air Act, a decision that did not sit well with the GWG.

The decision of EPA was not satisfactory for the majority of the SCOTUS either. So, the Court now reverses the common sense position that regulation is based on finding an air pollutant that causes or contributes to air pollution. Regulating the build up of CO2 or GHG in the upper levels of the atmosphere is not the regulation of a substance polluting the air. This is what the EPA refused to do under the Clean Air Act Authority.

But, now times have changed. There is hysteria over global warming that is even distorting the outcome of litigation. The GWG will not stop at the requirement to look at GHG emissions…they will want action. And, they will use every PR/photo op to get their way. Some years ago, I was involved in litigation over school prayer at commencement. The ACLU was not about winning or losing. It was not about the merits of each case. It was advancing their agenda to secularize America. By litigating a case, they actually deterred dozens or maybe hundreds of others from doing the same. They won by intimidation. I am getting the same vibes from the GWG. Whatever it takes, they will advance their cause without concern about the merits of their position. Global warming is the new unchallengeable sacred cow of the left leaning secular agenda.

Living in the World
Spring in the ECD

It is finally spring at the Eastern Continental Divide. On Easter Sunday we had 4 inches of snow and just a week ago it was cold with snow and raw wind. But, over the weekend we seemed to have turned the corner from winter. The summer like temperatures of the last few days will be replaced by more temperate, spring like ones.

Back in 1985, my father wrote a book for his grandsons about his life on the farm entitled Grandpa: His Life at the Old Homestead and Beyond, (Clearfield, PA: SGM Press, 1985, 2006). After his death it was reprinted with a new forward by his grandson, Lucas. In it, dad recounts his impressions of the seasons at the old homestead. Here is a small portion about spring:

On dawn in the Spring, you realize that you have been watching the leaves coming out on the maple, oak, beech and hickory and witch hazel tree as they all come to life as God has said that they should every spring. You see the apple, pear, peach, cherry and plum trees, as they respond to the Creator’s call. It’s time to awaken and show your beautiful coats of color as the blossoms break into full bloom. Under the trees, in the grass, you will see a strange little flower growing. It is multi colored, from a deep orange to a bright red to a brownish-yellow. This is the Indian paintbrush. Lucas and Robbie, I have shown you the Indian paintbrush. As the blossoms on the trees come out and get into full bloom the bees arrive to pick up their share of sweet nectar. They return it to their hive and make it into honey. They too have a part in the plan of God’s world. The bees come into the blossom, pick the nectar out of the blossom and crawl over it flying from one blossom to another. The bees make the flowers grow together. They are mating like male and female. If it weren’t for that we would have no fruit or berries.
As Spring arrives again, Lucas, do you recall that we talked about what happened? The days are getting longer. As he days get warmer, you can see the crocus coming up in the yard. The Easter Lilies are also coming out. All the bright colors are once again to do those things the Master has put them on earth for. That is to brighten up the earth, to fulfill the promise of constant life for all plants and for all mankind and animals. We are coming into a time when activity starts to grow again in the country side. If you listen very carefully you can hear the cattle in the pasture field. It is time for the morning milking. The older cows are talking to their calves. Probably just to let them know they are there. You can smell the fresh earth turned as the plowing and spring planting begins (pp. 34-5).

These are impressions of a time that has largely passed. But, we can all take time to use our senses to enjoy the coming of the Creator’s miracle of spring wherever you live. After all, it is here for us to enjoy and savor. It points to Him and glorifies Him. Maybe we would love Him more if we took time, as grandpa did, to appreciate His creation.

Living in the World
Evil at Virginia Tech

The culture seems to ignore the concept of evil except after events like 9/11 or the horrific carnage at Blacksburg, VA, on Monday. But, for Christians evil is very real and present always. Our self-centered mores allow us to deny evil unless it strikes us directly or when national/international events occur that cannot be ignored. But, notice that the general reaction is not that evil is an inward problem in man but some sort of outward issue. Guns of course are the favorite target. And, then there is the failure of the psycho-therapy that the gunman at VT needed. The shooting was somehow the result of a failure of societal systems.

The world refuses to believe that each of us is capable of evil deeds. Why? Well, first of all we have drunk deeply of the idea that man is basically good. The only kind of person who would shoot 32 people is one with a screw loose or one who is socially maladjusted If only he received the “help” he needed from the health care professionals, this would not have happened. This is the 75th anniversary of the publishing of Brave New World. And, over that span man is still looking for the “soma” that would control behavior. We live in the most medicated society that has ever existed. There are even reports the shooter at VT was on depression medication.

The answer to evil is not in the head but in the heart. The heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked. Who can understand it? [Jeremiah 17:9]. Modern man cannot accept such a concept. Christianity never ignores evil, unlike secular society. R.C. Sproul in his review of N.T.Wright’s Evil and the Justice of God, (Downer’s Grove, IL: IVP, 2006), at www.reformation21.com , explains the Biblical position on evil:
Bishop Wright works from the front backwards in the OT to see how the OT comes to grip with evil. The call of Abraham to be the father of the faithful and to implement God’s agenda of redemption in the world cannot be understood without first looking at the chaos of the building of the Tower of Babel, and even before that, the influenced of the serpents in the Garden. What Wright so astutely demonstrates in the reconnaissance of the OT history is that even with Abraham and his descendents, evil has not been eliminated. The saints of the OT repeatedly seek to build their own towers of Babel an continually find themselves easy prey for the serpent’s temptation. What the OT does, however, reveal is a plan. It is the plan of God to conquer and triumph and redeem evil. The plan reaches its culmination in the cross of Christ.

The Christian has an answer to the problem of evil that is not nay saying it or looking for a social solution. The plan is in Jesus Christ and Him crucified. Jesus has conquered sin and evil and provides an answer for both in the hearts of those who surrender their will and follow Him. Take all the guns and put everyone on a pill and there will still be sin and evil in the heats of men. And, it will claim victims. So, when man made solutions are floated in the aftermath of this tragedy, remember, as Sproul reminds us:
We live on the other side of the cross, the resurrection and Pentecost, where the power of the Kingdom has been set loose with manifold force.
What the world always needs is Christ changed hearts following Him.

Post-Modernity
What is Modernity?

Some have asked, do we not have to know what modernity is before we launch into determining what post-modernity is? Indeed. Here is a definition to chew on:

Modernism…is equated with “the Enlightenment Project” as it worked its way out in philosophy, art, literature, architecture and a score of fields of human endeavor. “God is dead and man has come of age!”, modernists claimed in a stance that was characteristically humanist, secularist and rationalist. Rejecting God and the traditional supernatural explanations, modernists retained the sense of such universal transcendental norms as truth, freedom, justice, equality, progress and beauty. But they based them on purely humanist formulations as reason, science, technology and Western tradition. Man come of age therefore exuded self-confidence.
Os Guiness, Fit Bodies; Fat Minds, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1994), pp. 104-05.

Modernity sought to throw off the chains of the church and ancient ways, holding on to truth but banishing the worn our supernatural explanations. As Guiness points out this was a result of the Enlightenment. What the Enlightenment represented is best summed up by its guru, Emmanuel Kant:

Enlightenment is humanity’s departure from its self-imposed immaturity. This immaturity is self-imposed when its cause is not lack of intelligence but failure of courage to think without someone else’s guidance. Dare to know! That is the slogan of the Enlightenment.

The Enlightenment provided man with the vehicle to go beyond God and the conventional. Man was not longer shackled and he could measure all things by his own reason.

One more distinction need be made. The Enlightenment worked itself out as Guiness indicated in three different places in three different ways. Here is a summary:

In France, the essence of the Enlightenment—literally its raison d’etre—was reason. “Reason to the philosophe, the Encyclopedie declared was “what Grace was to the Christian”…The idea of reason defined and permeated the Enlightenment as no other idea did…The driving force of the British Enlightenment was not reason but “social virtues” or “social affections” In America, the driving force was political liberty, the motive for the Revolution and the basis of the Republic. For British moral philosophers, and for American Founders, reason was an instrument for the attainment of the larger social end, not the end itself. And for both, religion was an ally, not an enemy.
Gertrude Himmelfarb, The Roads to Modernity, (NY, NY: Knopf, 2004),
pp. 18-19.

Reason did not dispatch religion in the U.S. Faith and reason in Britain and the U.S. has always had a relationship. Reason outlawed faith in France leading to the internal bloodshed of the French Revolution and the anti-clericalism that lead to the demise of the church in France.

So while modernism worked itself out differently in the U.S. there is still the emphasis on man and his definitions of reality instead of God’s. Just look at the man-focused, needs based, individualistic Christianity that grew in the 20th century and dominates evangelicalism today. Faith is still deemed o.k., but it must be privatized without influence in the world where we all live. There are still churches but they have no authority over believers. You can find a group of believers who cotton to your personal views of what Christianity is, even when those views are no where found in the history of Christianity. And, you do not have to answer to any authority of any kind. All you need is to be “born again”, sort of the Christian “I’m OK, you’re OK.” Its seems we are all modernists now…except for the post-modernists!

Global Warming
Objection from an unlikely Source

What an unlikely source to express doubt about global warming…Camille Paglia. She describes herself as a Clinton Democrat and a radical ‘60s libertarian. She is all in favor of the neo-paganism that exhibits itself as unbridled sexual conduct. She is in the vanguard of the so-called second wave of feminism. Yet in her on-line column in www.Salon.com on 11 April 2007, in answering a question on Global warning, she says this:

… I am a skeptic about what is currently called global warming. I have been highly suspicious for years about the political agenda that has slowly accrued around this issue. As a lapsed Catholic, I detest dogma in any area. Too many of my fellow Democrats seem peculiarly credulous at the moment, as if, having ground down organized religion into nonjudgmental, feel-good therapy, they are hungry for visions of apocalypse. From my perspective, virtually all of the major claims about global warming and its causes still remain to be proved.
Climate change, keyed to solar cycles, is built into Earth's system. Cooling and warming will go on forever. Slowly rising sea levels will at some point doubtless flood lower Manhattan and seaside houses everywhere from Cape Cod to Florida -- as happened to Native American encampments on those very shores. Human habitation is always fragile and provisional. People will migrate for the hills, as they have always done.
… when I tried to watch Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" on cable TV recently, I wasn't able to get past the first 10 minutes. I was snorting with disgust at its manipulations and distortions and laughing at Gore's lugubrious sentimentality, which was painfully revelatory of his indecisive, self-thwarting character. When Gore told a congressional hearing last month that there is a universal consensus among scientists about global warming -- which is blatantly untrue -- he forfeited his own credibility.
Environmentalism is a noble cause. It is damaged by propaganda and half-truths. Every industrialized society needs heightened consciousness about its past, present and future effects on the biosphere. Though I am a libertarian, I am a strong supporter of vigilant scrutiny and regulation of industry by local, state and federal agencies. But there must be a balance with the equally vital need for economic development, especially in the Third World.

Al Gore has not silenced everyone on the left. And, not only those on the right see his “blatant untruths”. It is amusing to see the neo-pagan diva decry the apocalyptic desires of those grinding down organized religion [read Christianity]. What else does she expect? And, how about a libertarian who wants “vigilant scrutiny and regulation of industry”? Cannot she see that her “noble cause” environmentalism taken to its logical end is the dogmatism of the greenies she detests with Gore as its high priest.

Well, in spite of her inconsistencies, it is refreshing to see one of Gore’s own standing against the new political correctness. Maybe there will yet be a serious debate on global warming that considers the contribution of the sun and cyclical climate change. Who knows, maybe global warming may yet be determined to be natural and not man made.

Post-Modernism
What is it?

Post-modernism is what is after modernism. That was easy…end of post! Is it different from modernism or is it a spin off of modernism? Some would ask what is modernism? So, it is with philosophy and culture, we really can’t explain it anymore. And, that may be the major issue with post-modernism.

Ravi Zacharias tells the story of the two Aussie sailors on shore leave in London. They wander into a pub on a fog shrouded night. And, as sailors do, they had a few too many pints. As they exited the pub, the fog seemed thicker which may have been the effect of the grog not the weather. They had forgotten where they were, a definite result of the booze. They spotted a figure in uniform coming toward them. It was a highly decorated British naval officer. They asked in a slurred brogue, “Bloke, do you know where we are?” The officer appalled at the condition of the sailors and their not recognizing him as an officer replied, “Do you know who I am?” One Aussie looked at the other and said: “Boy are we in trouble, we don’t know where we are and he don’t know who ‘e is!” That’s post-modernism…not knowing who we are or where we are.

I also like to use Justice Jackson’s definition for pornography: “I’ll know it when I see it.” Post-modernism defies definition but we know it when it manifests itself in our culture. Take the Imus dustup over his comments about the Rutger’s women’s basketball team. Now, I am no Imus fan. He is crude, rude and inconsequential. He has been spewing foul, ridiculous comments for over 3 decades. But, now he is under fire for saying something that is often repeated in Gansta Rap music performed by equally insensitive, foul mouthed black men. Why?

Well obviously we have he political opportunists who like to capitalize on racially charged comments. They are out hustling the media for Imus’ ouster. But, there is not an outcry for this type of language to be removed from the Rap music culture. Could it be because language has no more universal reference point? In other words, what is wrong for Imus is not wrong for black men who are part of the black culture. Language has no universal application but is specific to the personal interpretation of the world and culture in which we live. You know…what’s true for me is not necessarily true for you…it depends.

What is post-modernism? It is tough to define but keep your eyes and ears open and you will see and hear it. It is the air we breathe. We are all affected. For Christians it is easy to avoid the language trap of the politically correct. All you language is to be edifying, building up, not corrupting to others and give grace to those who hear it (Eph. 4:29). You see, the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ has an impact in these post-modern times. And, we can know where we are and who we are in Christ.

Living in the World
The Speaker and the Brits

Last week was Holy Week, the week that we remember and celebrate the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. But, it was also a strange week on the world’s stage. The Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, conducted a junket to the Middle East. The White House was not excited about the trip. Ms. Pelosi is obviously not the spokesman (!) for government policy. It could only create confusion. Furthermore, she visited Syria, a state that sponsors terrorism, and one the administration does not have dialogue with.

Well, it turned out to be a photo op for the Syrians. There she was smiling and parading around with Assad and delivering an incorrect message from the Israelis. And, for all the world, it appeared that there was not unanimity in US policy toward the Middle East. This coming right on the heals of the Speaker orchestrating a bill for funding of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan that gave dates for the pullout of troops, a bill the President said beforehand he would veto.

I have always wondered how Dr. Rice was accepted in the Middle East. She is a woman trying to deal with institutionalized “male chauvinists” to use a Betty Friedan description of male domination. But, at least it was understood she spoke for the Administration. But, Ms. Pelosi, who does she represent? The Democrats, her House leadership, San Francisco, or her own brand of liberal “we are the world”, “can’t we all just get along together” therapeutic zaniness? These folks in the Middle East are ruthless, Israel destroying, empire builders who are not exactly anxious to make peace with western nations they want out of the region. Ms. Pelosi was on a fool’s errand.

At the same time, the saga of the Brit military personnel was unfolding in Iran. After two weeks of suspense, the Iranians released them to celebrate the birthday of the prophet Mohammed and the death of Jesus on Easter. Besides the theological error that Easter is about the resurrection of Jesus, the Iranians tried to capitalize on there “niceness” in a gracious gesture in releasing the Brits. Overlooked is the outrageous grabbing of the young sailors and Royal Marines in disputed water. International protocol is to warn the intruders they are trespassing and demand that they leave. But, the Iranians, not ones to be compliant with international conduct, snatched the sailors and marines.

It is interesting that this happened immediately after the UN passed another resolution about Iranian nuclear weapon development. Do you think this whole affair may have been a diversion? It is indicative of Iran thumbing its nose at the international community, seeing the west as weak and orchestrating international theater to make them look good when they are doing bad. And, it seems to be working. Iran is winning the PR game being hailed as good guys for releasing the hostages.

The other aspect of this affair that is disturbing is the capitulation of the captives to issue statements damning their own government. They were not apparently beaten or tortured to obtain statements. They co-operated with their captors in very short order. What ever happened to name, rank and serial number? There are military personnel of Britain, what are they trained to do if captured? At a press conference the captives spoke of their ordeal. The Iranian’s then released videos of the men and woman in a seemingly comfortable, entertaining environment. Now it even surfaces that the Ministry of Defense have permitted the 15 to sell their stories to a hungry media. A sort of real “reality show”! This was not Britain’s finest hour!

Is it any wonder Iran, Syria and their agents Hezbollah and Hamas see the west as weak? If governments will not stand up to bullies in the world, why would their citizens, even sailors and soldiers, do so? Just today Iran, in defiance of the world, announced their ongoing uranium enrichment program. We live in a vicious world. That is why Nancy Pelosi cannot be waltzing around making “nice-nice” with dictators. Tyrants are exploiters and if they can exploit differences between policy makers of opponents, they will. Conflicting positions makes western governments more susceptible to actions like the Iranian hostage taking. If there is no policy consensus how can there be a consensus on responses to actions by foreign governments? We end up with “girlie man” reactions. Let’s keep the Speaker home and re-establish backbone and resolve into the policies of the leaders of the western world. Then, soldiers and sailors may respond to adversity without co-operating with the enemy.

Thoughts for Easter
The Mediator

Justification means this miracle: that Christ takes our place and we take His.
Emil Brunner

For the sake of His infinite love, He has become what we are in order that He may make us entirely what He is.
Irenaeus

As we approach Easter, we must never forget Christ and His Cross. Many terms are used to explain what happened at the cross. Some of them include substitution, ransom, satisfaction, atonement, expiation, propitiation, purchase, mediation, redemption, and reconciliation.

The quotes of Brunner and Irenaeus are focused on Christ as Mediator. This is what Paul calls Jesus in 1 Tim. 2:5. The writer of Hebrews refers to Christ as the Mediator of the new covenant (Heb. 8:6, 9:15, 12:24). Jesus alone is the Mediator between God and man.

And, that divine Mediation involves an exchange. Jesus takes upon Himself our sin and we receive His righteousness (2 Cor. 5:21). Too often our understanding of the cross involves only one side of the transaction. Like the fourth grade child in Sunday School when asked what Jesus did for us, we respond, “He died on the cross”. That is true, but only part of the answer.

Jesus lived a perfect life that provides for us the righteousness we do not have and cannot obtain by our own effort. His mediation for us is sufficient, complete and meritorious for our salvation. He takes away our sin and gives us His righteousness thereby satisfying the wrath of God and providing the merit necessary to enter into the eternal presence of God. Thus, He is the just and justifier (Rom. 3:26).

The Gospel means the problem of sin has been fully and adequately addressed. As the Mediator, Jesus reconciled God the Father and man. Jesus suffered the penalty of sin for us. Jesus also clothed us with His righteousness. At the Last Great Day we will be entering into eternal fellowship with God the Father because of Christ alone—The Mediator. It is the death and resurrection of this Mediator…Jesus Christ…that is alone the hope of our salvation. Praise be to Him!

Thoughts for Easter
Repentance

On 31 October, 1517, an Augustinian Monk nailed to the door of the Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany, his 95 theses. They were points upon which Luther invited public discussion and disputation. The first of these items was:
“1. When our Lord and Master, Jesus Christ, said ‘Repent’, He called for the entire life of believers to be one of penitence.”

The call to repentance is fundamental to all the proclaimers of the Gospel in the New Testament. John the Baptist, who was preparing the way for Jesus, preached in the wilderness of Judea saying, “Repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand”(Matt. 3:2). Likewise, when Jesus began His public ministry, He commanded, “repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matt. 4:17).

Peter, the preacher of the first post-Pentecost apostolic sermon, when asked by his audience what they must do, responded “Repent” (Acts 2:38). At the Aeropagus, Paul lectured the Athenian philosophers about the limited knowledge of God up to the coming of Christ. But now, with the revelation of the living God, all men are commanded to repent (Acts 17:30). And, in front of Agrippa, Paul stated that he was true to his conversion to Christ in calling Jews and Gentiles to repentance (Acts 26:19 ,20).

For the modern day Christian, repentance is often confined to the “day I accepted Jesus.” But, true repentance is much greater than that. Repentance, as the flip side of faith, includes trust in Christ that unites one to Jesus in His death, burial and resurrection (Rom. 6:1-11; Col. 2:9-12; 3:1-4). This empowers one to live as the Christian he/she is in the face of the world, Satan and the flesh.

Furthermore, this call to repentance is not just to the unbeliever. Jesus also has the household of faith in mind. Recall what He said to the orthodox Ephesians? “Remember then from what you have fallen, repent and do the works you did at first” (Rev. 2:5). This call to repentance for believers in the church by the Glorified Christ is also made to Pergamos (Rev. 2:16); Thyatira (Rev. 2:22); Sardis (Rev. 3:3); and Laodicea (Rev. 3:19).

When you are discharging the imperative of the Gospel, it requires repentance, daily and always. You are not to reform the flesh, but to put to death your members upon the earth (Col. 3:5). The child of God continues in repentance all of his/her life. The nature of sanctification (becoming more like Christ) is continual turning to Christ (faith) while turning from sin (repentance). Luther knew very well the centrality of repentance to the Christian life.

Seems to make sense, so why is there a problem? First of all, there is the emphasis of “getting saved”. While that is indeed the first step to salvation, it is just the beginning. The failure of churches to nurture and teach the saints into mature Christian belief and living contributes to the problem. Churches send folks right into the fray as “green recruits” without proper equipping. Doing [serving on boards, teaching Sunday School, going on mission trips] is never a substitute for being, which, comes from knowing.

Secondly, it is tacitly ingrained that you have been delivered in one fell swoop from temptation and sin. Instead of teaching that the Christian life is a lifetime of putting off the old and putting on the new, there is no time for dealing with indwelling sin. We are too busy doing good things.

We fail to see that God never promised to transform us instantly into super Christians who no longer need be concerned with sin and repentance. We need to get into Romans 6, 7 and 8. The power of sin has been broken, but that does not mean sin is gone. Sin is present, but, praise God, there is no condemnation for the believer (Rom 8:1).

Finally, there is a tendency to dwell on religious experiences instead of the reforming of the heart and mind. Involvement in programs and activities does not lead to the rooting out of sin in a life. Dealing with sin in your life requires the intervention of the Holy Spirit. The experience-oriented church has permitted guilty feelings and sorrow to be an inadequate substitute for repentance.

But, true repentance is not saying: “I’m sorry”. Nor is it feeling guilty for being caught. It is a turning from sin and a changing of one’s mind. It is intentional and purposeful. Repentance is a way of life for the believer.

What is true when one comes to a saving relationship with Jesus Christ must continue throughout one’s life. There must be a daily conversion of the heart and crucifying of the flesh. Repentance is the way God continues to impress upon the sinner who is a saint that he needs more of the Lord of glory. Repentance is the way to glorification, to being more like Jesus Christ. Repentance is the human response to a life lived by faith in Christ and the sign of a mature believer. During this season of Easter, have you repented?

Thoughts for Easter
Sin

One of the greatest impacts on the church from the therapeutic culture is the treatment of sin. In this society where all is self-referring, we have reduced sin to a horizontal relational problem. Sinful actions lead to terrible consequences for humans, resulting in ruptured relationships, emotional scars and physical and psychological pain. While the church must address these matters, they do not represent the ultimate tragedy of sin.

Sin separates us from God. Sin is treason against the Holy Emperor of the Universe. David wronged Uriah and Bathsheba with murder and adultery. Nevertheless, he recognized that his sin was ultimately against God and His holy law (Psalm 51:4). Human pain and suffering from sin is real. But, the church must be about addressing the deadly consequence of sin; the eternal consequence. The larger task is to reunite a sinner with a holy God through Christ as Lord and Savior.

Sin exposes us to the wrath of Almighty God. The fear of God is not a popular agenda item in our churches. And, that is, in large measure, a result of not seeing God as the transgressed in our sinful actions. By His blood, He saves us from His wrath (Romans 5:9). Sin makes us the enemy of Almighty God. Not so, protests Penelope Pewsitter, “God is love. He is not my enemy.” A very nice sentiment; but not Biblical. The death of Christ reconciled us when we were enemies to the Father (Romans 5:10).

By seeing sin for what it really is, we see the full majesty of the Savior. Paul tells us this salvation from the wrath of God and the reconciliation to God when we were his enemy is cause for rejoicing (Romans 5:11). Jesus did not die so we would treat each other better, provide for self-fulfillment or give us emotional stability in a turbulent life. He died to save us from the wrath of God and impute to us the righteousness necessary to make us acceptable to a holy God.

The sin of man disrupts the world and all who live in it. All the injustice and evil in the world has its root in sin. That is why all the self-improvement movements of man are doomed to failure. They fail to address sin. Only Christ can do that. The church has a message to tell all the nations. Point the sinner to the Savior. Christ Jesus came to die so that you could be reunited to God. This vertical relationship must be mended before anything can be done horizontally. This is the message of Easter.