Here's another track from "Captured" called "Nonsense"
This is the Promo Vid for "Captured"
LECRAE - REHAB: The OVERDOSE
Now, for an upcoming project, well as you may already know, Lecrae dropped an Album last September named "Rehab", well on January 11, 2011 "Rehab: The OverDose" is dropping. Im excited about this one, I love "Rehab" but this project is gonna go HARD!!
This is the Promo Vid:
Here's the single, you can cop it at iTunes, this one is called "OverDose"
You can cop both these projects on Amazon, iTunes, and their individual sites, however keep in mind that "Rehab: The Overdose" isn't dropping till the 11th!
Here's a video of my kids dancing (more like jumping hysterically) to one of the songs off of REHAB, this one is called "Use To Do It Too" featuring KB of HGA, who is now a Reach Records artist. See the article HERE, this is exciting news!! Enjoy and join the REHAB!!!
Tracklisting & Production Credits 1) Check In Produced by PK for PKALLDay.com Written by Lecrae Moore, Brian Taylor, Marlon Montgomery and Warren Harris
2) Killa Produced by CheeseBeats aka “Tha Kracken” for LateBloom Productions Vocal Arrangement CheeseBeats aka "Tha Kracken" Additional Vocals by Natalie Sims Written by Lecrae Moore, Natalie Sims and John Williams
3) Divine Intervention featuring J.R. Produced by J.R. for So Hot Productions Written by Lecrae Moore and Courtney Peebles
4) Just Like You featuring J. Paul Produced by J.R. for So Hot Productions Written by Lecrae Moore, J. Paul, Jacob "Biz" Morris, Jared Foster and Courtney Peebles
5) Gotta Know feat. Benjah Produced by Benjah and Sky Written by Lecrae Moore, Benjamin LeRoy Thom and Justin Boller Additional Vocals by Haley Hunt
6) Used to Do it Too featuring KB Produced by PK for PKALLDay.com Written by Lecrae Moore, Kevin Elijah Burgess, Brian Taylor, Marlon Montgomery and Warren Harris Additional Vocals by PK
7) Children of the Light featuring Sonny Sandoval and Dillavou Produced by Benjah Written by Lecrae Moore, Sonny Sandoval, Justin Dillavou and Benjamin LeRoy Thom Additional Vocals by Benjah
8) High featuring Sho Baraka and Suzy Rock Produced by CheeseBeats aka “Tha Kracken” for LateBloom Productions Written by Lecrae Moore, Amisho Lewis, and John Williams
9) New Shalom featuring PRo Produced by Street Symphony Written by Lecrae Moore, Derek Johnson and Torrance Esmond
10) 40 Deep featuring Trip Lee and Tedashii Produced by CheeseBeats aka “Tha Kracken” for LateBloom Productions Written by Lecrae Moore, William Barefield, Tedashii Anderson and John Williams
11) Walking on Water Produced by PK for PKALLDay.com Written by Lecrae Moore, Tina Fears, Brian Taylor, Marlon Montgomery and Warren Harris Additional Vocals by Tina Fears
12) God Is Enough featuring Jai, Flame Produced by Kajmir Royale Written by Lecrae Moore, Jai Williams, Marcus Gray and Abraham Gaskin
13) Boasting featuring Anthony Evans Produced by CheeseBeats aka “Tha Kracken” for LateBloom Productions Written by Lecrae Moore, Chris Lee Cobbins and John Williams
14) Background featuring C-Lite Produced by Alex Medina, G.Roc for Beat Mekanicz Productions, LLC and Joseph Prielozny Written by Lecrae Moore, Andy Mineo, Alex Medina, George Ramirez and Joseph Prielozny
15) New Reality featuring Chinua Hawk Produced by G.P. For Dvine Muzic/New D ENT/Preacher Boy Music Written by Lecrae Moore and Steven Abramsamadu
16) Release Date featuring Chris Lee Produced by CheeseBeats aka “Tha Kracken” for LateBloom Productions Additional Vocal Arrangement CheeseBeats aka "Tha Kracken" Written by Lecrae Moore, Chris Lee Cobbins and John Williams
17) BONUS TRACK: I Love You featuring Chris Lee Produced by Kajmir Royale Written by Lecrae Moore, Chris Lee Cobbins and Abraham Gaskin
This song is truly hot, very heartfelt and emotional. The video just contributes more to the emotions, I love what LeCrae is doing here. Praise the Lord for Young and Unashamed brethren who doing it right!!
Everyone knows that I'm ANTI-ABORTION!!! Well, this song deals with abortion. Now, I'm posting this song with some hesitation, my reasons are simply due to not endorsing the artist for doctrinal and theological purposes, so for that very reason I am not going to be providing any information concerning the artist. You may ask, "Then why are you posting the song, if you don't agree with his Doctrine and stuff?" Well, though I don't endorse the artist, I do think that this song is well worth the listen, the approach and concept is unique and interesting, doesn't touch much on doctrine, so I don't have conflict with this particular song. If you want the artists name, e-mail me or respond to this thread with your e-mail and I will gladly forward the artist's name to you.
Song title: UNBORN CHILD
Now, here's a CRISPY CLIP from "Hip Hop for Haiti", JSon, Lecrae and DJ Official!
C'Ya
I'ma leave ya with this quote from the Prince of Preachers!! "When you see no present advantage, walk by faith and not by sight. Do God the honor to trust Him when it comes to matters of loss for the sake of principle." Charles H. Spurgeon
Tim Keller wrote an impression on the book "The Shack" by William P. Young. Very interesting article, I suggest you read it, get acquanted with this book, that sold 7.2 million books in less than 2 years.
Over the holidays I read a good (and devastating) review of William P. (Paul) Young’s The Shack in the most recent print edition of Books and Culture: A Christian Review (Jan/Feb 2010.) It was a reminder that I was one of the last people on the planet not to have read the book. So I did. So why write a blog post about it? It had sold 7.2 million copies in a little over 2 years, by June of 2009. With those kinds of numbers, the book will certainly exert some influence over the popular religious imagination. So it warrants a response. This is not a review, but just some impressions.
At the heart of the book is a noble effort — to help modern people understand why God allows suffering, using a narrative form. The argument Young makes at various parts of the book is this. First, this world’s evil and suffering is the result of our abuse of free will. Second, God has not prevented evil in order to accomplish some glorious, greater good that humans cannot now understand. Third, when we stay bitter at God for a particular tragedy we put ourselves in the seat of the ‘Judge of the world and God’, and we are unqualified for such a job. Fourth, we must get an ‘eternal perspective’ and see all God’s people in joy in his presence forever. (The father in the story is given a vision of his deceased daughter living in the joy of Christ’s presence, and it heals his grief.) This is all rather standard, orthodox, pastoral theology (though it’s a bit too heavy on the ‘free-will defense’). It is so accessible to readers because of its narrative form. I have heard many reports of semi-believers and non-believers claiming that this book gave them an answer to their biggest objections to faith in God.
However, sprinkled throughout the book, Young’s story undermines a number of traditional Christian doctrines. Many have gotten involved in debates about Young’s theological beliefs, and I have my own strong concerns. But here is my main problem with the book. Anyone who is strongly influenced by the imaginative world of The Shack will be totally unprepared for the far more multi-dimensional and complex God that you actually meet when you read the Bible. In the prophets the reader will find a God who is constantly condemning and vowing judgment on his enemies, while the Persons of the Triune-God of The Shack repeatedly deny that sin is any offense to them. The reader of Psalm 119 is filled with delight at God’s statutes, decrees, and laws, yet the God of The Shack insists that he doesn’t give us any rules or even have any expectations of human beings. All he wants is relationship. The reader of the lives of Abraham, Jacob, Moses, and Isaiah will learn that the holiness of God makes his immediate presence dangerous or fatal to us. Someone may counter (as Young seems to do, on p.192) that because of Jesus, God is now only a God of love, making all talk of holiness, wrath, and law obsolete. But when John, one of Jesus’ closest friends, long after the crucifixion sees the risen Christ in person on the isle of Patmos, John ‘fell at his feet as dead.’ (Rev.1:17.) The Shack effectively deconstructs the holiness and transcendence of God. It is simply not there. In its place is unconditional love, period. The God of The Shack has none of the balance and complexity of the Biblical God. Half a God is not God at all.
There is another modern text that sought to convey the character of God through story. It also tried to ‘embody’ the Biblical doctrine of God in an imaginative way that conveyed the heart of the Biblical message. That story contained a Christ-figure named Aslan. Unlike the author of The Shack, however, C.S. Lewis was always at pains to maintain the Biblical tension between the divine love and his overwhelming holiness and splendor. In the introduction to his book The Problem of Pain, Lewis cited the example from the children’s text The Wind in the Willows where two characters, Rat and Mole, approach divinity.
“Afraid?” murmured the Rat, his eyes shining with unutterable love. “Afraid? of Him? O, never, never. And yet — and yet — O Mole, I am afraid.”
Lewis sought to get this across at many places through his Narnia tales. One of the most memorable is the description of Aslan.
“Safe?…Who said anything about safe? ‘Course he isn’t safe. But he’s good. He’s the King, I tell you.”
That’s better.
A little about Tim Keller: Dr. Tim Keller is the Senior Pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church (PCA) in Manhattan, NY and a Council member with The Gospel Coalition.
I love this clip so much, that I want to re-post it. It's Sho Baraka, "Revolutionary Died" snippet, Toasty!
Here "Downtown" Leon Brown from www.EvangelismTeam.com goes 1 on 1 with a couple of homosexuals, it's truly amazing, places a sense of who they really are, Humans in need of Jesus Christ, redemption and repentance!!!
What's so awesome about this encounter?? Well, for one, Leon just showed you that we don't really have to address the issue of homosexuality in one on one encounters. In light of the Gospel we all are sinners, and yes I personally agree that the bible says that homosexuality is an abomination to God. However, just like the homosexual, liars, thieves, and idolators have to repent too! Watch the Video, comment if you like!
Watch this video too!! This last one here hits home, this is the condition of many "American Christians".
Lord, I know that when things aren't happening in my own backyard, it's easier to respond and to say how we should be responding and what we ought to do. As I watch the coverage on the Tragedy in Haiti, I beat myself up for not picking up and going, I make all the excuses for not following through, but YOU truly know my heart, and whether or not I am sincere. I wish I can build the courage and support to go, deny self, which would require sacrificing family and more, I wish I could. I worship you in the midst of misery, tragedy and hurt. And I am not even there, I can't imagine those at the forefront, Lord have mercy! Send the workers, with YOUR GOSPEL!
All praise to the name of the savior who reigns. He’s taken our blame, embraced all our shame, He’s raised from the grave so his fame we proclaim. Salvation by grace through faith in his name.
All praise to the name of the savior who reigns. He’s taken our blame, embraced all our shame, He’s raised from the grave so his fame we proclaim. Salvation by grace through faith in his name.
Jesus, the beautiful and blessed Son, Immutable, majestic one Who was resurrected from the grave for the depraved. He paved the path for some Place faith in His passion, son Be saved from the wrath to come.
He’s fabulous, His status is immaculate I’m lacking the vernacular to adequately capture His glory. Incomparable, unconquerable, all powerful, unstoppable Absolutely phenomenal.
No obstacle He can’t navigate. He’s God and so He fascinates. With Him it’s impossible to exaggerate.
Lord of all continents, Source of all consciousness, His compliments are the consequence of His accomplishments Every sphere of life, He’s the Lord of it And every other power is either fraudulent or subordinate.
At first we snubbed Him, Now His vessels of mercy love Him. Your highest thought is infinitely unworthy of Him. Beyond vocabulary His actions vary, His wrath is scary All His adversaries are imaginary.
He has no competitors. Ask Nebuchadnezzar, bro He’ll mess you up, have you eating grass, You can bet He’s amazing.
He takes in blatant, flagrant vagrants, breaks them, remakes them, and shapes them to hate sin.
Jesus! There’s no better name! That’ll never change and He’ll forever reign while we spread His fame.
So all praise to the name of the Savior who reigns He’s taken our blame Embraced all our shame He’s raised from the grave so His fame we proclaim Salvation by grace through faith in His name!
All praise to the name of the Savior who reigns He’s taken our blame Embraced all our shame He’s raised from the grave so His fame we proclaim Salvation by grace through faith in His name!
As I approached this New Year, I was thinking of what to write on my Blog, cuz truthfully I'm not a big fan of the festivities, so as I was thinking of what to write, I realized that I have strong convictions and opinions, but lack the way to articulate, so I decided to post an article that I agree with, from a person who's opinion I respect. So please forgive me, for posting someone else's work, but I hope you can appreciate!
Ponder this question as you read: Do I look like a Christian or do I look more like them, the World?
Thinking Biblically Commentary – January 4, 2006 K. Joel Gilliard
Every year on December 31, great festivals and celebrations around the world are held to ring out the old year and bring in the new year. In fact, starting backwards from December 26th, news broadcasters begin to reflect on past events of the year, who died, who got married and whatever the big news stories of the year that there were.
Many people use this time of year to do their own reflection on the events of the past year in their personal lives. Many make promises to improve themselves in the coming year and as we well know, these things have a tendency not to last.
Now let’s think for a moment. Biblically, if you will.
Is it wrong to reflect over our lives and think on the major events of our lives? Of course not. Is it wrong to make plans for change ? Not at all. Scripture is replete with folks who do these very things – from David in the Psalms to Isaiah in his book.
The problem is our thinking at how to go about accomplishing these ‘resolutions’ that we make. There’s usually two faulty assumptions that go along with most new year’s resolutions-making.
First, many times, even Christians don’t approach things they resolve to do for the coming year with glory of God in mind. They don’t seek to make change to serve God better, but mostly to serve themselves better, expand their own territory, build up their own kingdom and prosper their own house.
The prophet Haggai spoke of people like this during the reign of King Darius when he delivered a word from the Lord on the subject:
“Is it a time for you yourselves to dwell in your paneled houses, while this house lies in ruins? Now, therefore, thus says the LORD of hosts: Consider your ways. You have sown much, and harvested little. You eat, but you never have enough; you drink, but you never have your fill. You clothe yourselves, but no one is warm. And he who earns wages does so to put them into a bag with holes.
“Thus says the LORD of hosts: Consider your ways. Go up to the hills and bring wood and build the house, that I may take pleasure in it and that I may be glorified, says the LORD. You looked for much, and behold, it came to little. And when you brought it home, I blew it away. Why? declares the LORD of hosts. Because of my house that lies in ruins, while each of you busies himself with his own house. Therefore the heavens above you have withheld the dew, and the earth has withheld its produce. And I have called for a drought on the land and the hills, on the grain, the new wine, the oil, on what the ground brings forth, on man and beast, and on all their labors.” (Haggai 1:4-11)
Several times here, the Lord admonishes His people to ‘consider their ways‘. That’s Hebrew shorthand for ‘think real close and reflect on how you’ve been acting and what’s been going on with your life’. We learn a lot in this passage. The context, dealing with the rebuilding of the temple under King Darius, is applicable to our present discussion.
So many times, we try to do things in our own strength with our own purpose and plan in mind. We spend our time and energy ’seeking with all our might’ after food, clothing and shelter (the same thing Jesus said the Gentiles did in Matthew 6). And to make it sound holy, we stamp the name of God on it and say ‘God wants me to have this’ or ‘God wants me to do this’ or ‘If it wasn’t of God, I wouldn’t have the vision or the desire’ and misquote scripture to support this notion (sometimes we’re taught to misquote scripture in this fashion).
My friends, this is nothing more than hedonism masked with Christian spiritualism. In English – seeking after self-pleasure and self-gratification but masking it with a layer of Christian-speak in order to make it sound acceptable to others and ourselves. Check your motivations real close. The desire to lose weight, for example, is not necessarily bad or good in and of itself. You’d like to lose weight for what reason ? So you’ll look cute in your bathing suit at the beach over the summer (or for the fellas, so you’ll look good and people will notice) ? How about because it makes you feel better about yourself ? How about so you’ll be healthier and live longer ? Or because it glorifies God when you take care of the body He has given you ?
Because we live in a fallen world and in fallen bodies, I’m not saying our motivations have to be perfect, but which of these three things is at the forefront of your thinking on the subject? God knows your heart, no matter what your lips might say. And the actions of your life will reflect it, no matter what you say the answer is. A tree is always known by its’ fruit.
Secondly, we approach the topic of resolutions for change with the world’s methods – sheer will-power and determination – instead of with the power and strength which Christ provides for change.
I make this a very important point because people oftentimes miss it. The major sin in the Garden of Eden was not merely disobedience, but independence. Man believing that he/she can do whatever he wants apart from God. Independence on one’s own strength and reliance upon one’s own strength apart from God can breed and foster an attitude of not needing God.
The average rich person will tell you they don’t need God at the center of their lives. They have everything they want at the time. The man who feels he can do anything and is fairly successful with his life will feel less of a need to be concerned with spiritual things.
So too, in the church, the person who feels that they will and can change their own destiny and God is just ‘along for the ride’ or ‘my eternal ticket to heaven after I’m done with my life’ will find that they really involve God in less and less of their daily life struggles and issues, other than on Sunday. Call it the ‘God is my co-pilot’ philosophy. This is how you find many professed Christians living in the world today: very religious in their speech, but their outward lives look no different than the world, their methods of dealing with life’s issues are no different than the world, they do the same sins as the world and use the world’s solutions for their problems. Or they may have God as an ‘add on’ – a cosmic bellhop to get them whatever they need as they reign sovereignly over their own lives and determine its’ course.
And it reeks of rebellion against God. Subtle rebellion, but rebellion nonetheless.
How should we think about these things ?
Reflection is good. It should never be a once a year thing, but a regular habit for the believer. At the reading of the law each week, Israel was always pointed back to things God had done in the past as proof of His continued faithfulness to them and hope for continued faithfulness in the future. Romans 8:28 should bring some of this to mind with the believer, as he looks back and sees that it was not he who ordered his own life, but God who prepared him for salvation, God who took out the wrong people from his life and put the right people in, God who ordered the events of his life so he would be where he is now. And we have His promise that He will never leave or forsake us – and this should bring us hope.
That reflection should drive us to seek His wisdom and counsel on how to live life skillfully. The Psalms, Proverbs, the book of Ecclesiastes and the book of James brings us thousands of years worth of very practical life-application mixed with sound teaching to put life into proper perspective for us. Immerse yourselves in these books and they will inform your mind on how to think and view life. This, in turn, will give you a right perspective from which to view changes in life and make change, grow your dependence on God for that change and help you live a life that is well pleasing and honoring to Him.
Let’s not be ‘resolution-driven’ people like the rest of the world. Instead, let us take time and fill our minds with the wisdom that God has given us in His word so that we can learn to live skillfully in this world. That’s real change that will last.
For TheologicallyCorrect.Com, I’m K. Joel Gilliard. Be blessed.
--end of article--
Wow, this guy hit it on the head! Now, think about your motives and why you have set your resolutions, I, for one, don't set resolutions, but continuously seek change, though I fall short!
So, now I say, Happy New Year, but who cares! When we look at our lives it shouldn't in terms of time, placing caps on it, but look at the BIG PICTURE and strive to please the KING of KINGS in all that you do!
Aight, GrassRoots 2 is available a day early!! Im excited cause these dudes dont play!! I am excited about listening to CHRIST centered HIP HOP!!!
So as an encore, Im posting the video again, but first the playlist:
Track List 1-Battle of the Ages // Hazakim 2-What’s Your Proof? // Stephen the Levite 3-Testify (Remix) // shai linne 4-I Do // Json 5-L.A.W. // Evangel 6-No Not One // Hazakim 7-The Choir // Stephen the Levite 8-I’m the One // shai linne 9-Who is He? feat. Lecrae // Json 10-Dedication // shai linne 11- feat. shai linne // Jas Knight 12-Alone (Bonus Mix) feat. Eric Westbrook // shai linne
I came accross this video, I thought it was interesting, worthy of posting, very nicely done fosure!! The production is tight, now my question is/was the Gospel presentation sound, thoroughly covered???
Lemme know your thoughts!!
C'ya later this week! Christmas is almost here, and the New Year is upon us! Lord, have your way!
This is a bit outdated, however relevant because this book (The Shack) continues to be a "Best-Seller" and by all means false in its presentation of the TRINITY! Therefore heretical in nature and intent.
My Pastor Bob Gianserra wrote a brief article in his BLOG concerning this book, and there is a video that further explains the falicy of this so called "fictional" book.
This book has infiltrated the Church BIG TIME, I cant believe how many "Christians" that I know own and love this book, but for the sake of a lack of knowledge many are being deceived!! I cannot stress the importance of studying, SCRIPTURE itself urges us to rightly divide the WORD of TRUTH!
Matthew 7:13 “Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy is the way that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. 14 For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few. We love to read many and many a books concerning "spiritual matters" but we hate to consider whether they are truly in line with Scripture, and the moment we point out errors we, excuse me in my case, me, I am being "judgmental" just because I compare and test everything to see if its in line, therefore I'm judgmental and critical, you know what I rather be safe then sorry. So when it comes to false teachers, preachers and ____________ (fill in the blank) I pass cause God has given us the ability to rationalize and to rightly divide His WORD!! So Mr. Bentley, Mr. Joyner, Mr. Hinn, Mr. Jakes, Mr. Pearson, Mrs. King, Mr. Jones later for ya, I pray that my Lord will have mercy on your soul, but as for me, I pass on ALL your heresy ya aint got nothing for me and my house!
Here's the end of the prior article I posted concerning Charles "The Heretic" Finney!
But if you want to read the first part of this series CLICK HERE!!
CON'T Part 2 We will return to Finney's doctrine of justification, but it must be noted that it rests upon a denial of the doctrine of original sin. Held by both Roman Catholics and Protestants, this biblical teaching insists that we are all born into this world inheriting Adam's guilt and corruption. We are, therefore, in bondage to a sinful nature. As someone has said, 'We sin because we're sinners': the condition of sin determines the acts of sin, rather than vice versa. But Finney followed Pelagius, the 5th-century heretic, who was condemned by more church councils than any other person in church history, in denying this doctrine.
Instead, Finney believed that human beings were capable of choosing whether they would be corrupt by nature or redeemed, referring to original sin as an 'anti-scriptural and nonsensical dogma' (p. 179). In clear terms, Finney denied the notion that human beings possess a sinful nature (ibid.). Therefore, if Adam leads us into sin, not by our inheriting his guilt and corruption, but by following his poor example, this leads logically to the view of Christ, the Second Adam, as saving by example. This is precisely where Finney takes it, in his explanation of the atonement.
The first thing we must note about the atonement, Finney says, is that Christ could not have died for anyone else's sins than his own. His obedience to the law and his perfect righteousness were sufficient to save him, but could not legally be accepted on behalf of others. That Finney's whole theology is driven by a passion for moral improvement is seen on this very point: 'If he [Christ] had obeyed the Law as our substitute, then why should our own return to personal obedience be insisted upon as a sine qua non of our salvation?' (p. 206). In other words, why would God insist that we save ourselves by our own obedience if Christ's work was sufficient? The reader should recall the words of St. Paul in this regard, 'I do not nullify the grace of God; for if justification comes through the law, then Christ died for nothing.' It would seem that Finney's reply is one of agreement. The difference is, he has no difficulty believing both of those premises.
That is not entirely fair, of course, because Finney did believe that Christ died for something--not for someone--but for something. In other words, he died for a purpose, but not for people. The purpose of that death was to reassert God's moral government and to lead us to eternal life by example, as Adam's example excited us to sin. Why did Christ die? God knew that 'The atonement would present to creatures the highest possible motives to virtue. Example is the highest moral influence that can be exerted...If the benevolence manifested in the atonement does not subdue the selfishness of sinners, their case is hopeless' (p. 209). Therefore, we are not helpless sinners who need to be redeemed, but wayward sinners who need a demonstration of selflessness so moving that we will be excited to leave off selfishness. Not only did Finney believe that the 'moral influence' theory of the atonement was the chief way of understanding the cross; he explicitly denied the substitutionary atonement, which '...assumes that the atonement was a literal payment of a debt, which we have seen does not consist with the nature of the atonement...It is true, that the atonement, of itself, does not secure the salvation of anyone' (p. 217).
Then there is the matter of applying redemption. Throwing off the Calvinistic orthodoxy of the older Presbyterians and Congregationalists, Finney argued strenuously against the belief that the new birth is a divine gift, insisting that 'regeneration consists in the sinner changing his ultimate choice, intention, preference; or in changing from selfishness to love or benevolence,' as moved by the moral influence of Christ's moving example (p. 224). 'Original or constitutional sinfulness, physical regeneration, and all their kindred and resulting dogmas, are alike subversive of the gospel, and repulsive to the human intelligence' (p. 236).
Having nothing to do with original sin, a substitutionary atonement, and the supernatural character of the new birth, Finney proceeds to attack 'the article by which the church stands or falls'--justification by grace alone through faith alone.
The Protestant Reformers insisted, on the basis of clear biblical texts, that justification (in the Greek,'to declare righteous,' rather than 'to make righteous') was a forensic (i.e., 'legal') verdict. In other words, whereas Rome maintained that justification was a process of making a bad person better, the Reformers argued that it was a declaration or pronouncement that had someone else's righteousness (i.e., Christ's) as its basis. Therefore, it was a perfect, once-and-for-all verdict of right-standing at the beginning of the Christian life, not in the middle or at the end.
The key words in the evangelical doctrine are 'forensic' (meaning 'legal') and 'imputation' (crediting one's account, as opposed to the idea of 'infusion' of a righteousness within a person's soul). Knowing all of this, Finney declares,
But for sinners to be forensically pronounced just, is impossible and absurd...As we shall see, there are many conditions, while there is but one ground, of the justification of sinners...As has already been said, there can be no justification in a legal or forensic sense, but upon the ground of universal, perfect, and uninterrupted obedience to law. This is of course denied by those who hold that gospel justification, or the justification of penitent sinners, is of the nature of a forensic or judicial justification. They hold to the legal maxim that what a man does by another he does by himself, and therefore the law regards Christ's obedience as ours, on the ground that he obeyed for us.
To this, Finney replies:
The doctrine of an imputed righteousness, or that Christ's obedience to the law was accounted as our obedience, is founded on a most false and nonsensical assumption.' After all, Christ's righteousness 'could do no more than justify himself. It can never be imputed to us...It was naturally impossible, then, for him to obey in our behalf.' This 'representing of the atonement as the ground of the sinner's justification has been a sad occasion of stumbling to many' (pp. 320-322).
The view that faith is the sole condition of justification is 'the antinomian view,' Finney asserts. 'We shall see that perseverance in obedience to the end of life is also a condition of justification.' Furthermore, 'present sanctification, in the sense of present full consecration to God, is another condition...of justification. Some theologians have made justification a condition of sanctification, instead of making sanctification a condition of justification. But this we shall see is an erroneous view of the subject' (pp. 326-327). Each act of sin requires 'a fresh justification' (p. 331). Referring to 'the framers of the Westminster Confession of faith,' and their view of an imputed righteousness, Finney wonders, 'If this is not antinomianism, I know not what is' (p. 332). This legal business is unreasonable to Finney, so he concludes, 'I regard these dogmas as fabulous, and better befitting a romance than a system of theology' (p. 333). He concludes in this section against the Westminster Assembly:
The relations of the old school view of justification to their view of depravity is obvious. They hold, as we have seen, that the constitution in every faculty and part is sinful. Of course, a return to personal, present holiness, in the sense of entire conformity to the law, cannot with them be a condition of justification. They must have a justification while yet at least in some degree of sin. This must be brought about by imputed righteousness. The intellect revolts at a justification in sin. So a scheme is devised to divert the eye of the law and of the lawgiver from the sinner to his substitute, who has perfectly obeyed the law (p. 339).
This he calls 'another gospel.' Insisting that Paul's rather realistic account of the Christian life in Romans 7 actually refers to the apostle's life before he had experienced 'entire sanctification,' Finney surpasses Wesley in arguing for the possibility of complete holiness in this life. John Wesley maintained that it is possible for a believer to attain full sanctification, but when he recognized that even the holiest Christians sin, he accommodated his theology to this simple empirical fact. He did this by saying that this experience of 'Christian perfection' was a matter of the heart, not of actions. In other words, a Christian may be perfected in love, so that love is now the sole motivation for one's actions, while occasionally making mistakes. Finney rejects this view and insists that justification is conditioned on complete and total perfection--that is, 'conformity to the law of God entire,' and not only is the believer capable of this; when he or she transgresses at any point, a fresh justification is required.
As the Princeton theologian B. B. Warfield pointed out so eloquently, there are two religions throughout history: Heathenism--of which Pelagianism is a religious expression--and supernatural redemption. And with Warfield and those who so seriously warned their brothers and sisters of these errors among Finney and his successors, we too must come to terms with the wildly heterodox strain in American Protestantism. With roots in Finney's revivalism, perhaps evangelical and liberal Protestantism are not that far apart after all. His 'New Measures,' like today's church growth movement, made human choices and emotions the center of the church's ministry, ridiculed theology, and replaced the preaching of Christ with the preaching of conversion.
It is upon Finney's naturalistic moralism that the Christian political and social crusades build their faith in humanity and its resources in self-salvation. Sounding not a little like a deist, Finney declared, 'There is nothing in religion beyond the ordinary powers of nature. It consists entirely in the right exercise of the powers of nature. It is just that, and nothing else. When mankind becomes truly religious, they are not enabled to put forth exertions which they were unable before to put forth. They only exert powers which they had before, in a different way, and use them for the glory of God' (emphasis in original). Thus, as the new birth is a natural phenomenon, so too a revival: 'A revival is not a miracle, nor dependent on a miracle, in any sense. It is a purely philosophical result of the right use of the constituted means--as much so as any other effect produced by the application of means.' The belief that the new birth and revival depend necessarily on divine activity is pernicious. 'No doctrine,' he says, 'is more dangerous than this to the prosperity of the Church, and nothing more absurd' (Revivals of Religion [Revell], pp. 4-5). When the leaders of the church growth movement claim that theology gets in the way of growth and insist that it does not matter what a particular church believes: growth is a matter of following the proper principles, they are displaying their debt to Finney. When leaders of the Vineyard movement praise this sub-Christian enterprise and the barking, roaring, screaming, laughing, and other strange phenomena on the basis that 'it works' and one must judge its truth by its fruit, they are following Finney, as well as the father of American pragmatism, William James, who declared that truth must be judged on the basis of 'its cash-value in experiential terms.'
Thus, in Finney's theology, God is not sovereign; man is not a sinner by nature; the atonement is not a true payment for sin; justification by imputation is insulting to reason and morality; the new birth is simply the effect of successful techniques, and revival is a natural result of clever campaigns. In his fresh introduction to the bicentennial edition of Finney's Systematic Theology, Harry Conn commends Finney's pragmatism: 'Many servants of our Lord should be diligently searching for a gospel that 'works,' and I am happy to state they can find it in this volume.' As Whitney R. Cross has carefully documented in The Burned-Over District: The Social and Intellectual History of Enthusiastic Religion in Western New York, 1800-1850 (Cornell University Press, 1950), the stretch of territory in which Finney's revivals were most frequent was also the cradle of the perfectionistic cults that plagued that century. A gospel that 'works' for zealous perfectionists one moment merely creates tomorrow's disillusioned and spent super-saints.
Needless to say, Finney's message is radically different from the evangelical faith, as is the basic orientation of the movements we see around us today the bear his imprint: revivalism (or its modern label, 'the church growth movement'), Pentecostal perfectionism and emotionalism, political triumphalism based on the ideal of 'Christian America,' and the anti-intellectual, anti-doctrinal tendencies of American evangelicalism and fundamentalism. It was through the 'Higher Life Movement' of the late 19th and early 20th centuries that Finney's perfectionism came to dominate the fledgling Dispensationalist movement through the auspices of Lewis Sperry Chafer, founder of Dallas Seminary and author of He That Is Spiritual. Finney, of course, is not solely responsible; he is more a product than a producer. Nevertheless, the influence he exercised and continues to exercise to this day is pervasive.
Not only did the revivalist abandon the material principle of the Reformation (justification), making him a renegade against evangelical Christianity; he repudiated doctrines, such as original sin and the substitutionary atonement, that have been embraced by Roman Catholics and Protestants alike. Therefore, Finney is not merely an Arminian, but a Pelagian. He is not only an enemy of evangelical Protestantism, but of historic Christianity of the broadest sort.
I do not point these things out with relish, as if to cheerfully denounce the heroes of American evangelicals. Nevertheless, it is always best, when one has lost something valuable, to retrace one's steps in order to determine when and where one last had it in his or her possession. That is the purpose of this exercise, to face with some honesty the serious departure from biblical Christianity that occurred through American revivalism. For until we address this shift, we will perpetuate a distorted and dangerous course. Of one thing Finney was absolutely correct: The Gospel held by the Westminster divines whom he attacked directly, and indeed held by the whole company of evangelicals, is 'another gospel' in distinction from the one proclaimed by Charles Finney. The question of our moment is, With which gospel will we side?
Unless otherwise specified, all quotes are from Charles G. Finney, Finney's Systematic Theology (Bethany, 1976).
Here's another Video concerning Alter Calls and Finney!
I know not too many people would appreciate this entry, but truthfully and with all sincerity- WHO CARES! Im not saved to please mankind, or play the "I gotta be sensitive card" If you know me you know that I dont have hair on my tongue, and I can care less about ruffling feathers, or rubbing someone the wrong way. I dont post so that you or anyone can "like" me, I post out of the conviction of my heart, and right now I wanna tell you about:
CHARLES FINNEY: The Heretic!
Michael S. Horton wrote an awesome article on Finney, I will be breaking his paper into various portions and posting them throughout the week.
Read cause if you got Charismatic, Pentecostal, or mainstream Christian background, you are going to appreciate the truths said here! Not only that but Finney initiated a lot of the practices that are exercised today in modern Christian Churches, that you need to see where, why, and how these practices came to be.
The Legacy of Charles Finney by Michael S. Horton
Jerry Falwell calls him 'one of my heroes and a hero to many evangelicals, including Billy Graham.' I recall wandering through the Billy Graham Center some years ago, observing the place of honor given to Finney in the evangelical tradition, reinforced by the first class in theology I had at a Christian college, where Finney's work was required reading. The New York revivalist was the oft-quoted and celebrated champion of the Christian singer Keith Green and the Youth With A Mission organization. Finney is particularly esteemed among the leaders of the Christian Right and the Christian Left, by both Jerry Falwell and Jim Wallis (Sojourners' magazine), and his imprint can be seen in movements that appear to be diverse, but in reality are merely heirs to Finney's legacy. From the Vineyard movement and the church growth movement to the political and social crusades, televangelism, and the Promise-Keepers movement, as a former Wheaton College president rather glowingly cheered, 'Finney lives on!'
That is because Finney's moralistic impulse envisioned a church that was in large measure an agency of personal and social reform rather than the institution in which the means of grace, Word and Sacrament, are made available to believers who then take the Gospel to the world. In the nineteenth century, the evangelical movement became increasingly identified with political causes--from abolition of slavery and child labor legislation to women's rights and the prohibition of alcohol. At the turn of the century, with an influx of Roman Catholic immigrants already making many American Protestants a bit uneasy, secularism began to pry the fingers of the Protestant establishment from the institutions (colleges, hospitals, charitable organizations) they had created and sustained. In a desperate effort at regaining this institutional power and the glory of 'Christian America' (a vision that is always powerful in the imagination, but, after the disintegration of Puritan New England, elusive), the turn-of-the-century Protestant establishment launched moral campaigns to 'Americanize' immigrants, enforce moral instruction and 'character education.' Evangelists pitched their American gospel in terms of its practical usefulness to the individual and the nation.
That is why Finney is so popular. He is the tallest marker in the shift from Reformation orthodoxy, evident in the Great Awakening (under Edwards and Whitefield) to Arminian (indeed, even Pelagian) revivalism, evident from the Second Great Awakening to the present. To demonstrate the debt of modern evangelicalism to Finney, we must first notice his theological departures. From these departures, Finney became the father of the antecedents to some of today's greatest challenges within the evangelical churches themselves; namely, the church growth movement, Pentecostalism and political revivalism.
Who Is Finney?
Reacting against the pervasive Calvinism of the Great Awakening, the successors of that great movement of God's Spirit turned from God to humans, from the preaching of objective content (namely, Christ and him crucified) to the emphasis on getting a person to 'make a decision.'
Charles Finney (1792-1875) ministered in the wake of the 'Second Awakening,' as it has been called. A Presbyterian lawyer, Finney one day experienced 'a mighty baptism of the Holy Ghost' which 'like a wave of electricity going through and through me...seemed to come in waves of liquid love.' The next morning, he informed his first client of the day, 'I have a retainer from the Lord Jesus Christ to plead his cause and I cannot plead yours.' Refusing to attend Princeton Seminary (or any seminary, for that matter), Finney began conducting revivals in upstate New York. One of his most popular sermons was, 'Sinners Bound to Change Their Own Hearts.'
Finney's one question for any given teaching was, 'Is it fit to convert sinners with?' One result of Finney's revivalism was the division of Presbyterians in Philadelphia and New York into Arminian and Calvinistic factions. His 'New Measures' included the 'anxious bench' (precursor to today's altar call), emotional tactics that led to fainting and weeping, and other 'excitements,' as Finney and his followers called them. Finney became increasingly hostile toward Presbyterianism, referring in his introduction to his Systematic Theology to the Westminster Confession and its drafters rather critically, as if they had created a 'paper pope,' and had 'elevated their confession and catechism to the Papal throne and into the place of the Holy Ghost.' Remarkably, Finney demonstrates how close Arminian revivalism, in its naturalistic sentiments, tends to be to a less refined theological liberalism, as both caved into the Enlightenment and its enshrining of human reason and morality:<>What's So Wrong With Finney's Theology?
First, one need go no further than the table of contents of his Systematic Theology to learn that Finney's entire theology revolved around human morality. Chapters one through five are on moral government, obligation, and the unity of moral action; chapters six and seven are 'Obedience Entire,' as chapters eight through fourteen discuss attributes of love, selfishness, and virtues and vice in general. Not until the twenty-first chapter does one read anything that is especially Christian in its interest, on the atonement. This is followed by a discussion of regeneration, repentance, and faith. There is one chapter on justification followed by six on sanctification. In other words, Finney did not really write a Systematic Theology, but a collection of essays on ethics.
But that is not to say that Finney's Systematic Theology does not contain some significant theological statements. First, in answer to the question, 'Does a Christian cease to be a Christian, whenever he commits a sin?', Finney answers:
Whenever he sins, he must, for the time being, cease to be holy. This is self-evident. Whenever he sins, he must be condemned; he must incur the penalty of the law of God...If it be said that the precept is still binding upon him, but that with respect to the Christian, the penalty is forever set aside, or abrogated, I reply, that to abrogate the penalty is to repeal the precept; for a precept without penalty is no law. It is only counsel or advice. The Christian, therefore, is justified no longer than he obeys, and must be condemned when he disobeys; or Antinomianism is true...In these respects, then, the sinning Christian and the unconverted sinner are upon precisely the same ground. (p. 46)
Finney believed that God demanded absolute perfection, but instead of that leading him to seek his perfect righteousness in Christ, he concluded that
...full present obedience is a condition of justification. But again, to the question, can man be justified while sin remains in him? Surely he cannot, either upon legal or gospel principles, unless the law be repealed...But can he be pardoned and accepted, and justified, in the gospel sense, while sin, any degree of sin, remains in him? Certainly not (p. 57).
With the Westminster Confession in his sights, Finney declares of the Reformation's formula 'simultaneously justified and sinful', 'This error has slain more souls, I fear, than all the universalism that ever cursed the world.' For, 'Whenever a Christian sins he comes under condemnation, and must repent and do his first works, or be lost' (p. 60).
Part 2 coming soon!
In the meantime if you want to read more, read this great article: Finney: The Heretic!
I have also provided a video if you dont want to read:
If you read enough you will see where this character will lead us to the ALTAR CALL! Then we shall examine that! Its gonna be fun, stay tuned!
Shai Linne has this awesome album called Storiez, its a project comprised of songs that depict stories, each song is deeply profound, and of course every song strives to Glorify our Maker Jesus Christ, one of my favorite verses on the album is on this song called "Martyrs" Im going to post the lyrics to JSon's verse (you can also listen to the song on my Player on the right, its the first song), here it goes, enjoy:
Martyrs (off Shai Linne's album "Storiez" written by j. watson, c. njoroge, b. davis, s. linne, m. stokes
The Time: 20th Century
The Place: China The Martyr: A young girl
(Json)
We would gather so Pastor could season us Christians
We were pleased just to hear the reading of Scripture
Because here in Asia, we can’t worship like the States
Because servants of grace might be murdered for their faith
So we give Christ the praises secretly, we ain’t treated equally
Even on today our bible study’s held illegally
As Pastor opened to read from the first sentence
Communist soldiers kicked the door straight off the hinges
I knew this could happen for accepting His precious gift
They threaten to kill us with guns clutched within their fist
I’m shaken and scared even though Jesus is my everything
I don’t know if I’m prepared to die at the age of seventeen
The leading official turned to my pastor and looked
Put a gun to his face and told him “Hand over the book!”
He reluctantly handed over the text that he so adored
They laughed as he grabbed it and it was smashed to the floor
I was truly grieved as I looked in his eyes
He said, “Any of you can leave if you spit on this book of lies!”
A man walked up, cried as he fell to the floor
“Father forgive me”- “Leave! Now you can go!”
I trembled with fear my mind started to think about death
Hair leaking with sweat I thought my heart would beat through my chest
A woman that walked up next spit on the Bible and left
The official shot in the air of the air continued yelling out threats
I was tempted to do it- I just wanted to leave
The moment I thought this, I felt overwhelmingly grieved
I gritted my teeth, tears began to stream down my face
I needed some faith I just started to think on His grace
In my head I said “forget it” as I walked toward the text
Kneeled to the floor, wiped the spit off the Bible with my dress
To live is Christ, to die is gain ain’t a popular song
I said, “Father forgive them" as I was shot in the dome!
Ifyou have a hard time interpreting the lyrics, just ask I will decrypt it for you, lol!!
This is the last post for the Calvinism Series, I will be starting the 5 Solas, possibly next week, Im debating on whether to take a week off from thematic Posting! Anyways here's the last posting, check out this DVD called "Amazing Grace: The History and Theology of Calvinism" it is a great 2 DVD set it gets very in-depth on Calvinism. Invest in it, CLICK HERE it will take you to the Amazon.com link for it!
Explaining the "Perseverance of the Saints"?
"The perseverance of the saints" is perhaps better construed as the "preservation of the saints".
The idea is that those that the Lord graciously saves by granting faith (Ephesians 2:8-9) he will graciously keep by keeping them in the faith.
Biblical support:
1) Those who are the Lord's sheep cannot be plucked out of Jesus' or his Father's hands. "My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand. I and the Father are one." (John 10:27-30)
The emphasis is not on the saints ability to persevere, but on the Lord's faithfulness and ability to hold onto us. Thus, to object that the person in the Lord's hand is able to snatch themselves out would, according to verse 29 suggest that somehow they at least are in some sense greater than the Lord. Futhermore, the first promise, that they shall never perish, has no qualifications about people snatching them out of His hand at all. It is entirely unconditional. His sheep will never perish, period.
More biblical reflection might come from John 3:36 (present possesion of eternal life) Romans 8:30 (as many as are justified are glorified - so much so that the glorified is past tense!), Ephesians 31:13-14 (the present seal of the Holy spirit guaratees future inheritance).
2) This is never to be used to suggest that all who profess faith faith are eternally secure. The parable of the sower holds true. There are many who profess faith who never posses saving faith. They never have been saved. Thus it is only those who persevere to the end who have ever received saving faith.
Note the tenses of Hebrews 3:14: "We have come to share in Christ if we hold firmly till the end the confidence we had at first."
If we don't persevere, we will show that we never shared in Christ - we were never saved.
We must recongnise that the Lord keeps us by use of means. It is not that a profession of faith saves us. Persevering faith saves us, for saving faith always perseveres. If the Lord gives us saving faith, he will use means (such as Scripture, the church, the ongoing work of the Holy Spirit) to keep us repenting and trusting in Jesus.
Or as Jude puts it, he keeps us from falling out of His love by calling us to keep ourselves in God's love, and enabling us by his Spirit to obey that command, and through the comunity of the church that will always be calling us back to repentance. "Keep yourselves in God's love as you wait for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to bring you to eternal life. Be merciful to those who doubt; snatch others from the fire and save them; to others show mercy, mixed with fear-hating even the clothing stained by corrupted flesh. To him who is able to keep you from falling and to present you before his glorious presence without fault and with great joy - to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen." (Jude 1:21-25)
The Baptist, John Bunyan puts it well:
The Father's grace provideth and layeth up in Christ, for those that he hath chosen, a sufficiency of all spiritual blessings, to be communicated to them at their need, for their preservation in the faith, and faithful perseverance through this life; "not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began" (2 Tim 1:9; Eph 1:3,4). Further reading from Baptists (There have always been baptists who have held to the perseverance of the saints).
Mark Dever is an Alliance Council member and senior minister of Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington, DC.
Posts
