MY GOOD FRIEND ALL MY LIFE DR. JERRY FALWELL HAS DIED AT THE AGE OF 73 IN LYNCHBURG VIRGINIA.

May 15th 2007

Charity and I and my mother and sister Ellen and and her son Stephen just had dinner with Jerry and his lovely wife on my mothers 85th birthday on April 15, 2007

Charles

I will post again on Friday. Time to reflect upon the lost of our good friend. We are praying and thinking about the Falwell family. Mrs. Falwell and the children and their family and grandchildren.

Jerry was given 50 years of ministry at Thomas Road Baptist Church, that was a real blessing. He started and died the same, working for the Lord. Every day and every moment he serviced the Lord. The Lord used Jerry to provide the encouragement for me to serve the Lord with all my ability.

CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS

PART ONE

What apologetics is not: "I think the way this article was framed is a bit sensational, and does a disservice to the body of Christ." This is from a person who has little skill of making a cogent persuasive statement. That was only a remark that is meant to express a loud comment against something.

Throughout the history of the church, Christians have been called upon to explain why we believe what we believe. The apostle Paul spoke of his ministry as "the defense and confirmation of the gospel." Peter said we need to "be ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you."

This activity of the church came to be known as apologetics which means "defense." But, if it is important that we defend the faith, how do we do it?

DEFINITION:

a.pol.o.get.ics

• n. (used with a sing. verb)
• The branch of theology that is concerned with defending or proving the truth of Christian doctrines.
• Formal argumentation in defense of something, such as a position or system.

What is apologetics, anyway, and what is it supposed to do? Apologetics has been defined as "the science and art of defending the faith." It is expressly concerned with the question of the truth of Jesus Christ. In the days of the Greeks, when someone was summoned to court to face a charge, he would present an "apology" or a defense. For Christians, this might mean answering the question, "Why do you believe that Jesus is God?" or a question more often heard today, "Why do you think Christians have the truth?"

• So, apologetics is first of all defense. It has come to include more than just defense, however. Not only is the truth of our beliefs an issue, but also the beliefs others hold.
• A second task of apologetics is to challenge other people to defend their beliefs.
• A third task of apologetics is to demonstrate a case for the truth of the biblical message.

One might call this task "establish" Christianity (although the matter of proof must be qualified). If this seems to be too ambitious a goal, we might speak simply of influencing people of the truth of the biblical message.

Apologetics is typically a reaction to a specific question or encounter, either stated outright or just implied.

• Paul reasoned with the Jews for whom the cross was a stumbling block, "explaining and giving evidence that the Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead." In the second century, apologists defended not only Christian beliefs but also Christians themselves against such charges as atheism and worldview . In the Medieval era, more attention was given to the challenges of Judaism and Islam. In the era of the Enlightenment, apologists had to defend Christianity against the narrow confines of scientific rationalism. Today the challenge has shifted again, this time from attacks on specific doctrines to the question of whether Christianity has any claim to final truth at all.

A QUESTION THAT SHOULD BE ANSWERED APOLOGETIC:

"I'd like to know why you assume God is the answer to everything. Some of these people don't want to hear all this stuff about Jesus. Did you ever think that maybe the reason that some kids want to commit suicide is because of the pressure put on them concerning religion? People are constantly pushing others to believe in God... that's wrong... that's a sin. What good is it gonna do to convert people. I say leave them be. There is nothing wrong with people's beliefs. What would make me happy is if people would stop trying to convince me that there is a God... There isn't in my opinion... and I am very happy without a God. So, maybe you should look at that perspective as well."

Understanding how to think properly, or logically, is important for Christians for several reasons.

• It helps us put together the various pieces of our faith to form a cohesive whole.
  
• It helps us make decisions in everyday life when the Bible doesn't speak directly to a particular issue.
  
• We must learn to deduce true beliefs or proper courses of action from what we do know from Scripture.
  
  
  Good, logical thinking is especially important for an apologist. On the one hand, it can help prevent us from putting together careless arguments for what we believe. On the other hand, it helps us measure the beliefs of those who challenge Christianity. Too often we stumble at criticisms which sound good, but which really stand on logically shaky legs.
  

This task is one what we need to work on all the time in our presentation of any sermon we preach or any paper we write.

Every sermon we preach is designed to be stated in a apoligetic form. To give a reason why we believe the text.

Drafted by Charles E. Whisnant, Proof Checked by Charity Whisnant

/Apologetics

Pearl of Wisdom "Nobody ever says, 'I think I will lie to myself today.' This is the double treachery of self-deception: First we deceive ourselves, and then we convince ourselves that we are not deceiving ourselves." - Lewis Smedes

THE TERM APOLOGETICS IN THE CLASSICAL GREEK

The term apologetics etymologically derives from the Classical Greek word apologia. In the Classical Greek legal system two key technical terms were employed: the prosecution delivered the kategoria and the defendant replied with an apologia. To deliver an apologia then meant making a formal speech to reply and rebut the charges, as in the case of Socrates' defense.

This Classical Greek term appears in the Koine (i.e. common) Greek of the New Testament. The Apostle Paul employs the term apologia in his trial speech to Festus and Agrippa when he says "I make my defense" (Acts 26:2). A cognate term appears in Paul's Letter to the Philippians as he is "defending the gospel" (Acts 1:7 & 17), and in 1 Peter 3:15 believers must be ready to give an "answer" for their faith. The word also appears in the negative in Romans 1:20: unbelievers are (anapolog‘etoi) (without excuse, defense, or apology) for rejecting the revelation of God in creation.

The legal nuance of apologetics was reframed in a more specific sense to refer to the study of the defense of a doctrine or belief. In this context it most commonly refers to philosophical reconciliation. Religious apologetics is the effort to show that the preferred faith is not irrational, that believing in it is not against human reason, and that in fact the religion contains values and promotes ways of life more in accord with human nature than other faiths or beliefs
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apologetics

What has been your approach as an apologetic in defending
..."ALWAYS be prepared to give a reason for the hope that you have..."
1 Peter 3:15

Are you prepared to give the reasons for your faith, as commanded by the Lord?

If you're at all like I used to be, you may be intimidated by the secular culture, which views the Christian Faith as a blind leap and Christians as simple-minded and shallow. Despite growing up in the faith, I always had hard questions, and slowly began to accept the secularist premise that I had to 'shut off my brain' as I went into church.

But instead of withdrawing or giving up, I began an in-depth study of the field of Christian Apologetics - the Defenses of the Faith. The best defenses of the faith is to know the Word of God. What I mean by knowing the Word of God is to study the text verse by verse, chapter by chapter, book by book, from Genesis to Revelation.

Now some just want to vociferate what they believe, but not really say much about the subject, sort of like Al Sharpton. Then there are the Francis Schaeffer’s, C.S. Lewis, and then John MacArthur ,Jr.

• Of course I like Francis Schaeffer and primarily I like John MacArthur Jr. The best defense of the faith is the Scripture. Now that sounds so Biblical. The task though is anything but easy.
  "Love the Lord with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment." Matthew 22:37-38

Have you wanted to study these issues, but just didn't know where to begin? I have been compiling a comprehensive overview of the Christian Faith, some 40 major doctrinal subjects - what we believe and why

Are You Ready To Lead A Group Toward Greater Christian Understanding and Maturity?

The great Philosopher of Religion William Lane Craig described the task succinctly:
"We should know our subject profoundly and share it simply."

The first step in a more confident and mature faith is trust in the Spirit, followed by a regimented program of education and study - this course sets the framework for just that, and enables the teacher to teach with proven and well documented materials. This way we carry on Paul's mandate from the Lord to relay the knowledge of the things of God and:
"...entrust to reliable men who will be qualified to teach others."
2 Timothy 2:2

So, finally, with Paul, we can:
"We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ"
2 Corinthians 10:5

Drafted by Charles E. Whisnant, and Proof Checked by Charity Whisnant

ROMAN CATHOLIC DEFINITION OF JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH

• Francis J. Beckwith was president of the Evangelical Theological Society (2007). JETS is the Theological Journal that I have read for years. This month Mr. Beckwith resigned from the ETS. He "was received into full communion with the Roman Catholic Church."

I have been studying for some time the doctrine of "Justification by Faith, and by Faith Alone" Monergism.com has provided 135 Essays, 67 Sermons, 44 Roman Catholic teaching on Justification. And I have been reading "The Doctrine of Justification: An Outline of its History in the Church and of its Exposition from Scripture" by James Buchanan.

My point in this study is to understand the means whereby we are Born Again, or Saved. Can the Roman Catholic say they believe salvation by the very same means the Fundamentalist say, the Reformed folks say, and the Evangelical people say?

Mr. Beckwith believes that the means by which the Roman Catholic are saved is the same way all other churches believe people are born again. (?)

Today I will look briefly into the Roman Catholic idea of "Infusion of Grace that brings justification."

THE ROMAN CATHOLIC INFUSION OF GRACE THAT BRINGS JUSTIFICATION

"Let it therefore remain settled...that we are justified in no other way than by faith, or, which comes to this same thing, that we are justified by faith alone."- John Calvin

SCRIPTURE ALONE, NOT SCRIPTURE PLUS TRADITION:

"Rome professes to hold that the Bible is the Word of God...she also nullifies or destroys the Word. She maintains that alongside of the written Word there is also an unwritten Word, an oral tradition, which was taught by Christ and the apostles but which is not in the Bible, which was handed down generation after generation by word of mouth. This unwritten Word of God, it is said, comes to expression in the pronouncements of the church councils and in papal decrees. It takes precedence over the written Word and interprets it. The pope, as God's personal representative on the earth, can legislate for things additional to the Bible as new situations arise. The Council of Trent, the most authoritative of all Roman councils and the one of greatest historical importance, in the year 1546, declared that the Word of God is contained both in the Bible and in tradition, that the two are equal authority, and that it is the duty of every Christian to accord them equal veneration and respect."- Loraine Boettner

THE COUNCIL OF TRENT 1546-1564
Because of Rome's doctrine of Semper Idem, Rome cannot repudiate or correct Trent. The council's sixth session teaches Rome's view of Justification, set forth in response to the Protestant teaching. Rome set forth the importance and necessity of grace by salvation. Also the necessity of faith:
"We are therefore said to be justified by faith, because faith is the beginning of human salvation, the foundation and root of all justification, without which it is impossible to please God and to come to the fellowship of His sons; and we are therefore said to be justified gratuitously, because none of those things precede justification, whether faith or works, merit the grace of justification." {Council of Trent: VI Session; Chapter VIII}
1) Justification is by faith (per fidem), 2) Faith is the "beginning" (initium) of salvation, 3) Faith is the "foundation" (fundamentum) of all justification, and 4) Faith is the "root" (radix) of all justification.
There is an agreement on "faith" with the Reformers, but an exclusion of "alone" from Rome's teaching. Rome believes in "justification by faith", but not "justification by faith alone." According to the reformers, faith is the instrumental cause ("by"), or the means by which Christ's work is appropriated.

INTRODUCTION TO THE SACRAMENTS

Reformers contend for two sacraments: Baptism and the Lord's Supper- the Roman Catholic Church celebrates seven: Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, Holy Order, and Matrimony. Roman Theology, contrasted to Reformed Theology, teaches that the Sacraments remove sins: "...supernatural life is generated by Baptism; brought to growth by Confirmation; nourished by the Eucharist; cured from diseases of sins and from the weakness arising from these by Penance and Extreme Unction."- Ludwig Ott, Roman Catholic Theologian. The sacraments work ex opere operato, by the power of the completed act, and their validity does not depend on the orthodoxy of the minister or his state of grace. Grace is infused into the sinner, through the Sacraments making the sinner righteous, thereby God will then justify the sinner.

Reformed: The Reformers taught that the Righteousness of Christ (or merit of Christ) is the sole ground of our justification, and Christ's Righteousness is imputed to the believer by faith (instrumental, not meritorious cause). Rome: The Roman Church teaches that the sacrament of Baptism is the instrumental cause of justification. Baptism is the primary instrumental cause of justification in that it is the 1st or initial cause of justification. This grace of justification received in Baptism may be lost, the secondary instrumental cause of justification is the sacrament of Penance. {Council of Trent: VI Session; Chapter XIV}

New Catechism of the Catholic Church: "Justification is conferred in Baptism, the Sacrament of faith. It conforms to the Righteousness of God, who makes us inwardly just by the power of His mercy."

The Roman Catholic Church teaches clearly that the infusion, rather than the imputation of Christ's Righteousness, makes justification possible if the believe assents to and cooperates with this grace:

" ...Jesus Christ himself continually infuses his virtue into the said justified...this virtue always precedes and accompanies and follows their good works, which without it could not in any wise be pleasing and meritorious before God- we must believe that nothing further is wanting to the justified, to prevent their being accounted to have, by those very works which have been done in God, fully satisfied the divine law according to the state of this life, and to have truly merited eternal life, to be obtained also in its due time, if so be, however, that they depart in grace...neither is our own justice established as our own as from ourselves; nor is the justice of God ignored or repudiated: for that justice which is called ours, because that we are justified from its being inherent in us, that same is (the justice) of God, because that it is infused into us of God, through the merit of Christ...after this Catholic doctrine on Justification, which whoso receives not faithfully and firmly can not be justified..." {Council of Trent: VI Session; Chapter XVI} The Roman Catholic doctrine of justification is itself a necessary condition for justification. At this point Rome affirms that the doctrine of justification is an essential article of the faith, essential to salvation itself.

What if Roman Catholics and Evangelicals agreed to unite and affirm: "We affirm together that we are justified by grace through faith because of Christ," would there be true unity based on Scriptural teaching? Rome: "because of Christ" means infusion...Evangelical Reformed: "because of Christ" means Imputation.

TO PREACH CHRIST IS TO FEED THE SOUL, TO JUSTIFY IT, TO SET IT FREE AND TO SAVE IT."

TO PREACH CHRIST IS TO FEED THE SOUL, TO JUSTIFY IT, TO SET IT FREE AND TO SAVE IT."

Martin Luther said,

• "One thing, and one alone, is necessary for life, justification, and Christian liberty; and that is the Word of God, the Gospel of Christ, as He said, "I am the resurrection and the life; he that believeth in Me shall not die eternally" (John 11:25) and also, "If the Son shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed" (John 8:36), and "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." (Matthew 4:4)
• 
  · "Let us therefore hold the Word of God for certain and firmly established that the soul can do everything except the Word of God, without which none at all of its wants and provided for. But, having the Word, it is rich and wants for nothing, since that is the Word of life, of truth, of light, of peace, of justification, of salvation, of joy, of liberty, of wisdom, of virtue, of grace, of glory, and of every good thing. "
  

Luther then was right, and today his words are right. My grandmother started my journey in reading the Word. In 1960 when I was 13, she got me started on my reading the Bible from Genesis to Revelation at least once a year. When I read the Word it’s as though I am reading the very words of Jesus Christ, speaking to me personally. That's better than speaking to any baseball player or person. My Bibles are never very far from my eye sight. In every room of my house there is a Bible. Even in my car there is always a Bible. The Words are never far from my mind.

When I was preaching/teaching, it was the Word that filled my preaching. Luther again said, "To preach Christ is to feed the soul, to justify it, to set it free, and to save it, if it believes the preaching. For faith alone and the efficacious use of the word of God, bring salvation. "If thou shalt confess with thy mouth thou shalt be saved" Romans 10:9 says. For the word of God cannot be received and honored by any works, but by faith alone. Hence Luther said, "it is clear that as the soul needs the word alone for life and justification, so it is justified by faith alone, and not by any works. For if it could be justified by any other means, it would have no need of the Word, nor consequently of faith. Luther

The one who believes the Word, has heard the Word of truth from the Holy Spirit. Ephesians 1:13. One believes and one has faith, not on his own but comes to him by the Word and the work of the Holy Spirit in him.

Faith is the moment one believes the message proclaimed, as opposed to the moment he "asked Jesus into his heart." After he believes (because he's been born again by the Spirit of God) he then expresses an interest in calling on God.

What I realize, the cause of my faith is not me, but the cause of my faith is Christ and His word on my soul. Thus, we can say we are born again first which is the cause of our faith. As the Word says, "But to all who did receive Him, who believed in His name, He gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God."

• John Chitty said, "This sentence does not say that God gave the right to become children to all who first receive Him. It excludes this by the clause, "...not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man..."

· The point is this "the reception must be the result of regeneration." Faith and being born again occur at the same moment.

R.C. Sproul counsels, We are JUSTIFIED BY FAITH, not regenerated. They are distinct works, although they typically happen simultaneously. Faith doesn't allow the Holy Spirit to regenerate us. The Holy Spirit regenerates us so that we can "see and enter the Kingdom of God" John 3. Which is to say, seeing and entering the Kingdom of God, being born again, is not a condition , but a work of divine monergism (the work of Christ alone) which enables you to believe, like wind causes the trees to sway.

Far too many good Christians have not learned to let go of the sovereignty of the individual over his own spiritual birth. They still want to allow the individual to have some free will to say yes to God for their salvation. We didn't have a free will to be born into this life and we don't have any choice to choose to be born spiritually.

• Ephesians 1 did the most to change my mind in this area of thinking about salvation. When teaching Ephesians in First Baptist Church in Altoona, and again at the Christ Church Apartments in Lexington, Kentucky, the truth bore out that God alone brings about the new birth in the lost person.
  
• I truly have the faith, I truly believe, it becomes my free will to believe and have the faith to believe, why? Because Christ breaks the chain of slavery of sin and frees me to believe. It’s all the work of Christ in me. Amen
  
• Drafted by Charles E. Whisnant May 8th 2007 Proof Read by Charity May 8th

GROW BY LEARNING'S 215TH POST SINCE AUGUST 2007

Good morning, this is the Lord's day in Ohio. It's the Lord's day in Kansas.

• My sister Ellen called us last night to tell us about the tragedy in Greensburg, Kansas. Bryan Williams' family live in Greensburg, it's Bryan's home town. He and his wife April and three lovely children live now in Plano, Texas. Bryan is married to Ellen's daughter, and Bryan supplies me with Lexmarks' latest die-cast and chasis cars.(1/64)

• Brian said his father and mother, and sister's family all are okay, in this town that was struck by a huge tornado. 95 percent of the city was destroyed.

On another note this week:

• Charity's (my wife of 37 years) first cousin Mike Gullett's son was killed in Baghdad last week. Zach was 20 years old.

• Also Charity's mom is going through cancer treatment.

• My daughter Becky, who is now living in Hutchinson, Kansas, is doing well in her second job. She is doing well also in her first job, too. She visited us last week here in Portsmouth, Ohio.

• Our three boys are doing good in Lexington, Kentucky.

• Charity's day at the bakery "Union Mills" was real busy on Saturday. She and her sister Debbie, and their good cake decorators Tammy and Sondi had a long day at work with making wedding cakes.

• This has been a long week for Charity and I, as we have been under the weather. Charity had a cold most of the week, and to top off the week she was coming down the steps at home, and missed the last two steps at three o'clock in the morning. I was downstairs myself, and I was also down with a cold. In our older years I think we might need to live downstairs. We are a few years away from those older years.

• I don't generally post our personal life in general on this post. But this post is my personal journal come to think about it. I generally post my journey in ministry.

• And my journey in church ministry has not lately been going so well. But my personal ministry is doing well.

• If I could discover a church that was fundamental in the faith, has a passion for the preaching/teaching of the Word of God, that is more concerned about the preaching of the Word rather than preaching from the KJV, had a passion for growth and discipling people, and was not intimidated by an older former pastor/teacher, and could use a teacher that would be also nice.

• We will rejoice in the Lord. He is Lord, He is Savior, He is My King, Lord of Lords.

Drafted by Charles Whisnant and proof read by Charity

• (Note from Charity: "No, DeWayne, I'm not Charles' 'ghost writer', but as Uncle Chuck noted, you can tell when I proof the text! ")

EUTHANASIA AND CHRISTIANS

I worked in a Health Care Home for over ten years, so I was always near those near death. I was asked about Euthanasia and related subjectsas Pastor of First Baptist Church in Kansas.

Should the Elders of the Church have a answer to those who ask this question?

Key Definitions
Euthanasia consists of any act or deliberate omission taken by oneself and/or others with the specific intention of causing the death of a person and actually causing that death. It is believed by proponents of euthanasia that the death being caused is for the good of the person who is being killed.

“Active euthanasia” consists of the effort of a person to cause his own death or the death of another. With active euthanasia, the medical cause of death is not disease or injury, but rather the act taken to cause death.

“Passive euthanasia” is the withholding, withdrawal or refusal of available medical treatment that could clearly enable a person to live significantly longer. The intent of passive euthanasia is to cause a person’s death at a time when death is not imminent.

“Letting die” (which is distinct from euthanasia) consists of the withholding or withdrawing of all life-prolonging and life-sustaining medications and technologies from a terminally or irreversibly ill patient with whom death is imminent even with treatment. The intention of “letting die” is not to choose or intend death but to enhance the well-being of the patient by avoiding useless prolonging of the dying process.

The difference between “letting die” and “passive euthanasia,” then, is this: With “passive euthanasia,” death is not imminent and medical treatment could clearly enable a person to live significantly longer, but with “letting die” the patient’s death is imminent even with treatment (i.e., medical technologies can no longer prevent death). Whereas the former seeks to cause a person’s death, the latter seeks to enhance the well-being of the patient by avoiding the prolongation of the dying process.

(Note: These definitions are from Keith H. Essex, “Euthanasia,” The Master’s Seminary Journal 11/2 (2000): 191-212.)

Biblical Response

Death is inevitable and its timing ultimately rests in the hand of God (Deut. 32:39; 1 Sam. 2:6; Heb. 9:27). Life is a gift from God, and everyone has an obligation to value his own life and the life of others regardless of the circumstances.

Because Scripture prohibits murder and suicide (Gen. 9:6; Exod. 20:13; Deut. 5:17), euthanasia is never an acceptable option for the believer. In addition to violating the prohibition of suicide, the act of killing oneself is the ultimate expression of selfishness.

In the case that the patient is irreversibly terminal and death is imminent regardless of the treatment provided, it is acceptable for the patient or—if the patient is unconscious—a legally authorized third party (e.g., a spouse or family member) to choose to withhold any of the following forms of treatment:

life-sustaining medication-

life-sustaining,

medically-administered nourishment-

life-sustaining support systems

In other words, although Scripture forbids all forms of euthanasia, we believe that “letting die” is an acceptable option in the circumstances described above.

You and your loved ones may want to consider creating a living will that indicates your wishes regarding medical treatment in order to guide medical personnel in a situation when you are unable to make decisions or choose treatment options.

I often say, Charity let me die if ? A lot of if's. Its not that easy for your wife or husband. Just because I am ready to go to heaven, willing too, we need wisdom in this matter of life and death.

Drafted by Charles E. Whisnant, May 2, 2007

Resouce from Grace Community Church, (MacArthur)