What to do with Sabbath?

I like this article posting by Micah Fries

Today we considered Jesus’ words concerning the Sabbath from Luke 6:1-11.

How we should treat the Sabbath in the New Testament church? Here are a few short thoughts that might help point us in the right direction. Please do not consider this to be a comprehensive list, but hopefully it can be a concise help to shape the way we approach the Sabbath.

1. Honoring the Sabbath is non-negotiable.
From the beginning of creation, God established a pattern that we see continued through the New Testament as even He took a day for rest & reflection at the end of creation. This pattern of a Sabbath rest is, in my opinion, a non-negotiable. By this, I don’t mean that were one to miss a Sabbath one week they would have somehow broken God’s law and then be subject to judgment/condemnation. Instead I mean that God’s plan for our lives is dependent on a regular pattern of rest, reflection and worship. Don’t neglect this. Take a Sabbath rest.

2. The purpose of a Sabbath is rest & worship.
This is an important point; don’t miss it. Sabbath rest should primarily center around rest & worship. This can be difficult for me. I find myself taking a “day off” only to spend all day at home, but working none-the-less. That’s not Sabbath, that’s just relocating the office. Sabbath is to be a time for rest & worship. However, be cautious that you don’t become legalistic about what this looks like. The Pharisees claimed to reserve the Sabbath for those things, but the regulations that they created turned God’s intended rest & worship time into a time of intense work & stress as one had to diligently work to keep the Sabbath. This is not rest.

3. Sabbath rest won’t Save you, but it just might save you.
Remember that our hope is not in Sabbath, or in any other aspect of God’s law. Our hope is in Jesus Christ, and in Him alone. However, while there is no spiritual salvation built into a Sabbath rest, there may just be a form of physical salvation as God designed our physical bodies for a Sabbath rest. To operate apart from this intent will most generally lead you to physical harm. Enjoy the rest that God intends. This is difficult for me. I don’t like to sit still. However, I have learned that my longevity in life & ministry, as well as my physical upkeep are dependent on my commitment to some form a Sabbath rest. If Jesus could find a way to consistently take rest, I would assume that my schedule is not too important to neglect my rest. Take your Sabbath, don’t feel guilty about it & enjoy the blessings that come with it as a gift of God’s grace to you.

4. Sabbath rest is not dependent on a dictated day.
Finally, be cautious not to become a Pharisee in your practice of the Sabbath. They believed that their hope lay in their ability to strictly adhere to the law. We don’t believe that. We affirm that our hope is in Jesus alone. I firmly believe that there is no dedicated day which one must honor as their Sabbath. Making sure you take a Sabbath, is the key. For me, Sunday is a difficult day to affirm as a Sabbath. While I am thankful for the privilege of worshiping with my Frederick family each Sunday, it is not a day of rest for me. While I worship on Sunday, I usually have to find one other 24 hour period in the week to slow down and allow my body some rest. Truthfully, I’m not very good at this, but I’m trying. Take your Sabbath!

Getting to the Heart of Parenting

Our church is hosting (via DVD) "Getting to the Heart of Parenting" by Paul David Tripp beginning Wednesday night. Here is a interview with Tripp about this topic from Desiring God.

Click here to watch it.

Read what is happening in Little Rock

Observations on God's Spirit Leading Us to Prayer

Bill Elliff

Thu, May 12, 2011

Permalink

As some of you know, the Lord has graciously led us in five weeks of spontaneous nightly prayer meetings that have lasted 2-4 hours each. This is a mercy drop of revival, but in over 42 years of ministry, I have never been involved in or observed a moment quite like this, and I am humbly amazed and grateful.

And it is a PRAYER MEETING. The agenda every night has been to hear our direction through God's Word, open the microphone, and shepherd all that happens into fervent, travailing prayer. Each night the Spirit of God has graciously directed us, through His Word and the needs of the people, into an arena of prayer.

Several pastors have asked me what is happening in these meetings, expressing a desire for God to do a similar work in their church and community. At the great risk of being misunderstood by having anyone think this could be programmed or manipulated, but also in humble recognition that God uses such moments to instruct and direct us, I offer the following observations about WHAT is happening and HOW God's Spirit seems to be leading in these particular prayer meetings at this particular season.

1. A group of intercessors have been gathering every night—completely un-orchestrated—to pray prior to the meeting. Often they are silently praying around the room. Many times they have entered into spiritual warfare, seeking God's protection from the enemy for the evening's meeting. They also pray for direction, the Spirit's leadership, etc.

2. There is a deep sense and constant awareness that the Spirit of God is the ONLY leader. We are to listen to Him and do exactly as He directs.

3. God has given us a deep faith during these meetings. The more we are led to pray, the more we realize it is God; therefore He has an agenda, a purpose, and we are merely cooperating with Him. Second Chronicles 7:14-15 has become precious to us, as we have been constantly reminded that at this moment, in an unusual way, God's eyes are open to us and His ears are attentive to our cry. I cannot explain this, but it is wonderful to pray in such faith.

4. The Lord has awakened us, it seems, to pray primarily for our city. There has been deep prayer for individuals, but also prayer nearly every night for the pastors and spiritual leaders and churches in our city. Many nights we have gathered around and prayed over pastors who have been attending.

5. I or another one of our pastors has been "shepherding" these evenings. It seems that the Lord will not tell us what is to happen ten minutes ahead, but He gives direction for each moment as we progress through the prayer time. The Spirit of God is a GOOD LEADER if we will just get out of the way, listen, and obey. He can be trusted to lead us in the "paths of righteousness for His name's sake."

6. The Lord has led us nightly to begin with simple, short worship in song, followed by simple singing throughout the evening as He prompts.

7. Each day, God has given us a passage to read and comment on at the beginning of the evening that seems to give a context or direction for what He is doing that night. Sometimes this is more extensive and deliberate than others. There is MUCH biblical teaching that occurs every night in one form or another.

8. We are learning at a far more rapid pace than usual because of the peculiar grace of God, the frequency of our gatherings, the teaching of our pastors and people, and our prompt obedience, which solidifies the truth and digests it into our daily lives.

9. In the first weeks there was a need to constantly remind people to not quench the Spirit by despising what the Lord was directing them to do (1 Thessalonians 5:19-21), but to promptly and humbly do what He says when He says it. Whether He told them to come to the altar, go to a brother and seek reconciliation, come to the microphone to seek prayer for a need (James 5:16), or give something, they should obey Him instantly.

10. We have put the four tenants of the Welsh Revival up on the screen nightly as a good reminder of our posture:

• Confess all known sin.
• Forsake all doubtful habits.
• Obey the Spirit instantly.
• Confess [proclaim] Christ boldly.

11. We often begin the evening, after sharing Scripture and exhortation, asking the people to stand and gather in groups to pray for our time together.

12. Nearly every night, the Lord seems to be leading people to the microphone to share. These are often people who would never have had the courage to share, but who realize that they are in a safe and helpful place that is full of God's grace.

13. As people share a need, a confession, a burden, a Scripture, or a word from the microphone, the Lord seems to give direction to me or whoever is facilitating that night. Some of the things He has directed us to do are as follows:

• Direct the person to go to the side, and ask people who have a burden to come pray over them immediately.
• Call the whole church to prayer over that issue, asking them to pray out loud together or to gather in groups or to join another individual in prayer.
• "Teach off of" that moment. Often several people in a row will share regarding the same issue, and we realize that God is calling us to learn something important. If the Lord prompts, I will take a moment, open the Word as He directs, and give further biblical instruction; or one of our other teachers/leaders/elders will come and do the same as they are prompted.
• Often, when one person shares a deep need, before we send them aside for folks to pray over them, the Lord will prompt us to ask if there are others with that exact need, and we ask them to stand. One night, when a brother shared of the bitterness in his heart and a desire for release, we issued the call to others, and thirty people immediately stood. This has happened many times. We then invite people to gather around them and pray.

14. We remind people every night and in multiple ways that they are not spectators but participants. They are standing before a holy God who is speaking directly to THEM, and they need to respond and not quench His Spirit.

15. It has seemed important to be aware of how God is directing, i.e., the "theme" that seems to be emerging at times, and call it to the people's attention so that we will not miss what God is saying.

16. There seems to be a natural moment when the Lord begins to indicate that the meeting is drawing to a close, but we do not determine that beforehand. I will admit that I don't always know when to close! On several nights, we have tried to close multiple times, but people came up and pled to share, so we would continue. We do not hesitate to close if we feel led, though, even if there are people lined up waiting to share.

17. We have realized, as one dear leader who visited from Michigan reminded me, that revival is messy! There are awkward moments, confusing moments, and moments when dealing with a "weaker brother" that call for patience, forbearance, and love. We must embrace these and move through them gently. But we have also been led on occasion to turn off the microphone for a moment and privately give some instruction to the one sharing, such as, "Be brief. Don't reflect negatively on anyone. Give God alone the glory, not any man."

18. We have opened the nursery for the smaller preschool children, letting parents bring their children there if they agree to serve; but we have also encouraged parents to bring their children into the meetings. These children have been wonderfully moved and often used to speak to us in precious ways. Many children have been saved.

19. We have not restricted those who come to the microphone confessing their faith in Christ and desiring immediate baptism. Sixty-five people have been baptized in the last five weeks.

20. The first weeks of the prayer meetings were consumed with much personal cleansing. Although this has continued nightly, the last few weeks have been less of that and more of intercession for those outside of our church.

21. We are now seeing multiple churches in our area gathering for prayer in this manner. We had over 500 at our quarterly citywide prayer gathering this week, and it was an unbelievable night of worship and fervent, travailing intercession. This is the first year we have called the city to pray regularly in this manner, and we as pastors are talking about increasing its frequency. Other churches are beginning either monthly or weekly prayer meetings. We are also wondering if God is about to call our lay people to start morning or noon prayer meetings all across our city. We will not manipulate this, but the idea is rising in many hearts.

22. Our Sunday morning services are dramatically changed, hopefully forever. There is no attention to the clock. Our first service has, more often than not, merged into the second with ease, and after the preaching of the Word, we have moved into the same ministry/prayer times that we have been experiencing nightly.

"Who has known the mind of the Lord, that he will instruct Him?" is our honest thought. God is the leader and longs to be so—we simply must let Him. Again, I plead with you not to take these thoughts as prescriptive, for God is gloriously creative and can move in whatever ways He desires. But we do feel that these observations at this particular season may be helpful to others.

May God bless all that we say and do to the reviving of His church, the awakening of the lost, and the rapid expansion of His kingdom!

Visit The Summit Church blog for more details about what God is doing in Little Rock, Arkansas.

Nancy Leigh DeMoss and Tim Keller on Revival

Collin Hansen interviews Tim Keller and Nancy Leigh DeMoss on revival. Oh, God, give us a hunger for revival.

Lord, Do It Again! from The Gospel Coalition on Vimeo.

Sermon Notes from Sunday, June 19, 2011

On May 29, I began a new series of messages on the Kingdom of God as seen in Matthew 13. I'm calling it a "Peek at the Kingdom." The theme of the Kingdom has been a study for a long time, but I am wanting to see it through the lens of Matthew 13.

The notes of the sermon today can be seen by clicking here. This is part two of a two part sermon"Jesus is the King of the Kingdom."

"Junk in the Trunk" - T.D. Jakes

This is classic T.D. Jakes. Watch:

Is Gambling Right - Part V

The Sin of Putting God to the Test

Here's a third characteristic of gambling. Remember, Gambling involves 1) Something valuable that is placed at risk; 2) Something belonging to someone else that is staked as a prize; and:

3. Gambling involves an element of chance that supposedly determines the outcome. This is a practical denial of the doctrine of divine providence.

God is sovereign over our prosperity. Deuteronomy 8:18 says, "It is [the Lord] that giveth thee power to get wealth."

Hope in sheer fortune is misplaced hope. Faith in "Good Luck" is misplaced faith. It is a kind of idolatry. We are not supposed to hope in such things.

In fact, there is no such thing as sheer, random chance. God is sovereign over all the details of life. The Bible says He even determines every roll of the dice: "The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the LORD" (Proverbs 16:33, NKJV).

There is nothing random in gambling. There is no such thing as Lady Luck, or the goddess of fortune, or Chance as a determinative force. God is sovereign even over the roll of the dice; He is the one who sovereignly determines everything that appears to be random.

That is why in the Old Testament, many decisions were made by drawing lots. And even early in the book of Acts, a replacement for Judas was chosen by lots. That was one way people had of getting guidance from God before canon of Scripture was complete and the Spirit given. (I don't believe it's a legitimate way for you and me to determine the will of God, but that is a totally different matter.)

The drawing of lots in such cases was not "gambling," because there was no transfer of any assets from the loser to the winner.

Someone will surely ask, "If God is the one who determines the roll of the dice, then what's wrong with trusting the Lord for the outcome of a gambling contest? Why not put my money on the spin of a roulette wheel and trust God for the ball to fall in the right place?"

Think about that question seriously. If that were a legitmate means of gaining wealth at all—if such an attitude were a true and warranted expression of authentic "faith" in any real sense—it would actually be better to bet your whole livelihood, your church's assets, and everything you could possibly get your hands on, on a single roll of the dice. Why squander an opportunity to make the most of an act of faith?

But we all know that's a ridiculous question, on the face of it. In fact, the question is not functionally different from the one with which Satan tempted Jesus: "Why don't you jump off the pinnacle of the Temple? You know the Bible says, "He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up."

Remember Jesus' answer? Matthew 4:7: "Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God." That's a quotation from Deuteronomy 6:16: "Ye shall not tempt the LORD your God."

Although we know God determines everything, including every roll of the dice, we are strictly forbidden to put Him to the test.

And furthermore, you cannot pretend to "trust" God for something He has not promised. To speak of trusting God in such circumstances is to twist the meaning of faith. God has never promised to allow you to prosper at a game of chance, so to think that He will is not to "trust" Him, but to presume on Him, and that is sin.

In fact, I don't believe God would ever reward someone by letting that person prosper in an evil activity. When God permits someone to prosper in an evil pursuit, it is actually a prelude to judgment. So if you are a Christian who gambles and you have been winning, that might not be a good thing at all.

Betting on chance events when you know God is the One who determines the outcome is no better than jumping off a building because He has promised to provide you with angelic protection against calamity. To bet money on some kind of game is the moral equivalent of asking God to preserve you when you deliberately put your hand in the fire. Both are ways of putting the Lord your God to the test. And that is a sin. It's also one more reason why gambling is wrong in principle.

Phil Johnson
Executive Director

Is Gambling Right - Part IV

The following is from "Grace to You" and the ministry of Dr. John MacArthur.

Does ‘Mutual Consent’ Eliminate the Evil in Gambling?
Wednesday, June 08, 2011

We are looking at four essential characteristics in a standard definition of gambling. I have argued that each of the four characteristics involves a violation of one or more vital biblical principles.

In other words, gambling is sinful for more than one reason. It's wrong on several counts. When you gamble, whether you win or lose, you violate God's moral law—quite possibly on multiple levels.

My previous post began this argument by pointing out that if you merely participate in a gambling contest with a desire to win, you are guilty of coveting that which belongs to your neighbor. The tenth commandment expressly forbids that.

Now consider the second of gambling's four distinguishing features. Here is, I believe, the most significant evil inherent in the practice of gambling:

2. In a gambling contest, something that belongs to someone else is placed at stake as the prize. The person who collects that prize violates the eighth commandment: "Thou shalt not steal" (Exodus 20:15).

I began this series of posts by recounting an incident where a college student challenged my views on gambling. He argued that winning a wager is not really the same as stealing, because the winnings are put up as a stake by mutual consent.

But when someone commits an act that causes hurt to another person, even if he does it with the victim's full permission, the mere fact of prior consent does not necessarily absolve either party from guilt. Lots of crimes are carried out and sins are committed by mutual consent that are nonetheless immoral or illegal. In such cases, mutual consent usually means that the moral culpability in the wrongdoing is shared jointly by both parties. It does not eliminate the guilt of the perpetrator.

A duel, for example, is a contest where one opponent kills another by mutual consent. The fact of the victim's consent does not absolve the victor from the guilt of murder, either in the eyes of God or in the eyes of the state. (I realize, of course, that certain societies have sometimes permitted dueling. That does not alter the immorality of the practice. It is certainly not justifiable by any biblical standard.) Kill someone in a duel in a just and civilized society, and you probably will be charged with murder.

Gambling is to theft what dueling is to murder.

Gambling is stealing by mutual consent. But it is still stealing. It is the taking of that which belongs to your neighbor and to which you have no right. It is not like a gift, which is given willingly and gratuitously. It is a loss he sustains to his hurt, even though he gives his consent to the contest before the die is cast.

Gambling is therefore morally tantamount to stealing. As such, it is a violation of every biblical principle regarding the gaining and sharing of our possessions.

Ephesians 4:28 says, "Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labour, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth." That is the spirit of Christianity, and it is the polar opposite of the various sentiments that drive gambling.

Is there no place for a "friendly bet?"

The question of whether penny-ante gambling is a petty sin is quite different from the question of whether it's a sin at all. If it's a matter of principle that makes gambling wrong, and not a particular amount, we ought to recognize that fact and acknowledge it. I'm expressly arguing that gambling is wrong in principle.

But to be clear: I'm not arguing that all forms of gambling are equally egregious. I'm not suggesting that church discipline should be carried out against Christians who play penny-ante poker. It should be fairly obvious that the size and seriousness of the wrong in a gambling contest is proportional to the amount gambled (among other factors).

Just in case that is not clear to someone, however, let me state plainly that I am not trying to portray the guy who plays Texas Holdem for spare nickels as a miscreant on the same level as the guy who foolishly bets the family farm on the spin of a roulette wheel. Gambling, like any sin, is wrong by degrees.

So I will gladly stipulate that the wrong in betting spare change is ordinarily quite trivial. We could probably list a whole lot of similarly trivial sins. I would argue, however, that in no case is it ever wise or even morally justifiable for Christians to practice any sin (even at a level we might all agree is "trivial")—especially for entertainment purposes, or with the express purpose of perfecting one's technique.

Trivial sins are, after all, still sins.

The problem with trivial sins is that when they are tolerated—especially when they are nurtured and defended—they tend to become big and bold. They also breed other sins. A £5-per-week addiction to playing the lottery will feed an awful lot of covetous fantasies.

It's really no wonder crime statistics are always higher wherever gambling is freely indulged in. In a society that caters to people's covetousness by sanctioning a form of larceny, we should not be surprised when other kinds of crime increase as well.

Feed the sins of "trivial" covetousness and thievery, and they will beget more evil. That's why Paul instructed the Ephesians to get as far from the sin of covetousness as they could. Notice that he ranked it along with fornication as the kind of sin that should never be dabbled in at any level: "But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints" (Ephesians 5:3).

Some people think all kinds of covetousness are "trivial," but the apostle often listed covetousness right alongside the most heinous of sins: "Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry: for which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience" (Colossians 3:5-6).

So the sin of covetousness, which lies behind every form of gambling, is in the same category of wickedness as the sin of fornication. What do you think of gambling as a form of "entertainment" now?

Scripture says, "Let your conduct be without covetousness; be content with such things as you have" (Hebrews 13:5). Gambling violates that commandment. And if you should happen to win, you have to add stealing to the list of sins you have committed by your gambling.

Remember, the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, and according to 1 Timothy 6:10, and those who love money tend to stray from the faith and pierce themselves through with many sorrows. The wreckage of many lives destroyed by gambling provides ample proof of that.

Phil Johnson
Executive Director

Is Gambling Right - Part III

The following is from "Grace to You" and the ministry of Dr. John MacArthur.

Gambling vs. Faithful Stewardship
Sunday, June 05, 2011

I closed the last post with a list of four distinguishing marks drawn from a standard definition of "gambling." All four of these are true of every variety of gambling:

One, something valuable is put at risk. Two, something belonging to someone else is at stake as a prize. Three, an element of chance is involved in determining the outcome. And four, no new wealth is created in the process.

Now, let's devote a few posts to considering each of those features of gambling, one at a time. It is my contention that there's something in each one of them that conflicts with biblical principles. We'll take them in order, starting with the first:

Gambling places something valuable at risk for an illegitimate purpose. That violates the most basic biblical principles of wise and faithful stewardship.

Let me point out first of all that one of the fundamental principles of all biblical stewardship is given to us in the Tenth Commandment, Exodus 20:17: "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's." It's is a sin to covet anything that belongs to your neighbor. This is not a gray area.

Gambling is covetousness distilled to its very essence

I know people—and in all likelihood you do, too—who claim that they gamble only for entertainment or recreation; not out of greed or covetousness.

But if it's mere entertainment they seek, why not play a game without staking any money on the outcome? Every gambler to whom I have ever posed that question has given me the same answer: "To play a game with nothing at stake is not as much fun." The stake makes the game more "fun" or more "interesting."

As a matter of fact, one commenter made that very point: "Poker simply doesn't work without some money at stake . . . the money at stake adds to the enjoyment of the game." He said he plays for small amounts—so that "the financial losses are not enough to be any more than entertainment money, and the prize not enough to create greed."

Analyze that for a moment. Why would the element of gambling make a game more "fun?" There is only one reason: because the "fun" is derived not from the game itself but from the possibility of winning something that belongs to your neighbor. In other words, what makes gambling "fun" is pure covetousness.

Sorry to be blunt about it, but that is sin.

Note carefully: it's the principle of covetousness that makes that sort of "fun" sin, not the size of the stake. A Christian who thinks it's safe to cultivate covetous desires as long as the sum at stake is small has completely missed Paul's point in 1 Timothy 6:9-11:

But those who desire to be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and harmful lusts which drown men in destruction and perdition. For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, for which some have strayed from the faith in their greediness, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows. But you, O man of God, flee these things and pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, gentleness.

Gambling involves an inordinate desire to get something from one's neighbor without a legitimate exchange. So it is a sin on those grounds, even if we said nothing further.

But There's More . . .

Gambling can be a sinful dereliction of the steward's duty for several other reasons as well. Note:I'm not arguing here that every act of gambling is necessarily tainted by all the following sins. But these are all major factors in the complex of evils that commonly accompany gambling. Anyone who practices gambling as a pattern of life is systematically tolerating and even cultivating the sin of covetousness in his or her heart. That person will of course be especially susceptible to many of the corresponding temptations, too:

• Slothfulness. Get-rich-quick schemes are practically all foolish and immoral. Solomon wrote this inProverbs 28:22: "A man with an evil eye hastens after riches, and does not consider that poverty will come upon him."

The promise of easy wealth is an overt appeal to slothful desire. Yet most gamblers freely acknowledge that the promise of gaining money quickly and with little effort is one of the major factors that adds to the "fun" of gaming. In other words, gambling fuels both covetousness andsloth.

• Foolishness. Listen to Proverbs 22:16: "He that oppresseth the poor to increase his riches, and he that giveth to the rich, shall surely come to want." That's an interesting verse. Most of us will instinctively understand that it is sinful to oppress the poor in order to increase our riches. But the verse also says that you shouldn't just give your money to the rich. Who would give their money away to rich people? People who gamble in casinos are doing it all the time.

Numerous studies have shown that poor people tend to spend a much larger proportion of their income on gambling than people in middle—or upper-income brackets. Gambling is a particular plague on lower-income people, primarily because of its illegitimate promise of getting rich quick.More than one study has demonstrated that the poor bet more than three times the amount wagered by persons in middle-income and upper-income brackets.

Meanwhile, those who are licensed to sponsor lotteries and casino games never lose—they gain enormous wealth by taking money off the top, and by skewing the odds overwhelmingly in their favor.

In other words, money won in state lotteries and other forms of gambling is money taken from the poor. And money lost in such wagers is money given to the rich. So both of the evils condemned in Proverbs 22:16 are fostered by the machinery of gambling. If you want to oppress the poor and give your money to the rich, there is no more systematic way to do it than through gambling.

• Profligacy. Gambling is an expensive business. In 1974, statistics showed Americans were betting about $17 billion per year through legal channels. That was an astronomical sum, but it ballooned to $330 billion by 1992. By most estimates, Americans now wager more than $600 billion each year.That's more than we spend on food. It's seriously wasteful by any standard.

• A lack of self-control. Furthermore, as the above statistics (and many others) indicate, gambling is seriously addictive. Research suggests that one in every ten gamblers does so compulsively. There are an estimated ten million gambling addicts in the United States alone. And the average compulsive gambler has debts exceeding $80,000. It is a bigger problem than alcoholism. And in areas where gambling is widespread—such as Las Vegas and Atlantic City—the suicide rate is three times higher than the national average.

• Miscellaneous concerns. There is the stewardship of time. Gambling consumes people's leisure time with activities that are neither relaxing nor healthy for the body.
  
  

We could also talk about gambling's negative impact on philanthropy and charity for the poor.

And there's gambling's destructive consequences for marriage and the family; its detrimental effect on society, the crime rate, and the spiritual climate wherever gambling flourishes. Gambling has been shown to contribute to turmoil and physical abuse in the home, crime and violence in society, and all kinds of personal and psychological disorders in the person who is addicted to gambling.

The effects of gambling are virtually all bad. And no wonder. It is contrary to everything Scripture teaches about wise stewardship.

Phil Johnson
Executive Director

Is Gambling Right - Part II

The following is from "Grace to You" and the ministry of Dr. John MacArthur.

Gambling: Some Definitions and Distinctions
Wednesday, May 25, 2011

To gamble is to wager on a contest or to play at a game of chance for stakes. When you gamble, you are risking money (or something else of value) on the outcome of something that involves an element of chance, uncertainty, or hazard—for the possibility of winning something someone else has put at stake.

A stake is a prize one person stands to gain through the loss of others.

Simple contest prizes, such as free sweepstakes and door prizes, do not involve gambling if no fee is charged for entry into the contest. Sweepstakes contests sponsored for advertising purposes are paid for by the sponsor. The winner's prize is not financed by the loss of other contestants. Therefore it is not gambling. Nothing is put at stake by the contestants in such events.

Likewise, investing in the stock market is not "gambling," regardless of how much risk is involved. If a stock gains value, all investors earn money. The gains of one investor are not financed by the losses of others. In other words, there are no losers when a stock gains value. When the stock value increases, the economic "pie" grows.

By contrast the size of the economic pie in a gambling contest is fixed. The prize is a pool of money contributed by the players. A casino may take a percentage of that pie off the top, but otherwise, the size of the pie is fixed by the aggregate total of the players' contributions.

Similarly, a farmer who plants seed hoping to yield a crop takes a calculated risk. (If weather or disease destroys the crop, he could lose all he has invested in the crop.) That risk is not, technically, a "gamble," because if the investment pays off, no one loses. Real wealth has been created, unlike in gambling, where no wealth is ever actually created.

In gambling, existing wealth merely changes hands. In other words, one person's gain always comes at the price of hurt caused to others. That is the reason an immoral principle underlies all gambling. (We'll probe this point more carefully before the end of this series.)

One more misconception is worth trying to clear up: You'll often hear someone compare the insurance business to gambling. But although buying and selling insurance involves risk, it is not the moral equivalent of gambling. Assuming risk per se is not gambling. As we know, life is full of risk, and if the act of taking a risk were inherently the same as gambling, you could say that we all gamble every day.

In fact, that is precisely what some who advocate gambling do say. They point out that you take a risk every time you get in an airplane or ride in a car—or walk across the street. You would also face some risk even if all you did was stay in bed trying to avoid risk. Therefore, they say, life itself is a gamble.

But all of that is based on a faulty understanding of what gambling is. Look again at our definitions: To gamble is to play a game of chance for stakes. And a stake is a prize that is obtained at another gambler's expense. Remember: in gambling, whatever one person wins is lost by another.

Furthermore, in gambling, the risk is artificial. It is risk that is created by a game of chance. And the sole purpose for assuming this risk is to try to gain something at someone else's expense.

Now, notice this: all gambling involves four elements: One, something valuable is put at risk.Two, something belonging to someone else is at stake as a prize. Three, an element of chance is involved in determining the outcome. And four, no new wealth is created in the process.

And those four characteristics of gambling are the very reasons gambling is wrong. Each of the essential characteristics of gambling, when combined with the other three, violates one or more biblical principles. In the next post in this series, we'll begin to see why.

Phil Johnson
Executive Director

Is Gambling Right - Part I

The following is from "Grace to You" and the ministry of Dr. John MacArthur.

Is Gambling OK? Don’t Bet on It
Sunday, May 22, 2011

Is it a sin to gamble? There's not an easy or instantly-obvious prooftext answer to that question. If you are looking for a "Thus saith the Lord: Thou shalt not gamble," you won't find it anywhere. Nothing expressly forbids gambling anywhere in Scripture.

Does that automatically put gambling into the realm of adiaphora, or indifferent matters? I don't think so. I would argue that gambling is a sin, full stop.

A Sin? Are you Serious? Why Would Anyone Believe that in this Enlightened Age?

Here are three reasons that instantly come to mind:

1. The absence of a single commandment or proof-text against gambling ultimately proves nothing. There are lots of things that are not explicitly mentioned in the Bible that we would probably agree are clearly sinful.
   
   There isn't anything in Scripture that forbids arson, for example. But we know arson is wrong because it violates other biblical principles. It's a violation of the commandment in Leviticus 19:18: "Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."
   
   As a matter of fact, even thinking about burning down your neighbor's property violates Zechariah 8:17: "Let none of you imagine evil in your hearts against his neighbour . . . [for] these are things that I hate, saith the Lord." So I don't think anyone would seriously argue that arson is OK, just because it isn't named in the Bible as a sin. Ditto with recreational drug use, graffiti-vandalism, and a host of other societal evils.
   
   
2. Gambling is inconsistent with biblical virtue. It is fueled by—and it fuels—covetousness, greed, and materialism. It is associated with crime, vice and corruption, so that wherever gambling exists, crime rates rise. And it is contrary to the biblical work ethic, because it is an attempt to gain wealth without working for it.
   
   
3. Our possessions are not our own to squander. They are given to us as a stewardship, and we will be accountable to God for how we use them. To put God-given resources at risk is to fail in the faithfulness required of stewards.

I once gave that answer to a college student who asked me about gambling in a public Q&A session in GraceLife. He stayed at the microphone while I gave my answer, and I could see he was not satisfied with it. When I finished, he asked if he could respond.

"By all means," I told him. "If that doesn't answer your question, ask a follow-up, and I'll expand on my answer.


Can't You Make a Better Case Than That?

"Well," he said, "I still don't think you have shown that gambling is a sin. Let me reply to your arguments one by one.

"First," he said, "take the example of arson. It is wrong to burn down your neighbor's field or his house only when there is no mutual consent. But suppose he wanted your help burning his field because he wanted to clear the land. Then it would not be a sin for you to set fire to his property.

"As a matter of fact," he continued, "My neighbors had an abandoned building they were going to demolish for a new commercial development. So they allowed some fire department trainees to set fire to the building and practice putting it out. It wasn't a sin for the rookie fireman to set fire to that house, because the owner had given his consent.

"And gambling is always by mutual consent," he said. So it cannot be wrong done against your neighbor, because you have his concurrence before the game of chance begins."

He wasn't finished.

"Second," he said, "gambling isn't necessarily motivated only by covetousness and greed. I like to gamble for recreation and sheer entertainment."

Looking at me, he asked, "What is your favorite form of entertainment?"

"I like to take my sons to a baseball game," I said.

"Fine," he answered. "If you take your family to a baseball game, by the time you bought tickets, paid for parking, and got some food or drinks, you would probably have spent $100 to $150. All that money to watch an athletic contest! You get nothing tangible for your money except maybe a Coke and a large pretzel. The whole game is over in two and a half hours, and you go back home, with nothing to show for the money you spent. It is just entertainment; sheer recreation.

"Now, the form of recreation I prefer is gambling. I can take the same $100 and go to a casino, where I might spend the entire evening playing Blackjack. I get all the Cokes and pretzels I want for free. And if I have a good night, I can play for four or five hours with my $100—twice as long as you spent at your two-and-a-half-hour ball game.

"Furthermore," he said, "I might win, and then I will go home with even more money than I came with. But I don't do it because of greed. I do it because that is what I enjoy, just like you enjoy baseball."

I started to respond, but he held up a finger to signal that he wasn't through yet.

"Now," he said, "Let's talk about the stewardship issue. You went to an athletic event and have nothing permanent to show for the money you spent. I might have more money coming out than I had going into the casino.

"But even if I lose," he said, "I am a disciplined loser, and I always set a specific amount I am willing to lose—never more than about 100 dollars. And if I lose that much, I quit and walk away. That is still less money than you spent on your baseball outing, and it usually buys me several hours of exciting entertainment. Sometimes I even win, so I can even make money through my form of entertainment. Now I ask you, which is better stewardship?"

I took a deep breath and pondered the best way to reply.

But before I could answer, he continued. "There are risks involved in gambling," he said. "But the farmer who spends money to buy seed and plant a field also takes a huge gamble every year. If the weather destroys his crop, he will lose far more than I ever risk. Risk is a normal part of all our lives."

And then he asked me, "Do you have any of your retirement savings in mutual funds?" As a matter of fact, I do, so I acknowledged that fact.

"Well," he said, "you are taking a risk with that money. You yourself are gambling that the market will rise. What if it goes down? You will lose money. So you are gambling that it will go up. Meanwhile, you have put your savings at risk. How in the world can you tell me you think gambling is sinful? You aren't even practicing what you preach. If it is wrong to gamble, it is wrong for you to put your retirement savings in the stock market. And if it is unwise stewardship for me to gamble at cards, then it is also bad stewardship for you to invest money in mutual funds.

"And finally," he said, "My enjoyment of gambling has got nothing to do with my work ethic. In addition to my student class load, I work a full time job during the week and make good money. For me to spend $100 on Friday night at the casino is no more a reflection on my work ethic than for you to spend $150 on Friday evening at a baseball game.

"Gambling is just entertainment for me, and unless you are prepared to argue that all forms of entertainment are sinful, give me better arguments to show that gambling violates the Bible's moral standards, or show me where the Bible says gambling is a sin, I am going to keep visiting the casino."

That's a pretty thorough off-the-cuff reply to my off the-cuff answer to his original question, isn't it? It was obvious that he had spent a great deal of time thinking through these issues. He had heard the standard arguments, and he believed he could answer them all.


Well, OK. Let's Think This Through More Carefully . . .

By then, unfortunately, we were running short on time, and I only had enough time left to give him a quick reply.

I told him first of all that I still believe a sinister principle underlies all gambling, and it is this: for every winner, there are losers. And the winners' gains come at the losers' expense. There is no other way to gain money through gambling. When you win, you are taking that which belongs to another. The winners' profit always comes directly from the losers' pocket. There's something more sinister about that than merely winning an athletic competition, which involves no material loss for the loser.

In other words, gambling is the moral equivalent of stealing. His argument about mutual consent between the players didn't seem to make it OK, because in real life many gambling losses lead to ruin for the loser. Prior consent doesn't eliminate the evil in that.

I also told him I did not completely buy his rationale that gambling might be just a form of pure entertainment—something better by which to pass the time than watching television. While the argument has some appeal at first glance, I pointed out that if there is an immoral principle that underlies all gambling—if gambling per se violates any clear principle of Scripture—then it is wrong on any grounds. To say that you gamble only for entertainment is not really a good defense against the argument that gambling is rooted in greed and covetousness.

For example, what if someone tried to claim it was OK to fornicate because he was doing it only as a form of entertainment? My point was this: if it's wrong to gamble on matters of biblical principle, then it is wrong to gamble in any circumstance, and it is wrong to gamble in anyamount. If there are principles that make gambling a sinful activity, then it is wrong to gamble for "entertainment," and it is wrong whether you are gambling 50 cents or gambling your whole paycheck.

I regretted that we had to end our Q&A session at that point. He went away unsatisfied with my reply, and so did I.

While I still felt all my arguments were biblically sound, I didn't feel I had done enough to highlight the real heart of the matter. And that prompted me to give more thought to the issue of gambling so that I would be better prepared to give an answer if the question ever came up again.

Since then, I have thought through the issues more carefully than ever. I've considered the arguments further. I've taken an even closer look at the biblical data. And I hasten to say that I am even more convinced than ever that gambling is a sinful activity. It is not a valid form of entertainment, and it is not a harmless matter of indifference. It violates a number of biblical principles and therefore ought to be avoided in all its forms.


Hold on; I'm Not Finished Yet

A blog is a great medium for exploring such a questions in careful detail. So in a couple of follow-up posts, I plan to give you a series of biblical arguments showing in further detail exactly why I still believe gambling is a sin.

Stay tuned for more . . .

Phil Johnson
Executive Director

| PDF | Print

Share

Sermon Notes from Sunday, June 12, 2011

On May 29, I began a new series of messages on the Kingdom of God as seen in Matthew 13. I'm calling it a "Peek at the Kingdom." The theme of the Kingdom has been a study for a long time, but I am wanting to see it through the lens of Matthew 13.

The notes of the sermon today can be seen by clicking here. This is part one of a two part sermon "Jesus is the King of the Kingdom."

Watch the Southern Baptist Convention & Pastor's Conference this week

The Southern Baptist Convention is meeting Tuesday and Wednesday of this week in Phoenix. The Pastor's Conference begins tonight and goes through tomorrow night. You may watch all the convention via the Internet by clicking here and all the Pastor's Conference by clicking here.

Here are links to see the schedule of the two events:

Convention schedule

Pastor's Conference schedule

Sermon Notes from Sunday, June 5, 2011

On May 29, I began a new series of messages on the Kingdom of God as seen in Matthew 13. I'm calling it a "Peek at the Kingdom." The theme of the Kingdom has been a study for a long time, but I am wanting to see it through the lens of Matthew 13.

The notes of the first sermon can be seen by clicking here.

The notes from this past Sunday "Walking as a Blessed Man" can be seen by clicking here.

Discipleship and the Idols of Familyl and Culture

Discipleship and the Idols of Family and Culture

by Stephen Um

Much has been written about the cost of discipleship. Even more has been said. And yet, as often as we hear about all that Jesus demands of us as his disciples, we cannot avoid being set off balance when we run into a difficult passage like Luke 14:26-27, 33:

If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple. Whoever does not bear his own cross and come after me cannot be my disciple. . . . So therefore, any one of you who does not renounce all that he has cannot be my disciple.

Who doesn’t bristle under the sharp language of hate, cross bearing, and renunciation? It seems to cut against everything that makes us who we are. Indeed, it does.

So what is Jesus up to in this passage? Is he really suggesting that we should “hate” our families, and even ourselves, with all that such a stance would entail? On the one hand, we must obviously say “no.” After all, Jesus is the one who perfectly fulfilled the commandment to love your neighbor as yourself, and even calls us to love our enemies. Whatever he means, he is not contradicting himself, and he is not suggesting that we do something that is out of accord with the rest of God’s Word.

But if he is not calling us to hate our families actively, is the cost of discipleship somehow made less than if he were? Again, the answer here is “no.” What Jesus is calling us to is ultimate allegiance. He is essentially saying, “To be my disciple, you must give me preeminence over and (sometimes) against all other relationships.” In other words, our lives should be so submitted to Christ that when we put our allegiance to him side-by-side with other allegiances, the difference is so great that it could be described in the black-and-white terminology of love and hate.

This is a remarkable cost for one to pay, is it not? It seems burdensome, too weighty, almost unbearable. And it is, in fact, all of these things. One wonders if anyone could ever pull it off.

What is remarkable about gospel-centered discipleship is the claim that someone did “pull it off.” Christ, the Son of God, chose to condescend into our world in his Incarnation. Rather than leave us to die as slave-disciples of cruel masters, he left his Father’s side in heaven, renounced all that he had, bore a cross that we deserved, and ultimately gave up his own life for us. In short, in Jesus’ call to radical discipleship, he does not ask us to anything that he has not already done for us. And it is this reality—that our Discipler has given up everything for us—that not only encourages us, but actually empowers us to respond to his call to costly discipleship. Only this kind of God could be worthy of our ultimate allegiance.

The Cost of Discipleship in Cultural Perspective(s)

This call to ultimate allegiance challenges and cuts against the idols of every culture. We might certainly explore this on the micro-levels of nation, ethnicity, neighborhoods, and more. But in this context I’m particularly interested in the macro-level differences between a more traditional Eastern culture and a progressive Western culture. The costly call of Luke 14 challenges both the Eastern and the Western cultural mindset, and is seen clearly in episodes in which Jesus calls his disciples to follow him.

In Matthew 4:21-22 we find James and John in a boat mending their fishing nets, and their father was with them in the boat. It is at this point that Jesus “called them,” and upon hearing this call, the brothers “immediately left the boat and their father and followed him.”

Now, what’s intriguing here is the different ways in which this text could be read. On the one hand, a typical Westerner might look at this passage and see little challenge in a call that results in the leaving behind of one’s father. This is because, in Western cultures, greater allegiance tends to be given to the individual and his vocation, regardless of how it might affect one’s family, community, and others. In stark contrast, a more conservative Eastern culture often places more emphasis on family, community, and corporate solidarity.

Thus, this call, which is a shining example of the kind of commitment that Christ called for in Luke 14, is particularly challenging to more traditional cultures. While society itself, our local communities, and even our families may be demanding that we give our primary devotion to them, the call to discipleship always includes a drastic re-ordering of that which is most precious to us, and may sometimes include a departure from those things that refuse to come under the rule of our new Master.

Equally Challenging for the Progressive West

Interestingly, however, Matthew 4:18-20 gives us a picture that equally challenges the overly individualized Western reader. It is there that we find Peter and Andrew in the middle of their day’s work—fishing. When Jesus sees them, he says, “Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men.” Notice that the call here is in specific relationship to their vocation. Jesus wants to redefine their entire lives, and he does so by calling them to shift their line of work. Upon hearing the call they immediately leave their nets and follow him.

Such a call might not be all that hard for those in a more traditional culture to hear. After all, they may be accustomed to sacrificing personal ambition and dreams on the altar of community and family. But for the more progressive Western reader, it is almost unfathomable that devotion to Christ might mean that ambition and career-building would need to take a back seat to Jesus.

Let me be clear: I’m not saying that Christ is calling Easterners to leave their families, and Westerners to leave their careers. Rather, I am saying that the call to discipleship is a fundamental redirection of our human existence, a reorientation, an all-embracing turning about of our lives in order that our affections might be placed primarily upon Christ. And, this being the case, the call to discipleship will cut through and across every culture. So, for the progressive, part of the call will be to make sure that Christ is more important than one’s work. We must find our identity in being a disciple of Christ, rather than as disciples of our career development. As for the traditionalist, the challenge may be in making certain that Christ takes precedence in one’s life over and above family, community, and society. We must make sure that Christ is the supreme treasure in our lives.

Whatever the case may be, as disciples of Christ we are challenged to give him our ultimate allegiance, no matter our cultural background or social location. This being the case, our comfort and our energies must be derived from the fact that Christ not only transcends human culture, but he also entered into it. And, having entered into culture, he not only challenges the reigning paradigms, but also promises to redeem all that is broken about them.

Sermon Notes from Sunday, May 29, 2011

This past Sunday I began a new series of messages on the Kingdom of God as seen in Matthew 13. The theme of the Kingdom has been a study for a long time, but I am wanting to see it through the lens of Matthew 13.

The notes of the first sermon can be seen by clicking here.

One additional word since the sermon on Sunday. I was reading in the Psalms and saw 81:11-13 and these words so fit into as an appendix.

"But my people would not heed My Voice, And Israel would have none of Me.

So I gave them over to their own stubborn heart,

To walk in their own counsels.

Oh, that My people would listen to Me,

That Israel would walk in My ways!"