The Dangers of Lukewarm Leadership

SPEAKER 01 : 0:00

Greetings to the brightest audience in the country and welcome to Theology Thursday. I’m Nicole McBurney. Every weekday we bring you the news of the day, the culture, and science from a Christian worldview. But today join me and Pastor Bob Enyart as we explore the source of our Christian worldview, the Bible.

SPEAKER 02 : 0:14

Please open to Colossians chapter 2. Colossians chapter 2 verse 1. Paul, this is one of his later writings. He starts out the chapter, of course the chapter Divisions were added by men centuries later. But Paul wrote the text and we’ve divided it up into chapters and verses so we could refer to it line by line. For I want you to know what a great conflict I have for you and those in Laodicea, and for as many as have not seen my face in the flesh. Now, Laodicea is one of the seven churches that that Jesus had written to in the book of Revelation. And all seven are located in Asia Minor in the country today that we call Turkey. And I know some of you in this room have gone to those churches, to either cities that are still thriving today or cities that there are nothing but remnants left. And someday, Denver Bible Church, we’d love to take a tour to Turkey and whoever would like to go, Well, then who could afford to go? We’ll all go for a couple weeks. Paul had a great conflict because he had not visited Colossae nor the nearby city of Laodicea, though he really wanted to spend time with them to help strengthen their faith. When we read the book of Revelation and we read each of Jesus’ letters to these seven churches, we find out that The Laodiceans were in the worst spiritual condition of any of the churches that he had addressed. It is the church to which Jesus said, I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot. I could wish you were cold or hot. So then, because you are lukewarm and neither cold nor hot, I will vomit you out of my mouth. Now, we have a larger group at the Bible study than normal. And some people who are not usually here, new time, first time visitor. But in the study and right off the bat now, I’m going to get into a bit of trouble. I’m going to make some observations in an application of that passage that can get some people upset. What are the two subjects you’re never supposed to talk about? Religion and politics. What are the two subjects that get me into the most trouble throughout my life? Religion and politics. And what are the two most important subjects that we can talk about? Religion and politics. You know, God and our relationship among men and the rules by which we interact. So God and the authority under which men live are two of the most important issues. So I’m going to talk a bit about the Republican Party a little bit, not a lot, but I know the vast majority of conservative Christians are Republicans and therefore I tend to get in trouble because I’m not a huge fan of the Republican Party, but let’s go for it. I frequently quote Jesus’ words to identify who is more dangerous, the openly wicked leader or the leader who looks Christian. but who support at different levels, abortion, pornography, welfare, homosexuality, adultery, evolution, fornication, our godless education system. Which is more dangerous? The enemy threatening you, saying, I’m going to kill you. Stand up so I can shoot you. Or your neighbor who’s in the foxhole with you, who’s going to shoot you in the back as soon as you turn around. Who’s more dangerous? Personally, if we compare Al Gore, George W. Bush, and a strong Christian running for president like, say, Howard Phillips of the U.S. Constitution Party. Now, Howard Phillips has absolutely no chance of winning an election for president. No chance in all the world. But he’s a really neat Christian guy. I like him. But if we compare those three, I think you can readily identify them As Al Gore cold. Howard Phillips hot. He really is a strong Christian man, leader. He was in the Nixon administration on Nixon’s cabinet as the head of a couple different government agencies. And George Bush as lukewarm. I think that’s how it goes. Gore cold. Someone like Howard Phillips hot. And Bush lukewarm. Now, why do I judge Bush as lukewarm? Well, he’s appointed many known pro-aborts to high judicial and government positions. He has increased welfare spending by the billions upon billions upon billions. He strongly promotes our godless education system. He defends the anti-American, godless United Nations, even though it’s opposed him lately. He’s trying to get churches to support his new welfare program by tempting us that we will be the middlemen to pass out new welfare dollars. So he wants to have church welfare where the churches will get grants. Let’s say Denver Bible Church. Maybe we could get $40,000 and then we could use it to dole that money out to the poor. So maybe they’ll come to our church. So we can use basically stolen money from our neighbors, some of whom are atheists, and we can use their money taken by force to try to promote our philosophy, our religion. Oh, and by the way, the Satanists will do the same thing. And so will the Wiccans. And so will every version of perverse religion and philosophy. And government should not promote welfare because welfare is destructive. Does that mean, oh, well, we’re conservatives. We’re Christians. We’re against welfare and socialism. But if you let us take a slice of the pie, then we’ll look the other way. And we’ll advocate a new welfare program. Spend another $100 billion a year. He has protected the father of the modern terrorist movement, Yasser Arafat. And he has appointed known homosexuals to high government office. And the list could easily go on and on and on Over the years, I keep my own database of what conservative Christian leaders do that’s against what they claim to be and against the simple principles of right and wrong, even in the Ten Commandments. Like the Republicans on the U.S. Supreme Court. Seven of the nine U.S. Supreme Court justices were appointed by Republican presidents. And they’ve just… legalized homosexuality nationwide. They’ve just done that. They recently ruled regarding child pornography. They ruled against law enforcement and on the side of the child pornographers who were saying, yeah, but we could use computer-generated graphics and if we make kids, but we make their faces out of, you know, how do you know? It could be just computers. The U.S. Supreme Court, the Republican Court, ruled on the side of child pornographers making law enforcement against child pornographers extraordinarily more difficult. Republican appointed judges are the ones who have ruled that a convicted, this is a federal judge in New York, ruled that a convicted homosexual child rapist has the right to go to a public park and give out balloon sculptures, animals made out of balloons, to kids. How’s that? Well, he has the right to do that. It’s a Republican judge that ruled that the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional because it says under God. These are Republican appointed judges. And all this from the Republican Party and the Republican presidents. Christians will point out Oh, look, the president has appointed some pro-life judicial nominees. Well, yeah, that’s true. And I point to a flood of pro-aborts and pro-homosexual, immoral, and liberal appointments throughout government. Jesus said, I’d rather you be hot or cold. If you’re lukewarm, I’ll spit you out of my mouth. And I think if our heroes, the ones we put in power, fill the U.S. Supreme Court with pro-abortion judges… Because they’re all pro-choice, all of them. There’s not one justice who’s pro-life. Did you know that? If you listen to National Right to Life, you think, well, all the Republican ones are pro-life. Not one is pro-life. Not one. Even the closest two pro-life say that if the states legalize abortion, then it has to be legal. See, they’re pro-choice state by state. That’s Scalia and Thomas. They say, well, Roe v. Wade was bad. But if a state like Massachusetts or California or New York legalizes abortion, then that’s how it should be done. That’s not pro-life. Christians will say, well, imagine if Al Gore was in the White House during 9-11. I’m not a fan of Al Gore. I despise him. George Bush, I think, has done a great job fighting the war on terror since 9-11. I’ve complimented him repeatedly. In Afghanistan, I think what we did was brilliant. In Iraq, I think it was brilliant. But we won World War II with FDR, with Roosevelt, whose wife was at least as bad as Hillary. Eleanor Roosevelt’s library now displays a private letter she wrote to a female photojournalist, this woman with whom she had a lesbian affair. So Eleanor Roosevelt, FDR, are they godly Christian people No, they defeated the Axis in World War II. So I don’t think we use current events to say, well, you know, lukewarm is really better than hot or cold. I disagree with that. If we can beat the Japanese, the Italians, and the Germans, well, I’ll just throw in the Italians since they happen to sign up. If we could beat the Axis in World War II under Roosevelt, then America could beat Al-Qaeda the Taliban and Saddam with almost whoever. And I’m not at all saying I’d rather have Al Gore than George Bush, but I am saying that Jesus said, I know your works, not your campaign rhetoric. He says, I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot. I could wish you were cold or hot. So then, because you are lukewarm and neither cold nor hot, he wrote to the Laodiceans, I will vomit you out of my mouth. And I am saying that a lukewarm president is way more dangerous than an outright wicked one. For example, our pro-homosexual Republican president, pro-homosexual Republican administration, pro-homosexual Republican Supreme Court has done a certain degree of damage by legalizing homosexuality nationwide. They’ve done a degree of damage. We can try to measure it. But what if we were to weigh it, not get an exact measurement, but weigh how much damage will that do to future generations of Americans, current and future generations, compared to 9-11? Which will be more destructive to the health and well-being of America? The Republican President Administration Supreme Court that’s legalized homosexuality nationwide or some Islamic terrorist organization who kill 3,000 Americans. I think that the Republican influence on America’s culture will do way more harm to our children and descendants than 10 Al-Qaeda’s, 10 Mullah Omar’s, and 10 Saddam’s could do. But back to Colossi, Colossians chapter two, Paul lamented that he hadn’t yet personally visited the city nor the nearby Laodicea verse 2 that their hearts may be encouraged being knit together in love and attaining to all riches of the full assurance of understanding to the knowledge of the mystery of God both of the Father and of Christ in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge that is so beautiful In God exists all wisdom and knowledge. What would be true if God did not exist? What if God did not exist? What would reality be like? Would there be a right and wrong if there were no God? That’s one thing the atheists agree on. And the atheists are right on that. They say, if there was such a thing as absolute right and wrong, that would necessitate there being a God. Therefore, we reject absolute morality. An atheist, if you ask him, was the Holocaust absolutely wrong? Is murder absolutely wrong? Kidnapping? No, nothing’s absolutely wrong because there is no God. If there were no God, there’d be no such thing as right and wrong because God is the standard on which we can say what’s right and what’s wrong. There could be no such thing as wisdom. without God’s existence. Because wisdom requires right and wrong as its foundation. If there was no such thing as right or wrong, how could you make an unwise decision? It wouldn’t matter what happened, any outcome of any event could not be right or wrong. Righteousness and wisdom flow from God as descriptions of his nature. But Paul goes further writing that in God, all wisdom and knowledge exist. All wisdom and knowledge exist in God. Or more technically, all wisdom and knowledge proceed from God. If God did not exist, knowledge itself could not exist. You couldn’t know anything. Well, of course, you wouldn’t be here and neither would I. Without God, there’s no such thing as knowledge. Albert Einstein… did not believe in God. But he wrote in 1944 about what he called, quote, the gulf logically unbridgeable. Einstein wrote about an unbridgeable gulf between ideas and matter. And he wrote, how could you get from matter to ideas? How can you have knowledge, concepts? Those things don’t flow from atoms and molecules, right? You can’t go from just, like we often say, since there’s love in the world, since a mother can love her child, and love cannot arise from chemical reactions. That alone is proof that there’s a God of love, if you can think clearly about such things. Well, Einstein said there’s this unbridgeable gulf between matter and ideas. And since his time… Since he wrote that, linguists, those who study language, and some scientists have referred to this as Einstein’s gulf. Atheists cannot explain anything at all. Every observation challenges atheism, and every observation is direct evidence for God. Every observation, not just some, every observation threatens atheism and provides direct evidence for God. So atheists cannot explain anything at all and are especially unable to explain how the universe can begin with matter alone and then develop to where knowledge is possible. They attempt to defend their atheistic worldview with tools which they can only rely upon if God exists. For example, without God, There is no reason. There’s no reason. There’s no right or wrong. Your answer can’t be right. It can’t be wrong. There’s no knowledge. There are no ideas. There could be no science, no language, and no logic apart from God’s existence. Paul writes that all wisdom and knowledge exist in God. It all proceeds from God. Nothing inherent in matter should reliably give rise to any knowledge whatsoever and then especially not to wisdom. For information science shows that knowledge does not arise randomly and chance cannot increase knowledge. So if there’s an atheist who thinks otherwise, if you come across an atheist who thinks that knowledge can exist apart from God, just ask him, well, since Albert Einstein, what evidence, what proofs have been discovered that indicate that? Because Albert Einstein admitted that there’s no reason that ideas should exist if you only have a material universe. So maybe you think you’re smarter than Albert Einstein, or maybe you think that since he died, some atheist has discovered the proof or the evidence that ideas can flow from matter. Paul said, in God are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. And in verse 2, we Christians, in addition to simply having access to raw knowledge, because the atheist, even though he denies God, he uses the tools that God enables. Reason, knowledge, understanding. The atheist uses those tools. It’s like being in a debate about whether or not oxygen exists. And the one opponent says it does not exist while he’s breathing it in order to utter the words. But he’s a fool and he’s denying that which sustains his own argument. And the atheist does that. But we Christians, in addition to having access to raw knowledge, just like an atheist does. In particular, we also have what Paul wrote in verse two, the full assurance of understanding. Wow, the full assurance of understanding. That doesn’t mean that I know everything or that any Christian knows everything or that we will ever know everything. Do you think when you get to heaven, you’ll know everything? No, you won’t know what your good friend in heaven is thinking. unless he tells you. We’re not going to become God when we get to heaven. We’re not going to be able to read other people’s thoughts. And we’re not going to be omniscient. We’re going to be created beings. But we have the full understanding of the mystery, a term that Paul uses, the mystery of the gospel of grace. Whereas throughout the entire Bible, from Abraham’s in Genesis 17, right up until the Apostle Paul got saved, everybody was getting circumcised. Right and left. Well, on the eighth day, or when you convert it, God said, you need to be circumcised or I will cut you off forever from my covenant. And so Jesus himself was circumcised. The apostles themselves had been circumcised. And then God saves the Apostle Paul and says, you know the covenant of circumcision? That was so central to my message. People no longer have to be circumcised to be counted among the members of my covenant. This is a new covenant by grace alone. No longer will I require circumcision as an entrance into covenant relationship with me. That’s what Paul calls the mystery. And when God made that change, That was a change in the rules. The rules changed. Until then, you had to be circumcised. Now, if you get circumcised, for religious reasons, Paul says it’s a curse because you’ve become a legalist and you’ve put yourself under the law that you have been delivered from. What did God do with that law? That law that we have been delivered from? God nailed it to the cross with Jesus Christ the law was nailed to the cross. Where in the whole Bible do we read that? In this chapter, Colossians chapter 2. And we’ll get to that in a bit. This verse, Colossians 2 verse 2, lends support to the security of our salvation. For the mystery, that is the gospel of grace, gives us full assurance of our salvation. Now let’s continue with verse 4. Now this I say, lest anyone should deceive you with persuasive words. For though I am absent in the flesh, Paul hadn’t been with them personally, yet I am with you in spirit, rejoicing to see your good order and the steadfastness of your faith in Christ. As you have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in him. Now Paul there, he didn’t just say some nice warm fuzzy. He made a very technical point. Did you catch it in verse 6? There’s a very technical point. As you have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in Him. There’s an extremely technical point being made. He makes it more clearly in Galatians chapter 3. That you have been saved by faith. not by the works of the law. How do you propose to live out your Christian life? Do you think you’re being saved by faith and then you should live by the works of the law? No. Just as you were saved, that’s how you’re to live your Christian life. As you have therefore received Christ, so walk in Him. The same method you used to receive Christ, as you have received, so shall you walk in Christ. By that same method, shall you live your life. Let’s look at Galatians 3. You might want to keep your finger in Colossians 2 and just turn to the left just a few pages. Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians. So Galatians 3, we can see this together. Verse 1, O foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you that you should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed among you as crucified? That verse just is an introduction. We’re going to focus on verses 2 and 3. This only I want to learn from you. Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law or by the hearing of faith? That’s the question. A or B? A or B? A wise man often when he’s asked A or B, he answers C. Neither of those. When an atheist says, is it this or is it this? The Christian often says neither. That’s a false dilemma. But Paul is not an atheist. He’s not a fool. He’s inspired by God. And he’s giving us a valid alternative. Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law or by the hearing of faith? How did you receive the Spirit? When you got saved, the Holy Spirit came and took up residence within you. How did that happen? By the works of the law or by the hearing of faith? Now, most Christians today would answer by faith. I was saved by faith. Martin Luther rediscovered Salvation by faith alone, apart from works. How did you receive the Spirit? By the works of the law or by the hearing of faith? Are you so foolish, having begun in the Spirit? So Paul answers it. You began in the Spirit. Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh? What’s interesting here is this passage uses a couple terms interchangeably as synonyms. By this third verse, Paul is using the term spirit and faith as though they were synonyms and works and flesh as synonyms. Let’s read it again. Oh, foolish Galatians. Now let’s go to verse two. This only I want to hear from you. Did you receive the spirit by the works of the law or by the hearing of faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun in the spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh? Paul’s number one issue that he communicates to believers in the body is to beware of those who would put you under the law and rob the liberty that you have in Christ. That is his number one issue. Many Christians have a hard time grasping What’s the big deal about law or grace? Are we under the law or are we under grace? The Apostle Paul says, when you’re a child, when you’re being raised, you need to be raised by a tutor, by a schoolmaster. And the schoolmaster imposes many laws on you, many rules, because you’re a child and you’re growing up. Like at Maranatha Christian Center in Arvada. Hundreds of students there and it’s the most extraordinary place environment I have ever been in seeing kids just behaving so maturely, so politely, so respectfully.

SPEAKER 01 : 28:45

Hey, this is Nicole McBurney jumping into the broadcast. We are out of time for today, so be sure to come back next Thursday to hear the rest of this study. To find other resources and Bible studies, be sure to go to kgov.com slash store. That’s kgov.com slash store.