Bad Behavior On Facebook and other Social Media

Just a thought I recently shared with someone that is having trouble with caustic friends on Facebook.

For me, Facebook is like my "house." I consider it a privilege to host people in my "house." If you behave badly while you're in my "house," I BLOCK you from returning to my "house." If you add NO value to the conversation at my "house," I UNSUBSCRIBE/HIDE you so that I don't waste any time reading things that aren't meaningful and beneficial. But, I have hundreds of friends that I regularly welcome to my "house" and I am glad to have them here. Sometimes they make me think. Sometimes they make me laugh. Sometimes they make me cry. Sometimes they make a good point. Sometimes I'm a little embarrassed. Sometimes they touch my heart. Sometimes we all pray together. Sometimes I go to places I'll never go myself through the pictures they post. Always (at my "house")...we are respectful of others and use my "house" constructively and not destructively. If all you want to do is argue with me in my "house," well, you get ejected (BLOCKED) from my "house." This is my "house" and you are a guest here. I'm glad to have you at my "house" and I want to be a good host to you.  But, if you misbehave at my "house"...well, you know what happens by now!

Don't let others bring you down by continually reading things that are caustic, uselessly controversial, and critical. Also, consider who's making the posts you read and ask yourself, "Does this person add value to my life or are they merely trying to stir up controversy?" Not every opinion expressed in my "house" is a good one, but I don't feel obligated to correct them (and if I were going to offer correction I'd do it privately). But, when people's opinions feel more like they are bullying people about their pet peeves...well, you get voted out of my "house."

FB has been a wonderful tool for me to reconnect with old friends and to make some new ones, as well. It has allowed me to have some influence in people's lives beyond the pulpit, which is where my greatest influence is found. It allows me as a "Shepherd" to see and connect with the people of our church as God is at work in their lives. It also allows me to impact people who aren't believers by showing the way of Christ to them. Social media is a tool for me, but when someone misuses this tool...I take away their privilege of having access to the tool at my "house."

This is my "house" and I'm proud to have you at my "house" with me. But, please be advised, bad behavior will result in you being removed from my "house."

Just thought I'd help some of you rid yourself of any guilt for "blocking" or "hiding" someone on FB. I've done it and will continue to do it.

___________________________________

This post was originally only on Facebook and seen by my friends. I decided to put it on my blog, which is open to anyone on the web so they might read it and find some peace in de-friending a few people, too!

King James Onlyism & Constantin Von Tischendorf

"King James Only" advocates have a penchant for parroting details out of context and/or spinning them to fit their own predetermined beliefs. Never mind following the facts where they lead you, especially if the facts lead you to a place that contradicts your long held and oft repeated dogma.

Recently, I heard someone repeating one of these inaccuracies while proposing that the KJV is the "only Bible in the English language for the English speaking people." In the process of making his point he completely misrepresented the facts about one of the oldest known Greek manuscripts discovered by Constantin Von Tischendorf and called the Codex Sinaiticus. Because this manuscript significantly predates the Textus Receptus, which is the foundational Greek text for the “KJV Only” position, advocates for this position often seek to diminish the importance of this monumental find. You can Google the story about the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus and see the facts for yourself. But, following is a portion of Tischendorf's own account of finding this magnificent document.

“It was in April, 1844, that I embarked at Leghorn for Egypt. The desire which I felt to discover some precious remains of any manuscripts, more especially Biblical, of a date which would carry us back to the early times of Christianity, was realized beyond my expectations. It was at the foot of Mount Sinai, in the Convent of St. Catherine, that I discovered the pearl of all my researches. In visiting the library of the monastery, in the month of May, 1844, I perceived in the middle of the great hall a large and wide basket full of old parchments; and the librarian, who was a man of information, told me that two heaps of papers like these, mouldered by time, had been already committed to the flames. What was my surprise to find amid this heap of papers a considerable number of sheets of a copy of the Old Testament in Greek, which seemed to me to be one of the most ancient that I had ever seen. The authorities of the convent allowed me to possess myself of a third of these parchments, or about forty-three sheets, all the more readily as they were destined for the fire. But I could not get them to yield up possession of the remainder. The too lively satisfaction which I had displayed had aroused their suspicions as to the value of this manuscript. I transcribed a page of the text of Isaiah and Jeremiah, and enjoined on the monks to take religious care of all such remains which might fall in their way.”

As you can see, Tischendorf in no way disparaged his find as being inconsequential or the discovery of an inferior Greek manuscript filled with errors. Quite the contrary! He saw it as the greatest discovery of his lifetime. Furthermore, the monks were not burning parts of this manuscript because it had no value, but because they didn’t know its value. It wasn’t even the New Testament that was being burned, it was parts of the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament) that were slated for the fire. In addition, not all of what was being burned was from the Septuagint, but apparently included other documents that most evangelical scholars don’t consider part of the biblical canon anyway. And, as we’ll discover in a moment, most of the Codex that Tischendorf so desperately wanted to see was “wrapped in a red cloth” and stored away in the “corner of [a] room” at the Convent of St. Catherine.

Becasue Tischendorf saw only a small portion of this extremely valuable manuscript on his first visit to Sinai, he returned fifteen years later to find all of the treasured Codex Sinaiticus. Listen to his delight upon discovering this ancient treasure with the entire New Testament intact.

“On the afternoon of this day I was taking a walk with the steward of the convent in the neighbourhood, and as we returned, towards sunset, he begged me to take some refreshment with him in his cell. Scarcely had he entered the room, when, resuming our former subject of conversation, he said: ‘And I, too, have read a Septuagint’--i.e. a copy of the Greek translation made by the Seventy. And so saying, he took down from the corner of the room a bulky kind of volume, wrapped up in a red cloth, and laid it before me. I unrolled the cover, and discovered, to my great surprise, not only those very fragments which, fifteen years before, I had taken out of the basket, but also other parts of the Old Testament, the New Testament complete, and, in addition, the Epistle of Barnabas and a part of the Pastor of Hermas. Full of joy, which this time I had the self-command to conceal from the steward and the rest of the community, I asked, as if in a careless way, for permission to take the manuscript into my sleeping chamber to look over it more at leisure. There by myself I could give way to the transport of joy which I felt. I knew that I held in my hand the most precious Biblical treasure in existence--a document whose age and importance exceeded that of all the manuscripts which I had ever examined during twenty years' study of the subject. I cannot now, I confess, recall all the emotions which I felt in that exciting moment with such a diamond in my possession. Though my lamp was dim, and the night cold, I sat down at once to transcribe the Epistle of Barnabas. For two centuries search has been made in vain for the original Greek of the first part of this Epistle, which has only been known through a very faulty Latin translation. And yet this letter, from the end of the second down to the beginning of the fourth century, had an extensive authority, since many Christians assigned to it and to the Pastor of Hermas a place side by side with the inspired writings of the New Testament. This was the very reason why these two writings were both thus bound up with the Sinaitic Bible, the transcription of which is to be referred to the first half of the fourth century, and about the time of the first Christian emperor.”

What could possibly be the justification for a person mischaracterizing and misrepresenting the discovery of one of the greatest treasures of all manuscript history? Have we reached a place where defending a tenuous position is more important than reporting historical facts accurately (people wouldn’t stand for this being done with American history)? Are some too ashamed or too proud to admit that they might have been wrong about the facts? If you want my opinion, I think most “KJV Only” advocates merely parrot what other misinformed people have told them, thus perpetuating the inaccuracies. It doesn’t matter how many times you tell an inaccurate story it is still inaccurate, even if people believe that what you are telling them is accurate. What you then have is little more than collective ignorance about the most important single document in the history of mankind...the Bible.

Here’s where the “logic” really meets the road. Until “KJV Only” advocates can produce a SINGLE, IDENTIFIABLE, and PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE manuscript that PERFECTLY REPRESENTS the originals penned by the authors so that we can compare all manuscript evidence to this original, the “KJV Only” position logically falls apart. History is indisputable in showing that God’s Word has been preserved in thousands of manuscripts which must be meticulously compared by textual scholars to bring us as close as possible to the original autographs penned by the authors of scripture. No two extant manuscripts match any other manuscript exactly and hence the need for this kind of careful textual analysis (i.e., textual criticism) to discover what the originals actually said. The extremely small amount of uncertainty in textual criticism (estimated to be less than 2% of the total text) does not affect any doctrine or core belief of the Christian faith. Even the highly revered (by “KJV only” advocates) Textus Receptus was derived using textual criticism employed by Erasmus, Stephanus, and Beza. So using this scientific approach to reveal the original biblical text does not, therefore, threaten the doctrine of inspiration and infallibility of the Bible. The real threat to scripture comes through people who are so bent on proving an unsupportable and illogical position that they are even willing to “spin” and/or misrepresent historical data in order to support their spurious point of view.

It’s time to stop arguing against modern Bible translations in an effort to have everyone return to Elizabethan English used in a cultural setting long past. There is no such thing as a “King James Bible,” as some “KJV Only” proponents boldly assert. It is and has always been known as the “King James VERSION,” meaning it is one of many translations (versions) of the Bible that have been made available to Christians through the ages. Use one/several of the translations available in your local Christian bookstore and/or on your electronic devices and let them enhance your understanding of God’s Word...it will foster a deeper walk with Jesus Christ in your life.  

Synopsis of Jude's Letter

Jude was the half brother of Jesus Christ and the author of the N.T. book that bears his name (1:1). Though we don’t know a great deal about the church or the Christians to whom he wrote (there are similarities between his letter and those of Peter, which might be a clue), he was deeply concerned for their spiritual well-being because of the presence of false teaching and false teachers in their church. His original intent was to write about their common salvation (1:3) so they could rejoice together in its many blessings. But, because false teachers/doctrine had slipped into their fellowship (“crept in unnoticed” – 1:4), he felt compelled to admonish the believers in the church to “earnestly contend for the faith” (1:3). These Christians were encouraged to not idly stand by while these purveyors of false doctrine and profligate living rambled about among their people. They had to take action and become active in the struggle against error and for the truth.

The presence of this doctrinal error was clearly dangerous to the spiritual lives of these people and to their testimony as believers. And, they needed to know that if God did not spare His own people (1:5), the disobedient angels (1:6), or the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah (1:7), He certainly would not spare these unrepentant apostates or the church that coddled them. These false teachers were having a significant negative influence in the congregation because of their immorality, rebelliousness, and presumptuous sins (1:8-11). Jude chose two well-known examples from the O.T. to show the danger these apostates posed (1:11). So pronounced was this danger that five descriptive word pictures are used to express his concern. He said they were like “spots in your love feasts,” “clouds without water,” “trees without fruit,” “raging waves,” and “wandering stars” (1:12-14). As these phrases indicate, the apostates had nothing to offer that was fulfilling or brought direction to these believers. They were characterized by empty promises, aimlessness of purpose, and unrestrained wickedness. As far back as the days of Enoch God had said that He would judge the wickedness of people of this ilk (1:14-15).

It’s not until you get almost two-thirds of the way through the letter (1:17) and after he has thoroughly revealed the true character of the apostates, as well as their certain judgment, that Jude gives the first direct commands to this fellowship (each of the following words/phrases is an imperative: “remember,” “keep,” “have compassion,” “save with fear,” and “hate the garments” – 1:17-23). Central to these commands is the one that states that they are to “keep [themselves] in the love of God” (1:20), which he explains as being accomplished by “building yourselves up on your most holy faith” (1:20A), “praying in the Holy Spirit” (1:20B), and “looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1:21). If the church would take a strong stance for the Apostolic doctrine handed down to them and get in the fight for truth, it was even possible that some that had been deceived by the apostates could be saved from the coming judgment (1:22-23). That, along with the purity of the church, was additional motivation for them to get off the sidelines and get in the struggle for the truth.

As quickly as the letter begins, it ends with the most complete and arguably, the most beautiful doxology in scripture. Jude was reminding these believers that their ultimate purpose was to glorify God through lives that are holy. Christ was/is able to keep His children from falling into the grievous errors of these apostates, if they’d simply entrust themselves to Him and to the truth they had received about Him (1:24-25).

Is Mormonism really a cult?

Dr. Robert Jeffress, pastor of the famed First Baptist Church, in Dallas, TX, lit off a vociferous debate when he recently declared that Mormonism is a cult and incompatible with the Christian faith. He made his declaration at a campaign appearance with Governor Rick Perry who is running for the presidency of the United States. To most of us that have studied comparative religions his remarks weren't shocking at all, nor did they reveal anything we didn't already know. But, to the left-leaning American news media it was the modern day equivalent of the "shot heard round the world" (especially in the context of a political campaign).

The media quickly began vilifying the pastor for his insensitive remarks and even some that operate under the name of Christianity joined in the fray. In our pluralistic society where no one is wrong and everyone is right, to make an absolute declaration, especially about what it means to be a Christian, is considered by many Americans as the epitome of intolerance.

The saddest part of the whole ordeal to me was the lack of support Dr. Jeffress received from those who know the truth about the roots of Mormonism (Christian leaders). It might be argued that the venue where his observation was made was not the most advantageous setting for a minister of the Gospel. However, he was simply answering a question asked of him by the media and his clarity, as well as his courage to speak the truth in such a context, is what's missing from many of our Christian leaders and churches these days.

Just so you know why Mormonism and Christianity are not compatible faiths, I have included a brief synopsis of Mormonism written by Dr. Albert Mohler. People following the “Jesus” of Mormonism may be deeply sincere people, but their souls are in eternal jeopardy. To fail to speak the truth to them is to show a lack of concern for their eternal destinies.

"Mormonism starts with an understanding of God that rejects both monotheism and the Christian doctrine of the Trinity. The Mormon concept of God includes many gods, not one. Furthermore, Mormonism teaches that we are now what God once was and are becoming what He now is...From a Christian perspective, Mormonism is a new religion, complete with its own scripture, its own priesthood, its own rituals, and its own teachings...Mormonism rejects orthodox Christianity as the very argument for its own existence, and it clearly identifies historic Christianity as a false faith [emphasis mine].

"Mormonism rejects the Bible as the sole and sufficient authority for the faith, and insists that The Book of Mormon and other authoritative Latter-Day Saints writings constitute God’s final revelation. Furthermore, the authority in Mormonism is mediated through a human priesthood, through whom God is claimed to speak directly and authoritatively to the church. Nothing makes the distinction between Mormonism and historic Christianity more clear than the experience of reading The Book of Mormon. The very subtitle of The Book of Mormon — Another Testament of Jesus Christ — makes one of Mormonism’s central claims directly and candidly: That we need another authority to provide what is lacking in the New Testament.

"The Mormon doctrine of sin is not that of biblical Christianity, nor is its teaching concerning salvation. Rather than teaching that the death of Christ is alone sufficient for the forgiveness of sins, Mormonism presents a scheme of salvation that amounts to the progressive deification of the believer. According to Mormonism, sinners are not justified by faith alone, but also by works of righteousness and obedience. Mormonism’s teachings concerning Jesus Christ start with a radically different understanding of the Virgin Birth and proceed to a fundamentally different understanding of Christ’s work of salvation.

"By its very nature, Mormonism borrows Christian themes, personalities, and narratives. Nevertheless, it rejects what orthodox Christianity affirms and it affirms what orthodox Christianity rejects. It is not orthodox Christianity in a new form or another branch of the Christian tradition. By its own teachings and claims, it rejects any claim of continuity with orthodox Christianity. Insofar as an individual Mormon holds to the teachings of the Latter-Day Saints, he or she repudiates biblical Christianity...[emphasis mine]"

Those are the basics about the Mormon religion in "Cliff Note" form! So, let me commend Dr. Robert Jeffress for having the courage and conviction to articulate what is the truth about Mormonism...it is a cult. I wish more Christians had the courage to speak the "truth in love" so we might rescue as many Mormons as possible from the clutches of eternal destruction.

Seeing What God Sees

Why do we fail to see people the way God sees them? How can we miss what is most important in other people's lives? Why don't we recognize the real need for mission work here and around the world?

The disciples of Christ struggled with this issue in the same way we do at times and you hear Jesus’ diagnosis of their problem in the story of the Samaritan woman.

We don't see as God sees...
1. Because we are preoccupied with the temporal/material.

After Jesus had finished talking with the Samaritan woman the disciples returned from Sycar with food for themselves and Jesus. They kept on insisting (4:31, “urged” - imperfect, active verb meaning “to keep on asking, begging”) that He take some of the food for Himself, but He consistently refused. His explanation was that He had food to eat that was more important than the food they had brought from the city. But, they struggled to grasp His meaning (4:33).

All the disciples could see and had interest in at that moment was the temporal/material (food) and it kept them from seeing what Jesus saw and wanted them to see.

We are too often preoccupied by the temporal/material and it blinds us to the real needs of people. We live for the things this world offers while neglecting what really matters...the eternal souls of people.

When will enough (things) be enough? When will more be too much? When will we say no to greed and avarice in our lives? Whatever happened to contentment? Materialism grips this age and many Christians are caught in its grasp.

What if God gives you more so you can invest in greater ways in His Kingdom work, not so you can spend more on yourself? Shouldn't we be willing to sacrifice for the cause of Christ as those in the first century sacrificed or were taught to sacrifice for others? (Acts 5; 2 Corinthians 8:1-4; 1 Timothy 6:6-10, 17-19)

We don't see as God sees...
2. Because we are oblivious to the eternal.

When the pursuit of the temporal/material becomes the primary focus of our lives we will no longer see the eternal things that really matter to God.

Jesus contrasted three things in this story that illustrated a distinction between the temporal and the eternal: water (4:10), food (4:34), & the harvest (4:35).

The disciples had gone into Sycar to get food, but never thought about the need of the souls in the city. They interacted with, had conversations among, and made purchases from the Samaritan people. But, as far we know, they never invited one person from the city to come out and meet Jesus.

On the other hand, a woman who had only known Jesus for less than an hour went back into the city and led a large group of people out to Him. Consequently, there were many in Samaria that believed on Him because of her (4:39-41).

Jesus rebuked His disciples for not recognizing the immediate spiritual need by quoting a phrase/proverb that was common among the people: "There are still four months and then comes the harvest" (4:35). This saying was familiar to the people and was used to indicate the need for patience or delayed action. (Something equivalent to, "Rome wasn't build in a day," i.e., it takes time.) In other words, the disciples were procrastinating about something that needed attention now...not later: the souls of the Samaritan people.

When you become preoccupied with the temporal/material you also become oblivious to the eternal. You’re living for yourself and for what you can get out of life at the moment, never realizing that there are people you could be influencing for the Kingdom of God. The need of people for the Gospel never crosses your mind or you choose to think about something other than what Jesus prioritizes. It’s the fundamental reason too many people won’t prioritize missionary endeavors or rearrange their spending to include the support of missionaries. They are oblivious to the eternal because they are preoccupied with the temporal/material.

We don't see as God sees...
3. Because we are ignorant of the potential.

Jesus quoted a second parable to the disciples that said, "one man sows and another reaps" (4:37). That point seems obvious, but the metaphor really speaks of an inequity that was recognized in the first century.

The joy was in the reaping, not always in the sowing. The sowers worked hard to prepare the ground and plant the seed, but often did not get to participate in the harvest. Consequently, they missed the celebrations that occurred during that special season of the year. Most people of this period saw this as an inequity that couldn't be helped. It’s a little like working hard most of your life to amass enough money so you can enjoy the rest of your life in ease only to die unexpectedly and leave it for someone else to enjoy. Sometimes life just doesn’t seem fair!

However, Jesus was saying to His disciples that the spiritual harvest of people's souls is different. Both the sower and the reaper equally experience the reward of bringing someone to Christ. Both will be rewarded for the labor they invest, regardless of whether they sow the seed (of the Gospel) or harvested the souls for Christ's Kingdom. Both would rejoice (4:36) in Heaven when the ones they’d led to Christ or helped others lead to Him, met them there. There is no inequity in the harvest fields of the world where God is at work. The one that sends the missionary, as well as the missionary himself/herself will rejoice and be rewarded together.

The disciples were ignorant of the potential that was right before them. If they only realized the opportunities around them they could lay hold of eternal treasures for Heaven’s sake.

When you become preoccupied with the temporal/material you lose sight of the eternal and fail to realize the potential of reaching others with the Good News that Jesus saves.

Jesus had to “shake” the disciples in order to get them to focus on what was really important. That’s why the first thing He says to them before telling them to, “lift up [their] eyes and look at the fields,” is “BEHOLD.” It is sort of like verbally grabbing someone by the shoulders and giving him a gentle “shake” in order to get his attention to see/understand what he is missing.

Conclusion:
Why don't you see the need of being involved in reaching the lost souls of this world? What are you willing to sacrifice so you can invest in the eternal rewards of Heaven? What changes will you make in your spending/living to prioritize what God prioritizes?

What will it take for God to get your attention so you will see what He sees?

The Church's Primary Mandate

The Mission
Matthew 28:18-20

It seems like everybody has a cause/mission they want you to join these days. As Christians many of these causes/missions are worthy of our interest, but never at the expense of our central mission. We cannot allow ourselves to be diverted from what God has primarily called us to do or permit His mandate to become so diluted by other things that we fail to fulfill the Great Commission.

I want to demonstrate that the Great Commission IS (!!) His primary mandate for the church by looking at several factors concerning this command:

1. The Location (28:16)

Mountains were important places where instruction/revelation were often given:

• Mt. Sinai
• Sermon on the Mount
• Mount of Transfiguration
• The Olivet Discourse on the Mount of Olives

Here...He invites the disciples to another mountaintop experience because what He has to tell them is to be another monumental moment in their lives.

2. The Repetition (28:19-20)

• “And He said to them, Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature.” (Mark 16:15)
• “And the gospel must first be preached to all nations.” (Mark 13:10)
• “Truly I tell you, wherever the gospel is preached throughout the world, what she has done will also be told, in memory of her.” (Mark 14:9)
• “Then He said to them, ‘Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. And you are witnesses of these things. Behold, I send the Promise of My Father upon you; but tarry in the city of Jerusalem until you are endued with power from on high.’” (Luke 24:46-49)
• “So Jesus said to them again, ‘Peace to you! As the Father has sent Me, I also send you.’” (John 20:21)
• “As You sent Me into the world, I also have sent them into the world.” (John 17:18)
• “But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.” (Acts 1:8)

3. The Occasion (28:18)

This commission was given after His resurrection and before His Ascension...as His last words!

A man’s last words usually carry special weight in scripture, especially when it’s specifically preserved in some form in all the Gospels, as well as the Acts of the Apostles.

Ex. Jacob, Moses, Joshua, David, Elijah, Paul (Acts 20; 2 Timothy), Peter (2 Peter 1:12-15.

4. The Configuration

The Great Commission is the focal point to and from which the Gospels and Acts flow.

A. The Gospel of Matthew:

• Matthew speaks more about disciples/discipleship than any other Gospel: What they believe, how they behave, what they must sacrifice...”Go therefore and MAKE DISCIPLES...”
• Matthew shows Jesus as the fulfillment of the O.T. Law/Prophets...The Great Commission emphasizes His authority (28:18).
• The Magi’s presence from the east is a reminder that He wants to reach all nations...”make disciples of ALL NATIONS...”
• “Today scholars agree that the entire Gospel points to these final verses: All the threads woven into the fabric of Matthew, from Chapter 1 onward, draw together here” (Bosch, Transforming Mission, p. 57)

B. The Acts of the Apostles:

“...you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.”  (Acts 1:8)

• Acts 2-7... The Gospel is preached to Jerusalem
• Acts 8... The Gospel goes to Judea and Samaria
• Acts 9... The Gospel goes to the ends of the earth

“The Great Commission is the climax to which everything points and the fountain from which everything flows.” (Kevin DeYoung)

5. The Affirmation

“All authority is given to me...I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” (Matthew 28:18, 20)

“There can only be a mission imperative because there is first this glorious indicative. God does not send out His church to conquer. He sends us out in the name of the One who has ALREADY conquered. We only go because He reigns.” (Kevin DeYoung, What Is The Mission of the Church?, p. 45)

“Since Jesus Christ today has all authority, we may obey Him without fear. No matter where He leads us, no matter what circumstances we face, He is in control. By His death and resurrection, Jesus defeated all enemies and won for Himself all authority...Christianity is a missionary faith.” (Warren Wiersbe)

Never did any army have such assets behind them!!

AND...Jesus wants worshippers from every cultural/linguistic group in the world!

6. The Situation

There are four verbs in 28:19. The main verb is “make disciples” and the other three participles (which have the force of imperatives) show how it is to be accomplished.

A. The MANDATE: “Make disciples”

B. The MEANS:

• Going...implies sending
• Baptizing...implies joining (the family of God)
• Teaching...implies developing/growing

Mankind is lost and in need of the Savior!! We MUST obey the Great Commission!

The OT mandate = Come & See

The NT mandate = Go & Tell

The preponderance of this evidence demonstrates that world missions IS God’s primary mandate for His church!! Nothing should divert or dilute our effort in taking the Gospel around the world!!