Protestant Reformation: The Day After

Two days ago was Reformation Day (and Halloween, of course, but that’s less interesting), and I never did get around to writing anything or throwing in my token of celebration. So I’m taking up a different topic on this later day: the aftermath of the Reformation. I want to offer a few thoughts on the way the Reformation has turned out and what lies ahead. Specifically, I want to highlight some of what I see as the good, the bad, and the hopeful.

The Good

  • Yay for the abolishment of indulgence sales! Many Catholics took Luther’s critiques to heart. Indulgences still exist, but as more of a formal relic than they did, and they are no longer sold for money and don’t exploit the poor. And of course this whole nonsense has never been a part of the Protestant churches which sprung from the Reformation. By Biblical standards, this was clearly one of the worst and most reprehensible problems with the medieval Catholic church.
  • Yay for the rejection of advanced Mariology! I’m not going to say that the official Catholic dogma technically transgresses into idolatry, but in any case I think the fixation on Mary in Catholic theology goes far beyond what is Biblically warranted. The accumulations of doctrines like her immaculate conception and assumption are painful for me to even contemplate. Mary was certainly a good example and should be remembered as such, and she was certainly blessed with a very unique role in redemptive history, but I’m happy that Protestantism is not concerned with thoughts of how Mary could stay a virgin forever, be taken body and soul to heaven, and be preserved from sin through the entirety of her life.
  • Yay for the rejection of independent, created grace and human righteousness! While I disagree with many of my Protestant brethren on the precise way that Catholicism went wrong on these issues and the exact way of a Biblical response, the Catholic system, especially in its medieval days, did have serious problems. We depend on Christ alone at every step. Grace is not created into us in some way of generated habits of righteousness. We do not have any hold over God’s grace; it is not an object which can be put in us and which we can then manipulate for better or worse by our wills. The union we share with Christ, by which we are righteous, is personal and alien and Spirit-ually connected at every moment by nature.
  • Yay for the rejection of papal and magisterial authority! Whatever role Scripture ought rightly to play in relation to tradition, reason, and experience, the idea that any infallible doctrinal authority might be placed in the hands of a vicar of Christ of a single body of scholars is simply foreign to the Kingdom of God in Christ. In addition to the formal problem of whether such authority is legitimate, much of the doctrine they have propagated from that authority is problematic.
  • Yay for the collapse of church/state unity! While the original Reformers continued to unite church and state, it was nonetheless the overall movements begun with the Reformation which eventually toppled this destructive practice. We now (particularly in Baptist circles) strongly resist the idea the Church should make such use of the powers of this age, and even the Catholic Church has come to understand this.

The Bad

  • Boo for the divisions in Christ’s body! While I am glad for the Reformation, and I don’t think we can or should pursue institutional unity between Catholic and Protestant churches at this point in history, I hate the way so many people on each side (especially ours) condemn those on the other. We have serious disagreements that make full unity impossible, but it is to our shame if we refuse to at least be united in love, good works, and our witness to the world and so divide Christ’s Body. (Because, as I have written on multiple occasions before, I don’t believe Catholics are heretics.)
  • Boo for the reintroduction of created grace in Protestant theology! After the Reformers rejected so forcefully the idea that God actually creates an independently operating grace in the believer which he can use and manage on his own, modern theologies of regeneration tend to reproduce precisely this error.
  • Boo for replacement of magisterium with confessions! Confessions are important, even vital, to establishing certain doctrinal standards and maintaining boundaries of unity. But they are not infallible, and there is not one single confession from the Reformation or any other context which has no errors, no shortcomings, or no room for reformulation (maybe reformation!) as the Church marches on. Yet in many circles, primarily Reformed ones, the classic confessions (particularly the Westminster Confession) are treated as absolutely authoritative. Sure, the people who do this admit they are subservient to Scripture, but they act naively as though any confession repeats univocally the truth of God revealed through Scripture, and thus they create a de facto replacement for the Holy Tradition which so repels them from Catholicism.

The Hopeful

  • So much work has been done on the topic of justification in the past century (or centuries) that I truly believe a unified doctrine could be worked out, given sufficient effort, in the next century. That will depend on willingness and cooperation, but I believe the theological and exegetical work necessary to do this has already been accomplished. A unified doctrine of justification accepted by Protestants, Catholics, and the Orthodox is a goal visible on the horizon of the Church’s future, if we just reach out and take it.
  • Despite the many advances since the Reformation, it is not truly over. Much work still needs to be done, both in places where the Reformation never really took root (like Italy and many South American regions) and in places where people are as Reformed as can be. Ecclesia reformata, semper reformanda secundum verbi Dei: “the church is Reformed and always being reformed according to the Word of God.” The Reformation will, in a certain sense, never be finished even if we one day reach some glorious reunification of a purified Protestant/Catholic/Orthodox Church. Until Christ comes, we will always need to reevaluate, criticize, destroy, rebuild, repackage, rediscover, and relearn how to respond, both theologically and practically, to the truth of the Word of God spoken by the Spirit. Fortunately, I see great evidence that this work is ongoing and will be quite fruitful.
  • In the near future, I have hope we may see more interdenominational cooperation between conservative Christians of all traditions as the West becomes increasingly hostile in culture and law to orthodox Christian values and ways of life. Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterians, Lutherans, Catholics, and Orthodox will all need to work together to do the work of the Kingdom and sustain our Christian witness in the coming dark ages, and I am convinced that many, if not all, will rise to the challenge and make the Church appear more united that it has in a long time.
Protestant Reformation: The Day After

Jesus Prayed, “May They Be One as We Are One” (My Growing Passion for Church Unity)

Unity. This word frequently presses on my mind in relation to the Church. There appears to be little unity these days. We’ve splintered into thousands of denominations. Even the large denominations and groups are internally divided in many ways. Churches split from churches for stupid reasons. Churches fall apart because of horrible, divisive people. So many groups make their distinctives as though they were the Gospel itself. Baptists condemn those who baptize infants, conservative Protestants in general condemn those who don’t follow sola fide, Pentecostals accuse other groups of lacking the Spirit, Catholics anathemize anyone who doesn’t follow the Pope, Calvinists accuse all others of compromising God’s sovereignty or even works-righteousness, many evangelicals (or more fundamentalist ones) condemn everyone who doesn’t subscribe to strict Biblical inerrancy, progressives accuse conservatives of bigotry, etc.

This is to our shame. Do we have the right to divide Christ? Of course we must stand up for truth, and rebuke and correct fellow believers when they go wrong, and rally around the Gospel of Christ as opposed to all false Gospels, but where is the line? I believe wholeheartedly that the line is Jesus Christ Himself, the Son of God and Lord of All. Those who trust in Him are all bound in a way that condemns and transcends their divisions.

I, alas, do not have all of the experience and eloquence to make the case I want to make, so I want to highlight an amazing series of blog posts by Alastair Roberts. I deeply agree with and resonate with almost everything he says in these posts about church unity and denominations. I’m just going to link to his posts on this and provide an excerpt from each.

#1: The Denominational Church

The Gospel itself is not as complicated as our various ways of articulating its logic are. The Gospel itself is remarkably simple: the declaration that Jesus is Lord and that God raised Him from the dead. It is this that is central. The central truths of the Christian faith are well summarized in the Nicene Creed. If these central truths are comparable to a language like English, the varying articulations of the Gospel that one encounters among the different denominations are like regional dialects. While there are better and worse ways of articulating the Gospel and some ways of articulating the Gospel that are at risk of becoming a different ‘language’ altogether, we must beware of so identifying our ‘dialect’ with the ‘language’ that we exclude some other ‘dialects’ altogether.

#2: Thoughts on Denominations, Church Union and Reunion 1

We can often take a posture similar to that of Jonah in relation to Nineveh. We see the liberal church and delight to pronounce divine judgment upon it, not thinking that God may have a purpose of surprising grace in the situation. The story seldom ends in quite the same way as we think that it will do. Our God is a god who adds the twist to every tale.

It has been almost five hundred years since the Reformation began and yet, despite numerous predictions of its imminent demise over the last centuries, the Roman Catholic church is still with us. In fact there are exciting signs of new life in many quarters. There has been a resurgence of biblical scholarship. Among the laity in many areas there has been an increased reading of the Bible. As Mark Noll has observed, with the new Catholic lectionary more Scripture is read in Catholic worship than is read in many Protestant congregations. Some of the finest theology of the last century has come from Roman Catholics. Undoubtedly many of the errors are still widespread. However, the story is far from over. I would not be surprised if God still has wonderful purposes for the Roman Catholic church.

#3: Thoughts on Denominations, Church Union and Reunion 2

I believe that one of the reasons why God has saw fit to split His Church is in order to ensure that various important perspectives and insights are not lost in a premature union. Rather than permitting the creation of a weak, unsatisfactory and compromised union between various parties, God wishes to preserve the insights that He has given to various parties intact, until the time comes when the Church as a whole is mature enough truly to take these insights on board. Among the various denominations God has scattered lessons that He wishes His people to learn. When the lessons have been learnt — and not until then — the denominations will cease to be necessary.

#4: Thoughts on Denominations, Church Union and Reunion 3

Theology is the Church’s task of narrating the itinerary that will lead us to God. Theology must retain both the simplicity and the complexity of the gospel. Theology should not lose us in the back alleys, but must always keep us directed towards our destination. Theology, when done well, will help us to see the finest details of the varied sights along our path, all the while identifying the path itself with the most wonderful simplicity and clarity.

The theologian should always recognize that the path is so much greater than his itinerary can ever be. Other guides might have noticed things that he has missed. Furthermore, the fact that another guide does not mention some of his favourite sights does not necessarily mean that they are directing people along different paths.

Jesus Prayed, “May They Be One as We Are One” (My Growing Passion for Church Unity)

Evangelicals vs. Fundamentalists: What’s the Difference?

Broadly speaking, there are four kinds of people in Protestant Christianity. These are not denominational lines, but apply more broadly, affecting the entire Christian worldview. What are these sections? Liberalism, progressivism, evangelicalism, and fundamentalism. All of these are rather distinct. Liberals tend to deny fundamental tenants of Christian doctrine in favor of a more private and unobtrusive spirituality, with an emphasis on social issues. Progressives tend to hold at least to the basic creeds of Christian belief (one God, Trinity, deity of Jesus, historical death and resurrection of Christ, future resurrection, etc.), but feel free to discard certain traditional teachings usually involving the Old Testament revelation of God, Hell, homosexuality, and abortion, among others (obviously within progressivism there is quite a bit of variety on these matters).

But the divide between evangelicals and fundamentalists is not always as clear-cut, and indeed to most liberals and progressives there is no real difference. Being an evangelical myself, though, I think the issue deserves further clarification. For most people, “fundamentalist” is a pejorative term, which “evangelical” doesn’t always have the same connotations. Moreover, the confusion of the two groups both causes bad association arguments by people both within and without them. 

To further complicate matters, not everyone agrees on the definition of “fundamentalist.” To some people, “fundamentalist” just refers to those who believe the basic tenants of Christianity, which would even include many progressives. To others, a fundamentalist is someone who believes that the Bible is inerrant. To still others, a fundamentalist is anyone more conservative than themselves.

The working definition I will be using here for “fundamentalism” aligns more or less with that used commonly by studied evangelicals. We recognize ourselves as distinct from but in some ways near to fundamentalism, but take many sharp breaks. So I’ll be for my purposes counting fundamentalism as more or less like you would see in an Independent Fundamentalist Baptist church, or this fundamentalist website. Evangelicalism will be represented by something more along the lines of where I am, the more average church with which my friends and family would be familiar, or names like John Piper, Michael Patton, Bobby Grow, Francis Chan, David Platt, William Lane Craig, maybe John MacArthur, etc.

So without further ado, here’s how I would differentiate between evangelicals and fundamentalists, using various issues to demonstrate. As always, these rules are pretty general and the lines can be really blurry at times.

  • Evangelicals celebrate Christian liberty; fundamentalists restrict it. Evangelicals are not likely to indiscriminately classify dancing, drinking alcohol, contemporary music, or movies as sinful. Fundamentalists tend to consider all of these and more as unacceptable and compromise with the world.
  • Evangelicals treat secondary doctrines with more charity; fundamentalists treat almost all issues as essential. Evangelicals usually allow for disagreement on questions like election, free will, modes of baptism, eternal security, spiritual gifts, styles of music and church services, etc. Evangelicals are charitable to those who disagree on such issues and will often cooperate with them for the Gospel. Fundamentalists often are quite strict on these matters, setting up stuff like the timing of the Rapture or the rejection of Calvinism as if they could make or break true Christianity.
  • Evangelicals are eager to celebrate many ministries proclaiming Jesus; fundamentalists are suspicious and looking for faults in well-known preachers. A great example of this: most evangelicals appreciate Billy Graham and his son Franklin Graham. Fundamentalists tend to consider them both dangerous compromisers. Evangelicals may like John Piper, Rick Warren, Beth Moore, or Francis Chan, while fundamentalists would be afraid of them all.
  • Evangelicals are generally more open to other Christian traditions; fundamentalists accept only a small minority. While not all evangelicals agree on all the boundaries, as a general rule evangelicals are more likely to consider people across certain major denominational lines like Catholics, Orthodox, or Lutheran as true brothers in Christ. Fundamentalists decry them all, and none more than the Catholics who they regard as the worst offenders of false gospel.
  • Evangelicals believe in God’s wrath; fundamentalists obsess over it. Evangelicals do believe that God has wrath and in hellfire for the unrepentant, but that is not the focal point of their theology. Usually, God’s love and grace are given a bigger spotlight as they deserve. Fundamentalists get really pumped from preaching God’s wrath and putting sinners under judgment. They act like Hell is the center of the Gospel: it looms, Jesus gets you out of it, so tell everyone else to avoid it.
  • Evangelicals allow for different opinions on creation; fundamentalists treat a young earth as core to the faith. Many evangelicals believe in a young earth, but many also believe in an old earth, or that God used evolution as His tool in creation, and even when they strongly disagree with each other they accept each other as brothers in Christ and cooperate in ministry with grace. Fundamentalists warn that anything other than a young earth belief is liberal compromise with atheists, and undermines the Bible’s authority, and sometimes even that it sends people to Hell.
  • Evangelicals freely use whatever translation suits their devotional life and ministry; fundamentalists usually only use the KJV. While evangelicals recognize that God’s word is best heard in whatever makes His voice clearest, and so are willing to use the HCSB, ESV, NIV, or NLT with few qualms, fundamentalists don’t trust newer versions and are usually unwilling to go further than the NKJV. Not all of them say the KJV is God’s only word (though many do), but if nothing else there’s usually a very strong preference.
  • Evangelicals believe in culturally appropriate modesty; most fundamentalists tend to straight-jacket attire into very specific and arbitrary forms. Everyone knows that evangelicals care about modesty, and of course it’s a controversial issue even among us. But fundamentalists are often not willing to even participate in this kind of discourse. Many of them are in the “women can’t wear pants” crew, or would balk at girls wearing anything without complete sleeves. They do not see rationally on how culture, modesty, lust, and practicality intersect because of traditions of men.
  • Evangelicals want to help improve the fallen state of the world; fundamentalists are content to condemn people and wait in their pews for the end. Evangelicals are willing to preach that we should help share life and grace in the world not just by witnessing, but also by projects which meet people’s physical, mental, or emotional needs. Food pantries, crisis pregnancy centers, orphanages, and other social projects actually have evangelical volunteers. Fundamentalists tend to simply complain about the state of things and sigh while they wait for Jesus to show up. Some of them even say we shouldn’t bother with these matters when we could be soul-winning.
  • Evangelicals try to win the world to Christ; fundamentalists just talk about soul-winning. In the evangelical world, people actually try to use whatever means they can to show people the life available in Jesus. They, like Paul, are willing to “become all things to all people” to save some. But fundamentalists tend to preach about evangelism, but instead of actually trying to win people they tend to do whatever it takes to repel and disgust them. They’ll witness about grace without using any, or talk about a Jesus no one wants to follow.
Evangelicals vs. Fundamentalists: What’s the Difference?

Why I’m Still An Evangelical Protestant

Before I get into the meat of this post, I’ll define my terms for any readers who don’t know exactly what Evangelical Protestant refers to. “Protestant” encompasses all churches descended from the Reformation, when Martin Luther and others concluded there was rampant intuitional and doctrinal corruption in the Catholic Church. They tried to reform it, but wound up breaking off into their own churches. Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists, Pentecostals, and most other non-Catholic churches fall under this label. While there’s a lot of diversity among Protestants, we all agree that the Roman Catholic Church is not the one true church, and that their Pope, Magisterium, and Tradition do not have special/infallible teaching authority.

The other part of this label—”Evangelical”—is harder to give a simple definition for, but really applies to churches which, after the fundamentalist/liberal wars of the 20th century, carried on most of the fundamentalist theology with an emphasis on evangelism and Bible. Baptists and Pentecostals make up most of the Evangelical demographic, along with non-denominational churches, and smaller portions from the Lutheran, Reformed, and even Catholic traditions.

Most of you, my readers, are probably Evangelical Protestants, too (though I know I have a few filthy Papists reading!). If you’re Baptist, I guarantee you are one of us. If there’s any further confusion, what I’m going to say in a moment will clear it up more.

So why am I writing this? For two reasons. For one, in the wider world of Christendom, Evangelicalism gets a bad name. We’re viewed as immature, shallow, and ignorant. But while there are several valid critiques by people both inside and outside Evangelicalism, I think much of the disdain is also undeserved or at very least exaggerated. We have strengths which offset and I daresay outweigh our weaknesses, and they deserve a fair hearing. The second reason for this post is to reassure you all that I really am still an Evangelical at heart. I frequently criticize the Evangelical world, and I often also defend other traditions, but I want to clarify that I only do this because Evangelicals are my own flesh and blood. Evangelicalism is still my home, and as such I’m more aware of its flaws than those of any other group. Who do you criticize more than your own family? But as family, however critical I may be, I’ll defend my Evangelical brethren to the death.

So, without further ado, here are the things that I think Evangelical Protestantism gets right, the things which keep me from leaving home.

Biblicism
We Evangelicals have a unique respect for the authority of Scripture. Radical fundamentalists treat Scripture like the Pharisees with their actually unbiblical rules and regulations. Liberal Protestants treat the Bible as an inferior thing to their modern and postmodern values, eschatologies, and science. Catholics give their own so-called “Sacred Tradition”equal weight to Scripture and give their leaders the ability to set interpretations in stone. As far as I’ve seen, only Evangelicals consistently try to live under the Bible, taking it at its word as best as we understand. Even when we let other stuff mess up our understanding of Scripture, there’s always a willingness to simply follow what it says.
Relationship
However much the term “personal relationship with Jesus” is overused and abused, there remains a very legitimate concept that each of us must have intimate fellowship with the Father through the Son through the Spirit. We emphasize the personal: you do not inherit union with Jesus from your parents or culture but must embrace Him yourself. We pound hard on the relationship: Jesus is personally invested in us with a great love and seeks for us to reciprocate. Prayer, Scripture, and all Christian acts bring us to know our Savior.
Passion
Nothing says “passion” like a big gathering of Evangelicals, especially teenagers. Sure, some of its hormones and shenanigans, but there’s real stuff, too, because in Evangelicalism we teach people to own their faith and let it drive their lives. Challenges and energy define our events and movements. While passion alone can be misplaced or fizzle out, when used properly it is a valuable asset for Christianity, moving people to really carry forth the love of Christ in the Gospel in a visible and impactful way.
Cultural Engagement
I’m not a fan of full-blown efforts to be/become “relevant,” but if there’s one place Evangelicals stand out most obviously it is in attempts to contextualize the truth and use popular culture and media to spread the Gospel. Sure, it’s usually done awkwardly and sometimes even embarrassingly, but that’s precisely why we need to keep people in Evangelicalism: so that theologians, data experts, and other people with necessary skills can round out the group in such attempts.
Evangelism
Last, but far from least, Evangelicals practically have a monopoly of the namesake, evangelism. As far as I know, no other tradition comes close to matching Evangelicals on the priority of taking the Good News about Jesus to those who haven’t heard. The Southern Baptists practically rule the missionary world. We’re not the only ones who believe in Hell, but we probably take it the most seriously. Plus, while most of the other traditions are talking about the importance of social justice, meeting needs, and solving problems in society (usually over the importance of evangelism), we Evangelicals are often out incorporating those very things into our mission work, spreading the Gospel while improving the world. And this, I believe, is of the utmost importance. After all, what was is the martyrs who Catholics so revere died doing? To what cause did Peter, supposedly their first Pope, devote his life?

I could probably extend this list a bit, but I think what I’ve mentioned so far, especially the first and last points, is enough to make my point. Despite all my theological musings, perplexities, and wanderings, these qualities of Evangelical Protestantism have kept me here. I honestly believe this is the best tradition for these reasons, even if I offer plenty of criticism, too. I only complain because I want to see us become the best and most Christian we can really be. And again, it’s these first and last points that really hold me in. I cannot conceive of doing Christianity that it’s robustly and ministerially Biblical, and emphatically evangelistic (even if in my personal life I don’t always live these out). So I plan on sticking around. And unless God decides to seriously throw me off, I expect that’s just what I’ll do.

(P. S. The Frances Chan featured image is because I think he’s one of the best we Evangelical Protestants have to offer.)

Why I’m Still An Evangelical Protestant

In Defense of My Catholic Brethren

Are Catholics Christians? To phrase it better, is Catholicism truly Christian, a thing which genuinely preaches and follows our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ? Do faithful, educated Catholics actually know Him?

I do believe the answer is “yes.”

I’ve wanted on some level to make a post on this for a very long time, but in all honesty fear has held me back, fear of how my evangelical Protestant friends, relatives, and other readers will react. I believe this was wrong of me, because if I am right that Catholics and Protestant are united as children born from the Father, then I should be willing to own my brothers instead of be ashamed.

So why do I believe that Catholicism is a legitimate part of the Christian religion, that Catholics are as born again as Protestants? Well, I’m not a Catholic apologist, so I won’t bother answering common objections about Mary, prayer to saints, images, transubstantiation, or baptismal regeneration. I don’t believe in these things, and I do think they’re problematic. My research and discussions with Catholics have at least led me to believe, though, that they are far from damnable heresies.

Where I believe things count the most, Catholics agree with us. We follow one God in the three persons of Father, Son, and Spirit. We agree that Jesus Himself was/is that Son, God become human for us and for our salvation. We believe He died and rose to set us free from sin and for Him. We believe in the coming final judgment and resurrection of the dead.

The core of this all is Jesus. Unlike every cult, false religion, and demonic ideology out there, Catholics get Jesus right. They trust in the one and only Mediator, the God-man, who lived and died to bring salvation to the human race. They preach Jesus the crucified Messiah and risen Lord. What else must we ask of them?

The truth is that God never listed for us certain doctrines about salvation, or the church, or praying which we absolutely must believe to be a Christian. He only says to throw ourselves on His Son as our only hope. Our good doctrine or bad doctrine, just like our good and bad works, are not the ground of our salvation. That is Jesus Himself. And as long as He alone is our hope and trust, we are promised that we will never perish but have eternal life, even if you’re Catholic.

None of this is to say that right beliefs are unimportant, or that there are no Catholic practices that are legitimately wrong. But the same goes for us. We all have something wrong, and probably all have some big stuff wrong. From what I see of Jesus in the Scriptures, and from the history of His Church, we are in no place to judge others for what we do ourselves on this matter.

The reason I bring this up at all is because I’m convicted about unity. Paul repeatedly commanded believers to have one heart and one mind, pounding unity over and over in his letters. John insisted that everyone born of God must show love to all of his brothers and sisters. Jesus Himself prayed to the Father asking that the coming church would be one just like He and the Father are one. This radical call to unity in Jesus our Savior means it is shameful, even sinful, for me to hide my belief that Catholics are fellow participants in God’s eternal life.

Unfortunately, in the average evangelical Protestant church, no one really knows or understands what Catholics actually believe and why they believe it. So we resort to inaccurate one-liners, gossip, and misrepresentations to maintain the wall of separation. This is clearly a shame. Because of this, I plan to ask some of my Catholic friends to continue guest posts to help give you more of their perspective on things, so that we can at least unite around the common love we have for Jesus and understand each other, even where we disagree.

In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas.

In Defense of My Catholic Brethren

A Few Silly Christian Jokes

Christian jokes. Gotta’ love ’em. Without further ado, here’s what I got:

Baptist Jokes

You might be a Southern Baptist if:

  • You think God’s presence is strongest on the back three pews.
  • Your definition of fellowship has something to do with food.
  • You honestly believe that the Apostle Paul spoke King James English.
  • You think Jesus actually used Welch’s grape juice and saltine crackers.
  • You think someone who says “Amen” while the preacher is preaching might be a Charismatic.
  • You clapped in church and felt guilty about it all week.
  • You got saved at 6 years old.
  • You are old enough to get a senior discount at the pharmacy, but not old enough to promote to the Senior Adult Sunday School.
  • You judge all church meals by the quantity and quality of the fried chicken.
  • You’ve ever gossipped about how much someone else gossips.
  • You have never sung the third verse of any hymn.
Why don’t Baptists believe in premarital sex?
Because it might lead to dancing.
What’s the difference between a Pentecostal and a Baptist?
One believes in a second blessing and one believes in a second helping.

Jews don’t recognize Jesus as the Son of God.
Protestants don’t recognize the pope as the Ruler of the Church.
Baptists don’t recognize each other in a liquor store.

One day a man dies, who was a devout Christian. Saint Peter meets him at the Pearly Gates and begins to give him a tour of Heaven. As the tour goes on, Saint Paul points out all the different Christians. “There’s the Catholics, there’s the Lutherans, the Methodists, the Presbyterians”, and so forth. As they come to this one group way off to themselves, Saint Paul motions for the man to come closer and whispers. “Now, for this next group, we need to be really quiet. They are the Baptists and they think they’re the only ones here.”

How do we know Adam was Baptist? Only a Baptist could stand next to a naked woman and be tempted by food.

A teacher asked her students to bring an item to class that represented their religious beliefs. A Catholic student brought a crucifix. A Jewish student brought a Menora. A Southern Baptist student brought a casserole.

A Dictionary of Arminian Terms

  • All (1): All always means all. Yup, Jesus died for every single human, including those already dead and in hell, and even including himself.
    (2): (as to sin) If its related to sin, “all” doesn’t include babies.
  • Arminius, Jacob: The first church father.
  • Assurance: Keep trying, hopefully you’ll make it, but since you have libertarian free will, you could just flip sides one day. Never can tell.
  • Bible: Cool book with stories that can be used as springboards into inspiring sermons about nothing to do with the text whatsoever. (See exegesis.)
  • Calvinism: We love everyone, because God is love. Calvinists are devil worshipers, their God is the devil, and Calvinism is a devil worshiping doctrine. We love them.
  • Calvin, John: Satan incarnated.
  • Dead (1): (as to Christ) Really, complete dead. Unable to see, hear, or respond to stimuli.
    (2): (as to Adam’s posterity) Somewhat sick. It’s hard to see, hear, or respond to the Gospel.
  • Determinism: False Calvinist teaching that God makes sure that his plan will come about.
  • Devil Worship: What Calvinism leads to. (Really.)
  • Drawing: Wooing. Usage example: “Drawing doesn’t mean God will surely bring men to himself, he (now, pooch lips out, making a small opening, and, in a low voice say) woooos them.”
  • Effectual call: Unbiblical Calvinist doctrine. Just as Calvinists try to make unwarranted leaps from physical death to spiritual death, they also make unwarranted leaps from earthly careers like “Shepherding,” viz., “My sheep hear my voice, I know them, they follow me,” to how God brings in his people in the flock, er fold, er, group.
  • Election: God’s “choosing” of people who chose him first. Kind of like me “voting” for the president after November 4th, 2008.
  • Evil: Something God cannot decree (except in the case of Jesus since God decreed his death at the purposeful hands of humans)
  • Exegesis: What?

A Dictionary of Calvinist Terms

  • All (1): (as to salvation) The elect. Duh.
    (2): (as to sin) All means all, and that’s all all means.
  • Arminianism: see false Gospel.
  • Arminius, Jacob: Father of heresies.
  • Assurance: If you’re elect, you’re guaranteed a spot in heaven. No worries. Nothing can separate you from the love of God. How do you know you’re elect? Well…
  • Bible: Book with lots of random references to Calvinism.
  • Calvinism: A nickname for the Gospel.
  • Calvin, John: The only divinely inspired prophet since the closing of the canon.
  • Determinism: God determined from eternity past how your child will die.
  • Drawing: Forceful and irresistible, but altogether pleasant, dragging by God.
  • Effectual call: When God flicks the switch in your heart to make you love Him for realsies. But He only does that to the elect.
  • Election: How God segregated the human race into Calvinists and everyone else.
  • Evil: God’s clever invented enemy He crushed to make Himself look good.
  • Exegesis: The art of making all of the Bible Calvinist.

Light Bulb Denominational Jokes

How many charismatics does it take to change a light bulb?
One, since his/her hands are in the air anyway.
How many Calvinists does it take to change a lightbulb?
None. God has predestined when the lights will be on.
How many liberals does it take to change a light bulb?
10, as they need to hold a debate into whether or not the lightbulb exists. Even if they can agree upon the existence of the lightbulb they may not go ahead and change it for fear of alienating those who use fluorescent tubes.
How many Anglo-Catholics does it take to change a lightbulb?
None. They always use candles instead.
How many Arminians does it take to change a light bulb?
Arminians do not change light bulbs. They simply read out the instructions and hope the light bulb will decide to change itself.
How many Atheists does it take to change a lightbulb?
One. But they are still in darkness.
How many Brethren does it take to change a light bulb?
Change??
How many Pentecostals does it take to change a light bulb?
10, one to change it and 9 others to pray against the spirit of darkness.
How many TV evangelists does it take to change a lightbulb?
One. But for the message of hope to continue to go forth, send in your donation today.
How many campfire worship leaders does it take to change a lightbulb?
One. But soon all those around can warm up to its glowing.
How many charismatics does it take to change a lightbulb?
Three. One to cast it out and two to catch it when it falls.

Cheesy Dialogue Jokes

A collector of rare books ran into an acquaintance who told him he had just thrown away an old Bible that he found in a dusty, old box. He happened to mention that Guten-somebody-or-other had printed it.

“Not Gutenberg?” gasped the collector.

“Yes, that was it!”

“You idiot! You’ve thrown away one of the first books ever printed. A copy recently sold at auction for half a million dollars!”

“Oh, I don’t think this book would have been worth anything close to that much,” replied the man. “It was scribbled all over in the margins by some guy named Martin Luther.”


There was a barber that thought that he should share his faith with his customers more than he had been doing lately. So the next morning when the sun came up and the barber got up out of bed he said, “Today I am going to witness to the first man that walks through my door.”

Soon after he opened his shop the first man came in and said, “I want a shave!” The barber said, “Sure, just sit in the seat and I’ll be with you in a moment.” The barber went in the back and prayed a quick desperate prayer saying, “God, the first customer came in and I’m going to witness to him. So give me the wisdom to know just the right thing to say to him. Amen.”

Then quickly the barber came out with his razor knife in one hand and a Bible in the other while saying “Good morning sir. I have a question for you… Are you ready to die?”


A boy was sitting on a park bench with one hand resting on an open Bible. He was loudly exclaiming his praise to God. “Hallelujah! Hallelujah! God is great!” he yelled without worrying whether anyone heard him or not.

Shortly after, along came a man who had recently completed some studies at a local university. Feeling himself very enlightened in the ways of truth and very eager to show this enlightenment, he asked the boy about the source of his joy.

“Hey” asked the boy in return with a bright laugh, “Don’t you have any idea what God is able to do? I just read that God opened up the waves of the Red Sea and led the whole nation of Israel right through the middle.”

The enlightened man laughed lightly, sat down next to the boy and began to try to open his eyes to the “realities” of the miracles of the Bible. “That can all be very easily explained. Modern scholarship has shown that the Red Sea in that area was only 10-inches deep at that time. It was no problem for the Israelites to wade across.”

The boy was stumped. His eyes wandered from the man back to the Bible laying open in his lap. The man, content that he had enlightened a poor, naive young person to the finer points of scientific insight, turned to go. Scarcely had he taken two steps when the boy began to rejoice and praise louder than before. The man turned to ask the reason for this resumed jubilation.

“Wow!” exclaimed the boy happily, “God is greater than I thought! Not only did He lead the whole nation of Israel through the Red Sea, He topped it off by drowning the whole Egyptian army in 10 inches of water!”

Pearly Gates Jokes

A fellow finds himself in front of the Pearly Gates.
St. Peter explains that its not so easy to get in heaven.
There are some criteria before entry is allowed.
For example, was the man religious in life? Attend church? No?
St. Peter told him that’s bad.
Was he generous? give money to the poor? Charities? No?
St. Peter told him that that too was bad.
Did he do any good deeds? Help his neighbor? Anything? No?
St. Peter was becoming concerned. Exasperated, Peter says, “Look, everybody does something nice sometime.
Work with me, I’m trying to help. Now think!”

The man says, “There was this old lady. I came out of a store and found her surrounded by a dozen Hell’s Angels. They had taken her purse and were shoving her around, taunting and abusing her. I got so mad I threw my bags down, fought through the crowd, and got her purse back. I then helped her to her feet. I then went up to the biggest, baddest biker and told him how despicable, cowardly and mean he was and then spat in his face”.

“Wow”, said Peter, “That’s impressive. When did this happen”?
“Oh, about 10 minutes ago”, replied the man.


Three men were standing in line to get into heaven one day.

Apparently it had been a pretty busy day, though, so Peter had to tell the first one, “Heaven’s getting pretty close to full today, and I’ve been asked to admit only people who have had particularly horrible deaths. So what’s your story?”

So the first man replies: “Well, for a while I’ve suspected my wife has been cheating on me, so today I came home early to try to catch her red-handed. As I came into my 25th floor apartment, I could tell something was wrong, but all my searching around didn’t reveal where this other guy could have been hiding. Finally, I went out to the balcony, and sure enough, there was this man hanging off the railing, 25 floors above ground! By now I was really mad, so I started beating on him and kicking him, but wouldn’t you know it, he wouldn’t fall off. So finally I went back into my apartment and got a hammer and starting hammering on his fingers. Of course, he couldn’t stand that for long, so he let go and fell — but even after 25 stories, he fell into the bushes, stunned but okay. I couldn’t stand it anymore, so I ran into the kitchen, grabbed the fridge and threw it over the edge where it landed on him, killing him instantly. But all the stress and anger got to me, and I had a heart attack and died there on the balcony.”

“That sounds like a pretty bad day to me,” said Peter, and let the man in.

The second man comes up and Peter explains to him about heaven being full, and again asks for his story.

“It’s been a very strange day. You see, I live on the 26th floor of my apartment building, and every morning I do my exercises out on my balcony. Well, this morning I must have slipped or something, because I fell over the edge. But I got lucky, and caught the railing of the balcony on the floor below me. I knew I couldn’t hang on for very long, when suddenly this man burst out onto the balcony. I thought for sure I was saved, when he started beating on me and kicking me. I held on the best I could until he ran into the apartment and grabbed a hammer and started pounding on my hands. Finally I just let go, but again I got lucky and fell into the bushes below, stunned but all right. Just when I was thinking I was going to be okay, this refrigerator comes falling out of the sky and crushes me instantly, and now I’m here.”

Once again, Peter had to concede that that sounded like a pretty horrible death.

The third man came to the front of the line, and again Peter explained that heaven was full and asked for his story.

“Picture this,” says the third man, “I’m hiding inside a refrigerator…”

A Few Silly Christian Jokes