1. PRESIDENT CLINTON'S PUBLIC "CONFESSION":

I put "confession" in quotes because I'm not sure it was. Of course I'm not sure it wasn't either. To be honest, I don't know what to think.

On the one hand, some are quick to use the "too little, too late" quip. This includes many Christians. Shouldn't we throw in a dash of mercy with this? I think we need to remember that God alone is Judge over the hearts of men (1 Sam. 16:7; 1 Kings 8:39; 1 Chron. 28:9; Prov. 21:2; Acts 1:24; Rom. 8:27; Rev. 2:23). After all, true repentance is not a "magic script" that we read to God and to the public -- rather, it is primarily a heart-matter. It is my personal conviction that I dare not judge the state of Clinton's heart in this matter (Matt. 7:1-2; Titus 3:1-3).

On the other hand, I must strongly protest the (evidently) popular idea that Clinton's "moral failure" (a popular euphemism for sin) has no bearing on the office of President. " ... this matter is between me ... my wife and our daughter -- and our God," the President said. "It's his business and has no bearing on his job as President," many American citizens are saying. I disagree.

Leaders are, by obvious implication, to be public role models. Such are responsible not only to their families, but to the people they lead. Furthermore, Clinton has acknowledged his responsibility to God as an individual. But as President he is responsible to God in a special sense -- as a leader (Ps. 76:12; Prov. 16:12; Luke 12:48; Rom. 13:1-7). This seems especially true insofar as the United States has always professed a willing submission to God (open your wallet and read one of your dollar bills, for instance).

Can a balanced viewpoint be achieved here? I don't know. As a Christian, I find myself unable to support much of what Clinton does. As a Christian, I also find the political cut-throat tactics of the "Christian right" to be neither "Christian" nor "right." Scripture clearly presents us with a God Who is greater than political factions - representing a Kingdom that exists and operates in spite of the wicked shenanigans of finite creatures (Ps. 2; Dan. 4:34-35). Wise political leaders (Prov. 8:15-16) are those who embrace this reality (Dan. 4:36), realizing that their own authority is derivative.

Perhaps the best course for individual believers is to follow Paul's instructions in 1 Timothy 2:1-3 -- let us pray for our leaders, remembering that God is in control (Prov. 21:1). Let us also persist in well doing rather than criticizing (Prov. 24:21-22; 1 Peter 2:13-17). Selah.

2. TAKING "CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS" TOO FAR:

I love apologetics. Every believer should read Josh McDowell's Evidence That Demands a Verdict (two volumes), and of course the classic Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis. Our faith as Christians is not at all "illogical" nor is it "unreasonable." Many lines of evidence support the veracity of God's Word.

That being stated, I think we sometimes forget that there are limits to such apologetic exercises.

We cannot "prove" our faith in the absolute sense. The Christian worldview, like any other worldview, is driven by certain non-negotiable presuppositions. This can be clearly seen in Hebrews 11:1, 3 -- it is "faith" that is the key. Such faith precedes "understanding." Then, in verse 6, we see how certain faith-presuppositions are necessary to a relationship with God: " ... for he that comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him."

The requirement of faith in Christianity is a part of the way in which God has chosen to do things. Jesus gave Thomas the tangible proof that he needed to believe (John 20:24-28). However, the words which Jesus spoke should occupy a prominent place in our efforts to convince skeptics: "Thomas, because you have seen Me you have believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed" (John 20:29). This is how we live in the present (cf. 1 Peter 1:7-9).

I think we damage the Gospel when we make it a set of historical propositions to be "proven" to the "skeptic" so that he might "accept" their validity. This is certainly not to deny apologetic arguments altogether. Rather, may we keep these in proper perspective. Christianity requires faith; the success of the Gospel requires a work of God in the heart of the sinner (John 6:44-45). The Holy Spirit is the best "apologist" -- convincing those in the world of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (John 16:8).

So then, should we stop using the apologetic arguments? Not at all! But we should know that any results from such are dependant not upon the apologist, but rather upon THE Apologist. Always seek wisdom from God (James 1:5), and be patient in your presentations. Remember, it takes a supernatural act of God to open the mind and heart of the natural man!

For those young believers troubled by the "experts" who regularly assault our faith - Scripture warns us ahead of time! This has always been a great comfort to me. When skeptics come out of the woodwork, ridiculing what I believe - God told me they would (1 Cor. 1:18-25; 2:14). When scourners remain stedfastly certain in their rationalism - God told me they would (Prov. 13:1; 15:12). When the evolutionists scoff at the truths of creation and the flood of Noah - God told me they would (2 Peter 3:3-7). Since God has prewarned us, let's not be shocked and surprised - nor "suckered" by arguments already based on the premise that our faith is not true. Let us remember that the very "wisdom" in back of such anti-christian arguments (i.e., the world's 'presupposition') is "earthly, sensual, and devilish" (James 3:15).

* Michael Green, Who is This Jesus? (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1992) -

Besides being excellent apologetic material, this book stands apart from others. It is a small compact book of 133 pages. Designed for the skeptic, the arguments are clear and concise - written in a style for the everyday person. This small book packs some big content! Finally, it is very inexpensive, and ideal for giving away to an inquiring soul. The central topic is the life, claims, Person and work of Jesus Christ. Short "Footnotes for the Curious" at the end of the book treat the secular evidence for Jesus and the trustworthiness of the Gospels.

"The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance." - 2 PETER 3:9

I want to address my Arminian brothers and sisters here concerning this verse. I have heard this verse thrown against the truths of God's sovereign grace countless times. In fact, I've used this verse myself in the past in this same way! The idea in such citations is that this verse teaches that it is God's will that "all" get saved. However, this just doesn't hold up for a number of reasons.

First, the context of 2 Peter 3 forbids such an interpretation. The whole discussion concerns the Second Coming, and Peter addresses those who will question it on the basis of the amount of time before it occurs. In verse 9, Peter is teaching us that God is not just pointlessly waiting. Rather, there is a purpose. The purpose of this present Gospel age is that the full number of the elect (a fixed number - see Rev. 17:8) might come to repentance.

Second, this is clearly demonstrated in the verse itself by the words toward us. This phrase limits the application of what Peter writes. The verse should be grammatically understood as saying that "God is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any (of us) should perish, but that all (of us) should come to repentance."

Third, Peter leaves no doubt when he further writes that it is "we" (verse 13) who "account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation" (verse 15).

Finally, Peter mentions that Paul taught the same thing (verse 15). Where? In Romans 9, a chapter which sets forth God's sovereignty in salvation in the clearest terms. In verses 22, Paul writes: "What if God, willing to show His wrath, and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction ... " Paul says that God is waiting, "enduring" the vessels of wrath (i.e., those not ordained to salvation - see verses 6-21) - but why? Paul answers in verse 23: "And that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of His mercy, which He had before prepared to glory."

So then, Paul and Peter teach the same truth: that God is patiently waiting until the number of His elect are complete. In the meantime, though God is more than ready to unleash His wrath against sin, He doesn't do so - instead He "endures" the ungodly for the sake of the elect, that they (the elect) might all come to salvation.