restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

home

welcome

about dave

on the road

the book box

columns & essays

reading room

contact dave

This is the story of our journey with clear cell uterine cancer — the most aggressive form of this disease. We have been honest and transparent with our journey in the hopes that others might be encouraged and challenged by our story. God has proven Himself to be completely faithful to us during this time of testing. For that we give thanks.

07/04/13 Running to Home Base 

05/18/13 Living with Resilience 

12/16/12 Moving from Orthodox Medical Treatment 

12/05/12 His Love, My Joy 

03/22/12 At a Fork in the Road 

03/15/12 On Dealing with Reality 

02/24/12 Life + Christ = Fine 

02/14/12 Going for the Deeper Joy 

02/10/12 Open Letter to My Ethiopian Family 

02/09/12 Five Things to Do When You Hear the “C” Word 

12/30/10Miracles 

10/28/10I’m Healed!  

08/26/10Dealing with Disappointment 

08/22/10 What Now? 

01/15/10Spiritual Fatigue

01/08/10Fatigue and Me

12/21/09 Peace and Priorities

10/23/09Living in Denial: Cancer and Romans

09/24/09Pain

09/16/09In Pursuit of Health

08/29/09Coping with Trauma

08/24/09Update from Becky

08/20/09The God of What-Ifs

08/18/09God Didn’t Make Me to Suffer! (Part 3)

08/15/09God Didn’t Make Me to Suffer! (Part 2)

08/13/09God Didn’t Make Me to Suffer!

08/10/09Where Can I Go to Get Away from You?

08/09/09To Go On Living Is Christ

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

Our “Education” President

 David Alan Black

Bush’s claim to be the education president is a smoke screen.

Public education continues to suffer from an incurable malaise. More than five decades ago Walter Lippmann diagnosed it as “the sickness of an over-governed society.” Lippmann noted the change from “the older faith…that the exercise of unlimited power by men with limited minds and self-regarding prejudices is soon oppressive, reactionary, and corrupt,…that the very condition of progress was the limitation of power to the capacity and the virtue of rulers” to the newer faith “that there are no limits to man’s capacity to govern others and that, therefore, no limitations ought to be imposed upon government” (Quoted by Wallis, An Over-Governed Society, p. viii.).

Ever since Horace Mann, politicians have argued that education is so important that government had a duty to provide it to every child and to see that it was controlled by “professional” educators. Thus education, like social welfare, is still another example of the socialist philosophy so prevalent in America. Sadly, the public school system is not viewed as socialist today, but simply as “American.”

It isn’t. The problem in schooling is not just that it isn’t constitutional. It is far from clear that federal compulsory attendance laws themselves have legal justification. Parents and local educators, not bureaucrats in Washington, ought to be in charge of our children’s educational courses. And any socialist schemes, from Goals 2000 to School to Work, ought to be stopped.

You may think, “But my child’s school is an exception.” Not likely. After 30 years of federal “aid” to education, the ugly tentacles of the federal government now reach into every school district in the nation. The reality is that biblical principles are banned in your local public school and Jesus Christ is robbed of His preeminence “in all things.”

The fact that state education is compulsory in America is no argument that it is legitimate. The entire weight of state-controlled education is molding the child to believe that the church and its message are unessential to the complete or normal life of an American citizen.

No academic skepticism, no secularist authors, no blatant materialism can so undermine the spiritual life of the country like the completely secularized training of the child under the authority of the state. Despite what Mr. Bush says, Bible-based education is mandatory for Christian parents. If we think we can keep our children in a secular school system and escape the dumbed-down, amoral, and immoral results of secular humanism in schools, we are sorely mistaken.

August 21, 2004

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com. His latest book is Why I Stopped Listening to Rush: Confessions of a Recovering Neocon.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

Origin of the Specious

 John Boquist 

When I first stated thinking about writing this essay, I was going to title it something like “Why This Busy Pastor Must Study His Preaching Text in the Original Language.” Having thought through much of my reasoning, the title I chose is much more to the point. One English dictionary defines specious as “Having deceptive attraction or allure” and “having a false look of truth or genuineness.” I have found that not studying the Bible in its original language can lead the preacher, who will in turn lead his flock, into something that looks like truth but is not.

Before going on, I have to tell you a little bit about my church. Cardinal Baptist Church in Caroline County, Virginia, is more wonderful than this pastor deserves! The good folk there seem to understand that preparing sermons is work, often arduous work. Sometimes, though, I have trouble knowing whether I am working or playing. I know, however, that it is part of my preparation to lead and feed my flock, so I don’t worry about it anymore.

But maybe you are not blessed in the same way that I am. If you think you’re too busy to make the original language study a good portion of your sermon preparation, why not get alone with Jesus and pray about that? You could say something like, “Lord, am I busy doing that which others could and should do?” If Jesus answers in the affirmative, then it is a matter of listing tasks, whose they are, and leading your people accordingly.

Perhaps, pastor, you are busy doing that which no one should be doing. If this is the case, your prayer to Jesus must be completely different that suggested above. Perhaps you have lost your first love. Perhaps the sin that clings so easily is clinging to you. I could go on with possibilities, but you know what I mean. If you have not yet disqualified yourself according to Scripture, repent and realize that Jesus needs good men who will lead and feed His flock from His Word!

Assuming you are ready to lead and feed, why must the original language be a significant part of your study? As tempted as I am to repeat what has been written by others, I will speak only from my own experience.

First, studying in the original is teaching me much that I had forgotten or never learned. Someone said the best preaching is that which reminds you of old truth and does not introduce new truth. When I wrestle with my grammar books and lexicons in the presence of God’s Word, it is as if I am back in seminary listening to my godly professor again. Just a few days ago, I found myself saying, “Aha, that’s what he meant!” Mind you, it has been more than three years since I sat under his teaching.

Second, studying in the original makes me aware of the many ways a single word was used. Thanks to quality lexicons, I have come to understand the wide range of meaning behind some words. Look, English is this way too. If I say, “The board got on board using a large board,” you might understand that a group of people entered a floating vessel using a large, flat piece of wood. But two thousand years from now, one might not know that “board” has no fewer than three common usages today.

Third, studying Greek and Hebrew makes me far more adept in English, my native language. My modest seminary training in Greek and Hebrew gave me a proficiency and appreciation for English that I had not had before. Seeing the broad range of usage in the original gave me a greater appreciation for choosing all my words, spoken and written, with much greater care. As a result, I am speaking and writing in a much more redemptive fashion. One reason for this could be that my Redeemer chose His words with great care as his holy men were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

Well, I am a preacher, and I just finished my third point. Before I go, pastor, let me offer a suggestion. If you studied the languages in the past and think you are too far out of seminary, why not make contact with your former professor to ask for help along the way? If your professor loves Jesus, he or she will be thrilled to hear from you and to help you. One word of advice from an embarrassing personal experience: Never ask the professor to do for you what you should do for yourself. That would be wasting your God-given intelligence and your professor’s valuable time.

Finally, would you kindly pray for me from time to time? You see, I am of the flesh. Since we struggle not against flesh and blood, would it not be easy to slip back into old habits and get busy doing that which we should not? Please read that question again. If we agree on the question, let us remember these words from our Lord: “Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven” (Matt. 18:19 ESV).

February 28, 2006

John Boquist married the former Yvonne Seymour in August, 1983. In 1988 and 1990 their daughters Patricia and Elizabeth were born. John spent much of his adult life in local church music ministry before beginning studies at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary in 2001. He became the pastor at Cardinal Baptist Church, Ruther Glen, Virginia in August of 2004. He may be reached for comment here.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

Origen on the Authorship of Hebrews

 David Alan Black 

The Book of Hebrews is one of the greatest writings of the New Testament. It has exerted great influence and done much good. Yet its authorship remains a puzzle. Who can possibly have written it?

Belief in the authorship of Hebrews as by Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles, was anciently held by Christian writers, but it is now widely given up. As most scholars will put it, “the author was certainly not Paul.”

I had long felt this way myself. But the evidence keeps bringing me back to the Pauline authorship of Hebrews as a sounder point of view. What is the evidence for Paul, and does it not call for a faithful reconsideration?

There is one consideration of major importance that has been widely—one may even say totally—neglected in dealing with the authorship of Hebrews. This is the evidence of the church father Origen. Origen’s adherence to the Pauline origin of Hebrews was determined by an ancient belief that he knew to be well founded. His testimony has been preserved for us by Eusebius:

That the character of the diction of the epistle entitled To the Hebrews has not the apostle’s rudeness in speech, who confessed himself rude in speech, that is, in style, but that the epistle is better Greek in the framing of its diction, will be admitted by everyone who is able to discern differences of style. But again, on the other hand, that the thoughts of the epistle are admirable, and not inferior to the acknowledged writings of the apostle, to this also everyone will consent as true who has given attention to reading the apostle…. But as for myself, if I were to state my own opinion, I should say that the thoughts are the apostle’s, but that the style and composition belonged to one who called to mind the apostle’s teachings and, as it were, made short notes of what his master said. If any church, therefore, holds this epistle as Paul’s, let it be commended for this also. For not without reason have the men of old handed it down as Paul’s. But who wrote the epistle, in truth God knows. Yet the account which has reached us [is twofold], some saying that Clement, who was bishop of the Romans, wrote the epistle, others, that it was Luke, he who wrote the Gospel and the Acts.

Origen meets the stylistic objection to Pauline authorship in a manner similar to that of his predecessor Clement: the thoughts are Pauline, but the style and diction are to be credited to another hand. In this way Origen maintains the apostolic origin of the epistle while removing the objection drawn from the diversity of style. When Origen says, “For not without reason have the men of old handed it down as Paul’s,” and then adds, “But who wrote the epistle, in truth God knows,” he does not mean to suggest uncertainty about the author but only about the penman—that is, the one who reduced the letter to writing—for he has just asserted that the thoughts are those of the apostle Paul. To assert (as is all too often asserted) that Origen meant to suggest that only God knew the author of the epistle is to suppose that Origen has contradicted himself in the very same paragraph.

It is astonishing to see how these basic facts about Origen’s view of authorship are overlooked by commentators on Hebrews, who almost always quote him in support of an agnostic position on the letter’s authorship (and, by extension, its conceptual background). It is clear that Origen is referring, not to the author responsible for the contents of the letter, but to its penman, and he is certain that the former is none other than the apostle Paul. Had these authors read the works of Origen they would have seen that his actual method of quoting Hebrews indicates a firm belief in the Pauline authorship of the letter. A sampling of quotations from Origen will make this clear.

De Principiis 1:

And therefore I think it sufficient to quote this one testimony of Paul from the Epistle to the Hebrews, in which he says [Heb 11:24-26], “By faith Moses, when he was come to years, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh’s daughter; choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season; esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures of the Egyptians.”

De Principiis 3.2.4:

And the apostle Paul warns us [Heb 2:1]: “Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest perhaps we should let them slip.”

De Principiis 4.1.13:

In another Epistle also, when referring to the tabernacle, he [the reference is to Paul] mentions the direction which was given to Moses [Heb 8:5]: “Thou shalt make (all things) according to the pattern which was showed thee in the mount.”

De Principiis 4.1.13:

Moreover, in the Epistle to the Hebrews, discoursing of those who belong to the circumcision, he [Paul] writes [Heb 8:5]: “who serve for an ensample and shadow of heavenly things.”

De Principiis 4.1.24:

For Paul openly says of them [Heb 8:5], that “they serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things.”

De Principiis 2.7.7:

And the apostle [Paul] says with reference to the law [Heb 8:5], that they who have circumcision of the flesh, “serve for the similitude and shadow of heavenly things.”

De Principiis 2.3.5:

I will show, however, from what statements of Paul I have arrived at this understanding. He says [Heb 9:26], “But now once in the consummation of ages, He was manifested to take away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.”

De Principiis 3.1.10:

To show more clearly, however, what we mean, let us take the illustration employed by the apostle Paul in the Epistle to the Hebrews, where he says [Heb 6:7-8], “For the earth, which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it, and bringeth forth herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed, will receive blessing from God; but that which beareth thorns and briers is rejected, and is nigh unto cursing, whose end is to be burned.”

Against Celsus 7.29:

And it is in reference to this Jerusalem that the apostle [Paul] spoke, as one who, “being risen with Christ, and seeking those things which are above,” had found a truth which formed no part of the Jewish mythology. “Ye are come,” says he [Heb 12:22], “unto Mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels.”

Against Celsus 3.52:

For the word is used by our Paul in writing to the Corinthians, who were Greeks, and not yet purified in their morals…. Now the same writer, knowing that there was a certain kind of nourishment better adapted for the soul, and that the food of those young persons who were admitted was compared to milk, continues [Heb 5:12-14]: “And ye are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness; for he is a babe. But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.”

To Africanus 9:

For the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, in speaking of the prophets, and what they suffered, says [Heb 11:37], “they were stoned, they were sawn asunder, they were slain with the sword.” …some one hard pressed by this argument may have recourse to the opinion of those who reject this Epistle as not being Paul’s; against whom I must at some other time use other arguments to prove that it is Paul’s.”

These examples are sufficient to show that Origen, in his extant works, ascribes the authorship of Hebrews to the apostle Paul. He knew that the ancients had handed Hebrews down as a Pauline epistle, and it was on the strength of that tradition that he constantly cited the letter as Paul’s and declared his readiness to prove his convictions by arguments. Origen was aware of two conjectures, one identifying the assistant as Clement of Rome, the other identifying him as Luke. Nevertheless, on the strength of the ecclesiastical tradition that he had inherited from the “men of old,” Origen consistently cited the epistle as Paul’s.

One author has written:

Origen has also stated, “No one knows,” when referring to the authorship of the epistle to the Hebrews. This may not seem brilliant, but it takes a large man to admit that he doesn’t know something. More scholars, theologians and people in general should learn to say, “I don’t know,” when the answer is truly unknown.

This is well-meaning but incorrect. It was only in reference to the identity of the penman that Origen wrote “in truth God knows.” In light of this fact, any further attempt to use Origen’s words in support of an agnostic position on the authorship of Hebrews is not to quote Origen, but to misquote him.

February 5, 2004

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com. He is currently finishing a 600-page work on Hebrews entitled Paul and Hebrews Compared.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

Ordinary Missionaries

 David Alan Black  

For several years now I’ve been studying the missionary movement in North America. I believe we are on the cusp of an era when insourcing missions will become the strategy for achieving global evangelization. A strategy that depends on outsourcing the work to paid professionals is not going to get the job done. Outsourcing will be around for a while longer because it is what everyone is used to. But insourcing will require a wholly different mindset. It’s not just about producing more missionaries. It’s about creating a completely different kind of environment — a collaborative environment in which everyday people like you and me are constantly thinking about how to generate towel and basin ministries both at home and around the globe.

When you start insourcing for more effective mission work, all kinds of good things begin to happen. For Becky and me, this has meant a deeper working relationship with Christians the world over. It has meant getting to work side by side with local churches in Ethiopia, where resources and manpower are most needed. It has meant streamlining efficiency as top-heavy bureaucracies are bypassed. It has meant more sustainable relationships between churches in the U.S. and churches in Africa. Moreover, the more you are seen as insourcing, the more people will want to get involved as they begin to realize that they too can play a part in global missions.

This is the dynamic that I, as a seminary professor, am tracking most closely. What strikes me the most about the new generation of seminary students is how ordinary they are. They are just everyday Christians who care deeply about the Great Commission and are willing to forego the American Dream in order to accomplish it. Moreover, they are beginning to realize that the church’s greatest asset is the so-called laity, people at the grass roots who think missionally and globally. There are so many trends, so many hopeful signs, that I dare not predict how it will all play out. But getting this right is going to be critical for the church of the twenty-first century. The work is so difficult, and the stakes are so high, that we can’t afford to sit in the fence any longer.

I will take it a step further and say that the greatest thing any local church could do for itself, for its people, and for the world is to publicly state its intention to place the Great Commission first in everything it does. The church’s raison d’être is utterly tied up with the process of getting Christians to live and act as salt and light in the world, as our Lord commanded. The church must be equipped to serve in the world precisely because it is not of this world. It is an upside-down kingdom that moves forward on its knees, casts down evil strongholds through sacrificial love, and opens closed doors. As never before, we need God’s servants who are willing to risk life and limb to preach the uncompromising Word of God. Excuses won’t do. None of us is too young or too old to learn the power of voluntary service for others in the name of Jesus. And when we have learned to embrace this attitude of self-denial, we will begin to experience the life described in the book of Acts.

How can the church in North America get to the place where we will launch out into action instead of merely talking about the millions of lost people all around us? The answer is very simple. There will be no change until we change our attitude from that of a hireling to that of a bondservant. We must turn our backs on all of our excuses and voluntarily live a life that is totally separated unto the Gospel. As the great British athlete C. T. Studd once put it, “Some want to live within the sound of a church or chapel bell. I want to run a rescue mission within a yard of hell.” It was because of His great love for people that Jesus deliberately reached out to the lost, sick, and dying people of His day. If we are truly born-again Christians, if we have truly come to grips with the terms of “costly discipleship” (Bonhoeffer), how can we possibly do anything less?

May 23, 2011

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

Ordinary Missionaries

 David Alan Black  

For several years now I’ve been studying the missionary movement in North America. I believe we are on the cusp of an era when insourcing missions will become the strategy for achieving global evangelization. A strategy that depends on outsourcing the work to paid professionals is not going to get the job done. Outsourcing will be around for a while longer because it is what everyone is used to. But insourcing will require a wholly different mindset. It’s not just about producing more missionaries. It’s about creating a completely different kind of environment — a collaborative environment in which everyday people like you and me are constantly thinking about how to generate towel and basin ministries both at home and around the globe.

When you start insourcing for more effective mission work, all kinds of good things begin to happen. For Becky and me, this has meant a deeper working relationship with Christians the world over. It has meant getting to work side by side with local churches in Ethiopia, where resources and manpower are most needed. It has meant streamlining efficiency as top-heavy bureaucracies are bypassed. It has meant more sustainable relationships between churches in the U.S. and churches in Africa. Moreover, the more you are seen as insourcing, the more people will want to get involved as they begin to realize that they too can play a part in global missions.

This is the dynamic that I, as a seminary professor, am tracking most closely. What strikes me the most about the new generation of seminary students is how ordinary they are. They are just everyday Christians who care deeply about the Great Commission and are willing to forego the American Dream in order to accomplish it. Moreover, they are beginning to realize that the church’s greatest asset is the so-called laity, people at the grass roots who think missionally and globally. There are so many trends, so many hopeful signs, that I dare not predict how it will all play out. But getting this right is going to be critical for the church of the twenty-first century. The work is so difficult, and the stakes are so high, that we can’t afford to sit in the fence any longer.

I will take it a step further and say that the greatest thing any local church could do for itself, for its people, and for the world is to publicly state its intention to place the Great Commission first in everything it does. The church’s raison d’être is utterly tied up with the process of getting Christians to live and act as salt and light in the world, as our Lord commanded. The church must be equipped to serve in the world precisely because it is not of this world. It is an upside-down kingdom that moves forward on its knees, casts down evil strongholds through sacrificial love, and opens closed doors. As never before, we need God’s servants who are willing to risk life and limb to preach the uncompromising Word of God. Excuses won’t do. None of us is too young or too old to learn the power of voluntary service for others in the name of Jesus. And when we have learned to embrace this attitude of self-denial, we will begin to experience the life described in the book of Acts.

How can the church in North America get to the place where we will launch out into action instead of merely talking about the millions of lost people all around us? The answer is very simple. There will be no change until we change our attitude from that of a hireling to that of a bondservant. We must turn our backs on all of our excuses and voluntarily live a life that is totally separated unto the Gospel. As the great British athlete C. T. Studd once put it, “Some want to live within the sound of a church or chapel bell. I want to run a rescue mission within a yard of hell.” It was because of His great love for people that Jesus deliberately reached out to the lost, sick, and dying people of His day. If we are truly born-again Christians, if we have truly come to grips with the terms of “costly discipleship” (Bonhoeffer), how can we possibly do anything less?

May 23, 2011

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

Open Letter to my Ethiopian Family

Becky Lynn Black  

Thursday, February 09, 2012, 11:25 AM

Dear Family in Ethiopia,

As you know, God in His mercy and goodness sent me a disease called cancer. We became aware of this gift in August, 2009, just after a trip to Ethiopia. And since that time, while we have continued the ministry, we have been receiving many health treatments. We have had surgery, radiation, several chemo therapies, and Cyber Knife. The cancer moved from my uterus, through the lymph glands to my lungs, but it has not yet spread to other parts of my body.

Although these treatments have been difficult, and sometimes I have been in the hospital at the edge of Death, God has sustained me and given me work to do for Him. I believe that He has done this because of the prayers of many people for me.

As you know, I have not prayed for healing. I believe that God can heal; it is nothing to Him to remove this cancer from my body, just as it is nothing for Him to move the stars in the heavens. But the Holy Spirit has never impressed upon me to ask for healing, and we must pray in obedience to the Spirit. Instead of healing, my great desire has been to be faithful to Him, as He has been faithful to me. So, whether He gives one day, or one month, or one year, or one decade…..it does not matter to be kept alive, so much as it matters to be kept faithful. My heart has been to serve Him by serving others with joy and praise to Him. And the greatest gift He has given to me these past years is the privilege of working for Him, hand in hand, according to the leading of His Spirit.

And now we come to the CT scan and doctor’s meeting of yesterday. For about 6 months we have been having a treatment called Avastin; this is like a chemo treatment…it is given every 3 weeks. And after each 3 treatments, we do a CT.  The CT scan in October showed that the cancer had stopped growing, and we thought perhaps God was healing me through the Avastin. But the CT scan in Dec showed 3 tumors in my lungs…all were growing, and one was growing especially fast.

This week we had another CT scan…this scan shows that all three are now growing very fast.  We met with the radiation oncologist (cancer doctor) to discuss doing Cyber Knife radiation again….but he said that because there are 3 spots, and they are far apart, that Cyber Knife cannot be used for treatment. He said there is no more treatment possible with radiation for my cancer. Surgery is also not possible, because the tumors are far apart. The only possible treatment is more chemo therapy. 

On Monday, we will meet with our chemo cancer doctor. There are very few chemo drugs available for my type of cancer, and none of them work well. We have already tried all the drugs. There are no more drugs that have been proven to be effective. We can either try these same drugs again, or we can try drugs that have been proven for other types of cancer (but are not proven for my type), or we can try experimental drugs (that are not proven for any type of cancer). So Monday’s meeting will be important.

In addition to these 3 lung tumors, 2 new things have developed. The first thing is that now the lymph nodes in my chest have cancer in them; this is an indication that the cancer is growing and soon will spread everywhere. The 2nd thing is that now I have pain in the bone of my right upper arm and shoulder. We do not know why I have this pain. Sometimes it is very difficult, and other times it is very little. On Monday morning we will do a bone scan….this will show us if the cancer has spread to my bones.  If it has gone to my bones, then we can use radiation on the bone to help with the pain; it will not cure the cancer, but it will sometimes reduce the pain. Cancer in the bone is very painful. 

So it appears that perhaps God is starting us on the last section of this Journey. He knows….we do not need to know the future. We only need to know the One who is holding our hand, and the One who will be faithful to us in the future as He has been to us in the past. Throughout this Journey with cancer, He has been very VERY good to me…..He has given me work, He has given me strength, He has given me nice curly hair, He has brought Nigusse here, He has given us Skype, He has given me your love and faithful prayers….and He has given me a platform to give testimony of who He is in the midst of Trouble and Difficulty.

I expect Him to continue to be good to me in the coming months. It is His nature to be good. He will continue to act towards me according to His character….He is loving, He is just and He is sovereign….as I have said many times in Ethiopia. He is worthy of our praise in the midst of difficulty and sadness. He is worthy of our trust. And He is worthy of our faithful, sacrificial, joyful service, and obedience. 

So, although we may be sad at this news, we must set our hearts to sing His praises and to continue faithfully living for Him and trusting His character. If I talk with you on the phone, you will ask me “How are you? Are you getting well?”  And I will probably say cheerfully, “I am fine.” It is the truth. I am fine. Because of the Lord Jesus, everything is fine. But in His providence, I am also dying from this cancer. As Paul wrote to the early believers, “Therefore we do not lose heart. Though outwardly we are wasting away, yet inwardly we are being renewed day by day” (2 Cor. 4:16). To belong to the Lord Jesus is a wonderful thing!

Know that you are greatly loved by me. It has been a great gift to know you and to work in the Kingdom with you. May He be glorified beyond measure in your life….this is my prayer. He is worthy of a life of joyful sacrifice! And nothing brings me more joy than to see you following after Him, as you have seen us model before you.

Rejoicing in our Lord Jesus, to whom all power is given, and whose presence is always with us (Matt 28:18-),

Mama B

February 10, 2012

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

The Only Hope for the World

 David Alan Black

Yesterday I took my Thoroughbred “Traveller” for a long ride. Check that. Traveller took me for a ride. Before I acquired him he used to race in California and, like most Thoroughbreds, was bred for one purpose: to be a lean, mean, racing machine. Traveller thinks he has only one gait—the flat-out gallop—which, by the way, suits me just fine.

I remember when we first moved to North Carolina. I had just taken Traveller through a section of woods on a neighboring farm when we came out onto a large oval-shaped field of hay, whose edges had just been bush-hogged (as is the custom here). Traveller took one look at that oval shape, figured he was back on the track in California, and off we went, afterburners blazing. I held onto the reins the best I could until I could get him back into a manageable gallop. That day I learned an invaluable lesson: Once a race horse, always a race horse.

Traveller is the opposite of Cody, my Arabian gelding. Cody will always be special to me, since he was my first horse. Each summer my wife and I would take our sons and our tent trailer to some new destination, and one year we headed for eastern Montana to do some fishing on the Tongue River. One evening we stopped for dinner in a little town called Cody, Wyoming, where we saw a handbill for the local rodeo. We decided to attend, and as I watched those magnificent horses doing their thing I thought, My, What a marvelous animal! When I get back to California I’m gonna get me one.

And I did. A neighbor had this young, light gray, “greenbroke” Arab for sale and, not knowing what “greenbroke” meant, I thought it was a pretty good deal. I purchased the horse and named him (of course) “Cody.” Having grown up in Hawaii the only “riding” I had done was on surfboards, so you might say that Cody and I learned to ride together. After months of daily practice (and numerous “unplanned dismounts”), I became a fairly proficient rider and was even able to teach Cody a few dressage moves, including the very difficult canter pirouette.

It’s amazing to me, but horses seem to know who’s on their back. I recall a brash upstart of a young lady who once wanted to ride Cody and “teach him a few things.” It wasn’t two minutes before Cody had that girl flat on her back in the arena. On other occasions we’ve had upwards of 175 students and their children to our ranch for dinner, and I would give all the kiddies a horsie-back ride on Cody. Without fail, Cody was as gentle as a dove when the children were on his back.

Now the difference between an Arabian and a Thoroughbred is more than height. The Arab, you might say, is the original horse—the way “God made them.” The Thoroughbred, on the other hand, is a purely man-made variety designed, as I said, for one purpose: speed. So while taking the children for a ride on Cody I would often ask them, “When Jesus comes back from heaven, do you know what He’ll be riding? That’s right—a white horse, and it’ll probably look just like the one you’re riding now.” I then ask them to get mommy and daddy to read for them the nineteenth chapter of Revelation when they get home to see for themselves.

Revelation 19 is probably the most dramatic chapter in the Bible. Here the living Savior returns to earth to crush all opposition to the truth and to establish His kingdom. The main event announced by the Old Testament prophets is not the judgment of the world or the triumph of the church but the glorious advent of the rider on the white horse. His eyes are as a flame of fire, and on His head are many crowns. At the incarnation Christ was crowned in humility, but now He is crowned with honor as King of kings and Lord of lords. What a privilege it will be to see the great Bridegroom and to be a part of His beloved bride. As the great 18th century writer Samuel Rutherford put it:

The Bride eyes not her garments,
But her dear Bridegroom’s face.
And I will not gaze at glory,
But on my King of Grace.
Not at the crown he giveth,
But on his pierced hands,
The Lamb is all the glory
Of Emmanuel’s land.

There is only one ray of hope in today’s world, and that is the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ. All other hopes are blasted hopes, whether they are based on science, politics, or religion.

Friends, this is not a fairy tale; this is the Word of God. The second coming of Christ is the culmination of all biblical prophecy.

Are we ready to meet Him?

July 27, 2003

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

The One Table of the Lord

 David Alan Black 

Anyone who reads 1 Corinthians 11 will notice how deeply Paul felt about the correct observance of the Lord’s Supper. Why has he expended so much powder and shot on the wealthy who went ahead and ate before the poorer members of the congregation had arrived? Because he is genuinely concerned about the unity of the Body, and he is furious to find one segment of the church being sidelined. There is, he argues, only one table of the Lord. There are not separate tables for the rich and the poor, the strong and the weak, the Jew and the Gentile, the free and the slave, the male and the female, the cleric and the layperson – or, we might add today, the home-schooler and the government-schooler, the agrarian and the suburbanite, the Republican and the Democrat, etc. Paul’s plain speaking in this chapter has a very practical purpose: “Therefore, my brothers, when you gather to eat, wait for each other” (1 Cor. 11:33).

It is, I think, a fair inference from the text that any practice of communion that separates one kind of believer from another kind would fall under Paul’s censure. An example might be selecting the heads of households to serve the elements to their families. No doubt such a practice has a very noble motive, to honor the family unit and to allow fathers to serve their kith and kin. But it is easy to overlook the fact that the unity of the Body of Christ is not determined by physical or familial bonds. There cannot be separate tables of the Lord for families and singles any more than there can be separate tables for the wealthy and the poor!

Now it is quite true that the New Testament nowhere teaches that families are to be segregated by age when the church assembles; and Eph. 6:1 clearly implies that children were present when the Body gathered. These facts combine to make a forceful argument for an age-integrated philosophy of ministry, as I have frequently argued. We know from 1 Corinthians 11 that love feasts accompanied the Lord’s Supper, a fact also attested by Jude 12, so that I can imagine the early communion service to be much like a family mealtime. We also know, however, that greed had broken out at the love feasts, and the dangers of abuse were so great that Paul had to deal with the problem at length. The wealthy were being self-willed. They were contemptuous of others and cared nothing about the consequences. Such I take to be the gist of Paul’s rebuke in 1 Corinthians 11.

Thus love for the brethren is to be the distinguishing mark of the gathered church. But love entails guarding the Spirit-given unity from destruction by prejudice, narrowness, and the refusal to accept a brother Christian for who he is in Christ. What, then, is the danger of serving the elements by families? It is, I believe, the subtle implication that the basis for our unity as believers is one’s marital or family status. However different our background, God loves all His children equally. Moreover, we are all equally sinners: forgiven sinners, but sinners nonetheless. None is superior to the other, none inferior. In Charles Wesley’s words:

Oh how shall I the goodness tell,

Father, which Thou to me hast showed?

That I, a child of wrath and hell,

I shall be called a child of God.

We do well to remember this truth whenever we observe the Lord’s Supper. Are we arrogant? Let us recall that arrogance had ruined the Corinthians’ love feasts. Are we guilty of replacing the Gospel with an emphasis upon marriage? Let us remember Paul’s instruction in 1 Corinthians 7: as high and holy as marriage is, singleness is not an inferior status for the Christian. Why, then, should there be one table of the Lord for the married and one for those who are not? How ironic it would be to make the observance of the Lord’s Supper a celebration of patriarchy, marital status, or social standing!

When we gather, let us proclaim the one table of the Lord at which all blood-bought believers are welcome.

March 21, 2006

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

One Person at a Time

 David Alan Black 

Think about this: If missions is going to get done, it’s going to take place one person at a time.

The call of the kingdom is not about how we confront social evils. It is about we get involved in sacrificing ourselves for the sake of others, including our enemies. What we need to see is that this is not going to happen until I do my part. As long as we buy into the lie that we can outsource missions to professionals and still further the Great Commission, we think our part isn’t all that essential. But it’s a lie. It’s a grand, satanic delusion.

The present generation of Americans, in particular, needs to hear this message loud and clear. Jesus said the fields are white unto harvest, yet still we build our lavish sanctuaries replete with baby grand pianos and fountains in the foyers. If you’ve ever traveled to the Majority World, I don’t really need to develop this point. But until you see the poverty in places like Ethiopia and India you may be unaware of the vast material luxuries and privileges we Americans enjoy. The true benchmark of our love for God is our burden — and action — for the whole world, not just the town where we live.

Do you weep over lost souls? Is all this talk about missions and evangelism out of touch with your daily concerns? Jesus never apologized for demanding obedience in this area. The Great Commission is not an option. We are all to be Christ’s ambassadors, sent out to represent Him to the lost. Moreover, we need to work together and support each other if we are to meet the demands of global evangelism. How long has it been since you’ve gotten down on your knees and cried out, “Lord, use me to reach the world! Jesus, I want to give my best for your cause!”

There is no longer any excuse for us to pursue the American Dream or live to mediocre lives without a sense of purpose. God is calling His people as never before to embrace a life of servanthood, one by one. Voluntarily each one of us must turn our backs on our apathy and excuses. We must say, “I will do your will. Here am I. Send me.”

June 26, 2012

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com.

Back to daveblackonline