An Athiest Congressman!

Rep. Pete Stark, a Democrat from California, came out of the closest this week. He is the first open atheist in congress. There may have been an atheist before Pete Stark in congress, but no one dared say it. At one time it would be political suicide to say you did not believe in God. However, this is not an issue anymore.

I do not know why some in the press think this is a big deal. This shouldn't surprise anyone. Our nation has grown more and more secular over the last 50 years. I will not call Rep. Stark brave for coming out, because he did nothing brave. If there was a chance this would hurt him politically then you could say he did something brave. Congressman Stark is a radical liberal who is in a radical liberal district. Now if he lived in rural Tennessee and said he didn't believe in God; I would then call him brave. Stupid, but brave.

The dumbest statement I have heard about this story was made by Newsweek reporter Elenor Clift. Ms. Clift is a communist running around in the disguise of a journalist. Over the years, I have come to expect the most radical statements from Ms. Clift. On a recent episode of the Mclaughlin Group on PBS, Ms. Clift was asked by the host what she thought the founders of the country would think about Mr. Stark. She replied, "I think they would be thrilled." I can only say that either Ms. Clift knows absolutely nothing about American History, or she is so twisted in her ideology that she can no longer be honest. Either way, it is bad for Newsweek.
The truth is, that Mr. Stark would not have survived congress if he came out 200 years ago. That is why he coming out is news worthy. For it would have cost him everything to come out at our nations founding.

Now if Mr. Stark really wanted to be brave, he would have stated that he is now a conservative evangelical Christian. If he would have said, "I believe in the Bible and will vote according to the truth that I read in it." Now that would have been news worthy. That would have cost him his job. It is much easier being an atheist in politics these days than a Biblicist.

My over all opinion of congress has not changed now that we have an atheist on board. I must ask the question: Is believing in no god worse than believing in the wrong god? I don't think so. Just because a person believes in god does not mean they truly believe in God. What most people do is create a god they like in their mind and believe it. They do not believe in the God of the Bible, or they would vote differently. Simply put, an atheist came out of a group of pagans. Why is this news worthy? It shouldn't be to Christians.

Scripture Alone

The reformers made Scripture alone one of their battle cries. They wrote over and over and over again about the sufficiency of Scripture. Their battle was against the Roman Catholics. The Papists (as John Calvin liked to call them) believe that their authority comes from many sources. The Roman Catholics believe that there is authority found in church history, councils, the Pope, and the Scripture. The reformers stood on Scripture as the sole authority.

I believe the doctrine of Scripture alone is desperately needed once again in the Church. I teach this often in my Church. I fear that many pastors do not. The onslaught of the Charismatic movement has done great damage to this historic doctrine. Many people are relying on prophesy and visions as statements of authority. This is dangerous.

We need to teach once again that the canon is closed. The Bible is God's complete and final revelation to man. It is sufficient. It needs no help. I believe that most Christian pastors believe this, however, they do apply it. If they did, it would end a lot of the nonsense I see in the local church.

There is nothing that gets under my skin more than to hear the words "God told me". I will say with complete confidence, "if it is not mentioned in the Bible, then someone other than God told you whatever you are about to say." The Bible is God's final revelation to man. It is complete. It is exactly what God wants us to know. It does not need any help. It is sufficient.

When people claim visions and prophesy that are not specifically written in Scripture, they basically are saying that the Bible is not good enough. That the Bible is only part of what God wants us to know.

The truth is, if a person believes that God is giving specific visions and prophesies then those visions and prophesies are just as valid as Scripture. If God is speaking today through prophesy and visions, then we need to add chapters and verses to the Holy Bible. For if God said it, then it is inerrant.

My desire is that Sola Scriptura becomes a battle cry again. My hope is that people would spend more time studying the Bible than listening to voices that often are contrary to Scripture. The Bible is so deep and great it needs no help. I plan on studying the Bible my entire life. I am convinced I will never learn all there is to learn about it. I see no need for modern prophesy and visions. I believe the Bible is good enough.