Dan Phillips goes after the 'let go and let God' teaching, the God is all-in-all so we just need to 'manifest' the God-life' idea. He points out that this approach still makes it all about self. "we all had the same fear: acting "in the flesh." We were afraid of going to church in the flesh, witnessing of Christ in the flesh, praying in the flesh, studying the Word in the flesh, obeying the Word in the flesh. So, for fear of doing any of those things in the flesh, we'd stop doing them altogether." He points out that this teaching results in a paralysis. Disobedience because of love for God - a handing of self over to sin. Indeed, this view results in condemning those who obey God because those works are 'in the flesh!' Never does the Bible depict Christianity as anything but in broad-daylight, with straightforward devotion to God, and never are the apostles locked in introspection "over serving God by Spirit-enabled, faith-motivated, grace-empowered obedience to Gospel commands in the flesh." "Never would Paul have interrupted an aglow, on-fire, Christ-loving Christian from telling the Gospel, and told him to go to his closet and stop witnessing until he was sure he wasn't doing it in the flesh." This teaching locks people in self-absorption. "The last thing it produces is Christ-centered, God-glorifying, robust, hearty, daring, fruitful, pioneering, world-rejecting Devil-defying Christians." Stunned, stymied and sidelined by sarkicophobia
HT Challies 6): "Carl Trueman offers more than a great (and original) title in this article about the Christian obsession with culture. "Plenty of talk about Christian approaches to art, music, literature, sex, even international politics. All very interesting subjects, I'm sure, and the topics of many a chardonnay-fuelled discussion after a hearty dinner party. But what about subjects that aren't quite so interesting? Take street sweepers, for example; or hotel lavatory attendants; or workers on an umbrella manufacturing line. Why no conference on the Christian philosophy underlying these vital callings and trades?"" Why Are there Never Enough Parking Spaces at the Prostate Clinic-. Leeman recommends it too. by Jonathan Leeman. So does Taylor. Trueman on the Evangelical Shibboleth of Culture
Challies reviews Marsden's A Short Life of Jonathan Edwards. Book Review - A Short Life of Jonathan Edwards
This parable is a good read. It is self-explanatory - but it has to do with methodology. Featured Parable, Week 1
Bird interestingly writes, "the historical Jesus is theologically significant in terms of showing that Christians cannot be docetists and rooting God's revelation of himself in his Son in the theatre of human history. In other words, the historical Jesus is a crucial component of the canonical Jesus because (1) the canonical Gospels include the impact of the historical Jesus, and (2) the historical Jesus is only available through the testimony and confession of the early church's faith." I'm not sure about this, "as long as we believe that theological utility is not tied to historical authenticity, then we have no fear of the historical Jesus." The Historical Jesus and New Testament Theology
Bayly exhorts Rick Warren, in his upcoming prayer, to pray for mercy and forgiveness to God for America's wickedness, since Warren insists that prayers are personal appeals to God, not sermons, etc. A simple plan for Pastor Rick Warren
Bayly: "While reading Hentoff's essays, I've been thinking about preaching in New York City, wondering how it is that abortion can't be mentioned in the pulpit of a PCA church while a Jewish atheist writing for The Village Voice can be one of our nation's principal defenders of the newborn and unborn, growing his reputation and influence while running anti-abortion pieces in the pages of publications like The Village Voice, the Atlantic, and Human Life Review (see his superb piece on euthanasia titled, "Come Sweet Death"). How ironic." This post is a pretty clear rebuke of Tim Keller. Nat Hentoff, a New Yorker with large biblical commitments
Mohler comments on Hollywood's predictable hatred of the suburbs (e.g. Revolutionary Road): "Something significant is represented in Hollywood's depiction of the suburbs as soul-killing enclaves of those unwilling to brave the "authentic" culture of the city itself. " "The stereotypical liberal view of the suburbs, formed by intellectuals who saw the city as the engine of social progress, is that the suburbs were artificial enclaves for those who sought refuge from the reality of "authentic" life in the city. " http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=3065
Someone sent White a message saying, "you've offended an atheist." White comments on a question by an atheist who agrees with the Reformed understanding of Romans 9 and John 6, and hates God - something that is hardly surprising, as an atheist spends the day suppressing the knowledge of God - to advocate of Molinism, William Lane Craig. White is appalled at the fact that many Christians are so concerned about offending rebellious creatures that they don't care about representing the glory of God rightly. The are ashamed of God's word, of God's deed, and are embarrassed to speak of those things that are offensive to God-haters. It is a good thing when your proclamation of the Scriptures is offensive on account of truth because it means you're actually proclaiming the truth! He goes on to address basic statements by Craig, that have no exegesis to back them, which assert a corporate election and the idea that people by their free will choose to make up that 'elect' group. Molinism is defective for numerous reasons, only one of which is the fact that in a Molinistic philosophy God knows all the possibilities and which ones would result in the right circumstances for people to believe, and so how is it that their lack of belief doesn't in result from the circumstances that God chooses to instantiate? Offending Atheists-
If you're trying to decode Dan Phillips' writings, here's a primer on his neologisms. My neologisms
JT doesn't much like Scot McKnight's blurb on NT Wright's new book. McKnight doesn't define 'neo-reformed', calling whoever they are 'zealots,' whom he says Wright "takes them back to Scripture..." Since the book is responding to certain people, JT writes, "So D. A. Carson, Mark Seifrid, John Piper and others are "religious zealots" "more committed to tradition than to the sacred text"? Even if one grants that Carson, Seifrid, Piper, et al are exegetically wrong, I have a hard time seeing how this name-calling and accusation is fair, charitable, or appropriate. The other blurbs, fortunately, are more irenic." Blurbs for Wright's New Book
Riddlebarger writes, "Yet another church seeks to be "hipper-than-thou," promoting their "U2-charist," featuring U2 songs during their New Year's Eve communion service. I thought U2 was pretty much passe in most circles. Maybe they should feature "Coldplay" or "Porcupine Tree" next time." [Sadly, New Hope Church here beat them to it a long time ago]. Willimon Reviews Ehrman
Bayly quotes Dr. Agan: "While fuller discussion is beyond the scope of the present article, we may at least name two implications... for the office of deacon if the conclusions summarized above are correct. First, it seems that the ecclesiastical title diakonos was chosen not because of its associations with the service rendered by domestic or table attendants, but because it well suited an arrangement in which "deacons" functioned as "agents" in authority over the congregation and under the authority of the elders, at whose behest they carried out a variety of tasks. Second, if deacons were such" agents," we should not speak of the office as one which was (or is) devoid of authority." Interestingly, Agan goes on to argue that the best understanding of Phoebe in Romans 16 is that she was a representive of the church. Helpful Presbyterion article on Romans 16-1 and woman deacons
Bayly "These [fellow church families] are happy, happy families God has used to propagate a godly seed for His Own glory. And not one of the mothers or fathers cast a longing eye at other believers who chose money, career, or status over another child. They're all poor, and they're all joyful. Trust me. (If you want to test it, send me a private e-mail and I'll put you in touch with them so you may ask them yourself.)" He goes on to suggest having children as a New Years resolution, as it is a blessing. The best New Year's resolution Christians could make
In Galatians, Paul "leaves no doubt about the seriousness and urgency of the topic of his letter. His burden is to explain and defend the true gospel of God's grace. He launches into the subject early and writes with fiery tone employing sarcasm, threats, warnings and rebukes to get his points across." Paul's strong language should be sobering. "Those who believe false gospels will wind up in hell. Those who teach false gospels deserve nothing less." "The churches of Galatia were very young when Paul sent them this letter. Yet, he expected that they--all of the members and not just the leaders--would be doctrinally alert enough to discern the true gospel from counterfeits" Getting the Gospel Right
Turretinfan responds to Scientology. He points out that it is contrary to Scripture, and in time, those who follow it will find out that they are in error, for it is appointed for a man to die once (reincarnation is false), and then comes judgment. Responding to Scientology
Mounce has a worthwhile post that touches on the issues in the gender debates with regard to translating men. 2 Tim 3-17 --- Man of God or All God---s People (Monday with Mounce 19)
Bayly points to Keller, who has addressed abortion. The whole thing is worth a read, but here's an excerpt: "If you don't believe in the image of God, what are you going to ground human rights in? You're going to ground it in capacities. If you can't protect the unborn you can't protect the newly born, you can't protect the mentally handicapped, you can't protect old people. It's a fact. It's logical. If you go back to the beginning of the Christian church, here's what you saw: they came into a Greco-Roman world that also grounded the idea of rights on capacities. Aristotle said that some races are too emotional, they couldn't reason because they didn't have the capacity for higher reason. They deserved to be slaves. And in the Greco-Roman world you had slavery, you had terrible poverty, you had lots of abortion (it was very dangerous then, but it still happened), you had infanticide, it was perfectly legal, especially girl babies died of exposure. And you took the elderly and sick poor people and just let them die. And that was all legal; and it was done all the time. But the Christians came along and they believed in the Imago Dei. And because they believed in the image of God, from the beginning they were champions ... well, first of all, they were totally against abortion, from the beginning... They were champions of women; they were champions of orphans; they were champions of the weak; they were champions of the poor. And they were against abortion. And they put the rest of the culture to shame because of their belief in the sanctity of life." Tim Keller addresses abortion
It's happening: "The next time you are tempted to scoff at folk with disabilities who worry that they many people think their lives are not worth living, remember this story. Two medical technicians from the UK have been arrested for allegedly deciding that the life of a man with disabilities wasn't "worth saving" from a heart attack. From the story:" Secular health care
The National Healthcare System in the UK isn't so safe: "NHS records show that 3,645 people died as a result of "patient safety incidents"--including botched operations and the outbreak of infections - between April 2007 and March 2008. The figure was 1,370 higher than two years earlier. Patient groups have warned that the true toll is likely to be higher because some hospitals do not record all incidents." The benefits of national health care
No comments:
Post a Comment