2009-06-12

MacArthur discussion biblical decision making. It is essential that a person actually be a Christian, filled with the Spirit, to make godly decisions. A person must obey the revealed, moral will of God. If Scripture prohibits something, don’t do it. If one option causes you to neglect a duty (e.g. a choice that causes you to neglect the local church; Heb 10:25) then it is forbidden. One must exercise biblical wisdom (James 1:5), gather the necessary info, consider all options, and seek godly counsel. Finally, one must consider his desire. If the desire is licit, then do it. One needn’t be concerned that he’ll mess up God’s sovereign plan. God works through our desires. Decisions, Decisions

DeYoung gives an answer for why he is a Calvinist. First, he hopes that the new Calvinism is preserved, and does not become another historically ignorant yet arrogant fad. The influence of Calvinism is growing because its God is transcendent and its theology. “In a day when “be better” moralism passes for preaching, self-help banality passes for counseling, and “Jesus is my boyfriend” music passes for worship in some churches, more and more people are finding comfort in a God who is anything but comfortable. The paradox of Calvinism is that we feel better by feeling worse about ourselves, we do more for God by seeing how He’s done everything for us, and we give love away more freely when we discover that we have been saved by free grace.” What draws people to Calvinism is that God is the centre, not man. He’s a God who is independent, holy, glorious God who loves us because He wants to. Why I Am a Calvinist (And a Lot of Other Christians Are, Too)

Turk comments on some SBC ‘twitter apologetics’ against alcohol wherein one claims that ‘God never said thou shalt not drink’, thus reducing God to an emotionless despot who has two modes of communication – forbid and command. i) Since largely these SBC folk despise Calvinism, one wonders if they would accept a definition of the Gospel that reads, “the command from God to believe and repent or be damned" on this principle. ii) Turk quotes Psalm 104, which in praising God for a litany of blessings from his wisdom, says, “He makes grass grow for the cattle, and plants for man to cultivate— bringing forth food from the earth: wine that gladdens the heart of man,” God is inviting man to receive it as a blessing which He has made in wisdom, because He is a Father who loves us. Prohibition season

Anderson @ Koinonia continues discussing the formative influence of the book of Mormon on Mormon culture. The characters in the book are stereotypes and examples, modeling core normative experiences. A whole sub-culture of toys, films, etc. has grown from the book. The Book of Mormon shapes foundation attitude and values; e.g. they have an aversion to contention and therefore avoid uncomfortable topics, they keep thorough records. they are passionate about missionary work. “the Book of Mormon’s significance extends far beyond its truth claims… It’s not just that they believe it, or believe it to be true. It represents ingrained patterns of thought and response which shape the fabric of their lives.” Understanding the Book of Mormon, part 5 by Ross Anderson

DG points to starvation in Myanmar as rats, nourished by the fruit of bamboo trees, ravage the land in the aftermath of the cyclone that hit the country a year ago. Widespread Starvation in Myanmar

Clint writes, “I was informed that my preaching at Together for the Gospel made the cut for the promotional video for the upcoming conference (see 1.10 or so into it). Of course I wasn't on the schedule of well-known and well-empowered preachers in the pulpit. I was just one more preacher at the conference who can't help but exhort, talk with his hands, and generally preach all the time (Thanks to Chad and Dan for making me aware of it).” T4G, Scottish Communion, and Running the Bulls

T-fan highlights a Roman Catholic contradiction. On the one hand, Trent will suggest that the unanimous consent of the fathers is a rule of interpreting Scripture, yet they have not infallibly defined a canon of the fathers, or told us which are genuine works (and editions). It’s a useless standard. Charles Hastings Collette on the Canon of the Fathers

Hays posts an ‘argument’ against Calvinism – which effectively reduces to saying that ‘we have all the freedom of God’, i.e. latent godlike powers and abilities: “So is man free? Absolutely. How free? He has God's freedom! He is free in the fullest sense. Note, God is revealed in man. Man is endowed with the possibilites and potentials stored in God and he is sent to work out these potentials. Man has free access to all programs that are hidden in the Father. No limitations to man's freedom here.” It’s pretty much self-refuting, as Hays illustrates. [doesn’t this sound a bit like pan(en)theism? “man is in God and outside of God there is nothing to find.” Doesn’t that mean that man’s sin is an exercise of the freedom of God, since “there are no random actions or something without a cause in God that man could perform. Every action of man has its origin in the Father, in God”?] Calvinism disproved!

Turretinfan writes that, though accused of Lutheranism (which he didn’t hold), the Catholic Encyclopedia (1913) insists that "Staupitz was no Lutheran but thoroughly Catholic in matters of faith." Yet he held to limited atonement. Christ laid down His life for the elect. He lived from A.D. 1460 - December 28, 1524. This suffices to show that Calvin didn’t innovate limited atonement. It is something Scripture teaches, that many Christians have professed (see previous post). Perhaps the Reformers did not face opposition on the doctrine of limited atonement because it was already part of the theological milieu, and the teaching of Scripture. Staupitz on Limited Atonement

Bird quotes Guy Waters’ review of Wright’s new book, who points out that the Reformed critics do not object to a final judgment according to works, but rather object to Wright’s view of the works in the final justification. The Reformed object to a judgment on the basis of works. A believer’s conduct is not the basis upon which he sustains the final judgment, but rather shows him for who he is – a person justified solely by faith, wearing Christ’s imputed righteousness. Bird agrees, pointing vaguely to a study of Paul’s prepositions which showed faith to always be the instrument for justification. With “Calvin, we can say that we are not justified by works, but neither are we justified without them.” Calvin: “By faith alone not only we ourselves but our works as well are justified” Guy Waters reviews N.T. Wright's Justification

But God says to the wicked: “what right do you have to recite My statutes; and to take My covenant on your lips? You hate instruction and turn your back on My words. When you see a thief, you make friends with him, and you associate with adulterers, you unleash your mouth for evil.” Psalm 50; HCSB.

Phillips Hither and Tither is worth a read today. Even more interesting than Megan Fox effectively saying that she would like to see Christians die a swift death, “remember how the MSM trumped what a Christian [Obama] was, and how wrong it was to make anything of his middle name, or to suggest he was in any way Muslim? Frank Gaffney make some sober (and alarming) observations about America's first Muslim president. We're either talking "contextualization" to a suicidally barking-mad degree, or Manchurian candidate. Another reason for professed Christians who put the scalpel in O's hand to repent.” And yep. Some media folk actually do think Obama is God.  09