Hays responds to Reppert’s claim that “all over Scripture you find God saying he wants everyone to be saved, that he sent Christ for everyone, that he grieves when people are lost, and that he loves every person.” i) We need a harmonistic principle, since every cult, etc. has its proof-texts. ii) John 3:16 must be exegeted. What is “world?” The text doesn’t doesn’t say God loves everyone. Clearly world isn’t always everyone (John 15, 1 John 5:19). iii) Reformed theology isn’t uniform on the fate of children who die young. Also, if a child goes to hell, it is for the stain of Adam’s sin. iv) It does violence to Scripture to neglect authorial and anthropomorphic usage. v) There are multiple positions within Calvinism regarding God’s love for the reprobate/the free offer. The trouble for Calvinism
T-fan quotes the Directory for Public Worship (1645) as approved for use in the Church of Scotland. “PREACHING of the word, being the power of God unto salvation, and one of the greatest and most excellent works belonging to the ministry of the gospel, should be so performed, that the workman need not be ashamed, but may save himself, and those that hear him.” T-fan commends it as a great primer in homiletics. i) The preacher must be gifted for the role, particular with regard to the Scriptures. ii) The subject ought to be some text of Scripture. ii) The intro should be brief, drawn from the text/context, or some parallel place, or a sequence of Scripture. iii) Lengthy texts should be briefly summarized. iv) Regard more the order of manner than the words; don’t burden “the memory of the hearers in the beginning with too many members of division.” v) Doctrine must be true, grounded in the text so the hears can discern how God teaches it. The emphasis must be on principle doctrines. vi) Deal with doubts/objections. vii) Don’t settle with abstract doctrine; connect it to the hearer’s lives. viii) Don’t raise dead heresies, do refute present error. ix) In admonishing, be sure to both discover the greatness of the sin AND explain the danger therein. x) In applying comfort, answer necessary objections and give evidence by which hearers may examine whether they can rest or are in danger of judgments, and quickened to obedience. xi) The preacher’s work must be done with extreme diligence, and preaching must not be an enticing with words of wisdom, but always looking to honour Christ and see Him honoured, and he must frame truth in such a way that it is most likely to be honoured, away from one’s own prejudices, with loving affection, and confirmed by his own example. Of the Preaching of the Word
Mohler writes that the issue of homosexuality presents all morally serious individuals with a crucial question – what is the moral status of homosexual relationships? Good, honourable, morally netural, dishonorable, wrong, sinful, context dependent, etc? Most Americans use a complex/confused moral deliberation that combines emotivism and moral intuition with minimal knowledge and historical judgment. Fundamentally it’s moral pragmatism. The same person may answer a differently worded question in contradictory ways. President Barack Obama recently signed a proclamation designating the month of June as "Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month, 2009." Clinton did the same. Obama is pursuing, among other things, more hate crimes laws. By affirming gay ‘pride’ Obama has made a massive moral judgment. We cannot find pride in what we know to be sin. The Bible is straightforward in its consistent identification of homosexual acts as inherently sinful, as well as other sexual sin. Sin is deceptive and addictive. Sin leads to death, judgment, and eternal destruction. Pride in sin is a testament to its deceptive deadliness. The assertion of homosexual pride is the ultimate rejection of normative heterosexuality. Those who think morality is merely conventional social constructions will go along with this. Christians cannot, or we undermine the Gospel. http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=3924
This post points to three functions of the Book of Mormon in Mormon experience. i) therapeutic – they feel hope, peace, comfort, encouragement, which they interpret as the presence of the Holy Spirit. ii) Aesthetic – they like reading their own life experience in the BoM drama. iii) Moral – it provides guidance for their lives, and how to live a fulfilled life. This guidance is experienced through “likening the Scriptures,” which comes from 1 Nephi 19:23, and describes how the reader places himself within the text, to see his own individual life situations and issues in the pages of the book. LDS leaders do not preach expositionally from the Book of Mormon, nor do Mormons meet informally to discuss it. Yet its principles inform many of their talks, and they often retell the book’s familiar stories to underscore religious principles and reinforce moral behavior. Understanding the Book of Mormon, part 2 by Ross Anderson
Here’s an article on the real reason Sarah Palin stepped down, detailing the despicable treatment of Palin by political opponents. She was so bogged down in unsubstantiated ethics investigations (150!) that she was unable to do what the tax-payers paid her for (ironically being forced to spend 500k in legal defences to defend charges of misused government resources). Governor Palin tried hunkering down. She ignored offers of help from outside and kept media outlets at a distance. She is now very suspicious of the media [and why not, they deserve no respect]. “Ms. Palin mostly likely will not run for president -- in 2012, at least. She made many mistakes after suddenly being thrust into the national spotlight last year, but hasn't merited the sneering contempt visited upon her by national reporters. She simply was not their kind of feminist -- and they disdained the politically incorrect life choices she had made.” They also can’t understand anyone who doesn’t have presidential ambitions, who might want to focus on family, etc. “In helping to convince Sarah Palin that her road forward in national politics would demand even more sacrifices and pain than exacted from most politicians, the media did nothing to encourage women or people of modest means to participate in politics.” [when you have feminists saying that she’s putting on a ‘pretense’ of being a woman, you ironically see women who think you need to be a man to be worthwhile, and who hate womanhood. Hypocrites.] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124700261179807839.html
Phillips wishes he had written Just Do Something, by Kevin DeYoung. It’s that good, and a refreshing read compared to Blackaby’s chapter on chasing nonexistent whispy voices. “Now, I know there are lots of good reasons why someone may still be in school past thirty. ...Just because you've been on the planet for one-fourth to one-third of your life and still haven't completed '"the transition" to adulthood doesn't mean you're automatically a moocher, a lazy bum, or a self-indulgent vagabond. But it could mean that. (13)” DeYoung calls for a over-introspective, hyper-spiritualized, omen-seeking, vapor-locked, pseudo-spiritual, choice-loaded generation to wake up and grow up, exposing the “God’s personal will for me” mantra as unbiblical and in opposition to the Bible’s vision of itself as God’s sufficient revelation. So get moving in obedience. “Trusting in God's will of decree is good. Following His will of desire is obedient. Waiting for God's will of direction is a mess. It is bad for your life, harmful to your sanctification, and allows too many Christians to be passive tinkerers who strangely feel more spiritual the less they actually do. (26)” While it is biblically excellent, etc. Phillips has a small caveat, as DeYoung leaves the door open for supplemental revelation (visions, etc.), but it’s just not the norm, or to be sought. Phillips observes that we haven’t exactly done a faithful job learning/doing/preaching what is already there. Book review — Just Do Something, by Kevin DeYoung
A new study indicates that those with low self-esteem actually felt worse after repeating positive statements about themselves. Self-help mantras only benefit those with high self-esteem (and only slightly) – those who need it most, supposedly, are ironically worsened by it. Unreasonably positive self-statements, such as "I accept myself completely," can provoke contradictory thoughts in individuals with low self-esteem. They’re in a better mood when allowed to have negative thoughts as well. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8132857.stm
At the debate with Ehrman, White argued that the tenacity of the text can be thought of as a puzzle with 1000 pieces, where we have 1010. Ehrman may agree if it were added that not all of the 1000 puzzle pieces are there. T-fan writes a post in response to a skepticism which suggests that we cannot have a certainty that we have not lost some vital pieces. i) Tenacity does not say that we can easily distinguish between readings, one way or the other. It simply says we have the original reading in there somewhere. The issue of whether we can perfectly put the puzzle together is separate. ii) It is possible to be skeptical of everything from a materialistic standpoint. Skepticism is self-refuting, since it presuppose that something must have sufficient warrant to be accepted, but what is the warrant to accept skepticism? iii) There was early widespread and decentralized transmission of the NT: There is intratextual evidence of the NT quoting the NT as Scripture. Some books were circular, like Revelation, some of Paul’s letters. The missionary efforts of the early Christians were widespread, commending the OT and the apostolic word. Wide dessemination of churches necessitated wide distribution of the texts. There was no mechanism for central control early on. By the time Constantine came on the scene, they were distributed throughout much of the known world. Persecution and such distribution practically guarantee a text impervious to intentional tinkering. When there are hundreds or thousands of copying procedures going on independently over the globe in a variety of languages, the chances of the same thing falling out by accident is fairly remote. iv) Textual criticism can only take us so far. Given how frail papyrus is, it’s remarkable that we have manuscripts even close to the first century, especially when compared to the ‘ginormous’ gap in other ancient texts. Ultimately it depends on God’s providential care of His word: Matthew 24:35, Mark 13:31, and Luke 21:33 say it will not pass away, and Isaiah 55:11 says it will accomplish God’s purpose, that no important part will be lost, showing us the character of His revelation. Jeremiah was destroyed, and rewritten with additional content, and hence we have two forms of the book (Jer. 36:23-32). Exodus 32:19, 34:1-5 shows us God giving Moses a new copy of the tables of the law. Deuteronomy 12:32; 17:18-20; Rev. 22:18-19 show God’s concern for His word. v) Accepting God’s word is not a matter of seeing a reliable text, which is merely confirmatory, but of faith through the work of the Holy Spirit in a person's heart. Tenacity of the Text - A Response
Girltalk notes that the book, Getting to 50/50, which says that women can have a great career, great marriage, and be great mothers if they just get their husbands to equally share the responsibility in the home, is in direct contradiction to Scripture, which assigns men and women equally important, yet different roles (Gen. 1:26-27, 2:18, 21-24; 1 Cor. 11:7-9, 1 Tim. 2:12-14). These women believe there is no difference between the roles of men or women. We are living in days where biblical womanhood is being assaulted and undermined by feminism. That’s why girltalk exists: to encourage women to receive God’s grace and strength to fulfill one hundred percent of the role to which He has called them. Because the Days Are Evil
Solapanel has a guest blogger note the illegality of tampering with worship music that is not yet in the public domain (according to the CCLI agreement, and copyright law), and that we have largely shifted into self-publishing and co-authoring. In the past, you had to petition to have words changed. Are we concerned with extending charity and authority to the authors of worship songs? The words are apparently sacrosanct. Rightly handling the words
Hays: “We live in the age of eugenics. Eugenic abortion. Eugenic infanticide. Eugenic “mercy-killing.” The eugenic outlook on life is becoming more mainstream, and therefore more radical-–since the movement is incremental. It warns against “alarmist” language while it quietly, but diligently, phases in its radical and homicidal policies.” This worldview puts evil in perspective, and the eugenic world is ideal. Singer et. al. thinks its best if we abort hemophiliacs, because their quality of life is lower. He views people as replaceable. But biblically life is more valuable. And natural evils supply the occasion for certain virtue, which is time-consuming and ‘burdensome’, putting a crimp in the lifestyle. Eugenics is in part about eliminating inconvenient people, people who demand too much of us, and violate our sacrosanct society. So what’s important in life, what’s fulfilling? Investing in others? Or remaining detached? Do people get in the way for you, or contribute to the value of your life? We get the best of both worlds as Christians – virtues only possible in a world with evil, and the carryover of these into the world to come where birth defects are no more. Living in a perfect world
Manata notes in dealing with Reppert’s embarrassment of God and hell that the God of the Bible is hard to do PR for, and so Reppert takes a rehabilitative view of hell: God still wants those "poor unfortunate souls" to come to Him, and hell is locked from the inside, and it’s their choice. But Reppert still hasn’t overtly denied God’s omniscience, inerrancy, etc., so God in his view is means-ends irrational. He knows who will choose Him and who won’t, and yet He still puts them in hell aiming to get them to come to Him, knowing they never will. Or, worse yet, this god is insane. Of god and Men
Here’s some videos on why Calvin is controversial, posted by Desiring God. Calvin is controversial for the same reason Athanasius or the Apostle Paul was: He was a faithful servant in a fallen world. He’s controversial because anytime you speak Christian truth clearly you will necessary arouse opposition. His theology is not one people naturally accept. His personality can be perceived as overly strict, and people misunderstand how he governed Geneva. Finally, he is controversial because of us, his followers. We are often harsh and narrow and unloving, when we should be winsome and loving.. Why Is Calvin Controversial-
James Anderson responds to T-fan on paradoxes in theology. Some generalized points: i) A proposition can’t be true and false at the same time in the same way. ii) Theological paradoxes should not be construed as genuine violations of the law of non-contradiction. iii) Philosophical paradoxes are not as trivial to resolve as one who is unread might think. Moreover, it isn’t trivial to state the Trinity and Incarnation in such ways that are both orthodox and non-paradoxical. iv) Anderson’s defence of theological paradox does not reject the strongly intuitive position of the universality of the laws of logic, particularly, the law of non-contradiction. TurretinFan Strikes Back
T-fan responds to the above, noting that he has no problem with apparent logical inconsistencies, so long as they are merely apparent contradictions. The problem is when apparent logical inconsistencies are also actual logical inconsistencies, and he thinks Anderson's definition of paradox is broad enough to include actual and apparent inconsistencies. He reiterates that his problem with Anderson’s definition is that it evades the issue that real contradictions can also be apparent contradictions, and it doesn’t preclude real contradictions. Response from James Anderson
DeYoung has written an allegory for the post-modern American life in the spirit of Pilgrim’s Progress. Here’s part 1 and 2 [so far it’s quite good!]: Many are Called, But Few are Chosen (Part 1); Many are Called, But Few are Chosen (Part 2)
Swan posts what ends up being a humourous commentary on the antics of Romanist apologists. Of note, he states along the way that one aspect of Sola Scriptura says that the Scriptures are the sole infallible authority for the church. That is, the only evidence of God's infallible special revelation extant in the world today are the sacred scriptures. Romanists in no way hold this because they adhere to Sacred Tradition and the teaching magisterium as having God’s infallible voice as well. Sola Scriptura does not deny that the church has authority, that there have been times when God’s infallible revelation has been oral, and that some traditions can be God honoring and useful in the church, provided they are tested and scrutinized under the authority of the Scriptures. Nor does Sola Scriptura deny that the Spirit guides the church – He can guide her without her being infallible. I've Been Refuted by DA, Once Again
Paul commands Titus to teach, to use words to declare one’s mind/thoughts, to preach, declare, and to do it now. And what it he to teach? The obvious stuff that is healthy doctrine as opposed to (for example) what is "detestable, disobedient, unfit". But Christians tend to overlook the obvious, getting caught up in endless genealogies and stupid myths. What's obvious
If you have a minute, this post from 9Marks is actually kind of funny. In the Eyes of a Ranger, the Unsuspecting Stranger by Andrew Sherwood
Phillips writes a short parable about a careless, reckless, ignorant, dangerous surgeon commended to you as you undergo surgery, to illustrate the opposite of 2 Timothy 2:15. A 2 Timothy 2-15 parable
Interesting point by Josh Walker (fellow aomin cruiser): NT Wright talks at length about justification and makes no indication of Christ. Justification without Christ
Challies begins by noting the sad and wicked idolatry of the pluralism as shown in The Story of India. Then, he notes that Michael Jackson’s memorial illustrated a whole different order of what is still idolatry, still similar to the pluralism of India. Commenting on one woman’s practical veneration, “All across North America, all across the world, there are similar stories of worship. Can we call it anything other than worship? I don't think this is too strong a word. For many people, Jackson was a god; for many people celebrity is idolatry.” “There are others who, in their idolatry, live vicariously through celebrities and who bow low before the spirit of the age. Michael Jackson's funeral, where God's name was invoked and where Jesus' name was supposedly held high, was as vivid an expression of idolatry as was the footage of hordes of Indian Hindus dancing with joy and veneration before their statues. One is a base idolatry, the other is sophisticated and proper. Both are the same ancient sin, the same ancient rebellion against the one true God.” Idolatry New and Old
Bayly commends Philip Gourevitch's history of the Rwandan genocide, We Wish to Inform You That Tomorrow We Will be Killed With Our Families as a book that should be read by every believer committed to opposing the slaughter of the feeble, elderly, newborn, and unborn upon which our civil compact has been built for decades, now. A Rwandan pastor had pointed out at their church once that Americans have no right to condemn the Rwandan genocide when Americans slaughter 1.3 million children a year in their own nation… even among those pastors who claim to be pro-life, precious few are anti-abortion. During the bloodshed, what did Rwanda's
T-fan has a post on Gregory of Nyssa in response to those who claim Gregory of Nyssa as a Roman Catholic. He was neither a "Roman Catholic" nor a "Reformed Presbyterian." He was an early churchman, and more specifically a Cappadocian. T-fan produces a number of quotes to the effect that the only one Gregory thought was sinless was Christ, and not Mary (thus he didn’t hold the immaculate conception). The references in Gregory’s writings to Mary being ‘immaculate’ or ‘unstained’ are shown to refer to her virginity, the fact that no man touched her before Jesus was conceived. The only immaculate birth Gregory is aware of is that of Christ. Gregory of Nyssa on Sinlessness- Only Jesus Sinless
Eek. Michael Jackson is apparently considered a Messiah figure. JT quotes Cornel West of Princeton: “It's almost like a crucifixion, in terms of the cross you have to bear. We reap the fruits of the resurrection, in terms of the power that emanates from [Jackson's] sacrifice. He sacrificed his childhood because he loved us so. He didn't just entertain us, he sustained us.” Messiah Jackson-
Here’s a discussion of the moneyhole that is YouTube (it’s apparently going to lose half a billion this year; it’s bandwidth costs will be 360 million this year). It tries to sell ads alongside with its videos. But Youtube has to buy pro stuff with which advertisers want to be associated. “YouTube illustrates the principle that Free removes the necessity of aesthetic judgment. (As he puts it, YouTube proves that “crap is in the eye of the beholder.”) But, in order to make money, YouTube has been obliged to pay for programs that aren’t crap. To recap: YouTube is a great example of Free, except that Free technology ends up not being Free because of the way consumers respond to Free, fatally compromising YouTube’s ability to make money around Free, and forcing it to retreat from the “abundance thinking” that lies at the heart of Free. Credit Suisse estimates that YouTube will lose close to half a billion dollars this year. If it were a bank, it would be eligible for TARP funds.” In the case of YouTube, the effects of technological Free and psychological Free work against each other. Gladwell Reviews Free
If you’re at Christian, you’re at war. Adams writes that you’re participating (or should be) in the mop-up operation going on between the seed of Adam and the seed of the serpent, though the latter is defeated. You Are In a War
Hays has some comments on the coverage of Michael Jackson. The same media that shredded him for years now canonizes him in his death. There’s a defiant amorality about the coverage, a studied refusal to consider the disturbing evidence of pedophilia. Turning an icon of evil into a great humanitarian. The apotheosis of Michael Jackson
White quotes a Hadith wherein Mohammad said he found no use in grafting trees, which resulted in the people listening, and the yield decreasing. In response Mohammad said that it was just his opinion, and that if he says anything on behalf of Allah, then do accept it. White wonders how many of the rest of Muhammad's actions were, like this one, unworthy of emulation? A Hadith to Ponder
Genderblog links to to an entire series of sermons by Platt on the Gospel and the family, which he entitled the “Attachment Series”. David Platt and Gospel-Centered Families
Genderblog notes stats that indicate that married women are at a much increased risk of obesity. Oddly, obesity would apparently make them happier in their marriages because they recognized their decreased value in the marriage market in a society which stigmatizes obesity. Some of the the posts points (from a woman’s angle): i) In dating, we put the best forward. ii) In marriage, apparently we don’t keep this up. iii) If we know as biblical men and women that our bodies belong to the Lord, then shouldn’t we be more disciplined to take care of what we’ve been given? iv) Live a life of self-control. Women ought to recognize being thin is no guarantee of marriage. Exercise. Start now. Plan for it. Cook healthy meals. And in all you do, do all to the glory of God. Weight and Obesity
Trueman appears to tell those who are hurt by someone’s writing to them, in my terms from what I gathered from it, suck it up. Naturally Trueman is more eloquent: “Expressions of hurt are too often really something else: cowardly attempts by representatives of a cosseted and self-obsessed culture to make themselves uniquely important or, worse still, to bully and cajole somebody they dislike to stop saying things they don't want to hear or which they find distasteful.” I Feel Your Pain
Hospitality isn’t just for the gifted. Girltalk points out that Biblically it is a continual theme and a mandate to God’s people. In fact, the number of times the New Testament authors exhorted believers to practice hospitality (Rom. 12:13, 1 Tim 5:10, Heb. 13:2, 1 Pet. 4:9, and so on.) led one author to observe that to them, “hospitality was evidently rated highly.” Highly Rated Hospitality
This post from Reformed Baptist Press reminds us that as Christians we’re dead men walking, not that we adopt a morbid martyr-complex. But we follow in the footsteps of the one who went to be killed and be raised up. “Paul says. The world has been crucified to me, and I to the world (Gal 6:14). The world judges Paul as worthy of death, and Paul judges the world as unworthy of life. Consider Jesus’ choice and fruitful servants. They seem to be as a grain of wheat, buried into the earth to die, only to spring forth with much fruit (Jn 12:24). They believingly internalize Jesus’ summons to cross-bearing. They embrace their own death in this world and already live in resurrection power. They are truly dead men walking – walking in newness of life (Rom 6:4), walking by faith, obedient through death. They even run their race with their eyes fixed on Jesus (Heb 12:1). Dead men running. Now, there’s a sight to behold!” Dead Men Walking
No comments:
Post a Comment