2009-07-17

Trueman writes (at Solapanel) on history. He notes that it’s a given today that ‘history is oppressive’,  and every group needs their own ‘history (e.g. black history, etc.) The point behind these ‘histories’ is that the dominant stories we know of the past are really just engineered as part of an overall explanation of the world to keep particular groups (i.e. wealthy heterosexual males) in power over everyone else. In wanting to write these histories, those advocating them point to the truth that not only can history be oppressive, but that it can also be liberating. (For these groups, the moral purpose is more important than the truth value, but the rending of fact and value is something that Christians cannot accept.) Now, reciting the Apostles’ Creed, for example, serves as an act that affirms the church’s identity against the wider culture; who God is, that Christianity is historical and very old (the creed is very old!), etc. Thus it is a sticking it to the cultural man, an act of cultural rebellion, sticking it to ‘the man’. And this is by extension true of Church history in general. We are connected to the past, and this is a key thing in a countercultural resistance. Sticking it to the man, or The case for church history, Part 2

DeYoung continues with his assessment on Wright’s book Justification and the New Perspective on Paul. i) While Wright seeks to bring the sincere but dim-witted old perspective folk back to a theocentric view (its not just about how I myself get saved), surely Wright isn’t shadow-boxing with Piper. Who has done more in our generation to call the church to a God-entranced view of all things than Piper? ii) Wright writes that Paul’s gospel is the story of God’s-single-plan-through-Israel-for the world, but seems to himself miss the point that the Reformers have not missed this point! They see the same God-through-Israel-for-the-world narrative without embracing the New Perspective. iii) Wright doesn’t like people saying “salvation is going to heaven when you die”. Sure, we can’t be reductionistic, but he thinks that ?everyone else? has neglected to reckon with the redemption of the whole cosmos. DeYoung points out, however, that this is a serious question. What happens when you die? Will you be with Jesus in paradise? In a heavenly dwelling (2 Cor. 5:1-10)? With Christ (Phil. 1:19-26)? “I wish he would do it in a different way and not undermine or minimize one of the most precious promises in all the Bible, that he who believes in Jesus will never die but has eternal life. I am simply jealous that in emphasizing cosmic renewal we don't lose the precious hope of heaven that anchors the believer in hard times and is our sweet reward at the end of our days.” Good News- We Go to Heaven When We Die!

The down-side of open source for security… Firefox 3.5's First Vulnerability Self-Inflicted

“According to a poll conducted for the company by Harris Interactive, more than 90% of us are frustrated with how our neighbors use their phones. Almost three quarters of the 2,000 people surveyed said they were most annoyed by people who text or email while driving. More than 60% said people talk too loudly in public. More than half have been annoyed by people on phones in restaurants, and close to half felt the same way about what transpires in movie theaters... Forty one percent mentioned use of phones in grocery stores as a pet peeve, and 26% were grossed out by others who talk and text in public restrooms. (Interestingly, only 38% of respondents admitted to having any annoying cell phone habits of their own.)” http://money.cnn.com/2009/07/10/technology/email__cell_phone_tech_etiquette.fortune/index.htm?section=money_topstories

This article at SBL attempts to argue (sort of) that Pheobe was a deacon/leader in the church, that all English translations have obscured this, etc. In Romans 16:2 the author also agrees with this: “Douglas Moo argues that if the cognate verb proistēmi is considered in determining the meaning for prostatis, Paul might be characterizing “Phoebe as a ‘leader’ of the church.”” [I will immediately point out that the text reads, “for she has been a patron [prostasis] of many and of myself as well.” Note that the apostle Paul said she has been a Patron of HIMSELF. For all the talk in the article, this crucial detail has gone unmentioned – was Pheobe a leader of Paul in the church?? It strains credulity. As to being a deaconness, the NET notes read: “In the NT some who are called dia,konoj are related to a particular church, yet the scholarly consensus is that such individuals are not deacons, but "servants" or "ministers" (other viable translations for dia,konoj). For example, Epaphras is associated with the church in Colossians and is called a dia,konoj in…, but no contemporary translation regards him as a deacon. In 1Ti 4:6 Paul calls Timothy a dia,konoj; Timothy was associated with the church in Ephesus, but he obviously was not a deacon. In addition, the lexical evidence leans away from this view: Within the NT, the diakon- word group rarely functions with a technical nuance. In any case, the evidence is not compelling either way.”] http://www.sbl-site.org/publications/article.aspx?articleId=830

Phillips doesn’t much like the post on Koinonia whining about Calvinism (neither do I; see a few days ago) by Douglas Estes. “If you want to — and I don't suggest that you should — you could go here to read about the lamest and most seemingly ignorant post griping about Calvinism that I can ever remember reading. Two factors make it particularly weird, though. First: the guy's a professor, a PhD (in theology!), and clearly feels he has a masterful grasp of the subject. But second: take the whole essay, change a word or two, and it reads like every hit-piece a smart-alecky pagan has ever written about Christianity and Christians. But it's passed off as a Christian critique of Calvinists. Strange. And then...”  Hither and Tither - 09

The mainstream media (big surprise here) has misrepresented again violence against abortionists. Regarding the “string of shootings and bombings over two decades” that the AP talks about, did you know that this is the first abortion related murder (Tiller) since 1998?ttp://politicalmath.wordpress.com/2009/06/01/ap-apparently-dislikes-accurately-representing-abortion-violence/

Many law-makers in Massachusetts are demonstrating their absolute lack of reasonable thinking, and they’re trying to add "gender identity or expression" to a list of protected categories in the state's civil rights and hate crime laws, which would entail opening women’s bathrooms to men. Here’s the governor: "Somehow we manage at home with bathrooms that don't have 'men' and 'women' on them. And we can probably figure that out on public spaces, too," Patrick said. But he probably hasn’t invited a known pedophile into his home to share the bathroom with his 6 year old daughter. Also: "The First Amendment mandates that no individual should be required to affirm, in act, word, or deed, that a man is a woman, or a woman is a man, against their sincerely held religious beliefs," Tracey said. "Yet this is precisely what (the bill) will do." http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/14/massachusetts-transgender-rights-fuels-bathroom-debate/

The article at ETC draws an illustration of the work of textual critics from the efforts of some in Hollywood, who seek to reconstruct the original images from original, grainy recordings of the 1969 NASA Lunar landing. Digital Criticism

Bayly observes that while President Carter claims to have been a Bible teacher, a practicing Christian, all his life, he left the SBC because it was “claiming that Eve was created second to Adam and was responsible for original sin, ordained that women must be "subservient" to their husbands and prohibited from serving as deacons, pastors or chaplains in the military service.”; to which Bayly asks the good Bible teacher would enlighten us as to the order of creation. Moreover, he smears the church and the SBC with a li, when he claiming it taught that Eve was responsible for original sin. She wasn’t Adam was. And Adam was also created first. President Carter was better at scheduling tennis courts

Patton talks about an attitude that he has seen: “I know God, but I don’t like God right now.” For whatever reason, be it something that happened or some truth about God, this person’s positive passions for God had been put on hold and replaced with animosity. This eventually gives way to an emotional distancing, an apathy, which is actually a defence mechanism in relationships, when people don’t live up to our standards. It’s very dangerous. There are two bad options: i) To recreate God when we don’t like Him. Just discard those things that we don’t like about Him. Our beliefs are governed by what is most palatable. ii) Apathy. This happens when one listens to Satan’s lie that God cannot understand the human plight, and that He’s effectively indifferent to us, and so one just lets their emotions go out of existence. It’s taking the ‘moral high ground’ and sitting in judgment of God. Both are extremely dangerous. Anger with God is dangerous. When we don’t like Him, this is serious. So if you’re angry, pray for change – in you. The Christian worldview does not allow us to change him nor to entertain apathy. To stand in judgment upon God is the worst of all positions to become comfortable with. Consider all His great promises. Let us fall in love with the judge, not become an apathetic judge. It’s not healthy to entertain unresolved anger toward the Lord. I Know God, But I Don’t Like Him

Menikoff at 9 Marks would be happy to preach on sex from the pulpit because the Scriptures preaches on sex. “There is no easy answer on how frank to be in the pulpit. I think wisdom would dictate sensitivity to children and even to the weaker brother. However, that the topic must be addressed, frankly and graphically in the context of church life is clear.” He notes the prevalence of sex trafficking in Atlanta, that johns have carseats in their cars, and so on, as an indicator of the need to equip the flock to resist temptations to sexual impurity. Mike, Yoga, Keller, and Preaching on Sex by Aaron Menikoff

T-fan notes a number of significant Romanist terms that do not appear in Gregory of Nyssa’s writings. Terms One Doesn't Find in Gregory of Nyssa

Bird quotes an interesting point from deSilva: “Apocalypses and the invocation of apocalyptic topics often have as their goal the clarification of the cosmic significance of the choices and alliances people make in the here and now. While speaking of future and other worldly realities, these apocalypses also shape the hearer’s perception of the present, this worldly realities” David deSilva on 2 Thess 2.1-12

This post briefly looks at The Politics of Jesus, by Yoder. In sum, Yoder is trying to draw an overall picture of Christ as a political figure, and while Christ did many things with political implications, Yoder seems to dig for political meaning even when that text does not seem to contain it. The example of this in this post is Yoder’s handling of the three temptations of Christ, which are political in his view. The Politics of Jesus Chapter 2- The Kingdom Coming (Part 1)

“The Jesus you profess to love, loves His churches, do you?” Jesus’ relation with his church is formal, covenantal, committed, and loving.  He delights in His gathered people and counts them as the apple of His eye.  He rejoices over them with singing (Zep 3:17). Yet there are people who say they think highly of Jesus but little of His church. But this simply cannot be. You can’t say, I love your head, but not your body! Don’t diss Christ’s wife. Dissin’ My Wife-

JT: The Guttmacher Institute and Ibis Reproductive Health have concluded (quoting source) “Overall, the results indicate that there is a very strong consensus among both public-health researchers and economists that public funding restrictions lower abortion rates.” The Guttmacher literature review contains citations to 20 academic studies documenting this. Restricting Medicaid Funding for Abortions Lowers Abortion Rates

While we have many excuses for not being hospitable, girltalk writes that these excuses aren’t biblical tenable. We must be hospitable. Moreover, “this has particular application to us as Christian women. It is “a natural extension of [our] authority in the domestic sphere.”” Not everyone shows hospitality in the same way – some have a gifting for it. The lack of a gift, however, does not mean one is not biblically obligated to do so. Hospitality Demands

Challies continues looking at The Rare Jewel of Christian Contentment. Burroughs seeks to show how Christ teaches contentment through the Word and through the Spirit. There are these lessons: i) self-denial is essential to be in Christ’s school. To recognize you are nothing, deserve nothing, etc. Through self-denial the soul comes to rejoice and take satisfaction in all God's ways. ii) The vanity of the creature: basically, for people who think if they have just a little more in the world they’ll be content, would be like the hungry opening their mouths in the wind to satisfy their hunger, and wondering why they’re still hungry. iii) Know the one thing needful – to have peace with God and have Him as one’s portion. iv) To know one’s relation to the world - the Christian is just a pilgrim, a sojourner, on this earth, and his home is heaven. v) Know that the good of the creature consists in the enjoyment of God. vi) Know one’s own heart, to discover where discontent lies, to know what best suits our condition, and to know what you’re able to handle. "We would not cry for some things if we knew that we were not able to manage them." Reading Classics Together - The Rare Jewel of Christian Contentment (V)

Bird points to a graphic image from ancient Rome for those who think Paul is too harsh regarding sexual ethics in Romans 1:26-28. I’ll pass on his warning about viewing it. Paul and Pagan Sexual Ethics