2008-11-29

Engwer provides a host of resources on the reliability of the infancy narratives. Here are some excerpts: "Critics who cite sources like Josephus and Tacitus against the infancy narratives, such as when discussing the Slaughter of the Innocents or Luke's census, shouldn't then argue that reliable information about such issues wouldn't have been preserved as late as the time of the gospels. If reliable information wasn't available at that time, then Josephus and Tacitus didn't have it either." ... "An argument that Matthew and Luke are inconsistent, if granted, doesn't give us reason to reject both accounts or even everything in one account. The argument from inconsistency only goes so far." ... "The early enemies of Christianity corroborated some of the evidence for the infancy narratives that modern critics argue against, such as the authorship attributions of the gospels [e.g. Jesus' birth in Bethlehem]" Christmas Resources

Hays comments on the nature of guilt. "for a normal adult not to know the difference between right and wrong is culpable rather than exculpatory. A normal adult is supposed to know the difference. So, not knowing the difference between good and evil is, itself, evil." "even if, for the sake of argument, we say the unbeliever’s evidence for God is merely probable rather than conclusive, an unbeliever is still culpable if he responds unreasonably in the face of the available evidence." The unbeliever is culpable for a variety of reasons. Probability & culpability

An interesting email correspondence by Hays regarding government/politics and the role of layman Christians. He points out that Horton's 2K theology doesn't provide specific guidance as to what social conduct the state should prescribe. Some excerpts: "I’m not saying the Bible has all the answers. Scripture gives us a combination of general norms and specific illustrations. We can get a lot of moral mileage out of that if we try. But Scripture is silent on some issues. That’s fine. That’s a point of liberty. There can be more than one acceptable course of action in a given situation. My problem is when Scripture isn’t consulted for the answers it has." "I’m not impressed by unbelievers who accuse Christians of hypocrisy when said unbelievers don’t know the first thing about Christian ethics. Their ignorant standards need to be challenged, not appeased." "It’s not as if all our hopes are vested in one man. ... We use him until he runs out of gas. Then we thumb down another vehicle to take us on the next leg of the journey. We’re political hitchhikers." "The GOP is a temporary vehicle. Conservative Christians generally vote Republican for the simple reason that Republican candidates are generally more sympathetic to our agenda while Democrats are generally antagonistic to our agenda." "If some people choose to attack Christianity via Bush, they’re entitled to be stupid, but that’s their problem, not mine." Church, state, and fate

Turk: People may "believe" global warming, but they aren't biting on the solutions. AHA!: "Less than half of those surveyed, or 47 per cent, said they were prepared to make personal lifestyle changes to reduce carbon emissions, down from 58 per cent last year. Only 37 per cent said they were willing to spend "extra time" on the effort, an eight-point drop. And only one in five respondents - or 20 per cent - said they'd spend extra money to reduce climate change. That's down from 28 per cent a year ago. The Canadian results, from a poll of 1,000 respondents"

White comments on a testimony of one who claims that he was a former Calvinist and saved out of Calvinism. [During a clip from the conference, at about minute 12:00, it is ironically said that the John 3:16 conference isn't about ad hominem, and yet White is called a hypercalvinist there] http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=3000

Bayly: "Few times in salvation history have the people of God cultivated such a highly sophisticated ability to worship the God of justice and truth while living in the midst of unjust, oppressive bloodshed. Typical of cities around our nation, here in Bloomington approximately one out of every five children conceived in their mother's womb is slaughtered." Oh, and apparently killing babies is profitable - Planned Parenthood made a good 37 million profit on top of 66 million in expenses. Abortion- Here am I, send me

2008-11-28

Here's a quick summary of Phil Johnson's definition of a hypercalvinist. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/BetweenTwoWorlds/~3/468387151/what-is-hyper-calvinism.html

People eager for deals on TV's and such at Walmart broke down the door and trampled a worker to death. Maybe if we called it jolly pink friday

Oh, and planned parenthood has made gift certificates available that you can put towards murdering your child. http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2008/11/28/kill-a-child-for-christmas-planned-parenthood-offers-gift-certificates-that-can-be-used-for-abortions.aspx

Interesting post on reasons not to get a tattoo. http://thefoolsgold.net/2008/07/23/five-reasons-i-dont-want-a-tattoo/

Phillips: Contextualization gone crazy with the Bible being translated into lolspeak. lolcat Bible - When Contextualization Goes Barking Mad

2008-11-27

White continues with this post on the SBC/Allen hypercalvinist accusation. Now apparently Allen has chided Calvinists for not reading the original sources, and yet he has attempted to quote Edwards (from a secondary source, ironically) to the effect that Edwards denied particular redemption. Now, the quote provided actually says the opposite, and White provides a few more. [As someone who actually reads the primary source material of Jonathan Edwards, I am struck by the absolute lack of any intellectual credibility behind the claim that Edwards rejected particular redemption. This is, once again, a sad statement on the state of the SBC's Arminian wing. Why have Allen's fellow Arminians not come out and corrected him for this egregious error in calling White a hypercalvinist and the blatant misuse of Edwards? One wonders.] http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=2994

Phillips reminds us that we are commanded to give thanks to God for hard times and suffering and tribulation. After all, you can read certain things in a book, but God afflicts us to truly teach us. Phillips says that he has a long string of bitter regrets from his first senior pastorate. So how have you been blessed in affliction? Giving hard thanks

Bayly responds to the claim that imposing the morality of the true God upon people in law is not pharisaical. The balance of power is predicated on the truth of human depravity. "The Christian has loved his neighbor and has sought to use our civil law to lead him away from sickness and poverty; from cruelty and oppression of his animals; from betrayal and abuse of his wife and children; from death and Hell. This is not bigotry, but love. We don't desire our neighbor's destruction here in this life or eternally in Hell." "God-haters deny and defy God's law, seeking to use the laws of the civil authority to aid them in their rebellion and to enforce that rebellion on their neighbors (you will rent to fornicators or else). But theirs is a morality every bit as moralistic, dogmatic, and religious as Western Common Law or the laws against sodomy, pederasty, and bestiality Christians seek to pass and enforce. The difference is only what morality, what dogma and god we serve." Christians pursue to true good and freedom of society and limited government - "Christians serve the Only True God revealed in Jesus Christ, and we seek to bind all consciences, not to His worship, but to the minimal aspects of His revealed Law that alone will assure that our civil society is civil, and that it is a society." The blind intolerance, moralism, and dogmatism of pagans

Yep, pagans don't even know what to do with 'thanksgiving.' My favorite holiday (part deux)

Proud people don't give thanks. People who recognize that God has given us everything, that we have sinned against Him, and that He sent His Son to die for sinners, do. 3 Truths to Induce Thanksgiving

Michael Bird's paper is available: "This study argues that historical Jesus research needs to pay greater attention to the field of textual criticism and study of early Christian manuscripts. It is accordingly argued that the field of textual criticism impacts historical Jesus studies in at least three ways: (1) the textual integrity of the New Testament and the possibility of historical Jesus research; (2) the significance of the agrapha; and (3) text-critical contributions to historical issues in life of Jesus research." Historical Jesus and Textual Criticism

Sola Panel: Strapped for time? Tall list of unread books? Get on with reading the Bible. You must read this book

Engwer quotes John Chrysostom here, who argues that there is much unknown, that there is much unknowable, and that God in His infinite wisdom has blessed us with many things unfathomable, and we should therefore give Him the thanks and the glory and cease to question His wisdom as He does His work for the good of mankind. Grateful When Some Questions Aren't Answered

Piper begins this tribute to gratitude by arguing that we do not do good works out of gratitude for Christ, although this is the reason many give, but 'that in the Bible "faith in future grace" not "gratitude for past grace" is the primary focus in motivating acts of love. ("You had compassion on those in prison...since you knew that you yourselves had a better possession and an abiding one" Hebrews 10:34).' But gratitude is great, and it is incompatible with many sins, and it feeds faith and is fed by faith. Only a true living faith can look back and thank God for all things. A Tribute to Gratitude

Mohler: Ingratitude is one of the main marks of unbelief (cf. Romans 1:21). On the other hand, gratitude and thanksgiving are natural to the believer who has experienced the grace and mercy of Christ. http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=2828

"A fool denies the existence of God; [Isaac] Newton denied that anything could come into existence apart from God." http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n1/majesty-of-god

Interesting summary of a presentation at SBL boston on Vaticus and the presence of Umlauts as indicators of textual variants. SBL Boston, Payne on the Umlauts in Vaticanus

2008-11-26

Here are some video interview with John Lennox. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/BetweenTwoWorlds/~3/466156942/video-interviews-with-john-lennox.html

Here's a link to an article on why we should be thankful for the puritans. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/BetweenTwoWorlds/~3/466249474/thanking-puritans-on-thanksgiving.html

Phil Johnson attempts to clear up the misuse of his words by Dr. Allen, who claims that James White is a hypercalvinist. It is odd that Allen is trying to tell Johnson what his own words mean, and how Allen drops important qualifications, makes the distinction between the preceptive and decretive will of God into a mere 'semantic' distinction, and seems to think that unless you're Arminian you're a hypercalvinist. http://teampyro.blogspot.com/2008/11/you-may-be-hyper-calvinist-if.html

White comments following Johnson's post (see above). "Hopefully by now you [the reader] have gotten to the heart of the issue on this matter: Dr. Allen, and most of those who oppose Reformed theology (but who likewise seem utterly unwilling to engage the topic when the other side will be equally represented), find the term "hyper-Calvinism" a useful pejorative. Useful in the sense that it helps them to try to insulate their followers from actually hearing what the other side has to say. Hence, when I seek to be fully consistent in my beliefs, and as a result, refuse to portray God as having eternally decreed His own unhappiness, I am labeled a "hyper-Calvinist" (despite the fact that it is painfully obvious Calvin surely agreed). I see no evidence that God will be standing upon the parapets of hell weeping for eternity because of His failure to accomplish His will." http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=2993

Challies speaks about Guinness's The Call. After some nauseating examples of gross narcissism and seeking the praise of men (e.g. Sharon Stone), he writes, "In The Call, Guinness discusses narcissim in the context of audience. Christians are to be motivated to serve and to please an audience of One. We are to called to seek the pleasure of God."  http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/challies/XhEt/~3/466218794/audience-of-one.php

Spurgeon: "Never think of the Church of God as if she were in danger. If you do, you will be like Uzza; you will put forth your hand to steady the ark, and provoke the Lord to anger against you. If it were in danger, I tell you, you could not deliver it. If Christ cannot take care of his Church without you, you cannot do it. Be still, and know that he is God. . . When you begin to say, "The Church is in danger! The Church is in danger!" what is that to thee? It stood before thou wert born; it will stand when thou hast become worm's meat. Do thou thy duty. Keep in the path of obedience, and fear not. He who made the Church knew through what trials she would have to pass, and he made her so that she can endure the trials and become the richer for it. The enemy is but grass, the word of the Lord endureth for ever."  http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/challies/XhEt/~3/466218794/audience-of-one.php

Wallace writes a short tribute to the late Zane Hodges. Zane Hodges (1933–2008)

Phillips: "Seeing is believing" is inadequate. We must believe that which accords with reality, even when it doesn't look that way or feel that way. Only Christians have this kind of privilege. Bruce Lee can beat you with

Phillips: Obama appears to be creating a Clinton III administration - more moderate and centrist than himself - rather than the 'change' he promised. "I'm happy for Obama to make complete fools out of everyone who voted for him, by not delivering on his distinctly evil and/or foolish promises." Whew! Great news! Obama may be a lying, hypocritical deceiver!

Straight-up: "For Moses, no greater tragedy could befall the people of God than the loss of God’s presence. No angel from heaven could suffice as a substitute. In the end, Moses longs for the presence of God more than he longs for the provision of God." We cannot afford to have the disastrous perspective of being content with God's blessings apart from God. Not Content with God’s Blessings

Here's a REALLY good reason to (1) cook your food, (2) wash your hands. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,455067,00.html

JT links to Colson: "Most of us know the story of the first Thanksgiving—at least, we know the Pilgrim version. But how many of us know the Indian viewpoint? No, I’m not talking about some revisionist, politically correct version of history. I’m talking about the amazing story of the way God used an Indian named Squanto as a special instrument of His providence." Squanto and the Miracle of Thanksgiving

AiG: This article comments on a presentation by a leading secular evolutionist. "The most important aspect of scientific epistemology, [the presenter] pointed out, is its basis on testable hypotheses." The article points out the distinction between observational and historical science, and says "Darwinian evolution is based on conjecture about a one-time event that we cannot repeat experimentally; the “documentation” of the fossil record is actually just an interpretation of unevolving fossils that presupposes evolution.³ Second, Darwinian evolution violates the law of biogenesis and the second law of thermodynamics. Third, there are good alternatives to evolution regarding the origin of life/biodiversity. These differences distinguish the dog-and-trash and the cattle-and-road-stripe examples from Darwinian evolution." Creationists don't reject inferential explanation , rather, "it makes a difference whether the inferential explanation is based on experience and known laws and fits the evidence best, or whether it’s a guesswork-filled tale built on circumstantial evidence, layers of interpretation, and philosophical beliefs that, at the outset, arbitrarily deny the possibility of a supernatural intelligence." "One’s recognition of God is the dominant factor in what one believes about origins." http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2008/11/26/great-scott-eugenie

A windpipe has been successfully grown and constructed from a patient's own stem cells. Astronauts see exoplanets for the first time, which is remarkable considering how many conclusions they've drawn about them. Another human 'ancestor' is found - but this one has a larger brain. http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2008/11/22/news-to-note-11222008

CotW: Here's an article discussing the age of the Jenolan Caves in Australia. The age of the Jenolan Caves, Australia

Piper has a high view of singleness in This Momentary Marriage. "God promises those of you who remain single in Christ blessings that are better than the blessings of marriage and children." Can you trust Him? “This Momentary Marriage” by John Piper Declares A High View of Singleness 

2008-11-25

Phillips would like to know where Scripture ever endorses nominalism, disobedience, etc. and the idea that sanctification is ever something that is optional or may be delayed. http://teampyro.blogspot.com/2008/11/sanctification-challenge-find-me-verse_25.html

Challies reviews Twilight here. Basically, he finds the love in it to be obsessive, idolatrous, perverse, and just plain weird, with an obvious endorsement/connection to the 'forbidden fruit' idea (cf. Genesis 2:17). He perceives it to be incredibly sensuous, although not erotic or explicit in any way. He doesn't think that it is a good thing for daughters to be reading. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/challies/XhEt/~3/464957610/book-review---twilight.php

The U.N. passed an 'anti-blasphemy' resolution favouring Islamic nations. Hypocritically, Canada voiced concerns (remember, we have the unconstitutional and therefore illegal human rights commissions here, which aim to have you fined and jailed for proclaiming that homosexuality is a sin). http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=2989

Piper: Apparently potential unity between reformed churches in Calvin's day was shipwrecked because an influential individual consulted the stars for wisdom. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DGBlog/~3/465008534/

Turk is thankful for his pastor - perhaps others should give honour to their own as well. http://centuri0n.blogspot.com/2008/11/thankful.html

9Marks: Thabiti seems to indicate that community is very possible without small groups in large congregations, since very large groups can be united in a common purpose, as the early church was. It is also possible to suffer/rejoice together and have the same care for each other in a very large group. We should first recognize that the church is a body and functions as such, and that different responses don't indicate different concern. All the members own the whole body. http://blog.9marks.org/2008/11/apart-from-smal.html

Phillips has some good observations about being a pastor, which boil down to the contentment to defer judgment of your work until Christ comes. Almost everyone will think you're wrong, most won't understand your job, and those with less knowledge and experience will have proportional more stubbornness and say about how you should be doing it. http://bibchr.blogspot.com/2008/11/what-its-like-to-be-pastor.html

Bock writes that there is no one translation: "some translations are more dynamic (read try to give you the full sense in the English with English style- NLT, Voice, TNIV), while others are called more formal (tend to render more like the Greek with less expansive renderings- NASB, ESV). Formal translations claim to be more literal but that is really not true. They simply are more circumspect about how far to press the implications of their translation choices in wording. Dynamics are less shy about such moves. Some fall inbetween (NET, HCSB). Either a formal or a dynamic rendering might do a better job on a verse depending on the verse in question and the accuracy of the judgment made about the translation's force." http://blog.bible.org/bock/node/438

Mounce has some comments on ETS: "Dan [Wallace]’s [leading textual critic] conclusion is that it is better for the church to live with a little uncertainty about the text than with a false certainty based on incorrect text critical assumptions." This is interesting: "C.E. Hill’s discussion of the New Testament canon. He showed how the concept of canon was tied directly with the church’s sense of the authority of divine revelation and emphasized that the church did not have the right to select certain books but rather to recognize those writings that were self-authenticating. After all, he concluded, Jesus’ sheep hear his voice." [This is actually close to my approach to canon]. Commenting on some ad hominem argumentation against the ESV at ETS, Mounce says: "The solution to this debate is to recognize that there are different translation philosophies, different goals and means by which to reach those goals, and the goal of the translator is to be consistent in achieving those goals. In all but one of his examples, our translation was the one required by our translation philosophy." http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/typepad/pQHu/~3/464603723/ets-day-2-by-bill-mounce.html

Colin Smith gives a brief overview of the structure of the Qur'an. "The Qur'an is not so much a systematic book of history, doctrine, and exhortation, but rather a collection of sayings, speeches, and law compiled over a period of time." "for Muslims, the Qur'an is the word of Allah, given directly to Mohammad through the agency of the angel Gabriel. For the Muslim, therefore, anything the Qur'an teaches is the final authority on that subject." http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=2985

Swan argues that the latest clarification of Luther's 'idea of justication' by the Pope is anything but. Swan says, "For Luther, justification was actually totally of works, but those works were perfect and performed by the perfect savior, Jesus Christ. These works are acquired by faith, imputed to the sinner." Basically, the pope's statements don't actually interact with Luther's thinking, and they are quite ambiguous. http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=2986

Piper in This Momentary Marriage: "So I argue that staying married is not mainly about staying in love. It's about covenant-keeping. If a spouse falls in love with another person, one profoundly legitimate response from the grieved spouse and from the church is, "So what! Your being ‘in love' with someone else is not decisive. Keeping your covenant is decisive" http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/genderblog/~3/465469450/This-Momentary-Marriage-by-John-Piper-New-Call-to-Covenant-Keeping

Tony Payne comments on the large amount of people who went into ministry in the 80's - and those who were left behind, so to speak. He goes after an unhelpful dichotomy: "there is all the difference in the world between giving up our lives for Christ's cause as a fellow worker in the gospel and choosing to live a comfortable life in a nice suburb with a nice career, a nice family and a bit of Christianity on the side." He proposes a test: "someone who has denied themselves, who has taken up their cross and who wants to serve the gospel of Jesus makes their decisions in this order: What's the best gospel work for me to be involved in? Where do I need to live in order to share in that ministry? What sort of job do I need to fund living in that place in order to do that ministry?" http://solapanel.org/article/christian_ministry_and_normal_christians/#When:22:00:01Z

This article gives some thoughts on why God didn't accept Cain's offering. http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2008/11/21/feedback-cains-offering

Charity is in decline. http://www.culture11.com/article/33735?page_art=1

CotW: This article points to a vegetarian lion as anecdotal support for the idea that carnivores were originally vegetarian (i.e. predation is postlapsarian). http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/6147/

CotW: "Leading 20^th-century evolutionist J.B.S. Haldane famously said in 1949 that evolution could never produce ‘various mechanisms, such as the wheel and magnet, which would be useless till fairly perfect.’" This article connects the significance in this statement to the apparent magnetoreception in cows. http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/6090/

CotW: A toy car is found in a rounded sandstone rock - a rock that looks tens of millions of years old. http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/6128/

CotW: "There are numerous instances where small transposable elements thought to be endogenous retroviruses have been found to have functions, which invalidates the ‘random retrovirus insertion’ claim... Transposable elements seem to be involved in controlling the sequence and level of gene expression during development, by moving to/from the sites of gene control." A large proportion of the genome labelled as ERVs are promoters, starting transcription at different points, enabling different RNA transcripts to be formed from the same DNA. "This again debunks the idea that 98% of the human genome is junk, and it makes the inserted evolutionary spin look like a tacked-on nod to the evolutionary establishment." ID and biblical creationist proponents predicted ERVs would have a function. This "may well go down as one of the biggest mistakes in the history of molecular biology." (citing an evolutionist). http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/6146/

CotW: In commenting on star formation, this article says: "So, a question raised is why have the dust particles close to the star not evaporated when it is more than hot enough to vaporize them. This suggests the disks are very young indeed. To evolutionary scientists, the dust grains near the star would be perhaps hundreds of thousands to millions of years old. Over those kinds of time scales the dust could not still be so close to the star unless something keeps it from being too hot, e.g., gas shielding the dust from the star’s light. This is an example of how scientists assume processes they have not observed are at work in order to explain how the observed dust could still be present." http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/aid/v3/n1/star-formation-and-creation

2008-11-24

Phil Johnson warns Christians about the new age movement. "The New Age movement is a diverse and eclectic approach to spirituality that stresses individual self-exploration through a variety of beliefs and practices borrowed from a wide array of extrabiblical sources and non-Christian belief systems, ranging from astrology to eastern mysticism to science fiction, and beyond." New age spirituality is radically syncretistic, man-centred, individualistic, subjective, and anti-authoritarians. It is the antithesis of a biblical worldview. http://teampyro.blogspot.com/2008/11/whats-new-with-new-age.html

Hays continues trying to interact with an atheist. Of note: 1) Christians don't believe things because they are in a book. Books just contain information. 2) "To “justify” altruism by appealing to natural selection commits the naturalistic fallacy. Morality is not about what is, but what ought to be. Even if our sense of altruism is a product of natural selection, that’s a descriptive statement, not a normative statement." 3) "We can observe an event, but the rightness or wrongness of an event is unobservable. Moral properties are not empirical properties." 4) "the conventional definition of divine omnipotence: God can instantiate any compossible state of affairs." Much of the post just deals with the atheist's self-inconsistency. http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2008/11/secular-scumbags.html

"The Holy Spirit comes through Jesus. Jesus immerses people in the Spirit. Baptism signifies all that the Spirit does for us. John's Gospel gives 4 effects of the Holy Spirit in our lives. He gives new life, makes us not just life-getters, but also life-givers, witnesses to Jesus, glorifies Jesus." http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DGBlog/~3/464226256/

Mohler gives just a brief summary of the persecution arising in California for those who supported prop 8. "Where same-sex marriage is legal, the coercive effect is to punish anyone who will not recognize, endorse, or celebrate same-sex marriages." [Those who proclaim 'tolerance' are hypocrites]. Their efforts to get supporters fired, etc. are indicative of that which is to come. http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=2813

Christians in Iraq are receiving vivid death threats. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/challies/XhEt/~3/463870560/a_la_carte_1124_2.php

Challies gives ten tips on reading better. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/challies/XhEt/~3/463932343/10-tips-to-read-more-and-read-better.php

Patton gives a brief argument for why he thinks that the ETS inerrancy requirement is already too much. He thinks the expansion of the statement is wrong-headed as it goes against the original 'iron-sharpens-iron' intent of ETS - it is a place to 'do' scholarship among 'evangelicals.' His argument has three points: 1) He doesn't think inerrancy is of supreme importance. 2) Inerrancy is too narrow and lacks meaning and ability to anchor in our day. 3) Authority is the issue. [On point three, I'll note that authority begs the inerrancy question - unless you're Romanist. The Bible is authoritive if its true. Authority is predicated on truthfulness. Affirming authority and denying inerrancy means an ad-hoc approach to the authority. See Hays' discussion a few months ago.] http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/ParchmentAndPen/~3/463644147/

JT: "In fact, fewer than 5 percent of churchgoers actually tithe 10 percent of their income; the average, according to numbers from Empty Tomb, a Christian research group that puts out annual reports on church giving, is now 3.4 percent, or 21 percent less than what dust-bowler counterparts gave during the worst of the Great Depression. Figures show that churchgoer contributions have been cascading downward since the 1960s. Religious conservatives do give more. Problem is, they only give nominally more and other groups give next to nothing." http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/BetweenTwoWorlds/~3/463996341/church-giving-during-depression-vs.html

Here's a funny comment on latin in schools. The quote ends, "... I came to the unfortunate conclusion that ethnic studies, women studies--indeed, anything "studies"-- were perhaps the fruits of some evil plot dreamed up by illiberal white separatists to ensure that poor minority students in the public schools and universities were offered only a third-rate education." http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/BetweenTwoWorlds/~3/464007584/victor-david-hanson-on-latin-in-high.html

Blomberg: National Geographic blows it again with an unsupported statement that the murders of the babies in Bethlehem under Herod almost certainly didn't happen because it is only recorded in Matthew (while reporting on the tomb that authenticates his existence). However, Josephus records Herod's cruelty and paranoia, where he has several sons and wives put to death! Matthew and Josephus both agree on the character of Herod, and 20-25 ordinary babies in Bethlehem weren't of concern for historians. A potential legal claimant to the throne would certainly become a target for the paranoid Herod. http://blog.bible.org/primetimejesus/content/national-geographic-blows-it-again

Bayly: Turns out Jehovah's Witness convert the artist formerly known as Prince [or whatever he calls himself now] is blunt about Scripture's teaching on homosexuality, while a baptist pastor simply appeals to 'it's just not been this way.'' http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/463388055/two-famous-californians-on-homosexuality.html

Bayly writes that God is indeed keeping count of the near 1 billion abortions. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/464208295/though-christians-try-hard-its-undeniable.html

Haykin: While Hitchens and other new atheists claim Christianity poisons the world, the ancient Roman pagans, who saw the remarkable love of the Christians, would likely beg to differ. http://www.andrewfullercenter.org/index.php/2008/11/more-on-centres-of-love/

The Screwtape Letters - on audio book - by John Cleese! http://bibchr.blogspot.com/2008/11/spectacular-find-screwtape-letters-read.html

AiG answers a 'contradiction' wherein it is said that Jesus violated the Mosaic Law by allowing the woman in adultery to go free. AiG answers by saying there were no witnesses left. [Better: The pericope is almost certainly not original, and besides, the contradiction wouldn't be that Jesus did that. it would be 'the NT claims Jesus is sinful, but the Law says...' At that point, one still must prove that Jesus broke the Law there - and He is free to dispense mercy.] http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2008/11/24/contradictions-against-the-law

Gender Blog points to 18 submissions at ETS that indicate that the Gender debate is far from over. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/genderblog/~3/464373056/Reflections-on-the-2008-Gathering-of-the-Evangelical-Theological-Society

David Allen cannot admit that he's wrong about James White being a hyper-Calvinist. It is disconcerting that this is what is coming out of the SBC's Arminian wing these days! http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=2988

2008-11-23

Hays presents several quotes from modern Roman Catholic standard commentaries on James and Paul that are compatible with the protestant understanding of sola fide. He brings these out to show that Francis Beckwith, in his book Return to Rome, doesn't even understand Roman Catholic scholarship. http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2008/11/perils-of-pauline.html

Hays responds to a post by Witherington (Arminian scholar) on Calvinism: Witherington's criticisms are self-refuting. 1) After criticizing 'theological systems constructed by finite human beings' and intellectual coherency as a guide to what is true, he has the audacity to claim that Calvinism is has too small a concept of God, and yet think himself to have such a great (and coherent) understanding as to be able to make that claim. 2) He puts a non-sensical dichotomy between 'assurance from the living presence of God' and 'intellectual certainty' (you need to intellectually identify this experience with certainty to know that this is the assurance from God!)  3) He says, "we should be placing our faith in God, not in a particular theological system." Hays says, "That’s a lot of pious nonsense. The immediate object of faith is our concept of God. Our faith is oriented to what we think, rightly or wrongly, God is like. The question, then, is whether our concept corresponds to what God is really like." Or, “Humility is fostered more by a recognition of and an owning up to what you don't know about God, than what you do.” Hays replies, "This is one of those mock-pious statements that sounds very modest and devout, but it’s also one of those throwaway disclaimers that he himself quickly discards in actual practice. Witherington is a very prolific speaker and writer. His entire life is dedicated to persuading his audience that he is right." He also presumes to think (ironically pridefully) that Arminians have a more spiritual experience than Calvinists. His mock-pious disclaimers are predicated on intellectual certainty. "he’s so oblivious to his own presuppositions that he arbitrarily oscillates between absolutistic claims and relativistic disclaimers." http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2008/11/deceptive-humility.html

Here is a good post with some reminders about what to do before, during and after church to make the most of serving others. Of note, showing up early is among them. http://solapanel.org/article/factotum_1_continued/#When:22:00:00Z

SolaPanel: Windsor argues that the idea behind Luke 9:57-62 and Jesus' words to would-be followers is that the good can be the enemy of the best. You might have to give up a good thing (which can feel bad) for the best thing for the kingdom. [He extends this to neglecting the church family - which is nonsensical if the church is the kingdom of God, since you cannot neglect the kingdom of God for the sake of the kingdom of God. That's like trying to pave more roads and build more buildings while your existing infrastructure is in shambled.] http://solapanel.org/article/the_enemy_of_the_best/#When:22:00:00Z

Phillips? Why would someone want to say he is Christian when he isn't really? 1) Wolf-in-sheep's clothing - he's feeling hungry. 2) Social respectability (e.g. early 20th century) 3) They like the perceived benefits of the Gospel that they don't really understand. 4) Self-deception to take care of that death-thingy. So can you know who is Christian? Yes - confession of Lordship and obedience and acceptance of His word are evidence. The NT requires, imposes, and provides tests (e.g. the true Gospel, correct doctrine, obedience, love for the brothers, etc; constant reference to false brothers, contra modern 'charity'). No - we must be cautious not to presume upon salvation. and, "mark this: there is no sentence, word, nor syllable of Scripture meant to give comfort to anyone willfully continuing in unrepented sin." This post is worth reading for those looking to understand this more. http://bibchr.blogspot.com/2008/11/defining-christians-and-republicans_21.html

This post has an excerpt on how forced recognition of homosexual marriages undermines a free society: "From the beginning, the debate over “same-sex marriage” has been one of those topsy-turvy issues in which the side that is truly tolerant and fair has been characterized as narrow-minded and oppressive, while the side that is intolerant and blatantly coercive has been depicted as open-minded and sympathetic." ... "those who advocate government recognition of same-sex “marriage” want to use coercion to deny other people their fundamental rights." http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/BetweenTwoWorlds/~3/457949256/karnick-on-how-forced-recognition-of.html

Spurgeon: "Fashion is the law of multitudes, but it is nothing more than the common consent of fools." http://www.joshharris.com/2008/11/charles_spurgeon_being_unfashi.php

Turretinfan goes after the notion that Muslims are worshiping the true God, just in error. They are worshiping a different god altogether. Just because there is only one true God doesn't mean that they aren't worhipping an imaginary god and not the true God. They explicitly reject Yahweh. Some worship Satan. Do they worship God? Jesus taught us that those who don't worship in spirit and truth are not true worshippers. (Zeph 2:11; 1 Chr. 16:26; Ps 96:5; 97:7; John 4:22-24; 1 Thess. 1:9; 2 Cor. 6:16; 1 Jn. 2:23) http://turretinfan.blogspot.com/2008/11/all-gods-of-nations-are-dumb-idols.html

Bayly: More on Keller and female deacons. "Unordained men and women serving in the same diaconate, on the same deacon board of a church with no distinction in their duties or authority, are what is being sought today by men like Pastor Keller. This is precisely what is contrary to the historic practice of the Church." Bayly provides an excerpt from Warfield on deaconesses. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/460131779/yes-but-it-leads-nowither.html

Interesting comments on the falling of America. "The United States, having for the most part a deeply conservative people, had until now just about stood out against many of the mistakes which have ruined so much of the rest of the world. Suspicious of welfare addiction, feeble justice and high taxes, totally committed to preserving its own national sovereignty, unabashedly Christian in a world part secular and part Muslim, suspicious of the Great Global Warming panic, it was unique." http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/462136837/the-other-hitchens-priceless-on-our-late-obamination.html

Koinonia: Here's a list of reviews on the Verbal Aspect series. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/typepad/pQHu/~3/456559887/basics-of-verbal-aspect-reviews-list.html

This post tries to remind us that the church is not the building we go to on a Sunday morning - a spiritual shopping mall - but the living body of Christ. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/typepad/pQHu/~3/456152261/monday-with-mounce.html

Gender Blog: It is predicted that half the clergy in the Church of England will be women by 2018. This church is increasingly becoming an illustration of Grudem's argument that evangelical feminism is a major step in facilitating a slide towards liberalism. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/genderblog/~3/460071549/Church-of-England-Clergy-Increasingly-has-Female-Face

Gender Blog recommends "Becoming God's True Women" edited by Nancy Leigh DeMoss. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/genderblog/~3/461299998/Becoming-Gods-True-Woman-Offers-Keen-Insight-into-Biblical-Womanhood

Patton on what 1 Peter 3:7 does and doesn't mean: It doesn't mean 1) that a man ever has the right to hurt his wife, 2) that a man has the right to bully her or verbally abuse her or belittle her or treat her life a slave, 3) that a man has the right to ask his wife to do anything illegal or immoral. It does mean that a man must 1) treat his wife with respect as he respects himself, 2) love his wife as Christ loved the church, 3) be a united front with his wife before the kids, and 4) he must trust his wife. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/ParchmentAndPen/~3/455541492/

Natural is a tricky word. Natural as opposed to artificial, and natural as true and pure against contamination, or natural in the sense of universal, or original. "In the thought of people such as Calvin and Aquinas, law is natural in the sense of being both universal and original; the presence of such law, and its recognition as such by men and women, are part of mankind’s primitive endowment." However, the fall has intervened in the operation of natural law. Now, man's essential nature remains (he is still man) but he is corrupted in every supernatural gift comprising the imaho dei (i.e. total depravity). With 'natural' law, the idea is a universal innate sense of supernatural origin. For Calvin, the sensus divinitatis is part of the esence of human nature, albeit perverted. "An apple tree produces apple leaves even though its blossom and fruit-producing powers have been extinguished by the blight. And similarly with the other aspects of mankind’s original powers." "So how do the Dutch Calvinists come to emphasise common grace at the expense of natural law? What is the explanation of Bavinck's mistake? It is, I believe, that he was working with a Counter-Reformation view of nature and grace, a view ultimately derived from Cajetan, and reading it back into Calvin's own situation: a classic case of anachronism." ... "I argue that these expressions ;’common grace’ and ‘nature’ are complementary descriptions of the same phenomenon; they are not at odds with each other, and so they are not to be set in opposition to each other. " Nature looks at persisting structures; common grace brings out is that these abilities and activities, as found in fallen and unregenerate human nature, are the result of undeserved, divine goodness (it could have been worse). http://paulhelmsdeep.blogspot.com/2008/11/natural-law-and-common-grace.html

"The swooning frenzy over the choice of Barack Obama as President of the United States must be one of the most absurd waves of self-deception and swirling fantasy ever to sweep through an advanced civilisation. At least Mandela-worship – its nearest equivalent – is focused on a man who actually did something." http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1084111/PETER-HITCHENS-The-night-waved-goodbye-America--best-hope-Earth.html

Hays demonstrates, again, that pop-atheists can't go for a paragraph without self-refutation and contradiction. http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2008/11/offer-he-cant-refuse.html

2008-11-22

Spurgeon points out that, like Judaism, Christianity has no tolerance or respect for other gods or religions. "The gods of the heathens may approach us with their mock charity, and tell us that every man may follow out his own conscientious conviction and be saved. We reply—No such thing: there is no salvation in any other; "for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved."" http://teampyro.blogspot.com/2008/11/intolerance-of-true-religion.html

"If I want my own way rather than God's, it is quite obvious that I shall want my own way rather than the other man's. A man does not assert his independence of God to surrender it to a fellow man, if he can help it. " http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DGBlog/~3/461870178/

Al Mohler recalls the heretical call by Emerson at Divinity Hall 170 years ago - a call to abandon preaching from the Bible, and preaching Christ, and to preach individualism sentimentalism instead. "Preaching," he explained, is nothing more than "the expression of the moral sentiment in application to the duties of life." [Emerson's call is just like that of the emergents today:] 'Christianity must change or it will die. The Bible is old, antiquated, a dead and lifeless book, and we can't limit his speaking to it, and we must abandon doctrinal teaching. The Bible is ineffectual and offensive.' http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=2791

Phillips says the greatest gift he could give his children is a clear witness to the Gospel. The second greatest is their mother. "But especially, word to would-be husbands. Remember, boys: you aren't merely choosing fun company or sexual release. You're choosing a person created in the image of God, whom you are to serve, lead and cherish; a partner to fill and round you out in your service to God — and a mother for your children." [Says something about day-care, too]. http://bibchr.blogspot.com/2008/11/one-of-very-best-gifts-i-ever-gave-my.html

Forty-five years ago today, JFK was shot. http://kimriddlebarger.squarespace.com/the-latest-post/2008/11/22/forty-five-years-ago-today.html

Apparently people are upset that Palin was interviewed in front of a Turkey farm while turkeys were being killed. This is yet another indication of the cultural insanity - where people would have trust funds for pets. Animals are given to us for food. [I'll add that I'm sure that among those objecting are those who have no problem eating a turkey dinner]. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/461460012/gobble-gobble-gobble.html

2008-11-21

Some statistics that demonstrate the mainstream media's campaign of misinformation and bias that helped Obama get elected. http://www.howobamagotelected.com/

Muslim apologetics at their finest. http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=2983

Hays comments on Francis Beckwith's Return to Rome. Hays points out that Beckwith seems unfamiliar with Protestant or Catholic scholarship and unaware that much of what he brings up is simply stock objections to Protestantism (he seems to think they're remarkable insights), he begs the question regarding the church fathers (what defines a 'Church Father'? Someone who seems more Romanist - so there is consent among the church fathers!). "For Catholicism, God treats us as if we were righteous partly on account of our good deeds. But, of course, we are not actually righteous. We are still sinners. Due to regeneration and sanctification, we’re not wholly evil. We can do good works. But we remain fallen creatures. To treat sinners as if they were righteous partly on account of their good deeds is a legal fiction. Worse: it’s a lie. A sinner merits condemnation. That’s simple justice. " "Sinners have a twofold problem: we are guilty and corrupt. Guilt is an objective condition while corruption is a subjective condition. As a result, saving grace remedies both conditions, but in ways appropriate to each. The grace of justification is objective because our guilt is objective. The grace of renewal (regeneration, sanctification, and glorification) is subjective because our corruption is subjective." Beckwith thinks Reformed theology was based on nominalism, but Gabriel Biel was a nominalist and a Catholic theologian in good standing. So Beckwith's church is complicit if he makes this charge." "Ironically, the net-effect of his book is to undermine the claims of Rome. He makes his best case for Catholicism. But when the best case of a bright, sophisticated, and well-educated guy like Beckwith is so appallingly bad, it simply reinforces the fact that there are no good arguments for Catholicism. It comes down to which bad argument, or set of bad arguments, you find more appealing." http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2008/11/mommas-boy.html

Hays responds to Beckwith's response to his comments. Beckwith shut down comments on his blog, apparently after Gene Bridges posted a correction by citing how McGrath didn't say what Beckwith claimed (that is telling). Beckwith accuses Hays of confusion, but it was Beckwith who generalized anti-creedal protestantism and used to to tar Protestantism in general. Hays distinguished between the two! Read the rest. http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2008/11/beckwith-in-retreat.html

Mathis writes that loving your wife is essential since, from 1 Peter 3:7, God 'interrupts' His relation with a husband if he is not living rightly with his wife. So loving your wife is a very productive activity because you can't do anything apart from prayer and to not do so hinders your prayers. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DGBlog/~3/460446604/

Here's some chilling commentary on Obama's interview with Falsani. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/460056859/obama-bell-mclaren-and-covenant-college-profs-some-people-are-being-fangoriously-devoured-by-gelatin.html

Bayly: Haleigh Poutre, a girl beaten into a coma and nearly condemned to death by medical officials who wanted to pull the plug, saying she was hopelessly vegetative, is now feeding herself, writing her name, etc. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/460102886/haleigh-poutre-escapes-judicial-murder.html

Patton: Simply put, teaching and studying preterism in the Theology Program is a waste of time. It has no historical or contemporary viability. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/ParchmentAndPen/~3/460352831/

This is a sickening testimony to the commercialization in the 'church.' http://solapanel.org/article/its_nearly_christmas/#When:22:00:00Z

Thabiti: Here are some good points about technology and the life of the church. 1. Tech can't be used to build community for those who don't have it. And the elderly, poor, etc. can't always or don't always want to obtain the latest tech... 2. we should avoid thinking of technology as in any way essential to being the church. 3. Don't use technology in any way that actually undermines community or contradicts the nature of the body. (e.g. virtual communion) http://blog.9marks.org/2008/11/matt-schmucker.html

Land o' the free, home o' the brave? A private business is sued and coerced into accommodating sexual perversion. Not a happy nor a proud moment in our nation's history. Michelle Malkin adds some observations about this latest incident of "gay" bullying, judicial insanity, and tyranny by lawsuit. (And, to anticipate any catcalls: I'm fairly libertarian on the matter of business. If a business doesn't want to serve wordy middle-aged white guys who like Chicago, that's their affair.) http://bibchr.blogspot.com/2008/11/hither-and-thither-112108.html

Excellent quote from Chesterton: "What we suffer from today is humility in the wrong place. Modesty has moved from the organ of ambition. Modesty has settled upon the organ of conviction; where it was never meant to be. A man was meant to be doubtful about himself, but undoubting about the truth; this has been exactly reversed...." http://www.joshharris.com/2008/11/gk_chesterton_humility_in_the_1.php

2008-11-20

Phillips responds to those who provide reasons for not attending church. He goes for the heart of the matter - that we are slaves, and Christ is our Lord, and if we make ourselves lord, then He is not. God said obey. The excuses all say, "God said it, but ..." This should be "There are these difficulties, but God said obey." If we aren't a slave of Christ, then we are a slave of sin. http://teampyro.blogspot.com/2008/11/thinking-like-slave.html

Phillips adds over here: "See, what never fails to dishearten me — and what I try to battle just as mercilessly in myself, is this: we can show such creativity in excusing ourselves from simple obedience; but we can't muster half the creativity to find ways to obey." http://bibchr.blogspot.com/2008/11/random-thoughts-112008-romney-post.html

Probability isn't going to be an excuse on judgment day. "Lord, there was a probability that your word was true and that you existed, but it was only 80%, etc." First, Romans 1 isn't talking about probability and apologetics. Second, if you drove away and killed someone after your mechanic told you that there was a 90% probability that your brakes would fail, it is self-evident that you are culpable. http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2008/11/probability-inexcusability.html

Patton argues that Calvinism is the more biblical but less rational option than arminianism because it doesn't seek to resolve the tension between the Bible's teaching on predestination and man's free choice. He argues that Arminianism compromises the former to resolve the tension, but Calvinism doesn't feel the need to do so. [I would point out a few problems with this: 1) It is not intuitive that LFW is "free" or "praise/blameworthy. 2) The tacit assumption that LFW is rational is the source of the supposed tension in the post. 3) I don't think that there is an antinomy at all because my experience accords with a predestinarian scheme, not an LFW scheme. etc. 4) the 'tension' is merely a product of cultural conditioning, not reason or common sense observation of experience.] http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/ParchmentAndPen/~3/459217580/

Well, al-Qaeda already hates Obama. http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/11/19/mideast/qaeda.php

Challies briefly shows the weakness of Scientific America's Shermer as he tries to say that evolution is good theology, among other things. "Michael Ruse, a well-known evolutionist, speaks truthfully when he says “evolution came into being as a kind of secular ideology, an explicit substitute for Christianity…Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and is true of evolution still today.” Evolution is not mere science, but is religion dressed as science. Evolution, and the naturalism that lies behind it, is a full-blown worldview, and in reality, is a religious system that stands in direct opposition to Christianity. " http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/challies/XhEt/~3/459612244/darwin-on-the-right.php

Hays writes that while universalism claims superior empathy, since it boasts that all relations are present in heaven, it could really foster a spirit of indifference and procrastination in relationships - since everyone is 'in,' what's the rush? It could actually foster a callous outlook on life. http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2008/11/lost-loved-ones.html

Mohler: While eastern religion is becoming mainstream, and their form of meditation is increasing in popularity even among Christians, the idea of emptying your mind is thoroughly unbiblical. Doing so denies that the word of God is to be our meditation all the time, and we are supposed to rid our minds of sinful things. Chanting, etc. is of a different religion and has no place in Christianity. That, and it is profoundly selfish to do this to avoid 'stress,' since we are to live with our minds to the glory of God, not first for our own comforts. [that and I would argue that setting your eyes on the glory of God is the key to escaping stress.] http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=2782

JT recommends a potentially promising book that urges Christians to not stop believing and that it isn't enough to just live like Jesus. Right belief and right living are both essential to being Christian. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/BetweenTwoWorlds/~3/459748094/dont-stop-believing-why-living-like.html

JT points to numerous observations of Obama's heterodoxy - he is not a Christian, in any meaningful sense of the term. Here's one comment: "Given the muddled way in which most Americans approach religion, and the pervasiveness of heterodoxy, I suppose I'm basically with Alan Jacobs: I think that figuring out exactly what sort of things Obama believes about God and Christ and everything else, and how those beliefs may affect his Presidency, is ultimately a more profitable pursuit than arguing about whether he should be allowed to call himself a Christian. Or put another way: I expect my Presidents to be heretics, but I think it matters a great deal what kind of heretics they are." http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/BetweenTwoWorlds/~3/457970512/obamas-heterodoxy.html

Why bother proclaiming and defending the truth when God blesses and loves and works through those who even hold substandard doctrine? The first reason is that God has proclaimed it in his word. Second, the worthiness of Christ and His glory. Third, for the sake of needy men who need the truth. "Because the orders which the Holy Spirit gave to Timothy two thousand years ago have never been rescinded!"  http://reformedbaptistfellowship.wordpress.com/2008/11/18/why-bother/

Phillips: He gives more indications and links regarding the insane rage of proposition 8 opponents. http://bibchr.blogspot.com/2008/11/people-worth-patronizing-prop-8.html

Hays has some interesting comments on how Jesus' response to the Sadducees in Mark 12 may more likely refer to levirate marriage than creation-ordered marriage. http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2008/11/family-life-in-afterlife.html

Here is more evidence put forward by evolutionists that at their own admission means they must 'rethink' early cell evolution. [this actually supports CREATIONISM.] "It wasn't a gradual development of complexity," Matz said. "Instead these things suddenly seemed to burst out of a magic box."http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2008/11/20/gromia-cambrian-02.html

Various megachurches and "Christian" ministries are racked with financial problems following sex scandals, overspending, and so on. http://kimriddlebarger.squarespace.com/the-latest-post/2008/11/20/should-christian-ministries-get-in-line-for-a-bailout-from-c.html

Bayly: The mayor of Los Angeles, in a disgusting twisting of Scripture, denigrates the Lord's name by suggesting that he would be for gay marriage. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/459826185/mayor-villaraigosa-jesus-and-tolerance.html

Bayly pulls up an interview with Obama and some other groups. Obama is far from orthodox, he's a relativist, he's a univeralist, and he's an emergent to the core.  http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/459919269/presidentelect-obamas-religion.html

CBMW: Bruce Ware, a member of CBMW, has been elected president of ETS. "Ware said he is encouraged by a movement he sees developing among younger evangelicals that embraces robust orthodox theology that was recovered during the Protestant Reformation. ... Ware said he is troubled by a trend among Christian colleges and some evangelical seminaries toward a wholesale embrace of egalitarianism. " http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/genderblog/~3/458949554/Ware-Elected-President-of-ETS

Turretinfan points to fringe groups in Catholicism as evidence of the fallacy in Romanist accusations that sola scriptura should be rejected because it causes disunity. http://turretinfan.blogspot.com/2008/11/not-because-of-sola-scriptura.html

Here's a reading plan to get through Calvin's institutes in one year. http://reformedbaptistfellowship.wordpress.com/2008/11/20/a-year-through-calvins-institutes-of-the-christian-religion/

Gilbert gives a good list of characteristics of one who should be an elder because he is 'elderly' - he is known, because he's there, he is known as confident, loving, knowledgable, wise, putting the interests of the church first. "All this makes you a center of gravity in the church. Not a loyal opposition center-of-gravity, but a person whom the people of this church are already gravitating to as a pastoral figure." http://blog.9marks.org/2008/11/what-were-loo-1.html

CotW: This article points out a number of huge theological difficulties between the Bible and evolution, and how the Bible must be rejected in evolution is true.Among notable ones: Death is the last enemy abolished by Christ, yet death is part of God's good design to form life! Moreover, survival of the fittest is part of God's good creation order, so there is no problem with the strong among us taking advantage of the weak. Moreover, the new heaven and earth will apparently have all the same death and suffering as now. http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/6071/

2008-11-19

Turk reminds us not to look forward to the day when the golden church returns, but to look forward to the return of Christ, and join with the church now. Indeed, hiding in your fortress is the problem. "the assembly on Sunday is not the end of Christian life but in fact the beginning of Christian life." http://teampyro.blogspot.com/2008/11/is-that-start-or-end.html

Swan points out that Tim Staples, Romanist apologist, contradicts himself in mere minutes, saying on the one hand that its ok to take other meanings from a text infallibly defined by the church as long as you don't contradict it, and Catholics are free to do private interpretation. Staples says "There is a lot of freedom with regard to the interpretation of Scripture." Then Staples claims, "For 1500 years, the Church always understood that nobody has the authority... just as Saint Peter tells us...of private interpretation.... to think that you or I can run around and interpret the Bible however we want and start our own church and that sorta thing that we see in Protestantism... that is completely alien to the Christian Church for the first 1500 years of the Christian era..." http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=2974

White writes about the hopeless scenario in which Muslim apologists find themselves, and the double standards that arise. The liberal scholarship is not applied to the Qur'an, although they are happy to apply it to the NT. Why? Because the Qur'an affirms the NT, but contradicts it. "there is a fundamental flaw in Islamic theology and history, and the modern Islamic apologist is forced to live within the parameters of that error. Specifically, his sacred text is ignorant of the contents of the Old and New Testaments (relying, it seems clear, upon an oral recitation of stories therefrom rather than from the text itself) while at the same time claiming consistency with them!" The Muslim apologist has to adopt naturalistic scholarship and assumptions to get around the veracity of the NT, but these same assumptions undercut the Qur'an. http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=2978

Challies gives some decent advice on when to confront a brother over some offence. First, examine yourself - then do it again. Then consider the importance of the matter. Ask, is this a one-off thing, or is this coming from a sinful pattern? Is this a preference? etc. Be sensitive to the circumstances of the person's life, particularly those that might have contributed to the offence. It can be good to quietly seek trusted council (be careful of gossip). http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/challies/XhEt/~3/458431166/overlooking-an-offense.php

Bethlehem Baptist's oldest member turns 100 years old shortly. She seems like a remarkable woman. http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/TasteAndSee/ByDate/2008/3417_Happy_100th_Birthday_Irene_Peterson/

Prince Charles - the postmodern prince - wants to change the king's title from 'defender of the faith' - that is, defender of a specific faith (first Catholic, then Anglican) - to 'defender of faith.' "The original title, Defender of the Faith, was granted to King Henry VIII in 1521. Pope Leo X was impressed by King Henry's defense of the Catholic faith against the Lutheran threat, granting him the title as a reward." They would later retain the title with reference to the Anglican faith ... "Nevertheless, far beyond the green and pleasant land of Britain, this news also tells us a great deal about how so many people understand faith. They see it as a substance or stance without any necessary object or referent. In this view, it all comes down to mere faith, and faith in faith -- and faith in any faith." http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=2761

In light of the PR disaster that is Dawkins et. al. some atheists are trying to repair the image, and they want to promote a 'positive atheism' that is known for what it does rather than what it denies. Atheism is currently political suicide in the USA. Mohler adds, "Atheists may attempt to create rituals, ceremonies, and practices that mimic Christian traditions, but this serves only to point to the infinite emptiness at the heart of the atheist worldview." http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=2768

Mohler points to a study that shows that today's high school kids think much more highly of their ability to succeed at work, family, etc. than their parents did. Secular observers are concerned that they have been praised too much as kids and are set up for massive disappointment. It's impossible for everyone to be above average. Worse yet, it indicates that kids who bask in the glory of unmerited praise, who just deserve to pass without earning it, are ill-equipped for the real world. [This just goes to show the massive sense of entitlement of today's youth, who demand respect, but have done nothing to earn it]. http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=2773

Solapanel: Based on the parable of the shepherd who leaves the 99 sheep for the 1, this post suggests that perhaps pastors should be evangelistically focused - including towards their own flocks, especially nominal Christians. Referring to Baxter: "For Baxter, the way to bring true reformation to England was to convert England. He exhorted his readers, writing “We must labour, in a special manner, for the conversion of the unconverted [as] ... the first and great thing we must drive at ...”. And so each reformed pastor has the obligation to “call after the impenitent and ply this great work of converting souls, whatever else you leave undone”." http://solapanel.org/article/a_truly_reformed_pastor/#When:22:00:00Z

SolaPanel: Mark Thompson is struck by the fact that the Puritans shut down the theatres during their time of influence in England. "The theatres weren't opened again until the Puritans fell from power and Charles II ushered in a new era of sensuality." Now, its easy to just write them off. This post asks, what is the place of entertainment, and suggests that we need a theology of entertainment (not the content, but entertainment itself). Is entertainment going to be a fixture of the new heavens and earth? http://solapanel.org/article/a_christian_view_of_entertainment/#When:22:00:00Z

SolaPanel: The mistake that was made in Job was that Job's friends didn't speak to God what is right. "Job treats God as someone with whom he has a relationship (albeit a scary relationship sometimes); his friends treat God as a theological debate. ... Rather than being just a book about the problem of evil, Job contains a sharp and scary message for would-be theologians. These people actually infuriate God with their endless discussions if they are not men and women of prayer (Job 42:7)." http://solapanel.org/article/job_and_prayer/#When:22:00:00Z

Carl Trueman is sick of talking about culture. For those who care to move beyond a post-modern obsession with culture rather than essence, this might be worth a read. http://blog.9marks.org/2008/11/carl-trueman-is.html

Triablogue: If you're looking for some rational, balanced thoughts and method about the Iraq war that isn't just a rehashing of the same illogical thinking put forward by many on this topic, give this a read: http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2008/11/penultimate-thoughts-on-iraq-war.html

The beginning of the end of the English language. http://www.founders.org/blog/2008/11/whatever-happened-to-english-language.html

Susan Hunt says: "Women’s ministry is not about women’s rights or about women’s feats, it’s about expressing our love for Jesus and His church – his body." She presents five principles for women in ministry: the principle of ecclesiastical submission, the principle of compassion, the principle of community, the principle of gender-specific discipleship, the principle of maturity. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/genderblog/~3/457865446/Susan-Hunt-Casts-Vision-for-Women-s-Ministry

Hilarious! http://bibchr.blogspot.com/2008/11/what-th-am-i-going-to-have-to-ban.html

Carolyn Mahaney describes how, above all, she wishes that she had trusted God more in parenting - and looked to Christ instead of worry. http://girltalk.blogs.com/girltalk/2008/11/what-i-wish-id.html

Whatever parenting practices you implement, parent from faith in God. http://girltalk.blogs.com/girltalk/2008/11/the-successful.html

JT: Here's a link to a petition against the Freedom of Choice Act and a description of what this act entails. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/BetweenTwoWorlds/~3/458531623/fight-foca.html

Turretinfan links to an article about a young woman who explored Catholicism, and he goes through the host (no pun intended) of bad reasons for rejecting the Roman Catholic religion. Indeed, she misses the real horrible reason to reject it. Turretinfan then asks - could this be your child? http://turretinfan.blogspot.com/2008/11/evangelical-parents-could-this-be-your.html

Politicians should not be theologians http://kimriddlebarger.squarespace.com/the-latest-post/2008/11/19/why-politicians-shouldnt-be-theologians-and-other-interestin.html. And Oops just doesn't seem to say it. Click here: Bonfire built by students caused Montecito fire, sheriff says - Los Angeles Times

Here are two stories that serve to illustrate the fundamental differences between men and women. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/BaylyblogOutOfOurMindsToo/~3/457345215/blindingly-obvious-think-act-relate-differently.html

This is a quick comment on the book Four Views on the Atonement. "the Christus Victor view (defended by Greg Boyd), the kaleidoscopic view (Joel Green), the healing view (Bruce Reichenbach), and the penal substitutionary view (Tom Schreiner)." Naturally, the former three all criticize penal substitution on the same grounds - "God is love, the argument goes, and he does not need to be paid off or placated. The cross is about God saving humanity from evil powers (Boyd), the effects of sin (Reichenbach), or a combination of both (Green). But it’s not about humanity being saved from God’s vengeance or wrath. After all, God is the Savior!" This post then reminds us that God does indeed save us from himself. http://blog.harvestbiblefellowship.org/?p=867

After answering some objections to the study of theology, Bob Kauflin gives several reasons why the study of theology is necessary for musicians, including the fact that every Christian is already a theologian (and you're either a good one or a bad one), the fact that God primarily reveals Himself through words, not music, and that theology will make you a better musician: Theology teaches us what music is meant to do, that worship is more than music, and that Jesus is better than music. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/blogs/worshipmatters/~3/457563690/

Phillips gives some thoughts on the definition of the GOP (hey, as long as you say you're Republican) and how that is NOT how Christianity is to be defined. http://bibchr.blogspot.com/2008/11/defining-christians-and-republicans.html

2008-11-18

JT: "G. K. Chesterton has inspired Christians and challenged skeptics with his unique wit and wisdom. He delivered biting analysis still relevant today: "A man was meant to be doubtful about himself, but undoubting about the truth; this has been exactly reversed." And he composed poignant prose that still touches the heart: "Love is not blind; that is the last thing that it is. Love is bound; and the more it is bound the less it is blind."" http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/BetweenTwoWorlds/~3/456823111/interview-with-lyle-dorsett-about.html

Prominent writer Marilynne Robinson's favourite books are by John Calvin, who she thinks is the one of the most falsely caricatured figures in history. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/BetweenTwoWorlds/~3/456845392/marilynne-robinson-home-novel.html

Nifty. A slurpee that can save your life. http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2008/11/18/ice-slurry-health.html

Dan Phillips sings the praises of the new book by Nate Busenitz, Reasons We Believe. It takes the presuppositional approach, and combining it with evidence presents a much needed positive case from a presup. perspective (rather than just negative), showing how to use the evidence. "Specifically, Busenitz focuses on the Bible's own way of arguing for the truth of revelation, and then he points to real-world demonstrations of those truths."  http://teampyro.blogspot.com/2008/11/book-review-reasons-we-believe-by.html

If you're interested in understanding the utter irrationality of spending time on conspiracy theories, read this. http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2008/11/making-peace-with-matrix.html, and this: http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2008/11/911-true-story.html

Piper quotes CS Lewis: "I was therefore writing "for children" only in the sense that I excluded what I thought they would not like or understand; not in the sense of writing what I intended to be below adult attention. I may of course have been deceived, but the principle at least saves one from being patronizing. I never wrote down to anyone; and whether the opinion condemns or acquits my own work, it certainly is my opinion that a book worth reading only in childhood is not worth reading even then. " http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DGBlog/~3/457326881/

Challies a la carte: Abortion Changes You "Greg [Koukl] had a really riveting interview yesterday with Michaelene Fredenburg from Abortion Changes You. She talked about the important, but often denied, fact that women who have abortions are never the same."   http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/challies/XhEt/~3/457078788/a_la_carte_1118.php

Challies reviews a Visual History of the English Bible. He laments that it has such good content surrounded by such poor style. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/challies/XhEt/~3/455927730/a-visual-history-of-the-english-bible.php

Bob Kauflin writes: "to highlight three characteristics of “successful” Christian musicians [in God's eyes]. 1. Successful Christian musicians don’t all look the same. 2. Successful Christian musicians are faithful to grow the gifts they’ve received. 3. Successful Christian musicians seek to please the audience of One." He brings this up to avoid the temptation to try to transform church worship into that which is successful in the world's eyes. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/blogs/worshipmatters/~3/456378001/

Dan Phillips. It's his eclectic blog, and he'll do what he wants with it. Stop whining about it. The whole post is worth a read. http://bibchr.blogspot.com/2008/11/cur-hic-bloggus-why-this-blog.html

Here's some advice on engaging the culture. http://theresurgence.com/Six_Ways_to_Engage_Culture

Here's the start of Patton's twenty year journey to theology (his testimony). http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/ParchmentAndPen/~3/456838545/

Turretinfan: " In a religious context, both latria and dulia are (in the Bible) inappropriate for things that are not God. In a religious context, both are encompassed by the broad term προσκυνέω (proskuneo). Proskuneo in a religious context, giving religious reverence, is only for God. The idea that mere religious dulia (or religious hyper-dulia) is acceptable while only latria is forbidden is simply without Biblical foundation." ... " We acknowledge that dulia can be rendered to the creation outside the religious context. We insist that all religious proskuneo, whether latria or dulia, is improper if directed to anyone but God." http://turretinfan.blogspot.com/2008/11/some-lightly-shredded-albrecht.html