Turk gives a post related to the Newsweek article against a biblical understanding of marriage. First, Turk rails against conservatives and the church for failing to clearly define marriage. The other side has. "this is why Ms. Miller can say exegetically- and theologically- ludicrous things about what “Christian” religious conservatives want. Religious conservatives don’t really know what they want, or how to get it. And frankly, they have effaced their own position so badly in this case, it is no wonder we can see the head of the hideous monster about to be born cresting behind what they say they want." If marriage were primarily needed just as a social contract to ensure rights, whatever. Let everyone have that. Christians understand the Bible to teach that "marriage is a surrendering of rights first to God and then to another person for manifold theological purposes – that is, a wide variety of purposes which, when acted out, give glory to God." Marriage is about God. [This is what I've been saying too...] Not only this, but celibate, single Jesus endorsed marriage: God's very own words explaining that marriage is between a man and a woman and that God made it this way so they should never separate. Marriage is a glorification of God in our obedience. Not only this, but Paul's description of marriage in Ephesians is devastating to the thesis of the article. #1: "if the church was serious about this kind of love – which is Christ’s kind of love, first and foremost demonstrated on the Cross for a specific bride in order to make her holy and spotless before God – it wouldn’t abide a social Gospel of nondescript good will or idiotic exhortations about “your best life now”." If you think its about self-satisfaction rather than sanctifying another, you're in trouble. And since divorce is viewed in the same way in the church it follows that the church views marriage the same way as the world. We are to blame for what the world thinks of marriage. And it is ironic that the article misses God's own condemnation of things, and pretends to appeal to God's way while wanting the opposite of it. Turk says to the homosexual advocates: "if what you want is the church to bless your social-contract view of marriage, and you admit that this view is about what you want and not about what God has prescribed for you ... you are asking for what you abhor in others, what "of course" we should abhor in the patriarchs described by Moses and the Prophets" "Stop asking for “marriage”. You don’t want marriage but a way to make other people put their blessing on your life and choices; you want them to call your values "holy" when you can't even say where they came from. I say you should have what you want here – because frankly you deserve what you are asking for, and that is not a compliment." Of Course, she says
Kurschner at aomin.org argues that 1 Timothy 2:4 teaches that "Paul uses “all people” in verse 4 to refer to all social classes (in this case, inclusion of kings and those in authority); then in his second use of “all” in verse 6 he refers to all ethnic classes (in this case, inclusion of Gentiles). With these contextual and historical dimensions of the text, we can value why it is essential that we are careful not to import our 21st century modern American cultural assumptions back into a 2,000-year-old Jewish letter." He disagrees explicitly with John Piper here. He also demonstrates that universally equating "all" to "every single person" is biblically untenable. 1 Timothy 2-4 - An Exegesis
Jesus taught that prostitutes and tax collectors - cheaters - would enter the kingdom of God before Pharisees. Why? Because they had believed the testimony of John the Baptist, that Jesus is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. Prostitutes Go in Before Priests
Irish Calvinist sadly points out that George W. Bush appears to believe in Moralanity, not Christianity. http://www.irishcalvinist.com/?p=2073
Challies gives a list of his top eight books of 2008. My Top 8 Books of 2008
Mohler writes that secularization is the process whereby a society becomes increasingly distant from its Christian roots. He goes on to point out the secularization of the church - the Church of England, in particular. "No longer the assembly of believers, the church is now defined merely as a public utility. What does this public utility do? It exists, he argues, in order to provide service such as education, funerals, and a context for important national events -- such as, he suggests, the funeral of Princess Diana." It seems that "church is now to be more or less on-call for a population that sees no need to attend these churches but nonetheless is assumed to appreciate the fact that they exist. " - "vicarious religion" is "the notion of religion performed by an active minority but on behalf of a much larger number who (implicitly at least) not only understand, but quite clearly approve of what the minority is doing." "This is ultimately where liberal theology leads, and where the church meets its end. The gates of hell will easily prevail over anything reduced to the status of a "public utility."" http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=2894
A great reality of the cross at work is that even though many will persecute for righteousness, many will see it and give glory to God. So there are two responses. Optimism, pessimism and the Christian life
Patton gives a brief overview of the charismatic position and the cessationist position. It's very important to recognize that both believe in supernatural events, healings, etc. Cessationists believe generally that the extraordinary gifts were signs, to establish the Gospel, and have ceased being normative. “charismatic” refers to those who believe that certain “spiritual gifts” such as tongues, prophecy, and gifts of healings, are normative for the church. He has a good discussion here, and distinguishes between confirmatory and revelatory extraordinary gifts. Why I am Not Charismatic (Part 1)
Turk: Here's a bluntly honest quote from atheist Camille Paglia on how marriage is a religious concept. This principled atheist is seeing what the church often misses. Name that writer
Ligon Duncan affirms that his "so that" in the definition of evangelism aims at defining it according to purpose, not necessary results. Feedback on What is Evangelism- by lduncan
Apparently American interrogators use loud pop music to break their subjects - something the artists don't like. Loud Music as Torture- How About Trying Some CCM-
Girltalk: Are you a distracted woman, like Martha, while Mary listens? "as Charles Spurgeon suggests, “We ought to be Martha and Mary in one: we should do much service, and have much communion at the same time. For this we need great grace. It is easier to serve than to commune.”" The Distracted Woman
JT's question for Obama: "Would you consider rescinding your promise to sign the Freedom of Choice Acts, given your desire to reduce abortions and to seek common ground, and in light of the fact that it would invalidate every measure and law intended to reduce abortions?" Ask Obama about the Freedom of Choice Act
Here's an interesting codex, to say the least: Codex Gigas (The Devil's Bible) on Air
Spurgeon is amazing: "In another part of the country, I was preaching once to people who kept continually looking round, and I adopted the expedient of saying, “Now, friends, as it is so very interesting to you to know who comes in, and it disturbs me so very much for you to look round, I will, if you like, describe each one as he comes in, so that you may sit and look at me, and keep up at least a show of decency.” I described one gentleman who came in, who happened to be a friend whom I could depict without offence, as “a very respectable gentleman who had just taken his hat off,” and so on; and after that one attempt I found it was not necessary to describe any more, because they felt shocked at what I was doing, and I assured them that I was much more shocked that they should render it necessary for me to reduce their conduct to such an absurdity. It cured them for the time being, and I hope for ever, much to their Pastor’s joy." Spurgeon's pithy pastoral pounding
AiG: This post points out that God never endorses polygamy, that there are commands against it in Scripture, and that generally it was tolerated in the Old Testament. That doesn't mean it wasn't sinful. http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2008/12/01/contradictions-a-man-of-many-wives
Genderblog: This post discusses the value of reading books for boys, and how it will contribute to their development of men - in contrast to the video game generation. Reading is for Boys, Part I
Kauflin briefly comments on the idea that it is deliberate practice, not hard work or talent, that makes one great at a particular thing. Is Talent Overrated-
Twenty questions for church planters. http://theresurgence.com/20-characteristics-of-a-church-planter
No comments:
Post a Comment