2010-08-27

JT summarizes Fred Sander’s critique of what he calls evangelical reductionism. He thinks that the Bible, the cross, conversion, and heaven are the right things to emphasize. He argues that ‘anemic’ evangelicalism ends up neglecting everything else, which are the things necessary for the cross to make sense. Christ’s work is flanked by His incarnation, His works, His ascension, and so on. Evangelical anemia happens when the emphatic points are treated as the whole, neglecting the full counsel of God: incarnation, ministry of healing and teaching, crucifixion, resurrection, ascension, and second coming. He does not argue for a change in emphasis, but a restoration of the background, for the sake of the big picture in which the rightfully emphasized elements rest. He uses the metaphor of the cutting edge of a knife. He says that while the Trinity does not belong to the cutting edge of emphatic evangelism, the Trinity belongs to the necessary presuppositions of the gospel.  How Emphatic Evangelicalism Becomes Reductionist Evangelicalism

Burk notes that Karl Giberson’s response to Mohler reveals his hand when he says, “Does the saving power of Jesus vanish if sin becomes something that developed through natural history?…” Burk writes, “Bottom line. No historical Adam. No original sin. No 1 Chronicles 1:1, Luke 3:38, Romans 5:12-21, 1 Corinthians 11:8-12, 15:22, 15:45, 1 Timothy 2:13-14, Jude 1:14 or the entire substructure of biblical theology. Yet Giberson somehow thinks he’s saving Christianity. Hardly.” Giberson Shows His Hand

Burk: “Is your doctor a believer? If not, a new study suggests that the care he is giving you may be inferior to that of believing doctors. The study appears in the Journal of Medical Ethics, and in it Dr. Clive Seale surveys more than 3,700 British doctors, of whom 2,923 reported on how they took care of their last terminally ill patient. In short, “Doctors who are atheist or agnostic are twice as likely to make decisions that could end the lives of their terminally ill patients, compared to doctors who are very religious” (AP report).” [I would add that this doesn’t bode well for claims that evolution is essential to medicine!] Is Your Doctor a Believer-

Hays posts his correspondence with TFan over religious art. Some points: I) Regarding the 2nd commandment, apart from God’s self-revelation (general/special revelation), God is unknowable. His invisibility is a hendiadys for his unknowability (barring self-revelation). ii) That interpretation harmonizes the 2nd commandment with the further fact that God projects images of himself to human observers in phenomena like theophanies. iii) Picturesque descriptions of God in His self-revelation appeal to the imagination of the reader or listener. iv) There isn’t a principled difference between a mental image and an extramental mental of the same image. v) What matters is whether an image is truly representational; if it corresponds to divine self-revelation. vi)  The incarnation isn’t a turning point in the above. Still picturing Jesus is not the same thing as picturing the invisible God (Deut 4). vii) A picture of Jesus reflects the theological interpretation of the artist. Hays then interacts with T-fan’s critique. The human face of God

“It seems to me certain that the wicked that are punished by God will continue to hate God all the while they are punished, and that their punishment, instead of humbling them, will stir up their hatred to God and make them blaspheme him. Now it is not probable that their punishment will be either taken off or mitigated whilst they do so, nor that they will cease so to do while their punishment is upon them. Those minds that are so destitute of principles of virtue, will unavoidably dreadfully hate that being that brings so much misery upon them. Therefore, the punishment of the damned will be eternal. Jonathan Edwards; Miscellanies No. 237” Edwards- An Argument for Hell's Eternity

AiG answers some questions about alleged refutations of their criticisms of radiometric dating. Some points: i) All AiG articles are peer reviewed. ii) Three assumptions go into all radiometric dating: “All the daughter atoms had to be derived by radioactive decay from the parent atoms since the rock unit formed. There were no additions or subtractions of parent or daughter atoms since the rock unit formed. The rate of decay had to remain constant since the rock unit formed.” iii) None of these three assumptions can be proven because there were no scientists there when the rock units formed, nor in the vast majority of time since, to make sure that the daughter atoms we measure today (1) have only come from radioactive decay of parent atoms, (2) have not been contaminated, and (3) the parent atoms had a constant decay rate through all the millions of years. iv) these three assumptions are fatally flawed, and we have impeccable evidence to show that. Numerous example in secular geological literature show inherited daughter atoms when a rock unit formed and contamination. Also, radioactive decay rates have not been constant. v) “What is not readily acknowledged by our opponents is that these same lines of evidence highlighted in the RATE research have also been documented in secular geological literature, although they have not recognized there that this confirms decay rates have not been constant.” [See yesterday’s post for secular acknowledgement that this is true] vi) None of the results of the RATE project have been refuted by the secular geological community. Geologists have not argued against it. vii) Most so-called refutations hinge on claiming they didn’t know how to collect samples or do field work, or that they didn’t know how to use the methods on rock samples. The article goes into some more technical detail. Feedback- Fallacious Refutations

JT posts a Q+A which answers, ‘what are we apart from Christ’, tracing Romans. He also points to Piper on why Paul would use homosexuality as a prime example of idolatry: “Piper’s most profound insight here is that Paul sees a “dramatization” of Christ and the Church in Christ-centered heterosexual marriage, and that he also sees a dramatization of idolatry in same-sex sexual behavior, as men and women unite with images of themselves.” What Are We Apart from Christ-

T-fan notes that one of problem identified with radiometric dating is int eh linked article (link to article). The apparent rate of decay seems to have a connection to the Earth's relationship to the Sun, and perhaps the Earth's relationship to a slowly spinning core of the Sun. The variation seems to be periodic and is small. Nevertheless, the point is that there is already some observed variation, and (so far) the cause of this variation is not known. Scientists also haven’t observed whether there are trends over hundreds of years. “They don't really know that radioactive decay is constant - that is assumed based on an apparent constancy at the present time.” That assumption is open to reasonable doubt. Radioactive Dating - a Problem

Purswell on Mahaney’s blog answers, “If we talk about the cross so much, won’t we end up focusing only on sin and ignoring this important aspect of the Christian life?” i) it is not only the resurrection that provides tremendous hope and motivation for a transformed life; the cross is meant to function this way as well. ii) For Paul one of the primary motivations for living a holy life is that Christ died for his sins, so 2 Cor. 5:14-15. iii) To be sure, the new birth, our union with Christ, and the gift of the Spirit decisively transform our lives. Yet our present life isn’t one of unbridled glory. And so, while we can know “the power of his resurrection,” at the same time we are to “share in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death” (Philippians 3:10).  To isolate either the cross or the resurrection in the Christian life is to distort and impoverish it. 3- Will a cross-focus lead us to be more aware of our sin than of our new life in Christ-

9Marks: The way to combat false teaching that unsettles churches is to stand firm in the faith, so we as a congregation want to continue to understand God’s ways from God’s Word. Faithful Teaching- A Congregational Responsibility

Dusman continues relating recent experiences evangelizing on campus. ‘In conclusion, take time to talk to people. Be calm, be nice, and most of all, try to be a good listener. People who vehemently disagree with you yet aren't overtly hostile will oftentimes appreciate a good conversation about ultimate questions.’ GTCC Outreach Report 8-27-2010

Hays discusses how national identity and Christian identity intersect, and how we see this happen along a spectrum. “When Christians from different cultures and subcultures come together, they don’t shed their differences but invite one another into the gallery of each other’s God-given experience. And that gives us an opportunity to take the best of each culture and make it our own.” God and country

JT @ Reformation21 has some solid words reminding Christians to beware of embarrassing intra-Christian dialogue in the public square. We need to be classy and careful, even in giving criticism. Some things are both impermissible and unhelpful at the same time. On Avoiding Public Self-Humiliation (Justin Taylor)

CMI has an article describing the biblical basis for ecology, for understanding the interrelations between different organisms in the ecosystem. CMI begins by affirming that the biblical world view is the essential foundation for an ecological worldview, a foundation which must be based on sound biblical presuppositions, like the fact that there is a Creator. “When Noah stepped out of the ark 4,500 years ago, his world had changed drastically. God’s judgment on the land and its creatures was devastating and complete. That judgment has implications for how we interpret the current mechanisms of geologic processes, organism diversification and distribution (biogeography), and complex biological interactions. Insights learned from understanding the land within a biblical creation model have biblical implications and applications in origin of life assumptions, godly stewardship, human relations, world hunger, sustainable agriculture, and energy use among many more. The following is a synthesis of creation research that contains many venues for future investigation.” http://creation.com/biblical-ecology

Interesting – “"Adoption means God is now my Father... I got the hottest Poppa and by the Spirit holler Abba"” That certainly is a unique way of phrasing it (not one I would have thought up!)

HT: Atonement

DeYoung: The U.S. Court of Appeals recently ruled that religious groups who primarily offer radio and internet worship services do not meet the IRS definition of church. Theological Acumen from the IRS

Patton has a brief exegesis of 1 Timothy 2:11-12. He notes that “the parallel continues in the apodosis of the last line of the creed. If we are unbelieving, Christ is still faithful. Faithful to what? To deny us in judgment. Why? ”Because he cannot deny himself.” His own character demands that those who don’t believe be judged.” So it’s not saying that God is faithful to love us even when we falter (not that this isn’t true elsewhere; it’s just not the point here). This creed demonstrates how important it is for us to communicate both hope and warning, both heaven and hell. A Short Exegesis of 2 Timothy 2-11-14 – An Early Christian Creed