thChallies notes this: Trellis & Vine Workshops - Matthias Media is holding several Trellis & Vine workshops across the US. Check the site for dates and locations. “Our aim is simple: to equip ministry leaders with the biblical foundations, vision and resources to train co-workers in gospel ministry in a local ministry context. The concrete value of the workshop is that participants will leave with at least the first draft of a plan for their training ministry.” A La Carte (4/17)
“One in seven people lived below the poverty line in 2009 in the world's richest nation.” U.S. Poverty at Record Level
9Marks: A church removed 575 members. “Inactive membership is contrary to what the New Testament teaches about the life of the church, so our action in removing members was motivated fundamentally by a desire to become a more biblically-functioning church… To be a "member" is to be part of a body (1 Cor 12:27) and part of a family (Eph 2:19). Both of these images depict vital relational connections.” Also, Hebrews 10:24-25. The church leaders encountered “resistance all throughout this process. Despite all the teaching, there are some brothers and sisters who believe that membership is more of a right than a responsibility and that we ought not remove anyone from membership except maybe in the grossest of immoral situations. Theirs’ is a principled disagreement. Others struggled for more personal reasons, as when the list of members to be removed included adult sons and daughters and grandchildren. ” Church Disciplines 575 Members
Here’s an interview on B.B. Warfield. To the question, what is the heartbeat of Warfield’s theology, Warfield stressed over and again that Christianity is a redemptive religion, that it is a religion specifically for sinners, that at its very heart it was a remedial scheme. He sees both the forest and the trees and understands all as pointing to this redemptive center. And for Warfield personally this was no merely academic discovery, but he is himself marked by a keen sense of utter dependence upon Christ. Two recommendations follow for starting to read Warfield: For broad acquaintance, his two-volume Selected Shorter Writings. For those less interested in the academic material, Faith and Life is a wonderful collection of sermons preached at Princeton, displaying well Warfield’s gospel-centered heart. An Interview on B.B. Warfield
From DesiringGod: Free PDF of With Calvin, and Pastoral Endorsements
Patton reposts an older article he wrote on the importance of getting theologically humiliated. He relates his own experience of being cut down at seminary. The early church took discipleship seriously. “In the early church Christians went through a rigorous discipleship process (notice the connection between disciple and discipline). Once you became a Christian you went through a three year boot camp. You were called a catechumen, derived from the Greek katechein, meaning “to teach” or instruct.” For three years your theology was shaped and scrutinized by superiors in the church… The church would not accept a new convert to the faith without this rigorous discipleship process. They took serious Christ’s command to “make disciples.”” “We need serious theological training. We need discipline. We need to be humiliated theologically. We need to know that we cannot do whatever we want with Christian belief and expect there to be so many lab rats available. If you have not been trained theologically, you need to be. This does not mean that you have read a book or two on theology, but you need to be in some sort of program that systematically, from beginning to end, takes you through the Christian faith, teaching you not only what to think and believe, but how to think and believe. We all need to be critiqued, disciplined, and humbled. We need more spiritual black eyes. We also need to be prepared to do the same with others.” Getting Theologically Humiliated
Bird talks his ‘not traditionally Reformed’/’not NT Wright’ view on justification in light of a review over at reformation21. “Waters raises a good question about what is the "righteousness" that believers are incorporated into or have imputed to them. Now I'm 100% convinced that it is not the merit of Jesus or his entire life of obedience. I've just gone and read again over Romans 5 and I see how people can think that, but it is clear that this is not explicitly said in the text. Jesus' "one act of righteousness" results in justification, but the one act of righteousness is not something that is imputed as the grounds of justification (Rom 5.18-19)…. by virtue of union with him we also share by implication in his faithfulness that was the basis of his vindication. So what is true of the Messiah is now reckoned to be true of the people of God. It is this implication that I think makes imputation legitimate. If we are in Christ than what is true of him is true of us, including the faithful execution of his messianic vocation as the second Adam, Son of God, and true Israel.” [I think that Bird puts a heavy emphasis on faithfulness of Christ, and he is inclined to the pistis christou=faithfulness of Christ; http://euangelizomai.blogspot.com/search/label/Pistis%20Christou. I’m a little less convinced myself] Review of Introducing Paul by Guy Waters
Phillips: “economics lesson: when government takes money from working citizens, and gives it to government ostensibly to create jobs, what is the result? Wellsir, $111 million "creates" 56 jobs — at the cost of #2 million per job.” Hither and thither 9/17/10
Burk points to an article by Gregg Allison which advises Christians on how to dress. i) Be conscious of the fact that clothes always communicate something. i) Don’t flaunt wealth with clothing. iii) Don’t flaunt sexuality or be seductive with clothing. iv) Don’t wear that which associates with evil/rebellion. v) Don’t spend too much/unreasonably on clothes. How To Dress Like a Christian
Beggar’s All writes on Kostenberger and Kruger’s The Heresy of Orthodoxy, which takes aim at the ‘new school’ of Bauer/Ehrman, concluding, “while the authors work from a presupposition that the New Testament is an accurate and reliable record of history, they also work from the presupposition that it is normative for the doctrine and practice of the church.” The Heresy of Orthodoxy – Introduction
Trueman on Glen Beck: “Beck is also both a function and a perpetuating cause of a wider problem in American politics: his idiom is the rhetoric of extremism and fear; he trades in Manichean cliches which see the political world as a very black and white place; he models for the wider world a form of discourse which is a million miles from anything which represents thoughtful, critical engagement with the issues and with those with whom he disagrees; he rarely puts forward a real argument (at least as I would understand an argument, with evidence, engagement with the strongest points of his opponents etc.); his attitude and tone when speaking about legally elected government are difficult to square with New Testament teaching on respect for those in authority…”… “If democracy ever dies, it is unlikely that it will be by act of Congress; more likely it will be because of the failure of the electorate to engage in an intelligent, civil manner with the democratic process. Sadly, Christians seem all too often to be in the vanguard of such uncritical incivility.” No, Mr Beck is Part of the Problem (Carl Trueman)
Manata has some interesting thoughts on the conversation on Christ the Centre on Michael Sudduth’s book, The Reformed Objection to Natural Theology. He briefly touches some of the nuances required in discussing epistemology. Natural Theology Discussion
Engwer notes that the objection to sola scripture that there are many denominations put forward by Romanists undercuts Catholicism itself, for Romanists often argue for the church by arguing for Jesus. But this requires the Catholic to argue for, or depend on others who have argued for, Jesus' existence, His identity, what He taught, the meaning of what He taught, etc. And there are many differing and contradictory interpretations of Jesus and His historical context. The Catholic appeal to the historical Jesus as an argument for Catholicism depends on our being able to sufficiently discern the historical Jesus. If we can do so, despite all of the disagreements that exist on the subject, why should we think the same isn't true with regard to the Bible and sola scriptura? But Romanists don’t often apply their arguments against their own belief system. Roman Catholic Suicide
A God Given Functioning Conscience
DG cites Edwards on the eternally increasing happiness and holiness of the saints: “and if their knowledge, doubtless their holiness. For as they increase in the knowledge of God and of the works of God, the more they will see of his excellency; and the more they see of his excellency . . . the more will they love him; and the more they love God, the more delight and happiness . . . will they have in him.” Edwards also holds that the essence of holiness is love for God. Holier and Happier Forever- How-
DG has a meditation, on the day of Yom Kippur, noting that the Day of Atonement was both provisional and a pointer (Heb. 9:23-26): “Jesus turned out to be far more than the Messiah had been expected to be. He was the consummate temple, Passover lamb, sacrificed goat, scapegoat, high priest, prophet and the King of kings. Here is the good news for Yom Kippur: Jesus the Messiah has put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. The Day of Atonement: it is finished.” Yom Kippur- It Is Finished
Well neato. Ancient Samaritan Synagogue Unearthed In Israel
Arctic Microbes Sleep for 100 Million Years [how exactly does the genetic material last that long??]
Hays notes the ramifications of fire/drying up in the hot, arid world of the Bible’s setting, and points out that possible that the metaphor of fire is associated with the related metaphors of hunger and especially thirst. Unquenchable fire signifies unquenchable hunger and thirst. And these, in turn, are figures of yearning. The damned forever long for what they shall never have. Dying of thirst, but cursed with immortality. Hellfire
Genderblog exhorts women to look for the qualities of Boaz in a man: A servant, a generous giver/provider, a God-lover, a protector, a kind man, a helper of the needy, respected, and a man of integrity. Boaz- A Model
Here’s an overview of the discover of Jericho. Top Ten Biblical Discoveries in Archaeology – #3 Jericho
Wallace exhorts Christians to interact with their communities with the ‘soft touch’; buying the girl scout cookies, giving out the best candy on Halloween, buying the lemonade at the lemonade stand, all to adorn the Gospel. Halloween- A Missed Opportunity for Evangelicals (Dan Wallace)
Here’s a sobering and realistic assessment of the doubts of the minister from Patton: I Don’t Really Know if I am Called to Ministry
Adams corrects the idea that nouthetic counselors oppose the use of medicine. Nevertheless they do oppose any medicines for ‘non-organically caused problems’ that ‘inhibit the body from functioning as it should’ (e.g. Mood changing drugs affect a person in such a way that the benefits of pain and other unpleasant feelings are not realized). He writes, “For help on so-called “chemical imbalances,” for instance, see The Christian Counselor’s Medical Desk Reference.” [I’ll note that whenever I’ve heard the critique of nouthetic counseling regarding a lack of meds, the meaning is psychological meds, so Adams is hardly clearing anything up hear]. Nouthetic Counselors Oppose the Use of Medicine, Don’t They-
CMI compares the world’s fastest supercomputer (10^15 flops [that’s floating point operations per second, a measure of CPU power, but not much more useful than measuring peak horsepower in a car). Compared to the human brain: “Estimated total number of nerve cells (neurons): 100 billion. Number of connections in the brain: 500 trillion (5 x 1014). Number of new nerve connections made every second: 1 million Processing capacity: 100 trillion instructions per second (1014).” The computer fills a room. [there will also be parallelization issues with the supercomputer, etc]/ Supercomputer to brain-storm the human brain
Challies point to an article in Canadian Business: “The focus of the article is pornography and its coming decline. It seems that pornography has been unable to adapt to the realities of Web 2.0, realities that dictate that everything must be free. Or nearly everything. Porn producers are saying that they have seen revenue fall 80% over the past three years; Playboy is bleeding money and laying off staff; actors who were once paid $2000 a scene are now being paid just half of that; revenue for major distributors has fallen 30% in just the last year.” Basically, porn can’t keep up with Web 2.0, where people just won’t pay for things. While the death of the industry in this form is in itself great, the reason it dies is not: Amateur/grass-roots free porn is supplanting professional porn. “Pornography is suffering because of reasons related to morality, and yet it is a lower rather than a higher morality that is making the difference. It’s not that as a culture we are objecting to pornography on the grounds that it objectifies women or hardens the hearts of men. Rather, the culture has decided that it won’t pay for what it consumes and that it will take whatever it desires. And even worse, the culture has become so hardened to what used to be shocking, that no allure remains.” Porn has succeeded itself into decline. Sex Isn't Selling
Hays has some interesting thoughts on the idea of right to privacy. Right of privacy
JT cites a comment pointing out the real heart of the whole Glenn Beck issue: The problem is Americolatry. “If our government does X, Y, and Z, then we will be joyful, satisfied, safe, and complete. Then we will live in heaven. But if the other guys get their way, it’ll be hell. In that equation, God is no longer our joy, our comfort, our satisfaction, our all. If God is brought into the conversation at all, it is to use God as a means for our own idolatrous ends.” Americolatry
Creationsafaris: “China has had a “one-child policy” for 30 years this week. This policy has caused untold grief for many families desiring children, and has resulted in unexpected demographic problems – such as aging of the population, not enough brides for young men, and enormous numbers of abortions. Two articles in Science this week explored the convoluted reasoning that resulted in history’s biggest social experiment, and asked, what are the prospects for abolishing the policy, or at least relaxing it? After all, this regrettable “case of ideology trumping science” sprang out of “a wave of neo-Malthusianism” that captivated government officials in the days of Chairman Mao – a view of population demographics that had influenced Darwin (01/15/2009) – but has largely been discredited today (12/09/2009 bullet 3, 12/12/2008, 06/05/2007, 03/17/2003)… ” the article goes on to detail the disturbing imbalance. “… in spite of negative demographic consequences facing China’s elderly, bachelors, work force, and the sustainability of its population – all based on flawed math and science and ideology – a majority of the couples in a province who were given, once again, the opportunity to have families with siblings, responded, with no disagreement from the bloated bureaucracy, “one child is best.”” China Suffers 30 Years of Misguided Malthusian Idea
T-fan responds to Dawkin’s critique of Rome’s doctrine of Original Sin – many of Dawkin’s ‘arguments’ would be easily cast at the Reformed doctrine as well. Dawkins Criticizes Rome and Original Sin. See also Hays’ critique here. Dawkins on the warpath For example, Dawkins says, “Even if Hitler had been an atheist – as Stalin more surely was – how dare Ratzinger suggest that atheism has any connection whatsoever with their horrific deeds?” Hays responds, “Why not? Even Peter Singer admits that human rights are traditionally grounded in the doctrine of the imago Dei. Once you reduce man to a meat machine, which is, in turn, the byproduct of a mindless machine (a la naturalistic evolution), then why not kill human beings with impunity?”
Dawkins is a selective moral relativist. Punishing the Pope
Mounce comments on whether ‘kai’ means ‘but’. Strictly speaking “there is no specific word in the Greek that has the basic meaning “but.”” Kai can have an adversative force. He notes that the danger in placing too much weight on something textually suspect, and the complexity of communicating the meaning of the author and its tension with communicating the direct structure of the original into English. The moral: check multiple translations. Does καἰ Mean But - (Monday with Mounce 76)
DeYoung writes, “Satan is an accuser and a deceiver. In both cases his weapons are words, which is why we must overcome him with the word of our testimony. In other words, it is through our belief in the gospel and our confidence in the power of Jesus Christ that we can stand secure in the face of Satan’s lies and accusations. ” Precious Remedies Against Satan’s Devices
Hays interacts with a detractor of retributive justice: “Scripture doesn’t regard the demand for retribution as inherently sinful. Consider eschatological setting of Rev 6:10. Furthermore, Scripture doesn’t treat forgiveness and retribution as mutually exclusive. To the contrary, God forgives the redeemed because he exacted punishment on the Redeemer. Penal substitution lays the foundation for divine forgiveness.” “In Scripture, divine forgiveness is contingent on repentance and retribution. We don’t have unconditional forgiveness in Scripture, where God forgives the impenitent. ” Are you washed in the blood-
Burk relates a chilling encounter with a the pro-choice escorts outside the abortion clinics, who directly oppose Burk and his group’s efforts to offer woman another choice [rather ironic, isn’t it! Just goes to show feminists hate women, and they aren’t really concerned with their ‘freedom to choose’]. The woman with whom Burk interacted actually said the mother has the right to kill the baby outside of the womb if it is still connected. “The encounter brought home again how indefensible the pro-choice position is. There is no morally significant difference between a person inside the birth canal and one outside. One is here, and one is there. But there’s no basis for arguing that one is human outside but not human while only inches away inside the birth canal (or for that matter in the womb). The pro-choice position is indeed ethically bankrupt.” “What I encountered in this woman was not mere irrationality, but spiritual darkness. She didn’t know Christ and needed desperately to be introduced to him. I tried to do just that by sharing the gospel with her, but as far as I know to no avail.” Pro-choice Irrationality
Mohler cautions Christians against practicing Yoga, as it cannot be decoupled from its pagan and sexualized roots. “Syman describes the yoga on the White House lawn as “sanitized, sanctioned, and family-friendly,” and she noted the rather amazing fact that a practice once seen as so exotic and even dangerous was now included as an activity sufficiently safe and mainstream for children.” The Subtle Body — Should Christians Practice Yoga-
Creationsafaris has a reminder of the discovery of soft tissue and blood cells in a T. rex bone, which, while evolutionists waltz around it, threatens to undermine the dating and phylogeny of the world’s most famous dinosaur. Waltzing with Dinosaurs
JT points to four observations in light of the Gospel on Green Awakenings. “This booklet co-opts language of the biblical gospel to articulate the work of creation care. Green Awakening’s articulation of renewal suggests, at times, a replacement of the transcendent God of the Bible with another god: the earth itself. The renewal presented in this booklet defines the role of human beings differently from the way the Bible defines it. This articulation of Renewal skews the whole biblical story, from beginning to end—because it misses the central point.” The Gospel must be central. Green Is Not the Gospel
Mohler cites a Harvard prof who argues that presidents don’t get far ahead of public opinion on controversial/moral matters. “how many politicians on both the right and the left take their positions based on such a political calculation? Apparently, for far too many, the risk of telling the truth “isn’t worth taking.”. When Telling the Truth “Isn’t a Risk Worth Taking”
Hays talks about how Protestants should view Eastern Orthodoxy. i) If our “heresies” are their orthodoxies, then what they take to be their corresponding orthodoxies are heretical from our own vantage point. ii) minor error, or even a minor truth, can become a major error if it is elevated to the status of an all-important truth. e.g. Seventh-Day Adventism and the Sabbath. Consider the theological priorities of the Eastern Orthodox. What do they consider all-important? And compare that with the theological priorities of the Bible. Is Eastern Orthodoxy Eastern heresy-
Genetics is complicated. Synonymous Codons- Another Gene Expression Regulation Mechanism
White points out that the reason even rejected proclamation is never a waste of time is because such a proclamation is honoring to God, because it is the declaration of His Lordship and truth. He contrasts this with William Lane Craig’s belittlement of the impact of sin. Glory-Based Apologetics vs. Rebel-Based Apologetics
Hays comments on the Arminian use of 1 Tim. 2:1-5. i) Arminians dismiss Calvinists taking this as all kinds of men (in light of vs. 1-2) as subterfuge, violating the ‘plain sense’ of the passage to uphold his ‘unscriptural belief system’. ii) If under the Arminian view prayer for all men doesn’t mean prayer for representative sample groups, then, presumably, the Arminian alternative means that we (or Timothy) pray for every individual. iii) How does Timothy pray for them all if he doesn’t know how many individual humans live at the time? iv) If Timothy prays for every individual, what does he prayer for? Does each human being have the same needs? Is there one generic prayer that we should pray for everyone? And, if so, what would that be? Is it a sincere and meaningful prayer to pray that God saves every single person? We know that God doesn’t save everyone. So isn’t it hypocritical to ask God to do something even though we know that God has no intention of answering our prayer? v) Or does this mean that we pray certain types of prayers, which automatically apply to whatever individuals happen to fit the terms of the prayer? Isn’t this the same as praying for different kinds of individuals? How does that distinguish the Arminian interpretation from the Reformed interpretation? Pray for all men
No comments:
Post a Comment