2009-02-17

Phillips says: "Challenge: I think you can make the Bible mean anything you want. Response: So, you're saying that the meaning of the Bible is objectively fixed and crystal-clear?" Hehe... Bible interpretation dodge #1 — plastic text (NEXT! #4)

Turretinfan briefly comments on some Luther statements, which he thinks take the two kingdom view too far, in that they seem to diminish - perhaps implicitly - the real offices and authority in the organization of the church. Elder/deacons are not mere labels. Two Kingdoms, Yes - But Don't Go Beyond the Bible

Here's an article 12 year old girl who has faced opposition for choosing to do a speech on abortion for a speech context. Indeed, it is discomforting for people to wave their sin in their faces. http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=89135

Interestingly, Romanist apologist Steve Ray argues that everything done is a spiritual act because it is what God wants you to be doing - which is a rather Protestant argument - whereas the medieval Catholic church offered the monastic life as a means to be truly spiritual. If you entered the monastery, you would be taking the path of the apostolic lifestyle. A renunciation of the things of this world was the way to deep spirituality. Swan then goes on to show Luther's position that all callings were sacred, not just that of the clergy and monastic lifestyles. Swan provides a quote of Luther on the burdens of parenting, and how such a view slights the Holy Spirit, since such work is adorned with divine approval. The difference, though, is that one must become perfectly spiritual in order to become justified in Roman Catholic theology; the soul must become objectively pleasing to God to merit heaven. For Luther, whatever work we do, we do out of gratitude to God for the perfect work of salvation Christ has accomplished already. Steve Ray Reinvents Protestant Spirituality

Here's a striking quote from Spurgeon about how he struggled at times with joy with the very words he preached, and one time he was struck to the heart with joy at hearing another person preach one of his sermons! Phillips points out that Spurgeon was no laboratory Christian: He experienced prayer, meditation, and temptation; and he admitted it. This is perhaps why Spurgeon remains so broadly useful. Faithful pastor- ever a waiter, never a guest-

Interesting quote from Schaeffer: "Nor should we think that our role will be passive. The moving of the Holy Spirit should not be contrasted with either proper self-fulfillment or tiredness. To the contrary, both the Scriptures and the history of the church teach that if the Holy Spirit is working, the whole man will be involved and there will be much cost to the Christian. The more the Holy Spirit works, the more Christians will be used in battle, and the more they are used, the more there will be personal cost and tiredness. It is quite the opposite of what we might first think. People often cry out for the work of the Holy Spirit and yet forget that when the Holy Spirit works, there is always tremendous cost to the people of God--weariness and tears and battles." Getting Things Done

Carolyn Mahaney exhorts single women to use one unique advantage - their time - and to use it to study God's word as much as they can. Use This Time

Apparently Muzzammil Hassan, founder of the Muslim TV station "Bridges TV" declared "the stories that are missing are the countless stories of Muslim tolerance, progress, diversity, service and excellence that Bridges TV hopes to tell" - and now he's charged with beheading his wife.  Click here: FOXNews.com - Muslim Television Channel Founder Charged With Beheading His Wife - Local News | News Articles | Nat" HT: The Missing Story of Muslim Tolerance

White comments on Ehrman's, and that of other postmoderns, tossing in of the towel, as it were, in the quest to find the original readings in the New Testament. White concludes, "Beware "leading scholars" who lead revolutions based upon a shift in worldview rather than a sudden increase in the underlying data relevant to that area of study. History tells us their revolutions are rarely worthwhile." Nothing has dramatically changed in the evidence to bring about this shift. A Very Telling Statement

Manata points out that, given that a person is still guilty of sin even if another causes him to sin, the common definition of cause, and the common man as the audience of the Bible, by the reasoning of recent Arminians, this proves compatibilism. Compatibilism About Moral Responsibility

Mohler reminds us that 'designer' babies are here, and many are in part or whole supportive. Those who honor the sanctity of life will have big problems with these technologies. Not only are genes for disease being targeted, but the extension to 'enhancements' and preferences is unavoidable and starting already. American consumerism applied to life. Genetic screening brings the brave new world of designer babies, dividing embryonic humans into those considered fit for life, and those considered unfit.  The "unfit" embryos are destined for destruction. http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=3311

Genderblog recommends Patrick Morley's new book, Pastoring Men: What Works, What Doesn't, and Why It Matter Now More Than Ever, which seeks to remedy the 'deer in the headlights' position of many men in the churches, who are hapless about everything from money to manhood to marriage. He argues that "they need to become authentic disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ and all that that implies." Many pastors and lay leaders don't often have a clear, biblical answer for the question, "What is a disciple?" Pastors are exhorted to intentionally produce men who are passionate disciples for Christ. Genderblog concludes, "While you will not find a full-orbed theology of ministry to men, you will find good practical advice for ministering to men from a layman who himself is deeply involved in local church ministry" Pastoring Men Offers Practical Help for Men’s Ministry in Local Church

As opposed to Freudian mining through a person's past, Adams says that Nouthetic Counselors deal with the past only when it is actually present. e.g. if a person must still repent for something done in the past, the matter has never been settled to God’s satisfaction, and is, therefore, not a past issue. It is actually a present reality. Same with permitting past abuse to govern present life. Nouthetic Counselors help people to live in the present with an eye fixed on the future. If past tragedy guides them, it will be into an uncertain but certainly miserable future. Past Tense Living

2009-02-16

While developed libertarian philosophers provide concessions and nuances that are less than helpful for the average Arminian's view, the latter generally relies on the 'ought implies can' principle. Now, say you repeated a moment of choice over and over and every time you chose the same - is it morally relevant whether or not I had the freedom to do otherwise? Why do I need an option I never exercise? It might be better to say, "I’m not responsible unless I would have done otherwise. " If this is a reliable intuition, then to use it against Calvinism, the Arminian must show that the reprobate would have done otherwise had they been able to do so. However, even this has problems: "If the robber had known the teller would trip the silent alarm, the robber would not have tried to rob that bank." Is that exculpatory? It hardly excuses his action. It hardly gets you out guilt that you would not have done wrong if you had known for sure there would be a bad consequence. " Typically, libertarians define libertarian freedom as the freedom to do something different under the same circumstances. But what this formulation leaves out of account is the self-identity of the agent. The question is not merely if an agent can do something different under the same circumstances, but if the same agent can do something different under the same circumstances." To enable LFW, one would have to remove the identity of the person. The libertarian intuition

Every Christian is a theologian, irregardless of whether he or she has sat down and pieced it together. Every Christian knows God and has some understanding of his nature and actions. Once this is understood, we should become the best theologians we can be. Getting doctrine right is the key to getting everything else right. Become a Theologian

Interesting thoughts from McKinley on humour: 95 Theses On Christian Humor by Michael Mckinley

Phil Johnson reproduces an article on the trend of Christianity Today towards universalism, an article he wrote a while back, which focused on Peter Kreeft's Ecumenical Jihad, a book suggesting that Christians need to abandon the exclusive claims of the Gospel to win the culture war, pursuing ecumenical relations with the world's religions, and investigate and learn from other religions. He effectively pedals religious pluralism. And, he also thinks that the Eucharist (transubstantiation) has the mystical power to do this uniting through a common adoration of it. Kreeft claims to have had an out of body experience wherein he saw Mohammed in heaven or purgatory, and he thinks that the world's religious leaders qualify for heaven because he thinks they all taught moral principles compatible with the teaching of Christ. Whatever may be faulty about their views is simply going to be refined in purgatory. CT got this guy to explain heaven. Kreeft doesn't think it's necessary to believe anything about Christ in order to get to heaven. He says (in his answer to question 34) that he believes "good pagans, Hindus, et cetera" will go to heaven. In a book review, CT affirmed inclusivism (the idea that those who don't know Christ will be saved by Him because God can read their hearts). They even try to sell it as a normal view through history. CT's rejection of the exclusivity of Christ is just more evidence of how far that magazine has strayed from her Protestant evangelical heritage.  What in heaven's name-

DeYoung points out that the modern view of McLaren and other avant-garde writers who diminish God's wrath, eternal punishment, do away with substitution, and are fundamentally antinomian, isn't really that new, and he argues that this was the thrust of Marcion, born 85 AD, a heretic opposed by the fathers. "Marcion's theological errors (and there were many) came from one main root. He refused to believe that the God of the Old Testament was the same as the Father of the Lord Jesus Christ. Marcion could simply not believe in a God full of wrath and justice. So he threw away the Old Testament and took for his Bible a truncated version of Luke's Gospel and selectively edited versions of Paul's epistles. When all the cutting and pasting was finished, Marcion had the Christianity he wanted: a God of goodness and nothing else; a message of inspiring moral uplift; a Bible that does away with the uncomfortable bits about God's wrath and hell. Marcionism was anitnomian, idealistic about human potential, and skittish about dogma and rules." "For him, there was a fundamental contradiction between law and love, righteousness and grace. Marcion thought that true Christianity was flawed by the incompatibilities at the heart of its teaching. His solution was radical. Nothing less than a restatement of faith would do, and for Marcion that restatement had to focus on what for him was the essential gospel: the love, mercy and compassion displayed in the life and teachings of Jesus. This, for him, was all that was necessary, it was the blueprint for a new and pure humanity." Marcionism and the New Mood

This post by Lisa Robinson discusses briefly how it can be perceived that prayer is futile; that if God will not grant us the desires of our heart, even if He has something greater, seems to suggest an indifference to the desires of man on God's part, perhaps more for those suffering. It can leave one thinking, what's the point? Leaving this seemingly hanging, she simply argues that the alternative, that is, to reject Christ as not worth it, is vastly worse. And even the biblical characters largely suffered (Hebrews 11:35-) while following Christ. Yet, trust in Christ is the point.  That trust does not promise a bed of roses during our earthly sojourn but it does guarantee an eternal hope.  Moreover, an accurate consideration of that trust is essential, that our faith is placed in the accomplishments on the cross to provide us with reconciliation to a holy God of whom we were an enemy to.  The promise is an eternal existence with Him. So What’s the Point-

Patton reminds people that theology is about the pursuit of truth, not prejudice. It is easier to be than to become, so we oft go to the text looking for verses to support our a priori conclusions. He thinks the methodology of trying to prove your own rightness, no matter what you're defending, even the truth, is dishonouring to God, as it lacks humility. Exegetes are not lawyers, and they are not to pass over things contrary to their preconceptions. The process of validation is essential. Manipulating the data to support your belief, no matter what this belief is, is not authentic Christianity and does not honor God. Christians should be above this. We need to avoid polished rhetoric, just to win arguments: Let none of us be able to be accused of using twisted, skewed, bent, shadowed, spurious, or in any other way manipulated information to defend your faith. We don’t need this. Christians are advocates of truth, not our prejudices. We must follow the truth wherever it leads, even if it takes us in places we do not want to go. Doing Theology is About Pursuing Truth, Not Prejudice

Here's a good quote JT provides from VanDrunen concerning culture: Two extremes they were to avoid. First, they were not to shun involvement in pagan Babylonian culture. Second, they were not to become so involved that they lost sight of their true destiny or the true destiny of Babylon. Instead, they were to do their various cultural tasks, building homes, planting farms, raising families, while all along recognizing the temporary and limited nature of the work they did. Biblical Theology and the Culture War

Here's an article on the advances of Muslims in the west to intimidate critics of Islam in Europe and across the West. The message in the European Union is clear: Politicians, religious figures, and even private citizens with religiously and politically incorrect opinions will be subject not only to Muslim protest, but to criminal prosecution and violent retribution. http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/20090212_The_Elephant_in_the_Room__Intimidating_critics_of_Islam.html

When counseling those who struggle with homosexuality, instruction regarding the profound implications of union with Christ is essential, for, it means that the statement, "I am a homosexual" is false, and the statement, "I am in Christ" is true, and that a recognition of this will result in a radical new way of thinking; it will bring hope and change to thoughts, desires and behaviors. They think and act in new ways abandoning homosexual and effeminate dress, words and mannerisms. Hope, Holiness, and Homosexuality

Rick Holland points out that Christ dealt with the problem of evil head on in His own crucifixion - when Pilate asserted his authority, Jesus declared that it was God who was in total authority, that the perpetrators, conspirators, and evildoers ultimately act under the authority of God. Piper says, “At the all-important pivot of human history, the worst sin ever committed served to show the greatest glory of Christ and obtain the sin-conquering gift of God’s grace. God did not just overcome evil at the cross. He made evil commit suicide in doing its worst evil." The problem of evil is our anticipatory cry for the glory of Heaven. Holland provides this quote: “…the degree of a Christian’s peace of mind depends upon his spiritual ability to interpose the thought of God between himself and his anxiety." The Problem of Evil at the Foot of the Cross

Apparently Romanist (for now) Dyer argues that Calvinists should consistently be "gnostic iconoclasts." Iconoclasts were generally anyone opposed to the worship of God by the use of images. It's a Scriptural position. That and Calvinism is hardly Gnostic. Turretinfan redirects the criticism, saying that we tend to see Gnostic (and related) influences in terms of an excessive focus on Mary. Some of their teachings regarding Mary seem to have found their way into Catholicism's folklore and legends, if not always into dogmatic teachings (such as the idea that Mary's birth of Jesus was pain-free: Gnostics, imagining Jesus to be a phantom, wouldn't expect the birth to be very painful). Response to Jay Dyer on Calvinism (Part 6 of 13)

Mounce points out the danger of defining a Greek word by its English cognate (never do it), in the misuse of moron to communicate the meaning of Greek mwros in the Sermon on the Mount. The association creates a terrible picture. "The fact of the matter is that a fool is not a "mentally deficient" person but a "morally deficient" person. A fool is someone who does not recognize the majesty and grandeur of God, a person who does not stand in fear of God. A fool is someone so blinded by his or her own sin that they cannot see God for who he is and therefore who they truly are. My dictionary defines it as, "ignorance of, an willful rebellion against, God and his will.'" He cautions against the inclination to display academic acumen by saying 'in the Greek,' especially if you're not sure. "The fact of the matter is that a fool is not a "mentally deficient" person but a "morally deficient" person. A fool is someone who does not recognize the majesty and grandeur of God, a person who does not stand in fear of God. A fool is someone so blinded by his or her own sin that they cannot see God for who he is and therefore who they truly are. My dictionary defines it as, "ignorance of, an willful rebellion against, God and his will""  Matt 7-26—Is a moros a moron (Monday with Mounce 21)

Commenting on the bizarre practice of older women playing with dolls to avoid the trials of motherhood, CBMW points out that the difficulties of motherhood slight and momentary. They are dust on the scales of reality when compared with the infinitely massive weight of glory and joy that is to come for those who entrust themselves to Jesus Christ. So, why the dust? Why not just get the glory without the affliction?  Somehow the dust works the glory. Eternity and the Inconvenciences of Motherhood

Peter Sholl writes about the corporate saying, “change will only happen if the perceived benefit is greater than the perceived cost", which has a certain sensibility to it. He concludes, "Frankly, as I think about my church friends and as I look through my missionary prayer diary, I see a whole lot of people who are undergoing great personal change and hardship for sometimes little visible benefit. If they were governed by shareholder meetings, they would have been downsized long ago. But fortunately for the people they minister to, and for those who hear the word of life through their ministry, faithfulness and love are greater measures of the worthiness of change than cost versus benefit." Love and the cost of change

Challies posts a few points from Koukl regarding Tactics. i) Because of the innate knowledge of God (he's taking a particular view of Romans 1) there is no reason to abandon reasoning with people, even in a postmodern context, because people ultimately know that beginning with relativism is incoherent. Reality is our ally, because of this cognitive dissonance in those who deny God. ii) A caution would be, don't approach conversations seeking to one-up or make someone look stupid. Tactics aren't manipulative tricks to coerce people. They aren't meant to belittle. They help you argue. iii) All our work without God's work is vain. This means we have an ally and can speak with confidence, for it is the Spirit who will convince. The Tactics Blog Tour

Adams warns against co-miserating; basically, wallowing in the mud with the counselee, joining in the chorus of hopelessness, etc. since this merely reinforces his view that God has no answers, since you, being the Christian counselor, would have told him if you had them. Co-miserating

Reformed Baptist Fellowship has this blog on the advances of the homosexual agenda over the last years, and the erosion of common grace in culture. Advocates advanced a six point strategy: "Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and often as possible. Portray gays as victims, not aggressive challengers. Give homosexual protectors a “just” cause. Make gays look good. Make the victimizers look bad. Solicit funds from corporate America and major foundations in support of the homosexual cause." Seven more strategies are listed as well, on all fronts. Albert Mohler warns of the potential collapse of Western culture if society allows ungodly social engineers to dismantle the moral foundations of sexual normalcy and the family.  He calls us to counter the attack at each of the seven battle lines drawn above.  He urges us to bear witness by being ourselves sexually pure and exemplifying godly family life.  He calls for us as Christians and as churches to reach into the lives of those ensnared in sexual sin and declare the power of the gospel of Jesus Christ.  We are all only saved sinners. Hey Don’t Say Gay

Mohler writes ton the idea of overlapping magisteria, saying that Gould's theory of NOMA has been thoroughly criticized from both sides, and for good reason.  The hard fact is that science and religion do often overlap, and that overlap is where the smoke of controversy is to be found.  If science and religion did not overlap, all this controversy would be over mere misunderstandings, but this is hardly the case. "why" and "how" are not so easily separated. It is simple anti-intellectual and dishonest to just redefine God and 'science' to fit each other. Fundamentally evolution is a challenge to Biblical revelation. The conflict between Genesis and evolution is not merely over the "how" as opposed to the "why" of creation.  Evolution presents a direct challenge to the entire story-line of the Bible.  http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=3300

Interesting find of a Greek inscription from 178 BCE. "The text shows an official Greek monumental text from just before the outbreak of the Maccabean revolt and these pieces apparently anchor the original location of the Heliodorus inscription to Maresha." Greek Inscription from 178 BCE at Maresha

Genderblog writes about how marriage is in decline, only 1 in 4 households consist in a married couple with children, and 5.2 million couples are co-habitating, and they are raising 2.2 million children. Even beyond the pragmatic horrors of this reality, covenant marriage is supposed to say something wonderfully true about God's covenant union with his Church, his Bride. God keeps his promises. Sexual immorality lies about God - it makes him look unfaithful.  While the married vow, ‘til death do us part,' cohabiters say, ‘til life drives us apart.' John the Baptist was beheaded for confronting this sin. Graciously Confronting Cohabitation

2009-02-15

Hays points out that with respect to Indulgences, Rome has created a fictitious problem and a fictitious solution, which only Rome is authorized to distribute - for a price. Long before there was faith-healers, etc. we had Rome. Purgatory, Inc

Here's a quick and humourous read. Fallacy of Equivocation

Helm brings up the question - does ought imply can? Augustinians would say no. Pelagians/Arminians, and Kant, would say yes. The Arminian thus holds that a person has an obligation to believe in Christ only because he has ability to exercise faith, and the hyper Calvinist holds that a person ought not to be commanded to believe in Christ because he does not have ability to do so. To the charge that John Gill is a hyper-calvinist, Helm points out that he cites the case of a debtor who may not be able to pay his debts and yet may still have the obligation to do so. The fact that a person may become habituated to evil does not entail that he does not have an obligation to live uprightly. Nevertheless, Gill makes a distinction between obedience to the law, and the performing of spiritual and evangelical obedience. He unnaturally seems to restrict spiritual obedience to the Gospel. Ought implies can, but there are different grades of ability, and so different grades of obligation, or so Gill seems to say. He seems somewhat ambivalent, and self-contradictory. But the label hyper-calvinist is hard to pin on him, and moreover, does he offer the Gospel, and to whom? Analysis 23 - Nemo obligatur ad impossibile

Genderblog provides a short bibliography for the question, "What should girls read?" Christian mothers of young girls find themselves in a difficult spot. Many "girly" books encourage frivolity by telling silly, shallow princess stories; while others seek to empower girls to "be all they can be" -- which usually includes throwing off traditional gender roles... Girls of Character- Teaching Biblical Femininity to the Next Generation through Literature

The media has venomously gone after the True Women conference, having now finally caught on that it happened. For example: "Meanwhile, can we set up a new gender for so-called True Women, so normal women don't have to share anything in common with them?" There are myriad ironies in here; Erbe, ostensibly a feminist, employs a highly abusive tone toward the women of True Women. The very thing she would presumably decry with gusto-the verbal abuse of women-she perpetrates because, in Erbe's mind, the women of TW do not fit the narrow feminist presuppositions that compose "true womanhood." By God's grace, most women are still women, even if Erbe and others hate women with their core being. Media's Clamor Over True Woman `08 is Anti-Woman

A recent article in the Post-Crescent newspaper of Appleton, Wis., ran an article under the headline, "Raising boys and girls is not so different-but not the same." Writer Lisa Strandberg interviews Dee Savides, a licensed clinical social worker with Samaritan Counseling Center of the Fox Valley Inc., on the similarities between boys and girls... it seems to represent another subtle attempt in our culture's seemingly tireless efforts toward flattening gender distinctions, it only confirms them. An Unintentional Admission- Boys and Girls Are Different

Comparing teaching types to the food pyramid, there are three types of Christian teaching. The first is expository. Expository teaching is the kind of teaching that takes you systematically through a particular part of the Bible. The second type is doctrinal, the Bible is still very important (indeed, the best doctrinal teaching will include a few mini expositions), but in doctrinal teaching, the structure and content is driven by the doctrinal topic rather than by only one particular passage. A problem with doctrinal teaching is that it relies a great deal on the integrative skill of the teacher... the teaching doesn't have much opportunity to show the work. The third type of teaching—topical teaching—is structured around the concerns of the world and the congregation. This can be like fast-food. There is, of course, overlap. Are you maintaining a healthy diet? The healthy teaching pyramid

Turretinfan gives some commentary on Proverbs 3:11-20. i) The hard times in our lives may often be chastening. For our good. God is a loving Father, not a Father who does nothing about our missteps. Solomon simply assumes that fathers who love their children will discipline them. ii) Wisdom is more valuable than anything you can desire, and discipline leads to wisdom. And wisdom has with it all the desirable things, as accessories! iii) T-fan connects Wisdom to Christ, namely, that Jesus is the wisdom of God, based on the creation of the world through wisdom, through the Son, so that to embrace the Son is to embrace wisdom. There is a double meaning. Proverbs 3-11-20

The final reason to pray if God is sovereign: God has ordained prayer as a means by which He accomplishes His eternal purposes. “the same God who has decreed the end has also decreed that His end shall be reached through His appointed means, and one of these is prayer.” [i.e. you cannot rend the decreed means from the decreed end simply because the end is decreed in the same decrees which decree the prayers! If you accept the latter, you must take with it the former, and then prayer has just as much a reality and effect as the other things, aside from prayer that tend to God's end.] e.g. God has elected certain ones to be saved, but He has also decreed that these ones shall be saved through the preaching of the Gospel. The post gives several examples of God's means being used to attain God's ends. Hence, this counters the error of fatalism. [I add that the fact that God's end is certainly going to be accomplished doesn't mean that the means aren't involved, because that end is accomplished certainly through the means, which are also certainly ordained]. God also revealed to Abimelech that Abraham would pray and successfully intercede for him. Same with Eliphaz and Job's friends. A similar scenario appears in God's promise that the Israelites will call on Him and will be delivered in Jer. 29:11-14. We should not think our prayers are aimed at changing God's decrees [as if we think He made a mistake?? or was less wise??]. But we pray in obedience, we pray because God has promised to answer prayer, and because He is able to. Why Pray if God Is Sovereign- (Part 4)

Spineless Westerners promote Dhimmitude in the U.K., as it would appear that banning discussion or debate over the Qur'an and Mohammed is under way. White makes a sober note to Muslims: Don't mistake the vacuous brand of postmodern 'christianity' for biblical Christianity. An Excellent Discussion to Watch

Here's some cheerleading, as it were, to get people to learn the original languages! Cheerleading by Miles Van Pelt

Challies provides this quote from Martyn Lloyd-Jones on the supposed antinomy between thinking versus faith, and Matthew 6:30. It is worth quoting: "Faith according to our Lord's teaching in this paragraph, is primarily thinking; and the whole trouble with a man of little faith is that he does not think. He allows circumstances to bludgeon him. ... We must spend more time in studying our Lord's lessons in observation and deduction. The Bible is full of logic, and we must never think of faith as something purely mystical. We do not just sit down in an armchair and expect marvelous things to happen to us. That is not Christian faith. Christian faith is essentially thinking. Look at the birds, think about them, draw your deductions. Look at the grass, look at the lilies of the field, consider them. ... Faith, if you like, can be defined like this: It is a man insisting upon thinking when everything seems determined to bludgeon and knock him down in an intellectual sense. The trouble with the person of little faith is that, instead of controlling his own thought, his thought is being controlled by something else, and, as we put it, he goes round and round in circles. That is the essence of worry. ... That is not thought; that is the absence of thought, a failure to think." A Failure to Think

Challies reviews the book Tactics, which sounds like a book on how to maneuver in conversations so as to stay on a good track to witness, and not manipulate, etc. Koukl begins by looking at three basics skills the Christian will need if he wishes to be an effective apologist. First, he must have knowledge, having a familiarity with the central message of the Bible; second, he must have knowledge that is tempered by wisdom that makes his message clear and persuasive; third, he must have the character of a Christian, embodying the virtues of the kingdom he serves. For example, 'never make a statement when a question will do the job.' ie. find clever ways of exposing bad thinking to lead people to the truth. The goal isn't to immediately convert but to 'put a stone in the shoe', and to interact with grace, etc. Book Review - Tactics

Challies gives three reasons to be more open regarding your own weaknesses. First, expressing weakness is an expression of humility. Second, expressing weakness allows others to plead for me before God.Finally, when I refuse to express my weakness I refuse to give other people the opportunity to minister to me. On Being Weak

Piper points to the wickedness of bribery. Two judges have confessed to accepting 2.6 million in bribes from a youth detention centre to give kids longer sentences. This violates not only the Law of Moses and the Law of Christ, but even the law written on every heart. You can't sustain a legal system if the judges take bribes. Why not? Because "a bribe blinds the clear-sighted and subverts the cause of those who are in the right" (Exodus 23:8). Thankfully God has made His own payment, not in a bribe, but in a ransom payment, for the salvation of sinners. The Wickedness of Bribery and the Hope of the Gospel

Interesting comment: "we quote from figures that lived hundreds of years ago rather than pointing to current reality.  Instead of saying, “Oh, yeah!  I’ll prove that Calvinism does not squash evangelism-look at what happened two hundred years ago buddy!”  Why don’t we instead say, “I can only tell you that I have never been more earnest, more involved, and more compassionate with souls than I am right now!”    The sad reality is that many times our critics have a point.  While Calvinism should not extinguish the fires of evangelism, the fact of that matter is that many of us who embrace the doctrines where once more passionate, more prayerful and more involved in personal witnessing when we were less “enlightened”." Let us let the truths affect us as they did William Carey. Is It Really True-

White points to the reason why the Gospel is foolishness to the perishing, and why human wisdom empties it. It has to do with the context in which God has placed the gospel: the sinful, fallen world. The gospel, in all places, at all times, calls rebel sinners, no matter what their culture, their language, their education, to repentance and obedience to His Lordship. Man will always respond to that message—and outside of grace, that response will always be negative. "Abandon the cross, atonement, forgiveness, and all you have is…worldly wisdom." Word of the Cross

Hence it is perfectly plain,that the observance of the Commandments consists not in the love of ourselves, but in the love of God and our neighbour; and that he leads the best and holiest life who as little as may be studies and lives for himself; and that none lives worse and more unrighteously than he who studies and lives only for himself, and seeks and thinks only of his own. Calvin and Your Best Life Now

Bayly points out that it doesn't seem as though those who claimed to be 'pro-life' yet supported Obama are crying out against his adamantly pro-baby-murder actions since he took office. As one Roman Catholics says, “There's something a little odd about rhetoric that tells that we're the ‘divisive’ ones, and lectures adult citizens about what we should challenge, and when we should stop. In a democracy, we get to decide that for ourselves," he said. “An issue that involves the life and death of unborn children and the subversion of entire traditional societies can't be ‘put behind us’ with an executive signature," Chaput added. Obama supporters claiming to be pro-life were never, really, opposed to abortion

Here's an open letter to African American Christians from an Reformed pastor in Africa: "Mr. Obama’s transition team has announced “that the new president will remove all restrictions on federal funding of embryonic stem-cell research immediately after taking office.” Stem cells are gathered from aborted children and used for scientific research. “The Mexico City policy (which requires all groups that receive federal funds not to perform or promote abortion abroad) will disappear the first day, as well.” Why all this talk about “the first day” he takes office, “the first thing I’ll do”? It designates priority. This is what Mr. Obama is about. These are his priorities. And he was elected with the votes of Bible-believing, pro-life Christians. Many of us call this a schizophrenia of the worst kind. I’m still trying to understand it." "Please pray that Christians in America, will come to their senses and see what they have done and repent, henceforth only voting for candidates who will do all they can to support and sustain life, so that we can start the slow process of rolling back the culture of death that has engulfed America for so many years." An open letter to African brothers in Christ on the occasion of Obama's Inauguration

Interesting comment from Jay Adams: "Why wouldn’t we expect a good father, who (as Jesus said) would give his child an egg rather than a stone, to assure his children that they are truly members of His family? What cruelty to keep him dangling on a string, wondering whether or not he was a genuine child of God?" Certainty

In counseling, counselors will have to be constantly reminding people of their own responsibilities to God's laws, and to steer clear from blame-shifting, as Adam and Eve did in the garden. Tell Me About It!

David Ogden's legal defence of pornography, on the basis of calling it a form of protected speech, has made it more difficult to prosecute those who sell pictures of child molestation and rape, etc. Porn is in the culture war, and since ordinary Americans see it as a threat to the family, liberals have added its defence to their agenda. Mohler writes that "pornography is one of the most insidious dimensions of American culture today.  It is a plague that is ruining lives, marriages, and public morals.  It endangers women, children, and the most vulnerable among us.  Putting one who can only be described as an extremist for pornography in such a high position in the Department of Justice -- Deputy Attorney General of the United States -- sends a clear signal at home and around the world.  If David Ogden is confirmed, the U.S. Senate becomes a party to this disaster." http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=3287

Ascol writes, "Now that the dust has settled a bit, there seems to be a consensus that there will not be any faculty at Southwestern removed on the basis of their Calvinistic soteriology." He points to three lessons: 1) The Bible's wisdom about discernment and judgment should be heeded at all times. "The first one to plead his cause seems right, until his neighbor comes and examines him" (Proverbs 18:17). 2) The divide over Calvinism in the SBC is significant and will not go away by pretending it is not there. Thankfully, there is a growing number within the convention who are serious about building bridges... 3) The SBC is in desperate need of leaders who refuse to put their fingers to the political winds before determining what steps to take. We need leaders who are willing to cooperate with all those who are confessionally committed to the Gospel of Jesus Christ and are determined to see the Gospel shape our churches and impact our world. Reflections on the dust-up over Calvinism at SWBTS

Atheism isn't really growing. http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2009/02/atheism-by-numbers-going-nowhere-fast.html

More insanity from the environmental priests. The prophets of population doom seem unembarrassed by the failures of their prophecies.  Figures such as Paul Ehrlich warned decades ago that the world would be devoid of human life by now... The reduction of a child to a "carbon footprint" is about as twisted a formula as can be imagined.  A child is compared to the loss of "2½ acres of old-growth oak woodland." http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=3235

An interesting article detailing the deficiencies in some of Ayn Rands thinking. http://maverickphilosopher.typepad.com/maverick_philosopher/2009/01/is-ayn-rand-a-good-philosopher-rand-on-the-primacy-of-existence.html

A post from a Catholic Catechism upholding partim-partim: How has divine revelation come down to us? Divine revelation has come down to us partly by writing—that is, by the Holy Scripture, or the Bible; partly by word of mouth—that is, by tradition. 11. Is it enough to believe only what is contained In the Holy Scripture? No; we must also believe Tradition—i.e., those revealed truths which the Apostles preached, but did not commit to writing.  Quotes on Tradition (partim-partim)

Challies positively reviews Haykin's book: Though Haykin has inevitably chosen letters by a process that is somewhat less than objective, he has chosen well. I very much enjoyed reading this small collection of letters and commend it to you. With Valentine's Day fast approaching, this may well be a good gift for your spouse. Read it and be blessed. Read it together and be doubly blessed. The Christian Lover

This post discusses the vacuity of the American dream. People seek happiness in everything but God. "This is the cotton candy fate of the American Dream that befalls all who embrace the cult of celebrity. From a distance it looks so appealing—a big and beautiful ball of glistening spun sugar. But those who finally get it, and taste it, find that it isn’t very filling. Sure, it is sweet for a moment. But it doesn’t bring lasting happiness. After a quick melt in the mouth it is gone forever . . . then what?" Until sinners submit to God, the acquisition of what they desire will always turn to dust. God alone is satisfying, in Christ Jesus. Let us not be the Samaritan woman, confusing physical satisfaction for spiritual life. The Emptiness of the American Dream

Speaking of video games, this post points out how they are a waste of time. Time invested in such pursuits is lost, and cannot be reused for things that matter. Hours that could be spent working, praying, reading, serving, fellowshipping, evangelizing, or just thinking, are instead wasted on activities that have no lasting value. time is precious (Ps. 90:12; cf. 39:4–5); we are not our own (1 Cor. 6); and we are to make the best use of our time. (Eph. 5:15-17). Video Games and Eternity

Interesting post on what a 'cut down' church would look like, assuming the NT church is the minimum, essential understanding of church: we could have a group of Christian people (of any size), with a qualified elder or overseer (or more than one, appointed or elected, we care not how), meeting in the name and presence of Christ in any location, at any time of day, on any day of the week, with any frequency (so long as it was regular and often), at which time they spoke and heard God's word together (through Bible reading, preaching/teaching, prophetic encouragement, etc.), and responded in prayer and thanksgiving, with the result that God is glorified in Christ and the people edified. The post asks this question: "what things do you currently regard as of the absolute essence of church—things without which you could not imagine church being ‘real church’—things that, in fact, are accidental, traditional or cultural details that could be otherwise?" This is not a real church

Jay Adams recommends empathetic disagreement, wherein the counselor acknowledges the seriousness of the situation of a counselee, but works to disavow them of dangerous beliefs (e.g. no one understands!) with biblical responses. "Yes, it is serious, but..." This is very important. To simply empathetically agree is to just wallow in the mud. “Nobody Understands”

Biblical counselors worth their salt are very much aware of their own sin or potential sin, that they see in the ones they counsel, and its potential effects upon them. What Biblical Counseling Does for the Counselor

2009-02-14

Manata comments on a comparison between Islam and Calvinism, where the poster effectively quote-mined to show acontextual comparisons to undermine Calvinism. Now, Muslims do get some things right. It's not like a similarity is automatically an argument against Calvinism. Ironically, Arminianism and Islam both deny that original sin actually affected man, prevenient grace having taken care of that problem. Now, Reppert thinks that the theodicy moves put forward by Calvinists could also be used by Islam. But Manata recently interviewed an Imam who affirmed LFW! "He makes the same moves Arminians make, viz., Allah is loving and merciful, he could not cause people to sin." Now, In the 8th century Mu'tazili argued that evil is the result of free will. Islam has its "Arminians" just like Christianity has its Arminians. But those who want quick and easy refutations of another religion are loathe to represent it in all its various sophistications. He cites several other Muslims, including a scholar, who makes very Arminian arguments. He concludes, "I have seen Arminian philosophers take more care to make sure that physicalism or atheist philosophers are represented charitably than I have seen care to make sure Calvinism is represented properly... In this we find common ground with Jesus. His fellow Jews sought to defend and let off Barabbas over him. His fellow Jews strove to misrepresent him and his teachings, searching for quick ways to dismiss him before the people. Calvinism walks this road too." Islam and Arminianism

Pike comments the deficiencies of a recent Gallup poll on whether people believe in the theory of evolution (there are really multiple competing theories, of which neo-darwinism is prominent). "I think if I were to spin this poll myself, I’d say that what it actually shows us is that those who are currently studying the theory of evolution believe it. And that, too, is logical since the dissent is never presented while you are studying the theory, and when you have intellectual peer pressure being put upon you to conform to the will of the professor (or high school teacher), you’re going to go with the crowd. Once you get out on your own, you realize two important facts: 1) Darwinism means absolutely nothing to you in your day-to-day living and 2) there are actually arguments against Darwinism out there." Gallup On

In answering an objection to hell based on its 'trumping' of heaven, Hays says that if "the objection takes the form of: “I’m pained by how much pain they’re in,” then I think that loses a lot of its traction if we discount the pop tradition of hell as a torture chamber." [he doesn't seem to have a conception of hell as torment]. He points out that our view of heaven in heaven will be different than our view now. Again, circumstances can dramatically change our view of a person, as we all experience. That should be considered. [I think that once our sensibilities are wholly aligned with God's we shall see perfectly and clearly the horridness of the crime of the rejection of God by our loved ones, and ourselves delight in the vindication of His glory in the display of His justice, in rightly condemning them]. i) We often feel we ought not to feel this way; but we don't have the same duties then as now. ii) We don't like to think of current relations as temporal. iii) Heaven is an ideal for which we have no analog. So it is surreal to us. God will wipe away every tear

Hays comments on Al Kimel advocating an ecclesiastical version of reader-response theory. He demoted the historical audience in favor of the implied audience, which he identified with “the Church.” Hays quotes the standard Catholic monograph on hermeneutics to show issues with this: i) If the intended audience is not just the believers contemporaneous with the author, and there are differences of views, how do we settle these differences [since there's no historical context?], and if we demarcate among believers, what is the criterion for this? ii) If it is the understanding common to all believers that counts, how can any believer or group of believers at any given time be certain of an interpretation, not having access to the understanding of those who have not yet lived? iii) There may be several legitimate understandings of the text that contradict each other! It should be noted the same issues apply to the Magisterium. Catholics don't have, as an example, access to future interpretations. Revelation & reader-response theory

Harris posts links to a few messages, and makes this interesting comment: "These messages all reflect, in one way or another, things that I've learned since I wrote the book I Kissed Dating Goodbye twelve years ago. I still stand by the message of that book that premature, short-term romantic attachments can be a big distraction from serving God—especially for teenagers. But in the years since I've also seen that a legalistic application of these ideas can be unhelpful, too. One of my main concerns in my church or any other church is that there be no disunity among Christians over issues of dating and courtship." He cautions people to hold their convictions on this with charity, to not go beyond Scripture, and to not elevate even his books to dogma.  What I've Learned Since I Kissed Dating Goodbye

White comments on a post concerned that White is becoming a Reformed Baptist wacko (he has been RB for years and years) that has this hilarious comment: "[As a clarification, Reformed Baptist have this tendency to believe (or at least act as if they believe) that one can by logical argument convince someone against their will to be a Christian without any assistance from the Holy Spirit.]" White writes, "Once again we are left stuttering and wondering "how can someone get it so completely wrong?" One is tempted to think that this is meant to be a humorous post, but, alas...I don't think so." Oh No! I Am in Danger of Becoming...a Reformed Baptist!

A primary idea in the Qur'an is continuity with religion before it, namely, Christianity and Judaism. The Qur'an, in its OT usage, does two things commonly: i) the stories are presented as teaching tools to make a present-day point, and ii) they are embellished. Colin Smith gives an example of the altered confrontation of David's sin over Bathsheba, and several others. Of note, Sura 12 recounts the story of Joseph in a way that appears at first to be simply a paraphrase of the Biblical account; however, the story soon deviates from the Biblical narrative. Instead of being accused of molesting Potipher's wife, Joseph is vindicated by eyewitnesses but chooses prison over being under her control (28-35). This testifies to the Islamic attitude toward the prophet: Allah will not permit him to be shamed. For the Muslim, the idea of Joseph being accused and convicted of impropriety with Potipher's wife would be as unthinkable as a prophet being executed as a criminal on a common cross. A Brief Introduction to the Qur'an- The Qur'an and the Old Testament

Haykin comments on Lincoln and the civil war. After observing that he did not appear to be a Christian, Haykin quotes Lincoln at length and writes, "Notice Lincoln’s conviction about the inscrutability of God’s will, a humble agnosticism about the purposes of God. Lincoln declares this in the form of a thesis: “The Almighty has His own purposes.” He then quotes Matthew 18:7 to suggest the moral character of life under God: “Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!”" He points out the sharp contrast with those on both sides of the civil war (which killed 2% of the population in 1860, 5 million if it were today), who felt strongly that the same God of the same Bible was on their respective side. Mark Noll has a fascinating comment: "The theological puzzle of the Civil War thus reveals a theological tragedy, both for those who retained profundity at the expense of Christianity and those who retained Christianity at the expense of profundity." Remembering Abraham Lincoln and the Second Inaugural Address

Interesting embellishment of the narrative of Jesus replying to John the Baptist's doubts, to illustrate that Jesus comforted and assured John, sending a promise to sustain his faith, and he will certainly do the same for us. "He does not always answer with the speed we desire, nor is his answer always the deliverance we hope for. But he will always send the help that is needed. His grace will always be sufficient for those who trust him. The hope we taste in the promises we trust will often be the sweetest thing we experience in this age. And his reward will be beyond our imagination." John the Baptist's Doubt

Piper quotes samples of love letters from Martin Lloyd Jones and Jonathan Edwards. Valentines from Jonathan Edwards and Martyn Lloyd-Jones

Bird has an interesting quote on the 'definition' of a Gnostic gospel: It is, i) used in the oral sense for preaching a message about salvation revealed through the coming of Jesus, it is the content of their soteriology, not the term, that distinguishes Gnostics from other Christians. Used in the mid-second century forward for written accounts of Jesus and his teaching commonly circulated among Christians, there is no special Gnostic Gospel; and ii) the poetics of the Gnostic universe push its teachers away from imaginative engagement with the historical or physical world such as might produce additional Gospel narratives. What is a Gnostic Gospel-

Bird cautions against overdoing the rhetoric in criticizing the church, especially since such seems to bolster egos and parade our vision of how it should be. If you call your friends fiance a stupid lazy whore, he might be ticked - even if she is. Remember that what you call the church, you'll calling Jesus' fiance. Slagging on the Church

Bird writes, "Whether you like Barth or not, if you are interested in theology, then you have to do business with him. One book that engages with Barth from an evangelical point of view is, of course, Engaging with Barth. This book has its own webpage which describes the volume and the contributors. Do check it out." He thinks that both Barthians and Evangelicals are rival siblings trying to move to orthodoxy from fundamentalism and liberalism. Engaging with Barth

Bird has a few notable comments on the Wilson review of Wright's book: 1) Wilson is correct that we need to dump this idea of merit and focus on the covenantal aspects of Jesus' obedience as the true Israel and second Adam; 3) I'm still not sure if the NT allows for a distinction between active and passive obedience (usually what is emphasized is his passive obedience, e.g. Phil. 2.6-11). He thinks union with Christ is missing from Wilson's presentation. Doug Wilson on Wright's New Book

Here is some followup on the above. After quoting Wilson to the effect that Wright can't get away from the idea of imputation (what does it mean to represent apart from it??) Bird thinks the problem is with those who want to find the whole package [of imputation, etc] in every key text, when it isn't there. He also says that the question is where does imputation fit into the story? Whereas some want to make justification the centre and imputation the centre of justification; I would make imputation a corollary explains the forensic nature of justification, the representative functions of Adam and Christ, the gift of righteousness, etc. Doug Wilson on Wright's New Book - Follow Up

Here's brief quote to the effect that the scientific method was designed to mitigate the effects of the fall upon man, the cognitive damage, to recover Adam's original unpolluted knowledge of nature. There were significant religious foundations in the formulation of the scientific method in the 16th and 17th century that reckoned with the brokenness of man. The Fall of Man and the Foundations of Science

Bird meanders about the theological centre of the NT, tentatively concluding, "I'm tending towards certain "fixtures" that involve God, Christ, and the story of salvation as it is made in the NT. The word "gospel" is an encoded reference to that story which is decoded in the apostolic proclamation that details the relationship between the exalted Lord and Messiah to Jesus of Nazareth, the life of Jesus in relation to the hope of Israel, the identity of Jesus Christ in relation to the God of Israel, and the God of Israel in relation to the rest of creation." The centre of the New Testament - Apostolic Discourse

Responding to the notion that John 14:6 is unoriginal gloss, Bird has some interesting comments: The old addage that Jesus proclaimed the Kingdom of God and the Church proclaimed Jesus is a half truth. Jesus proclaimed the Kingdom but there was always an implicit element of self-reference as it was his ministry of proclamation, exorcisms, and healings which are the means by which God's kingdom was breaking in... he comments on the 'believe with Jesus, not in Jesus', quoting this to describe the entire approach: "A God without wrath brought men without sin into a kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a cross." "Ultimately Christians believe in the all exclusive claims of the all inclusive Saviour." He points out that we can share things in common and relate positively in ways to other religions, noting some shared objectives and common grace. Inter-Faith Relations

JT has a post on indulgences - read for more detail. Indulgences are not for the forgiveness of sin but rather for the forgiveness of punishment. Christians in three locations: on earth, in Purgatory, and in heaven. All of them are united to Christ... Because of its authority under Christ, the Catholic Church believes that it may open and administer the benefits of Christ's Treasury - all of Christ's infinite merits before God, plus Mary's prayers and good works, plus the prayers and good works of all the saints in heaven -  to Christians under their jurisdiction in response to their prayers and good works, which in turn can expedite purification from punishment. "When it's all said and done, the whole idea of indulgences comes down to the idea that Christians must undergo a process of temporal punishment before they are allowed to go to heaven. But Scripture doesn't teach that. Rather, the punishment process was completely absorbed for us by Christ on the cross." Indulgences 101

DeYoung comments on the avant-garde tendency to church bash, noting the massive number (50 million) people who not only attend church every Sunday (vastly more than fill stadiums for sports), but also contributed, and not under compulsion. He pleas for charity for the church, and not to overlook what God is doing. We don't need eyes to spy the church's failures. That vision is getting closer to 20/20 all the time. What we need eyes for are all the reasons we should love the church. The reasons are out there. Why I Think the Church is Amazing (Even Though We Don't All Get Cool Buildings Like This One)

Is abortion just personal preference? DeYoung writes: "

These are common questions but not really germane to the issue. The question is not whether a woman has a right to choose what do with her body or whether a woman might suffer greatly if she brings the child to term. The question is whether "the unborn entity, from the moment of conception, is a full-fledged member of the human community", to quote Francis Beckwith. If the fetus is a human person, then abortion is prima facie morally wrong, and a moral wrong that ought to prohibited by the state. If the fetus is not a member of the human community, then we can debate whether the mother can terminate the pregnancy or not. But this would be to conclude that the unborn child is nothing much more than a mass of flaking skin cells. We don't talk about a man's right to choose to shoot his wife, or the right of a parent to suffocate her 4 year old, or the right of a 55 year old to push his aging mother in front of a car. These are not rights because in each case an innocent human person is being killed. If the fetus is a human person, then how can abortion be a right?" Abortion is not one issue among many; it is different. No one argues for hurting the poor! "Almost every state has fetal homicide laws for the prosecution of those who harm a child in the womb. And yet, every state allows for abortion in all three trimesters for any reason." If the fetus is human, it should be protected by law. Abortion and the Duty to Legistlate Some Morality

DeYoung points to an incredible example of the faithfulness "in sickness" part of the wedding vows. Just read it. Here's a quote: "Don’t get me wrong. I really, really like sex. But given a choice between the mere biology of lust and the deep soul of love, I’ll take love. My body has changed — but my doctors say my libido will be warming up again before I know it. Deb understands, and we’ve adapted." Love Is In the Details

Here's a bunch of stats on the net percentage change favour of various demographic groups for Obama. "There are many ways to parse the election, but basically Obama was a likeable candidate in a bad year for Republicans. The Republican base was virtually unmoved, but the Democrats chipped away at the Catholic vote and won big (bigger than usual) among ethnic minorities, thanks no doubt to Obama's personal story and the Republicans' hardline stance on immigration. All in all, 5% more of the population voted for Obama than for Kerry, and that made for a 54-46 victory for Obama in 2008, whereas Bush won 51-49 in 2004." Values Voters in the 2008 Election

Here's a rather funny comment on the temporality of electronic communications, as compared to being able to read the intimate writings of people from hundreds of years ago. The Christian Lover II- Dispatches from the Digital Age

Hays responds to a criticism of JT's post on indulgences which didn't fancy a critique from sola scriptura. The Roman Catholic, if he wishes to turn the discussion into one of a burden of proof, must discharge his own burden as well! Moreover, i) What's our source of information on the afterlife, etc. by which we could formulate a dogma of indulgences? ii) How do we know the mind of God to know how He operates, since this is presupposed in the dogma of indulgences? iii) If the atonement is generally sufficient, it is specifically sufficient; If Christ atones for mortal sin, then he atones for venial sin. If he atones for eternal guilt, then he atones for temporal guilt. iv) Indulgences assume a theory of retributive punishment, not remedial punishment. The demands of divine justice must be met. The assignment of a just punishment. Just desert. v) If Christ didn't atone for post-baptismal sin, this admits a deficiency in the atonement. vi) Catholics pile on their unfounded assumptions to prop up other assumptions. vii) This particular interlocutor does a bait and switch, trying to use remedial punishment as a justification for the retributive punishment of indulges. viii) If I must suffer to pay the debt of temporal punishment, then the suffering of Christ is insufficient to pay the debt of temporal punishment on my behalf and in my stead. That's not what Col. 1:24 means. Quoting Moo, who notes a change in vocab from 'sufferings' to 'afflictions' (a term never used in the NT for Christ's redemptive sufferings), "It is not that there is anything lacking ‘in’ the atonement suffering of Christ but that there is something lacking ‘in regard to’ (TNIV) the tribulations that pertain to Christ as the Messiah as he is proclaimed in the world." There is the backdrop of the promised suffering of God's people in the 'last days', which are inaugerated by Christ. Indulgences

Responding to a comment on Jewish conspiracy theories by a Romanist, Hays writes, "It’s an equally sad fact that in 2005, the American Life League identified 72 pro-abortion Catholics in Congress: http://www.all.org/crusade/congress.htm ... It’s also a sad fact that Catholic Justice William Brennan was the brains behind Roe v. Wade: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3798/is_199801/ai_n8769194 ... The Vatican is quite capable of publicly excommunicating someone when it wants to send a message, viz. Luther, Cranmer, Henry VIII, Elizabeth I, Frederick II, Castro, Perón, Lefebvre, &c. Why has it never seen fit to publicly excommunicate an influential proabortion Catholic politician?" Jay Dyer- Puppet of the International Jewish Conspiracy

Turretinfan has a sad story of an experience he just had in a chat room of 'Christians', who would have nothing to do with the 'fear of the Lord.' After quoting Romans 3:18 (There is no fear of God before their eyes), they reacted strongly, silencing him, claiming it was inappropriate to quote Scripture to people who weren't interested in it. "Probably I'm just too sheltered - but the pure evil of a religion that despises God's word so openly was absolutely shocking to me. I feel so sorry for those folks - it is the "reprobate mind" of Romans 1 written large. But they are not seared in their conscience as to be able to completely ignore the Scriptures. The felt the need to mock and revile them - and to mock me for bringing them up. I've seen the latter from atheists - but a group of people would call themselves "Christians" while attacking the church and the Scriptures left me near speechless." The Fear of God

Interesting quote from the Rule of St. Benedict, which seems to serve as a constitution of sorts to the Benedictine order, to the effect that the teachings of the fathers are exalted, but Scripture is in the highest place. Excerpt from the Rule of St. Benedict

Here's some links to some audio on the New World Translation with comments from James White. The New World Translation of Jehovah’s Witnesses

Turretinfan: "Officially, Rome is opposed to abortion. Unofficially, prominent pro-abortion politicians are permitted to continue to commune with Rome. Case in point, America's first papist vice-president, who not only takes communion but receives a standing ovation (link). Nota Bene: he is now the VP, but the communion-taking and standing-ovation-receiving were 2 days before, when he was only a senator and the VP-elect. One of the marks of a true church is whether godly discipline is being handed out." Catholicism's Double Standard

Turretinfan gives some thoughts on the 'rod of discipline:' 1) it must be for the child's good, not to satisfy one's own anger; (2) the severity of the chastisement must be tailored to the child's age / personality and the offense; (3) the discipline provided must be consistent; and (4) the punishment must follow as soon as practical upon the infraction. Those things said, the "rod" is the general term for any means of measured, reasonable physical correction: aka corporal discipline. Ironically, when T-fan was saying this in a chat room, a belligerent individual disagreed, with no regard for Scripture, who claimed he turned out ok without the 'rod', but in the end was booted from the chatroom! "There are some people that try to interpret the "rod" as being things like "time outs" and revoking privileges - but believers have consistently interpreted Scripture to mean actually, you know, giving your son a few whacks with a wooden stick." (cf. Sirach 30:1-13, although this is extreme, e.g. 'no liberty') Child Discipline Conversation

Turretinfan offers his own satirical comment on "all means all": " 1) World means World (This is an important tenet of "Arminianism.") 2) John 12:19 The Pharisees therefore said among themselves, Perceive ye how ye prevail nothing? behold, the world is gone after him. (Bold added to assist one's vision.) 3) Therefore, by "Arminian" logic, it follows that the Pharisees were saying that they themselves followed Jesus!"  Pharisees and Jesus - A Study in Arminian Logic

Tfan writes, "When I talk to people (average, ordinary people) they mean by choice just what Calvinism teaches about what choice is: people picking from among various options. They normally don't impose much of a philosophical framework on it." People will say if they were forced they didn't have a choice. They'll also say they got their spouses to choose them, often through persistent action. "The truth is that Scriptures clearly teach that God has foreordained whatsoever comes to pass (see Acts 17:26, for example), that men make choices (see, for example, Isaiah 65:12), and that God has a purpose in evil the evil acts of men (see, for example, Genesis 50:20). These truths are compatible, whether people like it or not. Everything is part of God's plan, even our choices." Choice and the Common Man

Turretinfan has some commentary on Proverbs 3:1-10. Some points: "If something is around your neck, it won't come off unless you lose your head. If something is engraved into the tablet of your heart, it's a permanent record that goes with you wherever you go." ... "we are to acknowledge God in all our ways, and as a result he will direct our paths. This is just a natural result. When we do what he says, he is guiding our paths. If you read the instructions, you are being led by the author of the instructions. If you want to know how to live your life, read the Bible." ... "The proverbs continues to point out the absolute necessity of humbling ourselves before God's Word" ... "The point is that God does reward obedience. If we give to God, he will give to us. It's not rigid formula, and its not an absolute promise. God is not an ATM from which we demand money. We need to honor God with our physical possessions."  Proverbs 3-1-10

Patton writes, "I don’t think that there is a more valuable phrase that I have learned than this. “The palatability of a doctrine does not determine its veracity.”" The tastes of a doctrine to our sensibilities does not settle its truthfulness. When there is clear revelation from God’s word, we must submit to it as the final authority, no matter how bad, bitter, spicy, or bland it might taste. Truth is not a democracy. He thinks that if things are not clear, then we can look to our sensibilities, even thought they are infallible, and palatability may have a say here. "we believe that we are created in the image of God. Theologians call this the imago dei. Being in the image of God creates what we call an analogia entis (analogy of being). The analogia entis is the correspondence that we have to God in our being and includes emotions and desires. The simple statement “God loves” only has meaning to us because we believe that our understanding of what it means to love corresponds to God’s. This creates an analogy of language that makes communication possible." It Does Not Matter if You Don’t Like a Doctrine . . . Truth is Not a Democracy

Copan has some comments and commendations (and a criticism) on a book that seeks to refute the claim that religion leads to violence. i) why point to just the violent associations with religion and ignore its non-violent representatives? ii) Jesus crucifixion hardly justifies violence, as Christ Himself laid down His life in sacrifice and did not retaliate; iii) Commenting on an author's accusation that monotheism leads to violence, Copan notes that during the first centuries of church history, Christians were viewed by Roman polytheistic, emperor-worshiping pagans as atheists (one God is close enough to atheism!). It was precisely because they were “monotheists” that they were singled out for attack. "Properly understood, the Christian faith (and not some generic category called “religion”), with its doctrine of the self-giving and other-centered Trinity, is actually a beacon of hope for peacemaking and reconciliation (Rom. 5:6-11; Eph. 2:14-17). Some may refuse to participate and continue the conflict, but that is not the fault of the Christian faith." Does Religion Cause Violence-

Tony Payne comments on a brutal interview process, hiring for a Christian institution: "I suppose I didn't expect theological astuteness, nor any real clarity about the gospel. But I guess I had hoped for at least a mention of Jesus or God or the cross or the resurrection or faith or anything! I would have settled for a passing reference to the Sermon on the Mount. Or the Ten Commandments.It was painfully and embarrassingly obvious that none of the candidates had ever given Christianity (as a subject) a moment's thought. It's not that they had wrong ideas so much as they had no ideas. They were saying the first thing that came into their heads, dredged up from who knows where." Eek. Not a clue

Jay Adams has a list of don't when counseling. When Counseling, Don’t

Here's a comment from John Ensor: "abortion is not on par. I remember how and when I came to this conclusion. It was the week of February 12, 1990, as marked on the Newsweek magazine I was reading. Kim Flodin, in an article on why she did not counter-march for abortion rights, wrote, "I was pregnant, I carried two unborn children and I chose, for completely selfish reasons, to deny them life so that I could better my own" (My Turn). There it was: a momentary lapse into honest concrete language about abortion from an advocate. No ancient Baal worshiper could have described the reasons for their child sacrifice better. I was stunned that it had to be stated so plainly for me to grasp the preeminent evil of it. It is not one issue among equal concerns. Abortion is our postmodern version of child sacrifice for the Me Generation. As such, it is an incomprehensible and unthinkable evil." Why Are We Striving To Make Abortion Unthinkable-

Gilbert makes the good point that people aren't 'provoked' by bad language. They're just somewhat shocked or amused that a nerdy preacher is trying to be cool by swearing. And if you really want to provoke people, tell them that they are sinners, and the only way to be saved is Jesus Christ. Come on, Mike..... by Greg Gilbert. In response to this question, re. Driscoll's conference message on course language: Humor, Coarse Language, and the Christian by Michael Mckinley

See also Thabiti's comments. Eph. 4:29 seems really, really clear to me.  "Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen."  Then there's Eph. 5:4--"Nor should there be obscenity, foolish talk or coarse joking, which are out of place, but rather thanksgiving." Our own consciences convict us of when we've used course speech. The Bible Is Clear by Thabiti Anyabwile

Phone counseling can indeed be useful (such as when someone calls you at 3 am, who is going to commit suicide). For Thabiti, From the Nuanced Nice Guy by Deepak Reju

Some good additions to a list of counseling don't's. Read them all, but here's a sample: 1. Don’t counsel people who want absolute confidentiality; 2. Don't counsel without scheduling boundaries; 8. Don’t counsel if you are struggling with “besetting sins,”; 10. Don’t counsel without personal accountability, someone who is willing to ask intrusive questions. Thabiti, Here are my additions..... by Deepak Reju

Nicole of Girltak writes, "It may surprise you to learn that in the Bible God has already given you a sneak peek into your future. As women, we are all appointed to be keepers of the home (Prov. 31:10-31; 1 Tim. 5:14; Titus 2:5)." Not that a woman's 'place is the kitchen' but that Scripture unapologetically sets forth the high priority of the home for each and every woman. Contra the world's [obtuse] thinking, homemaking requires considerable expertise - thus, prepare now. Future Homemakers

" So far we’ve given you three great deals for teenage girls: The Fear of the Lord  (part one and two); Mom’s Godly Teaching (part one, two and three); Homemaker Training (part one and two). Contrast these with the typical teenage priorities: Popularity, independence, and selfish Pleasures" Three Plus Two More

The godly woman is to live a life “devoted to good works” (1 Tim. 5:9-10)—or, as Jerry Bridges calls them, “deliberate deeds that are helpful to others.” We must be dedicated to good works, beginning at home, and flowing outward into the church and community. Teenagers must pursue and cultivate this while they are young. God has lines up works for them (Eph. 2:10) Deliberate Deeds

Good works begin at home, as Paul said (1 Timothy 5:4). Loving your family can be harder. From there, we move out to the church, then to the world. It may not be glamorous but it is glorious. This is a mark of sincere love. Glorious Good Deeds

How are you making use of the time, if you are single? Maybe you're always looking forward to another season. Whether marriage or singleness is better—that’s not the point! What ultimately matters is that time is short; that the days are evil. The real question is: how do we as Christians live in light of eternity? “Marriage and singleness both present us with unique trials and unique opportunities for our sanctification” explains John Piper. “There will be unique rewards for each, and which is greater will not depend on whether you were married or single, but on how you responded to each.” “Look carefully then how you walk, not as unwise but as wise, making the best use of the time, because the days are evil.” Ephesians 5:15-16 The Single Season

"How do you avoid wasteful spending of your time? Don’t invest it all in "the present form of this world." ‘Cause it ain’t gonna last." “Believe me, there is nothing here that is worthy of your pursuit,” warns pastor Charles Spurgeon: “If you give your soul up to anything earthly, whether it be the wealth, or the honours, or the pleasures of this world, you might as well hunt after the mirage of the desert or try to collect the mists of the morning, or to store up for yourself the clouds of the sky, for all these things are passing away.” Deal As If You Don't

Commenting on 1 Cor. 7, "Free from the anxieties attendant upon marriage and family, you have the opportunity to live for the things of the Lord, to pursue undivided devotion to Him." As Piper says, “It is not a calling to extend irresponsible adolescence into your thirties. It is a calling to do what only single men and women in Christ can do in this world, namely, to display by the Christ-exalting devotion of your singleness the truths about Christ and his kingdom that shine more clearly through singleness than through marriage.” Undivided Devotion

Here's some quotes from Augustine and Aquinas to the effect that they argued the saints could see the damned in hell. Interesting church history factoid on Hell (Tradition or not Tradition-)

Responding to a charge that Calvinism is tri-theistic, suggesting that the Godhead in the "Father" cutting off the "Son." Turretinfan replies that God cannot die, that Calvinism affirms monotheism and that the Christ's suffering was fulfilled in the incarnate Son of God, and that Jesus, in dying, was not removed from the Trinity, and there is no clear logical reason why Mr. Dyer would attribute such a view to Calvinism. Why Mr. Dyer thinks the Holy Spirit was somehow removed from the Trinity in Calvinism is so far from being what Calvinism teaches that it is mystifying to try to guess why he would say that. He then points out that in Catholicism, Mary is often treated as a goddess (being addressed by such absurdly exalted titles as "Queen of Heaven"), and the "saints" are often a "Christianized" equivalent to the pantheon of Greek/Roman lesser deities. They attribute to her divinity implicitly in praying to her. The first common rebuttal is to say that no one is really praying to Mary, they are just asking Mary to pray for them: But John Paul II disagrees! (quote provided).  Response to Jay Dyer on Calvinism (Part 5 of 13)

Bayly says that "by now readers know I regularly contrast the preaching of the Reformers with the preaching of Protestant pastors, today --usually with the goal of pointing out how fearful and timid we are compared to the men we claim as our heroes. This present discovery of sodomite rapists in parishes across North America is no exception. Why is it that mainstream Protestant print media like Christianity Today and World, not to mention theological journals and pastors in pulpits, never point out the very first thing that would have been said by church fathers of past centuries: that the heresies and errors of the Roman Catholic church inevitably produce such fruit? That, theologically and pastorally, this fruit is inevitable?" Rather than taking the opportunity to warn others about the dangers of the Romanist religion, what are we doing? we're busy showing how kind and gentle and non-censorious we are. He concludes with a warning to Protestants:  The church is only going to be sued more often in the years to come, and the man of God cannot be too careful protecting himself against false charges; but also against transference. Against a woman's fantasies or his own lusts. Cardinal Mahony faces scrutiny

Bayly, on Darwinism and Darwin's birthday: "The president of the Skeptics Society (which publishes Skeptic magazine), Michael Shermer, isn't waiting for the holy day to celebrate. He assures fellow homo sapiens that his cult's high priests have a "pretty good outline" of the origin of life. But then he goes and spoils it all by saying something stupid like...  "we still don't know how it actually started." Yup, that's what he said." Darwinists throw their own monster's ball

Talking about the favourite word, 'authenticity', of the former pastor of a church for which Bayly assumed the pastorate, he says: "Where did that word come from, anyway? A facile, glib, age whose heroes and heroines are actors... " A generation that responds to 9/11 saying that it was 'just like a movie'. The fakification of everything

Commenting on the scandal and shame brought on the church by Haggard, and how the unbelievers don't distinguish between the various groups of 'Christians', Bayly says: "Dear pastor, elder, or deacon: What are you and your wife, sons and daughters, older women and elders doing to respond to this blasphemy of our Lord Jesus Christ? First, does it grieve you that your Father has this reputation? Second, do you take it personally? Third, are you doing everything possible to flee sexual immorality--to not even allow a hint of it in your life and home and congregation? Fourth, are you leading your church to demonstrate loving discipline and disciplined love of those caught in such sin? Fifth, are you and the other shepherds of your flock asking questions of each other and the flock that will cause you to know of the sexual immorality of the married men in your church before the media publish it? Sixth, have we all learned once and for all that a man or woman being a member-in-good standing in our church, being an officer of the church, being married and having children, etc. are no proof of heterosexuality?" How the world sees Christ through His Bride

Rick Warren apparently called down a blessing on America, and praised Obama's decision to select Gene Robinson for the prayer. "So Warren agrees to call down God's blessing on a nation of bloodshed, whose infants are slaughtered by decree of our highest court and have died at the rate of a million and a quarter to a million and a half per year for thirty-five years, now--well over 50,000,000 in all." And Warren says that this is good for America. "When I say to the wicked, "O wicked man, you will surely die," and you do not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity, but his blood I will require from your hand. (Ezekiel 33:8)" "Tremble with me before our Holy God Who Himself has said He will hold the watchman personally responsible for the blood of the wicked he has refused to warn--wicked men such as Pastor Warren is commending and soon, before the watching world, will bless." Rick Warren, Gene Robinson, Barack Obama and the false presence of the Kingdom of God

"Here's a good reminder of who President Obama actually is, and what oppression and bloodshed have formed the cornerstone of his public service from its inception. And the Emergelicals? Well, this is precisely what they wanted, and still want. They're just not honest enough to admit it." And there arose up a new king over America, which knew not babies

Interesting comments, to the effect that people sit and enjoy action movies in the suburbs while gunshots are fired downtown, while militaries secure our freedom, while police shoot criminals, and so on. In other words, we live in peace given to us by the Man of Blood; we live in the midst of a civil security given us by men of blood who laid down their lives for the sheep; but then we pull back in horror when one of them barks, kills a wolf, or comes to church with blood on his hands. "He's so dirty! He should be Baptist or Pentecostal." In praise of sheepdogs

So, actually do it. These three words are the secret to success in a multitude of circumstances. It's certainly true of writing. When someone comes to me (as they quite often do), indicating their desire to be a writer, and then asks me how to go about it, I have only these three words to say to them: actually do it. Actually do it: it also works for evangelism, prayer and reading the Bible. Don't just think about it; learn about it, hear sermons about it, do courses in it, and go to conferences to get fired up about it. Actually do it

Another recommendation from solapanel for Carson's Memoirs of an Ordinary Pastor. Book review- Memoirs of an Ordinary Pastor

Answering the question, 'why pray if God is sovereign?' we add two more points. 1) It means that God is able to actually answer prayer. Perhaps the question, “If God is sovereign, why pray?” could be replaced with the question, “If God is not sovereign, why pray?” Believers must come to their God presenting to Him their requests because He has both the authority and the ability to grant what they have requested in their petitions and intercessory prayers. 2) God actually answers prayer. Jesus promised it, biblical history shows it over and over. "mediately after answering the question of how to pray in Luke 11:2-4, Jesus goes on to answer the question of why to pray by giving two reasons—because God rewards diligence in prayer by granting requests (Luke 11:5-10), and because God delights in giving good gifts to His children (Luke 11:11-13)." Why Pray if God Is Sovereign- (Part 3)