• Book Review: Pure Pleasure by Gary Thomas  

    2010-02-08 22:16

    JasonS - book reviews


    Pure Pleasure: Why Do Christians Feel So Bad about Feeling Good?Pure Pleasure: Why Do Christians Feel So Bad about Feeling Good? by Gary L. Thomas

    My rating: 5 of 5 stars
    Pure Pleasure by Gary Thomas
    I’ve known that Gary Thomas was out there writing books, but this is the first book of his that I have read. That being said, I enjoyed Pure Pleasure.
    Thomas has a way of writing that is easy on the reader. His writing is simple and down-to-earth. I like that. He is also a transparent writer. We are not left wondering what he thinks, nor whether he struggles as we do: he speaks openly and honestly on these subjects.
    Thomas deals with the question that has plagued many Christians for centuries- the issue of pleasure. Many have declared pleasure to be sinful. Others have become antinomians and declared that nothing is off limits. Thomas declares both ideas to be wrong and unbiblical. In fact, in the same vein of thought as Desiring God, Thomas declares pleasure to be good, and to be our duty.
    We do NOT have to feel guilty because we enjoy something. Why, then, do many Christians feel bad when they feel good? Simply because we have misunderstood our Bibles and what they say about pleasure.
    Not only does Thomas show us that things we naturally enjoy (sex, food, family,etc) can be enjoyed in a way that pleases God, he also shows us how that misplaced pleasure is dangerous. What is just as necessary to us is his chapter on finding pleasure even when things are difficult.
    All in all, Pure Pleasure is a message that we need to hear today.

    View all my reviews >>

    Filed under: book reviews Tagged: book review, Christian hedonism, Christianity, pleasure, Zondervan

  • Preaching Christ of Contention  

    2010-02-08 20:08

    Reforming Baptist - Fundamentalism Issues

    I wonder if Paul was referring to professing Christians like this, when he wrote these words:Philippians 1:15-18 Some indeed preach Christ even of envy and strife; and some also of good will: 16 The one preach Christ of contention, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my bonds: 17 But the other of love, knowing that I am set for the defence of the gospel. Then, I wonder if you and I can

  • Senator Scott Brown, The Calvinist?  

    2010-02-07 13:03

    John D. Chitty - Evangelicalism

    Just encountered a couple of links regarding the newly elected (and seated) Republican Senator Scott Brown and his religion. Thanks to the Riddleblog and one of its commenters for both of the links. Senator Scott Brown and family are members of an evangelical church plant called New England Chapel. This church is a member of the [...]

  • Book Review: Sense And Sensibility by Jane Austen: Bethany House...  

    2010-02-06 05:49

    JasonS - book reviews


    Sense and SensibilitySense and Sensibility by Jane Austen

    My rating: 5 of 5 stars
    Sense And Sensibility by Jane Austen
    What can be said about a classic? Much, I believe.
    Austen wrote a book that is very instructive in how people face life and love. Set in a time when many seemed to thrive on that which was deemed genteel and appropriate, but were very superficial, Sense And Sensibility shows the manner in which two (There were several others, but the Dashwood sisters are the two main characters.) sisters dealt with love. Elinor was prudent, careful, and thoughtful (She used sense). Marianne was passionate (Sensibile is the way Austen described her.). They both fell in love, and both were hurt in different ways. In the end, both learned the value of having a balance between careful, well-thought out approaches to love, and a passionate approach to love.
    The ins and outs of their loves are not too different from our times. Neither are the people. The great difference is in the setting. Human nature remains the same. We can learn much about life from this book.
    Bethany House Publishers has done the reader a service by providing appropriate historical details, references to various movies based upon the book, and humorous comments along the way.
    Who would have ever thought that reading a classic could be so much joy!?!

    Thanks to the kind folk at Bethany House for this review copy.

    View all my reviews >>

    Filed under: book reviews Tagged: bethany house, classic, Jane Austen, Sense and Sensibility

  • Dying to Death - Daily Devo for Fri, Feb 05, 2010  

    2010-02-05 17:29

    Josh Gelatt - Daily Devotions

    Dying to Death

    I am the resurrection and the life: he that believes in me, even if he dies, will live" (John 11:25).

    Recently I sat in my office with a man who lost his wife to cancer. They had been married for over 40 years, and I listened as he wept at the loss of his dearest friend and companion. Death is something that is ugly, painful, wretched--and according to the Christian worldview--unnatural. It is unnatural in the sense that it was never part of God's created design. He originally made a world of wonder, joy, and life. Death, along with its twin-brother misery, was only introduced because mankind refused to follow the life-giving way of God. In Jesus, that life-giving way of God is once again set before mankind.

    My wife and I are not even mid-way through an average lifespan. Yet one of us will eventually find ourselves saying a painful goodbye to the other. If, in the Lord's wisdom and goodness, I am chosen to be the one looking down upon the grave, I pray that I remember this wonderful promise of Jesus. He is the resurrection and the life! Even though my wife will have died, death cannot keep her. Jesus has conquered her sin and even death itself! How wonderful it is to be fully assured that my beloved bride is eternally secure in the protective hands of the divine Giver of life!

    The great promise of Jesus' good news is that new life is offered to us. Death may claim our mortal bodies, but it can never claim the souls and minds of those who belong to Jesus.
    Josh Gelatt (MDiv, MA, LLPC) is the pastor of Indian River Baptist Church in beautiful Northern Michigan. The thoughts and opinions in this article do not necessarily express the views of IRBC. Material may be used without permission, though may not be altered in any way.

  • Vern Poythress, John Walton & “The Lost World of Genesis One”  

    2010-02-05 16:19

    fundyreformed - Books & Reviews

    IVP recently published John Walton’s book, The Lost World of Genesis One: Ancient Cosmology and the Origins Debate.  Walton brings ancient near-Eastern (ANE) cultural and linguistic parallels to bear on the text of Genesis chapter 1.  I found the book both fascinating and challenging.  His method of developing his argument proposition by proposition, kept the argument clear, comprehensible and concise.  Ultimately, I found it quite convincing.  I will be reviewing that book on my site in the near future.

    Of course, a big sacred cow has been tipped in this book.  Against the very real attacks by atheistic evolutionists, Christians in general have united around a Creationist perspective that upholds a literal, six-day, young earth, non-evolutionary model of the origins of the earth and all life.  Over the last few decades, a steady stream of scientific analyses of Scripture have hit the shelves of Christian bookstores.  If you stop to think about this from a wider perspective, you would have to think that many church leaders of old would be amazed at the degree of scientific specificity that modern creationists find in the pages of Scripture.  It should be obvious that Scripture wasn’t written to answer every question in our science books.

    I am currently exploring this issue in more depth and looking to Scripture for what perspective to have on this issue.  John Piper’s thoughts on the matter are similar to mine at present.  In a recent online Ask Pastor John event, (the answer is not yet posted on their site), Piper says he leans toward Sailhammer’s view (as explained in the above link).  After reading Walton (as well as G.K. Beale), I agree.  I don’t think the issue has to be as divisive as some make it out to be.

    Everyone doesn’t agree that such matters should be open to such variation, however.  Vern Poythress, who I highly respect, recently offered a decidedly negative assessment to Walton’s book in World magazine.  His review, obviously bound by space constraints, did not adequately explain Walton’s position.  It misrepresented the book.  Now, John Walton has responded to that review.  Both Poythress’ assessment of the book, and Walton’s rejoinder are short reads and will provide a peek into the nature of the debate (and of course, the book).  I encourage you to take the time to read both articles, and let me know what your thoughts are.

    Vern Poythress: Walton has read Genesis with a false contrast between material and functional, and with equivocal meanings for the two terms. As a result, he artificially detaches Genesis 1 from questions of physical appearance and produces an unsustainable interpretation….  In short, Walton’s book has mixed value. Positive insights about the practical focus of Genesis 1 mix with some unsound claims.  (read the entire review)

    John Walton: I have read a few other reviews of the Lost World of Genesis One by scholars who had reservations about my theory. They were balanced, understood my position well, interacted with my ideas and evidence in depth, and offered assessment of aspects of the theory as they raised important questions. These are much appreciated. Dr. Poythress is certainly capable of offering such a review, but this effort fell far short of that helpful ideal. In the process I believe he did a disservice to me, to his readers, and to the discussion.  (read the entire response)

    Please feel free to share your thoughts on this in the comments below!

    You can purchase the book at Amazon.com or Westminster Bookstore, or direct from IVP.  Westminster Bookstore has a .PDF excerpt available as well on the book page.

  • Genesis, Creation, And The Ancient Near East  

    2010-02-05 15:43

    JasonS - Genesis


    It seems that the going thing for many is to draw parallels between the Genesis Creation account and various myths from the ancient Near East.

    I have not read much from the ancient Near East, but what I have read seems to be more dis-similar than similar.

    Why the parallelism/parallelomania?  Are there truly parallels to be found that show these similarities, or is it a sort of wishful thinking on the part of those finding the parallels?

    Filed under: apologetics, creation, Genesis Tagged: ancient near east, creation, Genesis, marduk

  • Two Preachers Sitting Around Watching Rock Videos.  

    2010-02-04 21:17

    Reforming Baptist - Random Thoughts

    Yesterday, a preacher friend of mine and I were in my office watching Rock Music videos on my computer. Why would we be doing such a thing? Isn't that hazardous to our spiritual health? Won't that corrupt us and cause us to become rebellious? I mean, that's what we tell our teenagers right?Well, it was an experiment actually. I am preaching through the book of Ecclesiastes and there is so much

  • If You Liked “My Story”…  

    2010-02-04 18:57

    fundyreformed - Fundamentalism

    When I first posted “My Story” on my blog back in December of 2005, I didn’t have a clue about blogging.  I posted an enormously long letter, with some slight formatting changes, as one big post.  By God’s grace, that post has blessed my readers more than any other.  I’ve received dozens of comments over the years, on the blog or by email, thanking me for sharing that story.  It’s not “my” story, really, It’s God’s.

    I think I now have found another story as long as mine.  However this one is formatted much nicer and contains many hilarious vignettes.  You will really enjoy Greg Wilson’s personal story, if you take the time to read.  Anyone more personally familiar with fundamentalism will especially be blessed.  Greg’s story narrates a similar “wake up” experience.  He continues in a faithful pastoral ministry in a Bible-believing (albeit non-IFB, non-KJVO) church.

    Here’s the link, enjoy the read.  May his story also be a help to those who may be “hurt” or confused by extreme fundamentalism.  And as Greg concludes his story: “Soli Deo Gloria“!  (To God alone be the glory.)

  • Perspectives - Daily Devo for Thur, Feb 4, 2010  

    2010-02-04 15:37

    Josh Gelatt - Daily Devotions

    Perspectives

    "When Jesus saw him lying there and knew he had already been there a long time, he said to him, 'Do you want to be healed?'" (John 5:6).

    Complainers are easy to identify. For the complainer, life is always difficult, work is overwhelming, family is stressful, and other people are problems. In a pound of joy, the complainer will find the ounce of misery.

    Yet Jesus has a way of exposing our self-centered complaints and putting our issues in proper perspective. One passage of scripture that helps shatter our complaining-attitudes is found in John 5. It records that while in Bethseda, Jesus visited a pool of water where hundreds of crippled and sick individuals would come hoping for miraculous healing. According to traditional lore, an angel sent from God would occasionally stir the water and the first person to enter the pool would be healed. Near the pool Jesus spotted a crippled man who was unable to use his legs. Because of his disability he never was able to make it to the pool first. He sat by that pool hoping to be healed for thirty-eight years! That's a long time to wait to be healed!

    Writing on this passage, Matthew Henry notes, "Shall we, who perhaps for many years have scarcely known what it has been to be a day sick, complain...when many others...have scarcely known what it has been to be a day well?"

    In the midst of life-long misery a crippled man waited patiently for healing from the Lord. How can we, who experience such temporary and fleeting misery, then use it as an excuse for complaint and grumbling? Our God is good---therefore live in the joy of that goodness!
    Josh Gelatt (MDiv, MA, LLPC) is the pastor of Indian River Baptist Church in beautiful Northern Michigan. The thoughts and opinions in this article do not necessarily express the views of IRBC. Material may be used without permission, though may not be altered in any way.

  • Dysfunctional Calvinism  

    2010-02-04 17:04

    Josh Gelatt

    Timmy Brister, whose Calvinistic credentials are unquestioned, offers the following assessment of "Dysfunctional Calvinism". I wholeheartedly agree, noting that far too many are drawn to Calvinism for all the wrong reasons. Their error lies not in their doctrinal formulations, but rather in their hearts and atitiudes. I would far rather have a congregation full of Cross-centered Arminians than put up with a handful of dysfunctional Calvinists. Sometimes, the most egregious errors lay closest to the truth.

    Brister on Dysfunctional Calvinism:

    Dysfunctional Calvinism is the practice of embracing human responsibility in converting people to Calvinism but denying human responsibility in converting people to Christ.

    Dysfunctional Calvinism likes to play the “sovereignty card” as a “get out of evangelism” exception clause.

    Dysfunctional Calvinism gives an articulation of the doctrines of grace without exhibiting grace to those who disagree with them.

    Dysfunctional Calvinism embraces “word” ministry to the exclusion of “deed” ministry–that is the love for the truth does not go far enough. Let’s just have another Bible Study.

    Dysfunctional Calvinism finds it easier to talk to Christians about election than the free grace of God to sinners.

    Dysfunctional Calvinism turns your right theology in a wrong-headed way, sometimes as a heresy hunter/watchdog blogger and other times a tacit gnosticism.

    Dysfunctional Calvinism is gospel-centered insofar as it satisfies their intellectual inquiry but does not inflame their affections and transforms their will in becoming “all things to all men that by all possible means I might save some.”

    HT: Arthur Sido
    Josh Gelatt (MDiv, MA, LLPC) is the pastor of Indian River Baptist Church in beautiful Northern Michigan. The thoughts and opinions in this article do not necessarily express the views of IRBC. Material may be used without permission, though may not be altered in any way.

  • Remember Terry Schiavo?  

    2010-02-04 09:25

    Ben

    The woman said to be in a persistent vegetative state who was starved to death by her husband after a lengthy legislative and legal battle?

    What if she really wasn't "vegetative"?

    An article just published in the New England Journal of Medicine by an international team of scientists raises grave questions about her and, ultimately, thousands of other patients. The Washington Post reports:
    These patients, the images clearly indicated, were living silently in their bodies, their minds apparently active. One man could even flawlessly answer detailed yes-or-no questions about his life before his trauma by activating different parts of his brain.
    Read the article here.

  • Deep Love - A Daily Devo for Wed, Feb 3, 2010  

    2010-02-03 12:05

    Josh Gelatt - Daily Devotions

    Deep Love

    "Love one another" (John 13:34).

    Immediately after the service a woman pushed her way to the front. "Pastor", she said, "I disagree very strongly with a word you used". She continued, "You said that all were invited to stay for the fellowship meal after the Church, and then you referred to this as an agape meal."

    "Yes", I replied, "that is what I called it".

    "But agape is God's love. You're cheapening it by acting as if its something we can do in the church dinning hall".

    This woman correctly understood that agape was one of the Greek words for love, but she seriously misunderstood what it truly implied. Often in the New Testament the noun agape (as well as its verb form agapao) was used to refer to God's great love for us. But it was also used to describe the type of love we are to have for Him and for one another. In fact, Jesus tells one person that the whole point of the law was to love (agapao) God with all our hearts and love (agapao) our neighbor as ourselves (Mark 12:30-31). Elsewhere he commanded Christians to "love (agapao) one another" (John 13:34). The apostle John goes so far as to declare that "anyone who does not love (agapao) his brother, whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen" (1 John 4:20). The whole point of the Gospel is to make us like Christ. We are to demonstrate outwardly the love of God that exists inwardly.

    After explaining all this the woman was still in disagreement. She stated, "I still think your cheapening this word by using it for a meal".

    Smiling, I replied, "Really? Did you know that this is a biblical term? In the letter of Jude (verse 12) he refers to a meal that was shared by believers in New Testament times. Believers would gather together to sing, prayer, meditate on Jesus, and simply enjoy each others company. And do you know what that verse in Jude calls this supper?---its called an agape meal!"

    How easy it is for us to claim we love God, all the while cheapening the relationships we have with others. Your involvement with brothers and sisters in Christ is not something that is on the periphery of your spiritual journey--it is part of its very foundation!

    Take the great wonderful agape love that God has for you and share it with others.


    Josh Gelatt (MDiv, MA, LLPC) is the pastor of Indian River Baptist Church in beautiful Northern Michigan. The thoughts and opinions in this article do not necessarily express the views of IRBC. Material may be used without permission, though may not be altered in any way.

  • Does Biblical Literalism Truly Lead to A Mean Spirit?  

    2010-02-03 02:41

    JasonS - Bible


    In an amazing article on PatrolMag.com Matthew Paul Turner tells of an experience he had while working for CCM magazine.

    It seems that the manager of the periodical wanted to run an interview with Amy Grant in the magazine.  He also wanted to run the interview with an apology from Grant for having gone through a divorce.  He is stated to have stipulated that the article would not run without the apology.

    The interviewer did not get the requisite apology and was called into his manager’s office and taken to task for not including an apology in the interview (Note: The article was run in a heavily edited/rewritten fashion with a fabricated apology). What caught my attention, however, was the portrayal of Gerald, the manager.

    “..Gerald called me into his office. I considered putting on a bulletproof jacket, or at the very least, wearing a wire so somebody who liked me could eavesdrop on our conversation. It was very possible I might need saving. In my opinion, Gerald was the worst kind of bully—a gruff, condescending, loud, biblical literalist.”

    I can see being “gruff, condescending, loud” as things that characterize a bully.  But why “biblical literalist”?  What does that have to do with being a bully of the worst kind? Nothing.  Nothing at all.

    Why does a desire to understand the Bible literally have nothing to do with being a bully?  Because, as Kevin Vanhoozer says in Is There A Meaning In This Text, the literal sense is the literary sense.  So…..what does one taking poetry as poetry, narrative as narrative, history as history have to do with one being a bully?  I see no reason to believe that it does.

    Turner’s statement is simply a classic case of one confusing a literal understanding of the Bible with a woodenly literal understanding of the Bible.  Wooden literalism doesn’t understand genre, figures of speech, idioms, etc.  Biblical literalism does know the difference and appreciates those differences.

    Anyone can be a bully.  Being a bully and being mean spirited aren’t monopolized by people with a literal hermeneutic.  Atheists, agnostics, liberals, conservatives, ad infinitum can be bullies.

    What makes a person a bully, then?  Sin.  Inherent depravity.  That makes a bully.   A literal hermeneutic does not a bully make.

    Filed under: Bible, hermeneutics Tagged: Amy Grant, Bible, CCM, hermeneutic, literal

  • "They aren't actually 'pro-choice' so much as they are pro-abortion":...  

    2010-02-02 20:44

    Ben

    Here's a welcome piece by Washington Post columnist Sally Jenkins on the Tim Tebow pro-life Super Bowl ad. Make no mistake—it's a pro-free speech piece, not a pro-life piece. But Jenkins' honesty is fresh and respectable—possibly even courageous. Here's the gist of her perspective:
    I'm pro-choice, and Tebow clearly is not. But based on what I've heard in the past week, I'll take his side against the group-think, elitism and condescension of the "National Organization of Fewer and Fewer Women All The Time." For one thing, Tebow seems smarter than they do.

    Tebow's 30-second ad hasn't even run yet, but it already has provoked "The National Organization for Women Who Only Think Like Us" to reveal something important about themselves: They aren't actually "pro-choice" so much as they are pro-abortion.
    I'm encouraged to see Jenkins make the obvious argument that the Tebows do more to care for women than the organization that claims to represent them:
    Pam Tebow and her son feel good enough about that choice to want to tell people about it. Only, NOW says they shouldn't be allowed to. Apparently NOW feels this commercial is an inappropriate message for America to see for 30 seconds, but women in bikini selling beer is the right one.
    Jenkins also exposes the fear in the pro-choice movement:
    If the pro-choice stance is so precarious that a story about someone who chose to carry a risky pregnancy to term undermines it, then CBS is not the problem.
    Maybe protests, placards and marches have their place. Seems to me, though, that this sort of message may find more of a foothold in American culture.

  • Sovereign Grace Ministries Super February Sale  

    2010-02-02 15:27

    fundyreformed - Books & Reviews

    The past couple years, Sovereign Grace Ministries has put on a SUPER SALE all through the month of February.  I’ve taken advantage of the sale myself in years past.  I grabbed up some of their superb music CDs, and also picked up a couple of their song books.  (Many of the songs I’ve showcased on my blog over the years, have been produced by Sovereign Grace Ministries.)  I have many of the books they are selling, but if anyone really wanted to bless me :) they could send me one of the following titles– Living the Cross Centered Life and Sex, Romance, and the Glory of God by C.J. Mahaney; Love that Lasts: When Marriage Meets Grace by Gary and Betsy Ricucci; and Worship Matters by Bob Kauflin.  All of these titles and others, are sure to bless you.  I encourage you to take advantage of this great offer.  Plus, for all orders of $15 or more, there is free shipping.

  • The Empty Chair - A Daily Devo for Tues, Feb 2, 2010  

    2010-02-02 15:07

    Josh Gelatt

    The Empty Chair

    "And the name of the city from that time on shall be, 'Yahweh Is There'" (Ezekiel 48:35b).

    Ending a ministry-related conversation on my cell phone, I jumped out of the car, shut the phone off, and hurried into the auditorium where my child was about to perform in an afternoon elementary school play. I slipped in a bit late, but just in time to see the children being escorted down the aisle and up onto the stage. My little one saw me and waived excitedly. At that moment I remembered how wonderful it is to be a daddy.

    Soon another group of children were being led down the aisle. One in particular caught my attention. She spotted an older lady in the crowd who sat just in front of me (whom I guess was her grandmother) and broke from the line running to her. Pointing to the empty chair next to the woman the little girl asked, "are you saving that chair for Daddy?" The grandmother cleared her throat and said, "I was honey, but your Daddy called and said he couldn't make it". Tearing up, the girl turned and began walking back to the other children, telling one of her friends "my Daddy never comes".

    We shouldn't judge this man too harshly. Real life has real problems, and it is very possible this man had legitimate reasons for his absence. But how very different is our heavenly Father. In the verse above, the prophet Ezekiel had just gotten through explaining the wonders of Heaven. But he has saved the best description for last (the very last verse of the book, actually). With all of its wonders and perfections, the best part of heaven is that Yahweh will be there! Daddy's chair will never be empty and we will always be in the presence of a Father who loves and cares for us.

    Oh how I long to see that glorious city with its streets of gold! Yet how much more do I long to see the one who sits in Daddy's chair.
    Josh Gelatt (MDiv, MA, LLPC) is the pastor of Indian River Baptist Church in beautiful Northern Michigan. The thoughts and opinions in this article do not necessarily express the views of IRBC. Material may be used without permission, though may not be altered in any way.

  • Book Review: The Meaning of The Pentateuch by John Sailhamer  

    2010-02-01 21:38

    JasonS - book reviews


    The Meaning of the Pentateuch: Revelation, Composition and InterpretationThe Meaning of the Pentateuch: Revelation, Composition and Interpretation by John H. Sailhamer

    My rating: 5 of 5 stars
    What can be said about John H. Sailhamer? He is professor of Old Testament at Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary in Brea, CA, an author of several books, and a very intelligent man.
    The Meaning of The Pentateuch covers the gamut of Biblical studies. Not only does it deal with the meaning of the Pentateuch, but it also gives a crash course in hermeneutics, Biblical theology, Old Testament theology, as well as interacting with covenant theology and dispensationalism. Considering this, it is no wonder that the book is over six hundred pages!
    Written from an evangelical perspective that seems to be pretty conservative, The Meaning of The Pentateuch addresses the issues surrounding the revelation, composition, and interpretation of the Pentateuch. This was no doubt a daunting undertaking, but the result is pleasing. Sailhamer is convinced that the Pentateuch was composed in its present state to present theological truth. He shows how various Biblical themes are arranged, organized, and presented throughout the whole of the Pentateuch. I was amazed to see this, because I learned so very many things that I had never known. This book has been extensively highlighted by me, and will be one to which I shall refer quite often when studying.
    In the end, Sailhamer essentially tells us that we should recognize that the Old Testament should be allowed to stand on its own instead of reading the New Testament back into it. The Pentateuch shows a much more detailed understanding of the coming Christ than most of us realize. Sailhamer brings this to the fore in this book. In doing so he has done a great service to the church.
    The reader should not allow the length and size of the book to deter him. It is a book worth reading and re-reading. It is destined to be a classic in Old Testament studies.
    Thanks to Adrianna Wright of IVP for this review copy.

    View all my reviews >>

    Filed under: book reviews Tagged: book review, Intervarsity Press, IVP Academic, John Sailhamer, Old Testament, pentateuch, theology

  • Pleasantville - Daily Devo for Mon, Feb 1, 2010  

    2010-02-01 20:09

    Josh Gelatt - Daily Devotions

    A daily devotion for Monday, February 2010

    Pleasantville

    "Whether it is pleasant or unpleasant, we will listen to the voice of the Lord our God..."
    Jeremiah 42:6 (NASB)

    I love being a Christian---I love everything about it: church life, the Bible, fellow believers, tithing, bible studies, etc. I especially love being an American Christian. As an American I have freedom, a nice car (relatively speaking), an air conditioned home, home owners insurance, and high speed Internet access. Sure, I respect my brothers and sisters overseas who are suffering for the Lord--and I'll even support them financially--but that doesn't mean I can't enjoy what the Lord has given me here, right?

    Well, certainly there is nothing wrong with wealth and possessions, but there is a difference between being thankful for a pleasant life and being addicted to and controlled by it. Most Western Christians can go through their entire lives without ever engaging in the radical, all-encompassing, life-transforming mission Jesus has given to us. Why should Satan directly assault the American Christian when he can more easily woo him with the wonders of a pleasant and tame life?

    How open are you to hear unpleasant things from the Lord? How would you respond if he asked you to tithe 20% of your income? What if he asked you to let your son or daughter go to a hostile nation for the sake of the Gospel or to fight a losing battle against cancer? What if he asked you to sell your car or forgo your remodel project in order to buy gospel literature for an inner city church? Or perhaps you have never heard God ask these things of you because long ago you stopped listening to anything that seemed unpleasant.

    God is asking great things of His people---though do not mistake 'great' for 'pleasant'. Whether He send sorrow or joy, may you faithfully accept whatever your Father (in His great love) sends.
    Josh Gelatt (MDiv, MA, LLPC) is the pastor of Indian River Baptist Church in beautiful Northern Michigan. The thoughts and opinions in this article do not necessarily express the views of IRBC. Material may be used without permission, though may not be altered in any way.

  • Poll: How Do You Hear of New Books?  

    2010-02-01 04:36

    fundyreformed - Books & Reviews

    Everyone reading this post, is reading it on a blog.  So this will skew the results of this poll.  Still, I’m wondering what this poll will show about how people like you and I hear of new books.

    Feel free to share some thoughts in the comment section too.  The world of book publicity is constantly changing these days.  I’m interested to see what this poll will show.

  • What is worse?  

    2010-01-31 13:27

    Josh Gelatt

    Last evening I watched CNN video of Scott Roeder's courtroom testimony. The jury, appropriately, convicted this man of murder. Yet as I reflect on this whole situation, I find it hard to determine which of the situations below is the most morally heinous. All are utterly sinful, but any thoughts as to which of the four is worst?

    A. The murder of a single human being.
    B. The murder of over 60,000 babies by a single human being.
    C. A nation's legally protected approval of the murder of babies.
    D. A church body that affirms/accepts into membership one who practices the murder of babies.
    Josh Gelatt (MDiv, MA, LLPC) is the pastor of Indian River Baptist Church in beautiful Northern Michigan. The thoughts and opinions in this article do not necessarily express the views of IRBC. Material may be used without permission, though may not be altered in any way.

  • Toward a More Meaningful Order of Service (Yes, I mean Liturgy!)  

    2010-01-29 16:26

    Reforming Baptist - Fundamentalism Issues

    Last week, I met with some pastors at a fellowship where the subject of liturgy was discussed. What are we doing on Sunday mornings to promote reverence and gladness? I grew up in a revivalist style of church service that valued spontaneity as a more meaningful expression of "letting the Spirit move". Formalism and liturgy were synonymous with liberalism and dead orthodoxy. Although I didn't grow

  • Book Deal & Free Books Alert  

    2010-01-29 17:59

    fundyreformed - Books & Reviews

    Free Books Alert

    Tyndale House Publishers are celebrating the launch of their newly redesigned website by giving away a four books each day for the next 30 days (starting Feb. 1st).  Here is the press release I received via email.

    As a faithful blogger and Tyndale supporter I just wanted to give you some information on the exciting launch of our new Tyndale.com website. On February 1st we will be introducing a newly designed, more user friendly, and information packed site.

    As a blogger and social media user here are some exciting features that can benefit you:

    • Links to all of Tyndale’s social media sites
    • A list of all Tyndale authors and their blogs, Facebook and Twitter accounts, etc.
    • A place where you can share stories about Tyndale products that have had an effect on your life
    • Under product details you can post reviews with a link to your own blog so others can see the exciting other books you’ve been reviewing

    To celebrate the launch of this new site, Tyndale is giving away four books a day in the following categories: Fiction, Non-Fiction, Bibles, and Kids.

    All you have to do is visit the site to sign up. If you don’t win one day, keep coming back to sign up!

    Feel free to pass this information along to your friends, family, blog readers, Facebook friends, or Twitter followers. Don’t feel obligated to pass this information along, but please visit www.tyndale.com starting on February 1st for a chance to win!

    Book Deal

    This weekend only there is a big sale on an important book.  Coming to Grips with Genesis: Biblical Authority & the Age of the Earth edited by Terry Mortenson and Thane Ury (published by New Leaf Group / Master Books) is on sale at Grace Books Intl. for only $6.99 (this weekend only).

    I will be reviewing this book in the coming months, but here are my first impressions of the book.  This is the best Biblical case for young earth creationism that I’ve seen.  I think that those grappling with the question of old earth vs. young earth creationism, should take the time to read this big book and hear the young earth viewpoint out.  I plan on listening and evaluating the arguments at length.  With the book available for $10 off it’s normal price, it’d be a good time to pick up a copy.

  • Bob’s Blog Finds: Magic, Polygamy, Abortion, Politics & More  

    2010-01-29 14:35

    fundyreformed - Bob's Blog Finds

    In my blog finds I highlight some of the best articles I’ve found online recently. You can see all my blog finds in my sidebar, under the Bob’s Blog Finds & Bob’s on Twitter sections.

    Magic

    Barry Wallace of Who Am I? has an interesting post examining the question “Is All Magic Evil?“  It has special reference to reading books about magic such as the Chronicles of Narnia or even Harry Potter.  I left my reasons for reading (and enjoying) the Harry Potter series in the comments there.

    Polygamy in America

    Albert Mohler directed my attention to a fascinating article in National Geographic re: polygamy in America.  The profile of the Mormon Fundamentalist Church of the Latter Day Saints is shocking, interesting and sad at the same time.

    Abortion

    Speaking of Al Mohler, he has a good article on a new trend among abortionists.  They are leaving the profession largely due to their encounters with ultrasound images of babies and abortions.  Read his post entitled, “Mugged by Ultrasound“.

    Politics

    I didn’t listen to the State of the Union address.  And all accounts I’ve seen of it make me glad I didn’t.  I don’t like to get mad over politics and I would have been!  La Shawn Barber pointed out (via her twitter feed), a good review of the speech at Politics Daily.

    Profiles: Tony Dungy & Don Carson

    I also found a fascinating write up of Tony Dungy by ESPN.  It examines his character and his role as one who helps troubled sports starts gain reconciliation.  The article elevated my respect for the man (which was already quite high).  It’s worth the read.

    Sharper Iron also recently posted a tribute to Don Carson.  He truly is the epitome of a Christian Scholar who serves the church.  It is good to see fundamentalists learning from people like Carson, and respecting him while disagreeing with his “non-fundamentalist” actions.  I appreciated the article and you might to.

  • The Central-Faith Merger: Two Thumbs Up, and a Question  

    2010-01-29 09:57

    Ben

    Tuesday's Baptist Bulletin article sheds some real light on the news. It raises some interesting issues that seem worth talking about, and I'm curious to hear what people think.

    First, Bauder thinks fundamentalism has too many seminaries:
    Bauder says the initial conversations were motivated by a “push and a pull."

    "The push comes from a multiplication of institutions in fundamentalism, a shrinking movement that cannot sustain all of its colleges and seminaries. By multiplying institutions, we have diluted our educational excellence,” Bauder says.
    My interpretation (and I speak as a Maranatha alumnus): There is no compelling justification to start another conservative fundamentalist seminary, particularly when the movement is already bleeding out more and more guys to places like Southern.

    By my count, there are at least ten seminaries serving conservative, non-KJVonly fundamentalism. Depending on how strictly you define "seminary" and "conservative fundamentalism," you might get even higher. I can't document their their combined full-time equivalent (FTE) enrollment, but I'd be utterly flabbergasted if it's more than 2,000. I'm guessing closer to 1,000, and that may be high.

    By contrast, the SBC operates six seminaries with a combined FTE enrollment of 7,750. At least two, and perhaps as many as four of them by themselves are larger than all the conservative fundamentalist seminaries combined. That doesn't mean the SBC's getting it right, but it does display a stark contrast. The data reinforces Bauder's arguments that multiplication has unnecessarily diluted resources and faculty. Whether that long-standing trend reflects the Fundamentalist impulse to splinter, or merely the natural outgrowth of a movement that skews more to independence than cooperation, I'll leave to the historians to settle.

    That leads to the second reason this merger looks like a good thing on the surface: It's reversing the Fundamentalist splinter impulse:
    “We come out of slightly different milieus. Faith comes historically from the Regular Baptist movement, and Central comes from the very conservative wing of the Conservative Baptist movement. Over time, these two branches have grown much closer together,” Bauder says. “One of our goals in the merger is to bring closer together two constituencies that never should have been separated in the first place.”

    James Maxwell agrees, saying, “We want to do all we can to preserve the heritage and constituencies of both groups.”
    Other groups and constituencies never should have been separated in the first place either, but this is a start.

    Now the question:
    According to Bauder, “all of the big philosophical questions are out of the way,” but the two boards were continuing to discuss “the thorny questions that are the standard factors in any academic merger.” Bauder lists the matter of combining the two boards, selecting administrators, merging administrative functions, and hiring faculty.
    This makes me wonder what the philosophical issues were. My sense is that Faith has historically held a quite rigid position on dispensationalism. Central has not, at least not to the same degree. Faith specifically affirms (PDF) traditional dispensationalism. At least from time to time, some faculty at Central have advocated some form of, well, non-traditional dispensationalism.

    For all my arguments that churches have no justifiable grounds to exclude members over many millennial or tribulational views, I believe a seminary bears no such obligation to tolerate differences. But that doesn't make rigid unanimity prudent. I have no inside information whatsoever, but I wonder if diversity on dispensational views was one of the philosophical questions. Is it possible that even some variations under the already narrow umbrella of "premill, pretrib" might be excluded? I hope this merger doesn't dilute the educational experience of the students by imposing an artificial, unnecessary unanimity.

    True, institutions must grapple with the parameters of their own identity and their target constituency. But students who don't hear thorough presentations of opposing views aren't equipped to refute them. And frankly, traditional dispensationalists haven't offered convincing explanations for all the biblical data. To be fair, maybe no one has, and that's all the more reason to draw the lines at least as broadly as Central has, historically.

  • Department of Redundancy Department  

    2010-01-28 22:16

    Ben

    From SI today:
    Editor’s note: D. A. Carson is Research Professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School in Deerfield, IL. and author of many articles and books. A few important recent volumes are Christ and Culture Revisited, Evangelicalism: What Is It and Is It Worth Keeping?, and Scandalous: The Cross and Resurrection of Jesus (RE: Lit). He does not claim to be a Fundamentalist.
    ;-)

    For what it's worth, I agree wholeheartedly with said editor's endorsement in the comments of Carson's Exegetical Fallacies. Without question, it's one of the five books that have influenced me more than all others. If you disagreed with Chris Anderson, you probably haven't read it.

  • Church History, with Wit  

    2010-01-28 12:34

    Ben

    Introductions to the Reformation are seldom styled as page-turners. Michael Reeves' The Unquenchable Flame is precisely that. Written with an unambiguous appreciation for Reformation principles and the people who propelled them, Reeves also exposes their flaws alongside explanation, not excuse. But what sets this book apart to me is Reeves' masterful narrative style and a characteristically British dry wit.

    How do you inject wit in Reformation history (apart from telling juicy Luther anecdotes)? A couple examples:
    If ever you should be so unfortunate as to find yourself in a roomful of Reformation historians, the thing to do to generate some excitement is to ask loudly: 'Was Christianity on the eve of the Reformation vigorous or corrupt?' It is the question guaranteed to start a bun-fight.
    And my favorite, concerning King Charles I of England's re-establishment of high churchmanship and his Catholic sympathies:
    [Charles] even managed to appoint his dream Archbishop of Canterbury, the diminutive William Laud [reading this, MLJr?], and Oxford academic who would never be trusted by the Cambridge Puritans. Laud was never a man much able to win people over; he seemed to reserve all displays of warmth for his pet cats and giant tortoise.
    No doubt the most practical portion of the book is its concluding chapter, "Is the Reformation Over?" Here, Reeves defends the centrality of justification to the question, and thoroughly repudiates Mark Noll with a combination of logic and centuries-old parallels. The implication that Noll is a contemporary Erasmus is thinly-veiled.

    Less practical, but more foundational, is Reeves' conclusion: The Reformation was not a negative movement—away from Rome, but a positive one—towards the gospel. May such movements, keep moving.

    Ok, so the bad news . . . the American B&H edition isn't available yet through the above link, but you can obviously pre-order. PLUS, if you can't wait (and I'm glad I didn't) you can buy the original British IVP edition (the one I read) right now, here.

  • Confusion Over Fighting Sin  

    2010-01-26 14:51

    fundyreformed - Devotional

    how high is your fence?Within fundamentalism, as in other areas of Christianity no doubt, there is quite a bit of confusion over fighting sin.  The thinking goes like this: if we erect a big enough fence, or hedge people in with enough rules, we will prevent them from falling into sin.  Sadly, this tactic most often fails, to one degree or another.

    The Former Fundys Blog recently posted some thoughts in this regard.  In a post entitled What’s Wrong with Fundamentalist Pastors?, the problem of pastors running headlong into adultery is brought up.  I thought the main point of the post, however, applied to more than just the fall of big name pastors.  Here is an excerpt from that post that may be a help to some of my readers.

    Fundamentalism has claimed to have the answers to stopping sin, by their superior standards that will keep one from sinning. Don’t go to the theater, and you won’t struggle with impure thoughts or with using foul language. Women have to dress a certain way, in order to protect men from lusting after them. Men and women can’t touch unless they are married(to one another), so they won’t fall into sexual sin. If one is a faithful soulwinner who reads/studies the Bible on a regular basis, they won’t fall into sin. I have heard “remedy” after “remedy” for stopping the presence of sin in one’s life, for keeping one away from sin by placing barriers in place to protect one from sin.

    But these remedies do little to protect the very pastors who put these rules in place from sinning….

    Fundamentalism misses the essence of what the Christian life is about. One is not moral because they follow rules. One is not moral because they go to church every Sunday. One is not a good Christian because they follow those rules. One is not a Christian because they follow those rules. Rule-keeping does not make a good Christian. And it does not make a good person. It is pure moralism, instead of Gospel.

    The answer is in teaching the Gospel, instead of rule-keeping. Too many Fundamentalists fail to teach repentance from sins as part of the salvation process, thus watering down the Gospel to something that is more palatable to sinners. They make their Christianity easy for those who love their sin, but want fire insurance. The answer is also in desiring Christ, and desiring to live for the glory of God. So much of Fundamentalism is about keeping rules, and following a list of do’s and don’ts. But that’s not what the Christian life is about. Sure there are things that a Christian can’t do, like have sex outside the confines of marriage, or get drunk or high, or lie to others. And sure there are things that Christians need to do, like read the Bible, pray, go to church. But that is not the essence of the Christian life. Following Christ is more than not doing or doing those things. I would strongly recommend that Fundamentalists look to books written by non-Fundy authors that deal with things like sin, or living for God, because Fundamentalists don’t have the answer. Books like “Overcoming Sin and Temptation” by John Owen(the Puritan), or “Desiring God” by John Piper.

    In short, such men are able to sin so gravely because they don’t understand the nature of sin, the Gospel, or the essence of the Christian life…

    My response to all of this is first to point out that the post is primarily addressing the IFBx wing of fundamentalism.  Not all fundamentalists that I’ve known are this bad.  However, in seed form, this idea concerning sanctification is prevalent throughout fundamentalism.

    The problem, as I see it, amounts to a widespread confusion over the nature of sin.  It doesn’t attract us externally, the desire for sin comes from within us.  We need the internal change of the Holy Spirit in our lives.  Too often, Christians fail to remember that the Gospel is for them — for believers.  And sadly, preaching is too often about moralism rather than the gospel.

    A few of my previous posts may be of interest to those looking to dig more deeply into this topic:

  • How to make sure you never learn, grow, or keep strong friendships  

    2010-01-25 13:00

    Scott W. Kay - Uncategorized


    I’ll give you the 4 ingredients:

    Be unteachable. But convince yourself that you really are teachable and that you just don’t know very many people that know as much as you do about the matter – especially since they don’t happen to be on your preferred list of authors, speakers, teachers, mentors, etc., that you learned most of what you know from. So, listen to others with a critical ear, not a hungry mind. Because a hungry mind would mean that you still want to learn and grow, and it would also imply that you could learn something from anyone or anything no matter how far beneath you, which, of course, are impossibilities for those who have already arrived.

    Be above correction. Rarely be open to the honest concern of others that you might be wrong, because, if you were wrong, you’d already know it, wouldn’t you? Dig in your heels and say (or at least think), “No, you’re wrong.” Besides, why should you listen to their concerns, when if they were teachable they’d be listening to you? How could you possibly be wrong? You’ve already considered every perspective, every fact, every possibility and come to the indisputably correct and wisest conclusion.

    C.H. Spurgeon described the person characterized by these first 2 like this:

    “None is so wise as the man who knows nothing. His ignorance is the mother of his impudence and the nurse of his obstinacy; and as if all wisdom were at his fingers’ ends – the Pope himself is not more infallible.”

    Never say your sorry. At least not quickly. And even then only when it’s an absolute necessity (like if they demand it). Saying your sorry implies that you think you were wrong, which, of course, you rarely are. Besides, they know you really love/like them, so there’s no need to act all humble about it. They just need to get over it and not let it affect the relationship. Saying you’re sorry is for doormats who let others make them feel bad. So, put away all self-doubt and redouble your self-confidence.

    Be easily offended. Keep your pride and personal insecurities so close to the surface that you are able to quickly react to others with the assumption that they meant to do you wrong. And never question whether you’re right to make this assumption. Use words, actions, or body language that make it clear that you feel annoyed, insulted, or wounded, and that you expect them to apologize. Never consider exercising the option to not be offended, or to show love by overlooking the matter. You’re an important person, with legitimate rights and expectations, and they’d better treat you with respect!

    Protecting these four traits in your life, and not allowing anyone or anything to make you more teachable, correctable, quick to apologize, or slow to be offended, is a good recipe for poisoning humility and love at the roots, and killing the vine of fulfilling, lasting relationships with the excuse that it’s always their fault, rarely yours.

    Of course if you want to grow, learn, love, and flourish in your marriage and friendships, then begin with some self-examination, some confession of your own sins and tendencies to act in the ways listed above, and then with the strength-giving grace of Christ, repent.

  • Trusting God: Even When Life Hurts by Jerry Bridges — A Review  

    2010-01-23 17:58

    fundyreformed - Books & Reviews

    Author: Jerry Bridges
    Publisher: NavPress
    Format: softcover
    Publication Date: revised edition, 2008
    Pages: 240
    ISBN: 9781600063053
    Stars: 4 of 5

    In Trusting God, Jerry Bridges tackles some big and important questions. How are we to approach the hurdles life throws our way? How can we trust God in spite of difficult circumstances? How are we to trust him even when life hurts?

    These questions all give us pause to think at some point in our Christian life. And there are many books which aim to help us deal with these issues. This book stands apart. Bridges points in an uncommon direction for finding help: the sovereignty of God. Most don’t like to think of God’s being behind the very difficulties that make life so painful.

    Bridges is under no illusions as to his ability to provide all possible answers to this age old dilemma. He offers hope but the answers aren’t easy or glib. He doesn’t reveal how he has personally conquered all such doubts and how his life story provides the answers to ours. Instead I picture him sitting down, opening his big black Bible and applying Scripture with care. This book is a Bible study, that will pay great dividends to those who dig in and hear what the Bible has to say about trusting God.

    Three themes are explored in depth, in Trusting God. The author explains:

    In the arena of adversity, the Scriptures teach us three essential truths about God — truths we must believe if we are to trust Him in adversity. They are: God is completely sovereign. God is infinite in wisdom. God is perfect in love. (pg. 16-17)

    Most of the book explores God’s sovereignty since so many Christians today are unfamiliar with the term and the concept. Bridges carefully shows the extent of God’s control over this planet and each of our lives. If you are unfamiliar with the Bible’s witness to God’s sovereignty you will be amazed at the number of Bible verses and passages that are examined.

    God’s rule over all things gives His children hope. God knows what He is doing, and this circumstance is not out of His control. Jerry Bridges explains, “There is no agonizing by God, no hoping He has made the right decision, no wondering what is really best for us. God makes no mistakes.” (pg. 126)

    After exploring the three themes of God’s sovereignty, wisdom and love, Bridges deals with how we can apply these Bible truths to our lives. The author’s great confidence in God, by the end of the book, becomes infectious. I particularly appreciated his insight into Christian’s common obsessing over knowing God’s will for us when it comes to a decision. I think his advice on this point is worth repeating at some length:

    Consider the book of Acts. The only reference to the disciples seeking to determine the will of God occurs in the choosing of Matthias to succeed Judas. From that point onward, it is a record of God’s guiding His people…. God does have a plan for each of us. He has given each of us different gifts, abilities, and temperaments and has placed each of us in the body of Christ according to His will…. We do have a responsibility to make wise decisions or to discover the will of God, whichever term we may prefer to use. But God’s plan for us is not contingent upon our decisions. God’s plan is not contingent at all. God’s plan is sovereign. It includes our foolish decisions as well as our wise ones. (pg. 181-182)

    Isn’t that perspective refreshing? Bridges shares his heart in this book. It doesn’t appear to have been an easy one for him to write. You can tell he’s been through a lot personally and has shared the grief of many who have suffered even more. His personal accounts and illustrations add life to the book. His openness about his sin and failures to trust God is inspiring. He writes with an earnestness and confidence that can only be accompanied by prayers for those of us who would read this important book.

    This book will be challenging at times, but the effort is rewarding. I encourage you to pick up a copy of this book and spend some time learning from Jerry Bridges as he takes you through the Bible. You will be better equipped to face the suffering that is in store for all of us. And you will find yourself trusting God, even when life hurts.

    JERRY BRIDGES is an author and conference speaker. His most popular book, The Pursuit of Holiness, has sold over one million copies. Jerry has been on the staff of The Navigators for over fifty years, and currently serves in the Collegiate Mission where he is involved primarily in staff development, but also serves as a speaker resource to the campus ministries.

    My thanks go out to NavPress for supplying me with a review copy of this book.

    Pick up a copy of this book direct from NavPress,or from Amazon.com or support a Christian ministry with your purchase at Westminster Bookstore or Monergism Books ~ Download a PDF copy of this review: pdf ~ Peruse my other reviews: on my blog, at Amazon.com, or at Goodreads.com.

  • A Pro-Life Case for Prudence  

    2010-01-22 14:21

    fundyreformed - Abortion

    Today marks 37 years since Roe v. Wade.  Justin Taylor posted a fascinating interview with Clarke Forsythe, a leading policy strategist in bioethical issues and senior counsel for Americans United for Life, a national pro-life public policy organization.  The interview will be worth your time, today.  I’ll post an excerpt and encourage you to go read the whole thing.

    Zeal is important but never sufficient to make a difference in politics. Prudence is absolutely essential because it makes zeal effective in making progress and making a difference. One common reason for imprudence is ignoring or overlooking obstacles to our goals and aspirations; and zeal is often the reason why we ignore or overlook obstacles.

    Let’s not put the cart before the horse. When it comes to politics, prudence judges in any particular circumstance whether an incremental strategy is the right one. Roughly speaking, I think of prudence as “strategic,” and incrementalism as “tactical.” Incremental means simply step-by-step, or, for example, limiting a social evil when complete prohibition is beyond our control. (The term is pervasive throughout politics, finance, sports, and the military.)

    When it is not possible to completely prohibit a social evil, it is both moral and effective to limit it as much as possible. When the ideal is beyond our power, it is moral and effective to seek the greatest good possible. Prudence instructs us that an “all-or-something” approach is better than an “all-or-nothing” approach in politics. One of the reasons is that progress is almost always a result of momentum, and momentum—in the face of countervailing obstacles—is often produced by small victories….

    An all-or-nothing approach, by contrast, is rarely prudent (I can’t think of an example) and rarely produces change, and when nothing is the result, it doesn’t create the needed momentum to produce change. This reality is reflected in the simple truth that it’s always good (a good goal) to limit an evil.

  • Dug Down Deep by Joshua Harris — A Review  

    2010-01-20 15:21

    fundyreformed - Books & Reviews

    Author: Joshua Harris
    Publisher: Waterbrook Multnomah
    Format: hardcover
    Publication Date: 2010
    Pages: 241
    ISBN: 9781601421517
    Stars: 5 of 5

    In today’s world, doctrine and orthodoxy get a bad rap. Many sincere Christians assume studying doctrine is primarily a waste of time. Doctrine usually leads to cold and dead religion, or else it promotes a divisive and bitter spirit that splits churches and wounds people. What really matters is one’s personal relationship with God, and his love for fellow believers.

    Joshua Harris would have agreed with this basic sentiment at one time. Dug Down Deep is the story of how he came to realize how important and even life-changing the study of the Bible’s doctrine really can be. Harris invites the reader along as he explains what the basic doctrines (or teachings) of the Bible are and illustrates the impact they have had in his own spiritual walk.

    Harris writes in a refreshing, open manner. He lets you into his life even sharing some of the dark secrets of his past. He shares the story of his father Gregg’s conversion to Christ, as well as his own journey from a seeker-sensitive church youth group to being pastoral intern to C.J. Mahaney.

    The book’s readability helps it to communicate so effectively when Harris explains such doctrines as the sovereignty of God, sinfulness of man, substitutionary atonement, and the gospel of God’s grace. It is the books focus on grace which most dramatically stands out. This is what drew Harris to the joy of knowing Bible doctrine, and it is worth quoting him at some length on this point.

    …it was this message of the gospel of grace for which C.J. Reserved his greatest passion. Most preachers and zealous Christians I knew got fired up over what we needed to do for God. But C.J.’s greatest passion was reserved for exulting in what God had done for us. He loved to preach about the Cross and how Christ died in our place, as our substitute.

    For someone who had practically been born into church, I found this surprisingly new. The deeper I delved into Christian doctrine, the more I saw that the good news of salvation by grace alone in Jesus, who died for sin—the gospel—was the main message of the whole Bible.

    I suppose it might seem completely obvious that this is the center of the Christian faith, and yet it felt new to me. I began to see orthodoxy as the treasuring of the truths that point to Jesus and his saving work. Doctrine was the living story of what Jesus did for us and what it means…. (pg. 27)

    As you can see, Harris’ own story provides the perfect backdrop for illustrating how important it is to learn Bible doctrine. Harris argues that we need to dig down deep in order to build our lives on the rock of the solid Biblical teaching of Christ.

    This book will introduce the young Christian to the glory of orthodox Christian doctrine. It will also encourage those who do know doctrine, to aim for a humble orthodoxy and see how such knowledge should fuel love and service for others. Dug Down Deep will be an easy read for anyone, but it packs a punch. It will challenge you to make sure you are building on a sure foundation. I recommend this book highly.

    Joshua Harris is senior pastor of Covenant Life in Gaithersburg, Maryland, which belongs to the Sovereign Grace network of churches. A gifted speaker with a passion for making theological truth easy to understand, Joshua is perhaps best known for his runaway bestseller, I Kissed Dating Goodbye, which he wrote at the age of twenty-one. His later books include Boy Meets Girl, Sex Is Not the Problem (Lust Is), and Stop Dating the Chruch. The founder of the NEXT conferences for young adults, Joshua is committed to seeing the gospel transferred to a new generation of Christians. He and his wife, Shannon, have three children.

    My thanks go out to WaterBrook Multnomah publishers for providing me a review copy of this book.

    Pick up a copy of this book direct from Waterbrook Multnomah,or from Amazon.com or support a Christian ministry with your purchase at Westminster Bookstore ~ Download a PDF copy of this review: pdf ~ Peruse my other reviews: on my blog, at Amazon.com, or at Goodreads.com.

  • The Last Days According to Jesus (Pt. 3)  

    2010-01-19 08:29

    Reforming Baptist - End Times

    The Beginning of Sorrows Matthew 24:4-14Introduction: In the last post, we established that the answer to the questions of the disciples about “when shall these things be?” has to be future to all of us and very shortly before the second coming. By Jesus pointing to Daniel 9, we can rightly interpret this to be the 70th week of Daniel which is a period of time determined upon Daniel’s people

  • Piper on The Meaning of the Pentateuch  

    2010-01-18 19:45

    Ben

    Should've linked this in the last post. Piper:
    It will rock your world.
    and
    I feel like a greedy miser over a chest of gold.

  • The Meaning of the Pentateuch Is Christ. Period.  

    2010-01-17 22:43

    Ben

    That's the theme of John Sailhamer's new book, The Meaning of the Pentateuch. It's a theme that, in my view, many Covenant Theologians need to grapple with more responsibly, and many Dispensationalists need to, well, grapple with.

    Here's a bit more of his argument in a recent Christianity Today interview:
    The old theologians used to speak of "the love for Scripture" as a sign of true faith in Christ. They would say, "We should read the Old Testament as if it were written with the blood of Christ." For them, the Old Testament and the Pentateuch in particular was a Christian book, a book about Christ. For most evangelical Christians today it is a book about archaeology and ancient history.

    Here we have to be careful because, to be sure, the Old Testament is about ancient history. But that is not its meaning. Its meaning is Christ. Saying that also calls for a great deal of caution. In my book, I take the view that the whole of the Pentateuch is about Christ, but that doesn't mean that Christ is in the whole Pentateuch. Finding Christ in the Pentateuch means learning to see him when he is there rather than trying to see when he is not there. I like to tell my students that we don't need to spiritualize the Old Testament to find Christ, but we do need to read it with spiritual eyes.
    What all this means is that the Pentateuch isn't primarily a record of Israel's religion. It's not primarily about how we should live. It's not a history of important things that happened before Jesus (though the things it says happened, did). It's about Jesus. And I especially appreciate his caution against finding Jesus in every nook and cranny of the OT. Just as George Washington won't appear as a character on every page of a book about him, so Christ doesn't appear on every page, even though every page contributes in some way to the message about Christ that the whole book communicates.

    Now having said all that, I'm not recommending that you go out and buy Sailhamer's new book unless you're pretty serious about digging into the issues. It's really long and fairly technical, though quite readable in the early-going. Instead, I'd encourage you to start with his NIV Compact Bible Commentary. It's an excellent, efficient tool to help you pick up on the major themes of Scripture, particularly the narrative passages and the prophets. And the "NIV" in the title is simply a publisher's marketing strategy; it's irrelevant to the content.

  • Newton's Confession of Faith  

    2010-01-16 20:52

    Josh Gelatt

    I just began re-reading Letters of John Newton, and came across a brief confession of faith he drafted in a letter to Rev. Francis Okeley. In this confession Newton was attempting a hasty draft of those things "necessary to believe" (e.g. those doctrinal truths essential to Christian faith).
    ---------------------

    I believe that sin is the most hateful thing in the world; that I and all men are by nature in a state of wrath and depravity, utterly unable to sustain the penalty, or to fulfill the commands of God's holy law; and that we have no sufficiency of ourselves to think a good thought.

    I believe that Jesus Christ is the chief among ten thousands; that he came into the world to save the chief of sinners, by making propitiation for sin by his death, by paying a perfect obedience to the law, in our behalf; and that he is now exalted on high, to give repentance and remission of sins to all that believe, and that he ever liveth to make intercession for us.

    I believe the Holy Spirit (the gift of God, through Jesus Christ) is the sure and only guid into all truth, and the common priviledge of all believers; and under his influence, I believe the Holy Scriptures are able to make us wise unto salvation, and to furnish us thoroughly for every good work.

    I believe that love to God, and to man for God's sake, is the essence of religion[1], and the fulfilling of the law; that without holiness no man shall see the Lord; that those who, by a patient course in well doing, seek glory, honour, and immortality, shall see eternal life; and I believe this reward is not of debt but of grace, even to the praise and glory of that grace, whereby he has made us accepted in the Beloved. Amen[2].

    [1] Per custom of the time period, in this context Newton used the word 'religion' to mean 'Christianity'.

    [2] Newton understood his language and formulation was probably lacking in accuracy. Just after writing the above, he noted to Okeley: "I pretend not accuracy in this hasty draught; they are only outlines, which if you please retouch and fill up at your leisure, I hope you will favour me with sight of it."
    Josh Gelatt (MDiv, MA, LLPC) is the pastor of Indian River Baptist Church in beautiful Northern Michigan. The thoughts and opinions in this article do not necessarily express the views of IRBC. Material may be used without permission, though may not be altered in any way.

  • Hear Horton on Harried Haiti  

    2010-01-16 18:52

    John D. Chitty - Evangelicalism

    In times like these, Biblical Christianity doesn’t only have to answer the biblical inquiry, “Why do bad things happen to good (bad or indifferent) people?” but also have to be able to explain why American Evangelicals with TV cameras persist in adding insult to injury to the suffering as they explain why God is judging [...]

  • "Precious Little Evangel": The Real Scandal of the Evangelical Mind  

    2010-01-14 15:53

    Ben

    Carl Trueman has a way of skewering the self-important in a way that magnifies their asininity. Perhaps it's that British thing.

    In any case, his article on the idolatry of man-fearing in the latest 9Marks E-journal is worth a read, not only for its characteristic Trueman wit, but also for the force of its arguments. I like where he's going when he writes:
    [I]f a movement does not understand what it is, then it cannot make any really satisfactory determination on who belongs and who does not. The boundaries of a movement are ultimately revealed by the person who comes closest to belonging but who nonetheless does not. Arius is a good early church example. As high and exalted as was his view of Christ, he could still only regard Christ as a creature and not fully God. The boundary was drawn and he was outside of it. Combine the problems of defining evangelical identity with the current cultural penchant for not excluding anybody and you have a heady recipe for total disaster.

  • Apologizing for Hell  

    2010-01-13 17:36

    Josh Gelatt

    Below is a lengthy excerpt from an article Al Molher wrote for 9Mark ejournal (bold/italics mine).

    APOLOGIZING FOR HELL: THE NEW EVANGELICAL EVASION

    In recent years, a new pattern of evangelical evasion has surfaced. The Protestant liberals and modernists of the twentieth century simply dismissed the doctrine of hell, having already rejected the truthfulness of Scripture. Thus, they did not enter into elaborate attempts to argue that the Bible did not teach the doctrine—they simply dismissed it.

    Though this pattern is found among some who would claim to be evangelicals, this is not the most common evangelical pattern of compromise. A new apologetic move is now evident among some theologians and preachers who do affirm the inerrancy of the Bible and the essential truthfulness of the New Testament doctrine of hell. This new move is more subtle, to be sure. In this move the preacher simply says something like this:

    "I regret to tell you that the doctrine of hell is taught in the Bible. I believe it. I believe it because it is revealed in the Bible. It is not up for renegotiation. We just have to receive it and believe it. I do believe it. I wish it could be otherwise but it is not."

    Statements like this reveal a very great deal. The authority of the Bible is clearly affirmed. The speaker affirms what the Bible reveals and rejects accommodation. So far, so good. The problem is in how the affirmation is introduced and explained. In an apologetic gesture, the doctrine is essentially lamented.

    What does this say about God? What does this imply about God's truth? Can a truth clearly revealed in the Bible be anything less than good for us? The Bible presents the knowledge of hell just as it presents the knowledge of sin and judgment: these are things we had better know. God reveals these things to us for our good and for our redemption. In this light, the knowledge of these things is grace to us. Apologizing for a doctrine is tantamount to impugning the character of God.

    Do we believe that hell is a part of the perfection of God's justice? If not, we have far greater theological problems than those localized to hell.

    Several years ago, someone wisely suggested that a good many modern Christians wanted to "air condition hell."[11] The effort continues. Remember that the liberals and the modernists operated out of an apologetic motivation. They wanted to save Christianity as a relevant message in the modern world and to remove the odious obstacle of what were seen as repugnant and unnecessary doctrines. They wanted to save Christianity from itself.

    Today, some in movements such as the emerging church commend the same agenda, and for the same reason. Are we embarrassed by the biblical doctrine of hell?

    If so, this generation of evangelicals will face no shortage of embarrassments. The current intellectual context allows virtually no respect for Christian affirmations of the exclusivity of the gospel, the true nature of human sin, the Bible's teachings regarding human sexuality, and any number of other doctrines revealed in the Bible. The lesson of theological liberalism is clear—embarrassment is the gateway drug for theological accommodation and denial.
    Josh Gelatt (MDiv, MA, LLPC) is the pastor of Indian River Baptist Church in beautiful Northern Michigan. The thoughts and opinions in this article do not necessarily express the views of IRBC. Material may be used without permission, though may not be altered in any way.

  • On Cessationists and Their Ironic Mysticism (Bonus #2)  

    2010-01-11 16:36

    Ben

    Several months ago I posted a brief series on ways many professing cessationists frequently speak and act in ways that contradict their convictions . I also tried to argue that these ways of speaking and acting can be quite destructive. Here are the links: part 1, part 2, part 3, bonus 1 (posted before the whole Carrie Prejean thing really blew up).

    This morning while reading in Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology, a passage in a footnote in his chapter on "The Sufficiency of Scripture" caught my eye.
    Because people from all kinds of Christian traditions have made serious mistakes when they felt confident that God was 'leading them' to make a particular decision, it is important to remember that, except where an explicit text of Scripture applies directly to a situation, we can never have 100 percent certainty in this life that we know what God's will is in a situation. (footnote 1, p. 128)
    Grudem actually articulates precisely what I hoped to argue. And, of course, the irony here is that Grudem is one of the leading defenders of continuationism, a decidedly non-cessationist position.

  • How the news coverage of Tiger Wood’s adultery illustrates some...  

    2010-01-11 13:00

    Scott W. Kay - Uncategorized


    I know that this has become “old news” already, but I’ve been trying not to waste the lessons of the scandal from a few weeks ago. I have prayed for the Lord to soften my own heart and be sanctified by the news of the sin of another. I have no stones to throw, except at myself. In all honesty I can say that I am the most sinful man I know.

    That humbles me, and the way that Tiger Wood’s sins have been put so publicly on display has put the fear of the Lord in me even more deeply. Who would want any of his own sins exposed the way Tiger’s have been? That’s humbling and frightening and sanctifying.

    There are some things illustrated in this scandal that have been on my mind and in my prayers:

    1. Americans still view adultery as wrong. I am glad to see this reaction by the public. Frankly, I was surprised that the world still cared about the commitments involved in the marriage covenant.

    2. A beautiful wife does not equal a happy life. Other ways of expressing this principle: Wealth does not equal having-it-all-together (too often it undermines it!). Outward luxuries do not carry the power to produce inner fulfillment – only the love of Christ toward us carries that power for us.

    3. Self-discipline in one area does not guarantee it in all areas. There are too many professional athletes to mention that illustrate this truth all too well (Michael Phelps, Magic Johnson, Wilt Chamberlain, etc.). If you give all your effort to being good at some particular outward skill, chances are you may be neglecting other important areas of your inner life and character.

    4. Be sure your sin will find you out. Be afraid – enough to not sin. A carefully crafted and controlled public image of yourself cannot conceal the truth about you indefinitely, no matter how good at it you are. What you are before God is what you really are.

    5. We are all too voyeuristic about celebrity scandals – grocery store magazines, news sites, news shows – it’s been everywhere all the time. It’s too much. But it’s there because the public loves to know. May this scandal make us wiser than before about our own lives, and find our cravings for celebrity gossip lessening.

    6. We should pray that God would humble him and bring him to genuine repentance and faith in Jesus Christ the Savior. I’ve been praying this for Tiger Woods. And it looks like I’m not the only one.

  • What's the Point of churching the unchurched?  

    2010-01-09 23:21

    Reforming Baptist - Local Church Issues

    I got another piece of junkmail about a conference in the Bay Area on how to re-think church so we can reach the unchurched. My first thought was: "What does it mean to 'church' the 'unchurched'?" When has a person become 'churched' anyway? After the first visit, the second visit, after a year of attendance? And what's the point of making a bunch of pagans into 'churched' pagans? Then what you'll

  • Do I think that movies like Avatar are too pagan for Christians to...  

    2010-01-08 00:05

    Scott W. Kay - Uncategorized


    Someone emailed me with that question this week. I’m posting our exchange here in the hope that you’ll find my answer helpful.

    Pastor Scott,

    I, too, am a recovering fundamentalist. So I really have enjoyed your web sites and the focus of your church. I would like your take on a topic that has me in some hot water with some friends…. The movie Avatar.

    How do you address blatantly pagan entertainment such as “Avatar” which, apart from its pantheistic theme, is a fun, exciting, interesting movie? Why should a believer waste his/her time with this? How, in light of Phil 4:8 and Romans 14:23 can a believer ingest a movie like this “in faith”? I do believe some things might be fine for one person and not fine for another (Rom 14). But with movies like this – which I place in the same category as pornography – I find it hard to see how it’s a good thing for anyone to partake of.

    What do you think? How do you counsel your people, if asked, about such a film that finds itself in the cross hairs of not just fundies, but also folks like Mark Driscoll.

    Resting in peace because of what He has done, (name withheld)

    My answer:

    Thanks for your email. I’ll try to answer you helpfully.

    I’ve been pondering your question, as well as the appropriateness of entertainment such as Avatar for Christians, since it presents a portrayal of openly pagan elements. This really is an oft-raised question about the point at which it is appropriate to deem something “too pagan” for Christian consumption.

    It seems to me that the question is one of degrees. Paganism has infected a great deal of today’s entertainment, so much so, that it is difficult to even notice it anymore, because it has become so common, and we’ve become so used to it, that we’ve become immune to it (which is a good thing).

    For example, you could conceivably create a scale with TV programs and movies that use magic such as Bewitched or I Dream of Genie or Mary Poppins on one end of the scale, then you could move further up the scale from those lighter-fare shows (to which most people are immune to the paganism, and are thankfully able to be uninfluenced by the superstitions in them), to those programs containing a bit darker magic such as Star Wars or Harry Potter or even movies such as Avatar, which contains open praying to a goddess.

    Honestly, different people would place these shows/movies on different points on the scale, depending on their sensitivity to such things, and the perceived blatancy of the movie’s attempt to influence the viewer to embrace ideas or practices clearly contrary to Scriptural teaching.

    I know some people that condemn Bewitched and Genie, and even Disney’s Snow White and Aladdin, as being “too pagan” and therefore unfit for Christian viewing, whereas others I know actually came out of the theater after watching Avatar with a list of things in the movie that caused them to have moments of worship to Christ. They said things like:

    “If the imagined world of Avatar is that astounding and beautiful and awe-inspiring, then what must the new heavens and new earth be like?”

    “If a mere man can imagine that kind of beautiful world, then surely God has put eternity in our hearts, and what God has imagined, and will one day create, will be even more spectacular than anything man can imagine! God is beyond comprehension and full of glory!”

    Also, Avatar was really nothing more than a future-looking take on the very well-known religion of the American Indian that most American school children are aware of (or used to be): a people primitive in weaponry, but skilled hunters with a sense of brotherhood with the animals, and communal worship of the “Great Spirit”, in Avatar’s case this was the goddess Eywa – who was strikingly similar to the American Indian concept of an all-emcompassing deity that is one with nature. It was all somewhat panentheistic. Pagan? Yes. More so than something we’d see in a cowboy and Indian movie? Not any more than ones I’ve seen in my day. Do the prayers to Eywa in the movie bother me? Yes, just like Luke using the force or Indians chanting and dancing for rain around a fire. But, I do not feel that my allegiance to Christ is threatened by those things, and can appreciate the imaginative value of the movie as an enriching experience, much like I can with Narnia and Lord of the Rings.

    So, in my view, it is a question of degrees: where does it go on the scale of an acceptable vs. unacceptable portrayal of paganism? To what degree is it harmful to the souls of the viewers, or to the consciences of the Christians? (the latter is a question which falls within the scope of Romans 14). For this reason, I am unpersuaded by the comparison of this kind of exposure to pagan religious practices with exposure to pornography.

    Being exposed to greater or lesser degrees of pagan religious practices can be withstood by possessing greater faith in the truth of Christ. But there are no degrees of exposure to pornography for which there is no defilement. Pornography does not call for an embrace of faith like false religion does, it lures one to indulgence of man’s carnal nature through lust. This is why a Christian can travel to an Islamic or Buddhist or Hindu nation and observe their worship in the streets and be unmoved by it, but cannot enter a strip club and be unaffected. There is a difference.

    I know that that’s not a simplistic answer, but I hope that it gives you at least some helpful insight. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to think out loud with you. These are good questions to wrestle with. Keep thinking through how to practice your faith in Christ. May God be glorified in us!

    Blessings,

    Scott Kay

  • The Last Days According to Jesus (Pt. 2)  

    2010-01-07 19:52

    Reforming Baptist - End Times

    When Shall These Things Be?Matthew 24:1-3Introduction: As we begin the Olivet Discourse, we need to be aware of the fact that there are many different ways of looking at Jesus’ Words which will color the entire passage. There are those who say that the vast majority of what Jesus will teach here is already fulfilled; there are others that would say that it is currently being fulfilled, others say

  • Will “Something Good Happen To” the Word of Faith Movement?  

    2009-12-17 21:22

    John D. Chitty - Captain Headknowledge: The Early Years

    So, the news announces that yesterday the pioneering faith-healer and televangelist and prosperity-gospel preacher, Oral Roberts, dies at the age of 91. I’m still kicking myself that as soon as I read Al Mohler’s interesting blogpost on Roberts yesterday, I should have set my DVR to record TBN’s Praise the Lord program, to catch whatever [...]

  • For Email Subscribers And A Reminder About One Earthly Enemy  

    2009-11-30 23:34

    John D. Chitty - Blog Features

    Here’s an idea. Since I’m no longer linking to my feedburner email subscription service and whenever I get my Google account mess straightened out, I’m going to be closing that account, which will affect those of you who have been receiving email notifications of my posts for the past couple of years. It might be [...]

  • Subscribe To My Misadventures By Email  

    2009-11-29 11:48

    John D. Chitty - Blog Features

    I used to use Feedburner as my email subscription service, but now that WordPress has set up their own service, I’ve switched over. If you used to receive email notifications through Feedburner, you probably still will. Somehow, I’ve gotten my wires crossed and can’t access Feedburner anymore, so I can’t yet figure out how to [...]

  • Better Than Thanksgiving Day Football (If You’re Me, That Is…)!  

    2009-11-27 19:34

    John D. Chitty - Baptism

    As many of you know, and a few others may be disappointed to learn, I’m a life-long Independent Baptist (though currently a member of a Southern Baptist church, by God’s wise and inscrutable providence) who has adopted Presbyterian views. That includes the Presbyterian view of infant baptism. Ever since having adopted this view, in the interests of “givning [...]

  • When “Whosoever” Misseth the Point  

    2009-11-18 16:32

    John D. Chitty - Biblical Commentary


    14.1 Mo
    For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him, should not perish, but have everlasting life. (John 3:16 KJV) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life (ESV)  For God loved the [...]

  • Reformation Day is Coming  

    2009-10-29 23:00

    John D. Chitty - Church History

    A few years ago, I was invited to speak on Martin Luther at church. The following link is a Power Point presentation I made for the event. In the sidebar you can find the audio if you’d like to listen and follow along. Just right click on the slideshow link to open it in another [...]

  • “Prescriptive Retrospective”: Finding Your Way Forward By Looking...  

    2009-10-21 05:06

    John D. Chitty - Church History

    “And what you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.” 2 Timothy 2:2. History lovers have to appreciate a book that charts the evangelical future by looking back on the life and legacy of a great theologian. Of course, such a [...]

  • Thinking Critically About Conspiracy Theories  

    2009-10-20 14:36

    John D. Chitty - Evangelicalism


    10.9 Mo
    Conspiracy theories abound. The New World Order; the JFK assasination; Government cover-up of UFO’s; Government involvement in the 9/11 attacks; faking the moon landing; you name it. Saint and sinner alike is distracted by claims of nefarious activities going on behind the scenes of many important events and incidents in our country and around the [...]

  • I said, “America is not a Christian nation”, but here’s a...  

    2009-09-01 02:42

    Scott W. Kay - Uncategorized


    16.0 Mo

    In my sermon this past Sunday, I said this:

    America is not a Christian nation. In fact, there’s never been any such thing as a Christian nation. There has been a Jewish nation, which was a theocracy. But never has there ever been anything like that since then. America has never been in a covenant with God like Israel was. We’re not a theocracy. In that regard, we are more akin to Babylon as a nation than to Israel.

    But I could have said more. I didn’t due to time constraints, and because I plan to say more about it as I preach through Daniel.

    Here’s what I was driving at with that comment.

    I know that, unlike Babylon, America is unique in that it was founded on many principles that derive directly from Scripture. Biblical principles and concepts abound in the founding documents, which have been woven into the fabric of our American government and culture. Yet, it is without question that those principles that have influenced American life and though for so long have been eroding at alarming rates in the past number of decades. The trajectory toward increased secularism is just that: a movement away from the Christian concepts, practices, and principles that have undergirded and permeated our American society.

    And yes, this concerns me greatly. Yes, there is much more that Christian individuals should be doing to influence government, society, and our culture to retard this trajectory. The operative word here is Christian individuals, not Christian churches.

    Christians are citizens of two kingdoms simultaneously, and so should participate in both for the sake of the good of others and the glory of God. But the responsibility of the church is to minister the Gospel, not seek to run a government. That is the realm of individuals. And I believe that it would be a good, God-glorifying thing if more Christian individuals were involved in these matters than there are at present.

    On the other hand, the church is to serve a prophetic function in the world, not a civil one. The church proclaims the good news of the Kingdom of God, but individual Christian citizens of the kingdom of man are free to influence government, culture, and society for the sake of maximizing the effectiveness of the preaching of the Gospel of the kingdom of God by the church. The church’s task is simple and clear: to minister the Word and the ordinances – to preach the Gospel, not to promote political agendas, politicians, or parties. The church’s function is prophetic, not political.

    This would mean that while the church does have a responsibility to preach on abortion, homosexuality, marriage, murder, theft, stealing, etc. (because the Scriptures directly address each one of those issues), the Scriptures do not promote any one political agenda, and therefore the church shouldn’t either.

    Furthermore, pastors need to be careful not to blur the lines between what Scripture says, and what even the pastor thinks is the best political agenda. As a pastor, when I speak behind the pulpit (that is, in a prophetic role) I am to speak where the Bible speaks, and be silent where it is silent. The pulpit is not the place for expressing my personal opinions or political persuasions.

    Now, to be honest, I am a political junkie, and love to talk politics in private. But I do not have the freedom to impose my political persuasions on those whom I pastor, when I stand to preach or when I counsel those who come to me for Biblical guidance. I must keep my heavenly charge in clear view: preach the Word. And Christian individuals must recognize that the function of the church is not to play politics or try to create a “Christian nation,” it is to preach the Gospel.

    If Christian individuals want to be more involved in politics, then there is great freedom from Scripture to do so, and there is a great motivation from the second greatest commandment to do so, because serving your neighbors in positions of authority can be a good way to “love your neighbor as yourself.” And if anyone should be loving their neighbors, it’s Christians! But Christians shouldn’t confuse their function as an individual seeking to serve and influence government and the culture through political involvement, with the function of the church to proclaim the good news to all men. Politics isn’t for that, pulpits are. Ultimately, the goal is not a “Christian nation,” but a nation filled with Christians.

  • Things that annoy me.  

    2009-08-27 17:00

    Ellis Murphree

    Just a random list here of a few things that tend to irk me...(actually, some of these things are more than annoying.....they tick me off!!!!) I'll have something more substantive coming soon......


    • People who drive too fast.
    • People who drive too slow.
    • “To” being used where “too” ought to be.
    • Red lights….especially when there are no other vehicles on the road.
    • The word “ideal” being used in place of the word “idea”.
    • The first syllable of “water” being pronounced “what”.
    • People who attempt to claim they aren’t racist by citing the fact that they used to have a really close friend who was black.
    • When I’ve got an itch on my back that I can’t quite reach.
    • People who refuse to admit that they are wrong…particularly when they are disagreeing with me!
    • Parents at sporting events who act like complete idiots when a call doesn’t go a direction that favors the team that their kid is on.
    • People smoking in a vehicle that has kids in it.
    • The sight of Brett Favre wearing that hideous purple uniform.
    • People texting while driving.
    • Texting.
    • Twitter.
    • 99% of all status updates I’ve ever read on Facebook.
    • The parent of one of the kids on my sons’ 6th grade football team who thinks it’s completely appropriate to yell out any profanity that happens to come to his mind.
    • The constant elevation of athletes as role models.
    • Road construction.
    • The unhealthy focus on entertainment in our society.
    • Sexually suggestive commercials.
    • People who think that a four-wheel drive vehicle somehow makes them invincible on the road no matter how hard it’s raining, how deep the snow is, or how thick the ice is.
    • The fact that there is a television network called “Cartoon Network” yet I can’t allow my kids to watch most of what airs there.
    • That I can’t watch national news without some story about Michael Jackson or Jon and Kate.
    • Politicians….nearly all of them.
    • Christians who think they are righteous in their laughter when calamity and / or death comes to some political figure with whom they disagree ideologically.
    • People who attempt to use the Bible to justify their own wickedness.
    • Athletes who are Christians only when their team wins a game.
    • The idea that God actually cares whether or not your team wins a game.
    • The idea that just because a thing isn’t expressly forbidden in Scripture that it must be acceptable.
    • People driving right on my rear bumper.
    • The fact that great programs like “The Andy Griffith Show” have been replaced by crap like “Family Guy”.
    • MSNBC pretending to be a news organization.
    • Some conservative talk show hosts pretending to be non-partisan.
    • Lists that go on for far too long.

  • Church Growth Pastor Concerned about ME! (259 Words)  

    2009-08-11 18:03

    Bob Bixby - Church Ministry

    I was moved today by the fact that a pastor of a large church in NYC is very concerned for me. It gripped my soul. Here's the letter he sent me. The fact that a busy pastor would take so much time out of his demanding schedule to write me a personal letter with a gentle rebuke for my nonchalance about church growth is deeply affecting.

    Here's his letter:

    Bob,

    I'm writing because I'm concerned about you.

    For the last three months you've been hearing about my Senior Pastors Tele-Coaching Network that begins NEXT WEEK on Thursday, Aug 20. This network is all about helping you and your church go to the next level of growth and impact.

    I've done everything I can to tell you about this network . . . I sent you a 30-minute Q & A video . . .I sent you the unedited testimonies from those who just completed the network . . . plus several other email and mailed invitations for you to apply.

    . . . but I still don't see your name on the application list!

    Frankly, I find that puzzling.

    Look, if you are interested in seeing your church grow and your leadership ability increase, I urge you to apply right now.

    . . . stop whatever you are doing and go to this Web site, download and complete the application:

    I don't want to betray his confidence so I didn't put the website down because he wrote the letter to me. Personally. Just me. I felt alone until now.

  • Everybody's Got A Gift (136 Words)  

    2009-08-11 17:54

    Bob Bixby - Humor

    I can just imagine the bumper sticker: I'm the Proud Parent of a Gifted Child: He can pick up whiffs of Python musk.

    I am sometimes tempted to be envious of gifted people, but for whatever reason I detect no sinful envy in my heart for this gift. It made me chuckle. Chalk it up to my bizarre sense of humor, but here's the full story of one of Florida's gifted citizens.

    The pertinent quote:

    Hill's skill at spotting the wily predators dazzles colleagues. During breeding season, he can pick up whiffs of python musk -- distinctive, but only if you're another python or know what you're smelling.

    ``The guy has a gift,'' said Hill's boss Dan Thayer, who directs invasives control for the district.

    What's your gift?

    I suppose mine is that I'm easily humored.

  • Graffiti on the Temple (463 Words)  

    2009-08-07 16:49

    Bob Bixby - Politics and Culture

    Apparently, if my surmising is correct, Doug Wilson is getting hammered for being "fundamentalist" (gasp!) for something he or his wife said about Christians and tattoos. Seems that they don't think Christians should wear tattoos and they are weary of the hyper-ventilating cries of "Fundamentalists!" that come accompanied with the most asinine argumentation from the pro-tattoo assembly. The argumentation is so boringly predictable it strains one's patience to bother attempting to reason with the evangelical pigment junkies. Wilson, however, is showing how much smarter he is than body art aficionados by giving a brilliant commonsensical answer that ought to be read and applied to many other things. Read it.

    To me it's quite simple. Tattoos infringe upon private property. The Bible says my body is, well, not mine. It's a temple and it belongs to God. I once asked a freshly tattooed friend of mine (we'll call him Tom) who had spiritualized his body marking by claiming to do for the glory of God if I could take a can of paint and brush "Tom's Car" with my best art on his cool car. He objected. I tried to explain that I would be doing it for "his glory" and that I would be clearly attempting to "please him" by making sure everyone who saw my art on his car realized that it actually belonged to him. It would stand out, I said. Everybody would know that the car was his. He should be grateful for my offer. It would be so individual.

    Tom didn't think so. Seems he didn't think I had a right to do with his car what I wanted to even when my goal was to honor him. Too bad Tom didn't apply the same simple logic to his body. His body is not his. It's God's.

    I cannot find a chapter and verse that forbid tattoos. And I don't think that the tattooed members of my church should feel compelled to cover theirs. What's done is done. But I also think that it is good common sense to tell Christians to think twice about getting a tattoo on the grounds of property rights: God's property and His rights. So I don't really need a chapter and verse. It's simple respect of another's property that make me pause. It's graffiti on the temple as far as I can tell.

    I once teased my wife that I was thinking about getting "I [heart] Jennie" imprinted on my butt cheek. She tersely responded that not only does the Bible suggest that my butt cheek is not mine, but according to 1 Corinthians 7 it also belongs to her. And she doesn't like black scrawling on pale white. So there.

    We live in difficult times when common sense is derided as legalism.

  • Precious Jesus! Glorious Savior! My Redeemer!  

    2009-08-05 19:15

    Ellis Murphree

    Your sacred head bowed down in pain. A cross your resting place.
    Your nail pierced hands blood hath stained. Your visage blood hath traced.
    Your thorn crowned brow – so much pain. Your bruised and battered face.
    Such selflessness – love defined… You freely took my place.

    They beat you and they mocked you and they called you evil names;
    Willingly ignoring the reason that You came.
    Maliciously they whipped You – Your back they opened wide…
    Your reaction was astounding! – “Forgive them”, was Your cry.

    Precious Jesus! Glorious Savior! My Redeemer, Lord, and Friend!
    You loved Your own and prayed for them. You loved them to the end.
    Alone and battered, bruised, rejected. A wounded, bloodied man.
    Was this the scene You had in mind? Was this salvation’s plan?

    This ugly scene of sacrifice – we cannot comprehend;
    My precious Jesus, loving and faithful, endured all to the end.
    The Perfect Lamb, unspotted – untainted out and in,
    Took my place through suffering - He died there for my sin.

    I gaze with awe at Calvary’s cross as questions flood my mind:
    Propitiation? Substitution? Atonement for my sin?
    My questions turn to tears – my sorrow turns to joy;
    He loves me! He forgave me! My penalty destroyed!

    Precious Jesus! Glorious Savior! My Redeemer, Lord, and Friend!
    Your grace and startling mercy! Your love that knows no end!
    You sought me and You found me and You said I am Your own!
    Your nail scarred hands now hold me. Your righteousness my robe!

    I kneel in shame and gratefulness, my blind eyes opened wide.
    I understand, though mystified, it was for me He died!
    This tragic death now glorious to me it doth appear.
    He changed my life! He paid my debt! He brought salvation near!

    The debt I owe to You, my God, is one I’ll ne’er repay.
    It’s greater than the former one – the one You washed away.
    You elected to redeem me. How astounding! How sublime!
    I’ll live for You, dear Jesus, though unworthy of Your name.

    Precious Jesus! Glorious Savior! My Redeemer, Lord, and Guide!
    I long to know You better…with You I would abide.
    Precious Jesus! Glorious Savior! My Redeemer, Lord, and Friend!
    I long to understand Your love…Your love that knows no end.

  • "Sin Myths" or "Why I hate the color grey"  

    2009-08-04 22:01

    Ellis Murphree

    Just because something is stupid doesn’t necessarily mean that it is sinful. Smoking half a pack of cigarettes a day is absolutely stupid. It is also unhealthy. It also makes you smell bad. It might even indicate that you have some lack of self-control. BUT it is most certainly not a sin to smoke. I will concede that addiction (to anything really) is sinful. Since cigarettes contain nicotine, they can potentially become addictive. So smoking your half a pack a day is (to state it again) stupid in that it could certainly lead you to the sin of addiction.

    I used to smoke cigarettes….a pack or so a day. I coughed all the time and I smelled bad. After doing this for a few years I decided to stop (with the exception of the occasional cigar on the golf course). I have no desire to smoke ever again. Mainly because of the smell and the fact that there is a chance that it could put me in an early grave. Both of those things aren’t really all that appealing to me. All that said, I respect your foolish decision to smoke. I’ll tell you it’s stupid and I might even tell you that you stink, but I won’t tell you that it’s a sin….because it’s not.

    Now, please do not confuse these statements as a defense of smoking. Do not view them as an encouragement to take up smoking. Do not view them as my attempts to justify some behavior of my own. Take them for what they are….statements of fact regarding one of the “sin myths” in Conservative Christianity.

    Whether the issue is drinking, smoking, divorce, dancing, a man having long hair, or a woman wearing pants, there are a number of “sin myths” that have taken an almost doctrinal status within Conservative Christianity. When one attempts to offer up a biblical perspective on these things he is often demonized for attempting to justify his own sin if he doesn’t come to the “Party line” conclusion. It makes one wonder at times if they are in the right “Party”.

    The many discussions I’ve involved myself in (or simply witnessed) on 10 or 15 different websites around the internet over the last several months regarding the alcohol issue have reminded my of this. Some of the discussions have been profitable. Some have been educational. Some have been challenging. However, most have ended up digressing into utter foolishness with one or both sides attacking the motives and character of the other. Why do disagreements over “grey areas” have to get so shallow and ugly?

  • Spurgeon on Pastors Using OT Parables as NT Illustrations  

    2009-08-04 14:11

    Ken Fields - New Testament

    Here is an interesting and convincing argument from the Prince of Preachers, a brief excerpt from the introduction to his sermon from Genesis 42:1-2, "Corn in Egypt":
    God in his wisdom hath so made the outward world, that it is a strange and wonderful picture of the inner world. Nature has an analogy with grace. The wonders that God does in the heart of man, each of them finds a parallel, a picture, a metaphor, an illustration, in the wonders which God performs in providence. It is the duty of the minister always to look for these analogies. Our Saviour did so. He is the model preacher: his preaching was made up of parables, pictures from the outer world, accommodated to teach great and mighty truths. And so is man's mind constituted that we can always see a thing better through a picture than anyhow else. If you tell a man a simple truth, he does not see it nearly so well as if you told it to him in an illustration. If I should attempt to describe the flight of a soul from sin to Christ, you would not see it one half so readily as if I should picture John Bunyan's pilgrim running out of the city of destruction, with his fingers in his ears, and hastening with all his might to the wicket gate. There is something tangible in a picture, a something which our poor flesh and blood can lay hold of; and therefore the mind, grasping through the flesh and the blood, is able to understand the idea, and to appropriate it. Hence the necessity and usefulness of the minister always endeavonring to illustrate his sermon, and to make his discourse as much as possible like the parables of Jesus Christ.

    Now, there are very few minds that can make parables. The fact is, I do not know of but one good allegory in the English language, and that is, the "Pilgrim's Progress in Parables, pictures, and analogies are not so easy as some think; most men can understand them, but few can create them. Happy for us who are ministers of Christ, we have no great trouble about this matter; we have not to make parables; they are made for us. I believe that Old Testament history has for one of its designs the furnishing of the Christian minister with illustrations; so that a truth which I find in the New Testament in its naked form taught me as a doctrine, I find in the Old Testament cast into a parable. And so would we use this most excellent ancient book, the Old Testament, as an illustration of the New, and as a means of explaining to our minds the truth that is taught to us in a more doctrinal form in the New Testament.
    Read the sermon in its entirety HERE. By the way, John MacArthur has adopted this same philosophy, usually employing the OT as illustrative material for the NT truth.

  • I often feel like Spurgeon did about his preaching  

    2009-08-03 14:00

    Scott W. Kay - Uncategorized


    That is, to get to stand and preach Christ each week is a privilege beyond description, but I often feel terribly inadequate for the task. This makes me deeply appreciative for your prayers for me as I stand each week to preach. I couldn’t have expressed this struggle any better:

    It is a long time since I preached a sermon that I was satisfied with. I scarcely remember ever having done so. You do not know, for you cannot hear my groans when I go home, Sunday after Sunday, and wish that I could learn to preach somehow or other—wish that I could discover the way to touch your hearts and your consciences, for I seem to myself to be just like the fire when it needs stirring—the coals have got black when I want them to flame forth!

    If I could but say in the pulpit what I feel in my study, or if I could but get out of my mouth what I have tried to get into my own soul, then I think I should preach, indeed, and move your souls! Yet perhaps God will use our weakness, and we may use it with ourselves, to stir us up to greater strength.

    (Good Earnests of Great Success, Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, Vol. 14, Sermon #802, p. 176)

    Thanks to my good friend Rob Murphey for pointing me to this.

  • Pharisees versus Freedom Freaks  

    2009-07-29 21:45

    Ellis Murphree

    There are two common approaches to issues of “Christian liberty”, both of which can be damaging. I term these two (1) Pharisees (not exactly original, I know), and (2) Freedom Freaks. Let me explain.

    First, the “Freedom Freak”. This is commonly found in mainstream Evangelicalism but is practically nonexistent in Fundamentalism. The Freedom Freak does everything in excess and out loud. He is often unconcerned with how others might find some of his “liberties” offensive. For instance, it’s not enough for this guy to simply say that he cannot in good conscience support a tee-totaller view on alcoholic beverages based on what Scripture has to say on the subject: he feels compelled to proclaim his favorite beers and rate his top ten favorite mixed drinks on his Christian blog. It never occurs to him that there is a point where Christians might need to take advantage of the liberty they have to abstain from certain things in order to not violate the conscience of a fellow believer. This guy will draw no distinction between peripheral issues and truly contentious ones. In his mind, whether the subject is dress, hair length, music, alcohol, entertainment, language, worship style, or any number of other things, the answer is the same: “Those Pharisees aren’t going to squash my liberty”. The “Freedom Freak” usually understands that Christianity is about a relationship with Christ, but he often neglects to view Christ as a holy and mighty God, choosing instead to focus on the fact that Christ had relationships on earth with some “undesirable” people. They will often paint Christ as kind of a “happy go lucky” guy who would probably avoid most Christians in favor of hanging out at the local pub if He were on earth today.

    Then there is the “Pharisee”. This guy is the antithesis of the “Freedom Freak” and is more commonly found in Fundamentalist circles. The “Pharisee” cannot process the idea that some people examine Scripture thoroughly and simply come to a different conclusion about certain things than he does. To the “Pharisee” the Christian life is about a fairly detailed list of do’s and don’ts. Even in matters in which scholars through the ages have differed, this guy sticks to his rules. After all, he probably knows better than some guy who lived 200 years ago and studied Scripture for his entire life in the languages in which they were originally written. The Pharisee tends to not engage in any sort of debate or conversation about the controversial issues. “It’s just wrong…you can see all through the Bible that it’s a sin!” is a summary of the best argument this guy will tend to lay out to defend some of his more difficult positions. The heart of the Pharisee tends to be on target…sort of. He has a desire toward righteousness…toward becoming more like Christ. However, in his zealous approach to sanctification, the Pharisee tends to relegate the Christian life to something that is more about a “look” and a “list” then it is about a relationship. Indeed, a relationship with Christ is more about reading the Bible every day than it is about anything else as far as this guy is concerned. The “Pharisee” tends to paint a horrible picture of God as some angry ogre in the sky who is going to punish you for any misstep you might make.

    While there is plenty of good and bad to say about both the “Pharisee” and the “Freedom Freak”, they both tend to miss the mark. They both have an incomplete and, consequently, a distorted view of Christ. They also both have a horrid understanding of the liberty and freedom that we enjoy in Christ. One makes the Christian life impossible and the other makes it look no more difficult than eating a snow cone. Both are horribly selfish in that they ultimately make life about themselves. Both would do well to lock themselves up in a room for a month or two and carefully study Romans and 1 Corinthians.

  • What I would have said about the Lord’s Supper if I’d had time…  

    2009-07-29 19:45

    Scott W. Kay - Uncategorized


    13.5 Mo

    After last Sunday’s sermon (Removing the Obstacles of Legalism from Taking the Lord’s Supper), I’ve been amazed at how many people have shared with me how they have struggled with taking the Lord’s Supper. The guilt, the unworthiness, even the fear and dread of taking it. On the one hand, I’m glad that people take it so seriously, but on the other hand, I’m convicted by how many of those serious-minded worshippers I’ve had a part in discouraging in the act of taking. I pray that Sunday’s message will be a tool for bringing a whole lot of grace-induced liberation to hearts bound by condemnation.

    My heart is still rejoicing to hear of the burdens that were lifted. Praise the Lord!!

    Some have asked about who then is to be “fenced” away from the Lord’s Table. The short answer is this: those who are unrepentant about sin should not partake, since, THAT is a state of rebellion, or as Luther said, a lack of DESIRE to receive the grace given in the ordinance.

    So, we should fence the table from 3 kinds of people: unbelievers, the unrepentant and the self-righteous. Everyone else is invited to come.

    Luther had really good pastoral advice in his Larger Catechism. I had planned to use this in the sermon, but simply ran out of time. I wanted to find a way to share it with you so I’m posting it here. This is really good, so I’m giving you all of it.

    Notice specifically the distinction in who should and shouldn’t come to the Lord’s Table in the first few paragraphs (paragraphs 2-4 in particular). Luther’s use of the term “desire” is the key here. (underlines and bracketed comments are mine)

    Luther in the Larger Catechism:

    But if you say: How if I feel that I am not prepared? Answer: That is also my scruple, especially from the old way under the Pope, in which a person tortured himself to be so perfectly pure that God could not find the least blemish in us. [This is a Catholic approach to the Lord’s Supper!] On this account we became so timid that every one was instantly thrown into consternation and said to himself: Alas! you are unworthy!

    But if you are to regard how good and pure you are, and labor to have no compunctions, you must never approach.

    We must, therefore, make a distinction here among men. For those who are wanton and dissolute [deliberately intend to continue in sin] must be told to stay away; for they are not prepared to receive forgiveness of sin, since they do not desire it and do not wish to be godly.

    But the others, who are not such callous and wicked people, and desire to be godly, must not absent themselves, even though otherwise they be feeble and full of infirmities… For no one will make such progress that he will not retain many daily infirmities in flesh and blood.

    Therefore such people must learn that it is the highest art to know that our Sacrament does not depend upon our worthiness. For we are not baptized because we are worthy and holy, [or] …because we are pure and without sin, but the contrary, because we are poor miserable men, and just because we are unworthy; …

    But whoever would gladly obtain grace and consolation should impel himself, and allow no one to frighten him away, but say: I, indeed, would like to be worthy; but I come, not upon any worthiness, but upon Thy Word, because Thou hast commanded it, as one who would gladly be Thy disciple, no matter what becomes of my worthiness.

    But this is difficult; for we always have this obstacle and hindrance to encounter, that we look more upon ourselves than upon the Word and lips of Christ.

    We must never regard the Sacrament as something injurious from which we had better flee, but as a pure, wholesome, comforting remedy imparting salvation and comfort, which will cure you and give you life both in soul and body. …

    … those who are sensible of their weakness, desire to be rid of it and long for help, should regard and use it only as a precious antidote against the poison which they have in them. For here in the Sacrament you are to receive from the lips of Christ forgiveness of sin, which contains and brings with it the grace of God and the Spirit with all His gifts, protection, shelter, and power against death and the devil and all misfortune.

  • Glorious Savior! Blessed Redeemer!  

    2009-07-22 22:34

    Ellis Murphree

    Battered and bruised, bloodied and bare
    Ridiculed and shamed;
    The Son of God bore all my sin.
    Oh, praise His Blessed Name!

    He became sin for us
    Though no sin He knew.
    He cloaked us in His righteousness;
    He washed us white as snow.

    The ugly mount called Calvary,
    Wretched, vile, and stained,
    Became a place of love and grace.
    My sins were washed away!

    Oh, glorious Savior, oh blessed Redeemer
    We stand in awe of You!
    You died for us. You live for us!
    Your blood has made us new!

  • God was there.  

    2009-07-20 20:08

    Brian McCrorie - Bible

    Save me, O God, for the waters have come up to my neck. I sink in the miry depths, where there is no foothold. I have come into the deep waters; the floods engulf me. I am worn out calling for help; my throat is parched. My eyes fail, looking for my God. (Psalm 69:1-3, NIV) These words pretty well summarize what David experienced–not the [...]

  • Slipping and Sliding...  

    2009-07-14 21:44

    Ellis Murphree

    The following rant brought to you courtesy of an unfortunate email exchange I recently endured. The subject matter of said email has been avoided in the rant below in order to avoid it being spilled out onto my blog…..


    I absolutely abhor the “slippery slope” argument that some use to “prove” their point. The basic idea of the slippery slope argument is that if you take some liberty / engage in some activity, etc it will ultimately lead to something much more egregious and sinister. For instance, embracing certain music forms (such as Sovereign Grace Music) will eventually lead you to sympathizing with the most profane forms of music (just so long as the “message” is good) and ultimately to an complete abandonment of any discernable separation from worldliness. Obviously this form of argumentation is nuts. The inadvertent effect of one making the slippery slope argument is that the thing with which they disagree isn’t wrong, per se, it will just lead to some erroneous position down the road. Like I said…nuts!

    While I fully support boundaries and rules, I think that often we attempt to make hard and fast rules where we don’t necessarily have to. I guess it’s easier to make a rule than it is to teach a biblical principle coupled with discernment in application. The application of the “slippery slope” argument caused my quite a bit of consternation during my childhood and young adult years: Listening to music with a pronounced beat would cause me to worship Satan. Holding hands with a girl would cause us to have sex. Wearing shorts would cause some innocent girl to lust after me – this would lead to premarital sex. A girl wearing pants would cause me to lust after her – this would lead to wicked thoughts and a broken relationship with God. Going to a “G” movie at the theatre would cause someone who saw me going in there to abandon Christianity. Not wearing a coat and tie to church would cause me to abandon all forms of separation from worldliness in my dress and conduct. One sip of wine would lead me to alcoholism. Missing one morning of personal devotions would cause all sorts of problems…God would punish me for it throughout the day until I got “back on track”…after all, if I didn’t have devotions this morning I was completely out of God’s will.

    Not all of those examples necessarily fit the “slippery slope” mentality, but I was on a role! You get the point though….bizarre and unexplained leaps of logic to “prove” that you ought not do something that I don’t like. Recently I’ve heard more of these “slippery slope” arguments (although some are disguised). At times the argument is simply, “Embracing Calvinism is part of the slippery slope”. At times the argument goes more like, “The problem with Calvinism is that it eventually leads to a denial of the inerrancy of Scripture”. Either way, the slippery slope argument leaves out important details. In one form you aren’t told where the slippery slope lands you – you just know that you’re on it. In the other form you are told that “A” always leads to “B” without any explanation or proof….even if “A” and “B” seem to be completely incongruous!

    In fundamentalism the slippery slope argument is almost always applied to matters of “personal liberty” or matters where the Bible is silent or vague. In most cases where the slippery slope card is tossed on the table a solid biblical principle will be the stake in the pot. Again, it’s the application (or misapplication) of said principle that is the issue.

    To be completely honest, I’m willing to be corrected when I’m shown to be wrong. I’m willing to concede that my point of view might be incompatible with what the Bible has to say when I’m shown so. All I ask is that you demonstrate to me where I’m wrong. If you utter the words “slippery slope” you will lose me every time.

  • Lessons from 1 Corinthians: Part 4 (The End)  

    2009-07-11 13:20

    Ellis Murphree

    (Part 1 - Introduction)
    (Part 2 - Characteristics 1 - 5)
    (Part 3 - Characteristics 6 - 9)

    We’ve been examining the characteristics of love as laid out for us in the first eight verses of 1 Corinthians 13. In the last few posts on this chapter we looked at the first nine characteristics. In this post we will conclude this series by examining the last 5 characteristics of love from this chapter.

    10. Love bears all things
    This is the second time that this concept is mentioned in this passage. The first time in vs. 4. The thought is the same - love provides a covering. No manner of evil - no amount of evil - should deter us from loving God and man. I think this is a difficult concept to catch hold of.

    11. Love believes all things
    This doesn't speak to being gullible; however, we are to “unsuspiciously” believe the best about people. Some people are always ready for somebody to fail. In Christianity, why did the news about Jimmy Swaggart and Jim Baker make such national news in the 80's? How about Ted Haggard a couple of years ago? In Fundamentalism, nearly everybody knows about Bob Gray - even those who didn't know the name before know it now. You can look at pop culture and see the same thing: Peewee Herman and Hugh Grant in the 90's - Brittney Spears a couple of years ago....and I could go on. There have been names through the years that nobody would know if they hadn't fallen. Why? People like a good car wreck!

    Why don't many churches grow? In many cases I think that one could make the argument taht they are suspicious of outsiders. If somebody looks a certain way, we automatically assume the worse. This isn't love - it's just the opposite. It is a type of hateful legalism that has no place in Christ's Church.

    12. Love hopes all things
    This follows “believing all things”. Sometimes a person just treats us wrong. We love them, love them, and love them some more. In return, they take advantage of us again, and again, and again. Our reaction, even when there is no more room for assuming the best is to “hope”. Regardless of how low a friend or family member has sunk, we are NEVER to give up on them.

    13. Love endures all things
    In Job 13:15, Job proclaims, “Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him”. This idea of enduring all leaves us with the impression that regardless of the troubles that come our way - at the hands of God or man - our love is to remain steadfast. Stepping away from the Job passage for a moment…love has the capacity to never get “rocked” by whatever may happen. I’ve seen so many seemingly strong marriages end because the couple wasn’t able to “endure” some tragedy – the loss of a child, an accident that leaves a child or one of the spouses disabled, financial struggles…A biblical approach to love endures these things and comes out better for it!

    14. Love never fails
    As we “bear, believe, hope and endure all things” this love will remain steadfast. As Paul begins to draw comparisons to end this passage, we see that nothing else is as sure as love. And, although everything else might crumble and fail, this true, biblical, agape love will not.


    A pastor friend once challenged me to read through this passage in I Corinthians 13 while substituting the name of Christ for the word “love” throughout the passage. The fact that God is love leaves us with good reason to believe that Christ perfectly demonstrated agape in His time on earth….let’s take a look at a few examples I’ve tossed together:

    1. Jesus suffered long (I Peter 2:23)
    2. Jesus was kind (Luke 8:40-56)
    3. Jesus was not envious (Matthew 8:20) Jesus just accepted the fact that all his creation was taken care of, but He had nowhere to lay His head.
    4. Jesus was humble. (Phil 2:5-8)
    5. Jesus acted appropriately (Matthew 22 - render to Caesar)
    6. Jesus was selfless (John 13 - he washed the feet of his creation – including those of the man whom He knew would betray Him later that night.)
    7. Jesus was not easily provoked (The Passion)
    8. Jesus didn't “keep score” (Praise the Lord for that!) (In Matthew 9:24, we hear the people laughing Him to scorn. In Mark 15:29-33 we hear the scoffers walking by a crucified, bloody mess of a man and saying – “come on! Save yourself! Look at you now! HA!” In John 10:20, we hear people saying, “Why would you listen to Him? He’s got a demon.” Yet, what does He say in Luke 23:34? “Father, forgive them…”
    9. Jesus rejoiced only in that His Father was glorified (John 13-15)
    10. Jesus covered our sins (I Peter 2:24)
    11. Jesus forgets our transgressions (Psalm 103:12)
    12. Jesus forgives us every time (I John 1:9) "Hopes" (Luke 7:37-46)
    13. Jesus is never exasperated by us (I John 1:9 again)
    14. Jesus never fails!

    That concludes this series....I hope you received some good from it. It's certainly been an educational study for me!

  • The shame of it all....  

    2009-07-06 21:25

    Ellis Murphree

    I know a lot of things. I know about a lot of things as well. Frankly, there are a lot of things that I know that I wish I didn’t know. There are places, people, activities, entertainments, etc., about which I know many things that I wish I didn’t. I’ve seen things, heard things, said thing, and been to places that cause me shame. More importantly, these things have brought shame to name of my God. I have knowledge of things about which no child of God ought to have knowledge. I have said things, laughed at things, and viewed things over the years that ought to grate like sandpaper on my sensibilities, yet I have done these things without even blinking.

    Five years ago or so I got to spend an afternoon with an old friend. I grew up with this man. He is currently a fairly well-known and public figure in a large Christian ministry. We grew up in the same church and attended the same school. We were both in single parent homes. We both attended Bible College. We have both been in leadership roles since our teenaged years. He’s a bit older than me and a man whom I’ve always respected and looked up to as a “big brother”. During this day we spent together some years ago I popped a joke without even thinking about it. My friend didn’t get it, as he had never heard one of the words before. As I was trying to explain the word to him I realized that it was something best left unsaid and I apologized for the joke. His ignorance about this matter truly stunned me. At the time I remember thinking to myself, “how can a man in his mid 30’s not know about that?” Recently however, I’ve gained a deeper respect for him in this area. The fact is that he has attempted to live a life separated to his God. His “ignorance” in this matter is more properly called “innocence”. There is a language that he doesn’t understand because, as a Christian, he has sought to live a life that is separated to holiness.

    It seems to me that many of us – me included – have no qualms about defiling ourselves with the pervasive wickedness of this world. Speaking for myself, I have become so desensitized to sin that it doesn’t even give me pause at times. Some in Christendom have taken passages like Paul’s proclamation of “becoming all things to all men so that I might by all means save some” and perverted them to justify our own desires to look and smell a bit more like the world. Unfortunately it’s not too difficult to find someone who will help us to blur the lines between “light and darkness” either. For instance, there are well-known, orthodox, evangelical expositors who are willing to wallow in the filth of this world all in the name of “relevance”. I am a proponent of reaching the lost right where they sit, but the idea of sacrificing purity to appear “relevant” is twisted at best.

    I think that we, too often, will drag the name of Christ along with us into places we ought not. Our eyes behold things that grieve our Savior. With our mouths we say things that bring shame to His name. The frightening part, at least for me, is that I can often do these things without a moment’s hesitation. At times I don’t even realize what I’ve done.

    “Be ye holy; for I am holy”….grasping hold of what that phrase means should radically impact the way we live our lives….

  • Off to Camp (276 Words)  

    2009-07-06 10:43

    Bob Bixby

    A couple of years ago I was hanging around my friend Peter Hubbard who is the teaching pastor at North Hills Community Church in Greenville, SC and I was impressed that despite the fact that his church had grown to a couple thousand he still drove a bus for a bunch of soccer campers and worked in the evangelism of children. He told me that he did not want to get caught up in the business of church and lose touch with the very thing that kept him energized for ministry: ministry. So he served God by working with children as much as he could. His passion for real contact ministry with children was inspirational.

    I think it's a good idea. It's too easy to get wrapped up in the theoretical, the "deep," and the elite part of ministry that one loses the joy of serving in the place where one gets dirty, smelly from sweat, and deaf from the sound of camp chants sung incessantly for six hours by a gazillion giddy 8 to 12 year old girls. So, I made a promise to myself to drive campers to camp every year. I love it!

    Jennie and I are packing into a couple of vans with no air conditioning and a bunch of juniors and young teens to go to one of the best camps in the land, Northland Camp. Can't wait!

    It's not hard work. My part is driving. Northland does the rest. I hope to catch up on blogging, report on the FBFI week and experiences, and read, read, read! Oh, I'll also enjoy my wife and two-year old son too!

  • Lessons from 1 Corinthians 13: Part 3  

    2009-07-01 22:45

    Ellis Murphree

    (Part 1)
    (Part 2)


    In my last post I began examining the first 8 verses of 1 Corinthians 13. I looked at the first 5 attributes given in this passage of biblical, agape love. It is patient and kind. It is not envious or boastful. It is not arrogant or rude. In this post I will examine the next 4 attributes of love.

    6. Love is not selfish
    Galatians 6:2 commands us to “bear one another's burdens”. I Corinthians 12:25 gives us the formula for ensuring that there is no “schism” in the body of Christ – “care for one another”. This is the most descriptive attribute of love. It is not selfish. It is completely selfless. Philippians 2:3-4 reminds us to “esteem others higher (or better) than ourselves”. It's this type of selfless love that the Apostle John writes about in I John 3:16 where he writes, “hereby perceive we the love of God because he laid down his life for us; and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.”

    In another recent post here I mentioned that this issue (selfishness) is at the root of all marital issues. Whether that selfishness manifests itself in a sexual affair with another person or in never thanking the marriage partner for their fidelity and for the things they do on a daily basis to demonstrate their love, the result of selfishness is often disastrous. When looking at how we deal with other people the same thing can be said.

    7. Love is not provoked
    The word “easily” that we find in the KJV is a bit misleading. The literal reading of this verse leaves us with the impression that we are NOT provoked to anger against another. James 1:19 reminds us to be “swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath”. To be able to listen selflessly requires love!

    There is nothing wrong with debate. There is nothing wrong with disagreement. There is nothing wrong with anger. We are, however, cautioned to “be angry and sin not”. In my life I have seen too much infighting in the church as a whole (and have engaged myself in plenty of it). We get caught up in petty issues and preferences and end up deliberately offending people. We are ready to go to war over issues that we have had to read into the Bible, instead of humbly remaining silent where the Word of God is silent. Some will do anything they can to stifle an individuals Christian liberty, while others will do whatever they can to demonstrate their “liberty” - even if it offends another. This is one of the chief problems I see with the mindsets of many in Fundamentalism as well as her critics. When these sorts of attitudes are displayed, I believe that we grieve our Heavenly Father. Love in not easily provoked, nor is it provocative. If we were able to get our arms around this thing called love, many hostilities end.

    8. Love does not keep score
    This term “thinks no evil” is really an accounting term. At the risk of sounding a bit naive, I'll say this: love has amnesia! Can you imagine going into a conversation without preconceived opinions about somebody? How often have you decided you didn't like somebody because of something they did to you years ago? From that point on, we just keep track of all the “stupid things” they do! We question their motivation. We become haters. Again that cancer called bitterness has gotten hold of us. Have you ever been involved in an argument with somebody and one or both parties end up dragging up “ancient history” in order to make a stronger case? This attribute of love is closely tied in with several of the earlier ones.

    9. Love rejoices not in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth
    We are to never take pleasure in sin. When somebody does evil, or evil comes upon somebody, we are not to take pleasure in it. True love as expressed to our God leaves no room for laughter at sin. This could be displayed in the things we say and give audience to. It could also be displayed in the way we react to events. We should be grieved at sin - ours and others. We should be grieved when tragedy strikes others. Yet we should applaud and rejoice when Truth triumphs!

    We’ve seen some tragic things in the last number of years. You can look at the events of 9/11 or, here in Kansas, some of the tornadoes of the last several years. Recently, making national news, was the murder of Dr. Tiller, the infamous abortionist. In all of these situations I’ve heard some Christians express something that I can only describe as joy, or at least some dangerous speculation. Last year a town that is just a few miles away from us was leveled by a tornado. I was present at a service where one preacher said (paraphrased), “I don’t know what’s going on in that town that it needed to be destroyed, but I hope they got the message that God is sending them”. I’ve heard several people express joy at the murder of Dr. Tiller…how can a Christian react like that?

    I'll have one more post on this passage soon looking at the last 5 attributes of love from 1 Corinthians 13.

  • Your Pastoral Preference - Multiple Choice  

    2009-05-19 13:06

    Mike Hess - pastoral preference

    Most know the difficulty of finding a good church. Inevitably, we all have to play a little "give and take" when it comes finding a church home. No church will have everything that we are looking for. A church is made up of fallen and depraved people. This includes their leadership too! But if the overall scope of the church is faithfulness to Christ, obedience to Scripture, loving and edifying one another, the purity of the church, and more than anything - faithful proclamation and exposition of the Word then it would be my inclination to overlook some preferential issues that we could honestly live without.

    Question for this Tuesday morning - Does it matter more to you that your pastor is a Calvinist, Dispensationalist, or....none of the above (how that would not matter to someone is beyond me).

    Choose from the following:

    A. It's more important to me that my pastor is a strong adherent to the doctrines of grace. I could live with the fact that he is not a strong dispensationalist.

    B. It's more important to me that my pastor is a strong traditional dispensationalist. If he leans Arminian that is fine with me.

    C. It simply does not matter to me.

    Any takers here???

  • Wheelwatchers!  

    2009-05-07 18:59

    Brian McCrorie - Miscellaneous

    Tonight, May 7th, and tomorrow, May 8th, as well as Wednesday, May 27th, if you are wheelwatching, you could be mccroriewatching too! Deborah and I had the opportunity to sit in on the taping of three shows of the Wheel of Fortune during our trip to California in early March.  You will see us on any [...]

  • Was Jesus A Real Substitute? More Reflections on Particular Redemption  

    2009-05-05 19:31

    Ken Fields - particular redemption

    Substitutes. In our world, they are viewed as inherently deficient.

    Sugar substitutes may save the lives of diabetics, but they possess a rather long-lasting aftertaste, and we're told they may even contribute to additional health problems. Sugar substitutes are better than no sugar at all, but they just don't match the taste and texture of sugar. They are, in many ways, deficient.

    The same could be said for substitute teachers (sorry to those of you who are substitutes!) ... although it may not always be the case. We all recall how our classmates responded to a substitute teacher. The sub rarely taught anything new. He never required the class to complete assignments. Usually, the sub's job was to keep the students from inciting a riot, or shooting one another's eyes out with spitballs and homemade paper footballs.

    Substitution, though, is an essential doctrine to Christianity, and contrary to our culture's view of substitutes, Christ's death as our substitute is in no way deficient. Instead, Christians laud the biblical view of substitution--even though it's a bloody reminder of our sin. In the Old Testament, lambs died as a substitute for believing Jews. In the New Testament, Christ died as a substitute for believers past, present, and future. Romans 5:8-9 clearly teaches substitution: Christ took our place, so that we are spared the need to die there.
    "But God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God."
    It's a precious and essential doctrine to our salvation. Christ died in the place of sinners. And in doing so, as a real substitute, Christ accomplished and secured something--actually some things--universally beneficial on behalf of those for whom He died: 
    "For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God (2 Corinthians 5:21)."

    "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, 'Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree'" (Galatians 3:13).

    "Who died for us so that whether we are awake or asleep we might live with him" (1 Thessalonians 5:10).

    "Who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works" (Titus 2:14).

    "By this we know love, that he laid down his life for us, and we ought to lay down our lives for the brothers" (1 John 3:16).

    "He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world" (1 John 2:2).
    It's the Greek word "hupo" and it means "in the place of" or "on behalf of." It means an actual flesh and blood substitute ... like that substitute flesh and blood teacher came and actually stood in your classroom in your teacher's place. And because Christ really died as a flesh and blood substitute on behalf of and in the place of sinners, consider what the aforementioned Scriptures promise:
    1) The wrath of God against our sins has been satisfied, absorbed, and saturated by Christ.
    2) We know--experientially--God's love.
    3) We've been redeemed from lawlessness, and are being purified so that we zealously pursue good works.
    4) We might live with Him.
    5) He took the curse for us so that we might be freed from it.
    6) We possess the righteousness of God in Christ.
    Those are real promises, based upon a real flesh and blood substituion--Christ dying in our place. Yet for all who purport an "unlimited or universal redemption" view, Christ cannot be a real flesh and blood substitute. Why? Because there are people for whom Christ substituted Himself who don't enjoy any of the benefits of that real flesh and blood substitution. And if that real substitution did not result in securing those benefits in the lives of all for whom Christ substituted Himself, there must be something deficient and defective about the substitute--just like the sugar and classroom substitutes. How could Christ die as a flesh and blood substitute for those who are facing in hell the same wrath He faced in their place on the cross?

    What's so dangerous about purporting a "universal substitution" view? It seems to destroy (or at least confuse) the meaning of "substitute," and it may well lead to an abberrant view of Christ as being deficient as a substitute. Nothing could be more dangerous to the reality of our faith than a defective substitute who did not actually substitute Himself in the place of sinners.

    We then are left to embrace one of two views: either Christ's died in the place of real people and thereby secured the benefits of a substitutionary atonement for them (real and particular redemption), or Christ's death was less than actually substitutionary in nature because it did not secure the benefits of a substitutionary atonement on behalf of all for whom He died (universal or unlimited redemption).

    Real-life, flesh and blood substitution has actual benefits attached. With Sweet-N-Low or Splenda, you get the taste without the calories. With a substitute teacher, you get a real living human to facilitate the class. True substitution, then, provides real-life benefits.
    "For God has not destined us for wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, who died for us so that whether we are awake or asleep we might live with him" (1 Thessalonians 5:9-10).
    So that. Christ died for us ... so that ... we might live with Him. There is no actual substitution without actual accompanying benefits.

    If that's not the case, I'm going to get fat ... really fat. One of my neighbors loves to bring me cheesecake laced with Splenda!  

  • Learning More about Jon Kirby  

    2009-05-05 00:11

    Brian McCrorie - Church


    0.0 Mo
    Here is some recent video from The Master’s Seminary of Jon Kirby sharing the faithfulness of God over his years in seminary. Here is the audio from our public question & answer time with Jon at Heather Hills: Q&A with Jon Kirby Here is the audio from Jon’s teaching on spiritual development at Heather Hills: Four Essential [...]

  • Heather Hills Welcomes Pastor Jon Kirby!  

    2009-05-03 16:17

    Brian McCrorie - Church

      This morning in a special business meeting of Heather Hills Baptist Church, the congregation called Jon Kirby to be our Associate Pastor of Spiritual Development with an 87% approval vote.  Pastor Kirby will largely focus on the areas of discipleship and Christian education at Heather Hills.   We welcome Jon, Janel, Amber, Alisha, Tanner, Abby, and Trent [...]

  • Heather Hills to Candidate Jon Kirby This Weekend  

    2009-04-23 17:53

    Brian McCrorie - Church

    After 4 months of searching and investigating over 50 resumes, I am excited to announce that Heather Hills is candidating a man for our new position of Associate Pastor of Spiritual Development!  It has been a rich process thus far and we have been able to interact with many godly men around the country who [...]

  • Pronouns and the Cross: Romans 5 and Limited Atonement  

    2009-04-21 15:31

    Ken Fields

    Pronouns.

    My high school grammar teacher would be pleased that I possess such an infatuation for them--especially when it comes to defending the great doctrinal truth of substitutionary atonement. You see, did Christ really die in the place of real people--releasing them from the sentence of death? Did He face God's wrath in their stead? All conservative theologians would answer a definite and resounding yes!

    Yet their enthusiasm for this same doctrine mysteriously wanes when the subject of limited atonement arises. Their "unlimited" view of the atonement (read: unlimited in hypothetical scope, limited in actual efficiency) borders on denying the real substitutionary death of Christ if, as they say, Christ died as a substitute for all people--even those currently facing God's unsatisfied wrath in hell.

    When pressed for the reasoning behind their universal view, many "unlimited" proponents use the "well-show-me-a-verse-that-always-limits-the-atonement-ONLY-to-the elect" argument. This, of course, is nothing more than a not-so-well crafted deflection tactic--a tactic that would require them to renounce their view of a pretribulational rapture (most unlimited, universal atonement proponents would be pretribulationalists). Just as there is not a single verse that limits the atonement only to the elect, there is not a single verse that specifically states Christ's second coming will occur in stages, and that the rapture will occur before a seven-year tribulation period. Yet, they will defend their rapture position with great fervor and vehemency--while deriding your "limited atonement" as a purely (il)logical argument that lacks sufficient scriptural support.

    This is where pronouns become huge--especially first-person plural pronouns like "we" and "us" and "our." As you remember from Language Arts class, first-person plural pronouns speak of a specific group--and are to be distinguished from third-person plural pronouns like "you (all)" and "they". Recognizing the specific intent of these oft-overlooked pronouns will make the doctrine of particular redemption come alive--especially when considered within their specific context.

    For example, I was taught that Isaiah 53:6 was indisputable proof of an unlimited atonement ... and at first-glance, I would agree: "All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned—every one—to his own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all." After all, all means all all the time, right? No. In this text, the all is a qualified all. Isaiah is not stating that the Lord laid on Christ the iniquity of all people--including those in hell. He is saying that the Lord laid on Christ the iniquity of us all. Us. There it is. First-person plural. All of us. Not all in an unqualified sense, but all in a qualified, first-personal plural sense. All in a specific, limited, group sense. For a much more detailed treatment of the entire Isaiah 53 passage in regards to particular redemption, see THIS.

    So this past Sunday I preached from Romans 5:1-11 on the subject of "Don't Waste Your Suffering." Never before had I seen the relationship between our justification and the purpose for our sufferings (to awaken within us a desire for glory through producing endurance, proven character, and hope).

    But that wasn't all I had missed from the passage; I had missed those first-person plural pronouns I had become so infatuated with in Isaiah 53. And then it hit me--like a proverbial ton of theological bricks: those who had paved the "Romans Road" must have embraced the same particular redemption I embrace. There it was. In black and white on the page before me. I could spend the next two-hundred and fifty words explaining it to you, but I'm quite sure you are capable of picking up on the first-person plural pronouns (especially verse 8)--and their relationship to justification and Christ's death.

    So here is the Apostle Paul in God's own words (first-person plural pronouns are in bold for effect ... not because I think you can't identify them!):
    Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. 2 Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God. 3 More than that, we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, 4 and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, 5 and hope does not put us to shame, because God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us.

    6 For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. 7 For one will scarcely die for a righteous person—though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die— 8 but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. 9 Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. 10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life. 11 More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.

    Praise God for first-person plural pronouns. Because Christ died for us while we were still sinners, we have peace with God ... access to God ... and the hope of God. We are recipients of God's love (through the Spirit), and are spared God's wrath. We, who were His enemies, are not killed, but spared through Christ's life.

    And smack-dab in the middle of this great text on the blessings of justification is a telling statement on Christ's death: "But God shows His love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us."

  • Christian History Fans Only, Please  

    2009-04-15 19:31

    Ken Fields - christianaudio.com

    With the sad news of Christian History and Biography ending publication of the printed magazine, Christianaudio.com steps in to save the day by unleashing an unbeatable value and must-have collection for any Christian historian. Here are the details:

    Greetings!

    Christian History MagazineIt was with great sadness that we received the news that Christian History and Biography Magazine was ending the print version of their magazine, announced late last year. Their outstanding publication offered well-researched and thoughtfully written articles covering a wide range of history and people.

    Before they ceased publishing the magazine, Christianity Today International and christianaudio partnered together to record a few audio versions of some of the most popular of the 100 magazines published during the last 25 years. The magazines regarding Luther, The 100 Most Important Events in History, and How We Got Our Bible are just a few of the excellent titles we recorded and continue offering christianaudio customers the chance to listen to.

    These magazines are wonderfully narrated and offer a great introduction to some of the most important events and people in Christian History. And, for the rest of April, we are offering all of them for the special low price of $4.98! Hurry, because this savings of nearly 70% expires on April 30, 2009 (midnight PST).
    Listen Enjoy Think Grow


  • Good Friday - Christ Becomes a Curse For Us!  

    2009-04-10 14:00

    Mike Hess - R. C. Sproul

    As R.C. Sproul does so often, he brilliantly illustrates the curse that Christ bore on the cross for the sins of all who would ever believe. This video lays out very clearly the truth of the atonement and also does it in a very dramatic and illustrative way.

    Ponder and meditate upon the truth of this verse as you watch this video - Galatians 3:13 - "Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree")" (NKJV)



    HT: Kevin DeYoung

  • They're Coming To Take Me Away ...  

    2009-04-08 14:41

    Ken Fields - new evangelicalism

    There's a first for everything, I guess, including being labeled a new-evangelical.

    Although I must admit, I am disappointed--I would much rather be labeled an old evangelical!

    The intended-to-be-inflammatory (but no offense taken) accusation comes from the keyboard of longtime reader and commenter Kent Brandenburg (HERE):
    * How is SharperIron still fundamentalist? How is it that real fundamentalists still associate with SharperIron?

    This is curious to me. I am not intending to offend anyone, by the way. I know I will, but I’m not intending to. Why don’t fundamentalists themselves point this out? They push and endorse a tremendous amount of new-evangelicalism on that blog. They don’t practice separation. On their blogroll they have the Southern Baptist Ben Wright, who is in Mark Dever’s church. They have the new-evangelical, Andy Naselli, the assistant to D. A. Carson, who attends a new-evangelical church. When you read the rest of their blogroll, including Joe Fleener, The World From our Window, and the Jay Adams blog now, they either constantly endorse new-evangelicals, or in the case of Jay Adams, he is one. On Joe Fleener’s blog, he had links to Psalms set to blatant rock music. I commented to point that out. He didn’t say a word to me; just deleted the comment. SharperIron is infatuated with, and I mean in the way of loving, conservative evangelicals. They rarely bash an evangelical and are always smacking fundamentalists. I sense a disdain for the Fundamental Baptist Fellowship there. How is it a fundamentalist blog?
    My open question to Kent: since he is using the term new-evangelical in a pejorative sense; and since he often disagrees with the people and positions we publish here; and because he is fundamentally a fundamental fundamentalist, why does he continue to read and participate with the new-evangelical World From Our Window (perhaps he would support an official name change here)? Doesn't his participation here make him ...

    I'd like to finish the last sentence, but the fundamentalist police are knocking at my church door. They are demanding to see my credentials. Perhaps I should burst out into song, "They're coming to take me away ... they're coming to take me away ... to the FUNDY FARM (see photo), where all is well."

    We could make it a quartet: Joe Fleener, Andy Naselli, Jay Adams, and me.

  • Live From Hollywood!  

    2009-03-08 06:23

    Brian McCrorie - Bible

    Today, Deborah and I had the day off from the Shepherd’s Conference so we tackled two prestigious locations.  The first was the resting place of my favorite U.S. President.  The second was the resting place of the most famous sign in the world. Our trip to Simi Valley was 45 minutes of wonderful.  The scenery reminded [...]

  • SHEPHERDS, DAY THREE: “If we seek to please God, it does not matter...  

    2009-03-07 08:23

    Brian McCrorie - Bible

    Once again, this final “official” day of the Shepherd’s Conference was a bright, sunny, and beautiful California day.  The first session of the day was begun with Grace’s Sunday night worship team, which is the more contemporary styled service.  They led a really wonderful medley of songs all pointing to the holiness of God: God [...]

  • SHEPHERDS, DAY TWO: “2 Sermons, 1 Interview, and a Spinning Wheel”  

    2009-03-06 05:34

    Brian McCrorie - Bible

    Today was the most beautiful March day I have ever experienced in my life.  It was just a perfect day, sunny and warm.  When I got out of my car after finding a parking space on a nearby street this morning, I was almost overwhelmed by the aroma of flowers and blossoming trees and bushes. [...]

  • SHEPHERDS, DAY ONE: “Step on the grass. Shoot a deer. Dig for...  

    2009-03-05 06:38

    Brian McCrorie - Bible

      The first day of the Shepherd’s Conference found me driving in pouring rain up I-5 past a terrible car wreck, through deep puddles of water, and searching in vain for a parking spot on the Grace Community Church’s lot.   HA!  A little rain isn’t going to ruin this day!  I found a parking spot along the [...]

  • Live from LA! Shepherd’s Conference 2009  

    2009-03-04 05:01

    Brian McCrorie - Biblical Interpretation

    As I write this, I am sitting in my hotel room in Burbank, California. I am eager to experience the Shepherd’s Conference for the first time. Each night, I will post a recap of the conference that day. Why am I here? There are myriads of ministry conferences a pastor can attend in the 21st Century. [...]

  • You Probably Saw This Coming  

    2008-09-25 16:41

    reglerjoe - Uncategorized


    Well, it’s been awhile since my last blog post. I’ve come to realize that anonymous blogging is an exercise in vanity. I’ve also come to see that the blogosphere is well populated with many who desire reform within independent Baptist fundamentalism.

    There’s just too much for me to do in service to the Savior to continue to expend energy into anonymous blogging. Perhaps one day I’ll return to the blogosphere, attaching my name to the post I write. But first, there’s a few doctrinal issues I need to nail down.

    Until then, you can find reglerjoe reading and commenting on the blogs linked in my sidebar.

    I have left posts that I thought are worth reading. I’ve removed the more caustic and controversial. I’ve also turned off the comments option so you won’t think this is an unashamed solicitation for comments extolling my writing style and expounding the reasons why I should keep a viable presence in the blogosphere. ;-)

    May God bless all of my readers.

  • Welcome! Joel…  

    2008-05-27 20:36

    NeoFundy - Miscellaneous

    Well, after much cajoling and haranguing by his friends, our own Joel Tetreau has begun his own blog with two articles that you should find interesting. Go over and take a look…

  • They Keep Crawling Down  

    2008-05-22 13:00

    Scott W. Kay - Uncategorized


    Do you ever struggle with a recurring sin? One that, just when you think you’ve got it conquered for good, manifests itself once again, to your surprise and frustration? And you think, “I can’t believe I did that. Where did that come from? Why do I keep doing that?”

    It’s discouraging, isn’t it?

    Well, here’s the best help to that problem I’ve read in a very long while (and it’s from a long time ago):

    “Every Christian must make up his mind and lay out his life to crucify all his several sins and to keep them crucified, till God has time to have them forever mortified. For, if a malefactor was once arrested and was crucified and was kept crucified till at last he died upon his cross, in that case his days of robbery and murder were at an end. But let the watching soldiers fall asleep, or let them become drunken, and let that crucified criminal’s old companions come and take him down from his cross, as sometimes happened, and that rescued malefactor would immediately return to his former crimes and even worse than before. And so will it be with those robbers and murderers who are still alive and unmortified in our own hearts. They may be really and truly be crucified and their days of open and outward transgression may seem to be at an end. But cease watching them; cease for so much as a day our an hour from keeping them crucified, and they will be back that very hour at all their former evil works. Those so besetting sins of yours that are today nailed to their cross ard are silent and motionless and shamming death, unless you watch with all your watchfulness they will be down from their cross and will be back again at all their evil ways.”

    (Source: Alexander Whyte, quoted in Worthy is the Lamb: Puritan Poetry in Honor of the Savior, Soli Deo Gloria Publications, 2004, p. .275)

    Colossians 3:3-10 (ESV) is the relevant passage:

    3 For you have died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God. 4 When Christ who is your life appears, then you also will appear with him in glory. 5 Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry. 6 On account of these the wrath of God is coming. 7 In these you too once walked, when you were living in them. 8 But now you must put them all away: anger, wrath, malice, slander, and obscene talk from your mouth. 9 Do not lie to one another, seeing that you have put off the old self with its practices 10 and have put on the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge after the image of its creator.

  • Maybe You Think They Went Too Far, But Maybe They Didn’t.  

    2008-05-16 17:52

    Scott W. Kay - Uncategorized


    Maybe we haven’t gone far enough.

    Ian D. Campbell writes at the Reformation21 blog:

    Some of today’s Scottish newspapers are running a story about our local school’s girls’ football team. Against all the odds, they beat off older teams from larger schools all over Scotland, to reach the final of a national tournament sponsored by Coca-Cola – only to discover it was scheduled to be held on a Sunday. To not a little disappointment, the decision was taken to pull out of the opportunity to win the national tournament because of the religious convictions of our community.

    I’m not sure how many communities would be featured in the press for this reason. Sunday has, of course, become this generation’s sports day, and sports is the opium of this generation. It is the new religion, with its own heroes, its own songs, its own loyalties, and its own holy days.

    I’m not sure what other evangelicals think of the decision of our local girls to pull out of the final: I suspect that on the whole issue of observing the first day of the week as the Christian Sabbath, many evangelicals have capitulated to the world’s way of doing things, and would see nothing wrong with holding, or attending, sports events on the Lord’s Day.

    If this week’s headlines demonstrate anything, they show that there is one God-given opportunity for us to nail our Christian convictions to the social mast – to honour the Lord publicly by honouring his day, and making it altogether different from every other day of the week, whatever the cost.

    Are they being legalistic? Or are they being weaker brothers (sisters)? Or are they honoring the Lord?

    Frankly, I’m heartened by the decision of the team. It reminds me of the “Flying Scotsman” himself, Eric Liddell (of Chariots of Fire fame), who made the same decision for the same reason.

    This past year I preached on the Christian’s observance of Sunday as the Lord’s Day (audio here – see the sermons on 11/11/07 & 11/18/07), where I publicly refused to become legalistic about making a list of rules on what is and is not permitted activity on Sundays, yet at the same time I pleaded with our congregation that whatever else they did on Sundays, they should honor the Lord’s Day by making it a priority to faithfully worship and rest on Sundays in accordance with the pattern established at creation – both for their own good and God’s glory.

    I realize that this is another one of those “debatable issues” over which godly and sincere Christians disagree. Yet I think that there is something noteworthy about this team taking the costly opportunity to publicly align themselves with a more noble cause than that of a sports competition. And not just any cause greater than that of sports, but a the particular cause of God’s honor.

    Honoring the Lord by honoring the Lord’s Day is a simple but too often flippantly-disregarded way to bring God glory. Our over-busy culture is probably baffled by such a “foolish” decision to withdraw from the games, especially for such a “silly” reason. Yet what is even more disappointing to me is that so many Christians feel the same way, and never attempt to honor the Lord in this way themselves – even when it wouldn’t cost them much more than getting an already longed-for break from the break-neck pace of their lives. It’s ironic to me that there is such resistance to, not legalistically, but gladly, ceasing one day a week from the normal pressures of life and spending it resting and worshipping the Lord with God’s people – both to God’s glory.

    If that were our higher priority, then Sundays wouldn’t be so negotiable.

  • God’s Joy – in a Bird  

    2008-05-15 15:57

    Scott W. Kay - God


    While I was praying this morning a bird kept singing outside my window. It sounded so joyful. As I listened and enjoyed the song, it made me realize that God even gives joy to birds – birds that, as Scripture sometimes describes the animals, “as having no understanding.” (e.g. the ostrich in Job 39:13-17)

    We know that birds and animals feel fear. Just try to get near one, and they’ll flee. We know God put that in them too (Gen. 9:2), for their own good. But when there’s no threat, they can even feel joy. What an amazing thing to realize that God made them to have emotions too. That little bird sounded so happy, just singing away.

    And it made me happy. In God.

    It reminded me that even my joy, in listening to a joyful song of a joyful bird, was a joyful gift from God to me. Both my joy and the bird’s joy are God’s gift to us both. What a joyful God we must have! Isn’t that encouraging? It is to me, because it sure did deepen my worship of my loving Lord this morning.

  • How Do You Admonish Someone on A Debatable Issue in the Church?  

    2008-05-15 01:02

    Scott W. Kay - legalism


    The answer to that question is in an email I got after a great discussion we had in our Sunday evening Bible study this week. I’ve posted it below. But let me put it in context for you.

    Our study of Acts has reached the episode of the Jerusalem Council in chapter 15. This is the pivotal chapter where the Apostles and Elders of the church at Jerusalem wrestle with what to make of so many Gentile conversions to Christ – that is, whether or not they were really saved since they were not circumcised like Jews. As expected, they conclude that Gentiles are saved just like Jews are – by grace alone. Gentiles do not have to become Jewish (through circumcision) in order to become Christian.

    Yet there is an interesting and unexpected twist in the plot. Not only does the Apostle James tells the Jews to quit troubling the Gentiles over getting circumcised, he tells the Gentiles to not do 4 specific things that are offensive to Jews: don’t eat meat offered to idols, don’t fornicate, don’t eat meat of things strangled, and don’t eat blood.

    The Gentiles were not being apostolically bound under the Mosaic Law to not do these things* (the Apostles had just declared that Gentiles were not under the Law), but that they were to defer to the sensibilities of the Jews on these things because they offended the Jew’s consciences. So purely for the sake of love and unity in the church among these two groups, James tells the Gentiles to not exercise their liberty in these areas. (* It’s possible that the reference to fornication here was a specific reference to marriages among those in close blood relation, thus all four of these practices are found in Lev. 17-18.)

    Since love and unity among Christians is the central issue here, that makes this otherwise odd text quite relevant to the church today. Whereas at least three out of four of the things James tells the Gentiles not to do would probably never show up on a list of practices that Christians should refrain from in our own day, there are plenty of ways we can defer to the sensibilities of other Christians on what are often called “debatable issues” (I’m sure you can think of a few), by simply not doing those things around them that we know will offend them.

    Yet aren’t there times when you should go to the “weaker brother” (like the Jews in the Acts 15 story), and seek to educate them and help them overcome their weakness so that they can grow beyond their “hang ups” (for lack of a better word)? I think there are clearly times for that, and have taken the time and effort to do so on occasion, as an exercise in exhorting others to greater maturity. But how should you go about doing it?

    To help answer that I want to share an email that was prompted by our Sunday night study that I received this week from one of our members. I’ve posted this with their permission, with only slight edits to conceal identities.

    Dear Pastor Scott-

    When shouldn’t we forebear but instead admonish one another on debatable matters in the church, especially in the case of what we see as a weaker brother?

    When we believe God is leading us to not forebear but instead approach a brother maybe the primary goal should be that no matter how the person chooses to respond to the correction, they should undeniably know that the person approaching them truly loves them. They should sense that the admonishment comes from the best motives, to build up, rather than from frustration, irritation, pride, anger, or any number of fleshly motives.

    This evening when [my spouse] and I got home from church we were reviewing our experience on this topic. As members of various [name of denomination withheld] churches in the past 9 years, we became aware of this nuance of love as we were the “weaker brothers” in our church communities due to our baptismal convictions. We witnessed many good examples of brothers earnestly concerned about our faith journeys, seeking to help us along in our understanding of theology, but we also had some painful experiences which opened our eyes to some sinful habits in our own hearts. Praise God for this!!! If you don’t mind I will share one or two of these experiences with you.

    When a group of people are together who appear to be like minded on a matter, they tend to let their guard down. We have been in Sunday school meetings and even personal conversations where [our position on an issue] was openly mocked to the point of making it hard for us to maintain true, deep fellowship with some other believers. We think in most of these cases, the people mocking were not aware of our convictions, so they were not intending to be malicious. But we felt we couldn’t be ourselves without being shunned or looked down upon. And when the topic of wine in communion came up once, we whispered to each other, “I’m so glad so-and-so didn’t come to church with us this Sunday. They would have been REALLY offended by the joking and sarcasm…”

    After these slightly painful experiences, [my spouse] and I became aware of times when WE were doing the same thing! We began to see that even our private conversations at home were sarcastic and jocular about the “weaker brothers” at church who thought our perspective was weaker. Ouch!

    This has begun a slow heart change for us – we still slip up! To love brothers from the heart we have to practice doing so when we are not even around them. Then in the off chance that we are around someone of differing opinion and we don’t realize it, we will be less prone to hinder unity by a slip of the tongue, for our hearts will be prepared to humbly love them in a respectful and earnest manner. After all, out of the mouth comes the well-spring of the heart! So there are times when we need to approach a weaker brother as God leads us, but we need to be prepared to do so with a truly humble and loving heart, seeking to build up rather than destroy. We pray that Grace Church ([our family] included!) will continue to grow in understanding of God’s command to love one another deeply from the heart.

    That’s my frequent prayer too, and it’s the reason why I took the the discussion in that direction. May humble love abound in both our forbearing one another and in our admonishing one another.

  • Where Have All The Heroes Gone?  

    2008-04-25 07:53

    NeoFundy - Fundamentalism

    Jeremiah spoke up and was thrown into a cistern, hip deep in mud, because of it. He came up, still calling God’s people to repentance. Nathan pointed the finger of truth at King David, risking life and limb to say, “Thou art the man.” Daniel refused a king’s capricious command and spent a night with [...]

  • Dangerous Fences  

    2008-04-10 20:31

    NeoFundy - Miscellaneous

    It seems that some of the favorite articles here at NeoFundamentalist are the parables, and one of the favorite parables is the series done on “fences.” One thing I never did was to link them all together so that they could be read as a series, so here is a listing of the series, beginning [...]

  • ID Documentary “Expelled”  

    2008-04-10 19:15

    NeoFundy - Miscellaneous

    Well…anything that gets the atheists up in arms and agitated is of interest to me. I was told about this movie today, so I did a little searching to find out what all the hubub is about, and in my reading, I found the inflammatory vocabulary that the detractors use to be very telling (For [...]

  • Vortex of Verbal Obfuscation  

    2008-04-10 00:59

    NeoFundy - Theology/Philosophy

    While I am on the topic of the verbal tendencies of those more Calvinistic than me, I thought I would add another discussion pet peeve. Have you ever noticed that some Calvinists like to have everything both ways? One of the frequent objections heard from many of the Reformed Cyber-chorus is how the Arminians misrepresent [...]

  • Why So Incredulous Mr. Calvinist?  

    2008-04-08 21:53

    NeoFundy - Theology/Philosophy

    I remember one fellow who came into my office, “The thing I like about your preaching is that you are a Calvinist,” he said. Sitting next to a shelf full of reformed literature, I chuckled to myself and told him that I really wasn’t a Calvinist. “What point do you reject?” He asked incredulously, and [...]

  • What is Sermons in Song?  

    2008-04-05 08:15

    NeoFundy - Miscellaneous

    This is the second prong of our upcoming ministry. Basically, a sermon in song is a sermon set to music. In some cases it is a summary of a sermon, and in other cases the listener can follow along with the song in their Bible, just like they would any other exposition of Scripture. I am [...]

  • Regarding my beard  

    2008-02-26 16:57

    Ryan DeBarr - West Virginia

    Last night, I pondered why I cannot bring myself to shave my beard despite the obvious professional and sexual advantages that come with shaving regularly. A few reasons come to mind: I hate shaving; my beard makes me look my age; if you got it, flaunt it. These are all true to some extent. A Communist once suggested that my beard is a cover for latent homosexuality- that one is not true.

    At last, I came upon the reason for my complusion toward beardedness.

    My beard is a projection of my frustrated desire to be at home in the mountains I love. It also represents my existential struggle to escape poverty and obscurity on the one hand, while serving as a connection back to my roots on the other. It furthermore serves as symbol of defiance against the stereotype that Appalachian folk are inferior.

  • Super Bowl in the Wilderness  

    2008-02-19 16:11

    reglerjoe - Miscellany


    “Then was Jesus led up of the spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.” (Matthew 4:1)

    At first glance, I usually only notice the major elements of the story of the Savior’stemptation_of_christ.jpg temptation: wilderness fasting, Satan tempting, angels ministering. But recently, one verse stood out from the text, grabbing my attention – “Jesus was led up of the Spirit.”

    Odd. Jesus instructs us to pray for deliverance from temptation, and here Jesus is led into temptation by none other than the Spirit of God. Why? Why would the Spirit draw the Son to the devil to be tempted to sin?

    Because Jesus was led to the wilderness to do combat – spiritual combat – with the devil himself. Though Christ teaches us to pray for deliverance from temptation, He needed not to fear it. We are weak; He is strong. We are clothed in flesh – sinful flesh; in Him dwells the fullness of the godhead bodily. We are nothing without Him; by Him all things consist.

    Up to that point in the history of man, the devil was unbeaten – he had a perfect season. His record was 1.5 bizzillion and 0. Every man and woman ever born, had succumbed to temptation. None had triumphed over the devil. Ever.

    Then Jesus came, and He was looking for a fight. Somebody needed to put the ol’ serpent in his place, and Christ was willing to do it – with both hands tied behind His back:

    “And after fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry.” (Matthew 4:2)

    With weakened flesh, hunger, exhaustion, He comes to the match. The Second Adam will triumph gloriously where the first Adam failed miserably, and Christ’s victory is made all the more glorious when contrasted with Adam’s failure. Adam succumbed in paradise; Jesus overcomes in the desert. Adam fell though he feasted on the fruit of the garden; Jesus was half-starved. Adam had the benefits of pristine surroundings and tame animals, untouched by the curse of sin; Jesus was engulfed in the scorching heat and surrounded by the wild beasts. (Mark 1:14)

    The combat ensues, and the devil brings his old playbook, well worn but always successful. And his favorite play of all? Make your opponent doubt the Word of God.

    Previously, Christ’s baptism was announced by the voice of God thunderously proclaiming, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” What does the devil say to the Son? “If thou be the Son of God…”

    “If”

    “Doubt Him,” is the devil’s game. His impudence and arrogance with Christ is telling. The devil quotes Scripture to cause doubt in the Word of the Father. How many times have I heard it said that the devil knows the Bible? Yes, he is acquainted with the Holy Book, but he is no theologian – else he would’ve understood that the Son cannot sin and that his efforts were an exercise in futility. Truthfully, I think the devil didn’t comprehend the fullness of Christ’s Sonship. This Jesus of Nazareth was not just God’s favored prophet, or some gifted miracle worker. He was not just an Elijah – He was more. Infinitely more. He is God in the flesh.

    Twice the devil comes with his “ifs”; thrice the Son responds with, “It is written.” And Jesus accomplishes what no other man could do alone – He vanquishes the devil. Like the Patriots who desperately wanted a perfect season, the devil labored to retain his perfect record, only to fall in the match that counted the most. One loss was all that it took, and now that ol’ serpent is a defeated foe, shamed and disgraced by the very Word he wished to disparage. And like the Giants’ fans that rushed the field to hoist their champions on jubilant shoulders, angelic spectators thronged their King, ministering unto Him.

    The world has a new Champion who will forever keep the title, “Undefeated.”

    “For we have not a high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.” (Hebrews 4:15)

  • Béla Fleck and Chick Corea at the Brown Theater  

    2008-02-19 14:26

    Ryan DeBarr - Uncategorized

    I went downtown to the Brown Theater yesterday evening to watch Béla Fleck and Chick Corea. It was superb. They are both amazing musicians. I highly recommend going to see them if you can.