gospel resurgence

On Becoming Attentive, Inside-Readers

2008-09-25T15:36:00.006-06:00

For the past four weeks I have been writing curriculum for a class, Christianity Explored: The Gospel of Jesus Christ from the Gospel of Mark, at our church, Redeemer Church, Fort Worth. What follows is part of the Interpretive Prolegomena for the course. In the coming days and weeks I will include here reflections from the curriculum. May God use it to enliven your faith.

There are many approaches to studying Scripture. To be sure, if each of us were honest about our own presuppositions, principles and rules we bring to a text, which supply the conclusions at which we arrive, the multiplicity of interpretive approaches would be evident. Studies of the Gospels often times have their own set of methods which arrive at their particular conclusions. More often than not, anytime you hear or read biblical commentary it is for the purpose of persuading or dissuading toward or away from certain theological convictions.

For the purpose of spiritual and doctrinal formation, we seek to pull the curtain back, not only on our presuppositions and principles of biblical interpretation, but also on our approach to the study of the Gospel of Mark. We admit that we too are hoping to persuade you to delight yourself in our Triune God--Father, Son and Holy Spirit--and despise your sinful flesh.

It is our hope that we all become better and better attentive, inside-readers of the biblical Text. As our knowledge of the text improves, so too, our interpretation of the text. From the attentive, Spirit-led reading of the Text, our presuppositions, principles and rules are sanctified, and, therefore, so too are our theological conclusions.

In a similar way that a family develops their own inside jokes, stories and experiences, the reader of the biblical Text develops in their ability to recognize the intimate verbal, structural and theological connections within Scripture.

Scripture is rightly interpreted only by members of the Family of God, or Christian readers. The student of the Word of God who is led by the Spirit of God increasingly recognizes the intertextual clues provided by the author(s) of Scripture. They will also better understand the author’s purpose in selecting and arranging the particular historical material at his disposal.

The greatest difficulty of interpretation does not primarily lie in a particular author’s lack of clarity, but rather in the readers’ lack of knowledge of, saturation in and submission to the Text.

Welcome Deacon Curtis Deevers

2008-01-06T22:51:00.001-06:00

Our third child was born yesterday. Deacon Curtis Deevers was born at 6:13 am is 7 lbs 15oz & 21 inches.

Sharpening Stone Men’s Retreat

2008-01-02T15:54:00.000-06:00

What? 2008 Sharpening Stone Men’s Retreat hosted by Redeemer Church

When? Friday & Saturday, February 22-23, 2008

Where? Riley Center on the campus of Southwestern Seminary.

Topic: “Purity in This Evil Age”

Who? Dr. Harry Schaumburg

Registration: Call church office for more information and registration 817-292-4722.

A Religious Monster Bash - Catholic and Baptist Ghosts on the Rolls (SBC Ghostbusters)

2007-10-04T16:10:00.000-06:00

Below is commentary on the USA Today story Are There Really 64 Million U.S. Roman Catholics?

US Roman Catholic Membership
To no surprise Southern Baptists are not the only religious organization suffering from AWOL members. The 2007 Official Catholic Directory for the Roman Catholic Church in America boasts of a staggering 64 million members. However, according the 2001 American Religious Identification Survey, 9.5 million people consider themselves to be ex-Catholics. Of these 9.5 million ex-Catholics, 28% said they left religion altogether, while 11% claimed to have become Baptist. We can assume (maybe) that they were re-Baptized by immersion following their conversion.

SBC Membership
In 2005 the SBC claimed 16.3 million members. An increase of 400k members from 2000, an average of 80k per year. The rub is, prepare yourself, that only 38% or 6.2 million claim to regularly attend the church's primary worship service. In other words, there are 10.1 million "ghosts" on the SBC rolls.

Just as one may question the Catholic, they have the right to question the SBC - "What about integrity of church membership and accurately representing your rolls?" If you are seeing the inconsistencies and asking similar questions, have no fear.

Help is on the way.

"Who We Gonna Call?"
"Who we gonna call?" You may ask. The SBC Ghost busters. Who else? They ain't afraid of no ghosts. The SBC Ghostbusters are a wily group of paraecclesiologists armed with proton pacs (read, membership interview process) and not afraid of a little ectoplasmic slime (read, difficulties of purging the rolls). They set up shop in a rundown firehouse and are ready for business. Their ghost eliminating method is sure to route out the Gatekeeper and Keymaster from your paranormal roster.

Select your paraecclesiologist SBC Ghostbuster.

~Dr. Raymond Stantz, aka, Dan Aykroyd, aka Mark Dever

~Dr. Peter Venkman, aka Bill Murray, aka Tom Ascol

~Dr. Egon Spengler, aka Harold Ramis, aka Matt Schmucker

~Winston Zeddmore, aka Ernie Hudson, aka Thabiti Anyabwile

There you have them...the SBC Ghostbusters.

Reflections on the Baptist Distinctives Conference on the Family

2007-09-27T16:59:00.000-06:00

Reclaiming a Biblical View of the Family, Womanhood and Manhood

The Baptist Distinctives Series conference this year at SWBTS was not only apropos for our nation, convention and school, but also for my own family. The conference was all about The Family: Reclaiming a Biblical View of the Family, Womanhood and Manhood. I’ve been to all three of the Baptist Distinctives Series conferences and, while the two previous were challenging and enriching, this year’s conference particularly stood out. I foresee it serving my family well for many years to come. I have been married for almost four years, have two children (two and a half and one and a half) and another child on the way in January. Needless to say, matters of the family matter very much to me. Thus, the reason why I am so grateful to the Lord for the men who presented at the conference.

In summary, Russell Moore challenged some of my complacencies in thinking and acting upon a sound theology of the family. Thomas White urged me to lead my family appropriately amidst the raging war on my family. Paige Patterson brought me to question my view and enactment of authority in my life and home. John Mark Yeats made a clarion call for orphans and adoption ministry in which I should have a vital part. Mark Liederbach confronted distorted views of beauty pointing to where I acclimate to the culture in what I view as sexy. David Jones championed biblical exegesis in matters of divorce and remarriage and pleaded with me to handle the biblical text well. Malcolm Yarnell was used of the Lord to bring conviction for my failures in family worship, especially with my wife. Richard Land urged me out of lethargy to actively advocate for unborn children, God’s gifts to the world to show off His glory. Finally, Tom Elliff caused me to reflect on the manner in which I lead my wife and how our marital unity has a massive gravitational pull on my children’s coming to know the Lord and persevering in the faith once and for all delivered to the saints. I would like to mention four sessions which were particularly helpful and used by the Lord to convict me of sin.

In plenary session one Dr. Russell Moore from Southern Seminary spoke on “Have Baptist Changed or Has Culture? The Baptist View of the Family.” Dr. Moore, in his characteristic modus operandi, spanned the horizon of cultural mores and Baptist ideals. I was challenged throughout his presentation to think biblically and act rigorously for the sake of my family and others coming to enjoy Christ by my family’s testimony to the gospel. He aptly wove his way through the contemporary Baptist scene in which many churches are “moving along the very same tide” as our culture which “empowers predatory men toward their appetites” noting that we “are just a little bit behind” our culture. He explicitly pointed out the fact that “issues of the family are gospel issues” claiming that we have lost the idea of a biblical husband, “Headship cannot be a grasping for privilege, but a burden of responsibility.” Dr. Moore dissected our Baptist theology of children and their need for me to share the gospel urging that “we don’t baptize babies, thus we believe that we have a special and unique responsibility to evangelize our children.” He attacked my own materialism, “The issues most often is love of money. We have men and women who want to live with the same standard of living as the people around them and are willing to grind their children down to get it.” He did not shy away from issues of deacons carting off their daughters to get an abortion, mommies dropping their children off at daycare so they can have significance in their career, the selfishness of parents unwilling to have multiple children or even adopt, the failed commitment men taking short pastorates to climb the corporate-church ladder and churches who have multimillion dollar family life centers who have no family life. Dr. Moore revealed that both Baptists and culture have changed, but they have remained the same as well. I was challenged not to be like the culture, rebelling against God, but to stand upon the sure foundation of Christ and the gospel as God’s appointed shepherd of my home. Thomas White echoed this last refrain.

Dr. White’s (Vice President for Student Services), presentation was entitled, “It’s Not Hillary’s Fault: A Discussion of Proper Male Headship.” From the outset Dr. White stated his purpose, “I’m here to talk about the major problem – the lack of male leadership in society. It’s our fault and our churches’ fault.” He shined the light on four models of fathering, begging the question as to which one I am, and which one I will be: the absentee leader, the abusive leader, the acclimatized leader and/or the appropriate leader. He made his case for me to be an appropriate leader with eleven scriptural insights found in creation. He then showed the three areas where an appropriate leader will lead: he will provide, protect and lead spiritually. I was prodded to “Cowboy up!” and lead with a knight’s valor, not blaming Hillary, but myself when I’m not appropriately leading my family. John Mark Yeats encouraged me to lead my family into adoption.

Dr. Yeats spoke on “The Biblical Model of Adoption.” I was thoroughly convicted and exhorted to “wake up and realize that [my] walk does not equal [my] talk.” He provided daunting figures reflecting the heart wrenching reality that our churches and I am not doing enough, much less our part. In the DFW Metroplex alone there are over 5,000 children who are awaiting adoption. Following his presentation, I had a long discussion with my wife in which we prayed and decided that we need to begin now making arrangements for the next child God brings into our home, Lord willing, via adoption.

David Jones’s presentation “The Betrothal View of Divorce and Remarriage” was instantly formational. I first heard of the view in Daniel Heimbach’s Christian Home class. I do find the betrothal position to be a convincing argument making best sense of the biblical and lexical data. I was challenged toward thoughtful, careful exegesis no matter the issue at hand.

I’m very grateful to our Father in Heaven that He made way for me to attend the conference. For there He used His servants to sanctify this servant’s shepherding of his family and those generations of Deevers to come. May He accomplish His purposes in my life and the life of my family.

Should I Ask the Question? Question & Comment Evaluation Chart for Students

2007-08-30T11:16:00.000-06:00

While in the classroom have you ever thought to yourself:

Should I ask this question?
I shouldn't have asked that question.
I wish that person would stop asking questions/making comments and dominating class discussion.
I think I have something good to add to this discussion, but I'm not sure if I should say anything.
I should've said something.
I know that person has something good to say, but why won't he/she say it?
I'm lonely.

The folks at Christians for Better Classrooms have provided all students around the world a Question & Comment Evaluation Chart to help us answer the inner-monologue many, if not all, of us reherse each time we are in the classroom. Enjoy.

The Gospel in Our Mouths

2007-08-16T21:45:00.000-06:00

For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” But how are they to call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!” But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed what he has heard from us?” So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ (Romans 10:13-17 ESV).

“But in your hearts regard Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you” (1Peter 3:15 ESV).

And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age” (Matthew 28:18-20 ESV).

“But the word is very near you. It is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it” (Deuteronomy 30:14 ESV).

“And as for me, this is my covenant with them,” says the LORD: “My Spirit that is upon you, and my words that I have put in your mouth, shall not depart out of your mouth, or out of the mouth of your offspring, or out of the mouth of your children’s offspring,” says the LORD, “from this time forth and forevermore” (Isaiah 59:21 ESV).

Preach the word. Share the Gospel with your mouth. Plead for His grace to help you do it. Fail on human terms and let God determine what is successful. His Word has and will triumph in bringing His sheep into His flock, bringing the captives home and brining life where there was death.

Best of WTS Sale: Pastoral Ministry Resources

2007-08-16T07:58:00.000-06:00

Prices good until August 28

Called to Awaken the Laity (Paperback) by Oak, John H. $15.99 $9.59	Cross and Christian Ministry: Leadership Lessons from 1 Corinthians by Carson, D. A. $12.99 $7.79	Elder and His Work by Dickson, David $9.99 $6.99	From Embers to a Flame: How God Can Revitalize Your Church by Reeder III, Harry L. $12.99 $5.85
Heart of a Servant Leader: Letters from Jack Miller by Miller, C. John $12.99 $6.49	Making Kingdom Disciples: A New Framework by Dunahoo, Charles H. $12.99 $5.85	Nine Marks of a Healthy Church by Dever, Mark PT 211: 100% $15.99 $8.79	The Peacemaking Pastor: A Biblical Guide to Resolving Church Conflict (Paperback) by Poirier, Alfred $14.99 $8.99
Reformed Pastor by Baxter, Richard PT 311: 100% $9.00 $4.95	Shepherds After My Own Heart: Pastoral Traditions and Leadership in the Bible (New Studies in Biblical Theology Vol 20) (Paperb by Laniak, Timothy S. PT 311: 100% $24.00 $13.20	Spiritual Leadership: Principles of Excellence for Every Believer (Paperback) by Sanders, J. Oswald PT 332: 100% $13.99 $9.09

Christina & Baby Are Immune!

2007-08-14T12:00:00.000-06:00

We just received word from our doc that Christina has been previously exposed to Fifth Disease, therefore, she is immune and consequently the baby in her tummy is immune. Praise the LORD!

Interesting to think of certain trials, illnesses, pains, sufferings etc. that the LORD ordains to take us through for future blessings. Principally, these bringings from God are for our eschatological blessing in Christ's return and our eternal communion with the Triune God.

May we rejoice always and

"Count it all joy, my brothers, when [we] meet trials of various kinds, for [we] know that the testing of [our] faith produces steadfastness. And let steadfastness have its full effect, that you may be perfect and complete, lacking in nothing” (James 1:2-4 ESV).

See Brothers, Our Affliction is for Their Comfort.

Prayer Request for My Wife, Son and Unborn Baby

2007-08-10T00:08:00.000-06:00

We found out today that our 2.5 year old has Fifth Disease which is usually not that big of a deal for kids.

The rash can last a couple of weeks (some cases lasting for several months) and may itch. Patients are usually no longer infectious once the rash has appeared.

In most cases Fifth is mild, however, there are serious consequences for certain risk groups:

In pregnant women, infection in the first trimester has been linked to hydrops fetalis, causing spontaneous abortion.

My wife, Christina, is 18 weeks pregnant. She is going in to the hospital tomorrow morning (Friday) to get blood work done.

Please be in prayer for her, our nonborn baby and Nation. I'll give updates when I get them.

I'm leaving Sturgis early to be with her, Nation and Noelle during this time.

As an update on Sturgis...

God encouraged my heart much this week with the power of the Gospel to convert the desires of non-believers and increase affection for Christ in believers. By God's design I met and shared the Gospel with numerous people this week. But, one of those most impacted by its power was me.

Thank you for your prayers for us while we were here. And, thank you for your prayers for my wife, our non-born baby and Nation.

Muzzled Mouths: If Not in Sturgis, in God's Courtroom

2007-08-08T16:43:00.000-06:00

Please continue to pray for us as we share the law to the proud and grace to the humble. Pray that idolators of self would become worshippers of our Triune God. Pray that our people will have boldness to declare with their mouths "that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God" (Rom. 3:19 ESV).

Pray that we would not be silenced by uncomfortableness, but would "Count it all joy...when [we] meet trials of various kinds, for [we] know that the testing of [our] faith produces steadfastness. And let steadfastness have its full effect, that [we] may be perfect and complete, lacking in nothing” (James 1:2-4 ESV).

“What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin. I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, 'You shall not covet'”
(Romans 7:7 ESV).

Please also be in prayer for my beautiful, pregnant helpmate Christina and my two wonderful children as I am gone. Pray that the children would be obedient and Christina will have energy to care for them and that she will delight herself in the LORD.

The Word Has Not Failed in Sturgis

2007-08-07T11:39:00.000-06:00

This is Bike Week in Sturgis, South Dakota. Over 500,000 bikers have overtaken a town of around 6,000 like they have for the past 67 years. I am here with Southwestern in partnership with a motorcycle ministry group called the Hellfighters to share the Good News of Jesus Christ to 1) non-believers in hope that they will repent of sin and believe in Christ through the change of desires birthed by the Holy Spirit; and, 2) to believers that they would continually delight themselves in the LORD as the Spirit gives them affections for Him and keeps them until the day of salvation.

Sharing the Gospel is so profitable for our souls - we see our need for our Savior afresh; we recognize our depravity and His grace and mercy; we feel the enlivening power of the Holy Spirit attesting to the power of God for salvation for all who believe, us included; we pray fervently that God would bring life to the corpses with whom we speak; we see the work of the conscience which God has graciously placed in every person as it condemns or commends them as they stand before the good law of the LORD; our hearts' yearn for strangers that they become brothers and sisters.

I am not ashamed of the Gospel. For it is the power of God for salvation for all who believe, to the Jew first and then to the Greek, for in it (the Gospel) the righteousness of God is revealed for faith from faith (Romans 1:16ff).

What about all those who reject Him here when you share the Gospel or even attempt to speak to them and they will not listen?

It is not as though the Word of God has failed. He will bring to Himself His sheep and His Word will succeed in that. His Word will not fail in the conviction of sin. His Word has succeeded on the cross, in the hearts of those who have and will believe and in the hearts of those who reject Him for it bears witness to their guilt before God.

I urge you now - believe in the Gospel. Plead with God to give you affections for Him. Plead that He would give and keep your faith in the treasure of all that God is for us in Jesus Christ by the uniting power of the Holy Spirit. Repent of sin and hope in God. Delight yourself in the LORD and He will give you the desires of your heart. Share the Good News with others teaching them to observe all that Christ commanded. Rejoice in the LORD always!

Straight Out of SWBTS Host Change

2007-08-02T08:30:00.000-06:00

Starting this Friday Straight Out of SWBlogTS will be hosted at Straight Out of the SWBTS Blogosphere by another a group of folks more capable than I.

My goal for Straight Out of SWBlogTS was to highlight the positive work and interesting thoughts of current SWBTS student and faculty/staff bloggers. May the weekly updates at their new host reflect well on the seminary - it's dedicated faculty, hard working staff and developing student-theologians - and our beautiful Triune God.

Straight Out of SWBlogTS Host Change

2007-07-30T07:50:00.000-06:00

UPDATE:

Starting this Friday Straight Out of SWBlogTS will be hosted at Straight Out of the SWBTS Blogosphere by another a group of folks more capable than I.

My goal for Straight Out of SWBlogTS was to highlight the positive work and interesting thoughts of current SWBTS student and faculty/staff bloggers. May the weekly updates at their new host reflect well on the seminary - it's dedicated faculty, hard working staff and developing student-theologians - and our beautiful Triune God.

ORIGINAL POST:

Straight Out of SWBlogTS (pronounced Swibits - the log is silent) is a weekly overview of interesting blog commentary from current students and/or professors who are enrolled or on faculty/staff at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary.

The first installment is slated for this Friday, August 3rd.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed by student and/or faculty/staff bloggers are theirs alone and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of SWBTS, any employee thereof or the author of this blog.

NOTE: If you are a student and/or faculty/staff member and would like to be included in the blogroll from which the content for Straight Out of SWBlogTS is taken, please email me your name, degree seeking/position and blog url. If you want to be removed or not included in the blogroll please email be your url and a removal note. No anonymous blogs will be accepted.

What's the Greatest Danger Facing the Church?

2007-07-27T23:12:00.000-06:00

Jim Hamilton's take is that it "is from within...from well meaning pastors."

How could well meaning pastors pose the greatest threat to evangelical churches today?

Do they deny the truth?

No, the pastors who pose the greatest threat to the church today will all confess belief in the right things. They will say they believe in the authority and inerrancy of the Bible, that Jesus saves, and even that Jesus is the only way of salvation.

So how can these guys who mean well and make the good confession pose such a threat to the church?

His advice for our avoiding a psychologyzing shepherd "who will harm the church by turning Christianity into the American religion of self help therapy"...

1. Look at the biblical qualifications for men in the ministry (1 Tim 3:1–7; Tit 1:5–9), and ask pastoral candidates direct questions about whether they meet these qualifications.

2. Since the feature that most distinguishes the qualifications for an elder (pastor) from the qualifications for a deacon is that the elder be “apt to teach” (1 Tim 3:2), pay close attention to his teaching.

3. Based on what you have heard of his preaching, ask yourself these questions:...

4. Ask direct questions about what he understands pastoral ministry to be about:...

Check out The Greatest Danger Facing the Church

Has the Father Given You Eyes to See and Ears to Hear?

2007-07-27T15:20:00.000-06:00

But to this day the Lord has not given you a heart to understand or eyes to see or ears to hear (Deut 29:4).

Light is sweet, and it is pleasant for the eyes to see the sun (Eccl 11:7).

Son of man, you dwell in the midst of a rebellious house, who have eyes to see, but see not, who have ears to hear, but hear not, for they are a rebellious house (Ezek 12:2).

And he took the blind man by the hand and led him out of the village, and when he had spit on his eyes and laid his hands on him, he asked him, “Do you see anything?” Mark 8:23

Then turning to the disciples he said privately, “Blessed are the eyes that see what you see! Luke 10:23

as it is written, “God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes that would not see and ears that would not hear, down to this very day.” Romans 11:8 (Show me Romans 11)

I counsel you to buy from me gold refined by fire, so that you may be rich, and white garments so that you may clothe yourself and the shame of your nakedness may not be seen, and salve to anoint your eyes, so that you may see. Revelation 3:18 (Show me Revelation 3)

Read Ched's helpful commentary on Mark 8 and Why Jesus Healed the Blind Man Twice.

8 Reasons Why I Can't Share My Faith

2007-07-26T09:25:00.001-06:00

I promised my wife that I would not post any more YouTube embeds on my blog. So, I'm forwarding you to one that I found on a friend's site. It's called 8 Reasons Why I Can't Share My Faith.

It's entertaining to say the least.

ChristCentric Spittin' God-centered Lyrics

2007-07-25T14:09:00.001-06:00

Welcome to SWBTS Quincy, aka Q-Dog.

Quincy is part of ChristCentric, a group reforming hip-hop by the transforming truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Sale: WTS Best of Biblical Theology

2007-07-24T12:16:00.000-06:00

Up to 55% off. Sale ends August 14th.

According to Plan: The Unfolding Revelation of God in the Bible by Goldsworthy, Graeme $22.00 $12.10	Central Themes in Biblical Theology: Mapping Unity in Diversity (Paperback) by Scott J. Hafemann and Paul R. House (Editors) $29.99 $16.49	Far as the Curse Is Found: The Covenant Story of Redemption by Williams, Michael D. $17.99 $8.10	From Every People and Nation: A Biblical Theology of Race (New Studies in Biblical Theology Vol 14) (Paperback) by Hays, J. Daniel $22.00 $12.10
God's Big Picture: Tracing the Storyline of the Bible (Paperback) by Roberts, Vaughan $12.00 $6.60	Goldsworthy Trilogy (Paperback) by Goldsworthy, Graeme OT 141: 70% $12.99 $8.44	Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament (Paperback) by Wright, Christopher J. H. OT 223: 100% $16.00 $8.80	New Dictionary of Biblical Theology: Exploring Scripture's Unity & Diversity (Hardcover) by Alexander, T. Desmond OT 113: Recommended $50.00 $27.50
Redemptive History and Biblical Interpretation (Hardcover) by Vos, Geerhardus ST 313: 30% $29.99 $16.49	Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses by Poythress, Vern S. $18.99 $8.55	Symphony of Scripture: Making Sense of the Bible's Many Themes (Paperback) by Strom, Mark OT 131: 100% PT 173: See Syllabus $14.99 $7.50	Temple and the Church's Mission:

You'll Have to See It To Believe It

2007-07-23T22:14:00.000-06:00

The title may be misleading, because if you've attended church for very long, you probably have seen it.

Without further ado, from the church I attended during High School and shortly after college.

Bible Boot Camp.

Update: Playdoh was passed out before the speech as an object lesson.

In one of the videos, during the music portion of the event, one of the electric guitarists was wearing a coconut bra! Fortunately they took the video down. I don't have conclusive evidence as to why, but I have reason to think that they were tipped off that a coconut bra had no place in a service where people gather to worship the Triune God.

Question 1: Is this type of sermon what you are accustom to in your church?

Question 2: What is right or wrong about this approach to "preaching"?

Book Recommendation - When Sinners Say I Do: Discovering the Power of the Gospel for Marriage

2007-07-19T09:12:00.000-06:00

Here's a look at the table of contents:

Chapter 1 - What Really Matters in Marriage
Chapter 2 - Waking Up With the Worst of Sinners
Chapter 3 - The Fog of War and the Law of Sin
Chapter 4 - Taking it Out for a Spin
Chapter 5 - Mercy Triumphs Over Judgment
Chapter 6 - Forgiveness, Full and Free
Chapter 7 - The Surgeon, the Scalpel, and the Spouse in Sin
Chapter 8 - Stubborn Grace
Chapter 9 - Concerning Sex
Chapter 10 - When Sinners Say Goodbye

Recommendations

“I read this book on marriage and this an honest impression of mine—it blew me away. I was very glad to write the foreword to this book because it was probably one of the most honest looks at the joys and struggles of marriage, a marriage between two flawed people who are living in a fallen world who are the sons and daughters of a faithful God. You’re selling yourself short if you don’t read this book. Don’t read it only if you’re married. Everyone should read this book because it has so much to say about the struggles that happen when sinners live near sinners; and how God rescues us by His grace and gives us the possibility of having good rlationships...This is the best book on marriage I have ever read.” - Paul D. Tripp, President of Paul Tripp Ministries and Adjunct Professor of Practical Theology, Westminster Theological Seminary

“Dave Harvey skillfully exposes the real root of most marriage problems – each spouse is still a sinner. But he doesn’t leave us to wallow in our sin. He shows the way out through the ongoing power of the gospel. This book will be helpful for any married couple whether they’ve been married five weeks or fifty years.” — Jerry
Bridges, author of The Pursuit of Holiness

“Dave Harvey not only offers a biblical diagnosis of marital strife, but prescribes the cure as well - the gospel. When Sinners Say "I Do" provides clarity in conflict, hope in despair, and points the way to a joy-filled, God glorifying marriage." — C.J. Mahaney, author of author of Humility

How to Grow a Church Without God

2007-07-13T07:34:00.000-06:00

Ten Ways To Grow a Church Without God
By Ray Baumann

I have spent many hours figuring out how to grow churches. I recently found some old notes that I had taken at a conference some years ago. To my surprise, I had an outline for success that was void of a Savior even being involved. Back then I focused on what attracted people to church. This is what my list read:

1. “Leadership is key.” This will be my number one way to grow the church without God. Thinking back, I would say that if I had a board comprised of wealthy businessmen, I’d have a great foundation for growing a church. You need resources to reach the community and what better way than to have many resources at your fingertips?

2. You want to create an oasis at church; let’s take a few ideas from Starbucks. Starbucks created a community of coffee drinkers. Starbucks is less about coffee and more about a place to commune. That is what you want to reproduce on Sunday; a place where people want to gather.

3. Next, your church has to offer something others don’t. You have to ask yourself who is your target audience. Find out what your audience wants and give it to them. This includes the type of music, programs, length of service and other variables. You want people to know that all of their needs can be met at church.

4. Spend money on logo and website design. You have to out market the church down the street. Mass mailings, newspaper ads and website traffic are key.

5. Advertise in the phone book, at movie theatres and during school programs. Call the media every time you have an event to get free publicity.

6. Be creative with your presentations. Be sure to utilize all of the latest technology for your cool short video illustrations. To get the full effect, you must have video projectors and plasma TVs. Lighting is also essential to set the mood during services.

7. Don’t let anyone come to church and leave without getting their information. You have one chance to make a first impression. When you have a visitor they must be greeted and shown around the facility and introduced to other church members. Giving them a free gift, like a thumb drive with the church’s information preloaded, is a nice gift.

8. Always be planning for your next event, whether it is an Easter egg hunt or Christmas drama. Every two months something big must be occurring to create excitement.

9. Have sermons focused around life issues such as parenting, managing money, eating right, getting along with others and making the best of your life.

10. Network. If you are going to grow a church, people must know who you are. Make it a routine to eat at the same places frequently. Always be involved with whatever is happening in the community.

Wondering About the Purpose Driven Church or Your Best Life Now?

2007-07-06T22:28:00.000-06:00

If you've ever wanted a second opinion on the best selling books by Rick Warren (Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary graduate) Purpose Driven Church or the Purpose Driven Life check out here and here respectively.

If you are wondering about Joel Osteen's Your Best Life Now see here. Here's a preview of the review to whet your appetite.

Someone might legitimately raise the question why we are reviewing this book. After all, the pattern here at 9Marks has been that we review Christian books.

I suppose we must be branching out now, because Joel Osteen’s Your Best Life Now is decidedly not one of those. Open the book to any random page, and you will likely find some mention of God or even a reference to Scripture. Yet that is just window-dressing.

When you wring the book out, what you end up with is nothing more than the soggy old self-help pop-psychology that people have been lapping up for a generation—with the word "God" thrown in every once in a while for good measure.

Is the Holy Spirit You Believe in Divine?

2007-07-05T09:59:00.000-06:00

Often our claimed "orthodox" pneumatology (doctrine of the Holy Spirit) finds itself subordinating the Holy Spirit into a lesser being (we'll still call Him divine though - and please don't use the pronoun "it" for the Spirit) who functions as a helper to the greatest beings, the Father and the Son. Now, we're quick to claim that the Holy Spirit is God, but functionally worked out, His divinity comes up lacking.

Have you ever thought of the Holy Spirit as "the sum of all that Christ purchased for man" (Edwards, Discourse on the Trinity, Yale: 136)? If you, like myself, have found yourself struggling over how to begin appropriately thinking of the personhood and the role of the Holy Spirit, let Jonathan Edwards pour affection and worship for the Holy Spirit over your heart and mind.

Just a quick note...neither Jonathan Edwards nor anyone else will exhaust the mystery of the Trinity, but this doesn't mean we can't think right thoughts about Him and rightly worship Him.

Our dependence is equally upon each in this affair: the Father appoints and provides the Redeemer; and himself accepts the price and grant the thing purchased; the Son is the Redeemer by offering up himself, and is the price; the Holy Ghost immediately communicates to us the thing purchased by communicating himself, and he is the thing purchased. The sum of all that Christ purchased for man was the Holy Ghost. Gal 3:13-14, he was "made a curse for us...that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith." What Christ purchased for us, was that we have communion with God in his God, which consists in partaking of the Holy Ghost as we have shown. All the blessedness of the redeemed consists in their partaking of Christ's fullness , which consists in partaking of that Spirit which is given not by measure unto him. The oil that is poured on the head of the church runs down to the members of his body and tho the skirts of his garment (Ps. 133:2). Christ purchased for us that we should have the favor of God and might enjoy his love; but this love is the Holy Ghost. Christ purchased for us true spiritual excellency, grace and holiness, the sum of which is love to God, which is but only the indwelling of the Holy Ghost in the heart. Christ purchased for us spiritual joy and comfort, which is in a participation of God's joy and happiness; which joy and happiness is the Holy Ghost, as we have shown. The Holy Ghost is the sum of all good things. Good things and the Holy Spirit are synonymous expressions in Scripture. Matt. 7:11, "How much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?" The sum of all spiritual good which the saints have in this world is that spring of living water within them, which we read of, John 4:10-15; and those rivers of living water flowing out of them, which we read of, John 7:38-39; which we are there told means the Holy Ghost. And the sum of all happiness in the other world is that river of water of life which proceeds out of the throne of God and the Lamb, which we read of, Rev. 22:1; which is the river of God's pleasures and is the Holy Ghost; and therefore the sum of the gospel invitation is to come and take the water of life (v. 17). The Holy Ghost is the purchased possession and inheritance of the saints, as appears, because that little of it which the saints have in this world is said to be the earnest of that purchased inheritance (Eph. 1:14, II Cor. 1:22 and 5:5). 'Tis an earnest of that which we are to have a fullness of hereafter. The Holy Ghost is the great subject of all gospel promises, and therefore is the Spirit of promise (Eph. 1:13)....All our good is of God the Father; 'tis all through God the Son; and all is in the Holy Ghost, as he is himself all our good. God is himself the portion and purchased inheritance of his people. Thus God is the Alpha and the Omega in this affair of redemption.

Thank you Holy Spirit for binding my heart to the Triune God.

Independence Days

2007-07-04T11:13:00.000-06:00

1. 2nd Birth, Regeneration, Reborn, Christian Birthday, when I got saved, the day I was justified by God, through Christ's imputed righteousness and the other names we may attach to the time when the Holy Spirit brought us into union with the Father and the Son.

God gave us independence or freedom from the sting of death, power of Satan, the curse of the law to be fulfilled for righteousness, idolatry of self and gave us independence or liberated us to justification by Christ's righteousness, fulfill the law out of our enjoyment of the Father and the Son by the Spirit not to gain righteousness, union with the Triune God and with other believers, an on and on we could go.

2. The Second Coming of Christ

When Christ frees us once and for all from the remnant of original sin that so wages war on our desires for enjoyment of God, and frees us to perfect loving, eternal union by the Spirit with our Triune God and all His children of every tribe, tongue and nation. There will no longer be tears of loss, for we are all found in Him.

There will be no more dark nights of depression, for the Light of God will fill all in all. We will not have faith in the products of sin, but a joy in GOD so intense that there will only be desires for Him. The slain Lamb standing will be exalted forever. The Father who governs His children with hesed (covenant loyalty) will be extolled eternally. And, the Spirit who keeps GOD's people in union with Him will be praised from age to age.

Glory in HIM today for your independence from self and independence to live in HIM.

NOTE: I consciously did not include "the rapture", aka the "secret coming". Also note that the great trumpet sound will coincide with the Second Coming.

False Prophets: What Should We Do with Them?

2007-07-03T12:47:00.000-06:00

In the November/December 2002 issue of EndTimes Magazine, this man claimed that Saddam Hussein was the AntiChrist, Apollyon (Greek) or Abaddon (Hebrew) in this article.

Here we have the sun being hidden by the smoke, attack helicopters described as locusts coming out of the smoke, and a king over them by the name of the destroyer — and Saddam’s name literally means "the destroyer."

What are the odds that the Bible would call this king by his actual name? At what point can we no longer say, “This is a coincidence?" If we were reading an Iraqi Bible, it would say, "They had a king over them called Saddam."

My point in referencing this man and his teaching is to say:
1. Yes, false prophets exist.
2. What should we do with them in cosideration of this verse?

But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name that I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.’ 21 And if you say in your heart, ‘How may we know the word that the Lord has not spoken?’— 22 when a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not be afraid of him. (Deuteronomy 18:20-22, ESV)

Edwards on the Trinity

2007-06-30T15:24:00.000-06:00

When we speak of God's happiness, the account that we are wont to give of it is that God is infinitely happy in the enjoyment of himself, in perfectly beholding and infinitely loving, and rejoicing in, his own essence and perfections. And accordingly it must be supposed that God perpetually and eternally has a most perfect idea of himself, as it were an exact image and representation of himself ever before him and in actual view. And from hence arises a most pure and perfect energy in the Godhead, which is the divine love, complacence (read satisfaction or contentment) and joy. Edwards, Works v21, Writings on the Trinity, Grace and Faith, Yale. p113

Some helpful notations:
1. God eternally and infinitely enjoys Himself.

2. God's "most perfect idea of Himself" which is an "exact image and representation of himself" and which He constantly has his eyes on is the Son.

or - God's most perfect idea of himself = His exact image and representation of Himself = the Son.

3. The "perfect energy" which unites God's perfect idea of Himself to Him is the divine love, contentment and joy which is the Holy Spirit.

or - The perfect energy uniting Father and Son = divine love = the Holy Spirit

Was Jonathan Edwards Promoting an Emergent Culture?
Read a lot of Edwards.
Sam Storms' Edwards resources.

The Golden iPhone - Copper Will Do.

2007-06-27T10:46:00.000-06:00

Apple's iPhone is scheduled to release on June 29th. You can watch the promo video here.

Susheel Daswani, attorney in San Francisco, makes no qualms about it,

"I've always had a huge case of gear lust for the iPhone. If I don't get one...Friday, I'll be utterly disappointed" (USA Today, June 25, 2007, 4B).

Gear lust. Utter disappointment. Unfortunately, I was there at one time. Maybe not utter disappointment, but the mindset was there. However, do in large part to God's using this man, I now have an internal war over lusting for other things more that I lust for fellowship with the Trinity and how that relationship actually plays out in my love for others over my love for gadgets.

God gives us money not so we can pound it into golden idols, but so we can use it as a means to being utterly delighted in Him in our God-lust and other's being gifted with a God-lust. By God's grace copper will do!

If you want learn what it means to have a pilgrim mindset with a war-time lifestyle. Go here and bathe in the gold of God's perspective on the almightly dollar. Below is one excerpt of the resources therein.

Lavish Giving, Loving Guests, Living Christ

Contribute to the needs of the saints and seek to show hospitality. Romans 12:13

How do you live when you know and feel that the mercy of God, obtained by the death of his Son, is the source of your life past, present, and future? That’s the question Romans 12 answers. Notice verse 1 again: “I appeal to you therefore, brothers,by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice . . .” I appeal to you therefore. “Therefore”—on the basis of everything I have shown you in chapters 1-11 about God’s wrath and mercy, about Christ’s deity and death and resurrection and reign and intercession for you, about the Holy Spirit poured out with love into your hearts, about justification by faith alone and how we are counted righteous because of one man’s obedience, about the sovereign power of God that governs the universe and works all things together for your good and will never let anything separate you from the love of Christ—therefore, because of these mercies, give your body to God and live like this.

Romans 12 is a description of how we live when we know and feel the truth that we deserve nothing but misery forever, but instead, because of Christ, we have the promise that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing to glory that will be revealed to us (Romans 8:18). Romans 12 is the way you live when you have been broken because of your sin—when you have said with the apostle Paul, “Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death?” (Romans 7:24)—and then, after being broken, you have discovered that in Christ God is for you and not against you, and that neither tribulation, nor distress, nor persecution, nor famine, nor nakedness, nor danger, nor sword can separate you from the love of Christ and from everlasting joy. Romans 12 is how you live when you know this Christ-bought, broken-hearted joy.

The Issue of How to Handle Our Money and Possessions

One of the great issues of life facing Christians in every age, and especially in times and places of great prosperity (like 21st century America) is how to think about and feel about and handle our money and our possessions. For Jesus this was simply huge. He spoke about it over and over again. He gave promises and warnings and commandments. He rebuked people bent on bigger and bigger barns for the sake of their ease. He told stories and parables. By hoarding possessions, he said, you can perish, and by giving them you can lay up treasures in heaven. How we handle our money and possessions is the barometer of how we trust God and treasure Christ. Where you treasure is, there will your heart be also.

How Crucial Are Giving and Hospitality?

Is it really that crucial? Is it near the center of life in Christ—giving to the needs of the saints and welcoming people into your home as v. 13 says?

Randy Alcorn says so well, “God prospers me not to raise my standard of living, but to raise my standard of giving” [The Treasure Principle (Sisters, Oregon: Multnomah, 2001], 71).

In answer to the first question: yes, giving lavishly and loving guests is near the heart of what it means to walk as a Christian. I appeal to you by the mercies of God, give generously and open your homes to the saints.

What Prevents Giving and Hospitality?

What stands in the way for us to do better at giving and at hospitality?

Four reasons we don’t give as we ought:

Obliviousness. For whatever reason, you may have never even thought about giving away your money regularly. It never occurred to you that this is part of worship (verse 1). The height of virtue for you is, “Thou shalt not steal.” Good start. But now God is calling you to hear the New Testament command. Not just: Don’t take what’s not yours, but give what is yours. “Contribute to the needs of the saints.” “Let him who contributes do so generously.” Don’t be oblivious anymore.
Carelessness. Perhaps we are not oblivious. We know this is what people who love Christ do. But we just never seem to get around to planning how much and when and where to give. Things just slide. God has appointed this message to bring you to a critical new place in your walk with him this week. Don’t be careless. Be thoughtful. Be intentional.
Greed—the desire to keep more than we need. The spirit of greed groans when it gives. It thinks of all the things we could buy if we didn’t give. The biblical alternative to this is not disciplined groaning. The alternative is a new heart and the joy of being free from the bondage of greed. It’s the glad experience that it is more blessed to give than to receive (Acts 20:35). Don’t live in the bondage of greed. Be free.
Fear that we won’t have what we need. Fear is the flip side of greed. Greed focuses on what we don’t have but would like to have. Fear focuses on the consequences of not having what we need to have. The answer to greed is the pleasure of Christ’s presence. The answer to fear is the certainty of Christ’s promise. Don’t live in fear. Be satisfied with Christ, and trust his promises.

How Do We Break Free in Order to Give Lavishly and to Open Our Homes?

The point of God’s providence is the point of his promises: trust me, and go beyond in ministry and in giving what you think you can.

What Are the Rewards or Giving Lavishly and Opening Our Homes?

Finally, our fourth question: what are the rewards if we trust God’s promises, give lavishly, and open our homes to each other and the needy?

The suffering of the saints will be relieved or at least diminished. That is what verse 12 means when it says, “Contribute to the needs of the saints.” We lift a burden. We relieve stress. We give hope. And that’s a reward!
The glory of God is displayed. Matthew 5:16 “Let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven.” Lavish giving and open homes display the glory and the goodness and the worth of God in your life. The reason God gives us money and homes is so that by the way we use them people can see they are not our God. But God is our God. And our treasure.
More thanksgiving to God is unleashed. 2 Corinthians 9:12, “The ministry of this service is not only supplying the needs of the saints, but is also overflowing in many thanksgivings to God.” God has given us money and homes not just so that we are thankful, but by our generosity and hospitality to make many people thankful to God.
Our love for God and his love in us is confirmed. 1 John 3:17, “If anyone has the world's goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God's love abide in him?” In other words, when we give generously and open our homes, the love of God is confirmed in our lives. We are real. We are not phony Christians.
Finally, we lay up treasure in heaven. Luke 12:33-34. “Sell your possessions, and give to the needy. Provide yourselves with moneybags that do not grow old, with a treasure in the heavens that does not fail. . . . For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.”

$5 Piper Books

2007-06-27T10:45:00.000-06:00

Every book in our store will be $5 on June 27-28, Wednesday and Thursday next week. No limits, so spread the word.

Abraham Piper, Desiring God blog

Was Jonathan Edwards Promoting an Emergent Culture?

2007-06-24T15:47:00.000-06:00

Though there may be some ends of particular works of providence that were not the last end of the creation, which are in themselves grateful (read, pleasing) to God in such particular emergent circumstances, and so are last ends in an inferior sense; yet this is only in certain cases or particular occasions.

This is an excerpt from Jonathan Edwards's Dissertation Concerning the End for Which God Created the World, Introduction, eighth general position.

In the eighth position Edwards is arguing that the "ultimate end...of [God's] works of providence must be the ultimate end of...creation." Edwards' definition of providence is God's putting His creation, especially the "moral world" (read, humans) to use toward His highest end in the world, that end being the "emanation and remanation" or, knowing and delighting (not two things) God and expressing it back to God praise.

"The end of God's main works of Providence towards moral beings, or the main use to which he puts them, shews the main end for which he has made the whole world" (Section II, Chapter II, Position 6).

Edwards's metanarrative for the End for Which God Created the World is,

God's respect to the creature's good, and his respect to himself, is not a divided respect; but both are united in one, as the happiness of the creature aimed at is happiness in union with himself. The creature is no further happy with this happiness which God makes his ultimate end, that he becomes one with God. The more happiness the greater union: when happiness is perfect, the union is perfect (Section 7).

Or, in an abbreviated form, GOD aims that His children glorify Him by delighting in Him as He delights in Himself. "God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in Him" (John Piper).

?Where does the Emergent Church come into this? (Note: I am not addressing the Emerging Church or Missional movement in this post. There are differences in the three, especially Missional from the other two.)

The postmodern* mindset, to which the Emergent Church movement tailor their propositionless "conversation", is incredulous to metanarrative (i.e. an overarching story to explain all knowledge and experience). Postmoderns* along with the Emergent Church deconstruct propositions, beliefs, overarching stories, etc. into more palpable minor narratives that aren't so "restrictive and suppressive".

Clearly, incredulity to metanarrative is incredulous to Jonathan Edwards. The story of God's glory is the bettametanarrative (read, better - should be "best" but it wasn't as phonetically pleasing) by which all other minanarratives (minor) should be understood and held in place.

Edwards, Emergent? No!

*if there is such a thing as "postmodern". See here and here.

Are We Amusing Ourselves to Death?

2007-06-23T14:38:00.000-06:00

Short Review and Response to Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Showbusiness.
Disclaimer: I do not want this to come across as if I think I have all the answers or that the effects or solutions I see and posit are all inclusive. I do hope it spurs on your thought in regards to being a good steward with TV.

In the form of a response to Amusing Ourselves to Death by Neil Postman, I would like to: 1) state the problem as postulated by Postman; 2) apply it to Evangelicalism during television's brief 20th century setting by showing some of the effects of TV epistemology on our seminaries, churches and missions agencies; and, 3) give four potential solutions.

The Problem. Neil Postman, with sharp discernment, posits that the television as a

“major new medium changes the structure of discourse; it does so by encouraging certain uses of the intellect, by favoring certain definitions of intelligence and wisdom, and by demanding a certain kind of content – in a phrase, by creating new forms of truth-telling” (27).

Formerly, the structure of discourse in the American culture was dominated by print. Under the influence of typography,

“public discourse tends to be characterized by a coherent, orderly arrangement of facts and ideas…which revealed the world…to be a serious, coherent place, capable of management by reason, and of improvement by logical and relevant criticism” (51, 62).

However, “as typography moves to the periphery of our culture and television takes it place at the center, the seriousness, clarity and, above all, value of public discourse dangerously declines” (29).

Application to Evangelicalism. Neil Postman’s juxtaposition of the typographic mind and television-based epistemology can be applied to evangelicalism by way of seminaries, preaching, the laity and missions agencies.

God has revealed Himself through Christ and a Book, the Bible. Thus Christians should be the most highly adept readers possible, able to develop thoughts, track proposition on proposition, focus intently on a text, and clearly and accurately articulate positions as a reflection of their love for the Text-Giver. The Age of Show Business with its easy access entertainment, context-free environment and amusement driven come-back-for-more TV ideology has devoured the Age of Exposition which had a

“sophisticated ability to think conceptually, deductively and sequentially; high valuation of reason and order; abhorrence of contradiction; capacity for detachment and objectivity; and tolerance for delayed response” (63).

“Television’s way of knowing is uncompromisingly hostile to typography’s way of knowing; its conversations produce incoherence and triviality; the phrase “serious television” is a contradiction in terms, and television speaks only in one persistent voice – the voice of entertainment” (80).

How has television-based epistemology affected the seminaries, churches and missions agencies? (in no particular order)

A decreased ability to focus intently for sustained periods of time and demand from ourselves rigorous attention to the study of the Word and the preaching/teaching of the Word .
A decreased ability to intelligently read, question, ascertain meaning, demand academic work from a text or a sermon/presentation.
The evaluation of methods by means of their visual excellence rather than their God honoring accuracy.
Aesthetic value is elevated over biblical accuracy.
Acceptance of what is biblically profane as commonplace.
Instant access and the remote control have elevated autonomy over the denial of assumed personal rights and living in community.
Comfort elevated over conviction due to the ability to control the output of “the tube”.
Humor esteemed of greater value to the soul than serious reflection and conviction over sin.
Felt needs esteemed over real needs the Text says one has but does not feel due to the blinding effects of the sin nature (i.e. conviction and godly shame for sin, fear of God, trembling in His presence).
The weighty things of God (gravitas) traded in for levity (levitas) due to the value of humor and entertainment on television.
Affluence prized over modest living.
Polished professionalism prized over servant hearted work in the trenches.
Sermons become commercials (Sermercials) built to address “the psychological needs of the viewer” (130).
Uncritical acceptance of ideas.
Pastor/teachers become celebrities (a cult of personality can happen without the TV).
The emptying of substance for the sake of image.
A decreased ability to retain information or memorize.
Emotionalism becomes commonplace over a consistency and balance of the heart’s affection and the mind’s attention.
Topical sermons mirror television as a “non-graded curriculum” which “excludes no viewer for any reason, at any time” (147) and do not push one to in-depth study due to a non-hierarchical, non-systematic bias doing away with systematic and biblical theologies.
Because on television “perplexity is a superhighway to low ratings”, (147) and “contentment, not the growth of the learner is paramount” (148) so churches can become comfort driven rather Gospel-driven.

Four Potential Solutions.
First, we must foster environments in seminaries, churches and missions agencies which are open to dialogue and serious thought over the effects of television-based epistemology.

Second, we must recover the Text by rigorous exposition aimed at conforming the heart and mind, which shows itself in joyful obedience to God (which is faith). This may force us to preach with notes as we attempt to develop Text-driven sermons and classes, built proposition by proposition through determined study.

Third, help people to set stewardly parameters on their consumption of television.

Fourth, if we televise our services we should ask “What is accurate to the text as God honoring?” rather than, “What is best for television?”

Below I have provided some links that you may find interesting.

You can attend church online - totally autonomous.
But, if it's too autonomous, you can join an after service chat room.
You donate to the online offering plate.
Check out how these two churches are promoting their series on Desperate Households and mylamesexlife.com

Theology, Unity and Inner-Trinitarian Unity-Reflection

2007-06-23T12:52:00.000-06:00

The Question:

For all the good that Continental Pietism did to nourish the spiritual lives of millions of Christians in Europe, it did downplay the need for doctrinal precision. In your view is this lack of an emphasis on theology for the sake of unity within the church healthy for a church or denomination over a long period of time? Why or why not?

My Answer:

Where an emphasis on theology does not exist, true unity, one will not find. Let me explain.

Theology: the humble, joyful submission to the Word of God in practice and in theory - worship with head and heart, affections and intellect. All learning is for lauding. Theology is a commitment to studying about the Triune God to apply His truths in order that the believer increasingly die to sin, live to righteousness, care for the saints, and to ultimately develop faith, hope and love for the Triune God.

Unity: the act of reflecting the inner-Trinitarian fellowship. Unity is the eager communion of the saints by the Spirit in the bond of peace in Christ as the Spirit enables the believer to fellowship with one another and the Trinity. The inner-Trinitarian fellowship, which the unity of the saints with Christ and each other reflects, is the intimate, open, submissive love which eternally radiates among the persons of the Trinity.

True Trinitarian unity-reflection only happens in a community which is beautifully and joyfully submitting itself to the Word of God (this is worship which is the purpose of theology), in order that the institutions - which God has erected to reflect His inner-Trinitarian unity - would submit themselves to Christ as Head of the Church and thus, show off His love for Himself.

Thus, theology and unity are inseparable because both are inseparable in their purpose - knowing and loving the Trinity to reflect His beauty back to Him.

Remove either one, theology or unity, and you never produce or maintain the other. They go hand in hand in their purpose.

Is the lack of theology for the sake of unity unhealthy? It's impossible. You can't produce beautiful Trinitarian-reflecting unity where worshipful Trinitarian-knowing theology doesn't exist and vice, versa.

Abort 73 - Help Stop Infant Homicide

2007-06-22T13:29:00.000-06:00

Abort73.com exists to cut through the skewed rhetoric of a broadly “pro-choice” culture by presenting young people with the conclusive evidence that abortion is a massive injustice, one which has and continues to systematically destroy the most innocent and helpless members of
the human race.

Abort73.com further exists as a gateway into the more fundamental questions of human existance. Where does human life come from? From whence does evil emerge? What is the meaning of life?

ANNUAL ABORTION STATISTICS

In 2002, approximately 1.29 million abortions took place in the U.S., down from an estimated 1.31 million in 2000 and 1.36 million in 1996. From 1973 through 2002, more than 42 million legal abortions have occurred in the U.S. (AGI).

In 2001, the highest number of reported legal induced abortions occurred in NYC (91,792), Florida (85,589), and Texas (77,409); the fewest occurred in Idaho (738), South Dakota (895), and North Dakota (1,216) (CDC).

There are 36 abortions per 1,000 live births in Idaho and 767 abortions for every 1,000 live births in NYC (CDC).

Overall, the annual number of legal induced abortions in the United States increased gradually from 1973 until it peaked in 1990, and it generally declined thereafter (CDC).

In 1998, the last year for which estimates were made, more than 23% of legal induced abortions were performed in California (CDC).

The abortion rate in the United States was higher than recent rates reported for Canada and Western European countries and lower than rates reported for China, Cuba, the majority of Eastern European countries, and certain Newly Independent States of the former Soviet Union (CDC).

The national legal induced abortion ratio increased from 196 abortions per 1,000 live births in 1973 to 358 abortions per 1,000 in 1979 and remained nearly stable through 1981. The ratio peaked at 364 abortions per 1,000 live births in 1984 and since then has demonstrated a generally steady decline. In 2001, the abortion ratio was 246 abortions per 1,000 live births (for the states that reported, a 0.4% increase from 2000 (CDC).

49% of pregnancies among American women are unintended; about 40% of these are terminated by abortion (AGI).

Why the name Abort73?
10 Ways You Can Help.
Shop Abort73.

All Books at Desiring God $5

2007-06-21T15:57:00.000-06:00

Every book in our store will be $5 on June 27-28, Wednesday and Thursday next week.
No limits, so spread the word.

Abraham Piper, Desiring God blog

Do You Suffer From Teenage Affluenza

2007-06-21T10:31:00.000-06:00

Prayer for My Wife, Christina

2007-06-20T09:54:00.000-06:00

Please be in prayer for my wife, Christina. She is ten (10) weeks pregnant with our third and has been nauseated pretty much non-stop. She doesn't just have morning sickness, it's all-the-time sickness.

Please pray that God would cause her nausea to subside and, should He choose that it continue, that He would give grace for her to rejoice in the Lord all the while.

Thank you very much.

Book Review - Created in God's Image

2007-06-19T10:45:00.000-06:00

Hoekema, Anthony. Created in God’s Image. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1986. 264 pp. $22.00

The fact is widely held that an artist’s work reflects much of the personality and make-up of the artist – the experiences, heritage, struggles, emotions, beliefs and so on. Surrealist sculptors and painters Salvador Dali and Joan Miro’s incessant desire for autonomy, liberation and revolution was reflected in their various cross usage and experimentation of medias.[1] The same producer/product reflection-relationship can be said for architects, authors, scientists and scholars. However, can one posit this same creator/product relationship to the Creator of the universe? Is it even proper to attribute this distinction to God? If so, what are the boundaries of this relationship? What is the nature of this relationship? Primarily, does the Bible have anything to say about the creature’s reflection of its Creator?

Created in God’s Image is Anthony Hoekema’s systematic attempt to answer some of these long pondered questions through a survey of biblical and historical information “about the nature and destiny of human beings” (ix); what is formally known as the doctrine of anthropology. From a Reformed perspective, Hoekema aims to

Present the image of God as having both a structural and a functional aspect, as involving man in his threefold relationship—to God, to others, and to nature—and as going through four stages—the original image, the perverted image, the
renewed image, and the perfected image (ix).

To his three goals we now turn.

In his theological summary of the image of God, Hoekema argues that,

The image of God in man must therefore be seen as involving both the structure of man (his gifts, capacities, and endowments) and the functioning of man
(his actions, his relationships to God and to others, and the ways he uses
his gifts) (73).

To be included in the structural aspects by which “man is like God, and therefore images him” are his rationality, moral sensitivity, conscience, capacity for worship, responsibility, volition, aesthetic sense, and others (70-71). These capacities which “enable man to function as he should in his various relationships” (70-71) “have not been lost” (10) post-fall, but have been retained according to Hoekema (72). On the other hand, man lost the image of God in the functional sense (72). This aspect of the image of God consists of “true knowledge, righteousness, and holiness” (71). In this sense the image of God “means man’s proper functioning in harmony with God’s will for him” (72). From the perspective of the God-given gifts (structural or broader sense) and purposes of those gifts (functional or narrower sense) the heinousness of sin can be seen “by the fact that man is now using God-given and God-imaging powers and gifts to do things that are an affront to his Maker” (72). Pre-fall both the structural and functional aspects were in harmony in man to glorify God in his threefold relationship.

From Genesis 1:26-27, Hoekema contends that “God has placed man into a threefold relationship: between man and God, between man and his fellowmen, and between man and nature” (75). As the perfect image of God, Jesus was in perfect functional peace in this threefold relationship, and likewise, so should man. The primary relationship for man as a “created person” (5) is with his Creator, and all of his “other relationships are to be seen as dominated and regulated by this one” (75). The second relationship given by God to man is his relationship to his fellowman. This relationship is to be used to glorify God by not viewing “gifts and talents as an avenue for personal aggrandizement, but as a means whereby he or she can enrich the lives of others…through acceptance and love” (78). The final aspect of man’s threefold relationship is his rulership over nature. This cultural mandate is “the command to develop a God-glorifying culture” (79); “to cultivate and care for that portion of the earth in which [man] is placed” (80). Hoekema believes that “the proper functioning of the image of God is to be channeled” (81) through this threefold relationship and that by looking at the four stages of humanity one can arrive at a more robust biblical view of the image of God.

The four stages of the image of God are: the original image, the perverted image; the renewed image and the perfected image. Briefly, the original image is in the pre-fall environment where the threefold relationship and functional and structural aspects all functioned properly. The perverted image is the situation post-fall into sin, where “the image of god was not annihilated but perverted” (83) in the sense that the structural sense remained but the functional sense changed from using his gifts and capacities for doing God’s will to fulfilling his own fleshly desires. The renewed image is the “restoration of the image [that] takes place in the redemptive process” (85) of sanctification. Finally, the perfected image is the glorious state of the image of God which is not a return to the original image but a moving beyond it into a situation where man is not only able not to sin (posse non peccare), and able not to die (posse non mori) but also not able to sin (non posse peccare) and not able to die (non posse mori) (92). Alongside these three stated purposes, Hoekema provides several worth while views.

Even though Hoekema is writing well within the Reformed tradition, he does hold to a modified view to said position in regards to the covenant of works. Standing with a few more recent Reformed theologians such as, G. C. Berkouwer, John Murray and Herman Hoeksema, he shares “their conviction that we ought not to call the arrangement God made with Adam and Eve before the Fall a ‘covenant of works’ (119). Among the classical Reformed theologians Hoekema confronts are Herman Bavinck[2] and William Shedd[3] to name two. Another not mentioned is Stephen Charnock.[4] One final Reformed theologian holding to a covenant of works with whom Hoekema did not interact due to his passing is Wayne Grudem.[5] Grudem actually deals with all four of Hoekema’s objections giving sufficient answers to affirm that in some sense the covenant of works is still in force and in others it is not. The ways in which he claims the covenant of works as still functioning are: 1) If one perfectly obeyed the law, then as Paul implies in Rom. 7:10; 10:5 and Gal 3:12, then he would have eternal life; 2) The punishment of death for breaking the covenant is still binding; and, 3) Christ perfectly fulfilled the covenant of works in our place. The sense in which the covenant of works is not binding are: 1) We do not have the law to refrain from eating of the tree in the Garden from which Adam and Eve ate; 2) Due to the sin nature which has been imputed to us from Adam, we no longer have the ability to meet the requirements of the covenant and thus, benefit from its blessings, we only get its punishments; and 3) “Christians have been freed from the covenant of works by virtue of Christ’s work and their inclusion in the new covenant, the covenant of grace.”[6] Now we shall turn to two objections dealing with what Hoekema terms as the “heart of the image of God” (22).

On pages 29, 57, and 73 he makes statements exact or similar to his statement on page 22, “the heart of the image of God is love. For no man ever loved as Christ loved.” Objection 1: The claim that the heart of the image of God is love goes against the doctrine of divine simplicity. By claiming that the heart of the image of God is love, Hoekema violates aseity because it pares the divine attributes. God is identical to His attributes and His nature, thus His existence. By elevating love he has a normative attribute. Why elevate love as a normative attribute, why not holiness or justice or righteousness? Perhaps a good starting place would be at God’s aseity. It imposes no methodological problem because any doctrine of God rightly starts with God’s self-existence. If talking of the heart of the image of God as an attribute then start where Van Til does, “First and foremost among the attributes, we therefore mention the independence or self-existence of God” and, “we must take the notion of the self-contained, self-sufficient God as the most basic notion of all our interpretive efforts.”[7] It may be interesting to see where this approach would lead. This brings us to the second objection.

Objection 2: Jesus himself made statements about His other attributes as well, not just love as the central understanding of the heart of God. Speaking as the perfect reflection or exact representation of the image of God, Jesus calls himself the “light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5); “the way, the truth and the life” (John 14:6). As judge, Jesus says He “came to cast fire on the earth” (Luke 12:49). In Revelation, He says He will stand as judge holding the world in trial (Rev. 3:10). There are other arguments but these should suffice for now as we move to the book’s impact on the field and its readers.

Created in God’s Image is a God-centered breath of fresh air in a narcissist society emitting deadly carbon monoxide for the soul. Hoekema has offered a highly laudable theological anthropology which has spanned the gambit of the field of study. He has rightly connected the historico-redemptive hermeneutic approach to the imago Dei. God’s redemptive plan and the presence of the imago Dei are no coincidence. Were Hoekema writing today, after multiplied critiques of the destructive integration of psychology with Christian theology, perhaps he would not have added their perspectives (204-05). That said, the critique is minor.

Readers are presented with a straight forward, balanced view of the Reformed tradition on the doctrine of man. The work is highly assessable due to Hoekema’s nimble perspicuity as he dissects biblically and historically the doctrines at hand. There is much spiritual value prompting the reader’s introspection over the heinousness of their sin in using the gifts of God for idolatrous purposes. Hoekema writes with spirited command over his topics of interest. I found myself amening the bulk of his work.

FOOTNOTES

[1] Wikipedia, last updated November 15, 2006, "Joan Miro," http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joan_Mir%C3%B3#_ref-0/ (accessed November 15, 2006).

[2] Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, ed. John Bolt, trans. John Vriend, God and Creation (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004), 560-88.

[3] William G. T. Shedd, Dogmatic Theology, ed. Alan W. Gomes (Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing, 2003), 479, 535-37.

[4] Stephen Charnock, The Existence and Attributes of God (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1996), 250-51, 253.

[5] Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), 516-18.

[6] Grudem, Systematic Theology, 518.

[7] John M. Frame, Divine Aseity and Apologetics (Reformed Theological Seminary, Prof. of Systematic Theology and Philosophy), 4.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bavinck, Herman. Reformed Dogmatics. Edited by John Bolt, trans. John Vriend. God and Creation. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004.

Charnock, Stephen. The Existence and Attributes of God. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1996.

Frame, John M. Divine Aseity and Apologetics. Reformed Theological Seminary, Prof. of Systematic Theology and Philosophy.

Grudem, Wayne. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994.

Shedd, William G. T. Dogmatic Theology. Edited by Alan W. Gomes. Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing, 2003.

Wikipedia. "Joan Miro." last updated November 15, 2006. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joan_Mir%C3%B3#_ref-0/ (accessed November 15, 2006).

Fathers and The Father

2007-06-18T10:52:00.000-06:00

Two Questions:

1. What are the biggest differences you see between being a man who is a father and a man who has children?

2. Is it necessary for a father to have God as his Father to fulfill his God ordained role?

The assumption in Q1 is that a father is not simply a man who can have children, but a man who takes care of his children in some higher sense than a man who simply procreates and leaves his child(ren) to be cared for by someone else.

6 Rules for Ethical Islamic Jihad

2007-06-15T15:24:00.000-06:00

The Guidebook for Taking a Life (This article modified from the "New York Times")

Rule 1: You can kill bystanders without feeling a lot of guilt.

The Koran, as translated by the University of Southern California Muslim Student Association’s Compendium of Muslim Texts, generally prohibits the slaying of innocents, as in Verse 33 in Chapter 17 (Isra’, The Night Journey, Children of Israel): “Nor take life, which Allah has made sacred, except for just cause.”

But the Koran also orders Muslims to resist oppression, as verses 190 and 191 of Chapter 2 (The Cow) instruct: “Fight in the cause of Allah with those who fight with you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors. And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out, for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter. ...”

In the typical car bombing, some Islamists say, God will identify those who deserve to die — for example, anyone helping the enemy — and send them to hell. The other victims will go to paradise. “The innocent who is hurt, he won’t suffer,” Dr. Massari says. “He becomes a martyr himself.”

There is one gray area. If you are a Muslim who has sinned, getting killed by a suicide bomber will clean some of your slate for Judgment Day, but precisely where God draws the line between those who go to heaven or hell is not spelled out.

Rule 2: You can kill children, too, without needing to feel distress.

True, Islamic texts say it is unlawful to kill children, women, the old and the infirm. In the Sahih Bukhari, a respected collection of sermons and sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, verse 4:52:257 refers to Ghazawat, a battle in which Muhammad took part. “Narrated Abdullah: During some of the Ghazawat of the Prophet a woman was found killed. Allah’s Apostle disapproved the killing of women and children.”

But militant Islamists including extremists in Jordan who embrace Al Qaeda’s ideology teach recruits that children receive special consideration in death. They are not held accountable for any sins until puberty, and if they are killed in a jihad operation they will go straight to heaven. There, they will instantly age to their late 20s, and enjoy the same access to virgins and other benefits as martyrs receive.

Islamic militants are hardly alone in seeking to rationalize innocent deaths, says John O. Voll, a professor of Islamic history at Georgetown University. “Whether you are talking about leftist radicals here in the 1960s, or the apologies for civilian collateral damage in Iraq that you get from the Pentagon, the argument is that if the action is just, the collateral damage is justifiable,” he says.

Rule 3: Sometimes, you can single out civilians for killing; bankers are an example.

In principle, nonfighters cannot be targeted in a militant operation, Islamist scholars say. But the list of exceptions is long and growing.

Civilians can be killed in retribution for an enemy attack on Muslim civilians, argue some scholars like the Saudi cleric Abdullah bin Nasser al-Rashid, whose writings and those of other prominent Islamic scholars have been analyzed by the Combating Terrorism Center, a research group at the United States Military Academy at West Point, N.Y.

Shakir al-Abssi, whose Qaeda-minded group, Fatah Al Islam, has been fighting Lebanese soldiers since May 20, says some government officials are fair game. He was sentenced to death in Jordan for helping to organize the slaying of the American diplomat Laurence Foley in 2002, and said in an interview with The New York Times that while he did not specifically choose Mr. Foley to be killed, “Any person that comes to our region with a military, security or political aim, then he is a legitimate target.”

Others like Atilla Ahmet, a 42-year-old Briton of Cypriot descent who is awaiting trial in England on terrorism charges, take a broader view. “It would be legitimate to attack banks because they charge interest, and this is in violation of Islamic law,” Mr. Ahmet said last year.

Rule No. 4: You cannot kill in the country where you reside unless you were born there.

Militants living in a country that respects the rights of Muslims have something like a peace contract with the country, says Omar Bakri, a radical sheik who moved from London to Lebanon two years ago under pressure from British authorities.

Militants who go to Iraq get a pass as expeditionary warriors. And the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks did not violate this rule since the hijackers came from outside the United States, Mr. Bakri said.
“When I heard about the London bombings, I prayed that no bombers from Britain were involved,” he said, fearing immigrants were responsible. As it turned out, the July 7, 2005, attack largely complied with this rule. Three of the four men who set off the bombs had been born in Britain; the fourth moved there from Jamaica as an infant.

Mr. Bakri says he does not condone violence against innocent people anywhere. But some of the several hundred young men who studied Islam with him say they have no such qualms.
“We have a voting system here in Britain, so anyone who is voting for Tony Blair is not a civilian and therefore would be a legitimate target,” says Khalid Kelly, an Irish-born Islamic convert who says he studied with Mr. Bakri in London.

Rule No. 5: You can lie or hide your religion if you do this for jihad.

Muslims are instructed by the Koran to be true to their religion. “Therefore stand firm (in the straight Path) as thou art commanded, thou and those who with thee turn (unto Allah), and transgress not (from the Path), for He seeth well all that you do,” says verse 112 of Chapter 11 (Hud). Lying is allowed only when it is deemed a necessity, for example when being tortured, or when an innocuous deception serves a good purpose, scholars say.

But some militants appear to shirk this rule to blend in with non-Muslim surroundings or deflect suspicion, says Maj. Gen. Achraf Rifi, the general director of Lebanon’s internal security force who oversaw a surveillance last year of a Lebanese man suspected of plotting to blow up the PATH train under the Hudson River.

“We thought the story couldn’t be true, especially when we followed this young man,” General Rifi said. “He was going out, drinking, chasing girls, drove a red MG.” But he says the man, who is now awaiting trial in Lebanon, confessed, and Mr. Rifi recalled that the Sept. 11 hijacker who came from Lebanon frequented discos in Beirut.

Mr. Voll takes a different view of the playboy-turned-militant phenomenon. He says the Sept. 11 hijackers might simply have been “guys who enjoyed a good drink” and that militant leaders may be seeking to do a “post facto scrubbing up of their image” by portraying sins as a ruse.

Rule No. 6. You may need to ask your parents for their consent.

Militant Islamists interpret the Koran and the separate teachings of Muhammad that are known as the Sunna as laying out five criteria to be met by people wanting to be jihadis. They must be Muslim, at least 15 and mature, of sound mind, debt free and have parental permission.
The parental rule is currently waived inside Iraq, where Islamists say it is every Muslim’s duty to fight the Americans, Dr. Massari says. It is optional for residents of nearby countries, like Jordan.

In Zarqa, Jordan, the 24-year-old Abu Ibrahim says he is waiting for another chance to be a jihadi after Syrian officials caught him in the fall heading to Iraq. He is taking the parental rule one step further, he said. His family is arranging for him to marry, and he feels obligated to disclose his jihad plans to any potential bride.

“I will inform my future wife of course about my plans, and I hope that, God willing, she might join me,” he said.

This brings to mind several verses:

We do not want you to be ignorant, brothers, of the affliction we experienced in Asia. For we were so utterly burdened beyond our strength that we despaired of life itself. 9 Indeed, we felt that we had received the sentence of death. But that was to make us rely not on ourselves but on God who raises the dead. 2 Corinthians 1:8-9

Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church. Colossians 1:24

But recall the former days when, after you were enlightened, you endured a hard struggle with sufferings, 33 sometimes being publicly exposed to reproach and affliction, and sometimes being partners with those so treated. 34 For you had compassion on those in prison, and you joyfully accepted the plundering of your property, since you knew that you yourselves had a better possession and an abiding one. 35 Therefore do not throw away your confidence, which has a great reward. 36 For you have need of endurance, so that when you have done the will of God you may receive what is promised. Hebrews 10:32-36

For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us. Romans 8:18

Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony about our Lord, nor of me his prisoner, but share in suffering for the gospel by the power of God. 2 Timothy 1:8

Share in suffering as a good soldier of Christ Jesus. 2 Timothy 2:3

Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword? 36 As it is written,
“For your sake we are being killed all the day
long;we are regarded as sheep to be slaughtered.”
37 No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. 38 For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. Rom 8:35-39

10 Principles to Combat Christian Jihad in Worship

2007-06-15T08:31:00.000-06:00

Worship that Pleases God (Pss. 92-98)
Sam Storms

I don’t know about you, but I’m weary of the worship wars that have wreaked havoc in so many churches. It’s sad to look back over the past twenty-five years or so at the damage and division that have resulted from this internecine conflict. Should we use traditional hymns or contemporary songs? Which do you prefer, a robed choir or praise team? Baldwin piano or acoustical guitar? Liberty or liturgy? Standing or sitting? Formal or free? Long or short? Hands raised or at your side? Solemnity or celebration?

As much as I may wish otherwise, I suspect the battle will continue. No, I don’t have a solution for a cease-fire or a remedy that will make everyone happy. But perhaps a start would be for us to return to the biblical text to determine, not what makes us feel comfortable, but what it is in worship that pleases God.

As I was reading through Psalms 92-98 I couldn’t help but notice the exhortations and counsel concerning how and why and to what end we are to worship. So, without further ado, look with me at ten truths or principles that we need to keep in mind when we worship and as we try to draw the near the throne of grace in a way that will honor and exalt the name of Jesus.

1. Worship that pleases God is perpetual and constant.

It is always and ever appropriate. The psalmist resolves “to declare your steadfast love in the morning, and your faithfulness by night” (Ps. 92:2). We should never think of worship as something reserved for a Sunday morning, as if there were any hour of any day where it wasn’t the thing to do.

2. Worship that pleases God is instrumental.

The psalmists speak of “the music of the lute and the harp” as well as “the melody of the lyre” (Ps. 92:3) and “trumpets and the sound of the horn” (98:5-6). This isn’t to say that singing a cappella is forbidden or unacceptable to God (far from it), but our Lord does appear to enjoy the loud and harmonious sounds that come from all sorts of instruments. Psalm 150 speaks of “trumpet sound” and “lute and harp” and “tambourine” and “strings and pipe” and “sounding cymbals” and even “loud clashing cymbals” (vv. 3-5).

3. Clearly God delights in joyful worship (92:4; 98:4).

“For you, O Lord, have made me glad by your works; at the works of your hands I sing for joy” (Ps. 92:4). Again, we are to “make a joyful noise to the Lord” and “break forth into joyous song” (Ps. 98:4).

So, I guess there are good grounds for the hymn writer having penned the words, “Joyful, joyful, we adore Thee” rather than “Grumpy, grumpy, we adore thee” or “Somber, somber, we adore Thee”!

4. Worship that pleases God is grounded in the recognition and celebration of his greatness.

Listen again to the psalmist: “How great are your works, O Lord! Your thoughts are very deep!” (Ps. 92:5). Contrary to the blasphemous sentiments of Christopher Hitchens’ recent book (God is not Great), I concur with King David: “Great is the Lord, and greatly to be praised, and his greatness is unsearchable” (Ps. 145:3). A great God calls for great praise.

5. Worship that pleases God is both loud and logical.

That may sound a bit strange, but seems reasonable in light of Psalm 95:2 (cf. also Pss. 66:1; 88:1; 98:4-6), for there we are exhorted to “make a joyful noise to him with songs of praise!” Note well that worship here entails noisy songs! There is volume to David’s praise, but not random or chaotic sounds. His noise takes the form of songs, of theologically precise and well-formed articulations of God’s worth and glory and majesty. It is good to know that one can be both exuberant and exact, both passionate and precise, or as I said, both loud and logical. We do not merely shout aimlessly in the air but fashion our delight into melodies of spiritual substance and theological clarity.

6. Worship that pleases God is physical.

In an earlier meditation I focused on the raising of one’s hands and its symbolic importance. Later, in our study of Psalms 149 and 150, we’ll look at the place of dancing. But in Psalm 95:6 we are called to “worship and bow down” and to “kneel before the Lord, our Maker!”

I can’t recall the number of weddings I’ve performed, but one in particular stands out in my memory. The bride was from England, and asked that I use portions of the Anglican ceremony that she had heard so often growing up. At one point the bride and groom take this pledge:

“My body will adore you,
And your body alone will I cherish.
I will, with my body, declare your worth.”

What a beautiful expression of marital affection! So I’ll ask, do you adore and cherish God with your body, no less so than with your mind and heart? Do you declare his worth physically as well as spiritually? Ron Allen put it well:

“We are not simply spirit beings. We are more than hearts or souls or ‘inner beings.’ We are persons possessing an intricate complex of physical and spiritual realities. We who worship God truly with the heart, do so with our physical bodies as well” (132).

7. Worship that pleases God is fresh and creative.

Numerous times in the Psalter we are exhorted not simply to sing a song, nor even to sing a song joyfully, but to sing a new song (see Pss. 96:1; 98:1; as well as 40:3; 149:1; Isaiah 42:10; Revelation 5:9).

I can only surmise that we are to sing new songs because God is always doing new and creative and unprecedented and heretofore unseen and unrevealed things for his people. God is fresh in his love and his redemptive and providential dealings with us, so let our worship of him be fresh as we constantly compose new and exciting songs of praise.

8. Worship that pleases God is public.

Now, no one enjoys private worship more than I do. Whether in my car or on my bed at night or in my study by day, I love to have a continuous flow of worship filling the air. But this should never justify the failure to corporately worship in the presence of all. “Declare his glory among the nations, his marvelous works among all the peoples!” (Ps. 96:3).

9. Worship that pleases God ascribes glory to his name but doesn’t add to it.

Take special note of Psalm 96:7-9 – “Ascribe to the Lord, O families of the peoples, ascribe to the Lord glory and strength! Ascribe to the Lord the glory due his name; bring an offering, and come into his courts!”

We should never purport to give God glory as if we were capable of adding to his supply or somehow enhancing and expanding the quantity of divine splendor. God’s glory and worth always have been, are now, and forever will be infinite. Our responsibility, indeed our joyful and delightful privilege, is to ascribe or predicate or declare or make known or display or pronounce what is inherently and eternally true of him.

10. God is especially honored when the whole of creation joins in celebrating his goodness and greatness.

So, “let the heavens be glad, and let the earth rejoice; let the sea roar, and all that fills it; let the field exult and everything in it! Then shall all the trees of the forest sing for joy before the Lord . . .” (Ps. 96:11-13a). And “let the rivers clap their hands; let the hills sing for joy together before the Lord, for he comes to judge the earth” (Ps. 98:8-9a).

Visit Sam Storms' resource laiden website - Enjoying God Ministries.
Subscribe to his newsletter.
Check out his blog.
Buy his book One Thing: Developing a Passion for the Beauty of God.
Buy his book Chosen for Life.

Discerning Reader: A Reader's Resource

2007-06-14T09:58:00.000-06:00

For those interested in not wasting your life reading bad books, I have two suggestions (There are numerous many others, but I'm trying to stick with being a good steward of my time. This means I have only two suggestions for now.):

Before buying a book see if Discerning Reader has a review of it and if so, read the review and then make your decision.
Read Mortimer Adler's How to Read a Book.

Book Review - The Nature of the Atonement: Four Views

2007-06-13T14:54:00.000-06:00

Beilby, James and Paul R. Eddy. The Nature of the Atonement: Four Views. Downers Grover, Il: IVP Academic, 2006. 208 pp. $20.00

Contributors include: Gregory Boyd - Christus Victor; Joel Greene - Kaleidoscope; Bruce Reichenbach - Healing; Thomas Schreiner - Penal Substitution.

Survey says? Within evangelicalism everyone agrees that Christ died to atone for sins. But, take a poll asking what the primary emphasis in Christ’s death was and you are liable to be struck by an errant stone thrown from a radical feminist who blames God for societal child abuse, get weak-kneed under the weight of a party of healing hands determined to free you from your sin-sickness, be whisked off to a Christian séance where the oppressive demons haunting your life are exercised or even given a paint brush and ushered up to a partially lit stage and encouraged to have a canvas conversation narrating which view of the atonement feels best for you at the given time in your given life-stage. All joking aside, while these are extreme positions, they are actual and go to show that theology and practice are wed. One’s view of the atonement is an outworking of, or a solution to his understanding of man’s problem and God’s requirement(s) to be in relation with Him. Is there a view of the atonement that garners biblical precedence over all others? A view by which all others are to be interpreted? A view which answers the historical problem of man and God’s requirement for a relationship with Him in a biblically faithful and foundational way? Or, is the testimony of Scripture equally weighted regarding atonement metaphors? A view that is a situationally-exalted position?

The Nature of the Atonement is a self labeled “panel discussion” attempting to answer some of these long pondered questions through a survey of four views over “the complexities of the Christian view of the atonement” (9). The dialogue flows in a positive-statement, three-rebuttal format. While each contributor affirms multiple shades of useful metaphors in the New Testament, all but one argue for a definitive model which informs the others (21). In the next four paragraphs I will point out from each author’s contribution, his preferential view of: 1) the atonement, 2) the nature of sin and the problem in the fall, and subsequently, 3) how he sees his preferred view of the atonement to be the solution reconciling God and man. To the four views we now turn.

Greg Boyd, arguing for the Christus Victor model, claims that “through the incarnation, life, death and resurrection of Christ, God defeated the devil” (24). He believes that the overarching testimony of Scripture is “accurately described as a story of God’s ongoing conflict with and ultimate victory over cosmic and human agents who oppose him and who threaten his creation” (25). In other words, Boyd thinks that the post-fall cosmic interplay of Satan’s kingdom and God’s kingdom is the explanatory story of history. Sin is an impersonal, human-victimizing force wielded by the cosmic powers; a “quasi-autonomous power that holds people groups as well as individuals in bondage” (29). God’s solution was His Son’s breaking into this long raging “cosmic war” (30) “to destroy the power of sin rescuing us from the cosmic powers that keep us in bondage to sin…this is the essence of the Christus Victor view of the atonement” (29). Jesus “set Satan’s captives free” (30). For Boyd salvation is “most fundamentally about [being] ‘transferred’ out of Satan’s dominion and brought under the reign of God through his son” (32). For these reasons and others “the Christus Victor paradigm…can be described as Satanward in its focus” (12). Next, we turn to the penal substitution view of the atonement.

Tom Schreiner forwards the penal substitution position. He defines it as such:

The Father, because of his love for human beings, sent his Son (who offered himself willingly and gladly) to satisfy God’s justice, so that Christ took the place of sinners. The punishment and penalty we deserved was laid on Jesus Christ instead of us, so that in the cross both God’s holiness and love are manifested (67).

Schreiner understands man’s fundamental problem as internal rather than merely external. “We ourselves are radically evil…wrongly related to God himself. Evil powers reign over us because of the evil within us. We are victims to sin because we have failed to glorify and thank God the way we should” (68). The problem in the fall is man’s idolatry or “spiritual adultery” whereby he “[finds] delight in the praise of people instead of seeking the glory of God (Jn 5:44)” (77). Schreiner shows the link between man’s “spiritual harlotry” (77) and the intensity of the problem in the fall by arguing that “(1) lawbreaking is not impersonal, (2) God judges sin retributively, and (3) God is personally angry at sin” (77). From this framework the atonement can be understood “theocentrically and not anthropocentrically” (88). “In the cross of Christ the justice and mercy of God meet. God’s holiness is satisfied by Christ’s bearing the penalty of sin, and God’s saving activity is realized in the lives of those who trust in Christ” (88). The penal substitution theory can be described as Godward in its focus or “objective” – “[understanding] the work of Christ as primarily addressing a necessary demand of God” (14). The healing view by Bruce Reichenbach follows.

In dealing with the nature of sin, the healing view understands man’s problem as a disease from which he suffers which “describes not only [his] spiritual condition but [his] physical, economic, political, social and environmental conditions” (120). Reichenbach admits that “God punishes sin by bringing sickness, devastation and death to person, nation, and land” (122) in the Old Testament, but also emphasizes that “not all suffering results from sin” (123). In order to reconcile “sin-sick” (120) man to Himself, the Great Healer, “God, in love sends the great Physician to take on and remove our sin; otherwise we are left without a cure for our deep human predicament” (138). This solution or healing can be physical and spiritual and here and now, not just eschatological (139). The healing view is known as part of the “subjective trajectory of atonement theories” where the “primary focus…is humanward” (18). The final view is the multifaceted kaleidoscope view.

Joel Green prefers an all-inclusive equally worthy view of the atonement. He favors this approach because of his understanding of Jesus’ crucifixion as so centrally wed to “the means for comprehending the eternal purpose of God” that “we may never exhaust the many ways of articulating its meaning for our salvation” (158). Green argues that “the death of Jesus cannot be understood apart from the powerful social, political and religious currents he set himself against” (163). In this context “his mission…was directed toward revitalizing Israel as the people of God” (163). Green, against my approach of defining each view as to how it deals with sin and the human problem and God’s solution, opts for a view that he claims “cannot be reduced to the relationship of the individual to God, nor an objective moment in the past when Jesus paid the price for our sins” (165). His kaleidoscope, he believes, privies him to a vantage point which upholds the “diversity in the Scriptures” (167) and “the diversity of the tradition” (168). For the sake of proving his multi-operative viewpoint to the situational audience, North America, he presents two “at home” (171) models, “atonement as sacrifice” (172) and “atonement as revelation” (177). The kaleidoscope view can be classified as the postmodern, relativistic, “incredulity to metanarrative”[1] view which is humanward in its orientation. Next, I consider chief objections to the Christus Victor, healing and kaleidoscope views from the perspective of a penal substitutionary view.

In his response to the healing position presented by Reichenbach, Greg Boyd employs an illustration of a scientist and a “self-replicating organism” (143) to argue his Christus Victor model. Using Boyd’s illustration, with appropriate biblical modifications, let us analyze the ineptitudes of each view from the perspective of the penal substitution model. The illustration goes as follows:

A scientist named Dr. Joe produced an airborne, self-replicating organism that would instantly annihilate every virus it came in contact with. Once released into the atmosphere, all viral diseases would eventually be eradicated from the earth. Now, those who had been suffering from viral diseases would be perfectly correct in proclaiming, “Dr. Joe healed us of our infirmities!” (143).

Greg Boyd goes on to point out that the great thing that Dr. Joe fundamentally did was not completely or best answered as the healing of people’s diseases. Boyd, argues that the great accomplishment was the annihilation of all evil viruses. Accepting the illustration for now, the penal substitution model would say that even if (and it’s a stretch) all the evil viruses lurking around the atmosphere were killed, the primary culprit, the evil viruses within each human, have been left unscathed. The real virus is a genetic disorder so debilitating that all are infected by their own desire to be such. The self-replicating Organism which, may I say was begotten not produced or made, from Dr. Joe had to be just like Dr. Joe in His immunity to man’s genetic disorder, but just like man as well so he could break the genetic lineage. Not only that, Dr. Joe’s anger against all organisms He made which rebelled against Him flow from His justice as the perfect Maker. At this point the relativist may come in with his kaleidoscope and analyze the cultural, political, socio-economic environment into which the defeator organism came and attempt to allow every diseased individual to come to a communal agreement through drawn out dialogue over the viability of any medicine to heal their disease, even if the medicine is out of date, not prescribed for the particular ailment or not accessible for whatever reason to the community at large. Much further and the illustration gets lost and/or breaks down, as all non-canonical analogies do.

Looking a bit more closely at the two positions, one can see the presuppositions concerning sin and reconciliation with God. The healing view sees man’s spiritual condition as having a high fever or the flu from a virus that to some degree is outside of him infecting him. So, the solution is not concerned with the Creator’s just nature, rather His love. Likewise, the Christus Victor view sees man as a victim to the controlling evil forces which are holding him in bondage. As go the bondage-making evil forces, so goes the freedom of man. Victory is won when the Hero defeats the forces of darkness. The Bible sees man’s spiritual problem as spiritual death (Eph 2). Man is hostile to the things of God because man is an idolator in need of a New Man to destroy the works of the flesh in his place. There are other arguments, but these should suffice for now as we move to the book’s impact on the field and its readers.

The Nature of the Atonement is a useful tool for evaluating four views of the atonement sided by side. The editors made a particularly helpful choice of which four views to put on display considering the recent vitriol against the penal substitutionary position and the growing strength of the postmodern or relativistic hermeneutic. Tom Schreiner did a fine job showing that the tree producing the fruit in the atonement views is the penal substitution model. I would like to have seen a brief final argument from each position after the three counterarguments were given. That said, the critique is minor.

Readers are presented with a straight forward, balanced view of the perspectives of the atonement. The compilation work is highly assessable and well represented by each author. Each did a fine job presenting the biblical information on the doctrine at hand. There is much spiritual value within the pages as one considers his sin, God’s holiness and what God has done to reconcile wicked man to Himself in His Son.

FOOTNOTE
[1] Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1997), xxiv.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Boyd, Gregory A. God at War: The Bible and Spiritual Conflict. Downer's Grove, Ill: IVP, 1997.

_______. God of the Possible: A Biblical Introduction to the Open View of God. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 2000.

_______. and Edward K. Boyd, Letters From a Skeptic: A Son Wrestles with His Father’s Questions about Christianity. Colorado Springs: Chariot Victor Publishing, 1994.

_______. Satan and the Problem of Evil: Constructing a Warfare Theology. Downer’s Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2001.

_______. Trinity and Process: A Critical Evaluation and Reconstruction of Hartshorne's Di-Polar Theism Towards a Trinitarian Metaphysics. Peter Lang Publishing, 1992.
Lyotard, Jean-François. The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1997.

Incarnational Love

2007-06-13T00:00:00.000-06:00

Here's a link to a sermon I preached at the church where I am member - Redeemer Church. The sermon text is John 17:20-26.

20“I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, 21 that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 The glory that you have given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one, 23 I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me. 24 Father, I desire that they also, whom you have given me, may be with me where I am, to see my glory that you have given me because you loved me before the foundation of the world. 25 O righteous Father, even though the world does not know you, I know you, and these know that you have sent me. 26 I made known to them your name, and I will continue to make it known, that the love with which you have loved me may be in them, and I in them.”

Charnock on the Inner Atheist

2007-06-12T10:39:00.000-06:00

It is necessary to depress that secret atheism which is in the heart of every man by nature. Though every visible object which offers itself to our sense, presents a deity to our minds, and exhorts us to subscribe to the truth of it; yet there is a root of atheism springing up sometimes in wavering thoughts and foolish imaginations, inordinate actions, and secret wishes. Certain it is, that every man that doth not love God, denies God; now can he that disaffects him, and hath a slavish fear of him, wish his existence, and say to his on heart with any cheerfulness, there is a God, and make it his chief care to persuade himself of it? He would persuade himself there is no God, and stifle the seeds of it in his reason and conscience, that he might have the greatest liberty to entertain the allurements of the flesh. It is necessary to excite men to daily and actual considerations of God and his nature, which would be a bar to much of that wickedness which overflows in the lives of men.

Excerpted from The Existence of God by Stephen Charnock, pg 27.

John Piper and Justin Peters Share Message against Health, Wealth and Prosperity Heresy

2007-06-11T16:04:00.000-06:00

Excerpted from John Piper's message "Where Is God? (UCF)."

I don’t know what you feel about the prosperity gospel but I’ll tell you what I feel about it…HATRED!

It’s being exported from this country to Africa and Asia selling a bill of goods to the poorest of poor, “Believe this message and your kids won’t die and your wife won’t have miscarriages. You’ll have rings on your fingers and coats on your backs.”

That’s coming out of AMERICA!

People that ought to be giving our money and our time and our lives, instead of selling them a bunch of crap called “gospel”!

And here’s the reason why it’s so horrible. When was the last time an American, African, Asian ever said Jesus is all-satisfying because you drove a BMW?

NEVER!

They’ll say, “Did Jesus give you that?”

Yes.

“We’ll take Jesus.”

That’s idolatry! Not the gospel. That’s elevating gifts above giver.

I’ll tell you what makes Jesus beautiful…

America's Ugly Exported "Gospel" from the Desiring God Blog

The Word of Faith Movement: Justin Peters Call for Discernment Part 4 final.

2007-06-08T16:08:00.000-06:00

OSTEEN: Well, I don't know if I believe they're wrong. I believe here's what the Bible teaches and from the Christian faith this is what I believe. But I just think that only God with judge a person's heart. I spent a lot of time in India with my father. I don't know all about their religion. But I know they love God. And I don't know. I've seen their sincerity. So I don't know. I know for me, and
what the Bible teaches, I want to have a relationship with Jesus.

JP: This is a stunning statement from a man who’s the pastor of the largest “evangelical” church in the country. On national television he’s asked three different times about the exclusivity of the gospel where Jesus is the only way to be saved and Joel Osteen responds that way by saying, “I don’t know. I’ve been to India with my father. I don’t know much of the Indian religion but I know they love God.” He’s talking about Hindus. Hindus don’t love God because they don’t know God. They reject the God of the Bible. So, how can you love someone you don’t even know?

Then he said, “I know for me and what the Bible teaches, I want to have a relationship with Jesus.” Well that’s spoken like a true relativist. He’s saying, “For me I want to have a relationship with Jesus, but what’s true for me may not be true for someone else.” Of course that flies in the face of the entire testimony of Scripture.

Joel Osteen, I do not doubt he’s a nice man, I don’t doubt that he’s a sincere man, but sincerity is not the issue. Truth is the issue. Joel Osteen, by his own admission, will not preach on sin, will not preach on repentance, self sacrifice, taking up the cross, all these things Jesus preached about, Joel Osteen won’t. He says, “I don’t use the word sin.” Well, until people are confronted with their sin, they’re made to realize they are sinners, they won’t see their need for a Savior.
Joel Osteen, I’m afraid, is a ear-tickler that Paul talked about in first Timothy, “People will not endure sound doctrine in the latter days but will heap to themselves teachers who will tickle the ears.” Joel Osteen a preeminent ear-tickler of our day. By not preaching the gospel, the clear, pure gospel, I’m afraid that Joel Osteen is tickling people’s ears all the way to hell. All the way to a Christ-less eternity.

DD: Hasn’t Joel put an apology out for his statements?

JP: Yes, he has. In fairness I want to address that. He received a great deal of criticism, and rightly so, for his statements on Larry King. And he apologized for not being as clear as he should have been. I don’t think that apology holds a great deal of water because the Bible says, “Out of the fullness of the heart a man speaketh.” But also, since that apology, on other national television venues, he has made almost identical statements. So, he continues to preach this watered-down, feel-good gospel that is completely devoid of sin. And any gospel message that is devoid of sin makes the cross null and void. It’s an empty gospel. It’s a different gospel.

DD: I’ve heard you say in your seminar, “Love devoid of biblical truth is not love.”
What is your purpose for traveling and speaking and doing all of the things that you do?

JP: Dustin, my motivation for bringing this seminar to people across the country is not out of bitterness or out of a personal attack. My motive is this; I love the Lord, I love His Word, I’m driven by the truth of His Word, and I’m growing weary of seeing false christ’s, false prophets, false teachers, preying upon God’s people. I want to help open eyes to just how dangerous this movement really is, how unbiblical it really is. But not only to show them the error and the heresy, but also to show them the truth of what God’s word really is. And then, by this people will be equipped to go out and do as Ephesians 4:15 tells us to do: speak God’s truth in love. Lovingly, gently, and firmly guide people away from the false doctrinal system that’s out there to do them harm physically and spiritually.

DD: Thanks so much for you time Justin, and your seminars and your work.

JP: You’re welcome, Dusty. My pleasure.

Read an interview Justin did with CBS News on Benny Hinn.
Watch Do You Believe in Miracles a documentary done by CBS news (41 min) with Justin as a contributor.
Read the three previous three posts in this series.

The Word of Faith Movement: Justin Peters' Call for Discernment Part 3

2007-06-08T11:13:00.001-06:00

Part 1
Part 2
Part 4

DD: Going through your seminar A Call for Discernment, I’ve heard you speak out against this movement but you do so in a very humble and loving way. I think this is a charitable approach, but you’re not compromising your message at all. Can you speak to the idea that, yes, we must speak against these issues and groups that are going against the Bible and the Gospel found therin, but there is a proper manner in which we are to do those things.

JP: The Bible tells us in Ephesians 4:15 to “speak the truth in love”. That’s what I want to do. I’m not out on a personal crusade against anyone. I’m not bitter that I was not healed as a teenager. What I want to do is help equip people to speak God’s truth in love. To make them aware of the dangers and heresies, to help equip them, to guide people away from a false doctrine system that is out there to harm physically and spiritually.

We should not criticize another preacher lightly. When I first began addressing this movement I would not mention names. However, I began to study the Word more in-depth and what I’ve come to discover is that there is a biblical precedent for naming names. The apostle Paul called out by name, publicly those who were teaching false doctrine. So, it should not be done so lightly, but there is a biblical precedent for it. All the individuals we look at in my seminar, have been teaching these false doctrines for years, some of them for decades. They have been called on it but remain unrepentant continuing to teach the same doctrines. They are leading God’s people astray.

DD: Is there is a difference in Word of Faith movement and Charismatics in general?

JP: There is, Dusty. I’m glad you asked that question. It might be easy to assume that a Call for Discernment, is an anti-Charismatic seminar, such is not the case. When it comes to the fundamental doctrines of Orthodox Christianity, clear-thinking Charismatics are in the same boat with me. I happen to be a Southern Baptist. Clear-thinking Charismatics agree with me as a Southern Baptist on all the fundamentals of the faith. The Word of Faith movement, however, is a different animal. It does compromise, and at times, deny some of the fundamental tenets of the faith.

So, I can sum up by putting it this way – all Word of Faith are Charismatic, but not all Charismatics are Word of Faith. To equate the two does a real disservice to clear-thinking Charismatics and it gives the Word of Faith Movement more legitimacy than what it really deserves.

DD: What are some of the most outrageous things you've heard from the Word of Faith teachers?

JP: There are so many. But some of the most prominent are the time when Benny Hinn taught under divine inspiration that there are nine members to the god-head! I think of a very recent video clip from Gloria Copeland saying that she can speak to storms and make them go away just by the words that she speaks. A recent clip of Benny Hinn and Miles Monroe in which Miles Monroe said that God can only do what we permit him to do. He said that prayer is us giving God permission to act on the earth; which of course is a very man-centered doctrine. It’s not God-centered at all. I think of Joyce Meyer teaching a TBN Praise-a-Thon audience that when you give (to TBN, the context of her sermon) you get a receipt in heaven, and so when you have a need you go before god and you say, “Here god, here’s my receipt. I’m cashing in my receipt.” It’s unbelievable. It is a gospel of greed.

DD: A Debtor’s Ethic.

JP: Oh absolutely! In this system God becomes a means to an end rather than the End Himself.

DD: You have all these clips in your seminar?

JP: Yes, everything is exhaustibly documented.

to be continued...one final part.

Order Suffer the Children
Order Justin Peter's Thesis An Examination and Critique of the Life, Ministry and Theology of Healing Evangelist Benny Hinn
Check out Justin's Schedule

The Word of Faith Movement: Justin Peters' Call for Discernment Part 2

2007-06-07T09:07:00.000-06:00

Justin Peters is quickly gaining respect for his thorough and non-caustic treatment of the Word of Faith Movement. Though Justin is known for his work as an expository preacher, his seminar A Call for Discernment: A Biblical Critique of the Word of Faith Movement has become his magnus opum. This is a clip of one of the three sessions Justin taught at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. He is also featured in a stunning documentary on the WoF Movement entitled Suffer the Children. Justin's message is clear, "this is another gospel."

Part 1
Part 3
Part 4

DD: So you have a lot of people come up to you and say, “Justin, thank you!” or they’ve been through the same type of emotion where they didn’t think they had enough faith? And, it was brought onto them by these faith healers.

JP: Sadly, Dusty, yes. Everywhere I go. It doesn’t matter if I’m in a church of 1500 people or 25 people, every time I present A Call for Discernment numerous people tell me that either they themselves or one of their loved ones has been affected by this movement.

DD: What is the Word of Faith movement?

JP: The Word of Faith movement is the proper term to the more commonly known name of the movement, that is the Prosperity Gospel – the Health and Wealth Gospel, the Name-it and Claim-it Gospel. Basically the doctrine says, it is always God’s will for a Christian to be wealthy, and it’s always God’s will for a Christian to be healed. No sickness should ever come his or her way and in the unlikely event that sickness does come, healing is guaranteed. The proper term for this movement which is lead by people such as Benny Hinn, Kenneth and Gloria Copeland, Creflo Dollar, Jesse Duplantis, is the Word of Faith movement.

DD: Help us with some of these terms like: Word of Faith; Faith Healers; Health, Wealth and Prosperity; Name it and Claim it; Positive Confession.

JP: Right, the Word of Faith movement is so termed because of the fundamental belief, the teaching of this system that God did not create the world out of nothing. He did not create ex nihilo as we say. But rather, God used a substance and the substance he used was “faith”. These individuals teach that faith is a literal tangible substance. When God created He spoke, and His words were containers – almost like Tupperware containers of this substance called faith, hence, Word of Faith. The proponents of this movement teach that we as believers can do the same thing. We can create our own reality. We can speak things into existence by using our “words of faith”. So the Word of Faith movement is a proper term.

Of course, faith healers, people that claim to have the gift of healing, particularly Benny Hinn – he’s probably the most prominent, but there are others, Ken and Gloria Copeland, Jesse Duplantis, teach that as long as people have enough faith they will be healed.

The Positive Confession doctrine, very much related to the name of this movement, Word of Faith, claims that we can positively confess our own realities and make them come into existence.

DD: You’ve used a few names Benny Hinn, Kenneth and Gloria Copeland, Jesse Duplantis, Creflo Dollar, Joyce Meyer, Paul and Jan Crouch; why do you want to go after these guys? A lot of people say, “These are great people. These are godly people.” What's the danger in their message?

JP: Well Dusty, the danger is, is that it’s a different gospel. It is my personal belief, and I believe the overwhelming testimony of Scripture, that the greatest threat to Orthodox Christianity does not come from outside of the church, it comes from within the “church”. The Bible, the Old and New Testaments both, are replete with warnings of false prophets. Jude talks about these men who have crept in unaware (Jude 1:4) and we see how Satan disguises himself as an Angel of Light (2 Cor. 11:14). So the greatest threat to Orthodox Christianity comes from within the “church”.

The danger of this movement is that much of what these individuals are teaching is right. Not everything that a Benny Hinn and a Ken and Gloria Copeland teach is wrong, but there is enough error and heresy mixed in with it to corrupt the entire message. The Bible says that a little leaven, leavens the whole lump (1 Cor 5:6). It truly is a different gospel.

The Word of Faith movement; a lot of people don’t realize this, but its origins are not Christian at all. The origins of the movement can be traced back directly to the metaphysical cults, such as Christian Science, New Age and New Thought. There is a healthy dose of Gnosticism in the modern prosperity gospel. So what we have is cultic doctrine that’s been wrapped in Christian terminology to make it more palatable to people like you and me. The Word of Faith movement does compromise, and at times deny, some of the fundamental tenants of Orthodoxy Christianity.

On minor issues of doctrine we can have differences of opinion and still have fellowship in Christ, but when it comes to the fundamentals, there’s no room for compromise. There’s no room for debate. It is a different gospel.

to be continued...

Meet Justin Peters

Book Justin at your event.

The Word of Faith Movement: Justin Peters' Call for Discernment Part 1

2007-06-06T09:15:00.000-06:00

I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel--not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of
Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you recieved, let him be accursed. Galatians 1:6-9

Sometimes I wish God would give me a Holy Ghost machine gun, I'll blow your head off (Benny Hinn, "Praise-a-Thon", TBN, recorded 11/8/90)! "I am a God-man!…I am a little Messiah walking on the earth in other words.…You are a little god on earth running around (Benny Hinn, "Praise-a-Thon", TBN, recorded November 1990).

Introduction:
Southwestern alum Justin Peters (MDiv 2000, Th. M 2002) was born with Cerebral Palsy. At the invincible age of sixteen, while many of his friends and classmates were scoring touchdowns and dragging Main Street, Justin was bound to watch from the sidelines in his wheel chair. However, faith-healer Nora Lam was coming to town and the prospect of liberation from the chair resonated like a golden reality.

DD: What’s the connection between your disability and the Word of Faith movement?

JP: At 16, a man came up to me and he said, “Justin, God has spoken to me and He has told me that He is going to heal you as long as you have enough faith.” This really resonated with me because at the time I could not drive and I could not play football. I couldn’t do all the things that I thought were so very important at that age. I very much latched onto this. He told me of a faith healer who was coming to town of Vicksburg, Mississippi by the name of Nora Lam. And in the weeks leading up to this I was completely convinced that I was going to be healed.

So, I went to see Nora Lam December 3rd, 1989 and a very long story short is that obviously I was not healed. The potential was there to do a great deal of harm in my faith of the Lord. Thankfully through the love and support of my faith and the love and support of my church home, none was done. At least not permanently. But, my faith was beginning to be shaken in the “faith healers”. I have lived this movement. I have been through it. I’ve been to the faith healers. So I know first hand the harm that it does to people physically and spiritually.

DD: The question would come up then, “Justin, didn’t you have enough faith to be healed?”

JP: Well, that’s what I was told. Because, you see, if you begin with the premise that it’s always God’s will for a person to be physically healed, and that healing does not happen, then the question must be asked, “Who’s fault is it?” By definition it cannot be God’s fault because He is perfect, so the only other one to whom to look is the one who is sick. And, yes, I was told many times that the reason I was not healed and I’m not today is because I don’t have enough faith. I’ve been told on at least two occasions in my life that the reason I’m not healed is because I’m not saved. That affected me for a while as a teenager. Now though, the Lord has matured me in my walk and in my understanding of His Word.

I tell people this – If you have enough faith to be saved, if you know Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior, don’t let anybody tell you that you don’t have enough faith to be healed. Because, being saved is by far the greatest miracle. But, how many millions of people are there out there in the world who, because of what they’ve been taught on Christian television and many of our churches – believe that they are sick or their child is sick because their lack of faith. It’s just not true.

to be continued...

Godly Shame and Wordly Guilt: Seeing God as a Good Father

2007-06-05T10:49:00.000-06:00

I have had several conversations this week with folks dealing with guilt over sin – the condemnation kind, not the godly grief kind. I am stunned by the way God deals with us when we have sinned. What I expect from my Judge is a big frown, maybe an injury to get my attention, a rough day at work to pay me back, at least a good guilt trip to remind me of my sinfulness. Where did I learn this? From where did this notion of God’s dealing me in my sin come? Maybe we learn it from an earthly father or our culture. It didn’t come from God. Paul tells us in Romans 8:1 how God deals with His precious children, “There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.” Amazing! No guilt trip (A godly grief that leads to repentance? Yes. 2 Cor 7:9-11). No fireballs of anger from above. No heavy handedness. Just mercy. All we get is mercy!

Will He discipline us? Yes – lovingly, as sons and daughters and “for the moment all discipline seems painful rather than pleasant, but later it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness” (Heb 12:5-11). So, the next time you are under conviction for sin, consider the mercy of God, repent and be thankful. Before the Judge of the universe you stand as His child, not His enemy. He loves us with a covenant loyalty (hesed – ESV “steadfast love”, Ex 34:6; Deut 7:9; Is 55:8-10; Joel 2:13; Micah 7:18; Ps 51:1; 89; 107; 109; 136) that flows from His infinite joy in Himself. The very One who alone can condemn, “destroy[ing] both soul and body in hell” (Matt 10:28), has “set you free in Christ from the law of sin and death” (Rom 8:2).

“By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for our sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit…. For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God. For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the Spirit of adoption as sons, by whom we cry, ‘Abba! Father!’ The Spirit himself bears witness with out spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs – heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him” (Rom 8:3-4, 14-16).

Virginia Tech Massacre? That Was Wrong!

2007-06-04T23:00:00.000-06:00

{This is an oped piece I wrote for a local newspaper. It's reprinted with permission.}

There we stood again, in front of our TV’s shaking our heads. This is just not right. 32 students killed – sons, daughters, friends, fiancés, mommies, daddies – dead, just like that. At least half that many wounded. Not to mention the psychological trauma experienced by more than anyone will ever know. What are you going to do with that? Where does a tragedy like this, the worst school shooting on American soil ever recorded, fit into your moral framework? Do you let it? Was it wrong? Did you feel like it was wrong?

What if your son or daughter, or husband or wife was in that VTech classroom staring down the barrel of a 9 mm Bringer of Death? Hard to imagine. I’m trying not to right now. Do you have a feeling that this is wrong? It is wrong for this guy to take these peoples’ life. Would it be wrong for him to take your daddy’s life? What if he shot you?

This feeling of justice for the victim, especially if you are the victim, has its root in our moral framework. It has been termed the “judicial sentiment” – the involuntary moral judgment that we humans make to hold people accountable for violating our rights. Moral relativists will look at an event like the Virginia Tech Massacre and pass it off as perhaps culturally unacceptable, but not universally deserving of a guilty verdict. But, draw the crosshairs close to home and personal pain yields guilty verdicts.

Darfur. 9/11. Columbine. There is no discussion as to whether this is wrong. The question is, “Why is it wrong?” If you were sitting at Starbucks today, perhaps now, and I stole your mp3 player or PDA, why would you automatically hold me accountable for theft? You don’t have to tell yourself that this is wrong. You know it. You feel it deep inside. You and I may try to deny it, but it’s there. We swing the judge’s gavel when our boss is ungrateful for our hard work in the office. We call for the bailiff to issue the damning verdict of the personal jury when our rights are violated.

An atheistic construction of moral relativity or plurality cannot adequately resolve the tension that lies at the core of our being – guilty verdicts for others upon the violation of our rights. The Christian recognizes that the judicial sentiment is a reliable response grounded in the character of God. If not God, then, where or what?

The Virginia Tech Massacre was wrong and we feel it. The cry of judicial sentiment is the very voice of the Holy triune God speaking loudly and clearly. Why does an event like this bother us? We have to ask ourselves. It will not suffice to leave it in a sterile environment.

The universality of the judicial sentiment is one witness to the objective reality of humanity’s creation in the imago dei, the image of God. Like a chisel aptly guided in a master carver’s hands, the Holy God engraved His perfect, objective, moral standard on our hearts. We can excuse it away denying it’s existence, but it speaks nonetheless. The mouth of the internal critic is never shut.

Book Review - God's Greater Glory by Bruce Ware

2007-06-01T13:40:00.000-06:00

I reviewed the book for Systematic Theology II. Foot-notes will be in [brackets] and have been converted to end-notes.

Paul Helm also provides a particularly helpful overview and critique of Ware's "Compatibilist Middle Knowledge" aka "Calvinist Middle Knowledge" aka "Modified Calvinism" here, an excerpt from the forthcoming book Perspectives on the Doctrine of God: Four Views, featuring Roger Olson (Arminianism), John Sanders (Open Theism) and Bruce Ware.

Ware, Bruce. God’s Greater Glory: The Exalted God of Scripture and the Christian Faith. Wheaton: Crossway, 2004. 254 pp. $18.00.

Joseph was thrown into a pit and sold into slavery by his brothers. Jesus was beaten and killed on a cross at the hands of wicked men. These horrible evils were committed and the Bible says, “God meant [Joseph’s sufferings] for good” (Gen. 50:20) and that Jesus’ killing happened “according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God” (Acts 2:23). If God is sovereign and “works all things according to the counsel of his will” (Eph. 1:11), how can Joseph’s brothers and Jesus’ killers be held responsible for the sins they committed when they acted in accordance with God’s plan? If these men sinned according to God’s will, how can God not be evil in ordaining the wickedness he condemns?

God’s Greater Glory is Bruce Ware’s attempt to provide a right understanding of God’s providence, or how we should “conceive of the divine-human relationship” (23) by reassessing classical and contemporary approaches to God. In removing the “duality reductionism” (56) of both classical and modern theism, Ware believes one will arrive at a more healthy, robust, scripturally accurate and worshipful knowledge of God’s glory. God’s Greater Glory is a systematic and philosophical treatment of the doctrine of God including His incommunicable attributes: immutability/mutability, impassability/passability, eternality/temporality, aseity, and omnipresence; and His communicable attributes: omniscience, providence, and omnipotence. Ware argues that “methodological balance in our doctrine of God” is the place to start (36).

According to Ware, the framework for an accurate view of providence is devoid of “duality reductionism” where “one conception of God [is] given normative status as the ‘prime datum’…under which all other conceptions must be adapted and conformed” (36). Ware argues that both classical and modern approaches are guilty of reductionism concerning primarily God’s “transcendence self-existence and His immanent self-relatedness” (56), and respectively, God’s ontologically and ethical immutability/relational mutability, impassability/passability and omnipresence/omnitemporality. He claims that “no scriptural warrant can be found to give either of these major truths a regulatory principle by which one effectively cancels out or minimizes the other” (57). Only after removal of methodological bias can one approach the God-human relationship in balance.

Concerning the God-creature relationship, Ware first affirms God’s “exhaustive, meticulous sovereignty” (67) where “God’s will encompasses all things that occur in the universe, and…is efficacious in that God works all things in fulfillment of his purpose” (emphasis in original, 69). The second affirmation is a compatibilist view of human freedom and divine sovereignty understood as “freedom of inclination” (80) or “the power to choose according to what we are most inclined to do” (79), and is absent of coercion or being “forced to act in ways contrary to what we most want to do” (80). The third affirmation is “God’s asymmetrical relationship to good and evil” (102) such that “God controls good in a ‘direct-causative’ divine agency” and controls evil “as his ‘indirect-permissive’ divine agency” but, both in His exhaustive, meticulous sovereignty (106). The fourth affirmation is a compatibilist middle-knowledge by removing the “grounding-objection”[1]. Following Luis de Molina,[2] Ware strongly emphasizes one aspect of God’s prevolitional knowledge (knowledge prior to creating the universe [110]) known as middle knowledge, or the knowledge of “what would be if circumstances were different from what they in fact will be in the actual world” (110). The “grounding objection” states that if man has libertarian free-will then “nothing grounds God’s knowledge of what free creatures would do in various possible sets of circumstances” (112). However, Ware claims to circumvent this objection by means of a “freedom of inclination” or compatibilist freedom, rather than libertarian free-will or a “freedom of indifference”. Next, Ware explains “God’s purposeful relationship with creation” (131) in “real relationality” between God and man (132).

After removing duality reductionism and affirming an asymmetrical, “Calvinist middle knowledge” (27) with exhaustive, meticulous sovereignty, Ware believes one has a proper framework for understanding the telos of life, “the uncontested supremacy and unrivaled glory of God alone (159). In this framework one can trust God and His sovereign purposes in suffering, through prayer can trust God’s self-sufficiency and sovereignty and, finally, can serve the Lord with gladness. However, the question arises, “Is this the right framework for knowing God and relating to Him?”

Compatibilist middle knowledge is a fairly recent addition to the theological family of God’s knowledge and providence. Proponents include Terrance Tiessen,[3] John Frame[4] and John Feinburg[5] to name a few. Ware seems to follow much of Tiessen’s methodology of reassessing the attributes of God then arguing for a compatibilist middle knowledge. There are, however, dissenting views as well.

Several scholars have logged critiques of this particular form of compatibilism. John Laing asserted that the “proponent of a Calvinistic-Middle Knowledge position seems to be caught between the horns of a dilemma.” [6] Ware unconvincingly attempts to deny his running with the bulls on the streets of Pamplona, Spain in an extended footnote on page 115. Both Steve Lemke[7] and David Werther [8] have evaluated several issues in Tiessen’s work, and thus, Ware’s indirectly through doctrinal association. However, by far the most comprehensive critique of Ware’s theological embracement of middle knowledge is Travis James Campbell’s Middle Knowledge: A Reformed Critique. [9] Campbell gives “five theologico-philosophical considerations which have convinced many that God does not possess middle knowledge.” [10] Now we shall turn to two major objections.

Objection 1: Ware’s duality reductionism violates aseity because it pares the divine attributes. Ware’s redefining of classical theism by removing duality reductionism leads him to affirm God’s relational mutability[11] or God’s passability, thus leading him to attribute to God contingent emotional qualities where God “ ‘responds’ to situations that arise” (29). [12] God is the only necessary being and not contingent as he holds all His attributes interconnected. Starting at aseity imposes no methodological problem because any doctrine of God rightly starts with God’s self-existence. The premodern method is proper. When talking of God one has to start with an attribute, and according to Van Til, “First and foremost among the attributes, we therefore mention the independence or self-existence of God” and, “we must take the notion of the self-contained, self-sufficient God as the most basic notion of all our interpretive efforts.”[13] Ware commits the fallacy of self-contradiction. By starting with transcendence he has a normative attribute (46). If Ware is saying that we should not give priority to any of God’s attributes then why would he start with transcendence? It seems arbitrary and ungrounded. Why not start with love as a normative attribute, why not holiness? Ware tips his hand as to why he is calling for his form of methodological balance – God’s aseity must be compromised in order to affirm middle-knowledge. Dutch reformer Herman Bavinck has a word for Ware.

In middle knowledge…God does not derive his knowledge of the free actions of human beings from his own being, his own decrees, but from the will of creatures, God accordingly, becomes dependent on the world, derives knowledge from the world that he did not have and could not obtain from himself and hence, in his knowledge, ceases to be one, simple and independent – that is, God. Conversely, the creature in large part becomes independent vis-à-vis God.[14]

Objection 2: Calvinist-middle knowledge is to be rejected as self-referentially incoherent. The first confusion is in Ware’s attempt to maintain a meaningful distinction “between God’s direct-causative agency and his indirect-permissive agency” (110) or what he calls “asymmetrical divine agency” (26). However, in Molinism God decrees whatsoever comes to pass by means of actualizing counter factuals of creaturely freedoms, He does not permit through an indirect agency. [15] Ware’s second confusion in his Calvinist middle knowledge discredits Calvin’s own teaching. Calvin attacked the carnally devised distinction “between doing and permitting” and said “they babble and talk absurdly who, in place of God’s providence, substitute bare permission – as if God sat in a watchtower awaiting chance events, and his judgments thus depended upon human will.” Fittingly he titled this section, “No mere ‘permission’!”[16] The third confusion is the fact that Ware elevates the acceptance of middle knowledge into the reformed tradition. This theory came about not from reformed thinkers but “its purpose [was] to harmonize the Pelagian notion of the freedom of the will with God’s omniscience.”[17] There are other arguments but these should suffice for now as we move to the book’s impact on the field and its readers.

Ware critiques and reassesses the behemoth doctrines of classical theism in a condensed amount of space. In this scenario, precision often is the handmaiden of brevity. Taking on the doctrine of God in this fashion is not advisable. Readers of a work of this method can be left frustrated due to inadequate treatment leaving historical gaps in theological and philosophical assessments, and/or misled by not having access to some range of the arguments.

God’s Greater Glory will require its readers to dig through classical theologies and philosophies in order to interact on its level. While there exists several articles discussing most of the topics in Ware’s book, a pointed treatment of his progression from duality reductionism in tradition to affirmation of compatibilist middle knowledge would be well received. It appears that compatibilist middle knowledge will not be passé any time soon.

Ware’s purpose for this work is laudable – man’s trusting in the glory of a “real relational” God both now and eternally. Though Ware has several rough spots in his treatments of God’s attributes, his strengths rest in his practical instruction for living in fellowship with God. In this regard Ware’s pastoral and doxological instruction is encouraging and revealing of the greatness of God’s glory.

FOOTNOTES
1 Steven B. Cowen, "The Grounding Objection to Middle Knowledge Revisited," Religious Studies, 39. 1 (2003): 93.

2 Luis de Molina, On Divine Foreknowledge, trans. Alfred J. Freddoso (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1988).

3 Terrance Tiessen, Providence and Prayer: How Does God Work in the World? (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2000), 290.

4 John Frame, The Doctrine of God: A Theology of Lordship (Philipsburg, N. J.: Presbyterian & Reformed, 2002), 501.

5 John Feinburg, "God Ordains all Things," in Predestination & Freewill: Four Views of Divine Sovereignty & Human Freedom, ed. David Basinger and Randall Basinger (Downer's Grove: InterVarsity, 1986). idem, No One Like Him (Wheaton: Crossway, 2001), 752.

6 John D. Laing, "The Compatibility of Calvinism and Middle Knowledge," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, 47, 3 (September 2004): 467.

7 Steve Lemke, Providence and Prayer: An Evaluation of Tiessen's Proposal (A Paper Presented at the 2002 Annual Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society).

8 David Werther, "Calvinism and Middle Knowledge," Ars Disputandi 3 (November 2003).

9 Travis James Campbell, "Middle Knowledge: A Reformed Critique," Westminster Theological Journal 68, no. 1 (Spring 2006).

10 Ibid., 22.

11 A change “of his attitude and disposition toward his moral creatures in ways that are commensurate to changes that happen in them” (142). Hodge’s classical definition of immutability: “God is absolutely immutable in his essence and attributes…He can never be wiser or holier, or more righteous or more merciful than He ever has been and ever must be.” Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Theology (Hendrickson, 2003), 390.

12 Perhaps Ware's best summary of this train of thought is found on page 145, emphases are mine. “On metaphysical and moral grounds [classical theologians] denied of God variable emotions. But metaphysically, we have already seen good reason to question these traditional conceptions of God that remove him entirely from any possibility of real relationship with the world. Yes, God is timelessly eternal, but he is also omnitemporal, entering fully into the moments of creaturely existence. Yes, God is absolutely immutable in the essential character qualities that are his by virtue of his being God, but this does not require immutability in all respects. While upholding the full transcendence of God in every way that Scripture demands, we should not conceive of God's transcendence so that other clear teachings of Scripture have to be eliminated–as I fear some have done with Scripture's teaching about God's emotions.”

13 John M. Frame, Divine Aseity and Apologetics (Reformed Theological Seminary, Prof. of Systematic Theology and Philosophy), 4.

14 Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, ed. John Bolt and John Vriend, God and Creation (Grand Rapids: Michigan, 2004), 201.

15 Thomas P. Flint, Divine Providence: The Molinist Account, Cornell Studies in the Philosophy of Religion, ed. William P. Alston (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1988), 40-48.

16 John Calvin, Library of Christian Classics, ed. John T. McNeill and trans. Ford Lewis Battles, Institutes of the Christian Religion (Louisville & London: Westminster John Knox Press, 1960), 228-231.

17 Bavinck, God and Creation, 200. See also Muller, Richard A. Grace, Election and Contingent Choice: Arminius's Gambit and the Reformed Response, ed. Thomas Schreiner and Bruce Ware (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995), 265-266. For discussions by reformed theologians on middle knowledge see Hodge, Systematic Theology, 398-400. Shedd, William G. T. Dogmatic Theology. Edited by Alan W. Gomes. (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian & Reformed, 2003), 287.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bavinck, Herman. Reformed Dogmatics. Edited by John Bolt and John Vriend. God and Creation. Grand Rapids: Michigan, 2004.

Calvin, John. Library of Christian Classics. Edited by John T. McNeill and trans. Ford Lewis Battles. Institutes of the Christian Religion. Louisville & London: Westminster John Knox Press, 1960.

Campbell, Travis James. "Middle Knowledge: A Reformed Critique." Westminster Theological Journal 68, no. 1 (Spring 2006).

Cowen, Steven B. "The Grounding Objection to Middle Knowledge Revisited." Religious Studies, 39, 1 (2003): 93-102.

Feinburg, John. "God Ordains all Things." In Predestination & Freewill: Four Views of Divine Sovereignty & Human Freedom, ed. David Basinger and Randall Basinger, 17-44. Downer's Grove: InterVarsity, 1986.

________. No One Like Him. Wheaton: Crossway, 2001.

Flint, Thomas P. Divine Providence: The Molinist Account. Cornell Studies in the Philosophy of Religion, ed. William P. Alston. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1988.

Frame, John M. Divine Aseity and Apologetics. Reformed Theological Seminary, Prof. of Systematic Theology and Philosophy.

Frame, John. The Doctrine of God: A Theology of Lordship. Philipsburg, N. J.: Presbyterian & Reformed, 2002.

Hodge, Charles. Systematic Theology. Theology. Hendrickson, 2003.

Laing, John D. "The Compatibility of Calvinism and Middle Knowledge." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, 47, 3 (September 2004): 455-467.

Lemke, Steve. Providence and Prayer: An Evaluation of Tiessen's Proposal. A Paper Presented at the 2002 Annual Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society.

Molina, Luis de. On Divine Foreknowledge. Translated by Alfred J. Freddoso. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1988.

Muller, Richard A. Grace, Election and Contingent Choice: Arminius's Gambit and the Reformed Response. Edited by Thomas Schreiner and Bruce Ware. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995.

Shedd, William G. T. Dogmatic Theology. Edited by Alan W. Gomes. Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian & Reformed, 2003.

Tiessen, Terrance. Providence and Prayer: How Does God Work in the World? Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2000.

Werther, David. "Calvinism and Middle Knowledge." Ars Disputandi 3 (November 2003).

Exploitation and Trafficking

2006-03-24T09:03:00.000-06:00

Around the world, children are exploited and abused in a variety of ways. They are exploited for cheap labor, prostitution, child soldiering, mining, domestic labor, agricultural labor, and other illegal activities. According to the International Labour Organization, more than eight million children around the world are engaged in the "worst forms" of child labor, including commercial sexual exploitation, hazardous labor, child soldiering, and illegal activities. Children who are forced to work instead of going to school are deprived of the opportunity to develop, learn, and be children; they are at risk of sexual and physical abuse; and are most are unable to defend themselves or their rights.

Right now, 2 million children are being exploited in the commercial sex trade.
Each year, more than 1.2 million children are trafficked around the world.
300,000 child soldiers participate in 30 conflicts throughout the world.
20,000 - 30,000 boys are exploited as prostitutes on Sri Lankan beaches.
At least 30,000 children in Nepal live on the streets.

In humanitarian crisis social protections that function in stable communities are not in place or are no longer functioning in displaced communities. Child trafficking and prostitution have become commonplace in areas where economic infrastructure and social safety nets collapse, leaving children and their families desperate for food, shelter and financial opportunity.

test post 1

2006-02-21T23:37:00.000-06:00

testing testing...what is about to happen???