Church
Carl Trueman continues to give accurate analysis and criticism of the American evangelical church's tendency towards exalting mega-church pastors to celebrity status. The point in many of his recent posts, this being one of them, is that, while not all mega-churches fall into this, most do what it takes to bring in the people and the money. Consequently, things that entertain the church, shouldn't. Topics that occupy space in church media, shouldn't. And even many who lead these churches, shouldn't be [leaders of the church at all]. The people and the material that the church are desiring fall more under the category of entertaining, than evangelical - more comedy, than news about the Creator. While I too understand there are exceptions to this, I have not yet found an objectionable point in Trueman's writing on the subject.
Books
Ten Questions to Diagnose Your Spiritual Health by Donald Whitney is a decent book for those who are regular "Church-going" folks who don't tend to read a lot of Christian literature. For those who read a lot, reading the table of contents may just be enough for you. In this work, Whitney answers some very important and pointed questions such as, "Do you thirst for God?" "Are you more loving?" and "Are you sensitive to God's presence." He looks to the classics for diagnosis and remedy, quoting multiple times in multiple chapters theologians like Spurgeon and Edwards. Overall, I was dissatisfied with a particular shallowness of the book. Whitney seldom addresses why people may not thirst or love or delight in God's presence. More or less, the chapters explain the question, quote from theologians concerning it, and give practical ways to address it.
Technology
For all of you iPhone lovers (or coveters) out there, here is a great article by a guy who gave his iPhone up and has not looked back. Most of us know the technology struggles that are becoming more and more common, if not down right aggravating. The author was convicted by his continuous neglect of discipline and even people; but his continuing devotion to a little device - the iPhone. I'm not trading in my iPhone after reading this, but I am more aware of certain ways the iPhone (and other phones like it) may cause me and others around me to erroneously and irresponsibly rearrange our responsibilities.
And, no, I don't have any thoughts concerning Steve Jobs death other than that, from what I know, he died without Christ. I am reminded every time I see a video or read an article about his contributions and accomplishments of the biblical irony of gaining (or changing) the world but losing one's soul (Mark 8:36). Would that Apple never existed on earth if that meant Jobs would have known Christ in heaven.
Life and Gospel
There is a common word floating around that accurately characterizes my life right now - struggle. In this video, Paul Tripp gets right to the point and purpose of disappointment, selfishness, and struggles in life. Watch this.
Saturday, October 8, 2011
Friday, October 7, 2011
Thursday, October 6, 2011
Avoiding Traps In Defending Your Faith
It is not uncommon for Christians to engage in a conversation about the existence of God. More times than not, these discussions boil down to a sort of evidential tug-of-war between the two parties. Whoever has the most evidence on their side wins. While such conversations can be good, they can turn ugly if the Christian falls into, what I call, the evidential trap - a conversation that accepts only evidential terms, from the outset, and excludes faith-based statements that are beyond the reason's ability to prove.
For example, if a Christian mentions matters of faith, such as the Bible or Christ, the evidentialist vehemently says, "Wait! You aren't allowed to speak of those things here!" If the Christian unquestionably concedes, he has fallen for the trap. At this point, Christ is not set apart as holy (1 Peter 3:15), but set aside as a subject to be proven by His creation. Christians must avoid such traps at all costs.
To do so we have to first be ready to expose the flaws in the trap. Perhaps one of the greatest flaws is that it assumes that evidence alone is sufficient for all certain knowledge - in this case, to prove God's existence. The truth is, however, that all evidence is interpreted and thus ultimately vulnerable to the subjectivity of human reason. Because of this vulnerability, conclusions based on evidence alone always leave room for either denying God's existence or holding that His existence is only probably true.
Second, the trap presupposes that evidence is more authoritative than God's Word. If God speaks (which He does!), then His Word is sufficient to convince, convict and assure us of His existence and salvation. It is treasonous to say, "The Bible doesn't convince me. I need to see evidence." This leads me to my third point.
Third, Christians must be equipped and ready to expose the faith commitments of the trap. To say that evidence alone can prove God's existence is itself a faith based comment - something that is unprovable by the evidence itself. In other words, to say that God cannot be known by any other epistemological means, is itself a statement that is beyond the ability of reason to prove. Very simply, the Christian has every right to stop the conversation by saying that he/she does not agree with the premise that certain knowledge comes only via empirical evidence. Revelation is also a sufficient way that people know things.
Further, in this line, I have not found a single evidentialist that is not relying heavily upon statements from others when promoting their views. Most have not tested the evidence themselves but merely quote authors they have read. The Christian should reduce the conversation to what it really is: The word of a person vs. The Word of God. Christians, in trusting the Words of God, should not fall into the trap of conceding that a person's words are more reliable and more authoritative than God's Words.
Finally, it is a fallacious appeal to authority to say that a kindergardener, who trusts the Word of God, could not correct the most educated unbelieving scientist concerning the existence of God. In other words, a PhD who writes a book about his theory of creation, can be silenced by a small child who simply says, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." When the good doctor asks what evidence the child has for her conclusion, it is completely rational for the child to answer, "The Bible tells me so."
For example, if a Christian mentions matters of faith, such as the Bible or Christ, the evidentialist vehemently says, "Wait! You aren't allowed to speak of those things here!" If the Christian unquestionably concedes, he has fallen for the trap. At this point, Christ is not set apart as holy (1 Peter 3:15), but set aside as a subject to be proven by His creation. Christians must avoid such traps at all costs.
To do so we have to first be ready to expose the flaws in the trap. Perhaps one of the greatest flaws is that it assumes that evidence alone is sufficient for all certain knowledge - in this case, to prove God's existence. The truth is, however, that all evidence is interpreted and thus ultimately vulnerable to the subjectivity of human reason. Because of this vulnerability, conclusions based on evidence alone always leave room for either denying God's existence or holding that His existence is only probably true.
Second, the trap presupposes that evidence is more authoritative than God's Word. If God speaks (which He does!), then His Word is sufficient to convince, convict and assure us of His existence and salvation. It is treasonous to say, "The Bible doesn't convince me. I need to see evidence." This leads me to my third point.
Third, Christians must be equipped and ready to expose the faith commitments of the trap. To say that evidence alone can prove God's existence is itself a faith based comment - something that is unprovable by the evidence itself. In other words, to say that God cannot be known by any other epistemological means, is itself a statement that is beyond the ability of reason to prove. Very simply, the Christian has every right to stop the conversation by saying that he/she does not agree with the premise that certain knowledge comes only via empirical evidence. Revelation is also a sufficient way that people know things.
Further, in this line, I have not found a single evidentialist that is not relying heavily upon statements from others when promoting their views. Most have not tested the evidence themselves but merely quote authors they have read. The Christian should reduce the conversation to what it really is: The word of a person vs. The Word of God. Christians, in trusting the Words of God, should not fall into the trap of conceding that a person's words are more reliable and more authoritative than God's Words.
Finally, it is a fallacious appeal to authority to say that a kindergardener, who trusts the Word of God, could not correct the most educated unbelieving scientist concerning the existence of God. In other words, a PhD who writes a book about his theory of creation, can be silenced by a small child who simply says, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." When the good doctor asks what evidence the child has for her conclusion, it is completely rational for the child to answer, "The Bible tells me so."
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
I Wish My Sins Didn't Affect Others...
In a fallen world, sin is always followed by the prepositional phrase "against another." It never occurs alone, no matter how secret the sin may be. Its fingers always reach into the lives of those around us. And, most importantly, its stench always reaches into the heavens.
I wish this theology wasn't true. I wish that I could disagree with my own orthodoxy concerning my own sin. But I can't. Truth is a person, a divine person, who is seated at the right hand of the Father in heaven, and who cannot be touched, manipulated or relativized by me or anyone else. Therefore, I am forced to struggle with the implications of my own fallenness. My sin is always against another.
When I slow down to consider my role as a husband, I can barely bear the weight of it. My wife, who is closest to me, is ironically the one who is most likely to see, and be affected by, my untamed sins. Then, I move down the relational line to my children. For some reason I am more sorrowful when it comes to them, and can even be brought to tears when I think about the ways they might be formed and molded by their sinful daddy. Will my little girls grow up and have acceptance issues? Will I hear my son one day tell me, "I never felt like you loved me."?
I'd also like to think that life isn't as serious or significant as it really is. Sometimes I want to sit my kids in front of the television and sleep the day away; or, get a sitter so I can escape to search the web or read some theological book. Other times, I lose hope altogether and over-desire a place that doesn't exist in this life - a place where I am sinless and not accountable for my actions; a place where only my good deeds affect people and my bad ones sort of evaporate before they touch another human being.
I'm going to resist now the ever-so-easy pastoral transition that goes something like, "But God...now I feel better." I can't say that I opened by Bible today and with my eyes closed pointed to just right the verse to fix me. I'm not fixed. I will say, however, that the reality of the above has forced me to think seriously about Christ, and how He is more significant and serious than the topic of a sermon or paper; that He is more than some theological avenue to let people know how much I know about Him.
Through these difficult weeks, I have been agonizing over the implications of the atonement. I have asked Him time and time again, "Jesus, I know you have redeemed me from the slavery of sin. But, what about the relational consequences of my sin? What about my sin "against others?" What about my children? What about my wife? Do you redeem that too?"
The orthodoxy that I previously desired to reject, now gloriously comes to rescue. The nature of the Savior cannot be understood apart from the nature of sin. If the tragedy of sin is that it is always against God and others, then I must understand redemption in the same relational context. The gospel informs me that Christ's redemption alone can heal the relational places my sin has wounded. In other words, my hope is found in nothing less than Jesus blood and righteousness.
In Him, redemption provides healing for every sinful wound. At this point, I rest in this. That I only need to show my wife and children Christ, who, unlike daddy, perfectly loves, saves, and redeems. Unable to fix what I have done, I am forced to abandon my selfish ship. By openly and honestly repenting to those I have hurt, I direct them to the Healer, the Refuge, who alone deserves our worship, and who is the only true object of our faith.
I wish this theology wasn't true. I wish that I could disagree with my own orthodoxy concerning my own sin. But I can't. Truth is a person, a divine person, who is seated at the right hand of the Father in heaven, and who cannot be touched, manipulated or relativized by me or anyone else. Therefore, I am forced to struggle with the implications of my own fallenness. My sin is always against another.
When I slow down to consider my role as a husband, I can barely bear the weight of it. My wife, who is closest to me, is ironically the one who is most likely to see, and be affected by, my untamed sins. Then, I move down the relational line to my children. For some reason I am more sorrowful when it comes to them, and can even be brought to tears when I think about the ways they might be formed and molded by their sinful daddy. Will my little girls grow up and have acceptance issues? Will I hear my son one day tell me, "I never felt like you loved me."?
I'd also like to think that life isn't as serious or significant as it really is. Sometimes I want to sit my kids in front of the television and sleep the day away; or, get a sitter so I can escape to search the web or read some theological book. Other times, I lose hope altogether and over-desire a place that doesn't exist in this life - a place where I am sinless and not accountable for my actions; a place where only my good deeds affect people and my bad ones sort of evaporate before they touch another human being.
I'm going to resist now the ever-so-easy pastoral transition that goes something like, "But God...now I feel better." I can't say that I opened by Bible today and with my eyes closed pointed to just right the verse to fix me. I'm not fixed. I will say, however, that the reality of the above has forced me to think seriously about Christ, and how He is more significant and serious than the topic of a sermon or paper; that He is more than some theological avenue to let people know how much I know about Him.
Through these difficult weeks, I have been agonizing over the implications of the atonement. I have asked Him time and time again, "Jesus, I know you have redeemed me from the slavery of sin. But, what about the relational consequences of my sin? What about my sin "against others?" What about my children? What about my wife? Do you redeem that too?"
The orthodoxy that I previously desired to reject, now gloriously comes to rescue. The nature of the Savior cannot be understood apart from the nature of sin. If the tragedy of sin is that it is always against God and others, then I must understand redemption in the same relational context. The gospel informs me that Christ's redemption alone can heal the relational places my sin has wounded. In other words, my hope is found in nothing less than Jesus blood and righteousness.
In Him, redemption provides healing for every sinful wound. At this point, I rest in this. That I only need to show my wife and children Christ, who, unlike daddy, perfectly loves, saves, and redeems. Unable to fix what I have done, I am forced to abandon my selfish ship. By openly and honestly repenting to those I have hurt, I direct them to the Healer, the Refuge, who alone deserves our worship, and who is the only true object of our faith.
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
One Altar Call, Many Wounded
About a year and a half ago I went to a Christian rally where about four thousand people, mainly youth, gathered to hear about Jesus. The organizer of the event, whose name will remain unsaid, did a great job getting people to a place where they were ready to hear the gospel. The testimonies, music and prayers were Christ-centered and God glorifying. For that, I commend them.
But when it came time for the "altar call", that is when my encouragement quickly became concern. While I am not a huge fan of altar calls, I usually refrain from criticizing those who utilize them.
If you live in the south, you have undoubtedly experienced the end of the sermon when the preacher tells everyone to bow their head and close their eyes. After this, he typically directs people in self-reflection, helping them to understand their need for the Savior. This is usually followed by a brief gospel presentation. That night, the preacher was on this track. So far so good. The next few minutes, on the other hand, were not so good.
After presenting the gospel, he ensured that everyone still remained with their head bowed and eyes closed. This was undoubtedly done to calm the nerves of those who were ready to accept Jesus, and where to indicate such by the raising of their hands. This could be a very embarrassing moment for a 12-14 year old, to let four thousand people know that they were a sinner in need of a Savior.
The preacher asked them to raise their hands. They did. All I could think about was Spurgeon's comment, that a repentant sinner, after hearing and believing the gospel for the first time, is like a wounded deer, who would rather go off to lick his wounds than parade his decision before men.
A minute or so later, the preacher told them they could put their hands down and that everyone could raise their heads and open their eyes. I was wholly unprepared, however, for what he said next. He told those that raised their hands to stand and come up front! After about half reluctantly did so, he then told the rest that if they denied Jesus before men then, Jesus says, He will deny them before the Father.
I almost stood up and openly rebuked this man. I could hardly stay seated. Not only did he take this Scripture out of context, but he used it to murder the conscience of young believers. That night, kids were lead to believe that the Christ who forgave all of their sins would now deny them before the Father because they were scared to "go up front." Perish the thought.
The fact that the name of this organization would be recognized by most, if not all, of those who read this post leads me to believe that there are probably thousands of kids who may be burdened in their conscience for not answering that altar call. If you are one of those people, or know someone who might be, let faith alone in Christ alone be your creed. Remain in your seat, trust in Christ, be set free. Those who trust Christ will never be denied.
But when it came time for the "altar call", that is when my encouragement quickly became concern. While I am not a huge fan of altar calls, I usually refrain from criticizing those who utilize them.
If you live in the south, you have undoubtedly experienced the end of the sermon when the preacher tells everyone to bow their head and close their eyes. After this, he typically directs people in self-reflection, helping them to understand their need for the Savior. This is usually followed by a brief gospel presentation. That night, the preacher was on this track. So far so good. The next few minutes, on the other hand, were not so good.
After presenting the gospel, he ensured that everyone still remained with their head bowed and eyes closed. This was undoubtedly done to calm the nerves of those who were ready to accept Jesus, and where to indicate such by the raising of their hands. This could be a very embarrassing moment for a 12-14 year old, to let four thousand people know that they were a sinner in need of a Savior.
The preacher asked them to raise their hands. They did. All I could think about was Spurgeon's comment, that a repentant sinner, after hearing and believing the gospel for the first time, is like a wounded deer, who would rather go off to lick his wounds than parade his decision before men.
A minute or so later, the preacher told them they could put their hands down and that everyone could raise their heads and open their eyes. I was wholly unprepared, however, for what he said next. He told those that raised their hands to stand and come up front! After about half reluctantly did so, he then told the rest that if they denied Jesus before men then, Jesus says, He will deny them before the Father.
I almost stood up and openly rebuked this man. I could hardly stay seated. Not only did he take this Scripture out of context, but he used it to murder the conscience of young believers. That night, kids were lead to believe that the Christ who forgave all of their sins would now deny them before the Father because they were scared to "go up front." Perish the thought.
The fact that the name of this organization would be recognized by most, if not all, of those who read this post leads me to believe that there are probably thousands of kids who may be burdened in their conscience for not answering that altar call. If you are one of those people, or know someone who might be, let faith alone in Christ alone be your creed. Remain in your seat, trust in Christ, be set free. Those who trust Christ will never be denied.
Monday, October 3, 2011
The Priorities of God: Ordinary Preferred Over Extraordinary
Miracles can be defined as extraordinary manifestations of God's covenant lordship (See Frame, The Doctrine of God). While every word in the definition is important, the word extraordinary stands out to most as that which, in our day, is either highly coveted or strongly doubted. Those who believe in God, along with those who desire to see proof of His existence, often look to the miraculous as the final linch-pin of certainty - the convincing straw that breaks their unbelieving back. For those who actively desire to disprove God's existence, they deny any possibility of miracle, presupposing from the outset an ordinary explanation for the extraordinary.
At first glance, the desires of both camps are pretty reasonable. Believers should want to see more miracles; and, unbelievers should want to see none. We shouldn't, however, be so quick to agree with either. I propose that things should be just the opposite. Consider two brief thoughts.
First, if unbelievers were consistent with their presuppositions, they should desire the extraordinary. The reasoning is simple. If the universe is random and if all of life and matter was brought about by chance, then it seems to me that ordinary events would be more miraculous than extraordinary ones. If it is ordinary for life to appear randomly and by chance out of nowhere, I see no reason why it would be extraordinary for a BMW to magically appear in my driveway - given enough time of course. Simply put, the unbeliever would find more evidence for his worldview in a highly extraordinary world - in a world where random things happened all of the time, without particular explanation, and without any known purpose. But, as it presently stands, the ordinary is the saw the unbeliever uses to cut off the branch upon which he sits.
Second, while God has used the extraordinary in glorious and redemptive ways, His priority is to use the extraordinary to prepare for the ordinary. This is perhaps the most significant point I learned from Frame's discussion on the topic of Miracle. He writes, "We often value spectacular experience over day-to-day routine. But God's priorities are different." In Genesis we see that the extraordinary flood is followed by the covenant of preservation where God promises ordinary and regular seasons (Gen 8:22). During the wilderness years, Israel was fed in an a miraculous way; but, their goal was to finally be in the land of Promise where normal harvests were the fulfillment of God's promise. And finally, Paul, in his letter to the Corinthians, tells them that the miracles of tongues and prophesy are far less important than ordinary love - for, love is that which remains.
Miracles are important, and are one way that the Lord manifests (and has manifested) His covenant faithfulness and lordship. It is the testimony of both Scripture and natural revelation that the ordinary is a glorious spectacle of His power, grace, and redemption. The believer and the unbeliever alike should stand in awe of the ordinary, for it is Jesus Christ Himself who holds it all together.
At first glance, the desires of both camps are pretty reasonable. Believers should want to see more miracles; and, unbelievers should want to see none. We shouldn't, however, be so quick to agree with either. I propose that things should be just the opposite. Consider two brief thoughts.
First, if unbelievers were consistent with their presuppositions, they should desire the extraordinary. The reasoning is simple. If the universe is random and if all of life and matter was brought about by chance, then it seems to me that ordinary events would be more miraculous than extraordinary ones. If it is ordinary for life to appear randomly and by chance out of nowhere, I see no reason why it would be extraordinary for a BMW to magically appear in my driveway - given enough time of course. Simply put, the unbeliever would find more evidence for his worldview in a highly extraordinary world - in a world where random things happened all of the time, without particular explanation, and without any known purpose. But, as it presently stands, the ordinary is the saw the unbeliever uses to cut off the branch upon which he sits.
Second, while God has used the extraordinary in glorious and redemptive ways, His priority is to use the extraordinary to prepare for the ordinary. This is perhaps the most significant point I learned from Frame's discussion on the topic of Miracle. He writes, "We often value spectacular experience over day-to-day routine. But God's priorities are different." In Genesis we see that the extraordinary flood is followed by the covenant of preservation where God promises ordinary and regular seasons (Gen 8:22). During the wilderness years, Israel was fed in an a miraculous way; but, their goal was to finally be in the land of Promise where normal harvests were the fulfillment of God's promise. And finally, Paul, in his letter to the Corinthians, tells them that the miracles of tongues and prophesy are far less important than ordinary love - for, love is that which remains.
Miracles are important, and are one way that the Lord manifests (and has manifested) His covenant faithfulness and lordship. It is the testimony of both Scripture and natural revelation that the ordinary is a glorious spectacle of His power, grace, and redemption. The believer and the unbeliever alike should stand in awe of the ordinary, for it is Jesus Christ Himself who holds it all together.
Saturday, October 1, 2011
The Rest of the Rest (10/1/11)
Books
James K. A. Smith's Desiring the Kingdom, is a very thought provoking work. The main message of the book is that our philosophical anthropology, especially post-Enlightenment, is too reductionistic, focusing our educational efforts on informing the mind while neglecting the more foundational work of forming the heart and affections. Contra Cartesian thought, we are more than just thinkers. And, contra Augustinian thought, we are more than mere believers. Smith argues with needed repetition that we are, at the most fundamental level, lovers who are pulled through life (rather than pushed) by our imaginative affections (rather than our minds) toward the telos of the good life. While this book is more philosophically than biblically referenced, I appreciate Smith's recognition that we are more than just minds in a body. Humans are so much more than thinkers...we are first and foremost worshipers.
I wanted so much to like reading The Trustworthiness of God: Perspectives on the Nature of Scripture, edited by Carl Trueman and Paul Helm. But I found it to be far more academic than the title let on. It should rather have been entitled something like The Trustworthiness of God: Authority Preserved Despite Historical and Biblical Criticisms of the Last Half Century. With all due respect for the authors and contributors, this book is not for the layperson. It is a compilation of articles by seminary professors and theologians whose goal is to confront and correct the critics of the nature and authority of Scripture. Don't get me wrong, this is a much needed and very informative book. It is better suited however, for the seminary syllabus than the Amazon Wish List.
Miscellaneous
This is a very insightful article by Carl Trueman entitled Is the Reformation Nearly Over? In it Trueman reminds us that the Reformation was not just about theology, but also about ecclesiology. Communities under the dominion of Medieval Catholicism were plagued with pastoral absence as well as ministerial fetishism. Ironically, the priests, bishops and popes, while highly neglectful of their pastoral duties, where, by the very people they neglected, worshipped. Dr. Trueman points out that modern evangelicalism, with its praise of and tendency toward the multi-site mega church model, is falling into the same deadly patterns. The pastors of these churches are, for the most part and for most people, absent. The shepherds, while highly esteemed, don't know their flocks. Because they are celebrities, they are untouchable - and this is antithetical to how things should be.
This article discusses the gospel-centered truth that Christ paid for our sins and how this protects and guards us from desiring that the people we love (namely, our spouses) pay for their own.
Here is a must read for both men and women about backward porn addiction. It discusses the temptation that women have to "capture the gaze of men." The question at the end of the article should stick with us all while we shop and chose clothing to wear.
Cool Stuff
Google makes the Dead Sea Scrolls available online. I don't think I can ever forgive myself for not visiting the DSS exhibit that came to Mobile. But now, thanks to Google, I can view the documents in high digital resolution on the web.
Take a look at these phenomenal pictures of eyes. While you look, think "random molecular activity" and "by chance" and "without design." After those thoughts strike you as absurd, worship the Creator, Jesus Christ for His excellency and wonderful creation.
Good Quote
Nothing makes a man more unpopular in the controversies of the present day than an insistence upon definition of terms. J. Gresham Machen
Ranting
Can I just vent for a second? I hate - yes, hate - front loader washing machines! For some reason all of the clothes decide while they are being washed that they want to tangle themselves together. Then! when I go to pull them out, about four or five articles of wet clothing fall on the ground (doesn't this defeat the purpose?)! This may be no big deal to those of you who are shorter than 6'9", but when I have to constantly bend down and pick up clothes off of the floor, I feel more like I'm doing squats for Sean T than laundry for my home!
James K. A. Smith's Desiring the Kingdom, is a very thought provoking work. The main message of the book is that our philosophical anthropology, especially post-Enlightenment, is too reductionistic, focusing our educational efforts on informing the mind while neglecting the more foundational work of forming the heart and affections. Contra Cartesian thought, we are more than just thinkers. And, contra Augustinian thought, we are more than mere believers. Smith argues with needed repetition that we are, at the most fundamental level, lovers who are pulled through life (rather than pushed) by our imaginative affections (rather than our minds) toward the telos of the good life. While this book is more philosophically than biblically referenced, I appreciate Smith's recognition that we are more than just minds in a body. Humans are so much more than thinkers...we are first and foremost worshipers.
I wanted so much to like reading The Trustworthiness of God: Perspectives on the Nature of Scripture, edited by Carl Trueman and Paul Helm. But I found it to be far more academic than the title let on. It should rather have been entitled something like The Trustworthiness of God: Authority Preserved Despite Historical and Biblical Criticisms of the Last Half Century. With all due respect for the authors and contributors, this book is not for the layperson. It is a compilation of articles by seminary professors and theologians whose goal is to confront and correct the critics of the nature and authority of Scripture. Don't get me wrong, this is a much needed and very informative book. It is better suited however, for the seminary syllabus than the Amazon Wish List.
Miscellaneous
This is a very insightful article by Carl Trueman entitled Is the Reformation Nearly Over? In it Trueman reminds us that the Reformation was not just about theology, but also about ecclesiology. Communities under the dominion of Medieval Catholicism were plagued with pastoral absence as well as ministerial fetishism. Ironically, the priests, bishops and popes, while highly neglectful of their pastoral duties, where, by the very people they neglected, worshipped. Dr. Trueman points out that modern evangelicalism, with its praise of and tendency toward the multi-site mega church model, is falling into the same deadly patterns. The pastors of these churches are, for the most part and for most people, absent. The shepherds, while highly esteemed, don't know their flocks. Because they are celebrities, they are untouchable - and this is antithetical to how things should be.
This article discusses the gospel-centered truth that Christ paid for our sins and how this protects and guards us from desiring that the people we love (namely, our spouses) pay for their own.
Here is a must read for both men and women about backward porn addiction. It discusses the temptation that women have to "capture the gaze of men." The question at the end of the article should stick with us all while we shop and chose clothing to wear.
Music
Here is Lecrae's testimony on I Am Second. This is well done.
Cool Stuff
Google makes the Dead Sea Scrolls available online. I don't think I can ever forgive myself for not visiting the DSS exhibit that came to Mobile. But now, thanks to Google, I can view the documents in high digital resolution on the web.
Take a look at these phenomenal pictures of eyes. While you look, think "random molecular activity" and "by chance" and "without design." After those thoughts strike you as absurd, worship the Creator, Jesus Christ for His excellency and wonderful creation.
Good Quote
Nothing makes a man more unpopular in the controversies of the present day than an insistence upon definition of terms. J. Gresham Machen
Ranting
Can I just vent for a second? I hate - yes, hate - front loader washing machines! For some reason all of the clothes decide while they are being washed that they want to tangle themselves together. Then! when I go to pull them out, about four or five articles of wet clothing fall on the ground (doesn't this defeat the purpose?)! This may be no big deal to those of you who are shorter than 6'9", but when I have to constantly bend down and pick up clothes off of the floor, I feel more like I'm doing squats for Sean T than laundry for my home!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)