Quotations...

A few quotes I ran across today which I wanted to share: 

Lord Jesus Christ, I admit that I am weaker and more sinful than I ever before believed, but, through you, I am more loved and accepted than I ever dared hope. I thank you for paying my debt, bearing my punishment and offering forgiveness. I turn from my sin and receive you as Savior. Amen.

- Timothy Keller

Observed Duties maintain our credit but secret duties maintain our life

Flavels Touchstone of Sincerity, Works Vol V, p 520. - quoted in Jonathan Edwards, The Religious Affections, Banner of Truth Edition (Carlisle:PA, Banner of Truth Trust, 2001) 65.

The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting. It has been found difficult; and left untried.

G.K. Chesterton, "What's Wrong with the World?” (Dodd, Mead and Company, 1910. Reprinted, San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1994), 37.

The Nature of the New Atheism

In the coming weeks I will be trickling out (without a production schedule) a blog series I am calling The Nature of the New Atheism - There has been a bit of a buzz in the media as of late about certain thinkers and leaders many are calling the New Atheism (See Wired Magazine Article - The Crusade Against Religion). 

Recently I have finished a book featuring the thoughts of Bad Religion front man Greg Gaffin, read some of the recent articles on the net and ordered another book by the atheist crusader Sam Harris.  I was thinking of reviewing books, engaging the articles, etc. but then had a bit of a different idea this morning.  What I propose I do is to cover some of the main ideological thrusts from the contemporary (really not all that new) atheistic front in our culture highlighting the books/works of various thinkers along the journey.

So in brief, here is my proposed outline with a brief abstract for each of the five stops on the path.  These entries I hope will be written well, but they will not be research papers handling all the breadth and depth of each topic.  My prayer is that they would serve as food for thought and dialog for us in these important times.

1. Naturalism as the overarching meta-narrative - the atheistic worldview has philosophical naturalism as its foundational story.  The view holds that our world is a closed system of cause and effect with nothing existing "outside" of nature and therefore nothing acting upon the world.  No gods, devils, angels, demons, non material human souls, universal ethical truths existing at all.  This is the story from which they spin both their rhetoric and scholarship.
2. Man de-centralizing man - For millennia human beings have thought that they inhabited a special and unique space in the cosmos.  Man, as it were, sat upon a throne at the top of the chain of being, a crowned creature in a world of matter, energy, things living and without life.  The atheistic project has sought to take man off of this throne and remove his crown.  Human beings are but a fortunate convergence of time + matter + chance - a combination which has deceived us into thinking we were special, that we had souls, that consciousness was spiritual, even made in the imago dei.
3. The primacy of the brain and “evolutionary wiring” - With the advent of neuroscience and the continued creation of computational devices which mimic "thinking" (think...your computer) much is being said today which reduces all consciousness to the function of specialized matter, localized inside your skull.  Ethics, language, sin, and religion are now matters of localized brain function brought into play by the work of evolution.  Over the years we were fashioned into "meat machines" whose brains foster all these illusions upon us.  Morality, God, that you are a soul not just a body etc. are just projections of human brains.  This area goes sci-fi really quickly - so we'll have some fun with this one.
4. The Fear of Religion and Anti-Religious crusading - With our world embattled by Islamic terrorism, the secularist is now setting aside his postmodern tolerance (well, only a few loud ones are) to rant against the evils of religion.  Not simply the religion which blows up one's self in the name of Allah, but ALL religions of every stripe.  They are outmoded evolutionary hang-ups that we need to grow out of and become enlightened naturalists who will bring utopia to the earth...or at least get us colonizing space before we blow ourselves to smithereens. 
5. Why Atheism is not the major boogy man it once was - Really, atheism is not the big bad enemy it was in the 19th century Europe and America.  There are new enemies now at the gates of belief.  It remains a formidable element of thought in our culture which we must engage (ie - why I am even writing this) but there are other views which I believe hold more challenge in the future of Christian Orthodoxy. I will discuss the challenges facing atheism and the new boogies in the final post.
   

Now, I just pray I can complete this sucker before Thomas Reid turns 1 in August of 2007.  Seriously, I hope I can crank these out over the next month or so.  Pray for me will you - I promise I have too much to do than try and write this stuff - but what do you do with an idea that grips tightly onto your soul...

Should be fun. 

Why you should use Firefox 2.0

Much talk in the tech world has been of the release of IE 7 and Firefox 2.0.  The two giants of the browser world just were updated and released in the past few weeks. I have IE7 on my home computer and will say that it is a great leap forward for the Mikeysoft crew.  I could use it now if Firefox 2.0 didn't have such a cool new feature that really ain't new.  What is this indispensable feature? Inline spell checking for forms.  ALL bloggers will greatly appreciate this. 

For instance, I currently use Movable Type with Ajaxify which gives me a WYSIWYG interface for my blog entries (with round trip into the HTML code for when I need/want that).  Now with Firefox 2.0 I get inline spell checking in the entries by default, just from the browser. When misspelled words are recognized (real-time as you type), they are immediately underlined with the familiar red squiggle...If you right click on the underlined words, you will get a list of spelling suggestions in the pop-up menu.

This feature alone is such an aid to blogging that Firefox 2.0 is staying my default browser.  

Get it today.  It is free...

Should I buy this book?

My decision is not usually this complicated…but I thought this graphic was funny.  A friend sent it to me; I’m not sure where he gleaned this little masterpiece. I lean towards the old quote by Erasmus as well -“When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left I buy food and clothes.”

 

(HT - Brad Tunnell) 

The Bifurcation of Knowledge - where all begins and ends

In the life of my children we are but beginning to lay a foundation in their education.  Thomas is 3 months old so we just talk to him a lot, using full sentences and not baby talk.  Kylene is 2 1/2 so we read to hear a lot, tell her stories which inflame the imagination and are working dialogically on basic questions about life and God.  Kayla is 5 we are working on language skills, basic math, good reasoning skills (logic) but most importantly theology.  More than anything I want Kayla to know where all knowledge and learning begin and end. 

It is a great shame today that education is unhinged from its fountain.  Truth taught about language and math without it bolted to the one reality in which all things hold together.  With my kids, I want a few things:

• I want them to be humble in all their learning
• I want them to love truth and the process of learning
• I want them to understand that they have been given minds to honor and glorify Father, Son and Holy Spirit and serve humanity

So with Kayla we are using a phrase, derived from Biblical truth, to posture her in life for learning: The Bifurcation of Knowledge

Deuteronomy 29:29 - The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the things that are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law.

Knowing this passage of Scripture gives us great humility - I am finite, I do not know and cannot know all that God knows.  Yet it also gives great hope that knowledge is possible, it is attainable, skepticism is unwarranted and learning not a nihilistic spinning of the brain. Humility and awe for God and learning - this is the goal.

In teaching Kayla I give him the ridiculous big word bifurcation - which means divided in two.  That knowledge itself exists in two categories.  So I ask her a series of questions after quoting Deuteronomy:

• Question: Kayla what is the bifurcation of knowledge?
• Answer: There are secret things and there are revealed things!
  

• Question: What can we know?
• Answer: The revealed things! (Daddy's qualification - we know only a partial amount of the revealed things...but we can continue to learn)
  

• Question: What does God know?
• Answer: The secret AND the revealed things (Daddy's qualification - God knows all things exhaustively and completely)
  

Summary statement: All theology, indeed all knowledge begins with revelation. That a gracious and good God reveals knowledge to us - therefore, there is truth, therefore, we can know, therefore, learning is a glorious way to worship God. This takes us directly to the Christian doctrine of revelation. God IS and God reveals.  His revelation comes to us generally in nature, conscience, design in general, design in us (see J. Budzizewski's What We Can't Not Know: A Guide) and specially - in the person of Jesus Christ who is the fullest revelation of God and in the Bible, the very Word of God which teaches us about God and his decrees.  The Scriptures being the norming norm for our knowledge of God and the primary guide for philosophical conclusions and our scientific and inductive investigations. 

It is my prayer that my kids have knowledge and God very connected...but this is the very difficult task of education...and it takes time.  I need to make more time to dialog, learn, laugh and worship with my kids.  Pray for us Fathers - that we would teach our children.

Do you U2?

What do you think of the U2 Eucharist? See the link and respond below: USA Today - U2 Eucharist

U2 Eurcharist

What do you think of the U2 Eucharist?

Um, didn't he say "Do this in remembrance of ME" Bono makes me think of Jesus I'm cool, just use wine at the table God, please don't destroy the Episcopalians

Current Results

Let judgment begin with the people of God...

Kairos Journal has a little article reporting on the research of sociologist Alan Wolfe, director of the Boisi Center at Boston University.

If you are a subscriber to Kairos Journal, the link to the article is here.  If you are a pastor, person in ministry, etc. You need to subscribe today. Here is the article:

---

Prominent Sociologist Reports: Christians Do Not Live Like They Say They Believe

Sometimes Christians can “tune out” the criticisms of unbelievers simply because they are non-Christians. It is a dangerous habit to develop. Very often those outside the Christian community can offer a fresh criticism that the Church needs to hear. Take sociologist Alan Wolfe for example. He serves as the Director of the Boisi Center at Boston University and is a self-described agnostic. Wolfe has spent several years now studying the beliefs of evangelical churches to see if they truly live their lives in ways consistent with what they believe. His method of finding this out was deceptively simple. He went out across America and visited specifically evangelical churches. His observations are put forth with disturbing clarity in The Transformation of American Religion.

Wolfe addresses whether or not evangelicals pose any sort of threat to secularism. His conclusions can be paraphrased in the following way:

Dear fellow secular Americans, I know that you are concerned about the “Religious Right” and their influence in America. You are worried that they possess too much power, and that if they are successful, they will make America into some kind of neo-theocratic state in which religious beliefs stymie the advance of personal moral freedoms in areas such as abortion, religious pluralism, and the normalization of homosexuality in the culture. But fear not, for on the basis of my studies, I have found that while evangelicals claim to believe in absolute truth and an authoritative Bible which governs all of life, they do not live like they say they believe. They say they believe the Bible is the Word of God, but somehow, strangely, the Bible always says what satisfies their personal psychological and emotional needs. They say they worship an awesome God, but their deity is not one to be feared, because He is pretty much nonjudgmental, always quick to point out your good qualities, and will take whatever He can get in terms of your commitment to Him. He’s “God lite”—not the imposing deity before whom Israel trembled at the foot of Mt. Sinai, but the sort of deity who is always there to give you fresh supplies of upbeat daily therapy. And as for God’s people, well, they are really just like everyone else—no more holy or righteous than the rest of us. Put them in the crucible of character, and they’ll fold like a cheap suit. In sum, democracy is safe from religious zealots, because such people don’t really exist in large numbers. So relax, evangelical Christianity in America is as safe as milk.

Here’s how Alan Wolfe describes his project’s conclusions in his own words:

In every aspect of the religious life, American faith has met American culture–and American culture has triumphed. Whether or not the faithful ever were a people apart, they are so no longer; . . . Talk of hell, damnation, and even sin has been replaced by a nonjudgmental language of understanding and empathy. . . . far from living in a world elsewhere, the faithful in the United States are remarkably like everyone else.1

Despite what one might think, Wolfe is torn, and even wistful, about the results he uncovered. He writes: “[W]atching sermons reduced to PowerPoint presentations or listening to one easily forgettable praise song after another makes one long for an evangelical willing to stand up, Luther-like, and proclaim his opposition to the latest survey of evangelical taste.”2 So anxious is evangelicalism to “copy the culture of hotel chains and popular music that it loses what religious distinctiveness it once had.”3

What Wolfe describes is a massive credibility gap for professing Christians. From what he has seen so far, nothing yet has convinced him that what is happening in the evangelical churches is anything particularly authentic. Of course, Wolfe has not visited every church in America. But one wonders how long it would take for him to uncover the kind of countercultural churches which he originally set out to find.

Footnotes :
1 Alan Wolfe, The Transformation of American Religion (New York: The Free Press, 2003), 3.
2 Ibid., 256.
3 Ibid., 256-257.

Justification by Faith

One of our small group leaders had a question on the Protestant doctrine of "Justification by Faith Alone" from a young women in here group.  I thought the response might be helpful to some of you as well.  Here is the response:

---

The question takes to task the term “Faith alone” or Sola Fide which is a reformation doctrine summarizing the clear teaching of the Bible. Just as we do not go looking for the word “Trinity” in the New Testament, you will not find “Faith alone” repeated in Scripture as it is language used to summarize the teaching of Scripture. For a summary see this wiki. - In this article you will see that both “faith” and “works” matter tremendously in the Bible. The question here is one of justification – how are sinful people, made righteous before a holy and just God. Are they justified, made righteous, by their works…by doing moral acts which accord with the law of God? Or are they made righteous by union with Christ, through his work on their behalf? In the former, one’s works are part of the person’s justification – their works along with Christ’s sacrifice make them justified. In the latter, Christ alone, not works justifies the sinner who then in turn lives a life of obedience out of thanksgiving and reverence for God. It will not do to simply quote James 2 or other passages which tell us that we ought to do good works – of course we should. If one desires to reject “sola fide” they must deny the clear teaching of many passages which teach man is not justified by “works of the law.”

In this brief treatment I will first lay out some important passages which teach the doctrine of justification by faith and then follow up with some responses to “objections” – namely the passages which teach about the nature of our good works. There are many relevant passages in the New Testament, mostly in the Pauline corpus, which articulate the teaching of Sola Fide. I will comment on a few of them in turn.

Philippians 3

1 Finally, my brothers, rejoice in the Lord. To write the same things to you is no trouble to me and is safe for you.2 Look out for the dogs, look out for the evildoers, look out for those who mutilate the flesh. 3 For we are the real circumcision, who worship by the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh— 4 though I myself have reason for confidence in the flesh also. If anyone else thinks he has reason for confidence in the flesh, I have more: 5 circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee; 6 as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to righteousness, under the law blameless. 7 But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ. 8 Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ 9 and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith— 10 that I may know him and the power of his resurrection, and may share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, 11 that by any means possible I may attain the resurrection from the dead.

In this passage Paul repudiates human accomplishment, even in religion, as a place for placing one’s confidence. He is clear that his zealous works, which were in accord with the law (the law of God and the laws of Jewish custom which developed over time) are in no way the place of standing before God for the Christian. Additionally, he says that “as to righteousness under the law” he was absolutely blameless. His works, his self-righteousness did not produce blamelessness with God, but only before man. His own righteousness and pedigree before placing faith in Christ, he says is literally “dung, doo-doo, crap, poop, rubbish.” He is contrasting this righteousness by works of the law with something else, a righteousness which is not his own but one that comes through faith in Christ. If one is trusting in one’s own religious observance in order to be made righteous, Paul tells us this is not a path which meets with success.

Romans 3

The entire first three chapters of Romans should be read leading up to the passage I will post below. Paul goes to great detail in Romans 1-3 to demonstrate several things. First, all are guilty before God and without excuse. Second, those who have the law, the Jews, are no better than the sinners without the law, in fact, they have more responsible as they posses the very words of God. They who know God’s law, yet break it, will most certainly be found guilty. Also, those without the law, have the law written on the heart knowing right from wrong. All then are guilty of transgressing or breaking God’s laws. No one is righteous in and of themselves…All stand guilty, all if judged according to their works and their hearts will be found guilty. The teaching of the Bible, as I see it, states that all will be judged by God according to their works. Now, Paul culminates with stating how one indeed is made righteous in light of our status as sinners and lawbreakers:

21 But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it— 22 the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. 26 It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. 27 Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? By a law of works? No, but by the law of faith. 28 For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law. 29 Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, 30 since God is one. He will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith. 31 Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.

This passage could not be more clear – it is only through faith in Jesus that people are justified. It is by God’s grace as a gift – redemption (God purchasing his people out of bondage to sin, death, and hell) and propitiation (the diverting of the wrath of God from sinners to his Son) are received by faith. Paul is clear here and elsewhere that the gospel excludes all boasting, self-righteousness, etc. for it is the work of Jesus on our behalf, not our own good works, or law keeping which justify us before God. What is the outcome of this faith? A life of obedience, of living works and life which accords with the ten commandments…we uphold the law.

Galatians 2:16, 17 and Galatians 3:1-14

The whole book of Galatians should be read in this discussion – it is as strong an argument for Sola Fide as found in the New Testament. I will pull out just a few verses:

15 We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners; 16 yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.

This is simply self-explanatory. No one will be justified by works of the law.

3:1 O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified. 2 Let me ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law or by hearing with faith? 3 Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh? 4 Did you suffer so many things in vain—if indeed it was in vain? 5 Does he who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you do so by works of the law, or by hearing with faith— 6 just as Abraham “believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness”? 7 Know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham. 8 And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham,saying, “In you shall all the nations be blessed.” 9 So then, those who are of faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith. 10 For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them.” 11 Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for “The righteous shall live by faith.” 12 But the law is not of faith, rather “The one who does them shall live by them.” 13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree”— 14 so that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith.

The language here is quite serious. What Paul tells us is that if we rely on our works, we are under a curse. The Mosaic covenant included both blessings for obedience and curses for disobedience. Under the law we are in bondage to it. If you do not abide by all things in the law, you are cursed. The essence of the gospel is that Jesus become a curse for us so that we would be redeemed from the curse of the law, the judgment and wrath of God, thereby making us forgiven and free from condemnation. Why? Because of our working? No, because of faith in Christ.

Ephesians 2:8-10 I like to share this passage with others along with a simple set of instructions. 1) Read it 2) Then ask yourself, which reflects the teaching of the Bible? So here is the passage:

8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

Here are two equations – which reflects the teaching of this passage of Scripture: The “-->” is a symbol from Chemistry which simply means “yields” or "leads to."

1. Equation 1: Faith + Our Good Works --> Salvation
   
2. Equation 2: Faith --> Salvation --> Our Good Works
   

Again, works are the follow through on true faith, not what makes one justified. So now we can come to the passage in James 2, which is a passage which should not be sidelined in these discussions. I’ll place it here in context:

14 What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that? 17 So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. 18 But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. 19 You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder! 20 Do you want to be shown, you foolish person, that faith apart from works is useless? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up his son Isaac on the altar? 22 You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works; 23 and the Scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness”—and he was called a friend of God. 24 You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. 25 And in the same way was not also Rahab the prostitute justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way? 26 For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead.

A few thoughts in closing. First, a faith that is not accompanied by works is not biblical faith. When the Scriptures talk of faith, it is is a faith which will bear fruit, produce works, evidence itself as genuine. If one is saying “I love Jesus and trust Jesus for my salvation” but yet has not fruit, good works – James is telling us that such a person is self-deceived. THAT faith will not save anyone. The reformers taught that biblical faith was not just a simple belief, but it involves three things. They used the Latin words Noetia, Assenus, Fiducia. First it involves Noetia – Knowing – we must know the gospel and understand what Jesus has done. Second it involves Assensus or Assent – we must believe it. Third, and I would add most importantly – it involves Fiducia – trust. We trust Jesus with our destiny, that his working on the cross is for us, for me. This sort of faith produces gratitude and love. Which in turn will bear fruit. Jesus said “If you love me, keep my commandments” (See John 14:15-24) What does the word “Dead” mean in the Bible? It means a separation of the soul from the body, a vitality removed, the life is gone and the body is left dead. A faith which does not work is ineffectual, lifeless, dead. It is as James goes on to say in verse 20 – useless.

This is further brought out in the context as James uses an analogy of body/spirit and death in verse 26. Verses 21-25 have been used to teach “justification by works” – now if one does not hold to the divine inspiration of the Bible we could play James vs. Paul etc. I will not do this as I take the Scriptures to have one author, God himself. So for me Paul and James cannot and are not contradicting one another. In fact, it is interesting that they both quote Genesis “Abraham Believed God and it was counted to him as righteousness” (See Romans 4). The following is helpful in understanding this passage:

James’ famous text that has seemed to so many to contradict Paul appears here. What we find, however, is not a collision with Paul at all. Any allusion to his teaching only stands against the very misreadings of the gospel that Paul stood against, for example, “Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase?” (Rom 6:1). The dissimilarities between the issues that concerned James and those that concerned Paul are much greater than the similarities. The way in which James used special terms, such as “works,” is quite different from Paul’s usage. James’ unique questions about the usefulness of inactive faith and the vitality of such faith were particularly his own. Finally, James was expounding upon the nature of faith, not on the question of salvation in the end. James was emphatic about the reality of judgment, but here he was restricting his declarations to the reality of faith. Who can and who cannot justifiably claim to have faith? This justification of the claim to have faith or the unjustifiability of that claim is what is in question. Only genuine faith can stand up under trial and thereby be “perfected” as it was in the case of Abraham and Rahab. These two figures are crucial, for they represent two who resisted the wisdom of the world in favor of God’s mercy. They are a “brother” and a “sister” (cf. 2:15) who serve as examples of authentic faith.

Kurt A. Richardson, vol. 36, James, electronic ed., Logos Library System; The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2001, c1997), 127.

So James and Paul’s purposes are different. James is clearly teahcing that faith without works is not real faith – genuine faith is shown forth and claims to faith are vindicated by the fruit/works produced. I have attached the full section on this passage from The New American Commentary for your reading… I hope this helps you address these issues – I think these things are central to the gospel and not small matters. Sola Fide, faith alone, is a term used to describe the doctrine of justification taught in the New Testament. Like the word “Trinity” it is not used in the text, but is a term we use to describe what the Bible actually teaches. The 5 Solas of the Reformation were written to clarify important doctrines, this being one of them. I will close with the London Baptist Confession's articulation of Sola Fide.

That those which have union with Christ, are justified from all their sins, past, present, and to come, by the blood of Christ; which justification we conceive to be a gracious and free acquittance of a guilty, sinful creature, from all sin by God,through the satisfaction that Christ hath made by his death; and this applied in the manifestation of it through faith.

London Baptist Confession (1644)

More evidence...

More evidence of the sissification of America - Not it! Mass. elementary school bans tag... No more tag, or touch football...good grief.

My childhood days of smear the queer (I know that is not a PC name for a game - but we made no reference to anyone's sexuality - it was just tackle to the dude with the ball) and tackle football are long gone for these kids.

Toughen up your boys - we might need them some day to be able to do much more than "tag"

(HT - Mike Radcliffe)

Shorts About Islam - Brought to you on YouTube

Many of you know about YouTube, the strange cultural phenomenon where teens, adults, hobbyists, copyright infringers, amateur and budding professional videographers upload their wares.  Yes, this is the company that Google just bought for $1.6b!!!  Yes that is little "b" billion...

Most of you know there is some goofy stuff (and some sketchy stuff - be warned) on your YouTube, but there are also some great finds. No, I am not speaking of the dancing video, or the RuBot II that solves the rubiks cube, but other more profitable items. 

This morning I ran across just such an offering.  Jay Smith, a scholar and evangelist in the UK has several short videos going up about Islam and society.  I heard Smith debate some Muslim scholars while I was in campus ministry. He does a great job and is very knowledgeable.  The films are short monologues answering Muslim questions, objections about the Christian Faith as well as commentary on contemporary issues in relations between Islam and Western society.  

Smith's reasoning for doing the shorts are on his web site:

A couple of Christian film-makers, after seeing me down at Speaker's Corner, approached me with the possibility of filming an entire series of public challenges to Islam, as well as rebuttals to their challenges of Christianity, and then housing them on 'YouTube', where they could be used to engage Muslims publicly, as well as employed by Christians who need answers to some of the more current challenges we are facing.

We decided to call these short videos 'Pfander Films', in memory of the great CMS debater of the 19th century, Dr. Carl Pfander.

I filmed my first 10 episodes (from 1 - 10 minutes each) on Thursday, and the first three have now been put on-line, at 'YouTube' for you to view at: http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=PfanderFilms

These include my introduction, a five minute clip on 'Jack Straw and the problem of the Hijab', and a clip concerning 'Who is going to represent Islam in Britain now?'  We have purposely chosen these first ones to represent topics currently in the news, and have made them look amateurish, as they then tend to generate more hits.

Feel free to go up and look at them, respond to any of them, as YouTube permits you to freely post either a text or video response, or respond to the Muslims who are commenting on the clips.  It's a great way to get involved in evangelism from the comfort of your own home, a sort of 'arm-chair' missionary, and it won't cost you a cent.

You can jump into YouTube here to view the films. 

(HT - A-Team Blog) 

St. John of Calvinism on Hebrews 6

Apologies for the title - I'm just having a little fun with those who think John Calvin is part of the unholy trinity of Satan, the Antichrist, and John Calvin and the totally reformed brethren of mine who almost want to revert to Rome so they can canonize St. John of Calvinism...Anyway, I am actually a fan.

Our church is teaching through the book of Hebrews and I found Calvin's commentary on Hebrews 6 to be quite helpful. 

If any one asks why the Apostle makes mention here of such apostasy while he is addressing believers, who were far off from a perfidy so heinous; to this I answer, that the danger was pointed out by him in time, that they might be on their guard. And this ought to be observed; for when we turn aside from the right way, we not only excuse to others our vices, but we also impose on ourselves. Satan stealthily creeps on us, and by degrees allures us by clandestine arts, so that when we go astray we know not that we are going astray. Thus gradually we slide, until at length we rush headlong into ruin. We may observe this daily in many. Therefore the Apostle does not without reason forewarn all the disciples of Christ to beware in time; for a continued torpor commonly ends in lethargy, which is followed by alienation of mind.

But we must notice in passing the names by which he signalizes the knowledge of the Gospel. He calls it illumination; it hence follows that men are blind, until Christ, the light of the world, enlightens them. He calls it a tasting of the heavenly gift; intimating that the things which Christ confers on us are above nature and the world, and that they are yet tasted by faith. He calls it the participation of the Spirit; for he it is who distributes to every one, as he wills, all the light and knowledge which he can have; for without him no one can say that Jesus is the Lord, (1 Corinthians 12:3;) he opens for us the eyes of our minds, and reveals to us the secret things of God. He calls it a tasting of the good word of God; by which he means, that the will of God is therein revealed, not in any sort of way, but in such a way as sweetly to delight us; in short, by this title is pointed out the difference between the Law and the Gospel; for that has nothing but severity and condemnation, but this is a sweet testimony of God’s love and fatherly kindness towards us. And lastly, he calls it a tasting of the powers of the world to come; by which he intimates, that we are admitted by faith as it were into the kingdom of heaven, so that we see in spirit that blessed immortality which is hid from our senses.

Let us then know, that the Gospel cannot be otherwise rightly known than by the illumination of the Spirit, and that being thus drawn away from the world, we are raised up to heaven, and that knowing the goodness of God we rely on his word.

But here arises a new question, how can it be that he who has once made such a progress should afterwards fall away? For God, it may be said, calls none effectually but the elect, and Paul testifies that they are really his sons who are led by his Spirit, (Romans 8:14;) and he teaches us, that it is a sure pledge of adoption when Christ makes us partakers of his Spirit. The elect are also beyond the danger of finally falling away; for the Father who gave them to be preserved by Christ his Son is greater than all, and Christ promises to watch over them all so that none may perish. To all this I answer, That God indeed favors none but the elect alone with the Spirit of regeneration, and that by this they are distinguished from the reprobate; for they are renewed after his image and receive the earnest of the Spirit in hope of the future inheritance, and by the same Spirit the Gospel is sealed in their hearts. But I cannot admit that all this is any reason why he should not grant the reprobate also some taste of his grace, why he should not irradiate their minds with some sparks of his light, why he should not give them some perception of his goodness, and in some sort engrave his word on their hearts. Otherwise, where would be the temporal faith mentioned by Mark 4:17? There is therefore some knowledge even in the reprobate, which afterwards vanishes away, either because it did not strike roots sufficiently deep, or because it withers, being choked up.

And by this bridle the Lord keeps us in fear and humility; and we certainly see how prone human nature is otherwise to security and foolish confidence. At the same time our solicitude ought to be such as not to disturb the peace of conscience. For the Lord strengthens faith in us, while he subdues our flesh: and hence he would have faith to remain and rest tranquilly as in a safe haven; but he exercises the flesh with various conflicts, that it may not grow wanton through idleness.

John Calvin, Commentary on Hebrews,
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom44.xii.ii.html 

Overall, I find those with a covenantal and communitarian view of the gospel to have much less difficulty with the language of the warning passages of Hebrews...particularly those of Hebrews 6 and Hebrews 10.  I somewhat straddle the covenantal view of the community and the Baptist view of a believing church...so these passages can be tougher for me.

I like the reformed view that the visible covenant community is a mingled mass of people both regenerate and unregenerate.  In such even the unregenerate person in the community is tasting, seeing, experiencing, etc. yet remains unregenerate.  These warnings then have full force when directed "at the people in the community" - yet are only actual possibilities for some.  Big box is the whole people, little box are regenerate, the warning aimed at all, only possible for some.

What do you think? Maybe Mark Dever can be of help for the reformed Baptist types who feel a bit in a pickle between the clear covenantal view and the mistaken Arminian view of the actual apostasy of regenerate believers...

Deceived...

The New York Times is running an article based on a survey designed to estimate the number of married households as a percentage of the population.  For the first time the data they have shows married households making up less than a majority of American households.

The interesting thing in the piece was the typical blah, blah, blah about the marriage "test drive" known as cohabitation.  The end of the article reads:

“Even cohabiting young adults tell us that they are doing so because it would be unwise to marry without first living together in a society marked by high levels of divorce,” Ms. Smock said.

A number of couples interviewed agreed that cohabiting was akin to taking a test drive and, given the scarcity of affordable apartments and homes, also a matter of convenience. Some said that pregnancy was the only thing that would prompt them to make a legal commitment soon. Others said they never intended to marry. A few of those couples said they were inspired by solidarity with gay and lesbian couples who cannot legally marry in most states.

Jennifer Lynch, a 28-year-old stage manager in New York, said she had lived on the Lower East Side with her boyfriend, who is 37 and divorced, for most of the five years they have been a couple.

“Cohabitating is our choice, and we have no intention to be married,” Ms. Lynch said. “There is little difference between what we do and what married people do. We love each other, exist together, all of our decisions are based upon each other. Everyone we care about knows this.”

If anything, she added, “not having the false security of wedding rings makes us work even a little harder.”

When this is stacked up next to the reality that cohabiting couples seem to separate at a higher rate than those who did not shack up, you can see a sad deception being perpetuated today (See Rutger's Univ Study on Marriage and Cohabitation).  Unfortunately the people ravaged by such popular "try before you buy" mythologies are the women who give it all up to some knucklehead guy without any commitment.  And when the boy will not grow up, commit, be a good dad...she is puzzled.  She should know better and find a real man.

How does this make you feel?

POCBlog has just passed the 700 entry mark.  I thought of what I would want to use for entry 701.  I have a book review percolating...and some more Philippians stuff to put up later in the week...but I thought this would be an interesting conversation starter.

Not many of you know but I have a very big interest in Artificial intelligence, human nature, the doctrine of the soul, and many related subjects.  Philosophically, I find it quite interesting to discuss issues of what make us human and how we are infinitely differentiated from machines which simulate intelligence.

So, to that end, I wanted to share this YouTube video with all of you and ask a simple question: How does this make you feel?

Take me to your leader...

The Exodus Decoded - An Interesting Documentary

 

Recently the History Channel showed a new documentary by Simcha Jacobovici entittled The Exodus Decoded.  The documentary is presented by award winning producer James Cameron (of Terminator and Titanic fame) who makes several appearances throughout the treatment of the Biblical Exodus.  A friend of mine caught the new documentary when it was on TV; I ordered the DVD because we don't get the channel. There are exerpts of the show available online and the trailer is very good. Before the brief review I wanted to give the brief description of the aims of the project

After six years of unprecedented research, host Simcha Jacobovici and a team of renowned archeologists, Egyptologists, geologists, and theologians shed revelatory new light on the Exodus and the era's ruling Egyptian Dynasty. Their new theory pushes events hundreds of years earlier than previously thought, allowing age-old stories to sparkle with new perspectives and startling historical import.

First, I will say that the creativity and production quality of this DVD is amazing.  The CG animation is fantastic with Jacobovici presenting from within this ancient-future looking set which smells of mystery, archaelogy, transcendence and wonder.  The camera zooms in and out and the viewer travels through the CG from the host, out to on location footage, to artifacts, and back again.  It is too hard to even describe, but is a must to see. The trailer can give you the feel.

Now the content of the film is basically an effort to prove that the Biblical Exodus is a real historical event.  It takes the narrative of the Bible as its source and stays faithful to the biblical accounting while seeking to demonstrate the reality of the events from the point of scientific investigation.  Jacobovici traverses the disciplines of forensic archaeology, vulcanology, Old Testament studies, and the histories of Egypt, the Ancient Near East, and the Greeco-Roman Mediteranean.  Evangelical Old Testament and ANE James K. Hoffmeier of Trinity Evangelical Divinity School and author of the recent Ancient Israel in Sinai: Evidence for the Authenticity of the Wilderness Tradition, makes a few appearances in the film offering expertise from his area of research. Jacobovici's theories and chronology are controversial and challenged by many scholars; the reality is that Exodus studies have many chronologies and many theories surrounding its dating.  This documentary suggests a very early date (around 1500), make the move to identify the Hyksos with the Hebrews (he is not the only one to do this), and uses geological phenomenon to account for the ten plagues. Basically, the plagues that God brought on Egypt are explained as being the result of a volcanic eruption, and a related effect which occurred in the Nile river delta.  Some of these explanations are plausible, others quite ridiculous (the death of the first born is a bit silly)

The science of the plagues is indeed interesting and though I in no way suggest this is what actually happened, its plausibility is attractive.  And if this were to be the case for some of the plagues, it would in no way "take God out of the equation" by providing a natural explanation for the actions of God.  It is clear that God did use natural things (frogs, gnats, etc) in the plagues, directed by his providential command, at the time Moses was speaking before Pharoah (just who the Pharaoh was is a big issue in dating the Exodus).

It is an interesting documentary which I believe is worth your time.  I am no expert in ancient Egypt, ANE Semitic scholarship, so if you are I would love to hear your thoughts...but I do think this film is a welcome tool for discussion of the events in the Bible.  Though obviously a bit of a showman, Jacobovici seems to be a believer in the historicity of the biblical Exodus as his final statement in the documentary shows.  I'll paraphrase from memory:

Was the Exodus a myth or a mere coincidence of natural phenomenon or was it an act of God establishing a New Covenant with mankind?

I'll only say this in closing - good question...and indeed one further question may be asked. Did the God who redeemed his people from the house of slavery, with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm, establish a new and lasting covenant with the peoples of the earth. This time not through the law written on stone tablets, but written on the hearts of his people. This time the covenant was established by the one who fulfilled the law of Moses, now sits on the throne of David, who sealed and established the covenant in his own blood...Jesus, the Son of God himself (See Hebrews 8)

This wiki has an outline of Jacobovici's theories. Theories abound on all of this...I don't buy all the stuff in the Exodus Decoded, ibut this one was at least a fine production that tries to follow the narrative of the text. 

(HT-Greg Hardin) 

Thoughts on Philippians 2:1-11

The following are some additional notes which were given out along with the sermon "Making Nothing of Yourself" given at the Inversion Fellowship on October 5th 2006.

Life in Christian Community 

In the early part of Philippians chapter 2, we hear of a certain kind of community we should be. Paul uses an introduction which is in the form of a conditional question. He says, if there be—encouragement from Christ, comfort from love, participation in the Spirit, affection and sympathy—if this is who you are, then you ought to live a certain way. The conditional “If” is used here as a rhetorical device by Paul. He is not “doubting” that these things are experienced by the Philippian church. John Chrysostom, a man who was fluent in ancient Greek perceives this in Paul’s choice of language:

See how earnestly, how vehemently, with how much sympathy he speaks, “If there be therefore any comfort in Christ, that is, if ye have any comfort in Christ, as if he had said, If thou makest any account of me, if thou hast any care of me, if thou hast ever received good at my hands, do this. 1

Knowing Paul’s already stated affections for the Philippians we know that this is an appeal to people he is in relationship with and is not meant to cast doubt on their standing with God, but rather to intensify his plea to them. The construction of the first verse also displays the Trinitarian nature of the Christian community. All the persons of the Godhead are involved in our lives, and our love in community reflects his care for us. Gordon Fee summarizes what is going on here for us:

Thus the basis of the appeal is first of all the Philippians’ own relationship to the triune God, which he and they share together, and second, his and their relationship to each other, brought about by their common relationship to the Trinity. 2

There are many exhortations in the Bible to live together in humble community. Jesus’ sermon on the mount (Matthew 5-7), Paul’s exhortation to the Christians in ancient Ephesus (Ephesians 4-6), and Jesus’ servanthood and exhortation to love in the upper room discourse (John 13) come quickly to mind. We should simmer our souls in these passages and ask God for the grace to live in like manner.

Finally, German author Dietrich Bonheoffer, a man who lived under Nazi oppression in the early 20th century wrote a little gem of a book about living in Christian community. The book is titled, Life Together,3 and I highly recommend it. In the latter part of the book he lists several things which are of much value to us today and reflect well the Biblical ideal of community. The following summary comes from Frank Thielman who recounts these principles as ways of eradicating selfish ambition from Christian community. I have added some scriptural references for your study. Christians should:

1. Hold their tongues; refusing to speak uncharitably about a Christian brother [James 3, Ephesians 4:29]
   
2. Cultivate the humility that comes from understanding that they, like Paul, are the greatest of sinners and can only live in God’s sight by his grace. [1 Timothy 1:15]
   
3. Listen “long and patiently” so that they will understand their fellow Christian’s need; [James 1:19, 20]
   
4. Refuse to consider their time and calling so valuable that they cannot be interrupted to help with unexpected needs, no matter how small or menial.
   
5. Bear the burden of their brothers and sisters in the Lord, both by preserving their freedom and by forgiving their sinful abuse of that freedom [1 Corinthians 8, Romans 14, Galatians 6:1-10]
   
6. Declare God’s word to their fellow believers when they need to hear it [Colossians 3:1-17, 1 Timothy 4:11-13]
   
7. Understand that Christian authority is characterized by service and does not call attention to the person who performs the service. [Mark 10:45; Matthew 23:11, 12]4
   

Bonheoffer summarizes well the functioning of Christian Community:

Each member of the community is given his particular place, but this Is no longer the place in which he can most successfully assert himself, but the place we he can best perform his service.5

Each plays his part and desires the best for the other, this is the exhortation of our Lord. We will fail one another on this path, but with confession, repentance and faith, God can transform us into a community which reflects his humility, grace and love to a dying world. And Jesus is our model and means...to him we turn.

Making Himself Nothing and the Glory of the Incarnation

Much has been written regarding Philippians 2:6,7—that Jesus who in the very form of God did not count equality a thing to be grasped, but made himself nothing (or emptied himself) taking the form of a man. Over the years debates have raged over the precise nature of Jesus’ incarnation, the Son of God becoming flesh. Much of the debate has centered upon the words heautou (ἑαυτοῦ, himself) and keno (κενόω, to empty or make void, make nothing). Scholars have wrestled with what it means for Jesus to empty himself or make himself nothing in regards to his divinity. Let me explain.

Jesus is clearly shown in the gospels to be the pre-existent divine Son of God, the third person of the Trinity. Many biblical passages bear this out (See John 1:1-3, 14; Colossians 1:15-20, Hebrews 1:3, John 8:58, John 10:30, John 14:8-11, Mark 2:1-7). Jesus is indeed God. Yet Paul tells us here in Philippians 2 in relation to Jesus’ divinity that he emptied himself to become a human being. Many questions have been asked and many explanations have been put forth to understand the deep mystery of the incarnation of the Son of God. In theological circles these theories usually run under the title of “Theories of the Kenosis” or “Kenotic Theories.” We will first look at one incorrect view and then present an understanding which is faithful to the Scripture and the historic teaching of Christian doctrine

View #1—Jesus laid aside, or emptied, his divine nature and attributes in order to become man

This theory takes the position that in order to become a human being Jesus had tom in some way, take off his “God suit”. He had to empty out his divine attributes to really become man. Using a mathematical analogy, we might call this theory addition by subtraction - that is, to add humanity to the Son, the deity had to be taken away. The following equation helps to illustrate:

Equation 1: Eternal Son of God — Deity = The Incarnate “man” Jesus

This is very problematic for several reasons. First, it denies the clear teaching that Jesus was, is and remained God while incarnate. He is the eternal Son of God—and God cannot become “not God.” This is a principle known as the law of identity...as I am teaching my little girls: “Something is what something is.” Now normal things can undergo change and become other things. Trees become lumber, newspapers, and toilet paper. Yet God can in no way “become” anything. He is a different sort of being, by his very nature he does not change. Wayne Grudem, in following Louis Berkhof, summarizes this well: God is unchanging in his being, perfections, purposes, and promises, yet God does act and feel emotions, and he acts and feels differently in response to different situations.6 So Jesus could no more become “not God” than a Mormon could become a god. The Scriptures bear a robust witness to this truth about God—For I the Lord do not change, Malachi 3:6.

Additionally, from the Council of Chalcedon in 451 AD, the church has univocally held that Christ was one person with two natures; humanity and divinity united in one person. To have Jesus empty his “God-ness” would be contrary to orthodox doctrine. Is there another way to understand this?

View #2—A more biblical understanding—Jesus took on human nature in addition to his divine nature

Other theologians, in keeping with the Scriptures, have described an emptying which happens by taking on human nature in addition to Jesus’ divine nature. Perhaps revisiting another mathematical analogy will help with the distinction. Whereas View #1 could be seen as addition by subtraction, the Biblical view we might call subtraction by addition. In other words, because of the addition of human nature to Jesus the Son, the deity of Jesus was veiled or covered or concealed in a way in which it was not in eternity past. Another equation will again be helpful:

Equation 2: Eternal Son of God + Human Nature = The Incarnate “god-man” Jesus

Theologian Bruce Ware provides a good example of subtraction by addition. Say you go to test drive a brand new car, a Hummer 2. It is pristine, shiny and tricked out. It has all the attributes of “Hummer2-ness”. Yet if you took it for a spin in the mud then brought it back, it would have a different appearance. Would it still have all the attributes of “Hummer2-ness?” Yes, it is only veiled – this is subtraction by addition but nothing has changed essentially to the car. All the luster and beauty are there and not removed, the mud simply hides what would otherwise “be displayed.”

With Christ, he remains fully God, but the fullness of God cannot be completely manifested in finite human nature. He cannot be fully displayed – it is a limitation “taken on” by Jesus in addition to his divine nature. So in taking on human nature it necessarily restricts the manifestation, use, or showing forth of many of the divine qualities (omnipresence, omnipotence, etc.) He cannot experience them in his personhood due to the taking on of real human nature. The attributes are not limited, but their use is limited. He laid aside his right to use the divine attributes that remained fully his, in order to live life on earth as a real human being. John Calvin says this well in his commentary on Philippians:

Christ, indeed, could not divest himself of Godhead; but he kept it concealed for a time, that it might not be seen, under the weakness of the flesh. Hence he laid aside his glory in the view of men, not by lessening it, but by concealing it.7

The incarnation of the Son of God—God becoming a human, is a marvelous, wonderful truth which provides great hope. He indeed understands what we experience as people. He can sympathize with our weakness, and in his body, he took the beating for our sins. In his incarnation, God the Son took the wrath of God the Father, so that we might be fully free to receive the Fathers love and mercy. In the incarnation and in the cross, we see the love of God triumph over the wrath of God for all that believe...and we are set free from guilt and condemnation. Romans 8:1 reminds us, there is NOW no condemnation for those who are in Christ. Why? The wrath of God is satisfied by the self giving, obedient, death of the Son on a cross for us. Have you worshipped Jesus today? Do not skip this—bow a knee now, thank him, love him, wonder at his amazing love. This is why we pray in the name of Jesus, for it is by him, and through him alone are we brought to the Father. I will close with the words of a song: I’m forgiven, because you were forsaken, I’m accepted, you were condemned, I’m alive and well you Spirit lives within me, because you died and rose again...Amazing Love, How Can it be? That you my KING should die for ME?

Worship, Worship, Worship!

Soli Deo Gloria and Blessings in Jesus,

Notes

1. Philip Schaff, Saint Chrysostom: Homilies on Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Thessalonians, Timothy, Titus, and Philemon accessed October 4 2006; Available from http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf113.html.
   
2. Gordon D Fee, Philippians The Ivp New Testament Commentary Series ; 11. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1999, 86.
   
3. Dietrich Bonheoffer, Life Together. San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1954.
   
4. Frank Thielman, Philippians The Niv Application Commentary, ed. Terry Muck. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995,107. Scripture References added.
5.  Bonheoffer, 93, 94.
   
6. We highly recommend Dr. Grudem’s treatment of immutability, God’s unchangeableness, in Wayne A. Grudem, Systematic Theology : An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Leicester, England; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Inter-Varsity Press; Zondervan Pub. House, 1994), 163.
   
7. John Calvin, Commentary on Commentary on Philippians, Colossians, and Thessalonians, 1509-1564. Commentary on this passage available online—http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol42/htm/iv.ii.iv.htm. Accessed 10/4/2006.

La Religion de paix

In France, the religion of peace is again doing something very strange and contrary to its nature.  The Washington Times is reporting that over 2500 police officers have been injured in an undeclared intifada.  Intifadas are uprisings where the religion of peace acts peacefully by throwing off its oppressors. 

However, when uprisings occur, the definition of of peace is many times morphed to include beating down cops and throwing Molotov cocktails.  This of course is due to the evil infidel dog oppressors not giving them what they want.  Bad infidels! You should know better than to force those of the religion of peace to resort to violence.  I guess since those who are rising up are living in impoverished areas, that it isn't their fault.  I am sure the French will capitulate in a few decades and turn over the country to the oppressed. This, you know, is not the France which beat back the Muslim invasions of Europe throughout the middle ages.  That France died long ago giving way to an enlightened France which appears will be unable to make an ideological stand when her hour comes.

Pray for France...pray for the gospel in Europe. 

Love

A friend showed me great kindness today in sharing with me so poetry through e-mail.  Man, this is some fantastic stuff: 

Love bade me welcome, yet my soul drew back,
Guilty of dust and sin.
But quick-ey'd Love, observing me grow slack
From my first entrance in,
Drew nearer to me, sweetly questioning
If I lack'd anything.

"A guest," I answer'd, "worthy to be here";
Love said, "You shall be he."
"I, the unkind, the ungrateful? ah my dear,
I cannot look on thee."
Love took my hand and smiling did reply,
"Who made the eyes but I?"

"Truth, Lord, but I have marr'd them; let my shame
Go where it doth deserve."
"And know you not," says Love, "who bore the blame?"
"My dear, then I will serve."
"You must sit down," says Love, "and taste my meat."
So I did sit and eat

Love (III) - by George Herbert 1593-1633

I highly recommend reading some of the metaphysical poets of 17th century England to found on this site - there is much to sit down and eat. 

Thanks Tim Dees for showing me some poetical love. 

Halloween anyone

It is that time of year again.  The fundamentalists will scream and rail about the Devil, mainstream America will fork out mad piles of cash on crap and candy, and evangelicals will be somewhere on both teams. 

Are you participating with demons, druids and false religion by playing tricks and gathering treats?  Is it a great way for Christian people to meet their neighbors and show some love to the parents and kids around us?  Should there be Halloween alternatives for the kiddos so they do not feel deprived of the American right to have fun?  

I don't have time today to write out all my thoughts on All Saints Day, All Hallows Eve, or Reformation Day...but James Harleman has a pretty good post which went up yesterday.

Here is the link - Gimme some sugar baby - the holy, hellish hodgepodge history of Halloween.

One thing is sure.  If you are a parent, you have to at least be intentional about what your family will and will not do.  Amidst cultural pressures this is tough.  Last year we did trick or treat - probably will again this year.  But I tell you that many think I am the anti-Christ for not doing the whole Santa thing.  Please no spam if you like the fat guy in the red suit taking up the full view of Christmas.  I love my Santa celebrating Christian friends - we just don't do that in our house...but we will discuss the glorious, unbelievable reality found in the doctrine of the incarnation.  God become man...to die for sinners.  Merry Christmas.

Get er done!

Some folks out there have linked to this interview over at Homiletics online.  It is a great discussion with David Allen, author of the best selling book "Getting Things Done - The Art of Stress Free Productivity" - A good read and quite helpful.

Here is the link to the interview.

(HT - Cawley) 

Thoughts on Philippians 1:18b-30

The following are some additional notes which given out along with the sermon "Life: Overrated" given at the Inversion Fellowship on September 14th 2006.

Deliverance?

In verse 19 there is a very powerful word Paul uses to describe the outcome of his upcoming trial in Rome. He tells the church that through their prayers and the Spirit’s help his ordeal in Rome will turn our for his deliverance. The word he uses for deliverance is a big word in the New Testament. It is the word soteria and it is most often translated as salvation. Now you can see why it is such a “big word.”

There is some debate among students of the Scripture as to how Paul uses the term. In his referring only to his deliverance and vindication in his coming trial or if he is using it to refer to “ultimate” salvation/deliverance despite whether he is set free or is executed.

One interesting factoid is that the phrase “turn our for my deliverance/vindication” is an example of what literary critics call intertextulality—the direct use of one text in the composition of another1. This phrase is directly from Job 13:16, this will turn out for my deliverance/salvation. This quotation of Job, who is defending his case against friends blaming his suffering on “secret sins”, gives us a clue that the deliverance spoken of here. Indeed, it appears that it is perhaps beyond simply being let out of prison. Rather it refers to the ultimate vindication and salvation of Paul in a higher court of appeals. Even if an earthly court in Rome (much like Jobs “friends”) condemns him, he will still ultimately be delivered. It is in his standing before God, and the righteous judge, where Paul will be finally vindicated.

This ultimate salvation, justification before God, is clearly the use of the soteria in verse 29 of the same passage so there is good reason it holds the same meaning in verse 19 due to the context. Certainly, Paul’s deliverance from jail could be also be in view, but it seems his deliverance is also much more than release from his house arrest in Rome.2 John Calvin said it this way: For it is evident from what follows, that he is not [merely] speaking of the safety of the body.3

What Does Paul Mean by "Depart" and Be with the Lord?

What happens when I die? There is no greater issue of more importance to human beings who all some day arrive at this fate. There are many interesting questions which arise around this issue in the New Testament. Do believers in Jesus go directly to heaven upon their death or does this happen at the resurrection of our bodies? Do dogs go to heaven? Oops, we’ll save that for another discussion.

Here in Philippians Paul makes something clear for us; upon death we depart this world to “be with the Lord.” Thanks, Now what the heck does this mean? Do we become ghosts until our bodies are resurrected at the last day? (See 1 Corinthians 15 and 1 Thessalonians 4 concerning the resurrection) How are we with him? In what sort of place do we exist? One thing is clear in verse 23, when our body dies, we depart. It seems clear then that the New Testament declares that “YOU” cannot be reduced to “your body.” Certainly, all people are a unity of soul and body and we never exist here on the earth as a disembodied ghost or spirit. Theologians call human beings a psychosomatic unity (psyche—meaning soul and soma meaning body) and you never see your friends walking around without their body; that would be weird.

Yet the language here speaks of us departing or setting sail. Additionally, Paul in 2 Corinthians 5 compares our bodies to tents in which we take up our earthy residence. He even goes on to say “We know that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord.” Yet it would be a mistake to say that we need to leave our bodies behind in order to be with God. The Christian faith has always held that the body is holy and that in the Kingdom of Heaven we will have new and glorified bodies. So how do we understand this teaching. Let me summarize before we go on:

• You are a unity of body/soul
• Upon your death, the soul of those who know Jesus go to be with him
• At the last day all people will be resurrected and have new bodies. Some will continue on the new earth, in the Kingdom of Heaven. Others who persisted in rebellion against God, will be consigned to hell.

So in wrestling with these truths, many have discussed the idea of an intermediate state where we exist with the Lord awaiting the resurrection of the body at the end of time. Some have conjectured that we will have bodies in this state, others describe it as a conscious relational reality while held in being by God. This stuff is really fascinating, and can make your head explode, but the thing that is certain is that we will be with Jesus, we will know it, and it will be far better than life now.

For some deeper reading on Body/Soul stuff see my paper at entitled Are Human Beings Constituted of One, Two, or Three Substances? available at TheResurgence.com.4 For a treatment of the many issues surrounding our understanding of Heaven, see Randy Alcorn, Heaven, (Grand Rapids: Tyndale, 2004). We can ask our questions about our dogs from that book.

"Joy" and "Glory In" In the NIV

The NIV is a great translation of the Bible. I trust it, memorized it for years and studied it as my primary Bible for the first ten years of my Christian life. So please don’ t here me hating on the NIV here. But, I want us to look at verse 25 and 26 in the NIV and then see that there is actually a bit more happening there:

25Convinced of this, I know that I will remain, and I will continue with all of you for your progress and joy in the faith, 26so that through my being with you again your joy in Christ Jesus will overflow on account of me.

In this case the word “joy” appears two times in this particular English translation. A quick read of this and we actually miss something as the words translated “joy” are actually different words in the original. In verse 25 the word is a recurring New Testament word for Joy - χαρά chara; which means: joy or delight. In verse 26 the word is καύχημα kauchēma; which means a boast or reason to be proud, reason to glory, something to boast about.5 So in this case the rendering in the ESV is more helpful.

25 Convinced of this, I know that I will remain and continue with you all, for your progress and joy in the faith, 26 so that in me you may have ample cause to glory in Christ Jesus, because of my coming to you again.

In other words, Paul's coming to the Philippians at some point in the future would provide an occasion to glory in Jesus—to worship him and to rejoice in him and to boast about what God has done in their midst. This fits Paul’s view of boasting throughout the New Testament, that we should boast only in the cross, only in Jesus. Oh yeah, there are places where I like the NIV much better than the ESV (1 Thessalonians 2:8 for example). My recommendation is to use a translation (NASB, ESV, NKJV) for study and read paraphrases devotionally (NLT, NIV, The Message) to help your understanding. But do not let a person's paraphrase keep you from your own study of the Scriptures.

Notes

1. Gordon D. Fee, Philippians, The Ivp New Testament Commentary Series ; 11 (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 67.
2. For a very thorough discussion of this see Silva, Moisés. Philippians. 2nd ed. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2005. 69, 70.
3. John Calvin, Commentary on Commentary on Philippians, Colossians, and Thessalonians, 1509-1564. Commentary on this passage available online—http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol42/htm/iv.ii.iv.htm. Accessed 9/14/2006.
4. Reid Monaghan. Are Human Beings Constituted of One, Two, or Three Substances? The Resurgence, 2005, accessed September 8 2006; Available from http://theresurgence.com/reid_monaghan_2005_are_human_beings_constituted_of_one_two_or_three_substances. Just do a search on the title to find the paper. That URL is too long.
5. Robert L. Thomas, New American Standard Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Dictionaries, Updated ed. (Anaheim: Foundation Publications, Inc., 1998, 1981). Chara—5479 and Kauchema—2745.