POC Blog

The random technotheolosophical blogging of Reid S. Monaghan

A Question about Calvin...

One of the guys on the staff at our church asked me an interesting question today.  John Farkas, who just recently started blogging here, sent me the following request:

Give me your perspective on Calvin's 3 most important contributions.  Try to keep it to about 100 words (150 if you must)

I have to confess that I sinned against keeping it brief, but I did ask for forgiveness.  Here is my response which may get some fun comments from John Calvinists out there.  Here goes.

----------------------------------------

John,

Sure thing. I am a bit of a fan of the reformed view of God, the gospel and the church so I have many positive things to say about the contributions of Jean Calvin...I'll try to stay at three but will likely sin against the word limit. 

Ad Fontes 

Calvin was trained in France during a transition time in western culture.  The medieval catholic church was in great need for reform and humanistic studies (not secular humanism, but the study of man and culture) were on the rise in Europe.  One of the beacon calls of the era as ad fonts - to the sources.  The call was to return to the classical roots of western culture.  Additionally, church scholars applied this to theology.  That to form Christian doctrine one ought to go to the sources of Christian faith - namely, the inspired writings of the New Testament...the teachings of Jesus and the apostles.  Calvin sought to craft a thoroughly Bible based theology and literally wrote the first Protestant systematic theology when he was only 27 years old: The Institutes of the Christian Religion.  A word about Systematics.  Today there are many who do not like a systematic theology - the cry is for narrative etc.  I get that and affirm narrative theology, biblical theology etc. Yet all systermatic (in the way of Calvin) seeks to do is not reduce the Scriptures teaching about something (say the identity and work of Jesus) to one part of Scripture.  Calvin and those who like systematic just want to say ALL that the Bible says about Jesus, not just part of it.  For instance some might say Jesus is a nice, pacifistic teacher in looking at the sermon on the mount.  Yet to not look at the exalted Christ of Revelation who comes with a sword to strike the nations would give you a one dimensional Jesus whereas the whole of Scripture gives a much more 3D, full view.  Calvin sought to form doctrine by treating all of Scripture.  I think that was a great contribution - he certainly was not infallible and I don't agree with all his conclusions, but this is a lasting contribution of his.  By going "to the sources" Calvin and other Protestants affirm the idea of God's revealing himself to us in Scripture.  Man, left alone with his imaginations, will only create idols as he seeks to create God in his own image.  I also think that applying this view to the arts gives art a "narrative framework" which to live within.  The rich narrative world of Scripture can give birth to art that is truly good and beautiful rather than that which is created by man with an unsanctified imagination.   

Unique Theological Contribution to understanding Jesus and the Church

To my knowledge Calvin was the first to articulate a rich typological view of Jesus as seen in the Old Testament offices of Israel - the Prophet, the Priest and the King.  Calvin taught that all of these foreshadowed the work and ministry of Jesus himself and then that Jesus extends that ministry in and through his church.  In the Old Testament - Prophets, Priests, Kings - Israel's life was structured by these offices, which served as types - these were the three offices which were "anointed ones" - those anointed by God and set apart to serve his purposes[1] The Prophet (1 Kings 19:16 - ) speaks the Word of God and Calls People to repentance, to God and His Mission.  The Priest (Leviticus 21:10 - Chief priest anointed with oil) intercedes between God and people facilitating worship and ministry.  The King (1 Samuel 10 and 16 - Samuel Anoints Saul and David, 1 Kings 1:39 - Zadok anoints Solomon, Jehu in 2 Kings 9 anointed by Elisha) ruled under the authority of God and his Word, guiding and shepherding a people through life.  The King protects, provides, and serves his people. Calvin saw this in Jesus' Ministry as a consummation of all the types. 

John Calvin --- Moreover, it is to be observed, that the name Christ refers to those three offices: for we know that under the law, prophets as well as priests and kings were anointed with holy oil. Whence, also, the celebrated name of Messiah was given to the promised Mediator.[2]

Jesus is our Great Prophet (Hebrews 1:1,2)- He is the fulfillment of the law and prophets - his word is God's word.  Jesus is our great High Priest - Hebrews 8:1,2 - We HAVE such a high priest, he intercedes for us, brings us to the father, covers our sins with his sacrifice of himself - there is one mediator (1 Tim 2:5, 6).  Jesus is our Covenant King (Psalm 2, Psalm 110:1; Matthew 1:1-4; Revelation 17:14) - He is our covenant King, our good shepherd, not one of his sheep are lost, he will guide us home, we will live and not die if we trust him.  

Additionally, his ministry extends in the Church. The prophetic Ministry of Jesus extends when the Word of God, the gospel is preached.  The priestly ministry of Jesus extends in the Sacraments - the new covenant is mediated by Jesus, in his church. Baptism serves as the entry sign into the covenant and the Lord's Supper as the continuing sign of the covenant.  Finally, the kingly ministry of Jesus extends in Church Government and Discipline. God gives elders to the church to guard the doctrine of the church, pastor/shepherd/love the sheep, and discipline us towards godliness and holiness.

All of this flows from Calvin's unique insight into the continuity of the covenants and the Old Testament pointing penultimately and typologically to Jesus, the Christ. 

Bible teaching and Commentary 

Many people fail to realize that Calvin was primarily a Bible teacher.  His sermons and commentaries remain a wonderful gift to the church that are available online for free - http://www.ccel.org/index/author-C.html.

Church sending, Pastoral Training and Cultural Transformation 

Something that is unknown about Calvin to many is that they trained hundreds of ministers and sent them out all over Switzerland and France.  Many of these young men went into France and were slaughtered for their preaching.  It is no historical mystery why the Protestant movement did not flourish as much in France - they were massacred.  Finally, there is good little book that I believe I heard referenced by Tim Keller on the influence of Calvin's theological vision on shaping the City - it is called Light of the City.

OK, I sinned against the number of strengths and word limit - forgive? 



[1]In the Old Testament priests (Exod 29:7, 21), prophets (1 Kgs 19:16), and kings (1 Sam 10:1) were anointed for special tasks  James A. Brooks, vol. 23, Mark, electronic e., Logos Library System; The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2001, c1991), 38.

[2]Jean Calvin and Henry Beveridge, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Translation of: Institutio Christianae Religionis.; Reprint, With New Introd. Originally Published: Edinburgh : Calvin Translation Society, 1845-1846. (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997), II, xv, 2.

 

Sweet Echoes in Life

Every so often life has a rhythm which brings a sweetness to the soul.  Not every day is like this, in fact the good days can be followed by some that remind you that the foul stench of the fall still dominates our reality.  Yet this weekend was filled with sweet echoes of a golden goodness which exists far beyond the shores of the earth.  My weekend was simple yet full of simple graces which make me smile even in writing.

I enjoyed seeing my kids on Saturday morning and then packing up my bags for a two day visit to the state of North Carolina.  Carolina is a special place for me.  Though it is not my home, in many ways it has a homelike ring to it for me.  I grew up in Virginia Beach; a great military and tourist town where I have many treasured youthful memories.  Yet it was in North Carolina that many signposts guiding me to the life I pursue today.  It was at UNC Chapel Hill that I met Jesus while studying Applied Science and Physics and competing for the tarheel wrestling team.  It was at UNC where I met a captivating young woman named Kasey Monroe; smart as a whip, gorgeous, fiercely interesting and tough as nails as an athlete.  Man, I am still so whipped in love with that girl.  She is sleeping now and I just thank God for her.  It was also in North Carolina that we connected with a new church in the mid nineties.  This weekend I spent time with this family of faith once again.

Grace Community Church was started in 1994 by a group of families that consisted of professors from Campbell University, Moms, business men and a cool group of their high school kids.  Kasey had transferred to Campell and connected with some of these folks as she was renting an apartment from one of the members of the new church.  During our last few years of college we were asked to do several events with their youth group; one of which was a weekend beach retreat where we encouraged the crew towards a radical commitment to Jesus.  The year we graduated and went on staff with Athletes in Action we had a six month season where we were raising money and actually being youth pastors with the high school kids.  One thing the youth group produced was Rhett and Link - we claim them on Tuesdays and Saturdays...and their new song on the Oscars is funny. We'll never forget Eric Woodruff, Rhett McClaughlin, Link Neal, Rebecca McKinney, Maria Mathews, Heather Wilson, The Enzor brothers, Chris Lanier and many others.  Grace was one of the churches that launched our family into ministry in 1997 so we are grateful for their friendship over the years.  So it was a sweet time to visit them this weekend.

I stayed in the home of Jim and Joy Aycock - Jim is a retired preacher who is gracious and spirited.  Joy is a wonderful host who showed so much southern hospitality that I rethought our call to Jersey for a couple moments.  It was sweet to be among people who still value spending time together, taking time to talk and bringing a word of friendship to others.  I met a new friend in pastor KJ Hill - who is actually FROM New Jersey but made it south to coach soccer...then became a pastor.  I love KJ and his family though my time with them was brief.  His wife Liz has a great mind and we had some great theological banter around the dinner table.  I caught up with Rhett and his wife Jesse - he is a young man I am really quite proud of.  Rhett spun a little comedy in introducing me on Sunday morning as a guy who could kill them with my bare hands as well as beat them in Jeopardy...funny - you can hear it in the sermon audio here. I preached twice on Sunday morning and then spent time at a pot luck dinner and shared the ministry of Jacob's Well with my old friends.  It could not have been more encouraging. Having such a good time made getting up at 3:45am CST to drive to the airport, fly home, drive to class and immediately take an exam feel all the more worth it.  I think I did OK on the test too - smile.

Finally, I was able to spend just a few moments with their pastor Brad Talley.  Brad is watching his beloved wife Linda struggle for life in the midst of aggressive brain cancer.  Oh, how it aches to see life ebb away.  I love pastors and hanging with them.  Brad has many challenges in these days but I was so encouraged by the way he talked about his Lord, his wife and marriage.  Pray for the Talleys as they walk so close the valley of the shadow of death.  Linda could very much be in her last few days of life. Our hope is with them and with them it is in Jesus.

Grace Community has grown beyond meeting in a living room, small buildings, the ruritan club, a school auditorium and cafeteria to having their own facility and a small staff. Yet they face some challenges and are moving forward in the gospel.  I kept thinking to myself "he who began a good work in them will be faithful to complete it..." I pray to stay in partnership with our friends at Grace for as long as God permits.  I love the people there, and they continue to love our family so well.  I would do anything for the people at Grace and thankful for this sweet echo over the weekend...which brought past, present and future together for me in the work of Christ.

 

POC Bundle 2.28.2008

General News

Apologetics

  • Chuck Colson says I Heart PETA - well, sort of.  For those unfamiliar, PETA stands for People for Ethical Treatment of Animals. 

The Church

  • The Pew Research Center has an excellent study on religions in American.  Summary available here
  • Interesting response by Os Guinness to Frank Schaeffer's book "Crazy for God" - CT Online here

Technology


 

Jonathan Coulton on TWIT

Jonathan Coulton, who is an indie singer song writer who appeals to technoid geeks was interviewed on This Week in Tech.  I personally like Coulton's songs which are strange playful interactions with science, sci fi, biotech and dystopian futuristic views.  If you missed it I blogged on Coulton here a while back. I am a fan of the songs Chiron Beta Prime, The Future Soon and Skullcrusher Mountain. 

This interview would be of interest to: 1) indie music people 2) tech people/programmers and 3) Pastors who did their undergrad in Applied Computer Science and Physics, love tech stuff and weird creepy biotech and zombie humor (OK, me).

Enjoy...

Sighting: Apple Cult Behavior

More evidence that we should be concerned about our Mac Brethren. Here is what MacIdolators do in their spare time. Very nice.

 

The Seven Deadly Sinful Cities

Forbes has up featuring the most sinful American cities. The technology is cool as well because a simple mouse-over will show the areas of the country which are the greediest, most lustful, etc. It uses the seven deadlies. It is true that Bible Belt folks are the fattest and and laziest. The West has its share of lust, the Mormons are full of pride and Tony Soprano was from New Jersey.  It seems that Memphis is just jealous, fat and lazy. 

Here is the link

(HT Al Mohler) 

Resurgence Conference

In an interview related to the upcoming Resurgence national conference, John Piper talks about the state of American pulpit/preaching ministry today.  The last line is just classic: "But oh my, there is a lot of foolishness going on." 

In case you are like me and just could not fit the schedule to go to the Resurgence Conference...our friend Jon Krombein, tech wizard of the Resurgence, just announced they will be streaming the content live and then have all the audio and video available for free in the weeks following.  The theme of the conference is Text and Context and focuses on brining the unchanging message of Scripture in to changing cultural contexts.

Baptism and Covenant

Christian baptism, which has the form of a ceremonial washing (like John’s pre-Christian baptism), is a sign from God that signifies inward cleansing and remission of sins (Acts 22:16; 1 Cor. 6:11; Eph. 5:25-27), Spirit-wrought regeneration and new life (Titus 3:5), and the abiding presence of the Holy Spirit as God’s seal testifying and guaranteeing that one will be kept safe in Christ forever (1 Cor. 12:13; Eph. 1:13-14). Baptism carries these meanings because first and fundamentally it signifies union with Christ in his death, burial, and resurrection (Rom. 6:3-7; Col. 2:11-12); and this union with Christ is the source of every element in our salvation (1 John 5:11-12). Receiving the sign in faith assures the persons baptized that God’s gift of new life in Christ is freely given to them. At the same time, it commits them to live henceforth in a new way as committed disciples of Jesus. Baptism signifies a watershed point in a human life because it signifies a new-creational engrafting into Christ’s risen life.

J.I. Packer

There is nothing more central to Christian faith than the person and work of Jesus the Christ.  There is nothing more central to his work and message than the gospel - the good news of what he has done, is doing and will do in redeeming sinners and this fallen world.  In walking together as the church in every age there are few things more central than the sacraments/ordinances Jesus gave to us.  Yet there have been few things which have brought up as much debate amongst Christians as the two sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s supper.  This essay has very small goals.  I will briefly treat the different views of baptism held by those who have a covenantal understanding of the gospel. I am looking mainly here at covenant baptism; the view that baptism is a sign and seal of the new covenant marking a person as belonging to Jesus and part of the church. In circles of confessing believers, I am speaking of baptism as viewed by those in reformed traditions, those who seek to trace their views back to Scripture in the Protestant view. 

There are many debates surrounding baptism which can take place along various lines. Very common are the questions of who should be baptized and the age at which is should be administered.  Additionally, there are debates about methodology: immersion/dunking, pouring, sprinkling, shaken but not stirred.  Here I only want to look at two simple questions. 1) First, the relation of baptism to the new covenant and 2) Who then should be baptized. After answering these two questions I become a bit less concerned.  Though I believe that immersion in water is the NT model that fits most clearly with the meaning of baptism, I find no problem with sprinkling, pouring, or dipping if/when environmental circumstances come into play.  Let me just get to the issue directly and tackle the issue of covenantal understandings of baptism and whether it should it be for babies or not.  OK, this is for my reformed and Baptist type friends.

Agreements

There is a wonderful agreement about baptism with those who hold to certain tenants of reformation theology.  We all believe the following:

  1. Baptism was commanded by Jesus (Matt 28:18-20) and practiced by the apostles (Acts 2)
  2. Baptism signifies the gospel and our union with Jesus Christ (Romans 6:3,4)
  3. Baptism marks a person as part of new the covenant community. It is the outward signifier that a person is under the new covenant of grace and part of Jesus’ church (Colossians 2:12)

Now when we come to the question as to when it should be applied; here we find our differences.  Historically reformed churches (Presbyterians, RCA, CRC and others) typically baptize infants as a sign of the covenant and a confession of the faithfulness of God to his promises. Baptistic types (Various Baptists, Bible Churches, Non Denominational) wait until a person has expressed faith in Jesus and applies baptism after conversion rather than physical birth.  Let us look very briefly at some support offered for both positions.

Baptism after Birth (Paedo Baptism or Infant Baptism)

It is a no small task to rightly give the traditional reformed view of baptism.  For that I refer you to a volume of essays entitled The Case for Covenental Infant Baptism edited by Greg Strawbridge. Here I only want to highlight a few of the biblical/theological arguments for baptizing infants:

  • In the New Testament we see statements that the promise of the gospel is for you and your children and those who are far off (See Acts 2:37-39).  The promise in the OT included children so in the New Covenant it does as well. 
  • Household baptisms - there are several circumstances in the NT where “households” were baptized.  Acts 16 has Lydia and her household as well as the Philippian jailer’s household being baptized.  1 Corinthians 1 has the “household of Stephanas” being baptized.  The assumption here is that infants and/or children would have been baptized as well as those who had believed.
  • There is a symmetry seen between Old Covenant circumcision and New Covenant baptism as the sign of the covenant.  In the OT the children of believers were included as members of the covenant community and in the NT this is the same.  Baptism signifies such membership and thus should be applied to children. As such the person is subject to the blessings and curses of covenant membership (see Deuteronomy 28).
  • Church tradition – it was an early and long standing practice in church history to baptize infants. 

Baptism after the New Birth (Credo Baptism or Believers Baptism)

  • Makes note that in the Bible there are no recorded instances of infants being baptized. Every record of baptism in the New Testament are of people who have heard the gospel and then placed faith in Jesus Christ. 
  • Household baptisms are an argument from silence and hence prove nothing as to who was actually baptized. Furthermore, in some cases, as in Acts 16, the word of the Lord was spoken to all in the house and all in the house rejoiced and had a party.
  • There is a break in continuity between Old and New Covenants.  Though baptism is the sign of the new covenant, it is applied not simply to males as was circumcision in the Old; it is applied to all who believe. As such the time of application is also different.  It follows regeneration/new birth exemplified by repentance and faith.
  • Meaning of baptizo - the meaning of the word baptism in the New Testament means to dip or immerse.  Sprinkling of babies would not be in view. 
  • Though this gets a bit towards the “mode” debate, it is clear that baptism is reflecting a “burial/death with Christ” and a raising “to live a new life” (See Romans 6:3,4 and Colossians 2:12). 
  • People also walked down into water to be baptized.  Jesus himself in the gospels and the ethiopian in the book of Acts (See Acts 8).  These rights seem to describe adult actions and is reflective of believers.
  • Practice of the church.  One of the earliest documents we have of early church practice, The Didache, gives details on the practice of baptism and it reflects believers baptism. For instance you cannot “order an infant to fast two days before his baptism.”

So what do we make of the two views? First, I agree that we should not loose the meaning of baptism as “sign of the covenant.”  When baptism was taught by some early Christians to “remove original sin” (this was Augustine’s view) the desire and motive for baptizing infants became enormous.  If a person was not baptized he was not saved.  This doctrine is not taught in Scripture but became a big deal in the church. If baptism is the means by which God removes original sin, then you must baptize as soon as possible.  Hence all matter of reasons, theologies etc were made to explain this application of baptism.  Some Roman Catholic theologians crafted a  doctrine of “limbo” to keep babies out of hell if they were not baptized. 

Later during the Reformation, those studying the Bible clearly brought into question the “saving power” of baptism.  The reformers were clear that it is the gospel that saves as God saves sinners through Jesus’ work on the cross. Their baptism signifies and seals this truth but does not save them in and of itself. However, many reformed churches created a sort of half-way view which is reflected in covenant infant baptism.  My thought is that once you sever baptism/salvation and maintain the proper meaning and symbolism as a outward sign of conversion (see JI Packer quote at the top) then it must be applied when it signifies an actual state of affairs. The person has been saved and at this point they ought be baptized.  Reformed thinkers acknowledge that the earlier Catholic view that baptism saves is flawed. Here is the 19th century reformed theologian Charles Hodge’s take. I will give the entire context of his 8th point arguing for infant baptism and then ask some questions.

On this point all Christians are agreed. All churches —the Greek, the Latin, the Lutheran, and the Reformed —unite in the belief that infants need “the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ” and the renewing of the Holy Ghost in order to their salvation. The Reformed, at least, do not believe that those blessings are tied to the ordinance of baptism, so that the reception of baptism is necessary to a participation of the spiritual benefits which it symbolizes; but all agree that infants are saved by Christ, that they are the purchase of his blood, and that they need expiation and regeneration. They are united, also, in believing that all who seek the benefits of the work of Christ, are bound to be baptized in acknowledgment of its necessity and of their faith, and that those who need, but cannot seek, are, by the ordinance of God, entitled to receive the appointed sign and seal of redemption, whenever and wherever they are presented by those who have the right to represent them.

Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Originally Published 1872. (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997), 3:557. 

I have made bold the above portion of the quote to emphasize the right turn that is made by Hodge. He is right to say that the Reformed have separated salvation from the ordinance, he is incorrect then in shifting back towards the view that those can receive who have not been regenerated in the gospel and exercised faith.  If he would end his sentence above with the word “faith” I would find complete agreement. Yet because of a theological system, he tacks on the clause I have highlighted.  We should be baptized upon our acknowledgment of its necessity (it is commanded by Christ) and of our faith.

If this be so, we ought to apply the sign at the time someone enters the New Covenant, and believe it or not, many are agreed that this happens at the new birth.  Now what are some in the Reformed tradition afraid of being lost in the process.  I believe it is child’s place in the covenant community. This indeed would be a terrible loss that I stand with them against.  Yet I believe we can maintain the “sanctification” or “set apart nature” of children of believers because Scripture actually teaches this in 1 Corinthians 7.  We do not need to baptize them to signify this. As a community we can hold up and pray for the babies (boys and girls) and then baptize if they become spiritual babies when they repent, believe and place their faith in Christ.  I love the interpretive framework of covenantal theology; I just don’t see that we must submit to something absent from Scripture in order to see the holistic covenant of grace unfolding in the Bible.

The current edition of the doctrinal statement of Jacob’s Well has this position that drives my hardcore Baptist friends nuts.  It is written to affirm what we see as the biblical teaching on baptism and show charity to other confessional Christians in regards to church membership. It is very close to the positions John Bunyan and John Piper.  

At Jacob’s Well we only perform and teach baptism by immersion for believers who profess personal faith in Jesus Christ. We believe that water baptism is symbolic of the fact that we have repented from our sins, we have been cleansed of our sins and God has forgiven us, we are buried in Christ in death and have risen with Him in newness of life (Isaiah 1:18; Matthew 28:19; Acts 8:36–38; Romans 6:3–5; Colossians 2:12; Acts 10:47). Additionally, baptism is the sign and seal which marks a person’s entry into the new covenant community of the church. This is our only practice of baptism, though we will receive people into membership who have been baptized by sprinkling, pouring, or immersion as long as it was performed by a biblical local church, the person now evidences conversion and where the baptism was performed in the name of the triune God.

Book Review - Vintage Jesus

 

 
Sometimes books come along that make you think, make you laugh, make you want to read excerpts out loud to the person in the next room.  I just finished a quick read of Mark Driscoll and Gerry Breshears new book Vintage Jesus and was not disappointed. I typically enjoy books that are both intellectually stimulating and engaging; I also like to find books I can give to just about anybody.  Yet such works are rare.  I think I found another one to add to that short list.

Summary

Vintage Jesus, is...well, about Jesus.  No surprise here.  The book is a treatment of the person and work of Jesus Christ written very much for a contemporary world which is ever interested in the man reared in Nazareth long ago.  The author of the work is primarily Pastor Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill Church in Seattle WA. He is joined in this marvel team up by Dr. Gerry Breshears professor of theology at Western Seminary in Oregon. The book is the first in a partnership between the Resurgence Theological Cooperative and Crossway Books.  The two organizations hope to produce a new line of books entitled "RE:LIT" which will espouse biblical faithful and theologically driven content written for today's world in a relevant way.  Yes, very nice.

The book was taken from a sermons series that Driscoll preached at Mars Hill Church of the same name.  The structure is pretty simple - 12 chapters each with a different focus about the Scriptures teaching about the person and work of Jesus Christ.  Dr. Breshears is a theological partner in the work and does a great job closing each chapter with theological questions and answers regarding some issue taken up by the chapter.  It is both rigorous in treating the subject matter but at the same time remaining highly accessible. 

Strengths

The greatest strengths of the book is its diversity and usefulness to life and ministry.  I will cover the books diversity first and then make a comment on its potential use in ministry. I will then comment on a couple of specific content items which I particularly enjoyed.

It is diverse in that it meets several goals rarely attained in the same volume.  First, it is funny and enjoyable to read.  Now I "get" Driscolls humor and tend to vibe with it so the enjoyability will have something to do with getting Mark's humor and style.  Though it is certain that some may find the language choices curt or pedestrian, I just found it funny.  Second, the book is a serious work in biblical Christology.  The range covered in the short chapters is very wide, though not comprehensive.  It shows a great mastery of Christological controversies in church history as well as a good grasp on the history of Christian thought. In the first few chapters you will see quotes from Pamela Anderson on one page and then discussions of various trinitarian heresies (dynamic and modalistic monarchialism anyone?).  The book will serve as a great introduction to Jesus and sound theology about him.  Third, it is diverse in that it communicates as a work of positive Apologetics.  The real Jesus is the best defense against the posers and the biblical Jesus (or Jesus according to Jesus) is shown off in the book.  Finally, the book is well researched and documented with copious footnotes in every chapter.  Now a large amount of the references are due to the choice to put biblical references in the notes, but their are serious sources cited and consulted in Vintage Jesus.

The glaring strength of this book is that you can likely give it to anyone under 35.  My partners in crime at Inversion have echoed that so many of the books aimed at young adults today are lightweight, many times emergent crap.  Many books we love do not easily connect to the flow of younger folks.  We love John Piper books and thankful for his ministry to the twenty something crowd, but sometimes Desiring God can intimidate the neophyte a bit...and we are big time on reading in our ministry.  In this book we have a work that can be studied in groups, handed to a non Christian friend and one that will actually make some folks laugh along the way.

Last, the book had content which I love as it speaks of the wonderul Savior God and King Jesus Christ.  The opening chapters are very clear about the tension with Jesus being fully God, fully Man in one person.  I love the Chalcedonian theology and it is on display in relevant terms in Vintage Jesus.  I also love the unique perspective of Jesus as the Prophet, Priest and King foreshadowed in the Old Testament.  A theological observation that John Calvin gave the church is very helpful in understanding Jesus' ministry and how Christ is the focus of both Old and New Testaments.  Sexy stuff.  The list of OT prophecy and NT fulfillment will be helpful for the budding evangelists and apologists out there - the coming of Jesus just was not a coincidence of time and place, but rather the very providence of God. The great chapter on the atonement and death of Jesus is timely as every generation reacts to "God died for you" and you can't save yourself.  We much prefer programs of self salvation.  Chapters on the resurrection and on Jesus uniqueness compared to other "saviors" (his quote of Stephen Colbert is revealing of the views in our age) again have great value for conversations with those who have questions.  Finally the book calls people to worship Jesus - which is the whole point of the gospel.  God making rebels worshippers of the triune God through the work of Jesus.

Weaknesses

I did not find too many terrible weaknesses to the work, but two small ones stood out.  The first one I felt reading the book came up right from the beginning.  As I said above I really get Mark's humor and particularly enjoy it.  Yet a few times I felt it was too frequent and a bit too much.  Personally, I am fine with the content of the jokes but they could have been spaced out a bit more at times.  When something feels overused it can distract a bit from the flow of the work.  My counsel to Mark would not be to tone it down, though others certainly would give that counsel.  My thought would be save some for later so that the humor doesn't loose its saltiness.  The use of a bit more subtlety and timing would have been helpful. 

The second weakness did not affect me but may be felt by the casual reader. There are many references to people and ideas which are not explained and may fly over some peoples heads.  Ironically this could take place both on the pop cultural level and the historical/academic level (I love the list of Christological heresies - even listing Eutychianism).  There are some that may just not know who some of the people quoted and referenced are.  I don't think this takes anything away from the book, it is not distracting, but some may wonder who some of these people/ideas are.

Two final comments are needed. One thing is certain about Vintage Jesus - uptight funnymentalists will not like the tone of the book...this has already been observed in the comments on Tim Challies' review.  Many will struggle reading some of the terms used by Driscoll; terms like shagging and knocking boots are so far from many Christians' vernacular. Yet there are people today that would look at the terms “knocking boots” and “shagging” (which is a British term for sex popularized in America by the Austin Powers movies that non Christian people are very familiar with) as so uncontroversial. If you spend significant time with real non Christians you will find that there are other terms used for this activity that are much, much more offensive (and I would say actually profane). But writing like this should provoke discussions about language and why we do or do not use certain words and phrases.  I think the discussion itself is needed as some go too far and some need to loosen up a bit. Finally, Bible discarding emergents and theologically liberal Christians will not like the exalted Christ and biblical focus, but I will only say this is a book about "Vintage" Jesus not "Reinventing" or "Reimagining" Jesus. Selah.

Conclusion 

Dr. Breshears and Mark Driscoll have produced a fun book that also has real meat and substance.  It is no wonder it has drawn endorsements from some of the best evangelical theologians (Grudem, Ware, Packer), an ultimate fighter, a music producer and a Disney executive. It is that diverse. More than anything I left the read loving Jesus more and for this I am personally thankful.  I highly recommend Vintage Jesus to read and give away to friends and neighbors of every belief and persuasion. Highly recommended.

In

Spiked - Another Story on "Religion and Violence"

There is a very interesting article by Roger Sandall regarding the secular intellectual discussions of "religion and violence" and the utter lengths that will be traveled not to say anything honest about the history of the religion of peace. 

If you have never studied the history of the Crusades this article is a must read for you.  Then pick up The New Concise History of the Crusades by Thomas Madden.

This article is worth the time to read. Here is an excerpt:

In the sort of books produced by Hitchens and Dawkins the Crusades are the usual point of departure for one-sided historical accounts coupling Christianity and “violence”. Indeed, Dawkins takes this so much for granted that he can’t even be bothered discussing the matter (“In this book, I have deliberately refrained from detailing the horrors of the Crusades”). Hitchens however regards the opportunity as too good to pass up, and on page 35 drags the Iraq War into the argument. The gist being that there’s nothing to choose between Christians and jihadis, and that the modern atrocities of the latter could be seen as a delayed but appropriate response to “the bloodstained spectre of the Crusaders”.

This attitude is widespread. Moreover, as Paul Stenhouse points out in a valuable recent study, “The Crusades in Context”, Hitchens’ “bloodstained spectre” is absurdly seen as the result of unprovoked Christian aggression. It is claimed that “five centuries of peaceful co-existence” between Muslims and Christians were brought to an end by deranged sword-waving Soldiers of the Cross, terrorising, killing, burning and sacking decent, respectable, peace-loving Muslim communities.

More than this, the Crusaders are being presented in schools as the original terrorists. As a Year 8 textbook in the Australian state of Victoria has it: “Those who destroyed the World Trade Centre are regarded as terrorists … Might it be fair to say that the Crusaders who attacked the Muslim inhabitants of Jerusalem were also terrorists?”

Why the Crusades took place

No it wouldn’t be fair. Nor would it be true. In the story Paul Stenhouse tells, the 463 years between the death of Muhammed in 632 AD, and the First Crusade in 1095, were extremely dangerous for Christian Europe. Instead of peace there were unrelenting Islamic wars and incursions; Muslim invasions of Spain, Italy, Sicily and Sardinia; raids, seizures, looting of treasure, military occupations that lasted until Saracen forces were forcibly dislodged, sackings of Christian cities including Rome, and desecrations of Christian shrines. And be it noted: all this went on for 463 years before any Christian Crusade in response to these murderous provocations took place.

Sixteen years after the death of Muhammed, in 648 AD, Cyprus was overrun. Rhodes fell in 653, and by 698 AD the whole of North Africa was lost. In 711 Muslims from Tangier crossed into Spain, set their sights on France, and by 720 AD Narbonne had fallen. Bordeaux was stormed and its churches burnt in 732. As Gibbon emphasised, only the resistance at Poitiers of Charles Martel in 732 saved Europe from occupation, and arrested the Muslim tide.

(HT - Ben Schellack)

POC Tech Bundle - 02.19.2008

Technology

  • iPod Shuffles are now only 49 bucks - a good deal for an MP3 player of that quality
  • Palm's Centro is not out on AT&T - in my opinion, AT&T has the suckiest data network out of the big three...but just in case you don't want to spend the loot for an iPhone and want to use AT&T. It is white with a greenish key pad.
  • Most of you probably know this but HD DVD is going to the deep technological grave which once consumed Sony's Betamax video cassette recorder.  This time Sony wins - Blu Ray Disc is going to be the defacto standard for High Def optical media.  Word is Sony just paid everyone better to win the day.  Once Warner went with it for movies the dominoes all fell.  Netflix, BestBuy and then the killer - Walmart.  If you can't do Walmart in consumer tech, movies, etc. You just can't win.  All the Walmart haters now tear thy cloths.

 

Our House - Now for Sale

Kasey and I are putting our house for sale as we work towards moving to New Jersey to plant Jacob's Well - if you know anyone who might be interested in moving to Franklin, please put them in contact with us. Blessings

 

Here is a link to the listing

Love or Sentiment?

I saw these posters online and thought they provoked many thoughts and ideas.  However, I find these sorts of statements, though provocative, to be far too simplistic.  I have no issue with the center poster - it is beautiful to me...the outer images however make me ask a few deeper questions.

These two images obviously are using the extreme to teach a point. They are using a form of visual hyperbole.  Yet this is the problem when taken in a very wooden fashion.  In other words, if we must examine what we mean by "love" or we can stoop into mere sentimentalism.

A few quick questions:

  • Did Jesus love the Pharisees? I would say “yes” - was he “nice to them” - well, he was pretty harsh with them. He said some of the most searing hot things to them. Why?
  • Additionally in Acts 13 did Paul “love” the sorcerer Elymus? I would say “yes” but he was not nice to him.
  • We also see Jesus talk about people perishing, the reality of divine wrath and judgment from his Father, etc.  Was God failing to "love his enemies" as some revisionist theologians would have us believe?
God in grace gives all sinners the call of grace and kindness to draw rebels and sinners towards repentance.  Yet he will by no means clear the guilty - and WE are the guilty.  Here we find the amazing in the grace given in the gospel.  Yet there is more to be said.
 
Hitler or Osama, or any of us may freely receive the grace of God - but there still remains temporal justice. Hitler or Osama or any of us ought to receive justice for our sins and our crimes.  The amazing grace of the gospel is that God forgives and justifies guilty sinners.  This ought to make us humble and grateful and willing to love anyone, not thinking anyone to far for the grace of God.  So yes, we ought to pray for our enemies, love them, but we should not capitulate to evil either. Love doesn’t mean we should offer up our children to murderers or pedophiles simply because “we love them.” It means entrusting justice to God and also keeping a murderer from doing further harm.
 
Posters like this are far too simplistic and assume too much. Should we “love” Osama - yes, in that we hope for his redemption, repentance and for grace to take hold of his heart…but that doesn’t mean he should not be firmly opposed and held responsible for any evil he does or has done.

One of the artists who designed this poster wrote the following:

I have so much anger in my heart at the very sight of a swastika. And I had to draw one to make these posters. It infuriated me. I’ve been trained to hate Hitler and Osama. Yet, Christ tells me to love these people—how? why? what? These people deserve justice and death! Look at what they’ve done. Look at these atrocities.

Before we turn off the outrage and anger in our consciences, let me encourage the designer. The swastika should not make us feel and think nice thoughts. It ought to make us angry for what it stood for. There is a righteous anger throughout the Old and New Testaments and exhibited in the very life of Jesus. To feel good about swastikas is a different kind of wickedness - that of a seared conscience.  It may disguise itself in sentimentalism, but it is not love. 

May God give us love for our enemies and righteous anger in the face of evil.  The cross of Christ is actually the perfect union of fierce wrath and justice as well as mercy, grace and love.  It is where righteousness and justice kiss - let us not forget to come to God in repentance and marvel at grace.  But the evil in our own hearts and all around us should not be welcomed with a fuzzy embrace.

Manhood Crisis is Solved!

OK - sometimes people's thinking is so ridiculous, off the wall and sad that it demands mockery.  In this case, it is also very funny...and sad.  I have received this video through e-mail several times over the last few days and have sent it on to many pastor friends...today I decided that the POCBlog reader might enjoy. 

A couple of pre-thoughts.  Did this guy not know that verse and chapter numbers were "added to" the writings of the Bible and not part of the inspired writings? His application of what this wonderful phrase means also is quite ridiculous. I have nothing but pity for his "this is what's wrong with our country bit" - but when he starts railing on the NIV and NKJV editors I just lose it...so the best thing to do is just laugh.

One reminder...Passion without reason and the Bible without any care of context can be dangerous things...

A Tale of Two Books

There are two books that I am greatly anticipating this spring, one of which just shipped from Amazon.com and will soon arrive in one of the sheik little brown boxes to my door step.  The two books are the kinds that you hope to be able to give to others who have questions about Jesus or the historic Christian faith...but will not be too simplistic or boring to actually give to someone.  The books are written for different audiences, but I think the reader of the POCBlog will love both.

For the Sophisticated Skeptic and the Thoughtful Believer
(Updated - There is now a dedicated web site for the book) 

 
The Reason for God:Belief in an Age of Skepticism by Timothy Keller, Penguin, 2008 Hardcover | 9.25 x 6.25in | 320 pages | ISBN 9780525950493 | 14 Feb 2008 | Dutton Adult

Keller is a well known Presbyterian minister at Redeemer Prebyterian Church in New York City.  He was recently interviewed in Newsweek magazine (see The Smart Shepherd) and is well known and loved in the missional/theologically driven church planting movement.  The book is a work of Christian Apologetics which is sectioned into two main parts.  Part I, entitled, “The Leap of Doubt” an exercise in defensive apologetics seeks to answer some objections to Christian faith:

  1. There can’t be just one true religion
  2. A good God could not allow suffering
  3. Christianity is a straitjacket
  4. The church is responsible for so much injustice
  5. A loving God would not send people to hell
  6. Science has disproved Christianity
  7. You can’t take the Bible literally

The second half, entitled “The Reasons for Faith,” the move is to more positive apologetics and shaping a case for the gospel.

  1. The clues of God
  2. The knowledge of God
  3. The problem of sin
  4. Religion and the gospel
  5. The (true) story of the cross
  6. The reality of the resurrection
  7. The Dance of God

This book will surely interupt my current reading and jump to the front of the line.  I may however tell Keller to wait as I really want to get to After the Baby Boomers - How Twenty and Thirty Somethings Are Shaping the Future of American Religion by Robert Wuthnow .

To purchase Keller's new book Westminster Books has it for 15.47. If you have some car time allotted in life, there is also an audio book version (read by Keller) which Westminster books has for 18.87

For the Indie, Emo and Younger Crowds - And Just About Everyone

 
Vintage Jesus by Mark Driscoll and Gerry Breshears, Crossway Books/Re:Lit 2008, Hardcover, 5.5 x 8.5 inches, 256 pages, ISBN: 9781581349757.

If there is anything that the Christian faith is centered upon it is the person and work of Jesus.  Far too often he is the subject of much revisionist theology, much cultural invention and just plain misunderstanding.  In this work you have pastor Mark Driscoll and theologian Gerry Breshears doing a marvel team up to put out some biblically faithful yet relevantly communicated Jesusology.  From reading Mark's other books and having interacted with Dr. Breshears on a few different occasions I really look forward to this book.  Driscoll's wit, erudite mind and humor will certainly come through as will Breshears theological care and acumen.  You want good theology and the laugh out loud - this is the book.  I think this is one you could give to any non Christian person under 35 without any concern.  Jesus will be honored, the Bible's actual teaching about him on display and by God's grace  the reader just might meet Jesus in the process. 

Amazon has it for cheap here. The sermon series upon which Driscoll based the book is also online for free (audio/video) at Mars Hill Church's web siteAudio book coming in March.

JI Packer - who is really getting up there in years - wrote this endorsement:

“This book reveals Mark Driscoll as a highly powerful, colorful, down-to-earth catechist, targeting teens and twenty-somethings with the old, old story told in modern street-cred style. And Professor Breshears ballasts a sometimes lurid but consistently vivid presentation of basic truth about the Lord Jesus Christ.”

J. I. Packer, Board of Governors’ Professor of Theology, Regent College

Wrestler and Ultimate Fighter Matt Lindland wrote this one: 

“This book presents an honest view of Jesus without giving in to the pressure to soften him up. I had to grapple with the real vintage Jesus. This is a Savior worth fighting for.
Matt Lindland, 2000 Olympic silver medalist in wrestling; top-ranked middleweight mixed martial arts fighter

Got Game?

A friend put me on to a trailer for an upcoming documentary entitled "Second Skin" which features the lives of several people who are addicted to massively multiplayer online role-playing games (mmorpg).  These games immerse players into online worlds and communities which consume massive time and resources.  The most popular combine fantasy worlds, powers, quests etc.  World of Warcraft is one of the most well known.  Anyway, the trailer for the documentary is below.

Looks to shed some interesting light on the world of the gamers in your life. For those not familiar with games such as WoW you may recognize the world from this Toyota Tacoma Commercial

Uncle Timothy Keller

 
Newsweek has a short piece on pastor Timothy Keller from Redeemer Presbyterian Church in Manhattan. Keller is a bit like the wise uncle and professor of the theologically driven, urban missional church planting movement.  So many listen and learn from him though he seldom does interviews and is very infrequently "in the spotlight" so to speak.  To be honest, I like him because he is not a self-promoter and keeps his head down and plugs ahead with the mission of Jesus.  He is highly respected in many, many circles.

Here is the Newsweek deal - The Smart Shepherd (good title for a fun, spooky smart guy to listen to)

Walk On - Salvation is of the Lord

2 Timothy 1 contains an amazingly long and amazingly beautiful sentence.  Now you may think, Reid, it is just weird to call a sentence beautiful.  The fact is there is so much wonderful theological truth packed into this sentence that I almost called it a sexy sentence-but that is definitely weird.   Let me go ahead and share the sentence with you:

Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony about our Lord, nor of me his prisoner, but share in suffering for the gospel by the power of God, who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began, and which now has been manifested through the appearing of our Savior Christ Jesus, who abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel,for which I was appointed a preacher and apostle and teacher, which is why I suffer as I do. But I am not ashamed, for I know whom I have believed, and I am convinced that he is able to guard until that Day what has been entrusted to me.

There is much to say about this sentence, but here I want us to focus on the nature and description of the manner in which God saves.  When we break down what is said here we will be coming very close to biblical teachings on election (God's choosing and calling of sinners to himself) and a word that causes many people to twitch-predestination.   I know even writing these words may bring an emotional response, but stay with me as we look at what our sacred writings teach us about these things...for as we do, I do believe that worship will be the end of our discussion.  In this essay I have very modest goals.  First, I want to track through the above verse and cross reference what it is teaching with other parts of Scripture.  Hopefully, it will become clear as to what Paul is saying here.  Second, I want to look at some objections to what is being taught.  The first of these objections will be theological in nature, the second with be existential-or dealing with our thoughts, emotions and experiences surrounding this teaching.  Since I believe it is pre-ordained, let us begin. 

On Self Salvation

The first phrase I want to look at is this: it is God who "saved us."  Let me build a bit towards my conclusion which will simply be this: The Bible knows nothing of "self salvation."  First of all there is no self creation.   The universe and every particle that makes it up only exists because the creator God desired it to be so.  Neither we, nor stars, nor pulsars, nor dark matter, nor monkeys or eggplants choose their own existence or bring their own existence about.   Our sacred Scripture teaches us that all things were created by him and for him (Colossians 1:16) and for from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen. (Romans 11: 36).  Secondly, there is no ultimate self determination.  Think about how much of your life is simply out of your control.  I know it feels a bit un-American to realize that you are not the captain of your own destiny, but think about all the things of your life you did not, and could not choose.  We did not determine the time or place set for our birth.  In fact, Scripture teaches that God determined these things for his purpose (Acts 17:22-34).  Furthermore, you did not choose who your parents would be-whether we like it or not our parents are the culmination of a long line of circumstances that we had nothing to do with.  Additionally, we do not choose to get sick, get hit by a bus, create  your own personality, or choose the actions of others (whether good or bad).   I know there are books out there that will tell you "the secret" is that you can control all things, make reality obey you...but let me tell you, that is a devastating lie.  Now I am not saying that our attitude is inconsequential, your choices do not matter, or that good or bad consequences do not result from wisdom or foolishness.  This of course is true.  But we must not believe the nonsense that you can control everything and everyone around you-everyone who is in therapy is trying to get off of that drug.  Only God could sit in such a sovereign position-so just realize that we have very limited control.  Finally, there is simply no self-salvation.  I know there are aisles and aisles of books in Barnes and Nobles which will tell you how to fix it all, but new ones must be written all the time promising the same things as the old ones.  We know that humans are seeking redemption, salvation and ways to fix ourselves, but the only book which holds the truth of that matter has already been penned...and its author is God.  

You see God knows the reality of the human predicament.  The Scriptures teach a very high and very low view of human nature.  We are created in the image of God and therefore the most important and valuable creatures in the world.  Yet Scripture is also clear that we are sinful and in rebellion against God.   No one by nature is running to God; we are running away.  Romans 3 teaches us there is none that seeks God, none that does good.    Additionally the prophet Isaiah teaches us that we all like sheep have gone astray; we have turned-every one-to his own way (Isaiah 53:6).   We are in rebellion, our desires are for self, sin, not submission to and the worship of God.. Paul in his first letter, the book of Galatians, he is clear that self salvation is pure mythology.  In his last letter to Timothy he again is clear.  If we are to be saved, it is he that saves us-there simply is no self-salvation.   If we could save ourselves we would not need a Savior.  We would declare ourselves without need of God for we could make ourselves perfect without his initiative.  Friends, this is the very essence of sin.

The Scriptures make this clear from beginning to end.  He saved us!  He saved Noah and his family when God's judgment fell upon the wicked on the earth.  He saved Abrahams family again and again.  He saved Israel from brutal slavery in Egypt, warring nations and its own self-destructive tendencies.  He redeemed Israel from exile in Babylon by raising up leaders such as Ezra, Nehemiah and Zerubbabel to bring people back to the land.  Ultimately and finally he saves his people and calls them to himself through Jesus Christ, the great high priest, the sacrifice given for our sins, the great King and Savior of the world.  Salvation is of the Lord !   This is the clear message of Scripture.  As such it is therefore of his initiation and volition.  He created, he redeems-all worship, credit praise and glory then go to God. We have no place to boast in self-righteousness or self salvation; we only marvel that he saves sinners such as ourselves. 

On Calling

The second thing Paul tells us is that God calls us.  Calling is a theme throughout the Scripture which states that God calls to all people generally and to those whom he saves particularly.  In other words, there are two ways described in Scripture by which God calls people back to himself.  The first we simply call a general call.  It is a theme of the Bible that God desires all people to be saved and come to him in repentance in faith (See 1 Timothy 2:4; 2 Peter 3:9).  He gives common grace to all by allowing us to have life, breath, gladness, sunshine to grow food to eat and rain for water to drink (see Matthew 5:43-45; Acts 14:17).  He also reveals himself to us in nature and conscience (see Romans 1-2).  This common grace is an expression of the love and care of God for all he has made.  Yet people resist this call because they do not desire God.  Hence, God further calls to some with saving grace and what we might say is the effectual call of God.   We see this when people's hearts are changed so that Jesus now looks lovely to them, God gives them new desires,  a new heart and saves them.  Jesus himself described this reality when he said for many are called, but few are chosen (see Matthew 22:1-14).  In a similar parable he tells his servants to go out and bring people in to his wedding feast.  The wording he uses is "compel them to come in." He calls them, liberates them from the bondage to sin, so that they now want to love, follow and worship God.  Additionally, Jesus also said that no one can come to  him except he be drawn by the Father (John 6:35-44).  Finally, Paul discusses calling in 1 Corinthians 1 and Romans 8.  Those whom God desires to save, he calls to himself such that they can and do respond to the gospel.  This calling brings us to God, gives us a desire for holiness and makes us part of his people. 

Not Because

The third thing Paul tells Timothy is that our salvation and calling is not because of our own works.  By saying that God's salvation is not based upon works, something unbelievably liberating is revealed here in the gospel.  If we are saved by grace, not by works, not from our selves (See Ephesians 2:1-10) then no matter how bad we are, God can forgive and redeem us.  There is no one too bad for the grace of God.  Furthermore it devastates human pride and self righteousness.   No Christian should see themselves as saved by God because of how good they are.  In fact, such pride in one's own "goodness" is an offense to the gospel.   Paul over and over in his letters stresses that our only boast is in Jesus (Galatians 6:14) not in our own goodness.  He saved us not because of what we have done good or bad.  Nobody is good enough, no one is too bad.  This is great news guys, unbelievable news.  In fact, many will not believe it as the default nature of our souls is to want to "do it ourselves" or "make ourselves better" or "prove our worth to God."  Such is the ruin of our hearts-only when he calls us to the free grace of the gospel are we set free from the dance of trying to earn the favor of God and man.   In the cross we receive the gift of salvation to us-and worship and obedience is now a response, not a dreaded duty.   So why did God save us? 

Because

Here we have only a marvelous mystery to ponder.  God saved us for his own purpose and grace.  His own purpose of grace is another way to put it. One of the great mysteries of the Bible is why God saves rebellious, undeserving people.  Why am I loved and forgiven and accepted by God?  Because of grace and for whatever purpose he has.  I know that I deserve God's wrath, his judgment as I am guilty of sinning against him.  If not convinced quickly read the 10 commandments-guilty!  Yet God gives grace.  Why? I have no freakin clue but I am glad he has a purpose.  All who come to him will in no way be cast out-yet we will not come.  What is the solution?  God saves us, calls us, for his purposes in the gospel.  I have no access to the master game plan of God.  Yet he picks me for the team, places me in positions in life, calls me to follow him and gives me a part to play.  A Gift Given provokes gratitude-gratitude wells up into worship. 

When?

The final section of our sentence tells us when he gives grace to his people .  Here is where our heads begin to explode.  Paul tells us grace was given before the ages began.  Literally it says he gave us grace before times eternal.   This means that God gave people grace before the universe was created, before time existed, before any humans were made, before my life existed, before I had done anything good or anything bad.  It means grace was given to us before we choose anything or even existed to choose.   Paul goes on to say that this was manifested in the first coming of Jesus to the earth, where he abolished death and brought life through his death and resurrection. This work continues today as God continues to save people through the sharing of good news, people believing and the church's continued mission.  

Objection!!!

Human beings react strongly against the idea that God is the author and initiator in salvation.  We do not like that God would save whom he wants, when he wants.  We like ultimate self determination (ultimately free-free will) and work hard to put everything back on our plate.  Some Christians say God chooses us based on "foreseen faith" - that in God's foreknowledge he saves us based upon our choice in hearing the gospel.  There is one problem I run into with this.  The Bible.  For God does talk about foreknowing "our faith."  It actually says he foreknows "those" who will be called and saved, not simply their faith.  He knows them before time, he knows them before they choose in time.  There are many ways to wrestle with this issue.  I want to give you some words to google to see how Christians have historically wrestled with these issues.  Ready, set, here you go: Molinist, Ariminian and Reformed views.  Have fun-I am almost out of space.

Another Objection!

Another objection is less intellectual, but more existential in nature.  If God knows all that will be saved, what about my kids?  What can we do?   I will only say that the knowledge of God as to who will be saved is not our knowledge.  We do not have any knowledge as to which persons will or will not respond to the gospel of Jesus Christ.  To be honest, it is inappropriate to think as if it matters to our work as his people.  We are called to share the gospel with all and allow God to save whom he will.   One thing can be certain.  God treats no one unfairly.  All deserve his justice-what is unbelievable is that God saves the guilty.  This is what Paul wrestles with in Romans 3-how can a just God, justify the guilty.  A friend of mine with whom I debate these things uses an example with me often.  He throws my daughters in the mix saying "What if God doesn't want to save them, then they are screwed and damned to hell."  Of course using my daughters is a ploy towards my emotions-for I love them more than just about anything.  Yet as I think about it, he is saying that their eternal destinies is in better hands if it lies in my own or their own power.  Yet I am reminded that neither me, nor my daughters are all good, all wise or all loving.  In fact, to put it lightly, we all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.  My response, both emotionally and biblically, is that God ‘s hands are the best place to entrust the salvation of people-particularly that of my little girls.  I trust him to do right more than any human being.   So it is my hope and prayer that God will save them in his time.  Additionally, I am going to plant churches in places where people do not want Jesus-I go in hope because I believe God can and does save sinners...even the ones like me who were not out looking for God.  God brings new birth to people in surprising places all over the world-from Afghanistan to New Jersey and here in Middle Tennessee.  He has chosen that we be his ambassadors who bring his message-and he saves people through our efforts.

Conclusion

I am not a Christian because I believe in election and predestination.  All Christians are saved because of the work of Jesus Christ on the cross, repentance and faith, and the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit .  Any Christian who follows Jesus based upon his atoning work on the cross is my sister or brother.  I will say with full conviction that I worship much differently because I know that I have received grace upon grace from God the Father, mercy through the work of Jesus applied to me by the Spirit when I wanted nothing but self, sin and rebellion.  It is interesting that the passages that deal most with the issues of election/predestination  end in worship (doxology).  In Ephesians 1 Paul reminds people that they have been chosen before the foundation of the world and that this was all to the praise of his glorious grace.  In Romans 8 in that great passage describing God's work in the gospel we read this:

Those whom God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

Yet when he ends the entire section about God's purposes in salvation he ends with worship (See Romans 11:36 above).  The teaching of Scripture about God's salvation is to provoke, awe, majesty and marvel at the grace of God in Christ.  Where God himself takes our penalty for sin and gives us his righteousness in Christ.  It is no small coincidence that Paul, in encouraging Timothy, reminds him of the gospel and all that God has done.  For the sovereign, saving God will be Timothy's hope in all the changes and challenges to be faced ahead.   I pray it would be so for each of us-Believe on the Lord Jesus and you shall be saved...so choose to believe.  But do know that we are saved by him, called to him, by grace before time, set in play in your life so that you would live, suffer and WALK ON in mission for his glory and praise. 

I am thankful today for the wonderful truth conveyed in one beautiful sentence in our sacred book.  Yours in the name of the one who abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel,

Reid S. Monaghan

Not my gifting to explain the Scriptures...

CBS' news magazine 60 minutes has a bunch of video up on its story on Joel Osteen.  Now I try not to be a hater, and look, each man stands before God to give an account of his ministry, but what I watched today was a bit crazy.

Go to this site and watch the clip at the bottom left entitled "No Mention of God?" The interviewer, in commenting on Osteen's most recent book said something like "to become a better you, there is no mention of God, no mention of Jesus Christ" and his answer was "thats just my message." Now I have a jaw injury because it smashed into the floor as I watched this.  What a nice guy.  Unfortunately I am teaching 2 Timothy 1 right now - and I think Paul would have flipped his gourd listening to this.

8Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony about our Lord, nor of me his prisoner, but share in suffering for the gospel by the power of God, 9who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began, 10and which now has been manifested through the appearing of our Savior Christ Jesus, who abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel, 11for which I was appointed a preacher and apostle and teacher, 12which is why I suffer as I do. But I am not ashamed, for I know whom I have believed, and I am convinced that he is able to guard until that Day what has been entrusted to me. 13Follow the pattern of the sound words that you have heard from me, in the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus. 14By the Holy Spirit who dwells within us, guard the good deposit entrusted to you.

Come on Joel - I am pulling for you to keep Jesus at the center of "your message." Please?

Loosing my Religion...

Shortly after I was really into the REM song "Loosing my Religion" Jesus saved me and changed my whole game life game plan. Yet many travel the opposite path down the river away from churches and the infamous, eeeevil things which get labeled with the term "organized religion." 

There is an interesting article about perceptions about “religion” in the coming generation. The article is by Stephen Prothero Chair of the Department of Religion at Boston University. This being so, it is a fair assessment that his classes do not represent “a whole generation of young people” across America but I do think his editorial is indicative of the mood of the younger folk today. 

The big mistake people make today is adjusting doctrines to the “tastes” of young folk as if we change the product to “sell to the young consumer.”  Yet I do think understanding how people think helps us to communicate truth in a manner which connects with the next generation.  Anyway, I thought this might interest others as well…

Here is the link – Is religion losing the millennial generation?