Inspiration and Idols

Yesterday it was my birthday. I hung one more year on the line...
Paul Simon

So maybe on my birthday I ought to have been out celebrating, or doing something a little special, but instead I stayed home all day (I had asked for the day off from work). How did I celebrate my birthday? Well, I spent a good deal of time just cleaning around the house and getting things organized in my home office. Also I managed to have an daylong argument with my wife about keeping the house clean. Fun stuff.

Anyway, lately it seems I have lacked inspiration, or to be more accurate, my motivation (for living for Christ and for pursuing certain goals) waxes and wanes. For example, a blog series on reformed theology I was excited to jump back into-- well I just haven't found the energy and focus to keep at it. I haven't been writing new songs either, which is always a bad sign. I mean, usually when I'm in a creative state I have lots of song ideas that come to me spontaneously-- melodies, which I will record. Actually I still have been getting ideas but I haven't been diligent enough to record them. The ideas haven't felt "inspired", so I didn't bother.

And my job. I have a real tough time getting excited about going into the office each day. The work is simply not something I'm motivated by. I know it's not what I am meant to be doing, if you know what I mean.

I know others who are also experiencing spiritual/life doldrums. What is the problem really? Why do I have such a hard time staying excited and motivated about God and about my life path?

Well I think the answer is pretty simple really. It's just putting the simple solution into practice that's the challenge. What is the solution? Well, it's just this: walking closely with God each day, and having a "big picture" life-goal, one that is dynamic and visionary, yet is subdivided into measurable daily objectives.

The key to it all is being connected to the Lord Jesus Christ-- abiding in Him continually, drawing life and inspiration from His life flowing in and though me. Out of this everything else will flow-- vision, goals, energy, motivation.

OK, this sounds simple, yet it's so easy to get distracted by the daily activities of life, isn't it? You get up each day and jump right into whatever it is you have to do next, and before you know it, you're off and running and God is forgotten. But as Jesus said, "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God (Matthew 4:4)." A Christian can't flourish without being in close communion with God through His Word. After a while the soul begins to feel its hunger and its weakness.

I feel as if the Spirit has been reminding me again and again about making God the "one thing" I desire more than anything else, by getting rid of idols that compete with Him for the affection of my heart. Most of my sins-- at their root-- have to do with frustration that I'm not getting something my heart longs after. And that thing I long after functions as my "god" in that moment. But "it" (whatever "it" may be) is not God, but only a substitute for Him. So even if I had/get it, I wouldn't be happy or fulfilled. The things of this world can't satisfy the longings of our soul. They were never meant to.

I'm convinced that all believers struggle, in varying degrees, and in thousands of different forms, with this problem of "idols in the heart". Which is of course why the Bible commands us not to worship other gods (Exodus 20:3, 1 John 5:21). It is a deep sin, a sin that underlies and is at the root of so many others.

If am not loving God with everything I have and all that is within me (obeying the great commandment, Matt 22:37, Deut 6:5) I need to ask myself-- what is competing for the affection of my heart? This will eventually lead me to identify my specific idols. Living under the sway of false gods ruling in the heart makes one callous to the presence of the true God. These "gods" redirect our attention to the things of this world, rather than the love of the Father (1 John 2:15-17). They demand that we sacrifice unto them-- our time, our money, or energy, our affection, our joy, our life. And the more we give them, the less satisfaction they provide, which in turn causes us to give them even more, hoping to get more, like a person who mindlessly puts all their coins into a slot machine in the hope of winning a big cash payout. Whatever small returns these gods put out, they never satisfy. Their promises are lies.

So I need to learn to see the truth and the love of God everywhere, to keep Him and His truth before me always. I need to know, not just in theory, but to be conscious of, the fact that He is really there for me, that He truly is with me, that He is working all things together for my good because we are in a love relationship that will never be severed (Romans 8:31-38, Matthew 28:20).

How will I know these things, deep in the bowels of my soul? I don't think such knowledge is to be sought in mystical encounter with God, nor necessarily in the hearing of inspired sermons or message. Regarding the former, I'm not sure that Christianity is really about that at all, despite the fact that having experiences with God wherein one feels Him somehow is all the rage these days in many Christian circles. I don't see in Scripture that body of Christ is being instructed to seek after God in this way. As for sermons and good messages, they are helpful when they bring out clearly some particular truth of God's word. The Holy Spirit applies those truths to us specifically, if we're listening.

So I think that true spirituality is found primarily in connecting with God through His word; in the doing of the simple daily acts of obedience that demonstrate trust and faith. Sowing these little seeds will eventually bear good fruit-- I'll sense more the presence of God and His pleasure. He'll become more and more the treasure of my heart, as I learn to savor His good pleasure in me more than I savor anything this world has to offer. It also involves getting together with the the family of God, to encourage one another, pray together and band together, as we live for God in this world that is not our home. And of course, taking the Lord's supper regularly, so that we remember what Christ did and is doing for us-- He is saving our souls through the gospel-- is not to be neglected.

Lord, keep my heart focused on You. Stir within me a hunger for more of You. Give me a hunger for Your word and eyes and ears to understand it. Direct me in your paths, and reign me in when my heart and life begins to go astray-- lead me back into the way everlasting, the way of truth, of peace, and of eternal joys at your right hand.

You make known to me the path of life; in your presence there is fullness of joy; at your right hand are pleasures forevermore (Psalm 16:11)

Tags: spiritual motivation, spiritual dryness, motivation, idols, worshiping other gods, abiding in Christ, feeding on God's word, making God the treasure of your heart

Read More...

Summary only...

Blips on the Blogosphere 20- Post-Christian America?

There's been a lot of press and discussion lately about the United States as a "post-Christian" nation.

President Obama's phrase, "we are no longer just a Christian nation", spoken during a keynote address Obama gave in June 2006, later generated much controversy during his presidential campaign. Obama has frequently reiterated this view, including just 10 days ago in prepared remarks made during a diplomatic visit to Turkey. He said, "We do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation; we consider ourselves a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values."

Newsweek's cover story this month by editor Jon Meacham is ominously titled The End of Christian America. Meacham notes troubling statistics about the state of American Christianity. According to the article, recent surveys by the American Religious Identification Survey [ARIS] and the Pew Forum's U.S. Religious Landscape Study have found that:

• the number of Americans who claim no religious affiliation has nearly doubled since 1990, rising from 8 to 15 percent;

• the percentage of self-identified Christians has fallen 10 percentage points since 1990, from 86 to 76 percent;

• the percentage of people who say they are unaffiliated with any particular faith has doubled in recent years, to 16 percent; in terms of voting, this group grew from 5 percent in 1988 to 12 percent in 2008;

• the number of people willing to describe themselves as atheist or agnostic has increased about fourfold from 1990 to 2009, from 1 million to about 3.6 million. (That is about double the number of, say, Episcopalians in the United States.)

Southern Baptist Seminary President and conservative blogger Al Mohler played a prominent role in the Newsweek essay. In a thoughtful analysis of the Newsweek piece, Mr. Mohler complements "the care, respect, and insight that mark the essay", and notes that the article "is elegant in form and serious in tone."

He agrees that Newsweek is right to designate, at least certain sections of America, as "post-Christian". But in his analysis Mohler highlights that the Newsweek story is primarily concerned with Christianity's waning political influence. Mohler notes that while this is hardly a "non-issue",

... my greater concern is not with political influence and what secularization means for the political sphere, but with what secularization means for the souls of men and women who are now considerably more distant from Christianity -- and perhaps even with any contact with Christianity -- than ever before. My main concern is evangelism, not cultural influence.

Mohler agrees in part with Meacham's argument that "what binds America together is not 'a specific faith' but instead 'a commitment to freedom' and, in particular, freedom of conscience. The founding generation did not establish the young republic on any religious creed or theological doctrine." But Mohler points out "there is something missing from this argument, and that is the recognition that

freedom, and freedom of conscience in particular, requires some prior understanding of human dignity and the origins of conscience itself. Though the founders included those who rejected the Christian Gospel and Christianity itself, Christianity had provided the necessary underpinnings for the founders' claims."

Mohler, as usual, hits the nail on the head-- the incredible freedoms and prosperity this nation has enjoyed to date were built upon a Christian foundation, without which they would not have been possible. So when the President says that we are a nation of citizens "bound by ideals and a set of values", his argument is that there is some set of values that transcends any particular religion and which all may somehow come to recognize and embrace. But Obama's argument raises many questions.

Is it really accurate to say that a certain set of values is going to be universally recognizable and agreeable to all? If not, who gets to define which are the set of values acceptable to be promoted in schools and enacted in public policy? Does government have the authority to play the role of deciding which values are the right ones to be promoted? Are values to be decided by majority vote? And shouldn't religious views be allowed to enter the public debate about values? Even if really it could be, why should values discussion and public policy-making be a "religion-free" zone?

Mohler closed his analysis with these fine words:

This much I know -- Jesus Christ is Lord, and His kingdom is forever. Our proper Christian response to this new challenge is not gloom, but concern. And our first concern must be to see that the Gospel is preached as Good News to the perishing -- including all those in post-Christian America.

Now a few of the questions I raised above are touched upon-- albeit briefly-- by writer/pastor Tim Keller, speaking on the MSNBC program "Morning Joe" last week on a special Good Friday edition. Keller sat next to Jon Meacham and participated in the short but interesting discussion on issues raised by Meacham's article. You can watch a video of the discussion below.

Keller agrees with Meacham that there is danger when the Church becomes overly concerned with grasping for political power and worldly influence. "If the Church tries to turn the world into the Church it turns out that the Church becomes more like the world." But Keller points to the rise of a new generation of college-educated evangelicals that is seeing these issues differently and with more clarity and depth than did their parents, who were more of a "blue-collar generation" of evangelicals:

All public policies are based on views of human flourishing that are basically based on faith, they are not scientific, they are not empirical, they're based on faith. And therefore everything that happens in the public sphere is based on a kind of religiousness, a kind of "faith" view of human flourishing, human nature, the ultimate sense of what reality is about. And therefore Christians wouldn't want to say well, we're not going to bring our religion to the public sphere anymore because they actually see everything happening in the public sphere having essentially religious roots. And I think people that have gone to college see that a little better and they have a tendency to see that there's religious background to all the positions instead of looking at just certain hot-button issues, I think evangelicals in the future are going to have a more nuanced and comprehensive, you might say, public philosophy than they have in the past. So I think John's right, that the old approach is dying.

I agree with Mr. Keller's argument-- public policy is not and cannot be forged in some sort of metaphysical vacuum in which questions about meaning-- theological questions- are simply ignored. Inquiries dealing with profound questions such as the existence of God and the ultimate reality of life must be answered, and those who advocate secularism indeed have their own "faith-based" take on such questions but want to mandate that overtly religious and particularly, Christian answers to these questions cannot be entertained in the public sphere, citing so-called separation of church and state. But Keller's comments show the fallacious thinking behind this position. Additionally history proves that Christianity has had a most powerful role and influence, in policy-making discussions, in law-making, and in the adoption of various policies in the United States. Christian principles have been felt in the creation of American universities, hospitals, charities, and of course, in the creation of our unique form of democratic government. The positive outcome of all this Christian influence is well-documented. And if Keller is right, a new generation of smart evangelicals will continue to see the connection between faith and policy-making and insist that Christianity is allowed to continue to make its case in the public square.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

HT: Alex Chediak

Tags: post-Christian, post-Christian America, President Obama, Newsweek, "The End of Christian America", Al Mohler, Jon Meacham, Tim Keller, MSNBC, "Morning Joe", Blips on the Blogosphere

Read More...

Summary only...

Watchblogging Revisited

In a recent post titled Evil as Entertainment, Reformed blogger Tim Challies takes certain watchblogs to task for harping on evil so much that they neglect to point out what is good and true. He feels such blogs may be the equivalent of a "spiritualized form of YouTube", in that they present evil as a form of entertainment. Reading his piece, I found myself convicted that I have indeed sometimes read certain blog articles that way, perhaps finding a bit too much pleasure in the heresies reported. And I agreed with Challies' main point, that believers are to focus on the good and the true, and that we ought to examine our motives if we find ourselves consistently drawn to those who post about nothing but the evils other believers are doing.

But the chief weakness with the article is its non-specificity- Challies doesn't "name names" (probably because he's trying to be gracious and just point out principles to follow), but specific examples would have made it easier to know just what or whom he's critiquing. Also, I'm not entirely sure that Challies is not critiquing a strawman, for I've not personally encountered those watchblogs that only speak of error while never pointing to what is true. Moreover, saying that some watchblogs are posting such things for mere entertainment value is a rather serious charge, and by not being specific as to which blogs he's talking about, Challies' seems to imply that watchblogs by their very nature are guilty of this.

I do find more that is helpful in Phil Johnson's well-written critique of Challies' piece, titled "Turning a Blind Eye to Evil Is Evil, Too". Johnson writes,

"There's quite a lot to applaud in what Tim said, but I don't think he said everything about the subject that needed to be said. As a result, I thought his post was (quite uncharacteristically for Challies, of all people) lacking in balance".

Johnson goes on to make a number of good points, which have the effect of providing balance to the message of Challies' article.

1) Defending the faith is a necessary task for shepherds.
When someone on his blog comments that he thinks Phil "would rather spend his time building up believers and himself in the Word rather than calling people out for damnable heresies that are causing people to drift away from the true faith and send[ing] them to hell", Phil agrees with the assessment, but hastens to add that

"calling people out for damnable heresies that are causing people to drift away from the true faith" is a shepherd's duty, not an option— and it can be quite edifying if done well.

I heartily concur with Mr. Johnson's point here and it's one I've made frequently here on Jordan's View in previous posts (see below):

Christian Watchbloggers- Good or Bad?
Discerning What Is Truth (Part 2)
Discerning What Is Truth (Part 1)
The Age of Tolerance Calls for Bold Proclamation of Truth

But returning to Phil's article:

2) Blogs are an appropriate forum for calling out doctrinal error publicly.
When preaching a sermon, Johnson states his main concern is to "explain the meaning of specific texts of Scripture and exhort people to apply the truth to their lives in obedience to God." However, when writing a blog, Johnson employs both "humor and criticism" to make certain points. The issue of whether this is appropriate is often debated, but certainly Paul and even our Lord both used humor and even sarcasm in ministry.

Of course, godly satire is challenging for sinners like us to pull off. As people who struggle with sin, Christians must check their hearts (motives) while engaged in any kind of ministry. Steve Camp chimes in on the discussion with an excellent, biblically saturated article, Blogging, Watchblogging, and Ministry, which both challenged and convicted me with these helpful questions to ask oneself:

1. How does my post glorify God and exalt Christ? Or am I seeking to only expand my daily readership by addressing controversial issues just for controversy's sake? (1 Cor. 10:31)

2. How does it equip the body of Christ biblically to be better Bereans on any issue they face? (Acts 17:11)

3. How does it convict and challenge me in my own life before I turn its truths on another? IOW, what do I need to learn, model, obey and repent of first before calling others to do the same? (Psalm 119:10-17)

4. How does it bring truth and foster change to the one I am disagreeing with? (Eph. 4:13-16)

5. How does it edify and encourage - not just exhort? (Eph. 4:1-3; 26-32)

6. How does it communicate real biblical resolve? (Roms. 12:1-2)

7. How does it enable others to live more like Jesus as salt and light in their communities, ready to serve their church and world? (Matt. 5-7)

8. Am I filled with the Holy Spirit as I write and unfold God's Word, or am I only giving knee-jerk reactions to what is the hot potato of the moment? (Eph. 5:17-21)

9. And lastly, in what I have just written and confronted caused me to focus more clearly on the person of our Lord Jesus Christ and something He would find pleasure, delight and honor in? (Heb. 12:1-3)

Camp offers gracious critique of Challies' article, and at the same time complements Tim for his writing and blog ministry. Camp writes about Challies, "He is thoughtful, circumspect, kind and generous. He is obviously very well read, reformed, insightful, and we are all the better for his contribution on many issues he addresses in the blogosphere."

I would like to stop at this point and also commend Tim Challies for his consistent promotion of reformed teaching and his steadfast output of helpful, well-written articles. As a fellow blogger I appreciate (and envy, in a good way) Challies' prodigious flow of writing. I know that hard work and discipline is involved in this and is probably a big reason his blog has become a great resource to so many.

So my chief concern with Challies' post is the fact that, because it doesn't also point out the value of the watchblogger's task, some may try to use it to justify writing off completely those who engage in the kind of ministry/critique watchbloggers do. But as Phil Johnson and Steve Camp point out in their articles and even I have also tried to do here on my blog, the defense of sound doctrine, together with rebuke of erroneous teaching, is an absolutely vital aspect of Christian ministry (1 Tim 1:3, 8, Titus 1:9, 2 Peter 3:16-18). And good watchblogs are doing this, not as a replacement for pastoral teaching but in response to the marketplace of ideas. And perhaps this task has become more necessary than ever in an age when false ideologies and aberrant teachings proliferate so readily via the Internet, and so may turn to the INternet for information. As Challies suggests, some watchblogs and ministries need more balance as they perform this vital task, but again I have not encountered the kind of watchblogs Tim is writing about. For example, he says:

But if a pastor of a church in Kalamazoo preaches a sermon in which he says something scandalous, it has no effect on my life and, beyond its draw as entertainment, I can think of few good reasons for me to even know about it. Multiply this by hundreds of new stories a week (or even just tens of stories a week) and I end up with a huge amount of negative information that stays in my head and heart, but which has no bearing on my life.

But those blogs I personally follow which write about bad teachings (or even this blog) are not singling out the errors of obscure pastors, but rather, pointing out false teachings infiltrating the evangelical church at large by persons whose names are well-known. So again it would have been helpful to know precisely what/whom Challies was criticizing.

Again, returning to Phil Johnson's article:

3) The role of the critic is just as necessary as the role of the encourager.

Phil writes:

I think what Tim Challies is saying is that it's unhealthy to fix one's attention on error full time rather than spending most of our time dwelling on things that edify. If that's all he is saying, I say (as heartily as possible) AMEN! (Philippians 4:8). But if someone wants to seize that point in order to suggest that it's always better to be an encourager than a critic, my reply is: That very attitude is largely responsible for getting us into this mess in the first place.

And again:

I understand Challies' central concern. There is a vocal segment of the fundamentalist/evangelical community for whom an obsession with sensational exposés and nattering negativity has proved seriously unhealthy. It has given them a sour attitude, a perpetually angry tone, and a really bad reputation. I don't enjoy reading what they write, either, and I don't hang around their blogs.

But the mentality that dominates the evangelical culture today— and the far greater problem, in my judgment— is exactly the opposite. The overwhelming majority of today's evangelical sophisticates would clearly prefer it if no one ever criticized evangelical Golden Calves. Rampant error doesn't unsettle them in the least. They are quite happy to live with it and even actively make peace with it.

But let someone dare to voice an objection to a troubling doctrine in the latest best-seller making the rounds on campus—even a denial of the Trinity or some other soul-destroying soteriological or Christological novelty—and the very people who profess to hate criticism (and who work so hard to seem agreeable in their dealings with with the unorthodox) will heap the nastiest kinds of vituperation on the soul of the one who has dared to criticize unorthodoxy and thereby threaten the "unity" evangelicals think their timid silence has won them.

Exactly-- the real danger in evangelicalism these days is not the relatively few unbalanced heresy-hunters but rather the many for whom heresy seems to be a non-issue, and who, in the name of a unity that is misguided and unbiblical, ignore the biblical injunction of defending sound doctrine and rebuking false teaching.

[Defending the above rather strong statement would require another post, but those of you who regularly read such blogs as Pyromaniacs know what I'm referring to].

And we so badly need truth to be boldly proclaimed by strong leaders who are also godly men, men who have applied the truth first to themselves, as Steve Camp helpfully reminds us.

Of course, we are all at different points in our walk with God and each of us struggles with particular sins (1 John 1:9, Romans 7:14-25). Owning up to this ongoing battle with the flesh does not (necessarily) disqualify us from service, but we need ongoing accountability and confessing of our sins to one another (Proverbs 7:17, Hebrews 10:25, James 5:16). This of course necessitates humility and submission and relationships with others in the body of Christ (Ephesians 5:22, 1 Peter 5:5-6, Phil 2:1-8).

I am truly grateful for men like Tim Challies, Phil Johnson, Steve Camp and others who are blogging about great reformed truths passionately, consistently and intelligently, and more important, trying to live out these truths by the grace of God in their own lives. I am glad too that, as Scripture says, "iron sharpens iron" and that some key biblical truths were shared by others that helped to balance out the point of the article by Mr. Challies.

Happy Resurrection Sunday and may the truth of Jesus Christ and His resurrection fill us with all joy, power and boldness! Let us live and proclaim His truth.

Tags: watchbloggers, watchblogs, Tim Challies, Phil Johnson, Steve Camp

Read More...

Summary only...

I Was Wrong, Mr. Charismatic!

Those who visit this blog regularly probably have noticed that I have become a staunch advocate of reformed theology here on Jordan's View. The transition was gradual-- I went from being charismatically-inclined to calling myself a reformed charismatic, but for the past year or more I have preferred to think of myself as simply a Christian who believes in reformed doctrine.

This has all suddenly changed.

You see, last night I had a very strange and vivid dream. I was attending a church service already in progress at my old church in New York City, Trinity Baptist, and as I walked in I noticed people of every color and tribe and nationality filling up every seat in the pews. Many were colorfully dressed in the garb of their native cultures. Everyone seemed very happy and there were smiles all around. The atmosphere felt full of kindness and warmth.

Upon noticing me, a kind, elderly usher whispered in my ear that there was a seat available at the front and would I like to be taken there. I nodded my head and he led the way slowly. As I got closer to the front I was amazed to see gold dust falling down like a mist around all around me. Then when I got up to the front I noticed a woman in a pink running outfit drenched in sweat, her baggy clothes soaked. She was lifting her hands and praising God, and her friend told me that when she had come into the service she was 300 pounds, but that God had touched her miraculously and she had lost 150 lbs of water weight in an instant. She smelled rather badly but no one seemed to care.

The preacher up front was getting very excited and kept on shouting "Boom!" and "Bam!". Taking my seat I looked up and noticed that the speaker was a shirtless Todd Bentley! Needless to say I was rather startled since not only was he shirtless but his torso, neck and arms were covered with tattoos. He was pacing back and forth on the platform, preaching a message about "reaching up for your miracle" and saying he could see "in the spirit" countless angels hovering over the audience, just ready to pour out miracles.

The next thing I witnessed shocked me even more-- R.C. Sproul, Al Mohler, John MacArthur, Phil Johnson and other guys I recognized from the reformed camp were all down on the floor, some prostrate and others kneeling. Most were weeping. C. Peter Wagner was coming behind them and seemed to be praying for each one in turn.

Then suddenly Bentley was shouting, "Look, the glory, the glory!" as a golden light seemed to fill the room. I asked a man next to me what was happening (I later learned this was Tommy Tenney), and he explained:

"Well my friend, you are seeing what happens when God comes in his shekinah glory and just takes over -- you see all these reformed guys are repenting that they spoke out against God's gifts for today, miracles are happening left and right, and God is just blowing our minds away!"

Then I asked him if he could prove this from the Bible. He looked at me sternly and replied, "The Bible is still being written man, it's happening right here in front of you. Now open your eyes and see His handwriting!" A dreadful fear came upon me and there was something like thick black smoke suddenly pouring into the sanctuary, but it wasn't smoke from a fire. And suddenly a thunderous voice spoke and said, "Just believe!!"

I was at that point I woke up and found that I was drenched in sweat. I was scared and I asked God what it all meant. I felt as if God spoke to my spirit and said, "My child, you need to stop thinking so much and trust my Spirit. You are being made whole."

So it seemed to me that God was saying to me that I should immediately stop being reformed, quit writing this long-winded series on theology and start praying and fasting for new marching orders. So, as of today, I will cease writing my series on "Arminian vs Reformed theology" and obey this prompting. I apologize to those who have been following the series and perhaps were looking forward to reading the updated version.

It seems I was plain wrong, about everything...











April Fools!!!

Read More...

Summary only...

Blips on the Blogosphere 19

UPDATE: I'm still working on re-posting the articles from my series on Arminianism vs Reformed theology, but I have decided to edit them as I proceed, so the process of reposting will likely take longer than I'd originally planned.

In the meantime, more "blips from the blogosphere"...

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

Seems there's been a lot of interest lately in the existence (or not) of Satan. A number of thinkers weigh in on the question, "Does Satan Exist?", in the "On Faith" section of the Washington Post.

Then on Nightline: Faceoff, the same question was debated by a panel in a show that aired March 26th. Arguing that Satan does not exist were writer and philosopher Deepak Chopra and United Church of Christ minister Bishop Carlton Pearson (he doesn't believe in hell either). Pastor Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill Church and Annie Lobert, founder of the international Christian ministry "Hookers for Jesus," argued that Satan does indeed exist. I've collected all the videos on vodpod and you can watch some of them right here: Jordan's Video. Click the link at the bottom of the widget to view all my collected videos.

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

Fans of Tim Keller, author of "The Reason for God" and senior pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church of New York City, will be delighted to have this new resource: a "Tim Keller wiki" which features links to news, books, articles, audios, videos, sermons and will be regularly updated by Tim Keller fans.

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

Recently I received by mail a flyer advertising an upcoming debate at Bioloa University between author and atheism defender Christopher Hitchens and the author and Christian apologist William Lane Craig. I learned that although the debate will be on a live webcast, one must purchase the rights to listen in. As much as I'd like to listen to this debate, in which it sounds Hitchens will be overmatched, I'm not willing to shell out money for it. Besides, Mr. Craig has debated many others and many of the debates are available for free online.

A debate between William Lane Craig and Walter Sinnott-Armstrong was later turned into a book titled "God?", which you can preview at this link.

Speaking of debates and apologetics, there is an excellent blog, Apologetics 315, that features links to numerous apologetic resources, including debates in MP3 format.

Tags: Does Satan exist, Nightline Face/Off, Tim Keller, The Reason for God, debates between atheist and Christian apologist

Read More...

Summary only...

Blips on the Blogosphere 18

I've been hard at work editing the old introductory article to my "Arminian vs Reformed theology" series and getting ready to re-post the series. In the meantime, here's some things I've stumbled across in the blogosphere lately.


Alex Chediak, who live-blogged almost all of the recent Ligonier 2009 National Conference (the reformed ministry headed up by R.C. Sproul), has put together links to all his conference posts here.

AND THIS JUST IN (3-26-09): Videos from the 2009 Ligonier National Conference (The Holiness of God).

And if you're into photos, check out these conference photos on Flickr.

-----------------------------
Pointing out that more top church blogs are by reformed bloggers than any other "theological strain or movement", an article titled "Young, Restless, Reformed Bloggers" asked this question back in January:

Are there so many popular Reformed blogs because of the movement, or has the movement grown, at least in part, because of so many average Reformed Joes and more-than-average Reformed mega-stars getting into New Media and using it more effectively than the other guys?

The author of the article, A- Team blogger David Nilsen, is inclined to think that the Reformed community as a whole, from the big ministry names to the not well-known (yet numerous) bloggers, have been drawn to "new media" (such as blogs) and has used such media very effectively in promoting the reformed view. I agree with this assessment. Let's keep up the good work friends.

------------------------------
Mark Dever writes on "What I CAN and CANNOT Live With as a Pastor" (there's also a corresponding MP3). One of those things Dever cannot live with is the practice of infant baptism, which he calls, sin. Wow. Fighting words? But Dever doesn't seem like he wants a fight, and explains his views in a related article, "The Sin of Infant Baptism, written by a sinning Baptist".

------------------------------
The coming evangelical collapse by Michael Spencer

Writing for the Christian Science Monitor (March 10, 2009 edition), Michael Spencer adapted a series from his blog, InternetMonk.com and created the above-titled article. In it he presents his vision of what is on the horizon for evangelicalism, and the picture he paints isn't pretty. I admire Spencer for speaking in this "naysaying" prophetic voice, saying things that aren't very heartening but at the same time, seeming to do so as a challenge to all Christians to prepare for tough times ahead. He says he's not a prophet and that his predictions could be wrong, but I do think much of what he's envisioning are trends one can already see in the present.

A few of his predictions:

Denominations will shrink, even vanish, while fewer and fewer evangelical churches will survive and thrive.

Expect evangelicalism to look more like the pragmatic, therapeutic, church-growth oriented megachurches that have defined success. Emphasis will shift from doctrine to relevance, motivation, and personal success – resulting in churches further compromised and weakened in their ability to pass on the faith.

The emerging church will largely vanish from the evangelical landscape, becoming part of the small segment of progressive mainline Protestants that remain true to the liberal vision.

Aggressively evangelistic fundamentalist churches will begin to disappear.

Charismatic-Pentecostal Christianity will become the majority report in evangelicalism. Can this community withstand heresy, relativism, and confusion? To do so, it must make a priority of biblical authority, responsible leadership, and a reemergence of orthodoxy.

While Spencer does see evangelicalism as a "crumbling empire", he remains optimistic. "We can rejoice that in the ruins, new forms of Christian vitality and ministry will be born. I expect to see a vital and growing house church movement. This cannot help but be good for an evangelicalism that has made buildings, numbers, and paid staff its drugs for half a century.

We need new evangelicalism that learns from the past and listens more carefully to what God says about being His people in the midst of a powerful, idolatrous culture."

Personally, I resonate with his statement that "a small band will work hard to rescue the movement from its demise through theological renewal", noting that "this is an attractive, innovative, and tireless community with outstanding media, publishing, and leadership development."

Spencer believes that despite such efforts, the "coming evangelical collapse will not result in a second reformation, though it may result in benefits for many churches and the beginnings of new churches."

Perhaps a reformation on the scale of the great Protestant Reformation is not to be, still it is my hope to be part of that small band that will trumpet reformed doctrine, and preach and practice the gospel in powerful ways, so as to purify the church and make her more effective in producing mature disciples, of whom I hope to be one.

Tags: Ligonier 2009 National Conference, R.C. Sproul, Alex Chediak, young restless and reformed bloggers, new media, Mark Dever, infant baptism, Michael Spencer, InternetMonk.com, the coming evangelical collapse

Read More...

Summary only...

The New Calvinism- Picking Up Where I Left Off

Back in November of 2006, I began writing a series examining Arminianism vs Calvinism (Reformed) theology. At the time, I had already become convinced that the Calvinistic position was the more biblically accurate, but I was still working through all its theological implications, as well as trying to answer from scripture the Arminian objections.

So as I began writing the series, my purpose was multifold. First, I wanted to study through to solid answers and put my conclusions in writing, as I have found that putting thoughts down in words brings about greater clarity and insight. Second, I wanted to present a strong, biblical argument and to answer objections biblically. My foundation for bible study is the conviction that the Bible contains the answers to these all-important questions, it being the true revelation of God to man. Third, I hoped my writings on the topic would be helpful and even educational to others who might also be wrestling with the serious theological questions brought out by the ongoing debate between Arminians and Calvinists.

I had also come to recognize that one’s answers to these profound theological questions, in other words, one’s theology, plays a vital role in determining how one lives out their Christian faith. For myself and my family, I wanted to be convinced I had come to sound, biblical conclusions. And as one wanting to be a guide and a help to others in these matters, I knew I would need to have solid convictions, anchored in a confidence that I had come to accurate conclusions based on correct biblical interpretation. Of course I recognized that sincere and godly people have come to different conclusions on many of the questions raised in this ancient debate, nonetheless I proceeded, based on the conviction that embarking on this type of study would bear good fruit. It would challenge me to my best thinking and digging into the Bible would undoubtedly bring more light to my understanding of these things.

Yet I found the challenge of writing on these matters while answering many objections was very consuming, and about midway through the series, I set it aside. Now, 2 and ½ years have passed since I first began writing and I feel compelled again to complete it. I have read and thought more on reformed theology. I am now attending a church that is solidly reformed in its preaching emphasis. My convictions about the accuracy of the reformed theological perspective has continued to grow.

A recent article in Time magazine has also provided new inspiration, since it lists “The New Calvinism” as one of the 10 Ideas Changing the World Right Now. In fact, the new Calvinism is at #3 on the list, though I’m not sure whether the list is in order of priority. I’m challenged by this that the biblical truths Calvin and others pointed to have fresh relevance in these troubled times.

As the world economy faces monumental challenges, wars continue to rage, and famine and natural disasters plague, religious questions are naturally raised. Does God really exist? What is the nature of God— is He the personal God of the Bible or the impersonal divine force that many religions describe? If He is indeed a personal God who is completely sovereign over all things, then why does He allow such pain and suffering? These are the challenging and profound questions that thinking people have always asked. Perhaps in these tremulous days the answers presented by the great Reformed thinkers are growing attractive to many. But more important, does the reformed picture comport with the Bible, or is it merely a man-made theological system? This being also the 500 year anniversary of Calvin’s birth, I feel it is fitting to take up such questions again, and to re-post my series comparing and contrasting the answers provided by Arminian vs Calvinistic (Reformed) theology. My plan then is to re-post the original articles (with perhaps some editing), then pick up in the series where I had left off. Stay tuned for more.

Tags: Arminianism vs Calvinism, Arminian vs Reformed theology, Calvinism, The New Calvinism, Calvin, 500 year anniversary of Calvin's birth, biblical convictions

Read More...

Summary only...