Above & Beyond

International Adoption

2009-10-03T11:25:00.004-04:00

We just launched the process of becoming accredited for international adoptions this week at Embraced by Grace, Inc. Actually, Pepper had started the process, but we submitted our Work Plan to the Council on Accreditation this week. This process will be intense and quite an accomplishment if we can pull it off. Our site visit is scheduled tentatively for July, 2010. I will be meeting with the staff on Monday to coordinate our efforts for this accreditation.

Once this is done, Embraced by Grace will be able to do adoptions for children from any of the 68 member nations of the Hague Conference on Private International Law. We will also be able to supervise and assist other adoption agencies who are not accredited to conduct an international adoption.

This is another step EBG is taking to care for the 138 million orphans in their affliction. Won't you join us? Visit our website to donate today.

Retooling

2009-04-11T09:07:00.002-04:00

I'm retooling this blog. It's been a while since I've updated. So much has advanced in the blogosphere since I began back in October 2004. I need to retool to catch up with the resources available for blogging and bloggers. This will probably include moving to a new site, but I haven't decided that for sure yet. Anyway, I hope to have a new site up and running within the month. We'll promote the new launch, so stay tuned. Thank you.

Praying for the Unborn

2009-01-20T11:43:00.003-05:00

This morning I led our staff in prayer at the adoption agency where I work. It is a sad day for the unborn in America.

A Story of Christ-like Compassion

2009-01-07T15:18:00.004-05:00

Michael was walking down the street in Memphis one day. He was one of thirteen children by a mother who was a crack cocaine addict. His father was not involved in his life (and would be murdered within three years). Michael carried a garbage bag in his hand that served as a suitcase holding all of his belongings. He didn’t know his birthday. He didn’t know his father. He wasn’t even sure if Michael was his real name. Every day’s goal was mere survival.

He had repeated first and second grades. In fact, he had attended eleven different schools by the time he was fifteen years old. This was in part due to his bouncing around the foster care system. On this particular day, he had no permanent address. He was a black homeless teenage dropout surviving on the streets of inner-city Memphis.

A white Christian family drove by Michael as he walked down the street. He was wearing shorts and a T-shirt walking in the snow. They pulled over and began talking to him. They invited him into their home. The Tuohy family included Sean, a former Ole Miss basketball star, his wife, Leigh Anne, teenage daughter, Collins and son, Sean, Jr. They ended up legally adopting Michael Oher into their family.

Michael was very socially challenged. He was an introvert who rarely said more than two words. Leigh Anne, his adoptive mom (and my debate partner in high school!) said that she hugged Michael for a year before he ever hugged her back. The Tuohys worked with him on developing social skills by giving him assignments such as going to the mall to buy his own clothes. The results were quite transformational as anyone who now knows the personable young man would tell you.

The Tuohys sought to enroll him in Briarcrest Christian School (my alma mater!), but he had only a 0.6 grade point average. School officials didn’t think he could handle the academic rigors of a private Christian academy. His IQ score was only 80. Through homeschooling, tutoring, and some online classes that replaced previous poor grades, he was able to get a provisional enrollment. His grade point average continued to rise to a 2.05 making him eligible to play football on the high school team. By the time he graduated from Briarcrest, he was on the honor roll.

Michael had never played organized sports before. His tremendous size and athleticism gave the coaches hope that this young man held promise as a football player. He flourished as an offensive and defensive lineman, and was invited to play in the U. S. Army All-American Bowl in 2005 on ESPN. The network named him the #1 offensive high school lineman in the nation.

After graduation, Michael went to Ole Miss where he started as a freshman and was named to several All-Conference and All-America teams. His records there are storied. He recently played his final game for the Rebels in the 2009 Cotton Bowl. He also made the dean's list at the university. Analysts predict that he is a likely first round pick in this year’s 2009 NFL Draft.

Oher’s story is a remarkable one that has been chronicled in Michael Lewis’ 2006 book, The Blind Side: Evolution of a Game. The book, a New York Times bestseller, sold 150,000 copies in the first quarter of its release. Twentieth Century Fox has purchased the rights to the movie and will release the film in 2009.

The remarkable thing about this story to me is not the adversity which this extraordinary young man has overcome to be a success. I am inspired by this story as I see a Christian family showing the love of Jesus is a powerful way. The Tuohys were a white family living in a racially-charged city where prejudices run strong. They took in this homeless black dropout son of a crack addict because of the compassion of Jesus Christ. At great personal sacrifice and inconvenience, this family reached out to the helpless and hopeless and made a difference. This boy who would possibly have ended up dead on the streets of Memphis or incarcerated may soon be making a lot of money as a successful player in the NFL.

It makes me ask myself, “What am I doing to show the unique and extraordinary love of Jesus Christ to others?”

More Important Than Money

2008-11-24T09:14:00.003-05:00

With every nightly newscast depicting our economy in desperate condition and growing worse, it is vital that Christians remember that there are some things that are more important than money. My pastor when I was growing up used to say, "Do you want to know how rich you are? Add up everything you have that money cannot buy and death cannot take away. That's how rich you are!"

The book of Proverbs mentions several things that are more important than money:

1. Reputation
"A good name is to be chosen rather than great riches, and favor is better than silver or gold." Proverbs 22.1

2. Wisdom
"Blessed is the one who finds wisdom, and the one who gets understanding, for the gain from her is better than gain from silver and her profit better than gold. She is more precious than jewels, and nothing you desire can compare with her." Proverbs 3.13-15 (see also 3.5; 8.11, 19; 16.16)

3. Integrity
"Better is a poor man who walks in his integrity than a rich man who is crooked in his ways." Proverbs 28.6

4. Knowledge
"Take my instruction instead of silver, and knowledge rather than choice gold" Proverbs 8.10 (see also 20.15)

5. Loving relationships
"Better is a dinner of herbs where love is than a fattened ox and hatred with it." Proverbs 15.17

6. Fear of the Lord
"Better is a little with the fear of the Lord than great treasure and trouble with it." Proverbs 15.16

7. An excellent wife
"An excellent wife who can find? She is far more precious than jewels." Proverbs 31.10

8. Righteousness
"Better is a little with righteousness than great revenues with injustice." Proverbs 16.8

Now, tell me. How rich are you?

We've Got it Backwards

2008-10-15T08:03:00.006-04:00

As I listen to the debates, speeches, and soundbites from the 2008 presidential election, I cannnot help but think that we as Americans have forgotten the purpose of governent. We all begin to look to the federal government as a parent, funder, or even Santa Claus! All of the candidates seem to have flavors of socialism in their ideas and plans.

Looking back to the Constitution written by our founding fathers, this was not the intent of the federal government. For example, consider the Preamble to the United States Constitution:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

We've confused the purpose of the government and now we have it backwards. The government is to "provide for the common defense" and "promote the general welfare." Citizens today believe that the government is to "promote the common defense" and "provide the general welfare." We've got it backwards.

We say things like, "We support our troops," thinking we have thereby promoted the common defense; but, do we provide for that defense through funding, equipping, training and staffing our military? Or is the constant cry to cut and downsize?

Many citizens have such an entitlement mentality that they look to government to provide their general welfare. Housing, bailouts, earmarks, pork spending, etc. all promise welfare entitlements to Americans. Who doesn't like such a "free lunch?" (Have you heard? There is no such thing!) But the government's job is to promote the general welfare, not to provide it.

The Republicans have spent the last eight years expanding the size of government and increasing spending. The candidates running this year from both major political parties are promising more of the same tactics. It is a far cry from what James Madison and others intended when they wrote the Constitution.

I'm sorry Mr. Madison, but we have gotten it backwards!

Mrs. Wooten Goes to Washington

2008-09-24T08:37:00.002-04:00

My wife, Pepper, is speaking at the National Council for Adoption's national conference in Washington, D.C. today at the Hyatt - Capitol Hill. I am proud of her for this honor and grateful that the Embraced by Grace adoption agency has been given this high profile opportunity.

Evangelism for Introverts

2008-09-17T09:28:00.002-04:00

We often tend to think that evangelism is for the Type-A, dominant, confident, extroverted (dare we say it? "loudmouth") type Christian. Those who are quieter and calmer often tend to disqualify themselves from participation in the Great Commission because they are more introverted.
"That's not my gift."
"I'm not wired that way."
"I could never do that."
We tend to give the idea that the Great Commission is optional. It is not. Not should it be viewed as a chore, obligation, or drudgery. It is a blessing and an opprotunity to spread the Gospel and impact eternity.

Tony Woodlief writes an insightful and even humorous analysis of evangelism and ministry from the perspective of an introvert. (see here) The person who just is not a "people person" has to keep several things in mind:

1. God uses all personality types.
Yes, there are the bold evangelists like the Apostles Peter and Paul, but there are also the shy and timid like Timothy. God uses all types to be His witnesses.

2. Introverts may reach people introverts could never reach.
Some people are turned off or intimidated by the person who always enters a room mouth first. They might be more inclined to hear from someone who is meek but compassionate.

3. The Great Commission is a universal command for all believers.
There are no exemptions or exceptions. We all are called to be witnesses to the salvation we have experieiced theough the Lord Jesus Christ. It is not merely the task of the "professional."

4. We all ought to be involved in other people's lives.
The example of Jesus is clear. He got His hands dirty with other people's lives. We must love, minister, meet needs, show compassion and witness to the Gospel. We cannot do that insulated or isolated from the world. We have to go where hurting sinners are and carry the message of God's grace to them.

So, go ahead. Roll up your sleeves. Show someone the extraordinary love of Jesus today. For the Gospel's sake.

Future Plans

2008-09-06T15:49:00.004-04:00

Many have asked how I will be spending my newfound free time. Well, here is the big announcement!
{Be sure to click on the small PLAY button on the lower left of the video viewer to watch this surprising news footage.}

Providence

2008-08-30T22:02:00.003-04:00

The Bible says that the Lord orders our steps. (Ps 37.23) Theologians speak of this as the "providence of God" that includes all things that come to pass as God's means of accomplishing all of His divine purposes. That providential care is sweet to believers. We know that He is the One that directs our paths. Indeed, He works all things together for good. His providence is a web of circumstances that affect more than one person, one family or one church. His providence has a domino effect that works out His will and accomplishes His purposes in a plethora of ways and lives. We usually get only a glimpse of this in our earthly perspective. Eternity will reveal a heavenly hindsight that will unveil God's purposes that will make so much sense to us then. We will understand things fully and completely when we see them from the viewpoint of glory. Our question marks will be turned into exclamation points. Our "whys" will be turned into "Hallelujahs!" We will rejoice fully in the wisdom, power and providence of God. He knows what He is doing. His name will be glorified when we "understand it better by and by."

On July 22, our pastor, Dr. R. A. Hargrave, told the pastoral staff that projections were that our church might end the calendar year $750k under budget. (Our annual budget is about $2.8m.) Discretionary spending has been cut deeply. The next inevitable step is to downsize the staff. The pastor explained that he would have to let one of the pastors go within thirty days. He suggested that if staff pastors wanted to pursue ministry opportunities elsewhere, it would save him from having to make a difficult decision. Whether someone resigned or Pastor had to terminate staff, he explained that the church would provide six months severance pay. Imagine the difficult responsibility of having to terminate a member of the pastoral staff that you built for ministry. Certainly he faced a tough choice. He decided to meet one-on-one with each staff member over the next two days to discover their goals, dreams and sense of calling. Each of the pastors went home to discuss these things with his wife and to pray seeking the will of the Lord.

On the following day, I was the first to meet with Pastor. We discussed the tough decision he faced, the state of my ministry at Riverbend, my ministry interests and future goals. I detailed for him that my interests were ministry management, teaching, and missions.

We spoke specifically about my heart for pastors and my desire to be involved in training the next generation of pastors. We talked about the dream of one day having a seminary at Riverbend. I have been a pastor for twenty-four years (sixteen at Riverbend Church). Much of what I have learned about theology, matching methods with beliefs, how to do ministry (and how NOT to do ministry) I learned from Pastor Roy here at Riverbend. Providence has given me a unique heritage to invest in the training of young preachers. We discussed my interest in teaching at the seminary level, and the academic credential I still lack to see that happen. We talked about my desire to pursue my PhD.

He asked if I knew of any alternative to downsizing our pastoral staff. My reply was that I believed that our staff was too large. I don't think that a church our size (1400 members) needs ten pastors. I think that too much of our budget goes to payroll. Therefore, it makes good sense, especially in light of the present fiscal shortfall, to downsize staff.

I left the following day for an 18-day mission trip to Romania and Austria. Pepper and I continued to communicate by phone and computer to discuss and pray about what we should do. On Sunday, July 27, I sent Pastor Roy an email stating that in light of the church's finances, the uncertainty under which the other pastors found themselves, and my desire to finish my formal education, that it made sense for me to be the one from our staff to resign. He wrote back the following day asking that Pepper and I be certain about this before he could accept my resignation. Since all of this was happening internationally via email, I suggested to him that he and I sit down face-to-face after I returned home. He agreed that this was best.

We met on Monday, August 10. I repeated my offer to resign. He accepted. This decision was announced to the church on Wednesday, August 27 and will be effective on September 5, my sixteenth anniversary as a pastor at Riverbend. I appreciate the way that Pastor Roy has been cordial, encouraging, and accomodating in these circumstances. We have a shared mutual respect for each other.

Pepper and I are grateful for sixteen years of ministry at Riverbend. We have seen God do some remarkable things. We are grateful to leave with our integrity intact. Not every ministry ends that way in this day and age. God has allowed me to serve alongside some of the most capable men I have ever known.

We are not sad about these circumstances because we understand the providential care of God. We are excited about the future, even though we do not know all that the future holds for us. I am not worried about Riverbend's present financial difficulty. I believe it is temporary. I believe that Riverbend's greatest days may very well be ahead of her. I am happy about the opportunities God has set before me. I am grateful for the friendship of those who have loved us. I invite you to rejoice with me in God's goodness, faithfulness and providence. He does all things well.

New BLOG for Our Creator's Hope

2008-07-09T10:02:00.005-04:00

It is quite a privilege for Pepper and me to serve on the board of directors for Our Creator's Hope (OCH). This organization provides grants to adopting parents to help defray the expense of adoption. Earlier this year, we awarded a grant to the Asperger family who are adopting two children from Ethiopia. Now we have just awarded our second grant to a family adopting a child from Kazakhstan.

The ministry has a new blog in addition to our website. Drop by for a quick visit by clicking here. More importantly, get involved in making a difference in the lives of orphans.

James 1.27 (ESV) Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.

To do your part please support our financial grants, use one of our shopping and websearch portals which supports our grant program, consider an adoption for your family, start an adoption/orphan ministry within your church, participate with medical mission trips that provide support to orphanages, and/or join monthly adopt-an-orphan programs.

Colossians 4.3-4

2008-07-08T10:12:00.002-04:00

I would like to request your prayers as I will be preaching eighteen times in 36 days in four different countries on three continents beginning July 27.

Colossians 4.3-4 (ESV) At the same time, pray also for us, that God may open to us a door for the word, to declare the mystery of Christ, on account of which I am in prison— that I may make it clear, which is how I ought to speak.

Stop Monkeying Around!

2008-07-02T10:00:00.006-04:00

Evolution doesn't only address the questions of cosmogony, but also has implications for today if carried to its natural conclusions. If animals are considered to be no different than homo sapiens in the evolutionary process, then it would make sense that rights afforded to humans should also be provided to animals. This is not far-fetched.

There is an emerging group of animal right advocates who are insisting that some animals not be killed and be given equal rights like humans. Slate magazine featured in its July 1 online edition an article about a bill before the Spanish Parliament that would "respect the personal rights
of animals of our 'non-human brothers.'" This bill has already passed successfully through a Parliamentary committee and is headed to the general assembly for passage. No longer would apes (this bill addresses primates in particular thanks to it being pushed by the Great Ape Project) be involuntarily incarcerated in zoos, used in advertisements or in scientific experiments. One animal rights activist is quoted in the article as seeing "the [Spanish] resolution as the first step in a campaign to 'elevate all mammals to moral equality with humans.' Ultimately, [this animal rights activist] warns, "Animal rights activists believe a rat, is a pig, is a dog, is a boy."

Think for just a moment about where this legislation will lead the international community. Soon it will be against the law to eat animals (however, do we really expect law enforcement to haul an antelope-eating lion off to jail?)

Using animals as beasts of burden would outlaw horseback riding or any equestrian activity of any kind, not to mention donkeys, camels, cows, elephants, etc. Any attempt to employ animals in entertainment would be against the law if the animal's participation was coerced. No more circuses, zoos, Sea World, commercial advertisements incorporating animals, movies, TV shows, etc. All of that would be illegal. (You might be able to obtain a bootleg copy of an outlawed episode of Lassie if you keep it hush-hush.)

I am sure that it will become a felony to intentionally kill any animal if this worldview is carried out to its natural consequence. Would that apply to roadkill or must malicious intent be proven beyond a doubt before a jury of one's peers? What about swatting a menacing fly or a blood-sucking mosquito?

If equal rights are required, then will we soon have presidential candidates advocating universal health care for all animals? Get your kids into veterinarian school now! There's a bundle to be made in the near future!

What about driver's licenses? Will we soon see chimps (is it politically correct to call them "chimps?") driving smart cars? Would that discriminate against Flipper if we don't give him (is Flipper a him?) a boating license? How will we decide which level of evolutionary progress must be attained before a species can obtain certain rights? Maybe there will be achievement tests required to demonstrate moral and intellectual capabilities of an animal before such rights can be granted.

You've got to admit that this is all ridiculous! But what makes this ridiculous? The fact that man is distinct from all other life forms - animal and plant - because he is created in the image of God. He is the only creature in the universe that bears this divine imprint. Man, apart from any other species, possesses the likeness of God.

The reason it is not against the law to pick a flower or cut down a tree or eat a steak is because other life forms do NOT bear the image of God. There is a sanctity of life, but only HUMAN life. Only human life is sacred. Why? Because God made MAN in His image.

Genesis 1.26-27 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.

Only in baseball

2008-06-30T14:28:00.002-04:00

For only the fifth time in the past 100+ years, a major league baseball team won a game without getting a hit. The Dodgers beat the Angels 1-0 Saturday night. I love this game.

Advantages of e-books

2008-06-26T21:37:00.003-04:00

Like most pastors, I am a collector of books. Actually, we don’t like to refer to ourselves that way because it portends that we don’t actually READ the books on our shelves. Most pastors love to show off their libraries, but cringe when a visitor asks, “Have you actually read most of these books?” Usually the answer is “no.” We are better at collecting books than reading them. It gives the illusion of scholarship.

Recently, I have been enjoying anew the Libronix Logos Bible Software Library. My current edition of this Bible software contains 913 books. I once heard my senior pastor say, “Because of the convenience of e-books, I’ll never buy another print book.” The advantages of electronic books over print books are overwhelming. Below are a few advantages of e-books over print books presented especially for those who are considering whether to utilize Bible software in their personal study habits.

E-BOOKS ARE EASIER TO GET

In addition to being purchased on CD or DVD, e-books can be downloaded directly to your computer or other book-reading device. There are no shipping and handling charges. (After all, that’s where they get you!) You can begin reading, printing, and searching your e-books within minutes of purchase and download. That’s much better than having to drive to the library or bookstore or wait days or weeks for your order to arrive. You can do this 24/7 rather than only when the bookstore/library is open.

The e-book is usually comparably priced with print books. The savings from shipping and handling (that’s where they get you!) makes it an even better deal! A cost advantage for the publisher that can be passed on to the consumer is the great reduction in expense involved in producing an e-book. There are no printing, binding, or distribution costs.

Because of that, getting a book to publication is quicker with e-books.

For those of you who care, getting e-books is environmentally-friendly. No trees were cut down in the production of an e-book. No gas emissions from trucks were necessary to deliver the book.

E-BOOKS ARE EASIER TO USE

E-books can be searched quickly and more thoroughly than using a print book's incomplete index. Every occurrence of a word or topic can be searched in seconds.

Text can be linked to other resources like dictionaries, encyclopedias, atlases or biblically-versified books like commentaries, etc.

Interactivity can be imbedded into e-books that cannot be done with print books. Electronically imbedded video, audio, hyperlinks and animation can be included in print books.

E-books are printable if you want a hard copy; however, now you can print only the section, chapter or paragraph you want.

Citations can be done using electronic cut-and-paste or drop-and-drag functions in the software. In addition, most e-books will automatically provide footnote and bibliographic annotations automatically in the style you designate.

Font size can be automatically increased in e-books to make the text easier to read. Each year on your birthday, simply raise the magnification according to your age!

Using e-books may actually improve the quality of time you spend on your computer. Instead of surfing endlessly through the blogosphere you can be reading great theological tomes!

Add-on software is available that can transform an electronic book into an audio book.

E-books can be read in the dark with only the power of a device’s (computer, laptop, or electronic book reader) backlight.

You can more easily read e-books hands-free by simply looking at the screen.

E-BOOKS ARE EASIER TO KEEP

Certainly you can save bookshelf space for more important things like that ceramic squirrel you received last Christmas from your Uncle Benny! This is actually a big deal not only for the book owner who no longer needs plenty of space for his voluminous print library, but also for the bookseller. He no longer needs the square footage his store once required holding inventory that may or may not sell.

Your books have never been more portable than with e-books. Instead of taking several books on vacation setting your suitcase over the airline’s weight restriction, you can bring hundreds of books on CD or a hard drive weighing only ounces.

E-books are less likely to be permanently damaged or destroyed. The only way to “back-up” your print library is to purchase duplicate copies. With e-books, back-up copies can be made and saved in a different location or on a different device.

Your electronic library is longer lasting because of e-books. Pages don’t get torn. Bindings do not fall apart. Spills do not stain pages. Again, not only is this an advantage for the book owner in that he owns the book longer, but e-books allow books to stay available after they might have otherwise gone out-of-print. This allows the author to continue to receive royalties longer than he would with only print copies of his/her work. Everybody wins!

It is harder to lose an e-book that a print copy. How many times have you searched for a book you have misplaced? Probably more often than you have tried to remember where your computer is, right?

E-books are easier to catalogue. A book in your library might fit into the biography category and the theology category or other multiple combinations. The physical limitation of print copies means that you have to choose which section to shelve the book. The electronic copy can be catalogued by title, author, topic, genre, etc.

The fact is, these are only a FEW of the advantages of e-books. HOWEVER, in the interest of fairness and equanimity, I will also present some of the disadvantages to e-books over print books (or, to put it another way, the advantages of print books over e-books):

Availability of titles – At this point, more titles are available in print form than electronic. (However, this is improving even with non-fiction titles and popular and non-technical books).

Hardware – It is true that you must own a device on which an e-book it can be read (i.e., computer or e-book reader). If you don’t, it is impossible to read an e-book. (But don’t most of us… especially blog-readers like YOU! already own such a device?)

E-books won’t increase in value as a rare or out-of-print book. Your great-grandchildren won't be at an auction in a hundred years bidding on some obscure electronic version of a rare literary or historical classic. (but the vast majority of print books never become valuable collectibles, either.)

Print books require no electricity or battery power.

Print books are lighter than stone tablets. (So are e-books, but I just wanted to show that print books WERE an improvement over writings from the past!)

Print books are less cumbersome than scrolls. (Again, I am trying really hard to be charitable here.)

Your computer is more likely to be stolen (and your e-books with it) than is your library!

Romanticism and nostalgia – Ah, here you’ve got me! Being a history student, I am a sucker for romance and nostalgia. On a cold, gray, rainy day it just might be more fun to sit next to the fire in a recliner with a blanket and a good (print copy) book…. Maybe.

The preceding blog has been posted with the desire that you will give serious thought to exploring the benefits of using Bible software in your study of God’s Word. If you’d like information on how you can purchase the Logos Bible Software at a discounted price, contact us at Riverbend Church (386-672-1821).

Is your prayer more likely to be answered by more people praying?

2008-06-02T14:52:00.002-04:00

Is your prayer more likely to be answered if you get a lot of people to pray for it? Don't think too much about that question before answering. There's time for that in a moment. What is your initial response to that question?

From my Reformed Baptist perspective, my initial response is, "No, my prayer is not MORE likely to be answered because I got a lot of people to pray for it." God isn't taking a poll to see how many got on board with my request before He decides whether He will answer or not. I'll never find myself saying something like "Wow! If only I had been able to get twenty more people to pray about that, my prayer would have been answered."

Prayer doesn't change God. Prayer changes us, and prayer changes things and circumstances. God is immutable and will accomplish His purposes.

The question then begs: Do I need to get a lot of people praying for my request? Is that necessary? I am on several lists to receive prayer requests from church members, missionaries, ministries and others. What is the purpose in sending those out? Is it to get more people to pray? Why is that necessary of the request is not more likely to be answered by getting more people to pray? Couldn't the sender of the email be just as (more?) effective if she just prayed herself?

What directive can you point to in Scripture that encourages us to get more people praying about a need or request? [For the moment, please exclude Matthew 18.19-20 until you are ready to consider that the context there is church discipline, not prayer.]

I have some thought on this, but I am interested in hearing from you first. So what do you think?

Is your prayer more likely to be answered if you get a lot of people to pray for it?

The Gracious Gaze of God - part 2

2008-05-29T13:41:00.002-04:00

Remember that in part one of this topic, pride was presented as the most offensive sin to God because in the list from Proverbs 6 of the seven things God hates, number one on the list is “a proud look” (vv. 16ff). In addition, pride brings the active, pointed, aggressive opposition of a holy and almighty God.This statement should cause us to shudder. 1 Peter 5.5 reveals, “God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.”

When you step back to consider that puny human beings would ever allow sinful pride to rise up in their hearts before Almighty God, it is incredulous. Yet we do. We are so very prideful. It is amazing the number things about which we become proud. Below are just a few areas where our sinful hearts become proud. These are listed inexhaustively and in no particular order. As you read through this list, ask God the Holy Spirit to point out any of these areas where pride has arisen in your heart.

1. Appearance

In a culture where outward appearance is equated with status, importance and popularity, it is easy for those who have been blessed with attractive looks to become proud. The person who spends an inordinate amount of time in front of the mirror or primping and grooming might want to take stock as to whether or not pride has found a place to dwell.

Certainly, we all should seek to look presentable and use proper hygiene; however, an obsession with our appearance belies the Old Testament reality that "man looks on the outward appearance, but God looks on the heart." Would to God that we would spend more time on the condition of our heart than the appearance of our body.

2. Heritage

Some people come from privileged backgrounds. Maybe they were born into wealth, prominence or some other favored status. This heritage, for which they had nothing to do themselves, can be a source of sinful pride.

3. Tradition

Some people find their particular way of doing things to be superior to others. And, while it actually may be, sinful pride is never appropriate.

4. Knowledge

The Bible tells us that knowledge puffs up. Certainly there is value in education; however, how many of us find those with a know-it-all attitude to be obnoxious?

5. Talent and ability

God has blessed some with natural ability. Others have honed their skills through discipline and hard work. Regardless, of how you arrived at your level of talent, pride is not the appropriate attitude.

6. Possessions

In our culture where one's zip code, ride, TV screen size, and designer labels define so many, we must remember that it is God who gives the ability to make wealth. (Deut 8.17-18)

7. Opportunity

Some have been blessed with opportunity to do things, travel places, meet people or have other extraordinary experiences. These can become a source of sinful pride.

8. Position

Title and position can be a source of pride. One's place at work or within some other organization - or his desire for such a position - can foster a spirit of proud ambition that is selfish and sinful.

9. Opinion

Some view their opinion as the only and always correct one. They are unwilling to learn or listen to the views of others. Pride has made them unteachable.

I have noticed that sometimes people who struggle with pride try to excuse it or dismiss it by explaining it as "confidence." Yet self-assurance can quickly degenerate into self-absorption. We must all be careful if we desire the gracious gaze of God because He looks to the humble, but He resists the proud.

One mark as to whether pride has overtaken you in one or more of the areas mentioned above is to give yourself this test: Do I regularly and often express sincere gratitude to others and to God for who I am, what I have, what I can do and the contribution of others in my life? Prideful people are not expressive in their gratitude. they almost have a sesne of entitlement because of who they are or what they can do. Humble thankfulness ought to be the mark of all of our lives.

Biblical images of Satan

2008-05-29T11:03:00.001-04:00

Question of the day: To what 5 animals does the Bible liken Satan?

The first one to post the correct answer in the comment section below wins a free book.

The Gracious Gaze of God – part 1

2008-05-22T09:41:00.001-04:00

Isaiah 66:1-2
1Thus says the Lord: “Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool; what is the house that you would build for me, and what is the place of my rest? 2All these things my hand has made, and so all these things came to be, declares the Lord. But this is the one to whom I will look: he who is humble and contrite in spirit and trembles at my word.

Isn’t that a remarkable thing God says in verse two above? “This is the one to whom I will look.” Now, God is both omnipresent and omniscient. That means, among other things, that He sees all and knows all. There is no place in the universe where God is not, and there is not a person anywhere – including you – who is not already and always under His watchful eye.

So what does God mean when He says, “This is the one to whom I will look?” Two issues present themselves here. Who is the one to whom God looks? What is this unique way in which God looks upon such a one? Let’s consider the first of those in this edition of the Above & Beyond blog.

Remarkably, the one who captures the gracious gaze of God is the one who is humble, contrite and who trembles at God’s Word. In a special, particular way God casts His loving eyes on the person of humility.

Humility is not an attribute prized in our day… neither in the world nor often in the church. It is often mistakenly equated with weakness, incompetence or lacking confidence. The lack of humility is pride.

C.J. Mahaney has defined pride as “an attitude of self-sufficiency and independence toward God and of self-righteousness and superiority toward others.” He goes on to comment that pride “robs God of the honor and glory due Him. It takes many forms but has only one goal: self-glorification.”[1]

The Bible has much to say about pride:

Pride may very well have been the first sin.
If you understand the meaning of Isaiah 14.13-14 to include Satan’s fall from heaven, you see that it was his haughty heart that ushered in sin.

Pride is the root of all other sins.
In Genesis 3, the devil introduced temptation to humanity by appealing to Eve’s pride (vs. 5). When she “saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise” (vs. 6) she was indulging in what the New Testament calls “the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride in one’s lifestyle” (1 John 2.16 HCSB).

Pride must be the most offensive sin to God.
In the list from Proverbs 6 of the seven things God hates, number one on the list is “a proud look” (vv. 16ff). This self-sufficient, self-righteous, self-glorifying attitude is detestable to God.

Pride brings the active, pointed, aggressive opposition of a holy and almighty God.
This statement should cause us to shudder. 1 Peter 5.5 reveals, “God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.”

John Stott has said, “At every stage of our Christian development and in every sphere of our Christian discipleship, pride is our greatest enemy and humility our greatest friend.”[2]

The gracious gaze of God is reserved as a gift – not for the proud, but for the humble, contrite person who trembles at God’s Word.

[1] C. J. Mahaney, “Cultivating Humility,” Dear Timothy: Letters on pastoral Ministry, Tom Ascol, ed. Cape Coral, FL: Founders Press, 2004. p 119.
[2] John Stott, Alive to God: Studies in Spirituality Presented to James Houston (IVP, 1992), p. 119.

loss

2008-04-08T22:43:00.001-04:00

Just as the ball was being tipped for the men's NCAA basketball national championship game, my cell phone rang. It was my best friend from Memphis, Bryan. I had talked to Bryan earlier that afternoon. He said he was having a big party at his house to watch the game.

When my cell phone rang exactly at tipoff, I was surprised to see it was him. I answered the phone and heard him sobbing. He said, "My brother Phil just dropped dead of a heart attack!"

After Bryan and I got off the phone that afternoon, Bryan had gone to play tennis with his brother, Phil. After a little while, Phil said he wasn't feeling good. They decided to quit. Bryan drove Phil home. They were laughing and talking in a way that reflected the close-knit friendship they shared as brothers. Phil went in the house and within10 minutes had collapsed on the floor and died.

When Bryan called me, he was leaving the hospital where they had tried unsuccessfully to resuscitate Phil.

Phil had been a missionary pilot with Wycliffe transporting missionaries to some dangerous remote locations in Colombia and other South American countries. Phil loved Jesus. Bryan said he was the spiritual center for his family. He leaves his widow, Maritza, a Costa Rican he met while serving on the mission field.

After we spoke on the phone, I began to cry.. sad for Bryan's loss (since August of last year, he has had three other family deaths including his father, his nephew, and his granddaughter). I also cried because the Lord was so kind to Bryan - kind to let him be the one would spend the last hours of Phil's life filling it with laughing, playing, sharing and loving. I also rejoiced that Phil was now in heaven with his godly mother and father, and with the Savior he had loved and served on this earth.

I went back into the room where the game was on TV in my house, but this game that I had so anticipated watching just didn't seem that important anymore.

Wearing Orange

2008-03-17T07:08:00.002-04:00

Today is a great day to wear orange!

This is St. Patrick's Day. Traditionally, people wear green on this day to commemorate the rich traditions of the Irish. I remember in grade school that those children who forgot to wear green were subject to being pinched by their classmates!

However, for those of us who are Protestants, orange is the more appropriate color. Orange is the symbolic color of Protestantism while green is the color of Roman Catholicism. The Irish flag has a green stripe representing Catholics, an orange stripe representing Protestants and a white stripe hopeful of the peaceful co-existence of the two groups. The first Protestant king, William of Orange is the reason why orange is chosen as the color for Protestants.

Another good reason to wear orange today is because the Tennessee Volunteers men's basketball team is the number two seed in the west region. It's March Madness time.

Wear some orange today!

They're back!

2008-02-18T12:48:00.000-05:00

Take a deep breath. Listen. Freshly mown grass. The pop of leather on leather as the ball hits the mitt. The crack of the bat. They boys of summer are back!

Asking Questions

2008-02-14T09:30:00.001-05:00

Asking good questions is a skill that every Christian needs to learn. It deepens fellowship and facilitates evangelism. I'd recommend two resources and one habit to help you learn this skill.

Resource #1: Don Whitney's website has a page of articles where good, thought-provoking, conversation-stimulating questions are provided. Learn these. Use them. (visit http://spiritualdisciplines.org/art10q.html)

Resource #2: Questioning Evangelism I haven't read this book yet, but I have perused it and can recommend it as a tool to learn how to use questions with someone when sharing your faith.

Habit: Collect good questions. Look for them. Read the "10 Questions" article in TIME magazine each week. Use questions as a way to get beyond shallow, surface talk and get into each other's lives.

Studying a Book of the Bible

2008-02-11T09:49:00.000-05:00

I've begun studying the Gospel according to Mark. This will be my focus for 2008 as Titus was for 2007. I am still surveying the book and doing background studies on Mark's gospel as a whole. I have found it profitable in personal Bible study to - when studying a book of the Bible - survey the whole, examine the parts and study the details.

I remember my first major league baseball game. {Ok, at this point the inevitable baseball illustration comes into play.} It was 1969. I was in first grade. My mother came to my school to get me and my brother out early. That NEVER happened! If I had been told that this was going to happen, I had forgotten completely, so this was a surprise. She was taking us to a big league ball game!

It was early April. The game was an exhibition game at the end of Spring Training. The New York Mets were "hosting" the San Francisco Giants. The game was in my hometown of Memphis where the Mets had a minor league farm team (the Memphis Blues). The game was at Blues Stadium (later to be called Chicks Stadium when the team changed names and affiliations and finally renamed Tim McCarver Stadium after the famous Memphian who was a big leaguer and baseball broadcaster). The year before the New York Mets had finished dead last as the worst team in baseball. Who was to know that this exhibition game was the beginning of a season that would catapult them to World Series Champions and forever immortalize them as "The Amazin' Mets!" Ok, ok... I know. Too much information, right? But this is BASEBALL!

I will never forget walking into that "huge" (to a first-grader) stadium. We walked up the ramp and out onto the mezzanine. I was amazed at the size and beauty of the place. I had never seen grass so green. The expansive diamond lay before me like a emerald paradise. We took our seats along the first base line. I noticed all of the billboards that comprised the outfield fence. I saw the press box, the score board and the grandstands. Then I began to see the players in the dugouts and on the field warming up. There were the greats: Willie Mays, Willie McCovey, Bobby Bonds and Juan Marichal. The Mets had Tom Seaver and a couple of rookies that no one had ever heard of: Jerry Koosman and Nolan Ryan. I began to watch these players following their every move.

It was a great game. I enjoyed every minute of it. It began a lifelong love of baseball for me. How wise my mother was to take me to that game (Proverbs 22.6)!

{Ok, thanks for the nostalgic reminiscing. Now, back to Mark...}

When studying the books of the Bible, we should approach it just as I did in my encounter with big league baseball:

1. Survey the whole (as when I saw the grass, and layout of the stadium)
2. Examine the parts (as when I noticed the fence, scoreboard and press box)
3. Study the details (as when I recognized and scrutinized the players)

That's what I intend to do this year in Mark's gospel. Already I have been blessed as I have been looking at the overview of this book. I'll share more with you soon.

To the ends of the earth

2008-01-31T08:57:00.000-05:00

brought to you by TravelPod, the World's First Travel Blog ( Member of the TripAdvisor Media Network )

Becoming a Missionary

2007-12-13T15:21:00.000-05:00

If you'd like information on becoming a missionary, contact me by calling the church office at Riverbend Community Church in Ormond Beach, Florida. We have some free materials for you to read that will help you pray through that decision.

Misconceptions of the Immaculate Conception

2007-12-04T15:12:00.000-05:00

Recently reporter Jim Haug of our local newspaper tried to clear up the misconception concerning the Catholic doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. The article featured Rev. Phil Egitto, pastor of Our Lady of Lourdes Catholic Church in Daytona Beach, FL. The article appeared in the "FAITH" section of the December 1, 2007 edition of the newspaper.

The article was helpful in clarifying what the Roman Catholic Church teaches concerning what is doctrinally called the "Immaculate Conception." Many Catholics, Protestants and others have mistakenly understood this doctrine to refer to the virgin birth of Jesus Christ. However, as Haug clarifies in the article, the doctrine actually refers to Mary's birth sans original sin. This was done by God, according to the article, so that she would be a worthy vessel as the mother of God. I have to confess that for many years, I shared this misconception concerning what the Roman Catholic Church meant when it spoke of the "Immaculate Conception."

The article brings up for our consideration what the Roman Catholic Church teaches about the virgin mother Mary. Understanding their teaching will underscore why reconciliation still has not occurred between Protestants and Roman Catholicism some 490 years since the Reformation. Because of such fundamental differences, the breach continues.

Why is the Catholic position on the virgin Mary so substantial as to be a contributing factor to the schism between Protestants and Catholics today? To answer this, we need to consider what is the Roman Catholic dogma concerning Mary.

The idea of Mary's birth being an "Immaculate Conception" resulting in her being born without a sin nature was not declared to be a doctrine of the Church until 1854. That is, for eighteen-and-a-half centuries, the Roman Catholic Church did not believe this about Mary. Comparatively speaking, this doctrine is a novelty.

In Haug's newspaper article, theology professor Elizabeth Johnson of Fordham University states, "An interesting footnote to history is that (Protestant leader) Martin Luther accepted Immaculate Conception but St. Thomas Aqinas rejected it." The idea of Mary's Immaculate Conception came to prominence in the late Middle Ages with Franciscan teachers like Duns Scotus and William of Occam. Gabriel Biel, who greatly influenced Luther's theology, affirmed this doctrine. Historically it was not the official view of the church until the nineteenth century. In fact, not only did Aquinas reject it, but so did Augustine, Anselm and Bernard of Clairvaux (who greatly venerated Mary). While it is true that Luther never renounced the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, his theological focus did undergo a clear shift away from the purity of Christ and His mother, to the purity of Christ alone.

Where can we go for a definitive, authoritative verdict on whether Mary was born with or without original sin? I suggest we go to the two most authoritative sources available to us: the Holy Scriptures and to the testimony of Mary herself. When informed by the angel Gabriel that she would bear a son, the Son of the Most High who would be the holy Son of God (see Luke 1.32, 35), she responds by bursting into song (often called the Magnificat). In her own words recorded in the inspired, inerrant Word of God, she says, "My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior." The question begs, "Why would Mary personally need a Savior?" The answer is because she was a sinner just like you and me. In fact, quoting from the initial article cited above, Catholic theology professor Lawrence Cunningham of the University of Notre Dame explained that "Mary was saved through the 'anticipated merits of Jesus.'" So, if she was sinless, what did she need to be saved from? She didn't need to be saved from the wrath of God against her sin if she had none. No, Mary the sinful human mother of the Lord Jesus Christ needed to be saved from her sins just like all mankind needs salvation.

However, Mary has become so exalted in Roman Catholic theology that she has been given the place of co-Redemptrix along with the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. In his papal encyclical of 1987 entitled "Redemptoris Mater," Pope John Paul II says - among other things about Mary - that she is absolutely pure and sinless AND that she cooperates in Christ's work of redemption ("cooperating in the birth and development of divine life in the souls of the redeemed") unceasingly interceding for believers. He refers to Mary as "Advocate, Auxiliatrix, Adjutrix, and Mediator." He clearly places her in a redemptive role by saying, "Mary, though conceived and born without the taint of sin, participated in a marvelous way in the sufferings of her divine Son, in order to be Coredemptrix of humanity." In this encyclical, Pope John Paul takes attributes given in Scripture only to God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit and applies them to a sinful human, Mary.

Again, what does the Bible say?

Mary needed a Savior herself. (Luke 1.47)
She occasionally tried to interject herself into her Son's ministry for which He rebuked her. (Luke 2.48-50; John 2.3-4; Matthew 12.49-50; Mark 3.34-35)
Jesus, while never saying that his relationship with His biological mother was unimportant, never made it of supreme importance, either. (see Matthew 12.49-50; Mark 3.34-35; Luke 8.21; 11.27-28)

The exaltation of Mary by the Roman Catholic Church contradicts the Protestant beliefs of solus Christus and sola fide taken from Paul's epistles. Until we can recover the biblical teachings of man, sin, salvation and even of the virgin Mary, there will continue to be a vast theological divide between Protestants and Catholics that makes fellowship together impossible.

May God grant us humilty to seek the Bible for answers to these dilemmas. As Rev. Egitto says at the end of the News-Journal article, "Religion is a lifelong process. I just think we're slow learners." I pray that the Holy Spirit of God will illuminate our minds to the truth from God's Word concerning these matters.

10 Ways to Engage in Missions in 2008

2007-11-28T17:38:00.000-05:00

1. Invite people to church.
2. Go on a short-term mission trip with your church.
3. Read through the book of Acts in the New Testament.
4. Make a list of five people you'd like to see come to Christ in salvation. Pray for them. Seek to share the Gospel with them.
5. Give to the Above & Beyond missions ministry.
6. Learn about the regions where we have ministry partnerships.
7. Adopt one of our missions partners. Pray for them. Write them. Encourage them.
8. Attend Riverbend's Introduction to Missions course the next time it is offered in RBI (Riverbend Bible Institute).
9. Read a book about missions. (I'd suggest John Piper's Let the Nations Be Glad or a biography like Through Gates of Splendor by Elisabeth Elliotot, To the Golden Shore (about Adoniram Judson) by Courtney Anderson, or King of the Cannibals (about John G. Paton) by Jim Cromarty.
10. Learn how to share your faith more effectively. Read this blog. Read a book on evangelism. Attend Riverbend's The Gospel Truth course the next time it is offered in RBI (Riverbend Bible Institute).

For more information on any of these, contact Riverbend Community Church in Ormond Beach, FL at (386) 672-1821.

The Two Sides of Reformation (part 5 of 5)

2007-11-14T22:37:00.000-05:00

"The the Lord put out his hand and touched my mouth. And the Lord said to me, 'Behold, I have put my words in your mouth. See, I have set you this day over nations and over kingdoms, to pluck up and to break down, to destroy and to overthrow, to build and to plant.'"

Jeremiah 1.9-10

This is the Old Testament definition of reformation. Jeremiah, "the weeping prophet" (can there be reformation without weeping?), was called by God to engage in the work of reforming the faith of Israel back to righteousness through repentance in order to escape God's judgment. Let me make a couple of observations generally about the work of reformation before addressing the "two sides of reformation."

First, the work of reformation has to be driven by the word of God. The Lord put His words into the mouth of Jeremiah. It was God's revealed word that Jeremiah was to use as a means to bring about reformation in Israel. It was not technique, program, personality or some other pragmatic strategy that God would use to call His people back to holiness. It was sola Scriptura.

Second, the work of reformation almost always has a broader impact than just our immediate world. Jeremiah's ministry would affect nations and kingdoms, not just Israel. The reformation of the sixteenth century had a far broader impact than the church in Wittenberg where Luther initially posted his 95 theses. Reformation often has far-reaching effects that are broader than those involved in the work ever imagined. It's a God thing!

Notice in the passage above that there are two distinct aspects that are to occur in Jeremiah's reforming ministry:

1. Plucking up, breaking down, destroying and overthrowing

The fact that reformation is needed in the first place means that there are things that are deformed that need to be re-formed. There are beliefs, practices, habits that need to be cast down. Error that opposes the truth must be exposed and eliminated. Methodologies that are rooted in faulty theology and are unbiblical or worldly need to be destroyed.

This task is what R.C. Sproul refers to when he speaks of the "upheaval" of reformation. It means exposing false teachers and false teaching. Many sensitive Christians today do not like this theological "name-calling;" yet, it is what the Apostle Paul often did. (Have you ever heard of Hymaneus, Alexander, or Diotophes?) He wanted believers to know who was NOT telling the Truth and to expose the errors taught by these false teachers. Too often today the church (especially in America) doesn't have the fortitude to confront doctrinal error. Many view any kind of such confrontation as mean-spirited. (Certainly we can be bold, pointed, direct, and uncompromising without being mean... see recent discussions about this in the blogosphere.) But a shepherd has a responsibility to the sheep to point out the wolves.

Real reformation cannot come by trying to build something new around a dilapidated structure that needs to be condemned and torn down. This is difficult and unpleasant work. It radically shakes up the status quo. It demands difficult work like plucking, breaking, destroying and overthrowing. People who have grown comfortable and complacent won't like it at all. There will be criticism and rebuke for attempting such work. Real change cannot occur without this side of reformation.

2. Building and Planting

Some reformers take pleasure in only bombing the rubble of modern American evangelicalism. This is a partial, incomplete attempt at reformation. In fact, it is the easy part. Tearing down is always easier than building and planting. It is not enough just to expose falsehood and carnal methodologies. Real reformers are not just reactive. They are proactive. They are deliberate in building up God's kingdom using His divinely ordained means and accomplishing His work in His way.

Reformation requires an intentional effort at proclaiming truth, establishing believers, building churches, developing leaders, equipping pastors, and enabling ministry. This is the positive side of the work of reformation. Reformation that only plucks, breaks, destroys and overthrows results in a barren wasteland devoid of anything vibrant, growing and alive. Reformation has to include building and planting as well. Both are two sides of the same coin. Real reformation will never have one without the other.

“I would like to see the beginning of a new reformation in our day, and I hope you would like to see it too and are praying for it. I hope you have become nauseated with the tawdry entertainment that passes for the true worship of God in many of our churches and, like the saints of the past, are longing for more of the deep truths of the inerrant Word of God. We certainly need a reformation.”

James Montgomery Boice

“I dream of a new reformation that is not simply a renewal of life but a new vision of life. As long as Christians restrict their Christianity to a religion, a faith that is compartmentalized and isolated from life, there can be revival but never reformation. We need to hear and do the Word of God in all of our lives.”

R. C. Sproul

“A Reformation is as much needed now as in Luther’s day, and by God’s grace we shall have it, if we trust in Him and publish His truth….We want such a one as Martin Luther to rise from his tomb. If Martin were now to visit our so-called reformed churches, he would say with all his holy boldness “I was not half a reformer when I was alive before, now I will make a thorough work of it.”

Charles Haddon Spurgeon

What is necessary for reformation?

2007-10-30T09:05:00.000-04:00

Taking our cues from the paradigm of the great Protestant Reformation of the sixteenth century, we can discover that there are several things that are necessary if we are to see reformation in our day. These elements must begin in our own lives, ministries and churches before they can spread with influence to others. This list is neither comprehensive nor maybe even accurate; however, they are my own personal musings on what must be done for us to see reformation in the American church. Read over this list. then leave a comment to rebut, amend, or add your own ideas. This kind of dialogue is healthy and profitable if real, lasting change is to occur.

If we are to see a modern-day reformation...

1. God must do it.

The Protestant Reformation was not the result of some coordinated effort or strategic plan. Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Melancthon and the boys never met in a back room to put a game plan together to overthrow Pope Leo X and his cadre of cardinals. It was a sovereign act of a merciful God who is benevolent to His Church.

Reformation will come to the church in America only if God does it. It cannot be manufactured in the plush conference rooms of denominational executives. Nor will it rise up from the grassroots spurred on by activist bloggers. It cannot be planned, orchestrated, marketed, or programmed. It will be God's doings.

That reality should drive us to our faces in prayer and dependence. We must beseech the throne of heaven that God would be merciful once again to His bride in bringing a fresh spiritual awakening that will so permeate our congregations as to bring genuine reformation.

We must depend upon the power of the Holy Spirt rather than effective communicators, the latest technology, innovative strategies, political clout, financial backing, or influential personalities. The breath of God must blow afresh if we are to see a reformation that will revive us from our theological slumber and moral malaise.

2. The Gospel must become central.

It's sad, but true, that the church in America has lost her gospel message. We have eclipsed the gospel by retaining the "palatable" parts while jetisonning the offense of the cross. God is depicted as a hopeful potential Savior who really wishes you'd just give Him a try. We have veiled the message of God's holy wrath against sin. Judgment and hell are topics that are taboo in today's preaching. No longer do America's pulpits thunder with the call to repentance of sins. The political correctness of our day necessitates that we present Jesus as an option alongside all of the other possible paths to spirituality available to seekers today. The exclusivity of the Gospel is too mean-spirited and intolerant to be spoken today.

We must recover the full-orbed gospel message. The purpose, nature and extent of the atonement of Jesus Christ must be crystal clear in our understanding and preaching. The cross has to be at the crux of our message! Amazingly, the cross of Jesus Christ is in danger of being forgotten in much of our preaching today. Sin must be made to be understood as the violation of God's law that leads to death. God's justice and righteousness that demands absolute perfection from man must be articulated in the clearest manner. Hell and judgment must be portrayed as the inevitable consequence of rejecting Christ. The glory of God must be set forth as the motive, goal and end of redemption history. All that God has done to reconcile sinners to Himself He has done not essentially or primarily for their benefit, but to bring glory to His matchless name.

The Protestant Reformation of the sixteenth century was about getting the gospel right. It was a recapturing from Rome and a rediscovery from the holy Scriptures of the full message of God's glorious Gospel.

3. Our methodology must line up with our theology.

How we "do church" (please excuse the crass phraseology) is too often today driven by either tradition or pragmatism. Tradition is not inherently wrong; however, when it becomes an entity to itself ("We've just always done it this way!") devoid of meaning that is commonly understood, tradition turns us into automatons. We do this not for any other purpose than we've done it, we know it, we're comforable with it. It has lost whatever reason that first instituted the practice. It has long ago been severed from any theological significance. Oh, we try to justify it by adding a theological tag to it to justify it as being "spiritual," but the identity of the practice is not understoond by the congregation for its theological underpinnings, but its historical practice in the congregation.

Pragmatism is an even nastier menace. The operating principle concerning pragmatism is "Does it work?" If it draws a crowd or produces "results" (we've redefined what THAT means!), then we'll do it. What we're often left with are carnal practices that are at best atheological and often unbiblical.

Certainly there are ramifications concerning the regulative and normative principles in this discussion; however, the point I'm making is that how we "do church" must be driven and determined by our theology. We must line our methodology up with our theology. This means that what we understand the Gospel to be will determine how we do ministry. What we understand biblical conversion to be will affect our ministry methods. What we understand about the doctrine of man and sin will impact how we do ministry. Pragmatism cannot be the measuring stick for what we do in ministry. Orthodoxy must be (Amos 7.7-9).

4. Perpetuation of the bureaucracy cannot be the paramount goal.

In my denomination, too often the energies and focus is on keeping the institution alive. This is not the goal. God does not need our denomination to continue His kingdom work. It is sinfully arrogant to think otherwise. Power, position and prestige (and all the perks that come with them) that come with denominational ascendancy can turn a man from a reformer into a bureaucrat. One leader of the conservative resurgence in the Southern Baptist Convention spoke of the "cause" in the context of keeping the conservatives in power. Is that really the "cause?"

Real reformation comes from God through men who are not trying to climb the ladder of denominational aristocracy. Tom Ascol (a modern reformer in Southern Baptist life) said, "They [the denominational elite and bureaucrats] don't have anything I want, and I don't have anything they can take away." Such a perspective makes a man dangerous.

The goal remains the glory of God. When we lose sight of that, reformation becomes unlikely.

5. It will come with upheaval.

R. C. Sproul once said to me, "Reformation never occurs without upheaval." Now, upheaval for upheaval's sake leads to anarchy. God's work is to be done decently and in order; however, to change the status quo (or RE-form) requires upheaval of what currently exists. We need to be willing to undergo the tumultuous process of upheaval if the hard ground is to be plowed up and cultivated for the fresh seed of God's Gospel to be planted anew.

But upheaval for upheaval's sake is unprofitable and damaging. This is the work of postmodernism. Their view is, "Let's remove the structure that is in place and replace it with nothingness." God hasn't called us to be rebels, but reformers. While the two are often accused of being synonymns, they are not.

6. It must be perpetual.

The church is a living organism with tendencies to drift towards carnal practices. Pride brings us to the place where we think we have arrived. We have our theology all figured out. We have our philosophy of ministry all figured out. We have our methodology all figured out. Everything is neatly packaged and marketable. Nothing needs to be refined, evaluated, or changed.

Not so in a reformation. The slogan of the Reformers from the sixteenth century was semper reformanda ("always reforming"). Like the hymnwriter said, we are "prone to wander. Lord, I feel it. Prone to leave the God I love." Our natural tendency is to move to a carnal, man-centered ministry. Therefore, we must be diligent to be semper reformanda!

Is Reformation Necessary?

2007-10-24T10:18:00.000-04:00

Some have suggested that the rift that tore some away from the Roman Catholic Church in the sixteenth century has been mended. The issues that divided tham have been resolved. They have happily proclaimned, "The Reformation is over!" Their reasoning is that if the Protestant Reformation "is truly a movement of 'reformation,' it must clearly have a limted number of reformational aims, which, when satisfied no longer merits a sundering of communion. So, if the Reformation is not over yet, what remains to be done?"

Others have suggested that "what separates Protestants from Catholics is more a difference in polity and liturgical custom than a difference in theology."

These statements could not be further from the truth. The Reformation is NOT over (or at least it needs to be resumed) because there is not a clear understanding and proclamation and practice of a true, biblical Gospel in the evangelical church today.

The issues that tore our communion asunder have not been reconciled. The cornerstone of the Protestant Reformation was justification by faith alone (sola fide). The other battle cries of the sixteenth century Reformers need to be sounded today as well: sola scriptura, sola gratia, solus Christus, soli deo gloria. The papacy that equalled or replaced the holy Scriptures as the authority of the Roman Catholic Church stands ensconced today. The addition of works as a means to justification stands in contradiction to the theological truth of salvation by grace through faith alone. Even the rising influence of Mary in the Roman Catholic Church as co-Redemptrix (see Second Vatican Council, "Sacred Liturgy," "Apostolic Constitution on the Revision of Indulgences," no.5) undermines the exclusivity of the Gospel (John 14.6; Acts 4.12) and the role of the Lord Jesus Christ as our soul's sole Redeemer. He alone is the mediator between God and man.

Re-sacrificing Jesus Christ as every mass is not a mere liturgical difference. Jesus' sacrifice on the cross was a "once-for-all" payment. The sacraments of Catholicism are not means of God's conveyance of grace.

The differences between Roman Cathoicism and the Protestants are NOT resolved. Ecumenical movements like Evangelicals and Catholics Together choose to ignore the divisive issues that separate them. "Why can't we just all get along?" they ask. The answer is: It is better to be divided by truth than to be united in error. Theological integrity and biblical orthodoxy by their very nature divide. We MUST stand with and for biblical truth.

In addition to the severed communion with the Roman Catholic Church over the past half of a millenium, there have arisen in our day modern enemies of the Gospel: naturalism, pragmatism, postmodernism, and others pose threats both from within and without evangelicalism. We must recapture a biblical Gospel. We must be clear about how a person is saved. We must stand for, with and on biblical truth.

Because the Gospel is under such assault today, the continuation of a theological Protestant Reformation is vitally essential today!

Luther Launches a Reformation

2007-09-28T13:25:00.000-04:00

Art can be expensive. Real art. Great art. Art by a master. So can a building program. In the sixteenth century, Pope Leo X wanted to construct an edifice that would be magnificient in architecture and filled with exquisite art by the masters of his day. He enlisted Raphael as the chief architect for St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome and commissioned Durer and Michelangelo to fill the cathedral with their finest work. But all of this came with a hefty price tag. In fact, the pope basically bankrupted the Vatican’s account in trying to create this monument. Where would Leo get the money?

About that time, a prince in Germany was trying to acquire particular political powers from the Catholic Church. Albert of Brandenburg had purchased two bishoprics from the papal see. He wanted a third (which was not permitted without a special dispensation granted by the pope) in Mainz. Pope Leo X was willing to grant this dispensation… for a price. They negotiated the terms and agreed on 10,000 ducats (justifying this by saying it represented the Ten Commandments). The problem was that the only assets Albert had was land. Leo needed cash. So Albert came up with a scheme.

Albert enlisted the help of his local monk, Johann Tetzel. Tetzel gained permission from the pope to sell indulgences to raise capital so that Albert could purchase his title and power and so that Leo could get the cash he needed for his building project. Indulgences had been used by the Catholic Church in the past to reward those who had fought in the Crusades (as well as those who wouldn’t/couldn’t fight, but could purchase said indulgence none the same… sounds kind of like buying a Purple Heart medal, doesn’t it?). Tetzel’s indulgences provided forgiveness of sins past and future. Nothing else was required except legal tender. No repentance. No confession. No satisfaction or works of penance. Just cash on the barrel was all that was needed. This practice violated the official dogma of the church, but it raised too much money to face objection.

This was quite a capital campaign by Tetzel. He would schedule local priests to lead up to his arrival in town by preaching sermons that depicted the parishioners’ dead relatives screaming in agony from purgatory. “Can you hear your dead relatives screaming out in pain in purgatory while you fiddle away your money?” Like a good marketer, Tetzel had a jingle to go along with his indulgences sale: Every time a coin in the coffer rings, a soul from purgatory springs.

People from all over Germany traveled to purchase an indulgence from Tetzel. Even parishioners from Martin Luther’s own church in Wittenburg went to buy from Tetzel. Luther could hold his tongue (nor restrain his pen) no longer. He composed 95 theses that addressed primarily this sinful practice of the sale of indulgences. His hope was that the area theologians could come together to discuss and debate the practice of selling indulgences. He nailed this document to the door of the castle church in Wittenburg. This act was the simple posting of an announcement or invitation.

While these theses do not really touch on what would become the theological cornerstone of the Protestant Reformation (justification by faith alone), they do begin with the first four theses challenging the church’s view as to what is the true nature of repentance. That would eventually lead to a reconsideration of what is the true Gospel.

Luther was not trying to launch a movement or become some kind of theological rock star. He just wanted to correct a practice that was inconsistent with official church dogma – the sale of indulgences. However, his theses were printed and distributed widely including to Prince Albert and to Pope Leo himself! They initially tried to dismiss him as irrelevant, but the protest took on a life of its own. Other more important questions began to be asked about the church’s beliefs and practices. Luther and many of his followers were eventually excommunicated from the church, but the Protestant Reformation had taken off and could not be stopped.

It spread to Switzerland and across Europe. It jumped the ocean to the New World. It broke from the Roman Catholic Church. It reformed what the church was, what they believed and how they did ministry. It recaptured a true gospel and a biblical ministry – reforms that we could benefit from again in our day.

Is the Reformation over?

2007-09-28T13:09:00.000-04:00

Four hundred and ninety years ago an Augustinian monk took hammer and nail in hand and posted a document to the door of the church in Wittenburg, Germany. In his mind, this was like posting an invitation to join him at the local pub, er, uh, coffee shop to debate (that’s “converse” to you emergents out there!) some contemporary theological issues facing the church. What Martin Luther never conceived was that this simple act would launch a revolt that would shake the world. The repercussions of this monk and his mallet spread across Europe and eventually beyond, and the echoes continued for centuries.

Stephen Noll, who two years ago was listed by TIME magazine as one of America’s 25 most influential evangelicals, has asked the question, “Is the Reformation over?” His answer is “yes, it is.” The reason for this answer is because of Noll’s conclusion that the issues that divided Catholics and Protestants for the past five centuries have been resolved, or at least no longer exist. This church historian who left evangelical Wheaton College early in 2006 to join the faculty at Notre Dame points to the documents published by the Evangelicals and Catholics Together movement as proof of his conclusion that the Reformation is indeed over. Unfortunately, Noll may be right, but for the wrong reasons.

Reformed scholar Michael Horton has also asked, “Whatever happened to the Reformation?” His thesis is that the character of God is under attack (from Open Theism, postmodernism, emergents, etc.) and must be recovered via a new modern Reformation if evangelicalism is to be salvaged. R. C. Sproul has observed, “As evangelicalism has emptied itself out theologically, novelty, experimentation, and cultural trendiness have overwhelmed many of the historic, bedrock affirmations that once characterized evangelical faith.”[1]

Yet in spite of the erosion in recent decades of historical Reformed theology in the American church, there seems to be a recent resurgence, especially among college and seminary aged young people. Despite the accusation that these are new doctrines (especially that they are new to Baptists), the reality is that they precede Luther and the Reformers. These are the doctrines preached by Augustine, and Paul before him and Jesus before him. These doctrines are not new.

As we approach Reformation Day, 2007, this blog will consider in future posts the historical Protestant Reformation, why we need a recovery of it in our day, and what is necessary for such a reformation to occur.

[1] Michael S. Horton, Whatever Happened to the Reformation? (Phillipsburg, New Jersey: P & R Publishing, 2001), xvii.

NEW SEMESTERS

2007-08-31T10:13:00.000-04:00

I love the atmosphere of the academic community. To me, there is nothing like walking across a seminary campus in the crisp, cool autumn air when the leaves are changing colors. The start of a school year signals a fresh, new beginning. The slate is clean. All is new. Students arrive eager to learn and apply themselves to their studies. Professors prepare to invest themselves in the preparation of tomorrow’s ministers of the Gospel. It is invigorating.

Close to home, we watch as students in Riverbend Academy come back for the new school year. This year there especially seems to be an air of excitement in the Academy. The newly expanded faculty has a sense of a full wind in their sails. Students arrive finding many changes in the course structure. These changes are exhilarating and welcomed.

Now we come to a new semester of Riverbend Bible Institute (RBI). RBI was the brainchild of Dr. R.A. Hargrave, senior pastor at Riverbend Community Church in Ormond Beach. FL. He had observed that many members of Riverbend wanted to study further in theology and biblical studies; but, because of family, jobs, etc., they couldn’t just put their lives on hold to go to Bible college or seminary. He decided to bring that caliber of education to the members of our church. Originally called, Riverbend University, RBI is a non-accredited program of study unaffiliated with any academic institution. There are “degree programs” including the Disciple’s, Theology, Leadership and Vocational degrees. Pastor Kent Pletcher oversees this ministry in our church.

The course selection this semester is expansive with nine classes offered. More than 130 adults have registered for these classes. I am teaching three courses: Know What You Believe (Systematic Theology), Church History (co-taught with Pastor Jason Karr), and The Pilgrim’s Progress. The first two are available as audio courses online. The Pilgrim’s Progress will be taught in a live-classroom format. We’re hoping to soon make this the first video online course ever offered by RBI.

What to expect for this week:

I will try to blog in preparation for the weekly class. I hope you’ll come back here each week to look for updates. In this week’s lecture, we will consider why it is important to study The Pilgrim’s Progress. We will dismiss some myths surrounding this book. Key themes will be identified as the focal points of the book. We’ll also be introduced to the author, John Bunyan, and consider the historical context of seventeenth century Britain.

It was my privilege in 2006 to visit Bedford, England where Bunyan lived and pastored. I stood on the spot where he was imprisoned in the Bedford jail for preaching the Gospel. I saw some of his personal belongings in the Bunyan Museum there. I stood in his pulpit and considered the marvelous preaching that went forth from that sacred desk 350 years ago. I stood in the church where Bunyan preached, and I saw, in the balcony, the original benches that served as pews for those who came to hear this Baptist preacher. The huge bronze doors to the church have several carvings depicting various scenes from The Pilgrim’s Progress. The stained glass windows depict various scenes from Bunyan’s life including his baptism and imprisonment as well as scenes from The Pilgrim’s Progress.

I am looking forward to walking with this great spiritual giant as we enjoy this course together in a new semester of RBI. When you arrive for the first class session, you'll receive your two textbooks and the first handout of class notes in a three-ring binder. Be prompt as we will begin right at 7:00 p.m. In preparatiuon, you may want to read the post below on "Bunyan's Philosophy of Education." See you Tuesday night in class!

Billy Graham and Jonathan Edwards

2007-07-24T21:47:00.001-04:00

Encyclopedia Britannica states that Jonathan Edwards is the most brillant mind that America has ever produced. Edwards was a pastor in New England during the 18th century. He was used mightily of God to usher in the first Great Awakening in America. Edwards' most famous sermon (indeed, one of the most famous sermons in American history) was Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God. Edwards was staunchly Calvinistic in his theology and vibrantly evangelistic in his preaching. He was a close friend of George Whitefield (another Calvinist) who was probably the greatest evangelist to ever preach on American soil.

Billy Graham is the most prominent American evangelist of the 20th century. He has preached to more people than anyone in human history. Graham is certainly not a Calvinist; however, early in his ministry, Graham preached Edwards' sermon, Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God. It was during his 5-week crusade in Los Angeles in 1949.

The gentlemen at the Jonathan Edwards Center at Yale University have provided the audio of Graham preaching this sermon on their website. Click on the link below to hear their introduction of Graham's rendition of this sermon as well as audio clips of Graham preaching Edwards' sermon. Also provided is the transcript of Edwards' sermon complete with Graham's diversions from the text.

http://edwards.yale.edu/graham/

I'll share some observations in a future blog after you've had a chance to listen to this.

Family Vacation

2007-07-02T16:47:00.000-04:00

We just returned from our family vacation! Actually, we climbed into bed around 1:30 a.m. this morning. We had a great time! We traveled to New England to spend a week with another family from our church. They are a sweet family, and we thoroughly enjoyed our time with them. They love the Lord, and our conversations often drifted naturally to spiritual matters. It was very refreshing to be with them. I was able to spend some wonderful time with my sons. This has been the busiest summer our family has EVER had. We are covering the globe with our travels (Nevada, California, Washington D. C., North Carolina x 2, Central Asia, Romania x 2, South America). Our only trip out of all of these to go all together as a family was this vacation from which we just returned. It was sweet to be with Pepper and the boys in the midst of such a hectic schedule.

We stayed at a seaside cottage overlooking the cliffs on the bay that faces Jamestown Island in Rhode Island. It was beautiful: sunrises over the bay in the morning, full moon reflecting on the water at night, working lighthouses, boats and ships, kayaking, as well as some intense games of "Settlers of Catan"

We did vacation stuff: eating well, recreating, resting, playing games, reading, touring, hanging out, etc. Late monday night we went to the train station to pick up another family who was coming in via NYC to vacation with us (there were four families all together by the time we all arrived). On the way back to the house, I was introduced to the infamous Rhode Island delicacy - hot weiners. These culinary curiosities are hot dogs covered in meat seasoned with a secret recipe of spices and finely chopped grilled onions. It was, as we say on the mission filed, cultural acquisition. I ate this delectable delight at almost midnight, and was expecting the experience to continue well into the night, if you know what I mean. But it was not a problem.

On Tuesday, Jon and I toured the first Baptist church ever in America. It was founded in Providence, Rhode Island by Roger Williams in the 17th century. It was very interesting. Jon and I had a GREAT time spending the day together. We went to Brown University, an Ivy League school that began as a Baptist university where pastors were trained. Today it is a bastion of liberalism, pluralism, postmodernism, and about every other -ism you can imagine. We ate at a great restaurant called Joe's. We got lost a couple of times. Jon is a lot of fun to get lost with. He's hilarious. We capped our side trip off with a stop for some ice cream at the Newport Creamery, a local "must-stop" for ice cream.

Pepper and the other boys spent the day enjoying the hospitality of a wonderful family we met there. They are relatives of the family with whom we stayed. Jon and I returned from our adventures to spend much of the evening there. Most of the day was spent swimming (pool & in the bay), ping pong, video games, basketball and a cookout. They have a beautiful home on the bay in Rhode Island.

Wednesday morning was spent golfing. I took Zach. It was the first time any of my sons played a round of golf with me. He did very well for his first time out. I played my average mediocre game. But it was a lot of fun. I hadn't been out for a round of golf in a couple of years. I really enjoyed this. I was in a foursome with the young bucks who were on vacation. They had fun telling "old guy" jokes! Who were they talking about?....

Wednesday was not a pretty sight. Jon and I got sucked into the vortex of women's shopping. We drove down Ocean Drive and saw the incredible seaside mansions of the Vanderbilts, Astors, and others. Unbelievable! Imagine the homes of Trump, the Von Trapps and the Clampetts all rolled into one. We grabbed lunch together, and then it happened. The group of ten females that Jon and I were with went into their first store. we immediately knew what was coming next (hours of shopping) so we bailed out for our own personal exploration of seasde Newport. Five hours later the women conceded and we went home. Jon and I had a great time. We went to a fresh seafood market where the ships unload their catches right at the docks. There was a festival of tall ships in town with ships from all over the world. These are the Pirates of the Carribbean-style ships. We found a very old wooden baseball stadium where we watched a couple of youth teams warming up to play. We played skeeball and other assorted games at an old-fashoined arcade. We tried to go see a movie (which we had plenty of time to do given the women's penchant for shopping), but the one we wanted to see wasn't playing there. That evening, like most, were spent playing "Settlers."

Thursday was our 22nd wedding anniversary. I can't believe it's been 22 years... partly because Pepper still looks so young, and partly because the years have rolled by so fast. Being married to Pepper is the greatest thing that has ever happened to me apart from God saving me! I gave her some anniversary cards (yes, cardS... plural: a sweet one, romantic one and a funny one). I also gave her a ruby and diamond necklace to remind her our her engagement ring. (The plight of that ring is another story for another blog!) The rubies are because of the verse in Proverbs that says that a virtuous wife is more valuable than rubies. Pepper is certainly a virtuous wife! I am more in love with her than ever.

Later in the morning she kayaked the bay with her friend, while Jon, Ben and I went out on the ocean on a 55-foot yacht. Wow! It was extraordinary! We circled Jamestown Island. It took about 2-3 hours! Among the eleven of us on board was the former Attorney General from Puetro Rico who is now running for the U.S House seat from that territory. He is a Democrat, and we had an interesting discussion regarding politics.

Friday I took Zach to the airport so he could return home. He went home early because he was leaving two days later for a mission trip to Central Asia. Our family gathered around him and prayed for and commissioned him to share the gospel in that Muslim land.

Later we attended a private fundraising reception for the candidate from Puetro Rico. This was in an unbelivable home overlooking the bay. Wow!

We went from there to the private opening of a restaurant where I was invited to pray. The restaurant owner's brother was our host for this vacation. This upscale Italian restaurant should do very well based on the location, quality of the food (chefs are from a world famous culinary school in New England), and the vision and drive of the two owners. This was a fun event.

The news came Saturday morning that a two-year-old boy from our church in Florida had been found dead in the family pool having drowned. Our hearts were very grieved. Much of the day was spent on the phone speaking with their family members, church members and pastors from Riverbend Community Church.

Saturday we attended a family reunion with our hosts. It was at the incredible home where we had the political reception the night before. the reunion was catered by the restuarant we had attended the night before. This was a VERY Italian family. It was a lot of fun. Kids, grandkids, cousins... a big family! Swimming, arcade games, lawn games, great food, interesting people, climbing on the cliffs, kayaking, exquisite views. However, even at this family event (where most present were unbelievers) my heart was drawn to the pain my church family was experiencing back home.

Sunday we listened on the internet to the church services from Riverbend. It was an emotional service for all who were there and for us listening so far away as we grieved over the death of this child.

In the afternoon we went out on another yacht to view the parade of tall ships with crews from each dressed in their national folk costumes and playing the music from their countries. The weather was beautiful and we had a sweet and relaxing time.

Then it was off to the airport and a flight home to Florida. All in all, the Lord blessed us with a wonderful week spending precious time together as a family and with good friends.

How to Read the Bible For All Its Worth

2007-02-10T22:03:00.000-05:00

How to Read the Bible For All Its Worth, rev. ed.. By Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stuart. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing, 2003, 287 pp., $16.99, paperback.

Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart have revised their popular book on hermeneutics, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth. Fee is a New Testament Professor at Regent College in Vancouver, British Columbia. Stuart teaches Old Testament at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary. In addition to this book, they have co-authored a sequel entitled How to Read the Bible Book by Book.

Their purpose in writing this book is to provide at a popular level a volume on how to study the Bible, but with certain distinctives. Their approach is to view the various literary genres of the Bible as requiring unique approaches in the task of interpretation. These genres require respective approaches not only in one’s studying of them, but even in reading them. According to the authors, the goal of Bible study is to get to the meaning of the text so that it can be applied and obeyed by the modern reader.

The task of the interpreter is to get at the plain meaning of the biblical text. Interpretation has to be done at two levels, or in two phases. The first is to discover what the human author intended for the original reader/hearer to understand. This is the “then and there” interpretation that the authors call “exegesis.” Next is the task of bringing that meaning to a relevant, culturally understandable meaning and application for the modern reader. That is, the task is to bring the text’s meaning to the “here and now” – a task the authors call “hermeneutics.”

To properly do exegesis, the interpreter must get to the plain meaning of the text as it would have been understood and received by the original audience. Careful reading of the biblical text is necessary if this is to be accomplished. The interpreter must uncover the literary context and the historical context. The historical context includes the date, occasion, culture, and setting (geographical, political, etc.) of the book. Of these, the most important is the occasion or purpose of the human author in writing the book.

The literary context provides the answer to the question, “What’s the author’s point?” The answer to that question will lead to the answers to “Why did he say it here? How does it lead to his next point?” Along the way it will be necessary for the interpreter to discover the meaning of words and ideas that are unused or unfamiliar to the modern reader (i.e., measurements, currency, political offices, etc.). Only one paragraph in the book thus far dealt with the issue of sensus plenior which the authors seemed to dismiss by stating, “The text cannot mean what the text never meant.” Though later, when considering the genre of prophecy, they will open the door to additional eschatological meanings

The basic tools that are essential for this work of exegesis are a good Bible translation (actually, the authors suggest using at least three different English translations for comparative study), a good Bible dictionary and good commentaries. Bible translators by the nature of their work have to interpret. Therefore using various translations will shed light on interpretive issues that had to be dealt with in wrestling through the original languages of the Old and New Testaments. The authors spend some time on textual criticism to show that the modern language translations we have today are reliable versions of God’s Word. However, by using various translations in Bible study, the nuances of meaning can be discovered. Explanations are given by the authors concerning the process of translation (choosing formal vs. dynamic equivalence). A helpful graph is given placing the most popular modern English translations on a continuum from formal to functional (dynamic) to free translations. Some of the problems translators come across are mentioned, and advice is given on choosing a translation.

The task of hermeneutics cannot be done rightly until first exegesis has been done. To reverse the order of these two will be to open the interpreter to all sorts of error by missing the plain and intended meaning of the biblical author. Exegesis is the necessary groundwork for hermeneutics to be done.

The bulk of the book takes the reader through the various literary genres found in the Bible with instructions on how to read and study each one. These include epistles (two chapters are devoted to this genre), narrative (with an extra chapter dealing with Acts as unique narrative), Gospels, parables (considered as a separate genre from Gospels), law, prophecy (or Prophets), psalms, wisdom and revelation (or apocalyptic) literature. Fee and Stuart take each chapter and give the how and what of doing biblical hermeneutics with each genre. They give the steps necessary for thorough Bible study as well as instructions on what to look for in each of those steps.

Often the examples given by the authors to demonstrate their point get bogged down to the point that it almost becomes necessary for the reader to forego reading the volume as a book and approach it as a workbook instead. Taking the time to look up the biblical passages (only references and brief snippets of quotes are provided by the authors) would make this book more understandable, but less readable. Yet it is difficult to see how they could have given examples in a broader way.

Two chapters make up the genre of epistles. In the first, the authors take the reader through two examples of how to look at the historical and literary contexts of Bible passages. In addition, they discuss how to approach problem passages where the plain meaning is not apparent. In the second chapter on epistles, the authors review common errors that are made by interpreters who are seeking to take the “then and there” of the biblical text and bring it to the “here and now.” These problems include trying to make the text say something that it never meant to the original audience, making the text say more than it really says, making the text (or not allowing the text) speak to particulars from the first century and trying to connect them to the twenty-first century.

In dealing with the Old Testament genre of narrative, the description is given of them as story rather than history, even though they are historical events. The narrator presents a particular point of view of the unfolding events. The narrative takes place on three levels: the highest level is that where God’s sovereign decrees are being worked out in time, the second level is God’s redemptive work of mankind in history, and the third level is the story of the events themselves with the human characters and actions involved. Narratives include characters, scenes, plot and dialogue. The interpreter is encouraged to read between the lines looking for those things that are stated implicitly. This is not a license to read into the text what is not there. Nor is it an admission that God has encrypted meaning into the narrative. Rather, it is to draw out what is in the text, but only there implicitly.

Acts is often considered the “history book of the New Testament” and is therefore considered in the chapter following Old Testament narratives. The authors provide an outline of Acts that is unique from the common forms of dividing the book based on Acts 1.8 or on the work of Peter and Paul. In discovering the purpose of Luke in writing Acts, the authors eliminated what his purposes were not. Acts is not presented as being normative for the church’s practice or polity.

The Gospels present four accounts of the many dimensions of the one story of the life and work of Jesus Christ. The interpreter must understand the not only the historical context of first century Palestine, but also the specific historical context of Jesus Himself. Especially where the sayings of Jesus are discussed, the interpreter must determine who the audience was: His disciples, the multitudes, the Jewish leaders, etc. In addition, understanding the historical context of the author will bring light to the occasion of each Gospel that makes it unique from the other three. With four accounts provided, it is important to compare the text under consideration with the other Gospels’ treatments (or omissions) of the same events or sayings. This allows for a fuller understanding of what happened. However, it is also important to consider why the evangelist presented it uniquely the way he did. What was he trying to convey by what he included and/or omitted? Each evangelist’s story must be considered in its contextual whole. It’s also important to view all four of the Gospels as a whole. Reading with both views in mind will aid the interpreter in getting to the plain meaning of the text.

The authors treat parables as a separate genre from the Gospels even though the parables are contained within the Gospels. The parables are not to be viewed as some encrypted code for Jesus’ inner circle; but they are stories that require seeking hearts to discern their meaning. This is the task of the Bible student.

The parables take different forms. Some have a developed plot like a story. Usually these stories contain an unexpected twist. Others are presented as similes and metaphors. The parables are not intended to be highly developed allegories where every element has some kind of symbolic meaning. Overreaching in this way in interpreting the parables is a common error that should be avoided.

Again, it is important to identify the audience for each of Jesus’ parable. This will be an indication as to the point He is making and the response for which He is calling. Often Jesus’ parables would point out the conflict He had with the religious leaders. However, the kingdom parables were meant to show the salvation that was coming through Jesus.

The biblical genre known as the Law demonstrates God’s covenant relationship with Israel. God was giving them instructions on how to be His chosen people. It was to provide the guidelines on how to relate to Him and how to be separate from the nations around them. The authors do not approach the Law in an antinomian view for Christians, but distinctions are made between civil, ritual and moral laws. As part of the historical context, the interpreter will want to examine the legal structures of other nations from that ancient period. The Old Testament laws fall into various categories; however, they are not codified as modern laws would be making the work of the interpreter even more vital.

The prophetic writings of the Old Testament are best viewed, according to Fee and Stuart, as being the enforcers of the covenant between Israel and God. Most of the prophetic writings present what God is saying to His people through His spokesmen. Their message was not their own. It was directly from God. It is very important for the interpreter to understand the historical context of each prophetic book in the Old Testament. The enemy nations mentioned and the events described provide a necessary background for understanding the plain meaning of the prophecy. Prophets spoke with various kinds of messages including promises, predictions, woes and judgments, and even as God’s lawyers as it were.

Here the authors open the door to a sensus plenior that they earlier seemed to dismiss. This fuller meaning is used in an eschatological sense and is discernable only to the later inspired writers of the New Testament and not to the modern interpreter. Examples are given to see what the authors call a “side view perspective of chronological events.”

The genre of the psalms must be understood as prayers, songs and poetry all at the same time. This means that they will have an emotional dimension that differs from all other biblical genres. Sometimes they express mourning and sometimes thanksgiving. They are filled with metaphors that must be understood as poetical. They are given to connect men with their God in worship. The authors give several examples to walk the interpreter through the exegesis of the psalm genre. Each psalm is to be studied as an independent unit.

The wisdom literature of the Old Testament includes Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and the Song of Solomon. One common error in interpreting the wisdom literature is that it is so dissected that the context and theme is lost. (Of course, this happens with other biblical genres as well.) The authors spend very little time on Job referring the reader instead to their sequel, How to Read the Bible Book by Book. It must be understood that proverbs are not promises; but rather, they are general principles that apply to how the people of God are to behave and think. They are intended to be very practical. The Song of Solomon is to be taken literally as a encounter between King Solomon and his bride, the Shulamite woman. Reading more into the text than this (i.e., Christ and the Church) may be eisegesis.

The apocalyptic genre of Revelation has its roots in the Old Testament prophets such as Daniel and Ezekiel. While the Old Testament prophecies were oracles from God, the New Testament genre of revelation involves visions from God. The images are fantastic rather than reality. The difficult task of the interpreter of Revelation is to get at John’s original meaning and what his audience would have understood him to write. There are some images that John interprets for the reader. This is the starting point for all further interpretation. It is dangerous to force an allegorical perspective on Revelation looking for meaning to every single element given. Understanding the overview and outline of the book is key to unlocking its meaning.

The helpful Appendix instructs Bible students on how to discern a good commentary from a bad one. Good commentaries provide not only textual examination but historical and literary contexts as well. Bible students should look up the sections of the commentaries that deal with known difficult passages in the biblical text to see if they present the various interpretations and their respective strengths and weaknesses exegetically. The Appendix concludes with a bibliography of recommended commentaries.

This book is helpful for Bible students. However, it might best be read slowly while looking up the many examples that are given and working through the exegetical process to understand the thinking of the authors. In fact, it might be helpful if a workbook supplement would be provided for this volume so that the student can practice these skills as they are presented by the authors.

John Bunyan's Philosophy of Education

2007-02-10T21:49:00.000-05:00

Shortly following the settlement of Jamestown in the New World and during the reign of Oliver Cromwell in England, a son was born to a poor tinker’s family outside of London in the town of Bedford. The boy’s name was John Bunyan. The year was 1628. It was during this time that Cromwell, England’s “Great Protector,” was trying to bring reform to the country. He sought to provide religious freedoms to Puritans in England. He granted permission allowing Jews to return to England who had been banned from immigrating. However, in a reversal of policy he later passed the Non-Conformist Act that required all ministers to be licensed by Church of England before they could preach. No other preaching was allowed except by registered preachers in Anglican Church. This was the world in which John Bunyan lived and ministered.

Historical Background
John Bunyan was an apprentice to his father, a tinker. Tinkers were metal workers, but their primary task was the repair of pots and pans. Young Bunyan had no formal education beyond learning to read and write. (It would therefore be an astonishing accomplishment that this uneducated tinker would write fifty-eight books in his lifetime.) As a youngster he was abused by his father. He turned to what would today be considered gangs. He was a hellion who was known for cursing, swearing and blasphemy as a leader among a group of thugs. Tragically, his mother died of an illness when he was fifteen years old. One month later death came again when his sister died. The following month his father with whom young John did not get along, remarried. As if that were not enough, he was conscripted into the army the following year at age sixteen. He did not want to be in the army, but he had to serve there for two years.

When he was twenty or twenty-one years old and had been out of the army for a couple of years, Bunyan married. His wife’s name is not known; however, Bunyan reveals in his writings that she was a Christian woman. Together they had four children. The oldest daughter, Mary, was born blind.

Bunyan’s father-in-law gave his daughter many good Christian books. Though John Bunyan was at this time an unbeliever, he and his wife would read these books together. During this time they would attend the preaching of a pastor there in Bedford. Through the reading of these books and the influence of being under faithful, biblical preaching Bunyan was converted sometime during his first five years of marriage. He describes the conviction he was under that led him to serious doubts about God, the Bible and eternity. One day, as he was passing through a field, this Scripture came to his mind: “Thy righteousness is in heaven.” Bunyan later recalled, “My righteousness was Jesus Christ. Now did my chains fall off my legs, indeed I was loosed from my afflictions and irons, and now went I home rejoicing for the grace and mercies of God.”[1] Bunyan mentioned that the means God used to bring him to salvation were the preaching by the pastor in Bedford and his own reading of Martin Luther’s commentary on Galatians. In regards to Luther’s commentary on the New Testament epistle that God used to show the Reformer that salvation was by grace alone, Bunyan stated, “I found my condition in his experience so largely and profoundly handled as if his book had been written out of my heart.”[2] He became a member of the church in Bedford. As a twenty-six-year-old layman Bunyan was asked to preach at the Bedford church. It was obvious to all who heard him that he was a gifted preacher with a special anointing. People would come from all over to hear this lay preacher/tinker. It was not unusual with only one day’s notice for twelve hundred people to come at seven o’clock in the morning on a weekday to hear Bunyan preach. Such was his giftedness as a preacher. John Owen, Puritanism’s greatest theologian, would go hear Bunyan preach. Once King Charles asked Owen, dean of Oxford, why he would go hear the unlearned Bunyan preach. Owen replied, “I would willingly exchange my learning for the tinker’s power of touching men’s hearts.” Quickly Bunyan gained the reputation as a very gifted preacher.

When he was thirty years old and had been married for ten years, his wife died leaving Bunyan alone to raise their four children including blind Mary who was now nine years old. One year later he married a remarkable woman named Elizabeth. One year later Bunyan was arrested for preaching without being registered with the state. The reason for his refusal to be registered was his theological differences with the Anglican Church, the state church of England. Elizabeth was pregnant at the time of his arrest, and the stress of his arrest coupled with the responsibility of caring for his four children as though they were her own caused her to miscarry. For the next twelve years Bunyan would be imprisoned. Elizabeth cared for the children. (Later God would bless them with two children of their own.) Bunyan could have been released from prison if only he would agree to stop preaching since he was not registered with the Anglican Church. Concerning his refusal to either register with the Anglican Church or refuse to preach as the condition required for his release, Bunyan said, ““If nothing will do unless I make of my conscience a continual butchery and slaughter shop, unless putting out my own eyes I commit me to the blind to lead me as I doubt is desired by some, I have determined – the Almighty God being my help and shield – yet to suffer if frail life might continue so long, even till the moss grows on my eyebrows rather than to thus violate my faith and principles.”

The years passed. John Bunyan was forty-four years old when word came that Parliament had passed the Religious Indulgence Act freeing Non-Conformist preachers like Bunyan. He was released from prison and immediately the Bedford church called him to be their pastor. The church bought and renovated a barn for their building. This church of one hundred and twenty members was where he pastored for the next sixteen years of his life until he died.

Still there was political unrest in England, especially concerning religious freedoms. Three years after his release Bunyan was imprisoned again. This was because of a resurgence of persecution against the Puritans and Separatists who would not comply or cooperate with the Anglican Church. This second imprisonment of Bunyan lasted for six months. Some think that it was during this second imprisonment that he wrote Pilgrim’s Progress.

For the last sixteen years of his life, his ministry was under constant duress as were most of the Non-conformists. Persecution in the 1680’s in England was intense. Churches would meet in secret. Often church services were interrupted by authorities, and members were arrested and taken to prison. Congregations had to keep changing locations so that authorities wouldn’t be able to find them. It was common for churches to post a sentinel to lookout and sound an alarm if he saw the authorities coming so that folks could escape or so they could cease the worship service. They had to stop singing hymns altogether because the sound would alert the authorities to their whereabouts. Under the floor or in the ceiling they would have a trap door where the pastor would hide until all had assembled. Then he would come out to preach. He would return to the hiding place until all had left and the coast was clear. Bunyan always expected during those last sixteen years of ministry to be arrested and imprisoned again.

On a preaching trip to London, he was caught in a rain storm. He took a fever and died a few days later. The great lasting legacy of John Bunyan is his writings, most of which were written from prison. Among these are Grace Abounding, The Holy War, The Heavenly Footman, and The Life and Death of Mr. Badman. His most renowned work is Pilgrim’s Progress. This work has been translated into over two hundred languages. John Bunyan, who had no formal education, never studied Hebrew or Greek, and possessed no theological degrees has a legacy that lives on more than three centuries after he died. Three hundred and eighteen years later Pilgrim’s Progress has sold more copies than any other book except the Bible.

Bunyan’s life was marked by suffering. All of his writings have the flavor of affliction. He was abused by father as a child. His mother died when he was young. His sister died soon after. His father remarried. He was forced to join the army. His own beloved wife died. Their first child was born blind. He was raising four children as a single parent. He was arrested for preaching. His second wife suffered a miscarriage. He was imprisoned for twelve years. He endured a second imprisonment for six months. Such was his life filled with affliction. George Whitefield said of Pilgrim’s Progress, “It smells like the prison. It was written while its author was in the Bedford jail. Preachers never write or preach so well as when under the cross. The Spirit of Christ and of glory then rests upon them.”

Bunyan thought he would be martyred. Many were being martyred in that day. He expected to be one as well. If that happened he desired that even his death would strengthen the faith of his church. He said, “I did often say before the Lord that if to be hanged presently before their eyes [his church members’] would be means to awake in them and confirm them in truth, I gladly should consent to it.” In fact, during his twelve-year imprisonment, many of his church members were arrested and thrown in jail with him. At one time, as many as sixty of his parishioners were in the jail with him. Bunyan preached the Word of God to them.

Bunyan rested firmly on God’s sovereignty. He stated, “I have in a few words handled this to show you that our sufferings are ordered and disposed by Him that you might always when you come into trouble for this Name not stagger nor be at lost but be staid, composed, and settled in your minds and say, ‘The will of the Lord be done.’” In God’s mercy He allowed Bunyan to be in prison so that his church and the Church might benefit from his writings. That prison cell became a holy chamber where Bunyan immersed himself in the Word of God. Speaking of how God used imprisonment in his life, Bunyan said, “I never had in all my life so great an inlet into the Word of God as now. Those Scriptures that I saw nothing in before were made in this place and state to shine upon me. Jesus Christ was also never more real and apparent than now.”

The great Charles Haddon Spurgeon loved, read and often quoted John Bunyan. He read Pilgrim’s Progress over one hundred times in his life memorizing large passages from it. Of this work Spurgeon said, “This book is dearer to me than any other except the Bible.” Of Bunyan, Spurgeon said, “This man was a living Bible. Prick him anywhere and you will find that his blood is bibline. The very essence of the Bible flows from him. He cannot speak without quoting a text for his soul is full of the Word of God.” Pilgrim’s Progress is rich in theology and saturated with the Word of God.

Bunyan’s Philosophy of Education as seen in Pilgrim’s Progress
Despite being the best-selling book of all time save the Bible, Pilgrim’s Progress was not originally written for publication. It was written for Bunyan’s own personal gratification. In the author’s apology for this book Bunyan wrote, “I did not think to show to all the world my pen and ink in such a style….I did it my own self to gratify.”[3] It was birthed while he was writing another book (probably The Heavenly Footman). His motive was not monetary gain by producing what he hoped would be a best-seller. It was not written to aspire to literary fame. Rather, it was written as a means to engage Bunyan’s mind while imprisoned and to keep from wasting the hours away. His Puritan work ethic would not allow himself to languish the days away in jail. In addition to writing this work, he spent his prison days penning eleven other books, counseling, preaching, and even carved a flute out of a chair leg and supported his family by making shoe laces. It took six years of his friends’ (including John Owen) persuading him to publish it. They finally prevailed, and in 1678 the first edition of Pilgrim’s Progress was published.

Nothing shows Bunyan’s philosophy of education more than the genre he selected to present these truths. Bunyan employs the technique of allegory (which he also referred to throughout his work as similitude, metaphor, parable, figure, type, fable and shadow). The root word for “allegory” comes from a Greek word that means “other reading.” Allegory is an extended metaphor containing a moral message. People and places in the narrative represent deeper ideals. In an allegory symbols have a literal meaning and a symbolic meaning. Others had used allegory such as Dante in his Divine Comedy, and Spenser’s Faerie Queen, and Nathaniel Hawthorne’s Young Goodman Brown. In Pilgrim’s Progress as in most allegories the symbols are unambiguous. With names of characters like Ignorance, Talkative, and Obstinate, the points are clear that Bunyan is making. Bunyan pastored common, working people. He was careful to write in a manner that common, working people could understand. Even the Bible uses forms of allegory in its teaching of biblical truth. Jesus employed this method when he spoke in parables. One of Bunyan’s defenses for employing this method was that indeed the Bible itself used such a methodology. The Norton Anthology of English Literature calls Pilgrim’s Progress “the most popular allegory in our literature.”[4]

Bunyan was roundly criticized for using such a novel technique as allegory. It was the opinion of the day that theological tomes were the appropriate way to present substantial doctrinal truth. He was willing, however, to use innovative means to reach sinners that were hostile to the Gospel. Bunyan would not endorse any means, buy as long as the means were considered holy he felt it would reach the holy ends he envisioned. Allegory was Bunyan’s garment to clothe the truth.

Bunyan is trying to present the Christian life as a journey rather than just an event. Conversion is juxtapositioned in the context of pre-evangelism experiences of conviction, seeking and godly sorrow. But conversion is not the ultimate end…glorification is. The journey is not complete until every believing pilgrim finds his way home to the Celestial City. It was important for Bunyan to realize this for himself given his confining circumstances, and he also wanted the members of his flock to progress in their spiritual journey as well. His desire is that this work will provide a map of salvation as it were. He demonstrates that often people will begin well, but will not reach the “gate of glory.”

It is often believed that since this work is an allegory, its intended audience is children. This is not true. Pilgrim’s Progress deals with some very adult themes including lust, greed, suicide, etc. Nevertheless, its genius is that with the layers of meaning embedded within the allegory, it is a story that is adaptable for children. Therefore, while it is a work that is beneficial not for children primarily, they still can derive both pleasure and instruction from it. Adults will find the greatest benefit from it because they will be able to identify the nuances of meaning in the different figures and types.

The tone of Pilgrim’s Progress is not an academic one. Bunyan was criticized vociferously because of this, but it was not his intention to produce an academic work. He deliberately took a pastoral tone rather than an academic one. He understood his role as the shepherd of the Bedford church to feed and instruct them. He is concerned for the souls of men. His was an emphasis that would emerge in other Puritan works – that of producing both light and heat. This work was intended to reach the mind and stir the emotions. Bunyan believed that the Christian life involved both the mind and the emotions together. Truth ought to convince, rebuke and exhort.[5] That is, it ought to enlighten the mind, stir the emotions and move the will.

Bunyan’s philosophy of education is to be thoroughly biblical. As Spurgeon said, Bunyan bleeds bibline. Biblical texts and concepts are woven together often in ways that are not direct quotations, but ever-present nonetheless. There are direct Scriptural quotations, but there are other concepts that are saturated with biblical truth without being verbatim quotes from the Bible. From a basic level of an adventure story for children with biblical themes to deeper levels that include doctrinal distinctives that only adults would perceive, Pilgrim’s Progress is Bunyan’s attempt to provide a composite presentation of biblical truth. He deals systematically with doctrines such as the Bible, God, man, sin, Jesus Christ, salvation, the Holy Spirit, the church, and last things. There is a centrality of the Gospel in all of this work.

The themes Bunyan addressed are those necessary in every age of Christian education. Every age needs a clear presentation of the Gospel. Each generation needs to understand God’s sovereign grace. Every believer, no matter what era in which they reside, needs a simple understanding of what sanctification is and how it works in the life of the Christian. Every generation’s naturally tendency is to be selfish and man-centered. Bunyan calls us to approach all of life’s journey from a God-centered perspective.

One final aspect to consider in Bunyan’s use of allegory as an expression of his philosophy of education is his desire not only for doctrinal truth to be understood, but for it to be remembered and recalled. By painting biblical concepts in such vivid metaphors, Bunyan is providing mental hooks from which readers may pull these themes and ideas out into the conscience mind again and again. He asks in his introductory poem, “Would you see a truth within a fable? Are you forgetful? Would you remember from New Year’s day to the last of December? Then read my fancies, they will stick like burs, and may be to the helpless, comforters.”[6] These “burs” will remain in the readers’ memories more than would happen with a theological tome.

More than three centuries later, this masterpiece written by the tinker from Bedford is being used of God to educate Christians. The map of this journey has provided explanation and inspiration to countless believers through the years. Written with vivid images, precise doctrinal truth comes alive in way that common people, children and intellectuals can understand and remember. It stands as one of the greatest pieces of literature produced in the history of Christian education.

[1] Grace Abounding
[2] ibid
[3] The Pilgrim’s Progress, John Bunyan, p. 1
[4] M. H. Abrams. Ed. The Norton Anthology of English Verse (New York: Norton, 1993), vol. I, pp. 1857-8.
[5] 2 Timothy 4.2
[6] Pilgrim’s Progress, p. 7

The Present Future

2007-02-10T21:37:00.000-05:00

Reggie McNeal is the Director of Leadership development for the South Carolina Baptist Convention. He has authored seven books including the one to be released in July, 2007: Get a Life!: It IS All About You. He served on church staffs for ten years in various rolls as well as another ten years as senior pastor. Presently, he travels and speaks at conferences and seminars for church leaders. In 2003, he wrote The Present Future.

McNeal states that he wrote the book to provide the reader with “a synthesis of essential actions, an overall strategy, which will help you move forward with those who will join you in reshaping the Christian movement in North America.”[1] His style is deliberately provocative. McNeal believes that the church has fallen asleep and the postmodern culture has dismissed her as unengaged and irrelevant. Therefore, he uses a style that will evoke an emotional reaction.[2] He admits this when he says, “I am writing this book as a polemical volume. I want to galvanize church leaders to action before it’s too late.”[3]

The book is seasoned with what could be seen as a low view of the church. He speaks disparagingly of the church in America. He almost seems to be calling for an abandonment of the church with a challenge to start over with something new and better. While the church in America is anemic at best and more likely, apostate, rather than calling for revival and theological reformation, McNeal seems to want to do an end run around the church bypassing it for the work of God in the postmodern age.

In addition, McNeal seems to present a low view of God. He mentions how if church leaders keep functioning as they are now by asking the wrong questions (and therefore getting the wrong answers), then the mission of God may be circumvented. How can God’s mission be thwarted? Who can stay His almighty hand? Will not the Lord of the Church build His church so that not even the gates of hell will be able to prevail against it?[4]

To his credit, McNeal does call for reform in the church. His idea of reform takes a pragmatic and programmatic road rather than a theological one[5]; however, much of the American church’s malady today is due to embracing a man-centered, compromised eclipse of the biblical gospel. The reformation that is needed is not as much the social engagement called for by McNeal as a rediscovery and recapturing of the biblical gospel. The foundational question that must be asked is “What is a Christian?” According to McNeal, returning to the past is a mistake. Instead, he prods the reader to do something new and innovative in the future. While it is true that whatever the church had been doing brought her to a diseased (if not dead) state, simply increasing the same activity that brought this about will not bring revival and reformation.

McNeal places a high value on individual experiential Christianity and away from corporate congregational community. This is especially clear in his chapter on spiritual formation. He wants to mobilize Christians rather than mobilizing the church.[6] Yet the church is the recipient of the Great Commission. It is the Church that is to be the “pillar and ground of the truth.”[7] His emphasis is on personal experiences. He seems to almost disdain doctrinal training and proclamation of theological truth as a means to equip and mature the people.[8] He states that the devil could sign off on most churches’ doctrinal statements![9]

The church should be transforming culture. McNeal sees this happening through service and ministry focused on people, places and activities that are outside of the church facilities. His call to a missional mindset is much needed in the church today. He seeks to redirect the vision of the congregation away from its own numerical growth to the growth of God’s larger kingdom. Nobody would disagree with McNeal that the church needs to be salt and light in the community by taking the love of Jesus into their jobs, neighborhoods and communities. The church undermines this objective by making members so busy doing work in the church that they are never able to penetrate their culture outside the church.

Occasionally McNeal slides into a seeker driven mindset. He observes that since the community is embracing spirituality, they should set the agenda for their spiritual growth. “…Why not interview them [new converts] about what they would like to see happen in their lives in terms of their spiritual development and personal growth?”[10] Would a mother or father parent their child like this? Yet the Apostle Paul speaks of how he nurtured new believers like a mother would her children.[11] But for McNeal, this seems appropriate for the learner to decide what to be taught. “The agenda is more and more being set by the learner. In the emerging world learners will decide what they want to learn, when they want to learn, and how they will learn….”[12] He prefers terms like “coaching” and “mentoring” rather than more biblical terms such as “teaching” and “discipling.”

McNeal uses a great illustration to critique how we use the wrong measurements to assess spiritual growth. He refers to a fitness club member who goes to the gym, but never works out. The trainer at the gym is not going to praise the unfit club member just for faithful attendance if no exercise program is followed nor is progress made towards fitness. So churches should not necessarily consider regular attendance to be a mark of spiritual maturity.

McNeal criticizes churches that spend huge amounts of money on church buildings when those funds could be directed more missionally. He certainly has a point, especially as many American churches are being saddled with loads of debt due to building programs.

McNeal misses the boat by not understanding the church’s priority. He states, “…the number one pursuit is the development of human beings created in the image of God and redeemed into his family through Jesus.”[13] Rather, the priority of every church ought to be the glory of God. This must be ultimate. Outreach and evangelism at best become penultimate. This confusion affects not only postmodern, but modern churches in America as well.

He draws some distinctions that just don’t fit. He tries to draw a distinction between the outdated paradigm of church planning that needs to be replaced with “preparation” instead; however, the explanation he gives of preparation, is nothing more than a description of planning.[14] He’s forcing a point that doesn’t fit to further develop his argument. In addition, he draws a distinction of apostolic leadership as leadership that works outside of the church to the culture; however, the work of the New Testament apostles was tied directly to local churches: planting them, appointing elders, strengthening them, etc.

His resource development on pages 132-133 is thought-provoking and will be helpful to churches to rethink the way they are doing ministry. This was the most profitable part of the book.

His last chapter is a misnomer: “What I Did Not Say.” In this chapter he tries to take the edge off of the provocative statements he has made throughout the book. He tries to soften the blows he has landed; however, it is a futile attempt to try to undo some of the extreme statements he has made throughout the book.

The Present Future. By Reggie McNeal. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2003. xviii + 148 pp., $23.95, hardcover.

[1] McNeal, Reggie. The Present Future. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2003, p. xvi.
[2] Shock for shock’s value is a common literary technique. John Piper sometimes resorts to this tactic in his writing; however, Piper’s content is much more substantial than McNeal’s.
[3] Ibid, pp. xv-xvi.
[4] McNeal alludes to this verse from Matthew 16.18 almost parenthetically.
[5] McNeal, p. 2.
[6] Ibid, p. 28.
[7] 1 Timothy 3.15
[8] See pp. 55-56.
[9] Ibid, p. 81.
[10] Ibid, p. 76.
[11] 1 Thessalonians 2.7-9.
[12] McNeal, pp. 84-85.
[13] Ibid, p. 91.
[14] pp. 93ff.

The Art of Personal Evangelism

2007-02-10T21:27:00.000-05:00

In light of the church’s decline, Will McRaney wrote The Art of Personal Evangelism to stem the tide of decline by equipping believers to evangelize the current postmodern culture. His desire is to get believers to begin sharing their faith. McRaney’s book is an effective resource for Christians wanting to learn how to witness in this postmodern world and for churches looking for a tool that will help equip members to engage the culture in a relevant way with the gospel. The book begins with McRaney giving a theological and cultural overview of personal evangelism in the postmodern age. He then gives practical help on sharing the gospel with postmoderns and tips for churches seeking to provide training in personal evangelism.

One of the strengths of The Personal Art of Evangelism that sets it apart from other books on reaching the postmodern culture is its strong commitment to the Scriptures. McRaney gives examples from the Old and New Testaments tracing biblical concepts through both. From the theological foundations of why the church must do evangelism to the essential elements of the gospel message, the Bible is provided as the authority for what evangelism is and why it is to be done.

There is also a strong commitment to the local church as the means through which God will save sinners in the postmodern age. Often in postmodern church growth literature the church is dismissed as being ineffective and irrelevant.[1] McRaney realizes that God has chosen the church to reach the lost, that Christ will fulfill His promise to build His church, and that the church is the community of faith to which postmoderns are included when they come to Christ in salvation.

One of the most valuable theological sections of the book is McRaney’s teaching on the “Holy Spirit in Evangelism.” Here he explains the Holy Spirit’s role in using the witness and in preparing the sinner to hear the gospel message. In addition, he describes the Spirit’s work before, during and following the evangelistic encounter. There is an understanding of the witness’ strong dependence upon the Holy Spirit if one is to be effective in evangelism.

For a Southern Baptist seminary professor, McRaney makes some statements that are surprisingly refreshing. His courage to be honest is appealing. He states that the altar call is neither a biblical method nor an essential part of the gospel message (pp. 90-91). This would be frowned upon by some leaders in McRaney’s denomination.[2] In addition, he offers cautious warning and wise counsel on the evangelization of children. Children can be easily manipulated. It is easy to persuade children to make a "decision" in order to please their parents or pastor. Also, churches are baptizing children at surprisingly younger ages.[3] Care must be taken to do evangelism in a way that preserves the theological integrity of the God-ordained message and means of the gospel.

It is difficult to tell if McRaney is coming from a Calvinist or Arminian (or semi-Pelagian) perspective. His book is biblically balanced. He speaks strongly of God’s sovereign work in salvation (i.e., pp. 20, 40, 47). The Engle Scale presents a more Arminian (or semi-Pelagian) approach by placing regeneration as a response to repentance and faith rather than a prerequisite to it (p. 50). Nevertheless, the book will be found to be theologically sound regardless of one’s particular soteriological perspective.

McRaney provides one of the clearest explanations of what postmodernism is, who postmoderns are, how they think, and how the church can reach them with the gospel (pp. 116-122). Though postmodernism seems to be an emerging worldview that is still in flux and formation, McRaney gives definite steps and approaches that can be taken to engage them in spiritual conversations that lead to evangelistic encounters.

The assertion is made by McRaney that there is no biblical approach to evangelism (p. 56). It would be interesting had he interacted with a work such as Robert Coleman’s classic, The Master’s Plan of Evangelism. Many have detailed Jesus’ method of training His disciples to carry the gospel to the ends of the earth as a template for churches to follow.[4] Yet McRaney does not recognize a biblical methodology for evangelism.

Jesus came to give us a message and a mandate, but I am not so sure He came to give us a method. He did give us guidelines for how we should relate to others and guard things that would damage His glory, but as for the biblical approach to evangelism, I just do not see it in the Scriptures. (pp. 56)

Believers need to consider the approaches and questions suggested in The Personal Art of Evangelism to engage postmoderns in conversations about the gospel message. Skills must be developed to be less monological and more dialogical in sharing the gospel. Listening to the lost person’s thoughts, values and understanding of biblical truth is a skill that believers need to cultivate.

The Appendices in McRaney’s book offer helpful resources for learning to construct a testimony that can shared easily and naturally in witnessing situations. For those who are visual learners, the gospel illustrations are helpful tools that can be used spontaneously to clarify the gospel message. In writing The Art of Personal Evangelism, McRaney has provided a helpful tool for churches who desire to “share Jesus with a changing culture.”

The Art of Personal Evangelism. By Will McRaney, Jr. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2003, xii + 268 pp., $19.99, paper.

[1] For an example of this, see Reggie McNeal, The Present Future: Six Tough Questions for the Church (San Francisco: Jossey-Boss, 2003).
[2] Bobby Welch, Jerry Vines, Johnny Hunt, the late Jerry Falwell and others have publicly denounced churches who do not give a public altar call as being less than evangelistic. These men and others erroneously equate the altar call with the gospel invitation. They are not synonymous. The altar call is an appeal to coax people to the front of the sanctuary (or whatever building may be used) to make a “decision.” The gospel invitation is an appeal to sinners to come to Christ in repentance and faith.
[3] Dr. Paige Patterson, president of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, warns that Southern Baptists are becoming dangerously close to becoming paedobaptists because of this trend.
[4] See most popular evangelism training materials like Evangelism Explosion and F.A.I.T.H. Evangelism Training.

AQUA Church

2007-02-09T09:20:00.000-05:00

Leonard Sweet understands postmoderns. In Aqua church he writes to postmoderns about postmodernism. He speaks their language. He is professor of postmodern Christianity at Drew University in New Jersey. His other works include soulTsunami and A Cup of Coffee at the Soul Café. In Aqua church, Sweet attempts to equip church leaders with the skills necessary to lead the church in the postmodern age.

Regardless of the content of Aqua church, it is hard to get past Sweet’s writing style. In an exuberant effort to be clever and novel, this book gets muddled in a morass of metaphors. According to Sweet, “Metaphors are the very stuff of which the mind is made.” (p. 42) Most of the metaphors surround a nautical theme; however, Sweet is not opposed to mixing metaphors at a whim to try to convey a point. Unless the reader is steeped in the ways of postmodernism, Aqua church is a difficult read simply because of Sweet’s style. In addition, the layout design is busy and postmodern. Whether this was Sweet’s work or done by Group Publishing is unclear, but it is excessive. Watermarks on almost every page, incessant pull quotes, primary and secondary font selections all combine to make the book appear cluttered and artsy. Maybe this appeals to postmoderns.

Most of the leadership essentials are standard fare for a book for church leaders. Jesus is our example. The Bible is our guide. Build on the past without reliving it. Be willing to take risks and be innovative. Lead with vision. Make sure that throughout the congregation there is clear communication so that members feel included and take ownership. Work together by building a cohesive team. Be creative. Overly illustrated with Sweet’s metaphors, when stripped away to their bare essentials, these concepts are traditional leadership principles.

Sweet does present some ideas for leaders that are not traditional fare. He speaks of the leadership art of “Vibrations.” (chapter 5) While vision is important for effective leadership, Sweet suggests that hearing comes before seeing. Vibration comes before seeing (p. 114). The application Sweet provides is predictably for churches to utilize their worship experiences to connect with postmoderns and cultivate their interest in spirituality. Another issue that is more rarely spoken of among leaders is the idea of Sabbath rest. Sweet explains, “The faster the tracks, the more leaders need to learn the art of slowing down, the art of going slow.” (p. 151) In Aqua church leaders are encouraged to view rest as holiness, not laziness. When even leisure time has become a frenzy-filled schedule of recreational activities, the idea of Sabbath rest has been lost. Leaders should take time to relax, experience, refresh, renew. This is the idea of Sabbath. The word literally means “to cease.” A third leadership art that is unconventional is Sweet’s concept of intellectual capital. (chapter 11) Effective leaders in the emerging , postmodern world of the twenty-first century will take information and convert it to wisdom by filtering it through a theological and spiritual grid. Leaders are learners. If you stop learning, you stop leading. This is the essence of Sweet’s idea in Aqua church. Finally, intuition is what Sweet calls “Leadership Art # 11 1/3” because postmodernism doesn’t end in a complete packaging and because this last of his leadership arts builds upon the previous eleven.

One of life’s “soft” mysteries is “intuition.” Insights grasped without explanation, conclusions reached without evidence, truths revealed without truths’ rigging –these we chalk up to a “sixth” sense we call intuition. Intuition is the wild card of navigation, an opportunistic leadership skill that can turn any ship into a splendid sailing vessel or into a ship of fools.

It will be extremely difficult for most readers to get through the postmodern gobbledygook of Sweet’s incessant metaphors and illustrations to get to the essence of what he is trying to say. The primary action step this blogger will take after reading this book is to further explore the idea of Sabbath rest – not just to recover from the experience of “paddling upstream” through Aqua church, but to seek to take the time to refuel. The result in many churches is that many pastors are running on fumes long before the congregation realizes it or is aware of the damage that is causing. Churches need to explore this idea of strategic Sabbath rest.

Aqua church will not be a resource that this reviewer will recommend to leaders or potential leaders. It seems that Sweet’s attempt to be novel and clever keeps him from being clear. The “leadership art #8” that he endorses (communication) is not followed in his writing of this book. There are too many other great resources for developing leaders. Aqua church is not significant enough to warrant the time and great amount of energy it takes to consider its concepts wrapped and rewrapped in postmodernism artsy packaging.

Aqua church. By Leonard Sweet. Loveland, Colorado: Group Publishing, 1999, 269 pp.

Our Mission

2006-11-22T12:50:00.000-05:00

God is sending His church to the ends of the earth with the message of this good news.

Sinners can be saved from God’s wrath if they will repent of their sins and turn to Christ in faith.

Matthew 28:18-20 “18 And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

Romans 10:13-15 13 For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” 14 But how are they to call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? 15 And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!”

Acts 1:8 “But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.”

God’s plan is for us to go tell others of His salvation. This is the “Great Commission.” Because it is God’s plan to do His saving work through the ministry of the local church, Riverbend Communitry Church will partner with local churches to evangelize the lost and strengthen believers. Where there is no local church in our ministry area, we will work with resident missionaries or church planters to bring one into being.

Our strategy is not to civilize, Americanize or modernize anyone, but to evangelize and edify. We respect the national, ethnic and racial diversity of our partners and fields of ministry.

1 Corinthians 9:19-23 “19 For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them. 20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. 21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. 23 I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings.”

We will seek to conform in dress, social customs, linguistic expression and cuisine as directed by the local pastor/missionary/church planter as long as they do not violate biblical truth or principles of godliness.We respect the autonomy of each local congregation and the authority of its pastor(s). We seek to partner with them as an indigenous (“home grown”) church. We expect and desire that each indigenous local congregation will be (or become) self-propagating, self-supporting and self-governing.

What in the World is God Doing?

2006-11-22T12:41:00.000-05:00

It is important to see the big picture of God’s purpose and plan. God created all things, and they exist for His purpose.

What is God’s purpose?

God’s purpose is to bring glory to His name. He alone is worthy of all glory.

Romans 11:36 “For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen.”

All of creation exists to give praise and bring glory to God.

Psalm 19:1 “The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork.”

Our lives are to be all about bringing glory to God.

Psalm 72:19 “Blessed be his glorious name forever; may the whole earth be filled with his glory! Amen and Amen!”

In a special way God created man in His own image that we might glorify Him.

Isaiah 43:7 (NKJV) “Everyone who is called by My name, Whom I have created for My glory; I have formed him, yes, I have made him.”

1 Chronicles 16:28-29 28 “Ascribe to the Lord, O clans of the peoples, ascribe to the Lord glory and strength! 29 Ascribe to the Lord the glory due his name; bring an offering and come before him! Worship the Lord in the splendor of holiness”

We glorify God when we love Him and obey Him with all of our hearts.

Matthew 22:37-38 “37 And he [Jesus] said to him, ‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. 38 This is the great and first commandment.’”

But we have failed to glorify God as we should.

Man loves himself more than he loves God. This is idolatry.

2 Timothy 3:2, 4 “For people will be lovers of self… rather than lovers of God”

This lack of love and obedience is what the Bible calls “sin.”

Through our actions, words, thoughts and attitudes we have sinned against a holy God. We have failed to glorify Him.

Romans 3:23 “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God”

God is glorified by calling all men to judgment.

Hebrews 9:27 “And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment”

Revelation 20:11-12 “11 Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. From his presence earth and sky fled away, and no place was found for them. 12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done.”

God is glorified by His proper punishment of sinners.

God glorifies Himself by saving hopeless, lost sinners.

John 3:16 “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.”

God has chosen to glorify Himself by saving us when we could not save ourselves. This demonstrates the greatness of His love and forgiveness.

Romans 5:8 “but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.”

God’s glorious love for us was demonstrated when He punished His own Son in our place.

Jesus Christ, the sinless Son of God, took God’s wrath towards our sin as our punishment for that sin when He died on the cross. Then God raised Jesus up from the dead on the first Easter Sunday. Now Jesus lives forever. His resurrection is proof that God has accepted Jesus’ sacrifice for our sins.

God’s desire is to glorify Himself by saving us.

If we repent of our sin and have faith in Christ, we are saved.

REPENT: To turn from loving your sin and yourself and to begin to love and obey God

FAITH: Confident trust in Christ to forgive you of your sin and to follow Him as Lord (Master)

Acts 20:20-21 “20 how I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that was profitable, and teaching you in public and from house to house, 21 testifying both to Jews and to Greeks of repentance toward God and of faith in our Lord Jesus Christ.”

We must repent and have faith in Christ to be saved.

We must confess our sin and disobedience. We must express deep sorrow for failing to glorify God as we ought. We must rely on Christ through His death to forgive our sin and to save us. We must commit to stop loving sin and self and start loving God and obeying Him.

Romans 10:9-10 “9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved.”

THE FOUNDATION FOR APOLOGETICS

2006-08-15T12:04:00.000-04:00

The task of Christians is to share the Gospel of Jesus Christ with the goal of seeing sinners repent of their sins and trust in Christ for salvation. Many times the heart of the sinner is sufficiently prepared by the work of the Holy Spirit to bring about such a response. Other times the job of the witness is to sow the seed of God’s Word into the heart and mind of the listener or to “water” what some other believer has previously done in sharing the Gospel. Occasionally preparation needs to be done in the mind of the listener before he or she is ready to hear the Gospel message. There may be intellectual barriers that need to be removed before there is any openness to the Gospel message.

These intellectual barriers can be many and varied. The listener may embrace a vague spirituality but reject an exclusive message of Christianity. They may consider Christianity to be too replete with rules and legalistic demands. They may dismiss Christianity out of hand because of individual professing believers they know who are in fact hypocrites. Christianity’s claim to be the only way to God may seem too narrow for them. Assertions that science has proven the miracles of the Bible to be a farce can be a barrier that keeps the listener from ever hearing the Gospel message. The theodicy issue of the origin of evil and God’s part in that might be a barrier to faith. Questions about the historical Jesus or His resurrection might keep the listener from belief.

The work of the Christian apologist is almost pre-evangelism as he seeks to remove the barriers that keep the listener from even being open to hearing the Gospel message. It is difficult, however, for cogent arguments to be made if the witness and the listener are on different grounds or foundations. That is, there must be a common foundation shared by both before the listener will be ready to accept the message of the Gospel witness. For the witness, the desired foundation is to accept what the Word of God has to say in addressing the particular intellectual barrier. Much advantage can be gained by the Christian apologist if he can bring the listener to accept the Bible as an authoritative source. Otherwise, most of the witness’ arguments can be dismissed if the basis for those arguments, the witness’ claim to the authority of Scripture, is rejected by the listener.

Granted, not all barriers to faith are intellectual. Some are emotional. Others are due to sin in the life of the listener that makes him unwilling to hear a message that he knows will call him to forsake his wicked lifestyle. Yet even those barriers can be overcome better when the foundation for engaging in the discussion is the same for the listener and the witness; and, for the witness, the best ground is to argue from a position that embraces the authority of Scripture.

So how does the Gospel witness bring the listener to embrace or at least be open to the authority of Scripture? An apologetic for the authority of Scripture must be brought to bear upon the mind of the listener to help him accept the arguments built by the witness that rest on the Scriptures. How can a Christian apologist bring the listener to stand on the same foundation so that their subsequent discussion is built from the same understanding and framework? How does the Christian apologist convince the listener that the Bible is an authoritative message that can address the intellectual barriers that are keeping the listener from faith?

A beginning point is to consider the Bible’s claims for itself. If the Bible makes no claim for authority, then it is pointless to try to make the Scriptures the foundation for arguments that would seek to remove the intellectual barriers in the listener’s thinking. It is futile to exert energies trying to make the Bible be something it never claims to be. However, if, on the other hand, the Bible does claim to be an authoritative message, then that claim is worthy of investigation in the chance that it may be correct. The Christian apologist must demonstrate that not only does the Bible make such a claim to authority, but that the claim has credibility.
Not all claims have credibility. A claim can not be considered truthful just because it is made. If I claimed to be Superman, the claim cannot be believed as truth just because it is made. Anyone can claim anything to be true, but that does not make it true. However, if there is no claim, then there is no reason to try to verify it because it is a nonexistent claim. Claims that are made are not necessarily true, but a claim never made cannot even be investigated in the first place, nor should it be.

The Bible claims to be the Word of God. Such a claim carries with it all of the authority and veracity of God. If the Bible is the Word of God, then it must be true. If it is true, it must be authoritative. If it is authoritative and a person rejects it, then that person must be wrong. The Bible claims in 2 Timothy 3.16 and 2 Peter 1.20-21 (as well as in other places) to be the Word of God. This claim should not necessarily be embraced without evidence, but such a claim cannot be dismissed without considering the evidence.

One evidence that makes this claim deserve investigation is the uniqueness of the Bible. This book, that claims to be the authoritative Word of God, in unlike any other book ever written. That should pique the interest of the honest investigator trying to find the truth. The Bible is the best selling book of all time. No other volume even comes close. It is unique in that it was written in three different languages: Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. It was written by forty different authors, most of whom did not know each other. These authors came from all walks of life. They were not all academics or clergy. They included kings, fishermen, physicians, lawyers, and prophets. They were not all from the same educational level. Some were trained in the finest universities. Others never attended a day of school. The Bible is unique in that it was written over a period of some 1500 years. It was not a collection of contemporary authors who were all colleagues of each other. These various authors wrote from a variety of locations: pastures, palaces, prisons, and other places. Their topics included some of the most controversial concerning the human existence: death, origins of the universe, existence of God, sexuality, moral absolutes, truth, afterlife, miracles, spirit beings, etc. Yet they agree one hundred percent of the time with no contradictions or internal inconsistencies. The uniqueness of the Bible is a statistical marvel.

It is true that a book’s claim to be the Word of God cannot be accepted simply because it is unique; however, because the Bible is so unique that it is unlike any other book ever written, and because its uniqueness is so vast, its claim that it is the authoritative Word of God is certainly worthy of investigation by any honest inquirer of truth. In fact, the only reason one would not investigate the claims of the Bible upon realizing its claim and its uniqueness is because that person does not desire to know the truth at all and may very well be content to build his life upon a lie.

Upon investigation, the historicity of the Bible as a reliable document stands up to careful examination. It is an account of verifiable events that can be corroborated by extra-biblical accounts of secular historians of that time. In addition, verifications are being constantly brought to bear through modern sciences like archaeology. Modern-day discoveries are demonstrating the veracity of biblical accounts related to geography and anthropology. Textual criticism of biblical and extra-biblical texts is verifying the authenticity of what was originally written in the Bible. The number of ancient copies available for textual criticism and the proximity of the document to the date of the original writing of the autograph manuscript make the Bible’s claim to be the authoritative Word of God very convincing.

The historical documents of the Bible were written by eyewitnesses who actually saw and experienced most of what they wrote about. In addition, they were written at the time of other eyewitnesses who corroborated their writings and would have exposed the accounts as fraudulent if they had indeed been so.

These historical biblical documents that were corroborated by eyewitnesses in the presence of other eyewitnesses record supernatural events. They include healings and miracles that defy human explanation apart from a miraculous divine intervention and suspension or superseding of natural laws.

Probably the most convincing proof that the Bible is what it claims to be -- the authoritative Word of God – is the numerous fulfilled prophecies. These prophecies were made, in many instances, with specific detail and precision. They were made hundreds and often thousands of years before their fulfillment. They were fulfilled in a way that would have been impossible to manipulate or manufacture. They converge in number to elucidate the reality that the Bible’s claim to be the authoritative Word of God is viable and verifiable.

In fact, there is no external evidence to argue against the Bible’s claim to be the authoritative Word of God; therefore, the logical conclusion for the listener is to accept is as the foundation for the answers given by the Christian apologist to the intellectual barriers brought to bear by the listener. His task at that point is to bring the listener to the same ground of understanding that accepts the Bible as an authoritative message and begins to investigate its truth and answers that keep the listener from faith. Upon addressing and satisfactorily answering these questions and removing these intellectual barriers, the witness is then able to bring to bear the claims of Christ and the message of the good news of the Gospel to the listener in need of salvation. With the tool of the Word of God and the ministry of the Holy Spirit (and only with these, though certainly using God-ordained human means and instrumentation) the listener can be brought to new life in Christ.

SUMMER READING - part 7

2006-08-14T15:30:00.000-04:00

Here is some more of my summer reading...

COMING TO PEACE WITH SCIENCE by Darrel R. Falk. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004.

Darrel R. Falk is the professor of Biology and the Associate Provost at Point Loma Nazarene University in Point Loma, California. In addition, he has taught at universities in New York and Ohio. He earned his Bachelor of Science degree with honors at Simon Fraser University. He earned his PhD at the University of Alberta. He has also done post-doctoral studies at the University of British Columbia and the University of California – Irvine. The courses he teaches include Cell Biology and Biochemistry, Human Biology and Bioethics, and is also an instructor in the Biology graduate program. He is also the director of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute.
Dr. Falk writes Coming to Peace with Science with the goal in mind of building a bridge between the world of faith and the world of science rather than erecting a wall between the two. His discouragement from watching so many Christians who were indoctrinated with a young-earth creationist worldview crash and fall from the faith when confronted with what he views are irrefutable evidences from science pointing to an Old earth and a gradual appearance of life led him to try to reconcile both. Regardless of what you may call Falk’s view, it falls under the category of theistic evolution.

The metaphor used by young-earth creationists of God as a designer is a misleading and unbiblical image. God is not the designer of the universe, according to Falk, in the mechanical sense. A better metaphor for Falk to explain God’s role in the origin of the universe is that or artist or composer. He uses terms like “dance,” “ballet,” “symphony,” “orchestration,” and “story” to describe God’s activity in creating the universe. God is the not mechanical constructor of the universe as much as He is the artist who puts into motion the dance of nature that results in the universe that exists.

In order to come to this conclusion, Falk has to do some fancy foot-work himself around the Scriptures. While he claims to embrace the Bible as being “God-breathed,” he never takes much time to define or bring precision to what he means by that. It is clear that he considers it a mistake to interpret the Bible, especially the opening chapters of Genesis as historical events. Rather, they are a “song” that points to God as the source of all origins and the one who instituted marriage. He refuses to use a literal hermeneutic in considering the biblical account of salvation. In addition, while he never comes out and says forthrightly, he does not appear to embrace the inerrancy of the Scriptures. Since Falk does not view Genesis 1-11 in a literal sense, he doesn’t have to spend time arguing about the meaning of the word “day (Hebrew, yom) from the biblical creation account. Falk views the world of nature as an equal revelation of God with the Scriptures. He does not seem to consider that the world is fallen because of the curse and does not completely reflect the image of God nor does it exist in the state in which it was originally created.

Falk promotes a “gradual creation.” The two distinctives that summarize his position and set it apart from young-earth creationism is his embracing an old earth and the gradual appearance of life. For Falk, the scientific evidence for these two conclusions is too overwhelming to be refuted. Most of his scientific focus is on the fossil record. Chapter five deals with the fossil record and these pages comprise more than twenty-five percent of the book. His dating of the earth’s age is arrived at by dating methods that include the distance and light from the stars, the magnetic poles on the earth and isotopes ratios.

The style Falk uses to present his case is understandable to the scientific and theological layperson. He employs a tone that is devotional, anecdotal and at times, biographical. He describes his own journey that led him to theistic evolution.

Concerning the gradual appearance of life over the course of long epochs of time, Falk accepts the idea that life forms were generated and died long before human beings bearing the image of God in their souls walked the earth. The “death” that entered the world through man’s sin was only a spiritual death, not physical death. Likewise, when carried out to its conclusion, Falk’s view does not embrace a physical resurrection of the saints’ bodies in the last day, but merely a spiritual resurrection.

Falk presents the creative work of God as ongoing. God intermittently intervenes in the natural realm in “hidden ways.” If this is true, then how the scientist can do is job using observable scientific methods is untenable.

Like Hugh Ross, Falk desires that the battle over creationism among evangelicals be brought to at least a cease-fire if not a full-fledged peace treaty. (What Ross and Falk would really like is an unconditional surrender by young-earth creationists!) He desires for there to be peace and not dissension among brothers. He is so willing to have peace that he is willing to accept error. He concedes that evangelicalism is broad enough for those who would interpret Genesis 1-2 figuratively and those who would interpret it literally to coexist with fellowship in good standing with one another. He seems to lack assurance of his own position that he elsewhere says has “overwhelming evidence.” If he is convinced that he has the truth on his side, then why not stand for the truth and demand that fellowship be based upon truth? Because in Falk’s mind, unity is a greater value than truth. However, it is better to be divided by truth than to be united in error. While young-earth creationists should not be vitriolic, they should continue to “contend earnestly for the faith once for all delivered to the saints.”

Falk’s argument is weak from the beginning because of the diminished view he has of Scripture. Belief in the doctrine of inspiration does not mean that he is an inerrantist. If the Bible is filled with error, then who is to say definitively how the universe originated? In addition setting nature up as a revelation of God that is equal to the holy Scriptures is another evidence of Falk’s diminished view of the Bible. Falk’s fear of being dismissed by the scientific community as irrelavent or ignorant because of taking a stand for biblical truth intimidates him to accept without question the interpretation of the scientific evidence as it presents itself today. The only way a bridge can be built to the scientific community is by the church being the pillar and ground of the truth that anchors that bridge to the firm, unflinching, uncompromising authority and inerrancy of the Word of God.

SUMMER READING - part 6

2006-08-13T20:55:00.000-04:00

Here's more of what I've been reading this summer....

A Matter of Days. By Hugh Ross. Colorado Springs: NavPress, 2004, 250 pp.

Dr. Hugh Ross is a Canadian astronomer and the founder and president of Reasons to Believe, a Christian apologetics ministry based in California. He publishes a newsletter, Facts and Faith. He has written several books on the Bible, science and apologetics including The Creator and the Cosmos, Creation and Time, The Genesis Question, and The Fingerprint of God. Ross earned a B.S. degree from the University of British Columbia and a Ph.D. in astronomy from the University of Toronto. He spent several years studying at the California Institute of Technology researching quasars and galaxies. He has also served on the pastoral staff of a local church for over eleven years. Today he travels the country and internationally giving lectures, seminars, courses and participating in debates on reasons for faith in God from the Bible and science. He hosts the weekly “Reasons to Believe” television show as well as a weekly radio webcast. Ross has memberships in several scholastic societies including the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Astronomical Society, the American Institute of Physics and the Evangelical Theological Society.

Summary

The subtitle of this book is “Resolving a Creation Controversy.” Ross’ argument is that the age of the earth is much older than six thousand years as promoted by young-earth creationists. This is because, according to Ross, the six days of creation were not twenty-four-hour periods, but epochs of time. Ross disavows any association of his views with Darwinian or theistic evolution. He admits to a literal interpretation of the Genesis account of creation, and embraces the Bible as the inerrant Word of God. In presenting his argument, he attempts to include evidence from biblical hermeneutics and linguistics, theological ramifications, historical understanding by the church concerning the origins of the universe, and scientific “proofs.”

It is obvious that Ross has been offended by opponents who have aimed their attacks not only at his arguments, but at him personally. He writes as one who has been wounded from these emotional barbs hurled his way. As much as twenty percent of the book is given over to a call for Christian courtesy in the midst of this controversial debate. He asks those who differ from him, particularly young-earth creationists, to refrain from vitriolic language in their efforts to present their cases or in seeking to argue against his. The reader is moved beyond sympathy to annoyance with the extent of his appeal. The first third of the book is especially laden with these calls for civility as a reaction to those who have called him names or been – in his view – unkind to him and others who hold his view.

It is interesting that Ross refers to this debate over the length of time of the creation of the universe as a “peripheral point” that does not pertain to the essential fundamentals of the faith.[1] It seems odd that he would spend so much time in this and his other books as well as the majority of the focus of his “Reasons to Believe” ministry engaged in a secondary theological issue. The debate does have important ramifications related to the reliability of the Scriptures, the relation of science and the Bible and even doctrines concerning God, man, and salvation.

The crux of the controversy over this creation debate is determining what is meant by the word “day” in the creation account of Genesis 1-2. Ross argues that through both the context of these first two chapters of Genesis and the broad use of this word “day” throughout the rest of the Old Testament, the case can be made convincingly that these six creation days described in Genesis 1-2 are not twenty-four hour periods, but rather long epochs of time.

He cites Philo, Irenaeus, Origen and Augustine as the primary church fathers who questioned young earth creationism (YEC) and at least leave open the possibility of the creation “days” of Genesis 1 being longer eras of time.[2] He tries to argue that many other church fathers did not address the issue of the origins of the universe which may support the idea that many of them also embraced Ross’ day-age creationism. He makes the same claim with the divines who formulated some of the great historical confessions. That argument from silence is a weak one.

The theological underpinnings of Ross’ argument include the character of God that would be contaminated with a YEC because a universe with the appearance of age would be a deception, a lie... and God cannot lie. His view of divine revelation is that God has provided two revelations: His world and His Word. These two are reliable and do not contradict each other. While he admits that Adam’s sin brought death to humanity, it did not affect animals and plants as they are soulless. The death experienced by plants and animals was part of the created order unaffected by human sin. This argument is necessary to sustains his day-age theory.

Ross suggests that his view that the universe is eternal and the heavenly bodies static contradicts YEC; however, this may be a misrepresentation of the YEC view. Certainly advocates of YEC are not saying that any matter is eternal. This might be the view of the Darwinian evolutionist, but not YEC. He suggests that his view is a middle ground as far as assigning an age to the universe. It rejects both the YEC of a creation that occurred in 144 hours as well as the Darwinian or theistic evolutionists who advocate billions and billions of years for the universe to come to its present condition. He falls in the middle – actually closer to YEC, though he still views creation as taking billions (maybe 10-15) of years.[3]

Because of astronomical evidence that the universe is continuously expanding and cooling at the same time, Ross supports a version of the big bang theory. He argues that this is consistent with the existing laws of nature: gravity, thermodynamics, electromagnetism, etc.[4] The specific arguments he gives are beyond this reviewer’s ability to affirm or refute because of limitations of knowledge of astronomy. Ross spends a lot of time moving into technical language in providing astronomical evidence for his view.

Critical Evaluation

Ross certainly is thorough in his presentation. Every major YEC objection is addressed. His purpose was to call into question the YEC view of six twenty-four-hour days in the creation account of Genesis 1. This he has done primarily by stepping into astronomical observations, the description of which are beyond the average layman’s ability to understand (or refute). He also calls for courtesy in the debate; however, he does not refrains from making a few pointed jabs of his own at certain YEC advocates.

The value of Ross’ book is to try to allow for a literal view of Scripture while rejecting a YEC. The presupposition underlying that purpose may be spurious, but it allows those trying to marry the theological community with the scientific community a place on which to stand. Some validity has been given to Ross’ view by popular advocates such as John Ankerberg, Pat Robertson, Jack Hayford and James Dobson.

It is hard to tell if the astronomical arguments given are a strength to the book or not because only the most studied astronomers will comprehend the technical language. Ross has a Ph.D. in astronomy with additional years of study at CalTech. He certainly spends a lot of time providing evidence for his view from quasars, hypernovae, gamma-ray bursts, globular clusters, helium and deuterium ratios, etc. He speaks of Tolman test results and Doppler-effect velocities with the assumption that the reader understands these concepts.

There are several issues that readers with a YEC tendency will find difficult to embrace in Ross’ book. The first is his unwillingness to embrace the classical Protestant view of sola Scriptura. Ross does not view Scripture as the only certain, infallible authoritative standard for faith. He equates the universe – God’s general or natural revelation – as equally infallible.[5] He does not accept that God’s curse upon sin had a cataclysmic effect on the universe leaving it in a fallen state. He views the universe as being just as inerrant and infallible as the Holy Scriptures. Ross has even referred to the record of nature as the “sixty-seventh book of the Bible.”[6] This is a problem for those that see the Word as being God’s ultimate revelation of Himself. Ross elevates science to the level of Scripture and even re-interprets Scripture if necessary to make it “fit” with scientific observations. Since man who is making these observations is fallen and since the world he is observing is fallen, it makes sense to let the divinely inspired Word of God that is not fallen rule over science rather than Ross’ view of the other way around. Scripture is to be viewed in a magisterial sense and science in a ministerial sense.

Ross is neither consistent nor complete with his interpretations of the Hebrew word “yom” (“day”). He only offers or emphasizes examples of its use that might be considered as speaking of a period of time longer than twenty-four hours, but does not exegete those passages where the biblical text would disagree with (or disprove!) his view. There are other lexical problems with Ross’ arguments. For example, he presents plural words as singular (Hebrew behema and behemoth). He refers to “behemoth” (Job 40:15-24) as a hippopotamus rather than a dinosaur.

Ross argues that in order for Noah to have taken every “kind” of land animal onto the ark, he would have had to have taken every species onboard. He says that the only way to have the manifold species we have today using the YEC view of Noah’s passengers is to promote some type of super-rapid evolution. He dismisses the YEC claims that speciation can occur within a “kind.”

The correlation between the day after the creation week and the fourth Commandment is not a direct, literal one. In other words, man is not to take a twenty-four-hour rest every week because God rested on the seventh day of creation week. In fact, Ross claims that God’s Sabbath rest has not ended, but continues and will continue until He creates the new heavens and the new earth at the consummation of the ages. Nevertheless, the object lesson God intends fits much better in the context of a YEC view of the creation “days.”

One glaring weakness of his argument is where Ross addresses the entrance of death through sin mentioned in Romans 5:12ff. Human death came as God’s curse upon Adam’s sin. Other death, according to Ross, of plants and animals had been occurring for epochs of time. Man’s sin had not punitive affect on animals and plants. However, a face value hermeneutic of Genesis 3 indicates that the first animal to die was killed by God in order to provide coverings for Adam and Eve. This must have been a horrific thing for Adam and Eve to witness and spoke to the gravity of their wickedness. Sin is so awful that the blood of an innocent is required.

As mentioned above, Ross rallies patristic support of his view by quoting some who are unclear as to what “day” means in Genesis 1. That is, they are merely open to Ross’ view, not advocates of it. Other church fathers who did not speak or write on the origins of the universe were, according to Ross, probably supporters of his view. This argument from silence is weak.

To create a universe with the appearance of age makes God a deceptive liar in Ross’ view. However, does he think that God created Adam as a zygote or an infant rather than as a fully mature man? While we may never know if Adam had a belly button, we do have every textual indication that Adam was created with fully functioning maturity. This was not deceptive in that God never said otherwise. In fact, we are told how He made man and woman. He did not create some myth or lie to deceive them. Nor did Adam and Eve look around the garden and doubt that it had all just been created a few days ago because they believed the word of God.

There are other problems with Ross’ view that YEC would have problems reconciling with Scripture. For example, the idea of a universal flood is applicable in Ross’ scheme only through intent, not extent. That is, it affected all of mankind, but not necessarily all the planet. The idea of carnivorous diets not occurring until after the fall of man is foreign to Ross’ paradigm. He finds his view of creation compatible with a form of the big bang theory. His interpretation of the fossil record eisegetes into it a preconceived bias against YEC.

Ross is articulate and his knowledge of astronomy can be intimidating to a layman; however his arguments are built upon a faulty view of the Bible, God’s character, the nature of man and animals as well as other epistemological difficulties. While he occasionally puts the YEC view on its heels, he doesn’t score the knockout punch he had hoped for with this book.

[1] Ross, p. 15.
[2] Ibid, pp. 42-46.
[3] Ibid, pp. 121-2.
[4] Ibid, p. 144.
[5] Ibid, pp. 88-90.
[6] Ross, Hugh. Creation and Time, NavPress, Colorado Springs, p. 56, 1994. See also Staley Lecture Series, Toccoa Falls College, March 1997.

SUMMER READING - part 5

2006-08-09T16:41:00.000-04:00

More summer reading...

Faith, Form, and Time. by Kurt Wise. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2002, 287 pp.

Dr. Kurt Wise has been the Associate Professor of Science at Bryan College. Bryan College is located in Dayton, Tennessee, home of the famous Scopes Monkey Trial of the 1920’s which focused the nation’s attention on the issue of Creationism verses evolution. In 1989 Bryan College founded the Center for Origin Research (CORE) to foster study and scholarship concerning the study of origins. CORE produces a scholarly journal, curriculum, makes presentations, provides data and shares research with others doing study on origins. (http://www.bryan.edu/core.html)

Wise is affiliated with several scientific associations including the Creation Research Society, the Paleontology Society and the Geological Society of America. He has written chapters for several books on Creationism dealing usually with geology or paleontology. In addition, he has produced Creationism curriculum including video series and Bible studies. His areas of expertise include biosystematics, cave science, creation theory, Evolution theory, geology, paleontology, and the philosophy of science. (www.bryan.edu/344.html)

He studied at the University of Chicago earning a B.A. in the Department of Geophysical Sciences. He studied at Harvard under the professorship of Stephen Jay Gould where he earned both his Master’s and PhD. (book jacket: Faith, Form, and Time) Dr. Wise has recently accepted a faculty position at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville as Professor of Theology and Science.

Summary

The subtitle of this book is “What the Bible Teaches and Science Confirms About creation and the Age of the Universe.” The premise Wise is seeking to defend is that the universe God created is only about six thousand years old as opposed to millions or billions of years as is popular in most scientific circles today (p. 52). This premise is called “young-age creationism” (p. xii). To make his argument, Wise divides the book into five parts. The first two parts (chapters 1-5) lay down the ground rules for considering the other parts. The remainder of the book (parts 3-5 that include chapters 6-16) follow the major epochs of biblical history allowing the biblical text to explain the evidence from that era for a young-age creationism.

In Part 1: God’s Word on the Matter, Wise presents his presuppositional position that the Bible has to be the authority for what we believe about the origins of the universe. To understand the specifics of the origins of the universe, it is important to get the account of an eyewitness. Since no man existed at the time of the universe’s origin, then the only eyewitness is God. He has communicated information to us in His Word, the bible, concerning that origin. This is the truth about the origins of the universe. Because of man’s sinfulness, he is constantly suppressing the truth of God for a lie (Romans 1.18-20). Therefore God presents his truth with an “intentional ambiguity” so that man has to come to God by faith rather that by his rationale (Hebrews 11.3). Doubting that all of his readers will so ready to embrace the authority of the Bible as the authoritative Word of God, Wise provides an apologetic for the inspirations and authority of the Bible. Part 1 concludes with Wise giving a parameter of how we are to do science by giving the presuppositions and ethics involved in the discipline of the physical sciences.

Having established his view of the Bible as being authoritative on the issue of origins and as the underlying basis for studying the physical sciences, the Wise moves on to detail how dating of matter should be done in the physical sciences in Part 2: The Dating Game. Presupposing that God created the universe (Wise does not spend time on the philosophical arguments for God and His existence: ontological, cosmological, teleological, and moral), the questions is posed, “How long did it take God to create the universe?” The biblical account of creation approaches the events as historical, not allegorical. This historical account claims a six-day creation of twenty-four hour days. The Bible offers genealogies at significant points in the biblical narrative allowing us to calculate the dating from the origin of the universe (Genesis 5 and 11, Exodus 6). Wise advocates, “The fact that a complete creation-to-Christ chronology can be developed from the biblical text suggests that it was written so that such a chronology could be developed.” (p. 52) Finally, reconciling the revelation of a young-age creation from Scriptures and the appearance of a much older creation from observing the physical universe requires acceptance of the reality that God created the universe as already mature.

In Part 3: Creation Week Wise proposes that the universe was created so that man could exist. God’s purpose was to glorify Himself by creating man and saving him. The universe had to be designed in such a way as to sustain human life. Natural laws such as gravity, electromagnetic force, molecular structure, photosynthesis, etc. were put in place by God so that human life could exist. Without these laws operating, human life on earth would be impossible. Because the universe involves the dimensions of matter, space and time, the Creator must be beyond those – that is, immaterial, omnipresent and immanent, and eternal. The atheistic theory of the Big Bang is dismissed because, among other reasons, of the length of time necessary for it to occur. Wise uses the concepts of baramim, holobaramim, apobaramim, and monobaramim to explain the expansion of species beyond what was originally created in the Garden of Eden. This section takes up the largest portion of the book.

Wise speculates in Part 4: From the Garden to the Grave that Adam and Eve were in the Garden of Eden for seventy to one hundred years before the Fall into sin. Possibly the continents were much closer together if not joined. The impact of the Fall upon the physical universe is, according to Wise, of catastrophic proportions (much more than this reviewer ever considered!). Incidentally, it was not angelic sin that brought this curse, but man’s sin. This seems to underscore Wise’s anthropic view of the purpose for the created universe. Wise points out, “The curse was specifically a response to the sin of man. And notice that it was a response to their sin, not a direct result of it.” (p. 158) As a result of God’s response of curse upon the universe, the earth began to “wax old like a garment” (Psalm 102.26) and “groans and travails” (Romans 8.21-22). Death entered the world through sin. Genetic mutation, disease, natural selection, thorns, and carnivory are all results of God’s curse upon the universe in response to man’s sin. Man would have to live off the earth only through toil and labor. Animals would be killed by man for sacrifices and food making the beasts fearful of man. Suffering came to man through painful childbirth, disease, abuse and death. The guilt and shame of man’s sin necessitated that he cover his naked body.

During this era before the Flood human lifespans were regularly over nine centuries! Dinosaurs that had been created on Day Six of Creation Week co-existed with man. The Flood would bring another global (and according to Wise, even universal) upheaval to the world. This is the focus of Part 5: From Noah to the New Earth. The Scriptures are clear that the Flood was global and not merely localized. Wise gives carefully reasoned and biblical proofs for asserting a global Flood (pp. 179-181). The effects of the Flood upon the Earth were tumultuous. It affected the sea-floor and tectonic plates under the mantle of the Earth. It established the geological and fossil records. It probably involved continental drifts. Wise discusses that diluvium impact may also involve the moon, magnetic fields of the planets, the surface of Venus and possibly Mars. Dramatic climate changes that created deserts and gorged canyons into the Earth’s surface were a result of the Flood. In fact, Wise purports, the Earth is still actively recovering today from the effects of the Flood (p. 210). Earthquakes – the earth’s surface correcting itself from the upheaval of the Flood -- are an example of this as are volcanoes. High volumes of post-Flood precipitation began effects on the Earth that continue today including, but not limited to, soil erosion and the creation of lakes. Finally, Wise uses the biblical Babel account to explain the beginnings of languages, cultures, and even races.

Critical Evaluation

It seems that Wise does a better job at recounting the biblical epochs and the affects of Creation, the Fall and the Flood upon the universe than he does in presenting clear-cut arguments for young-age creationism. The insights from the historical biblical record help to explain what man has observed in the physical universe concerning the Earth’s experience and results from these events. Yet Wise offers few arguments as an apologetic for his premise. It is as though young-age creationism is presupposed for the sake of this study rather than being argued for throughout the book.

The book is a valuable survey of the biblical record through the first eleven chapters of Genesis as it concerns the study of origins. As Kay Arthur states in review of this book, “…this book causes its reader to stand in awe of God and assures him he can truly take God at His Word from Genesis 1:1 on – without apology or embarrassment in the face of those who believe otherwise.” (inside leaf)

One of the great strengths of Wise’s book is to explain the catastrophic effects of the Fall and the Flood upon the physical planet man lives on. It is interesting to consider that these events are continuing to have effects upon the planet even today. In addition, it was provocative to consider that the Flood may have had impact beyond this planet…even to Venus and Mars.

Wise also makes a valuable contribution with his explanation of how we are to do science and the ethics that should be involved in this discipline of study. He offers a philosophy of doing science and causes the reader to consider why and how to approach this as well as any other discipline.

There are parts of the book that get bogged down in what to the lay reader may appear to be scientific minutia. Sometimes Wise’s explanations go deeper than the non-science student can travel. Without an extensive background in the physical sciences, some of his explanations become tedious. This is especially true with his explanations concerning bacteria and also the baramim.

Some of what Wise writes challenges the thinking of the reader. This reviewer found himself challenged to consider new ideas as well as to look at some beliefs in anew light. For example, Wise’s concept of the biblical revelation being given to man with “intentional ambiguity” was a provocative idea. Certainly the major premise is true that God’s revelation of Himself to man through creation, conscience and even Scripture is not the totality of truth. There are some things that the Lord has chosen not to reveal for whatever reason. (Deuteronomy 29:29) In addition, some things that he has revealed are explained only partially or without complete detail (i.e., the exact timing of Christ’s return). Wise’s minor premise that God desires (and even demands) that men come to Him on the basis of faith and not reason alone also is true. (Hebrews 11.3, 6) However, does it naturally follow that God has therefore given His revelation in a form that is “intentionally ambiguous” to restrict man from coming to God solely on the basis of reason?

The fact that God created the earth mature and fully functioning includes some realities this reviewer had never considered before reading them in this work by Wise. For example, with light traveling at a specific speed and the stars from which that light emanates being a specific distance from the earth, then some of the light that is reaching men’s eyes today left that particular star at the time of Adam or the Creation. The cycle of soil production coming as it does from the process of erosion would have to be put into place as a functioning operation at the moment of creation for mature plants to reproduce. Adult animals would have to be created with full knowledge so that they would not have to learn how to walk, fly, swim, eat, reproduce, scavenge, etc. Other aspects of this were beyond this reviewer’s full understanding but included mature earth issues related to supernova, comets, solar dust, earth’s magnetic field, and volcanic lava.

There were other ideas that were new to this reader. Previous teaching on origins and the Flood has always indicated that there had never been rain before the Flood. Wise suggests otherwise (p. 151). The idea that “life” is possessed only by man and animals, because plants are never spoken of as dying was new to this reviewer. This book will certainly stretch the reader to consider new ideas.

Wise humbly submits that this is not the definitive word on young-age creationism. He urges others to continue research in this field of science and even suggests areas where further research is needed. He produces this book only as a beginning point to consider young-age earth creationism. May others come behind and continue the study of the universe God has created.

SUMMER READING - part 4

2006-08-08T22:13:00.000-04:00

Here's more of what I've been reading this summer...

Wright, Tom. The Resurrection of the Son of God. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003.

Summary

Wright’s 817-page book began as a seventy-page final chapter of volume two in this series; however, the publisher had already printed the cover that was too thin to include the chapter. As began to develop it further, it mushroomed into this monumental tome. It is thorough, well-researched, organized, comprehensive and even, at times, tedious in its presentation. Wright gives a strong defense for the literal, physical, visible, bodily resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ on the first Easter. In it Wright addresses every major objection that have been raised by skeptics through the years concerning the resurrection of Jesus including whether it is even important at all.

The essence of the book is to determine what happened on Easter. Did Jesus Christ really rise from the dead, and, if He did, what is meant by that? Wright’s argument is that the early church would not have exploded in growth as it did if the central tenet of its faith was not true. If it was just the influence of Jesus that lived on, and not His physical body, then the movement would never have gained the immediate, rapid momentum it did. The disciples would not have risked everything including their lives if Jesus was still dead.

According to Wright, the two most compelling arguments that necessitate (more about this word later) the resurrection of Jesus are the missing body of Jesus from the garden tomb and the appearances by Jesus to His followers after His crucifixion. Therefore, he tries discover the first century believers’ understanding of what happened to Jesus and how legitimate is that understanding.

The target of his argument is the liberal theologian who would refute the resurrection of Jesus by saying that the early Christians didn’t mean by “resurrection” what modern evangelicals are trying to force them to mean. They had a different understanding of resurrection when they used the term concerning Jesus. He argues against the liberal view that the Apostle Paul believed only in a spiritual resurrection of Jesus, never a physical one. He refutes the idea that the early Christians beliefs in the missing body and the post-resurrection appearances were later concoctions produced to bring validity to their movement. This was accomplished by the writing of the Gospel narratives written decades after the crucifixion of Christ. He argues against those who would say that the post-resurrection appearances must be understood as religious experiences and not literal encounters with the person of Jesus.

The book begins with an examination of what pagans and Judaism believed about death and any existence after it. Then an in-depth look is taken at the New Testament writings of the Apostle Paul concerning the resurrection, especially focusing on the letters to the church at Corinth and zeroing in on 1 Corinthians 15 and 2 Corinthians 4. Then the other New Testament references to the resurrection are considered as well as the understanding of the resurrection by the early church fathers. Only then does Wright bring the reader to a consideration of the Gospel narrative accounts of the resurrection. He concludes by looking at the resurrection’s meaning as an historical event as well as its theological implications.

In addition to the Old Testament, Wright takes the reader through Plato, Homer, and others to discover their understanding of death and life after it. Apart from the Jews, the common understanding was an impossibility of any kind of resurrection from the dead. Death was often considered as a release of the spirit being from the imprisonment which the body enforced. Resurrection, then, would not only be impossible, but undesirable. To these pagans, the road to death only ran one way.[1] Jewish thought kept open the idea of resurrection, but it was not a fully developed concept. At first Judaism viewed resurrection as a restoration of Israel. Only later did it come to be understood as a bodily return from the dead. Within Judaism there was a spectrum of belief about resurrection. The Sadducees denied the supernatural, miracles, angels and any belief in the resurrection; however, the majority of Jews held to a physical understanding of the resurrection of the body.

In part two, Wright moves to the Christian understanding of the resurrection. He begins with the Apostle Paul who produced the first Christian writings of the New Testament. Paul makes several strong statements that point to a physical understanding of the resurrection[2] In his careful study of 1 Corinthians 15, Wright makes it clear that Paul never thought of the resurrection of Jesus as only an ethereal resurrection, but a bodily one.[3]

The Gospel narratives are put off until later in Wright’s argument for the reason that they are considered to be so controversial, so the next part of his book looks at the rest of the non-Pauline, non-Gospel writings as well as early Christian writings going into the third century. Most of the New Testament passages that refer to the resurrection are examined with a more detailed consideration given to passages that are difficult to interpret.[4] In the extra-canonical writings of the early fathers, the earliest writings embrace a bodily resurrection; however, there are some writers who seem to oppose the idea of resurrection as physical.[5] Nonetheless, Wright makes the point that the idea of resurrection as physical and bodily was an idea that appeared early in the Christian church as opposed to being a later innovation.

Finally Wright comes to the Gospel narratives. He demonstrates that these are not literary inventions but historical accounts of the events they describe. One evidence given is the prominent role played by women as those who came to the tomb, discovered the body was missing and were among the first to whom Jesus appeared. This is significant since the testimony of women was dismissed in that culture and would not have been a credible case to make the point if the Gospel writers were inventing this story. John’s Gospel places a strong emphasis on Jesus’ physical, bodily appearances by pointing out that Mary held His body, Thomas touched the scars in His body, and Jesus appeared to the disciples in Galilee.

Wright dismisses alternative theories as false because of their implausibility in light of the missing body and the post-resurrection appearances of Jesus. Modern scientific thought has dismissed the resurrection because it is miraculous. This, Wright explains, is what makes his point rather than refutes it. The notion that dead people do not stay dead is what made this such a remarkable event causing the explosive expansion of the Gospel message and Christian movement throughout the world so quickly in the first century. The Gospel narratives themselves are willing to stand against objections raised as Matthew’s Gospel even dispels directly the theory that the women and disciples simply examined the wrong tomb.[6] In addition, any alternative theory fails to provide an adequate explanation for the dynamic growth of the early Christian Church as a religious movement. Wright shows how the uniqueness of the story of the resurrection of Jesus makes it impossible that it is merely a re-telling of a similar pagan story of gods who die and rise again repeatedly. The fact that different people see Jesus in different places at different times is compelling evidence to Wright.

To Wright, the two realities of the empty tomb and the appearances of Jesus make a sufficient argument to prove the physical resurrection of the body of Jesus from the dead. Resurrection is the only natural conclusion given these circumstances. However, Wright goes further to say that resurrection is not only a sufficient conclusion to draw from thee evidences, but it is necessary to draw this conclusion. If these two evidences had not existed, then belief in resurrection would not necessarily follow. Since they do exist, the only conclusion that can be drawn is that Jesus rose from the dead.

Despite the efforts of many to argue to the contrary, the truth of the resurrection stands some two thousand years later. No alternative theory has been viable enough to overcome it. In conclusion, Wright argues that the resurrection of Jesus was the convincing proof of His Messiahship and that He was the offspring of divinity.

Critique

Wright’s wit and quirkiness as an academic come through in certain respects in this book. He often uses humor – even self-deprecating humor – to make a point or take a mental break. He also insists on referring to God with a lower case “g.”[7] This reviewer found the former to be engaging and the latter to be annoying.

By his own admission, Wright recognizes that his argument, though sound and comprehensive, does not answer all questions about the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. For example, the exact nature of the substance of the body of the resurrection Jesus is a mystery. It could mysteriously appear and then vanish as he willed. It was not always recognizable even by His closet friends.

The length of Wright’s work is a tribute to its attempt to be thorough; however, it is a daunting read that demands perseverance through some tedious parts including the examination of the pagan view of death and some of the arguments dealing with the non-canonical writings of the early centuries.

The strongest criticism of this work applies to most of Wright’s writings. It is evident here again. The Bishop of Durham has a difficult time explicitly stating that Jesus Christ is divine God co-equal, co-eternal and co-essential with God the Father. He comes close to saying it, but he never quite gets there. He describes the resurrected Jesus as the Messiah, the offspring of divinity who is absolute sovereign, and the personal revelation of the one true God. He writes that “Jesus is the one sent by God, from God, not only as a messenger but as the very embodiment of his love. To send some one else is hardly an ultimate proof of self-giving love.”[8] But he never can come out and bold say that Jesus is God.

There is one other observation that makes The Resurrection of the Son of God an incomplete work by Wright. That is his quote in a recent debate where he stated that it is possible to deny the physical bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead and still be a Christian. His example is his co-author from his book Who Is This Jesus?, Michael Borg. Wright states that though Borg denies the physical resurrection of Christ, he still “believes in Jesus and follows him passionately.” The Apostle Paul describes the Gospel as being essentially the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus from the dead.[9] This gospel is the power of God unto salvation.[10] It is only by this gospel that any one can ever be saved. To preach another gospel is damnable.[11] A resurrection-less gospel is “another gospel.” It is a shame that Wright would discount his tremendous work in The Resurrection of the Son of God with such a statement.

[1] Wright, Tom. The Resurrection of the Son of God. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003.
[2] For example, Philippians 3.21 and Romans 8.11.
[3] Wright, p. 398.
[4] For example, 1 Peter 3.18: For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit…. [emphasis added]
[5] Roberts, A. and J. Donaldson, et al, eds. “Adversus Haereseis, ” The Ante-Nicene Fathers. Buffalo: The Christian Literature Publishing Company. vol. 2, p. 29.
[6] See Matthew 28.12-15.
[7] Wright, p. 6.
[8] Ibid, p. 732.
[9] 1 Corinthians 15.1-3.
[10] Romans 1.16
[11] Galatians 1.8-9.

SUMMER READING - part 3

2006-08-07T19:31:00.000-04:00

More of what I've been reading this summer...

Wright, Tom. The Original Jesus. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1996.

As the Bishop of Durham since 2003, Tom Wright is one of the most influential leaders of the Anglican Church. He has taught at Cambridge, McDill University in Montreal and at Oxford. He served for six years as the Dean of Lichfield and as canon Theologian for the Canon of Westminster before going to Durham. He is the author of more than forty books and several dozen articles. He has been involved in the production of several special presentations for both radio and television.

Wright earned his Master’s and two Doctoral degrees from Oxford. He is presently writing a six-volume work on Christian Origins and the Question of God. The first three of these volumes have been published and are his most widely acclaimed writings: The New Testament and the People of God (1992), Jesus and the Victory of God (1996) and The Resurrection of the Son of God (2003). He is presently working on volume four, Paul and the Justice of God, that will be a complete study of Paul. Other volumes planned for this series include The Gospels and the Story of God and The Early Christians and the Purpose of God.

Summary

The first half of The Original Jesus is an expanded transcript of a television special produced by Wright for the BBC’s series “First Light.” In this first section, entitled “Jesus – Then and Now,” Wright addresses the key elements of Jesus’ ministry and teaching focusing on the aims Jesus had in mind for His work on earth. The second half of the book was added for those who desired further study from the television program. This second section, entitled “Reading the Gospels with Both Eyes Open,” demonstrates the differing approaches taken by the four Gospel writers. The book is a popular work that is filled with beautiful photography mostly of scenes from the Holy Land.

Wright explains that the thing that made Jesus Christ different from the thousands of others who had been executed by the Roman authorities was the unique circumstance of His resurrection from the dead. John the Baptist is presented as the leader of a movement of which Jesus was a part. When John was arrested, Jesus launched out with a movement of His own. Jesus would use stories to communicate eternal truth. His stories dealt with common things and circumstances; however, they always had an unexpected twist that shocked the audience into a response (usually belief in or rejection of Jesus). Wright portrays the Sermon on the Mount as a political rally at which Jesus was trying to drum up support for His new movement. Throughout the book Wright focuses on Jerusalem as the central point of Jesus’ life, ministry and teaching. He suggests that the followers of Jesus had no idea that He would be put to death or that He would rise from the dead. Both events came as quite a surprise to them. Wright, like other British apologists (i.e., Michael Green), comes close to speaking of Jesus as the divine Son of God, but never quite gets there.

Critique

Wright’s style is an easy-to-follow popular style that is almost like a story as he reconstructs for the reader the life and ministry of Jesus including His death and resurrection. He often makes authoritative statements that sound convincing, but need to be called into question. Below are a few examples of these.

Wright suggests that the baptisms conducted by John the Baptist had little to do with the idea of cleansing from sin, but instead pictured the Exodus crossing of the people of Israel over the Jordan River into the Promised Land.[1] Yet this seems to contradict what John the Baptist said as he called sinners to be baptized.[2]

The era that witnessed the Incarnation of Jesus Christ is called by Wright “the lowest point of history as far as Israel was concerned.”[3] His evidence given to substantiate this statement is based on the heavy taxation levied against the Jews by the Romans, the paganizing of their culture and the oppression of the Roman rule over them. Was this era a lower point to them than the exile? Was it lower than the abomination of desolation committed in the temple by Antiochus Epiphanes? It may have not been their most glorious era, but there does not seem to be any indication from the biblical text that Israel viewed the first century as the lowest point of their history.

John the Baptist is presented by Wright as the leader of a movement who attempted to rally followers around him. The way in which Wright describes this makes Jesus to be almost a reluctant leader who steps out only because John the Baptist is no longer able to head the movement after his arrest. He makes Jesus’ assumption of the reigns of this movement appear to be filled with a fearful resolve.[4]

Many of Wright’s conclusions about the work and ministry of Jesus have more to do with looking back to the nation of Israel than looking forward to the kingdom of God. The baptisms by John the Baptist mentioned above are one example of this. Another is Wright’s explanation of the parable of the prodigal son. The real meaning of the prodigal’s return in repentance to his father is to picture Israel coming back from exile.[5]

There are other incidental observations by Wright that seem to miss the point. When he describes Jesus’ teaching on “turning the other cheek,” Wright presents the turning of one’s cheek as an act of defiance, not of forgiveness. He explains that by turning the other cheek you are insisting that the offender strike you a second time, this time with his forehand rather than his denigrating slap with the back of his hand. It is a way for you to demand respect from the offender.[6]

The most troubling part of Wright’s book to this reviewer is his hesitancy to be forthright concerning the deity of Jesus Christ. He interprets Peter’s confession of Jesus as the Christ in Mark 8.29 as being a recognition of Jesus only as a king.[7] Wright seems to be weak on presenting Jesus Christ as deity. Wright speak of Jesus as looking like God, showing us God, giving a human face to God, and “a human being aflame with the love of God.”[8] Would Wright confidently declare that Jesus Christ is the Creator God and is co-equal, co-eternal and co-substantial with God the Father? He doesn’t declare this in The Original Jesus. He comes very close, but at the last minute, Wright backs down. He concludes, “So, when somebody asks me, ‘Was Jesus God?’ I usually turn the question around. ‘Is it true that the living God was uniquely and personally present in Jesus?’”[9] There is a huge difference, Dr. Wright!

It is easy to see from The Original Jesus why Wright is so popular. He comes across as an academic who desires to communicate with the general public in a popular manner. Yet he presents a perspective of Jesus that seems to draw conclusions from extra-biblical sources that contradict the text of the Scriptures.

[1] Wright, Tom. The Original Jesus. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1996. p. 29.
[2] See Matthew 3.11 where John the Baptist explains to the Pharisees and Sadducees, “I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance….” See also Mark 1.4; Luke 3.3; Acts 13.24; 19.4.
[3] Wright, pp. 29-30.
[4] Ibid, p. 31.
[5] Ibid, p. 41
[6] Ibid, p. 51.
[7] Ibid, p. 60.
[8] Ibid, p. 78-83.
[9] Ibid, p. 85.

SUMMER READING - part 2

2006-08-04T11:46:00.000-04:00

Here's more of what I've been reading this summer...

Green, Michael and Nick Spencer. “I’d Like to Believe, But…”. Baker Books, 2006.

Michael Green is an internationally renowned evangelist, British theologian, priest in the Anglican Church, and the author of more than fifty books. He serves as Senior Research Fellow at Wycliffe Hall at Oxford University.[1] His expertise on evangelism is shared in a variety of ways. He teaches courses at Wycliffe Hall on evangelism (as well as some classes on New Testament studies). He writes and speaks extensively both as an evangelist and on evangelism. He has served as an advisor to both the bishops of Canterbury and York. In the past he has served as Principal, St. John’s College and as Rector of St. Aldate’s Church in Nottingham. For a while he was the Professor of Evangelism at Regent College in Vancouver. Born in 1930, Green is married to Rosemary, and they have four adult children. His biography has been made available of late by Harper Collins.

Nick Spencer works for the London Institute of Contemporary Christianity and the Jubilee Centre. Their strategy is to “focus on making whole-life discipleship a central, operational component of UK Church culture.”[2] Spencer is a researcher and writer for the LICC. His research determined which issues would form the chapter topics for this book.

Summary

In “I’d Like to Believe, But…” Green addresses the most popular barriers to belief that people give (based upon the research done by Spencer) for not believing in Jesus Christ. The reasons for not believing are given to Spencer through his research by people who admittedly do not go to church and are unsure about God. These respondents characterized themselves as agnostics. Green’s purpose in writing this book is to remove some of those intellectual barriers to faith by answering the issues raised by these agnostic seekers. Each chapter begins with a personal anecdote relating one of these intellectual barriers to a person Spencer encountered in his research. Then Green addresses the issue from a spiritual, theological, biblical or even sometimes philosophical perspective.

The issues addressed include the idea of embracing a general spirituality without adhering to specific tenets of the Christian faith, the complaint that the church is too ritualistic and legalistic, the objection that too many Christians are hypocrites, and that Christianity is too intolerant of other faiths as well as Christianity’s claims of exclusivity on the truth as it relates to finding peace with God. In addition, Green and Spencer answer those who would doubt the veracity of the Scriptures and those who argue that science has proven religion to be a farce. The age-old discussion of the existence of evil in light of the concept of a good and omnipotent God is considered. Those who do not see enough evidence to admit that the historical Jesus is truly the Son of God are answered in this book. An apologetic for the resurrection is given for those who do not believe it occurred or do not see its relevance today. The desire for an immanent God is provided through a discussion on the Incarnation.

Green’s approach in dealing with these intellectual barriers to belief seems to be simple and vague. Maybe this is intentional. It seems that he might be trying to just begin a dialogue with agnostics. This book certainly does not provide conclusive answers, only a gentle prodding to consider some alternatives to the way the agnostic may be thinking. Nevertheless, there are far too many problems for this book to be used effectively as an apologetic tool in witnessing to unbelievers. The faulty theology presented – sometimes by what is said and sometimes by what is omitted – has the potential to lead the agnostic reader to faith that is not grounded solidly on the truth. Some are fundamental essentials of the faith while others deal with secondary issues. They are discussed below in the order in which Green addresses (or doesn’t, but should have) them.

In calling the agnostic back to church he promotes a consumer approach to Christianity and to finding a church. He states, “It is the age of consumerism. The age of choice. Some of the liveliest churches have recognized this fact.”[3] He encourages churches to do whatever it takes to draw a crowd.[4] Yet after presenting his argument advising seekers to find a church that makes them feel comfortable and meets their felt needs, he then contradicts himself by stating, “So a church is unlike a supermarket; when we attend a church, we are not consumers. Rather, we are called to be disciples, or “learners….”[5]

The book presents a weak view of God. In overemphasizing the free will of man, Green makes God out to be an impotent but hopeful spectator wishing that man would take Him up on His offer of grace.[6] Where is the call to submit to Jesus Christ as Lord? Instead Green describes a relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ as being “not about control but about free will and generosity on both sides.”[7] Yet the Apostle Paul says that we are God’s possession and under His control. We are not our own because he has purchased us with His blood.[8] Where is the fear of the Lord in Green’s theology? It seems to be that green presents a message of Christianity merely as another way of personal life enhancement. He invites the reader to experience release from guilt, freedom from habits and fears, deliverance from loneliness, purpose in life.[9] Where is the sinner called to flee from the wrath to come? Where is the message of repentance? Where is the law that, like a schoolmaster, brings us to Christ? It is absent from Green’s presentation.

There are questions to be raised about Green’s view of the Scriptures. He seems to view the Old Testament as less reliable than the New Testament.[10] He also at least opens the door to a weak view of Scripture by acquiescing to a non-literal view of Genesis 1-11.[11] One natural result of this is to be susceptible to the idea of theistic evolution. Green states, “It makes not one iota of difference to our faith in an intelligent Force we call God [almost sounds like panentheism] what evolutionary or other processes brought the world to its present state.”[12] Not only does he seem to embrace the big bang theory as an explanation for the origins of the universe, but he equates this idea of a big bang with the incarnation, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ![13] This just further calls the veracity of the Scriptures into question.

With his strong emphasis on free will, it is clear that Green is far from being a Calvinist. In fact, he tries to soften the sovereignty of God by equating the truth that God is not the author of evil with the notion that God does not send suffering to us.[14] Yet the Bible is clear that God does sometimes send calamity and suffering.[15] In addition, Green’s treatment of suffering eliminates from the equation the glory of God which is often His primary motive in allowing suffering to come to people.

Like other modern British apologists, Green often comes close to explicitly stating that Jesus is God, but never quite makes it there. He says that Jesus “embodied all that could be known of God,”[16] that unlike the other great religious leaders of history Jesus brought “God before our gaze,”[17] that “Jesus was a real person who brought God into our midst,”[18] and that Jesus was “the human embodiment of God, as much of God, if you like, as could be crammed into human form.”[19] The closest Green comes to confessing an evangelical view of Jesus Christ as God is when he admits that Jesus “was more than human, sharing God’s nature.”[20] When it comes to Green’s understanding of the Holy Spirit’s relation to Christ, he seems to have a modalistic view.[21]

He is to be commended that as an evangelist Green sometimes gets aggressive towards the end of a few of the chapters in calling the reader (and sinners) to Christ.[22] His last chapter is a compelling call to come to Christ.

Whether intentional or not, the book seems to be too vague and general to really direct unbelievers to the truth of God’s Word as found in the Scriptures and in Jesus Christ. There are better tools that can be used in presenting an apologetic defense of the Christian faith and a call to embrace the gospel of Jesus Christ.

[1] There is some indication that he has recently accepted a position as co-rector at Holy Trinity Church in Raleigh, North Carolina. See http://titusonenine.classicalanglican.net/?p=8563.
[2] From their vision statement taken from their website: http://www.licc.org.uk/about/vision.php.
[3] Green, Michael. “I’d Like to Believe, But…”. Baker Books, 2006. p. 19.
[4] Ibid, p. 21.
[5] Ibid, p. 23.
[6] Ibid, p. 40.
[7] Ibid, p. 38.
[8] 1 Corinthians 6:19-20
[9] Green, p. 39.
[10] Ibid, p. 43.
[11] Ibid, p. 46.
[12] Ibid, p. 55.
[13] Ibid, p. 85.
[14] Ibid, p. 62-3.
[15] For example, Isaiah 45:7
[16] Green, p. 43.
[17] Ibid, p. 71.
[18] Ibid, p. 79.
[19] Ibid, p. 86.
[20] Ibid, p. 79.
[21] Ibid, p. 99.
[22] Ibid, p. 80f.

SUMMER READING - part 1

2006-08-03T19:44:00.000-04:00

Here's a review of some of what I've been reading this summer...

McGrath, Alister. Intellectuals Don’t Need God & Other Modern Myths. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1993.

Alister McGrath is the Professor of Historical Theology at Oxford University. Originally he was on track to pursue chemistry and in the late 1970’s his studies took a dual track of chemistry and theology. He was ordained a deacon in 1980 in Nottingham and became a priest one year later. In 1983 he joined the faculty of Wycliffe Hall at Oxford teaching theology. In addition to the Ph.D. he earned at Oxford in microbiology in 1978, McGrath also earned a D.D. degree in historical and systematic theology from Oxford. He is the author of more than twenty-five books and is the editor of three others. His works have appeared in twenty-three languages. In addition, he has published over forty-five journal articles.

Intellectuals Don’t Need God is an attempt to move the discipline of Christian apologetics away from the realm of academia and into the marketplace where common people are discussing ideas about truth. In the postmodern world of today, apologetics is becoming a necessary tool of pre-evangelism. The book is divided into three sections: "Creating Openings for Faith," "Overcoming Barriers to Faith," and "Apologetics in Action."

McGrath begins with the theological foundations of effective apologetics. He points out that one limitation of apologetics that is grounded in creation and redemption is that because of the Fall and the subsequent Curse, the universe is a fallen (and therefore distorted) revelation of God. God has communicated a reliable revelation of Himself to us in His Word, the Bible.

The practical use of apologetics can be drawn from various images McGrath draws from Christian doctrine. Apologetics will be to some a battlefield that shows Christ as victor. To others it will be like a court of law that presents the doctrine of justification in operation. Others will see apologetics from the perspective of relationship with the goal being reconciliation. Deliverance is offered when apologetics is presented in the image of one being in prison. The image of a hospital offers healing through an effective use of apologetics. The wise apologist will seek to discern the needs of his hearers and appropriate the proper image of apologetics to best meet those needs. The ability to explain something in the language of the hearer so that they understand demonstrates that the apologist really understands the topic.

McGrath describes those needs when people find apologetics helpful to their faith development. To the person who has an unsatisfied sense of longing, apologetics can demonstrate that Christ has come to give purpose and direction. The order and structure that god has built into the universe can address the questions by the rationalist. The standard of morality that is inherent in the thinking of every person helps point people to God. The reality that man is a finite being who will die can be used by the apologist to move to the Gospel.

The limitations of what apologetics can and cannot do are honestly presented by McGrath. Apologetics can present the evidence to demonstrate particular truths; however, there comes a point at which the road of rational examination of the evidence must end and faith must take the seeker the rest of the way. The task of the apologist is to find the point of contact (need, question, etc.) and use that as a port of departure to get to the saving message of the Gospel.

The most important question an apologist can ask is “What is keeping this person from faith?” Once this is determined, the apologist will know how to proceed to get to the Gospel message with that person. There may be intellectual barriers to faith as well as emotional, ethical, relational and psychological ones. McGrath does a fine job detailing some of the most common intellectual barriers to faith including the problem of suffering, religious pluralism, the resurrection of Jesus, and the divinity of Christ. He also shows how other worldviews collide with Christianity and are incompatible with it.

Maybe the most helpful section of the book is the final one where McGrath explains the pragmatic doing of apologetics. In conversation or preaching, the apologist will find McGrath’s counsel to be sound and wise. His chapter on how to deal with inquiries during Question and Answer sessions was particularly practical and helpful.

This book is a good popular introduction to apologetics that bypasses the historical and philosophical foundations of that discipline. For this reviewer who is coming to the end of his studies at New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary, it is regrettable that the course for which this book was assigned (British Apologists) was his first (and will be his only) apologetics course in his Master’s studies. Intellectuals Don’t Need God will create an interest in the reader not only to read more in the field of Apologetics, but also to read more by McGrath.

Jesus' perpetual humanity

2006-01-23T10:55:00.000-05:00

Here's a question that came up in my BFG (Bible Fellowship Group) the last two weeks.

What evidence is there that Jesus Christ still possesses his humanity now that He has ascended to the right hand of the Father on heaven's throne?

I'll share my thoughts soon, but let me hear from you on this.

WARNING!: Please do not go into shock that I have blogged twice in one day. I know that you are used to my "quarterly blogs," but I'm trying to be more consistent. :)

Stupor Bowl

2006-01-23T10:34:00.000-05:00

With the Colts out of the running and the NFL's best quarterback (Peyton, of course!!) gone hunting, what is all the fuss over the Super Bowl? At it's best, the game is tolerable. The playoffs are always better games. For example, the 4th quarter of the Steelers vs. Colts was back-and-forth, edge-of-your-seat drama. But now, alas, the season has ended for Indianapolis. So trying to convince myself to actually be FOR one of the remaining teams (who are they, again?) is pointless.

There is one fantastic thing about the Super Bowl that I will share with you at the end of this blog. But let me provide one small disclaimer:

The Super Bowl IS a lot of fun...if you GO to it! Last year I had the opportunity to be at the Super Bowl in Jacksonville. Being at the game is a blast! A lot of fan fest stuff is happening around the stadium. People in the stands spend more time celebrity-watching than viewing the game. We were seated in a section with Michael Waltrip, LeBron James, and some TV actors. {They were on their cell phones with their celebrity friends saying, "Hey! I think I'm in the same section as one of those pastors from Riverbend!"} My pastor was seated in another section. Snoop Dog was in the seat behind him. They were seated about 20 rows in front of Presidents Clinton and Bush 1 who were raising funds for tsunami victims. Paul McCartney was the halftime show. I can now say I've seen a Beatle live in concert. It was a real privilege to be the recipient of such a generous giftas a ticket to the big game. I had a great time.

Now it's back to watching it on TV. I'm not a fan of either team. The commercials are not as good as they used to be. And the prehistoric Stones (Mick, not Fred and Barney) are the half-time show. No, for me, all of the hype and hoopla about the Stupor Bowl points to one marvelous fact:

There's only two weeks until pitchers and catchers report to Spring Training!

Investment Advice

2006-01-04T15:47:00.000-05:00

Every January a quick perusal of the local newstand reveals a plethora of financial publications offering advice on the best places to invest our hard-earned money for the coming year. Such prognostications promise high yields on our returns.

Today I want to throw my own hat in the ring and offer some investment advice for those of you who have stopped by to visit this blog.

To me, it seems that the highest yield on an investment is the one that won't diminish over time. In other words, the best investments are those that last the longest. It's important that we step back from our typical financial paradigm of short-term yields, medium- and long-term. We have to think bigger than that. What are those things that we could invest in that would last forever? That's right! An eternal investment. What are the things that we can invest in that will last for eternity?

Jesus said in Matthew 6:19-21 "Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal, but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also."

What are the heavenly treasures we can lay up for ourselves? The Bible teaches that there are three things that will last forever. By that, I mean earthly things. Certainly God will last forever. Heaven will last forever. But there are three things mentioned that are presently here on earth that we can invest in that will pay eternal dividends.

1. The Word of God

The Bible says, "The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God will stand forever." (Isaiah 40.8) If you want to invest your life in something that lasts forever, invest it in the Word of God. Begin this new year with a renewed commitment to spend time in God's Word. Set aside time to read the Bible. Memorize God's Word. Let your mind meditate on the Scriptures. Put yourself under the faithful, accurate preaching of the Scriptures in a good church.

Do you want a high return for your investment? Then, as the Apostle Paul said, "Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly." (Col 3.16)

2. The souls of men

God has placed eternity in our hearts. (Ecc 3.11) God gave man an ever-living, never-dying soul. Our souls will last forever - either in heavenly bliss with Jesus or eternally separated from Him in hell. Nevertheless, one thing that will last forever is the human soul.

Therefore, if you want to invest in something that will last forever, then spend yourself in the lives of others. Love them. Share the gospel with them. Speak biblical truth to them. Disciple them. Minister to them. Serve them. Get involved in the lives of people.

We live in a day when people are becoming more and more isolated. They drive home from work and enter their home by using the garage door opener and shutting themselves into their fortress of a home with their security alarms. They screen their calls using caller ID and voicemail to keep from having to speak to anyone they don't want to. They order their movies pay-per-view. They shop online. They order their meals to be delivered to their homes. Gone are the days when neighbors visited on the front porch after sunset. Today we isolate ourselves.

Yet people are hungry for real, vital connections. God has made us for relationship. Are you so busy that in all of your hectic schedule you have crowded out time to spend with people? Make a date with your child. Go for a walk with yor wife. Ride bikes with yor family. Drop by the neighbors or better yet, have them over. Make your house a hospitality center for love and ministry. Get involved with people. They need Christ. They need encouragement. They need you.

One way to invest in something that will last for eternity is to invest in the souls of men.

3. The prayers of the saints

Here is an interesting verse from the Bible:

Revelation 5:8 "And when he had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints."

Also take a look at Revelation 8.3-4: "And another angel came and stood at the altar with a golden censer, and he was given much incense to offer with the prayers of all the saints on the golden altar before the throne, and the smoke of the incense, with the prayers of the saints, rose before God from the hand of the angel."

What exactly does that mean? I'm not sure I know, but one thing is clear...the prayers of the saints prayed here on earth follow us to heaven. They are incense around the throne of God.

I've never met a Christian who thinks he or she prays too much. None of us are fully content with our prayer lives. Yet with a deliberate effort, we can pump life into our praying by (sorry for the cliche) just doing it!

Mark off regular time to spend in extended periods of prayer this year. Each week should have a time when you have blocked off for prayer.

Pray daily with your spouse. Pray with and for your children. Pray for your pastor and church. Pray for our BFG. Pray for our political leaders. Pray for Christ's kingdom work. Pray for lost people. Pray for missionaries. Still can't think of anyone to pray for? Pray for me!

What should you pray? One good example would be to pray the prayers of the Bible. No, not in some superstitious, "prayer of Jabez," good luck charm kind of way; but look at the prayers Paul prayed for the New Testament believers. (for example, see Eph 1.15-23; 3.16-21; Phil 1.9-11; Col 1.9-12; 2 Thess 1.11-12) Wouldn't they make great patterns for our prayer requests? In addition, how can we improve on the blueprint given to us by the Lord Himself in Matthew 6.9-13? Use this model prayer to guide you in praying as you should.

If you're looking for an eternal dividend from your investment, then why not invest in those things that last forever? Invest this year in the Word of God, the souls of men and the prayers of the saints.

Happy New Year!

Farewell, Busch Stadium

2005-10-22T10:53:00.000-04:00

Farewell to Busch Stadium, home of the St. Louis Cardinals.

It was always great news when we were going to take in a Cardinals game at Busch. (By the way, you WATCH games in other sports, but in baseball, you "take in a game." Refreshing, huh?)

I used to have a "clergy pass" to all Cardinal games in 1989. With that pass (provided free by the Cardinals organization), I could enter the stadium for $1 and I could bring one guest for $2. We had to find our own seats, but that was no problem. Those were the days when manager Whitey Herzog had the outfield fences pushed back to allow for the speed of his team (Coleman, Smith, McGee) to have an advantage.

My eldest son was born in Missouri Baptist Hospital -- right down the I-70 corridor from Busch Stadium. Just hours after his birth, we watched the Cards beat the Mets on TV from the hospital room. ("Train up a child in the way he should go....") He is still a Cardinals fan today as are my other sons, Ben & Jon.

My first trip to Busch was in 1973 to see the Cubs lose. Bob Gibson, Joe Torre, Ted Simmons, Lou Brock, Tim McCarver VS. Fergie Jenkins, Ron Santo, Joe Peppitone, Don Kessinger, Billy Williams (and a benchwarmer in the Cubs dugout named Tony LaRussa!).

The only triple play I ever saw live in MLB was in Busch Stadium. I once saw Jim Lindeman hit a foul ball OUT of Busch Stadium down the first base side. Wow!

My wife's favorite part of Busch Stadium was the electric Cardinal that would fly on the outfield scoreboard whenever the Cards hit a homerun.

Sometimes we'd get there early on gameday and talk to the opposing players as they walked over from the Marriott. Then we'd grab something to eat at the Old Spaghetti Factory, the chili place (what was the name of that place...Skyline Chili? maybe), or maybe even a White Castle. Once we even ate at Mike Shannon's. Ouch. The bill was a little pricey for a young married couple like us. Often we'd stop and eat at the food court at Union Station on our way to the ballpark and get some fudge at the Fudgery where the employees sing and entertain while making the fudge.

I went on the field at Busch once for Fan Appreciation Day where we got pictures and autographs from the players. I told 2B Tom Brunansky that he was on my Rotisserie Fantasy Baseball Team. He was nonplussed by this astounding news. I remember the heat off that astroturf was about 110-degrees. Putting in the grass was a great move for the Cardinals (also helped the aging knees in the outfield).

I once went to a weekend series vs. the Mets. The Friday night game was one day after the Cards clinced the division pennant. Whitey gave almost all of the starters the day off that Friday night. Bummer.

I took a youth mission team to a game at Busch against the Padres where Jack Clark won the game for the Cards with a walk-off homer (they weren't called that back then) in the 13th inning.

Great memories. While I wished the final game played there had been game 4 or 5 of the 2005 World Series, I still am grateful for the wonderful memories I've shared there with family and friends.

The Cardinals listed on their webpage the top ten moments in Busch Stadium:

Top 10 Moments at Busch
• No. 10: Mark McGwire's 70th home run Sept. 27, 1998
• No. 9: Lou Brock's 3,000th hit Aug. 13, 1979
• No. 8: NLCS Game 7 clinch Oct. 21, 2004
• No. 7: Lou Brock steals his 105th Sept. 10, 1974
• No. 6: Edmonds' walk-off in the '04 NLCS Oct. 20, 2004
• No. 5: Jack Buck's poem, "For America" following 9/11 Sept. 17, 2001
• No. 4: Gibson's 17-K game in the '68 Series Oct. 2, 1968
• No. 3: Cardinals' 1982 World Championship Oct. 20, 1982
• No. 2: Mark McGwire's 62nd home run breaks Maris' record Sept. 8, 1998
• No. 1: Ozzie Smith's homer in the '85 NLCS Oct. 14, 1985

"Go crazy, folks! Go crazy!"

Farewell, Busch Stadium.

The Busy Blogger

2005-10-12T13:30:00.000-04:00

How do you bloggers have time to write thoughtful, poignant, provacative posts? I'm struggling with finding the time to blog.

Yes, I admit my blogging frequency has deteriorated in the past three weeks. It's been busy at work. I travelled to Atlanta to meet with a church planter and other interested folks concerning the launch of Fellowship Community Church in Buford, GA. The pastor left another church to start this one. You can see why when you read one visitor's blog about the old church.

In addition, the day-to-day oversight of 11 pastors keeps me busy. These are great guys: forward-thinking, hard-working pastors. Coordinating their efforts is a thrilling and daunting task.

I preached in Jacksonville at Point of Grace Church. I always enjoy my time there. The folks are wonderful and their hospitality is warm and friendly. Their Pastor is a good friend. He was away at Piper's conference on Suffering.

I am continuing my seminary studies with my current courses: Supervised Ministry II and Systematic Theology II. I have a research paper, mid-term and book report all screaming for my attention. This weekend, my family is all gone to Riverbend Church's Youth Discipleship Weekend. I'm planning on hunkering down to get some serious schoolwork done. (Especially since the Vols are off this week, although the Cardinals are on TV!)

We are presently doing some remodeling on our house: bathroom, carpet, deck removal, etc. In addition, my lawn mower and fridge are on the blink. This has diverted my attention from blogging.

My boys need time with their dad. I took my son Jon out for a Coke recently to discuss his desire to be baptized. He shows some signs of regeneration, and we are going to proceed with scheduling his baptism soon. Monday night we went as a family to watch two of our church's softball teams play. I kept getting asked, "Why aren't YOU playing?" My answer is the same as this blog...I don't have the time to be committed to it.

My wonderful wife, Pepper, and I have been determined to spend Tuesday nights together. I really look forward to those times, and I can't think of anything that has been so important that I have had to cancel "date night" with her.

Also, it's playoff time for major league baseball. My friend, Bryan, thinks this is the only time baseball games have any meaning. He wonders why they even play the 162 regular game schedule. Why not just have the playoffs and get it over with? I referred this Philistine to my essay on this blog concerning "The Superiority of Baseball."

CONFESSION: Despite all of the above demands on my time, I have found a recreational diversion to help me relax, clear my head and sharpen my thinking. Many of you have already discovered it. It's called sudoku. It's a lot of fun. Give it a try. I'm getting better at it. I now score in the top 50% on the "easy" level. (I'm no Einstein.)

I do have some topics I want to discuss on this blog, so maybe I can multi-task this week and write while I'm cheering on the Cards!

A Missionary's Journal

2005-09-23T17:15:00.000-04:00

Two of my favorite members of our church are the Coffmans. Bob Coffman and his wife, "Willie" (Emalene), came to Christ as senior adults. God called them to the mission field. They served in China, and recently returned home to retire. Here are some excerpts from their journal...

I accepted the Lord Jesus late in life when I was fifty-six years old. I did not know what God had in store for me at that time....In the year of 1991 I became very ill and everyone thought I was going to die, but the Lord God was not ready for me yet. God had other things for me to do....In January 2002 our senior pastor Roy Hargrave was giving a sermon on missions and he stopped in the middle of the sermon and it appeared he was looking right at me and he said, "You senior citizens have nothing better to do. Why don't you go into the mission field?" The Holy Spirit convicted me right then and there. I thought He was going to knock me off my chair and put me on the floor. The conviction was so strong that Willie and I applied to the IMB to go into their service.

We were chosen to go to China for three years....We left Richmond, Virginia on October 19, 2002. After a twenty-hour plane flight we arrived in Kunming, China.... We flew to a city called Lincang....Willie signed a contract to teach English to the high school students.

I now know what God's calling was for saving me and what calling He was going to give me. That calling was to be an evangelist to help fulfill the Great Commission and the Great Commandment.

We have found here in China most people want to learn English. In the schools, the government does not ask the students if they want to learn English. They tell them, "You WILL learn English." So on Saturday mornings I taught English to fourteen primary school children (grade school in USA). They are very intelligent children. Most children go to school from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. six days a week.

In January 2003 we had the opportunity to go down by the Burma border to visit some remote villages. These people are known as the Huai minority. They live a very primitive lifestyle. This gave us a chance to tell them about our God.

Willie and I are learning the language very slowly. At the present time we both know about 200 words and short phrases. In Lincang, we had what we call our "English Corner" on Friday evenings. We had it for anyone over the age of eighteen. That gave us the opportunity to tell them about Jesus. As a result we had two college students who accepted Jesus. The headmaster and the head of the English department asked us to start an English Corner at the College on Saturday afternoons. So we started a new English Corner. We knew it would be a good source to be able to witness to those lost souls. We loved working with these people. We love it here, and we love these wonderful people.

Our first eight months in China produced only two new believers. God showed us the way to witness to them. Willie and I take this position that God honored and gave us to do very seriously. Jesus has instructed us to fulfill His two commands. These are the Great Commandment and the Great Commission. That is why God chose us to come and serve Him in China to do His work.

We have been told that we are too bold and too brash, and that we put ourselves to a high risk with the Chinese government. My two answers to these people are:
1. Read the book of Acts!
2. If they would get away from the television and quit being a couch potato and start telling these lost souls about Jesus, we would have a tremendous revival here in China.

I have had a lot of jobs in my life but working for God is the best job that I ever had. Our job here in China is to save souls for Jesus and not to worry about our personal safety.

More from the journal of these marvelous people in a later blog....

Baseball Takes the Field at Roberts Hearings

2005-09-15T18:40:00.000-04:00

Baseball Metaphors Take the Field at Roberts Hearing

Despite the calls from Washington Post reporter, Dana Milbank, for them to cease, the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Nomination Hearings of Supreme Court Justice nominee John G. Roberts, Jr. was filled with metaphors to baseball. It’s amazing how so much of our conversation is subliminally filled with allusions to our national pastime.

In his opening statement, Roberts led off by stating that “judges are like umpires.” It explained that as a judge, “it’s my job to call balls and strikes and not to pitch or bat.” In the first two and a half days of questioning, the word “umpire” had been used over 30 times.

Roberts was not the only person tossing out the baseball metaphors. ``You hit a home run yesterday,'' Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr., D-Del., told Roberts on Tuesday. But, Biden added, ``the founders never set a strike zone.'' Biden said questioning Roberts was ``like pitching to Ken Griffey'' but added, gamely: ``Let's play baseball.''

Sen. Herb Kohl, D-Wis.,, owner of the Milwaukee Bucks basketball team, picked up the ball. ``As all of us with any involvement in sports knows, no two umpires or no two referees have the same strike zone or call the same kind of a basketball game,'' he said. This seems to be a foul ball. By the way this is true. Someone compared the popular worldviews today by saying that the presuppositionalist umpire would say concerning balls and strikes, “I call them what they are.” The modernist umpire says, “I call them as I see them.” And the postmodern umpires says, “They aren’t anything until I call them.”

Back to the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings of Mr. Roberts: Sen. John Cornyn, R-Tex., said. ``Yesterday we were talking about baseball, but today we're talking about dodgeball,'' he protested. Surely Cornyn wasn't talking about Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. ``I'll start out by pitching you something of a softball,'' Schumer said to Roberts.

I draw this to your attention to point out that even in matters as important as the appointment of a man to the position of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in the United States of America, it still all comes back to baseball. Be sure to see my blog on “The Superiority of Baseball,” especially you Philistines otherwise known as football fans.

More in Heaven or Hell?

2005-09-12T21:14:00.000-04:00

Recently in our Bible Fellowship Group, I mentioned a quote by Charles Spurgeon where he stated that he thought there would be more people in heaven than in hell. A friend of mine in Ft. Smith, Arkansas tracked down the quote for me. The Spurgeon quote is from his writing called, "A Defense of Calvinism." It's taken from a book called, "Charles H. Spurgeon: The Best From All His Works." It's from the Christian Classics Collection, 1988, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville. It's edited by Charles Erlandson. Anyway, here's the quote from pages 268-269.

"The Father's love is not for a few only, but for an exceeding great company. 'A great multitude, which no man could number,' will be found in heaven. A man can reckon up to the very high figures; set to work your Newtons, your mightiest calculators, and they can count great numbers, but God and God alone can tell the multitude of His redeemed. I believe there will be more in heaven than in hell. If anyone asks me why I think so, I answer, because Christ, in everything, is to 'have pre-eminence,' and I cannot conceive how He could have the pre-eminence if there are to be more in the dominions of Satan than in paradise. Moreover, I have never read that there is to be in hell a great multitude, which no man could number. I rejoice to know that the souls of all infants, as soon as they die, speed their way to paradise. Think what a multitude there is of them! . . ."

My reflections:
Well, take a deep breath and I will stand up to address the great English pastor.

1. This quote presents hell as the dominion of Satan. While hell was created for the devil and his angels (Mt. 25.41), hell is not the domain of Satan. Rather it is the eternal dungeon where he will be among its everlasting prisoners. We do not believe in a dualism where God is in charge of heaven and Satan is in charge of hell. (Nor do I think Spurgeon believed this either. Whatever he is saying in the above quote, I don't think he's promoting dualism.)

2. Spurgeon lived in a day when the mortality rate of children surviving childbirth was very high. Obviously he takes this into consideration in his "calculations."

3. My main objection to Spurgeon's quote is what Jesus told us in Matthew 7:13-14, "Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few." How can it be understood that more will be in heaven than in hell when few find the narrow way and many take the wide way?

4. Whether there are more in heaven or more in hell will not affect the preeminence of Christ. Certainly He is the eternal Judge who will separate the sheep from the goats and will sentence each soul to his eternal destiny. His preeminence rules over those in heaven as well as those in hell. Consider Philippians 2:9-11, "Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." Regardless of a person's eternal destiny, he will confess Jesus Christ as Lord and in all things Christ will have the preeminence.

5. Even so, I won't say dogmatically that Spurgeon is wrong. After all, who am I to raise my hand to the brilliant Spurgeon? Yes, he is just a man, but a marvelous preacher whose mind was saturated with the holy Scriptures. In addition, his observation concerning infants who die presents a compelling aspect to his argument. Counting infants, he may be right (consider the 1.5 million abortions annually in the U.S. for the past 30+ years!).

6. My final reflection concering this quote is to humbly say that because of God's deep mercy and marvelous grace He has saved me, so I'm just grateful that I will be numbered among the multitude in heaven. Will you?

21 Flaws of the "Altar Call"

2005-09-10T12:50:00.000-04:00

The invitation system is a modern evangelism innovation...

1. ...without scriptural warrant.

2. ...that is faulty and dangerous.

3. ...that has created a new, unbiblical vocabulary (i.e., "repentance and faith" have been replaced with "decide for Christ," "ask Jesus into your heart," "Give your heart to Jesus," "first-time decisions," etc.)

4. ...not practiced by the church until about 150 years agao.

It was begun by Charles Finney who believed conversion was a psychological event and used this "anxious seat" to replace the purpose of baptism.
It was popularized by Dwight L. Moody.
It was standardized by Billy Graham.

5. ...that has contributed to filling our churches with unregenerate church members.

6. ...leading easily to abuse and manipulation of the method, especially towards children and teenagers.

7. ...established upon psychological premises.

8. ...mistakenly equated often with the new birth and/or conversion.

9. ...involving a high rate of apostatizing (90+% according to the BillyGraham Evangelisitic Association).

10. ...that is unnecessary for the Holy Spirit to do His regenerating, saving work.

11. ...that is used to attempt to quantify soul-winning results.

12. ...that is not the biblical mark of whether a church is committed to evangelism or not.

13. ...where often the appeal to "come forward" supercedes or replaces any explanation of sin, repentance, or faith.

14. ...that implies (or sometimes states explicitly) that those sinners who do not "come forward" are disobeying a divine command.

15. ...climaxing with the recitation of a sinner's prayer that is equated with conversion.

16. ...that some respond to in their attempt through human effort to earn their standing before God.

17. ...calling for the sinner's instant performance rather than his careful contemplation of his sinfulness and the One whom he has offended.

18. ...that adds a condition for salvation ("come forward") that Christ never gave.

19. ...that confuses the unregenerate man as to the specific obligations of his duty.

20. ...that morphs the task of the evangelist to the duty of "drawing the net" by coaxing people to come down the aisle.

21. ...seeking to give men relief from God's conviction before He has made them fully humble and miserable over their sin.

I believe that the altar call has become the modern evangelical equivalent of Roman Catholicism's pennance. Ask a Catholic how he knows he is right with God, and he will tell you that he did his pennance (x number of Hail Mary's, etc.). Ask someone in a modern evangelical church how they know they are right with God, and he will likely tell you that he "came forward" during a public altar call. Both are woefully inadequate and unbiblical evidences of the new birth.

When I Made the Switch to the ESV

2005-09-10T12:26:00.000-04:00

The following was written in 2002 as a defense for why I was making the move to the English Standard Version (ESV) as my version of preference for preaching and teaching. Riverbend Community Church now widely uses the ESV. The Pastor now preaches from the ESV. The only translation sold by the church is the ESV.

“While Riverbend doesn’t have an “official” Bible translation that it endorses, the New King James Version (NKJV) is the one more Riverbenders use than any other.[1] There are two reasons for this. First, Pastor Roy preaches from the NKJV.[2] Since his sermons are verse-by-verse expositions of the Scriptures, people like to use the same version that he does. It is easier to follow along with him.

A second reason the NKJV is the version-of-choice among Riverbenders is because the two most popular study Bibles with notes from a Reformed perspective utilize the NKJV. These two study Bibles are the MacArthur Study Bible and The Reformation Study Bible (formerly called the The New Geneva Study Bible).[3]

I have used the NKJV since its inception in 1982. The advertising slogan used when it was introduced to the market was “The New King James Version: For all who love God’s Word!” I qualify! I like the way the NKJV retains the poetic beauty of the old King James Version (KJV). It is still easy for those who want to keep using their old KJV to follow along with the reading and preaching from the NKJV. Yet I am glad that the “whithersoevers” have been modernized. “Thee’s” and “thou’s” have been updated to the way we talk today (“you”). The NKJV capitalizes references to God which is a great way to honor Him.[4] The NKJV is written at a 9th grade reading level making it more understandable than either the New American Standard Bible (11th grade reading level) or the KJV (12th grade reading level).

Though I have used the NKJV now for twenty years in my personal use and preaching, I am now thinking about making a switch. I’m considering a new translation for two reasons: a recent disappointing discovery I made regarding the translation process used with the NKJV, and the introduction of a new Bible version that comes highly recommended.

An article I read a few days ago said that when the translators of the NKJV had finished their work, they brought the new version to be distributed. However, because they had preserved so much of the language of the old KJV, they were forced by the publisher (Nelson) to go back to make more changes. These changes were not done for greater linguistic accuracy, but simply so they could escape copyright laws that guarded the old KJV. These added changes were made just so the NKJV would differ enough to earn its own copyright protection. This was change just for change’s sake. I find that kind of legal, marketing tampering with the Scriptures to be disappointing. It has made me open to looking for another Bible version.

While the NASB is an accurate, literal translation, it is not very easy to read or memorize. It lacks a flow and cadence. The NIV (New International Version) is a modern, readable Bible translation, but it’s use of dynamic translation method (where translators do a phrase-by-phrase translating technique rather than word-for-word) weakens – and sometimes changes – the true meaning of the text. The NIV is the most-read Bible version in the English-speaking evangelical world. That helps explain the anemic condition of the American church.

Enter the ESV. I first saw the English Standard Version at John MacArthur’s church. I purchased a copy to familiarize myself with it. As I read the Preface, I became reluctant because I saw that it sought to be an update of the Revised Standard Version (RSV). I had never liked the RSV. It was the “official” version of the ultra-liberal World Council of Churches. It employed language that left the text in error at best, and un-Christian at worst. When I saw that the ESV sought to update this translation that I had always referred to as the “Reviled Standard Perversion,” I wasn’t interested. I put my ESV aside for some time.

Over the next few months I kept encountering strong endorsements of the ESV by prominent, conservative, Calvinistic Bible teachers who were well-respected…i.e., R. C. Sproul, John Piper, and John MacArthur. Maybe I had been too hasty in my judgment. I took another look.
I learned that the ESV began as a response to Zondervan’s attempt in 1997 to publish a gender-neutral version of the NIV. As though the NIV didn’t already have enough problems, this attempt at a politically-correct Bible demanded a response. At a meeting convened by evangelical leader James Dobson (Focus on the Family), guidelines for a translation of the Bible’s gender-related language were drafted. Among those who drafted these guidelines with Dr. Dobson were Joel Belz (World Magazine), Wayne Grudem (Council of Biblical Manhood and Womanhood), John Piper (Desiring God), and R. C. Sproul (Ligonier).[5]

In addition to these guidelines, the idea emerged of a new Bible translation that would partner the literal accuracy of the NASB with the readability of the RSV, but without that version’s de-Christianizing of the text. Thus was the beginning of the ESV.

This new version (published in 2001) may be just what I’m looking for. I’m still investigating, but I have already taught several Bible studies and preached a sermon using this new translation. I think it is at least worth your checking out. Buy a hardback copy. See if you like it. If you do, go get a nice leather copy (genuine, not bonded!). Don’t be surprised if you don’t see me carrying my own copy soon. (I have my eye out for the release of the “Heirloom Calfskin edition” to be released soon.)[6]

Here’s what some folks are saying about the ESV:

“This translation is outstanding. The ESV achieves a new standard in accurate Bible translations for our day.” R. C. Sproul[7]

“The ESV beautifully blends good, contemporary Englsih with reverence and accuracy. I hope it will be mightily used of the Lord.” Erwin Lutzer, Pastor, Moody Church, Chicago

“Because we treasure the Bible as God’s authoritative Word, we rejoice in the appearance of an English Standard Version. Both readable and accurate, the ESV is a marvelous accomplishment.” Dr. Luder Whitlock, former president, Reformed Theological Seminary

“I believe the ESV is the Bible of the future. It is readable, accurate, and reverent.” Dr. Thomas Schreiner, Professor of New Testament, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary

“In a day of endless compromise in translation, I rejoice in the accuracy, objectivity, and conviction evident in the translation of the ESV. This may well be the breakthrough for which we have prayed.” Dr. Paige Patterson, president, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary

“I would like to see the English Standard Version become the most common Bible of the English-speaking church for preaching, teaching, memorizing and study…. Exposing millions of people (pastors, teachers, students, laypeople) to the ESV would undo the dominance of the NIV and put in its place a more literal, and yet a beautifully readable, memorizable, Bible – the Englsih Standard version. And this would be a good thing.” John Piper

Serving on the Advisory Council for the ESV are, among others, Eric Alexander, Alistair Begg, Sir fred and Lady Catherwood, Al Mohler, Mark Dever, Ligon Duncan, Sinclair Ferguson, Timothy George, Carl F. H. Henry (now deceased), Paige Patterson, John Piper, Thomas Schreiner, R. C. Sproul, Joni Eareckson Tada, and Luder Whitlock.

I have three regrets with the English Standard Version. First, I wish they had retained the practice employed by the NKJV of capitalizing pronouns referring to God. I believe this shows an honor to God through His word by the translators that does not diminish the accuracy of the translation. (Remember, that in the original manuscripts, there were no capital letters, even at the beginning of sentences or for proper names.) Second, there is currently no copy of the ESV available in a red-letter edition. Many people find this printing device helpful in their understanding of the Gospels, especially certain dialogical passages. Third, the verses are stacked in paragraph form making it difficult when preaching or teaching to find a verse quickly. I prefer the Lockman Foundation’s method used in the NASB where each verse begins on a new line and paragraphs are marked by printing the verse number of a new paragraph in bold font. These are typesetting issues made by the publisher and have no impact on the fine work of translation done on the ESV.”

I have now used the ESV in preaching, teaching and personal use for three years with great satisfaction.

[1] This may no longer be true.
[2] Dr. Hargrave has since changed to the ESV.
[3] The Reformation Study Bible came out in ESV in 2005.
[4] I regret that the publishers of the ESV (Crossway Books) did not retain this.
[5] The result of this meeting was that Zondervan backed off the gender-neutral version and promised not to proceed with it. They have since broken that promise.
[6] I love this edition. It is the softest leather Bible I have ever held in my hands!
[7] As mentioned earlier, Sproul has converted his study Bible from NKJV to the ESV.

New series in BFG

2005-06-04T18:26:00.000-04:00

On June 12 we begin a new series in BFG on the 10 Commandments. While we studied these commandments a few years ago (maybe 2000 or 2001?), it is important that we go back and reconsider them regularly.

One new theological wave is something called New Covenant Theology. This is not to be confused with Covenant Theology held by our Presbyterian friends. Their theology promotes a household faith that causes them to baptize infants (paedobaptism). Rather New Covenant Theology teaches -- among other things -- that the 10 Commandments are no longer relevant to believers saved by grace under the new covenant (see Hebrews 8.8ff, 10.16ff). Some have referred to this as Antinomianism ("against the law"); however, New Covenant Theologians reject this accusation.

This subject is of particular interest for three reasons:

1. Pastor Roy's sermon series
It will be interesting to see how this new covenant is dealt with in pastor Roy's Sunday morning sermons. He's getting to the place in Hebrews (chapters 8-10) where the New Covenant Theologians build their theological system.

2. Our new BFG series on the 10 Commandments
How are we to understand our relationship to these commandments? Are they obsolete? Are we no longer responsible to obey them? What does Jeremiah 31.31-34 means? What about Romans 2.14-15?

3. Our missions partners
We have mission partners that we are working with who are embracing New Covenant Theology. Is this a tehological nuance that we merely disagree with or is it a heresy that will require the severing of our ministry partnership?

Don't miss this series on the 10 Commandments that begins June 12. I'll see you there.

Is blogging the new spiritual discipline?

2005-06-04T17:55:00.000-04:00

I really thought it would be easy to post regularly to this weblog. Nope. With priorities like a family, a ministry, school, etc., it's been tough to get online when my mind is fresh enough to write coherently. Maybe these posts would become more regular if I viewed blogging as a spiritual discipline.

Certainly we have been told by Don Whitney and others that journaling is a good discipline for the Christian life. One of the fads currently in the youth group is to blog or post thoughts on a discussion forum. However, much of what they write is drivel and folly. (OK, please don't equate my previous post on baseball with drivel and folly!) But maybe this site would see more regular posting if I viewed it as a way to express what God is doing in my life and in our church.

Anyway, I hope that this will be a means for us to communicate, discuss important theological issues and other matters. I'll also be posting some shorter blogs just as a way to get back into the swing of things.

One of the reasons for my renewed interest in blogs is my discovery of Phil Johnson's new blog, Pyromaniac. Check it out. Phil is Executive Director of John MacArthur's radion ministry, Grace to You. Anyway, feel free to post a reply to anything you read here. This is Riverbend's first BFG weblog as far as I know. See you Sunday!

3 months later...

2004-12-30T13:12:00.000-05:00

Since beginning my blog page I have been to New Orleans, Romania, and Memphis. My winter was abruptly transformed with the Pastor's announcement of his sabbatical that began immediately. I've been filling his responsibilities as well as trying to stay on top of mine which included family, work, school (two 12-page papers to research and write + 4 reports to write), etc. My days have been very busy. The vacation days that I had coming have not all been taken, and many of them that were I spent studying in sermon preparation. I've really enjoyed getting to preach each week in Palm Coast and Ormond Beach. Yet I miss Pastor and look forward to his return. I'd like to thank the following folks for helping to make these days productive and delightful:

My Bride
My lovely wife has taken on many responsibilities related to our family, Christmas, and other things so that I could concentrate on my added responsibilities. I am thankful for her help, encouragement and love. She is the best.

My Sons
These three guys are wonderful! Their time with their dad has been reduced from what it would have been during these holidays, but they have handled it well. They have loved and encouraged me and prayed for me. My ministry is stronger because of them. Their ministry is partially fulfilled as they enable me to preach and serve.

My BFG
I had to be out for six weeks this Fall. I was preaching or teaching in Palm Coast, Jacksonville, at Riverbend and in Romania. I came back for one week only to announce that I would be out for the next 7 weeks due to the sabbatical. They have been very understanding. In my stead, Lamar Carnes has been our substitute teacher, and I hear he's doing a great job! Our class loves him. I'm thankful for this great class and their understanding during my absence. I look forward to being back with them on January 9.

Our staff
The pastors on our staff have stepped in and covered some of my duties so that I could step in and cover for the Pastor. There have been times that they have needed my attention and it wasn't available for them. Once Pastor returns, I will be able to catch up with them on their various needs and projects. But during the sabbatical, they have been great at carrying the load.

Pastor
I'm glad he feels comfortable leaving for such a long time. His trust in me is something I am grateful for. Our conversations during these weeks indicate to me that God has done a fresh work in his heart. I look forward to the new year with him back at the helm.

I intend to be a little more regular in my blogging. The two research papers were really an albatross around my neck. I'm so glad they are done. Preaching has consumed much of my time as it takes at least 14 hours for me to write a sermon. (I know, I know....you can't tell I've spent that much time studying when you hear it, but I have! :) ) Anyway, my blogging should become more regular now, so keep reading. Also feel free to post comments to any of these blogs. I'll read them all.

Check this out...
As I was reading James White's blog, I saw his allusion to a website featuring movies reenacted in 30 seconds by bunnies. Yeah, it caught my attention, too. This is not an endorsement, but you can check out this site at www.angryalien.com. Don't miss this page's rendition of "It's a Wonderful Life."

The Superiority of Baseball

2004-10-07T14:55:00.000-04:00

Since the major league baseball post-season has begun, I thought I'd re-release an essay I wrote a few years ago. The following was originally written while I was on a trip to Belarus in 2001:

As I write this, most of the leaves of autumn have peaked in the display of their brilliant color; however, there is a convincing proof that Fall has not yet had its pages closed by the icy fingers of winter. The World Series is being played. The Fall Classic reminds us that summer is still trying to linger, while we must begin to prepare for the dark, bleak days of winter. Winter is a despairing time - not because of its frigid temperatures or gray, dreary skies - but because there is no baseball.
The World Series always makes me wish I could turn back the clock to the days of springtime and summer when the sounds of the baseball sandlot echo across America’s continent. The smell of freshly mown grass, the crack of the bat, the feel of a leather mitt, the cry of the umpire yelling, “Play ball!”, and the visions of a double steal, a squeeze play, or a hit and run all embrace the senses with a feeling that everything in the world, at least for that moment and in that place, is all right.
This particular year I am all the more nostalgic for baseball because I am in a foreign country, and access to the game I love is unavailable. I can only hope and wonder if the dreaded Yankees will finally meet their demise by this latest great National League hope. Distanced away from the action, I am able to contemplate on the greatness and innate goodness of the game.
Baseball as a sport is so far superior to all other games. It towers above its peers in the realm of athletics. Every other sport must bow in reverence to the game that is our national pastime. A casual glance at the nature and character of the game makes it easy to recognize why baseball is identified with Americana along with our favorite dessert and our most nurturing parent.
The longevity of baseball has allowed its roots to sink deep into the American soul. It has been around longer than any of the other popular team sports. It transports us back to a time when life was simple, neighbors cared for each other, and a day off from school sent lads scurrying to an empty lot nearby with a ball glove hanging from a bat thrown over their shoulder.
Baseball is a genteel sport. It is not a war game like football where there are violent trenches, bombs and blitzes and the noisy clamor of collisions. Unlike football players who are garbed in helmets with face guards, baseball players wear knickers and caps. It is a sport where guests always go first, but the home team always has the last say.
It is not played out on a field, but in a park. That park has such splendor that it is called a diamond. Instead of being so rigidly measured, it includes mounds, alleys and gaps. More than just the rectangle of so many fields and courts (another uninviting name for a sport’s location), baseball involves a mosaic of geometric shapes: square bases, the arc of the infield, the circle of the pitcher’s mound, the pentagram of home plate, and even a rectangle on which the pitcher stands. There is an aesthetic appeal to it unlike those rectangular sports that simply move back and forth in a predictable and monotonous ping-pong fashion.
Baseball is a team sport, but one that exposes individual failure. You cannot hide incompetence like you so easily can in football, basketball and other team sports. Baseball accounts for everything: balls, bases, errors. The individual stands out yet within the choreography of the team.
So many things isolate baseball as unique among other sports. Hitting a baseball has been said to be the single most difficult feat in all of sport. Baseball is the only sport where the defense possesses the ball. Baseball has a proper respect for the elements (rain and snow) and is concerned more than any other sport about the comfort of its spectators.
So many sports are driven mechanically by a clock. The time-driven games cause men to perform cowardly acts that they never would if not haunted by the ever-expiring clock. In football, the quarterback will drop to his knees to end the play just to run out the clock. In basketball, the intentional foul is a desperate attempt by the players to prolong the game before the dictatorship of the clock demands its demise. Baseball is agrarian. It is a game of speed played with an unhurried pace. It is a game that is played until it is finished, not until the clock runs out. There is no gun that sounds nor horn that blares to signal that the game has abruptly ended - even if it is in the middle of a play.
Baseball demands that those who would play it must be complete athletes, not just one-task specialists. To be a baseball player, one must be able to run, throw, field and hit. (Yes, hit. The recent development of the designated hitter is a aberration that hopefully will soon go the way of rotary-dial phones.) You must be a skilled generalist to play the game.
The championship for the game is referred to as the Fall Classic. Its global appeal and planetary preeminence in all of sport designates it as the World Series. This contrary to the always disappointing Madison Avenue hype of football’s Super Bowl where there is more excitement about the halftime entertainment and the television commercials played during timeouts than the action being played on the field. The Super Bowl is played on a neutral field robbing the hometown fans of any reward for their season-long allegiance. This football game is a one-chance game that could end with the fluke of one team simply having a bad day as opposed to the World Series that is a best-of-seven series that builds the drama to a crescendo over the course of a week or so. The greatest thing about the Super Bowl is that only two weeks follow until pitchers and catchers report to Spring Training.
I guess the thing I like most about baseball is that it centers around a place called home. That is the goal in baseball...going home. Home is a place from where we are sent. Home is always the best place to return. Those who don’t return home are “stranded,” and those who successfully return home are “safe.”
I have heard all of the arguments to the contrary pleading with the American conscience to abandon the game we love for some lesser sport. They are empty clamorings of the barbarians trying to justify their lack of couth and culture. I will stay with baseball. It is worth waiting through winter.

Welcome to BLOGworld!

2004-10-01T21:08:00.000-04:00

Well, here we are! We have our own blog now.

What is a "blog?" The term is short for "web log." It is an online commentary. It's a cyber pulpit. It's a place for us to express, discuss, interact, fellowship, chat, vent, etc. Bloggers are the new media. It was primarily bloggers that kept the pressure on CBS and Dan Rather during the recent "Rathergate" controversy causing them to finally admit what the rest of the world already realized -- that documents critical of President Bush's National Guard service were indeed forgeries.

I'm not sure exactly how we'll develop this, but I hope it will be fun for you. Feel free to respond to my commentaries and to submit your own ideas. Occasionally we feature guest bloggers as well. We'll look at things related to our BFG class, ministry, Christian growth, Riverbend, reformation, Cardinals baseball, weekly BFG lessons, family, history, Tennessee football, books, theology, computers, politics, interesting websites and more.

I'm not sure how often there will be updates, so just bookmark this page in your "favorites" and check back regularly. Check out these other blogs:

www.aomin.org - This is James White's blog for his ministry Alpha and Omega Ministries where you will find his webcasts, bookstore, blogs, and more. Dr. White has preached at Riverbend. You'll find great theology on this site.
www.worldmagblog.com - This is the blog site for World Magazine, a weekly news magazine written from a perspective committed to the Bible as the inerrant Word of God. John Piper and Al Mohler are regular contributors to the print version of this periodical.

If you know of other blogs you'd recommend, post them here for us to read.