Reformed Baptist Thinker

Rest in Peace RBT, Long Live ACFAR!

2008-03-21T22:30:00.000-05:00

As regular visitors to this blog know, the Reformed Baptist Thinker blog has laid dormant for several months. Why? Simple. I am now spending my time regularly posting to a new blog: the ACFAR Blog. This weekend, I have finally decided to officially close this blog.

But don't worry! You will still find me over at the ACFAR Blog! So don't forget to subscribe to my new blog in your feed reader. If that sounds too complicated, you can simply sign up to have my blog posts sent to you by e-mail. And for those bloggers out there that have included me in your blogrolls, please consider updating your link to my new blog.

I appreciate the many readers and visitors that have been a part of my first blog. The Reformed Baptist Thinker has definitely been a learning experience! Thank you again for your encouragement and support. Now let us glorify Christ through defending His truth in East Africa!

Come and Read With Me!

2007-12-17T21:00:00.000-05:00

I know that this blog has laid dormant for a while, but I have been keeping busy with the Africa Center for Apologetics Research (ACFAR) and our ministry's new blog. If you have not yet done so, I highly encourage you to check out the new site and subscribe to its blog.

In any case, I am excited about a new way that you can participate in our East African ministry. I have established the ACFAR Network, a community of evangelical Christians that will work together toward making a difference in Uganda and throughout the region. We will begin by reading through The New Faces of Christianity: Believing the Bible in the Global South by Philip Jenkins. Starting in January, the ACFAR Network will read and discuss one chapter a week for two months.

Want to learn more? Even better, would you like to join? Read more about our new group and sign-up here. I look forward to reading and interacting with you!

Africa Center for Apologetics Research Celebration!

2007-12-03T00:00:00.000-05:00

Today is the day that I have set aside for people to get to know my ministry, the Africa Center for Apologetics Research (ACFAR). The web site has lots of information as well as some new features, including a page of endorsements, a blog, and the ability to donate online. Be sure to check it out!

If you are a fellow blogger and would like to join in the fun, you can easily promote ACFAR on your blog too! Simply check out last week's post "Spread the Vision!" for the guidelines. And don't forget: one random blogger will win a free autographed copy of Tim Challies' new book The Discipline of Spiritual Discernment (sent to the winner as soon as it is released).

Please remember to add yourself and your ACFAR blog post to the list at the "Welcome to the ACFAR Blog!" page. It will be your ticket for the drawing. Thank you in advance for being a friend of the Africa Center for Apologetics Research!

Mormonism, Blomberg, and Me

2007-12-02T23:00:00.000-05:00

This weekend has proved to be an interesting one! Over on the ACFAR Blog, I have begun posting relevant links in a weekly round-up along with some brief thoughts. Last Friday, two of those links were Rob Bowman's "Do Mormons believe 'that Jesus was fully God'?" and "Christianity Today, Mormons, and the Deity of Christ" from the Parchment and Pen blog.

So what? You may ask. Well, I was also critical of some of the comments in Bowman's entries posted by Craig Blomberg and Paul Owen. Much to my surprise, Dr. Blomberg commented on my blog! Today, I posted a response. Again, Blomberg commented.

But I'm not simply trying to get you to read a he-said-he-responded dialogue. I believe our interaction was both informative and gracious. What do you think?

Lord willing, I hope for more of this kind of conversation at the recently launched ACFAR blog. You're welcome to join us!

Michael W. Smith, "It's a Wonderful Christmas"

2007-12-01T16:00:00.000-05:00

OK, I admit it. I am a traditionalist at heart. Especially when it comes to the holidays. My car radio is tuned to the 24-hour Christmas music station. My family decorated our Christmas tree the weekend after Thanksgiving. We're even going to observe the Advent season (and we're not Catholic!).

Needless to say, I like my Christmas music traditional as well--full orchestras, Christ-centered words, etc. In an ironic way, the latest from Michael W. Smith largely fits into this mold. I was able to get a copy through the blog for music program, and appreciate Reunion Records sending it my way. What do I think? "It's a Wonderful Christmas" is a balanced album with a good mix of instrumental and carol-like songs. We were listening to it while setting up our Christmas tree and it set a wonderful Christmas mood.

While I am not always the biggest Smith fan, I found this CD to be a treat. I'm sure we'll continue listening to it through the holiday season.

Spread the Vision!

2007-11-26T22:00:00.000-05:00

Over the last few months, I have spent a lot of time working on improving the web site for the Africa Center for Apologetics Research (ACFAR). From changing some of the graphics and layout to adding new features (such as online donations and a blog), the ACFAR site has really been enhanced. Be sure to check it out—and don't forget to add the blog's feed to your feed reader!

To celebrate ACFAR's expanded presence online, I am asking all bloggers to join me in promoting the web site together on Monday, December 3rd. After checking out the site, please consider posting an entry on your blog with a link to ACFAR. Your post can be about whatever you like: the need for apologetics worldwide, a summary of ACFAR's plans, your interests in East Africa, etc. Be creative (and if you need help, don't be afraid to ask)! The goal is to help others discover a ministry in Uganda that seeks to glorify Christ through defending His truth.

At the same time, by getting involved with raising awareness, you will be entered into a random drawing for a free autographed copy of Tim Challies' new book The Discipline of Spiritual Discernment (sent to the winner as soon as it is released). Additionally, your blog will be featured here as a friend of the Africa Center for Apologetics Research.

So what are you waiting for? Start making plans now! And if you plan on joining, please let me know with a comment on this post. Your comment will be your ticket for the drawing. To help you out some more, below are a couple of graphics that you can use in your blog post. I look forward to seeing what God can accomplish through us!

Yesterday's Narrow Mind

2007-11-20T23:00:00.000-05:00

Yesterday I was interviewed by Pastor Gene Cook on the Narrow Mind show. So be sure to download Program #887. We talked about my conversion from Mormonism and my plans with ACFAR. Enjoy! As always, I love comments!

Monday's Iron Sharpens Iron

2007-11-13T21:00:00.000-05:00

I appreciate Chris Arnzen for having me on the radio show "Iron Sharpens Iron" yesterday. For those of you who were not able to listen, you can now download the program as an MP3. I welcome your thoughts and/or questions!

Gaining Exposure and Raising Awareness

2007-11-09T22:00:00.000-05:00

As usual, I have been keeping busy lately! What's new?

First, an article I wrote responding to Dr. Craig Blomberg's sermon "What Would Jesus Say to a Mormon?" (available to download in MP3 format) has been published in the latest issue of Mormonism Researched. I am sure that Mormonism Research Ministry will eventually post the article on their web site, but why not sign up for a free subscription and get it in print now?

Second, I am scheduled to be interviewed on Monday's Iron Sharpens Iron radio show about the need for biblical discernment in East Africa and ACFAR's vision to address this critical issue. If you can, please listen in between 3-4 PM EST on the radio or online. You can even call in and say "Hi!"

Book Review: Announcing the Kingdom

2007-11-02T22:30:00.000-05:00

Since beginning the process of becoming an international missionary, I am seeking to become more knowledgeable of God's missionary task in light of His revealed Word. One book I recently pulled off of my shelf is Announcing the Kingdom: The Story of God's Mission in the Bible by Arthur F. Glasser. As a well-known and respected missiologist, I knew that Glasser's analysis would be important to read and digest.

The author's intention is to unfold the mission of God throughout redemptive history. As a result, his work is divided into six parts: God's mission in the beginning, God's mission through Israel, God's mission among the nations, God's mission through Jesus the Christ, God's mission through the Holy Spirit by the church, and God's mission extends to the end of time. Through exploring the theme of the kingdom of God through Scripture, Glasser seeks to provide insight for missionary work in the new millennium.

In reading the book, I appreciate Glasser's desire to understand missions through the lens of biblical theology. Too often missions books focus on international ministry in light of contemporary sciences. While these areas may provide insight into our God given task, the Christian's primary and central source for the study of missions is Scripture. Glasser roots his discussion with the proper starting point—the Word of God.

However, the author's unveiling of the kingdom of God needs to be founded upon a more robust covenant theology. There were many areas in which I disagreed, and they are too many to handle in this review. But to mention a few, he appears to hold to inclusivism (holding out the possibility of salvation in Christ to those who have never heard the gospel), does not like confessional Calvinism (because of our belief in reprobation), is weak in his ecclesiology (does not believe Scripture sets forth a specific church structure), and holds to premillennialism (admittedly not the dispensational version). Some of these issues are more troublesome than others, but I frequently could not find biblical support to ground Glasser's claims.

Additionally, while I appreciated many of the author's mission insights, they seemed "tacked on" to his survey rather than flowing from his engagement with Scripture. It is almost as if I was reading a biblical theology overview with some missionary application thrown in. With this being the case, it seems better for one to read a distinguished biblical theology (say Graeme Goldsworthy's According to Plan) along with an introductory work on missions.

Announcing the Kingdom was informative, but I admit that I was hoping for more and would hesitate recommending it to others given some of my reservations. Maybe I'll find what I am looking for in Christopher J. H. Wright's massive work The Mission of God: Unlocking the Bible's Grand Narrative. We'll see!

A Nice Cruise

2007-10-23T23:00:00.000-05:00

Some of you may have been wondering where I have been. Well, my wife and I celebrated both my graduation from seminary as well as our tenth anniversary by taking a cruise. We went with Alpha and Omega Ministries up the Canadian border for a time of refreshment and edification.

You can read Jame's White's reflections over at his blog. I simply want to thank him (as well as the great work of Sovereign Cruises) for a wonderful time of learning and fellowship. Here is a picture of James and I together on formal night:

Book Review: Who are the Living-Dead?

2007-10-05T22:30:00.000-05:00

While preparing to become a missionary in East Africa, I am seeking to better understand the cultural beliefs and worldviews of those living in this region of the world. The latest book I have completed is Who are the Living-Dead? A Theology of Death, Life After Death and the Living-Dead by Richard Gehman. Gehman is an American missionary who served for years with the Africa Inland Mission at Scott Theological College in Kenya. He is also editor of the Africa Journal of Evangelical Theology.

The living-dead may not be much of an issue for Christians and others in North America, but they are very real for many Africans. As an experienced missionary teaching African pastors, Gehman recognized the need to address ancestors, death, and the living-dead biblically. He summarizes his purpose with three goals:

This book has three objectives:
(1) to provide theological and pastoral help for the Christian pastors and church leaders in Africa so that they can teach and strengthen Christians to face sickness and death with courage without returning to African Traditional Religion.
(2) to provide the educated, thinking lay Christian in Africa with an understanding of death according to the Bible so that he can develop a Christian world view and stand strong in his faith.
(3) to help the church in Africa develop a biblical theology of death, life after death and the living-dead so that she will continue to grow strong in the knowledge of the gospel and resist teaching contrary to the truth of the gospel (x).

His book is broken down into five parts. The author begins by explaining and summarizing the African Traditional Religion's beliefs and practices regarding death, life after death and the living-dead. Then he examines how Christians are to relate to God and to our parents, including the tension between the first and the fifth commandments concerning worship and honor. Next, he turns to different solutions Christians have offered to these issues in Africa, assessing their truthfulness in light of Scripture. The rest of his work is devoted to building a biblical understanding of the living-dead, death, and the afterlife.

Overall, Gehman's book is excellent. I found it very informative. He tackles many questions, such as the difference between veneration and worship, whether the living can speak and relate to the dead, and the powers of darkness. His work is theologically rich while remaining clear for the average believer. Additionally, I am grateful to his continual commitment to the centrality of Scripture in his study. He exegetes numerous biblical texts to see how they relate to the important issues under consideration.

One section of this work that really stands out is his consideration of the intermediate state (as well as his appendix on Hades and Sheol). What happens to believers and unbelievers between their deaths and the time when Christ returns? Gehman's treatment is one of the best overviews surrounding this complex question that I have read. Easy to understand and biblically compelling, I am especially thankful for the clarity he brings to this difficult issue.

However, I do have a couple of disagreements. First, Gehman seems to believe that Christians can be demonized (demon possessed). He writes:

Christians who are walking in obedience to God, filled by His Spirit and washed in the blood, have nothing to fear from the powers of darkness, as we shall see. But the Christian who lowers his guard and falls away from God by living in sin, may open himself up to various forms of oppression from the unclean spirits. There are various degrees of demonic control, ranging from milder forms of demonic oppression to a complete spirit possession (170).

While demons are real and can bring severe external oppression upon Christians, a true follower of Christ cannot be demonized. For more information and an excellent refutation of this view, see the article "Can a Christian Be 'Demonized'?" by Brent Grimsley and Elliot Miller in the Summer 2003 issue of the Christian Research Journal.

Second, when dealing with the destiny of the unevangelized, Gehman leaves open the possibility of salvation apart from the gospel. Following Reformers such as Zwingli and others, he says:

General revelation does not offer any hope of salvation. Only by a special revelation from God Himself can anyone understand his own sinful condition, repent of his sin, and turn to the Lord for forgiveness. Normally this comes through preaching the gospel. But there may be some individuals whom God draws to Himself apart from such proclamation, as He did with Job, Melchizedek and others. But this is the exception, not the rule (282).

In his analysis, the author simply does not sufficiently take into account the progression of redemption. We do not live in the era of Job and Melchizedek. Jesus Christ has come, establishing the reality of the new covenant. No hope exists apart from gospel proclamation.

Nevertheless, I cannot stress enough the importance of this book for Africans and missionaries serving our Lord in Africa. The church is indebted to Gehman for his taking the time to provide a theology of death, life after death, and the living-dead. I am sure that this book will continue to be essential reading for years to come.

One last note: this book was published by Evangel Publishing House in Nairobi, Kenya. While their distribution reaches Britain, this book may not be easy to find and purchase. Do not let this challenge deter you—it is well worth the money.

Book Review: Free Indeed From Sorcery Bondage

2007-09-26T23:30:00.000-05:00

"Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God" (Galatians 5:19-21). The Apostle Paul warns followers of Christ about the works of the flesh. In the West, we are familiar with most of these sins. But sorcery? What should we think of this evil?

For people living throughout Africa, this is not an abstract question. Sorcery is a part of their daily lives, and it does not simply disappear when one becomes a Christian. Marvin S. Wolford should know--he served as a missionary for 42 years in the Republic of Congo. And he brings the light of Scripture to bear on his experience and ministry in Free Indeed from Sorcery Bondage.

His book is divided into three parts. To begin, Wolford explains the reality of sorcery in Africa. For many throughout the continent, sorcery is more than a reality. It is a way of life. Next, the author turns to the Word of God. What does the Bible have to say about sorcery? Quite a bit, actually. But too many of us have never really taken the time to recognize the numerous passages dealing with sorcery or connected beliefs and practices. Wolford leaves no stone unturned, thoroughly explaining what God's truth has to say about this overlooked issue. Finally, he seeks to bring his insights down to a practical level. How can believers minister to sorcery-bound people? Practical steps and guidance is given to those seeking to work with individuals involved in sorcery.

I really appreciate Wolford's work. His explanation of sorcery in animistic contexts was enlightening. He also includes numerous examples of people throughout Africa, showing how central the sorcery cycle is to different cultures and people groups. Most importantly, he turns to Scripture for a true assessment of sorcery. This is the book's key strength. One may consult various anthropological or sociological materials to learn about sorcery. But only the Bible provides the examination necessary for faithful and fruitful ministry among those who live with sorcery. I enthusiastically agree with the author when he observes:

Preaching based on the scriptural facts, plus teaching the meaning and pertinence of the Scriptures, are the means of delivering people bound by sorcery. There is no human strength nor human wisdom that can deal with the situation. Spirit filled evangelistic preaching from the Bible, which regards sorcery as a sin, but a forgiveable sin, should direct people to a definite time of confession and repentance that will make a definite break with their past beliefs and practices. This is precisely the first work of the Holy Spirit in those who are in bondage (81).

At the same time, I must admit that Wolford and I come from different perspectives. He is a Wesleyan Arminian. Hence, in his rejection of fatalism, I have difficulties with his defense of personal free choices. He says, "Consequently, it is God's will for everyone to choose life; but the choice is up to each person" (134). Or, "When Jesus urges: 'Seek first his kingdom and his righteousness,' he is admonishing his hearers to make the choice to seek God's kingdom first before all other things, but he leaves that decision up to them" (137). Biblically, we simply do not have this kind of freedom. Our hearts, our minds, our wills, every part of us is depraved. We would never choose God if left to ourselves. It is only through God's sovereign work of grace that we repent, believe, and obey Him.

Additionally, I would disagree with his belief in a second work of grace. Wolford writes "there is a distinct experience of filling that is separate from the initial salvation which Christ accomplishes in the repentant sinner's heart. The Holy Spirit is sent by Christ himself (see John 15:26), and his work in the believer is to glorify Christ (see v. 14), to guide him into all truth, and to give power to his life" (179). Thus, he divides Christians into two groups: victorious Christians and nominal Christians. However, this is an artificial separation. All believers are filled with the Holy Spirit when we are saved. Our lives are a slow process of spiritual maturity as we become more like Christ.

Regardless, I would not let these differences stop a Christian from being richly blessed through the reading of Free Indeed From Sorcery Bondage. Wolford provides such a wealth of insight and biblical application that I believe all missionaries serving where sorcery is a challenge should read this book. As I prepare to serve my Savior in Africa, I am sure that I will be regularly referring back to Wolford's work.

Unfortunately, his book is no longer in print. However, you can still purchase copies through sending a check for $10 each plus $2 shipping per book to:

Jean Wolford
125 Lowry Lane
Wilmore, KY 40390

For those desiring to learn more about this vital subject, make sure to pick up a copy while you can.

John Simpson?

2007-09-25T21:30:00.000-05:00

Yes, I am a Simpsons fan. So when I heard that I could become a Simpson, well, what do you think I did? Here's the result:

What do you think? Would you like to become a Simpson too? Just visit the site!

Book Review: Every Thought Captive

2007-09-20T23:00:00.000-05:00

The Bible informs all Christians of our need to defend the faith: "always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect" (1 Peter 3:15). How are we to do so? Different methods have been advocated over the years, but many believers (including myself) have come to embrace presuppositional apologetics as the biblical way to defend the Christian worldview.

Nevertheless, presuppositionalism tends to remain far too difficult for most believers to understand. What in the world are presuppositions anyway? Too often, presuppositionalists remain content in using technical and philosophical jargon in explaining our view. We'll use phrases like "epistemological inconsistency" or "the preconditions of intelligibility." Our approach to defending the faith never gets down to the grass-roots level. But it should--and it must.

Answering this challenge is Richard Pratt and his book Every Thought Captive: A Study Manual for the Defense of Christian Truth. Specifically written for the high school level and above, this work admirably popularizes presuppositional apologetics. The result is a helpful and easy read.

Pratt's writing really is this book's greatest strength. His is the first presuppositionalist book that I have read where ordinary language is used throughout. The chapters even include helpful pictures and diagrams to visually help readers understand the points being made. I have finally found a book that I am not afraid to recommend to sincere Christians desiring to learn how to defend their faith.

If there is a shortcoming that I find with the book, it is that this work is too short. Pratt takes care in laying down the foundation of our apologetic task, but he seems to rush through applying these biblical principles at the end. Since he intended it to be a practical manual, I would have liked to see a little more "how-to"ness.

Regardless, all Christians desiring to defend our faith will benefit by reading Every Thought Captive. I pray that it will inspire and equip many believers to become apologists. I wholeheartedly agree with John Frame as he writes in his foreword:

Reformed people have been generally weak in training one another to do apologetics. Generally we have set forth the theory and have hoped that the practice would take care of itself. But this attitude has often kept Reformed apologetics in the status of a scholars' game. That ought not to be. Van Til's insights are life-transforming and world-transforming. It is time that gifted apologists be mobilized to press the claims of Scripture upon their friends and neighbors and upon the whole opinion-making process of our culture (vii-viii).

Book Review: Christian Apologetics by Cornelius Van Til

2007-09-13T22:00:00.000-05:00

For Christians seeking to know how to defend our faith in today's world, Cornelius Van Til is impossible to avoid. Some love him, others hate him, and still others try to ignore him altogether, but no one denies that he began a revolution in the field of apologetics. Believers should no longer defend our faith in the traditional way, Van Til insisted. Rather, we must reason by presupposition.

As a result, anyone wanting to learn more about the presuppositional method of apologetics needs to go back to the source--Van Til himself. And a great introduction to his approach is Christian Apologetics.

At the same time, reading Van Til is not easy. He writes as a knowledgeable and sophisticated philosopher, and this work is essentially one of his syllabi for courses at Westminster Theological Seminary. I admittedly found myself reading over some paragraphs three or four times, and even then I only probably understood 3/4ths of his book. Nevertheless, this difficulty should not stop anyone from taking the time to digest Christian Apologetics. After all, how can one truly learn except by struggling through important and informative material? This book is well worth the effort.

There are a few reasons why I recommend this book so strongly. First, Van Til roots his method for defending the faith in theology. He begins his study of apologetics where any Christian should start--with our Triune God as He has revealed Himself in Scripture. The biblical worldview itself (including its truths about God, humanity, Christ, salvation, the church, and God's plan for His creation) leads us to understand how we are to defend our faith. We defend God's revealed worldview as a whole, confronting non-believers with their rejection and suppression of it.

Second, Van Til often uses helpful and memorable illustrations and analogies. From a fortress to a saw, from the sun to water, this book is filled with memorable insights as he explains his tightly-knit argumentation.

Third, actually reading Van Til will correct misunderstandings surrounding him and his views. For example, how many times have you heard that Van Til didn't believe in using evidences? Anybody who will take the time to read his work knows that such a claim is simply in error. Here is one example:

This does not imply that it will be possible to bring the whole debate about Christian theism to full expression in every discussion of individual historical fact. Nor does it imply that the debate about historical detail is unimportant. It means that no Christian apologist can afford to forget the claim of his system with respect to any particular fact. . . . It is only as manifestations of that system that they are what they are. If the apologist does not present them as such, he does not present them for what they are (153-154).

Van Til was not opposed to using facts. He was opposed to using "brute" facts--facts used on their own, divorced from the Christian worldview that gives them meaning.

Fourth, the second edition of this book is even more valuable. Edited by William Edgar, it includes a helpful introduction as well as explanatory notes throughout (while never distracting from Van Til's actual writing). Latin terms are translated and philosophical concepts are explained. His notes are brief but tremendously beneficial.

What can I say? Take up the difficult but rewarding challenge of reading Van Til. If you stick with it, you won't be disappointed. Once we understand how God wants us to defend our faith, we can confidently confront non-believers with their rebellion against their Creator. By God's grace, they will be reconciled to Him through Jesus Christ.

Announcement: ACFAR is Now Online!

2007-09-10T22:30:00.000-05:00

I have a major announcement: the Africa Center for Apologetics Research now has its own web site. While it is definitely a work in progress, be sure to check it out!

I appreciate all of the hard work that has gone into this site and pray that God will use it to raise awareness as well as the needed support to bring biblical discernment to East Africa.

Feel free to send me your thoughts, comments, and questions. I am especially humbled by the endorsements that have begun to come in. Here is one by my spiritual mentor, Dr. Tom Nettles:

I have known John Divito and his family for several years now in our relation through Southern Seminary and local church life together. He is a highly gifted man, with powerful gifts of analysis and teaching, with deep motivation for service to Christ and preserving gospel purity. His particular calling in helping indigenous pastors and churches resist the invasion of the cults and consequent gospel corruption fits his abilities and his background wonderfully. I commend him, his family, and his labor to the churches for he is giving himself to do an urgent Great Commission task, "teaching them to observe all things, whatsoever I have commanded you."

Book Review: Pushing the Antithesis

2007-09-07T22:30:00.000-05:00

Knowing of my interest in apologetics, a good friend of mine gave me a copy of Pushing the Antithesis: The Apologetic Methodology of Greg L. Bahnsen as a graduation present. I greatly appreciate his gift, and ever since have been looking forward to reading this book.

As one who appreciates Bahnsen's insight in defending the Christian faith, I welcome this work's intent. A college-age handbook on presuppositional apologetics with attention to application, it is a unique and needed treatment for young Christians bombarded with challenges to their faith.

Unfortunately, I finished the book disappointed. First, it claims to be a distillation of a series of presentations by Bahnsen to high school and college age students. By this, I expected the book to be essentially a textual version of these lectures. After all, the book never mentions an editor or indicates a different author. Nevertheless, I cannot see how the bulk of this material came from Bahnsen's lectures. It regularly includes excerpts from Bahnsen's books (Always Ready, Van Til's Apologetic, etc.), something I doubt he would have done in his speaking engagements. Additionally, many quotes are from contemporary sources that were published after Bahnsen's untimely death in 1995. I really had no idea throughout the book whether I was actually reading Bahnsen or another (unnamed) writer.

Second, the book was overly reliant on the internet for its sources. Not only does this lead to a short shelf life, but it indicates a lack of substantial scholarship. Should one really turn to the online version of Encarta for outlining the scientific method (p. 119)? Wikipedia is even used several times as a source, a basic no-no for serious research and writing. A college student would never get away with something like this!

Third, its practical usefulness is limited. The book spends a lot of its time showing how one can refute atheism. While it effectively demonstrates the shortcomings of naturalism and materialism, our shifting culture forces us to interact with other kinds of challenges. How does one use the transcendental argument with a Muslim? With New Age spirituality? With cultists? A reliable handbook for Christian students must treat such issues much more thoroughly to be helpful.

I do not mean to say that Pushing the Antithesis has no value. It is a decent introduction to presuppositional apologetics. Nevertheless, with the problems given above, if I wanted somebody to learn more about Greg Bahnsen's apologetic methodology, I'd probably just suggest that he reads Always Ready.

New Dogtoons Interview with Weird Al

2007-08-28T21:30:00.000-05:00

OK, so I know that I haven't blogged much in terms of substance lately, but thought I'd at least pass along the latest release from Dogtoons in their "Weird Al" interview:

Monk and Neagle, "The Twenty-First Time"

2007-08-28T19:57:00.000-05:00

Do you like Steven Curtis Chapman or Michael W. Smith? Do you enjoy acoustic pop music? If so, then you may want to check out the upcoming CD from Monk and Neagle, The Twenty-First Time.

Reunion Records was generous in sending me a free copy to review, and I appreciate hearing new music from fellow believers devoted to the Lord. While I admit that their music was not exactly my cup of tea, I know that those looking for a good beat will not be disappointed.

So if you are interested, it'll be released on September 18th. Here's a little more promo information:

The celebration and contemplation of everyday life is where we discover the truth and joy of who we really are. Even the stories that emerge from daily encounters with ordinary people and conditions can oftentimes offer profound life-lessons and help resolve what really matters in this life.

Telling these stories is front and center for Monk & Neagle, an acoustic-pop duo that sprang to life organically in Amarillo, TX out of a 12-year friendship between Trent Monk and Michael Neagle. Now back with their sophomore album release, The Twenty-First Time—its first on Reunion Records—Monk & Neagle deliver a storyteller’s delight, full of deep spiritual conviction, high-octane fun, passionate imagination, and sincere, heartfelt worship. A road-worthy soundtrack for life from start to finish, The Twenty-First Time beckons you to listen and follow.

“These stories, these songs were born in the everyday,” Michael Neagle says, “from the conviction that comes out of personal experience, faith in the middle of doubt, and our desire to unbox the Gospel. To show how relevant it is to where we all live.”

Produced by Ed Cash, The Twenty-First Time exceeds the John Mayer/Jack Johnson/Bebo Norman jazz/acoustic-pop fusion established on Monk & Neagle’s 2004 self-titled debut with even more irresistible hooks and melodies. The duo’s phenomenal vocal work is powerfully evident. But by far, the telltale mark of distinction here is found in the lyrical depth and meaning that permeates the record.

“I’ve worked on a lot of great records,” says Cash, Gospel Music’s 2007 “Producer of the Year,” “and the special ones you can usually identify. From the beginning, the songs to me on this record are simply at another level… It’s been amazing, watching these guys bring them to life.”

From the unforgettable title track, which pricks at our excuses not to love the unlovable, to the heart-melting “What Soldiers Do,” to the authentically worshipful “Hallelujah, Jesus,” these stories—these songs—grow richer with the telling.

"Weird Al" Concert

2007-08-20T21:00:00.000-05:00

Yes, my wife and I attended the "Weird Al" Yankovic concert in Cincinnati last weekend. What can I say? There is a reason that "Weird Al" is my favorite musician/comedian. Instead of rambling on about how much I loved the concert, here are a few pictures:

Weird Al singing "Do I Creep You Out?"

Weird Al performing his classic hit "Eat It"

Weird Al singing "The Saga Begins" (yes, he had Darth Vader among a line of storm troopers dancing to the tune!)

As you can see, it was an awesome concert! And his encore was definitely memorable, including a song based on an "interview" he had with Michael Stipe of REM. Here is a video of this destined classic (but please remember that this video is not from the concert I attended--I didn't bring a digital camcorder!):

Personal Update

2007-08-17T19:00:00.000-05:00

This evening I would like to try to catch everyone up to speed on my life. I know that I have not been blogging much lately, and I hope this post will explain a little more fully why this is the case.

I am simply amazed at how fast this year has gone by. So much has happened, and there are still several months left! But the Lord has been gracious to me and my family, and we are thankful for his abundant provision and blessing.

My year began with a mission trip to Uganda. You can read my reflections about Uganda in an entry I wrote after my return. In many ways, my heart has remained in Uganda.

Nevertheless, I had one last semester to finish at seminary to graduate. My wife was also entering her third trimester of pregnancy with our fourth child. February to May breezed by, filled with activity and stress. By God's grace, we made it through this turbulent time. I technically received my M.Div. and my new daughter on the same day!

It was in the midst of all this busyness that my wife and I made a life changing decision. After much prayer and hearing wise counsel, we would serve Christ in Uganda. The need for biblical discernment and apologetics is so great in East Africa. Both of us have become deeply burdened for the body of Christ there.

However, if this was to become our future, much remained to work through after graduation. We needed to figure out the details about living and serving in Uganda. Then we had to develop a strategy to raise awareness and support. This process took longer than we expected—the months of June and July.

During this time, I also realized that my work situation would no longer fit our future plans. I didn't need the flexibility during the day to attend seminary; I now required free time on evenings and weekends to travel and speak about our ministry in Africa. Therefore, I found a new full-time IT job and dropped my two part-time jobs.

This brings us back to my blog. My new IT position does not have the down time for blogging that I used to have. Evenings are devoted to family and future mission preparation. With this in mind, I'm not sure what the future holds for The Reformed Baptist Thinker.

I do plan on continuing to post, but the frequency of my entries will likely be less and my focus will probably shift to more missions and international-related posts. I welcome any thoughts or questions that you have. Regardless, I hope this brief personal note helps you understand a little more fully the transition of my life and this blog.

ACFAR: Bringing Biblical Discernment to Africa

2007-08-16T22:00:00.000-05:00

I know that I have been away from my blog for a while. Much has happened in my life over the last several months. I plan on giving a more thorough update tomorrow. Nevertheless, I wanted to let you know about my family's future now that I have finished seminary.

Our desire is to serve the Lord by bringing biblical discernment to Africa. Ever since I returned from Uganda in January, I knew that my family needed to return. Now we have officially begun the process to make this a reality.

Below is a letter that I sent out today along with a family prayer card (do you know how hard it is for a family of six to have a good photo?!?) and a commitment card. If you or anyone you know would like to receive a copy, I'd be more than happy to send you one. Just e-mail me and let me know.

I pray that God will unite many of us together with a common vision of helping believers in Uganda with biblical discernment, defending the faith, and countering the cults. May Christ bless our efforts!

Dear Believer in Christ,

Imagine waking up one morning and discovering there was nothing in your language to help you respond to the errors of the cultists coming constantly to your door—no tracts on Jehovah’s Witnesses, no books to counter Mormonism, not even one countercult organization you could turn to for assistance. This may be an imaginary problem here in America, but it’s all too real for pastors and lay Christians across Africa. Yet by God’s grace, we can change this!

My local church is preparing to send me as a missionary with CFAR, the Centers for Apologetics Research. CFAR is a unique international network of evangelical cult research and education agencies whose main goal is to equip Christians in the developing world for biblical discernment, the defense of the faith, and cult evangelism.

You and I can make a lasting difference in Africa! God has opened the door to establish the Africa Center for Apologetics Research, a partnership between CFAR and the Kampala Evangelical School of Theology (KEST). Because they share this vision, KEST has asked me to chair a new department of apologetics, from which I can train African church leaders and organize conferences on cults and biblical discernment. Additionally, this Center will become a regional research and training hub for equipping Christians to defend their faith.

It seems the Lord has uniquely equipped me for such a work as this. As a former Mormon, I know what it’s like to be in a cult, and God has given me a strong, continuing love and concern for cult members. And through my studies at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, He’s given me the tools to defend Christ’s gospel against cultists and equip other Christians to do so.

To embark on this ambitious task, our family will need to raise $6,000 per month to live and minister full time in Kampala. While this amount is more than I anticipated, extensive interviews with missionaries and nationals in Uganda confirmed that it reflects what a missionary family of six will need.

You are very important to me. You can count on my prayers, and in the weeks and months ahead I’ll keep you informed. May God use us both to make a difference for Christ in Africa!

Because of His grace,
John Divito, East Africa Director
The Centers for Apologetics Research (CFAR)
e-mail: divito@thecenters.org

P.S. In case you’re wondering—individuals and churches who want to financially support our family’s ministry in Africa may begin now, because funds will accrue toward our considerable travel and outgoing needs, enabling us to reach the field sooner. We hope to move to Uganda and begin our work just as quickly as our Savior allows!

Ten Books that I'd Love to See

2007-08-03T17:30:00.000-05:00

Some bloggers have recently been posting titles of books that they don't plan on actually seeing any time soon. Be sure to check out the hilarious lists over at Pyromaniacs and Triablogue. I thought I'd continue the series with my own top ten list of books that I'd love to see. Here they are:

10) R.C. Sproul, Presuppositional Apologetics: A Biblical Defense of the Christian Faith and a Critique of Traditional Apologetics

9) John MacArthur, Why Every Self-Respecting Calvinist Rejects Dispensational Premillennialism

8) Joyce Meyer, A Woman Must Remain Silent

7) Benny Hinn, Don't Give Me Miracles, Just Give Me Jesus

6) Brian McLaren, Absolute Truth? H*ll Yes!

5) Samuel Harris with a foreword by Richard Dawkins an an introduction by Christopher Hitchens, Why I am Not an Atheist

4) Francis Beckwith, The Pope is the Antichrist

3) T.D. Jakes, Christian, Thou Must Believe the Trinity

2) Steve Chalke with a foreword by Scot McKnight, PSA: Penal Substitutionary Atonement is the Heart of the Gospel

1) Robert Millet with a foreword by Stephen Robinson, How I Left Mormonism and Found Christ

Moore on the Gospel, Culture and Evangelism

2007-08-01T22:00:00.000-05:00

I'm sure you have noticed my reduced posting over the last few weeks.... Well, I hope to fill you in on what I've been up to soon.

Until then, be sure to listen to the first podcast from the Said at Southern folks. It is an interview with Dr. Russell Moore on the Gospel, Culture and Evangelism. I can't wait to see what they come up with next!

McLaren Continues Reading

2007-07-30T14:00:00.000-05:00

Can't get enough of Brian McLaren? While I have easily grown tired of his one-note fiddle, I try to keep up with his antics as an apologist.

That is why I won't stop with my previous post of his first two readings from his latest book. He's already posted part three. Maybe he'll read his entire book online and then I won't need to buy it.... But somehow, I doubt it!

For Whom Did Christ Die? Conclusion

2007-07-27T19:00:00.000-05:00

Our study has taken us a long way. We began by asking the question: "For Whom Did Christ Die?" Looking to Scripture for our answer, we examined the atonement's purpose, nature, and result. Then we contrasted our biblical conclusions with the opposing view. Finally, we took the time to consider common objections (Part 1 and Part 2) against the doctrine of limited atonement. Now we have reached the point of concluding our study.

Conclusion

For whom did Christ die? He died for a select group: his people. This precious truth revealed in the Word of God is the doctrine of limited atonement. Examining the atonement’s purpose, nature, and result confirms that the Bible is not silent on the atonement’s extent. Christ did not die for all people equally; his death actually accomplished the salvation of his elect people alone. Even after considering objections, the sufficiency and efficacy of Christ’s death prove its limitedness.

Completely convinced of Christ’s sufficient atoning power, Spurgeon faithfully preached Christ’s death to his people. He proclaimed:

He [Christ] suffered all the horror of hell: in one pelting shower of iron wrath it fell upon him, with hail-stones bigger than a talent; and he stood until the black cloud had emptied itself completely. There was our debt; huge and immense; he paid the utmost farthing of whatever his people owed; and now there is not so much as a doit or a farthing due to the justice of God in the way of punishment from any believer; and though we owe God gratitude, though we owe much to his love, we owe nothing to his justice; for Christ in that hour took all our sins, past, present, and to come, and was punished for them all there and then, that we might never be punished, because he suffered in our stead.[1]

[1]Spurgeon, “The Death of Christ.”

Brian McLaren's Latest

2007-07-26T12:45:00.000-05:00

Well, Brian McLaren is starting to promote his latest screed: Everything Must Change: Jesus, Global Crises, and a Revolution of Hope. Publisher's Weekly has released a review as well as an interview with McLaren.

And if that is not enough to make you boycott your Christian bookstore when the book is released, you can watch McLaren read from his book in his YouTube channel.

Here is reading 1:

And reading 2:

Our Tenth Anniversary

2007-07-25T22:00:00.000-05:00

Ten years ago, I was truly blessed by my Lord. He allowed me to enter into the sacred marriage covenant with my wife. While we have been through a lot together over the years, God has given us four wonderful children and a strong, vibrant relationship. May Christ continue to bless us as we seek to glorify Him!

Ed Stetzer Now (Consistently) Blogging

2007-07-24T21:30:00.000-05:00

I have come to appreciate the insightfulness of Ed Stetzer. Now he has a blog through LifeWay that he intends to regularly update. It is definitely a blog to check out regularly (or to add to your feed reader). Here is his initial post: "On Better Blogging."

Lifting the Veil of Polygamy Video Online

2007-07-23T22:00:00.000-05:00

The video Lifting the Veil of Polygamy is now available to watch online in its entirety. For those interested in the history of Mormonism or in today's fundamentalist Mormons, you'll want to watch it. Enjoy!

(HT: Mormon Coffee)

For Whom Did Christ Die? IIIC-E Considering Objections (1 Timothy 4:10, 1 John 2:2, 2 Peter 2:1)

2007-07-20T10:30:00.000-05:00

"For Whom Did Christ Die?" We must turn to Scripture for our answer. After introducing the controversial question, we examined the atonement's purpose, nature, and result. Next, we also contrasted our biblical conclusions with the opposing view. Then we began considering objections against the doctrine of limited atonement. This week, we will finish analyzing objections.

C. 1 Timothy 4:10

The Apostle Paul wrote to Timothy, “For to this end we toil and strive, because we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe.” Terry L. Miethe says, “Now certainly those who do not believe are not saved. The Scripture is completely clear on this. Thus, quite obviously, this verse is saying that although Christ died for all men—i.e., the free gift was extended to all—it is finally effective only for those who accept it.”[1] However, Miethe provides no exegetical support for his assertion.

I. Howard Marshall, himself a proponent of unlimited atonement, shows that the usual translation of this verse is misleading. He notes, “The possibility exists that we can translate malista, not by ‘especially,’ but by ‘namely.’ The Pastor makes a statement of the character of God as the Savior of all men, and then he makes a necessary qualification: ‘I mean, of those [among them] who believe.’ Since this translation gives an excellent sense here, it should be adopted.”[2] If this interpretation is adopted, then Paul qualifies his own statement about Christ dying for “all people.” He means that Christ died for believers. This is the doctrine of limited atonement.

D. 1 John 2:2

The Apostle John wrote the following about Jesus’ atonement: “He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.” Of this passage, Norman Geisler observes, “[O]ne need only consult the generic (general, unlimited) usage of kosmos in John’s writings to confirm that he speaks of the fallen, sinful world. . . . It goes far beyond the strain of one’s credulity to somehow conclude that kosmos in 1 John 2 refers only to the elect.”[3] Unfortunately, Geisler is being overly simplistic in his analysis. John uses kosmos or “world” in various ways. Determining its meaning depends on establishing the context surrounding its use.

Should “world” be taken as all of humanity in 1 John 2:2? Ernest C. Reisinger and D. Matthew Allen respond, “Notice first off that Jesus ‘is’ the propitiation for our sins (not that he merely makes propitiation possible). Did Christ accomplish propitiation for everyone who ever lived? . . . Hence, this little word ‘is’ alone refutes the general redemption theory.”[4] Moreover, interpreters should recognize the parallel between this verse and John 11:51-52. In this passage, John wrote, “He [Caiaphas] did not say this of his own accord, but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but also to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad.” Comparing the two texts reveals a striking resemblance.

John 11:51-52	1 John 2:2
Jesus	He
would die	is the propitiation
for the nation,	for our sins,
and not for the nation only,	and not for ours only
but also	but also
to gather into one	for
the children of God who are scattered abroad.	the sins of the whole world.

Since the Apostle Paul refers to John as an apostle to the Jews (Gal 2:9), it makes sense that in writing to a Jewish audience he would emphasize the universal scope of salvation as extending to all peoples and nations in the world. First John 2:2 in no way contradicts limited atonement.

E. 2 Peter 2:1

In his second letter, the Apostle Peter warns, “But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction.” Geisler says, “Here Peter speaks of Christ purchasing the redemption even of those who are apostate. Since all Calvinists agree that those who have truly been saved will never lose their salvation—and since this passage speaks clearly of lost persons—when Peter affirms that Christ ‘bought’ these lost souls, he means the Atonement is not limited to the elect.”[5]

While 2 Peter 2:1 could be interpreted in this way, it makes more sense to remain consistent with the truths already established elsewhere in Scripture. Thomas Schreiner provides an alternative explanation for Peter’s use of the phrase “the Master who bought them.”

I would suggest that Peter used phenomenological language. In other words, he described the false teachers as believers because they made a profession of faith and gave every appearance initially of being genuine believers. . . . Their denial of Jesus Christ reveals that they did not truly belong to God, even though they professed faith. Peter said that they were bought by Jesus Christ, in the sense that they gave every indication initially of genuine faith.[6]

Phenomenological language is speech as appearance. Peter said that false teachers are “even denying the Master who bought them” because they appeared to be Christians. Nevertheless, their destructive heresies demonstrate the falseness of their faith. Jesus Christ never actually bought them by his death; he only appeared to do so by their false profession. Again, Christ secured the salvation of all those for whom he died. None will be lost. None will face swift destruction.

[1]Terry L. Miethe, “The Universal Power of the Atonement”, in The Grace of God and the Will of Man, ed. Clark H. Pinnock (Minneapolis: Bethany House, 1989), 80.
[2]I. Howard Marshall, “Universal Grace and Atonement in the Pastoral Epistles”, in The Grace of God and the Will of Man, ed. Clark H. Pinnock (Minneapolis: Bethany House, 1989), 55.
[3]Geisler, Systematic Theology, 3:359.
[4]Ernest C. Reisinger and D. Matthew Allen, Beyond Five Points (Cape Coral, FL: Founders, 2002), 119-120.
[5]Geisler, Systematic Theology, 3:356.
[6]Thomas R. Schreiner, 1, 2, Peter, Jude, in vol. 37 of The New American Commentary, ed. Ray Clendenen (Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 2003), 331.

"Weird Al" Yankovic is Coming!

2007-07-17T10:00:00.000-05:00

I am amazed that it has been so long since I have posted anything on "Weird Al" Yankovic. After all, everybody surely knows how obsessed of a fan that I am. Maybe I was too busy watching the DVD set of "The Weird Al Show." Or maybe I have spent the last several months memorizing his song "Weasel Stomping Day" in Klingon.

In any case, you can rest assured, I am just as devoted as ever. And I am here to report some earth-shattering news: Weird Al is coming in concert! No, not to Louisville--but King's Island is only a couple of hours away. And I can see him live for the first time since his Running with Scissors tour on August 18, 2007 at the Timberwolf Amphitheatre.

Well . . . that is if we can find a babysitter for the day, and if I can get tickets (a not-so-subtle suggestion for a perfect birthday gift, perhaps?).

Bishop Carlton Pearson, "The Way I See It"

2007-07-17T09:30:00.000-05:00

A lot has been in the news lately about Bishop Carlton Pearson. A Pentecostal minister, formerly featured on TBN, Pearson has embraced universalism. The most recent news report was released this month on 20/20: "'Nobody Goes to Hell': Minister Labeled a Heretic."

Now you can read Pearson's so-called "wisdom" on your next Starbucks cup. The Way I See It #250 contains this jewel of spiritual insight:

In reality, hell is not such an intention of God as it is an invention of man. God is love and people are precious. Authentic truth is not so much taught or learned as it is remembered. Somewhere in your pre-incarnate consciousness you were loved absolutely because you were. Loved absolutely, and in reality, you still are! Remember who you are!

It makes me wonder--where in the world does he come up with such foolishness? Almost every phrase of this quote is riddled with error! Pearson yet again demonstrates what happens when people sever themselves from God's truth revealed in Scripture.

For Whom Did Christ Die? IIIA-B Considering Objections (“All” and “World,” Isaiah 53:6)

2007-07-13T10:00:00.000-05:00

After introducing the question "For Whom Did Christ Die?" We have covered a lot of biblical terrain. We examined the atonement's purpose, nature, and result. We also contrasted our biblical conclusions with the opposing view. Finally, we can begin considering the objections of those who deny limited atonement.

III. Considering Objections

Given its controversial nature, numerous biblical arguments have been raised against the doctrine of limited atonement. At the same time, most objections generally revolve around several biblical phrases and texts. Do these verses undermine limited atonement? Since the Bible is God’s Word, answering this question forces believers to examine each passage carefully. After all, Christians are obligated to develop doctrinal truth from Scripture, not read their beliefs into the text. The extent of the atonement must be determined from carefully handling the Word of God.

A. “All” and “World”

The Bible includes numerous texts using phrases including “all” and “the world.” The oft-quoted John 3:16 states, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.” The Apostle Paul writes in 2 Corinthians 5:14-15, “For the love of Christ controls us, because we have concluded this: that one has died for all, therefore all have died; and he died for all, that those who live might no longer live for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised.” Many other examples could be cited, but these verses do appear on the surface to teach Christ dying for all of humanity.

Nevertheless, each passage needs to be understood within its own context. While interpreting each of these texts individually is beyond the limits of this analysis, properly examining these statements demonstrate that they do not conflict with limited atonement. David N. Steele and Curtis C. Thomas explain the usage of such phrases:

One reason for the use of these expressions was to correct the false notion that salvation was for the Jews alone. Such phrases as ‘the world,’ ‘all men,’ ‘all nations,’ and ‘every creature’ were used by the New Testament writers to emphatically correct this mistake. These expressions are intended to show that Christ died for all men without distinction (i.e., He died for Jews and Gentiles alike) but they are not intended to show that Christ died for all men without exception (i.e. He did not die for the purpose of saving each and every lost sinner).[1]

In a work exhaustively examining these verses, John Owen concluded, “in no one place wherein it is used in this business of redemption, it [the word ‘world’] is or can be taken for all and every man in the world.”[2] Later he added, “it is nowhere affirmed in Scripture that Christ died for all men or gave himself a ransom for all men, much less for all and every man.”[3] None of these biblical passages deny limited atonement.

B. Isaiah 53:6

The prophet Isaiah prophesied about the future atoning work of Christ: “All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all.” Millard Erickson comments on this verse, “This passage is especially powerful from a logical standpoint. It is clear that the extent of sin is universal; it is specified that every one of us has sinned. It should also be noticed that the extent of what will be laid on the suffering servant exactly parallels the extent of sin. It is difficult to read this passage and not conclude that just as everyone sins, everyone is also atoned for.”[4]

Is this the conclusion one should draw? The beginning of the verse says “all we like sheep have gone astray.” Who are the “we” spoken of here? Erickson assumes it is all of humanity since sin is universal. Nevertheless, this verse should not be severed from its covenantal context. Throughout the Old Testament, Israel is referred to as God’s sheep (Ps 23, Isa 40:10-11). Whereas their own shepherds had failed them, God promised to become their shepherd (Ezek 34). He fulfilled this promise in Jesus Christ (John 10:1-18). Therefore, the “we” is clearly God’s covenant people. Just a few verses later, Isaiah explicitly states, “he [Christ] was cut off out of the land of the living, stricken for the transgression of my people” (Isa 53:8b, emphasis added). While his people had gone astray, God laid on Christ the iniquity and transgression of his rebellious people. Furthermore, Jesus spoke of his role as the shepherd of his wayward sheep:

I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. He who is a hired hand and not a shepherd, who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees, and the wolf snatches them and scatters them. He flees because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep. I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep (John 10:11-15).

Jesus lays down his life for his sheep. He will loose none of those whom the Father gives him, giving his life for them. Referring to his atoning work, Isaiah 53:5 actually supports limited atonement.

[1]David N. Steele and Curtis C. Thomas, The Five Points of Calvinism: Defined, Defended, Documented (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1963), 46.
[2]John Owen, The Death of Death in the Death of Christ (Carlisle, PA: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1959), 193.
[3]Ibid, 195.
[4]Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 1998), 847.

Latest Mormon Ad

2007-07-12T16:00:00.000-05:00

Over at the Pyromanics blog, Frank Turk reports on the latest Mormon online ad in "So much for 'Hiatus.'" I would love to comment more, but I simply don't have the time right now. So go over and check it out.

Major Conference on Mormons and Evangelicals Announced

2007-07-11T15:00:00.000-05:00

Standing Together has just announced a major conference on Mormonism and Evangelicals to take place this fall: The National Student Dialogue Conference. It will occur on October 19-20 at the Salt Lake Christian Center. Check out the Event Poster and the Plenary Sessions (PDF).

I am not sure what to make of this event. Given those involved, I honestly do not know what to think. While I would love to attend myself, I already have the prior commitment of going on the Alpha and Omega Ministries cruise. I hope they'll record it all and make MP3s and/or DVDs available. If anyone plans on going, please let me know!

(HT: John Morehead)

MacArthur Begins Series on Worldviews

2007-07-11T13:30:00.000-05:00

Over at Pulpt Magazine, John MacArthur has begun a series on apologetics that I am really looking forward to: "War of the Worldviews (Part 1)." The following is the conclusion to his first post:

That very narrowness sets Christianity apart from every other world view. After all, the whole point of Jesus’ best-known sermon was to declare that the way to destruction is broad and well traveled, while the way of life is so narrow that few find it (Matthew 7:14). Our task as ambassadors of God is to point to that very narrow way. Christ Himself is the one way to God, and to obscure that fact is in effect to deny Christ and to disavow the gospel itself.

We must resist the tendency to be absorbed into the fads and fashions of worldly thought. We need to emphasize, not downplay, what makes Christianity unique. And in order to do that effectively, we need to have a better grasp of how worldly thought is threatening sound doctrine in the church. We must be able to point out just where the narrow way diverges from the broad way.

In tomorrow’s post, I will overview what I believe to be six key components of a biblical worldview – that is, the worldview that sets Christianity apart from every other worldly viewpoint.

Am I an 80s Nerd?

2007-07-10T19:00:00.000-05:00

OK, maybe I am one of the few seminary graduates who thinks that the upcoming movie The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters looks hilarious. I admit it: I am both an 80s nostalgic nut and a classic video game aficionado (even though the Kong arcade game was admittedly a little before my time). Anyway, for the few of you who find my quirky personality interesting, here is the movie trailer:

Tony Jones

2007-07-09T09:00:00.000-05:00

I don't know how else to write this post on Tony Jones--Deny Burk says it all in "Tony Jones: A Gobbledygook 'Orthodoxy'." He concludes:

No doubt Tony Jones and the Emergent Village belong to what has been called the “revisionist” wing of the emerging church. They are among those who are radically redefining what it means to be Christian, which for some is another way of saying that they are not Christian. When a movement or “Christian” community treats the seven ecumenical councils as if they were up for grabs (or otherwise as a plaything to be deconstructed), then that movement or community has crossed over from the ranks of the orthodox to join the JW’s, the Mormons and all the others who do not stand in the life-giving stream.

The danger of Emergent deconstruction is that in many cases its heterodoxy wears an evangelical garb. But this should not be surprising. We received fair warning that this is precisely how the wolves always work (Matthew 7:15; Acts 20:29-30).

Jones' latest venture into heresy is also linked in Burk's post (in PDF format). If you have a strong enough stomach, read Jones' entire presentation.

For Whom Did Christ Die? II Contrasting Views

2007-07-06T13:00:00.000-05:00

I began this series by introducing the debate over the extent of Jesus Christ's atonement. Then we examined its purpose, its nature, and its result. Now we have come to the point where we can contrast our biblical findings with the opposing view.

II. Contrasting Views

A. The Problem of Provisional Salvation

The doctrine of limited atonement has always been contested by those who believe that Christ’s death was made for all of humanity. These Christians believe in an unlimited atonement, where Christ’s atoning work makes salvation possible for every person, but it only comes to those who believe in him. H. Orton Wiley, a holiness theologian, advocated this view. In his magnum opus, Christian Theology, he stated, “The atonement is universal. This does not mean that all mankind will be unconditionally saved, but that the sacrificial offering of Christ so far satisfied the claims of the divine law as to make salvation a possibility for all. Redemption is therefore universal or general in the provisional sense, but special or conditional in its application to the individual (emphasis added).”[1] Thus, salvation is provisional. It is dependent upon one’s freely made response to the offer of salvation. Contemporary theologian Norman Geisler also emphasizes the universal provisionalism of Christ’s atonement. He makes such statements as: “all are savable, but only those who believe will be saved,” “everyone is potentially justifiable, not actually justified,” “reconciliation of all (‘the world’) did not guarantee the salvation but the savability of all,” and “reconciliation by Christ makes salvation possible.”[2]

Here is the heart of the debate: did Christ die merely to make people savable, or did he actually accomplish salvation for his people? Does the atonement secure salvation, or does it just make salvation possible? The biblical truths already established readily counter the error of unlimited atonement. Salvation is assured, not provisional. James White observes, “Christ’s death saves sinners. It does not make the salvation of sinners a mere possibility. It does not provide a theoretical atonement. It requires no additions, whether they be the meritorious works of men or the autonomous act of faith flowing from a ‘free will.’ Christ’s death saves every single person that it was intended to save.”[3] White is simply summarizing the consistent teaching of Scripture: Christ saves his people.

B. The Danger of Universal Salvation

If the atonement actually saves those for whom Christ died, then holding to an unlimited atonement necessitates believing in universal salvation. R.C. Sproul explains, “The atonement of Christ was clearly limited or unlimited. There is no alternative, no tertium quid. If it is unlimited in an absolute sense, then an atonement has been made for every person’s sins. Christ has then made propitiation for all persons’ sins and expiated them as well.”[4] The result of an effective unlimited atonement leads to universalism. Sproul concludes, “This means that if Christ really, objectively satisfied the demands of God’s justice for everyone, then everyone will be saved.”[5]

Obviously, universalism is an unbiblical position outside the bounds of the Christian faith. This is why evangelicals holding to an unlimited atonement rightly reject it. Unfortunately, to maintain both orthodoxy and their view of Christ’s death, they have gutted the atonement of its power. Christ becomes a potential Savior of all but an actual Savior of none. Thankfully, Scripture does not reveal Christ’s death in this way.

[1]H. Orton Wiley, Christian Theology, vol. 2.
[2]Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology (Minneapolis: Bethany House, 2004), 3:352-353.
[3]White, The Potter’s Freedom, 230.
[4]R. C. Sproul, Grace Unknown: The Heart of Reformed Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1997), 164-165.
[5]Ibid, 166.

NPR on Mormonism and Romney

2007-07-06T12:15:00.000-05:00

As I was driving home from work yesterday, I was listening to NPR's show "All Things Considered" (yes, I regularly listen to NPR!).

All of a sudden, I started to hear a segment on Mitt Romney and Mormonism. It was a good discussion centering upon the relationship between Mormonism and historic Christianity. The next segment was an interview with Mormon scholar Richard Bushman. I was amazed with the amount of spin that he used in his answers, but I really wasn't surprised.

In any case, you can listen to or read both segments on the NPR site:

"Romney Faces Uphill Battle for Evangelical Voters"
"Explaining the Underpinnings of Mormonism"

Watch or Download the Lost Book of Abraham

2007-07-03T10:00:00.000-05:00

The Institute for Religious Research produced an important video on Mormonism titled The Lost Book of Abraham: Investigating a Remarkable Mormon Claim. Now it is available in its entirely to view or download online. You should really take the time to watch it:

(HT: Mormon Coffee)

Worldwide Mormon Mission Work

2007-07-02T11:00:00.000-05:00

In Saturday's Salt Lake Tribune, an insightful and troubling article appeared: "Mission metamorphosis." With the subtitle "Today, LDS gospel is not only proclaimed to every tongue and people, but also by them," this article should be read by all of those concerned with the growth of Mormonism worldwide. Here is the introduction:

The LDS Church announced this week that it had called its 1 millionth full-time missionary, but declined to name the candidate who gave the church its symbolic success.

Too bad.

It would have been nice to know if the new face of Mormon missionaries was a Scandinavian-looking Utahn, a dark-skinned Brazilian or an ebony-hued African. After all, the number of Americans among the church's nearly 54,000 missionaries is slowly declining. Today, about a third come from other nations.

While many Utahns are still being sent to far away lands, more and more missionaries serve in their own countries, seeking converts in their language and culture. Instead of heading to Provo to be trained in the art of proselytizing as generations before them did, many now go directly to one of 16 training centers in places like Johannesburg, San Paulo or London.

How Can We Make the Bible Relevant for the iGeneration?

2007-07-02T10:30:00.000-05:00

For Whom Did Christ Die? IC The Atonement’s Result

2007-06-29T10:00:00.000-05:00

I began this series by introducing the question: "For Whom Did Christ Die?" Then I looked at the purpose and the nature of Christ's death. This week, we finish examining the atonement itself by understanding its result.

C. The Atonement’s Result

What happens when the salvation Christ provides is applied to his people? The Apostle Paul answers in Romans 8:31-34.

What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things? Who shall bring any charge against God's elect? It is God who justifies. Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died—more than that, who was raised—who is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us.

This passage provides tremendous insight into the extent of Christ’s atonement. First, the Father gave the Son “for us all,” for those referenced in the previous verses (vv. 28-30), for the predestined and called people of God. Second, since the Son has been given up for this elect people, they can have confidence in their salvation because God saves them perfectly. No charges or condemnation can be claimed against them. Third, Christ’s death—and subsequent resurrection—brings his chosen people ongoing intercession. James White comments, “Since the Father is the one who justifies, who then can condemn? Once the divine sentence has been uttered, there can be no appeal to a higher court. This is why there can be no condemnation of those who are in Christ Jesus, for the number of those in Him is identical with the number of the elect.”[1] All those for whom Christ died cannot be condemned—they are in him. White continues, “Can Christ Jesus bring a charge of condemnation against them? Certainly not, for He died and rose again and sits at the right hand of God, ‘who also intercedes’ for whom? For us. Who is the ‘us’? The elect of God.”[2]

Jesus explains this intercession for his people in his high priestly prayer. “I have manifested your name to the people whom you gave me out of the world. Yours they were, and you gave them to me, and they have kept your word. . . . I am praying for them. I am not praying for the world but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours. All mine are yours, and yours are mine, and I am glorified in them” (John 17:6, 9-10). Loraine Boettner explains the Old Testament background and significance to Christ’s prayer:

There is also a parallel to be noticed between the high priest of ancient Israel and Christ who is our high priest; for the former, we are told, was a type of the latter. On the great day of atonement the high priest offered sacrifices for the sins of the twelve tribes of Israel. He interceded for them and for them only. Likewise, Christ prayed not for the world but for His people. The intercession of the high priest secured for the Israelite blessings from which all other peoples were excluded; and the intercession of Christ, which also is limited but of a much higher order, shall certainly be efficacious in the highest sense, for Him the Father hears always.[3]

Christ intercedes for his people. This intercession is directly connected to his atoning work on the cross. Since this intercession is the application of Christ’s atoning death, then it follows that his sacrificial death is limited to those whom the Father has given him. For whom did Christ die? He died for the elect.

[1]James R. White, The Potter’s Freedom (Amityville, NY: Calvary, 2000), 238.
[2]Ibid.
[3]Loraine Boettner, The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1932), 158-159.

The Gospel Coalition

2007-06-28T11:00:00.000-05:00

The Gospel Coalition web site has been launched! I have already added it to my links and look forward to regularly utilizing its resources. You'll want to check it out as well!

The Albert Mohler Program on Mormonism

2007-06-27T14:00:00.000-05:00

Yesterday's Albert Mohler Program was devoted to answering the question: "Are Mormons Christians?" While I was not able to listen to the radio show live or to call in, I found the discussion helpful. Check it out!

During the program, Mohler said that he will begin a debate on the same question with Orson Scott Card (a Mormon) over at the popular spirituality web site Beliefnet. When I see the dialog begin, I'll try to post a link to it.

UPDATE: The "blogalogue" between Mohler and Card has now begun: "Are Mormons Christian?"

(HT: Arthur Sido)

Gerald McDermott Responds

2007-06-26T16:30:00.000-05:00

Earlier this month, I wrote a post on an article at the Christianity Today site: "Christianity Today, Mormonism, and Compromise." Yesterday, one of the co-authors of the CT article responded. The following is his comment, followed by my thoughts:

This is Gerald McDermott, the evangelical theologian some of you think has embraced heresy by sugegsting that the Mormon Jesus and the classical Christian Jesus are one and the same. The point of our op-ed in CT online was to say that, when considering presidential candidates, we are voting for a president, not a theologian. And that plenty of other presidents have had wacky theologies. On the LDS and Jesus, it is a fact that the Mormon view of Jesus is better than the Jehovah's Witness view, which is fully Arian. They do indeed believe Jesus is fully God--altho, as some of you have rightly said, their Jesus was not always God. He "grew" into God. If you read my statement in context, you will see that I let stand uncorrected the evangelical [correct!] accusations that Mormons add to revelation and assert that humans are of the same species as Jesus and can someday attain his status. I also add that Mormons reject key Christian doctrines such as the Trinity and creatio ex nihilo. If you read our forthcoming book (Claiming Christ), you will see that in every chapter I make it clear that the LDS Jesus is not the Jesus of classic orthodoxy. Gerald McDermott

Dr. McDermott, I appreciate your sincere desire to clear up the confusion that has resulted in the wake of the CT article that you co-authored. I am especially glad to hear you say that you clearly differentiate the LDS Jesus from the orthodox (and biblical) Jesus in your upcoming book with Robert Millet. I plan on buying and reading Claiming Christ when it comes out.

At the same time, I do not know how you can maintain: "On the LDS and Jesus, it is a fact that the Mormon view of Jesus is better than the Jehovah's Witness view, which is fully Arian. They do indeed believe Jesus is fully God." While I have no problem insisting upon the defectiveness of the JW Jesus, the LDS Jesus is no less defective. The LDS do not believe that Jesus is fully God--if we are defining God consistently. The only way one could maintain that the Mormons believe that Jesus is fully God is by committing the fallacy of equivocation, for the God we refer to is nothing like the God of Mormon doctrine. The word "God" is not some nebulous, abstract notion. God has revealed what divinity is to us.

Essentially, the LDS church redefines "God" when they apply it to Jesus. And in this case, they are no different from the JWs. Both refuse to accept Jesus as the eternal, immutable, omnipotent, omniscient God. Both are distortions of our one, true Trinitarian God. As you have stated, the LDS Jesus is not the Jesus of classic orthodoxy. He is a false Jesus--an imaginary Jesus who cannot save.

Finally Free

2007-06-25T16:00:00.000-05:00

As far as I am concerned, Nicole Nordeman is one of the best artists in Christian music today. A new video based on one of her songs is making its way around the web, and for good reason. Nordeman eloquently sings about the freedom we have in Christ. Check it out and see what you think:

For Whom Did Christ Die? IB The Atonement’s Nature

2007-06-22T09:00:00.000-05:00

I began this series by introducing the question: "For Whom Did Christ Die?" Then I examined the purpose of Christ's death. Now let us think through the nature of his atonement.

B. The Atonement’s Nature

If the purpose of Christ’s death is salvation for his people, then what does this salvation include? In other words, what did his atonement accomplish? The Bible uses four key words to reveal the nature of Christ’s atoning work: redemption, propitiation, reconciliation, and substitution.

Redemption. Ephesians 1:7 specifically ties the death of Christ to the redemption of believers. “In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace.” The Apostle Paul expands on this truth when writing to the church of Colossae. “He has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins” (Colossians 1:13-14). Michael Horton provides an informative definition. “Redemption means ‘to buy back,’ to ‘return to one’s possession by payment of a price.’ You were kidnapped and held hostage by sin. But if you are a believer, Christ paid the ransom price for you to be freed so you could become his possession.”[1] The atonement frees believers from slavery.

Propitiation. The Bible also refers to the atonement as a propitiation. Paul states, “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith” (Rom 3:23-25a). Horton explains this concept as well: “Propitiation refers to the breaking away of the enmity and hostility that keeps God at odds with us. Propitiation removes God’s wrath.”[2] How? Because Christ has taken it on our behalf.

Reconciliation. Additionally, Scripture reveals Christ’s death as bringing reconciliation. Paul says, “Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life” (Rom 5:9-10). Horton summarizes, “‘To render no longer opposed’ is the definition of reconciliation. . . . People who are reconciled are made friends. And Jesus said that he would lay down his life for his friends (John 15:13).”[3] Believers are at peace with God through Christ’s death.

Substitution. Furthermore, Christ became the substitute of his people in the atonement. Paul declares, “For our sake he [God] made him [Christ] to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Cor 5:21). Substitution is at the very heart of the atonement, and is clearly seen throughout the Bible. Horton explains, “The concept of substitution is found throughout Scripture as the act of one who suffers vicariously, or in the place of another. . . . You were the criminal, but Christ stepped in and took your place. Because he took your place, you will not have to take it [the punishment you deserve].”[4] Christ took his peoples’ wrath and they are given his perfect righteousness.

Through Jesus substituting himself for his people, his death redeemed them, took the wrath of God which they deserved, and reconciled them with God. The nature of the atonement itself secures all of these wonderful realities.

[1]Michael Horton, Putting Amazing Back into Grace: Who Does What in Salvation? (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994), 139.
[2]Ibid, 139.
[3]Ibid, 139-140.
[4]Ibid, 140.

Norman Geisler, the Local Church, and the Supreme Court of Texas

2007-06-21T14:30:00.000-05:00

Norman Geisler has written a good response to the decision of the Supreme Court of Texas on the controversial case between the Local Church cult and Harvest House Publishers: "The Local Church Cult and the Supreme Court of Texas: A Big Victory for the Counter-Cult Movement."

Here is Geisler's outline:

I. The Victory Won
II. Lessons to be Learned
III. A Major Mistake

Ed Stetzer Challenging Southern Baptists

2007-06-20T11:00:00.000-05:00

I really appreciate the ministry of Ed Stetzer, newly named director of LifeWay Research. He gave a great challenge last week at the annual Southern Baptist Convention. Now you can watch the video online. Take the time to watch--you won't be disappointed!

Why I Love Spurgeon 1

2007-06-19T15:30:00.000-05:00

As many of you know, I love C. H. Spurgeon. God used him mightily during his life of ministry and continues to bless the body of Christ through Spurgeon's work today. One of my regular practices is listening to his sermons "re-preached" on my MP3 player, and over the weekend I listened to "God's Will and Man's Will." This sermon is another great example of why I am so edified by Spurgeon. Here is an excerpt where he forcefully counters those opposed to Calvinism:

According to their theory—that salvation depends upon our own will— you have first of all this difficulty to meet, that you have made the purpose of God in the great plan of salvation entirely contingent. You have then put an "if" upon everything. Christ may die, but it is not certain according to that theory that he will redeem a great multitude; nay, not certain that he will redeem any, since the efficacy of the redemption according to that plan, rests not in its own intrinsic power, but in the will of man accepting that redemption. Hence if man be, as we aver he always is, if he be a bond-slave as to his will, and will not yield to the invitation of God's grace, then in such a case the atonement of Christ would be valueless, useless, and altogether in vain, for not a soul would be saved by it; and even when souls are saved by it, according to that theory, the efficacy, I say, lies not in the blood itself, but in the will of man which gives it efficacy. Redemption is therefore made contingent; the cross shakes, the blood falls powerless on the ground, and atonement is a matter of perhaps. There is a heaven provided, but there may no souls who will ever come there if their coming is to be of themselves. There is a fountain filled with blood, but there may be none who will ever wash in it unless divine purpose and power shall constrain them to come. You may look at any one promise of grace, but you cannot say over it, "This is the sure mercy of David;" for there is an "if," and a "but;" a "perhaps," and a "peradventure." In fact, the reigns are gone out of God's hands; the linch-pin is taken away from the wheels of the creation; you have left the whole economy of grace and mercy to be the gathering together of fortuitous atoms impelled by man's own will, and what may become of it at the end nobody can know. We cannot tell on that theory whether God will be gloried or sin will triumph. Oh! how happy are we when come back to the old fashioned doctrines, and cast our anchor where it can get its grip in the eternal purpose and counsel of God, who worketh all things to the good pleasure of his will.

Then another difficulty comes in; not only is everything made contingent, but it does seem to us as if man were thus made to be the supreme being in the universe. According to the freewill scheme the Lord intends good, but he must win like a lackey on his own creature to know what his intention is; God willeth good and would do it, but he cannot, because he has an unwilling man who will not have God's good thing carried into effect. What do ye, sirs, but drag the Eternal from his throne, and lift up into it that fallen creature, man: for man, according to that theory nods, and his nod is destiny. You must have a destiny somewhere; it must either be as God wills or as man wills . If it be as God wills, then Jehovah sits as sovereign upon his throne of glory, and all hosts obey him, and the world is safe; if not God, then you put man there, to say. "I will" or "I will not; if I will it I will enter heaven; if I will it I will despise the grace of God; if I will it I will conquer the Holy Sprit, for I am stronger than God, and stronger than omnipotence; if I will it I will make the blood of Christ of no effect, for I am mightier than that blood, mightier than the blood of the Son of God himself; though God make his purpose, yet will I laugh at his purpose; it shall be my purpose that shall make his purpose stand, or make it fall." Why, sirs, if this be not Atheism, it is idolatry; it is putting man where God should be, and I shrink with solemn awe and horror from that doctrine which makes the grandest of God's works—the salvation of man—to be dependent upon the will of his creature whether it shall be accomplished or not. Glory I can and must in my text in its fullest sense. "It is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy."

Critical Thinking and Christianity

2007-06-18T15:30:00.000-05:00

I disagree with theologian Richard Mouw in different areas, sometimes significantly. But his latest blog post is a gem: "Critical Thinking." You really should read the whole entry. His conclusion?

Steve Evans once wrote a little book on existentialism with the intriguing title Despair: a Moment or a Way of Life? That poses the options nicely. Is critical thinking about religion a moment or a way of life? I cherish it as a moment, as a necessary exercise that at least some of us ought to engage in periodically. But to make it a way of life—that is what postmodernism at its worst is all about.

This has important implications for theological education. Are we educating men and women to be critical thinkers? Well, yes, of course. But the critical thinking thing must be a moment—a necessary exercise—in the service of a larger process. And the larger goal is not simply to produce critical thinkers, but to equip persons who are faithful to the truth of the gospel. Some of us must engage in critical thinking in order to be effective in encouraging God’s people to be faithful, both to the biblical message and to all that is good and worthy in the Christian traditions that we have received.

For Whom Did Christ Die? IA - The Atonement’s Purpose

2007-06-15T10:00:00.000-05:00

Last week, I began my series on Jesus Christ's atonement by introducing the controversy over its extent. This week, we begin to examine his atonement by seeking to understand its purpose.

I. Examining the Atonement

A. The Atonement’s Purpose

What did Christ intend to accomplish by his death? His name itself summarizes the purpose of his atoning work. In announcing his birth an angel of the Lord said, “She will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins” (Matt 1:21). Jesus’ name reveals several essential truths about his purpose: 1) he brings salvation, 2) his salvation is for his people, and 3) his salvation delivers them from their sins. Therefore, Jesus Christ has a specific chosen people for whom he came to save.

God’s people were predestined to be the beneficiaries of Christ’s death. The Apostle Paul wrote to the Ephesian church: “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world. . . . In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace” (Eph 1:3-4a, 7a). Christ’s death was always intended to redeem a chosen people. Elsewhere, Paul cautioned to the Ephesian church elders: “Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood” (Acts 20:28). Christ obtained a people through his sacrificial death on the cross.

Nevertheless, the salvation he brought is Trinitarian, involving the Father, himself, and the Holy Spirit. The Father gives a chosen people to his Son to save, the Son saves these elect ones, and the Holy Spirit applies this salvation to them. Jesus himself explained this intratrinitarian work. “All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day” (John 6:37-39). James White explains,

The will of the Father for the Son . . . is that He (the Son) should lose nothing of all that the Father has given to Him; rather, the Son is charged with the responsibility of raising up at the last day all those who have been given to Him. This is His task, His duty, His act of obedience to the Father. . . . In short, the Son is charged with securing not simply the possibility of salvation for God’s elect, but, positively, with actually saving completely those who are the objects of God’s saving grace.[1]

All the Father gives to Christ will be saved by him and raised on the last day. The security of their eternal life is found in the very nature of God himself as the Trinity. Christ’s death actually and fully saves his people from their sins.

[1]James White, Drawn by the Father: A Study of John 6:35-45 (Southbridge, MA: Crowne, 1991), 37-38.

The Nicene Council

2007-06-14T13:30:00.000-05:00

Don't forget to check out the new Nicene Council site. Formerly the Apologetics Group, this organization releases and sells a lot of great material for Christians at good prices. Would you like to know more (including why they changed their name)? See their "About Us" page.

For Whom Did Christ Die? Other Reading

2007-06-13T14:00:00.000-05:00

I start posting a weekly series answering the question "For Whom Did Christ Die?", and this week the Resurgence site adds an article by Tom Wells titled . . . "For Whom Did Christ Die?"

OK, so the question is common. In any case, Wells article is helpful. Check it out as supplimental reading as I continue my series (obviously, there will be some overlap in our presentations). Wells and I may not agree on the interpretation of certain biblical passages, but we both come to the same conclusion:

Words like Redemption, Reconciliation and Propitiation, when applied to the death of Christ, show that His death was for His people and not for every person who ever lived. Does that seem threatening? It need not. What we all must remember is that everyone who puts His trust in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior will be saved. No one will ever believe, only to find that there is no Atonement for him or her.

The death of Christ is as broad as the category of believer. Beyond that it would do no good anyway. If Christ died for those who will never believe, His death would not help them in any fashion. It would only add to their condemnation. But Christ died for all who would ever believe. They, and no others, receive the benefit of the death He died for them.

Mormonism in the News

2007-06-11T16:00:00.000-05:00

Two new articles paint somewhat different pictures of the growing public presence of Mormonism. The first came out yesterday by Reuters news: "Mormons in the spotlight." Here is its introduction:

After more than a century on the fringe of America's consciousness, Mormons are riding a wave of media attention and public scrutiny -- and say they welcome the chance to set a few things straight.

From Mitt Romney's bid to become the first Mormon in the White House to Public Broadcasting Service's four-hour documentary on Mormonism in May and a Hollywood movie opening this month focusing on one of Mormon history's darkest episodes, the once-isolated religion is moving into the open.

"We welcome it," Elder D. Todd Christofferson, a member of the Presidency of the Seventy, a church leadership body, said of the sudden attention.

"To the extent that attention can be informative as opposed to pejorative and there's a sincere interest and honest curiosity, I think that's positive," he said.

But look at today's story in the New York Times: "Romney’s Run Has Mormons Wary of Scrutiny." How does it begin?

In this wide valley where the twin spires of the Mormon temple dominate the landscape and some neighborhoods have a Mormon chapel every few blocks, Mitt Romney’s bid for president is both a proud sign of progress and a cause of trepidation.

Many Mormons here are rooting for Mr. Romney, a fellow church member whose success in business, Adonis looks and wholesome family tableau seem to them to present the ideal face of Mormonism to the world. Among the Republican front-runners, Mr. Romney, former governor of Massachusetts, recently was the leader in campaign fund-raising; his candidacy is, for many Mormons, a historic moment of arrival.

“He represents the best of what the church can produce,” said Kenneth W. Godfrey, 73, a historian of Mormonism and of this valley about 80 miles north of church headquarters in Salt Lake City.

But even for the many Mormons who support Mr. Romney, the moment is fraught with anxiety because his candidacy is bringing intense scrutiny to their church, and could exacerbate longstanding bigotry.

I assume they are both telling the truth from somewhat different perspectives. Mormons want to be understood, but they also don't want to be alienated. How will you as a Christian respond?

Because I Love My Wife. . .

2007-06-10T01:00:00.000-05:00

Because I love my wife, I am posting an obligatory link to a Joyful Days blog entry: "Look!! Books!!" Since my wife doesn't have a blog but really wants to win some free books, I am posting the link on her behalf. Apparently, she can win five Christian fiction books (not my cup of tea!) by participating in a series of reviews.

So, for what it's worth, here's a post for the one I love.

Hating the Prosperity Gospel

2007-06-09T13:22:00.001-05:00

Some of you may have already seen this, but every Christian needs to hear these words from John Piper:

For Whom Did Christ Die? Introduction

2007-06-08T15:00:00.000-05:00

They [many divines] believe in an atonement made for every body; but then, their atonement is just this. They believe that Judas was atoned for just as much as Peter; they believe that the damned in hell were as much an object of Jesus Christ's satisfaction as the saved in heaven. . . . Now, such an atonement I despise—I reject it. I may be called Antinomian or Calvinist for preaching a limited atonement; but I had rather believe a limited atonement that is efficacious for all men for whom it was intended, than an universal atonement that is not efficacious for anybody, except the will of man be joined with it. . . . Oh! glorious doctrine! I would wish to die preaching it! What better testimony can we bear to the love and faithfulness of God than the testimony of a substitution eminently satisfactory for all them that believe on Christ?[1]

These words were preached by the 19th century Baptist pastor Charles Haddon Spurgeon. Clearly recognizing the importance of properly answering the controversial question “For whom did Christ die?,” Spurgeon defended the doctrinal position normally called “limited atonement.” This view understands Christ’s redeeming death to be for his chosen people alone. Jesus’ atoning work was not universally made for every individual; it was made specifically for his own people. He strenuously argued against the opposite position, usually labeled “unlimited atonement.” Those holding this view maintain that Christ died for all of humanity. His atoning work makes salvation possible for every person, but it only comes to those who believe in him. Was Spurgeon correct in his denunciation of unlimited atonement?

Christians must turn to Scripture to discern the extent of Christ’s death. And when one takes all biblical teaching into account, he or she should recognize that Spurgeon was indeed right. Limited atonement is a precious truth revealed in the Word of God. By examining the atonement’s purpose, nature, and result, believers will see that the Bible is not silent on the atonement’s extent. Christ died for his people. This truth needs to be contrasted with the belief that Christ died for all people equally. Additionally, objections must be considered. Nevertheless, in this weekly series of posts we will see that the sufficiency and efficacy of Christ’s death prove the doctrine of limited atonement.

[1]C. H. Spurgeon, “The Death of Christ,” in vol. 4 of The New Park Street Pulpit.

Scripture and Reason

2007-06-06T13:00:00.000-05:00

What is the relationship between Scripture and reason? John MacArthur has a brief but helpful answer to this question over at Pulpit Magazine: "Scripture and Plain Reason." His reply?

Scripture isn’t antithetical to sound, rational wisdom, though many today imagine otherwise. Reason is no substitute for Scripture, of course, but when good reason and sound logic are kept subject to the authority of Scripture, they are in no way a threat to the truth. On the contrary, the application of sound, logical thinking to the truth of Scripture is a key aspect of the formula for discernment.

Contrary to what a lot of people these days assume, discernment is not a mystical or intuitive ability to know the truth as if by magic. It is the skill of understanding, interpreting, and applying truth accurately. Discernment is a cognitive act. Therefore no one who spurns right doctrine or sound reason can be truly discerning.

Authentic spiritual discernment must begin with Scripture-revealed truth. Without a firm grounding in divine revelation, human reason always degenerates into skepticism (a denial that anything can be known for certain), rationalism (the theory that reason is a source of truth), secularism (an approach to life that purposely excludes God), or any number of other anti-Christian philosophies.

When Scripture condemns human wisdom (1 Cor. 3:19), it is not denouncing logic and reason per se, but humanistic ideology divorced from the divinely-revealed truth of God’s Word. In other words, reason apart from the Word of God leads inevitably to unsound ideas, but reason subjected to the Word of God is at the heart of wise spiritual discernment.

Encouraging Update from Christianity Today

2007-06-06T11:30:00.000-05:00

Kudos to Keith Walker from Evidence Ministries!

After Christianity Today posted a troubling article on Mormonism, Keith wrote a letter to the editor which was also posted on his blog: "Christianity Today Misrepresents Mormonism." His letter led to a response by Madison Trammel, Associate Editor of CT, and Keith humbly replied to her e-mail: "Christianity Today Responds To My E-mail."

Why do I bother posting all of this background material? Because Trammel responded again with an encouraging e-mail: "Christianity Today Admits Mistake In 'Mitt's Mormonism and the "Evangelical Vote"' Article." Here is her message:

Keith,

Thanks for writing back. Your points are well-taken -- indeed, upon further reflection, I agree with you that the article's foray into Mormon doctrine was an unnecessary, and ultimately unhelpful, diversion from the article's main point. Please check back at our website in the next week or so. I'm hoping we'll be able to pull together a good response article that outlines Mormon-Christian theological differences.

Sincerely,
Madison

Thank you Madison and CT! I look forward to this response article and agree with Keith as he concludes:

I don't know about you, but I see this as a victory. I am encouraged that they are concerned about the issue and plan on making a distinction between Mormonism and Christianity in a future article. I eagerly await the piece and will pray that any confusion the original article produced will be cleared up. PRAISE THE LORD!

Renowned Missiologist on Brian McLaren and Emergent

2007-06-05T11:30:00.000-05:00

Paul Carden recently brought to my attention an important article on Brian McLaren and his Emergent cohorts by a renowned evangelical missiologist: David J. Hesselgrave, "Brian McLaren's Contextualization of the Gospel," Evangelical Missions Quarterly (January 2007): 92-100. The article can be read online by subscribing to EMQ. Hesselgrave contrasts McLaren's view of mission, believing, belonging, and becoming with the evangelical faith commitments of the Interdenominational Foreign Missions Association (IFMA). It is well-worth the read! Here is the article's conclusion:

McLaren and his colleagues are convinced that the future of the Church and missions does not rest on the kind of faith articulated be modern churches and missions, including conservative ones. Rather, it rests on resisting "modernism" and accommodating postmodernism by recovering "the faith articulated by the common consensus of the ancient Church" as they conceive it. But if partially right on some counts, both he and they are profoundly wrong on others. In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, both liberals/modernists and conservatives/fundamentalists (and then evangelicals) attempted what can be thought of as "contextualizations" of the Christian gospel for modern (Western) culture. The former did it by accommodating traditional faith to modern culture. The latter did it by maintaining and restating biblical faith for modern culture.

McLaren and his colleagues are essentially right in concluding that both contextualizations were culturally-conditioned because all contextualizations are culturally-conditioned by definition. They are also partially right in concluding that the gospel preached in Eastern and other cultures was often quite "Western" and under-contextualized.

But they are profoundly wrong in following the lead of twentieth century liberals when they insist on accommodating postmodernism by resisting biblical authority and replacing the biblical gospel with another gospel of whatever derivation. The postmodernism of McLaren and the Emergent Church movement represents a radical over-contextualization and is destined to fail both the Church and missions in the twenty-first century just as surely as the modernism of Higher Criticism and the Social Gospel failed the Church and missions in the twentieth century. In the end, the biblical gospel--and only the biblical gospel--will prevail.

Christianity Today, Mormonism, and Compromise

2007-06-04T11:30:00.000-05:00

I stopped regularly reading Christianity Today several years ago. Why? Because it almost completely lacks any substance and shows perilously little discernment in its pages. The magazine seems to have become little more than cursory reporting and articles on the latest developments and fads in whatever someone labels "Christian." I don't need a sanitized Oprah magazine, and I can keep up-to-date with excellent worldview-based reporting from WORLD magazine.

Why should I go on a brief harangue about CT? Because its web site recently posted the article: "Mitt's Mormonism and the 'Evangelical Vote': Can conservative Protestants vote for a member of what they consider a cult?" This article is co-written by Robert Millet (a Mormon) and Gerald McDermott (an evangelical). As most of you know, I don't mind evangelicals discussing whether or not they can vote for a Mormon for President. But these words simply cannot go without a response:

Besides, Mormon beliefs are not as un-evangelical as most evangelicals think. Unlike Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons hold firmly to the deity of Christ. For Latter-Day Saints, Jesus is not only the Son of God but also God the Son. Evangelical pollster George Barna found in 2001 that while only 33 percent of American Catholics, Lutherans, and Methodists agreed that Jesus was "without sin," Mormons were among the "most likely" to say that Jesus was sinless.

Most evangelicals would also be surprised to learn that the Book of Mormon contains passages that teach salvation by the merits and grace of Christ ("There is no flesh that can dwell in the presence of God, save it be through the merits, and mercy, and race of the Holy Messiah" 2 Nephi 2:8) and others that require personal trust in Christ for salvation, such as 1 Nephi 10:4-6: "All mankind were in a lost and in a fallen state, and ever would be save they should rely on this Redeemer."

This article justifiably caused James White to go into apoplexy. He has produced a great response properly titled "Evangelical Apostasy." Make sure to read both posts: Part 1 and Part 2. Sharon Lindbloom at the Mormon Coffee blog also wrote a brief, helpful response with "Really -- What is Mormonism? Most Evangelicals Would Be Surprised."

With replies like these, I really have nothing to add. But I wholeheartedly agree with Roger Overton when he says:

There is too much ecumenism today at the expense of clear understanding of differences in fundamental beliefs. If we as Christians are not explicitly clear to our non-Christian Roman Catholic and Mormon friends that what their churches teach is a false gospel, then we are not truly their friends and are simply condemning them with a smile (as Piper puts it). If we are to be faithful to our call as Christ's followers and ambassadors to this world, we must live with a renewed boldness and submission to God's Word. And the fewer differences we see between Mormon beliefs, the Roman Catholic Church and Evangelicalism, the more fervently we should reject Evangelicalism as an abomination.

Strong words? Absolutely! Still, they are true and need to be heard. If this is the kind of superficial and deceptive dialogue that I have to look forward to when reading Millet and McDermott's upcoming book on Christ, then I will honestly be wasting my time.

Book Announcement: Claiming Christ

2007-06-01T14:30:00.000-05:00

Here's a controversial new book due out later this year: Claiming Christ: A Mormon-Evangelical Debate by Gerald R. McDermott and Robert L. Millet. A kind of follow-up to Craig L. Blomberg and Stephen E. Robinson's How Wide the Divide: A Mormon and an Evangelical in Conversation, I'm not sure what to expect from this project.

I have read McDermott's God's Rivals: Why Has God Allowed Different Religions? and Millet's A Different Jesus? The Christ of the Latter Day Saints. I was extremely disappointed with both of them. Therefore, it is with some hesitancy that I will take up their combined dialogue and read it when it comes out. At the same time, I recognize this work's importance in contemporary evangelical and Mormon discussion, so it will be important to critically engage.

In any case, here is the book's description:

Some have predicted that Mormonism will be the third-largest faith in America by the middle of the twenty-first century, yet confusion abounds regarding what Mormons actually believe, especially about Jesus. Do Mormon beliefs and evangelical Christian beliefs differ significantly, or are their views similar enough to be considered the same faith? Can Mormon and evangelical believers learn from one another and even work together?

In Claiming Christ, respected scholars Gerald McDermott, an evangelical, and Robert Millet, a Mormon, engage in a back-and-forth exchange comparing evangelical and Mormon views on one of the most significant issues dividing and uniting the two faiths: the identity of Jesus. Throughout the conversation they exhibit genuine respect for one another, seeking to clear up misconceptions and find common ground even as they dig deeply into each faith's texts and traditions. The result is a fair, thoroughly researched analysis that will be a valuable resource for pastors, students in college and seminary apologetics courses, and lay Mormon and evangelical believers seeking to understand the differences and similarities in how Mormons and evangelicals view Jesus.

You can also read the introduction online (in PDF format).

Dialogue with Non-Christians

2007-06-01T10:00:00.000-05:00

In thinking about such issues as evangelism, apologetics, missions, and Christianity's relationship to other religions, I ran across an older but excellent and informative article: I. Howard Marshall, "Dialogue with Non-Christians in the New Testament," Evangelical Review of Theology (16): 28-47. Unfortunately, this article does not appear to be online. Nevertheless, it is essential reading for all Christians interested in sharing the gospel with others. It begins where we all should start in working through these issues--God's Word. While I'd love to post the whole article (but am equally sure that I cannot!), below is the introduction to whet your appetite. Hopefully it will serve as a "hook," leading you to find a copy and read it in its entirety.

The place of dialogue with non-Christians in relation to the evangelistic task of the church has received renewed attention recently in the pages of the Evangelical Review of Theology. It is clear that some Christians regard dialogue as an important form of witness, and think that the church's evangelistic task should be carried on by means of dialogue as well as by proclamation.

We may roughly contrast the two possible approaches as follows. In proclamation the evangelist (X) has a message (G--the gospel) which he communicates to his hearer (Y) as something which is to be accepted or rejected; the evangelist himself has received this unchanging message, and he communicates it virtually without change. In dialogue, however, the message is not something which the evangelist already possesses in normative form. Rather he must enter into discussion with his hearer, both participants contributing to the dialogue and thus together reaching an understanding of the gospel.

A. PROCLAMATION
G ---> X ---> Y

B. DIALOGUE
X ---> G <--- Y

The question which is posed by juxtaposing these two types of approach is whether the Christian message is something 'given' to the evangelist which is passed on unchanged to the potential convert, or whether the truth of the gospel is something that emerges in the course of dialogue. Obviously the issues are not as sharp as this in practice. Any evangelist must shape his proclamation to the situation and character of the hearer; it is no use speaking in German to somebody who only understands Tamil, and illustrations and concepts must be chosen which will be intelligible to the hearer. Similarly, even in a situation of dialogue the evangelist will have some understanding of the gospel, even if his understanding of it may undergo radical alteration in the course of dialogue. Nevertheless, it is still necessary to ask whether the essential content of the gospel is something 'given' to the evangelist or can undergo radical alteration in a common search for truth along with a non-Christian.

It is surely essential that in discussing this matter we have a clear understanding of what is meant by 'dialogue' in the New testament and determine whether it was practised as a means of evangelism. We shall look first at the meaning of the Greek verbs which suggest the idea of dialogue, and this will involve us in a study of the church's evangelism as portrayed in Acts. From there we shall turn back to the synoptic gospels [Matthew, Mark, and Luke] to see whether the dialogue form can be found there, and then we shall move forward to see whether Paul's letters reflect the use of dialogue, and finally we shall consider the Gospel of John as a source for dialogue. The essay will close with some brief conclusions.

Said At Southern Seminary Day

2007-06-01T09:00:00.000-05:00

Today has been designated "Said At Southern Seminary Day" by the revamped Said At Southern blog. I have enjoyed this site and appreciate all of the blogs brought together from those involved with the seminary.

As a recent alum, I should be featured in the "Alumni Said" section soon. Regardless, check out why The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary is one of the greatest evangelical institutions in our country today!

Where Am I?

2007-05-30T15:30:00.000-05:00

Adjusting to my new life is taking longer than I expected, but I'm enjoying every minute of it! Here is the reason for slacking off on my blog:

At least I have my other two daughters to help (while my son continues to find new ways to terrorize whatever place he finds himself!):

P.S. If you leave any comments, please do not include my children's names. I'd prefer for their lives to remain somewhat private!

What About God Commanding Canaanite Extermination?

2007-05-29T16:30:00.000-05:00

I am now beginning to catch up with what I have missed over the last couple of weeks, and I've ran across a great article by Bob Gonzales over at the Reformed Baptist Fellowship blog: "God’s Command to Exterminate the Canaanites: A Biblical Apology." Does the question of God's commanding the extermination of Canaanites ever haunt you? Then check out Gonzales' post. Here is his conclusion:

When placed under the light of the overall Biblical teaching and worldview, the theological and ethical “problem” of holy war evaporates. In the end, those who have serious problems with the OT Holy Wars probably have serious problems with God Himself. But there are also several practical applications we can draw from the reality of the OT Holy Wars. To begin with, God’s commands to Holy War remind us to be preeminently concerned with God’s honor and rights above mere human honor and rights. Secondly, God’s commands to Holy War remind us of the serious with which God views human sin. Thirdly, God’s commands to Holy War remind us of that the consequences of sin often extend beyond the individual to the family, the church, and the society. Fourthly, God’s commands to Holy War remind us of the dangerous influences of an anti-Christian society around us. Fifthly, God’s commands to Holy War remind us how zealous God is to protect the purity of His worship and His worshipers. Sixthly, God’s commands to Holy War remind us of the serous commitment to His word that God expects from His people. And finally, God’s commands to Holy War provide us with a picture of our spiritual battle against remaining sin, the world, and the devil, as well as a foretaste of that ultimate battle between good and evil yet to come.

Week Off

2007-05-25T12:00:00.000-05:00

As most of you can tell, I have not been posting this week (except for a brief update about my busy weekend!). This is because I have been devoting myself to my family this week.

But don't worry! I plan to return after Memorial Day. Until then, enjoy the weekend!

A Busy Weekend!

2007-05-22T23:00:00.000-05:00

This picture was supposed to be taken at my graduation last Friday. . . .

But my family's schedule had to change. Everyone needed for my wife's scheduled c-section was only available on Friday morning. With the seminary's graduation at 10 am, there was simply no way for me to participate. I officially received my degree "in absentia" (in absence).

Nevertheless, on May 18th 2007 my newest daughter was born. I know that I am biased, but she is a beautiful baby girl! The Lord has blessed my wife and daughter with quick recoveries, and they were both released from the hospital yesterday. Our family thanks God for his abundant blessings and looks forward to what he has in store for us in the coming months and years! Stay tuned to read more about our future!

Images of Jesus, Part 5 (Now Complete)

2007-05-17T10:30:00.000-05:00

For those of you who have been following along with me, the fifth and final part of Justin Griffin's book--The Truth about Images of Jesus and the Second Commandment-- has been posted online. Here is the complete series:

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5

Wiccans

2007-05-16T14:30:00.000-05:00

Today's New York Times includes a fascinating article on Wicca: "Wiccans Keep the Faith With a Religion Under Wraps." The following is an excerpt:

Among the most popular religions to have flowered since the 1960s, Wicca — a form of paganism — still faces a struggle for acceptance, experts on the religion and Wiccans themselves said. In April, Wiccans won an important victory when the Department of Veterans Affairs settled a lawsuit and agreed to add the Wiccan pentacle to a list of approved religious symbols that it will engrave on veterans’ headstones.

But Wicca in the civilian world is largely a religion in hiding. Wiccans fear losing their friends and jobs if people find out about their faith.

Bible Fruit?

2007-05-14T12:30:00.000-05:00

This month, T. M. Moore wrote a challenging article for Breakpoint: "The Fruit of the Word." Moore examines Hebrews 6:7-8 and applies it to contemporary evangelicalism. His thoughts?

The fruit of the Spirit, the tokens of love, obedience unto holiness, and fervent witness for Christ: These are the fruit the Lord Himself is expecting as He cultivates the field of the Church and rains down the waters of His truth upon it, week after week.

So where’s the fruit?

We all know lots of Christians. But I’m willing to bet we know very few Christians who match up to the four-fold profile outlined above as the reasonable fruit of the Word which God is looking for in our lives. Where are they? You don’t see ‘em. I don’t seem ‘em. Christian scholars, pollsters, and sociologists don’t see ‘em. The world complains over and over about our shallowness and hypocrisy. And every year the evangelical church moves more squarely into the margin of moral, social, and cultural issues and debates. What’s wrong? Why is the most Christian-educated generation in all of Church history so devoid of the fruit we should reasonably expect to find in them?

Perhaps we’ll tackle that question in another installment. For now, can we agree on just this much: Contemporary Christian education—from the sermons we hear to the classes we take and the degrees we earn—is very near to being a complete failure, when considered in the light of the fruit we should reasonably expect to find. I know that conclusion won’t set well with many, but I’ve been involved in Christian education for over thirty years, so I have to wear this indictment myself.

TIME on Romney and Mormonism

2007-05-12T12:45:00.000-05:00

The current issue of TIME magazine (Vol. 169 No. 21) has Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney on the cover. It contains two stories on Romney and Mormonism. While I am avoiding posting too many entries on Romney, this kind of major attention deserves to be noted and interacted with. Here are the two articles:

Karen Tumulty, "What Romney Believes." A brief history of Mitt Romney and his political life.

Nancy Gibbs, "Romney's Mormon Question." A look at Mormonism and the role of religion in the political sphere.

The Names of God

2007-05-11T10:00:00.000-05:00

Identify three primary names of God found in the Old Testament (not including El, Elohim, Adonai). Using a Bible dictionary or encyclopedia, indicate what is the theological significance of each of these names. What do these names tell us about God’s character? In what way do they inform our understanding of God's relationship to us? How can they be used in a pastoral setting or in the development of one’s spiritual life?

God has revealed many names for himself in Scripture. These names do far more than simply identify a divine being—they teach us more about the God who is revealing himself. This rich abundance of insight can be demonstrated through identifying and briefly studying three primary names of God found in the Old Testament.

One name of God is ’El Shaddai. The Tyndale Bible Dictionary (TBD) explains: “God as ’El Shaddai is presented as the all-powerful One, totally self-sufficient, absolute ruler, and the One who can and does make final disposition.”[1] Essentially, ’El Shaddai expresses God’s sovereignty. Genesis 17 gives us the first recording of this name in Scripture: “When Abram was ninety-nine years old the Lord appeared to Abram and said to him, ‘I am God Almighty [’El Shaddai]; walk before me, and be blameless, that I may make my covenant between me and you, and may multiply you greatly’” (Genesis 17:1-2). God uses this name when entering into a covenant with Abraham, commanding him to follow God as the Sovereign One. Christians have the same responsibility, becoming children of Abraham through faith in Christ (Romans 4:11-12). As our Sovereign Creator, we owe God our love, our trust, and our submission. He has the absolute right to do all things in accordance with his own good pleasure.

Consequently, ’El Shaddai greatly instructs believers in the development of our spiritual life. Since Jesus is God incarnate, the Christian life is a life of submission to his lordship. There is no Christian faith without submission to the Savior. Pastors need to proclaim the whole gospel, including the need for converts to crucify themselves daily. Grace is not cheap—it cost Jesus Christ his very life! Believers’ spiritual lives are lived in repentance for our failures and trust in Christ’s atoning work for righteousness. Pastoral ministry must also be rooted in God’s Word, for it is in the Bible that Christians continually remember and apply the gospel as well as understand God’s purpose and will for our lives. Whether from the pulpit or in counseling sessions, the Bible is the foundation upon which God’s sovereignty is learned and observed.

Next, God is called ’El ‘Olam. This name is also clearly defined by the TBD: “’El ‘Olam is used to refer to God as the everlasting or eternal one, a clear instance where the name of God and an attribute of God are combined.”[2] It was also used during the life of Abraham: “Abraham planted a tamarisk tree in Beersheba and called there on the name of the LORD, the Everlasting God [’El ‘Olam]” (Genesis 21:33). God’s eternal relationship to us is clearly portrayed in Psalm 90: “Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever you had formed the earth and the world, from everlasting to everlasting you are God. You return man to dust and say, ‘Return, O children of man! For a thousand years in your sight are but as yesterday when it is past, or as a watch in the night’” (Psalm 90:2-4). While God is eternal, our lives are short and then we die. God’s eternality demonstrates the fundamental difference between the natures of God and man. God necessarily and always exists whereas humanity’s existence is dependent on God and ends due to God’s wrath against sin (90:7-11).

Pastors also find a rich wealth of truth in ’El ‘Olam. Psalm 90 points us toward the practical significance of God’s eternity in its first verse: “Lord, you have been our dwelling place in all generations.” By having God as our dwelling place—our place of rest and security—our lives find meaning and purpose. In the New Testament, we see that this rest comes in Jesus Christ (Hebrews 4). Therefore, church members can depend on the eternal God who has always existed, will always exist, and will never change. And Christ has taken the wrath we deserve upon himself, reconciling us to God. This truth enables believers to endure and even find joy in various trials and troubles, knowing that “for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose” (Romans 8:28). Pastors should point to God’s eternal name and nature for security and comfort.

Third, Scripture refers to God as Yahweh-Rohi.[3] This name appears at the beginning of Psalm 23: “The LORD is my shepherd [Yahweh-Rohi]; I shall not want” (Psalm 23:1). Here, God’s name reveals himself as a shepherd. In Ezekiel 34, God further explains this truth, especially in verse 15: “I myself will be the shepherd of my sheep, and I myself will make them lie down, declares the Lord GOD.” Of course, God as a shepherd is most clearly seen in Jesus Christ: “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep” (John 10:11). God cares for his people and his creation, and as a shepherd he is intimately involved in his world. His supreme act of shepherding was in the sacrificial death of his Son.

God as Shepherd clearly displays his love and care for those made in his image. In a unique way, Jesus Christ shepherds his people as our chief shepherd (1 Peter 5:4). What comfort he provides! Thus, the well-known Psalm 23 points Christians to their Savior. David concluded by writing, “Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life, and I shall dwell in the house of the LORD forever” (Psalm 23:6). Pastors rightly quote this biblical passage to show God as a shepherd. In him, whether in life or in death, we have true joy.

When one studies the names of God, he or she should praise God for the complementary ways in which his names function to reveal more of himself to us. God is sovereign (’El Shaddai), he is eternal (’El ‘Olam), and he is our shepherd (Yahweh-Rohi). May we rejoice in our God, proclaiming him to a world that needs to hear of him and of the redemption which he alone gives.

[1]Walter A. Elwell and Philip W. Comfort, ed., Tyndale Bible Dictionary (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 2001), 540.
[2]Ibid.
[3]Ibid, 542.

More on (and from) Beckwith

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

Obviously, the blogosphere is still buzzing after Francis Beckwith's return to Roman Catholicism. While I cannot link to everything (nor would I want to!), here are a few more important updates:

1) Statement of the ETS Executive Committee regarding Dr. Frank Beckwith’s Resignation as ETS President (already added as an update to a previous post)
2) Christianity Today online, "ETS Resignation Triggers Tradition Discussion"
3) Christianity Today online, "Q&A: Francis Beckwith"

Additionally, in his latest blog post, Beckwith said the following:

Over the next year or so I hope to work on a book, or perhaps a major article, that offers a detailed account of why I returned to the Catholic Church. Consequently, please do not treat this interview [the Christianity Today Q&A] as if it were my theological treatise on the subject.

I look forward to the growing interaction on these essential issues!

Images of Jesus, Parts 3 and 4

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

What happens when you are finishing your final semester of seminary? You forget to continue reading an online series posted weekly.

Therefore, here are the next two sections from Justin Griffin's book The Truth About Images of Jesus and the Second Commandment:

Part 3
Part 4

Book Review: The Battle Belongs to the Lord

2007-05-08T12:00:00.000-05:00

Does defending the Christian faith scare you? Why do you hear so much about apologetics today? Is it something that you ought to let informed people like church leaders, theologians, and philosophers handle? Should you use your Bible when talking to those who deny that its God's Word?

If you are asking questions like these, then you must read K. Scott Oliphint's The Battle Belongs to the Lord. It is a simple introductory work which turns to Scripture to understand God's call for his people to defend the faith.

After applying insights from the biblical battle between David and Goliath in 1 Samuel 17, Oliphint structures his book around explaining what several key biblical passages reveal to us about our apologetic work. The chapters include examinations of 1 Peter 3:15-17; Jude 1:3; 2 Corinthians 10:3-5; Romans 1:16-18, 19-32; and Acts 17:15-34.

Oliphint summarizes his central concern by saying:

Since Christ is Lord, and the battle is his, we must always be ready to contend for the faith once for all delivered to the saints. We must use the weapons, not of this world, but of the Lord. We must take every thought captive to the obedience of Christ as we demolish the arguments, with gentleness and reverence, of those who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, exchanging the truth of God for a lie, worshipping created things, rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

What an excellent statement! And every phrase of it comes from God's Word. Why should we begin with anything other than God's own revelation in learning more about defending the faith?

I simply cannot recommend this book highly enough. It is filled with biblical insight. Additionally, Oliphint includes study and application questions at the end of each chapter, making it a great teaching tool or small group study. I am simply amazed that he has managed to compress so much in less than 200 pages.

At the same time, this work should be seen as the beginning of fruitful apologetic study. It is an introduction to the Christian life of gospel proclamation and defense. More detail and depth will come through reading other material. Nevertheless, Oliphint has provided us with an invaluable starting point. Every follower of Christ will find this book spiritually challenging and edifying.

ETS President Returns to Roman Catholic Church

2007-05-07T10:30:00.000-05:00

I know that the blogosphere has been buzzing with the news that Francis Beckwith returned to the Roman Catholic Church. I don't want to post my thoughts for several reasons: 1) I am a seminary student while Beckwith was just president of the Evangelical Theological Society, 2) Beckwith has not yet given enough details for me to understand why he has left for Rome, and 3) other evangelicals have provided insightful, respectful, and balanced responses.

As a result, I decided to post some links for those interested:

1) Francis J. Beckwith, "My Return to the [Roman] Catholic Church." You'll obviously want to start with Beckwith's own explanation.
2) Carl Trueman, "Thoughts on the Return to Rome of Professor Beckwith." Some good thoughts, including a brief examination of Beckwith's appeal to the early church fathers and their writings.
3) R. Scott Clark, "ETS President Converts to Rome." A helpful look at Beckwith in light of the growing bankruptcy of evangelicalism. While I'm not as opposed to modern evangelicalism as Clark (and Hart) seem to be, I completely agree with us coming to see the bad fruit of not having a confessional foundation.
4) Jason Engwer, "Francis Beckwith's Reversion To Roman Catholicism." Engwer makes several important points.
5) James White, Any Recent Post on His Blog. While White is getting a lot of heat for publicly "outing" Beckwith's decision, his concerns and responses are necessary and needed.

I want to close by reposting a letter to Beckwith by Douglas Groothuis:

Dear Frank:

This is a sad day for all true sons and daughters of the Protestant Reformation, for all who lived and died for its truths.

Having abandoned the distinctives of the Reformation (which are deeply rooted in Holy Scripture), you are embracing serious theological error. I wish I could say otherwise, but conscience-bound, I cannot.

By joining Rome, you are putting an institution above God; you are putting men (and I mean males) ahead of the pure gospel of Jesus Christ (See Galatians 1:6-11).

However, you are doing the right thing to resign from your position at ETS.

I have appreciated much of your writing over the years, but I lament what you have now done.

Sincerely,
Doug Groothuis

UPDATE: The Evangelical Theological Society's Executive Committee has responded.

Mohler on Mormonism

2007-05-04T11:45:00.000-05:00

Dr. Albert Mohler has posted his contribution to the current OnFaith internet discussion: "After 175 years of existence, is Mormonism entering the mainstream of American religious life or are people still suspicious of it?"

His response: "Evangelicals, Mormons on Same Side of Cultural Divide." Here is an excerpt:

Mormonism holds that God is an exalted man, with a physical body. Christianity teaches that God is Spirit. Mormonism denies the historic Christian understandings of the Trinity, the person and work of Christ, and the doctrine of salvation. Christianity promises salvation through Christ's atonement and the sinner's justification by faith. Mormonism promises deification. Christianity calls for personal faith in Jesus Christ. Mormonism calls for obedience to its own teachings as the path to exaltation. Mormonism replaces belief in the sole authority of the Bible with other writings, including the Book of Mormon. This list is only a brief summary of the vast chasm that separates Christianity from Mormonism. Put simply, Mormonism is not just another form of Christianity. It is a rejection of historic Christianity.

That is a theological summary, but there is a sociological dimension as well. From that perspective, Mormonism can certainly claim to have achieved a comfort level in contemporary American culture -- especially in what might be called "Middle America." Most Americans would feel quite comfortable with Mormon neighbors. The Mormon effort to identify with American culture has been stunningly successful, and the movement's idealization and inculcation of family values has won it the admiration of millions of Americans -- including many evangelical Christians. The convergence of Mormon and evangelical Christian concerns on a host of cultural, moral, and political issues is no accident. The preservation and conservation of the family is a prime concern of both groups.

The Accuracy of Scripture

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

Read a discussion on textual criticism. Suppose someone in your church comes to you, telling you that she has just discovered that some manuscripts of the Bible do not always agree on how the text should read. Her faith has been shaken. How would you inform and encourage her, in light of what you have studied about the state of textual critical understanding?

Unfortunately, many Christians today are uninformed about how we obtained our Bible. We don’t have the actual, original letters written by the Apostle Paul. Neither does anyone possess Jeremiah’s originally written Old Testament book. What we do have are copies that have been passed around and duplicated further since they were reproduced. When believers discover this historical information, they often wonder if the Bible we have today accurately preserves the inspired Word of God. With this in mind, it is not hard to imagine people’s faith being shaken when they learn about different copies of Scripture. Suppose someone in my church came up to me and told me that she has just discovered that some manuscripts of the Bible do not always agree on how the text should read. How would I respond and encourage her?

To begin, I would assure her that it is perfectly understandable and acceptable to wonder about these issues. After all, we’ve all played the “telephone game,” where we’ve started to pass a message down a line of people only to discover by the end that the message the last person hears bears little resemblance to the original message. Could the Bible be any different? After all, there was no printing press for most of the Bible’s history. The only way copies were made was by hand. A member from one church would visit another church which has a copy of a letter from an apostle. He would then write it down and take it with him. This practice continued as Christianity continued to grow. Even if all the copies were in the original languages (and they obviously are not, having been translated numerous times), then after 2000 years knowing what was originally written appears impossible.

However, the “telephone game” does not really apply to the transmission of Scripture. First, the distribution was not linear, where one person gave a copy to a second who gave another copy to a third, etc. The Bible was spread geometrically. For example, one letter made five copies which then became twenty five which then became two hundred. Copies were normally reproduced multiple times. Second, transmitting something by writing allows for much more accuracy and testing than spreading a message by word-of-mouth. The more copies we have from different places and different periods of time, the more comparisons we can make.

We have an amazing number of copes from the Bible, especially the New Testament—over 5000 Greek manuscripts or parts of manuscripts. There are 8000 more partials or complete manuscripts of versions. All of these manuscripts are divided into text types, where copies are classified on the basis of which location they originated from. Mixed types result when a manuscript was taken from one region to another and then reproduced along with other local manuscripts. When copies are very similar and show evidence of direct borrowing, they are classified together as a family.

With this information in mind, it is usually not hard to tell which copy reflects the original (also called the autograph). Misspellings become clear and changed word order is easily noticed. When a copyist wanted to mistakenly assist the reader by adding something to a manuscript for further insight, these additions are straightforwardly detected. Are there differences between the copies that we possess? Sure there are. But the vast majority are easily resolved. There is simply no reason to doubt the accuracy of a Bible translation. The translators are almost always able to determine the original words of the inspired biblical writer.

As D. A. Carson and Douglas J. Moo summarize: “The overwhelming majority of the text of the Greek New Testament is firmly established. Where uncertainties remain, it is important to recognize that in no case is any doctrinal matter at issue.”[1] Christians don’t have to worry about any of our beliefs depending on one debated textual difference. These scholars continue to explain: “Of course, textual variants may raise the question as to whether a particular doctrinal stance or historical datum is or is not supported in this or that passage, but inevitably one can appeal to parallel passages where the text is secure to address the larger doctrinal or historical issues.”[2] God has clearly revealed himself to us in Scripture, and we can trust his truths as they are communicated throughout the Bible.

It is also wise for us as Christians to trust in our all-knowing and all-powerful God to preserve his revelation for us. We do not know why God did not allow us to keep the autographs of Scripture, but it ultimately was for our good. If we did have the original texts today, they would have brought with them their own problems. Believers would most likely care more about them as a sacred artifact than they would pay attention to the message they actually convey. Just look at how many Christians throughout history have handled relics! Imagine what people would do with the actual scroll written by the hand of the Apostle Peter.

Of course, I would also welcome questions and the opportunity for further discussion when talking with a woman about these issues in my church. There are answers to her questions and doubts. She can trust in her Bible, and in the Savior that it reveals to us.

[1]D. A. Carson and Douglas J. Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2005), 31.
[2]Ibid.

Interaction with a Mormon

2007-05-03T13:30:00.000-05:00

On the "Faith and Reason Radio" show, Matt Slick (from the Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry) recently interviewed Steve (a Mormon) on various biblical verses and topics. While Slick is much more aggressive than I would be in this dialogue, the back-and-forth is still informative. Listen to the interaction (in MP3 format).

(HT: Jeff Downs)

PBS Mormon Series Aftermath

2007-05-02T16:30:00.000-05:00

I admit it--I haven't seen the PBS documentary series The Mormons. With the end of the semester looming, I have been busy writing a research paper on the extent of Christ's atonement. While a friend is taping it for me to watch, now I may not even need to pick it up from him.

Why? Because PBS has been generous enough to post the entire documentary online. I cannot wait to finally watch this series!

And what do Mormons themselves think about it? Today's Deseret News includes a report on their reaction: "'Mormons' elicits a mixed response." It is worth the read.

UPDATE: Don't forget to check out the official LDS response to the documentary. Additionally, be sure to visit the On Faith internet panel, which is currently discussing the question: "After 175 years of existence, is Mormonism entering the mainstream of American religious life or are people still suspicious of it?"

Baptist and Mormon DVD Distribution

2007-05-01T10:30:00.000-05:00

Yesterday, Baptist Press released two articles on the recent nationwide Jesus Christ/Joseph Smith DVD distribution:

"DVD challenges Mormons to take closer look at their beliefs"
"Collegians flex passion for Mormon witness"

A Mormon on Responding to PBS Series

2007-04-30T12:00:00.000-05:00

Today, Maurine Proctor writes about how Mormons should respond to the PBS series: "On the Frontline: PBS Documentary The Mormons." Her piece provides a lot of insight into how Mormons themselves will perceive this week's PBS documentary series. Here is an excerpt:

It is at this fascinating moment that the most comprehensive, thorough and lengthy production ever created about the Church is going to air on PBS. In two hours each on Monday and Tuesday night, April 30, and May 1, The Mormons, will air as an unprecedented collaboration between two PBS news series, “Frontline” and “American Experience.” As the documentary unfolds, will Latter-day Saints cringe in dismay or nod in recognition? Will we feel misrepresented or see ourselves in a way that feels familiar and accurate, saying, “Yes, that’s me. We have been defined with a sure brush stroke.” Word from those who have had advance screenings is that there will be moments of both.

SnapShots?

2007-04-30T11:30:00.000-05:00

Joe Thorn's thoughts on SnapShots have been making their rounds through the blogosphere. While I am currently using this program, I am more than willing to reconsider. What do you think? Here is what Thorn says:

To all the bloggers out there who are using the SnapShots link preview feature on their blogs. We hate it. It makes looking through your blog less enjoyable. No, it’s worse than that - it annoys us. In fact, 10 out of 10 blog readers surveyed say the SnapShot feature discourages them from returning to a blog (I made that up). Don’t believe that most people find it annoying? If you use it, take a poll on your blog and ask. Or you can just do the right thing and disable the feature.

MacArthur Revisited

2007-04-26T17:30:00.000-05:00

What are you doing reading my blog?!?!?

Go over to the Illumination blog and continue reading Waldron's response to MacArthur’s Millennial Manifesto--now!

Chapter 1: John MacArthur Is My Friend!
Chapter 1: Supplementary Excursus--Supersessionism and Replacement Theology
Chapter 2: All Calvinists Should Be What?!!!
Chapter 3: MacArthur Versus Church History!

Responding to MacArthur's Anti-Amillennial Sermon

2007-04-25T13:00:00.000-05:00

Sam Waldron has finally begun a detailed response to MacArthur's notorious message against amillennialism over at the Illumination blog: "MacArthur’s Millennial Manifesto." I really look forward to following this series! Here is his introduction:

I am going to try something new over the next couple of weeks in this blog. I have just now named it “blog a book.” I am responding to MacArthur’s recent introductory sermon at the 2007 Shepherds’ Conference. You can help me write this response by your comments and input. So here goes with Chapter 1.

USA Today on Rising Mormon Publicity

2007-04-25T09:00:00.000-05:00

Yesterday's USA Today includes a story on the rising presence of Mormonism in the public square: "Mormon story opens up." A brief piece, it focuses on the two new productions I have mentioned before--September Dawn and The Mormons (the PBS special). I definitely plan on watching both. In any case, I look forward to the increasing discussion on Mormon history and contemporary life. Here is the report's introduction:

In their 180-year history, Mormons have evolved from a reviled and persecuted people in exile to a religious group that produces top leaders in business and politics.
New films, books and the presidential campaign of Mormon Mitt Romney, former governor of Massachusetts, are bringing Mormonism into sharper focus on the national scene. The question: Will closer examination hasten society's embrace of this group or reinforce longstanding fears?
"We tend to use elections as a way to hold national seminars on religion," says Alan Wolfe, director of the Boisi Center for Religion & American Public Life at Boston College. The candidacies of John F. Kennedy and Sen. Joe Lieberman triggered "seminars" on Catholicism and Orthodox Judaism.
"This is our seminar moment for Mormonism," Wolfe says.

Images of Jesus, Part 2

2007-04-24T13:00:00.000-05:00

Last week, I mentioned a new series in the Reformed Perspectives Magazine on images of Jesus Christ. This week, the second part has been posted: "The Truth About Images of Jesus and the Second Commandment." Often an overlooked issue, I believe that this is a question we should reexamine in light of Scripture.

Religion and Ethics Show on Mormonism

2007-04-23T10:00:00.000-05:00

Over the weekend, PBS' Religion and Ethics Newsweekly included a piece on Mormonism. While it was fairly introductory in nature, it does briefly summarize the disagreements which exist between The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the historic Christian faith. You can watch the video online or read the transcript through the R&E site.

Upcoming Event

2007-04-20T13:00:00.000-05:00

I am honored to be involved in an upcoming missions conference in Kentucky later this year. If you can, make plans to attend this September! Here is more information from Matt Perry's blog:

Each Homecoming weekend at the end of September, our church holds our Annual Missions Conference. This year, the conference will take place on Saturday, September 22, 2007. The theme will be “From Our Neighborhoods to the Nations” and will have one representative from our Judea, Jerusalem, Samaria, and the Ends of the Earth. Last year was a tremendous success with Jim Smith (DOM, Boone’s Creek Association), Randy Foster (Kentucky Baptist Convention), J. D Payne (Missions School Professor, Southern Seminary), and David Sills (former missionary to Ecuador, missions professor at Southern). Our people left with a tremendous burden to reach Eastern Canada for Christ.

This year, the line-up looks just as promising because I know the Lord is at work in these men:

Matthew Perry (yes, that’s me — I’ll give an overview);
John Ferguson, Lexington Rescue Mission, Lexington, KY (Jerusalem)
Dr. Hershael York, Professor, Southern Seminary; Pastor, Buck Run Baptist Church, Frankfort, KY; former KBC President (2004-2005)(Judea);
Bill Barker, Appalachian Regional Ministry (http://www.arministry.org/), NAMB (Samaria);
John Divito, Centers for Apologetics Research, Missionary-to-Be in Uganda, Editor of “The Reformed Baptist Thinker” (Ends of the Earth)

Please be in prayer over this — and if you can, plan on attending. It takes place from 9:00 a.m. until 3:00 p.m.

Ryan Bolger and Alan Roxburgh on Missional Churches

2007-04-18T15:00:00.000-05:00

If you want to learn more about where the missional / emerging church movement is going, be sure to check out the new video interview between Ryan Bolger and Alan Roxburgh. Here is the description:

The Allelon Netcast What is Missional Church? series continues with this video - a conversation between Fuller Associate Professor Ryan Bolger and Alan Roxburgh. Ryan talks about the emerging church in light of the missional conversation - citing the research done by he and fellow Fuller Prof, Eddie Gibbs in their book Emerging Churches: Creating Christian Community in Postmodern Cultures. He also shares his own spiritual journey in this engaging conversation.

The second half of this Allelon Netcast interview will be released in May, with Ryan and Al discussing the Allelon Missional Schools Project. In light of that conversation, we would also recommend you read Ryan and Mark Lau Branson's paper: Missional Theology For Evangelical Seminaries - A Discussion Paper, which we mentioned in our last update.

Christianity and Truth

2007-04-17T12:00:00.000-05:00

Over at the Pyromaniacs blog, Dan Phillips has written a great post on the centrality of truth in Christianity: "Why truth matters." Briefly expositing 2 John, Phillips reminds us that our faith is established on apostolic doctrine, beliefs we must be zealous to defend.

Images of Jesus

2007-04-16T15:00:00.000-05:00

In this week's issue of the Reformed Perspectives Magazine, Justin Griffin begins a series of five parts: "The Truth About Images of Jesus and the Second Commandment." An online version of his book, it promises to be a helpful examination of a very controversial topic. In light of the second commandment, should Christians portray Jesus Christ in pictures and/or art? To begin thinking through an answer, I suggest reading through this series with me.

Thinking Blogger Awards

2007-04-14T02:00:00.000-05:00

I obviously don't deserve this honor, but I have been selected for the Thinking Blogger Award. And I've been so busy that it has taken me over a week to post about it! In any case, I thank Granny for nominating me!

Here are the participation rules:

1. If, and only if, you get tagged, write a post with links to 5 blogs that make you think
2. Link to this post so that people can easily find the exact origin of the meme
3. Optional: Proudly display the 'Thinking Blogger Award' with a link to the post that you wrote (here is an alternative silver version if gold doesn't fit your blog).

I decided to choose five blogs that are not well known but worth reading:

1) Steve Cowan. Cowan's a busy man and only posts occasionally, but I always enjoy reading what he has to say. After all, he edited the Zondervan Counterpoints book on Apologetics!
2) Jeff Downs. Jeff is a great apologetics and cult resource man. Unfortunately, he also is a Presbyterian and thinks that sprinkling babies is biblical. I guess I'll forgive him!
3) Kevin Larson. A great friend and a person who always holds my feet to the fire, challenging me to think through how we as Christians should engage our culture.
4) Jonathan Moorhead. I enjoy Jonathan's blog, but wish he'd finally abandon dispensationalism! Regardless, he has a good mix of humor and solid theological insight.
5) Matt Perry. Matt is a friend who graduated from seminary and is now pastoring a church. He's also another "Weird Al" fan--a rare breed for us evangelicals!

Make sure to check these blogs out!

LDS Church Responds to Woodward Article

2007-04-12T12:45:00.000-05:00

Today, the newsroom for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints released a response to Kenneth Woodward's New York Times editorial piece on Mitt Romney and Mormonism: "The Mormon Moment." While there is obviously an element of spin in their response, they basically confirm the core claims made by Woodward. After reading the original editorial, this reply is definitely worth checking out.