Books

So for my absence from your bright, shiny screens. Like most of you, life and snow combine to render me busy...but not too busy to read, of course.

-----
Mark Dever's ministry philosophy 9 Marks of a Healthy Church has turned into the foundation for a wide-reaching ministry aimed at revitalizing lagging chruches or simply kicking them in their Biblical keisters. At their website, 9Marks presents a great resource of articles, book reviews, and audio interviews - any pastor would do well to bookmark their site and use it as a source of encouragement and learning.

The book that started it all is centered around Pastor Dever's (Capitol Hill Baptist Church in D.C.) conception of what a healthy church looks like:

1. Expositional preaching
2. Biblical theology
3. The gospel
4. A Biblical understanding of conversion
5. A Biblical understanding of evangelism
6. A Biblical understanding of church membership
7. Biblical church discipline
8. A concern for discipleship and growth
9. Biblical church leadership

It's hard, if not impossible, to disagree with his assesesment that unfaithfulness in many of these marks persists in today's churches. While each reader could probably substitute one or two other "marks", it would also be hard to argue that any church consciously striving for faithfulness in these nine areas would be missing something. In the book, each "mark" gets the same treatment: a chapter-length, Biblical defense of what it is and why it's important. I especially appreciated the chapters on expositional preaching and a Biblical understanding of conversion.

The negative side of the book is not any of the teaching, but the simplicity of the teaching. As Dr. Dever aims at helping the church by convincing her leaders of what a Biblical church looks likeI think he could have delved into the Biblical teaching on these topics more significantly than he did. One of the blurbs on the back reports that Nine Marks is required seminary reading, which is disappointing - again, not because of the book's faithfulness, but because of its simplicity. Readers who are presbyterian by conviction will find a few other points to quibble with, as Dr. Dever writes from a muted-but-present Baptist background.

I did enjoy this book and appreciate the reason it was written; originally, I read it to see if it was something our session could benefit from reading together. In the end, I decided to go with something more consciously presbyterian and pastoral, John Sittema's With a Shepherd's Heart. Nine Marks is a fine book of solid ecclesiology; perhaps it might become the basis for a more in-depth book in the future.

-----
The Enemy Within by Kris Lundgaard is a highly readable, extremely helpful book about our fight against sin. Lundgaard begins by acknowledging his dependence on the venerable John Owen, whose two books, Mortification of Sin and Indwelling Sin, form the theological backbone of this book. Anyone who has read John Owen realizes the great work Lundgaard has accomplished by making Owen's dense, theological, Puritan writing easily understandable.

The problem of sin faces every believer and it doesn't always make sense - "In what sense has Christ defeated sin in the believer?" The answer is that he has overthrown its rule, weakened its power, and even killed its root so that it cannot bear the fruit of eternal death in a believer. Still - and this is amazing but true - sin is sin; its nature and purpose remain unchanged; its force and success still grab us by the throat.

Through a series of short chapters (with discussion questions included at the end), the author begins by examining the power of sin in a believer - what is it, how does it work? As I read this, I felt like I was getting a sneak peek at the enemy's playbook, or as Bryan Chapell put it, a "remarkable reconnaissance mission behind enemy lines..." If Lewis' Wormwood and Screwtape were devils conniving against a soul from the outside, Lundgaard would have us also recognize the incredible enemy lying inside - what the Apostle Paul calls our flesh.

Throughout the book and especially toward the end, Lundgaard is our general in the battle against sin, teaching us to use our weapons against sin, teaching us to keep our eyes on Christ - especially His cross - and encouraging us to never let up in the battle.

The Enemy Within can be read in short order (I shot through it in a couple plane rides) - but should really be read slowly. The Biblical teaching in this book is exactly what need for the ever-present battle against sin - and is best digested through meditation and prayer.

I cannot recommend this book highly enough; for you who read it, you will likely be spurred on to read John Owen's writings as a followp-up, which is an added benefit. The Enemy Within would be a great book for accountability partners, small groups, men's groups, etc. For the good of your soul and the purity of the church, read this wonderful book!

Immanuel

I know everyone's thinking and writing about the Colts winning the Super Bowl. But something much more important happened last weekend.

Friday night the Great Lakes/Gulf presbytery of the RPCNA met to organize Immanuel Reformed Presbyterian Church as a particular congregation. It was a great night of worship and rejoicing in the greatness of God. Pastor Barry York preached for us from Psalm 45, on our call as a daughter church to "forsake our people and our father's house" and our mother church's great sacrifice of sending a daughter away from her in order to pursue Christ's kingdom. James Faris, pastor of the Southfield (MI) RPC, prayed the prayer of constitution, and Immanuel became a congregation - we start with 38 communicant members and 32 baptized members.

Two men were elected as ruling elders: David Carr, who was a ruling elder in Lafayette, and Ben Larson. I might be more excited about this than anyone else - I am, perhaps, an incurable presbyterian. I'm so glad to have men to work alongside with, men to keep me accountable and watch over souls with me.

The service was wonderful. And wonderfully long - it takes Presbyterians a while to do something like this. At one point, Pastor Faris reminded us that, though the world was focusing their attentions on a football game, what we were doing that night would be remembered for eternity because it was of eternal significance.

Sunday was our first full day of worship together. Though it feels weird and a little "off" to not be worshipping in the Lafayette church, it was an exciting day. In our morning worship, I began a sermon series examining the theme of Immanuel throughout Scripture. In our evening teaching service, we're studying through the Westminster Shorter Catechism.

If we come to mind, pray that God might use us for His glory and purposes, that the kingdom of Christ would come in West Lafayette as it is in heaven.

1978 was a banner year. Clearly.

A Good Goodbye

Sunday morning was our last time of Sabbath worship as part of the Lafayette Reformed Presbyterian Church. Pastor Long preached on God's character as a sending God and then we had a service of consecration and sending for the folks going to Immanuel RPC. It was a truly blessed morning - not easy by any means, but it was clear to us all that we are following God's will in church planting. There was sadness without bitterness and joy for how Christ has cared so well for us. My only role in the service was to say IRPC's official "goodbye's" to our church family. I really thought I would be fine, but it ended up taking twice as long because of tears (I think I had something in my eye...), which seemed to be plentiful all around. Really, even as I read these goodbyes, I was astounded at how faithful God has been to us through this dear church family. Here, at length, is our goodbye - quoted to honor our "mother" church and to glorify God.

-----

January 28, 2007
To the Reformed Presbyterian Church of Lafayette,

How can we really speak of our love for you and our thankfulness to God for how He has used you in our lives? Certainly better words than these would still fail to make clear how dearly we cherish you, so please accept these words of love and gratefulness with the depth we wish we could express.

God paints several word-pictures to help us understand the church better. In each of these pictures, we find reason to confess our love for you and our deep thankfulness to God for His work through you. Please understand, as we speak of our love and respect for you, we know behind you is our perfect God who has used you and blessed your faithfulness to us.

The Church is an army
As you have you have reminded us day after day, Jesus’ church has an outward focus, a worldwide mission, a passion for multiplication. We have learned this from your words and your example. In fact, if you’re a little sad to see us leaving, realize that it’s mostly your fault – you have given us a vision for pursuing the kingdom of Christ over our own comfort.

Because you have fought for us and alongside us, and because you have equipped us with the weapons of spiritual warfare and are willing to send us, we love you and we thank God for you.

The Church is the temple of God
Paul tells us God’s temple is holy, and you are that temple. 1 Corinthians 3:17 The temple is where and how God dwells with His people. Rather than a building, now the temple is wherever God’s Spirit is. Living and worshipping with you, we know God’s Spirit abides in you – we know this in part because you have driven us again and again to the pursuit of holiness for the glory of God. You’ve never abandoned us when we stumbled; rather, you have consistently walked beside us and held us up as we sought together to live a life pleasing to our Creator.

Because the Spirit in you has led us to holiness, we love you and we thank God for you.

The Church is the body of Christ
God also calls His church a body; specifically, He says we are the body of Christ, united not just in our purpose, but in our head, Jesus Christ. We have seen in you what this means for day-to-day life in the church: some of you are elders, some teachers, some serve in ministries of prayer, ministries of mercy, ministries of service, the grand ministry of raising children…but all of you have a place in the body. You have helped each of us to find how we can serve the body of Christ; you have removed us from the spectator stands and brought us into significant service to Jesus.

Because you have shown us that the church is more than a club, that the ministry lies at all our feet, we love you and we thank God for you.

The Church is the bride of Christ
The Apostle John’s Revelation describes heaven as a marriage feast, when the church and Christ will be finally and fully unified. And so, learning from you, we look forward to the day when all our sins will be purged, when we are clothed in the robes of Christ’s righteousness. And in faith, we see this has begun even now. You have shown us the church is truly beautiful, not because she’s yet perfect, but because she is Christ’s bride. But in you and with you we have learned to look with the eyes of faith and see what the Holy Spirit is really doing.

Because you are beautiful and ever-growing in your beauty, we love you and we thank God for you.

The Church is God’s flock
We are a flock, a rather humiliating reminder of our weakness, our constant need for guidance, our inability to follow Christ on our own. Rather than pretending to be strong, you have shown us how to live in meekness and rejoice in weakness in order to glorify Christ. You who have been our elders have shepherded us faithfully and lovingly, never serving in selfishness, but calling us to follow our Great Shepherd, Jesus Christ. This is especially true of Pastor Long, whose faithful ministry in the Word can now be measured in decades rather than years. All of you have called us to hear the Shepherd’s loving voice day after day.

Because you have shown us how to follow the Shepherd’s voice in the midst of weakness, we love you and we thank God for you.

The Church is a family
Perhaps more than anything else, today we remember that God calls His church a family, a household. We are thankful to God for the meals we have shared together and will share together, for the acceptance we have found in your midst, for the innumerable opportunities for prayer and worship together, the many chances to labor with you, physically and spiritually, and even for the discipline we have sometimes needed. And we believe and want you to know that you aren’t like our family, somehow resembling something like a family but you really are our family. We call you brothers and sisters without qualification, for this is what you are. We truly believe that, although you are sending us out today, you can never get rid of us as your family.

Because you are our loving family, we love you and we thank God for you.

We don’t know and cannot see every implication of this move for us and for you. Certainly many changes will come – but surely God will bless the relationship between two local congregations seeking to do His will. We know that for some of you, it is as hard for you to send us as it is for us to leave – but again we’re going to blame you. If you had taught us following Christ was about being comfortable and seeking our own pleasures, we wouldn’t be leaving. But you haven’t. Rather, you have shown us true discipleship means evangelism and equipping, sacrifice and sending, always looking to the Savior and seeking God’s will above ours in all things.

As you send us forth to pursue the Kingdom of Christ, we bless our great God for the love He has poured on us through you. We are honored to be your letter of commendation, living proof of what Christ has accomplished through your faithfulness.

Love, the families of
Immanuel Reformed Presbyterian Church

1 John 4:11-12
Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. No one has ever seen God; if we love one another, God abides in us and His love is perfected in us.

The God-Man

I came across this in preparation for tonight's Bible study on the incarnation:

If salvation were simply a matter of correcting some mistaken ideas that humans held, then Jesus need be no more than a good teacher sent by God in the manner of Moses. If salvation were simply a question of rectifying social structures that were oppressing the people, then Jesus need be no more than a faithful prophet sent by God in the manner of Amos or Isaiah. If salvation, in short, were simply a human matter, then Jesus needed to be only a human being.

But what if the New Testament speaks about salvation in terms quite other than didactic or political? What if the witness of the New Testament - and the life and practice of the church from the beginning - regarded salvation as something far more than the adjustment of thought or of social structures? Then the agent of salvation must fit the nature of salvation. If the salvation witnessed by the Scripture and experienced by the
church could come only from God, then the agent of that salvation, Jesus Christ,
must be considered fully divine (because we have received from him what only God
could give) just as he is fully human (because we have seen and heard him as a human like us). And this is exactly what the earliest witnesses to the experience of Jesus tell us.

from The Creed, by Luke Timothy Johnson

Thoughts on other people's thoughts

Books & Culture magazine usually provides quite stimulating reading; it's not something I can read for enjoyment, as I have to keep my orthodox and reformed shields up while reading, but it does really draw me into other conversations and issues I wouldn't otherwise consider. Here are some notes on articles in the most recent issue.

• Virginia Stem Owens reflects warmly on the name we choose to use for God when we pray. "Getting that initial address right seems important to me...the name I call to God with determines the guise in which I come to this task, duty, privilege of prayer." Our #1 is starting to pray more for our mealtimes. It's a true delight to hear him thank God for the snow and the opportunity to shovel and throw snowballs and sled down hills; sometimes he waxes poetic so long that our food gets cold. But what strikes me the best is the way he begins his prayer, with an earnest "Our gracious heavenly Father!" It's a big phrase for a little guy. Thing is, I don't think he got this from me. Rather, I'm pretty sure he picked it up from my dad. Regardless of the word we use to name God at the beginning of our prayers, wouldn't we do well to consider that name and consider what we're really saying about Him and us with that name?
• Saray Hinlicky Wilson has an engaging review of The Complete Calvin and Hobbes entitled "A New Kind of Calvinism." But we already have neo-calvinists, so would this be neo-neo-calvinism? Anyway, it's light-hearted and clearly in love with Bill Watterson's boy-and-tiger strip. A quote: "Still, every Christmas without fail, Calvin is acquitted of his crimes and showered with gifts, even when he learns the wrong lesson from it. A parable of God's love for the sinner and justification by faith, not works, the theologian infers - good Calvinism, indeed."
• Edward Short reviews the book Gothic Arches, Latin Crosses by Ryan K. Smith about the rise of Gothic architecture in American Protestant churches. Realizing that American Protestants were originally quite simple in their architecture and in the trappings of worship, the question becomes, "What changed? And when? And how?" Smith documents how in the 1840s American Protestants wandered from their iconoclastic roots and began feeling more comfortable with crosses and candles and stained glass and Gothic architecture. Therein lies a parable about the relationship between Protestants and Catholics: as the population of Catholics and Episcopalians rose dramatically toward the 1850s with the Protestant churches not keeping step, Protestants began to argue how and why they could borrow more traditional forms from the Roman church. "In the Gothic style Protestants saw an ideal not only of piety but of refinement, and they were determined to make it their own." Surely lessons could abound for us and how our heart leads us to make decisions, individual and corporate. Are we trying to keep up with the Jones'? Is that always bad?
• Bill McKibben reviews David Orr's Design on the Edge, the story of how Orr and others worked to produce a "high-performance building" for Oberlin College (OH) for their environmental studies program. The building only uses 1/3 of the energy that comparable buildings use; the coolest innovation was titled the "Living Machine", an outdoor series of manufactured ponds and wetlands that treat the building's waste as it leaves, thus making the water going out as clean as the water going in. Apparently, Orr's book is as much about the politics of such a building as the building itself; one can imagine...what if we encouraged churches to think and build this way? Is it foolish for me to be scared of being associated with Al Gore just because I believe Christians ought to be concerned about the environment? Indeed, that Christians ought to be leading in such projects like Orr's and not putting up roadblocks? Anyway, it's a mighty nifty building that is just a nice little piece of dominion.
  

At this moment, I am giving a Hebrew exam to seven wonderful students in my office. We're about 15 minutes into the exam, at which point I say, "2 more minutes!" and they all look up in horror. Good fun was had by all. Or at least me.

Updates

What's going on in my life...

• Baby #3 is sleeping around 7 hours a night now, for which we (mostly my wife) are quite thankful. #1 just learned his first Bible verse (John 3:16) and laughs with joy every time he gets to say it for us. #2 is, well, learning how to work the system as the only little girl in the house. And the beautiful bride is obviously lovingly busy.
  
• Our mid-week Bible study is going piece by piece through the Nicene Creed and studying each doctrine Biblically. It has been more encouraging than I could have hoped. If you'd like a copy of the Bible studies I've been writing, let me know. I've toyed with the idea of putting them together in a nice little booklet for Bible study groups.
• At Immanuel RPC, we're nearing the end of our sermons in Colossians. It has been, for me at least, very helpful and very convicting. February 2nd is our official organization date - you're welcome to come! I've been praying that it would be a night of great encouragement and great glory for God. If you do want to come, we'll be at the Lafayette church building, beginning at 7 p.m.
  
• February 4th is first morning worship together; we haven't picked a new sermon series yet, but hopefully we will soon. We're all very excited to begin our full Sabbath day of worship together.
  
• This weekend is our college winter conference. Pastor Harry Metzger is coming to speak on developing a heart for the lost...nothing too convicting, I hope. I'll be doing a workshop on improving our worship.
• Tootsie rolls lollipops now have a lemon lime flavor. It's like a party in my mouth.
  

Housekeeping:

- Check out the nifty "search my library" doohickey down toward the bottom on the right.
- I'm not planning on posting anymore links in these posts. I will continue to update the "links" section on the right with new and interesting and otherwise.

Blessings on your Sabbath!!

Becoming a fearful statistic

In the latest Books & Culture, Christian Smith (professor of Sociology at Notre Dame) contributes an oustanding article, "Evangelicals Behaving Badly with Statistics." Dr. Smith documents then laments the generally pathetic manner of evangelicals and statistics. His example is an advertisement for a ministry conference heralded by these words: "Wake Up Call - Christianity Won't Survive Another Decade Unless We Do Something Now." What proof could be marshalled to support such an appalling view of the future? "...current trends show that only 4 percent [of teens] will be evangelical believers by the time they become adults. Compare this with 34 percent of adults today who are evangelicals." Of course, Dr. Smith did some digging and found that this "statistic" came from a book on youth ministry wherein the author recounts an informal survey of 211 teenagers in 4 states, finding that only 4% of them were, at that time, born-again believers. Smith believes, and I concur, that this is one example among many of "Evangelical leaders and organizations routinely [using] descriptive statistics in sloppy, unwarranted, misrepresenting, and sometimes absolutely preposterous ways, usually to get attention and sound alarms, at least some of which are false alarms."

He then goes on to dig a little deeper - the band-aid prescription is for the leaders of the church to simply be wise about how statistics should be gathered and use. But the deeper prescription has to address the deeper problem - why is this a trend in the evangelical church? "Evangelicals, by my observation, thrive on fear of impending catastrophe, accelerating decay, apocalyptic crises that demand immediate action (and maybe money)." I have, in past conversations, labeled this tendency as "fear-mongering"; peddling platitudes and statistics designed to scare someone into committing themselves to extra-Biblical doctrines and commands. Keep your eye open for it and you'll see it in many different ministries from many different corners of the church.

Ironically, just today I read that good-for-a-laugh Pat Robertson has made his yearly prediction, that God has told him of mass killings in America in 2007, perhaps even nuclear attacks. Putting aside, if we are able, the theological problems and sheer silliness of Robertson and his club, what's the point of his prediction? Isn't it to scare people into (1) greater Christian service [the best option] or (2) giving more money to the 700 Club so they can get the word out [the more probable reason]?

This isn't a problem only among the theologically wayward like Robertson. Fear-mongering and alarmism can be heard from many parachurch ministries and many churches themselves. Every time a Christian leader prophesies and proclaims that this is the doomsday, this is the worst generation ever, we are facing a moral decline unlike any in the history of Western civilization, etc., we need to name those platitudes for what they are: rubbish. Is our country in a sorry state? Yep. Is it the worst country ever? Nope. More importantly, are we, the children of God, to be operating from the assumption of pessimism and fear of the world or from the foundation of optimism and confidence in Christ our King? When we make decisions based on fear of anything/anyone but God, we are foolish and have our head in the sand, Biblically speaking - whether that decision is about what ministries to support or how and where to educate our children, fear-based decisions aren't Christian decisions. Not that we don't take into account possible downsides of certain decisions, but that our decisions must ultimately be motivated by confidence in the promises of God, not fear of what man can and is doing.

May God grant for His church to begin operating on confidence and certainty in the kingdom of Christ and her King. May we be alarmed at what is truly alarming: the prospect of eternal punishment for those who refuse to bow their knee to the King. Beyond that, let's meditate and act upon God's promises and not oft-repeated predictions of doom. Serve in the church, not because the world is going to hell in a handbasket, but because Christ promised to make all things new and we get to take part.

Creeds vs. Hyper-preterism

A comment in a post below contains a somewhat-common sentiment - Why use creeds to determine orthodoxy? Why not just use Scripture? In response to that question, and to encourage all of us toward more submission to the creeds, I'd like to line out for some of the arguments given by Doug Wilson in his chapter "Sola Scriptura, Creeds, and Ecclesiastical Authority" in When Shall These Things Be? (side note: despite some recent controversy, Wilson does support and submit to the church's creeds and offers clear thinking on the issue ...and this chapter has nothing to do with the federal vision controversy.) The length of this post reflects on the importance I place on this subject.

• The debate between the church and hyper-preterists isn't really about the timing of eschatological events; people within orthodoxy debate those things all the time. Rather, the debate is over things the church has settled a long time ago, especially the resurrection of the dead. The debate hinges on the question of authority.
• If the hyper-preterists are right, then the church has been wrong for a very, very long time on some very, very important issues. This means that the HPists must have for their goal the restoration of some purer form of the church than has existed for two millennia. If this sounds familiar, it's because this is the same thinking ("arch-restorationism") behind Mormonism, who take the idea of restoring the true church to an extreme.
• Wilson argues well that many semi-restorationists have been and are orthodox; the Church of Christ (Campbellites) would fall into this category. But they are orthodox through inertia, because they have inherited from the saints before them creedal Trinitarianism and creedal Christology, even though they would never admit it.
• The response from HPsts is "Sola Scriptura! We must submit to Scripture, even if it means calling 2000 years and millions of saints dead wrong in what they believe." Wilson: "But the definition of Scripture itself is a creedal issue, and if one is consistent in a disparagement of the creeds, he finds that 'just me and my Bible' is soon replaced by 'just me.'"
• The enemies of creeds love to proclaim their dependence on Scripture. But how do they know what Scripture is? How do you know what books to include and Scripture and which are apocryphal? They know because the church has defined the canon through her creeds! "...restorationists of all stripes have no foundation for their appeals, and hence their appeals are consistently parasitic. They get their Bible from the historic church, and then use it to attack the historic church. Another name for this is sawing off the limb you are sitting on." Later: "If everything in the creeds is up for grabs, then sola Scriptura is up for grabs."
• Some view creeds as helpful tools without any real authority, preferring to stick with Sola Scriptura. (Ed Stevens, a prominent HPist, wrote that creeds have "no real authority anyway.") The problem: even sola Scriptura is a creed. The second problem - they don't understand what sola Scriptura really means. "Sola Scriptura, rightly understood, means that Scripture is our only spiritual authority that is ultimate and infallible. Other spiritual authorities exist and have genuine authority over us." All the great theologians you love viewed church tradition, as encapsulated in creeds, as a "subordinate norm" or a lesser, but very real, authority. To fight Rome, the Reformers went back to the creeds, to the church fathers, as well as to Scripture. Go page through the Institutes and see how often Calvin is quoting someone with an odd Greek name.
• Though the church has never totally agreed on eschatology, she has always agreed on this one point of eschatology, that Christ is returning in the future to judge the quick and the dead and to raise the dead to life. "In short, the only eschatological position that the universal church has been able to agree on thus far is that hyper-preterism is wrong."
• It follows, "authority need not be infallible." Example 1 - parents' authority over children. Example 2 - the church over the flock. The creeds (namely, Apostles', Nicene, and Chalcedonian) are the height of the church's real-but-fallible authority. If the fallibility of the church presents a problem for you submitting to her creedal authority, realize that she is also the pillar and ground of the truth - capable of error, but also enabled by God to be the guardian of His truth. Or else your kids don't have to submit to your fallible authority anymore...
  
• Flippantly dismissing the creeds' authority shows a lack of historical humility, something vital whenever considering important doctrines.
• Sola Scriptura was never meant as a license for each individual to come up with their own interpretation of Scripture for themselves - though, judging from the American church, that is precisely what has happened. Needed: a balance between overly-individualistic interpretation of Scripture and overly-heirarchical interpretation of Scripture. "Balance" itself is usually something rejected by those pushing an aberrant exegetical agenda.
  
• Scripture was given to the church as a whole, not only individuals - "orthodox creeds, councils, theologians, and individual layment line up against their heretical counterparts...the Word of God is given to us so that we might come to confess it together."
• In some corners of the church, anti-intellectualism still reigns - look for those who proudly claim to be a "layman with no formal seminary education." This is a good thing?? Of course we don't believe that seminary education renders one infallible or necessarily more capable. But there is a reason the church has valued the training of her pastors for centuries - because when unsubmissive men with little exegetical skills study God's Word apart from the historic teachings of the church, very bad things happen (see: Jehovah's Witnesses).
• Also, be wary of those who want a "New Testament church" - rather, view the New Testament church as the New Testament does, as "an historical phenomenon, one that was intended to develop over time...into greater and greater maturity..." Remember the gifts Christ gave to the church (Eph. 4:11-16), gifts intended to make the church able to grow. And though the church isn't perfected by any means, there have been great points of catholic like-mindedness, teachings of Scripture which everyone in the church got behind - for one, the coming return of Jesus Christ. For two, the idea of sola Scriptura (which is, to repeat, a creed itself).
  
• To those who would call for us to show more charity to HPists, to spend more time in debate, etc., we only need to remember that loving the sheep means fighting wolves. If we're not sure if someone is a wolf or not, we extend charity until we're sure one way or the other; but if they growl and devour the sheep like wolves (my, what big anti-resurrection teeth you have!), we don't wait around for our asssumptions of their wolfiness to be confirmed.
  
• Charge: Adherence to creeds is inherently Romanist (oh snap! he said "romanist") because it gives authority to infallible men. Response #1: The HPsts are closer to Rome because they believe "that there can be no church authority without church infallibility. Rome agrees with this fully." Response #2 - HPists maintain the church cannot speak authoritatively unless she speaks infallibly; apply this to marriage and see how your wives start acting. Response #3 - The HPist himself must submit his own "readings" of Scripture under this charge; is he infallible? If not, then he ought to toss his writings into the fire along with the creeds!
• Charge: The creeds were "Hellenistic" and therefore their relevancy is bound to that culture. Response - rather, the Nicene and Chalcedonian creeds stood strongly against any who would make accommodations to Hellenism, strongly supporting the real, corporeal body of Jesus Christ (a totally anti-Hellenistic idea). The creeds were used by God to keep Hellenism at bay.
  
• Charge: Adherence to creeds keeps folks from really examining any theology which contradicts them. Response #1 - great! This is what they're for, to "help many laymen recognize faulty theology when they do not have time to study everything for themselves." Response #2 - The truths of the creeds are "theological prerequisites. A student is not going to get on very well in fifth grade if he has to restudy and reexamine everything he learned in first grade." Assumption of truth gets us going somewhere! Rejection of it, contra HPist rhetoric, is boring and stagnant. [I.e., there is no semper reformanda apart from the creeds. The church is progressed and beautified when she stands upon the foundation of the forefathers, not when she forgets how to speak and babbles like an infant again.]
  
• What to do with HPists? If they are teachers of HPism, they are wolves and must be treated as such. And the church's shepherds must name them for what they are. If the HPists in question are followers but not teachers, "we must...grab them by their baptism." We must exhort them to repent of their beliefs and be faithful.
  
• "If we are headstrong and unwilling to study the faith of our fathers carefully, then we are headed for trouble. If we insist on individual 'veto power' over all the creeds of men, we have not successfully gotten away from all man-made creeds. We have simply submitted to the creed of one, a creed that is often composed on the fly...which conveniently leaves me by myself, in charge of myself."

We ought to be thankful to God for the creeds of the church; we ought to know them, measure our beliefs by them, measure our teachers by them - not as a denial of sola Scriptura, but as the only real way of holding to sola Scriptura faithfully.

Merry Christmas, part 2

Several of the comments before regarding Christmas noted that Dr. Kinneer statements weren't supported by research. Grant Van Leuven, a friend who works for RPTS, sent me this link to Dr. Kinneer's expanded answers regarding commonly held Christmas myths. Grant also reminded me/us that Dr. Kinneer's purpose is not to debate the celebration of Christmas, but to defend the truth of the gospel accounts. It's very fascinating reading. [thanks, Grant!]

Books!

In the college Sunday school class, we recently finished an overview of church history. As we sped through church history, every now and then we came to a book that had an important place in church history, usually accompanied by my gentle encouragement, “You must read this!” The following is a list of some of those books. Take this list as an encouragement to investigate history theologically and theology historically, not necessarily as an endorsement of every book listed. Plus, now more than ever, the accessibility of these books renders the church even more excuse-less for being not being historically minded.

1. Mark Noll, Turning Points (this is the book we used as our outline for the class)
2. Nick Needham, 2000 Years of Christ's Power, vol. 1-3 (a good, readable overview of church history)
3. Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews - great for knowing the historical context of the gospels
4. St. Athanasius, On the Incarnation - absolutely indispensable. Also, a great book to read on Christmas holiday. Free online version here.
5. St. Augustine, Confessions and City of God and On the Trinity
6. St. Benedict's Rule
7. St. Patrick's Confessions
8. Kallistos Ware, The Orthodox Way - An in-house overview of Eastern Orthodoxy.
9. Thomas a Kempis, The Imitation of Christ
10. Martin Luther, 95 Theses and Bondage of the Will
11. John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion
12. Iain Murray, Wesley and the Men Who Followed
13. Philip Jakob Spener, Pia Desideria
14. John Murray, Redemption, Accomplished & Applied and Song in the Public Worship of God
15. J. Gresham Machen, Christianity and Liberalism
16. Abraham Kuyper, Lectures on Calvinism
17. Greg Bahnsen, Always Ready: Directions for Defending the Faith (re: Cornelius Van Til's presuppositional method of apologetics)
18. Francis Schaeffer, How Should We Then Live? and Collected Writings

What books might you add as being important pieces of Christian history?

Merry Christmas

I'm so happy about this. Dr. Jack Kinneer was one of my professors at RPTS. This Christmas season he's done some good work debunking popular Christmas myths, especially the ones about Christmas being based on a pagan holiday and Jesus being born in the Spring or Summer. So if your conscience permits you, have a merry Christmas!

Embarrassing

This is fairly ridiculous, a Left Behind Video game. I had many things typed out, but I've decided to simply open this up for conversation: How should we respond to this?

Word

Been a while. My regrets that your internet life has been slightly less shiny.

-----

A word for the day: Henotheism. Several weeks ago, our mid-week study on the Nicene Creed was considering the idea of "one God." In that study, we tossed around nice big words like polytheism, pantheism and atheism. But one word came up that seemed to capture so clearly why monotheism (one God-ness) is a vital piece of the Christian religion.

Henotheism means, according to dictionary.com (sorry, Elizabeth, I can't afford the OED): the worship of a particular god, as by a family or tribe, without disbelieving in the existence of others. When I came across this while studying, it struck me as the perfect word for the state of the church in relationship to other religions. We love to be nice, naturally, and so we more and more like to allow people to remain subjected to their own god or gods. Mind you, we don't deny Jesus as Lord or anything like that, but we don't really mind all that much when others do it.

Believing there is only one God for me is henotheistic. Believing there is only one God for everyone is monotheism. We ought to stand squarely in the latter but so often find ourselves waddling in the former. If we are going to be true believers, we must also be true disbelievers. If we are going to claim that Jesus is Lord, we must also claim that Allah, Buddha, et al, aren't. And this makes a huge difference in our evangelism: we don't do evangelism just to make people's lives better, to bring them from a nice, quaint religion to a really, really good one. We do evangelism because they owe to the Living God their allegiance and we are not satisfied with anything less.

Another internet quiz. *sigh*

This is kind of frightening. Maybe I need to review my answers:

You scored as Anselm. Anselm is the outstanding theologian of the medieval period.He sees man's primary problem as having failed to render unto God what we owe him, so God becomes man in Christ and gives God what he is due. You should read 'Cur Deus Homo?' Anselm 87% Karl Barth 80% John Calvin 60% J?Moltmann 60% Martin Luther 53% Friedrich Schleiermacher 47% Jonathan Edwards 40% Augustine 40% Charles Finney 33% Paul Tillich 7% Which theologian are you? created with QuizFarm.com

A Proverbial End

Well, tomorrow is the end. The end of an era. *sniff* It will be my last sermon in Proverbs. To celebrate, I thought I'd give a book review round-up of the books I've used in my studies:

The Book of Proverbs, Chapters 1-15 & The Book of Proverbs, Chapters 15-31, by Bruce Waltke (New International Commentary on the Old Testament series) - These were simply outstanding and incredibly helpful. Around chapter 7 or 8 of Proverbs, I decided to bite the bullet and preach straight through the book rather than go topically through the rest of it. It was Waltke who convinced me this was possible by showing me that Proverbs isn't as haphazard as we normally think. He does a great job separating out different sections of Proverbs and getting to the meat of the matter. These are fairly scholarly books, but they are absolute musts for any pastor or teacher working through Proverbs. Waltke's Proverbs commentaries are, for me, the standard by which all others are measured.

Proverbs, by Derek Kidner - This is volume 15 of Tyndale's Old Testament Commentary series, a great set of small, paperback commentaries that manage to be immensely helpful. I've already enjoyed Kidner's writings on Genesis and Psalms, and I was not disappointed by this 180-page welterweight. Due to space limitations, Kidner obviously does not deal with every question or possible application. But somehow he manages to answer most of the questions I had about different verses. Also, the first 50 pages contain wonderful introductory material and excellent subject studies to which I referred many times over the last two years. While he deals a little with the original languages, this is one that anyone wanting to understand Proverbs deeply could benefit from.

How to Read Proverbs, by Tremper Longman III - My opinion on this book has come around since I began preaching Proverbs. Though I disagree a little with the amount of freedom that Dr. Longman takes with applying the Proverbs, this is one of the best introductions to wisdom literature I've read. Longman carefully takes the reader through everything he needs to know in order to gain the greatest benefit possible from Proverbs. He explains what proverbs are and how to read them, he explains how to find Christ in the pages of the Proverbs, and he gives a few examples of how we can use the Proverbs to find specific help for things like our money, our words, and our wives/husbands.

Laws from Heaven for Life on Earth: Studies in Proverbs, William Arnot - Arnot was a 19th century pastor in Scotland. This book of more than 100 short sermonettes through Proverbs is his lasting literary contribution to the church. Arnot does not deal with all, or even most, of Proverbs, choosing rather to focus his thoughts on one verse at a time. These sermonettes would profit any reader, but could be especially suited for family worship with teenagers (especially boys - Proverbs is their book!). Good stuff.

Proverbs: Everyday Wisdom for Everyone, by Eric Lane - To be honest, I stopped working with this commentary partway through my time in Proverbs. Though I didn't find much to disagree with, its format is not helpful for a preacher. However, it could be a great book for individual or family worship. Though Lane doesn't believe Proverbs has much discernable structure to them (contra Waltke), he organizes the book according to the chapters of Proverbs. The content of his chapters is mostly an application & sermon-style. Though I could wish he wasn't so tied to Proverbs' chapter divisions, I could see folks reading Lane profitably along with their devotions or in preparation for Bible study.

Wisdom for Today's Issues: A Topical Arrangement of Proverbs, by Steven Voorwinde - This small book is simply a rearrangement of the book of Proverbs into topical sections. So, for instance, if you'd like to know what Proverbs says about money, you could just read pages 154-160. Because I didn't preach topically, this book was only marginally helpful; obviously, though, it could be helpful for those needing quicker answers from Proverbs. But...if you're tempted to study Proverbs regarding just one subject, heed these words from Longman (above): "the first step is to read through the whole book, noting those verses that bear on the topic we are interested in...This may sound mechanical, but it isn't, at least not entirely." In other words, if you simply pull out from Proverbs all those verse that mention "money" or "wealth" or "poverty", you're going to miss other verses that don't have those words yet bear directly on the topic you're studying. To put it another way, if you choose to study Proverbs like Voorwinde's book, make sure you treat Proverbs like a whole book and not a random collection of helpful thoughts.

Proverbs, by Charles Bridges - This classic commentary is best described as Puritanical. In a good way. Mostly. Bridges deal carefully and exegetically with each verse of Proverbs, leaving the reader satisifed that he hasn't missed anything. Like many Puritans, he's apt to read too much into the text, making laws out of applications. But, studying for sermons, whenever I got stuck on a question or verse, Bridges was usually able to take care of me.

Ending Proverbs, my prayer is that God's people here in Lafayette will have a taste for how God's glory can be pursued in every corner of life, that they will have such a vision for His glory that they'll hold dearly to this book of wisdom, seeing in its pages the life of Christ in everyday situations.

The Gospel of Moulin Rouge

I was nervous. Good friends Micah and Emily loaned us Moulin Rouge and encouraged us to watch it. But Micah challenged us to see the picture of the gospel in the story. Would I find it? Would I be able to spot it?

Here's what I came up with:

• It's all about Hosea and Gomer. Jesus loves His people despite our spiritual prostitution. Regardless of how many idols we've given ourselves to, He sings irresistibly to our souls and draws us to Himself in love. He convinces us that His love - not diamonds - is our best friend.
  
• No matter how hard we try to push Him away, He will freely forgive and because we are His, we will not be able to resist His song of love. Thank God.
  
• And Jesus is the writer of the story. No matter how much the enemy tries to mess it up and regardless how apt we are to gum up the works, it's still completely and totally His story. And at the end, He will get the girl. He's far too jealous for us; He can't just walk away.
  

Micah, how'd I do?

p.s. - Much like Hosea, the movie has "adult" themes and situations, but I didn't find it offensive or out of place. The caveat's been issued.

Country Soul

It's been a while since I've foisted my musical tastes upon you (I think I'm still bitter that you haven't bought Derek Trucks' album yet). Anyway, here's a doozy: a country album by the king of soul, Solomon Burke, the King of Rock and Soul.

This is quality stuff. Who knew soul singers and country went so well together? Mind you, this isn't country you'll hear on Hank-FM or whatever you have floating through the airwaves. This is vintage country, tears-in-your-uh-lemonade country. Not twangy, but vintage.

Nashville's producer, Buddy Miller, found a great balance between slow ballads, hoe-downs and country rockers. He also found several incredible guests: Dolly Parton, Emmylou Harris, Gillian Welch and Patty Loveless.

If you're shopping for some new music to make you smile, tap your toes a little and sing along in your best soul singer impression, this is it.