July 30, 2006
Alistair Begg - movie star?
OK, this is old news, but it was new to me. When I read on Gary Shavey's blog that Alistair Begg had been in a movie, I was skeptical. Marni and I decided to rent the movie. The movie tells the story of Bobby Jones, the only golfer to ever win a Grand Slam (all four of the biggest tournaments).
Of course, we didn't check in advance who Begg was playing. We tried to figure it out during the movie. We were surprised to discover that Pastor Begg was exactly who we thought he was -- what was so shocking was how many lines they gave him!
Spoiler warning! This link provides the story of how Begg (who has no acting experience) got involved, but it will also reveal who he plays.
PC(USA) -- losses in membership
I have made a few blog posts in the past on the PC(USA). My intention has not been to be mean-spirited, but to honestly probe what happens when the simple yet counter-cultural teaching of Scripture is circumvented in the name of relevance. That having been said, I am in no way denying that there are some God-honoring, Christ-exalting, Bible-affirming PC(USA) pastors out there. For example, I've been blessed by much of what Mark D. Roberts has been sharing.
Here are some of the sad statistics on the massive decline in membership within the PC(USA). In short, a loss of 65,000 in 2005 and an estimated loss of 85,000 in 2006. Does anyone have access to an explanation from PC(USA) leadership regarding these numbers?
(HT: Mark Driscoll)
Desiring God National Conference - Sep 29 - Oct 1
We're back from our family vacation to Grand Rapids, MN. It was a fantastically relaxing time of sitting by the lake, swimming, barbeque-ing every night, and bonding. Our daughter Karis had some difficulty (as did Marni and I) with the sweltering heat (mid-90s, sometimes with humidity to boot).
The family vacation afforded me the opportunity of some extended reading time. I read ahead on most of the assigned reading for my upcoming Preaching class this Fall and Spring. But the book that has most been captivating me (I'm about 1/3 of the way through) is David Well's Above All Earthly Powers. Here's an excerpt from John Piper's synopsis:
The burden of Wells’ book is first to understand the postmodern world, and then to confront that world with the never-changing Christ. His thesis is that the West today is not simply a product of Enlightenment ideology, with its rejection of authority and reliance on reason without revelation, but is also the product of a process of consumeristic, technological, media-driven modernization that created an experience of reality which affirms and reinforces that ideology.
One effect of this modernization has been to give rise to the centrality of the psychologically oriented self in the place of a morally oriented human nature. The postmodern, all-consuming “self”—with its self-made spirituality—is subject to no outside authority. All reality has contracted into this self. It is radically individualized and privatized and insistently therapeutic. It does not feel at home in the doctrines and traditions of religion. It is on an endless quest for the enhancement of its experience measured by itself alone.
This volume from David Wells is the last of four installments in a series that began in 1993 with No Place For Truth. Wells' most recent book is a masterful depiction of how modernism fell and why the postmodernism ethos has come into vogue. Moreover, Wells gives an insightful critique of contemporary evangelicalism as well as a stirring exhortation on how we should faithfully herald the eternally true, relevant gospel in our particular day and age.
John Piper was so moved by this book that the entire Desiring God National Conference this year is being based on the themes expounded by David Wells' book. The speakers are Donald Carson, Mark Driscoll, Tim Keller, Voddie Baucham, David Wells, and John Piper. The Conference looks outstanding. Pre-registration has begun.
Particularly if you are unable to attend, I highly recommend that you purchase Above All Earthly Powers. It is a must-read for anyone who wishes to understand where our culture is today, as well as the trends within evangelicalism, including the morphing of the seeker-sensitive movement and the rise of "emerging churches."
Update: Here is an interview with David Wells discussing Above All Earthly Powers, and its relation to the previous three books in his series.
Joe Lieberman - On the Ropes
Joe Lieberman has gained respect in his three-term U.S. Senate career as a centrist Democrat who is able to work with Republicans to get things done. Though I do not agree with him on every issue (his support of abortion rights, his opposition to the tax-cuts which are profoundly responsible for today's strong economy), he consistently comes across as a man guided by principle rather than by public opinion polls. For example, Lieberman has supported school vouchers (as I do) and criticized affirmative action. As the Democratic Vice Presidential nominee alongside Al Gore in 2000 and candidate for President in 2004, Lieberman can in no way be characterized as a "closet republican."
Which is why it is all the more shameful that prominent Democrats are abandoning him in his pursuit of a fourth Senate term. Lieberman seemed invincible in his Aug 8 Democratic Primary face-off with little-known liberal Democrat Ned Lamont until just a few months ago, when everything began to unravel. The key issue seems to be the left-wing of the Democratic Party seeking retribution for Lieberman's support of the Iraq War. Multi-millionaire Lamont is an outspoken war critic. In addition to an otherwise well-financed campaign (Lamont has spent $1.5 million of his own money), Lamont has also received considerable support from antiwar bloggers.
Shailagh Murray writes in today's WaPo of Lieberman's eroding base. Irving Stolberg, former speaker of the Connecticut House, and close friend of Lieberman since the 1960s has now publicly supported Lamont. "It's been a wrenching decision. I've supported him every step," Stolberg said of Lieberman. "But the issues and the principles trump 40 years of friendship."
To make matters worse, today's New York Times features a scathing editorial against Lieberman, publicly endorsing Lamont less than 10 days from the Primary in a race too close to call.
Shailagh Murray notes that "Lieberman is accustomed to the rough and tumble of politics, and can be combative in his own defense, as he showed during a recent debate. But he [Lieberman] said he has been jarred by the intensity of Democratic anger toward Bush -- and, by extension, toward him. Liberal bloggers have called Lieberman a 'liar' and a 'weasel.'"
Lieberman noted that it is not just opposition to Bush, but a deep hatred that he perceives. If he's correct, that will not bode well for the Democratic Party.
I predict that Lieberman will lose on August 8, and wish him my regrets in advance.
July 21, 2006
Blogging Vacation: July 22 - July 29
Dear Readers,
My wife and I will be taking Karis up to a lake for a week (it is a Minnesota-sort of thing to do). No Internet. Almost no telephone. Just a few books, games, and conversation.
I posted a bunch of stuff tonight, and Lord willing, will be back to posting on July 30.
Blessings,
Alex
My interview with MSN Match.com
I would be grateful for your prayers as I prepare to respond to questions submitted to me for an interview to be published in MSN Match.com's Faith-Based Dating section. Somehow, they got a hold of my With One Voice book, and think an interview with my wife and I would interest their readers. I will be digesting the following questions as I spend the week away (July 22-29) at a lake with my family:
What does spiritual IMMATURITY look like in a dating person?
Define spiritual maturity:
What’s an example/characteristic of a spiritually mature woman?
What’s an example/characteristic of a spiritually mature man?
Why do singles need spiritual maturity?
Why does spiritual maturity matter in a relationship?
How can singles develop spiritual maturity?
The interviewer agrees with me that the readership of the Faith-Based Dating section of MSN Match.com will likely be "religious, but not necessarily evangelical." Feel free to leave me any advice on handling the interview. I plan to submit replies via e-mail on July 29. We apparently have 600 words for the entire interview.
I'll try to get permission to post the results of the interview on this blog.
July 20, 2006
Embryonic vs Adult Stem Cell Research
President Bush made his first veto yesterday, rejecting a bill that would have advanced embryonic stem cell (ESC) research. Sometimes people merely say "stem cell research holds the promise for curing intractable diseases." But such statements are illusive because they are ambiguous. Then they can make conservatives look bad by saying they "oppose important research that has the potential to save lives."
Michael Fumeno notes that adult stem cells (ASCs) from numerous places in the body as well as umbilical cord blood and placenta – are curing diseases here and now and have been doing so for decades. But this actually angers those who support embryonic Stem Cell Research.
See Fumeno's informative and persuasive essay for more details.
In an earlier post I linked to a Joe Carter essay from the same perspective.
I think that Fumeno and Carter are correct regarding this issue, and so am pleased with Bush's veto. I'd love to hear any comments on why you think so many Republicans supported the bill, including presidential-candidate Bill Frist.
Women and Childlessness
I am continuing to discuss the Barbara Dafoe Whitehead/David Popenoe report entitled The State of Our Unions, The Social Health of Marriage in America 2006, Essay: Life Without Children.
I make this particular post because I find the report's observations on women and childlessness to be interesting and provocative. I'm not entirely sure what to make of them.
The report notes, "most women still want to have at least one child and, ideally, two. In fact, 68 percent of Gen X women today are likely to say that having a child is an experience every woman should have compared to just 45 percent of baby boom women in 1979."
Perhaps the 1979 figure is attributable to the phenomenon of radical forms of feminism more popular in that day. The Gen X figure is corroborated by the widely cited Amercian Values report, which found that many college women continue to desire husbands and children, though the men in their midst pursue them for these reasons with far less frequency.
The report notes that one reason for the decline in childbirth rates is that the median age of first marriage for women was not quite 21 in 1970 and today it is just shy of 26. For women who hold a four-year college degree (an increasing percentage of the female population) the age of first marriage is even higher.
Secondly, after marriage, women tend to wait longer before they bear their first child. In 1960, 71 percent of married women had a first birth within the first three years of marriage. By 1990, the percentage had fallen to 37. By 2000, the majority of women had not started raising children prior to being in their thirties. In 2004, almost one out of five women in their early forties were childless compared to one out of ten in 1976.
(HT: Why Family Matters)
Economic Ramifications of Childlessness
I am continuing to discuss the Barbara Dafoe Whitehead/David Popenoe report entitled The State of Our Unions, The Social Health of Marriage in America 2006, Essay: Life Without Children.
I want to highlight some of the report's findings on the economic factors of the childless trend, and the market forces that support it (perhaps unwittingly, though I think sometimes consciously):
1. Childless young adults are exceedingly well suited to life and work in a dynamic society and global economy. They display great facility and comfort with new technologies. Their youthful penchant for experiment, risk-taking, adventure, along with their sheer physical energy, fit the requirements of the 24/7 work world. One of their most desirable attributes is that they are not tied down by child-rearing obligations. They can pick up and move. They can work odd hours and go on the road. They can quit their jobs without worrying about having more than one hungry mouth to feed.
2. As consumers, young adults who do not yet have children represent a highly desirable market segment. A growing proportion of today’s well-educated young adults step into high paying jobs shortly after they finish their education. They may have college loans to pay off, but their financial obligations are theirs alone. They aren’t yet responsible for others. And their pay-checks and credit cards are stretched to include more than bare necessities. They eat out, go drinking, take vacations, get big screen TVs, join health clubs and buy tickets to sports events and concerts. Even the less well-educated and less well-employed spend money on affordable luxuries for themselves—one reason for the astonishing growth and success of Starbucks.
If you invest in stocks, you'll note that these industries are all doing very well. Another contributing factor is baby-boomers living off lavish retirement savings. The report notes: "Individuals over 50 make up a growing share of Americans with money to spend on second homes, travel, recreation, learning and entertainment. Sales of so-called 'recreational' homes reached record levels in 2005."
(HT: Why Family Matters)
State of the (Marriage) Unions - Childlessness
Barbara Dafoe Whitehead and David Popenoe of the National Marriage Project have come out with their State of Our Unions report for 2006 (the reports come out annually, in the summer). The report is titled Life Without Children, highlighting the troubling trend of (often deliberately) childless marriages.
Their Executive Summary:
For most of the nation’s history, Americans expected to devote much of their adult life and work to the rearing of children. Today, life without children is emerging as a social reality for a growing number of American adults. Due to delay of marriage, postponed childbearing, increases in childlessness and longer life expectancy, Americans are spending a smaller share of their expected life course in households with children and a larger share of their life course in households without children.
As the active child-rearing years shrink as a proportion of the life course, life with children is experienced as a disruption in the life course rather than as one of its defining purposes. More broadly, it is life before and after children that American culture now portrays as the most satisfying years of adulthood. (emphasis mine)
(Editorial Note: This was one of the concerns, initially impressed upon me by Dr. Albert Mohler, that led to my writing With One Voice. The subject is not without controversy, but it has massive importance for the future of society, both inside and outside the church.)
Noteworthy excerpts from the report include:
1. "The percentage of households with children has declined from half of all households in 1960 to less than one-third today—the lowest percentage in the nation’s history."
2. "The 'adult entertainment industry,' which includes gambling, pornography and sex, is one of the fastest growing and most lucrative sectors of the consumer economy. This multibillion dollar industry has gained respectability and power in the corridors of Washington..."
3. "The expressive values of the adult-only world are at odds with the values of the child-rearing world. Indeed, child-rearing values—sacrifice, stability, dependability, maturity—seem stale and musty by comparison. Nor does the bone-wearying and time-consuming work of the child-rearing years comport with a culture of fun and freedom. Indeed, what it takes to raise children is almost the opposite of what popularly defines a satisfying adult life."
4. "...parents [in the past] have been rewarded (many would argue inadequately) for the unpaid work of caring for children with respect, support and recognition from the larger society. Now this cultural compensation is disappearing. Indeed, in recent years, the entire child-rearing enterprise has been subject to a ruthless debunking. Most notably, the choice of motherhood is now contested terrain, with some critics arguing that the tasks of mothering are unworthy of educated women’s time and talents. Along with the critique of parenthood, a small but aggressively vocal 'childfree' movement is organizing to represent the interests of nonparents."
The entire report is available.
(HT: Why Family Matters)
Update: I want to clearly state that in no way am I intending to add grief to those who struggle with infertility, or who (for genuine medical reasons) must avoid, delay, or space out pregnancies, or who (based on a spiritual conviction of a call to celibacy, I Cor 7:1-9) will not marry.
July 19, 2006
Al Mohler (Years Ago) Changed His Mind on Women as Pastors
Al Mohler comments on the fact that Dr. Frank Page (SBC President) once affirmed that women should be allowed to be pastors. In Dr. Page's 1980 Ph.D. dissertation, he argued for the abolition of all distinctions in the role of men and women in the church. Mohler explains that this was the prevailing view in the SBC at that time, which led him, too, to accept this position as a seminary student in the early 1980s. Get this: Mohler actually went so far as to help lead a protest of the 1984 SBC resolution on women in ministry.
So how did Mohler come to change his mind on this crucial issue, such that he now embraces complementary roles for men and women in the family and in the church?
It started with a general unrest in my thinking. But then it exploded with a comment made to me in personal conversation with Dr. Carl F. H. Henry in the mid-1980s. Walking across the campus, Dr. Henry simply stopped me in my tracks and asked me how, as one who affirms the inerrancy of the Bible, I could possibly deny the clear teaching of Scripture on this question. I was hurt, embarrassed –and highly motivated to answer his question.
Mohler began to study the issue voraciously, even though most of the literature was egalitarian. The result of Mohler's passionate inquiry:
my study of the question led me to a very uncomfortable conclusion — my advocacy of women in the teaching office was wrong, violative of Scripture, inconsistent with my theological commitments, injurious to the church, unsubstantiated, and just intellectually embarrassing.
Read Mohler's explanation here. There is nothing embarrassing about gladly accepting the clear teaching of Scripture, and it is never too late to do so.
HT: Justin Taylor and Russell Moore
And here is Bob Allen's breaking story in Ethics Daily.
Cotton Mather on Preaching
Cotton Mather, who died in 1728, wrote this in the Preface of his book Student and Preacher, a declaration he termed "Directions for a Candidate of the Ministry:"
The great design and intention of the office of a Christian preacher are to restore the throne and dominion of God in the souls of men; to display in the most lively colours, and proclaim in the clearest language, the wonderful perfections, offices and graces of the Son of God; and to attract the souls of men into a state of everlasting friendship with Him.
(As quoted in Between Two Worlds: The Challenge of Preaching Today by John Stott.)
The Feminization of the Church
Holly Pivec in the Spring 2006 issue of the Biola Connections magazine pens an outstanding article entitled The Feminization of the Church: Why Its Music, Messages and Ministries Are Driving Men Away. She cites numerous Christian leaders, like Patrick Johnstone (Operation World) and David Murrow (author of Why Men Hate Going to Church). Nancy Pearcey is another who touches on these themes in Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from Its Cultural Captivity.
Some excerpts:
"93 percent of senior pastors in America are men, according to evangelical pollster George Barna. But, the majority of attendees in a typical church are women. Barna goes so far as to refer to women as 'the backbone of the Christian congregations in America.'"
"In America, among evangelical churches, 57 percent of members are women and, among mainline Protestant churches, 66 percent are women, according to a 1998 book American Evangelicalism (University of Chicago Press)."
"The imbalance is greatest in rural churches, small churches, older churches, traditionally black denominations, and in liberal churches, Murrow said, citing research from the 1998 National Congregations Study. It’s smallest in non-denominational and Baptist churches, he said."
Johnstone believes the feminist movement in mainline churches has contributed to the decline in male membership.
(Comment: I agree with Johnstone; manliness has less of a home in egalitarian churches. These churches tend to, eventually, become accepting of homosexuality, resulting in further shrinking numbers. In church history, I'm told that the resulting smaller denominations later merge, and the cycle repeats itself.)
Pivec's article goes on to discuss "love songs to Jesus" and "feminine spirituality" as well as "touchy-feely sermons."
Last excerpt: "When a mother comes to faith in Christ, her family follows 34 percent of the time, but when a father comes to faith his family follows 93 percent of the time."
Lesson: Preach the whole counsel of God. God is unambiguously revealed in masculine traits throughout the Bible. The emasculation of God is rampant in many churches today. Build up the men, and you'll get women and children too. Aim primarily for women, and the men will scram. Going back to Mansfield's point (from my last post) -- men need to have their sense of masculinity validated. This is not chauvinism but a God-given pointer to the role God intends men to play in the family, the church, and (to some degree) in society at large.
Harvey Mansfield - Manliness
Harvey C. Mansfield, a Professor of Government at Harvard University, has written a provocative book -- particularly given his Ivy League status -- called Manliness. Manliness, says Mansfield, causes men to need to feel important. Mansfield is concerned that in a gender-neutral society, neither men nor women will be well served because manliness will have no legitimate place. Mansfield observes that innate sexual differences persist in our society and are generally enjoyed. He calls manliness, "the remaining obstacle to gender-neutrality, which does not seem easily removed."
Here is a particularly quotable quote from chapter 1 (entitled "The Gender-Neutral Society"):
Now supporters of the gender-neutral society (call them feminists) are torn between showing that they are as competent as men and doing away with gentlemen who might oppose them. In the first mode, they want to show that they are manly; in the second, they want to deny that there is any such thing.
This book strikes me so far as an outstanding volley against egalitarianism (rampant both in the culture and the church). Egalitarianism is ultimately anti-women because it pushes women to have to be like men. Egalitarianism is ultimately anti-men because it diminishes a proper domain for expressions of manliness.
Check out Mansfield's book here.
For more on this topic, see my previous post on Newsweek, Feminism, and the Disrespect of Women.
July 18, 2006
Mainline Denominations like the PC(USA)
Mark D. Roberts has been an articulately expressing concern at the direction of the PC(USA) with respect to their understanding of the Trinity and the ordination of homosexuals. Mark noticed this analysis by Steve Levin of the Pittsburgh Post Gazette on mainline denominations losing impact on the nation.
Excerpt: "Today...secular culture defines mainline churches' dialogue on everything from social issues to politics and morality, tellingly shown this summer at the emotional and acrimonious national gatherings of the Presbyterian Church USA and the Episcopal Church."
Levin observes these disturbing trends:
** Huge membership declines in the Presbyterian Church USA, United Methodist Church, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and the Episcopal Church from declining birth rates and weaker denominational ties have sapped their collective strength.
** The mainline churches have been paralyzed by internal theological and political debates. Stark divisions between denominations' "liberals" and "conservatives" make it difficult for Christians even to communicate with one another.
** Secularism -- the number of people who say they have no religious affiliation -- has increased to 14 percent of the American adult population, up from 8 percent in 1990. That segment's growth easily has outpaced that of any religious denomination.
** Church giving is down. According to Empty Tomb, a mission research and advocacy organization in Champaign, Ill., per capita giving among 11 mainline denominations in 2003 was 2.5 percent of income, less than the 3.3 percent of income that was given in 1933 during the Great Depression. What is being given is being focused on salaries and in-house programs, not missions and evangelism.
Is it time to leave the PC(USA)? Roberts plans to stay. He has a series of interesting posts on what's good about denominations.
Being in a denomination can bring many blessings. But is it worth being in a denomination at the expense of gospel clarity? Can two walk together unless they be in agreement?
Stem Cell Research - U.S. Senate Legislation
President Bush is threatening to use his veto power for the first time in his presidency if the Senate (as anticipated) passes legislation this week to expand federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. Joe Carter (Director of Communications at The Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity) provides an articulate (Bush-supportive) response to the typical reporting on this issue by the MSM.
On a related story, see this Justin Taylor post on in-vitro fertilization and test-tube babies.
I'd like to learn more about both sides of these issues, so would be particularly grateful for any comments.
July 17, 2006
Calvinism vs. Arminianism Debate -- available on DVD
The controversy among evangelicals surrounding the issue of who does what in salvation is among one of the most long-standing, sometimes heated debates in all of church history. Books and monographs related to this topic have been proliferating in recent years as a result of a widely noted resurgence in Calvinistic thinking, particularly on the part of younger scholars. Certainly there is evidence for this in the Southern Baptist Convention, for example.
Given the strong interest on this issue, Appleseed Ministries hosted a debate between Tom Schreiner and Bruce Ware (representing the Calvinistic persuasion) and Jerry Walls and Joe Dongell (representing the Weslyan-Arminian persuasion) on the University of Kentucky campus. I recently enjoyed watching the debate, which was extremely well-organized with all of the participants doing a fantastic job representing their positions. Each participant is given 15 minutes for introductory remarks. After that, there is an opportunity for the scholars to question each other, followed by a few questions from the students in the audience, and lastly closing remarks from both sides. In the Q&A part of the debate, it was particularly refreshing to see the students wrestling with significant theological issues and not succumbing to a postmodern (anti-objective truth) mindset pervasive in today's university culture (though perhaps more so outside the Bible belt). The total DVD running time is about two and a half hours.
As a convinced Calvinist, I think Jerry Walls and Joe Dongell do a very good job presenting a classical Arminian position. They avoided the danger of minimizing sin (which they rightly acknowledged is more common among contemporary Arminians). I was equally impressed with Schreiner and Ware. Not surprisingly, my position was unchanged......
You may recall that Walls and Dongell published a book with IVP in 2004 entitled Why I am Not a Calvinist. I just completed reading it as part of a school assignment, and I should be reviewing (and critiquing it) soon. You'll then see why I am still a Calvinist. Schreiner and Ware have also published on this topic in compilations such as Still Sovereign: Contemporary Perspectives on Election, Foreknowledge, and Grace.
Whether or not you've landed on either side on this issue, I highly recommend this debate as a means of more accurately understanding both perspectives of this classic debate. It would also be useful in a small-group Bible study context or a Sunday school class examining the doctrine of salvation. The debate is available for $7.50 (audio CD) or $11 (DVD), but only on E-bay. All proceeds go to support Appleseed Ministries- a non-profit group designed to promote Christian thinking and outreach in university settings (tax deductions are not applicable on Calvinism Debate purchases but please know all the money goes towards ministry efforts).
Drop me a comment if you'd like to know more about Appleseed Ministries and I can put you in touch with their leadership.
Father, Son and Holy Spirit - and the PC(USA)
Albert Mohler does a great job holding his ground in response to The Christian Century. At issue is Mohler's concerned response (here and here) to the PC(USA)'s 217th General Assembly's alternative suggested titles for the Persons of the Godhead (which included "Rainbow, Ark and Dove," "Speaker, Word and Breath," "Overflowing Font, Living Water and Flowing River," "Compassionate Mother, Beloved Child and Life-Giving Womb," "Sun, Light and Burning Ray," "Giver, Gift and Giving," "Lover, Beloved and Love," "Rock, Cornerstone and Temple," "Fire that Consumes, Sword that Divides and Storm that Melts Mountains," and "The One Who Was, The One Who Is and The One Who Is to Come.") I also expressed concern (here and here).
Now The Christian Century posts an article, in which they note:
Al Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, offered his opinion: "The Christian faith is based exclusively in the understanding that God alone has the right to name himself. . . . He does not invite his creatures to experiment in worship by naming him according to their own desires." Mohler sounds more like a Muslim describing the revelation to Muhammad in the Qur'an than a Christian describing a doctrine that the church took several centuries to hammer out.
See Dr. Mohler defend himself with both clarity and charity.
July 16, 2006
Wild at Heart - John Eldredge
Even after the Promise Keepers movement began to lose some of its initial sensation in the evangelical culture, there were still a number of best-selling books aimed at addressing "men's issues." One was by John Eldredge and it was called Wild at Heart (Nelson Books, 2001). By 2003, over half a million copies had been sold. Even just today, this book is #383 on Amazon (which means only 382 books are selling at a faster rate). Eldredge has clearly struck a nerve. Given the unabated popularity of the book, I thought it worthwhile to refer you to an outstandingly fair and balanced review written by Randy Stinson in 2003.
Stinson, on faculty at Southern Seminary and the Executive Director of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, begins by giving Eldredge credit for drawing our attention to several maladies in our day with which many men seem to intuitively resonate:
1. Our culture (and even our churches) has adopted a strategy that facilitates the feminization of men.
2. Masculinity, with its predilection to adventure, rowdiness, and risk has become a condition to be cured.
3. Consequently, boys are in big trouble. School systems and churches have not taken the unique features of masculinity into consideration when designing curriculum or programs.
4. Our culture, intent on emasculating its boys, has produced a huge sense of withdrawal and boredom from its men.
5. As disconcerting as it may be to mothers everywhere, masculinity can only be imparted by masculinity. In other words, a young boy is never really sure he’s become a man until another man, or group of men, tells him so.
6. Sadly, many, if not most, men have abdicated this responsibility.
7. Every man needs a battle for which he can live and die.
Having acknowledged that Eldredge achieves an important objective in helping men see that it is praiseworthy to be masculine, Stinson proceeds to delineate some of the book's shortcomings.
Problem One: An Unbiblical View of God
Excerpt: "Eldredge's description of God and His 'adventure' leave the reader with a confusing and unbiblical picture of God. For him, men are risk-takers and adventure-seekers at heart because God is a risk-taker and adventure-seeker."
The problem is that the Bible portrays God as having exhaustive knowledge of the future. God, by definition, cannot take risks since nothing that happens surprises Him.
Problem Two: An Unbiblical View of the Believer
Excerpt: "The second problem is that Eldredge, in his effort to encourage men to follow their heart in these matters of masculinity, has given a false view of the condition of the heart of a believer. His line of thinking can be seen in what follows:
'Too many Christians today are living back in the old covenant. They’ve had Jeremiah 17:9 drilled into them and they walk around believing my heart is deceitfully wicked. Not anymore it’s not. Read the rest of the book. In Jeremiah 31:33, God announces the cure for all that.: ‘I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people.’ I will give you a new heart. That’s why Paul says in Romans 2:29, ‘No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly, and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit.’ Sin is not the deepest thing about you. You have a new heart. Did you hear me? Your heart is good.'" (Italics his)
Clearly, this is not a biblical foundation for promoting the sanctification process. Stinson's entire review is most illuminating.
For additional reviews of Wild at Heart, check out The Thirsty Theologian (scroll down the column on the left side of screen).
P.S. Ironically, an unfortunate motto of Promise Keepers (as displayed on their website) is "Releasing the Raw Power of Your Heart."
Getting Things Done - be like Wayne (Grudem)
We are all used to the pressures of having so many things to do that it seems almost impossible to concentrate on a particular task. If there is ONE personal management system that I continue to hear good things about from Christian leaders and scholars, it is Getting Things Done by David Allen.
This from Amazon:
Yes, Getting Things Done offers a complete system for downloading all those free-floating gotta-do's clogging your brain into a sophisticated framework of files and action lists--all purportedly to free your mind to focus on whatever you're working on. However, it still operates from the decidedly Western notion that if we could just get really, really organized, we could turn ourselves into 24/7 productivity machines.
And this from Wayne Grudem:
"Those of you who have ever seen my home study will probably remember that I’ve always had piles of paper on my desk – things waiting to be done. Now for the last 10 days I have had a completely clean desk for the first time in over 20 years. No piles of papers! And this is in the midst of a lot of demands on my time regarding some publishing deadlines and other responsibilities. How did this happen? It was the result of a remarkable new book by David Allen called Getting Things Done. I had heard of the book from several different sources and read through it about two weeks ago. I began to implement Allen’s remarkable system and all my papers are now either processed (those that take under two minutes Allen says to process immediately) or else put in a file and alphabetized, as well as being listed on a 'project list' that I now carry with me and can look at quickly and see everything at a glance. Allen has a number of other helpful procedures, such as creating a “next actions” list out of the project list, but I won’t try to reveal the whole book to you at once.
"Just let me say that I highly recommend it and it has marvelously increased my peace of mind, clarity of thought, and ability to concentrate on the task at hand as I sit at my desk each day. And I know it’s working because my desk stays clean as new items come in and I process them according to Allen’s system."
I plan to read this book soon! My wife is a productivity expert, and she has already been helping me in this regard.
(HT: Justin Taylor)
July 15, 2006
Stop Test-Driving Your Girlfriend!
Michael Lawrence, colleague of Mark Dever at Capitol Hill Baptist Church, pens an outstanding essay on how a man should purposefully, honorably, and in a timely fashion pursue the possibility of marriage in a relationship, rather than stalling indefinitely in a pattern of continual indecision.
The theological and practical convictions Lawrence expresses are similar to the concerns that drove me to write With One Voice: Singleness, Dating and Marriage to the Glory of God. Too many men fail to value the intrinsic goodness of marriage, and how God intends romantic and sexual longings to point in that direction. Too many men fool themselves into thinking "the grass is greener on the other side" (perhaps some other girl might be better for me).
On another note, too often the church fails to give single men a kick in the rear for the passivity and laziness that contributes to their delay of entering marriage. Much confusion surrounds the "gift of singleness." Yet I Cor 7 and other passages teach a gift of CELIBACY not a gift of singleness. Nor is it (necessarily!) a violation of biblical contentedness to strongly desire a husband or wife. Rather, those desires are often God-given means to point toward marriage for our sanctification and enjoyment.
Hey I'm biased, but you should really read the whole book!
Note: You can click elsewhere on this website to see a more detailed summary of With One Voice, along with endorsements from R. Albert Mohler, Bruce Ware, Ben Patterson, and Rick Holland (college pastor alongside John MacArthur) and reviews by master-blogger Tim Challies and seminary student Ryan Corbett.
July 14, 2006
Same-Sex Marriages Struck Down in New York
The New York Court of Appeals (New York's highest court) ruled 4 to 2 against more than 40 same-sex couples seeking the right to marry in a July 6 ruling. Judge Robert S. Smith wrote the majority opinion, which stated that the court found no basic constitutional right to same-sex marriage. He did open up the possibility that a change in the state's marital law could be initiated by the legislative branch, but then proceeded to give numerous reasons why that would be ill-advised. Among other points, Smith argued that that limiting of marriage to heterosexuals was not solely based on prejudice, since childbirth is a natural consequence only of heterosexual marriage.
The majority opinion offered these summary remarks:
The idea that same-sex marriage is even possible is a relatively new one. Until a few decades ago, it was an accepted truth for almost everyone who ever lived, in any society in which marriage existed, that there could be marriages only between participants of different sex. A court should not lightly conclude that everyone who held this belief was irrational, ignorant or bigoted. We do not so conclude.
See Dr. Albert Mohler's blog post for further analysis and other exceptional quotes from the majority opinion.
For a comparison to a similar recent ruling by Georgia's Supreme Court, see here.
Andreas Kostenberger - Parenting
Andreas Kostenberger pens some excellent advise on parenting.
"Ultimately, we should be careful not to rely on any one human method that, no matter how biblical it may claim to be, is always one step removed from the Bible."
"Parents, too, are sinners, and so must guard against putting their own interests above those of their children. Are they concerned that their children disobey in public simply because this causes them embarrassment?"
Read the whole thing.
Milton Friedman -- Education Vouchers
In a conversation with Larry Arnn, renowned economist Milton Friedman makes some powerful arguments in support of educational vouchers. I found the following quote to be a particularly creative, insightful, and gripping way of stating the matter:
"Think of it this way: If you want to subsidize the production of a product, there are two ways you can do it. You can subsidize the producer or you can subsidize the consumer. In education, we subsidize the producer—the school. If you subsidize the student instead—the consumer—you will have competition. The student could choose the school he attends and that would force schools to improve and to meet the demands of their students."
A few follow-up questions were asked:
LA: Although you discuss many policy issues in Free to Choose [a book Friedman wrote in 1980], you have turned much of your attention to education, and to vouchers as a method of education reform. Why is that your focus?
MF: I don't see how we can maintain a decent society if we have a world split into haves and have-nots, with the haves subsidizing the have-nots. In our current educational system, close to 30 percent of the youngsters who start high school never finish. They are condemned to low-income jobs. They are condemned to a situation in which they are going to be at the bottom. That leads in turn to a divisive society; it leads to a stratified society rather than one of general cooperation and general understanding. The effective literacy rate in the United States today is almost surely less than it was 100 years ago. Before government had any involvement in education, the majority of youngsters were schooled, literate, and able to learn. It is a disgrace that in a country like the United States, 30 percent of youngsters never graduate from high school. And I haven't even mentioned those who drop out in elementary school. It's a disgrace that there are so many people who can't read and write. It's hard for me to see how we can continue to maintain a decent and free society if a large subsection of that society is condemned to poverty and to handouts.
LA: Do you think the voucher campaign is going well?
MF: No. I think it's going much too slowly. What success we have had is almost entirely in the area of income-limited vouchers. There are two kinds of vouchers: One is a charity voucher that is limited to people below a certain income level. The other is an education voucher, which, if you think of vouchers as a way of transforming the educational industry, is available to everybody. How can we make vouchers available to everybody? First, education ought to be a state and local matter, not a federal matter. The 1994 Contract with America called for the elimination of the Department of Education. Since then, the budget for the Department of Education has tripled. This trend must be reversed. Next, education ought to be a parental matter. The responsibility for educating children is with parents. But in order to make it a parental matter, we must have a situation in which parents are Free to Choose the schools their children attend. They aren't free to do that now. Today the schools pick the children. Children are assigned to schools by geography—by where they live. By contrast, I would argue that if the government is going to spend money on education, the money ought to travel with the children. The objective of such an expenditure ought to be educated children, not beautiful buildings. The way to accomplish this is to have a universal voucher. As I said in 1955, we should take the amount of money that we're now spending on education, divide it by the number of children, and give that amount of money to each parent. After all, that's what we're spending now, so we might as well let parents spend it in the form of vouchers.
Read the whole thing.
July 13, 2006
Multnomah Being Sold - And Possibly Closed
Justin Taylor reported the news earlier today, from a Publishers Weekly article. Some of this was confirmed to me via personal correspondence from a former Multnomah employee. On a personal level, this is sad, as the future of many good editors and managers is uncertain. On another level, I'm concerned that the future owner will likely be a secular publishing house, and hence more likely to make publication decisions based on economic driving forces rather than theological or pastoral convictions. (That is arguably already an issue in the industry.)
An announcement is due Friday that will clarify the rumors, says CT weblog.
Hamdan v. Rumsfeld - Media Coverage
James Taranto delineates the significance of the 5-3 Supreme Court ruling regarding the treatment of detainees in Guantanamo Bay (Hamden v. Rumself). Not surprisingly, it is not as "significant a blow to the President" as the media has purported.
Media coverage:
* "The Supreme Court on Thursday repudiated the Bush administration's plan to put Guantanamo detainees on trial before military commissions, ruling broadly that the commissions were unauthorized by federal statute and violated international law. . . . The decision was . . . a sweeping and categorical defeat for the administration."--New York Times
* "The Supreme Court yesterday struck down the military commissions President Bush established to try suspected members of al-Qaeda, emphatically rejecting a signature Bush anti-terrorism measure and the broad assertion of executive power upon which the president had based it."--Washington Post
* "In a sharp rebuke of President George W. Bush's tactics in the war on terrorism, the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday struck down as unlawful the military tribunal system set up to try Guantanamo prisoners."--Reuters
* "The Supreme Court rebuked President Bush and his anti-terror policies Thursday, ruling that his plan to try Guantanamo Bay detainees in military tribunals violates U.S. and international law."--Associated Press
* "The Supreme Court on Thursday sharply rejected the Bush administration's use of military commissions to try suspected terrorists, eliminating a central pillar of the president's anti-terrorism strategy. In a blunt dismissal of President Bush's claim that he had unfettered authority to try enemy combatants captured in the war on terror, the court ruled 5-3 that military trials of detainees at the Guantanamo Bay naval base in Cuba violated domestic and international laws."--Chicago Tribune
See Taranto's piece for more details, but here is the bottom line:
"The court did not decide that unlawful combatants at Guantanamo are entitled to Geneva Convention protections as either civilians or prisoners of war, only that Common Article 3, which governs "conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the [signatories]," applies--though because of Kennedy's demurral, precisely how it applies is an open question."
"For now at least, the court has not mandated that terrorist detainees be granted the rights of either ordinary criminal defendants (who cannot be held indefinitely unless charged and convicted) or prisoners of war (who, among other things, cannot be interrogated)......The chief result of this ruling will be to delay the trials of Guantanamo detainees until Congress or the Pentagon establishes a regime of military commissions that meets the court's approval. For those concerned with the duration of terrorists' captivity--a perverse thing to worry about anyway--there's little to cheer here."
From: http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/ (James Taranto, July 3, 2006)
Also see Charles Krauthammer's rebuttal to the Supreme Court's ruling.
Thomas Sowell - Coverage of Iraq War
Thomas Sowell writes a good essay on how the media coverage of Iraq fails to grant soldiers the presumption of innocence with regard to unproven charges. The irony, of course, is that even citizens who do not sacrifice for the good of America enjoy the presumption of innocence. How much more ought courageous soldiers (seeking to secure the freedom of others) receive this fundamental privilege of democracy? Key quotes:
"A recent study by the Media Research Center found that the three big broadcast news networks -- CBS, ABC, and NBC -- ran 99 stories in 3 and 1/2 hours about the investigation of charges against Marines in the death of Iraqi civilians in Haditha last November. These remain unproven charges in a country where people on the side of the terrorists include civilian women and children who set off bombs to kill American troops and who can set off lies to discredit those that they do not kill."
"But the same networks....gave less than one hour of coverage of all the American troops who have won medals for bravery under fire."
PC(USA) Assembly and the Trinity
In an earlier post, I mentioned that some Presbyterians had been contributing to "...the degradation of the Trinity into trite platitudes such as 'Rock, Redeemer, and Friend.'" I was referring to the 217th General Assembly meeting of the PC(USA) last month in Birmingham, Alabama. Read more about the strange developments here.
Excerpt:
Pastor Parker T. Williamson, CEO of the Presbyterian Lay Committee, says the PC(USA) is showing contempt for historic church teaching with these substitutions. "The understanding of God as three persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit in this divine communion that draws us into itself -- all of that's been trashed by this assembly," he contends.
(HT: Mark Heinrich)
Tax Cuts Put More People in Higher Tax Brackets
President Bush receives little credit for the strong US economy, yet it is indisputable that the tax cuts he instituted in 2003 have been overwhelmingly helpful.
"In the nine quarters preceding that cut on dividend and capital gains rates and in marginal income-tax rates, economic growth averaged an annual 1.1%. In the 12 quarters--three full years--since the tax cut passed, growth has averaged a remarkable 4%."
"In the first nine months of fiscal 2006, tax revenues have climbed by $206 billion, or nearly 13%. As the Congressional Budget Office recently noted, "That increase represents the second-highest rate of growth for that nine-month period in the past 25 years"--exceeded only by the year before. For all of fiscal 2005, revenues rose by $274 billion, or 15%."
The growth rate is slowing a little bit, which is why the Fed might soon stop raising the interest rates (having already made 17 consecutive increases in an attempt to curb inflation since the economy is doing so well).
Here's the kicker:
"Individual income tax payments are up 14.1% this year, and "nonwithheld" individual tax payments (reflecting capital gains, among other things) are up 20%. Because of the tax cuts, the still highly progressive U.S. tax code is soaking the rich."
What this means is that more people are seeing strong gains in their income, which is putting them into higher tax brackets, which is (in part) why tax revenues have gone up so much.
This entire article is an extremely persuasive argument on the benefits of tax cuts. Now if only (a) they could be made permanent, and (b) we could reign in spending!
(HT: Justin Taylor)
John MacArthur Books & Phil Johnson
Many of you know that John MacArthur publishes a lot of books. The man is so prolific that one wonders where to find time to read them, let alone how John writes them. He does receive assistance from an editor, Phil Johnson. Over the years, people have asked precisely how this editorial relationship works. Here is the explanation, along with a helpful introduction to MacArthur's next major book, The Truth War (due in Spring 2007).
Excerpt: "The Truth War is going to be a powerful, and very controversial, book....It is without question the most provocative book John MacArthur has written since The Gospel According to Jesus. It deals in no-holds-barred fashion with 'postmodern evangelicalism,' the Emerging Church, the deliberate dumbing-down of theology, and the trivialization of everything sacred."
July 12, 2006
Prayer and Fasting
I recently finished reading A Hunger for God by John Piper, an older book (1997) that seems as relevant in our day as ever before.
God created bread and hunger "so that we would have some idea of what the Son of God is like when he says, 'I am the bread of life' (John 6:35)." And God also made food taste good because He meant for food to be enjoyed as a gift received from His hand. We glorify God by receiving food with gratitude (I Tim 4:1-5). Eating and not-eating are not ultimately essential (Rom 14: 3-6).
So why fast? As an intensification of our hunger for all the fullness of God. We fast because the Bridegroom has gone on a journey and will not return until the great wedding feast (Matt 9:14-17). And we want the conditions to be in place for the Bridegroom to return, meaning world evangelization (Matt 24:14). Piper shows how prayer and fasting have been a hallmark of the church in South Korea. The first Protestant church in Korea was planted in 1884. Today, 30% of the population is evangelical and there are an estimated 30,000 churches. That's an average of 300 new churches a year for 100 years. And not surprisingly, the South Korean church is outstripping the West in missionary venture.
And we fast for the reward of the Father (Matt 6:16-18), which often includes greater sense of alertness, focus, and zeal in prayer. Fasting has been common for Christians throughout the ages when faced with difficult or perilous circumstances, perhaps through adversity or the need to make a very difficult decision (Acts 13:1-4, II Chronicles 20:3-4).
Fasting is fraught with dangers, primarily spiritual but also physical (the book deals mainly with the former). Piper explains the weakness both of asceticism (which leads to boasting in one's own abilities, Col 2:23) and of an indulgent, pleasure-captivated life that cannot willingly deny itself (Luke 9:22-26). The book closes with some outstanding quotes from eminent Christians throughout history who have benefited immensely from fasting.
A Hunger for God is an outstanding read on a oft-neglected discipline.
July 11, 2006
African American Church Leadership
Thabiti Anyabwile (an African American converted to Christ out of Islam) persuasively argues that "it's well past time to reform the model of black pastoral leadership at play at the national and local church levels."
Anyabwile describes the morphing of Black pastoral leadership from the days of Lemuel Haynes:
"Since the earliest days of an independent Black church, Black church pastors have played the role of community leader, organizer, and public intellectual. Historically, those roles were necessarily played by pastors because the church was the one institution controlled by African Americans and often pastors were among the better gifted and educated leaders in the community. There was no sufficient political infrastructure for mustering resistance to social and political injustice outside of the local church prior to the late 1960s. And once Dr. King became the icon of the Civil Rights movement, with television broadcasting the poignant protests of church leaders and community members into American living rooms, the pastor-as-Civil-Rights-leader became the dominant paradigm for successful pastoral leadership."
African Americans must return to an older model of pastoral leadership, says Anyabwile, one that cares more for the conversion of sinners and the purity of the church (both doctrinally and morally) rather than the mere elevation of the political (either liberal or conservative).
The entire essay is a worthy read.
(HT: Justin Taylor)
July 10, 2006
Liberal Christianity -- A Dying Breed
In a recent (July 9, 2006) issue of the Los Angeles Times, Charlotte Allen, a Catholic, published a scathing analysis of the moral and doctrinal decline of American mainline evangelical denominations. The Episcopal Church USA and Presbyterians receive the brunt of the attack. An overview:
1. Liberal Christianity was embraced in the 1960s by the leadership of many mainline Protestant denominations as the future of the Christian church. However, each of the denominations who embraced liberal doctrinal positions (e.g., wincing at the exclusivity of Christ) are now in steep demographic decline if not overt disintegration.
2. In 1960, mainline churches (Episcopals, Presbyterians, Methodists, Lutherans, and the like) constituted 40% of all American Protestants. Today, it is closer to 12%. In 1965, there were 3.4 million Episcopalians; now, there are 2.3 million. In the same time, the number of Presbyterians fell from 4.3 million to 2.5 million. By contrast, the Southern Baptist denomination counts 16 million members. (Ref: Hartford Institute of Religious Research)
3. Mainline churches pioneered the ordination of women. Today, women make up 25% of all Episcopal priests as well as 29% of Presbyterian pastors. Other trends exhibited by these denominations include the growing toleration of same-sex marriages or cohabitation, and the degradation of the Trinity into trite platitudes such as "Rock, Redeemer, and Friend." (Wayne Grudem ably presents the trend that mainline denominations which first embrace egalitarianism later have significant numbers favoring the acceptance of same-sex unions.)
4. Evangelical churches which preach biblical morality, affirm the Lordship of Christ, and eschew women's ordination are growing robustly in the USA and around the world.
It is unfortunate that the article does not breakdown the term "Presbyterians." Clearly, there are more conservative and more liberal Presbyterian denominations -- it'd be interesting to see more data distinguishing these. Allen does note that PC(USA) has been in financial straits for several years.
The irony of Allen's piece is that what was said to be the "future" of Christianity is looking more like a dying relic. Allen's sometimes humorous article is worth reading in its entirety.
(HT: Nick Nowalk)
For further reading on this theme, see Albert Mohler's excellent piece "The Cutting Edge Has No Edge."
July 09, 2006
Newsweek, Feminism, and the Disrespect of Women
The June 19, 2006 issue of Newsweek had a periscope called "Managing Mommies" in which Linda Hirshman discussed her book Get to Work: A Manifesto for Women of the World. Hirshman informs stay at home mom's that they "should have work that brings influence, honor, compensation, a way of being political, and a hand in shaping the world around you." It was incredible that Newsweek could be so foolish as to promote such an overt expression of feminism -- and one that, ironically, demeans millions of women who are shaping the next generation and society in many significant ways. Not surprisingly, college-educated, intelligent, capable homemakers among Newsweek's readership overwhelmed the Editor with nastygrams displaying (justifiable!) shock and fury.
As I alluded to when I reviewed Danielle Crittenden's book, if women of a bygone era were discouraged from influencing the world through the pursuit of a career outside a home and thus restricted to their uniquely womanly callings (bearing and raising children, managing a home), society today has flipped to the other end of the spectrum: Intelligent, successful women are routinely discouraged from leaving the workforce for the sake of family because society considers this a "waste of potential." Such sentiments are antagonistic and condescending towards women, who innately care deeply for their children. These expressions of feminism are anti-women; they invariably elevate maleness and push women into trying to be like men, denying aspects of their God-given orientation. It is not an issue of whether women are capable of having careers but of whether they must have them in order to receive the respect of society. In this regard, see Harvey Mansfield's plea for a new feminism.
Anticipated Blog Topics - An Overview
I thought I'd take a moment to give readers an overview of the sort of topics on which I'll be posting. Barring the occasional post when I just write on something that's on my mind, the following are the sorts of topics you can expect to be discussed regularly:
1. Cultural issues impacting marriage and singleness. Such matters overlap with my most recent book, With One Voice (reviewed here), which deals with singleness and the relevance of complementarianism in premarital relationships & deliberations regarding marriage. It also discusses the biblical normality of marriage for adults (along the lines of what Al Mohler and Mark Dever (see his chapter in this volume) have occasionally discussed).
2. Book Reviews. My summer reading list includes Preaching the Whole Bible as Christian Scripture; Why I'm Not a Calvinist (which I will read and respond to for a seminary class in practical theology -- I've heard it is one of the best books for articulating an Arminian position); I'm the Teacher, You're the Student; Leading with Love; and The World is Flat. See previous posts here and here.
3. Commentary regarding contemporary political issues . For example, security, terrorism, the economy, issues related to the USA midterm elections, etc.
4. Theological commentary. (Could be anything.)
5. Breaking news (like the City Church thing).
Frequency of posting: My goal is to have at least one post, six days out of every seven (except when out of town or on vacation).
Thank you for stopping by, and I welcome any comments on how I can better serve you.
July 08, 2006
North Korea & Appeasement
This past Independence Day, North Korea shocked the world by launching at least six missiles, including a long-range Taepodong. In the Fall of 2002, North Korea both revealed that they had broken the 1994 agreement to not development weaponry, and nevertheless promised a moratorium on missile testing. I guess one deception begets another.
The occurrence of these military exercises on the 4th of July was a clear attempt to gain one-on-one dialogue with the USA. President Bush, holding a press conference in Chicago yesterday, was asked about the developments in North Korea. One reporter suggested that Bush's foreign policy was incongruous:
REPORTER: Mr. President, a lot of people here in Chicago tell us that they see an incongruity in your foreign policy. We're involved in a shooting war in Iraq; yet we have a leader in North Korea who has announced his affection for nuclear weapons and no hesitation to use them against the United States. Is your policy consistent between the way you have dealt with Iraq and the way you have dealt with North Korea? And if so, are we headed toward a military action in North Korea? And if so, can this nation sustain military action on three fronts -- Iraq, Afghanistan and North Korea?
This reporter failed to realize that over 15 UN Resolutions were passed regarding Iraq prior to the war starting in 2003. The Iraq conflict was in the making for 12 years, as Iraq repeatedly failed to live up to international expectations. We did not rush to war then, and a diplomatic solution is being carefully pursued now as well. (The President's reply was outstanding and thorough.)
Here is an excellent comparison of North Korea's leader, and his ability to keep his word, to pre-WW II Hitler. We need to observe the lessons of the past lest history repeat itself.
July 06, 2006
Good news on the health of David Powlison
David Wayne, aka "the Jollyblogger," provides a good report on the health of David Powlison. Having benefited tremendously by Dr. Powlison's writing, I was delighted to hear the good news. An excerpt:
"He said that for five years he had been living with an undiagnosed sleep disorder. He was never able to enter deep sleep. Now that he has been properly diagnosed and is being treated he is starting to feel like his old self again. He mentioned that one of the great things about this is that, for five years he has been pulling back from involvement and activity and now he is in a place where he can begin thinking, praying and strategizing about where to plug back into activities. He is on a sabbatical now, will teach a bit in the fall and spring and during the next several months, should the Lord continue to bless him with good health, will make plans for the future."
July 05, 2006
While Europe Slept
Tim Challies posts a fantastic review on what appears to be a very important book on a concerning issue:
An excerpt:
While Europe Slept documents the mounting evidence indicating that radical Islam is destroying the West from within. Massive Islamic immigration to Europe has changed the face of the continent, leading to the likelihood that the Europe of the future will bear no resemblance to the Europe of the past. He [the author] found throughout Europe rapidly-expanding Muslim enclaves in which "women were oppressed and abused, homosexuals persecuted and killed, 'infidels' threatened and vilified, Jews demonized and attacked, barbaric traditions (such as honor killing and forced marriage) widely practiced, and freedom of speech and religion firmly repudiated."
Check out the book here.
City Church of San Francisco to Leave the PCA
When I lived in Berkeley, CA (1999-2004), I made a few visits to worship with City Church, a vibrant body of 800 or so attendees (as of 2003) in the heart of the city. An affiliate of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in New York, NY, City Church sought to reach out to San Francisco with a theologically Reformed framework and methodological winsomeness akin to that of Tim Keller.
One of the tenets of the PCA is the belief that the ecclesiastical offices of the church (elders and deacons) are open only to qualified males. Sadly, City Church is now leaving the PCA over that particular issue. CBMW reports that City Church's congregation and its pastors recently told presbytery officials, "The elders of this church find themselves out of accord with BCO chapters 8 and 9, which assume the role of deacon and elder are for qualified males only. We have changed our views and believe that the ecclesiastical offices of the church are open to both men and women, and can no longer with good conscience prohibit women from these offices."
According to the CBMW report, the North California Presbytery of the PCA granted their request to leave the PCA on June 10, 2006. City Church is pursuing affiliation with the Reformed Church in America (RCA). Though more moderate than the PC(USA), the RCA website acknowledges that "deep divisions" exist within the denomination over homosexuality.
I am personally discouraged by this development, as I believe that the egalitarian position is not only unfaithful to the Scriptures, but that, as our understanding of manhood and womanhood touches all of life, this shift will inevitably have unintended consequences. In the past I have enjoyed my visits to City Church, have had numerous conversations with their leadership, and have recommended the church to others. Another reason for sadness is that I am no longer aware of any strong, calvinistic, complementarian church in San Francisco that I can recommend. If you know of one, please inform us in the comments section.
I have also written City Church's leadership and expressed my concern. However, since these matters have been disclosed publicly, I feel at liberty to also comment publicly.
Update: Mike Hayes (Executive Pastor) informed me via e-mail that City Church leadership was persuaded over the past year of an egalitarian position regarding I Tim 2:8-15 and other related texts. In short, they believe that while the complementarian position is possible, the egalitarian position represents a better understanding of both the grammar and historical setting. Based on this understanding of Scripture, Hayes reports, they consequently found themselves out of accord with the PCA Book of Church Order chapters 8 and 9, which assume the role of deacon and elder are for qualified males only.
Update #2: If you are looking for an outstanding scholarly response to egalitarian arguments of I Tim 2:8-15 and other important passages, see Wayne Grudem's tome, Evangelical Feminism and Biblical Truth, which is also available electronically.
July 03, 2006
Affirmation Ratio: Husbands, love your wives!
When my wife and I did premarital counseling, our pastor described something called an "affirmation ratio." He commended the notion that a spouse should give ten compliments for every one critical remark. Not only would that tend towards softening the tone of the rare critique, but it ensures that the critical remark is heard in a larger context of love and delight. I thought that was a good word, particularly for type-A, perfectionistic husbands who tend to badger and nit-pick their wives.
The Mary Carol Winkler case is a dramatic, extreme example of what can happen when a husband fails to make regular, positive investments in the happiness of his wife. Winkler reports that she "told him I was sorry, and that I loved him" even as he was dying from the wound of her gunshot. I don't know about you, but I take her at her word. I find it very difficult to believe that the murder was premeditated. She testified that her husband "had been really on me lately. He criticized me for things, the way I walked, what I eat -- everything." She said, "I was tired of it. I guess I just got to a point and snapped."
Don't get me wrong: In no way does that excuse what she did. She did something horrible in exacting a punishment that far exceeded his crime of being an inconsiderate husband (at least for a season). But it does serve as a graphic, extreme example of what can happen when a husband does not invest in his wife by making regular deposits of love and respect. God calls husbands to be about the business of making their wives lovely, even as they care for and nourish their own bodies (Eph 5:28-29). What's even more interesting is that this pastor and his wife had an "ideal marriage" according to many of the parishioners who considered the pastor a "wonderful minister." Let this be a sober reminder to all of us husbands (especially those in leadership) to love our wives privately and not just maintain the appearance of a healthy marriage before a sometimes unknowing public.
SPONSORS
Please support this site by visiting the
sponsors, or contact me about sponsorship.
>
Search
Categories
Archives
Recent Posts