September 29, 2009
Interview with David Sitton - Part 2
A few weeks I had the privilege of interviewing David Sitton on this blog. Mr. Sitton is the President of To Every Tribe, a ministry which has been planting churches among unreached people groups of Papua New Guinea and Mexico for many years now. Next month they are hosting a conference entitled The Privilege of Suffering: Jesus is Worth It. So that any who are interested may attend, there will be no charge for this conference. However, they ask that folks please register so that they can plan accordingly. To Every Tribe will seek to offset the conference costs through the freewill offerings of those who attend and the generous gifts of supporters.
David was kind enough to answer a few more questions for us. My questions are in bold below.
David - Thanks for your willingness to talk a bit more.
It’s great that so many read our first interview and some cared enough to respond. I’m glad we can do a Part 2.
For an opening statement, I’d like to reply to Justin Long at The Network for Strategic Missions and his observation (as a comment on your blog) that my definitions of unreached and unevangelized, according to many missiologists are inverted. That’s mostly true. However, Donald McGavran, one of the foremost missiologists of the last 100 years, defined unreached much the same way I do. “Socially isolated away from gospel witness” is one way he put it. But the important point is that I suspect most of our differences are largely in the semantics.
I would still argue that the natural progression for the gospel among unreached people groups is this: They are first unreached, meaning, there is no knowledge or access to the gospel within their culture. Then, as they hear the gospel, some are converted, leaders are trained and a small church is established. At this point, I consider them to be reached, meaning, that Christ and the gospel are now known, embraced (church planted) and accessible in their culture.
But there is still a remaining need for evangelization to be completed among them. This is the third phase, which I like to call reaching. This simply means that the needed evangelization is completed through the efforts of their own national believers (church) and with their own local resources.
At this point is when the pioneer church planter should move on to other unreached people groups. So the process is Unreached – Reached – Reaching.
Many missiologists see the process as Unevangelized – Unreached – Christian.
Here’s the reason I especially don’t like that third category (Christian) very much. It has largely lost its meaning for me because too many statisticians include anyone that claims to be Christian into that category. For example, it is often said that Papua New Guinea is 97.28% Christian. That is complete nonsense to anyone that has spent any amount of time in PNG. When the Christian category stretches its arms so wide as to surround and include Catholics, far-fringe syncretistic cargo cults and sometimes even the Mormons, it completely confuses the true situation of the urgent need for mission in the remote and still unreached places.
Romans 15:17-24 has greatly affected the way I think about the remaining task of mission. Paul explains that he is leaving the region from “Jerusalem all the way around to Illyricum (modern day Albania)” because his aim is to preach the gospel, not where Christ is already named. Paul justifies his departure by quoting Isaiah 52:15 – so that “Those who have never been told of him will see, and those who have never heard will understand.”
Paul says “there is no more place for me to work in these regions”, and so, he turns his attention to Spain which Paul considered to be an “uttermost” region where Christ was still not known.
How could Paul say there was “no more work for him in these regions?” Certainly there were lost people all over that huge swath of territory that still needed to be evangelized. But for the pioneer church planter, Paul’s
job in the region was finished, and he turned his attention to less reached places.
Paul wasn’t saying by his departure that there was no more need for evangelization. He was saying that this territory was now sufficiently reached so that the remaining work of evangelism could be completed by the local believers in the churches he had established.
This is what I understand from Romans 15:
Unreached Peoples are places where Christ has not been named; where people have never been told of him; where there are those who have never heard of him.
Reached (but not completely evangelized) Peoples are places where Christ is already named; the people have been told of him; they have heard of him; Churches are planted; and the remaining need to evangelize the unsaved, within that now reached region, falls to the local believers.
Reaching Peoples are those that, with their own national manpower and local resources, are completing the job of evangelization and missionary mobilization (and sending) themselves.
And the church planting missionary moves on to other unreached places where Christ is still unknown (unreached) to repeat the process.
I want to say clearly, again, much of the difference, I think, among missiologists comes from our having slightly differing definitions. But we all agree on the distressing spiritual condition of the remaining unreached peoples of the world.
I hope that’s not overly tedious, but I wanted to explain why I have come to use these words and definitions.
I was wondering if we could tackle a couple of exegetical questions. How do you understand Matthew 24:14 ("And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.") in light of the widespread belief in the imminent return of Christ?
I believe the Lord wants every generation of believers to live under the expectation on an imminent return of Christ. Paul himself, I think, was looking for the return of Jesus in his lifetime (I Thess. 4-5) and even encouraged believers to live in a way that would “speed” its coming (2 Peter 3:12).
As for Matthew 24:14, I take it at its literal face value. It means exactly what it says. When every one of the 17,000 ethnicities (people groups) in the world has the gospel established among them, then Christ will return. The Lord will not have an incomplete crop! Heaven will be gloriously populated with the elect from “every nation, tribe and language group” (Rev. 5:9; 7:9).
Do I live in expectancy of an imminent return of Jesus Christ? I do. Jesus is coming soon. And it’s certainly a lot nearer now than when we first believed (Romans 13:11-12). However, humanly speaking, I know there
are thousands of places around the world where the peoples are still desperately unreached and groping around like blind men in the strongholds of hostile spiritual darkness. So from that stand point, I don’t expect Christ to return tonight. But here’s the thing for me; Jesus said three times in Revelation 22 “Surely I am coming soon”; the last prayer of the bible is the church saying in response – “Amen, come Lord Jesus.” So when I pray – “Come, Lord Jesus”, I’m praying that the gospel would speedily go to the ends of the earth; I’m praying for the rapid success of the gospel among unreached peoples; I’m praying for the elect to be quickly drawn in. And when the Lord has gathered in the last portions of his purchased Bride from among the earths peoples, the Lord will split the skies and come for her. And the Lord could make that happen in an instant if he so chooses.
How do you understand Colossians 1:24 ("Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church")? Specifically, how does our suffering relate to the extending of Christ's kingdom?
I tip my hat to John Piper in helping me understand this one. His message a few years ago entitled “Doing Mission when Dying is Gain” is a must listen.
There are two questions that scream out of the Colossians 1:24 text.
Question 1: What is lacking in Christ’s afflictions?
Answer: Absolutely nothing is lacking in its accomplishment of salvation for his people. Salvation is full and free and completely purchased and secured by Christ through his death and resurrection.
Question 2: If there is nothing lacking in the accomplishment of Christ’s afflictions to acquire salvation for his people, then what is lacking (because the verse clearly says that Paul was filling up the lack)? And how can we provide what is lacking?
Answer: The lack in Christ’s afflictions is not in its accomplishment, but in its, personal, specific application to the nations.
Josef T’son has said – “The nations will be won by his (Christ’s) cross and through our crosses.”
I understand that to mean that it’s the cross of Christ that accomplished salvation – But it’s our cross; that is, it’s our joyful enduring of hardship, suffering and martyrdom (maybe) that proves the truth of the cross to hostile nations.
It’s a difficult dynamic to understand at first. But the Ecuador 5 is a great example of how this works. The cross of Christ was proven to be the power of God for salvation for the Auca tribe. The truth of the gospel was confirmed through 5 human crosses when they were slaughtered by the Auca spears.
When a missionary speaks the gospel in love, then meets violent death in joy for this gospel, a miracle sometimes occurs. The eyes of unbelievers are opened. God enables them to understand the significance of the death of Christ, as demonstrated by the missionaries they just killed – And many of them eventually believe in Christ. This is the consistent testimony from the stoning of Stephen to this present day explosion of gospel advance in the most heavily persecuted areas of the world. Persecution and suffering is not a set-back to mission; it’s an incentive for more aggressive gospel witnessing.
I believe that suffering, hardship, persecution and missionary martyrdom is a divine strategy that God intentionally uses - To advance the fame of his name to all nations. Persecutions always advance the gospel more quickly.
Not to belabor the point, but isn’t it interesting that God has a predetermined number of martyrs (Rev 6:11-14) that he has appointed for the ingathering of his predetermined number of lost sheep (John 6:35-40; 44 and John 10:15)?
We talked about "panta ta ethne" (to all the nations - ethnicities) a bit last time. One of the facts that impressed me when I took the Perspectives on the World Christian Movement course was that the last 50 years seem to have brought us much closer to the goal. Can you comment on that?
We are, of course, closer to the goal. But the remaining part of the task is the hardest part. We often say at To Every Tribe that the easy-to-reach places have already been reached. The remaining unreached peoples are (often) geographically remote, culturally and linguistically confusing and oftentimes physically hostile to those carrying the gospel.
When could we finish the task? It could happen quickly if a few thousand martyr missionaries would rise up to go; a few thousand financial martyrs would rise up to sacrificially support them and a few thousand Moravian-like prayer martyrs would rise up to intercede for them. This is the kind of revival I’m praying and believing for. The problem is not essentially a manpower or money shortage. The shortage is in the number of missionaries who are willing to “fall into the earth and die” for the greater harvest (John 12:23-25). A lot of seed needs to be buried in order to reap the remaining crop.
Mark Noll
The missionary task is not an American effort; and these days, missionaries from the West are among the least effective in the remaining rough and tough places of the world. Pioneer church planting is grueling work and it will not be accomplished over the long haul by soft, fearful, risk-avoiding missionaries. I praise God that he is raising up fully abandoned, martyr witnesses from 2nd and 3rd world peoples; and we want to work with them.
The effect of this cross-cultural work force will only have a positive effect on To Every Tribe. We want to learn how to maximize multi-cultural church planting teams with our brothers from other countries. We want to be on the aggressive front-line of helping them to organize and mobilize for the nations. In our own Center For Pioneer Church Planting, I see near-future multi-cultural partnerships and church planting teams consisting of American, Canadian, Australian, Mexican and Papua New Guinean believers. Part of our vision is to establish missionary training bases in PNG and Mexico in order to launch these church planting teams in the fastest, most contextually relevant and cost effective ways that we can.
Thanks again for your time and your important work.
Thank you, brother, for your interest in our ministry. I pray God’s best blessings on your family and your good work for the gospel. Let’s reconvene for a third conversation sometime.
September 27, 2009
2009 West Coast Conference - Session 8 - R.C. Sproul
Dr. Sproul brought the conference to a close with a message entitled He Is Risen! -- The Resurrection and Worship.
INTRODUCTION
Sproul read from Exodus 19, the preamble to the giving of the Decalogue. Imagine that you were there: "On the morning of the third day there were thunders and lightnings and a thick cloud on the mountain and a very loud trumpet blast." And Moses was told to warn the people, "lest they break through to the Lord to look and many of them perish."
We already heard from Alistair about the road to Emmaus. And that passage recounts the relationship between resurrection and worship. Jesus' disciples conversed with the resurrected Christ, not aware of who he was. And then when Jesus disappeared, what did the disciples say? "Did not our hearts burn within us while he talked to us on the road, while he opened to us the Scriptures?" (Luke 24:32)
The church marked the significance of the resurrection by changing the day of the week that God's people had worshiped for centuries. The first day of the week was marked "The Lord's Day" because that was the day that Jesus was resurrected from the dead.
WORSHIPING WITH REVERENCE
In Exodus 19 we find the announcement that the transcendent God was going to come down to meet them in His immanence. But there were preconditions. The people had to be consecrated so that they were ready when He came down. They needed to do everything in their power to be rid of defilement, to be clean when they come near to me. God didn't want them coming near the mountain without appropriate regard for the significance of the meeting.
But the message of our day is to be comfortable. So when we come to church as if we were going to the YMCA, we are saying "whatever else happens on Sunday morning, it is not holy ground."
You may say "clothes do not make the man." That's true. And a tuxedo won't get you into heaven. That's also true. But we distinguish between various kinds of clothes: formal, informal, sporting, etc. If you went to the White House to have a meal with the President of the United States, you would not wear shorts and flip-flops.
We've lost a sense of the solemnity, the reverence, the adoration, of God. After Jesus disappeared, not what the disciples said:: "Did not our hearts burn within us while he talked to us on the road, while he opened to us the Scriptures?"
We should not forget the historical context in which the Decalogue was giving. The people had to be consecrated. They were given the Decalogue amidst thunder and lightnings.
COMING BEFORE GOD HIMSELF
Sproul recounts preaching to 50-60 people at a church. He told them that he gets nervous before he speaks, every time. He told them, "Do you know who's here?" God Himself. In Hebrews 12:22 we read, "But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable angels in festal gathering." We worship God in heaven itself. We get a taste of heaven itself in corporate worship.
The New Jerusalem is in the future. But the author of Hebrews writes that right now we have come to the heavenly Jerusalem:
But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable angels in festal gathering, and to the assembly of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel (Heb. 12:22-24).
Not only do we cross from the profane to the holy, from the secular to the sacred, we also join the communion of saints throughout the ages. Yet we attempt to make worship casual. Friends, worship cannot be casual. "For our God is a consuming fire." Not God was a consuming fire, but God is a consuming fire. We're to offer to God "acceptable worship, with reverence and awe." But at many churches there is not much to be reverent about.
CONCLUSION
But God has not changed one bit. He is still an all-consuming fire. He has given us the unspeakable privilege of entering His presence because He's given us a Mediator who has paid for all our sins and clothed us in His righteousness.
When you go to church, do you have an acute sense of being in the presence of God? If not, why not?
2009 West Coast Conference - Session 7 - Alistair Begg
Dr. Begg returned to the pulpit to bring a message entitled In the Likeness of His Resurrection -- The Bodily Resurrection of the Believer, taking his text from 2 Corinthians 5.
INTRODUCTION
He then read a portion of a message that a pastor might deliver at a funeral. A text that affirms not just the continuity of life, but the resurrection of the physical body. The Christian's view of death and resurrection ought to be a great apologetic in our day. There is a reason why graveyards used to be near churches. It makes sense. We have the anticipation of a new heavens and a new earth to look forward to.
But in our day not everyone even has a funeral. We have memorials. (We wouldn't want to think so-and-so died.) It is as if we are afraid of death itself. If a funeral isn't solemn, what is solemn?
The writer of Ecclesiastes: "It is better to go to the house of mourning than to go to the house of feasting, sorrow is better than laughter, for by sadness of face the heart is made glad" (Eccl. 7:2-3).
It was Catholicism that gave us "wakes" and "viewings." It is Christian to face the full weight of death's finality (in this world) -- to be made to fully grasp the fact that your mother is now 6-feet under in the ground. In another day, the family members would themselves lift the dirt and fill up the grave.
Richard Baxter said it is the pastor's job to prepare his people for death, and he was right. For Paul, to die was gain because to live was Christ. The former requires the latter.
I. WE KNOW.
(a) that our bodies are like tents, and (b) that our earthly bodies will be destroyed, and (c) that when we do, we have a building from God.
We know. Not we feel, but we know. The resurrection of Christ is the pledge of the believer's resurrection. But, sadly, many churches want to start a service by singing about our feelings, rather than the deep truths of God (which can fuel our praise).
To confirm the reality of Christ in our heart is not the same thing as to confirm the resurrection. The former is an experience that ebbs and flows the latter is a historical reality.
In Ecclesiastes 12, we have an apt description of the demise of a human being at the end of a natural life.
Someone had asked about cremation. Yes, if one is cremated, they can still receive a resurrected body. There are two instances in the Bible describing cremation, but these passages suggest that it was a bad thing. Advocacy of cremation originally came from a few Unitarians. It was an expression of disdain toward God and the resurrection of the dead.
But burial is a picture of being "sown in dishonor, and (someday) to be raised in glory." It is also a reflection of the biblical imagery of going to sleep.
2. WE GROAN.
This is also mentioned in Romans 8. Groaning is a reaching out for what is to come. We groan in frustration with the current limitations and with anticipation of what is to come.
Alas the lack of honest groans in our congregations. A lament allows someone else to open up, cry, groan. There is no dissonance between the knowing and the groaning. No, we know, and so we grown. Paul was looking forward to "putting off the earthly tent."
There is a guarantee: "He who has prepared us for this very thing is God, who has given us the Spirit as a guarantee." Cross-reference to Romans 8, "we cry, 'Abba! Father!'" It is by the Holy Spirit that we are able to say -- to cry -- "Abba Father." And sometimes, in our hearts, that is all we can do. (Need to admit that, because some mistakenly reason that because we know we do not groan. The reality is we don't moan in unbelief but we groan with anticipation.)
3. WE LIVE.
We live by faith. Taking God at His word, trusting His promises, heeding His warnings. Faith is like a muscle -- you use it, it grows; you don't, it atrophies. God has given us means of grace. The Scriptures, the sacraments, the benefits and privilege of prayer, we have the fellowship of God's people, and the experience of trials. Confidence comes by living by faith not by sight. And it is knowledge that builds confidence for living. Paul says that he would prefer to be away from the body and at home with the Lord.
What will heaven be like? We don't really know. But everything we know of God gives us confidence that it will be unimaginably wonderful. Look at the beauty of this creation, and note that the new heavens and earth will be even more breathtaking.
4. WE MUST.
There will be a final exam. Everyone will take it. It is a "divine must." "For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil" (2 Cor. 5:10).
And who else will tell people about this? The same principle which seals the doom for the wicked will be used to distribute rewards among the just. We make it our goal to please him.
CONCLUSION
We were once without God and without hope in the world. But now we have passed from death to life. And this hope does not make us ashamed.
2009 West Coast Conference - Breakout Session - Jason Stellman
The Rev. Jason Stellman is the pastor of Exile Presbyterian Church in the Seattle area. He is the author of a new book entitled Dual Citizens: Worship and Life Between the Already and the Not Yet, available from Reformation Trust.
In this breakout session, Stellman unpacked a chapter in his book Dual Citizens.
Our desire for eternal life is there in our hearts from the beginning. God has put eternity in our hearts. We are hard-wired for heaven and nothing less will truly satisfy us. This flies in the face of the "Jesus is better than drugs" version of evangelism. Because of why God has made us and what He has made us for, we don't need to deny that other things in creation can bring true pleasure even now. But something much better awaits. Creation itself is groaning until the sons of God are revealed.
Peter Kreft: "Escapism is an accurate description of other-worldliness if one knows that this other world does not exist. But if the other-world (heaven) does exist, than disbelieving in it is escapism."
The desire for life beyond the grave -- the deep longing -- is something we hold in common with the unbeliever. In fact, we know something about them that they might not know as well. The problem with the world isn't always that the world is evil per se, it is that the world is ultimately unworthy of our affections.
May we love our neighbors and help them to see what they were truly made for.
2009 West Coast Conference - Session 6 - Q&A - Begg, Horton, Sproul
"What do you think of Barth's view of the resurrection?"
HORTON: Barth was considered a fundamentalist among his contemporaries for believing in the bodily resurrection. Others have been more clear. Many in Germany and in Switzerland at the time denied either the virgin birth or the bodily resurrection or both.
"Do Christ's death and resurrection accomplish different things? Romans 4 seems to have this sort of language."
SPROUL: Yes, they are different, but you cannot separate them. Jesus satisfies (for us) the demands of God; He propitiates God's wrath, making it suitable for God to forgive us. Expiation has to do with God removing our sins from us as far as the east is from the west (like the word "exit"). But the declaration, the vindication, of Christ's work awaited the resurrection.
God has appointed a day and a Person for a future judgment -- the Person is the One he has declared to be the righteous One, having "given assurance to all by raising him from the dead." So you cannot separate the crucifixion of Christ from the resurrection, nor the resurrection from the ascension, nor the ascension from Pentecost, nor Pentecost from the second coming. But each accomplishes something distinct.
"Why does the Bible sometimes use inverse logic? 'Why do you look for the living among the dead?' -- but they were clearly looking for someone they thought was dead?"
BEGG: Jesus and the Scriptures are master teachers. These questions lead into explanations.
"Is the anathema against adding revelation refer to the whole Bible or just the book of revelation?"
HORTON: A similar warning was made with regard to the book of the law ("whoever adds to or takes away will receive the plagues") as what we see in Revelation. I think those apply specifically to the book of revelation but by extension to the whole canon. Because only the King can altar the terms of the canon.
"Are tongues for today, and if so for what purpose?"
BEGG: What happened at Pentecost was unique. My friends who exercise it say it is a prayer language that gives them greater intimacy with God. What gets more interesting is when an interpretation is also provided. In my experience, the interpretation is at best a sentimental truism and at worst something quite bizarre.
SPROUL: Had glossolalia truly been normative in the church after the first century, then we could assess what it is. The problem is that we can't bridge the gap to the first century.
I think that many people want to overcome the difficulty of unleashing their profound feelings to God in prayer. So they think that if they can bypass the mind, somehow they can find some release of their deep, inexpressible feelings.
BEGG: Let's suppose that prophetic utterings given via tongues did not add to the canon of Scripture but they did (as some have suggested) add to the canon of living. It is a short step from that to a diminishing of the value of Scripture.
SPROUL: In the 1960s I had about 40 prophecies said over me, and these were specific, verifiable predictions ("on this date, X will happen"). But zero of them came true. So I decided I needed to live by the word of God.
HORTON: The miracle at Pentecost was one of hearing the Word of God in their one language. It wasn't some individual prayer activity.
"We get a free pass on sin because of Jesus' death, is that right? Where do works fit in?"
SPROUL: I'm judged by the works of Christ. By grace through faith I pass over from death to life. But the text also says that we're judged by our works. Not all have the same level of reward in heaven.
"Did Jesus die only for the elect?"
SPROUL: I'd say he only died for believers. The benefits accrue exclusively for believers. But then the question is: Who are these people? Answer: The elect. Those whom the Father gave to the Son, for whom the Spirit would later seal redemption. Was God's plan/design for the atonement (a) to make salvation possible for everyone or (b) to assure salvation for some?
We believe that God gave a people to Jesus, and executed a purposeful plan to redeem those people for Christ and by Christ.
If not everyone is saved, and God is sovereign, does that mean that God was frustrated by some higher, stronger will? No, of course not.
For Dr. Horton: "Are we Jesus' hands and feet?"
HORTON: No, the bodily Jesus (who has his own hands and feet) is coming back. The church is His covenantal body. It is a mystical union -- affected by the Holy Spirit. We receive our life from Him.
We are active in taking that message (which we passively receive) to the world. We are active in doing good works for the world and our neighbors.
The incarnation is unique. Since I'm a recipient of that, I can show my neighbors who Jesus is.
SPROUL: The "what would Jesus do" question is the wrong one. The real question is "what would Jesus have me do." Jesus and I don't have the same office. He is the mediator -- I bear witness to the resurrection.
"How do you explain the success of Islam given that its origin is similar to that of Christianity?"
SPROUL: What? Please. Mohammad was neither raised from the dead, nor was he born of a virgin, nor did he live a perfect life.
BEGG: It is Satanic. It arises because of our natural love for a system of works, for legalism, for self-salvation.
HORTON: Judaism is a cult of the Old Testament -- it is a break-off from the Old Testament system which pointed to Christ, but Judaism has truncated God's truth by not accepting the fulfillment of the promises. Islam is a cult of Christianity. It is a parasitic distortion of both Christianity and Judaism.
SPROUL: The Bible says there are many anti-Christs. Mohammad is one of them.
BEGG: This is what surprises me about the present Pope. I don't understand how the Pope can foster the notion of pluralism. My Jewish friends say Jesus was not the Messiah. I say He was. We can't both be right. Hindus say God has been incarnated many times. I say it happened once. We can't both be right. Muslims say it is an unthinkable for a prophet to die on a cross. I say it isn't. We can't both be right.
We have been softened theologically for years, and now the chickens are coming home to roost. Young Christians are not prepared to accept the weight of the exclusivity of the truth claims of Christ.
"If God is not the author of confusion, why do Christians have such differences? Why did God make it so confusing?"
HORTON: Differences are not the same as contradictions (or errors). There are four different gospels. They have different ways of defining the kingdom. It is one gospel said through four witnesses. God likes diversity.
We are both finite and fallen. I'm just as fallen and fallible as Muslims and Hindus. Except God has spoken and we're able to see through a glass, darkly. God has communicated via language. But language is a fragile instrument. Given our fallen and finite state, we may have disagreements.
SPROUL: Every time I read the Bible I subject myself (and my thinking) to the thinking of God. We don't put the Bible under us. We are often confused because of what we bring to the text, not from what we take from the text. (Again, our fallenness results in disagreements.)
BEGG: Between ourselves and non-Christians, we differ on the central matters concerning faith. But among Christians, we need to realize that (particularly in mainstream fundamentalism) that we've made the secondary matters fundamental, and this leads to a loss of the central things.
God allows us to have different views (for example, on baptism) because we are finite. We have something to look forward to in heaven in terms of our a greater understanding and (therefore) like-mindedness at that time. And God is patient with us; He wants us to be patient with each other.
Consider how confused Jesus disciples often were, even with the best Bible teacher (our Lord Himself) proclaiming God's truths in their midst. Why should it be any different for us?
2009 West Coast Conference - Session 5 - Michael Horton
Michael Horton began his message reading Paul's Mars Hill sermon from Acts 17. He then cited a recent Newsweek article from Lisa Miller. Ms. Miller opined "we're all Hindus now" and her reasoning was (in part) that we all believe in the continuity of life (into an afterlife stage where we play on harps in the clouds, and that sort of thing).
When Paul spoke in Thessalonica to a largely Jewish audience, he argued that it was necessary for Christ to be raised from the dead. But he couldn't go to Athens and argue from Old Testament promises.
I. PAUL UNDERSTOOD HIS CONTEXT (Acts 17:16-17)
Paul was genuinely concerned and sympathetic to these people given that the city was full of idols. Paul had a love not only for Christian gentiles but for those he formerly regarded as dogs (godless pagans). Why didn't he just get up and read his script, give the proofs, and then shake the dust off of his feet?
Paul couldn't do that -- he was the apostle to the Gentiles. Paul was trained under Gamaliel II, who himself was well educated. He was educated in the Hellenistic tradition, which had a high regard for the Greco-Roman culture.
Sympathy and seriousness -- that was Paul's disposition. And what did that give rise to? "So he reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews and the devout persons, and in the marketplace every day with those who happened to be there." Paul's message was focused on the work of Christ. Jesus was the object of his faith.
Jesus is not sold as a product here. Rather, Paul attests to Christ's work in history.
II. PAUL ADDRESSED HIS CONTEXT (Acts 17:18-23)
For the Athenians, the gods (who are material beings) are blissfully uninterested in human circumstances. The Jewish Mishnah says of the Epicureans that they have no sense of the Messianic world to come. The goal was to obtain perfect tranquility for knowledge, friendship, and virtue. When you die, you die. The Epicureans had no sense of any kind of divine judgment; rather, they feared unhappiness. They were not licentious, because they recognized that abundance could lead to poverty. They were interested in the "good life" -- finding that golden medium, avoiding pain and unhappiness.
In response to the question "why do bad things happen to good people," the Epicureans responded, "because the gods don't care. They've already attained that happy eternal existence."
The Stoics, by contrast, were focused on duty and being detached. If the Epicureans focused on happiness, the Stoics focused on virtue (even virtue above relationships, because the latter created attachments and friendships can fail and disappoint).
So Paul entered this situation. And they recognized that Paul wasn't offering just some fad. Rather, Paul was bringing something odd and unusual -- even by the Epicurean and Stoic standards.
Paul recognized that the gospel had its own PR apparatus. It had its own way of blowing things up and making a lasting impact.
III. PAUL CHALLENGED HIS CONTEXT (Acts 17:22-32)
Paul starts out by criticizing their religiosity: "Men of Athens, I perceive that in every way you are very religious." This was not a complement. Paul announces that he is going to proclaim the reality of the unknown God.
In Romans 1 Paul explained that everyone is religious. But that religiosity manifests itself in (a) the search for religion, and (b) the distortion of truth and the establishment of idols. So Paul had no desire for an "inter-religious dialogue."
"This I proclaim to you." Paul is a herald, an ambassador. He is not there to debate these matters, but to proclaim historical reality. (Religion's domain, by contrast, lies in the search for happiness.)
The argument:
A. GENERAL REVELATION
1. God is the creator of everything. (As opposed to the Epicureans and Stoics who thought that matter was eternal.) Not even the soul was divine -- it, too, was created. For them it was "spiritual stuff" and "physical stuff." For Paul it was "God" and "not God." God is the creator of everything. He is the Lord of heaven and earth.
2. God is involved in the world. (The Stoics thought God was one with the world -- they were pantheists. The Epicureans, by contrast, that the gods were utterly detached from the world and its cares.) In fact, God is both transcendent (free from the world) and immanent (free for the world). Though God doesn't need us, He showers blessings upon us, giving "to all mankind life and breath and everything." God cares for everything He has made. See verses 26-28.
The Epicureans might have responded (as many do in our own day), "I cannot believe in a God that is that involved with the world, not given all the junk that actually happens in the world."
The problem is not a lack of information, says Paul: "Being then God's offspring, we ought not to think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and imagination of man." Everyone has a personal relationship with God, the question is what kind of personal relationship. Nobody finds God via general revelation. Rather, people suppress general revelation. So general revelation is sufficient to judge but not to save.
"As even some of your own poets have said, 'For we are indeed his offspring.'" Hey guys, Paul is saying, even some of your own poets understood this much better than you. We're God's offspring -- we can't be part of God (contrary to the Stoics), nor is God utterly disconnected to us (contrary to Epicureans).
The audience was tracking with Paul because he was in the realm of general revelation. But then Paul shifts to special revelation.
We know the law by nature (it is in our hearts). But the gospel is unfamiliar territory -- the gospel is good news (datable events) not timeless principles.
B. SPECIAL REVELATION
1. The gospel declares that God became flesh.
What a shocking concept. They saw physical matter as evil, as a trap, a prison. They were trying to escape their flesh. But Paul was proclaiming the most bloody religious system they'd ever heard of. God spills blood via a brutal execution on a cross (their equivalent of the electric chair). And then the good news is that you get your body back? The resurrection of the body and the life everlasting?
No wonder it was foolishness to the Greeks. Plato's view of the afterlife has more credence in our day than the Christian one. The resurrection has already happened -- just in a spiritual sense.
When my dad was dying I heard the refrain, "The sunset is as glorious as the sunrise." What an offense. No, death is horrible, a curse. Jesus wept at the grave of Lazarus minutes before he raised him from the dead. Christianity takes the horror of death seriously.
2. God is not far away from us. We are far, and God came looking for us.
Some in Paul's audience might have thought, "Wow, a rabbi dies and rises again. That's one more cool, weird thing."
But Paul was arguing that if God came in the form of man, lived, died, and rose again, then this God is Lord of all, and (a) He will judge everyone one day, and (b) God has put up with your ignorance long enough. It is time for everyone to repent and believe in Jesus, because God has raised Him from the dead.
CONCLUSION
We will all be judged by works that day. But for believers, it will be by Christ's works. We have already been told (via our justification) that those works are accepted by God. Jesus is not a life coach. He is either a Savior or a dreadful judge.
The gospel is good news. It is not just a great story with historical interest.
September 26, 2009
John Piper and Doug Wilson Discuss Collision
A 15-minute conversation about the film Collision. Piper asks Wilson perceptive questions (which you can read or listen to at the link above) and there are no "spoilers." Listen away!
Ligonier West Coast Conference - Session 4 - R.C. Sproul
R.C. Sproul has for many decades proclaimed and defended the resurrection of Jesus Christ. As the founder and president of Ligonier Ministries, his teaching can be heard worldwide on the program Renewing Your Mind, which is available on 230 radio outlets in the United States and in fifty countries worldwide. Dr. Sproul also serves as the senior minister of preaching and teaching at Saint Andrew's Chapel in Sanford, Fla., and he is the author of over sixty books including his most recent publications, The Prince's Poison Cup, The Truth of the Cross, and Truths We Confess.
Dr. Sproul's message was entitled Witnesses of the Resurrection -- The Apostolic Message. He read I Corinthians 15:12-32.
INTRODUCTION
In 1965 we had our first son (our daughter was three years old). My mother was very happy. She had just received the dress she would be wearing to my ordination ceremony (scheduled to occur 10 days later). We talked that night, and then she went to sleep. That night she died in her sleep. I had spoken to her within 8 hours of the moment that I discovered her dead.
While Alistair was speaking, he said that the resurrection is rationale. It struck me that death is irrational.
Wherever we look at human culture we see this hope for the continuity of life -- a hope that refuses to be extinguished from the human heart. But as the Bible says, without Christ we are really without hope.
PAUL'S AD HOMINEM ARGUMENT
There were those in the Christian community in Corinth who were saying that there was no such thing as the resurrection. So Paul is responding to them in this letter. Paul was extremely well educated; he had the equivalence of two Ph.D.s by the age of 21. But Paul understood that logic was shared by all humanity. And the human mind was created by God to be rationale, not chaotic.
Sometimes we think that Aristotle invented logic. He didn't. Aristotle discovered the laws of logic.
And here Paul argues to the Corinthians in an extremely logical manner. The ad hominem abusive fallacy is when you attack the person. But there is a legitimate form of ad hominem argument, and that's what Paul does here in I Corinthians 15. That is when you step into the shoes of your opportunity and say: "OK, let's assume what you are saying is true. And let's take it to the logical conclusion." In this manner, Paul reduces his opponent's argument to absurdity.
THE LAWS OF IMMEDIATE INFERENCE
If we say "all men are mortal." And "this man is not mortal" -- that's a contradiction. You can't have a universal negative and a particular affirmative. "If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised" (I Cor. 15:13).
And if that's the case, our preaching is in vain. Every moment that I've spent in the pulpit has been a herculean waste of time. And not only has my preaching been in vain, but your faith is in vain. Hear the preacher of Ecclesiastes: "Vanity of vanities, all is vanity." The vanity here is futility.
Jean Paul Sartre wrote a book called Nausea. He argued that man is "useless passion." What a way to describe a human being. We all have passions. A loved one dies; we weep. But Sartre says it is a "useless passion." There is no way to make any sense of it at all. And our culture has been drowning in this sort of atheistic nihilism for decades.
Jean Paul Sartre, Nietzsche, and Albert Camus -- these folks had no time for the silliness of humanism. The humanist wants to exalt the dignity of a grown-up germ who (ultimately) has no meaning (according to the humanist). The humanist thus lives on borrowed capital; he (as Francis Schaeffer said) has "both feet planted firmly in mid air." Human dignity has no basis in a humanistic worldview, but it has a firm basis in a Christian worldview.
JEHOVAH'S FALSE WITNESSES
Moreover, we are found to be Jehovah's false witnesses. Why? Because we're telling people that God has raised Jesus. But if the dead are not raised, then God has not raised Jesus. For if the dead are not raised, not even Jesus was been raised. And your faith is futile. And you are still in your sins.
That's not all. Those who have died have perished -- fully and finally. Your funeral services are hoaxes. All those you know and love who have died -- they are gone. Forever. They have perished. And if in Christ we have hope in this life only then we are of all people the most to be pitied.
Sometimes non-Christians, when we discuss these things and disagree, and they get angry, I tell them: "Don't get mad. Pity us. We're of all people the most pitiable."
Paul goes on to say: "Why in the world am I out here fighting wild beasts at Ephesus? I'm dying daily here. Don't say you are a Christian and that you disbelieve in the resurrection. I protest."
RELIGION A CRUTCH?
But if the only reason for believing in the resurrection was so that we can have something nice to hang on to, then Christianity is a chapter in Alice in Wonderland. Christianity is not a pain killer. If Christ is not raised, I'm going to sleep in tomorrow. I'm not going to spend my life preaching and teaching the things of God.
Paul is saying: "I want you to understand what is at stake here. I want to disavow you of any compromise, like humanism." In verse 20 Paul says that Christ has in fact been raised from the dead.
Back up to the beginning of the chapter: "For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures."
How would your life change if you knew with absolute certainty that Jesus had risen from the dead? What if it came to you from an infallible source? That's the testimony we have -- the word of God. The only infallible rule of faith and practice. No syllogism or formal demonstration could exceed the certitude of the affirmation of the infallible word of God. Remember that Jesus prayed in John 17 that God would sanctify His people in the truth -- Your Word, O God, is truth.
I grew up in a liberal church. One minister said the meaning of Easter was to give us courage each day. Another minister said when you're dead, you're dead. But in 1957 on the way to a bar a football player told me about Jesus. And he spoke of Jesus as if He was actually alive. And more than anything in the world, I wanted what he had. That night I met the living Christ.
CONCLUSION
Paul's conclusion comes at the end of the chapter: "Therefore, my beloved brothers, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that in the Lord your labor is not in vain."
That Christ has risen from the dead makes all the difference in the world. It means our suffering is not in vain. Our cancer is not in vain. Every tear, every labor, counts forever.
Ligonier West Coast Conference - Session 3 - Q&A Begg & Horton
For Dr. Horton: "You said that we are not an extension of Christ's kingdom. How does that cohere with our being the body of Christ? Our being the hands and feet of Christ, as it were?"
HORTON: We bear witness to the redemption that Christ has wrought. Yet we are co-workers with Christ, because we are proclaiming him. The difficulty is that sarx and soma are sometimes confused. We are not made one flesh with Christ. We are made one with Christ by the Spirit. He is the first-born from the dead. We have an organic, covenantal relationship, but there is not a fusion between the believer and Christ.
"What is our (the church's) relationship to Israel?"
HORTON: There is a difference of opinion among Reformed believers about the relationship between the church to ethnic Israel. I myself did a "flip" on Romans 9-11. "Thus all Israel will be saved." I don't think we should go back to some sort of rebuilt temple in Jerusalem. I don't think the largely Gentile church replaces Israel. The grafting in of the Gentiles is the fulfillment of the promises to Israel.
My old view is that there was no future for ethnic Israel; everything was happening now in the church (nothing more than a "remnant" of Israel being saved). But now I am more open to their being a future outpouring of God on the people of ethnic Israel. I was moved toward this view by folks like Ribberbos and Hodge.
BEGG: I agree with much of what Mike just said. And it is not a simple replacement theology.
"How does the Jewish view of substitutionary atonement differ from the Christian understanding?"
BEGG: The Old Testament people were looking forward and we're looking back.
From Sproul to Horton: Was salvation a different economy back then?
HORTON: Paul contrasts the Mosaic law with the Abrahamic promise. The contrast is between the conditions by which the Israelites could stay in the land (Mosaic law) and how an individual can be saved (Abrahamic promise). Abraham was saved by grace alone through faith alone.
For Begg: You quoted Karl Barth. Was Barth correct when he wrote that Christ was "the elected man" and that all people are "in Christ."
BEGG: Yes, Christ was the elect man. But not all people are in Christ.
SPROUL: Barth said he wasn't a universalist, but he was. He said that God's "yes" extends to everyone; although we can resist it, God will triumph over it.
"Could you please expound on what the federal vision is? It is tearing up my church."
HORTON: Federal vision is an over-reaching against what is perceived as a baptistic tendency to see the sacraments as merely signs. And the over-reaching ends up viewing baptism as (essentially) regenerative. In contrast, Reformed theology has classically understood there to be a distinction between the covenantal community and those who are indeed regenerate.
So you go to Hebrews 6 and you see language of "tasting, participating." But "like dry ground drinking in the rain often, it doesn't bear fruit.....but we are confident of better things with you, brothers, things that accompany salvation."
Federal Vision folks define justification differently. Classically, Reformed theology believes that saving faith is a resting and receiving. It doesn't (itself) include obedience.
SPROUL: Though Federal Vision is not monolithic, there is a tendency to overlap the visible church and the invisible church. So you can be in the "invisible church" and then fall out of it.
Federal Vision is often confused with the new perspective on Paul; they are not the same. The PCA studied both of them and came to the conclusion that both of them are outside the historical norm.
"Should we be praying for material needs (our daily bread), or should we not be anxious about such things, and rather pray for spiritual needs?"
BEGG: There is a simplicity to asking God to meet our basic needs. Particularly in what we call the third world. We should not be anxious about our material needs, but rather pray about them (along with spiritual needs) and then thank God as He provides.
"How do we interact at the graveside with the death of a loved one who was not a Christian?"
BEGG: I never want to guild a lily. I don't want to appear to have a theology for one party and a different theology for another party. My approach is to affirm for the person left behind the availability of and the character of God in relationship to them. As believers, we should enter into the heartache and the loss. Often our deportment at such times will convey more of what is useful in the moment. We may need to wait for much later to say more.
SPROUL: You weep with those who weep. But people in this country believe in justification by death. They don't believe in hell and they don't believe in a last judgment. Jesus talked more about hell than heaven. So somehow, even as we weep with those who weep, and while we don't want to be harsh, we need to get that message out too.
"Should my husband and I leave our church...."
BEGG: Yes. (joking)
SPROUL: If you aren't in a church that is serious about the gospel and the sacraments and church discipline, you need to be in a church that feeds you the truth of God.
"Why would our current church service be patterned after a covenant renewal ceremony, when that only happened a few times a year in the Old Testament?
SPROUL: It happened more than a few times a year. Joshua 24 is a good example of it. But covenant renewal was also associated with succession -- with passing down the baton to the next generation.
I once suggested that the Lord's supper was both a covenant renewal and a dynastic succession event. Jesus "turned us over" to the Holy Spirit. And Jesus used covenant renewal language when he instituted the new covenant. What do you think of that?
HORTON: Yes. And it is important to establish which covenant is being removed. There are some covenants in this world that are negotiated. But a suzerain didn't negotiate the terms of the covenant: You obeyed or you were out.
Briefly, there is a similarity between Genesis 15 and the Sinaitic covenant. God says "I will do this..." (promise). And God (rather than Abraham) walked between the body parts (as the weaker king normally would). Then at Sinai, Israel makes a promise, and they (Israel) fail to keep it. And then at the Lord's supper, Jesus promises to walk through the pieces on their behalf ("my blood, for you.") Jesus pays for their failure to keep the covenant.
"Is the Mosaic covenant a republication of the Adamic covenant?"
HORTON: We all agree that there is a distinction between the covenant of works and the covenant of grace. But is the Mosaic covenant a republication of the covenant of works? Yes, and at a different stage in redemptive history. Adam was in a covenant of works individually. Israel was in a covenant of works as a nation. Israel was called to be a replica of what the kingdom of God would look like. That was why it was important for Israel to obey everything that God specified.
Ligonier West Coast Conference - Session 2 - Michael Horton
Michael Horton is J. Gresham Machen Professor of Systematic Theology and Apologetics at Westminster Seminary California, and he co-hosts The White Horse Inn, a nationally syndicated radio talk-show that explores issues revolving around Reformation Theology in American Christianity. Dr. Horton is a minister in the United Reformed Churches of North America and is an accomplished writer whose many books include God of Promise: Introducing Covenant Theology and Putting Amazing Back Into Grace.
Dr. Horton read from Acts 1 (the sequel to the gospel of Luke), verses 1 through 11. The ascension is actually part of the gospel. It is part and parcel with the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The disciples, even after the resurrection, were confused: "Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?" They were basically thinking, "Now that He's been resurrected, why would he leave?"
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
Jesus fulfilled the Old Testament shadows and types, such as Moses and David. In I Cor 10:1-6, Paul even likens Christ's cross with Moses' Red Sea crossing. But in Jesus we have both Moses (who leads His people through the Red Sea) and Joshua (coming out on the other side to take possession of the promised land).
All of Jesus' replies from Satan are taken from Moses' speech in Deuteronomy 6. The goal of the Exodus was not just deliverance from Pharaoh but deliverance unto God. "I am the One who delivered you from Pharaoh....therefore, you shall have no other gods besides Me."
Eating and drinking in the presence of the Lord is a prominent theme in the historical books and it reappears in the accounts of feasts in Luke's gospel. Peace and joy and feasting in the presence of God.
Israel was called upon to execute the judgment of God upon the nations--the judgment that was meant to prefigure the last judgment. Yet Israel did a poor job of it. God said of them that they, like Adam, disobeyed. Israel was sent into exile. This is where we find Israel at the time of Christ's first advent.
The Pharisees were eager to restore obedience to Torah, so that Messiah would come and restore the theocracy.
A NEW EXODUS
What we find in Acts 2 is a new exodus. Jesus instituted it Himself. God had attested to this Jesus of Nazareth by raising Him from the dead, vindicating His claims. The signs and wonders pointed to God Himself. When asked how they knew He lived, they never said, "Because he lives within my heart." No, they knew Jesus lived because the resurrection was historical.
Looking back, recall Jesus' foretelling that he was going to Jerusalem to be crucified. But Peter and the others thought he was going for an inaugural parade of honor. Remember the mother of the sons of Zebedee asking Jesus (as Palm Sunday was drawing near), "Lord, when you enter your kingdom, can one of my sons be on your right and the other on your left." Jesus told her she had no idea what she was talking about. That would have meant dying on his left side and right.
A NEW WILDERNESS
Following the new exodus of Jesus' death and resurrection, we have a wilderness period between the resurrection and the ascension. Jesus was immersing, day and night, His apostles in what they needed to know to be His apostles. For 40 days they received intensive instruction about the kingdom. And now the 40 days are ended by Jesus entering the heavenly Canaan (as opposed to the promised land that Joshua entered).
Note that "while eating with them" Jesus revealed the truths of the kingdom to them. One, this was to give testimony to the physicality of the resurrection. (Remember Jesus asking for fish in one of the resurrection accounts?) But there is another reason: It is a renewal of the New Covenant promise that he made with them in the upper room (take, break and eat). Only in this case, Jesus is the meal. Jesus makes Himself the sacrifice and the substance of our salvation.
The "breaking of the bread" becomes central in New Testament worship. They heard Jesus open up the Scripture and their hearts were burning (Luke 24). But they didn't recognize it was Jesus until he "took, broke, and eat."
Eating and drinking in the presence of the Lord is an essential part of our participation in the new covenant. Someday it will occur bodily.
Jesus gives a charge to those He led across: To wait in Jerusalem until the promised Spirit (to be sent). Just as Pentecost came 50 days after the Passover, the true Pentecost came 50 days after the true Passover.
But the Ascension was crucial: The disciples/apostles could not enter their earthly conquest until Jesus entered His heavenly kingdom. But the disciples, in asking, "Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?" were still thinking of an Old Testament theocracy. But it wasn't that bad, since Jesus was talking about the kingdom of God. The disciples were wondering when the resurrection of the just was going to occur, and why Jesus would be leaving.
Jesus answer was a partial yes. Stay in Jerusalem, until you get empowered to be my witnesses. The full consummation of the kingdom would come off in the distance.
LIVING IN THE LAST DAYS
Jesus' ascension opened a fissure in history. The second temple expectations of the Pharisees were not fulfilled. We're living in that fissure -- "these last days of this present regime."
It is good that Jesus went, and it is good that the Holy Spirit came. Recall that Jesus called "the gospel", "the kingdom". But it is not a geopolitical kingdom. It doesn't grow by political coercion or by ballots, but by God's spirit. As prophet, Jesus reveals the Father's Word. As priest, He intercedes for us. As King, he is looting Satan's possessions during these last days (having previously bound the strong man).
The cloud which guided Israel in the wilderness, which filled the tabernacle.....the cloud now takes Jesus into heaven at His Ascension. That cloud will come again to empower the disciples.
In Luke 24, we have two witnesses to the resurrection ("why are you looking for the living among the dead?"). Here at the Ascension, we have two witnesses ("why do you stand looking into heaven?"). The witnesses were telling the disciples to keep their eye on the ball, the next new thing was about to happen.
Luke 24 tells us similarly that "While he blessed them, he parted from them and was carried up into heaven. And they worshiped him and returned to Jerusalem with great joy, and were continually in the temple blessing God." Soon they will be thrown out of the temple -- but only the earthly temple. Jesus was in heaven building the true temple.
WHY THE DELAY IN CHRIST'S SECOND COMING?
Why the delay in His coming? Peter tells us that it is because of God's mercy, as living stones are being added to the new, the true, temple.
The conquest of Christ in this world is greater than any conquest in the Old Testament. What fills this gap? Nothing, Jesus absolutely must come back. But in the meantime, we enjoy a real union with Jesus Christ. And on the basis of that union, we are sent out. Sent out by the missionary God.
The logistical detail of replacing Judas with Messiah -- what's it doing here in the early part of Acts? They are there because the Kingdom is not entirely invisible. It is a visible, even now. The kingdom is visible in the preaching of the gospel, the sacraments, and church discipline.
Church growth in the book of Acts is described by the phrase "and the word of God grew." We have two Advocates, in fact: One in heaven and another on earth. And we need both. The powers of the age to come has broken in. The everlasting feast has already begun.
All the outer courts of the temple have been broken down. We have immediate access to God. We are living stones in Him. No longer insiders or outsiders (as Jews and Gentiles were); no, we are one people -- He has broken down the wall.
CONCLUSION
That which is unclean can (in Christ) become clean. "But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light. Once you were not a people, but now you are God's people; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy" (I Peter 2:9-10).
Ligonier West Coast Conference - Session 1 - Alistair Begg
Alistair Begg led us off with the first session. Dr. Begg has served in pastoral ministry for over thirty years, ministering in churches in Scotland and the United States. He has served as senior pastor of Parkside Church in Cleveland, Ohio, since 1983, and he can be heard teaching daily on the radio program Truth for Life. Dr. Begg is a sought-after speaker and writer, and he has written many books including Preaching For God's Glory
The topic of Dr. Begg's message was He Is Not Here -- The Significance of the Empty Tomb. He took his text from Luke 24, verses 1-27 --- the powerful account of Jesus' post-resurrection conversation with His disciples on the road to Emmaus.
INTRODUCTION
Dr. Begg began by noting that he often images people singing songs. The disciples on the road to Emmaus might have thought to themselves "it's all over now." They were speaking about the events of Jesus in the past tense. "But we had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel." The Old Testament pointed to the coming of a prophet par excellence. But at this point the disciples were both amazed and confused.
A CRUCIFIED MESSIAH?
The downcast faces of these disciples represented their logic: a crucified Messiah was a contradiction in terms. The plot line of their story has been thoroughly turned on its head.
Going back to the women (at the beginning of Luke 24), they were going to bring spices. They were not going to witness a resurrection. They were unprepared for what they found -- or rather didn't find. They did not find the body of the Lord Jesus.
Then they were confronted by a strange sentence: "Why do you look for the living among the dead?" But they weren't looking for the living. They had embalming material with them. The angel asks if they remember what Jesus had taught concerning His death and resurrection. Clearly the women had not remembered.
So the ladies reported this to the disciples, who were eager to hear of it. No. They were hiding like a bunch of chickens. Eventually, Peter went to investigate the matter, but he walked away from the empty tomb confused. Either the disciples were going to need to find another Messiah or altar their expectations completely.
A NEW PETER
In Acts 2, we see a different Peter. We see Peter giving a masterful treatment of what has happened in the whole sweep of redemptive history. The dramatic transformation of the disciples was a tribute to the Holy Spirit's new covenant ministry. The disciples were demoralized on Good Friday, bewildered on Easter Sunday.....yet just a few weeks later, we see them bold and courageously proclaiming and explaining Christ's resurrection. Such a transformation can only be attributed to Jesus' historical resurrection from the dead.
The disciples were eager to report the historical facts of Jesus and His resurrection. Absent the resurrection, there would be no Christianity. As F.F. Bruce said, "If Jesus had not risen from the dead, we probably would have never heard of him." The disciples don't provide us with detailed evidence for the resurrection -- they themselves are that evidence.
We can make three observations:
1. The resurrection is historical.
Christianity is a historical faith. It is based on actual events. There was a tactile element; the disciples saw and touched the risen Lord. When Peter preached in Acts 2, he did not hold back. He said "as you yourself knows" (vs. 22-23). Later, when Paul spoke of the resurrection (I Cor. 15), he noted that many of the witnesses were still living. It was as if Paul were saying, "Go ahead and check this out -- verify it for yourself." It would be as if I wrote a book about The Beatles making up some fantastical story about who they were and where they came from. It would never fly. There are plenty of people around who remember the Beatles. They know that there were only four of them, and that now just two are left.
The Bible is either true or it is the most amazing falsehood ever spun. And to believe the latter is to build one's lives on despair.
[Aside: The resurrection of Christ, and the believer's union with Him, is why believers do not perish upon their death. Their resurrection and eternal life are secured by their union with Christ, who conquered death.]
2. The resurrection is rationale.
The Dawkins' book, The God Delusion, does not interact at all with the resurrection of Jesus. Dawkins writes, "Jesus probably existed, but the idea that he rose from the dead is absurd." On what basis? He gives none.
The resurrection is the center of Christianity, because it confirms:
A) The reality of the fall and the decay which is pervasive in this world. "The whole creation is groaning."
B) The reality of the immortality (life beyond the grave).
C) The demonstration of the truth of all of Christ's claims and the trustworthiness of all of Christ's promises.
D) The inevitability of our own resurrection.
3. The resurrection is empirical.
It stands up to the test. It truly fulfills man's longing. Men like Hemingway and Shakespeare wrote that life was a journey from "nothing to nothing." But the resurrection answers the cry for meaning. For forgiveness, love, hope, God.
And this is the story that we are called upon to take to the world. Take Sartre: "Here we are, all of us. Eating and drinking for preserving our existence, and yet there is no reason for our existence."
But C.S. Lewis wrote, "I believe in Christianity as I believe in the sun, not because I can see it, but because by it I see everything else."
CONCLUSION
The symbol of Christianity is the triumphant Christ, risen and reigning. And men and women can call out to Him and find Him to be a Savior and Friend.
Prime Time America Interview on Retirement
David Butler and I were interviewed by Paul Butler on Moody Radio's Prime Time America. David Butler, Paul's father, serves as Ministry Operations Director for Trans World Radio, serving on the island of Guam. The feature was aired today, and can be heard in its entirety (~7-8 minutes) on Paul's website.
The interview was prompted by an article I wrote in the October 2009 issue of Tabletalk magazine entitled Don't Retire; We Need You.
September 25, 2009
Piper Primer on the Doctrines of Grace
Good, short piece by John Piper showing the scriptural warrant for (what many of us call) the doctrines of grace (total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace, and perseverance of the saints). Piper begins:
We believe that these 5 truths are biblical and therefore true. We believe that they magnify God’s precious grace and give unspeakable joy to sinners who have despaired of saving themselves.Read the whole thing.
September 24, 2009
New Trailer For Movie Collision
Here.
Interview with Tullian Tchividjian on Oust Attempt
Bobby Ross Jr. of Christianity Today interviews Tullian Tchividjian on the attempt to oust him as the senior pastor of Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church.
The context: In March, Tchividjian was elected senior pastor of Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church by a 91% vote. Soon after Tchividjian's installment as the senior pastor, a small, vocal minority has been seeking to remove him from that office. In an op-ed piece in the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, Tchividjian recounted that to address this issue once and for all, the church had a congregational meeting and a vote this past Sunday. A little over two-thirds of the congregation voted to keep Tchividjian as their pastor.
An excerpt of the interview:
Ninety-one percent of Coral Ridge members supported your hiring earlier this year. In the vote Sunday, 71 percent voted against ending the church's relationship with you. That's still a two-thirds majority, but how do you get back the support you have lost? Do you even try?
Tchividjian: It's a bit misleading. Anybody who was registered as a member was eligible to vote. However, there were about 150 people who came on the day of the vote who hadn't been to this church since before I got here. But they had friends who were unhappy and came back to vote with their friends.But in a church our size, my guess is, there are still 100 to 200 people who are not supportive of me.
How do I go forward? I keep pastoring the whole church. I keep shepherding the whole church. I keep preaching to the whole church. I keep leading the whole church.
September 22, 2009
Excerpts from Counterfeit Gods - Tim Keller
I just finished reading the Table of Contents & Introduction. It's fantastic. Here are few excerpts:
"Each one has its shrines—whether office towers, spas and gyms, studios, or stadiums—where sacrifices must be made in order to procure the blessings of the good life and ward off disaster. What are the gods of beauty, power, money, and achievement but these same things that have assumed mythic proportions in our individual lives and in our society? We may not physically kneel before the statue of Aphrodite, but many young women today are driven into depression and eating disorders by an obsessive concern over their body image. We may not actually burn incense to Artemis, but when money and career are raised to cosmic proportions, we perform a kind of child sacrifice, neglecting family and community to achieve a higher place in business and gain more wealth and prestige.""In ancient times, the deities were bloodthirsty and hard to appease. They still are."
"In Ezekiel 14:3, God says about elders of Israel, “These men have set up their idols in their hearts.” Like us, the elders must have responded to this charge, “Idols? What idols? I don’t see any idols.” God was saying that the human heart takes good things like a successful career, love, material possessions, even family, and turns them into ultimate things. Our hearts deify them as the center of our lives, because, we think, they can give us significance and security, safety and fulfillment, if we attain them."
"An idol is whatever you look at and say, in your heart of hearts, “If I have that, then I’ll feel my life has meaning, then I’ll know I have value, then I’ll feel significant and secure.” There are many ways to describe that kind of relationship to something, but perhaps the best one is worship."
"The Bible uses three basic metaphors to describe how people relate to the idols of their hearts. They love idols, trust idols, and obey idols."
"The way forward, out of despair, is to discern the idols of our hearts and our culture. But that will not be enough. The only way to free ourselves from the destructive influence of counterfeit gods is to turn back to the true one. The living God, who revealed himself both at Mount Sinai and on the Cross, is the only Lord who, if you find him, can truly fulfill you, and, if you fail him, can truly forgive you."
Counterfeit Gods - New Book By Tim Keller
Tim Keller's latest book, Counterfeit Gods: The Empty Promises of Money, Sex, and Power, and the Only Hope that Matters
Success, true love, and the life you've always wanted. Many of us placed our faith in these things, believing they held the key to happiness, but with a sneaking suspicion they might not deliver. The recent economic meltdown has cast a harsh new light on these pursuits. In a matter of months, fortunes, marriages, careers, and a secure retirement have disappeared for millions of people. No wonder so many of us feel lost, alone, disenchanted, and resentful. But the truth is that we made lesser gods of these good things -gods that can't give us what we really need. There is only one God who can wholly satisfy our cravings- and now is the perfect time to meet him again, or for the first time.Here's a "sneak-peak" of the Table of Contents and Introduction. WTS Books is offering a 5-pack for less than $11 each (45% off).The Bible tells us that the human heart is an "idol- factory," taking good things and making them into idols that drive us. In Counterfeit Gods, Keller applies his trademark approach to show us how a proper understanding of the Bible reveals the unvarnished truth about societal ideals and our own hearts. This powerful message will cement Keller's reputation as a critical thinker and pastor, and comes at a crucial time-for both the faithful and the skeptical.
I am looking forward to reading it. I imagine I'll have more on this in the weeks to come.
Interview with Dan Goeller (Part 3)
I've been interviewing Dan Goeller over the last couple of weeks (Part 1, Part 2), whose recent album Sing Praise To The Lord I previously reviewed. Here's installment #3.
CHEDIAK: It seems that academia (i.e., the music department at a University) approaches music differently than the general evangelical public. You seem to compose for a general (non-academic) Christian audience (i.e., churches), yet it seems to have a classical quality to it. We often think of "classical" as less accessible to the common person. Where does your music fit in?
GOELLER: As I mentioned previously, I often think of my music as an “equal opportunity offender.” I try to defy standard conventions of style. Since common labels like “contemporary” and “traditional” just don’t seem to apply, some people have difficulty classifying my music. Evangelicals think that I am composing traditional, academic music while academics think I am composing warm-fuzzy evangelical music.
So much music, in both popular and academic circles, goes wrong when an agenda is attached to it. By this, I mean that the artistic and communicative quality of the music becomes a secondary consideration behind an ideological goal. In my opinion, evangelicals and academics both often fail in this regard. They are like two sides of the same coin: Academics sometimes produce music that is inaccessible to performers and listeners because their agenda is to impress others with their intellectual prowess. Evangelicals sometimes produce music that seems watered down and heavy handed because their agenda is to ineffectively overstate their message while attempting to imitate the popular music of secular entertainment culture.
My goal is to create beautiful and honest music. I spoke previously about how music should contain three important elements: truth, goodness and beauty. I hope that my music will encourage and convict others because it is artistic and innovative while remaining accessible. This is a delicate balance of competing elements, but when achieved, ensures that one’s music will be an effective way to profoundly communicate and connect with both listeners and performers.
CHEDIAK: With regard to composing, are there any historical examples that you seek to emulate?
GOELLER: With each piece I compose, I am looking for a musical context that will most effectively communicate the message of the text. In purely instrumental music, my goal is still to effectively communicate, but in a more abstract way. Perhaps Henry Wadsworth Longfellow said it best: “Music is the universal language of the mind.”
The list of musical influences on my musical output is extensive. I find that I must continually challenge myself to discover more about the craft of composing if I am to continue writing music that will encourage others. I am inspired, in this endeavor, by studying the music of great composers. This never-ending process of learning invigorates the desire to create new and, perhaps most importantly, meaningful music.
I think finding good musical influences is one of the important components in making meaningful music. People often comment that my music is “visual.” I think part of that sensory stimulation, beyond the scope of the auditory, is based on the fact that effective composers understand how to use sound to communicate ideas. What I believe makes music unique, as a form of communication, is that it communicates on three planes simultaneously: cognitive, affective and spiritual.
The Sluggard
A poem on Proverbs 24:30-34 by Isaac Watts:
'Tis the voice of the sluggard; I heard him complain,HT: Josh Harris
"You have waked me too soon, I must slumber again."
As the door on its hinges, so he on his bed,
Turns his sides and his shoulders and his heavy head."A little more sleep, and a little more slumber;"
Thus he wastes half his days, and his hours without number,
And when he gets up, he sits folding his hands,
Or walks about sauntering, or trifling he stands.I pass'd by his garden, and saw the wild brier,
The thorn and the thistle grow broader and higher;
The clothes that hang on him are turning to rags;
And his money still wastes till he starves or he begs.I made him a visit, still hoping to find
That he took better care for improving his mind:
He told me his dreams, talked of eating and drinking;
But scarce reads his Bible, and never loves thinking.Said I then to my heart, "Here's a lesson for me,"
This man's but a picture of what I might be:
But thanks to my friends for their care in my breeding,
Who taught me betimes to love working and reading.
September 21, 2009
New Home For Justin Taylor's Blog
At The Gospel Coalition:
http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justintaylor/
Check it out, and update your bookmark.
September 19, 2009
Hansen, Piper, James: Panel on The New Calvinists
Collin Hansen, John Piper, and Carolyn James were on a September 11, 2009 panel at the Religious Newswriters Association’s annual convention. Their topic was: The New Calvinists.
Collin Hansen:
John Piper:
The book Piper predicted would be the definitive work on Calvin was: Calvin
.
Carolyn James:
Q&A with Reporters:
HT: David Mathis
Sweden Slashes Income Taxes To Boost Job Creation
A headline in today's Breibart--"Sweden slashes income tax further to boost jobs":
Since coming to power in late 2006, the government has launched a series of measures aimed at inciting Swedes to return to the job market instead of living off of state subsidies.John Hinderaker observes:
It's an interesting comparison: Sweden experimented with the nanny state, learned that it was devastating to the economic and moral health of its people, and is moving back toward individualism. Here in the U.S., we had the world's most dynamic economy, and the lesson we took away from that--some of us, anyway--was that we were doing something wrong and needed to socialize everything. Curious.John had previously observed that the U.S., even before the Obama administration, already had the most progressive income tax system in the world, collecting "more household tax revenue [income plus social security taxes] from the top 10 percent of households than any other country and extracting the most from that income group relative to their share of the nation's income". According to data from the Congressional Budget Office and the Internal Revenue Service, as reported on Sept. 15, 2008:
The top 1 percent of income earners now pay 40 percent of all federal income taxes, which is almost double their share of the national income. The top 10 percent pay 71 percent of federal income taxes, though they earn just 39 percent of the nation's pretax income....Meanwhile, the lowest 40 percent of income earners as a group actually receive net payments from the federal income tax system.
September 18, 2009
Mike Horton: The Gospel-Driven Life
WTS Books is offering Mike Horton's new book, The Gospel-Driven Life: Being Good News People in a Bad News World (Baker, 256 pg hardcover), for 45% off (only $10.99). The offer is good for the next week and a half.
(HT: JT)
Mike Horton, Alistair Begg, and R. C. Sproul will be speaking at the Ligonier West Coast Conference in Seattle, WA next weekend (September 25-26) on the theme Is There Life After Death? (I'm assured they will all answer in the affirmative.) I'm looking forward to live-blogging the event.
September 17, 2009
More on Humility and Narcissism
Very interesting NY Times piece by David Brooks on the immodesty/pomposity/lack of restraint of our day (exemplified publicly, in recent days, by Kayne West's opinionated interruption of an award-winner's speech, Serena Williams' vulgarity-laced verbal, threat-filled assault of a line judge, and Michael Jordan's egotistical, long-winded Basketball Hall of Fame acceptance speech) in contrast to the humility and restraint of war veterans (and, by extension, America as a whole) the day World War II ended.
Over the airwaves that day a passage was read by Ernie Pyle, the famous war correspondent who had been killed just a few months earlier. In anticipation of the military victory to come, Pyle had written: "I hope that in victory we are more grateful than we are proud.” Brooks observes:
When you glimpse back on those days you see a people — even the rich and famous celebrities — who were overawed by the scope of the events around them. The war produced such monumental effects, and such rivers of blood, that the individual ego seemed petty in comparison.Speaking of the change from that culture to our own, Brooks writes:
When you look from today back to 1945, you are looking into a different cultural epoch, across a sort of narcissism line. Humility, the sense that nobody is that different from anybody else, was a large part of the culture then.And that, says Brooks, gave rise to the growing acceptability (if not the preference for) immodesty and self-indulgent expression. And so today we boast much about little, and demand recognition or attention for athletic prowess or artistic popularity. Yet Brooks' last line is powerful:But that humility came under attack in the ensuing decades. Self-effacement became identified with conformity and self-repression. A different ethos came to the fore, which the sociologists call “expressive individualism.” Instead of being humble before God and history, moral salvation could be found through intimate contact with oneself and by exposing the beauty, the power and the divinity within.
It’s funny how the nation’s mood was at its most humble when its actual achievements were at their most extraordinary.Read the whole thing.
HT: Owen Strachan
September 16, 2009
Be Like David (Robinson), Not Like Mike (Jordan)
Both David Robinson and Michael Jordan were recently inducted into the Basketball Hall of Fame. Voddie Baucham contrasts their acceptance speeches: Robinson's was marked by humility and gratitude, Jordan's was marked by arrogance and self-centeredness. Robinson (a Christian) conveyed that his life was about much more than his basketball career, Jordan "needed this moment to snatch his throne back from the likes of Kobe Bryant if only for one night." I couldn't agree more. As a Chicago native and Bulls fan, it was quite sad to see a man so reduced by narcissistic indulgence. An excerpt:
David Robinson’s personal words to his three sons were about the most poignant, moving, inspiring words from a father I’ve heard in a long time. Here was a man receiving the highest honor in sports, and he turned it into a father/son moment that his boys will never forget. He spoke to each son, acknowledged their unique gifts, and his unique relationship with each of them.Voddie broke down his contrast into these points:M.J. also acknowledged his children, but the theme was the same... ‘It’s all about me.’ At one point, M.J., said to his kids, “You guys got a heavy burden... I wouldn’t want to be you guys if I had to.” (This was right before his absolutely classless remarks about the $1,000.00 ticket price for the event) While this may be a true sentiment (Jordan was referring to the unfair expectations on his children), the context was unfortunate. Instead of a loving father sympathizing with the plight of his children, M.J. came across as an arrogant superstar admiring the magnitude of his own shadow and using his kids as no more than a punch-line.
1. David Elevated Others... Mike Elevated Mike
2. David Honored His Family... Mike Honored Himself
3. David Was Brief... Mike Was Indulgent
4. David Honored God... Mike Honored Basketball
5. David sees His Legacy in His Family... Mike sees His Legacy in His Highlights
Read the whole thing.
Here is David Robinson's seven-minute speech:
HT: JT via Andy Naselli
Interview with David Sitton
David Sitton is the President of To Every Tribe, a ministry which has been planting churches among unreached people groups of Papua New Guinea and Mexico for many years now. They are hosting a conference next month entitled The Privilege of Suffering: Jesus is Worth It. David was kind enough to answer a few questions for us about his testimony, his passion for missions, and the organization he leads.
David, can you please tell us a little bit about your background. How did you come to know the Lord?
I appreciate you taking the time for this interview for your blog/website.
I grew up in Corpus Christi, Texas and was quite the wild hare hellion in my junior high and high school days – That would be about the years of 1973-76. I was gladly dominated by the adrenaline-laced life of drugs, girls and the South Texas surfing sub-culture.
But there was always a super-charged spiritual drive within me that was in competition with the excitement of wild living. I remember those days as being a miserably conflicted young man.
The short story for salvation is that the Lord drew me in through the consistent testimony of one of my girlfriends; her whole family actually. It wasn’t the immediate click of a gospel light switch though. For me, it was more like one of those mood lamps where you turn the knob and the light gets slowly brighter; I was drawn in to Christ over the process of some months.
How were you called into missions work, and among what people did you serve?
I’ve got to say that I cringe at the idea of a missionary “call”. Too many believers hide behind the mirage of an expected miraculous, mystical “calling” that never seems to be dramatic enough. There is nothing in the New Testament anything like our Western view of a “missionary call.”
The biblical reality is that 99% of the cross-cultural workers in the book of Acts got there one way: Persecution! And most of the remaining 1% went because the Apostle Paul challenged them to go. And that’s how it happened for me.
The Lord got me for unreached peoples through a missionary. He looked me straight in the eye, quoted a text and asked me a question. Romans 15:20-21 was the text – “I make it my ambition to preach the gospel, not where Christ has already been named, lest I build on someone else’s foundation, but as it is written ‘Those who have never been told of him will see, and those who have never heard will understand.” And here’s the question – “There are lots of unreached tribes in Papua New Guinea. Some of them are cannibalistic and hostile headhunting tribes; they are completely unreached by the gospel. Come with me brother – Let’s go get some of them for Jesus.” I was 19 years old. But from that moment, my life was re-directed and set upon a course for the unreached regions. And that was 32 years ago.
With the emphasis that men like Ralph Winter put on the concept of "panta ta ethne", has pioneering mission work (work among unreached peoples) become more common today?
Ralph Winter almost single-handedly put the concept of “unreached peoples” into the missionary consciousness. Until the early 1970’s, the church had focused upon “geo-political countries” as the target for missionary outreach. Winter popularized “panta ta ethne” which is the Greek phrase out of Matthew 28:19 “to all the nations (ethnicities)” as the biblical target for the gospel. The intent of the death of Christ was to secure salvation for the elect people of God within each and every ethnic and linguistic people group; more than 24,000 of them worldwide.
So, yes, this concept is very much understood today in the missionary community, but not so much in the churches.
My understanding, and I could be mistaken, is that the majority of new missionaries still tend to go to reached cultures, as opposed to unreached ones. But I'm wondering if this trend is changing.
Thanks for the set-up for something I really want to say clearly. There’s an important difference between unevangelized and unreached peoples.
Unevangelized people are unconverted individuals in places where there are established churches. Unreached peoples are those that live in regions where there are no churches and no access to the evangelical gospel in their culture.
And to answer your question about the present trend; 96% of the missionary work force is still laboring in unevangelized, but not truly unreached regions. Here it is again – 9 out of 10 Christian missionaries that go cross-cultural are still going to reached places!
Here’s still another way to say it – Something like 90% of all “ministers” worldwide are concentrating on only 2% of the world’s population! We are massively overly evangelizing places where the gospel is already well planted! I believe that we need a substantial strategic redeployment of the missionary workforce to the areas where there is still no access to the evangelical gospel.
You represent a ministry called To Every Tribe. What is your unique emphasis or focus? How are you similar (or different) from groups like Frontiers or Pioneers? Do you partner with any other groups?
Our emphasis is upon the strictly unreached people groups of Papua New Guinea and Mexico along with a growing presence among Muslim immigrants here in the United States.
We have many friends among FRONTIERS and PIONEERS and we highly value their work for the gospel in hard places. And we are interested in gospel partnerships as those opportunities arise.
To Every Tribe though is unique in an interesting blend of its distinctives:
1. We are committed to the least reached people groups.
2. We are a pioneer church planting ministry.
3. We come from a reformed, non-cessationist theological perspective.
4. We are a missionary training institution as well as a sending agency.
You have established the Center For Pioneer Church Planting in south Texas. Can you talk a little about the strategic role of church planting as opposed to other forms of mission ministry (e.g., medical missions, engineering missions)?
Everything is a tool. Medicine and dental clinics and clean water systems and feeding the hungry and all of that is important work. And its gospel work when used as means to actively demonstrate the love and compassion of Christ and to gain a hearing for the gospel in sometimes hostile environments. But the preaching of Christ is the emphasis. Establishing new believers into vibrant, reproducing fellowships is the goal. Everything else is a tool that helps us get the name of Christ and salvation to the most interior places.
Do you think it is preferable for these other forms of missions to be done in cooperation with a church planting team, say, among an unreached people group?
These tools should be carefully used so that they do not become the main thing. One of the big problems in mission is in creating dependency among those we are trying to reach. There is a way to plant indigenous churches so they are not dependent upon American manpower and money-power from the West. And these are the most healthy and happy churches.
Speaking of church planting, what do you do with the fact that nearly 2/3 of the missionary labor force is female?
We actively recruit women and joyfully send them as a part of our church planting teams!
Are there certain areas in which women are particularly suited to serve?
There are many things that only women can and should do! By the way – I counted one time 36 people in the New Testament that were named by name as being co-workers with the Apostle Paul. And almost half of them were women! The list of things women can do is far longer than the “can’t do” list.
Are there areas in which they should not serve?
The Scriptures are clear about male leadership in the church. Women should not serve as elder/overseers in the local church. And they should not lead the way in the teaching and preaching of the Word (though that doesn’t mean absolute silence either as 1 Corinthian 14 gives guidelines for how women should pray and prophesy in the assembly of believers).
But here is a question I get a lot. Can women plant churches? Again, we believe that men should lead church planting teams.
But here’s a question for you? Do you know who planted the church among the Auca Indians in Ecuador? Rachel Saint did. That wasn’t the plan. The men were leading the way in that gospel effort among the Auca’s – But the Ecuador 5 were slaughtered by the Auca warriors! Rachel Saint and Elisabeth Elliot went back in and eventually got the gospel established among that hostile tribe that had killed their brother and husband! So absolutely, women can plant churches as they have repeatedly done all through church and mission history. But our emphasis is still upon male leadership of church planting teams.
At the Bethlehem Pastors conference in 2006, you openly invited men to join you, and sensed that God was calling 10% of those in attendance to join you in pioneer missions work. Is that right? Can we get an update on that, three years later?
That whole period of time leading up to the Bethlehem Pastors Conference was an anointed time almost unprecedented in my entire life. In the weeks leading up to the conference, the Lord strongly impressed upon me the number of 140. I had been told that there would be 1,400 pastors in attendance – And that’s where the “tithe” came from.
Our staff and students were actively praying and fasting for the 3 weeks leading up to the conference that God would release 140 pastors into the worldwide harvest. And the Lord is doing it.
In the weeks and months following the conference more than 200 people contacted me. Some of these are presently on our staff and have gone through our missionary training and are en route for unreached places!
I have received e-mails, letters and phone calls by numerous people that have told me they resigned their pastorates, sold their homes and are now working among unreached peoples around the world (with other agencies). One especially touching testimony happened the following year when I was again at the Bethlehem Conference as a registrant. A man came up to me, introduced himself to me and burst into tears. He said, “I heard you speak last year. I had my daughter listen to the tape. And she is now living among an unreached Muslim people group in the Middle East.”
It was a miraculous day where the Lord mobilized a large number for the unreached regions. And I suspect there were missionary martyrs that were gloriously raised up for the gospel that day. Only in heaven will the complete testimony be known.
What are your hopes for the next 10 years?
Let’s make it 5 years. Anything I say about the possibilities a decade down the road will seriously undershoot what the Lord is about to do. But we do have a 5 year plan. Here’s the way I wrote it out in a purpose statement: My hope is that the Lord will use To Every Tribe to train and launch church planting teams to at least 25 more unreached people groups within the next five years. 25 church planting teams represent about 80-90 missionary families and singles.
I’m asking for missionary martyrs to step up and get prepared for the frontline hostile places; and I’m asking for those that don’t go to step up as financial martyrs to sacrificially send them!
David, thank you so much for your time.
Brother, thank you so much. Let’s do this again.
Update: Part 2 of this interview.
September 15, 2009
How A True Calvinist Fights
Ray Ortland (quoting John Newton):
If you account him [your opponent] a believer, though greatly mistaken in the subject of debate between you, the words of David to Joab concerning Absalom are very applicable: “Deal gently with him for my sake.” The Lord loves him and bears with him; therefore you must not despise him or treat him harshly. The Lord bears with you likewise, and expects that you should show tenderness to others from a sense of the much forgiveness you need yourself. In a little while you will meet in heaven. He will then be dearer to you than the nearest friend you have upon earth is to you now. Anticipate that period in your thoughts. And though you may find it necessary to oppose his errors, view him personally as a kindred soul, with whom you are to be happy in Christ forever.Read the rest. From John Newton, writing to a young minister, The Works of John Newton, I:268-270.
Eschatology Evening At Bethlehem Baptist Church
Sunday night, September 27, following the Desiring God National Conference, there will be an eschatology panel at Bethlehem Baptist Church.
Conference speakers Sam Storms and Doug Wilson have graciously agreed to stay with us for an extra evening, and Jim Hamilton from Southern Seminary will be joining us (and lecturing to Bethlehem College and Seminary the following day), as John Piper hosts “An Evening on Eschatology.” Piper will interview the panel; Storms will represent the amillennial position, Wilson the postmillennial, and Hamilton the historic premillennial view.
The event is scheduled for Bethlehem’s Downtown Campus at 6:30pm.
Interview of Dan Goeller (Part 2)
We're picking up where we left off in an interview with Dan Goeller (whose music I previously reviewed).
CHEDIAK: In our last installment, you said it was your desire to "make music unto the Lord–in a more artistic, innovative, and profound way–that would eventually lead me away from the music industry in Nashville and on a distinctively different musical journey." Can you expand on that?
GOELLER: After a decade of living in Nashville and working in the music industry, I was ready for a change…not just professionally but for our family as well. After the birth of our second daughter in 2005, we wanted to be closer to family, reduce our cost of living, and try to pursue making music more on our own terms. This meant making a move from Nashville to Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Sioux Falls had everything we were looking for in a place to raise our family, and it was also close to (my wife) Heidi’s family. In February of 2006, we made the nearly 1,000 mile journey of relocating to Sioux Falls.
One of the miraculous things that happened, our first four months in Sioux Falls, is that the University of Sioux Falls agreed to rehearse and record a work for choir and orchestra that I had been trying to produce for a couple of years. In His Own Words is a 45-minute work that derives its musical and narrated texts exclusively from the New Testament words of Christ. In His Own Words is a perfect example of a project that every publisher and record label, with whom I had a working relationship, had rejected. In His Own Words broke all of the marketing and publishing rules. But I was passionate about composing and producing it because it is exactly the sort of music that I believe we Christians should be creating.
CHEDIAK: How does your Christian faith inform the style of music you compose and orchestrate?
GOELLER: If you listen to my music, you’ll quickly recognize that it is stylistically diverse. This is because I believe that defining one’s music mainly by style is very limiting. Whenever I sit down to compose a new piece, I try to consider which sort of style(s) will be most effective to communicate the intended message. However, It is my observation that churches define their “identity” mainly by style and demographic. This seems contrary to the apostle Paul’s admonition to not make these sorts of distinctions (Galatians 3:26-28).
This emphasis on stylistic identity has created a real struggle for me. For example, many churches have dismissed In His Own Words as “not the kind of thing that they do.” Obviously it’s not the words of Christ that they “are not into”, but rather the musical style in which Christ’s words have been set. On the other hand, churches who have embraced In His Own Words or my Christmas project The Word Became Flesh, have rejected my most recent project Sing Praise to the LORD–A Musical Exploration of the Psalms, as “too contemporary.”
It appears that my music is an equal opportunity offender. Rather than trying to subjectively ascertain which style will appeal to a certain group, or the largest group, or generate the most sales, I try to take my cue again from the apostle Paul (1 Cor. 9:19-23) by considering which style will be most effective and appropriate for each piece I compose.
CHEDIAK: What do you hope your music accomplishes?
GOELLER: I think that music is most effective when it intersects three crucial areas: truth, beauty and goodness. This “artistic triumvirate” has been widely discussed since ancient times. Much of the music I hear, even in the Christian music industry, tends to touch one or two of these areas, but not all three. I personally feel that failing to touch all three of these areas relegates ones music to the realm of entertainment rather than art. Of course, there’s nothing wrong with entertainment. But I think that we Christians who devote our lives to the creative arts have a unique opportunity to powerfully impact society. Music can be a very effective vehicle to express the truth of God’s word and “His goodness which endures forever.” And even purely instrumental music, without an associated text, has the possibility of bringing beauty and hope to a world that desperately needs it. I often remind myself that David played his harp for King Saul to calm his spirit (1 Samuel 16:14-23).
September 12, 2009
A Balanced View on Singleness & The Gift of Celibacy
Years ago I was involved in the debate over what some call "the gift of singleness." Some tend to think of the gift of singleness as the state of singleness: to be single, is to have the gift. I wholeheartedly disagree. I think it is better to differentiate between a gift for celibacy and the state of singleness. Not all who are in the state of singleness are gifted to remain there--though, of course, celibacy is the biblical requirement of all singles. Which is one of the reasons most of them should marry (I Cor. 7:9). As I wrote in a 2006 essay:
[The gift of celibacy] is a rare gift that is accompanied by a Spirit-endowed ability to cheerfully and without bitterness or rancor abstain from sexual intimacy and the deep emotional companionship that only comes with marriage and having children. In many cases, I believe this is accompanied with a particular life calling that greatly profits from the status of singleness (e.g., missions, a life-threatening vocation, excessive traveling, etc.).On the other hand, a comprehensive view of singleness has to answer questions like: What about the person who wants to marry, tries to marry, and is repeatedly unsuccessful? Should we ever exhort others to pursue marriage, or is that a nosey intrusion on a purely personal decision? And if it is possible have too little motivation to marry, can one want marriage too much?
These are the sorts of questions I try to address in an article published today called A Balanced View of Singleness. My conclusions:
An essential aspect of loving singles is being open to helping them in the process toward marriage, while recognizing:Check it out.* our relationship with Christ is more important than our marital state
* some singles are uniquely gifted to remain single for greater kingdom effectiveness
* many singles struggle profoundly with loneliness, lust, fornication, and the like, and welcome (or should welcome) loving, gracious, and balanced input on the process toward marriage from Christians who care about their souls and their bodies
* for most, marriage will be a means of profound sanctification, and they ought to responsibly (and diligently) move in this direction even as they embrace other adult responsibilities
* just as God ordains the ends, He ordains the means. The means may include overcoming your fear and telling a girl how you feel. They may include giving a guy a chance, even though you grew up seeing your parents go through a divorce, and you've closed your heart like a shell.
September 11, 2009
The Path To 9-11: A Great Docudrama
On the eighth anniversary of 9-11 I thought I'd repost my thoughts on this summer's viewing of the uncut version of The Path To 9-11. If you recall, this 5-6 hour docudrama was aired on ABC over two nights (September 10 and 11, 2006) at the five year anniversary of the infamous 2001 terrorist attack. I was among the 28,000,000 people who saw it at the time, but my wife had missed it. Two weeks prior to its airing in 2006, Disney/ABC came under tremendous pressure from Democrats in Congress (notably Harry Reid and Charles Schumer) as well as President Clinton's lawyers to cancel the movie or at least cut material. According to the writer and producer Cyrus Nowrasteh, a letter was sent to Disney/ABC threatening revocation of their station licenses if they didn’t pull or recut the miniseries. Disney CEO Bob Iger caved to pressure and cut three minutes out of the program. The material that was cut is in the YouTube clip below.
The entire docudrama is absolutely outstanding. Watch it if you can. Unfortunately, Disney/ABC have blocked all efforts to sell or rent DVDs of the film via Netflix, Blockbuster, etc.
Incidentally, the efforts to block the release of The Path To 9-11 have themselves become the subject of a documentary entitled Blocking the Path to 9-11. It can be ordered for $20 .
September 09, 2009
Together for Adoption 2009 Conference
The 2009 Together for Adoption conference will be held on October 2-3, 2009 at Christ Community Church (Franklin, TN). Registration: $40 per single or $60 per married couple. Group rates are available (email dan.cruver@TogetherforAdoption.org for information). College Student Rate: $25 (Parents may also utilize this rate for children 9 years old and older).
The speaker/topics will be:
Michael Easley, Orphan Care and Jesus, the Great Servant of the Poor
Russell Moore, Adoption and the Renewal of Creation
Scott Roley, Adoption and the Pursuit of Racial Reconciliation
Scotty Smith, The Freedom of Adoption
Ed Stetzer, The Gospel, Social Justice and the Missional Church
Zach Nielsen will be live-blogging the Friday night / Saturday conference.
Interview of Dan Goeller (Part I)
I previously reviewed the well orchestrated, worshipful, classical-sounding CD Sing Praise To The Lord. I also said I'd be introducing Dan Goeller a bit. Dan is a musician, a conductor, and a man with a deep desire to produce beautiful, innovative choral and instrumental music. In 2005, after a career in Nashville, TN working with a slew of popular Christian artists, he started his own music publishing business, Dan Goeller Music Publishing.
Below is part 1 of an interview series we'll be doing.
1. What gave birth to your interest in music? Did you pursue formal training? If so, where?
When I was young, I spent hours listening to the radio and vinyl records that I would check out from the library. In addition to listening to music, I would also play the pieces I heard on a small electronic keyboard. I was most fascinated by the music of J.S. Bach. I particularly enjoyed his compositions for pipe organ, since I could more accurately recreate these on the keyboard. Even later on in college, when I became much more fluent in reading music, I still relied on those early memories of learning keyboard repertoire (by ear) to shape the musicality of my performance practice.
My “formal training” began the summer preceding my senior year of high school. I had the opportunity to study pipe organ at Duquesne University and composition at Westminster Choir College in Princeton. After graduation from high school, I studied composition and organ at the University of Miami (in Florida). After that first year of college, I decided that I wanted to finish my remaining three years of college at home. So I transferred to Christopher Newport University and had an opportunity to study composition with Aldo Forte–the staff arranger and composer with the Air Force Band at Langley. This move was especially good for me because it provided an opportunity to conduct and compose music outside of academia. This approach, even while formerly studying at the university, instilled a desire to create music that was aesthetically beautiful and elegantly crafted while maintaining accessibility to both performers and listeners.
2. How did you get into the Christian music "industry"? What were your experiences in that field?
Right after I graduated from college, I wanted to try and find employment as a working composer, arranger, and/or orchestrator. So I packed up my things and moved to Nashville, Tennessee. My first few years there, I struggled to make ends meet as I worked, on a freelance basis, at one of the largest publishing and recording companies in town. I was only paid $4 an hour, so I spent most of my waking hours making copies, editing choral and orchestral pieces, listening to test cassettes, typesetting music, and compiling sales reports. Despite the tedious drudgery and economic hardship of these first few years in Nashville, I used this time as an opportunity to learn everything I could about how the music business worked.
As time went on, people in the industry started to recognize my unique musical knowledge and abilities. It is unusual to find people in the music business who have a comprehensive academic knowledge of music. Most people either grow up in the business or have limited academic training. This extensive knowledge of music provided me with opportunities to work with talented and well-known music industry figures like Amy Grant, Michael W. Smith, Vince Gill, Point of Grace, Cece Winans, Larnelle Harris, Greg Nelson, and many others.
In addition to working with these artists on national tours and recordings, I also spent a great deal of time arranging and orchestrating music for church print publications. This combination of experiences–in the recording studio, in live performance, and for print publication–formed the foundation of my knowledge of how the music industry works. These experiences also made me restless for opportunities to make music that focused more on the artistic and theological content of the music rather than its market potential. It was this desire to make music unto the Lord–in a more artistic, innovative, and profound way–that would eventually lead me away from the music industry in Nashville and on a distinctively different musical journey.
September 08, 2009
Albert Mohler on President Obama's Education Speech
Dr. Mohler writes that President Obama's message on education today "should be welcomed by America's parents, both Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives." But he also sounds a more cautious note (referring to the initial inclusion of remarks that students "help the President achieve his goals"):
Children are to be asked to help the President meet his goals the day before the President puts his administration on the line for his controversial health-care reform effort? Conspiracy? No. Horrible timing? Yes. Administration slow to get it? Obviously.Mohler's conclusion:
Barack Obama is President of the United States. Christians must be the first to pray for this president and to model respect for the presidency, even when we must disagree with the President's policies and proposals. Given what this president intends to say tomorrow to America's students, count me as one who hopes many are listening. If even a few young hearts are encouraged, those moments will be worth all the controversy.Read the whole thing.
President Obama's Education Speech is Great
Read the text before you critique it. I think it is a remarkably outstanding speech; indeed, a gift of God's common grace to American students. A couple of excerpts:
"I’ve talked about your parents’ responsibility for making sure you stay on track, and get your homework done, and don’t spend every waking hour in front of the TV or with that Xbox....But at the end of the day, we can have the most dedicated teachers, the most supportive parents, and the best schools in the world - and none of it will matter unless all of you fulfill your responsibilities."The question is not: Should a president be able to address American students this way? Rather, the question is: Why has such a message been so rarely delivered by a U.S. president in the last 20 some years? Arguably, the last time was George H.W. Bush in 1991, which House Majority leader at the time, Dick Gephardt (D-Mo.), called "paid political advertising.""Maybe you could be a good writer - maybe even good enough to write a book or articles in a newspaper - but you might not know it until you write a paper for your English class. Maybe you could be an innovator or an inventor - maybe even good enough to come up with the next iPhone or a new medicine or vaccine - but you might not know it until you do a project for your science class. Maybe you could be a mayor or a Senator or a Supreme Court Justice, but you might not know that until you join student government or the debate team....And no matter what you want to do with your life – I guarantee that you’ll need an education to do it."
This link lists a number of media reports from 1991 which show the remarkably ironic similarity in the presidential messages and the reaction by the opposing political party.
John Piper is similarly impressed with Obama's education speech.
Related: My previous reflections on the permissibility of the president addressing American students on taking responsibility for their education.
September 06, 2009
Interview With Randy Alcorn
Randy Alcorn is the founder and director of Eternal Perspectives Ministries, a Bible-believing, Christ-centered nonprofit organization with two goals: (1) to teach the principles of God's Word, emphasizing an eternal viewpoint; (2) to reach the needy in Christ's name.
If you buy this book, you won't enrich Mr. Alcorn at all, as the book includes this note in the opening pages:
"One hundred percent of the royalties from this book will be given to promote good, oppose evil, and relieve suffering around the world."That's not surprising for those of you who know of Randy Alcorn's longstanding generosity. If you are not familiar with Mr. Alcorn, he is the author of a wide range of books, both fiction and non-fiction, some for adults and others for children. For a taste of his heartbeat and testimony, listen to these two messages from the 2004 Desiring God Conference on money, ministry, and the magnificence of Christ.
Andy Naselli has interviewed Randy Alcorn about his new book, If God Is Good: Faith in the Midst of Suffering and Evil
. Andy asks Mr. Alcorn: 1. What do you think of the books currently in print on the topic of God, suffering and evil?
2. What distinct contributions does If God Is Good make to the existing body of books on this subject?
3. How would you briefly summarize If God Is Good?
Alcorn's reply:
The book addresses what is arguably the greatest issue in human history: the problem of evil and suffering. The question is this: Why would an all-good and all-powerful (and all-knowing/all-wise) God create or permit a world with so much evil and suffering? This is not merely a problem, but the problem. Not only do atheists raise it, a poll of Christians revealed it is the question people would most like to ask God.God promises to return and finalize his redemption of his once-good creation, to remove once and for all the evil and suffering under the Curse. In eternity he will reveal to us the riches of his grace in Christ, and we will see firsthand that the temporary evil and suffering will have yielded an eternal joy beyond what could otherwise have ever been known.
4. What are some factors that led you to write on suffering and evil?
5. What would you say is the most unusual chapter in the book?
6. You asked a variety of readers go through early drafts of your manuscript, critiquing you and suggesting changes. How helpful was this?
7. You interviewed many sufferers and tell many people’s stories in the book. Why was that important to you?
8. Many readers of this blog are familiar with John Piper's resources on suffering. How does your view compare to his view theologically and pastorally?
9. What are some ways that you hope If God Is Good will serve people?
10. You quote a great deal of Scripture in the book and also cite many theologians. Why is this important to you?
As you might suspect, it is a fairly long interview. And it is followed by a few videos of Alcorn answering various questions. Thanks, Andy and Randy, for the great material!
Students Should Hear Their President's Speech on Tuesday
On Tuesday, September 8, President Obama is set to address the nation's K-12 students in a 12:00 (EDT) speech. The White House says: "The President will talk directly to students across the country on the importance of taking responsibility for their education, challenging them to set goals and do everything they can to succeed." Many conservatives have reacted negatively, suggesting Obama will use this opportunity to "indoctrinate" students in partisan politics.
Let's step back for a moment. President Reagan (and his wife) told high school students to "just say no" to drugs. In 1991, President George H.W. Bush made a national speech, urging students to study hard, avoid taking drugs, and disregard peers who look down on being smart. Remember how frustrating it was when the last President's every action was greeted with a torrent of intemperate criticism? Shouldn't we be more prudent and mature in our response?
I am thankful that President Obama is lending his extraordinary positional power (not to mention his obvious oratorical gifts) in the service of promoting students taking responsibility for their education. It is a message that is sorely needed, particularly in the inner cities of this country where many are trapped in a vicious cycle of failure. If the result of the President's speech is that students passing classes rather than joining gangs and dropping out, will we not all be better off? If the academic achievement of African American young men in particular is enhanced by seeing a black President exhort them to stay away from gangs and drugs, to work hard, and to not make excuses for failure, would that not be a wonderful thing?
It is my understanding that schools are providing alternative activities for children whose parents object to them hearing the speech. But if my children were of school age, I'd hope for them to hear the president's speech.
HT: John Piper, who hopes his daughter hears the speech
Update: The text of the President's ~18-minute speech, as prepared for delivery.
Update #2: I think the speech is great.
The Best Article on Health Care in America
Is written by business man David Goldhill (Democrat) in this month's The Atlantic. The ~10,000 word article is entitled "How American Health Care Killed My Father". The executive summary:
After the needless death of his father, the author, a business executive, began a personal exploration of a health-care industry that for years has delivered poor service and irregular quality at astonishingly high cost. It is a system, he argues, that is not worth preserving in anything like its current form. And the health-care reform now being contemplated will not fix it. Here’s a radical solution to an agonizing problem.It takes a while to read, but is well worth it. It is as fair, balanced, and educational an assessment as I've ever read on the health care issue. And it presents a solution as bold and holistic as I've ever heard. John Schwenkler of The American Conservative calls this article "Maybe the Best Thing I’ve Read on Health Care Reform." Schwenkler's has a ten-point summary:
1. We spend too much money on health care.
2. We treat “health insurance” and “health care” as synonymous, but they shouldn’t be.
3. There is a massive moral hazard problem.
4. We’re the only ones who can pay.
5. Governments can’t do enough reduce costs.
6. Regulation limits competitiveness.
7. Medical providers work to serve the people who pay them, not the people in their care.
8. The costs of medical technologies are vastly inflated.
9. The present push for “comprehensive” reform will do nothing to solve the underlying problems.
10. The proper response is a shift toward consumer-driven care, with subsidies for the poor and a single program of truly catastrophic insurance available to all.
Who else is singing the praises of Goldhill's proposals? The left-leaning Huffington Post linked to it, as did David Brooks (NY Times), as did the conservative Weekly Standard. And many others from both the left and the right, which in itself is impressive. If Obama went this way, I'd support it in a heartbeat.
Read the whole thing.
HT: JT
September 05, 2009
AP News Picks Up The Early Marriage Theme
Associated Press writer Eric Gorski:
When Margie and Stephen Zumbrun were battling the urge to have premarital sex, a pastor counseled them to control themselves. The couple signed a purity covenant.Gorski goes on to talk about Regnerus' Christianity Today article, The Case For Early Marriage (which we previously discussed). He also quotes Glenn Stanton (director of family formation studies for Focus on the Family), Michael Lawrence (associate pastor at Capital Hill Baptist Church), and Jimmy Hester (co-founder of True Love Waits). Read the whole thing.Then, when the two got engaged and Margie went wedding dress shopping, a salesperson called her "the bride who looks like she's 12." Nonchurch friends said that, at 22, she was rushing things.
The agonizing message to a young Christian couple in love: Sex can wait, but so can marriage.
"It's unreasonable to say, 'Don't do anything ... and wait until you have degrees and you're in your 30s to get married,'" said Margie Zumbrun, who did wait for sex, and married Stephen fresh out of Purdue University. "I think that's just inviting people to have sex and feel like they're bad people for doing it."
September 03, 2009
SBTS Panel Responds to N.T. Wright on Justification
The panel was moderated by Dr. Albert Mohler and consisted of Dr. Denny Burk, Dr. Tom Schreiner, Dr. Mark Seifrid, and Dr. Brian Vickers. Here is the video of their approximately one hour discussion:
The men on the panel interact on John Piper's The Future of Justification: A Response to N. T. Wright (Crossway, 2007 -- available for only $6.30! Skip your lunch today and buy it) and the response to that volume by N.T. Wright, Justification: God's Plan and Paul's Vision (IVP, 2009).
HT: Denny Burk
What Will We Suffer if We Refuse to Suffer for Christ?
A Christian dies for their faith somewhere in the world at a rate of approximately one every 3-4 minutes (160,000/year). David Sitton writes:
What will I suffer if I refuse to suffer for Christ? What will I lose if I refuse to lose my life with Jesus for the nations? What “glory” (Paul’s word – Romans 8:18) will I miss out on if I shirk suffering for the gospel?Read the whole thing.There is something in suffering for the gospel that produces supernatural affection and compassion within you towards those who are harming you. At the same time, when one can praise God instead of denying him in the midst of suffering, unbelievers take notice. Some are inevitably saved, which generates more persecution, which in turn, fuels an even more passionate scattering of the gospel. The result is that whole new regions are quickly populated with believers and churches. This is how suffering and persecution nearly always advances both personal sanctification in the sufferer and the speedier, wide-ranging expansion of the gospel among the persecutors.
The Case For Early Marriage - Mark Regnerus
Mark Regnerus, Ph.D., is an associate professor of sociology at the University of Texas, Austin, where he lives with his wife, Deeann, and their three children. He has written a fantastic article for Christianity Today called The Case For Early Marriage. It encapsulates one of the central messages of With One Voice: the biblical association of intimacy with marriage, along with the formative and stabilizing benefits of marriage, suggest that its preferable to enter the lifelong bond early in the adult years, not later. After addressing the devaluing of marriage in our culture (which is a greater problem and probably a precursor to the rising acceptance of same-sex marriage), Regnerus addresses the "elephant in the room"--the relative absence of Christian men:
Among evangelical churchgoers, there are about three single women for every two single men....Regnerus notes that though we tell young people marriage is a "big deal" ("don't rush into a relationship" or "first loves aren't likely the best fit" or "you have plenty of time"), we fail to mentor them about the rigors that any marriage will invariably face. Young adults therefore underestimate the role that commitment plays, as opposed to romantic feelings, which "may lead us out of a marriage as quickly as they lead us into one." Citing the troubling statistic that 90% of Americans engage in premarital sex (a number slightly lower among Christians - 80%), Regnerus explains:Given this unfavorable ratio, and the plain fact that men are, on average, ready for sex earlier in relationships than women are, many young Christian women are being left with a dilemma: either commence a sexual relationship with a decent, marriage-minded man before she would prefer to—almost certainly before marriage—or risk the real possibility that, in holding out for a godly, chaste, uncommon man, she will wait a lot longer than she would like. Plenty will wait so long as to put their fertility in jeopardy. By that time, the pool of available men is hardly the cream of the crop—and rarely chaste.....
Men get the idea that they can indeed find the ideal woman if they are patient enough. Life expectancies nearing 80 years prompt many to dabble with relationships in their 20s rather than commit to a life of "the same thing" for such a long time. Men have few compelling reasons to mature quickly. Marriage seems an unnecessary risk to many of them, even Christians. Sex seldom requires such a steep commitment.
As a result, many men postpone growing up. Even their workplace performance is suffering: earnings for 25- to 34-year-old men have fallen by 20 percent since 1971, even after accounting for inflation. No wonder young women marry men who are on average at least two years older than they. Unfortunately, a key developmental institution for men—marriage—is the very thing being postponed, thus perpetuating their adolescence.
Most young Americans no longer think of marriage as a formative institution, but rather as the institution they enter once they think they are fully formed. Increasing numbers of young evangelicals think likewise, and, by integrating these ideas with the timeless imperative to abstain from sex before marriage, we've created a new optimal life formula for our children: Marriage is glorious, and a big deal. But it must wait. And with it, sex. Which is seldom as patient.He then spends the rest of the article responding to five objections to early marriage:
(1) Economic insecurity
(2) Immaturity
(3) A Poor Match
(4) Marrying for Sex
(5) Unrealistic expectations
Read the whole thing. Extremely provocative and an important, timely message.
Regnerus is the author of Forbidden Fruit: Sex & Religion in the Lives of American Teenagers
September 02, 2009
New Godawa Book - Word Pictures
Earlier this summer I had the opportunity to meet and speak with Brian Godawa, screenwriter of To End All Wars
So I'm delighted that Mr. Godawa has published a new book with IVP called Word Pictures: Knowing God Through Story & Imagination
Some of the endorsements:
"Brian Godawa is that rare breed--a philosopher-artist--who opens our eyes to the aesthetic dimension of spirituality. Cogently argued and fun to read, this book analyzes the rich variety of literary genres found in Scripture itself. Godawa shows convincingly that God interacts with us as whole persons, not only through didactic teaching but also through metaphor, symbol and sacrament."
—Nancy R. Pearcey, Francis A. Schaeffer Scholar, World Journalism Institute, and author of Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from Its Cultural Captivity
"Brian Godawa's book is an exploration of the literary nature of the Bible. It is a spirited and balanced defense of the imagination as a potential conveyer of truth. There is a lot of good literary theory in the book, as well as an autobiographical story line. Pervading all this wealth is a sense of the author's energetic mind. The thoroughness of research makes the book a triumph of scholarship as well."
—Leland Ryken, Clyde S. Kilby Professor of English, Wheaton College, and editor of The Christian Imagination: The Practice of Faith in Literature and Writing (Writers' Palette Book)
Read the publisher's description or the first chapter.
The Paradox of the Protestant Work Ethic
John Piper on the paradoxical connection between a God-dependent theology and focused energy in the service of productivity and industry:
Three Events - Three Cities - Three Liveblogs
The White Horse Inn folks highlight a trio of conferences featuring both R.C. Sproul and Mike Horton.
The 2009 Ligonier West Coast Conference in Seattle, WA - September 25-26, 2009.
Theme: Is There Life After Death?
The 2010 Ligonier West Coast Conference in Los Angeles, CA - March 26-27, 2010
Theme: Are We Practicing Christless Christianity?
The 2010 Ligonier National Conference in Orlando, FL - June 17-19, 2010
Theme: Tough Questions Christians Face
As it turns out, I'm slated to live-blog all three of these events. So if you're there, please come say hello. I may look like I'm frantically typing, but interrupt me anyway.
Nine Marks Journal - Church Discipline
Church discipline is the subject of the September/October 2009 issue of the Nine Marks Journal.
September 01, 2009
Nine Marks Workshop in Riverside, CA
A workshop entitled Building Healthy Churches will be held at Fellowship Baptist Church in Riverside, CA on November 6-7, 2009. The speakers are Mark Dever, Greg Gilbert, and Rick Holland. Register online by October 30. $45 for the general public and $35 for students enrolled in a minimum of 9 credit hours.
Location:
Fellowship Baptist Church
3624 Arlington Avenue
Riverside, CA 92506
Check out the schedule.
The Influence of Christianity on Civilization
Kevin DeYoung reviews what sounds like a very interesting book: Human Accomplishment: The Pursuit of Excellence in the Arts and Sciences, 800 B.C. to 1950
With regard to purpose, my position does not require that the secular life be a life without purpose. Rather, I argue that it is harder to find that purpose if one is an atheist or agnostic than if one is a believer. It is harder still to maintain attention to that purpose over years of effort. Devotion to a human cause, whether social justice, the environment, the search for truth, or an abstract humanism, is by its nature less compelling than devotion to God. Here, Christianity has its most potent advantage. The incentives of forgiveness of sin and eternal life are just about as powerful as incentives get. The nonbeliever has to make do with comparably tepid alternatives.DeYoung makes other interesting observations from this book. Read the whole thing or check out the bookWith regard to autonomy, I do not see Christianity as its only source. It is easily possible to believe in one’s efficacy as an autonomous actor by holding the secular Greek ideal of the human....Possible–but, as in the case of purpose, harder if one is not a believing Christian. For evidence, look around at today’s intellectual climate in both Europe and the United States. “Unique,” “free,” “rational,” “powers of observation,” “critical inquiry”–every one of those words and phrases is problematic in today’s postmodern intellectual milieu. It is much easier to use them with confidence if one is a Christian, or still clings to the Christian/humanistic synthesis of early modernity.
.
Obama's Decline Is Due To Liberal Policies
On August 25, President Obama had a +9.8% spread (approval vs. disapproval) according to a rolling average of various polls. Today, that number is only 8.6%. Two good pieces which explain why:
1. David Brooks (NY Times):
From the stimulus to health care, it has joined itself at the hip to the liberal leadership in Congress. The White House has failed to veto measures, like the pork-laden omnibus spending bill, that would have demonstrated independence and fiscal restraint. By force of circumstances and by design, the president has promoted one policy after another that increases spending and centralizes power in Washington....All presidents fall from their honeymoon highs, but in the history of polling, no newly elected American president has fallen this far this fast.
2. Steve Chapman (Chicago Tribune):
The reason John Kerry lost and Obama won...was not liberal voters.....while Kerry had a 9-point edge over his Republican opponent among moderates, Obama carried them by 21 points. Obama also did significantly better among conservatives than Kerry.......In 1998, 61 percent of Americans said they had confidence in the federal government's ability to handle domestic problems. On the eve of the 2008 election, only 48 percent felt that way.Even amid the worst recession in decades, most have not changed their minds. Today, more than half say the president's policies go too far in expanding the federal government, and his popularity has declined as a result.
Sing Praise To The Lord - Dan Goeller
Two things draw me to powerful, Scripture-laden worship songs: (1) Music has always had a profound impact on how I feel and think--my affections, and the object of my affections. (2) We were made to praise that in which we delight. Scriptural and theologically-rich lyrics, set to a worshipful tune, have an inexplicable way of lifting my affections back to God, and putting gospel-oriented thoughts in my mind--thoughts which readily turn to meditations on the One in whom we live, move, and have our being.
It is in that vein that I heartily recommend Sing Praise To The Lord by Dan Goeller. The album contains seventeen (17) marvelously worshipful songs. The instrumentation is diverse and the melodies are both catchy and musically satisfying. The tempo of the songs greatly varies throughout the album; some make use of an assortment of percussion instruments, others are slow and contemplative. Several lead vocalists are featured in the different songs and a few employ the simple reading of Scripture set to music. Others have a choral flavor, with what sounds like a full range of vocalists (from bass to soprano). Best of all, each song, with the exception of two instrumental interludes, is a meditation on a specific Scripture or cluster of Scriptures directly from the book of Psalms. And each song blends naturally into the next, seamlessly weaving together the various musical themes.
1. Shout for Joy (Psalm 100:1-5)
2. My Soul Thirsts For You (Psalm 63:1, 4, 7-8)
3. Be Still (Psalm 37:7, 62:1, 5; 91:1)
4. Rescue Me (Psalm 31:2-4, 9-13)
5. The Lord is My Rock (Psalm 18:1-3; 27:1-3; 5-6; 46:1)
6. I Cry To You (Psalm 40:12; 130:1-2)
7. Search Me, O God (Instrumental Interlude)
8. Have Mercy On Me (Psalm 51:1-2, 7, 10, 12; 139:23-24)
9. Open My Eyes (Psalm 119:10-11, 18, 34, 37, 77)
10. Trust In The Lord (Psalm 19:14, 37:3-6; 55:22)
11. How Majestic Is Your Name (Psalm 8:1, 3-6, 9:1-2)
12. Let Us Sing To The Lord (Psalm 9:1, 19:1, 24:1-2; 33:6, 9; 57:5; 92:4; 95:1-2, 5)
13. My Heart Is Troubled (Instrumental Interlude)
14. Abandoned (Psalm 6:2-3, 22:1-2, 19)
15. Your Promise Gives Me Life (Psalm 34:17-18, 94:19, 119:41, 50, 114; 139:7-10)
16. You Are Always With Me (Psalm 16:1-2, 8-11)
17. Let All That I Am Praise The Lord (Psalm 103:1-4, 6, 8, 19-20, 22, 150:6)
As you can see, the songs have a range of thematic elements (from unbridled praise and adoration to intense supplication). Listen to free samples of every song. Classical music lovers (like me) and those who either sing in or enjoy choirs will particularly like this great album. For everyone else, I encourage you to stretch and expand your musical repertoire by taking time to Sing Praise To The Lord with the help of these songs.
Starting next week, I'll be interviewing Dan Goeller about his musical training, his theology/philosophy of worship music, his diverse career, and his current projects.
Search
Categories
Archives
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
Recent Posts
- Interview with David Sitton - Part 2
- 2009 West Coast Conference - Session 8 - R.C. Sproul
- 2009 West Coast Conference - Session 7 - Alistair Begg
- 2009 West Coast Conference - Breakout Session - Jason Stellman
- 2009 West Coast Conference - Session 6 - Q&A - Begg, Horton, Sproul
- 2009 West Coast Conference - Session 5 - Michael Horton
- John Piper and Doug Wilson Discuss Collision
- Ligonier West Coast Conference - Session 4 - R.C. Sproul
- Ligonier West Coast Conference - Session 3 - Q&A Begg & Horton
- Ligonier West Coast Conference - Session 2 - Michael Horton