Michael, I’m reading the CT article on Fred Rogers, and this quote from William Orr struck me:

‘Evil simply disintegrates in the presence of forgiveness. When you look with accusing eyes at your neighbor, that is what evil would want, because the more the accuser’—which, of course, is the word Satan in Hebrew—’can spread the accusing spirit, the greater evil spreads.’ Dr. Orr said, ‘On the other hand, if you can look with the eyes of the Advocate on your neighbor, those are the eyes of Jesus.’

I heard this dispy guy on the radio trying to parse Daniel’s visions, and I got to thinking. Then I stumbled on my copy of Schaeffer’s Genesis in Space and Time and got to thinking some more, about Robert’s statements. Then I got to thinking about how much time we spend here on end-times and creation.

It strikes me that Christians devote an inordinate amount of time on questions like, “How did things begin?” and “How will things end?” We don’t spend anywhere near as much time on the truly important question: What are we supposed to do? Yet much of the Bible is devoted to telling us exactly what God requires of us. This ties in with my criticism of Blackaby, as much as it does my frustration over the origins question or over prophecy debates. Now that I’ve re-read Schaeffer, I’m more convinced that he’s right: the point of Genesis 1 is not to relate how God acted, in terms of a specific historical transcription of events. The point is, however, that God has acted in creation, and that his action is historical, in the sense that it is a part of the flow of time. I’m convinced that Schaeffer would ignore the whole young earth/old earth debate, and be frustrated with Ross as much as with Ham and Hovid, because he understood that the fundamental issue of evangelism – and Schaeffer understands his own role primarily to be evangelistic – is to get out the message that God exists, and He enters into history to meet us.

If I had more time and discipline, I’d work this idea up into a full IM article. (I’m not sure if I’m saying that to excuse me from doing it or to goad you into encouraging me to do it…)

Greg: I just pulled the word stone from the top of my head. I didn’t mean the law. I could have just as easily said cornbread. But anyway my question is: Is worship that is not commanded by or honoring to the One being worshipped really worship? God Himself has made clear that the ceremonial law and sacrificial system are finished. I could worship God by painting yellow dots on midgets foreheads, but is that really worship? I can call it anything I like, and in this country I can do it as long as the midgets don’t object, but can I really decide how to worship? Didn’t Saul lose his kingship for this kind of arrogance? God says don’t do this anymore, the Jews say, thanks for the advice but we’ll keep doing it anyway. Is that worship?

Scott: Why is it that the whacko groups always compare everyone that disagrees with them with Hitler? To animals, all people are Hitler? Think about this. Isn’t this just like saying, “black people? they all look alike?” Oops! That was not politically correct.

Jim: I am not certain the Concorde is such a bad plane. I think we are just a bit sensitive in our news about anything that happens with one, despite the fact that they have a better safety rating than “normal jets.” I think it is a rather expensive way to fly, however.

Richard: LaHaye is a moron. The rapture theology is relatively new, at least as a big movement. But, accepting bad eschatology and reading bad fiction are not the same thing. The man has gotten quite rich off the series. NOTE: The other “author” wrote all the words; LaHaye just rode the coat-tails, by being the “bible expert,” and gets half the profit. What a shame.

Bill: I did not mean to imply that the law, written on stone, meant worshipping stone. I do think the Jews are worshipping the Father, so we will be in disagreement. I also believe that they are going about things the wrong way, which we can certainly agree on.

Ken: The Jewish people got the law so they could understand the need for a savior. They missed the point when they did not see Jesus as the Messiah, so they still focus on legalism (at least the orthodox). But, this does not mean the covenant has changed. There is still the sacrifice, but the lamb is now Jesus, the one perfect sacrifice for all times.

CT’s Nice pieces about the ministry and faith of Fred Rogers.

Six Limos. 1 giant ego (among other things). It’s J-lo avoiding exercise.

If you don’t want your kid harssed in the Maine public schools, don’t try Des Moines.

Internet Monk News Room (2-29-03) Barna, Warren to Produce Offspring
—-Chicago,Ill—- Church growth researcher George Barna and best-selling author and Saddleback Valley Church pastor Rick Warren have announced that they are mixing their DNA in a North Chicago laboratory in an effort to produce a child.

Barna said that if the procedures are successful, he and Warren will be the parents of a child who knows all and does everything right. “The next step would be to clone the child and make it available to pastor search committees.” Warren, who donated his DNA yesterday, said that the project was a “purpose driven” vision he and Barna conceived during a recent church growth conference.

Warren also recently announced plans to seek nomination as the next pope. “I feel the Roman Catholic Church could benefit from some of my ideas, and I really like the housing arrangements.” Barna is planning to have himself declared “supernaturally intelligent” at the next meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society. (IMNR)

It has been said that a politician governs with a view to the next election but a statesman governs with a view to the next generation. Regardless of one’s views on this war it is clear that Tony Blair is a statesman. The guy may well be committing political suicide but he is determined to do what he thinks is right and best for today and for the years ahead.

Here is Rather’s own WSJ Online piece describing his interview with the monster.

Tony Blair: “The level of their suffering is beyond anything that British people can possible envisage, let alone understand his obsession to develop and possess weapons of mass destruction. Do the British public know that it is normal practice for Saddam’s regime to demand the cost of the bullet used of in the execution of their beloved family members and not even to allow a proper funeral?

If the international community does not take note of the Iraqi people’s plight but continues to address it casually this will breed terrorism and extremism within the Iraqi people. This cannot be allowed to happen”.

Remember Kosovo where we were told war would de-stabilise the whole of the Balkans and that region now has the best chance of peace in over 100 years?

Remember Afghanistan, where now, despite all the huge problems, there are three million children in school, including for the first time in over two decades one and a half million girls and where two million Afghan exiles from the Taliban have now returned.

So if the result of peace is Saddam staying in power, not disarmed, then I tell you there are consequences paid in blood for that decision too. But these victims will never be seen. They will never feature on our TV screens or inspire millions to take to the streets. But they will exist nonetheless.

Ridding the world of Saddam would be an act of humanity. It is leaving him there that is in truth inhumane.

And if it does come to this, let us be clear: we should be as committed to the humanitarian task of rebuilding Iraq for the Iraqi people as we have been to removing Saddam.

And there will be no stability in the Middle East until there is lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians based on a secure Israel and a viable Palestinian state. I promise we will not rest until we have used every drop of our influence to achieve it.”

What does one man telling the truth about the world sound like? Victor Davis Hanson takes a survey of the whole scene and wakes up those who will hear. We are reliving times past. This is precious truth in a world of hype, spin and lies. Take it all in.

Jonah on Garofalo. If this is how the left is thinking, things are in bad shape. Garofalo’s moral reasoning- not her sincerity- but her moral reasoning, is just….well…..breathtaking in barbarity.

Dehrer on Muslim Eschatology.

Dan Rather’s questions to Saddam. Not the answers. Just the questions. Read and decide for yourself.

RE: Face transplants. If that can be done it’s amazing but it does bring up some issues. For one thing the donor’s family would know that somewhere out there there is someone walking around with their loved one’s face. They might recognise their dead loved one on the street. The emotional impact of this seems greater than knowing someone’s walking around with a loved one’s heart or other internal organ that can’t be seen. Interesting!

Hi Lee. Welcome back. Thanks for the story.

Internetmonk News Room (2-28-03) Lahaye Raptured. Tribulation Begins.
—-Dateline: Dallas, TX.—- World famous prophecy author Tim Lahaye was raptured today while giving an interview to Beliefnet.com. His last words, caught on tape, were: “And at this point, well, I’m more popular than Jesus. Everyone knows that.” Lahaye immediately vanished.

Lahaye’s co-author, Jerry Jenkins, was told of the rapture moments later, and was too emotional to make a comment to the media. The impact of Lahaye’s disappearance on the remaining Left Behind series remains to be seen.

Lahaye joins the ranks of Enoch and Elijah in being caught up to heaven without dying. According to Lahaye’s theology, the rapture signals the beginnng of the tribulation. Reformed and Amillenial churches issued a statement saying “We told you so.”

I’m sure this news made Wacko Jacko’s day. If I were Elizabeth Taylor, I’d watch my back.

If you ever doubt the depravity of man from the start, volunteer to watch the two year olds at your church’s nursery.

Rock on, Kurt. I think that the most important thing that we need to convince non-believers of is the reality of human depravity. When I say that people are evil my Dad scoffs. I think once a person comes to grips with the fact that people are not good, it’s almost a downhill ride to believing that Christ is the only source of salvation.

Ok, I think Dr. LaHaye has some things out of perspective…here’s a quote: I believe we’ve been silent too long about the mercy of God and overexaggerating the wrath of God.
If anything, I think Christians do just the opposite. The big lie that the world believes is that we’re all okay, and that God’s a big fuzzy wuzzy and He loves you so much that that’s all you have to know. A loving merciful God wouldn’t send anybody to hell, would He? Bologna. I think the biggest obstacle so many have in coming to Christ is having to believe that, hey, we’re all sinners, and God is good and right to destroy us. Yes, God is infinitely loving and merciful, but I don’t think we can truly grasp this mercy until we first grasp the judgement that we all deserve.

In the interest of equal time, I present the answer to PETA: Vegetarianism is genocide.

All, I just met with my supervisor. I am officially retained. So far, only one person I know was released (a real injustice in his case, so please pray for him – his name is Ravi.) We’re all breathing a huge sigh of relief. Praise the Lord!

Yeah, Mr. LaHaye… and then there are those who believe in taking the Bible piece by piece and trying to assemble scriptures to fit a particular view of eschatology. I’m not naming any names, tho…

So the books have sold 5 million copies. 10 volumes. No one person has 2 books. Maybe, o Theology Master, only 5 million people agree with you. Or maybe, they’re bored, and wanted to read some light fiction. If Stephen King outsells you, does that mean that more people are interested in mass murders than in rapture.

By the way… PETA is now comparing eating meat to the Jewish Holocaust. The Jews are appropriately thrilled to be given consideration by PETA. Especially after they showed such concern for the people killed by the donkey bomb.

The Brits are taking the Concord out of service because of falling demand and safety problems. The French claim nothing’s wrong, even though the planes are falling apart in the air. Anyone noticing a pattern here?

Tim LaHaye on biblical literalism and Reformed propaganda.

Interviewer: And yet the Rapture isn’t considered orthodox Christian theology ……

LaHaye: I think that is an erroneous conclusion propagated by the amillennialist and reform church movements. The truth is, Christianity is divided between those who take the Bible literally and those who take it figuratively. Those who take it literally are far more in the majority, if you’re talking about evangelical Christians—Southern Baptists, Assemblies of God and independent churches, like the Brethren. There are a lot of denominational groups that accept this, so I don’t think it’s fair to say [it’s a minority view]. Lets face it, we’ve sold more than five million copies of Left Behind books, and they say every copy is read by 10 people. Five million times 10 is a lot of people.

The whole interview is here. Aaaaaaarrrrrrrrgggggggghhhhhhh!!!!!

Greg: I’m in cautious disagreement. If someone wants to worship a stone, they will do so, but to what end? True worship in my opinion is somehow efficacious and can only be true worship if it accepted by the One being worshipped. True worship of the Father can only come through Christ so while the Jew claims to be worshipping the one true God, and historically has, I don’t believe he really is.

Thief breaks into church. Steals credit card. Uses it to purchase Bible study books – in Kentucky!

To me, the question of what God can do to effect someone’s salvation isn’t the issue. God can use any means to bring someone to faith, and as Michael points out, the Calvinist view certainly explains that process more effectively than the arminian view. The question isn’t whether God can impart saving grace to those who have never heard, but whether he does do that. Of course, we can’t know that.

I don’t know if belief contributes to salvation, but the bible makes pretty clear it is necessary for salvation. “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved

I don’t think we can base our assumptions on what God can do ,but on what He has revealed and what He has shown Himself to do historically. God can just plant the message and history of Christ in the minds of humanly unreachable people groups. We just don’t know if He has ever done that or will.

Gregory: Good point about 2 Cor. 3:3. I will use that in class, also.

Anyone: Someone point me to some good commentary, etc. on the Eternal Covenant, esp. Hebrews 13:20.

In the “It does not matter whether you think you are right, or the law thinks you are right, we think you are wrong” category:

``(Augusta National) should not be shocked by the KKK’s endorsement,’’ Burk told the newspaper. ``They have behaved in a manner that attracts this type of support. They are going to have a real circus if this goes on.

``If I was Augusta National, I would spare my golfers, my members, my patrons, the city and citizens of Augusta, and the tournament all the trouble by simply opening membership immediately to women or announcing a plan to do so in a reasonable amount of time.’‘

And, if you do not, we will use this to blackmail you.

Michael: I do not see that either side has a lock on this, but I will not try to resurrect a dead horse. BTW, are you really surprised that outside of the salvation choice/predestination issue, that we agree on so much? ;->

Ken: The writer in Hebrews 8 is quoting Jeremiah 31, which is a prophecy of Christ. In my reading, the fulfillment of Jeremiah comes through in 2 Corinthians 3:3 You show that you are a letter from Christ, the result of our ministry, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts. This new covenant deals with the law being written on our hearts through the grace of God. And, since it is expressed on the heart, not on stone, it is superior, as it deals with a very personal relationship with God. But, it is still the same covenant, just expressed differently.

Both law and grace deal with man’s faith in God. Man messed up the law and used it to constrain the Spirit. Look at the Pharisees when they rebuked Jesus for healing on the Sabbath. God’s reasoning for keeping the Sabbath holy was for man to focus on Him, not so they could punish those who lifted a finger.

Bill: The Jew of today misses the significance of Jesus, as Messiah. Looking for a earthly king that would return Israel to its glory, they miss the bigger picture. To the Jew, Jesus is a failed Messiah. But, this is a misreading of the Old Testament. Do they still worship God, the Father? Certainly! Does the fact that they do not see the divinity of Christ mean that they are not worshipping the true God when they worship the Father? I would say no. They are missing the fulfillment of the covenant, which is a shame.

Jim: I would say that there are more conservatives than liberals, if we need labels, but not that we are a conservative blog. I just think Ariana Huffman is whacked. I read her commentary this week along side of Jonah Goldberg’s. Jonah put forth the case for war, and Ariana claimed that this war was set up to line Cheney’s pocket. As she is a commentary writer, she does not have to substantiate what she writes; if she were writing normal journalistic pieces, much of what she writes borders on libel or slander.

On a related note, I caught Jeneane Garofalo on Fox & Friends the other day (viewed on the website as I am at work at this time). While I believe Jeneane was parroting many things, the host looked like a moron with his attacks. I really dislike hosts that feel that attack is a valid way of showing the superiority of your ideas. Dumb! Dumb! Dumb!

From the RCC Catechism: Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience – those too may achieve eternal salvation…
“Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men.

I have always found that one of the great advantages of believing in the Calvinistic view of Salvation, was that this problem was more easily resolved. God saves sinners by grace through faith through the work of Christ. If you think that BELIEVING actually CONTRIBUTES to salvation, there is a problem. But if you believe faith is the means to a salvation TOTALLY OUTSIDE of you, it resolves more easily.

Judd: Let’s go back to the year 1000 a.d. North/central/South America. There are several million people living on this side of the Atlantic. It is 1000 years after the time of Christ. Piper says none of these people can be saved. Why? Because- in his view and the view of many other evangelicals- you cannot be saved without hearing about the historical Jesus. No one on the American continent could have been saved before 1492 a.d. Impossible.

I disagree. Here’s my case.

Acts 10:1-5 ESV Acts 10:1 At Caesarea there was a man named Cornelius, a centurion of what was known as the Italian Cohort, 2 a devout man who feared God with all his household, gave alms generously to the people, and prayed continually to God. 3 About the ninth hour of the day he saw clearly in a vision an angel of God come in and say to him, “Cornelius.” 4 And he stared at him in terror and said, “What is it, Lord?” And he said to him, “Your prayers and your alms have ascended as a memorial before God. 5 And now send men to Joppa and bring one Simon who is called Peter

Now what if Cornelius had fallen down the steps and broken his neck? Would he be in hell? Piper says yes. I say no.

Revelation 5:9-10 9 And they sang a new song, saying, “Worthy are you to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation, 10 and you have made them a kingdom and priests to our God, and they shall reign on the earth.”

Does “every” mean every or all kinds? Here I believe it means every, including people in America 1000 a.d.

Acts 10:34-35 34 So Peter opened his mouth and said: “Truly I understand that God shows no partiality, 35 but in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him.

Do Peter’s words here mean before hearing of Jesus or after? I believe before. Piper says it means only after hearing of Jesus. I say some cannot hear, but are still given the gift of faith.

Romans 1:19-21 9 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.

Paul says men can be condemned by general revelation because there is enough “light” in general revelation to condemn. Why is there not enough light to justify, if saving faith is exercised towards what truth is known?

Romans 2:14-16 14 For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them 16 on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.

Why does the word “excuse” in this passage not support my interpretation?

In short, I believe there are persons in every age and place who have been given the gift of saving faith exercised towards what truth about God was available. I believe all those saved without knowing the name and historical circumstances of Jesus are still saved BY Jesus.

John 1:9 The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world.

This is a view held by many orthodox Christians. Socrates was a Christian before Christ one said. This is the teaching of the RCC. (I’ll post later) I do not believe this in any way discourages evangelism, but glorifies God, who is the author and the finisher of our salvation.

How was Abraham saved? He did not know anything about God, but God revealed himself and Abraham said YES to what he knew. God gave him faith and saved him. And it was all by Christ, even though Abe didn’t even know the name of God.

Hebrews 11:6 6 And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.

Hebrews 11:16 16 But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared for them a city.

Ken: Quote away. I’m not famous enough for it to matter.

Judson: Excellent point. Like I said earlier, it’s by GRACE not RACE.

Jim: Switching to butt-kickin’ mode…... (JN)

Gregory & Michael: Ah, the eternal covenant of Hebrews 13:20. But would, you agree that the O.C. is a shadow of the N.C. & the writer of Hebrews in ch. 8 says the N.C. is superior to the O.C.

Bill: May I use this quote in class: The New Covenant has swallowed up the Old.


Michael: the Southern Baptists in our men’s class would all agree that the O.T. saints were saved by faith. That much, they have learned from our Galatians study.

Biblical Literalism: Constricting the Cosmic Dance by Conrad Hyers. This is what I am ALL about right here.

Comparing Biblical and Scientific Maps of Origins by Conrad Hyers.

It may be true that scientism and evolutionism (not science and evolution) are among the causes of atheism and materialism. It is at least equally true that biblical literalism, from its earlier flat-earth and geocentric forms to its recent young-earth and flood-geology forms, is one of the major causes of atheism and materialism. Many scientists and intellectuals have simply taken the literalists at their word and rejected biblical materials as being superseded or contradicted by modern science. Without having in hand a clear and persuasive alternative, they have concluded that it is nobler to be damned by the literalists than to dismiss the best testimony of research and reason. Intellectual honesty and integrity demand it. -Conrad Hyers

Interesting article describing the RCC view of evolution. Say what you want. This is healthier.

Judd: I am going to dodge the question for the moment in the interests of 1) my current exhaustion and 2) Not turning the BHT into chaos while other good topics are on the table. Look for an e-mail.

I have thought about your post about your sweet and brilliant wife and this young earth business all day long. It has really broken my heart. In his book Creation and Time, Hugh Ross has a couple of closing chapters about his ministry to these scientists and how so many have been just beaten up by the young earthers. (I didn’t know this till today, but Duane Gish has apparently raised the possibility that if you won’t affirm 7/24/6000 you may not be received into the church.) I have received nice letters all day on that mediocre little article, including one from a guy who said the article pulled him out of a box of guilt he had been in from his fellow Chrsitians for years. My own brother walked away from the faith over a failure to get an answer to a question about evolution. These are brilliant people, with a passion for truth, many of whom are open at some point in their life, and what do they get? So sad. I have had a couple of moments of panic over my kids hearing from me something different than they hear from their biology teachers in our Christian school, but it quickly fades.

I just wish we could be honest. Just honest. Quit imposing things like this on our kids and let them work it out with assistance from honest people who want to love God with all their minds and think His thoughts after him. One thing I appreciate about Roman Catholicism. It has NEVER had this hangup since Vatican II. Maybe they learned something with that Galileo deal. We just keep doing it over and over.

The Three books that I most want to recommend on this topic:
The Meaning of Creation by Conrad Hyers (John Knox Press) This is a Grand Slam. A book I underlined till the pages were ripped. Here is a review. I could not agree more BUY THIS BOOK!

“Probably the finest book ever written on this topic. Hyers points out the hermeneutical dilemmas associated with the reading of the Genesis creation accounts. The Creation/Evolution controversy should never have arrived at a scientific level, and Hyers wants his audience to understand why. This well written work separates itself from the hodgepodge of works that have come out the past several years attempting to integrate theology and science. Hyers’ work does not add another trumpet to that redundant performance. Rather, he looks at the literary genre and how it is being violated by the literalists. He also examines how our modern literalistic culture places a harmful interpretive shade over our eyes as we read ancient texts written during a time rich with allegory. And he explains the neglect of authorial intent in the Genesis creation accounts—texts which appear to be more of a response to one or both of the ancient cosmologies neighboring the Hebrews. Hyers is sensitive to those who cling to traditional interpretations of the creation accounts in Genesis, and is careful not to insult the intelligence of anyone. Hyers is a conservative theologian, but his definition of conservative is to conserve the original meaning of the text, as opposed to conserving a traditional interpretation of the text.”

Creation and Time by Hugh Ross (Navpress). This is Ross’s book on the age of the universe, and his response to creationism. It is the most readable and pastoral of his books.(Most of his others are way too technical for me.) I find this book- while not flawless- to be wonderfully persuasive, and very moving in its appeal. BUY THIS BOOK and BUY A COPY FOR SOMEONE ELSE. (Btw, look at the reviews on Amazon, and how the creationists go after him.)

Why I Am a Christian edited by Geisler and Hoffman. (Baker) This is a book written on a high level of sophistication. It is more intellectually appealing than most of the popular treatments of the same subjects. The authors are all first class scholars. If I were going to give a book to a thinking person with some level of openness to the QUESTIONS that matter, this would be it. Don’t be derailed by the Publisher’s Weekly review. It is a very very well done book, and I think you guys who enjoy the Stand to Reason approach will like this.

These are the three books I would love to give Amy.

Gregory: I agree with every word you wrote. (Thump)

Ken Boyd: There is one covenant in the universe. It was revealed to different key persons at different points in different ways, but it was all the one Covenant between God and his people through faith in Jesus Christ. Seeing part of this truth isn’t necessarily embracing a false religion, but stopping short of the whole truth. I won’t say what God thinks of that. I am afraid some Covenant theologians and New Covenant brothers tend to be a little too dispensational if they forget that Abraham and all of us and everyone who ever will be saved are all saved in the same covenant by the same God through the same Gospel. I am afraid, however, that many Southern Baptists have been taught and told that people were saved in the OT by works, but now by faith. Piper is very good on this. That even obedience to the law was the obedience of faith.

MatthewJ: Thanks for being in here all day today. Good points every time.

Later guys…..I am still tore up over Amy and all the bright kids she represents. I’m going to the Wine Cellar.

I just went to our local movie theater this afternoon. Among the movies being shown were “Bowling for Columbine” and “Gods and Generals”. Guess which one went to see?

And- in a total about-face from my previous post- a question for the barkeep.

Michael- weeks ago you mentioned not agreeing with Piper that knowledge of the historical Jesus was necessary for salvation. Care to elaborate? Be careful, I might just agree with you. I could be a liberal after all! Egads!

Jim and Matthew: Amen! The modern state of Israel is about as Jewish as Iraq is Muslim- or as America is Christian. Jesus Christ split history in half. I believe the only old Israelites who were True Israelites were those who had been given a heart of flesh- just as the only modern Christians who are True Israelites are those who are being given hearts of flesh.

I think we have to blast through this exclusivity question as quickly as possible- because a brother or sister will not treasure their salvation if they think that membership in any cultural group is sufficient enough to merit it. Only Sovereign God marks the lambs- we have no part in it.

Present scriptures like this: “If anyone denies me before my Father in heaven, so also will I deny him”. Then let the Holy Spirit do the work. That’s acid that will eat away at this inclusivity disease.

This is getting good.

Greg: The Jew of the first century, after the crucifixion, misses the fulfillment. So, I agree that something is missing. But, he still is praying to the one God.

While I agree that this is technically true, is this Jew worshipping the true God? Is he worshipping in spirit and truth? He doesn’t have the Spirit or the truth. How much more true is that today where most Jews have heard of Jesus and rejected his claim to Messiahship.

I’ve been thinking of my statement that the New Covenant replaces the Old. I don’t like it. I think of it this way rather: The New Covenant has swallowed up the Old.

Ken B, in the spirit of Dennis Miller, re Matthew’s ”...the State of Israel as we know it has no connection to the OT or NT. It is a secular state. It is not ‘Israel’ and never will be,” if anyone disagrees with that, you have my permission to kick their axx. Call me if you need help.

Gregory, I blog-hop too fast to catch all the posts at any sight. Including this one, especially with as much traffic as we get. Are we a conservative blog?

Jim N: I read the Rogers piece. Very nice. I also read some of her other blog pieces and the build up of Ariana Huffman is a bit over the top. ;->

Richard: The Jew of the first century, after the crucifixion, misses the fulfillment. So, I agree that something is missing. But, he still is praying to the one God.

Ken: John 8 is quite specific about why the “Jews” are called children of their father the devil. If you read through the entire communication, you see a direction. Jesus fulfilled the scripture, and they should have been able to see that, had they truly been children of God and of Abraham (both mentioned in the discourse). They were blinded to the divinity of Christ, as are Jews today.

As for the new covenant better than the new, re-read old testament. You see the same covenant in both. The definition of the covenant is only realized when you look at the entire picture, as both old and new ultimately point to Christ. Whether Galatians or Hebrews, the faith of many of the old fathers shows that they “got it” and walked with God. The law was largely designed to show that man is incapable of being righteous without God (Romans). It illuminates our weaknesses, just as Christ illuminates the darkness that our lives were prior to accepting Him as Lord and Savior.

How about this question: Do the Jews worship the same God that Christians do?

Think of it this way. Imagine a righteous Jew living in the 1st century. By all accounts he prays to and worships the true God. Then some events happen in Jerusalem. Jesus is crucified and buried on a Friday. Early on Sunday Jesus is raised from the dead. When the righteous Jew comes to his prayers on Sunday afternoon, is he now praying to and worshipping a false god? No! He’s still worshipping the true God. But something has changed… Something is now missing that wasn’t missing on Thursday because it didn’t exist on Thursday. He doesn’t know it but he needs the gospel. He needs to know what happened on the weekend! But he’s still worshipping the true God.

I see no reason to think any differently of the faith of Jews today.

Bill: I was discussing this very question with my pastor last night. I turned to John’s Gospel chapter 8, I believe around verse 42 and following and we read where Jesus rebuked the Jewish leaders saying “If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me” and a few verses later “Ye are of [your] father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do.” Don’t know if that answers that question about the Jews today, but many of the religious leaders in Jesus’ day did not.

Robert: I guess you answered the same way I would … So I would say as kindly as possible, that Judaism is a false religion, they do not worship the same God that we do.

... unless someone can convince me otherwise, from Scripture.

Someone at the Catholic church thought it would be a good idea to licence the BVM. Cooler heads prevailed!

Ken: You’re right, it is a tough issue. If you don’t come out and say it is false, then you leave open the possibility that they will think that the Jews can come to God their own way, ala John Hagee. I’m just not comfortable saying the Judaism is a false religion because of the reasons I stated. Even Judaism today could (theoretically) lead someone to conclude that Jesus is the Messiah, although that probably doesn’t often happen. You are correct is stating that the observation of Judaism itself is no longer God honoring and no, no one is justified by the ordinances of Judaism now because they weren’t justified by the ordinances even before Christ.

How about this question: Do the Jews worship the same God that Christians do? I get asked that alot. How would you guys and girls respond? Talk about inflammatory questions!

I disagree with your coworker. I wonder what he means by the nation of Israel being central to God’s plan in the world today. If he’s referring to a body of people, then the church is clearly central. Overall, though, I agree that Christ’s death and resurrection are central to everything.

JimN, yesterday in our debriefing over the whole prayerwalking conference, I used your response to the “God is about to do some of the greatest things He’s ever done.” The consensus of the class was that you are right. Duh.

Robert: Thanks for the links concerning NCT. I “surfed” the ids.org site several days ago.

Matthew: A fellow that I work with told me today that the nation of Israel was “central” to God’s plan in the world today. Paul, from scripture, would argue that the cross is “central”. I would have to agree with Paul not my co-worker.

Ken, I don’t think it is anti-Semitic, although people will often misconstrue it that way. I would say ‘yes, orthodox Jews are practicing a false religion.’ Their religion is not even the religion of Israel in the OT. When was the last time they sacrificed in the temple? They haven’t since AD 70. They are just grasping for some semblance of the religion of Israel which was fulfilled in the Messiah. Their practices have no significance concerning salvation. Now, we can be winsome in explaining this to folks, but they still may not want to hear it.

Bill: My goal is not to be Anti-Semetic (sp?). Are orthodox Jews practicing a false religion?

Yes, nearly everything in the Old Covenant points to Christ. But is anyone truly justified with God by practicing the ordinances and sacrifices of the Old Covenant? The ordinances and sacrifices simply point to Christ, who is the only one who saves.

Matthew: This question (#3) will probably raise a big stink in our class. Kinda like predestination / election does in the same class. ”...the State of Israel as we know it has no connection to the OT or NT. It is a secular state. It is not ‘Israel’ and never will be.” I will probably be the only one in class stating or agreeing to this fact.

Ken: Judaism is meant to point to Christ, who is the way of salvation, so in that sense it isn’t a false religion. It is being practiced incorrectly now, however, since it missed the coming of the Messiah.

I would say the New has replace the Old.

Yes, only Christians are God’s chosen.

Abraham preceded the Mosaic Covenant, which people regard as the Old Covenant, but there was an Abrahamic covenant also which of course he was bound to.

Ken, on #3 I understand that the church is Israel and therefore the chosen people. Gentiles were grafted into True Israel because of their faith in Christ. I always try to make clear that the State of Israel as we know it has no connection to the OT or NT. It is a secular state. It is not ‘Israel’ and never will be.

Matthew:
1. I agree. True sons of Abraham are those who have trusted Christ alone for salvation. GRACE not RACE.
2. Jesus fulfilled the Old Covenant, but according to Hebrews 8:6, 13 the new is superior and the old is vanishing. So, I would say the new replaces the old. The old covenant is a “shadow” of the new. The new is fulfilled by and in Christ.
3. I guess I was approaching this in line of reasoning that some would call the Nation of Israel God’s Chosen. Maybe the question is not clear enough.
4. I am looking for any help that you guys can give. If there is a better way to ask the question, I want to ask it that way. As I understand Galatians, Abraham was justified by faith, centuries before the law was given. In my opinion, Abraham was not under the Old Covenant, but was under grace (again pointing to Jesus, Abraham’s true seed).

Matthew, thanks.

Ken, I normally don’t participate in discussions like this, but I’m feeling saucy today:
1. Yes. Judaism as we know it is a form of pharisaism; it’s rabbinic Judaism, not the religion of Israel. The real faith of Israel rests in the messiah who has already come.
2. I would say fulfilled (Sermon on the Mount, Jeremiah 31).
3. Well, if you’re a Calvinist I reckon you should say ‘Yes.’
4. There might be a more nuanced way to frame this question. Abraham was counted righteous because of his faith. I’m going to have to think more about this question.

These are some possible questions that will be asked in our Sunday Night Men’s Discipleship Training class this week, concerning our study of Galatians 4:21-31. We will also be looking at Hebrews ch. 8.

I would appreciate any input or suggestions for other questions concerning this passage concerning the two covenants.

” Can we say that any religion that doesn’t lead (point) to Jesus Christ as the sole way of salvation is a false religion? If so, what of Judaism?”

” Has the New Covenant replaced the Old Covenant? Added to the Old Covenant? Come along-side the Old Covenant? Explain “

” Are the only ‘Chosen People’ of God those who are born-again believers? “

” Was Abraham under the Old Covenant? Why or why not?”

This morning after I dropped my kids at school, NPR dropped this bomb on me:

Fred Rogers died this morning of stomach cancer. He was 74.

I am not ashamed to admit I wept as I drove to work. One more kick-ass piano player in heaven, one less gentle genius on earth. I predict Mr. Rogers work will someday be considered as brilliant in his chosen genre’ as Mozart was in his.

I was too old for Mr. Rogers Neighborhood when he first started broadcasting in 1968, but when I started having children, my children watched. And that’s when I discovered the compelling beauty of his work and the rare genius of the man. What a magnificent body of work he leaves behind. And what a gentle, humble and – dare I say it – godly example he set for us all.

Goodbye, Mr. Rogers. Thanks for a thousand beautiful days.

Here’s a Fred Rogers reaction that’s worth the read, from a mom.

Judd, good call, brother. I am fuming that someone would suggest that Michael cannot read. I suggest that people who accuse Michael of illiteracy go take an English course somewhere. Good freaking grief, people!!! Maybe Eric and I can come up with a list of words for the sidebar so that those who can’t read properly can figure out what we’re talking about. Metaphor, allusion; those are two off the top of my head. This is surreal.

Scott: I agree, it isn’t worth the risk to continue to let them serve while they are being investigated.

Jake: Thank you. I think maybe we Christians need to be a little more concerned about the fact that there’s billions of people headed for Hell, than whether the word “yowm” was translated correctly in Genesis 1.

Bill MacK: On the Zero Tolerance Policy: my take is that when a priest is accused of a sex crime, they should immediately be put on the police equivelent of desk work. No active ministry. No contact with kids. Minimal public contact. Since this is a secular crime, let the secular authorities investigate. Once that investigation is complete, if the guy’s guilty, cut ‘im off from ministry. If he’s innocent, welcome him back in. Maybe I’m being a bit oversimplistic, tho.

Fred Rogers: Such a wonderful, gentle teacher. You’ll be missed, neighbor.

I’ve been thinking of the RCC pedophile priest scandal quite a bit lately. There are some things that are bothering me, but not perhaps what you might think.

1. Pedophile clergy: Protestants are in no position to throw stones here, this could happen anywhere. Some are quick to point out that enforced celibacy of the RCC clergy is what leads to this, but I think that is an oversimplified and erroneous assumption.

2. Shuffling and coverup of pedophile clergy: This is a legitimate area of criticism. This needs to be fixed and punished, even if it goes all the way to Rome.

3. Zero tolerance policy: I’m a little uneasy about this because the assumes the accuser is always right or truthful, which we know is not always the case.

4. Cash settlements to victims: This is the biggest thing that is bothering me right now. The Boston diocese (or whatever it is called) is shelling out millions of dollars in settlements to the victims of the priests. Forget for a moment whether they are entitled to this or not, my question is this:

Why is the RCC sitting on all this money?? If the Boston diocese can afford millions, the the RCC as a whole may be sitting on billions in assets. How many churches, missionaries, food program, disaster relief programs etc. could be built or supported with this kind of money? The RCC isn’t the only culprit here. I’m sure many of the big Protestant church are doing the same thing, albeit on a smaller scale. Maybe if the Christian church was doing what it should for the people of this country and world, then the government wouldn’t have to bleed us dry with taxes.

Sorry, I’m ranting. I just can’t imagine Jesus, or those who are called by His name, sitting on large sums of money for any reason. I could be wrong. I often am.

Willie Nelson is the best songwriter AND the best singer in the United States of America. I’ll take 100 Willies over a single Bono any day.

TOO SICK TO PRAY by Willie Nelson

I’ve been too sick to pray, Lord
That’s why we ain’t talked in awhile
It’s been some of them days, Lord
I thought I was on my last mile

But I’m feelin’ okay, Lord
And I’m glad that I called you today
Never needed you more
I would have called you before
But I’ve been too sick to pray

Remember the family, Lord
I know they will remember you
And all of their prayers, Lord
They talk to You just like I do

Well, I reckon that’s all, Lord
That’s all I can think of to say
And thank you, my Friend
We’ll be talkin’ again

More sacred secular music from Judd.

Susan Werner is a fantastic, classy singer on the coffeehouse circuit. Go hear her if she comes thru your town.

I Still Believe

Lewis lost his marriage when he lost his illusions
But it had been the modern-day ideal
They both worked way too hard and made love way too little
No surprise she found that San Jose had more appeal
But last night I saw Lewis walking down by the river
With a suitcase in his hand
And Lewis looked at me with eyes that were wiser and said
“I’m going there to make her understand”

That I still believe, I still believe
I still believe, I still believe
I still believe, I still believe
I still believe, I still

Lucy lost her parents when she lost her illusions
But they had been the family ideal
Lucy dove into the fast and shiny city
She found her feet in dancing but she lost the heart to feel much of anything
But last night I saw Lucy walking down by the river
With a husband and a brand new son
And Lucy looked at me with eyes that were wiser and said
“Who’d have thought that I would be the one?”

But I still believe, I still believe
I still believe, I still believe
I still believe, I still believe
I still believe, I still

Laura lost her bearings when she lost her illusions
But she had nothing much to fear
She lost her ponytail and six long months of sleeping
When the big C came to call last fall
But last night I saw Laura walking down by the river
And I could hardly hide my tears
But Laura looked at me with eyes that were wiser and said
“Wanna go with me to Italy next year?”

‘Cos I still believe, I still believe
I still believe, I still believe
I still believe, I still believe
I still believe, I still

Jim brings up a topic which is of intense interest to me. I’ll tell you why. BHTers have heard this, but some lurkers probably haven’t.

Young earth is a bitter poison pill which turned my wife away from the gospel in the 8th grade. Her zealous mother persuaded her to argue with her earth science teacher, causing shame and ridicule. If anyone here remembers what it was like to be in the 8th grade, you will remember what shame and ridicule felt like then.

Jim is fortunate. Amy was not. Because of that single incident she has spent her entire life in bitter doubt of the gospel.

People, believe what you want. But I tell you- young earth is NOT the gospel. Michael is a nice man. He correctly reminds you all that God is NOT a rock, that it is NOT better to be dead than alive. I am not so nice because I have seen what this foolishness will do.

Better a millstone tied around your neck, and you cast into the depths of the sea, than cause any little one to turn from the gospel. Because you would rather ride your fundamentalist hobby horse than LIVE AND BREATHE THE GOSPEL OF GRACE FOR THE FORGIVENESS OF SINNERS you are doing this.

I am extremely conservative. I despise the liberal philosophy of just about everything. But people- I tell you- LIBERALS ARE NOT THE ENEMY. Indwelling sin in your members is the enemy. Learn this. Live it. Use your BRAIN for our saviour’s sake. If you are capable of reading Charles Dickens, or Larry McMurtry, or Emily Dickinson, then by God you are capable of not imposing some dumb, insane personal vendetta on HOLY SCRIPTURE.

Believe young earth, preach it, teach it if you will. But remember what I have said. I love you as a brother or sister and I will not call you a fool for what you believe. But I WILL CALL YOU A FOOL IF YOU TURN ANOTHER LITTLE ONE AWAY FROM THE GOSPEL. I will humble you and shame you at every turn for this. I despise it even more than liberal philosophy.

DENNIS MILLER is my new hero:

“If only Saddam Hussein would open an all-male country club somewhere in Iraq, so the Times could get behind this invasion.”

“The last time the French wanted more evidence, it rolled right through Paris with a German flag.”

“Sean Penn is urging restraint. How do we get Sean on board? Too bad Saddam isn’t a paparazzi.”

“I was home-schooled. Oddly enough, at a branch campus.”

“If 15 out of 19 terrorists are from one country, that’s not profiling. That’s being minimally observant.”

“Do you think they’ve got a lottery to determine which dogs will be drug-sniffing dogs and which dogs will be bomb-sniffing dogs?”

“About those 74 virgins . . . innocence is great, but wouldn’t you think after about 10 virgins, you’re gonna want a pro?”

“Every now and then we’ve got to remind these guys we’ve got the Big Portabella. I don’t say drop one on the people. Wait for a windless day and drop one out in the desert. Just remind them that you’ve got the Big Persuader.”

“What if the crop circles are really just ads for Target?”

“I come from a simpler time when palm pilot was a title you acquired upon entering puberty.”

“I was raised Catholic. I went to confession the other day. I said, ‘You first.’ “

“If you’re in a peace march and the guy next to you has a sign saying that ‘Bush is Hitler,’ forget the peace thing for a second and beat his axx.”

“The only way the French are going in is if we tell them we found truffles in Iraq,”

“The French are always reticent to surrender to the wishes of their friends and always more than willing to surrender to the wishes of their enemies.”

Hugh Ross has a great ministry, and is a brilliant guy. Better at science than at Bible. To my mind, he attempts much of what the creationists do, but with a different result because he has a broader and better view of Astrophysics. (He is an astronomer, not a biologist. Quick- name a Creationist astronomer??) I enjoy his general books on Creation and Time, etc, more than his books on Genesis. He really is an original, and has been beaten up and kicked dozens of times by the creationists. Talk about misquoted!! I admire him.

I mentioned Fredrick Buechner back during the discussion of Christian authors. I just finished reading The Storm. (hope that link works…) An interesting retelling of Shakespear’s The Tempest.

Michael, where to begin? re: Robert’s quote from Alan Hayward, it’s sad that something similar won’t be coming from the Young Earth camp. I somehow can’t imagine Ken Ham making that statement. re: the passing of Fred Rogers, in a real sense his “Make-Believe” world occupies the same space in my house as Narnia, Middle Earth, and the world of Beatrix Potter’s stories. After his retirement, my youngest kids would cry everyday until we found a local PBS station that was running reruns.

I wrote a long reply to your article (largely favorable), but blogger ate it yesterday. The most damning bit of evidence against the Young Earth for me is the astrophysics. The night sky is virtually a calendar. As someone brought up wiht a strict YE approach (I failed science in the 7th grade because my father went to school to argue with the teacher on evolution), I find in myself a huge emotional attachment to the literal 7-day view, because the “slippery slope” argument was drummed into our heads (“If you don’t take Genesis 1 literally, then you end up not taking the rest of the Bible literally.”)

I tend to keep looking for the “big picture” on these, and so I’ll briefly bring up how the so-called “gramato-historical” hermenutic is at the root of both the YE/literal 7-day view and … dispensationalism. Just a quick jab to reiterate a theme I’ll keep drumming until you all drum me out: if you start with faulty hermenutics, you end up in all sorts of interesting places.

This says it all, from the article Mike referenced earlier…

{Hashem al-Iqabi, one of Iraq’s leading writers and intellectuals, had hoped the marchers would mention the fact that Saddam had driven almost four million Iraqis out of their homes and razed more than 6,000 villages to the ground.

“The death and destruction caused by Saddam in our land is the worst since Nebuchadnezzar,” he said. “These prosperous, peaceful, and fat Europeans are marching in support of evil incarnate.” He said that, watching the march, he felt Nazism was “alive and well and flexing its muscles in Hyde Park.”}

To all of you people who have sent me notes telling me the meaning of a 24 hour day in Genesis 1: Should I send you back a description of what the words “the stars fell to the earth” means in Matthew? Or what the word “rock” means when the Psalms say God is a rock? This isn’t about a dictionary. It’s about what the text is supposed to do and how it goes about doing it. The assumption that the text was MEANT to answer scientific questions doesn’t work for me, any more than the explanation of procreation I gave my son at age 4 would work in a college Biology class. The point is this: Why does the inspiration of any part of the Bible depend on its conformity to a “truth” outside of itself, IF THAT WAS NOT ITS INTENTION? When the Gospels say all Jerusalem went out to hear John the Baptist, is it failing to demonstrate inspiration if anyone didn’t go hear John? Or do we not require that level of precision from the text? When the writer of Ecclesiastes says it is better to be dead than alive, do we eliminate the book from the canon? Or do we ask why it said that- why it used that kind of expression? This is about intention, and you are free to disagree with me on my views! Please do so. But don’t tell me I can’t read or understand the words.

The amount of good done in this world by the simple lived-out Christianity of Fred Rogers boggles the mind. My kind of television evangelist. Enjoy the new neighborhood Fred.

Meanwhile, back here on earth…..

Whaaaaaaaaaaaa....

Children of American soldiers are not having a nice day in the Maine Public Schools. Don’t get one of these teachers within six feet of me.

This human shields idea has some real possibilities. Could we get up a BHT list? Multi-billionaire liar and guru Depak Chopra wants to go. Could we get Alec Baldwin? Gerofalo? Sheen? When asked about this yesterday, Rummy said “People who put themselves in dangerous places have put themselves in dangerous places.” People who want to get between the avengers of 911 and Saddam Hussein. What a way to end your life.

A great speech by the President last night, refuting every huge lie told by those who prefer torture and death for the Iraqi people.

A moment of silence for Fred Rogers, who passed away of cancer at age 74. May he eternally praise our Creator. The neighborhood will miss him.

An old friend falls silent: Pioneer 10.

Saddam will fight to the death? Ok. Let’s see.

Sick and Sad. A child sex pervert is the #1 artist in America.

Why won’t Anti-War types listen to Iraqis?

Robert: Great quote.
Daniel and Judd: I suppose it never occured to you guys that money may have changed hands to get this level of exposure.

I was reading this list of the Translation Committee for the ESV. Pretty Impressive. Especially in that it represents a broad concensus that there are some problems with the NIV.

We got to discuss the prayerwalking thing in class today. It’s the first class we’ve had since the whole debacle. A couple of us went off on this guy’s constant berating of the NIV and other translations. He seemed to suggest that he liked the original better. Our prof said that he knew the speaker spent considerable time in the original languages. Now, I’m not usually argumentative, but I humbly gave my prof and the class a little piece of my mind. I like to study the original texts, also. However, I am not a biblical scholar and neither is the speaker we had last weekend. Neither one of us busted our tails in grad school and neither one of us have PhD’s. Also, I think an important thing that this guy neglects, maybe out of arrogance or maybe out of ignorance