I posted here at 9:20am, then again at 4:15pm and just after 6pm. Each of those represents the only short breaks in a work day that started at 6:30am for me and looks like it could go as late as 10pm. Hey, if you’re on AIM and you see me, drop me a note and let me know that someone outside this building is still alive.

One of our faithful lurkers, John Hendryx over at Monergism.com, has sent this link to some good stuff on what the writer calls “New-Gnostic Calvinism.” Knox wouldn’t be able to figure it out, but I can tell you its good and does identify a problem in the Calvinistic ranks.

Michael: I’ll confess to an even worse sin than failing to catch the Piper reference – I didn’t even read the article in question until after I posted. Had I done so, well, I might not have posted. That’s what I get for going out of town for four days and then reading top to bottom to catch up. Oops!

I’ll grant you that Piper is an examplar of reason and grace, and as much as the article attempted to link the two, it prevaricated. Okay, lied. Dirty rat b-st-rd!

As far as the RPW element goes, I just interject it to note that when I first began to become familiar with Reformed theology, it was through the Chalcedon Report and Credenda Agenda, so arguments about the RPW and Calvinism will be forever linked in my own mind, probably unfairly. That said, I’ve had several friends who attend(ed) Dallas Theological who seemed to also associate the two principles. Then again, at least one was as adamant about pre-millennial dispensationalism as he was about TULIP, so who can explain why people link the things they do?

I’ll take your word on the specifics of people within SBC. I care little about the SBC as an organization, though I know several fine people trapped within (sorry), and I care even less about Knox. I suspect he is being malicious out of prejudicial ignorance, but I’m honestly not aware enough of him to know that for sure – I just like to give the benefit of the doubt for as long as I can.

Certainly I can’t think of any Calvinist teachers or leaders who would venture into such a ridiculous position. But I’ve met several (young, naive) students who call themselves Calvinist who would do just that. I chalk it up to the youthful student part more than the Calvinist part, which is why despite all of that, I consider myself a Calvinist today. I can’t say that I’ve seen it to the extent that I would consider it a trend, but I can see how what I’ve seen would definitely turn some people off.

As far as the rest, it seems ignorant to me. I’ve spent my entire life so far hearing people who don’t know the first thing about the RCC say all sorts of outrageous things about them, and AofGers say some wacky stuff about Baptists, and vice-versa and so on and so on until it makes my head spin. I don’t know how much of it is truly malicious (though it all seems that way), so much as a demonstration of willful ignorance, which might be worse in my eyes. That is, they show so little respect for the opposing view that they make no effort to understand it. I’ve watched it happen, and it has at times seemed to me like at least one of the two parties involved is deliberately trying to misrepresent the other. Sometimes, as with Knox, that is probably true. But sometimes, it really is just stupidity. And I mean that in the nicest possible way, of course, which still doesn’t come out very nice at all.

Believe me, I’ve heard the whole anti-missionary stuff before, usually from people who wouldn’t know a Calvinist if I bit them. While some people somewhere (Knox, perhaps?) must know better, most people are just blindly repeating whatever they hear without even knowing if there is truly such a person in their circle of acquaintances as a Calvinist from whom to seek the truth.

Heck, my children go to an AWANA Baptist youth indoctrination class every week, and I’ve given up on trying to re-educate them afterwards each week. Is there such a thing as Junior-ALPHA?

Anyway, I’ll close by sticking with my original point, though I made it poorly. Is it possible that the complaints of the author are valid, though incorrectly (and perhaps even maliciously) associated with Calvinism? My own experience tells me that at least we Calvinists are being misrepresented by some of “our” youth, and we probably ought to examine ourselves to see if there is anything we can do to repudiate the arrogant “Calvinistic Terrorists” while we marvel at the audacity of Knox and his ilk.

“Calvinistic Terrorist.” I like it.

Hi, I’m PWinn. I’m a Calvinistic terrorist. They say acknowledgement is the first step toward really enjoying yourself. Excuse me, I’ve got to go kick an Arminian or something. Except not my wife. Mustn’t kick the wife…

P.S. I’m really not trying to drag the dead horse back into the open. Sorry.

People like this make it hard to make the case that not everyone opposed to military action in Iraq is unpatriotic. A sample:

The only true heroes are those who find ways that help defeat the U.S. military,” Nicholas De Genova, assistant professor of anthropology at Columbia University told the audience at Low Library Wednesday night. “I personally would like to see a million Mogadishus.”

I guess it’s a long way from the Columbia campus to the WTC site. I’m not rabidly in favor of the war, but people like De Genova should at minimum be deported, if not detained in Guantanamo. Or better yet, let’s make him watch Michael Moore eat.

Militant Calvinism? Two summers ago during youth camp (SBC – Siloam Springs Ark), the “youth communicator” discussed briefly the fact that many college students were turning on to, and I use his words, “hardcore Calvinism”.

This was about the time that I was “turning on” to it as well. It gave me an excellent opportunity to discuss the doctrines of Grace with my wife, and two teenage daughters.

You will think I am lying but I am not. This isn’t the Onion or Scrappleface or IMNR. Michael Moore is going to make a Moore accusing the Bush Family of being in league with Bin Laden. ANGUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! HELP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

VDH is my Friday dose of truth. I love this man. Read him.

“In disgust at the hysteria, I took a drive to Washington to the National Cathedral on Sunday. Big mistake. All except one of the entrances were closed due to security concerns. I walked in under the wonderful sculptures of Frederick Hart, an authentic American genius who almost single-handedly restored classical realism to American sculpture. A small statue of a kneeling Lincoln, who sent thousands into battle to eradicate slavery, was in the corner. A plaque of quotations from Churchill, about the need for sacrifice in war, was on the wall. So I was feeling somewhat good again — until I heard the pious sermon on “shock and awe.” In pompous tones the minister was deprecating the war effort, calling down calumnies upon the administration, and alleging the immoral nature of our nation at war. Such a strange man at such a strange time, I thought. His entire congregation, by its own admission, is in danger from foreign terrorists (why else bar the gates?). His church is itself a monument to the utility of force for moral purposes. His own existence as a free-speaking, freely worshiping man of God is possible only thanks to the United States military — whose present mission he was openly deriding at the country’s national shrine. ”

If you own a copy of a recorded work or book, you have a right to that copy that includes backing it up in some form to preserve your copy. That’s what a copyright is. If you own the album, your right to the material on the album does not cease when the medium of the recording becomes damaged. You have a right to the recording, because you purchased that right when you purchased the album.

Does anybody else think it’s weird that the Beastie Boys will “Fight for Your Right to Party,” but won’t fight to overthrow a fascist?

Phillip, Phillip, Phillip…..I must instruct you in the fine art of slander, liberal SBC style. You may not be in a position to understand just what is going on here. Believe me- I am.

1) The article associates this form of aggressive Calvinism with John Piper. This is blatant lying. I can assure you, that Dr. Piper has nothing to do with the kind of obnoxious, strict RPW, mean-spirited Calvinism the article describes. Dr. Piper’s church is a healthy and diverse church that many non-Calvinists attend. None of his books or tapes advocate this. He has many statements about worship on the web. He fellowships and worships with Charismatics and non-Calvinists more than any Calvinist leader. Knox is puposely slandering Piper by association and it is indefensible.
2) Not a single Reformed distinctive or part of TULIP speaks in any way to the use of instruments in worship or the PRW or Psalm singing or the rejection of Arminian worship. In fact, those who restrict instruments or use Psalms only are a minority of a minority of a fraction among Calvinists and are almost all Presby in background. But Mr. Knox won’t let anyone know that. It doesn’t fit his purposes.
3) Knox makes it appear that Southern Baptist Calvinism is the source of these youth group raiding Calvinist Taliban. In fact, the Southern Baptist Founders movement is about as generically SBC as they come. Men like Dever, Ascol, Malone, Nettles, Ware, Shreiner and Mohler have absolutely nothing to do with the strict RPW and they frequently say that Armnians are zealous and missionary minded Christians. It is completly slanderous and purposely malicious to even imply that young Calvinistic fanatics are being fed this from the Founder’s movement in the SBC or any SBC Calvinists. Knox is not being ignorant. He is being malicious.
4) I cannot name a mainstream Calvinistic teacher of any kind- including those who teach frequently on worship- who question anyone’s Christianity based on worship. This is more garbage written to incite liberals against Al Mohler and SBTS.
5) Half of Knox’s panel are liberals who know as much about Calvinism as I do about fusion. This is a familiar tactic with these guys. They have done past articles on conservatives quoting their liberal opponents as experts. I would be utterly surprised if they have ever attended a Founder’s Conference or interviewed Ascol or Dever.
6) Knox and Wingfield previously tried to paint SBC Calvinism as anti-missionary. Now they are painting it as radical RPW, Psalm singers and rejecting Arminian worship. This is completly ridiculous. If there are college Calvinistic fanantics picking this up, they are not getting it from Piper, Macarthur, Sproul, the Founder’s Movement, Modern Reformation, New Covenant theology, ACE, James White, Al Mohler/SBTS, Ernie Resinger or even Al Martin’s Reformed Baptists. It is a typical Marv Knox and Mark Wingfield assault on a group they fear and loathe using manipulative misrepresentation to try and ignite moderate SBCers to get mad.
7) Know is painting Calvinists as Cultists and it is a shameful tactic.
8) Antecdotal stories about Calvinists harassing youth groups, discussed by a panel convened by a journalist. Anyone see something rather odd about this kind of journalism?

Phillip- I know all the people involved here. If some college kids have gone over the deep end, it has nothing to do with Calvinism or Calvinism in the SBC. Frankly, I am a very well read Calvinist and I wouldn’t know where to go to find the sort of people Knox is writing about. Some people like to argue about the RPW. This tends to make pragmatists feel they are being challenged. They are. There ought to be a scriptural defense of all that is done in worship. But such a discussion is not a rejection of Arminians or their worship as non-Christian. (For example, is the “God is my girlfriend” discussion of CCM lyrics a rejection of Arminian worship, or a real issue of Biblical principle?)

Michael: I dislike defending people with whom I don’t really agree, but I have to say that think I’ve encountered some of them there militant Calvinists that Baptist guy is talking about, and I don’t blame him for being bothered.

I’m not the timid sort, myself, so I don’t even mind aggressive doctrinal “discussions,” which is why I signed up here. But I’ve heard more than one conversation that seemed to center chiefly around whether or not one could truly be worshipping at all (with the unspoken assumption of calling one’s very Christianity into question) if one did not practice the RPW perfectly, and that’s bothersome.

I’m reminded of the joke about the two folks who meet on a bridge and, well, here’s the joke:

I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said ‘Stop! don’t do it!’ ‘Why shouldn’t I?’ he said. I said, ‘Well, there’s so much to live for!’ He said, ‘Like what?’ I said, ‘Well…are you religious or atheist?’ He said, ‘Religious.’ I said, ‘Me too! Are you Christian or Buddhist?’ He said, ‘Christian.’ I said, ‘Me too! Are you Catholic or Protestant?’ He said, ‘Protestant.’ I said, ‘Me too! Are you Episcopalian or Baptist?’ He said, ‘Baptist!’ I said, ‘Wow! Me too! Are you Baptist Church of God or Baptist Church of the Lord?’ He said, ‘Baptist Church of God!’ I said, ‘Me too! Are you original Baptist Church of God, or are you Reformed Baptist Church of God?’ He said, ‘Reformed Baptist Church of God!’ I said, ‘Me too! Are you Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1879, or Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1915?’ He said, ‘Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1915!’ I said, ‘Die, heretic scum,’ and pushed him off.

Militancy on issues of importance, I can understand. Militancy from young punks over whether a guitar is acceptable as part of a worship service strikes me as a bit, well, immature. In other words, the sort of thing one might expect people to get worked up over at a Baptist University, regardless of the sub-variation of Baptist.

Still, I suppose they are fore-ordained to be aggressive, and you’re fore-ordained to be invigorated, and I’m fore-ordained to make the same old tired jokes about Calvinism. At least I’m glad this one is over.

My father has always reminded me that an “ill eagle” is a sick bird. Copyright violations, on the other hand, are against the law. Even copyright violations that seem to fall well within the USSC precedent established during the initial advent of VCRs qualify, apparently.

Since you aren’t all familiar with me enough to know when I’m being sarcastic yet, I’ll give you this pointer: I’m always being sarcastic. That applies to my previous post, of course, though strangely, not this one.

Jake: A can of worms? How so? How can anybody possibly disagree on “file sharing”? After all, everybody knows that it’s, well, what it is!

(Carefully avoiding a statement either for or against file sharing/music piracy/downloading/whatever…)

Oh, and of course there are copyright laws in hell. What else would all of the lawyers there do all day? 8^)

jake: How big an attach ment can you take?

Jake: how fast is your connection speed?

This morning, when we woke up, Linda said that she was thinking about taking the kids along with another home schooling family into Manhattan to see the DaVinci exhibit at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Now, I’m under a lot of pressure at work, and it’s becoming something of a personal crisis; I felt a strong sense that she shouldn’t go in, so I asked her not to – “for the purely selfish reason that I don’t need anything else to worry about today…”

When I arrived at the office – having almost forgotten this all, as I was preoccupied with mulling over my work problems as I drove in – I heard a report on the radio that there were delays on all the NYC bridge and tunnel crossings because of “police activity.”

The author of this article is Marv Knox. The low point of the Ky Baptist state paper was the Knox regime. It was Knox who started the print crusade against conservatives at SBTS, carried on later by the Mohler-loathing Mark Wingfield who added Calvinists to the wash. These guys are typical of the journalistic saviors the liberals in the SBC love. They feed the prejudices of the anointed class. They revel in hauling in the most ignorant sources and quizzing them in some sort of NPR fantasy world. They apparently believe all conservatives are hostile, easily manipulated, brown-shirt troops of the evil empire ruling the SBC. Calvinists are- I guess- the SS or something. I have never seen these guys write anything that bothered to talk to Piper or the Founders guys or to consider Calvinism seriously. They are cowards and abusers of the power of the press. I hope the 55 churches that read ABP enjoy the slander.

Mr. Knox, if you Google into this article, I salute you for what may be the most ridiculously second hand, gossipy misrepresentation of a serious subject I have ever read. I particularly thought of two things: 1) Have you ever attended a Founder’s Conference? How could you dump men like Mark Dever and Tom Ascol and Fred Malone into the caricature of this article? 2) Talking about the obnoxious behavior of college students is amazing. How many college students are extreme liberals? Extreme anything? The threat of college Calvinists to our poor little youth groups. You paint Piper and Baptist Calvinists like a cult. Pathetic.

I know the Calvinists in the SBC. They are of a very different personality than the regular SBC conservatives. All the words used of these College students are complete slanders to the men in the SBC Founders movement. Shame on you Marv Knox.

Panel moderator Randy Hatchett, professor of Christianity and philosophy at Houston Baptist University, noted Calvinism has emerged in church youth settings in his area.
“It has a militant (GASP!!) nature, especially around the issue of worship,” Hatchett observed. “Calvinists imply non-Calvinists can’t worship as well as Calvinists.” (Could Randy later come in the bar and explain what the hxxx he is talking about?)

“There’s an aggressive (UMMMPH!) movement of Calvinism at many colleges, and it’s even reached into our youth groups and into parachurch youth groups,” said Roger Olson, professor of theology at Baylor University’s Truett Theological Seminary in Waco. “They’ve decided to take back (WHHOOOYAH!) popular folk religion. They’re reaching into youth groups, pressuring (OOOOOOO YEAAAAH!) them to adopt Calvinism,” he added. “I have nothing against garden-variety Calvinism, but aggressive Calvinism is another matter.” (I am a 7 point, lethal, scimitar carrying, sevon point Calvinist you wimpy liberal. Come over here and meet your God.)

ABP has surpassed today’s edition of the NYT as a piece of worthless nonsense. I’m invigorated.

Thanks for all the nice reader mail on the Fanaticism piece. You guys make it worth it, particularly those who have come on a similar journey to my own.

I’ve got a full day tomorrow. In addition to my classes, I have prospective teachers to visit, and a musical guest for two concerts.

A funny story. Denise and I are SGA (Student Government Association) sponsors. We are at election time and that is always fun. So one student is not sure what position to run for. We have a Prez, VP, Sec-Treas, Parliamentarian and Chaplain. Noel suggested that this person run for Parliamentarian. She said “I can’t run for that job. I don’t even believe in God.”

Eric: try some Scrappleface headlines on your class:

:: Blix Says Blisters, Vomiting and Death Don’t Mean WMD
:: 1972 Dolphins to Find Mines in Gulf
:: Amber Alert Goes Out for Connie Chung
:: U.S. Offers Iraq Russian-Made Equipment

Anyone seen Road to Perdition? I just bought it, along with Signs and Bourne Identity.

Jonathan Last at WS: “Still not convinced? Consider the greatest military collapse of modern times, the infamous French fold at the start of World War II. Germany invaded France on May 10, 1940, didn’t get to Paris until June 14, and didn’t get a French surrender until June 22. Even the French—the French!—were able to hold out for 44 days. If Saddam prolongs the fighting for another 5 weeks, all he will be doing is rising to the level of military competence set by France.”

Tiger Woods: “I have great respect for the men and women fighting overseas to protect our way of life in Iraq and other parts of the world. As the son of an Army officer, I understand the strength, courage and discipline required to successfully carry out their missions in hostile environments and feel tremendous pride they are representing us.
Obviously, no one likes war. Our Congress and President tried hard to avoid the use of force, but ultimately decided it was the best course of action. I like the assertiveness shown by President Bush and think we owe it to our political and military leaders, along with our brave soldiers to be as supportive as possible during these difficult and trying times. I just wanted to take this opportunity to let our forces know that I am thinking about you and wishing you and your families the best.”

Best of the Web Today is very good as always.

If you have some great links to post from a less left leaning perspective, I would love any and all. I am currently fighting anti-war scourge in the MVP groups (internal private Microsoft), especially a particularly rabid Seattle-ite. I especially like those that come from a non-convervative source.

OK. They’ve vandalized the Statue of Liberty. What can we mark up?

Michael Moore Making Next Film: ‘Saddam and Me’
(2003-03-27)—Academy-award winning filmmaker Michael Moore said his next documentary will chronicle how Iraq’s lax gun-control laws have turned a peaceful Islamic republic into a cauldron of death and destruction.

The film, “Saddam and Me,” will capture Mr. Moore’s misadventures and witty banter as he attempts to ask the Iraqi president to ban personal ownership of firearms.

“Every nation that allows individuals to own guns will eventually wind up like Iraq,” said Mr. Moore. “The gun culture encourages violence. Most Iraqis own personal firearms, and look what’s happening over there. Children are dying. It’s just like Columbine.”

Things are tough all over. Man stabs pet pig for pork chops.

I love this. Tim Lahaye sued the producers of the “Left Behind” movies for producing movies of a “lower quality” than promised. HA!

Secrets of Life REVEALED!!! Sperm smell their way to eggs!!!!! (Angus barred from posting anything about this story.)

Jeannette hasn’t posted in a long time. Do you figure she’s really upset about the French thing?

I’ve tried several times to type something here, but everything I come up with will require too much repentance later, so I’ll just post the link and you can sin for yourselves.

Sorry Jenny. I too love the line where the kid defames Jesus. It’s so ridiculously invented as to be hilarious, and add to that the fact that so many people bought it hook, line, and sinker…too funny. To my students’ credit, several of them said, “This is made up, isn’t it?” I tried to play it off for a few minutes by reassuring them that I did not make it up, and it was from a well-known and popular online news source. They still weren’t buying it—good for them. Some of them anyway. It was great to watch the faces of the others as they got to the last paragraph, about Satan’s, um, member. It’s fun to watch a group of people’s jaws drop at different times—sort of a domino effect.

Help! My eight year-old came in while I was laughing out loud at the Onion article.

Satire is such a difficult thing to explain to kids. Then my eldest reminded me of the riot I caused in watching the Oscars a few years back with Robin Williams’ “Blame Canada” bit from South Park (she’s a big Anne Shirley lover).

Wouldn’t you know it, the one line she managed to read was the “little kid’s” line defaming Jesus. “Mommy why do you always laugh at bad things?” God help me.

I guess that I’m sort of confused about what Herr Bonhoeffer means by “religion.” In fact, every time the subject of “religion” is brought up, it seems that I discuss the matter from one definition, and everyone else discusses it with another.

Michael mentions that old evangelical cliche, which goes, “Christianity isn’t a religion, it’s a relationship.” I used to spout that wholesale, but as I thought long and hard about it one day, I ran across this little gem from James 1:27: Pure religion and undefiled before our God and Father is this, to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, [and] to keep oneself unspotted from the world. (ASV). In other words, religion is motivated by a genuine desire to a) help those who cannot help themselves, and b) strive after purity and holiness. Of course, this religion is built upon a relationship; in fact, religion is an outward expression of that relationship. Interestingly, the word “religion” is related to the Latin word “religare,” which means “to bind.” Perhaps religion is part of the glue which holds the relationship together: the sacraments, corporate worship, prayer, etc. Religion is the way one binds himself to God in a relationship.

The reaction against religion is mostly directed at false religion: a religion that is self-seeking, self-serving and self-aggrandizing. The religion we should seek to cultivate should be what I call “the James 1:27 variety.”

it seems to me that Bonhoeffer is disgusted by those whom identify their faith via the conduit of religious stereo types and finds himself desiring a world were the Christian ideal is evident and natural through the course of everyday interaction, without a pervading need to make sure that all the appropriate jargon and commensurate stereotypical behavior has been implemented. A world where each mans introspection brings him closer to God (who is alive within him but seperate from him) than to the systems of the church.

just my two cents…
Was I even reading the same quotes as everyone else?

Michael: I’m digesting Bonhoeffer and will get back to you.
I’m about to have some fun!! I’m talking to my research class today about the pitfalls of Internet sources when doing a research paper and how to discern. So I’m going to introduce the lesson by letting them read the Onion’s infamous Harry Potter article that caused such an uproar a while back (as I predicted it would). I almost couldn’t find the sucker—the Onion seems to have removed it from their site. Then, when my class is all worked up about it, I’ll let ‘em in on the secret! Diabolical! I love it!

Here is the Bonhoeffer quote. I’d be interested in comments on it from the Tavern.

Great article, Michael. I would like to email it and the first one to a few people.

Thanks for reading Robert. Do two articles on Fanaticism make me a fanatic? Am I writing about what I most fear is true of me? May be- but some of these things have to be said. If you look at the first article, you will see that I believe we are way too patient with things that wind up being hurtful. Christianity as a message is great. But as we put it into practice, we need to look very very closely at what is happening.

Sorry Jim.
It was late and Angus was a bit cranky. Here is a site I am working on, any suggestions? it is a work in progress.