Kim Clement is on TBN saying that God told him Scott Petersen is going to become the next Apostle Paul.

Hat Tip to Joe Carter and Evangelical Outpost for typing out part of a print interview with the Eugene Peterson. Of course, it’s about the church.

What other church is there besides institutional? There’s nobody who doesn’t have problems with the church, because there’s sin in the church. But there’s no other place to be a Christian except the church. There’s sin in the local bank. There’s sin in the grocery stores. I really don’t understand this naà¹?ve criticism of the institution. I really don’t get it.

Frederick von Hugel said the institution of the church is like the bark on the tree. There’s no life in the bark. It’s dead wood. But it protects the life of the tree within. And the tree grows and grows and grows and grows. If you take the bark off, it’s prone to disease dehydration, death.

So, yes, the church is dead but it protects something alive. And when you try to have a church without bark, it doesn’t last long. It disappears, gets sick, and it’s prone to all kinds of disease, heresy, and narcissism.

In my writing, I hope to recover a sense of the reality of congregation – what it is. It’s a gift of the Holy Spirit. Why are we always idealizing what the Holy Spirit doesn’t idealize? There’s no idealization of the church in the Bible – none. We’ve got two thousand years of history now. Why are we so dumb?

Now I am like Yaconelli. The church is a zoo, and that’s why a chimp like me can actually be part of it.

A lurker sent me the following extended quote from Professor Pete Enns at Westminster Philly. It has to do with the dead horse, and the bold sections are from the lurker.

Vewy Vewy Vewy intewesting…. More »« Less

This is my third season with Gameday Audio. I’m contemplating getting MLB.TV. Probably won’t. MLB Radio.com is free and is very interesting stuff.

Ten Ways to Get Ready for Opening Day.

My baseball season began last week with OBI baseball practice. We’ve had all the non-basketball athletes this week. The basketball boys will join us when their season is over. Being an assistant Baseball coach has been the single best thing I’ve done for myself and my mental health. In fact, I’d recommend it to anyone on here. Time at the ballpark is a wonderful way to replace television.

An interview with Robert Louis Wilken, first rate historian of the early church, on the Creeds of the early church.

I appreciate prayers for my mom, but I am not asking anyone to pray she gets better. We simply pray that she will gratefully receive all the life and health that God has for her. I always think of what James Boice said when he told his congregation about his advanced liver cancer: I am not asking you to pray for healing, because I believe that God could have prevented this from occuring if that were his will. Aren’t Presbyterians annoying.

Some of you have messaged me and asked that I start a debate on Calvinism. My response: You do it.

Hey y’all. Long time, no type, I know. I have something I hope you’ll pray about.

As you all know, Kurt and I had our daughter in January. Since then I have been struggling with extremely low milk supply. I have tried all sorts of things from drinking stout, tea, various herbs and even perscribed drugs. Nothing has helped.

Would y’all please pray for me about this. I really want to breastfeed and it’s very frustrating and upsetting that this is going on. Please pray either that I get the milk I need to nourish my baby, or that I’ll have peace about not being able to.

Thanks, I appreciate it.

As I write below I am hockey starved and am now getting my sports fix from curling... But I am psyched. I have just purchassed the 2005 season of Major League Baseball Game Day Audio which gives access to every radio broadcast of every MLB team for the whole season. But who cares about every team – as long as I can get every game of the World Series Champion Boston Red Sox (I love writing that!). Anyway… this is a great deal for baseball fans who live in the outback. Less than 15 of your dollars for the whole season. Wow!

I have lived for the past 8 summers without the healing sounds of radio baseball in the background of my life. Something was missing. I can’t wait for the season to start. (And I love high speed connections!)

Some real life stuff for which the prayers of anyone are appreciated.

1) Next Tuesday, my mom (83) has last ditch surgery to save some of the sight in one eye. She is down to about 15% vision in one eye. This surgery won’t be laser. They will go into the eye and attempt to get blood out of the eye. MD is incurable, and my mom is brave, but total loss of vision would mean a move and the loss of her independence. She already feels the world has died all around her. Pray for Dorothy Spencer. If she gets to heaven before you, a good word from her could help, because as far as I know, she’s entirely sinless :-)

2) The pastor at the campus church suddenly resigned. I have never had a good relationship with the pastor of the local church, and I am now on my third. The first resigned because the school hired me. The second liked me until it became clear I was the more popular preacher, and he subjected me to continual, terrible public humiliation. The third seemed to do OK with me until I went back to MPC to preach. Since then it’s been….uh….”awkward,” to use a word. So he’s quit, and at some point between now and the end of school, he will no longer be preaching on Sunday p.m. or helping me with a.m. That means, at least for a while and maybe permanently, 4-6 more sermons a month. That could bring me up to as many as 18 sermons a month. Too many. But I could do it. I don’t want to do it. I want the church to get a pastor I can work with. So that’s my prayer. Oneida Baptist Church will get a pastor who can work with our school, and with me. Otherwise, I am going to start preaching the same 18 sermons in rotation.

3) As a result of the pastor’s resignation, the two, week-long “revivals” for the school are now my responsibility. This is a change we needed to make. Of course, I don’t like revivals, invitations or altar calls. It’s a problem. So I have to retool all of this. Three, 4 day meetings. A new name. (No more “revivals”) And I need to be out in front of the suggested speakers, etc that will be in my mailbox soon. We pay decently for these meetings, and ought to get good speakers and worship leaders. Any suggestions from the reading public will be welcome.

4) I just interviewed the best prospective staff members I’ve met in a long, long time. I pray they decide to come. Great people. Scott, Cathy and David. We need “real” science teachers. After years of Bob Jones textbooks, etc. our principal is ready to upgrade the science curriculum.

5) OBI has been in the chase for a grant for most of the last 6 months. We usually don’t do this sort of thing- don’t ask why. This time we did, and it has paid off. A very, very nice gift. The grant for textbooks will be the best gift our kids have received in years. Thank you Lord for some new friends.

As of last night, my ire is no longer directed solely at elitist Lutherans. I’ve dearly wanted to be a part of this conversation, but I’m fighting a damn virus on my computer. Symantec is no help whatsoever. I think that were Dante to be alive today, the tenth level of hell would be reserved for those who program computer viruses.

F&%$ing hackers!

You know you’re a Canadian when this turns your crank. I am hockey starved but even if the NHL were in full swing I would still care a lot about curling. Believe it or not this stuff is on prime time tv up here.

Curling is a beautiful sport. Not unlike baseball in its relaxed pace. The level of skill is incredible. That last shot by Ms. Jones was one of the most skillful things I’ve seen. I can make a 3-point basketball shot from time to time and not by accident. But there’s no way I can make a curling shot like that. It takes more skill to be a top curler than to be an NBA player.

I take it back. I hate theology, too.

Michael, great post.

I love the parable of the lost son. I hate to think it is “overused” because it IS but that’s okay. No one likes the son who stays home. Often we, the rich white folks in America can’t stand to see the rapist/murderer find forgiveness.

Speaking of Rick, I’ll have the opportunity to visit his church. Should I test the “James’” principle and dress sloppily or should I just attend and ask questions about regeneration?

Started a men’s group study of the story of the Prodigal Son this morning, and did some introduction.

What is a gospel? A gospel is the story of Jesus, but told with a purpose: A Gospel completes the story of Israel by telling the story of Jesus.

The story of Israel had ended badly: Creation, fall, flood, Abraham, Exodus, law, conquest, judges, 3 kings, division, destruction, exile, partial restoration, oppression….and there the story was, seemingly, on hold.

The Gospels begin with this story, but they continue it in the story of Jesus: Birth, Baptism, ministry, miracles, exorcisms, healings, teaching, inclusion, conflicts, Passion, Resurrection, Commission, Empowering. (And, of course, Acts continues the story of Jesus in the story of the apostles.)

To see how the Gospels are doing this, look at two “songs” in Luke 1:46-55, and Zechariah, Luke 1:67-79. Both of these songs are the voice of Israel, proclaiming that, in Jesus, God is completing all that he promised to do, and repairing all the damage of the exile and oppression. They are remarkable passages when read this way, and not just as individual expressions.

Each of the Gospels does this. Mark does it through a secret. Matthew through fulfillment of OT citations and connections. Luke by interpreting the story of Israel/Jesus for the Gentile world. John by Jesus replacing the various festivals and rituals of Judaism.

Now that we understand this, we can read Luke 15, and get some sense of what Jesus is doing. Luke 15:1-2 tells us that the story we are about to hear was told to subvert the approach of the Pharisees. Their way of being Israel was the way of separation, purity and traditions. Jesus frequently aimed his ministry at the worldview of the Pharisees, and many of his actions and teachings were not only directly confronting their approach to “being Israel,” but subverting their entire way of thinking about God.

To substantiate their “traditions” and use of “holiness” as a way of power, the Pharisees theologized and taught a God who excluded and condemned sinners. Jesus proclaims and embodies a God who is including, forgiving, reaching beyond barriers and over traditions. The Father, according to Jesus, genuinely delights in forgiving and restoring, and that is as true for the tax collector on the corner or the demoniac in the cemetary as it is for all Jerusalem or the whole nation.

Jesus reminds us that not only are we the younger son, we also may be the older brother, threatened if God isn’t cooperating with our system of control and guranteed outcomes. We may also be worshipping the wrong God, because God delights in and celebrates the inclusion and restoration of rebels, outsiders and lost people.

First, I want to apologize to the bar for disturbing what has been a peaceful month. I wish I could explain what is happening here, but I am not sure I understand. Correction. I do understand this much: I feel personally attacked when Joell hauls Calvinism into a discussion. That’s my issue and my problem. I need to just back up and back out, which is what I am going to do. That’s the end of it. Best that I can, I won’t involve myself in this kind of discussion again.

On to another subject. Dawn Treader has an extensive set of links to bloggers and commenters concerned that the Emergent Church is a bad, bad thing. Read it and consider it for yourself.

For those of you who don’t know, this article has generated a huge volume of mail at IM. It’s about how a rather mediocre book by a megachurch pastor has made millions of dollars, and we are all supposed to like it. If you don’t like it, there is something wrong with you. If being told that you are a loser and you don’t love the lost unless your church does what this pastor says and does irritates you, there is something wrong with you. If you find the advice in his books pedantic, ordinary, trite and heavy-handed, there is something wrong with you. If the whole thing- from books to videos to satellite feeds to more books and more videos and monogramed journals and bathroom tissue- leaves you disgusted, there is something wrong with you.

Like it all. Try harder. Do as you are told….be a good little consumeristic sheep. Don’t think for yourself. That’s not “Christian.” If you don’t buy the lie that some pastors are more important than others, keep it to yourself. It might irritate someone who is doing the newest Christian bookstore produced fad.

Don’t say ANYTHING critical about this pastor, because God has raised him up to lead us through the darkness. How do we know this? Look at this big church and his big numbers! Size matters!

Something I can sink my teeth into! Potlucks!

[Edited}

Seerveld on how to read the Bible. Excellent, and NO, I didn’t steal any ideas from him. We’re just both right.

Michael: thank you for the encouraging words.

I think we are done. Annie met with the lady in charge of the women’s ministry today for an hour and a half. I am proud of my wife for searching the scriptures so diligently to prepare, she had about 8 pages of notes with biblical support for her position. The meeting was definitely friendly, and frankly they agreed on most details of doctrine. It’s God working through us, God initiates salvation, etc. Basically agreeing with Annie’s points. She even brought a Piper book to the meeting.

But here is the difference – the ministry leader thought that by Annie’s method (theology of the cross) and the study’s method (theology of glory) that you end up in the same place. That the goals are the same. That it’s just different ways of saying the same thing. Then she offered to let Annie be over the entire women’s study as the trainer for the small group leaders, but only if Annie agreed that the study was a good building block to start from, thought it was a valid spiritual life method, etc.

Meanwhile I was able to talk to one of our elders that I know pretty well. We had taken a few seminary classes together. Basically our church doesn’t have any statement that defines their method of teaching the spiritual life. This is the problem with Dallas Seminary: he had heard the exact same teaching as the study (complete with the gnostic-like problems) from some professors, and good theology of the cross from others. Everyone at our church is associated with Dallas that has a degree, and since the seminary doesn’t take a hard stance on it we don’t either. I don’t have any bitterness about that really, just frustrated that they don’t rule out some things without feeling like they are too dogmatic. I mean, we are an independent bible church with people from a variety of backgrounds, so I can’t expect denominational level doctrinal commitment.

So it struck me how completely postmodern our church is. Through the conversation with the elder, it came up that we are being intentionally vague in a lot of doctrinal areas in order to be a church home for the widest amount of people. This seems like a baby-boomer and Gen X preference. I’m finding that those in our age range that we spend time with (25-30) want more doctrinal commitment and more tradition. We are generally tired of the cheesiness.

Right now we are thankful that we are still on good terms with everyone that we’ve talked to, and a little depressed at how it is all unfolding.

While we were in SoCal for my grandmother’s funeral, she wished to be buried next to my father and grandfather, we toured around my old “stomping grounds”. One evening we wanted to take a walk and as Anaheim had changed quite a lot I thought that it would be wise to walk around the Disneyland Hotel…tourist areas are quite safe. The area was quite changed from my growing up years, I went to high school only a half a mile away so this area was very familiar to me growing up, but it had changed in the last fifteen years. I could barely find my way around.

We ended up having a delightful walk in the Disneyland Downtown area, it was a cool area between the Hotel and the Main Gate at the Park. There were lots of shops and restaurants and we walked, held hands and shared a smoothie. There were lots of people, but it was different, quite entertaining and one of the few rain-less times of our visit.

The next day we drove up to Silverado Canyon to visit friends, this is an old mining area to the east of the LA/Orange County Basin that’s now become a refuge for those trying to enjoy a bit of rural life in one of the biggest, most sprawling cities in the world. As we exited the canyon area and came back to the metro area we drove past Saddleback Church in Lake Forest CA. It was 6:35 on Saturday evening so I decided that we’d see if there was a Saturday nite service…there was, we went.

I could go on for quite a while about the motivational presentation given about leadership that evening, complete with tag-team presenters and music breaks. Mr. Warren’s Bible version agility is apparent in his “study handout”. There was a superb guitar solo during the offering, superb. Mr. Warren did tell an interesting story to everyone’s delight of how he was on a plane with a bunch of professional athletes and people kept coming to him for autographs, and he did say he was able to give Dennis Rodman (sp?) a copy of “the book”. There were about 1,500 very enthusiastic people there that evening and as we searched for a restroom after the show we walked about the “campus” and realized a very important thing about Saddleback Church and Rick Warren.

They make sense a day after visiting Disneyland. Saddleback Church is a perfect reflection of the shallow SoCal culture.

Tommy: As I have said before, I would strongly urge you and your wife to move on, and I don’t say that out of some need for everyone to become Reformed. I say it with some pastoral wisdom- I hope- about these situations.

Your church leaders have a theology and a chosen direction: dispensationalism, exchanged life teaching, and Rick Warren’s Purpose Driven Model. If you can’t support these things, you need to leave. You won’t change them. The PDC model tells those guys what to do with you. I can tell you what they say about you when you leave the room, because I’ve been in the room. Nothing you will do will correct this direction. They will say they appreciate it, they will promise to take your concerns seriously, they will shuffle it to the appropriate staff members, and you will continue to be either 1) an annoying burr in their saddle or 2) a guy they expect to lose and therefore won’t try to accomodate.

If I am wrong here, then I rejoice in being wrong.

Tommy, LIFE IS SHORT. You should thank this church for all its done for you, and move on to somewhere else. We all need to attend a church where our thoughts and worship are directed toward God, rather than toward the theology of the preacher or the problems we have with the direction of the church. That hour or two is precious. It’s important for you and your family, and it all needs to be about God and the Gospel. Not the kid’s programs or the latest fad. God-centered worship. Period. Find that place. I’ll be glad to help if you need help.

peace, MSpencer

Stand-up Presbyterians in Taiwan.

Michael Horton’s article put it all in perspective for me: What we’ve been going through at our church, my rapidly declining allegiance to dispensationalism, why my spiritual life was shriveling up, all of it.

I’ll have to make a long post about my theological and spiritual journey. All I want to do right now is cuss.

I just subscribed to Modern Reformation BTW.

Century One Bookstore. Great prices and good selection on material for Biblical Study.

Alex has good problems.

Next Sunday may well mark the day that our SBC church elects its first women deacons. The majority are in favor of it but there is some opposition. Ultimately it was decided to allow the Elders (a very un-SBC situation itself) to decide the matter and we agreed to allow women to serve if nominated and elected.

Our deacons do not have any spiritual authority. They are in charge of the grounds, ordinance preparation, benevolence, etc.

This is the thing that puzzles me greatly. Those that oppose electing women don’t have a problem in the world with women performing any of the duties listed above as long as we don’t call them deacons.

In other words, women can do deacon stuff, as long as they aren’t called deacons.

Is God fooled by this? If women can’t be called servants, then they can’t serve. It’s as simple as that.

Let my heresy trial begin.

Excellent article by David Wayne on forgiving the unrepentant.

How do KJV-Onlyists deal with the fact that King James was a raving homosexual?

The tasty bit of news that I like to drop on the KJV-onlyists is that for quite a few years the “Authorized Version” contained the Apocrypha, I don’t believe it was dropped until the early 1800’s. About half the onlyists that I’ve met believe that “authorized” refers to God, not to King James…weird. Their cultural paradigm is as Kurt said, indeed narrow. Being partly Jewish I find replacement theology one of the most difficult to tolerate.

In my never-ending quest to add nothing of substance to the BHT, I submit this quote from Brennan Manning. I know several of you have read and enjoyed his writing. This comes from The Ragamuffin Gospel. “Aristotle says I am a rational animal. I say I am an angel with an incredible capacity for beer.” Amen, brother.

Also, has anyone seen this? I have no idea why I’m so enthralled, but I find this hilarious. Not only that, but because the song is stuck in my head, I ended up downloading Dragostea Din Tei by O-Zone. Maybe JS can translate for me since it’s in Romanian.

I like what Jared and the others are doing here. Can we do something like that here? If not, I’m going to go ahead an order the book that the Thinklings are going to read and particpate with them. I really think this would be something fun for us to do and I need this kind of interaction.

I just finished reading “What St. Paul Really Said”, and I just received “The New Testament and the People of God” in the mail and I’m starting it today. (Also got Leith’s Creeds of the Churches and Piper’s DVD set for my home group.)

So, here are a few thoughts:

Piper v. Wright
If you listened to Piper’s talks at the Reformission conference page, you heard him get upset at Wright calling the imputation of righteousness nonsense. Here is the section in “What St. Paul…” (Pg. 122-123) that got him riled up:

I really enjoyed the book, it is a good read, and you can read it quickly. I wanted a general introduction to what he was going to say in his thicker volumes before I waded into them. I think what is frustrating about Wright is that he is trying to change the basic language that we have used post-Reformation, and doesn’t offer us language to replace it. I.e. he redefines what justification means, what the gospel means, what the righteousness of the believer means, etc. An example is found on page 41:

You can react one of two ways to what Wright is doing. 1) lose your faith for a time like a commenter said happened to him. If you do, you are ignoring statements like the one above where he says he agrees with you and to keep doing what you are doing, only use some different language for it. 2) Incorporate some or all of his language on certain subjects into what we use. I found that the way he described the law-court analogies in the NT to be very helpful. I personally am not ready to ditch the imputed righteousness of Christ, but I have to take seriously what Wright wrote about it. Interestingly enough, Doug Moo agrees with some of Wright’s conclusions about “the righteousness of God” meaning that it is God’s own righteousness that He does not give any other, although Moo thinks that it only means this on select occasions, not every time.

Regardless of whether you end up agreeing with Wright or not, his scholarship is top-notch and deserves to be read. This isn’t another new philsophical fad like Open Theism, this is rooted firmly in the Old Testament, the history of 2nd Temple Judaism, and the New Testament. He takes the Word of God very seriously, and it is reflected in his writing.

I usually try to respect opposing viewpoints in the world of Christendom. For example, I’m not throwing my lot in with the Young Earthers, but it doesn’t bother me if somebody holds that view. Same with Dispensationalists. I mean, I feel I was delivered from “Lahaye-ism”, but I’m not about to call my mom up and argue about how Left Behind is poopy.

But KJV-onlyism…I just can’t politely disagree there. It’s just crazy and bunk and rubbish. I mean, even the KJV is prefaced with a note that it is only an imperfect translation and better ones will come in the future. (Or something like that…need to find and frame the exact text).

The other thing that drives me up the wall is that KJV-onlyism is an Anglo-centric view at its worst. Coincidence that the only true translation would be in English? Of course, because the United States of America is the New Jerusalem. Amen.

Brrrr.

Are KJVonlyists the best Christians?

They certainly have the highest view of the scriptures. Holding to the doctrine that a bible that we have now is the inspired, infallible Word of God.

In fact, to deny the KJV is to deny God.

OR…are KJVonlyists a dangerous and frightening cult?

If your wife has pierced ears…you are in trouble. The whole Biblical message on piercings and jewelry...right here in the Boar’s Head Saturday Bible Study, led by Van Til the BHT’s Magic Tail Chasing Dog. Everyone get your NIV/BHT Study Bible and head for the back room.

The founder of Gospel for Asia- a group Denise and I gladly support at every opportunity- talks about persecution and the sad preaching of American televangelists. Listen to this man. He’s a wise person, and his words about American “No Gospel” preaching are prophetic. Osteeniacs- read and consider what he’s talking about.

I am approaching the conclusion of “The New Testament and the People of God,” so it’s now safe to say that Open-Source Theology has a summary of the entire book. The first two sections are daunting to most people, but the last two sections are accessible, ground-breaking, and highly significant. Denise has been reading “The Challenge of Jesus,” which takes a short view of some of the same material in Wright’s first two big books. So we’ve had some interesting conversations, particularly as she encounters Wright’s ideas for the first time. (She frequently tells me where my past teaching has gone directly counter to NTW :-)

Crucial to Wright’s work is comprehending the larger “story” that is the first century Jewish worldview. Wright doesn’t harp or rant, but he clearly says that when we approach the New Testament, and then the Old Testament, as books with a Christian (I would say “protestant evangelical”) story and worldview, we are bouncing happily along the wrong road. The resulting effect on interpreting the smaller units of New Testament material can be fairly traumatic to Baptists like me, who have worked some passages from the standpoint of Christian evangelism so long that we don’t know what to do when someone turns on the light and we realize we’ve quite possible been in the wrong room saying the wrong thing for a long time. This has been doubled up for me as I go through Mark section by section with my Advanced Bible students, and look at those stories, parables and teachings in the “Wright light.” If he’s “right,” I’ve been right on some things, and way wrong on others.

Just to be basic, my students ask a lot of questions from the standpoint of the Christian, protestant, evangelical, revivalist way of reading the Bible. “When did Peter become a Christian?” for example. Wright would point out that what we have is a record of Peter considering if Jesus is the Messiah, what kind of Messiah Jesus is, how his life is affected by the Messiahship of Jesus, what Jesus as risen Messiah means for Peter’s conception of Israel’s God, etc. Is there a moment where Peter “comes to faith” in the uniquely Christian sense? Prays the sinners prayer in a revivalistic, evangelical way? Goes from lost to found in an identifiable moment? Wright says we’re asking the wrong questions and are going to find wrong answers.

The danger then becomes this: Are all the stories, etc in the New Testament “big picture” stories about Israel rather than stories and teachings about individual faith, etc? If the story of, for example, the Prodigal Son is really about the end of the continuing exile of Israel from God’s favor, and the acceptance of God’s new kind of Kingdom in Jesus, can we preach that evangelically to the people in front of us? I say absolutely yes. What it says to Israel, and to those deciding to stand with or against a God who takes back such a people, is just as true for each of us, as we decide whether we identify with, trust and serve such a God. What may have been true about Israel is true about Israelites, and Gentiles (Paul’s Gospel) and eventually, according to Wright, the story of Jesus is heard as the story of the Jewish people, and I would say, the story of all of us. Our story is the story of Israel and Israel’s God, and God’s Gospel to them, and us, is Jesus.

It’s a bit scary, but it’s done more to bring all sorts of things together than anything else I’ve read. We’re enjoying it.

The phrase “original autographs” makes me laugh until my sides hurt.

“I believe that the Bible is inerrant in the original autographs.” OK. You can believe that. I believe that the surface of the planet Venus was once a garden paradise, occupied by highly intelligent flying squirrels. With all my heart.

And that fact changes my life exactly as much as the “proverbial original autographs” do for inerrancy holders.

Paul dictates a letter to “the churches in asia minor.” Let’s say that it’s going to 4, maybe 6 churches. Simultaneously. Now, he might have dictated a single copy, or maybe, just maybe, he had the scribe make 4 or 6 copies at once, and sent them all on their way. Which copy is “inerrant”?

Inerrancy that doesn’t apply to documents that actually exist is inoperative. It’s useless. It has no practical implication. You could just as well say that John Norman’s Gor novels were “inerrant in their original autographs” (although perhaps those still exist…), or Beowolf was inerrant, or that God revealed himself in the pattern of residue left in the pan when you fried an egg last week, but your mom accidentally washed it before you could show anyone. Or that an angel told you where gold plates were buried, and gave you some special glasses and underwear to use when reading them, but then the angel came and took the plates back.

If you believe that “something” was without error “some time”, but got “lost”, then you’re hoping that somehow a bit of that rubs off on your particular copies. I don’t care how you couch it, or how much you insist.

When you believe in things that you don’t understand, you suffer. – Stevie Wonder, well-known theologian.

This is general enough that I hope I’m not breaking the dead horse ban, but it does refer to the Challies article and Michael’s illegal post (JN).

The closing section of the Challies article instantly reminded me of a debate that James White had with some guy name Matatics over the doctrine of Mary and her being born without original sin.

Matatics argued this:

Mary is the mother of Jesus.
Jesus could cause his mother to be born without original sin. To deny this denies His power.
Jesus would have wanted His mother to be born without original sin. To deny this denies His goodness.

The hubris should be evident, in both arguments. “I know what God is like, therefore because I know what God is like, I know how He operates and I know how He would handle __________ (fill in the blank). “To deny my definition of _________ and to deny my understanding of God is to deny God”

quod erat demonstrondum

Rules are made to be broken. I am going to post one post on inerrancy. Maybe I will open comments, maybe not. I have e-mail.

First, let me say that Tim Challies wrote an excellent and fair minded series of articles on inerrancy. I appreciate the thoroughly researched content, and the kind, moderate tone. Tim is a fine writer, and a gracious person. I particularly appreciate his pointing out that inerrancy and young earth creationism don’t go hand in hand. Though I disagree with this logic, as an old earther, I am glad to be included among those who may still take scripture seriously and believe in an old earth.

I want to respond to three things. First, In the first essay, Tim says that I never offered a definition for inerrancy, and he is correct. The entire weight of my posting on this subject rests on the fact that “inerrancy” is a self-evident term, with a prefix negating the root. The root, “error” is the term that inerrantists can’t allow to be defined with a simple dictionary definition. (Look up the term in a simple dictionary and note the lack of qualifiers.) A qualified definition must be created that must be explained as not including various categories of error. These errors- including, but not limited to, non-scientific description, words intended to be lies, approximation, poetic imagery, etc.- must be excluded from “inerrancy,” and the believer in inerrancy must accept a special definition of error that excludes various kinds of strict non-truth. With all due respect, this is sophistry, and in any other field of knowledge, it would be called such quickly. (Imagine political liberals defining their version of being “pro-life.”) I fail to see why the term “inerrancy” is philosophically essential. It’s almost as if the adherents are claiming that GOD requires this word to be used. Is that what I am getting? There are twenty great words to use about the Bible that need almost no qualification at all (beyond the fact that we are speaking of the Bible) to be meaningful: True. Authoritative. Sufficient. Inspired. How can we say that if I use these four, but refuse to use inerrancy, I am demeaning the Bible? It’s like asking why I don’t put a knob on my amp that goes to 11.

Secondly, Tim closes a paragraph on the importance of using the term inerrancy with this sentence: The doctrine of inerrancy is taught within the pages of the Bible as clearly as if the word “inerrancy” was used. In this paragraph, Tim argues illustratively that the term “Trinity” isn’t used in scripture. Yes, and it isn’t used in a number of creeds of confessions either: Apostle’s Creed to New Hampshire Confession. Would my friends refuse to ordain a minister who said, “I believe there is one God eternally existing in three persons: Father, Son and Spirit. But I do not choose to use the word Trinity, because there is much confusion about the term. I prefer to use the full sentence.” Would you require him to use the term before ordaining him?

I’ll say it again: Why is my willingness to fully subscribe to Westminster Section 1- without reservation- not sufficient? Why must I be pressed to deny a term that is not confessionally or theologically essential? Why did one BHT commenter announce that I am outside of “orthodoxy” because I choose to not use a term that no confession used until the 20th century?

Finally, In a closing section, Tim makes the following statements, each one with an explanation.

First, if we deny inerrancy, we make God a liar.
Second, if we deny inerrancy we lose trust in God.
Third, if we deny the clear testimony of Scripture that it is inerrant, we make our minds a higher standard of Truth than the Bible.
Fourth, if we deny inerrancy, and indicate that small details are incorrect, we cannot consistently argue that all the doctrine the Bible contains is correct.

If Michael believes the Bible contains everything God wanted in it the way God wanted it said, He is calling God a liar, and losing trust in God.
If Michael affirms Westminster Section 1, as written, without addition, he is calling God a liar and losing trust in God.
If Michael preaches and teaches that the Bible is true, inspired, authoritative and sufficient, but refuses to use the word inerrancy as defined by __________________, he is calling God a liar and is losing trust in God.
By refusing to speak of the Bible in a term the Bible does not use, Michael makes his mind a higher standard of truth than the Bible.
Michael cannot believe the Bible teaches correct doctrine unless he also believes that all small details in the Bible are correct.

I leave it to you, good readers, to read what I have written on the Bible and decide if these statements are true. If I have called God a liar, am making my mind a higher standard than scripture and are causing others to lose trust in God, then there is a logical course of action that ought to be taken with those who trust me to be their minister, teacher and pastor. Otherwise, perhaps we could consider what has happened when the term inerrancy divides evangelicalism in the ways indicated above.

A Conversation in God’s Kitchen
Magic Books, Grocery Lists and Silent Messiahs
Does This Help?

I only saw Gene Scott once on TV when I was staying at a friend’s house, late at night. He was chomping his cigar as usual, wearing a cap that said “Kill a Pissant for Christ” and talking about an upcoming weinie roast out at his ranch that cost $1000 a ticket, and then he was only promising you might get half a weinie, but you’d get to see his famous Arabian horses perform. I always wanted to see him again but never could find him where I was living at the time, and by the time I moved to Tulsa he was not on Tulsa TV anywhere.

Where I really became a fan of his is when I saw Glen Campbell on TBN with Paul Crouch. Glen talked about how instrumental Gene Scott was in his coming to Christ and Paul Crouch looked all nervous and changed the subject. Anyone who could make Paul Crouch uncomfortable is AOK in my book!

This one needed it’s own post.

Exchanged Life teaching

Let me put it as simply as I can. You were born with a desperately sinful nature (Rom 1:28). It was not responsive to God at all. When you came to Christ, that old sinful nature died (Rom 6:6). It no longer exists. In its place is your newly created nature that responds to God and His love (2 Cor 5:17). Your new inner being, sometimes called “spirit man” is a container inside you for God’s life. So now you – the real you deep inside – is a new creation who is deeply loved by God.

If you are a believer, you may get confused about that “you” that is supposed to be good. Let’s face it, sometimes we don’t look like a saint. That’s because we live on earth in a fleshy body taht can still sin. It can go on a real “flesh trip” (Rom 7).

Although your spirit – that person deep inside – is completely righteous and good (2 Cor 5:21), your mind, your emotions, and your will are still under construction…When your new inner self was created, it was left to live in a body with a mind, will, and emotions that need reprogramming. That process of reprogramming happends when we choose as an act of our will to “die” to our fleshy attitudes and actions and to allow Jesus to live in us and through us

If you are a believer, a living Jesus is on the inside of you every minute of every day with His full and powerful life always available.

Caterpillars and Butterflies

An illustration of the Christian life:

1) A butterfly egg is an unbeliever.
2) It hatches into a caterpillar, this is your conversion. Just like a caterpillar is hungry, we are hungry to know God and begin to grow and grow
3) We grow until we come to the place of total commitment and we think we can’t grow anymore. We now enter the cocoon phase. Direct quote: “If we are serious about going on with God, growing beyond our comfort zone into His will for our lives, there will come a time when we enter the “cocoon” phase so God can transform us. It will be a crucifixion time where we die to the former ways we have thought and believed and acted and where wwe are being retooled for a new dimension in living. It often feels lonely, and we may be in the dark. It may seem that God has forsaken and forgotten us. Life may not make sense. But if we will be still and patiently wait for God’s work in the process, one day we will experience life on a level we never thought possible. We will be set free.”

4) “In a very real sense, the old caterpillar has died and has been replaced with a completely new life. The old has gone, the new has come. When we decide to make Jesus Christ not only our master and Lord but our life, we are ready to live on a higher plane. Mature, flight-ready Christians emerge from teh “crucifixion cocoon” with new internal equipment….That new created you-that innermost you-was created by Christ Jesus to be holy and righteous. You are no longer a dirty, rotten sinner. You are a saint created for good works. Do you see who you are?”...”You have to live in an earthy body that still has flesh, but the real authentic “you” is vibrantly, thrillingly alive. This is why you can “esteem” yourself, love yourself.”

These are from Annie’s bible study:

1) Read Romans 8:12-13. According to verse 13, what action do you have to take to live according to the Spirit?

2) I want you to see that the cros was not just a place in time and history, although it certainly was that. It is also a principle that operates in the life of a believer on a continual basis. This crucifixion principle is dying to “self-nature” or dying to “flesh.” It is absolutely necessary to obtain the freedom in Christ Jesus that we are promised.

3) If you continue in your journey with God, longing to move forward in knowing Him, He will inevitably lead you to the cross. His cross will somehow, someday cross your path. At the place where He crosses you, you will have a decision to make. Will I live in the flesh, getting what I want, when I want it, the way I want it, or will I choose to go to the cross with what I want and get in on what God wants? Will I give up and give in, or will I go my own way.

More on the way…

4) Most of us experience the panic of the “hang time” that comes even after we commit to fully surrender and trust in God. It may not seem like He’s there. It may not look like He is able to hold you securely when you’re dangling over the cliff. But if you will surrender fully to Him in complete abandon, He will always be there for you.

(diagram of a person on the “cliff of safety” that needs to jump off the “cliff of surrender” into the sea of “loss of control” – this is the crucifixion principle)

You will have a choice. The choice is to jump into the arms of God or to stay on the cliff of your own will. You are facing the decision of your life. What will you do? Will you let go of everything in your life that keeps you from total and complete dependence on Him? Are you ready to surrender to Him?

5) You will never discover life as it was meant to be lived if you don’t give in to the cross. You will never be free to bear the fruit of the Spirit in your children’s lives if you resist its call. If you hold on to your self-life, you will lose your whole life. But if you surrender to the cross, you will find your life…Did you experience a crucifixion moment today?

more… More »« Less

Holy Schnikes! How did I miss this? And why am I surprised? I’m not.

Our geographical epicenters of importance are not God’s. Praise him for that.

I’ll be moving to the So.Cal world in a few weeks after accpeting a position. Woot!

Anyone in the area willing to meet in meat space? I drive down in about 2 weeks.

Seeing I’ll be in the San Diego area there is the remote possibility that I may also attend/hang out at Westminster.

I Couldn’t Look Away: The Crazed, Cranky Christianity of Dr. Gene Scott.

Now get on the phones!

The impending excommunication of the Episcopal church from the Anglican communion is now all but finished. There’ll be some time to clear things up, but it looks pretty bad. I got the story and commentary at This is Life, but you can read the original document here. Here’s the most important paragraph:

14. Within the ambit of the issues discussed in the Windsor Report and in order to recognise the integrity of all parties, we request that the Episcopal Church (USA) and the Anglican Church of Canada voluntarily withdraw their members from the Anglican Consultative Council for the period leading up to the next Lambeth Conference. During that same period we request that both churches respond through their relevant constitutional bodies to the questions specifically addressed to them in the Windsor Report as they consider their place within the Anglican Communion. (cf. paragraph 8) . . .

18. In the meantime, we ask our fellow primates to use their best influence to persuade their brothers and sisters to exercise a moratorium on public Rites of Blessing for Same-sex unions and on the consecration of any bishop living in a sexual relationship outside Christian marriage.

This is pretty big news for us Anglicans. I can’t wait to talk to my priest this Sunday to see what he has to say about it.

“Tickets to see the Rev. Joel Osteen this weekend in Dallas are going for as much as 10 times their face value,” the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram reports. Dallas’ American Airlines Center has only about half the seats of Osteen’s Lakewood Church in Houston, and now the $10 tickets—long since sold out—are selling for more than $100. (seems like it would be cheaper to make the four-hour drive to Houston).

“Joel Osteen is now to the Christian religion what Michael Jordan was to the NBA,” Perfectseats.com’s Gary McBride told the newspaper. “When Michael Jordan played for the Chicago Bulls, game tickets sold out months in advance. In Christianity, Joel Osteen is that much of a superstar.”

Now I know why I like “Jesus Christ Superstar.” At least it gets the main character right.

I am going to be out of the picture about half the time in the next 3 days. You guys need to blog a bit without me. We need some posts in here. People read this you know.

Feel Josh’s pain. He tries a bit of humor, but dem Lutherans dey just don’t laff. (Gotta read the comments to the original if you can.)

Josh...try this: “A Lutheran came from Nantucket…”

Jared predicts the Oscars.

A few thoughts on Lewis, and God’s work through us.

I thought I was going to read a post on great art...but Noooooooo.

GetReligion on the impending Anglican Split. Guess who has been asked to leave?

Safety seats are great. You can strap your two year old in while you have sex with one of your students.

I watched this Ward Churchill guy giving an angry speech on C-Span the other night. Seems he is a multi-talented person.

Rather well written and poetic piece by worship leader David Crowder....who does break the unwritten rule that CCM types must be good looking. (Good for ya David!)

I’m trying to get an IM piece on Gene Scott done before I go to Lexington and see this.

Well, finally yesterday I got my adsl back(along with digital tv… bundled… kinda funky) and then this morning find out that the house we are renting will no longer be our house at the end of March. Carp! So, we have now stopped unpacking boxes and are now house hunting while our house in Kitimat remains unsold…. (sigh).

Had a wonderful trip to Lander, Wyoming where my brother-in-law is the Pastor at an Alliance church. Had a great time in the nosebleed section of North America (with nary a inter-racial marriage in sight! ) and got to take the entire family caving! Pictures should be available soon!

I have enjoyed the discussions on Communion, Innerancy and MacArthur which featured all kinds of stress for Mike without me being the cause… always a nice thing. Let me just say that John MacArthur Sr. was my pastor in high school…. I assume he’s dead now though. He was an awesome guy (or “is” if he ain’t actually dead yet).

My Old friend has moved with me from New England to my backyard in the Rockies. Here he is in the third picture from the top, lying down and looking to the skies.

BTW – This is really what I see from my bedroom window. Cool eh?

I know this is really old news (2003) but I have just found out that I have lost an old friend. I lived about a couple hours away from him and used to visit him often. Rain, snow or shine he was always there, like a rock :-), to greet us and give our family lovely times of wonder as we just looked at him and enjoyed his quiet presence. How he bore witness to the skill of his Creator! But old age was bound to do its work and he is gone. My son was born since the last time I saw my friend and it makes me very sad that Owen will never get to meet him. I shall miss him! So long Old Man!

Read the Obituary

Anyone recognize this guy?

Life has gotten crazy. Three days ago I was in hot water over allowing two groups of African-American students to do dance routines at our talent show. (We have a “no dancing rule. Don’t talk to me about it. It’s so embarassing.) The students were “talked to” and at least 7 staff complained. One rather racist rural white kid was extremely offended. One staff member said I had allowed a “mating dance.”

I talked to the Dean of Students. I really poured out my heart about what I believed God was doing in bringing 40% of our students from non-white, non-American cultures. I talked about having a God-centered view of the cultural expressions our kids share with us. She listened.

Today, she found me pretty early and thanked me for the talk and a letter I gave her. She said she viewed the DVD of the shows, called in the girls and apologized for being displeased. She said their talents were wonderful, and the next time they performed she would be on the front row clapping.

You win some….you lose some. Most of the time, I lose. This time…the reasonable view prevailed. Fundamentalism doesn’t always have the advantage.

Then, yesterday, our just resigned pastor cancels the Spring revival. I have to find a way to replace it, March 27-30 or April 10-13. That will be a full time challenge for the next few weeks. I would appreciate your prayers as I look for a speaker.

UPDATE: I just staffed the Revival in less than 3 hours. God is good.

As it happens, I go to church with two people who work for one of the organizations represented on the WorldviewWeekend site, so I’ve printed out the test and their “correct” answer key (I’m a moderate, its seems), and I plan to ask at least one of them about it. I’ve already let the one (who does a radio show) that I have a beef with people who venture dogmatically far beyond what I think Scripture supports, which simply shocked him, but I haven’t yet given him details.

It shocked him because by that time we had chatted quite a few time and even shared beer together at a local pub, and he figured I was all on board with his worldview stuff. {:)}

Proof that the “Actors are Somehow Better Than You” mentality isn’t just found on the left, note this comment concerning Kirk Cameron: By the age of 8 he was so convinced there was no God that he laughed at those who thought there was. But that all changed one afternoon as he sat in his sports car pondering the first Gospel message he had ever heard.

Just think: if we can just get all those eight-year-old atheists into sports cars, we could evangelize the whole world, and Jesus won’t have died in vain!

Having a “Christian worldview” gives parochial-and-anxious-about-it Evangelicals and various attenuated Protestants an ersatz catholicity and depth which they need for a variety of reasons—both to meet their honest and well-placed desires for membership, proper beginnings, and to keep the Times from lumping them in with Pat Robertson.

Fr. Gassalasca Jape, S.J.
The New Pantagruel

Stop whatever you’re doing right now. This is better than Macarthur. The future of America and Christianity depends on it.

Now, calmly and rationally take the Worldview Center’s Christian Worldview Test. This test will tell you in just a few minutes how good of a Christian you are, based on your agreement or disagreement with such statements as “The Ten Commandments originally provided a basis for our legal and political system creating justice and peace” and “Biological evolution (life from non-life to human beings) runs contrary to reason, science and history.” Seriously, take the quiz. It’s the most fun you’ll have all day.

The good news is that I’m a Moderate Biblical Worldview Thinker. The bad news is that in the “science” sub-section I am a Communist/Marxist/Socialist/Secular Humanist Worldview Thinker. Not believing in a worldwide flood makes me a Communist. It must be true because Kirk Cameron told me so.

On Macarthur again, I have to say that it says a bunch when your editors (I assume) tell you that it is ok for you to title your book…...well, see for yourself.

It’s almost a parody on itself. How do you say it? “Yes, I wrote the book on _______?”

How Jesus Christ Ended the Old Covenant Regime. John Piper’s current pastor’s column. Very pertinent to our discussion on Isaiah 7. Remember, I was responding to Ed Babinski’s leaving the flock over this issue. I think it is vital. Piper addresses it well. And he’s reading Goldsworthy. Trouble ahead! :-)

This is an important, Christ-centered, interpretative statement. (Obviously Piper reads the BHT.) More »« Less

The author of the article Dolan links- from a journal edited by a former BHT fellow- contains the following statement:

If such verbal complexity seems to border on deception, Scripture states that with the devious, God will show Himself shrewd (2 Sam 22:27; Ps 18:26), and Ahaz was certainly devious.

Tim Challies is starting his series on inerrancy.

It’s interesting that Tim says “It is difficult to know exactly what Michael believes about inerrancy, and I suspect he is as much in the dark as the rest of us. Whether he dislikes only the term “inerrancy” or the underlying doctrine is difficult to discern, but I suspect both are true, at least to some extent.”

This morning I had an email from “For Ministry.Com,” a ministry of the American Bible Society, wanting to link 5 of my articles on the Bible. I have a generous amount of letters in my files on the IM essays I’ve written about the Bible, and the vast majority at least figured out what I said enough to be helped. A bunch of people in the blogosphere heard what I said enough to conclude I am “out of historic orthodoxy.”

I explained it long posts and in short ones. I can explain it in a sentence: God got exactly what he wanted.

I am looking forward to Tim’s posts, but let’s be honest. If you are supposed to “reformed” and you don’t go down this rabbit hole, then you must not be a rabbit. That’s my problem.

Speckledbird wrote in comments: I spent a lot of ministry time in So Cal, and one thing most of us pastors agree on is that a young man out of Master’s Seminary (MacArthur’s School) is most likely going to be a legalistic, prideful pain in the butt. I had an elder at a former church who felt like every time his son came home from masters, he would have to deprogram him from believing he had all the answers. Fortunately, his son moved on and got a life. Others aren’t so fortunate.

Several years ago I was a summer pastoral intern at a church in Montreal. A team of undergraduates came from Grace Community Church (Dr. MacArthur’s church) to do a month of youth ministry and outreach (door-to-door, youth rallies, etc). Within a week they demanded to have a meeting with the staff and the board and then proceeded to lay before us all that was wrong with our church and how we should fix it so that we would be more like GCC. Their attitude was very much that once they had shown us “what was wrong” we were under obligation to fix it.

The only reason I can think of why we didn’t send them packing back to California with a swift kick to the backside is that, well… we were Christians!

Jim: I grew up in Sunday School and around the Bible, and I had never read the Prophets- other than Jonah and some Elijah stories- until college. Then I took a class in the Prophets from my OT prof, and was just blown away with all I didn’t know. Amos. Isaiah. Micah. It was the most exciting Bible study in my life. In fact, I really had no idea there was an OT story, or how this king fit with that prophet fit with that book. I sat there for a semester just blown away. We read the Bible as the New Testament with a few proof texts from the Old. Then we said we believed it all. Every word.

Indeed, Michael, one of the things which bugged me as a teenager was that Mary and Joseph did not, in fact, name their son Emmanuel. {:)}

There is no question in my mind that everything in the O.T. should be re-evaluated Christologically, but let’s not make the foolish mistake of stating that the way in which Christ fulfills all those O.T. prophecies is obvious. I don’t tolerate that kind of silly sloppiness when it comes from fortunate tellers or ancient prophecies of 9/11, and I think it would be quite absurd to claim that Christ is found in O.T. by the same standard. He’s there, of course; He’s the whole point of it all. But that doesn’t mean every mention of a mysterious figure is actually pre-incarnate Christ, or that every minor prophecy was actually about Christ and the contemporary audience should have seen it.

I have a modest proposal. If, in fact, we are going to discuss the specifics of a particular passage here on BHT, can we make it a general principle that those involved in the discussion (including lurkers) should, wherever possible, actually read the passage and the surrounding context in their bibles for a while before posting? It will help make discussions a lot more fun, believe me. Taking about things you have no actual knowledge may work on TV, kids, but here in the real world, it’s not going to help you pick up babes.

While you’re finding your bibles and blowing the dust off them, let me help you out a bit. Here’s the passage in question, in context. Be advised, my commentary will likely offend everyone:

Again the LORD spoke to Ahaz, “Ask the LORD your God for a sign, whether in the deepest depths or in the highest heights.”

But Ahaz said, “I will not ask; I will not put the LORD to the test.”

Then Isaiah said, “Hear now, you house of David! Is it not enough to try the patience of men? Will you try the patience of my God also? Therefore the Lord himself will give y’all a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel. He will eat curds and honey when he knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right. But before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste. The LORD will bring on you and on your people and on the house of your father a time unlike any since Ephraim broke away from Judah-he will bring the king of Assyria.”

Ahaz is supposed to ask for a sign. He refuses. God gets pissed. [In the American sense of the word. Sorry, but that’s what happens. Deal with it.] Through Isaiah, God