Just sitting here with my lovely wife watching “My Name is Earl” and noticed the Cold Beer sign in the bowling alley is the same one as here in the BHT.  I’m guessing I’m not the first to notice that, but it made this newbie laugh.

Pirate, the 15-20 minute point is a little non sequitir, but other than that, Amen and Amen.

Addicted to sermon-stealing? Try these three steps, and you’ll be writing your own sermons in no time flat!

1. Preach for 15-20 minutes instead of 45-60.


2. Preach a text, not a theme.


3. Write a little Bible study on the text before you preach. Ideas will come.


4. Know your people. Pastors on the intarnets aren’t preaching to your people.


5. Stop exhausting yourself planning some stupid, huge show every Sunday.

MOD: That’s five.

Jim: I appreciate your post, but I have to tell you that I have great problems understanding where Driscoll or anyone else is coming from.

1) Everyone knows a woman doesn’t want to have sex every day.
2) Reducing this to a “woman provides a release for the man” act is another issue entirely. Some women may freely choose this kind of relationship, but most women won’t, and no reading of “your body is not your own” implies that a woman should provide sexual release for a man on a daily basis.
3) I’m totally in awe of the lack of consideration for a woman’s emtional, physical and family stress that Driscoll’s comment implies.
4) In a real marriage, with illness, children, emergencies, whatever, it just won’t happen.
5) How can I say this? When Driscoll talks like this, it seems demeaning to men. Yes, we have physical/sexual needs, but to quote someone famous, “I am not an animal. I am a human being.”

peace MS

BTW….there were 20 comments waiting to be approved at IM when I got back on line tonight. A record for a few hours and one post.

Most of my good illustrations are attributable to others (and I do give credit). Mostly because I’m a boring jacka$$.

This, however, boils my blood.

Michael: Frankly, I think a lot of the fur flying over Driscoll’s comments is just plain jealousy; a lot of people are mad because he apparently is getting action every day, and they aren’t.

There is a large segment within the contemporary evangelical church that has bought just enough of the Oprah agenda of pop psychology and feminism to find the ammo they need to resist gaining an honest, human, biblical perspective on their husbands’ sexuality, desires and needs. “Mutual submission” is just new-speak for “She doesn’t have to put out.” Anyone who talks about headship or submission in the context of marital intimacy – treacherous ground on which to tread anyway, to be sure – is lambasted as a misogynist (or worse, as a closet bondage freak.) The rest of us tolerate this nonsense, and then march out for the hand-wringing ceremony over dirty pictures on the Internet. John had words for where that will take the church – cf. Revelation 2:18f.

I’m well past 20, and while I’m currently celibate, sex once a day strikes me as by no means excessive; Were the appropriate partner available, I’d do it for the obvious physiological benefits (sex is excellent exercise; it also relieves tension, evens out the testosterone cycle, and it promotes a healthy prostate), If that’s offensive to Christians, perhaps we take Paul’s better-to-marry-than-burn argument to its logical conclusion, and admit that for some men, the best situation would be to allow for Islamic-style committed polygamous marriages (which require financial arrangements and conjugal rights at parity for each wife), rather than giving our de-facto endorsement to the serial polygamy that no-fault divorce legislation has given us.

(I can’t wait to read the mail I get from this one…)

So it’s all there in the WCF! If you look hard enough, you can root today’s controversies in an uninspired, errant, man-made but wonderfully helpful and sound document, which by the way, I am grateful to God for. Especially now! Now my arguments are no longer subjective, but objective, and confessionally referenced. Pirate and I agree on this. (jn)

Bob, thanks for at least pretending to talk about the subject for a change. However, your rhetoric indicates to me that you are under the incorrect impression that I support the Westminster Standards or subscription to them by any church body. I don’t. I subscribe to the Book of Concord, which entails a rejection of most of Westminster. Thus, I think they’re chock-full of false doctrine. See, just because I’m interested in what a document means or how it’s used in a church body does not mean I believe in what it says. I’m currently writing a paper on two decrees of Vatican II, Lumen Gentium and Unitatis Redintegratio, and what they mean for modern Roman Catholic theology. In my estimation, these two documents are garbage from beginning to end. But that doesn’t mean I have no desire to understand or interact with them. So stop acting so threatened when I suggest that WCF does or doesn’t say something. When I say “The Westminster Standards teach X,” that is not the same as saying “X is true.”

So the whole point of this discussion is not to try to force you to hold one theological viewpoint or another in obedience to the Standards. I have absolutely zero affection for Westminster. The point is that I’m trying to understand what the Standards say, how the PCA uses them, whether how the PCA uses them is actually consistent with what they say, and how this all reflects on their internal theological integrity and clarity. That is why I have found you up to this point extremely unhelpful. I am trying to wrap my mind around a historical document. its doctrinal significance, and its historical and ecclesiastical context, and you’re talking about your personal feelings and giving these sarcastic answers (as though WCF I is talking about the order of service!). I do have some thoughts and questions, though, if you’re interested in actually talking about your Standards:

More »« Less

On Slashdot of all places I saw a great Tennyson quote. Thinking about Mark Driscoll’s comments, or the debates we all love to have about Calvinism, Arminianism, denominations, confessions, the best beer, beans or no beans in chili, rock vs. classical, it all boils down to this:

Our little systems have their day; They have their day and cease to be; They are but broken lights of thee.
-Tennyson

IM is updated with “Daily Sex With Pastor Mark.”

Michael, Driscoll actually said men want to know how to have sex with their wives “at least once a day”. Was this just men in their 20’s or is this giving hope to all men?

If he had said these men need to know how to have great marriages, including exciting sex that is godly and channeled completely in their marriages, then no problem. If he had said, most men are pigs, their lust is wrecking their lives and they need to be taught how to rejoice in their wives as co heirs of grace as well as lovers ala Proverbs 5:15-23… no problem. Michael, I’ll be interested to read your essay as this comment also made me cringe.

Re. the discussion I was having with Pirate, I guess my part ends this way. I believe the main issues the PCA has skirmishes about are not Confessional, like music style and what women can do in a worship service. Pirate states the confession does indeed reference these issues, at least providing the context these issues fall under and then asks me to discuss and list the parts of the WCF of that I believe have no relevance to the issues I see people fighting over. My position was that nothing in the WCF’s 33 chapters resolves these issues. Pirate asked me to prove that the WCF did not speak to these issues by citing the Confession and discussing it.

So then with Pirate’s encouragement spurring me on, I ransacked my WCF and found some references. On praise bands and drums, the WCF requires them.
WCF I Of the Holy Scriptures VIII “they are to be translated into the vulgar language of every nation ….the Word of God dwelling plentifully in all, they may worship in an acceptable manner” This is a slam dunk for my position, and I thank Pirate for helping me find this since everyone agrees with me that music is just another form of speech and communication… This part of the WCF proves that the men who wrote it were culturally sensitive, and knew each culture would need the translation of scripture in their own “vulgar” (read street-Language) tongue. Hip Hop worship is required for Hip Hop contexts.

On women verbally speaking, WCF XXI I speaks to this when it states that “God … is to be feared, loved, praised, , called upon trusted in, and served , with all the heart, and with all the soul, and with all the might.” And on Baptists preaching in our Presbyterian churches, the WCF also requires that we not cut ourselves off from the communion we have in “each other’s gifts and graces and are obliged to the performance of such duties, public and private, as do conduce to their mutual good, both in the inward and outer man” (WCF 26:1). I argue that allowing John Piper, Michael Spencer, and Charles Spurgeon (were he alive) to preach to my Presbyterian congregation is a communion in their gifts and serves the mutual good. Another slam dunk for my position.

So it’s all there in the WCF! If you look hard enough, you can root today’s controversies in an uninspired, errant, man-made but wonderfully helpful and sound document, which by the way, I am grateful to God for. Especially now! Now my arguments are no longer subjective, but objective, and confessionally referenced. Pirate and I agree on this. (jn)

(leaves room…. plate crashes right as the door closes behind)

This sounds like the plot of a P.D. James mystery but it appears to be all too true. A conservative Anglo-Catholic vicar was poisoned after preventing the election of a liberal bishop in Central Africa [more here]. This is a most unpleasant turn in the ongoing Anglican conservative/liberal debate/battle.

Wondering why Bibles are getting increasingly pricey? Blame the Chinese nicotine addiction.

(EDIT: Thinkling Jared adds some good thoughts on this.)

Having watched the video, it’s not bad overall, with the exception of the quote Michael mentioned. It’s typical Driscoll. He’s on his typical point about male leadership, and by now everyone should know that about him. With that, I don’t think anything he said was specifically anti woman. His network is about producing male leaders. His comments were not really anti woman as they were about women not being on the radar of leadership in Acts 29. Again, it’s a known thing. With that, I think Bill Hybels’ off hand comment was out of line, and I have to ask, where’s the “Contageous Christianity” in that?

On to the sex comment. This is, sadly, another in a string of cringe-worthy comments pastor Driscoll has made. He likes to go for the edge in his approach, and needs to get more people around him to keep him from occasionally jumping off. I’m curious if he and John Piper are communicating regularly. There’s potential for a good mentoring relationship there. Back to the comment: someone should encourage pastor Driscoll to recheck the Bible here. I don’t see scripture telling us that to be manly men, we have to be exercising our libidos daily. I’m sure all of our physical natures are thinking “WOOHOO” at that, but I get the impression from scripture that God is more concerned with us being faithful wives and husbands, chaste if we’re not wives or husbands, and being willing to put the body on hold every so often for prayer. Seriously, it’s the Bible, not the Kama Sutra.

When pastor Driscoll boldly calls on men – everyone for that matter – to exalt the risen and glorious King Jesus, the one who conquered death and is exalted at the right hand of the Father, I’ll shout Amen! But when he turnes the call men to be Godly men into discipleship plus a good sex life, he lets his hyperbole hang out too far.

Watch the 9 minute video that’s got Mark Driscoll in some hot water. (This is the video that Mars Hill produced for a conference Mark couldn’t attend. After it was shown, Bill Hybels apparently criticized its male-only tone and the conference then refused to distribute the videos. You can read all that at the link.)

About half way through, Mark says that twenty-something men want to be taught how to have sex with their wives once a day. (Listen please, and get the context.)

Excuse the Freudianism, but something about that statement bugs me. It’s pretty revealing of what bothers me about a guy I basically like a lot. I’ll blog about it later at IM.

Any thoughts?

Oops. I forgot to mention that we use coffee and chicory. I actually like Community Dark Roast but Bruce likes Louisianne. He drinks it at all hours.

About coffee,

Matthew is right on the money. The one/third cup measure is the trick. The variation is the amount of water. Louisiana  oil rig coffee is eight cups. Regular dark roast is ten cups.  Regular see the spoon in the bottom of the cup is a completely full coffee maker—that’s twelve cups.

At my house we do the eight cup version. My husband drinks it with sweetener and enough creamer to lighten it a bit. My way is like coffee shop gourmet:

1/3 c. coffee to an eight cup pot. Pour 1/2 cup of fresh coffee into a 1/2 cup scalded milk. Add 1/2 teaspoon good vanilla and if you had a pile of beignets you’d be in heaven.

Aaron, we’re in Auburn—just up 316 from you about eight miles.

Whatever happened to Jennifer Knapp?

I’ve often wondered that myself. She was one of the bright spots in the recent history of CCM. The only info I could find was on the Wiki, where it said she was taking some time off from the music business. I wish her well, but it’s a loss for the  rest of us.

Regarding coffee, Michael, just grab a 1/3 cup measuring cup and stick it with your coffee can. 1/3 cup and a full pot of water (I can’t remember if it’s 10 or 12 cups) will get it for you. That’s what I do when I make it.

From hearing in her in concert a couple of times and from what little I truly know about her, I speculate that Jennifer Knapp has a real soul and didn’t want to sell it to the CCM monster.

Good for her if that’s the case.

Google Shakespeare.

Whatever happened to Jennifer Knapp?

Anyone else feel like the National Day of Prayer has become a wholly owned subsidiary of the GOP?

I’m thinking about some kind of movie discussion group this summer. If it doesn’t get in the way of baseball.

I really wish there was a coffee shop nearby. I can’t make coffee and it drives Denise nuts. I just have a mental block about amounts.

The parallels between my life and Thomas Merton are really freaky. Especially lately.

I need some banner and button work done. Here’s the short list if you want to become incredibly famous.

A banner for Coffee Cup Apologetics. There are exact specs for the size: 740×180 pixels.

A sidebar button for Coffee Cup Apologetics.

A new banner for Internet Monk. Something that graphically grabs the idea of post evangelicalism. Empty churches appeal to me, but so do empty churches, prayer in empty churches, urban churches in the middle of the city, abandoned church buildings.

An Internet Monk sidebar button

A BHT sidebar button

If you think you might have some foo, talk to me. NO PROMISES on using your work, but if I do, I’ll loudly give you credit.

Mark Devine makes it clear what he believes about Acts 29 and what he said to the MBC committee: the same reasonable, analytically careful and missionally truthful things he’s always said. (It’s in a pdf linked on his page.) So it appears to me that the MBC committee hears this kind of analysis and decides to go 180 degrees the opposite direction to protect the MBC from beer.

We’ve got a denomination here that believes it is one thing when it’s something else. Somebody better wake up and remember what cooperation means. Every young church planter who hasn’t left the SBC is doing this denomination a favor.

It’s time for those actually doing evangelism and church planting to speak forcefully and truthfully.

Aaron, did you ever get relocated back up here to Goergia? Winder, no less?

I owe you a pot of soup.

Timmy Brister has a good post on the MBC/Acts 29 situation. Read it all, but go to the end and read the amazing information that Mark Devine’s contribution was misstated by the state Baptist paper. (Surprise.)

Does this mean that Ed Stetzer will not be able to do any work with the MBC?

MOD: Ed Stetzer was just hired as the Director of Research for Lifeway, so he’s out of the denominational thang. Barely.

My conviction is that no confessional standard is sufficient to spell out all issues.

Agreed. But what about the issues it does spell out? That is what I have been talking about, and now you’re sidetracking into whether or not Africans should be forced to use traditional English metric in their hymnody. You’re kind of fixated on musical meter, which is about the least relevant thing even tangentially related to what I’m talking about, and I assure you, it is no more than tangentially related. The Standards actually do say things about creation, images, baptism, and fellowship. I’m interested in talking about what they actually say, their internal theological integrity, and how that’s relevant to current PCA controversy and practice. In case you didn’t notice, I haven’t even mentioned my own beliefs.  But you seem interested in talking almost exclusively about what goes on inside your own head, using language like “My conviction,” “I would let,” and “I can’t relate.” I’m raising questions about Westminster, and you’re ignoring them to talk about yourself. Talk about your postmodern discourse.

More »« Less

What’s to understand?

1. The MBC loaned Journey church money for a building. They paid it back.
2. Journey has a theology pub.
3. Some guy in the MBC went #@#%!@#....or something similar.
4. The MBC started having meetings wringing their hands over the evil that is Acts 29.
5. They read a lot of Ken and Ingrid.
6. Since these state denominational bureaucracies are increasingly irrelevant to younger pastors, the best way to become relevant is to declare a crisis with the emerging church, Calvinism, charismatics, wine at communion or excessive use of toilet tissue.
7. The Baptist Press covers the story with a serious look on their face. God knows we must save our churches from men like Joe Thorn.
8. Books and CDs by John Macarthur are passed out.
9. Mark Driscoll saying “hot sex” is put to a backbeat and played continuously on a MySpace page.
10. Stay tuned for more this summer, as we unite the SBC under the banner of “No Dark Lager With Spaghetti!”

Seriously, let me say one thing: Listen to Journey Church’s podcasts for a few weeks. At the same time, read the coverage of this story. You will come away convinced that certain parties in the SBC have lost their minds.

I really do not get this.  Maybe yall folks that are smarter than me can explain it.

Driscoll video banned at conference.

I say, that’s what you get for mixing it up with people like Ed Young Jr. and T.D. Jakes.

Pirate,  My conviction is that no confessional standard is sufficient to spell out all issues.  Shame on anyone who tries to use a European/Western produced confessional standard written centuries ago to rule on whether African churches can have music that is indigenous to their culture.  Use the Bible, and do it carefully.  Use the Creeds, but humbly.   Ransacking any creed for answers it never intended to give, and guidance it is silent on is a vain task.   John Frame sets this up well in his book on Contemporary Worship Music. 

Scripture= sufficient, but we must respect the silences of scripture and the areas of Christian liberty. Calvin thought at best theologians get it 80% right. 

It’s not necessarily the weakness of WCF, or system of doctrine subscription, or even your much weaker and mushier Lutheran creeds (jn…. kind of…. Presbyterians don’t really take Lutherans all that seriously either…. )  It’s just that manmade creeds were never meant to be timeless and culturally universal.  They’re flawed….. always will be….. kind of like me….

Not sure anyone else in here is interested in a Presbyterian and Lutheran comparing notes….

Matthew and Sharon: should we expect news of a Methodist version of the AMiA in the next 5-10 years? (h/t Glenn). (Sorry if I left out any other BHT Methodist fellows.)

Bob, I think you’re misreading me.  “The confession doesn’t give me details” and “this isn’t a confessional” issue are not equivalent statements.  For example, in Lutheranism right now, we’re having a lot of fighting about what “adiaphora” in the Formula of Concord’s statement on worship means, because it’s not really, really clear.  The fact that the FC doesn’t specifically say “You can/can’t throw out the hymnody and use crappy 70’s praise choruses” doesn’t mean that this activity has zero relation to what the FC is talking about.  It’s either adiaphora, or it’s not.
I think it’s the same way with WCF.  Either having women address the congregation, praise bands, and whatever is within the bounds of what WCF XXI calls “the acceptable way of worshipping the true God [which] is instituted by Himself, and so limited by His own revealed will,” or it is not.  You can’t have a confession that sets up absolute, normative principles for worship and then say that controversies about worship don’t have any relation to the confession.

The same goes for what the Larger Catechism says about who should be restricted from communion.  Either Baptists are within that definition, or they are not.  Your personal opinions about how to conduct your church life don’t help me understand what the Catechism is getting at.  If either what you’re doing actually contradicts the Catechism, or the Catechism is so vague on this point that there’s no way to tell, then you’re just proving my point about the weakness of your own confessional standards.

The Father of Post-Evangelicalism died Friday. Robert Webber. Tireless to the end. A great scholar whose books and gentle spirit led me out of fundamentalism into what he called “The Majestic Tapestry” of the Great Tradition.

Thine is the glory, risen, conqu’ring Son;
Endless is the victory, Thou o’er death hast won; Angels in bright raiment rolled the stone away, Kept the folded grave clothes where Thy body lay.

Thine is the glory, risen conqu’ring Son,
Endless is the vict’ry, Thou o’er death hast won.

Lo! Jesus meets us, risen from the tomb;
Lovingly He greets us, scatters fear and gloom;
Let the church with gladness, hymns of triumph sing; For her Lord now liveth, death hath lost its sting.

No more we doubt Thee, glorious Prince of life;
Life is naught without Thee; aid us in our strife;
Make us more than conqu’rors, through Thy deathless love: Bring us safe through Jordan to Thy home above.

Thine is the glory, risen conqu’ring Son,
Endless is the vict’ry, Thou o’er death hast won.

Pirate, what does WCF 21 say about what kind of music?  If you take Psalms as Exclusive psalmody then fine. That’s a way to stop all music controversies.  Presbyterians threw that interpretation out long before the PCA or OPC was formed. 

What does it say about Becky Pippert addressing my congregation, or Elizabeth Elliot?  Both of them would be welcome anytime. Hey, if they read this and want to come let me know!  : )

I would let a Baptist preach in my church any day.  Michael Spencer, John Piper, etc. could come and preach here, so could Sovereign Grace guys, Mark Dever, etc.   I would ask them not to preach on Baptism, or areas of difference, but I would use the occasion to trumpet our broader catholicity.  And yes, I have many Baptistic members who refrain from baptizing their children.  I respect their conscience, and gladly baptize them upon their profession of faith, even granting them immersion in a swimming pool.  Again, this is a strength, as it shows a sense of proportion, and  Biblical Catholicity with Baptists and Presbyterians celebrating this step together. 

Yeah, it’s true that I can’t relate to PCA’s who won’t grant Baptistic people membership.  But I would respect their consciences as PCA leaders, and expect them to respect mine.

I think this is healthy, realistic, and perhaps even the best ideal for working out these areas of difference.  I’m not for saying it doesn’t matter, but I also get my hackles up when people act like these areas of difference are more important than they really are.  And I think the Biblical emphasis is on the “things of first importance” (1 Corinthians 15:3).

A BHT Lurker sent along this link, and speculates that we might have several things revolving around the National Day of Prayer.

Pirate, WCF 21 and WCF 4 have nothing to say about the little controversies within the PCA.

Care to back that up with any evidence?  As I read WCF 4, it teaches literal six-day creation.  WCF 21 establishes the regulative principle, which would put all worship controversies under its jurisdiction.  So how am I wrong?

And finally, I reiterate, I believe the PCA is unified.  Very much so.  These little dust ups are not enough to really get inside any PCA church.

Well, I’m getting different stories from different Presbyterians.  Some are bemoaning the constant FIRESTR0M OF CONTROVERSIE!!! plaguing their presbyteries or congregations, with the notion of confessional subscription ill-defined, others say the denomination is unsure of its theological identity, with congregations allowing Baptists to teach or even preach from the pulpit, and others are telling me it’s very much united, and any purported controversy is just a matter of “nothing to see here.”  So ya got me.

It’s not covered in “The Parables of the Kingdom”, and I don’t have his other parables books yet, so could someone post or email me a brief summary of Capon’s take on the parable of the Shrewd Manager (Luke 16)?

Oh, Mark. What did we do to deserve that? I’ve heard worse off key singing before. What got the chuckle was the keyboard. There had to be a better sound to pick.

Good for them for trying, though. I’ve been rehearsing with a band for about two months and we’re having our first gig this coming week. I’ve performed before several thousand before, and it doesn’t really bother me, but I’m nervous for this one, and that will only be in front of a couple hundred. Our church has larger attendance than that. Perhaps it’s because we’re playing music we created instead of covering other stuff. Who knows? Maybe I’ll post something after the gig. Until then, I shall pray.

John Armstrong reflects on the Don Imus episode.

Nice find, Mark. I don’t know if you can tell, but that’s Pirate on the electric guitar.

Pirate, WCF 21 and WCF 4 have nothing to say about the little controversies within the PCA.  No one I know of frames these battles with reference points in the Confession. 

What that says is your idea that a less comprehensive confessional document, or one that is Basic Christianity/ Apostles’ Creed Christianity would heal the divisions is just wrong.

And finally, I reiterate, I believe the PCA is unified.  Very much so.  These little dust ups are not enough to really get inside any PCA church.  But please, don’t redefine justification or take away from double imputation if you’re PCA ordained.  Admire the good stuff Wright brings, but don’t fudge on Justification.

Taking the kids to their AWANA pinewood derby now, but I couldn’t leave without sharing some uplifting music.

I’ve set up a web site for the Coffee Cup Apologetics presentations: www.ccapologetics.wordpress.com.

Is this it?

MOD: No

New show? Humm, My daughter’s got a prom dress in the closet and I think there’s some snake oil next door at the church.

Wait, no, that’s Watkins Flavorings left over from the UMW bazaar.

Noel/Mola just called and told me that a church in her area is doing the three day fast there. We compared notes and it’s the same thing: has something to do with the Pilgrim’s setting up a cross, and maybe it’s a John Haggee thing. Can anyone find what’s going on? I’m working on a podcast.

TBN is taking user suggestions for new shows (HT Kim Riddlebarger)

BHTV!!!!

One of the reasons I’m not leading a church is I can’t bring myself to use the kind of rhetoric that insists everyone do the same thing in obedience to God’s command. If it’s not in scripture, I don’t think I can say it authoritatively. I’d make a terrible Missouri Baptist.

I think I’d make a great evangelical snake oil pusher. I have a million scripts in my head that were burned ritualistically into my scull with holy ghost charcoal. I could hype a three day fast, or a forty day fast for that matter, with zeal enough to start an epic revival. There’d be Fox news with a crew interviewing the serpent line of vehicles—mistaken for a pilgrimage to the world’s largest yard sale—but no, it’d be winding on down to the woman preacher’s revival brought on by her Holy Ghost Prayerfast to Bring True Repentence to Homosex/abortion/demonpossessed/unGAWDly Hollywood, etc. circus revival. I’d wear robes that’d make Katheryn Kulhmann’s look shabby. I’d have a prissy piano player, and the best looking, honey crooning song leader (not a worship leader) I could find. I’d bank roll it with prophetic appeals to “give from your heart, just like we mean to take back America for Jesus” We’re gonna give it so we can take it! You haven’t been blessed because so far you’ve been the one who’s been taking. Now brothers and sisters, give it back. Give it back to Jesus. Then we’ll take back America and give it to Jesus.
There’d be great testimonies of oily redemption and not to mention plenty of gorgeous ex-gays saying they’d been ‘healed.’ They need to be gorgeous because they have to woo the less than beautiful people into the fold.
I know I could do it because I grew up watching it.

What I’m saying is I KNOW what people want to hear. All you have to do is listen to the rumblings in the herd.

I’m dizzy.

Father Jonathan Morris laments the loss of the ability to have intelligent moral discourse in a postmodern era. A Catholic charity having a pro-abortion advocate for a fund-raiser. That really begs for more ideas for similar events. Any suggestions? Chris Hitchens speaking at this years SBC?

A bit of a follow up to my “Bad Day With Angry Women” I reported two days ago: The next day the culprit moves to the front row and lives with her hand up. While I was getting ready to teach, the small talk was this contrived conversation about “I love studying Revelation in this class.” Apparently, the look on my face spelled “Your grade is toast” or something similar. The kiss-up after these incidents is almost worse than the incident. These kinds of students invariably believe teachers are like little children, and if they kick me yesterday, a piece of candy today will make everything all better.

My fasting question comes from an incident happening in a local Charismatic church. First of all, I don’t object to these kinds of things per se, but they are on my list of old covenant practices that some Christians are fascinated with. And let’s be truthful: all this rhetoric about what God might do for our nation or community if we fast is old covenant to the core. It’s old covenant spirituality. Is there a place in the New Testament where Gentiles are told to fast as an expression of Christian worship? Jesus’ words about fasting were in a Jewish- old covenant- context. This is just like tithing. Christians can’t let go of old covenant rhetoric and thinking because it’s more appealing than the gospel. (The church that called the fast is almost completely gospel deficient.)

Further, the pastor calling this sort of thing puts him in a spiritual role that is rather precarious. Where in the new covenant do leaders get to say “God wants us to fast for a particular reason,” other than a very particular decision or challenge? (And again, isn’t it always a Jewish context?) If the pastor wants to emphasize missions, I still don’t believe he can say “God wants us to fast for this.” I believe he can say, “Some of us are going to fast and pray for this, the fasting being a form and aid to prayer, but not a divine command.”

Finally, this creates the spiritual Olympics that evangelicals are so fond of. One family tells me that their children want to do this. Little kids. What do those legalistic little minds learn from that exercise other than non-Gospel, old covenant, works righteousness lessons? Pastors who say “God wants us to….” are often saying, “I want to know who will support me by jumping through any hoop I announce, so here’s one.”

One of the reasons I’m not leading a church is I can’t bring myself to use the kind of rhetoric that insists everyone do the same thing in obedience to God’s command. If it’s not in scripture, I don’t think I can say it authoritatively. I’d make a terrible Missouri Baptist.

Pirate, but the PCA does not fight generally over any confessional issues.

Well, it is only 30 years old.

What woman can do in the church, the kind of music used, issues of culture, views on Creation

So far, you’ve listed three fights over WCF XXI and one over WCF IV.

Anyway, you had the “free offer” dispute a while back, and I’ve seen quite a bit of bickering over both WCF XXI (which most of what you said fits into) and images. I kind of wonder how long before someone upstairs decides that “good faith subscription” and “not calling all images or representations of God ‘sin’” (WLC, Q109) are incompatible, bringing the hammer down on at least a few pastors. I also think that the rather rapid influx of Baptists and the growing awareness that “Reformed theology” and “Baptist theology + wet baby dedication” are not identical makes a full-on battle over whether folks who don’t live by one of the basic tenets of the covenant and baptize their kids are among those “as are found to be ignorant or scandalous” (WLC, Q173).

The Missouri Baptist Convention Statement is a watershed in abandoning the Bible and embracing denominational statements as our authority in the SBC. Statements like this reek with the stench of the worst of Roman Catholic views of authority.

6) We recognize the diversity of opinion in American evangelicalism when it comes to alcoholic beverages. This does not negate our historic and ongoing affirmation of the resolutions at 57 annual meetings of the Southern Baptist Convention regarding abstinence as the Baptist position on the sale and use of alcoholic beverages;

Don’t talk to me any more about the SBC and the Bible. Leaders like this are going to run our denomination by self-referencing each other and ignoring whatever scripture says that they don’t like.

Pirate, but the PCA does not fight generally over any confessional issues. Fights are rare in the PCA over anything.  Tensions, yes, but they get buried and people go on about their ministry.   Generally the rare fights that happen  are over “What woman can do in the church, the kind of music used, issues of culture, views on Creation, etc.”  I can agree 100% with someone on 33 detailed chapters of the WCF and yet not be able to function in unity with them in the local church, or a church planting effort of Presbytery because of these other issues.   And I have not heard anyone propose that a new confession on these hot button issues would solve anything, or is even workable. 

The Presbyteries I know of in the Philly region have not had one fight over FV or NPP. So far it’s been totally irrelevant.   No one in the PCA of any real ministry significance is a “movement” kind of campaigner for these concepts. 

Missouri Baptists vs. the Emerging Church (HT Steve McCoy)

See point 4.  Buh-bye Journey Church.

Joel, if I may offer an outsider’s opinion, I think a lot of the problems stem from the Westminster Standards being compromise documents at the outset. Vague language hurts the integrity of a doctrinal standard—it’s better to say nothing at all about an issue than to be vague about it, because then the fighting over who’s interpreting the compromise “correctly” will never come to an end. You’ve got people who want to use it dogmatically, since that’s sort of what authoritative doctrinal statements are for, but it subverts that end by its very nature. The Three Forms of Unity, by contrast, are pretty clear. I don’t even like to interact with Westminster when critiquing Calvinism because half the time, I can’t make head or tail of what it’s saying. I’m pretty sure what the guys who composed Helvetica II meant, though. That’s probably why you have this “system of doctrine” subscription for PCA clergy with allowable exceptions. But I think the only confession worth having is a confession worth subscribing strictly to. A confession of faith should have those articles which are absolutely necessary, stated clearly enough that necessary limits on interpretation are sufficiently obvious and leave out the optional stuff entirely. Further, if you’ve got a confession that you don’t require at least the clergy to subscribe strictly to and allow them to take exceptions, you’re saying “This doctrinal standard isn’t laying out the catholic faith. It’s only my group’s way of looking at things.” And that’s basically to admit you’re a sect.

More »« Less

I recommend you begin rooting for a the Tampa Bay Devil Rays. They need the fans and they will accept apostate Yankee fans like yourself, no questions asked.

I’ve no need to collapse into the woodwork. It’s just that (here it comes) the regular season is boring. I read all summer, and then start paying attention when the playoffs come. You know, when the Yankees are always still playing.

Joel: I didn’t realize the NHL was still around. Huh. Who knew?

Canadians, and cool people like me.

Mark Horne writes a brief description of the Federal Vision. I may understand it! Yarg!!

I love watching Yankee fans disappear into the woodwork. “Who me? Me? A Yankees fan? HA!”

Here’s a memory to help Yankee fans recall just how great it can be to be a Yankees fan. Magical, special things happen right there in your own ballpark.

I’ve been in despair for several years over the demise of my favorite rock band, Michael Been’s amazing band “The Call.” To say I can’t get enough is an understatement. The band hasn’t released new material for years, and I was in the latter stages of adjustment.

Then today I hear a single by a band my kids have listened to a bit: Black Rebel Motorcycle Club. There’s a bit of something about the sound that reminds me of The Call. A bit o’ research reveals that one of BRMC’s major contributors is Robert Levon Been, son of Michael Been.

The apple didn’t fall far from the tree. I see that Been is doing sound and helping the band on their new project. Get a taste of what that sounds like here. A new album appears next tuesday.

T-Bone Burnett is involved with these guys as well. All very cool.

If your pastor proclaimed a three day fast for the congregation [not for any locally significant reason, but just a general “God wants us to do this for spiritual reasons” thing] would you participate?

No.

It’s all in the justification you gave. I can think of possible occasions when I would participate in such a fast. But the spectacle of such a dramatic request would cause my Manipulation! proximity sensors to trigger and the Herd! alarm would not silence until my little legs had carried me to the nearest pub for a plate of fish and chips and a couple or seven of Mark’s ESBs.

Travis, I didn’t realize the NHL was still around. Huh. Who knew?

Just for the record, Joel, I’m not sobbing about anything…didn’t even know the Yankees’ pitching staff was collapsing (besides…what else is new?) until I read it here, since I’m really only a nominal baseball fan in the first place.

Actually, I’m the furthest thing from sobbing right now.

QOTD: yes, I’d do the fast. Edit: NO, I wouldn’t do the fast. Just realized I glazed over the “just for spiritual reasons” part. There should be something local and congregational tied to it. Always was in Scripture, anyway.

Mark: I don’t have a PhD, so the FV makes me say OMG and drink an ESB.

Just had my first ESB yesterday. Otter Creek. Yummy.

Corporate 3-day fast? Probably not. The last time I was in a church that called a 3-day fast not very many people could last that long, and the preacher then put everyone on a guilt trip about it.

If my pastor asked me to what would I do?  I’ve been blessed to have some pretty incredible pastors lead me.  When I put the question into those contexts (people like James Montgomery Boice, and someone Shea knows well) I think I would definitely jump into line to do so.  Three days is a bit demanding for a corporate fast, but Yes.

My mother fasted one day every week (usually on Mondays) for as long as I can remember. All it made her was grouchy.

Oops, I said I was going to be quiet for a while.  Well, that’s the problem with sipping Laphroiag, you find you just can’t shut up.

If my pastor actually thought he had heard some voice of God telling us to do this as the key to revival, I might have some questions for him.  But if he was just leading us in the corporate practice of this spiritual discipline, absolutely I would do it with anticipation of great things.

From one of the geniuses of the Ingrid/Ken regime, this ironic headline: “C.S. Lewis and Martin Luther Speak Out Against Rick Warren’s ‘Seeker-Friendly Gospel”

Let’s get this right: You can believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary, purgatory, reject inerrancy and substitutionary atonement, smoke, cuss and drink beer…..but if you say something negative about Rick Warren you’re OK.

Anyone who links to CRN ought to be ashamed of themselves. What a mockery of real concern for the church.

Probably not, but only because I’m fully aware that I haven’t the will nor the strength to endure that long without food.

Question of the Day:

If your pastor proclaimed a three day fast for the congregation, would you participate?

Not for any locally significant reason, but just a general “God wants us to do this for spiritual reasons” thing.

While Travis is busy in the corner sobbing himself to sleep, lamenting the collapse of his beloved Yankees’ pitching staff just when the Red Sox are rolling into town, I’ll pipe up for a couple of very brief comments on Alphabet Soup Theology in the PCA.

More »« Less

Every so often, I have to go into a local Christian book store to remind myself of the truth of the popular rendition of Sturgeon’s Law: “90% of everything is crap.” (Frank, if you’re reading, I’m certain your book store is in the 10% that is NOT crap.)

Even so, I was able to procure this. (Pirate will be happy.)

It’s one in a series of purchases I’m making to study the major creeds, confessions, and faith statements in Christianity.

Sure, I could read almost all of it online for free, but sometimes I want to sit in a shady spot outside or a well lit, quiet room, away from a computer, and enjoy the feel of a good book.

Music 123 is having a $99 Sale. I’m highly tempted to buy that mandolin….then travel to Bill’s house and sing him some Bill Monroe.

Seriously, some good stuff here if you want to do some early Christmas shopping for someone in your family.

A big part of what has led me to flee the open seas of the blogosphere for the refuge of this pub is that debates out there frequently turn from questions like “Is imputation biblical?”  to questions like “Does what this person believes about imputation make him a heretic?”

I would very much enjoy a spirited debate about imputation in the company of people like you who are not so quick to anathematize.  But I’m the new guy, so I’ll just sip my Laphroiag and be quiet a while.   

This interview with Andrew Sandlin will get a big “amen” from most of the BHT. It’s about his book Uninventing the Church, but it spends a lot of time in the first half on the sectarian nature of reformed Christianity and, especially, the “guilt by association” tactics that are so common today. Really a good interview.

 I’m new in the Bar, but I’ve lurked here for nearly 4 years. 
Why?  Not for the rare fights, though fights in here  are great fun to watch.   I think what kept me coming back  is the honest broker feel of the BHT.  Sometimes a hearty yawn is the best rejoinder to the fracas going on elsewhere. 

Proverbs 26:17 Like one who takes a dog by the ears Is he who passes by and meddles with strife not belonging to him.

Van Til the dog, do you like that verse?

Tom said something I agree with. Close the doors.

From the Blue Raja:

About Federal Vision – I think the basic idea has to do with the “objectivity of the covenant”, namely the idea that a person is considered a member of God’s covenant family by baptism (not by regeneration), resulting in a view of the Church which dissolves the “visible/invisible” distinction. The only church is the visible church, and while a person can be a faithful or an unfaithful member of the covenant, being a member of the family is established on sacramental not inward, spiritual grounds. Thus anyone who recieves the sacraments in the name of the Trinitarian God is a Christian and should be seen in solidarity with other Christians (including Roman Catholics). The issue of whether such members are actually faithful members, or whether they require discipline or admonition is a different question which FV people see as inappropriately conflated with conversion by other Reformed folks. There’s more than that, obviously, including some theological nuancing about imputation that raises Reformed hackles. Here’s a great article on the topic, if anyone’s interested.

I should have also mentioned that this emphasis on objectivity in defining a Christian (i.e. baptism) results in a doctrine of justification that necessarily emphasizes the future assize when all men will be judged based on the presence or absence of real faith in Christ, demonstrated by the Spirit’s fruit during their lifetime (another paleo-Reformed belly buster).

By that I mean, I don’t remember the FV (whatever it is) ever generating enough interest to stimulate a conversation, let alone enough controversy for dead-horsehood.