For your consideration:

Pictured above is Trinity Broadcasting's multi-million dollar headquarters and their gold plated chairs. Trinity Broadcasting boasts $190 million in revenue every year peddling "prosperity gospel." Or the idea that Christ came so that you would be rich with money, especially if you buy their indulgences, I mean give to their ministry.

Isa 58:6-7

No, this is the kind of fast I want.
... I want you to share your food with the hungry
and to provide shelter for homeless, oppressed people.
When you see someone naked, clothe him!
Don't turn your back on your own flesh and blood!

Isa 61:1

The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me, because the LORD has anointed me to bring good news to the poor; he has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to those who are bound;

These are the verses Christ used in Luke 4 to announce His mission. Who do you trust to interpret Christ's mission?

Below is video for the song "Jesusland" about what Christ might think of this mentality:

What the world needs...

"What the world needs is a religion born in defeat and catastrophe"
-Fulton J Sheen

Edwards and Newton: Battling Doubt

So do we merely accept doubt and unbelief? I was interested in searching for Edwards’ prescription for doubt and found it in his thoughts on those who take communion but have doubts:

“And though the pastor is not to act as a searcher of the heart, or a lord of conscience in this affair, ...but... to be helpers of their joy, and promoters of their salvation.”
-Qualifications for communion

And his Resolution 25: "Resolved, to examine carefully, and constantly, what that one thing in me is, which causes me in the least to doubt of the love of God; and to direct all my forces against it."

But how? Jay Bennett probably knows better as he has made Edwards the focus of his studies, but I like hymns, so Newton fills in the gaps vividly for me in "Begone Unbelief": look to Christ, not to your faith or will, by Christ is faith strengthened:

1. Begone unbelief, My Savior is near,
And for my relief Will surely appear:
By faith let me wrestle, with God in the storm
And help me my Savior, the faith to adorn

2. Though dark be my way, Since he is my guide,
'Tis mine to obey, and His to provide;
Though cisterns be broken, And creatures all fail,
The word he has spoken will surely prevail.

3. Why should I complain, Of want or distress
Temptation or pain? He told me no less
The heirs of salvation, I know from his word
Through much tribulation Must follow their Lord

4. Since all that I meet will work for my good,
The bitter is sweet, The medicine food;
Though painful at present, will cease before long,
And then, O! how glorious, The conqueror's song!

Doubt: Hymn for the week

"Why must holy places be dark places?" -C. S. Lewis, Till We Have Faces

William Cowper lived a life to study. He wrote "God Moves in a Mysterious Way" and "Sometimes a Light Suprises." Some men's lives are read to know what great heights in faith may be reached (i.e. Paul and Adoniram Judson). Others are examined to know failure and depression are not the marks of a bad saint ( i.e. David Brainerd and William Cowper). Cowper lived a life painfully aware of his own inadequacies in depression, and even attempted suicide. John Newton and William Cowper began writing a hymnal together, but Cowper, due to his crushing depression, was unable to finish all of his half.

C.S. Lewis said we should not present ourselves to God as we should be, but as we truly are. Many times our modern songs tell us what we should feel. Cowper lets us know, we should not only tell God what we think He wants to hear, but admit to God our doubts so He can heal them like in this lesser known hymn/poem:

The Lord will Happiness Divine:

The Lord will happiness divine
On contrite hearts bestow;
Then tell me gracious God, is mine
A contrite heart or no?

I hear, but seem to hear in vain,
Insensible as steel
If aught is felt, tis only pain
To find I cannot feel.

I sometimes think myself inclined
To love Thee, if I could
But often feel another mind,
Averse to all that's good

My best desires are faint and few
I fain would strive for more:
But when I cry, "My strength renew",
Seem weaker than before

Thy saints are comforted, I know,
And love Thy house of prayer;
I therefore go where others go,
But find no comfort there.

Oh make this heart rejoice or ache;
Decide this doubt for me;
And if it be not broken, break,
And heal it, if it be.

Hear this hymn put to song once, in a decent way: here

In this Album

More on William Cowper from John Piper. (MP3)
On Battling Unbelief: Book by Piper

Doubt: The companion of faith

“I believe, help my unbelief.” - Mark 9:24


Many believers are told their doubt is not normal as a Christian. Doubt perhaps shows they really are not a Christian. To all those of little faith a Southern Baptist minister is quoted, at another site, as saying at the end of his sermon:

“If you’re not 100% sure that you are saved…if you are 99% sure, but have even 1% of doubt, then I want you to come forward this morning and repent. You need to rededicate your life to Christ.”


Sola fide run amok! Is faith binary: either a 0 or 1, either on or off? I thought to balance this quote with a little quotation on doubt I found illuminating in one of my classes. I will wait until the end to tell you who said it:

We ought not to seek any more intimate proof of this than that unbelief is, in all men, always mixed with faith. [cf. Luke 24:11-12] …While we teach that faith ought to be certain and assured, we cannot imagine any certainty that is not tinged with doubt, or any assurance that is not assailed by some anxiety. On the other hand, we say that believers are in perpetual conflict with their own unbelief. …In the course of the present life it never goes so well with us that we are wholly cured of the disease of unbelief and entirely filled and possessed by faith. Hence arise those conflicts; when unbelief, which reposes in the remains of the flesh, rises up to attack the faith that has been inwardly conceived. But if in the believing mind certainty is mixed with doubt, do we always come back to this: that faith does not rest in a certain and clear knowledge, but only in an obscure and confused knowledge of the divine will toward us? Not at all! For even if we are distracted by various thoughts, we are not on that account completely divorced from faith. Nor if we are troubled on all sides by the agitation of unbelief, are we for that reason immersed in its abyss. If we are struck, we are not for that reason cast down from our position. For the end of the conflict is always this; that faith ultimately triumphs over those difficulties which besiege and seem to imperil it. (John Calvin, The Institutes 3.2.4,17,18)


Doubt is an evidence that there is a faith to doubt. While we chase assurance, we are all reminded to pray the prayer of Mark 9:24, “I believe, help my unbelief” for '100% total assurance' is a façade we might fake because we think we are supposed to, or a delusion we might imagine, but it is a fish we will never catch and demon we will never cast out this side of glory, when faith becomes sight. Though doubt is common, we still pray "help my unbelief."

A Prayer for the Church: A Hymn to get you through the rest of the week

Jesus, with Thy Church abide

I never tire of complaining about the church. I complain that she turns herself into a community center, a self-help center and a concert hall. Of course, it rarely occurs to me:

1. she is us; and
2. We cannot leave her for she is our mother as
3. She is the body of Christ


To realize the Church is made up of depraved people (us) makes us realize the necessity of prayer for her sin (our sin). To realize she is the body of Christ makes us accept we have no hope of being in Christ without her. This moving hymn by Thomas Pollock (pictured right) is a prayer for the Church. Pollock ministered to the poor of London as a minister in the Church of England. Here are the better verses:

Jesus, with Thy Church abide,

Be her Savior, Lord, and Guide,

While on earth her faith is tried:

We beseech Thee, hear us.


Keep her life and doctrine pure,

Help her, patient, to endure,

Trusting in Thy promise sure:

We beseech Thee, hear us.



All her fettered powers release

Bid our strife and envy cease,

Grant the heav'nly gift of peace:

We beseech Thee, hear us.




May she guide the poor and blind,

Seek the lost until she find,

And the broken hearted bind:

We beseech Thee, hear us.



All that she has lost, restore,

May her strength and zeal be more

Than in brightest days of yore:

We beseech Thee, hear us.




May she holy triumphs win,

Overthrow the hosts of sin,

Gather all the nations in,

We beseech Thee, hear us.

I don’t think that word means what you think it means.

Lately I've been wondering: what does “evangelical” mean?

In reading up on the subject, people have been called evangelical in 3 different historical time periods with 3 different meanings:

1. 1500s - “Evangelical” was almost universally synonymous with Lutherans. As the split appeared between the followers of Calvin and the followers of Luther, most of the former took the label of “Reformed” and most of the latter took the appellation of “Evangelical.” Yet, some Reformed would also refer to themselves as evangelical, as this merely identified themselves with Luther’s recovery of the gospel. [Hence, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America claim the label of evangelical, meaning little of what is meant today]

2. 1700s - “Evangelical” refered to the new religious furvor associated with the Wesleys and Whitefield in the Methodist revival movement in England. The emphasis of the “evangelicals” was on personal conversion and an experiential response to the gospel (John Wesley described it as a “strange warming”). Evangelicals often insulted the Anglican establishment by preaching the need of conversion (the gospel) to baptized church members.

3. 1900s - After the 20s and 30s revealed the inadequacies of mere “Fundamentalism” in its blunt, militant, separatist reaction to theological liberalism, the neo-evangelicals adapted some of the revival techniques of the Second Great Awakening attempting to be “nice fundamentalists.” In America, this movement was most commonly associated with Billy Graham and Harold Ockenga, a Baptist and Presbyterian respectively and in England with Martin-Lloyd Jones and John Stott, a separatist Methodist Calvinist and an Anglican minister respectively. Yet after these leaders, evangelicalism began to focus on the same fundamentals that all Christians share, and ignore distinctives.

D.G. Hart recently wrote an entertainingly controversial book where he contends that “evangelical” means little more than “someone who likes Billy Graham.” Some may have an affinity for J.I. Packer, but his Reformed Anglican views offend many separatists, and some like Christianity Today, though it is derided by many a purist. Even the doctrine of "faith alone" is questioned as a necessity by the keepers of the gate. In an increasingly post-Graham world, the loose alliance of people may shatter between those who often like to "take their ball and go home" in regards to denominations. Hart voices the opinion of some Reformed and most Lutheran theologians who like their distinctives and rather not abandon them. Hart claims the term is no longer meaningful or useful in historiography as those called evangelicals will have no common identity after Graham and now that evangelistic revivals have fallen out of favor.

While I agree with much of Hart‘s criticisms of “generic evangelicalism,” and bad theology coming from revival evangelism, I think he might be a little too harsh on “the e-word.” I am not quite ready to abandon the term “evangelical” as long as it can be an adjective describing a general alliance, rather than noun conveying a lowest common denominator. In other words, the depths of Christian spirituality are found in its traditions, be they Reformed, Lutheran, Anglican or pietist/puritan. These traditions can come together in common cause, for the gospel. But in doing so, they should not lose the depths of the spiritual insights gained by the Reformed focus on the doctrines of grace, or the Lutheran/Anglican sacramental spirituality, or the puritan communion with God through the word. If they lose these distinctions, they run the risk of becoming irrelevant while chasing relevancy and dull while “sharpening” our gospel message.

So check out Hart's book if you want your assumptions challenged, though most will not agree with his solutions, his diagnosis is important to contend with...

Towards a revival of hymns: A hymn to get you through the rest of the week

Jesus, I My Cross Have Taken

I threw a shoe at my TV the other day. I made the mistake of watching a few minutes of Daystar, the gnostic, epicurian heretics posing as a Christian TV network. The host asked for money, promising financial blessings if one pledged to give him money. The host said “Some say God doesn’t want us to be rich, well then does God want us to be poor?! I wouldn’t serve a God that wanted me to be poor!” Don’t worry, you don’t serve Him. I listened to Henry Lyte’s hymn, as sung by Andrew Osenga, shortly after and immersed myself in the lines:

Go, then, earthly fame and treasure,
Come disaster, scorn and pain

Here’s the full hymn, another one that is not seeker friendly:

1. Jesus, I my cross have taken,
All to leave and follow Thee.
Destitute, despised, forsaken,
Thou from hence my all shall be.
Perish every fond ambition,
All I've sought or hoped or known.
Yet how rich is my condition!
God and heaven are still my own.


2. Let the world despise and leave me,
They have left my Savior, too.
Human hearts and looks deceive me;
Thou art not, like them, untrue.
O while Thou dost smile upon me,
God of wisdom, love, and might,
Foes may hate and friends disown me,
Show Thy face and all is bright.


3. Man may trouble and distress me,'
Twill but drive me to Thy breast.
Life with trials hard may press me;
Heaven will bring me sweeter rest.
Oh, 'tis not in grief to harm me
While Thy love is left to me;
Oh, 'twere not in joy to charm me,
Were that joy unmixed with Thee.

4. Go, then, earthly fame and treasure,
Come disaster, scorn and pain
In Thy service, pain is pleasure,
With Thy favor, loss is gain
I have called Thee Abba Father,
I have stayed my heart on Thee
Storms may howl, and clouds may gather;
All must work for good to me.

5. Soul, then know thy full salvation
Rise o'er sin and fear and care
Joy to find in every station,
Something still to do or bear.
Think what Spirit dwells within thee,
Think what Father's smiles are thine,
Think that Jesus died to win thee,
Child of heaven, canst thou repine.

6. Haste thee on from grace to glory,
Armed by faith, and winged by prayer.
Heaven's eternal days before thee,
God's own hand shall guide us there.
Soon shall close thy earthly mission,
Soon shall pass thy pilgrim days,
Hope shall change to glad fruition,
Faith to sight, and prayer to praise.


Amen?!

Here’s the sheet music if you would like to attempt to force your worship leader to play it during the invitation Jesus bids us come and die: click here

Buy a CD with a modern version here.

And here's the RUF hymnbook online.

My King

So Life Action is making a visit to our church this week. As is normal for me I have been praying through having an open heart for yet another program which is suppose to change my wretched existence. Well all in all it has been good and I am glad they are here. But this video definitely got me stirred up quite a bit. Guess they succeeded in getting to me with lights and sound and well, hard to be cynical when I watch it, and I am tired of being so cynical. Had our church applauding throughout. Check it out...

1Sa 8:6 But the thing displeased Samuel when they said, "Give us a king to judge us." And Samuel prayed to the LORD.
1Sa 8:7 And the LORD said to Samuel, "Obey the voice of the people in all that they say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected me from being king over them."

Caedmon's Call

Buy this album. Seriously. Caedmon's Call is pretty much the only Christian band worth listening to lyrically and instrumentally. This blog is for theology and this is the only band from which I hear GOOD theology. SO SUPPORT THEM SO THEY STICK AROUND!!! Derek Webb is back involved in the band, and so is Andrew Osenga, a former member of my old home church of East White Oak Bible Church in Normal IL. EWO's choir director even provides some trumpet support, not much though: its folky.

If you need an endorcement, here's Christianity Today's.

Hymn for the Day. (from preferably dead hymnists)

A while ago, my brother posted on hymns. Hymns, like biographies of saints, are an untapped treasure of the church. I think I might start periodically posting some lesser known hymns (like with the Newton post) from Isaac Watts, John Newton, Charles Wesley, William Cowper, and others. I join my friend Mike Freitag in lamenting how they are slowly being replaced by self-focused choruses like:

Over the mountains and the sea
Your river runs with love for me
[Ain't I great! Well...and the Son]
And I will open up my heart
[really, the Holy Spirit doesn't do that?]
And let the healer set me free
["Let Him"? If you are not free how can you "let Him"?]
I’m happy to be in the truth
And I will daily lift my hands
[Daily? That's some good discipline. Better than me]
For I will always sing
[Ever stop for air?]
Of when your love came down
[What does that even mean? maybe when "Your Son" came down?]

Chorus:
I Could Sing Of Your Love Forever
[Is God's name "You"? Could you really sing forever presently?]

These lyrics are sung, because it preserves the "dignity of man" as important and "empowered." As Mark Noll said, we are what we sing. We don't know what to do with hymns that when they use "I" a lot, talk about our inadequacy and sin like:

A Hymn to God the Father:

Wilt Thou forgive that sin where I begun,
Which was my sin, though it were done before?
Wilt Thou forgive that sin, through which I run,
And do run still, though still I do deplore?
When Thou hast done, Thou hast not done,
For I have more.

Wilt Thou forgive that sin which I have won
Others to sin, and made my sin their door?
Wilt Thou forgive that sin which I did shun
A year or two, but wallow'd in, a score?
When Thou hast done, Thou hast not done,
For I have more.

I have a sin of fear, that when I have spun
My last thread, I shall perish on the shore;
But swear by Thyself, that at my death thy Son
Shall shine as He shines now, and heretofore;
And, having done that, Thou hast done;
I fear no more.

[Thou [God] hast done, not "I will" do. Hmm...and John Donne wasn't even a Calvinist...]

Dr. D. James Kennedy

Dr. D. James Kennedy died in his sleep last night. He pioneered "Evangelism Explosion" that took a Florida Presbyterian Church from tens to thousands, all with new converts. Kennedy would readily admit he never converted a soul, God could only do that. Kennedy was a great preacher and a witty, funny, and ardent Calvinist. R.I.P.

John Newton: the anti-Prosperity gospel

[What I love about John Newton (the author of Amazing Grace), among other things, is: He's a dead theologian. He is unincumbered by our modern belief that Christ died to give me a big house, a BMW and health. How offensive: the idea God has us suffer on purpose?! Roger Olsen says the "Calvinist God" scares him. Me too. Well, at least I fear Him, I think I am supposed to. I may think Piper pushes it too far sometimes, by not connecting purpose with suffering, but I also think he is right."I Asked the Lord" has been put to modern music in this album.]

"I asked the Lord" by John Newton:

I asked the Lord that I might grow

In faith, and love, and every grace;

Might more of His salvation know,

And seek, more earnestly, His face.

’Twas He who taught me thus to pray,

And He, I trust, has answered prayer!

But it has been in such a way,

As almost drove me to despair.

I hoped that in some favored hour,

At once He’d answer my request;

And by His love’s constraining pow’r,

Subdue my sins, and give me rest.

Instead of this, He made me feel

The hidden evils of my heart;

And let the angry pow’rs of hell

Assault my soul in every part.

Yea more, with His own hand He seemed

Intent to aggravate my woe;

Crossed all the fair designs I schemed,

Blasted my gourds, and laid me low.

Lord, why is this, I trembling cried,

Wilt thou pursue thy worm to death?“

’Tis in this way, the Lord replied,

I answer prayer for grace and faith.

These inward trials I employ,

From self, and pride, to set thee free;

And break thy schemes of earthly joy,

That thou may’st find thy all in Me.”

I have a problem with authority: an essential problem in Protestantism

[A blog to ask a question to the reader:]

Sola Scriptura means: Scripture alone. It is one of the five solas of the reformation. It means that Scripture is the final authority on matters of truth. Yet, in regards to Scripture, there are two levels:

Revelation: What God says
and
Doctrine/Interpretation: What we say revelation means.

So "Sola Scriptura" says nothing about who has the right doctrine/interpretation. Here's a test case:

Does baptism save?

What does Scripture say?: "baptism now saves you" 1 Peter 3:21.

Thus, when speaking about this passage, we have no disagreement over what Scripture says, Scripture says "baptism now saves you," even mentioning the water in particular. We do have a disagreement over what Scripture means.

But here is the question: Who decides what it means? Catholics appeal to the See of Peter as authoritative interpreter, Orthodox appeal to the Seven Ecumenical Councils as the collective interpretation of the Church, Protestants have:

1. The clear testimony and reading of Scripture? [the clear reading is "baptism saves"...]

2. The internal testimony of the Spirit? Whose internal testimony? Mine? My Protestant Lutheran brother who quotes the Augsburg Confession that says "Baptism they teach that it is necessary to salvation" [link]? Or my Protestant Reformed brother that quotes the Westminster Confession that says "salvation [is] not so inseparably annexed unto [baptism], as that no person can be regenerated, or saved, without it" [link]? [both the Lutheran and Reformed brother claims Sola Scriptura]

3. Human Reason? That same "reason" that Luther called a, ahem, prostitute? Again, whose reason? Mine? Yours? If they contradict, who decides? If reason, why do we need revelation which is "foolishness" to those reasonable Greeks?

My answer: I have none, that's why I am throwing it out there. I do not believe water baptism saves [I side with the Reformed brother in question 2, as I believe most people reading my blog do] just as I believe justification is by faith alone though the "plain words" of James say differently. But how do I as a Protestant escape taking the Pope's hat off the Bishop of Rome, and putting it on my head? How do I avoid making my self and my personal interpretation the only council I listen to? Or do I have no such assurance?

[This post is not meant to imply Catholics and Orthodox have no problems here as Orthodox have no means of addressing new theological questions after the Seven Councils and the fact that the doctrine of Papal Supremecy did not develop until the 5th Century and many would say their answers have contradicted each other. I'm merely concerned with the Protestant problem here.]

This Too Shall Be Made Right

On the theme of present evil and God's sovereignty, I submit for you a song Derek Webb wrote titled: This Too Shall Be Made Right. There is a free live mp3 version available for download here. (If you like it, buy one or all of his albums here.) Derek Webb wrote it in response to others making the case that war in and of itself is a good thing based on:

Ecc 3:3-4

(To everything there is a season)

A time to kill, And a time to heal;

A time to break down, And a time to build up;

A time to weep, And a time to laugh;

A time to mourn, And a time to dance;

Derek Webb juxaposes the present reality of Ecclesiates 3 with the future hope that killing, weeping and mourning are not good things and will some day be made right aluding to Rom 8:19-24 and Rev 21:4. No matter if we support a particular war as necessary, it is also terrible, heartbreaking and a thing to mourn and hate. Here are the lyrics with the Scripture below:

This Too Shall Be Made Right:

people love you the most for the things you hate

and hate you for loving the things that you cannot keep straight

people judge you on a curve

and tell you you’re getting what you deserve

this too shall be made right

children cannot learn when children cannot eat

stack them like lumber when children cannot sleep

children dream of wishing wells

whose waters quench all the fires of Hell

this too shall be made right

the earth and the sky and the sea are all holding their breath

wars and abuses have nature groaning with death

we say we’re just trying to stay alive

but it looks so much more like a way to die

this too shall be made right

there’s a time for peace and there is a time for war

there's a time to forgive and a time to settle the score

a time for babies to lose their lives

a time for hunger and genocide

this too shall be made right

I don’t know the suffering of people outside my front door

I join the oppressors of those who i choose to ignore

I’m trading comfort for human life

and that’s not just murder it’s suicide

and this too shall be made right

Romans 8:19-24
19 For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; 21 because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. 22 For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now. 23 Not only that, but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body. 24 For we were saved in this hope, but hope that is seen is not hope; for why does one still hope for what he sees?

Rev 21:4
4 And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying. There shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away.”

Why John Piper sometimes annoys me

The other night, my wife and I started to read John Piper’s Pierced by the Word. The first devotional's title was “How strange and wonderful is the love of Christ.” Piper’s demonstration of Christ’s love? The story of the death and resurrection of Lazarus in John 11. Good so far! Definitely one of the greats! But how does Jesus show His love?

1. By letting Lazarus die.

2. Pointing that fact to God’s Glory.

3. Motivated by a love for Mary and Martha.

Huh? Ok, all those things happened (though #3 doesn’t seem to fit as it is the thesis, not a reason). The rest of the “devotional” is analogous to saying “because I said so” and “Quit crying or I’ll give you something to cry about.” NOWHERE WAS A REASON GIVEN!!! How is announcing God’s power letting Lazarus die saying anything about “the strange and wonderful love of Christ”?!

Piper never gets to after Lazarus dies, how Christ:

1. Gave the hope of the resurrection (John 11:23)

2. Pointed to Himself as the source of that hope (John 11:25-26)

3. He wept (John 11:35)

Ultimately, Christ displayed not His mere power, but His power over death which pointed to God’s Glory. Christ did not flaunt His power for the heck of it. Frankly, if someone just lost a loved one, I would not give him/her Piper’s devotional. Piper’s devotional (which ignores the ending of resurrection!) says: “God killed your loved one because He is power drunk and wants you to know it.”

The whole of John 11 displays the strange and wonderful love of God, but in a way that says says “Death tells us this world is not as it will be, but Christ has power over death.” Christ gives us hope and comes along side of our experiences with us. This demonstrates the Glory of God, not the mere announcing of it. I think some Calvinists I’ve heard (Al Mohler, John Piper) wish to communicate that God does not conform to our ideas of what is “good.” While this is true, death is not good, I'M SURE OF THIS (for the Bible tells me so:) because it is a curse (Gen 3:19). Death announces the sin and rebellion of humanity, not the Glory of God (in and of itself). Death announces that creation is "not as it should be" or is ultimately purposed to be.

What is the point of brow-beating people with the "Glory of God"? God's sovereignty promises “All things work together for good” (Rom 8:28) for believers, NOT all things that happen ARE good. It is an eschatological hope. Going to the dentist is good because he drills out cavities for the end of healthy teeth, not to merely torture you with his power. While letting go of our conceptions of “good” as the standard to judge God, we should not point to God’s power without pointing to His love (not that we can see or understand it at a certain moment).

I believe this, not because I am not a good enough Calvinist, but because if we only point to God's power and call this His love, God is made out to be a despot and a Machiavellian, not Love as God defines it:

"God is love. In this the love of God was manifested toward us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him. In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins." (1 John 4:8-10)

(UPDATE: yeah, I think Piper believes all of the above, I guess I would just like to see him connect it more often. Perhaps my criticism is more on presentation than theology. Soli Deo Gloria!)

N.T. Wright’s gospel of “being put to rights”

I just listened to N.T. Wright's talk on Romans at Calvin College. After listening to it, my verdict is…mixed. Wright picks up on two important themes:

1. Our poor eschatology of heaven as floating spirits (which is a gnostic, dualistic or Manichean idea coming from the concept that matter is somehow evil and a detour in creation).

2. Our lack of concern for greater new creation rather than just personal eternal life.

Then one gets to where N.T. Wright talks about justification as a “putting of the world to rights.” Wright has a system looking towards the restoration of the world in new creation. Thus, Judgment is restoring the rights of creation.

Ironically, N.T. Wright talks about how our understanding of Paul is too focused through Enlightenment concepts. Yet, Wright uses "rights" in a similar way as Enlightenment thinkers, in a modern idea of rights. “Right” becomes a positive claim, or an inherent birthright. This was conceived in some of William of Ockham’s ideas, birthed by the lawyer Grotius (the person who invented the idea of governmental atonement) and reached a whiny, violent adolescence in the French Revolution, the culmination of the Enlightenment.

A true pre-Enlightenment thinker, Thomas Aquinas, defined “right” (or "ius" in Latin) as DUTY. This idea was developed in explaining Romans 2:14-15:

for when Gentiles that have not the law do by nature the things of the law, these, not having the law, are the law unto themselves; in that they show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness therewith

Thomas Aquinas explained this “law written on their hearts” as “lex naturalis” (natural law). Specific precepts of natural law are “ius naturalis” (natural right[s]), in other words the law has specific duties.

We have ALREADY been put to rights or duties: we have been given the law. Our problem is not being “put to rights“ or properly speaking “being put to the law’s duties” but that we do not do our right/duty, we do not keep the law (Rom 3:10-11). The “right” thing to do (a better understanding and use of the term) is for God to do His duty as Judge to the law and now destroy us, as the law demands. The declaration that we are to “be put to rights!” should make us shutter! If the Judgment means everyone will be put to rights, then everyone is damned. The declaration that we have unmerited favor, or vicariously merited favor, is the good news.

To put it in classical terms (the right definition of right) is:
Christ has done our duty/right on our behalf. Christ was put to death for our trespass of rights.

To put it in modern terms (I rather use birthright than right):
Our birthright is death. Christ’s birthrite is life. Christ takes our birthright, and we take His birthright.

More important than justification by faith is justification by grace. We have no birthrights to restoration, only duties we cannot perform, but have been performed for us and a reward confered on us by shear grace.

But don’t be put off Wright altogether [Here is a balanced evaluation in Christianity Today]. He is great on the resurrection and generally on the new creation. Piper is putting out a book specifically targeting N.T. Wright, which I can only hope properly separates the good from the bad [as Piper does not have a reputation for gentleness in rebuke, ask any Free Grace adherent or Arminian]. Wright is a friend to orthodox Christianity, not an enemy. Wright tends to be about 90% correct in his teaching, a great leader against liberalization on homosexuality in the U.S. Episcopal church and a defender of the doctrines of the resurrection and the Bible as the Word of God. That's actually a big deal for someone in the Church of England.

Some good N.T. Wright:

Wright on resurrection (great sermon!)

Wright on the sacraments.

[a tip of the hat to Solus Christus for first posting the Christianity Today article]

Pop Quiz!

Peter Kreeft starts out a short lecture with a pop quiz. Here are five of the questions:

1. Name the living person with the greatest influence on your life.

2. What is the church's gospel?

3. What is God like?

4. What is the meaning of life?

5. What is truth?

You can listen to the talk on mp3 for the answer. Here's a hint: This post is a defense of my post: The Golden Key. And, there should only be one answer for all the questions above. We have the answer, now we seek the questions.

All Good and All Powerful

I was thinking about this the other day when I was talking with a friend about how God’s purpose in everything is to reveal his own glory. My friend joked and said “Yeah like with the Holocaust”. I joked about that taking some nuance. It made me think of Rabbi Kushner though. I always thought he had written his famous book in response to the Holocaust. Obviously a stereo type on my part because he is Jewish. Actually he wrote it in response to his son’s death. His reasoning I believe goes something like this; ‘God can not be all good and all powerful and let something like this happen. So he must not be all powerful.’ But the sacred writing of his own religion testifies to God being all powerful. I have never read his book, but I have read Job. My wife bought the Rabbi’s book when she was young. Thank God she never read it at such a young and impressionable age. Pain is not meaningless as John Piper discusses so well so often. Read his latest response to Rabbi Kushner here. Why would I find comfort in believing pain is just a bunch of meaningless stuff that happens? Or that God has no purpose or plan because he can do nothing about it. Not much of a God to worship. Sounds like any old friend down the street would be better.

August 6, Day of the Transfiguration

August 6 is the commemoration of the Day of Transfiguration, a day Peter told the Church to remember in 2 Pet 1:17-19, and Luke records here. Calvin said of the Transfiguration: “the disciples could taste in part what could not be fully comprehended.” As it was a precursor to the resurrection, we remember it because we too, with the whole of orthodox Christianity (i.e. those that adhere to the Apostles' Creed at least), look forward to the resurrection of the body. Perhaps then we will be given greater ability to perceive and experience God's Glory: our resurrection bodies, able to fully taste what we now cannot comprehend. Christianity Today has a slideshow showcasing different artists attempting to convey the event. My favorite art in commemoration, however, is Sufjan Stevens' beautiful acoustic song "the Transfiguration," (sample here) especially the end:

When he took the three disciples
to the mountainside to pray,
his countenance was modified, his clothing was aflame.
Two men appeared: Moses and Elijah came;
they were at his side.
The prophecy, the legislation spoke of whenever he would die.

Then there came a word
of what he should accomplish on the day.
Then Peter spoke, to make of them a tabernacle place.
A cloud appeared in glory as an accolade.
They fell on the ground.
A voice arrived, the voice of God,
the face of God, covered in a cloud.

What he said to them,
the voice of God: the most beloved son.
Consider what he says to you, consider what's to come.
The prophecy was put to death,
was put to death, and so will the Son.
And keep your word, disguise the vision 'till the time has come.

Lost in the cloud, a voice. Have no fear! We draw near!
Lost in the cloud, a sign. Son of man! Turn your ear.
Lost in the cloud, a voice. Lamb of God! We draw near!
Lost in the cloud, a sign. Son of man! Son of God!

I Suck: Why I Need Hope.

I wrote this post, then found this essay which captures the idea much better than I could. Here's the point in better prose.

Eph 1:13-14 - You were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise, Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.

I am saved. But I still sin, hurt others, hurt myself and I am going to die.

We often talk about the work of salvation as a past event. “When were you saved?” A popular answer is “when I asked Jesus into my heart at age ___.” Yet, we still sin, we still hurt, we still hurt others and we all die. Why? This is what the Bible says: Because we are not yet saved.

While we have been saved, and are presently saved, if that is all we have in “the finished work of redemption,” then salvation is a disappointment. We are not yet glorified and the problem still exists: we all hurt, sin and die. What is so great about that?

Paul, however, tells us by God sealing us in the Spirit, we have an earnest (or down-payment) of our inheritance. Paul reminds us of the necessity of hope. We hope because salvation is not finished and we look towards “the redemption of the purchased possession.” We have been bought and we will one day be saved.

John tells us:

Rev 21:4 He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.

The next verse floors me. The final two chapters of Revelation pull back the curtain and flood our mind with hope and Christ declares:

Rev 21:5 And He who was seated on the throne said, "Behold, I am making all things new."

We have been told Christ is done. It is finished. He sat down at the right hand of God. While the payment has been made, He is not done. He tells us so. This is not as good as it gets. Hallelujah for that.

The Golden Key

George MacDonald wrote a children’s story called “The Golden Key.” The children in the story are sent on a reverse quest, they are first given the golden key, and then must find what it unlocks. MacDonald used this as a metaphor for Christ. We see bumper stickers that declare “Jesus is the Answer” which begs “What is the question?” That is the paradox of the Christian spiritual journey. While philosophers ask their questions and then seek the answer, Christians have an answer and seek the questions.

I used to be a little embarrassed by this fact. It seemed faith was not rational, not the product of reasoned inquiry, but a logical fallacy in search of justification. One may read with Enlightened condescension a definition of faith as “belief seeking understanding.” Then how did I figure it out?! What foolishness. What foolishness to us Greeks.

Our search lacks perspective. Humanistic philosophy looks at the ground, illuminated by light and asks how each thing here on earth provides its own light and knowledge. To the elect, God lifts their vision to the Sun, no, God provides the Sun. We see all things physical by an apriori (before the fact) reality: the Sun. This is why God must seek us, and not the other way around. We have no means of sight. We must first be given the light, the Sun, the answer, the key: Christ. Then our journey begins and illuminates all other things along the way.

But we are proud. We tell God we want to find Him ourselves. To one who wants to find the way themselves, to credit their own insight and powers for finding God, God tells us:

I spread out my hands all the day to a rebellious people, who walk in a way that is not good, following their own devices;
a people who provoke me to my face continually, sacrificing in gardens and making offerings on bricks; …
who say, "Keep to Yourself, do not come near me, for I am too holy for You." These are a smoke in My nostrils, a fire that burns all the day.
Behold, it is written before me: "I will not keep silent…”
Isaiah 65:2-6

We, who did not seek God, but were sought by Him now have light.
We have a key. Happy journey in looking for the doors it unlocks.

Christianity is African.

You may have heard the thesis: The "center of gravity" in Christianity is moving South. Stories abound of Africans in the Anglican denomination resisting the liberalization in the U.S. branch of the Anglican Communion. In the public mind, this thesis gained popularity in the works of Philip Jenkins, namely his work The Next Christendom, and his newer work New Faces of Christianity. One of my favorite stories from the later book tells of an African and American bishop sitting down for a Bible study over the issue of homosexuality. Finally the African bishop exclaimed in disbelief: "If you don't believe the Bible, why did you bring it to us?!"

The statement above displays a common misconception of African Christianity, even by some products of Western missions. Lesser known scholar Andrew Walls fills in some gaps. He was recently interviewed by Christianity Today as the "most important person you don't know." His work is not limited to the strange contemporary events, but the long history of African Christianity. From the story of Philip and the Ethiopian in Acts, Africa has not just played a secondary role in the grand Christian narrative, but, Walls argues, a primary part. Walls, an Oxford grad and professor, in a series of lectures delivered at DTS in 2003, lays out how all roads in the Christian narrative do not lead to Rome, and how African Christianity was the mind of early Christianity, the arms of the missionary movement throughout history, and, perhaps, the soul of future Christianity when "Envoys will come out of Egypt; [and] Ethiopia will quickly stretch out her hands to God"[Ps 68:31] Give a listen:

Part 1: Two Thousand Years in African Christian History

Part 2: A Tale of Three Continents

Part 3: Tales of the Unexpected

Part 4: Africa as Leader in World Missions

Apostolic Father: Ignatius of Antioch

or Sanctification by the Church.

Ignatius was bishop of Antioch, another member of the generation after the apostles.
Protestants all know, one can have too high a view of the Church. But another sin Protestants forget, is having too low a view of the Church. Ignatius introduces us to a very foreign topic to Protestants: Sanctification by the Church. While we know the primary agent in sanctification is God (1 Pet 1:2, 1 Thes 5:23, 2 Thes 2:13), we may forget that sanctification is also mentioned in a group context (1 Cor 1:2).

Ignatius develops this thought further, in lines such as:

“He, therefore, that does not assemble with the Church, has by this manifested his pride, and condemned himself. For it is written, ‘God resisteth the proud.’”

“I am far inferior to you, and require to be sanctified by your Church of Ephesus.”

“being subject to the [Church leaders], ye may in all respects be sanctified.”

So Ignatius might say to the modern Christian: Just you and Jesus? A Christian without the Church? No such thing. God may alone sanctify, but he does by means of the Church and if we take Rom 6:22 seriously, sanctification must precede eternal life. And if the Church is the means, either here or in the next life, we have to learn to love the Church, and be sanctified by it.

Ignatius wrote seven letters which survive. His letter to the Ephesians is best for a one letter introduction to his thought.

Ignatius also ended his life in martyrdom, fed to the lions in Rome.

Apostolic Father: Polycarp

Polycarp, a leader or bishop in Smyrna, was a direct student of John. Some speculate that if the angels in Revelation are bishops, he is referred to in Rev 2-3. Reading his epistle, one can see the similar simplicity with John. He quotes Scripture as much as he uses his own words. He says little profound, but has a loving spirit towards the believers in Philippi. The account of his martyrdom reveals his wittier side. The Roman officer gave Polycarp an opportunity to avoid death by his association with the ‘atheist‘ Christians, telling him:

“Swear by the fortune of Caeser; repent and say, Away with the Atheists.”

"Polycarp…looked up to heaven, [and] said, 'Away with the Atheists.'" Adding later, “if you wish to learn what the doctrines of Christianity are, appoint me a day, and thou shalt hear them.”

Polycarp was burned alive.

Read Polycarp's Epistle to Philippi here.

Read his Martyrdom here

And about him here.

Apostolic Father: Clement

For most evangelicals, The early church consists of the book of Acts, and it picks up in the Reformation, or with Billy Graham, or perhaps when they were born. But Paul, Peter and John had their own disciples, many who died for their faith. They are a rusty treasure of the church.

I begin with Clement. This may very well be the Clement mentioned in Php 4:3. A man who knew Paul and Peter. Clement is identified by Irenaeus as one of the Bishops of Rome. His only surviving work is his letter to the Corinthians. Though we may think the Apostolic Fathers may merely confirm our perception of Scripture, often they challenge it. For instance, see how Clement explores the tension of justification by works and by faith:

“Let us cleave, then, to those to whom grace has been given by God. Let us clothe ourselves with concord in humility, ever exercising self-control, standing far off from all whispering and evil-speaking, being justified by our works, and not our words…does he that is ready in speech deem himself righteousness?…Let our praise be in God, and not ourselves; for God hateth those that commend themselves Let testimony to our good deeds be born by others, as it was in the case of our righteous forefathers.”

Clement juxtaposes works and words. Clement talks about praising our own works, indicating he is talking about our faith in the presence of others. We are shown justified (in the right) before men by our works, not our words. Though modern evangelists may object, Clement tells us the gospel is confirmed as true, not by our words (logical, apologetic, rational, or whatever our approach) but, as James said, by what we do. But then if we might think our relationship with God is of works, Clement continues:

“[The Levite priests were] great, not for their own sake, or for their own works, or for the righteousness which they wrought, but through the operation of His will. We, too, being called by His will in Christ Jesus, are not justified by ourselves, nor by our own wisdom, or understanding, or godliness, or works which we have wrought in holiness of heart; but by that faith through which, from the beginning, Almighty God has justified all men; to Whom be glory for ever and ever, Amen.” (Clem XXXII)

Check out Clement for yourself.

Celebrating Dependence: Calvin and Communion

From a Baptist background, the ministers always explained the "only" or “merely” aspect of the Lord’s Supper. “This is MERELY a symbol of the forgiveness of sins.” It was only described in the negative: Not Catholic. One begins to wonder if this tradition is so minor, so mere, why do we do it at all?

This “mere” idea comes from Zwingli and dominates the sacramental theology of Baptists and Presbyterians, Reformed and otherwise. Yet, Calvin’s mind in Soteriology is acknowledged as far superior. Why not entertain some of his thoughts on the Lord’s Supper?

Turns out Calvin’s Institutes find little “mere” or “minor” in the symbol of Christ‘s blood and body. Some selections:

“As bread nourishes, sustains, and protects our bodily life, so the body of Christ is the only food to invigorate and keep alive the soul. When we behold wine set forth as a symbol of blood, we must think that such use as wine serves to the body, the same spiritually bestowed by the blood of Christ.”

Calvin invites contemplation on the “similitude” of bread and wine to the “giving daily” of the benefits of Christ. I find Psalm 104:15 lists both and their function:

Bread:
“Bread to strengthen man's heart” (ESV)
I may surmise that Christ continually is to be our strength.

Wine:
“wine maketh glad the heart of man, making the face brighter than oil” (JPS)
Christ is to be the gladness of our heart, making our face beam more than oil.

While Christ’s sacrifice for sin was once for all, the Lord’s Supper reminds us of the continual nature in which Christ is the source of our strength and our joy. Our sustaining Providence and the source of our delight. Thus, while we may see baptism as our death and new life with Christ, done once, the Lord’s Supper is the continual coming to Christ for strength and joy. Calvin does not leave the symbolism to the past grace of Christ, but the present and future. We are continually given the benefits of Christ’s “wonderous exchange.” What does Calvin mean by this phrase? He tells us:

“the wonderous exchange…having become with us the Son of Man, He made us with Himself sons of God. By His own descent to the earth, He prepared our ascent to heaven. Having received our mortality, He has bestowed on us His immortality. Having under-taken our weakness, He has made us strong in His strength. Having submitted to our poverty, He has transferred to us His riches. Having taken upon Himself the burden of unrighteousness with which we were oppressed, He has clothed us with His righteousness.”

In the Lord’s Supper, perhaps we ask the wrong question of “Does the bread and wine become Christ?” Perhaps we should ask “Does Christ become our bread and wine?” Our strength and delight.