Can you explain Christ this well?

Not known for his Christianity this person none the less, has it nailed. Any guesses who said:

"At the center of all religions is the idea of Karma. You know, what you put out comes back to you: an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, or in physics—in physical laws—every action is met by an equal or an opposite one," explains [...]. "And yet, along comes this idea called Grace to upend all that. . . . Love interrupts, if you like, the consequences of your actions, which in my case is very good news indeed, because I've done a lot of stupid stuff."

This person went on to say:

"Look, the secular response to the Christ story always goes like this: He was a great prophet, obviously a very interesting guy, had a lot to say along the lines of other great prophets, be they Elijah, Muhammad, Buddha, or Confucius. But actually Christ doesn't allow you that. He doesn't let you off that hook. Christ says, No. I'm not saying I'm a teacher, don't call me teacher. I'm not saying I'm a prophet. I'm saying: 'I'm the Messiah.' I'm saying: 'I am God incarnate.' . . . So what you're left with is either Christ was who He said He was—the Messiah—or a complete nutcase. . . . The idea that the entire course of civilization for over half of the globe could have its fate changed and turned upside-down by a nutcase, for me that's farfetched."

You can find out more about this person by reading the full article here. A good question to ask yourself is "could I have witnessed for Christ as well, and if not why not?

This guy can play a guitar

On the lighter side; enjoy a one man orchestra. I had no idea anyone could make an acoustic guitar sound like this. Amazing.

Arminianism is inconsistent universalism

I spend more than I should on books. I think it was Erasmus who said something like this: "I buy books and if I have money left over I buy food." That's me! Now I want a book that costs $80+ at Amazon, on sale, and it's not a text book. (If you feel sorry for me all donations will be cheerfully accepted).

The reason I buy so many books is because of a simple mandate found in scripture: "be transformed by the renewing of your mind." (Rom 12:2) The only way I've found to accomplish this is by reading, studying, and thinking. The problem with "renewing the mind" is that most of the time you will be taken into areas of thought you had no intention of going, which may result in taking actions you have no real desire to pursue. But, if you believe as I do, that God is in providential control of "all things," there is a reason this will happen.

For instance, I have challenged my Church's use of the 1833 New Hampshire Statement of Faith. A careful reading of this document led me to the conclusion that many parts of it were written from a frame of mind which had more to do with American democracy than with God's authority or activity. One of the points I challenge in the statement is in regard to the Fall of Man. In that section the writer, Dr. John Newton Brown, a Baptist preacher, states men sin, "not by constraint, but of choice."

For all intents and purposes the "not by constraint" concept eliminates God's sovereignty over Mankind. Not by constraint means men do not have a nature corrupted by original sin, therefore we are free to choose of our own free-will to follow Christ - or not. If that is so, then Christians who believe that, must understand, logically, God who is unchangeable, knows all things, and created all things, cannot intervene in the choices we make. God does not change His mind, so if He gave us an autonomous free will, He has no intention of interfering with our choices. We are on our own. If God changes His mind about anything we are on a fools errand trying to be Christians: He might change the rules at anytime, and if that's possible then there are no rules.

More importantly, however, is if we are not constrained what do we do with scripture such as Colssians 1:17 which states, in part: "By him all things consist?" Do they? If men can be convinced to make a "decision for Christ" based on their "free will," providential oversight of our activities has just been eliminated. By what criteria would we then be able to believe our choice is effective. If we are free, in will and agency to do as we please, the question must be asked; why do we pray for God to intervene in any way in our lives? Some even go so far as to say, in defense of their autonomy, "God didn't make a bunch of robots." (Meaning he is incapable of changing us for his purposes. If He interferes in our choice we are no more than robots).

Logically, then, why do we spend so much time praying for God to override the "decisions" of men who choose not to follow Christ? By not choosing to follow Him those men have made their unconstrained  choice. When we ask God to intervene we are asking Him to change His mind regarding His omniscient decision to supposedly grant "free will." Theologically I haven't quite figured out how that would work. Philosophically it means those who believe in free-will have arrogated to themselves power which is not theirs to take. They have changed the True God into a god that is an idol of their own making. It is the Golden Calf of "make a decision for Christ." This Idol has populated the American Church with so-called Christians who have no idea they are on their way to an eternity in hell.

That $80 book I want is The New Measures: A Theological History of Democratic Practice. In it the author says:

Like a new measures preacher, I have picked the practices that I think will best accomplish my purposes. I hope to write a theological commentary on a small but important set of practices of democratic culture in America. With that end in mind, I attend to six particular measures: organizing worship so that it achieves measurable results in this world (chapter one); using novelty to compete in an economy of attention (two); demanding that people make free decisions (three); proclaiming the formal equality of all people (four); representing private selves in public spaces, and so speaking with the authority of celebrity (five); and telling stories to illustrate points (six). These six chapters each work from a close reading of some revival practice to a critical, theological engagement with some preoccupation of contemporary social criticism: instrumental reason, novelty, freedom, equality, sincerity, and secularization. In connecting the practices with these top(ics), I do not mean to hide my activity of selection and arrangement. I have chosen to focus on the new measures that open into the most fruitful conversations.

  The new measures displayed elective affinities with many important elements of modern cultures, and those affinities helped them to thrive in the intensified competition between churches for adherents. The new measures became so powerful over time that they ceased to be an issue in most white Protestant churches that were not part of Pentecostal movements. Even northern Presbyterians, who split bitterly over new measures practices and theology in 1837, came together around a new measures agenda in 1869 so obvious to all parties that they could agree to call it “pure and simple.” Practices now so familiar as to escape notice were once so jarring as to be unrecognizable. When Finney started preaching in the 1820s, his style seemed so different that some people did not even recognize it as preaching. By the time of his death in 1875, the new measures style had become the invisible instinct of most white Protestant preachers.

Now, here we are (American democratic Christians) 200 years later, wondering why we have churches full of people with "itching ears," wanting even more novelty to satisfy their felt needs. We do more and more with technology to entertain them and placate their whims. Still they will leave if we happen to play and sing music they don't like, or we happen to say something that doesn't quite agree with what they have interpreted as being "true for themselves." Scriptural Truth has little effect on these folks, they worship their own ideas, desires and beliefs. Augustine dealt with their predecessor Pelagius in 350 AD. And the Council of Dort dealt with his philosophical offspring, Arminius, during the Reformation.  

Along these lines is an important article at the Banner of Truth. The author says:

Arminian redemption disavows the saving ministry of the Holy Spirit, since it claims that Christ's blood has a wider application than does the Spirit's saving work. Any presentation of salvation that makes the Father's or the Spirit's work in salvation lag behind Christ's work contradicts the inherent unity of the Trinity. The Father and the Son are one. The Spirit and the Son are one. Christ cannot possibly have died for those whom the Father did not decree to save and in whom the Spirit does not savingly work. God cannot be at odds with himself. Arminianism is inconsistent universalism. [emphasis added]

I Enjoy Conferences

My church, First Baptist Church, Canton, Michigan, is hosting the fall meeting of the World Baptist Fellowship. I haven't been able to attend all the sessions, but what I've heard from the speakers, so far, is outstanding.

Last night Dr. David Bryant, past President of Arlington Baptist College, preached. Dr. Bryant has been gifted with an outstanding memory and a gift for public speaking. I could listen to him all day, I think, and not get fidgety or tired. He is that good.

Anyway, he spoke for a half-hour, or so, about the Sovereignty of God and as I recall mentioned the word sovereignty only once. I wish I had that kind of skill.

Let's face it though, Dr. Bryant was obviously born with certain God-given gifts, but to achieve the level of skill he has has taken a life-time of study, prayer, practice, and education. Shouldn't everyone of us do our best to emulate those we admire and do what they do? I think so!

So, after this conference ends tonight, I will have to study more and longer. I'll never be a David Bryant, but I can sure try to be the best Mason I can be.

Christ and Justice

Quote from Wittenberg Reformed Theological Seminary

It is an injustice to Calvary that the true pain of the Cross is often overlooked by a more romantic, but less powerful theme. It is often thought and even preached that the Father looked down from heaven and witnessed the suffering that was heaped upon His Son by the hands of men, and that He counted such affliction as payment for our sins. This is heresy of the worst kind. Christ satisfied divine justice not merely by enduring the affliction of men, but by enduring and dying under the wrath of God. It takes more than crosses, nails, crowns of thorns, and lances, to pay for sin. The believer is saved, not merely because of what men did to Christ on the Cross, but because of what God did to Him - He crushed Him under the full force of His wrath against us. Rarely is this truth made clear enough in the abundance of all our Gospel

preaching! - Paul D. Washer

A good source

I found another source for very good articles on Reformed Theology. The quote below is from one of Rev. Samson's posts:

Romans 12:2 teaches us that our mandate as Christians is not to allow the world to squeeze us into its mould, but to be different - transformed, even metamorphosized, by renewing our minds to the will of God. To avoid the world's mould, we must first recognize what it is, and see the pitfalls ahead of us. If we do not, we might find ourselves caught up in the thinking of the culture around us without even realizing it. We must understand what the world thinks, how it thinks and how it wants us to think. Then we need to take deliberate steps to walk not in the counsel of the wicked, nor stand in the way of sinners, nor sit in the seat of scoffers; but delight in the law of the LORD, meditating on it day and night.

 I often run into Christians who believe there is no need to really understand how the world around us thinks. I suppose if we all believed that there wouldn't be any reason to claim to be Christian.

The shallowness of the thinking of so many Christians is astonishing. Rev. Samson is exactly right in saying we need to take deliberate steps to avoid thinking as the secular-world around us thinks. We have to spend time "renewing our minds" as God through the Apostle Paul instructed us. If we don't we won't know when our thinking is the world's and not "the mind of Christ's"

10 Reasons

Doug Wilson is delighted Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize. He has posted 10 reasons for his elation.

Here is reason number 8:

Because there is no apparent reason for the prize, this must mean that the committee is inviting all of us to assign our own meanings to it -- and so I would submit that Obama got it for continuing the Bush policies of rendition, roving wiretaps, indefinite detention of accused terrorists, urging continuation of the Patriot Act, and so forth.

You can read the other 9 reasons here.

Spurgeon said:

Freedom cannot belong to will any more than ponderability can be­long to electricity. They are altogether different things. Free agency we may believe in, but free-will is simply ridiculous. The will is well known by all to be directed by the understanding, to be moved by motives, to be guided by other parts of the soul, and to be a secondary thing. Philosophy and religion both discard at once the very thought of free-will; and I will go as far as Martin Luther, in that strong assertion of his, where he says, “If any man doth ascribe aught of salvation, even the very least, to the free-will of man, he knoweth nothing of grace, and he hath not learnt Jesus Christ aright.” 

Couldn't have said it better myself. 

The Christian in the world

Jaques Ellul wrote:

"The Bible tells us that the Christian is in the world, and that there he must remain. The Christian has not been created in order to separate himself from, or live aloof from the world. ...if the Christian is necessarily in the world, he is not of it. This means that his thought, his life, and his heart are not controlled by the world, and do not depend upon the world, for they belong to another Master. Thus, since he belongs to another Master, the Christian has been sent into this world by this Master, and his communion with his Master remains unbroken, in spite of the 'world' in which he has to live.
"...the Christian finds that he is not confronted by the material forces of the world but by its spiritual reality. Because he is in communion with Jesus Christ he has to fight not against flesh and blood but against 'the principalities, against the powers, against the world-rulers of this darkness.' At the same time this communion assures him that he does not belong to the world, that he is free from the fatality of the world which is moving towards death, and, as a result of this liberation by grace, he can fight against the spiritual realities of the world."

More can be found here.