Worshiping in Song

Pastor Doug Wilson's Church is Moscow, Idaho. Most people may know him from his televised debates with the atheist Christopher Hitchens. Pastor Wilson's church obviously loves to sing. Watch this video to see a church truly worshiping God through song. You can read about the setup by clicking here.

O Sing a New Song to the Lord from Daniel Foucachon on Vimeo.

Materialism Out; Spirit In

Long ago I read several books by Ayn Rand in which she proposed "emotions are not the means of cognition." Rand was a "pop" philosopher disdained by the intellectual elites so the only contact most people have had with her is through their high school assignment to read and discuss her book "The Fountain Head."

Objectivism, her philosophy underpinning  her books, and atheism were Rand's springboard to notoriety.  She believed that all a human needed to live the good life was available to him through the evidence of his senses coupled with a strong obedience to the necessary materialistic application of that evidence.

What Rand never dealt with, as I recall, was the animating activity on men by the cascade of chemicals in the brain. By that, I mean, I don't recall reading anything about her dealing with consciousness, or to put it in my simple language: how is it possible for anything or anyone to be self-aware?

Now comes the hint of a new strain of thought prying at the door of the materialistic-evolutionary lock-box. Some are beginning to question the cant of the likes of Rand and Richard Dawkins which is; we think because that's the way we evolved - accept it as fact and move on.

In Section 5, devoted to neuroscience, Staune conscientiously explains that contemporary research is far from being unanimous on a number of key issues, most notably the exact correspondence between neuronal phenomena and mental events, and particularly conscience. He patiently argues that in humans the animating force cannot find expression without neuronal activity, but is not a mere result of such an activity. Boldly he puts forward the possibility that much current rationalist and scientific research offers again acceptable space for a dualistic hypothesis (body and spirit).

My-oh-my! What will science do once it is cornered by popular demand to explain why we are able to think merely because a bunch of chemicals in our brains fire synapses in a particular order? What/Who decides the order of firing from which abstract thought is derived?  In other words can evolution explain why it is I'm able to ask that particular question? I don't think so.

Materialism appears to be increasingly ruined and “passé.” A spiritual and religious alternative, for the moment mostly akin to Platonism (presented in some detail), seems to him the most plausible replacement; in any case divine presence and intervention in one form or another have again become, he maintains, fully plausible. I will not enumerate here the powerful voices adduced by Staune to support his conclusions.

The article the quotes came from here. It is an interesting read.

Hat tip to Remonstrans for pointing me to the article. Read their post - Humor In Unbelief.

Everyone Needs To Watch This

Matt Chandler of Village Church, Dallas, Texas speaks the Truth in Love to every Christian.


more about "Everyon Needs To Watch This", posted with vodpod

Groothuis Articles

Doug Groothuis at Denver Seminary has a link with some of his articles. This is a great resource for those interested.

THINKING FOR CHRIST!

New/Old Idea #2

Day Number #2

Spurgeon's Catechism

Question 2 What rule has God given to direct us how we may glorify him?

Answer 2 The Word of God which is contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments (Ephesians 2:20; 2Timothy 3:16) is the only rule to direct us how we may glorify God and enjoy him. (1John 1:3)

New/Old Idea #1

Second Timothy 2:15 commands us to "Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that need not be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."

With that thought in mind, I thought for the next several months I would post a daily quote from Charles Spurgeon which will help me (and maybe you) better understand what it is I believe. Spurgeon listed and numbered a series of teachings to help his church. I hesitate to call this list what he called it because today the name he used is generally recognized as belonging only to a particular denomination. Oh well, I can't avoid the name forever so here is a quote from Spurgeon himself about his list:

I am persuaded that the use of a good Catechism [emphasis added] in all our families will be a great safeguard against the increasing errors of the times, and therefore I have compiled this little manual from the Westminster Assembly's and Baptist Catechisms, for the use of my own church and congregation. Those who use it in their families or classes must labour to explain the sense; but the words should be carefully learned by heart, for they will be understood better as years pass. May the Lord bless my dear friends and their families evermore, is the prayer of their loving Pastor.

          C. H. Spurgeon

So, with Spurgeon's words in mind, here is day one:

Question 1 What is the chief end of man?
Answer 1 Man's chief end is to glorify God, (1Cor. 10:31) and to enjoy him for ever. (Psalms 73:25,26)

1 Corinthians 10:31 Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.

Psalm 73:25 Whom have I in heaven but thee? and there is none upon earth that I desire beside thee. 26 My flesh and my heart faileth: but God is the strength of my heart, and my portion for ever

Saved Again?

Yesterday I had a short conversation with a friend at my church. He asked me what I thought of a particular preacher we recently heard in a conference. I explained I did not care for his presentation, as I found it offensive that his entire "schtick" was to make himself somehow appealing to the audience and by that means get some to respond to his altar call.

Let me say up front I do not agree with the manipulative aspects of the altar call. Charles Finney, who popularized this atrocity made it clear in his memoirs that he believed salvation was absolutely the product of manipulating the unsaved into making a "decision for Christ," which flies in the face of Biblical anthropology.

During my conversation with my friend he said that people often get saved but many don't show any evidence of salvation so they have to get saved again. I asked how that could be if the doctrine of eternal security our church espouses is true. If a man "gets saved" a god who cannot keep him secure is logically no god at all. He is just an idol and might as well be made of the same gold as that used by the Israelites to make their Golden Calf.

My friend is just an average guy and does not make a habit of thinking deeply, so I did not press the issue with him. He is a product of the Finney legacy-disaster that is rampant now in American Christianity. I won't go into the proof texts for this assertion here, you can read them for yourself by Googling, Charles Finney and Ashahel Nettleton. (Nettleton was a reformed preacher relying on God alone to do the saving).

The point of my post today is that the idea of "salvation" and how to attain it is so corrupted in much of the church today, the average person is absolutely confused about the whole matter. I was confused about it as well for years until one day I gave up and in the next instance I knew I was different. No bolt of lightning, nothing unusual other than I just told God, "I quit." I said, "If you don't change me then I'm in deep trouble."

Essentially that is the difference in what I had been taught, "say the prayer, walk the aisle, get baptized," the Finney idea, and the Biblical, or Nettleton concept, "I can't do this, God you have to change me."

God had changed me after my plea and His Holy Spirit witnessed to me I had been changed. At the time I could not have told you how I had been changed, other than a sense of absolute well-being, even though at the time I was in serious trouble. Later, however, the change became more overt. I no longer desired the life-style activities which had gotten me into the trouble. And still latter, I noticed a change in my desire for reading material.: Before I read the bible because I was told Christian's should read the bible. Now I read it because I desire to read it. I read about God and his activities in the world now where before I read about Man and his opinions..

The Wittenberg Door has a two part series on this which I recommend to anyone. Here is a portion from Part one:
[...]
"So you’re saying that God drags people into heaven against their will, while those sincerely desiring to get in can’t because they’re not the elect?”
[...]
We’ll start with the second objection: Is it the case that there are sinners who want to reconcile with God but God won’t let them because they're not of the elect?

Here’s the problem with this objection: it doesn’t take into consideration the state of man. Scripture teaches that Adam’s sin brought spiritual death to us all (Gen. 2:16–17, 3:1–7; Rom. 5:12; Eph. 2:1–3; Col. 2:13).

As a result, men are spiritually deaf, blind, and completely corrupted (Ecc. 9:3; Jer. 17:9; Rom. 8:7–8; 1 Cor. 2:14); also, men are slaves of sin (John. 8:34; Rom. 6:20; Tit. 3:3) and children of the devil (Eph. 2:1–2; 2 Tim. 2:25–26; 1 John 3:10).

So how does natural man respond to the revelations God has given him? He suppresses the truth in unrighteousness (Rom. 1:18). Consequently, man in his unregenerate state hates God and is therefore not seeking Him.

10) as it is written,
"THERE IS NONE RIGHTEOUS, NOT EVEN ONE;

11) THERE IS NONE WHO UNDERSTANDS,THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS FOR GOD;

12) ALL HAVE TURNED ASIDE, TOGETHER THEY HAVE BECOME USELESS;
THERE IS NONE WHO DOES GOOD, THERE IS NOT EVEN ONE."

Romans 3:10-12

Added Link

Over the years I've listened to many sermons from Preachers through the Internet. The ability to do that is one of the blessings of Al Gore's technology. (That's supposed to be funny: Lighten up!) Anyway, I find it a blessing because I hear men I would never have the opportunity to hear except for this indescribable thing called the "Internet."

One of the men I heard is a young Preacher who is outstanding. His name is Voddie Baucham from Houston, Texas. His ability to treat complex theological concepts is, in my opinion, unparalleled.

I've posted a link to his "page" on Sermon Audio in the Resource Links section on the right. If you have a few minutes, pick any one of his sermons to listen to and see if you don't agree. You will hear a man called and blessed to the vocation of Preaching.

I know it's a man thing. But new cars are just something we have to explore. This is Nate taking a look at the interior of Papa's new car. I told me he wanted to drive it but I explained he would have to wait until he was little older.