Circumcision: Skin or Heart, Both Useless and Futile
15 We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners; 16 yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified. (Galatians 2:15-16)
-
10 For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them.” 11 Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for “The righteous shall live by faith.” 12 But the law is not of faith, rather “The one who does them shall live by them.” 13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree”— 14 so that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith. (Galatians 3:10-14)
-
1 For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery.
2 Look: I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you. 3 I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law. 4 You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace. 5 For through the Spirit, by faith, we ourselves eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness. 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love. (Galatians 5:1-6)
21 But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it— 22 the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. 26 It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.
27 Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? By a law of works? No, but by the law of faith. 28 For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law. 29 Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, 30 since God is one—who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith. 31 Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law. (Romans 3:21-31)
Westminster Theological Seminary suspends OT Professor
Christianity Today reports:
Two of the hottest issues in evangelical theology right now are the New Testament’s use of the Old Testament and evangelical textual criticism. Peter Enns’s 2005 book, Inspiration and Incarnation: Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old Testament, aimed to pose difficult questions about the human aspects of Scripture. It received both praise and criticism from noted evangelical scholars.
And it made things difficult for Enns at his school, Philadelphia’s Westminster Theological Seminary. A battle over whether the book undermined or contradicted the Westminster Confession of Faith has been raging for some time now, and apparently came to a head Wednesday at the meeting of the school’s board, which decided to suspend Enns (at the close of the school year).
Trevin Wax summarizes the controversy nicely:
- Enns has been criticized for emphasizing the human nature of Scripture over against the divine.
- Enns has written that the first chapters of Genesis are firmly grounded in ancient myth, which he defines as “an ancient, premodern, prescientific way of addressing questions of ultimate origins in the form of stories.”
- Enns claims that Scripture is inspired and inerrant, however the way he describes Scripture seems to counter that belief.
- Enns does not seek to harmonize seemingly-contradictory parts of Scripture because he believes the diversity of Scripture is complementary.
- Enns rejects the idea of objective unbiased historiography.
It is very unfortunate whenever any seminary faculty member is suspended or dismissed on theological grounds. Do pray for Westminster Theological Seminary (students, faculty, Board of Trustees, and families) as they go through this controversial time. May we all examine ourselves and our own theology first, and read carefully about what is actually being debated, before pointing any fingers.
61min Video of Tim Keller at Google
Tim Keller visits Google’s Mountain View, CA, headquarters to discuss his book, “The Reason for God.” This event took place on March 5, 2008, as part of the Authors@Google series.
(See here for Tim Keller’s 90min video at UC Berkeley)
Belief in an Age of Skepticism
Here’s Dr. Tim Keller at UC Berkeley speaking about the topic of his new book, The Reason for God: Belief in an Age of Skepticism.
This is the full talk and Q&A session (94mins total), so you’ll want to add this one to your favorites!
(HT: Justin Taylor)
Theology Bleeds
MEMORANDUM
School of Theology
To: School of Theology Students
From: Dean Russell D. Moore
Subject: Theology Bleeds
Date: February 26, 2008
I’m concerned about something, and I’d like to ask you to join me in prayer and action about it.
It seems to me that too many of our churches—and too many of us—think of the Great Commission as little more than Jesus’ way of promoting a Christmas offering or of marketing an evangelistic video series.
Too many theologians—even pastor-theologians—tend sometimes to ignore the Great Commission. After all, isn’t it a “practical” exhortation, better left to denominational bureaucrats and women’s missionary auxiliary leaders? At the same time, too many missionaries and evangelists tend to ignore theology. After all, what does abstract theorizing have to do with Jesus’ ultimate church-wide missions emphasis—the Great Commission?
As a result, we are left with theologians who lust more for recognition by the American Academy of Religion than for the global expansion of the gospel. And far too many missionaries, evangelists, and church planters see themselves as the ecclesial equivalent of the civil service—organizing initiatives and promoting programs.
The problem, whenever the Great Commission is taken for granted, is the eclipse of Jesus. (more…)
What It Means to be a Human Being
God is very funny sometimes.
I came across the following last night, while reading for my Systematic Theology II class:
To be a human being is to be directed towards one’s fellowmen. Again we go back to Genesis 1. Note the juxtaposition, in verse 27, of “in the image of God he created him” and “male and female he created them.” More than sexual differentiation is involved here, since this is found also in animals, and the Bible does not say that animals have been created in the image of God. What is being said in this verse is that the human person is not an isolated being who is complete in himself or herself, but that he or she is a being who needs the fellowship of others, who is not complete apart from others.
This point is made even more vividly in Genesis 2, which describes the creation of Eve: “the LORD God said, ‘It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him’ ” (v.18). The Hebrew expression rendered “a helper suitable for him” is ezer kenego. Neged (the word translated “suitable for him”) means “corresponding to” or “answering to.” Literally, therefore, the expression means “a helper answering to him.” The words imply that woman complements man, supplements him, completes him, is strong where he may be weak, supplies his deficiencies and fills his needs. Man is therefore incomplete without woman. This holds for the woman as wellas for the man. Woman, too, is incomplete without the man; man supplements woman, complements her, fills her needs, is strong where she is weak.
Hoekema, Anthony A. Created in God’s Image. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1994. (76-77)
Hoekema goes on to clarify that marriage reveals and illustrates more fully than any other human institution the polarity and inter-dependence of the man-woman relationship, whilst reiterating that it does not do so in an exclusive sense. For even the ideal man Jesus never married and there will be no marriage in the life to come.
Nevertheless, it is interesting… ironic even, to read this in one of my theology textbooks. What God is saying is clear as mud 
Nashville Conference on the Church and Theology 2008 audio
The 2008 Nashville Conference on the Church and Theology was held recently (Feb. 8-10) and featured D.A.Carson, Steve Lawson, and Tim Challies. The conference serves as “an opportunity to rediscover the power of the Cross. NCCT 08 is a call to reformation. It is for preacher, leader and layman alike, all wrestling with the same questions. Can the church reach out without selling out? Can it address the culture without abandoning its core message?”
The sermon audio from NCCT’08 was just posted here, but since that page lacks direct links to download the mp3s, I thought I’d help and provide the direct download links here:
Session 1: D.A. Carson - Keeping Up With the Conversation
Session 2: Steve Lawson - The Power of the Gospel
Session 3: D.A. Carson - The Gospel and Postmodern Minds
Session 4: Steve Lawson - Bring the Book!
Session 5: Tim Challies - Loving God with Your Mind
Session 6: D.A. Carson - We Preach Christ Crucified
Session 7: D.A. Carson - The God Who Helps
I’m looking forward to listening to these conference talks over the next week. Don Carson gave some interesting talks on postmodernism/Emerging church apparently; Steve Lawson powerfully spoke the Word as always; and Tim Challies’ message should be discerningly enlightening!
The Spotless Purity of Truth
The Church of Christ is continually presented under the figure of an army; yet its Captain is the Prince of Peace; its object is the establishment of peace, and its soldiers are men of a peaceful disposition. The spirit of war is at the extremely opposite point to the spirit of the gospel.
Yet nevertheless, the church on earth has, and until the second advent must be, the church militant, the church armed, the church warring, the church conquering. And how is this?
It is in the very order of things that so it must be. Truth could not be truth in this world if it were not a warring thing, and we should at once suspect that it were not true if error were friends with it. The spotless purity of truth must always be at war with the blackness of heresy and lies.
–C. H. Spurgeon
The Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, vol.5 (London: Passmore & Alabaster, 1879), 41.
12 Days of Theology
On the first day of Theology my professor gave to me atonement on an old tree.
On the second day of Theology my professor gave to me two Testaments and atonement on an old tree.
On the third day of Theology my professor gave to me three divine persons, two Testaments, and atonement on an old tree.
On the fourth day of Theology my professor gave to me four Gospel books, three divine persons, two Testaments, and atonement on an old tree.
On the fifth day of Theology my professor gave to me five points of Calvinism! Four Gospel books, three divine persons, two Testaments, and atonement on an old tree.
On the sixth day of Theology my professor gave to me six days of creation, five points of Calvinism! Four Gospel books, three divine persons, two Testaments, and atonement on an old tree.
On the seventh day of Theology my professor gave to me seven churches in Asia, six days of creation, five points of Calvinism! Four Gospel books, three divine persons, two Testaments, and atonement on an old tree.
On the eighth day of Theology my professor gave to me eight persons on the ark, seven churches in Asia, six days of creation, five points of Calvinism! Four Gospel books, three divine persons, two Testaments, and atonement on an old tree.
On the ninth day of Theology my professor gave to me nine fruits of the Spirit, eight persons on the ark, seven churches in Asia, six days of creation, five points of Calvinism! Four Gospel books, three divine persons, two Testaments, and atonement on an old tree.
On the tenth day of Theology my professor gave to me ten Commandments, nine fruits of the Spirit, eight persons on the ark, seven churches in Asia, six days of creation, five points of Calvinism! Four Gospel books, three divine persons, two Testaments, and atonement on an old tree.
On the eleventh day of Theology my professor gave to me eleven apostles on Easter, ten Commandments, nine fruits of the Spirit, eight persons on the ark, seven churches in Asia, six days of creation, five points of Calvinism! Four Gospel books, three divine persons, two Testaments, and atonement on an old tree.
On the twelfth day of Theology my professor gave to me twelve tribes of Israel, eleven apostles on Easter, ten Commandments, nine fruits of the Spirit, eight persons on the ark, seven churches in Asia, six days of creation, five points of Calvinism! Four Gospel books, three divine persons, two Testaments, and atonement on an old tree.
(Source: Rob Bowman)
Putting Jesus in His Place
Book summary:
What Christians have affirmed for nearly two millennia—that Jesus is God—is frequently and openly called into question today. It’s natural that those who reject the Bible also reject its exalted view of Christ. But surprisingly, many who embrace the authority of Scripture are quick to argue that Jesus’ deity is found nowhere in its pages.
Putting Jesus in His Place demonstrates that the New Testament—from beginning to end—clearly reveals Jesus’ divine identity. What’s more, it shows that belief in Jesus as God was the conviction of his original Jewish followers, rooted in Old Testament theology and in what Jesus himself said and did.
In a manner that is both academically sound and spiritually engaging, the authors make a case for the deity of Christ that is easy to follow and hard to forget.
Putting Jesus in His Place: The Case for the Deity of Christ, by Robert M. Bowman Jr. and J. Ed Komoszewski (with a foreword by Darrell L. Bock)
Piper responds to Witherington
There is some juicy debate on theology going on right now, while I’m studying for finals.
As I reported & commented on this issue in my previous post “Magnifying God in Christ“, Pastor John Piper has just responded to Ben Witherington with his own article, God’s Loving Self-Exaltation:
1. The explicit biblical textual foundation for Schreiner’s thesis is pervasive and overwhelming.
2. God’s exaltation of his own glory is not narcissistic but loving, because it directs our attention away from ourselves to the one glorious reality that can satisfy our souls forever.
3. God’s self-glorification is not the alternative to our glorification but the foundation and goal of it, as Schreiner will make plain.
4. The real cultural bondage today is not that too many people are making God radically God-centered, but that most people cannot conceive of his being loving unless he is man-centered.
5. To suggest that Tom Schreiner is “creating God in our own self-centered image” because he says, with the apostle Paul, that God saves us “for the praise of his glory” (Eph. 1:6, 12, 14) is less an indictment of Tom than of Ben.
Check out also Piper’s Biblical Texts to Show God’s Zeal for His Own Glory, in which he summarizes a few passages in support of God’s loving self-exaltation.
Magnifying God in Christ
God magnifying himself through Jesus Christ by means of the Holy Spirit.
That is the underlying and over-arching theme of the New Testament, according to Tom Shreiner’s upcoming book, New Testament Theology: Magnifying God in Christ.
However, in a recent blog post by Ben Witherington (Professor of New Testament Interpretation at Asbury Theological Seminary), he confesses that such a thesis about our Lord as a self-centered God is disturbing and “narcissistic”:
In other words I am arguing Christ, the perfect image of God’s character, reveals that God’s character is essentially other directed self-sacrificial love. God loves people, not merely as means to his own ends, but as ends in themselves.
[...]
Let me be clear that of course the Bible says it is our obligation to love, praise, and worship God, but this is a very different matter from the suggestion that God worships himself, is deeply worried about whether he has enough glory or not, and his deepest motivation for doing anything on earth is so that he can up his own glory quotient, or magnify and praise himself.
Denny Burk gives an appropriate, biblical response to Witherington’s narcissistic view of our self-centered God:
Everywhere the Bible teaches that God’s love and redemptive acts are designed to magnify His own glory (e.g., Exodus 9:16; 2 Samuel 7:26; Psalm 79:9; Isaiah 42:8; 48:9; Ezekiel 36:22, 32; John 17:5; Romans 9:17; 11:36; Ephesians 1:6, 12, 14). God’s love and God’s glory are not at odds, as John Piper would say. God’s love (manifested supremely in Jesus Christ crucified and raised for sinners) is a means by which His glory is manifested to the world. This is the common Arminian error. They mistakenly regard God’s means (His love and redemptive acts) as ends in themselves. But the Bible simply does not bear this out. The ultimate end or purpose of everything is God’s glory (see the texts cited above).
How typical of Witherington to say what he says, for when we remember that he’s an Arminian then it all makes sense!
In my own spiritual pilgrimage, I have been blessed by the ministry of Louie Giglio and John Piper. Through these men and their ministries, they have given us young evangelicals a God-centered theology through catch-phrases like “Yes Lord, walking in the way of Your truth we wait eagerly for You, for Your name and Your renown are the desire of our souls” and “God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in Him.”
The interpretation of Scripture that I have learned and discerned from sitting under their teaching and then submitting myself to the study of God’s Word (especially in the Gospels and Paul’s letters) is that God does everything He does for the ultimate purpose of His glory, honor, and praise. As it says in Revelation 4:11, “Worthy are you, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and by your will they existed and were created.“ He is rightfully self-centered and egotistical because He is God! (To do anything less than make everything about His own glory would make Himself out not to be God.)
I am the Lord; that is my name; my glory I give to no other, nor my praise to carved idols.
And if He is LORD and Lord over all creation, should He not rightfully be completely self-centered? After all, if He is the greatest and most glorious thing in the world, should He not do all that He does for His own glory? If He loved us and gave His Son only for our sake as a means in and of itself, wouldn’t that make us a little bit more important than God Himself? Honestly, there are times when I wished that John 3:16 would say “For God so loved Himself” because somewhere in this world, some Christians and seminary professors have put themselves on a pedestal, thinking they are so important to God that you know what — He really should love them! This is a pitiful interpretation of Scripture and I am very saddened that such controversy arises even within biblical scholarship today 
In short, Witherington’s own concluding paragraph works nicely when we consider him as the subject of it:
“I suppose we should not be surprised that in a culture and age of narcissism, we would recreate God in our own self-centered image, but it is surprising when we find orthodox Christians, and even careful scholars doing this.”
(HT: Justin Taylor)
A Review of The Doctrine of God by John Frame
This is a review of
Frame, John. The Doctrine of God. Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 2002.
864 pp. $39.99
Copyright © 2007 by Alex S. Leung. All rights reserved.
Introduction
The popularity of J.I. Packer’s classic book, Knowing God (1973), is evidence to the widespread desire in today’s church to reclaim the center of Christianity in the knowledge of God. In recent times, the need to understand why major disasters and calamities have occurred underscores the yearning of the society at large to understand who God is and why He does what He does, why He would allow so much suffering to occur if He is truly good. More recently, in response to 9/11 or the bridge collapse in Minnesota, many Christians are even questioning whether or not God truly had control of the events. Some have argued that God allows and uses suffering in the world to amplify the dire need in people to repent of their sins, including unbelief, and to put their trust in the atoning work of Christ on the cross. In spite of this, many still are left dumbfounded by life’s circumstances about the will of God in all these things.
This pervasive rejection of the God of Scripture in secularism and alternative spirituality and religions compels us as Christ’s ambassadors to call unbelievers to be reconciled with God (2 Cor 5:20). What this undeniably implies is that we actually know this God of whom we confess, so that we would be ready in season and out of season, to give a biblical defense for the hope we have in Jesus Christ (2 Tim 4:2; 1Pet 3:15). While postmodern epistemology may be accurate to assert that we cannot exhaustively know everything about God, we can however know with certainty everything that God has explicitly revealed about himself in Scripture. In “The Doctrine of God”, John Frame, professor of systematic theology at Reformed Theological Seminary, provides a concise exposition of theology proper as defined in Scripture.
The Highest Place and the Greatest Honor
I can’t believe I found this on my portable hard-drive! Back in Toronto, I served 2 years as the Worship Coordinator for Ryerson University’s CCF (Chinese Christian Fellowship) for the school years 2003-2004 and 2004-2005.
The following was my evaluation of the 2004-2005 ministry year, the theological reflections I presented to the CCF Planning Committee and fellowship.
May this be a blessing to you, as we think through how to live lives of worship — lifestyles that puts Christ at the highest place in our lives and gives the Father the greatest honor.
In holy and divine matters one must first hear rather than see,
first believe rather than understand,
first be grasped rather than grasp,
first be captured rather than capture,
first learn rather than teach,
first be a disciple rather than a teacher and master of his own.
We have an ear so that we may submit to others,
and eyes that we may take care of others.
Therefore, whoever in the church wants to become an eye and a leader and master of others,
let him become an ear and a disciple first.
This first.-Martin Luther, First Lectures on the Psalms II, Works II.245-246.
I think that there’s a tendency in fellowship to build up the next generation of leaders, and in so doing, we neglect our first and foremost mission that is to make “disciples.” We puff ourselves up to be “leaders” as if we have something to teach and change others. If we do this long enough via trial-and-error, I’ve personally found myself to be a failure at leadership. People don’t listen for one, they don’t learn anything, and don’t even embrace the Spirit-sanctified truth that is in our words. I think what God requires of us is what Luther said so plainly–we need to become disciples ourselves first, before we even remotely consider our role in leading others.
(more…)
Give Me An Answer 2008
Give Me An Answer Conference 2008
Immortal Combat: Is It Finished?
Missions, Spiritual Warfare, and the Kingdom of Christ
February 8-9, 2008 @ The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary
Speakers:
- Dr. Albert Mohler: President of The Southern Baptist Theological
Seminary and cultural commentator (and host of The Albert Mohler Radio Program) - Dr. Russell Moore: Dean of The School of Theology and author of The Kingdom of Christ
- Dr. Chuck Lawless: Dean of The Billy Graham School of
Missions, Evangelism and Church Growth and author of Spiritual Warfare.
Piper at Passion’s OneDay conferences
3 John Piper - Passion conferences messages from the Desiring God DVD “One Day: One Passion” are now available free online:
- Boasting Only in the Cross (OneDay 2000)
- A Generation Passionate for God’s Holiness (OneDay 2003)
- How Our Suffering Glorifies the Greatness of the Grace of God (Passion06)
It’s such a blessing to the church that Desiring God can provide these videos free to the public! I’ve seen the first couple sermons from the original Passion DVDs and saw Piper preach live at Passion06 for the talk on suffering. I highly recommend these videos if you have not seen or heard the sermons before. Certainly, seeing Piper preach live is a spiritual feast — Pastor John is so biblical and passionate in his expositional preaching that many times I just want to shrink and hide myself from how he pierces the heart and mind through God’s Word!
(HT: Desiring God blog)
The Deceptiveness of Sin
In light of the recent conversations about Erwin McManus’ book “Soul Cravings” and its lack of a clear Gospel presented, I think it would be timely and appropriate to quote Hans Madueme on “The Deceptiveness of Sin“. (If you don’t know him, Hans Madueme, M.D., is Research Analyst at The Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity and a student at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School in Deerfield, Illinois.)
Hans paints a very clear picture of the theological and biological implications of the noetic effects of sin:
Something is rotten in the state of the world. We do not need as witnesses the Wall Street Journal or BBC News. Just look around. We live in a dark, painful, and unjust world. Ethnic minorities are victimized. Women are second-class citizens. Children are pawns in evil chess games, now sex slaves, now victims of million-dollar advertising shenanigans. We feel the pain of brokenness in our homes and in our neighborhoods; bitter anguish permeates our world. We try to placate our cries with Zoloft or the comforts of a cigarette and one more strong drink. Our world is morbidly obese, stuffed up with the calories of injustice and unrighteousness: need we mention Auschwitz, Rwanda, Bosnia, and Darfur? The poor remain oppressed, the foreigner denied justice. Once upon a time, people may have enjoyed happiness, peace, and justice, but for many today, misery is an intimate companion.
The situation is grim, but these are symptoms of a deeper malady, what the Christian tradition calls sin. The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is more real than anything else; God is creator and all else is creation. In him we live, move, and have our being (Acts 17:28). God is also holy, morally pure and impeccable. He is light; in him there is no darkness at all (1 John 1:5). The prophet Isaiah glimpses the high and lofty one, dwelling in a high and holy place (Isa 57:15). There is no sin in God. To behold his glory is to be utterly ruined: “For I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips, and my eyes have seen the King, the LORD Almighty” (Isa 6:5). Yet mysteriously we are unclean, sick, desperately ill, and ridden with moral disease. We fall short of the holiness of God, like bent arrows missing the target. We are perverted, wicked, and unholy. We are morally crooked, defective, twisted. Committing high crimes against God, we are fools, disobeying God’s law and demeaning his character. In religious vernacular, we are sinners.
But like letter writing, this self-understanding has fallen on hard times, a myth from a pre-scientific age. Functional MRIs have taught us that “my brain made me do it.” If there is anything ‘unholy’ here, it is the waxing and waning levels of serotonin and norepinephrine (the usual neurotransmitter suspects). Behavior is a complex interplay of countless pathways in our neural systems. The quaint notion of moral culpability, presupposed by the language of sin, has no currency here. Perhaps your grandmother believed in sin, but we have reached adulthood, so we put away childish things. In short, damaged brains cause bad behavior. Or so the claim goes. Since the pastor is on a long paid leave, we can now consult the friendly neuropharmacologist—neuroethics replaces soulcare. To go deeper: we know that genes determine all that we are and do (since the genome encodes the brain). The real culprit, then, is my DNA double helix. Ergo, I need gene therapy! Maybe you find all this too reductionistic, and you prefer a more psychosocial paradigm. Here, too, there is often no conceptual room for the language of sin. Human beings are socially and historically located; we are victims of situations beyond our control—an abusive father, a poor neighborhood, low socio-economic status, childhood mental and psychological abuse, and so on. Sin is not the problem: “My poor upbringing made me do it.”
We have simply restated the ancient nature-nurture debate. Scripture and Christian tradition recognize, of course, that both nature and nurture are part of our identity. They shape us in important ways, though we cannot be reduced to either biology or sociology. These categories do not exhaust the moral significance of being human. Our moral lives transcend both nature and nurture; they are therefore not determined, though they are influenced, by them. We are moral agents made in the image of God. To make either nature or nurture tell our whole moral story is itself evidence of the noetic (intellectual) effects of sin. Intellectual self-justification and moral slipperiness reflect diminished ability to reason and think well; our noetic life is impaired. Thus we forfeit moral clarity as we think about the world in which we live, our fellow human beings, and even ourselves. We become like the man who looks at his face in the mirror and sees a remarkably fine specimen of humanity. Alas he does not realize the mirror speaks lies. In reality, his head is flattened, his stomach grossly inflated, and his arms helter-skelter. Call this the reverse ‘circus mirror’ syndrome. Such are the distorting noetic effects of sin: irresistibly, the tree looks good for food and pleasing to the eye.
Continue reading the article at The Gospel Coalition.
The Atonement in Focus
The latest (summer) issue of The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology has just been published and is focusing on the ever important doctrine of the atonement – the primary doctrine which has been under attack in evangelicalism.
Fellow Canadian Dr. Stephen J. Wellum (professor of Christian Theology), in the opening editorial writes,
“…in the evangelical church today we are in danger of downplaying and even distorting the true meaning and signifi cance of the cross.
A number of examples could be given to demonstrate this last observation, but I want to focus on one disconcerting trend that is increasingly occurring in evangelical theology, namely, an effort to reinterpret the cross in non-substitutionary terms.”
Continue reading Wellum’s article “Articulating, Defending, and Proclaiming Christ our Substitute”.
Amend ETS
Does anybody think it is necessary to amend the statement of faith of the Evangelical Theological Society (ETS)?
After the past ETS President jumped shipped, resigned and joined the Roman Catholic Church, it may be time to rethink and revise the ETS Doctrinal Basis, which currently only reads:
“The Bible alone, and the Bible in its entirety, is the Word of God written and is therefore inerrant in the autographs. God is a Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, each an uncreated person, one in essence, equal in power and glory.”
Denny Burk and Ray Van Neste are thinking it is time to amend this. I’m thinking it is necessary also. Visit http://www.amendets.com/ for details and info about how you can be a supporter.
Opinions are just that
Truth is different.
Hullabaloo Over the Gospel
Seems like there’s been quite a hullabaloo over the gospel lately.A man named Chalke, echoing a McLaren, echoing a Green and a Baker, echoing a number of feminists, used the words “divine child abuse” to talk about the cross. In response, two major British evangelical institutions refused to let Chalke speak, thereby cutting ties with a third institution that has Chalke on its board.A book called Pierced For Our Transgressions responded to Chalke, which in turn provoked a heavy-weight named Wright to enter the ring, pound the book, and defend Chalke.The conservative blogosphering bleacher-sitters then jumped to their feet and started quarrelling with one another over whether or not Wright is one of them. Another heavy-weight named Piper now promises to leap in soon with a book that says “no” and argues that Wright is “harmful to the church and to the human soul.” Meanwhile, the U.S. counterpart to the British publisher that printed Pierced decided not to touch the book, telling the enquiring yours truly that the book “doesn’t add anything to the conversation.”Those evangelicals. Always squabbling with one another instead of doing the work of the ministry. Isn’t that what this is?
Well, what does Jude mean when he says “to contend for the faith”? What does Peter mean when he says “be on your guard”? What does John mean when he warns a church to not “even greet” false teachers? What does Paul mean when he says to let anyone with an alternative gospel—my goodness—”be eternally condemned”?
Until this world is ended, the gospel will be challenged from places high and low. It will be tweaked and twisted, denounced and denied. And most fundamentally, Christ calls local churches—not seminaries, not presbyteries, not synods, not theologians, not publishers, and not even eJournals—to defend the gospel. It’s the people in the pews and the pulpits whom these apostles address.
Insofar as God permits, this issue of the 9Marks eJournal aims to equip local churches and pastors to do just that—defend the gospel. The sweet news is, defending the gospel means meditating on it. Start with Powlison, and you’ll see exactly what I mean.
–Jonathan Leeman, in his “Editor’s Note” to the
July/August 9News (PDF): CHALLENGES TO THE GOSPEL
Individual Online Articles: (more…)
This is the Road
“This life, therefore, is not righteousness but growth in righteousness,
not health but healing, not being but becoming, not rest but exercise.
We are not yet what we shall be but we are growing toward it.
The process is not yet finished but it is going on.
This is not the end but it is the road.
All does not yet gleam in glory but all is being purified.”
-Martin Luther
What’s on your heart?
At the heart of Reformed Theology, at the heart of Luther and Calvin’s struggle, and in Knox and Jonathan Edwards, were men who were awakened to the greatness, to the majesty, to the holiness, and the sovereignty of God. By contemplating the holiness and sovereignty of God, they were driven to develop their doctrines of the grace of God. Because until you meet a God who is holy and is sovereign, you don’t know what grace means. I don’t think we are ever going to see a healthy evangelical church until the evangelical church is solidly Reformed, where it takes biblical Christianity seriously with a right concept of a sovereign God.
Continue reading this quote by R. C. Sproul - from his series “A Blueprint for Thinking.”
