Click here.
Monthly Archive for January, 2010
Page 3 of 8
Scott Klusendorf:
In short, you didn’t come from an embryo, you once were an embryo. At no point in your prenatal development did you undergo a substantial change or change of nature. You began as a human being and will remain so until death. Sure, you lacked maturity at that early stage of life (as does an infant), but you were human nonetheless. ‘Living things do not become entirely different creatures in the process of changing their form,’ writes Greg Koukl. ‘Rather, they develop according to a certain physical pattern precisely because of the kind of being they already are.’
Not only can family be an idol, it may be the most common idol amongst Christians in the West.
And, remember this – - making something an idol is a sure-fire strategy for destroying the thing you idolize.
Pastor (and Iowa native) Steve Dewitt suggests ways family can be an idol. Read his thoughts here.
David Augsburger:
Since nothing we intend is ever faultless, and nothing we attempt ever without error, and nothing we achieve without some measure of finitude and fallibility we call humanness, we are saved by forgiveness.
This quote is a good reminder of why we all need to learn to biblically unpack forgiveness. I read it in an advance copy of Paul Tripp’s, What Did You Expect , a forthcoming book on marriage.
If you are married, What Did You Expect? Redeeming the Realities of Marriage, is a book you are going to want to read once it is out.
In the mean time, consider reading something on forgiveness . . .
David L. Turner:
In evangelism and apologetics the Christian should not attempt to prove the existence of God to the unbeliever. The unbeliever, if he is honest with himself, knows this already. The Christian should proclaim the gospel, God’s appointed dynamic for turning the lost to himself.
In an article, “Cornelius Van Till and Romans 1:18-21: A Study in Presuppositional Apologetics,” GTJ 2:1 (Spr 81).
I keep forgetting this one shared by Daryl Dash.
“A good and sobering reminder from D.A. Carson in The Cross and Christian Ministry:
We follow a crucified Messiah. All the eschatological promises regarding the new heaven and the new earth, all the blessings of sins forgiven and of the blessed Spirit of God, do not negate the fact that the good news we present focuses on the foolishness of Christ crucified. And that message simply cannot be communicated from the haughty position of the triumphalists’s condescension. Until the end of the age, we will take up our cross – that is, we will die to self-interest daily – and follow Jesus. The less any society knows of that way, the more foolish we will seem and the more suffering we will endure. So be it; there is no other way of following Jesus.
Leaders in the church suffer more. They are not like generals in the military who stay behind the lines. They are like the assault troops, the front line people, who lead by example as much as by word. To praise a form of leadership that despises suffering is therefore to deny the faith. (pp. 107-108)
I am having the right kind of fast food for lunch today, meaning I’m having no food at all. Rather than allowing my stomach to always pound out marching orders, I am using the extra time to focus on prayer (1 Cor 9:27). Every time my stomach protests, I am going to be reminded to pray.
In Matthew 6, Jesus said that WHEN we fast . . . The Lord assumed that his people would fast.
“And when you fast, do not look gloomy like the hypocrites, for they disfigure their faces that their fasting may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you fast, anoint your head and wash your face, that your fasting may not be seen by others but by your Father who is in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you.(Mt 6:16-18)."
So, today I am skipping my noon meal in order to focus on prayer. One of my primary goals today is to follow the model of Jesus in Luke 6:12 when we are told that the Lord prayed all night before choosing the Apostles. A goal for our church in the next 5 years is to see men grow in a special way as leaders. And, that won’t happen apart from prayer.
You might chide me a bit for telling everyone on the world wide web that I am fasting. Isn’t it supposed to be done in secret (Matt 6:1). But, this is a matter of motivation. And, there is a place to give leadership in prayer and to challenge God’s people.
Why not fast for at least one meal and really pray?
If nothing else, read the last paragraph.
Doug Moo (NIV Application Commentary on Romans, 82-83):
We do not think these verses give any grounds for thinking that salvation can be gained apart from the gospel. Paul’s argument in 1:18-3:20 is intended to establish the reason why God has unleashed his saving power in the gospel. Human beings are locked in sin and need to be rescued. For Paul to introduce at this point the possibility of salvation apart from the gospel would undercut his own argument.
What, then, do we say about people who have never had a chance to hear the gospel and either accept or reject it? Are they automatically excluded from salvation because they do not have a chance to hear? This very question was one of my key objections to the gospel when friends of mine in college first confronted me with the claims of Christ. The contemporary pluralistic environment has sharpened the question even further. Influential theologians—some within the evangelical movement—are arguing that people of genuine moral commitment can be saved apart from explicit faith in Christ. Karl Rahner, an influential Roman Catholic theologian, has coined the term “anonymous Christians” to describe such people.
While attractive for many reasons, this view simply does not square with the claims of Scripture. Paul’s argument in this part of Romans is straight-forward: All people are under sin’s power and can escape the wrath that sin brings only by responding in faith to the gospel of God’s righteousness in Christ (See Romans 3:9, Romans 3:20, Romans 3:21-22). To be sure, we cannot always know just how God may reveal his gospel to people. As Paul’s own example powerfully demonstrates, the preaching of the gospel by missionaries and others is God’s normal means of making his gospel known to people. But we must allow that God may have other ways of revealing his gospel to people that we do not know or even understand. So, while insisting that only faith in the gospel can save, we perhaps need to be open to different ways by which people may come to know the gospel.
One final point should be made. The problem of those have not heard takes on a slightly different complexion depending on whether one is a Calvinist or an Arminian. The Arminian, in a sense, has the bigger problem here. For Arminians believe that God’s prevenient grace puts all people in the position of being able to respond to the gospel. There response is, therefore, the crucial factor. Calvinists, by contrast, while insisting on the need for response, also claim that the ultimate cause of salvation lies in God’s election, his specific choice of certain persons for salvation. The Calvinist can therefore argue that God will, in his sovereignty, see that every person he has chosen will also be exposed, in one way or another, to the gospel. Having determined the end, God will also enact the means.
I must confess that I am little closer to a compelling answer to my question about those who have not heard than I was when I was first converted. I think Scripture requires that we insist on faith in Christ as the necessary means of salvation. And I trust utterly in the absolute fairness of the God who has revealed himself to me in Jesus Christ. I am content to leave my questions in his hands and hope for clearer resolution in heaven.
At our church, one of the things we have seen Paul stress in the first chapter of Romans is that people are inherently aware of God. Even those who deny God, are only suppressing something that is stitched deeply into their being. As a result of this awareness, people are forever worshipping something.
In the article I link to here, Al Mohler, interacts with the new religion of worshipping the environment. (And, for the record – - Christians ought to be very concerned about the environment).
The human species is inherently and resolutely religious. The Bible and the Christian tradition affirm this truth, even as we know that the religious impulse can so easily transform itself into idolatry.
Even the most cursory of world culture’s will indicate the religious fervor that characterizes humanity. The only observers who seem shocked by this universal phenomenon are the secularists and the prophets of secularization theory who were absolutely certain that religious faith and religious fervor would disappear in the modern world.
Needless to say, it hasn’t turned out that way. The theory of secularization is a shadow of its former self. Leading proponents like Peter Berger of Boston University now acknowledge that the secularization thesis was not an accurate predictor of the fate of religious belief in the modern world. The modern world is not secularized. Indeed, many of the most heated conflicts around the world today involve conflicting faiths. As Berger has commented, it turns out that a few European nations and the American intellectual elites are the exceptions, rather than the rule.
And yet, the intellectual elites are not so secular as they believe themselves to be. As it happens, their religion may not be theistic, but it is a religion all the same.
That fact is confirmed in a recent article in The Chronicle of Higher Education. Stephen T. Asma, a professor of philosophy at Columbia College Chicago, argues that the new religion of many secular folk is ecology. As Asma explains, many secular types suffer from “green guilt.”
In “Green Guilt,” he writes:
Now the secular world still has to make sense out of its own invisible, psychological drama—in particular, its feelings of guilt and indignation. Environmentalism, as a substitute for religion, has come to the rescue. Nietzsche’s argument about an ideal God and guilt can be replicated in a new form: We need a belief in a pristine environment because we need to be cruel to ourselves as inferior beings, and we need that because we have these aggressive instincts that cannot be let out.
The rest here.
The LA Times reports:
The former Florida quarterback and his mother will appear in a 30-second commercial during the Super Bowl next month. The Christian group Focus on the Family says the Tebows will share a personal story centering on the theme "Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life."
The group isn’t releasing details, but the commercial is likely to be an anti-abortion message chronicling Pam Tebow’s 1987 pregnancy. After getting sick during a mission trip to the Philippines, she ignored a recommendation by doctors to abort her fifth child and gave birth to Tim.
The 2007 Heisman Trophy winner ended his college career with several NCAA, Southeastern Conference and school records, and two national championships. Tebow also has been very involved in his family’s Christian-based ministry.Jim Daly, president and CEO of Focus on the Family, said the commercial comes at a time when "families need to be inspired."
"Tim and Pam share our respect for life and our passion for helping families thrive," Daly said. "Focus on the Family is about … strengthening families by empowering them with the tools they need to live lives rooted in morals and values."
HT: Trevin Wax
