Real Shame VS. Shameless Profiteering

Perhaps you have heard the news that Ted Haggard is going to have his own reality show on TLC. I know. Just when you think someone's willingness to abase himself and his family can't be any greater...

Over at Ref21 Carl Trueman helpfully points out the difference between genuine shame and the shamelessness of profiting from that which is shameful. Of course, part of our problem is that we tend to think shame is an inherently bad thing. But shame plays an essential role if we are to be healthy people. Do you really want to live next door to someone who has no sense of shame? Do you want that person teaching your children, preparing your food, or leading your church?

Anyway, kudos to Carl for this paragraph particularly:

It is, of course, great that Ted Haggard's family seems to have survived intact, despite all that he inflicted on his wife and children. But I am left wondering if there is any shame or sense of basic decency left in this world; and are there no limits to the American `If you've got lemons, make lemonade' mentality? Are forgiveness and redemption really appropriate contexts for the marketing of oneself? Does everything in America have to be celebrified in a manner that would even make Liberace's PJs look tasteful? [emphasis mine]

What price relevance?

By now, you've no doubt heard about the troubles afflicting the Crystal Cathedral. It is not everyday that a mega-church files for bankruptcy after all. Therefore it's worth noting; not because of the sad details but because of the irony. The decline of the Crystal Cathedral is ironic because of Robert Schuller's well known commitment to make the gospel relevant. Now the state-of-the-art glass monument will stand, for some, as a failure of those efforts. Of course, what Schuller made relevant was not really the gospel. His message was an amalgam of pop-psychology, Norman Vincent Peale(ism), and Christian liturgy.

Christianity Today, which has previously reported on the troubles in the house that Schuller built has included another article, this time with the provocative sub-title: "Why we are better off letting God make the Gospel relevant." It's a good enough article. I am happy to see CT reaching some of these conclusions given the fact that they were all excited about the church growth movement not too long ago.

My quibble with the article is in the following statement:

Some are tempted to hit the man while he is down, but this is unwise. Robert Schuller is not the problem—contemporary evangelicalism is. Schuller was only leading the parade of those who believe they are responsible for making the gospel relevant. The lesson is not that Schuller got it wrong or that his theology is out-of-date; it is not that we just need to find a better, more current point of cultural contact. The lesson is that our attempts to find and exploit a point of cultural contact inevitably end in bankruptcy.

There is a lot right in that paragraph. However, while Schuller is not "the" problem he certainly has been a part of the problem. Evangelicalism is an abstract, an idea. It is people who define it. Robert Schuller was indeed near the front of the sad parade of modern evangelicalism and therefore shares responsibility in its vaudevillian shenanigans.

Also, the problem is not that Schuller's theology is "out-of-date", though, it surely is. His shtick sounds like some 1970's encounter group meeting. However, the real problem with Schuller's theology is that it is woefully lacking in adherence to the full counsel of Scripture. Not least of those elements absent from Schullerism is any mention of sin. For Schuller, sin is simply a failure to love yourself well enough. Plus, any mention of sin will only make people feel bad about themselves. Therefore, Schuller never mentioned it. This however dramatically shrinks the gospel. No sin? No need for grace. God, then, becomes utilitarian. He exists to restore my image of myself, to fill me with great thoughts of who I am. This is no small failure. This is not the Gospel.

On not allowing "a divine foot in the door"

Harvard’s Richard Lowentin quoted in the Jan. 9, 1997, New York Review of Books:

We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to ful"ll many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a prior adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door. The eminent Kant scholar Lewis Beck used to say that anyone who could believe in God could believe in anything. To appeal to an omnipotent deity is to allow that at any moment the regularities of nature may be ruptured, that miracles may happen.

Ex Nihilo

"Theistic evolution is a biblical and theological disaster." So writes Dr. Al Mohler in the latest edition of magazine of Southern Seminary. The theme of the current edition is "Ex Nihilo," or "out of nothing."

Check it out and pay special attention to the following articles:

The New Shape of the Debate by Al Mohler

The New Atheism and the Dogma of Darwinism by Al Mohler

All Things Dark and Terrible by Russell Moore

Evolution and Creation in Higher Education by Mark Coppenger

Creation and American Christianity by Gregory Wills

Tough questions about how I raise my kids...

This morning I read a report on the tragic suicide of Bill Zeller, the 27-year-old son of fundamentalist preacher George Zellar. Bill was a Ph.D candidate at Princeton University and a well known internet programmer. In his suicide letter, Zeller reveals for the first time that he was the victim of sexual abuse in his childhood. It is heartbreaking to read how he was haunted throughout his life by the abuse he suffered. Reading the lengthy suicide letter I was struck by the pain and anger he directed toward his family (primarily his pastor-father) and his religious upbringing.

I cannot read such a letter without asking myself some difficult questions. I am a pastor and father of three. My children are healthy and seem to be well adjusted. But I am a sinner with many deep flaws. So I ask myself, to what extent will my sins and flaws impact my children both now and in the years to come? I don't mean to sound pessimistic or fatalistic. God is unimaginably gracious. He covers over a multitude of sins. What is more, God loves my children even more than I. But the reality of my falleness most certainly impacts my kids.

So here are few questions I ask myself as I think about Bill Zeller's sad letter.
1. Am I aware of signs of sadness or feelings of isolation in the hearts of my children?
2. Have I nurtured a relationship with my children such that they feel the freedom to tell me about their pain?
3. Do my children see inconsistencies in my preaching and the way I live?
4. Do I place unrealistic expectations on my children because they are "the pastor's kids"?
5. Do my children perceive that I overemphasize God's holiness to the neglect of His love?
6. Have I helped my children to understand the realities of God's judgment in a way that does not undermine their confidence in His abundant grace for sinners?
7. Does my commitment to the church and ministry appear to my children to be greater than my commitment to them?

Paul Tripp on Parenting

WTS Bookstore has a great deal on an excellent resource by Paul Tripp. The DVD series, Getting to the Heart of Parenting is now only 14.99 (75% off!).

The "E" Word

Kevin DeYoung has an excellent post on the importance of moral language in the face of such events as Saturday's mass murder in Tuscon.

I have no doubt Loughner is messed up, crazy, off his rocker, and out to lunch. It seems that he’s needed help for a long time. But why jump to conclude that this is a “Tragedy of Mental Illness”? To be sure, mental illness is real but it does not honor those who endure it to rush a diagnosis and start naming disorders every time an anti-social, nihilistic, solipsistic young man with guns and grudges sins in the worst possible ways. Where have all the active verbs gone?

Words Have Meaning

Unfortunately, pundits shy away from explicitly personal and moral categories in precisely the moments we need them most (9-11 may be the one exception). Whenever a public tragedy like this occurs everyone on the right and the left struggles to find some cause, and that cause is almost always outside the self—video games, strange novels, mistreatment by friends, a culture of hate, the second amendment, heated political rhetoric. And when an internal cause is suggested it almost always points away from personal responsibility to some element of us that doesn’t really belonging to us—like a mental disorder or our own personal demons.

We instinctively resort to passive speech, unable to bear the thought (let alone utter the words) that a wicked person has perpetrated a wicked crime. The human heart is desperately sinful and capable of despicable sins. Of course, no one commends the crime, but few are willing to condemn the criminal either. In such a world we are no longer moral beings with the propensity for great acts of righteousness and great acts of evil. We are instead, at least when we are bad, the mere product of our circumstances, our society, our upbringing, our biochemistry, or our hurts. The triumph of the therapeutic is nearly complete.

Read the entire post HERE.

R.C. Sproul on Abortion...

R.C. Sproul Discusses the Issue of Abortion from Ligonier on Vimeo.

"The Thermopylae of Christendom"

"The pulpit is the Thermopylae of Christendom: there the fight will be lost or won.

"To us ministers the maintenance of our power in the pulpit should be our great concern, we must occupy that spiritual watch-tower with our hearts and minds awake and in full vigor. It will not avail us to be laborious pastors if we are not earnest preachers.

"We shall be forgiven a great many sins in the matter of pastoral visitation if the people’s souls are really fed on the Sabbath-day; but fed they must be, and nothing else will make up for it.

"The failures of most ministers who drift down the stream may be traced to inefficiency in the pulpit. The chief business of a captain is to know how to handle his vessel, nothing can compensate for deficiency there, and so our pulpits must be our main care, or all will go awry."

- C. H. Spurgeon, from Lectures to My Students: Second Series (London: Passmore and Alabaster, 1877), page 146

HT: Tony Reinke

"A Murky Landscape"

Ross Douthat offers wise commentary on the mysterious motives of the Tuscon shooter. Along the way he gives a timely rebuke to those who seek to assign blame for political advantage.

But chances are that Loughner’s motives will prove as irreducibly complex as those of most of his predecessors in assassination. Violence in American politics tends to bubble up from a world that’s far stranger than any Glenn Beck monologue — a murky landscape where worldviews get cobbled together from a host of baroque conspiracy theories, and where the line between ideological extremism and mental illness gets blurry fast.

This is the world that gave us Oswald and Bremer. More recently, it’s given us figures like James W. von Brunn, the neo-Nazi who opened fire at the Holocaust Museum in 2009, and James Lee, who took hostages at the Discovery Channel last summer to express his displeasure over population growth. These are figures better analyzed by novelists than pundits: as Walter Kirn put it Saturday, they’re “self-anointed knights templar of the collective shadow realm, not secular political actors in extremis.”

This won’t stop partisans from making hay out of Saturday’s tragedy, of course. The Democratic operative who was quoted in Politico saying that his party needs “to deftly pin this on the Tea Partiers” was just stating the obvious: after a political season rife with overheated rhetoric from conservative “revolutionaries,” the attempted murder of a Democratic congresswoman is a potential gift to liberalism.

But if overheated rhetoric and martial imagery really led inexorably to murder, then both parties would belong in the dock. (It took conservative bloggers about five minutes to come up with Democratic campaign materials that employed targets and crosshairs against Republican politicians.) When our politicians and media loudmouths act like fools and zealots, they should be held responsible for being fools and zealots. They shouldn’t be held responsible for the darkness that always waits to swallow up the unstable and the lost.

We should remember, too, that there are places where mainstream political movements really are responsible for violence against their rivals. (Last week’s assassination of a Pakistani politician who dared to defend a Christian is a stark reminder of what that sort of world can look like.) Not so in America: From the Republican leadership to the Tea Party grass roots, all of Gabrielle Giffords’s political opponents were united in horror at the weekend’s events. There is no faction in American politics that actually wants its opponents dead.

Read the entire article HERE.

HT: Justin Taylor

Sunday's Sermon

This week's message was entitled "Our International Anthem" and was taken from Psalm 96. You can listen to or download it HERE.

Q & A with D.A. Carson

Gospel Coalition Q & A from Realityla on Vimeo.

David Wells in Tabletalk

David Wells, author of the indispensable No Place for Truth was interviewed for the most recent edition of Tabletalk Magazine. It is worth reading.

The first question posed to Dr. Wells was, "Besides the Bible, what has been the most influential book you have read this past year?" Now, when a man like David Wells is asked that question, my ears perk up. Wells responded:

The book I would love to see become the year’s most influential is J.I. Packer and Gary Parrett’s Grounded in the Gospel: Building Believers the Old-Fashioned Way. It argues that our churches should be catechizing because this kind of teaching, especially of our young, preserves doctrine. Biblical doctrine is what makes the church the church. We are stumbling in passing on the doctrinal core of the faith, and that goes to the heart of the church’s weakness today.

I reviewed Grounded in the Gospel for the Gospel-Coalition earlier in 2010. You can read that review HERE.

Dr. Wells was also asked, "How can the church maintain an effective witness as we move into a decidedly post-Christian era in the West?" Wells answered:

We need a little perspective here. Our situation in the U.S.A., relative to Christians elsewhere, is not unusually difficult. It is true that we are now moving away from a time when Christianity has had some cultural acceptance. After all, consider how popular it has been to be “born again.” But let us remember that outside the U.S.A., there are Christians who live under tyrannies, such as from Islam, or in extreme poverty, or surrounded by horrible political corruption, or are subject to rampant crime. Our situation is really not that bad! What it requires is that we have some conviction about biblical truth, some savvy about the culture in which we are living, and the spine to preserve our identity as believers. It is a temptation to think that by being nice and accommodating we can make the Christian gospel seem like a great little addition to everyone’s life. But the gospel is not a great little addition. It is a soul-shaking, costly, demanding reality. The church cannot hide this fact! The gospel is not about self-therapy. Despite our pressured, taut, nervejangling age, the Christian message is not there just to make us feel better about ourselves or more able to cope. It is about coming before our great God and Savior, confessing our sins, entrusting ourselves to Him, and surrendering our claim upon ourselves to Him. What is most needed, and what is most lacking in the church, is a little character in differentiating its message from self-help therapies and marketing strategies. Our deficiency is not that we lack the right technique. It is that we often don’t have a real alternative. [emphasis mine]

Indeed!

Disgrace

So much for abortion being "safe, legal, and rare."

My question for the pro-choicers, like the misinformed Planned Parenthood spokesperson featured on the news report, is why not be happy about this news? Isn't this simply a sign of women exercising their "reproductive rights"? During President Bush's administration, Planned Parenthood and NARAL expressed concern when a particular state's abortion rate decreased. Surely this was evidence of a right-wing conspiracy to deny women their rights. But I digress. We could talk about the moral confusion of the pro-choice crowd all day.

So, why should pro-choicers be troubled by high abortion rates? If unborn humans are merely a part of the mother's body, fetal tissue, or some other kind of non-persons then why be bothered by high abortion numbers? No one voices concern over the number of appendectomies. No one will be bothered by a sudden increase of people having moles removed. Why all the fuss about removing animate tissue?

On Being a Target of Criticism

Carl Trueman has an excellent piece over at Ref21 about being the frequent target of email criticisms.

For me, the season also brought the usual Christmas accusation by email from somebody with time on their hands that I am a false teacher. Now, the world is full of people whom I regard as false teachers; but, given the choice of using two minutes of my finite life to send them an email decrying them for blasphemy and cursing their children to the fifth generation, or simply pouring myself a glass of wine, putting Mark Knopfler on the stereo, and stretching out on the sofa with a good book, I have to say the choice for me is clear. Yet the world is obviously full of more than a few people with no taste for wine, no Knopfler back catalogue, and no comfy sofa; so what better way to spend their time than firing off the odd heated email to somebody who has no clue as to who they are? For me, sufficient to the denomination and institution are the problems contained therein; so these days it takes a lot for me to engage on a personal level with a false teacher outside of my denominational or institutional patch.

Along the way, Dr. T. makes some important points about the gravity of the teaching office and the necessity of being accountable. I suggest you take time to read it.

As the pastor of a church I receive my share of accusations hurled from the comfortable distance that email provides the accuser. It is amazing how much bravery is birthed through social media.

Anyway, just this week I was accused of being both "right-wing" by a liberal (pretty sure he was not trying to complement me) and of being "part of the problem" by a fan of Alex Jones for not warning our congregation of the threats we face from our President or something like that. While pastoring in Kansas I was periodically criticized by political conservatives for not preaching politics or allowing an American flag in our worship center. I also took a few punches for not allowing "patriotic services" on 4th of July Sundays. My decisions were based on that whole two-kingdom thing which I don't have time to address here.

The point is, you can't please everyone. But so long as I am being whacked by some for being too political and others for not being political enough then perhaps I've found my sweet spot. Of course I recognize that's a pretty subjective standard. Maybe I could take down the American flag at Church of the Saviour but begin wearing an American flag tie. But that would require that I start wearing a tie. This is the kind of dilemma I face. Perhaps I will just go home, make a delicious pot of Italian roast, fire up a Partegas #10, and enjoy a quiet evening.

Remembering the saving acts of God

"Worship is a memorial or remembrace of the saving acts of God on which the covenant relationship is based"

- Hughes Oliphant Old, The Reading and Preaching of the Scriptures, Vol. II, p. 232.

Westminster Preaching Conference

In October, Westminster Seminary hosted their annual Preaching Conference. The keynote speaker was Dr. Dennis Johnson of Westminster Seminary California.

Dr. Johnson (B.A., Westmont College; M.Div. and Th.M., Westminster Theological Seminary; Ph.D., Fuller Theological Seminary) has taught at Westminster Seminary California since 1982. He previously pastored Orthodox Presbyterian churches in Fair Lawn, New Jersey and East Los Angeles, California.

After teaching New Testament for 16 years, he now teaches primarily preaching and ministry courses, applying his background in biblical studies to the issues of ministry, the church, and the culture. He is Associate Pastor of New Life Presbyterian Church (PCA) in Escondido, California. Dr. Johnson has preached and taught internationally in Africa, Asia, and Europe. He is the author of Triumph of the Lamb: A Commentary on Revelation; Let’s Study Acts; The Message of Acts in the History of Redemption; and Him We Proclaim: Preaching Christ from All the Scriptures, as well as numerous articles and reviews. Dr. Johnson and his wife, Jane, have four married children, whose families are scattered from Florida to Asia.

Opening Meeting
2 Samuel 16:5-14
Falsely Accused
Dr. Dennis Johnson

Plenary Address
Defining and Defending Apostolic Christocentric Homiletics
Dr. Dennis Johnson

Plenary Address
Substructures and Strategies for Apostolic Christocentric Homiletics
Dr. Dennis Johnson

Seminars
Seminar 1
From Biblical Text to the Sermon Manuscript
Dr. Greg Beale

Seminar 2
Why Johnny Mustn’t Preach: Anemia in the Pulpit, Anarchy in the Pew
Dr. David Garner

Seminar 3
The Prophetic Message: Preaching to the Heart of Imagination and the Imaginations of the Heart
Mr. Mike Kelly

Closing Meeting
Philippians 2:12-18
Bright Stars in a Dark Sky
Dr. Dennis Johnson

Understanding the Bible and Ministry

Mark Dever interviews New Testament scholar Bruce Winter concerning issues such as cultural contextualization in ministry, the importance of historical background for interpreting Scripture, and bad contemporary ideas of leadership.

Check it out HERE.

HT: Justin Taylor

Q & A with R.C.

Ask R.C. Live (Nov. 30, 2010) from Ligonier on Vimeo.

What price credibility?

Dr. Darrel Falk is celebrating the impact of Biologos on the evangelical church. Indeed, he has declared the "dawning of a new day." At the same time he laments the continuing influence of men like Al Mohler and John MacArthur. Dr. Falk will understand, I trust, that there are many of us who do not share his concern over Drs. Mohler and MacArthur. Likewise, many of us do not celebrate the possibility of greater numbers of evangelicals embracing the views of Biologos.

In a recent article Al Mohler points out that Biologos has been advancing far more than the theory of evolution only. Quoting Dr. Falk, Mohler writes:

Will we ever be able to show the followers of Albert Mohler, John MacArthur and others that Christian theology doesn’t stand or fall on how we understand Genesis 1 or the question of whether Adam and Eve were the sole genetic progenitors of the human race? These are extremely critical issues to many and the task of showing in a convincing manner that evangelical theology doesn’t depend on the age of the earth, and it doesn’t depend upon whether Adam was made directly from dust will likely take decades before it will be convincing to all.

So, Dr. Falk sees the task as that of convincing us that evangelical theology “doesn’t depend” upon affirmations about the age of the earth or the historicity of Adam as “made directly from dust” — but Falk envisions this task as lasting decades “before it will be convincing to all.” With all due respect, I think he will need a longer calendar. Most frustratingly, Dr. Falk’s statement does not acknowledge the fact that the arguments published by BioLogos go far beyond even these important concerns. Articles at BioLogos go so far as to suggest that the Apostle Paul was simply wrong to believe that Adam was an historical person. A recent BioLogos essay argues that Adam and Eve were likely “a couple of Neolithic farmers in the Near East” to whom God revealed himself “in a special way.” There is a consistent denial of any possibility that Adam and Eve are the genetic parents of the entire human race. The BioLogos approach also denies the historical nature of the Fall, with all of its cosmic consequences. BioLogos has published explicit calls to deny the inerrancy of the Bible. The concerns do not stop here.

The Bible reveals Adam to be an historical human being, the first human being, and the father of all humanity. Adam is included in biblical genealogies, including the genealogy of Jesus Christ. If the arguments offered thus far by BioLogos for resolving the “theological challenges” associated with “evolutionary creation” are any indication of what is likely to come in the future, Dr. Falk and his colleagues will wait a very long time indeed for evangelicals to join their club.

In his Biologos post, Dr. Falk makes a very telling comment: "Scientific knowledge is not deeply flawed and we cannot allow ourselves to be led down this pathway any longer." Falk likens any opposition to evolution as damaging to the church's witness. He reasons that if the church insists on believing in things like the special creation of Adam and Eve and the historicity of the Fall then the scientific community will not take us seriously. Of course, our cultured despisers do not take Bilogos seriously. After all, they believe in God. For this very reason, Biologos has been mocked by well known atheists. I ask you, what will they think of the church if we embrace Darwin's theory of evolution but insist on holding to other such anti-scientific claims as the virgin birth, deity, atonement, and resurrection of Christ?

The British are Coming

So it's official. Tenth Presbyterian has a new Senior Minister. Liam Goligher was an excellent choice and I look forward to meeting him. My problem with the whole thing is that there will now be one more British accent on Sundays in the Philadelphia area. That means preachers like me are just going to sound more ordinary than we already do. Let's be honest. These guys could read the phone book and we'd love it. So I am suggesting that we require Liam, Carl Trueman, Mark Johnston and any other invaders from across the pond to temporarily adopt a more pedestrian accent. I'm thinking upper-midwest.

Carl has some thoughts about the whole thing HERE.

"Nothing but a bunch of cells can be her"

Ross Douthat has posted a thoughtful article on America's paradoxical attitude toward the unborn.

"This is the paradox of America’s unborn. No life is so desperately sought after, so hungrily desired, so carefully nurtured. And yet no life is so legally unprotected, and so frequently destroyed."

I continue to be astonished at the moral blindness of the politicians and activists who protect and defend this detestable practice. I am just as astonished by the Christians who prop them up.

Tenth Presbyterian endorses Liam Goligher

The Pastoral Selection Committee of Tenth Presbyterian Church here in Philadelphia has put forward Liam Goligher to serve as the next Senior Ministier.

To my mind, this is an excellent selection. Dr. Goligher is an outstanding preacher and writer. I have personally benefited from his ministry. His book The Jesus Gospel is outstanding.

Congratulations to Tenth Presbyterian and the Goligher family.

"The Legalism of Tolerance"

Derek Webb likes to stir it up every now and again. His favorite targets of disdain are those rascally conservative Christians. Recently he's made a few headlines by offering his troublingly thoughts on homosexuality. Along with his seeming agnosticism on that particular perversion, however, is an even more troubling lack of clarity concerning the Gospel. These tendencies are on full display in a recent interview he granted to the Huffington Post.

In response to the HuffPo interview, Frank Turk has written a thoughtful, helpful, and tough open letter to the singer. Frank has also posted a follow-up in which he further deals with the specifics of Webb's comments.

Among Turk's keenest observations about the trouble with Webb's perspective is what he refers to as the "legalism of tolerance."

Christ died to call out the Church. This is an unquestionable fact of the New Testament; it's the key-note point of Paul's first letter to the Corinthians, and also the "book ends" of Paul's letter to the Romans. Somehow, if Christ died for us, we are a new people set apart from the world and it's fallenness. Right? Colossians 3? So when we make the confession that we are sinners, we are also making the confession that we ought not to be sinners. Making allowance for the sins of others so that we can "love them" is unloving because it is spiritually deadly. It completely squashes the actual Gospel in place of a new kind of legalism. Rather than seeking to find out all the ways in which we ought "not to do," we are in fact seeking out all the ways we can allow all the things we ought not to do. It's a legalism of tolerance -- which you exchange in your interview into a legalism of love. It's not love, you might say, if it doesn't include those who mutilate themselves to justify their sexual urges. It's not love, you might say, if we can't bless the sexual union of two people who are sexually identical rather than sexually compatible. It's the legalism of permissiveness, which is merely license raised to a moral imperative.

More "Best Books"

Sam Storms has posted his favorite books of 2010 HERE.

On his list is one that could easily have made mine but I neglected to list it. It is Tom Schreiner's outstanding 40 Questions About Christians and Biblical Law.

He also lists a volume that has been on my wish list for a while - God's Battalions: The Case for the Crusades by Rodney Stark.

Storms notes:

To be brief, Stark dismantles the long-held myth that “during the Crusades, an expansionist, imperialistic Christendom brutalized, looted, and colonized a tolerant and peaceful Islam” (8). Nothing, notes Stark, could be further from the truth. There’s no other way to say it: this superb historical treatment will challenge and, dare I say, change virtually everything you ever read or heard about the Crusades. It is beautifully written, meticulously researched, and persuasive.

My Top Reads for 2010

The following are the books published in 2010 that I enjoyed most. I am limiting the list to those books from Christian publishing houses.

The Heresy of Orthodoxy by Kostenberger & Kruger

The authors carefully and effectively dismantle the arguments of Bart Ehrman and a generation of liberal scholars who sought to discredit the essential unity of early Christianity.

Histories and Fallacies by Carl Trueman

Excellent and highly readable study of how to properly read and "do" history.

Magnifying God in Christ by Thomas Schreiner

Perhaps the most readable and helpful introduction to the theology of the New Testament I have read.

A Place for Weakness by Michael Horton

Previously published as Too Good to be True, this reissue under a new title is, in my opinion, a must read.

Why Johnny Can't Sing Hymns by T. David Gordon

Provocative. Controversial. Polemical. Need I say more?

The Shepherd Leader by Tim Witmer

Must reading for anyone in church leadership.

The Good News We Almost Forgot by Kevin DeYoung

Deyoung has done the church a great service by introducing and reintroducing many to the beauty of the Heidelberg Catechism.

Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy by Eric Metaxas

Moving account of modern martyr.

The Doctrine of the Word of God by John Frame

Okay, I'm cheating a bit because I have not yet completed reading this book. However, so far it is outstanding.

Domesticated Transcendence

From Michael Gerson writing in The Washington Post:

Christmas has become a kind of alternative religion, offering watered-down versions of profound theological doctrines. Its miracles are found on 34th Street, not in Bethlehem. The visitation of Gabriel has become the visitation of Clarence, assuring us that it is a wonderful life. The modern cult of Christmas offers a domesticated form of transcendence. Naughty or nice instead of good or evil. A jolly old elf rather than an illegitimate child, destined for an early death…

I choose to take a more liberal view of the Christmas cult. Its tacky materialism can be unattractive. But the desire for Christmas miracles and visiting angels – for Tiny Tim not to die and for hooves on the rooftop and for George Bailey to be the richest man in town; for just one night of calm and hope – are not things to be lightly dismissed.

‘If I find in myself,’ says [C.S.] Lewis, ‘a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world.’ In this argument, the sentimental desires of Christmas are hints and rumors and reminders of a birth that somehow represents their culmination. Put another way: The hopes and fears of all the years are met in Thee tonight.

HT: Denny Burk

How "mere" can Christianity be before it ceases to be Christian?

Carl Trueman calls attention to a very interesting article in The Spectator. Bruce Anderson, an atheist, makes some insightful claims about Christianity which suggest that he understands the Christian faith far more than theological liberals.

Anderson writes:

"We unbelievers are entitled to regard the Bible as magnificent literature. More is demanded from the faithful. Yet these days, even some soi-disant Christians would claim that the miraculous elements of the New Testament are only metaphors. To me, that is agnostic slop. Faith is more than literature. Faith is an epiphany of abasement, ardour and rigour, in the hope of grace, redemption and joy. But there is an entrance fee. “If you do not believe in the literal truth of the Incarnation and the Resurrection, you are not a Christian”." [my emphasis]

Trueman comments:

Reading this, I found my mind wandering back just over a decade. As the new, young, and very naive editor of Themelios, I had just lost my first subscriber, a self-identifying evangelical academic at a Welsh university, who had written me a letter to say that, after being a faithful subscriber to the journal since its inception he was, `with heavy heart,' canceling his subscription. The problem? I was, he said, `narrowing the bounds of Christianity beyond charity and common sense.' Specifically, I had written an editorial in which I claimed that those who denied the resurrection could not be Christians. I responded to said academic with a very gentle and respectful letter, apologising if I had transgressed in tone, and asking him where I had deviated from Paul's teaching, as I had no wish to teach error in the pages of the journal. Suffice it to say, I never heard back: it was apparently a worthwhile use of his time to accuse me of lack of charity and false teaching, but not to teach me a better way as this gentleman understood it.

Given the choice of dinner with that gentleman or Bruce Anderson, I would have to ask, `Is that a question?' Mr Anderson understands the New Testament in a way that that evangelical theologian, for all of his life spent studying the faith, does not; and, indeed, to update the scenario, Anderson grasps Christianity in a manner which also seems beyond those who hold to that specious antithesis that 'Christianity is a way of life, not a set of doctrines.' Yes, doctrine divides and excludes; and Anderson knows that that is central to the message of Christianity, unpleasant as that may appear.

It was Nietzsche who declared that what is now decisive against Christianity is our taste, no longer our reasons. What he did not realise was that he was prophetically speaking about Christians at least as much as atheists.

Can you explain the Gospel?

What is the Gospel? from Southern Seminary on Vimeo.

Will a Christian deny the virgin birth of Jesus?

Writing for The New York Times, Nicholas Kristof once pointed to belief in the virgin birth of Jesus as evidence of that conservative Christians are a bit dim. There are even so-called evangelicals who cast doubt on the importance of belief in virgin birth (more correctly virgin conception) of Jesus. Rob Bell has referred to the virgin birth as just one spring on the trampoline of Christianity that be disconnected without disrupting the fun. But this begs the question, "Just how important is the virgin birth?"

Al Mohler weighs in on Kristof's pronouncements:

Kristof is absolutely aghast that so many Americans believe in the Virgin Birth. “The faith in the Virgin Birth reflects the way American Christianity is becoming less intellectual and more mystical over time,” he explains, and the percentage of Americans who believe in the Virgin Birth “actually rose five points in the latest poll.” Yikes! Is this evidence of secular backsliding? “The Virgin Mary is an interesting prism through which to examine America’s emphasis on faith,” Kristof argues, “because most Biblical scholars regard the evidence for the Virgin Birth … as so shaky that it pretty much has to be a leap of faith.” Here’s a little hint: Anytime you hear a claim about what “most Biblical scholars” believe, check on just who these illustrious scholars really are. In Kristof’s case, he is only concerned about liberal scholars like Hans Kung, whose credentials as a Catholic theologian were revoked by the Vatican...

Kristof also cites “the great Yale historian and theologian” Jaroslav Pelikan as an authority against the Virgin Birth, but this is both unfair and untenable. In Mary Through the Centuries, Pelikan does not reject the Virgin Birth, but does trace the development of the doctrine.

What are we to do with the Virgin Birth? The doctrine was among the first to be questioned and then rejected after the rise of historical criticism and the undermining of biblical authority that inevitably followed. Critics claimed that since the doctrine is taught in “only” two of the four Gospels, it must be elective. The Apostle Paul, they argued, did not mention it in his sermons in Acts, so he must not have believed it. Besides, the liberal critics argued, the doctrine is just so supernatural. Modern heretics like retired Episcopal bishop John Shelby Spong argue that the doctrine was just evidence of the early church’s over-claiming of Christ’s deity. It is, Spong tells us, the “entrance myth” to go with the resurrection, the “exit myth.” If only Spong were a myth.

Ultimately Mohler concludes:

Must one believe in the Virgin Birth to be a Christian? This is not a hard question to answer. It is conceivable that someone might come to Christ and trust Christ as Savior without yet learning that the Bible teaches that Jesus was born of a virgin. A new believer is not yet aware of the full structure of Christian truth. The real question is this: Can a Christian, once aware of the Bible’s teaching, reject the Virgin Birth? The answer must be no.

Read the entire article HERE.

There's a sermon illustration in this somewhere...

Read about a woman who cannot experience fear.

"The heart wants what the heart wants"...

So said Woody Allen as he sought to justify his sexual relationship with his step-daughter. In one sense it is easy to dismiss Allen's behavior as isolated albeit disgusting. But now David Espstein, a political scientist from Columbia University, has been charged with incest for carrying on a sexual relationship with his adult daughter. Most of us have a reflexive response of disgust concerning such behavior. It is sinful. It is gross. But based upon what the left has told us for years about homosexuality must we now embrace incest so long as it is "consensual"?

Over at Slate, William Saletan asks, "If gay sex is okay, how can incest be wrong?"

Nowadays, when we talk about incest, we tend to think of child sexual abuse. That's how we use the term in the repressed-memory debate and in abortion legislation. When politicians such as President Obama make exceptions in abortion laws for "rape and incest," they're using the terms synonymously, except that in the incest scenario, the rapist is your dad.

But you can't prosecute Epstein under that theory. According to news reports, his daughter is 24, and their affair began in 2006. That makes her an adult. Furthermore, police say the sex appears to have been consensual. Four years ago, Ohio's Supreme Court upheld the incest conviction of Paul Lowe, a former sheriff's deputy, for what the court called "consensual sex with his 22-year-old stepdaughter." And last month, a 27-year-old Florida woman was sentenced to five years of probation for sex with her father. Clearly, we're prosecuting people for incest regardless of age or consent.

At this point, liberals tend to throw up their hands. If both parties are consenting adults and the genetic rationale is bogus, why should the law get involved? Incest may seem icky, but that's what people said about homosexuality, too. It's all private conduct. To which conservatives reply: We told you so. We warned you that if laws against homosexuality were struck down, laws against polygamy and incest would follow. And now you're proving us right.

Read the entire article HERE.

Take time to read observations on this case from Al Mohler and Carl Trueman.

This article is a very interesting window into the sexual confusions that lie at the heart of our age. To his credit, Saletan gets the conservative argument basically right:

The conservative view is that all sexual deviance—homosexuality, polyamory, adultery, bestiality, incest—violates the natural order. Families depend on moral structure: Mom, Dad, kids. When you confound that structure—when Dad sleeps with a man, Dad sleeps with another woman, or Mom sleeps with Grandpa—the family falls apart. Kids need clear roles and relationships. Without this, they get disoriented. Mess with the family, and you mess up the kids.

That’s a pretty fair summary. Of course, the Christian argument goes much deeper than the merely conservative argument, affirming the fact that, with exacting precision, God has spoken to the sinfulness of such behaviors — specifically condemning both homosexuality and incest. In other words, Christians move the question from mere wrongfulness to sinfulness and place all issues of sin within the biblical account of sin and redemption.
- Al Mohler

Not with a bang but a whimper

“That God would take human flesh, and that not of one of the great and the good but of a child born of apparently dubious parentage to a young woman scarcely more than a child herself, that he would be delivered in a stable - these are things that are an affront to us as human beings. That God would make himself weak and helpless, vulnerable to all of the things that plague this fallen world is outrageous. That he would risk his person through being born in a stable, without even the most rudimentary of medical assistance then available, is ridiculous. Indeed, had one stood at the door of the stable in Bethlehem on that first Christmas night, and seen the tiny mite lying in a manger, it is very doubtful that anyone could have persuaded you that you were gazing upon the very fulfillment of history, the arrival of the last Adam, and were thus in the presence of God himself.

“If we are to be rescued and redeemed, we want it to be on our terms, by a redeemer worthy of us: a great and mighty one, powerful in word and deed, one who strikes instant fear and commands immediate respect. It is an insult to us that we should be rescued by one weaker than ourselves. And yet that is the glory of the gospel. Of course, as Paul points out, this gospel foolishness culminates in the cross on Calvary; but it is foreshadowed in the absurdity of the manger. God needs no advice from us; he does not pander to our expectations; the eternal explodes into time, not with a bang, but with the whimper of a new born infant.”

- Carl Trueman

Sunday's Sermon

Today's sermon was entitled "Born to Raise the Sons of Earth" and was taken from Matthew 1:18-25. You can listen to or download the sermon HERE.

George and West

The following video is of Princeton professors Robert George and Cornel West. It is an excellent discussion. Dr. George is perhaps the most formidable conservative intellectual in America while Dr. West is a well known man of the left. Their discussion is a model of respectful dialogue. Among the issues they discuss is whether the left is on the wrong side of history regarding abortion.

Thinking about Christmas...

Ref21 has posted some excellent articles by Carl Trueman reflecting on the miracle of the incarnation. These three articles are well worth reading.

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Sunday's Sermon

On Sunday I concluded a series of messages through Hebrews. Part 50 was entitled "Benediction" and was taken from 13:20-25. You can listen to or download the sermon HERE.

Book Review

My Review of Carl Trueman's Histories and Fallacies has now been posted at TGC Reviews.

Histories and Fallacies is a different kind of book for Carl Trueman. He is accustomed to writing history, not about how history ought to be written. In a rather candid moment Trueman admits that his view of the historical task formerly mirrored Shaw’s attitude toward teachers: “those who can write history, do write history; those who cannot, write books telling others how to do it” (p. 13). Thankfully, however, Trueman has come to believe that there is indeed a place for the historian to weigh in on those questions that underlie the task of writing history.

Not only is Histories and Fallacies a different kind of book for Trueman, it is a different kind of book for Crossway. That is, it is not an explicitly “Christian” book as we tend to measure such things in our present moment. I commend Crossway for publishing such a work. For while this present volume does not deal with explicitly Christian themes in the sense that a book on the doctrine of Christ does, Histories and Fallacies is nevertheless an important book for Christians whose hope is wrapped up in thousands of years of history. After all, we say that our salvation depends upon a series of objective events in the past. Christians, therefore, ought to be competent historians.

Trueman readily admits that there are unavoidably subjective realities in the interpreting and writing of history. “History,” he writes, “is not simply a collation of facts which can only be related together in one valid narrative” (p. 17). However, as we consider the past we must “rule out of bounds the possibility that there are a potentially infinite number of sometimes contradictory yet equally valid ways of talking about the past” (p. 17). Using the rather amusing example of theories suggesting that Elvis is “still alive and well and working as a shelf-stacker in a supermarket,” Trueman warns against “a kind of epistemological nihilism that has so relativized everything that access to the past in any meaningful way is virtually denied” (p. 18). This, I suggest is the heart of Histories and Fallacies. It is also the reason why this volume is important. Many of us who labor as pastors are often confronted with the fruit of historical deconstructionism and “epistemological nihilism,” which has become rather chic in certain evangelical circles.

Read the entire review HERE.

Fathers - Indispensable for a child's good...

There's a fascinating, albeit not surprising article posted at Touchstone concerning the importance of fathers regarding the Christian commitment of their children.

In short, if a father does not go to church, no matter how faithful his wife’s devotions, only one child in 50 will become a regular worshipper. If a father does go regularly, regardless of the practice of the mother, between two-thirds and three-quarters of their children will become churchgoers (regular and irregular). If a father goes but irregularly to church, regardless of his wife’s devotion, between a half and two-thirds of their offspring will find themselves coming to church regularly or occasionally.

A non-practicing mother with a regular father will see a minimum of two-thirds of her children ending up at church. In contrast, a non-practicing father with a regular mother will see two-thirds of his children never darken the church door. If his wife is similarly negligent that figure rises to 80 percent!

The results are shocking, but they should not be surprising. They are about as politically incorrect as it is possible to be; but they simply confirm what psychologists, criminologists, educationalists, and traditional Christians know. You cannot buck the biology of the created order. Father’s influence, from the determination of a child’s sex by the implantation of his seed to the funerary rites surrounding his passing, is out of all proportion to his allotted, and severely diminished role, in Western liberal society.

A mother’s role will always remain primary in terms of intimacy, care, and nurture. (The toughest man may well sport a tattoo dedicated to the love of his mother, without the slightest embarrassment or sentimentality). No father can replace that relationship. But it is equally true that when a child begins to move into that period of differentiation from home and engagement with the world “out there,” he (and she) looks increasingly to the father for his role model. Where the father is indifferent, inadequate, or just plain absent, that task of differentiation and engagement is much harder. When children see that church is a “women and children” thing, they will respond accordingly—by not going to church, or going much less.

Curiously, both adult women as well as men will conclude subconsciously that Dad’s absence indicates that going to church is not really a “grown-up” activity. In terms of commitment, a mother’s role may be to encourage and confirm, but it is not primary to her adult offspring’s decision. Mothers’ choices have dramatically less effect upon children than their fathers’, and without him she has little effect on the primary lifestyle choices her offspring make in their religious observances.

Read the entire article HERE.

Issues Etc. on Harold Camping's latest prediction

Kim Riddlebarger was featured on Issues Etc to discuss Harold Camping's exotic approach to interpreting the Bible in light of his prediction that Jesus will rapture the church on May 21, 2o11.

Take a listen HERE (scroll down to the episode on Camping).

Books Worth Giving this Christmas...

Knowing God by J.I. Packer
What else can be said about Knowing God that has not already been said? It is number one on my list of books I wish every church member would read. Of the books written over the last 100 years none have had such a profound impact on my understanding of and desire to know God than Dr. Packer's classic.

The Cross of Christ by John Stott
"There are not many 'must read' books—books that belong on every minister's shelf, and on the shelves of thoughtful laypersons who want a better grasp of what is central in Scripture—but this is one of them." - D.A. Carson

A Heart for God by Sinclair Ferguson
This little volume on the character of God is one I would like to get into the hands of every believer. In his typically warm style Ferguson offers a passionate portrayal of God's holiness, his tender care, and his faithful love. Highly recommended.

The Great Work of the Gospel by John Ensor
The Great Work of the Gospel begins with the bad news of human sin and corruption. John Ensor does not skip over or sugar coat the depravity of the unregenerate heart. But this is precisely why the Gospel of God's grace in Jesus Christ shines so brightly in this beautiful book. This is not a book I read once and then put away. My copy is dog eared and beaten up from being turned to so often. Ensor helps us rejoice in the forgiveness purchased for us by our Savior.

A Praying Life by Paul Miller
"This is as fine a book on prayer that you will ever read, but it is so much more. It is the story of our struggle to actually live like we believe that our Heavenly father really does love us. If we did, nothing could keep us from being committed to the day by day hard work of prayer. Paul exegetes our struggle in a way that is convicting, insight giving and encouraging. This is a book on prayer that actually makes you want to pray!" - Paul Tripp

A Body of Divinity by Thomas Watson
Thomas Watson's masterful commentary on the Shorter Catechism is a model of theology that is at once devotional and doxological. A Body of Divinity is my favorite of all the Puritan classics. It has been and continues to be a regular presence in my practice of devotions.

Strategic Church Attendance

Colin Marshall has written a helpful article for The Briefing. There is far more ministry that can happen "in the pew" than we often think.

Once we make the attitude shift from being passive pew sitters and receivers to active workers and givers, there is no end to the difference we can make to others and to the running of the meeting. All of the suggestions below are of the informal type—things we can do at our own initiative. They are the types of involvement that every congregation member can have. The key to people work is to observe what happens around you and respond to people's needs. Think through your church meetings chronologically. What can we do before, during and after the meeting?

Before
Preparation
One of our great contributions is our preparation. The minister should not be the only one preparing for church. We prepare by praying for the preacher, the musicians, the service leader, the Bible readers and the newcomers. We prepare by studying the Bible passages so that we maximize this learning opportunity by being sensitised to the issues and questions in the passages being taught. Such preparation also has other benefits. We are better equipped to enter into discussion with others if we have looked at the passage beforehand. It is also a great encouragement to the preacher to know that the congregation is eager to understand the Bible and willing to put in some effort. Preaching is hard work, both for the preacher and the listeners. An intelligent question, comment or observation upon the sermon is an enormous motivating factor for the preacher who, week by week, has to try and engage the congregation's minds and hearts in the word of God. Those who sit in the pew can make a great contribution to those teaching from the pulpit.

Meeting visitors and newcomers
We enjoy meeting our friends at church, but we need to develop a nose for new people. We need to sit with them and help them feel comfortable in this strange place by introducing ourselves and explaining what is going on. We should greet the non-Christian friends of other members and introduce our friends to others. It's all about genuine hospitality. The way we welcome and look after people when they visit our homes should be a model for the household of God. And genuine, relaxed hospitality will slowly evaporate some of the prejudices held by outsiders.

Arriving early
All of this requires that we arrive not on time or late, but early. That may be the greatest miracle of all.

During
Active listening
People in the pews have an enormous impact on those who are teaching and leading. Communication is always a two way process. Energetic listening through taking notes, making eye contact with the preacher, sitting at the front, laughing at jokes (even old ones), will spur on the preacher. It is very hard to preach enthusiastically to a sleepy, distracted, fidgety group. Our active listening will also infect others with enthusiasm for learning, just as our fidgeting will discourage them. Unbelievers will also pick up that these ideas are worth listening to if they see rows of regulars eagerly soaking up the Bible.

Singing
Similarly, those in the pew can be a great help to the singing and leading of music. It is everyone's responsibility to share in the corporate singing of the congregation. The music may be well chosen and played but if it is poorly sung it is disheartening. Our enthusiasm and gusto in singing the great anthems of the faith is of great help to those around us and those leading the music, even if we can barely hold a tune. Just pretend you're under the shower.

Logistics
Each member in the pew also has an important part to play in the smooth running of the meeting. The devil will use anything to distract people from hearing the word of God. We musn't rely on ushers to fix things. If the window needs to be opened, get up and do it. If the microphones are not right, signal to the speaker so the problem can be fixed before they continue on without being heard.

Newcomers
Keep attending to newcomers' needs. If they can't find their way around the Bible or the service outline, or they don't have a Bible, or they need to find the creche, help them yourself. It is your meeting, not the minister's. It's all about being observant and outward-looking.

After
Discuss God's word
We have just heard the word of God and we spend all of morning tea talking about last night's video. It isn't right and we know it, but many of us are just uncomfortable starting up ‘spiritual’ conversations. If you get the ball rolling, others will pick it up. During your preparation and the sermon, think up some comments or issues to raise with others. Asking “What did you think of the sermon?” will usually put your neighbour into a coma, but making a specific comment like “I didn't know Abel was a prophet. What makes someone a prophet?”, may generate a fruitful conversation. Even if the conversations don't always get off the ground, your enthusiasm for learning the Bible will be contagious and non-Christians will see that church is not dull and boring but fascinating and life shattering.

Pray with others
Use the supper time to meet others and find out their concerns and pray quietly with them. This will look a bit weird to newcomers with pairs of bowed heads all around the building, but they will know that we love each other and trust God's providence.

Newcomers
Newcomers tend to leave fairly quickly so we have to move fast by identifying the visitor in our pew and offering them conversation immediately the service ends. It's all very purposeful: make sure they are welcomed properly by you and your friends, maybe introduce them to the minister and help them see how they can fit in to the congregation. You may have to postpone catching your friends until after the newcomers have been cared for.

Stay late
Once you catch this vision of church, you are always the last to leave because the opportunities to minister don't end until the last person leaves. Gone are the days of fitting church in between breakfast and brunch. Ministry of the pew takes time. In the forthcoming issues of Factotum, we'll continue to explore practical ways in which we can be better Christian servants. Sorry to have ruined your ‘day of rest’. Church requires a lot of effort, if we are to build the body of Christ. Don't worry: you have Monday to Saturday to rest so that you'll be fit for next week's work at church.

Training outline
This outline can be used to discuss Ministry of the Pew in a small group to work out how to implement these ideas in your church.

1.Why think about where to sit in church?
2.How would your church members express their reasons for attending church?
3.How do these reasons affect what they do in church?
4.Who in your church is actively engaged in the ministry of the pew? How can youencourage and support them?
5.What is the attitude of your members toward bringing others to church?
6.What practises in your church meeting last Sunday would have alienated non-Christians?
7.Next Sunday carefully observe who in church is ‘left out’ in some way.
8.What are your plans for your ministry from the pew?

Read the entire article HERE.

Great prices on Children's Books

Westminster Bookstore is having a 50% off sale on outstanding children's books.