The Oak Log

Irreconciable War

2012-01-28T07:06:00.002-05:00

The fact that the devil is everywhere called God's adversary and ours also ought to fire us to an unceasing struggle against him. For if we have God's glory at heart, as we should have, we ought with all our strength to contend against him who is trying to extinguish it. If we are minded to affirm Christ's Kingdom as we ought, we must wage irreconcilable war with him who is plotting its ruin. Again, if we care about our salvation at all, we ought to have neither peace nor truce with him who continually lays traps to destroy it. (Institutes 1.14.15)

Implications of Psalm 110:1 on the ascension

2012-01-27T05:00:00.000-05:00

The first half of Robert A. Peterson's book on the work of Christ, aptly titled Salvation Accomplished by the Son, focuses on the events of Christ's salvific work. These include: the incarnation, a sinless life, death, resurrection, ascension, session, Pentecost, intercession, and his second coming.Compared to some of these works, the ascension of Christ is an oft overlooked but vitally important accomplishment of Christ. Peterson begins his discussion of the ascension by looking at Psalm 110. In particular, the first verse is important and one should note that it was quoted by Peter in his Pentecost sermon. It reads,

“The LORD said to my LORD,

Sit at my right hand,

until I make your enemies your footstool”

(Acts 2:34–35)

Peterson moves to an explanation of how this verse works with the ascension:

There are three implications that we can draw from the connection between Psalm 110 and the ascension.

First, the destination of Christ’s ascension is the right hand of God, the Father, the place of greatest honor and authority. He ascends not merely into heaven or into the clouds, but to the dwelling place of God.

Second, the ascension is connected to kingship. Christ’s ascension marks him as the true Davidic King, who is greater than his father David. I will explain this theme further in the chapter on Christ’s session.

Third, the ascension is connected to Christ’s victory over his enemies. Christ by his selfless sacrifice won the definitive triumph over the powers on the cross, but the cross is the beginning of that victory, not the end. As Christ takes his rightful place seated at the right hand of God, he also awaits the culmination of his triumph when all his enemies will be placed under his feet in subjection. (emphasis and line breaks mine)

This is fascinating! Christ sits in at the pinnacle of power and the apex of authority. He is the King of kings. And he is victorious. Clearly the ascension is an aspect of Christ's work that warrants more study on our part. Peterson has done us a fine service in dealing with this in his book!

Prepare your minds

2012-01-26T06:22:00.002-05:00

In his classic book called The Glory of Christ (Law, R. J. K. The Glory of Christ. Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1994. Print.), John Owen discusses the wonderful blessedness that saints in heaven experience due to their beholding the glory of Christ. He writes,

"A great part of the blessedness of the saints in heaven and their triumph lies in beholding the glory of Christ and what glorious results his work as mediator has produced." (54)

He continues on this track by admitting that the glory that those in heaven behold is beyond our understanding.

However, he declares that though we may not comprehend the full scope of Christ's glory that is reveled in by those in heaven, we are not left without the opportunity to behold the glory of the Son of God while here on earth.

"Yet even here, if we are not lazy or worldly, we may behold the glory of Christ's love by faith."(54)

The key passage that I wish to share with you this morning is Owen's instructions to those who would "behold the glory of Christ's love by faith".

So make every effort to prepare your minds for such heavenly thoughts. If your thoughts are filled with earthly things, then a sense of Christ's love and its glory will not abide in them. Few minds are prepared for this duty. The outward behaviour of most reveals the attitude of their souls. The thoughts wander up and down to the corners of the earth. It is useless to call such persons to the duty of contemplating the glory of Christ's love as mediator. A holy calmness of mind ruled by spiritual principles, a heavenly mindedness, and a realization of how excellent this this divine glory is, are required for this duty of meditation. (54, emphasis mine)

Owen continues with an admonishment to set one's minds on Christ and the glorious pursuit of beholding God's Son. Clear, distinct, and accurate thoughts of Jesus Christ as gleaned from Scripture are the doorway to this enjoyment of "the sweet perfume of his mediatorial love" (54).

Be encouraged this morning to contemplate and consider the compelling characteristics of Christ!

Condescension according to Scott Oliphint

2012-01-25T05:00:00.000-05:00

As you will note from this post here, my book of the year for 2011 was the book by Scott Oliphint titled God With Us: Divine Condescension and the Attributes of God. This book was an eye-opening and enthralling experience for me. I encourage you to read my other posts on this book ( here, here, here, and here) and then go and buy the book for yourself.

As is obvious from the title, one of the crucial elements of this book is the concept of condescension. The following is an excerpt in which Oliphint explains what he means by condescension. Oliphint elaborates and elucidates what this term means and how it applies throughout the entirety of the book. But this quote will give you an introduction to the idea.

First, what does it mean for God to condescend to and be with his creation? Certainly the notion of "condescend" or "coming down" is a metaphor.God does not literally move from a higher location to a lower one, given that God is always and everywhere present. The metaphor, however, is intuitive enough that most would see immediately what we generally mean when we affirm that God has condescended. We mean that God freely determined to take on attributes, characteristics, and properties that he did not have, and would not have, without creation. In his taking on these characteristics, we understand as well that whatever characteristics or attributes he takes on, they cannot be of the essence of who he is, nor can they be necessary to his essential identity as God. In other words, given that whatever properties he takes on are a result of his free knowledge and will, he did not have to take them on; he could have chosen not to create or decree anything. Thus, his condescension means that he is adding properties and characteristics, not to his essential being, as the triune God (since that would mean that God was essentially mutable), but surely to himself (more on this later). (110)

As I read through the book, one of the things that came across as plain as day is summed up in this line: "The very fact that God brings something into existence to which he himself is in some way related entails automatically an act of condescension." (110) I have not read any works that refute this claim. But having read Oliphint's book, the concept seems to be built solidly on the Biblical record of God's interaction with humans and the Scriptural witness to his attributes and character. It also explains many difficulties and paradoxes that are evident in God's revelation of himself.

Again, I strongly recommend this book!

Substitute and representative

2012-01-24T06:08:00.002-05:00

Christ's salvific work is staggering in its scope. What He came to do can be simplified; He saved us. But it can also be studied and appreciated inexhaustibly.The grandeur of the life He lived, His birth, His death, His resurrection, and all that is incorporated in the works of Christ is a glory-filled investigation that will never end.

Robert Peterson, in his book Salvation Accomplished by the Son, puts the works of Christ on display for readers to marvel at. The study of Christ quickly transforms into the worship of Christ for his deeds are remarkable.

In this excerpt from his book, Peterson informs that Christ's work is both as a representative and a substitute. He is considering one of the most notable passages from Mark found in the tenth chapter:

For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”(Mark 10:45 ESV)

Peterson writes:

Christ redeems as both representative and substitute. He is representative because he is “the man Christ Jesus.” He became a member of the human race to function as Mediator between God and human beings. It is possible that the preposition anti on the front of “ransom” has its classical meaning of “on behalf of.” If so, then it also indicates Christ’s representation of his people before God. The preposition in “a ransom for all” clearly communicates substitution.

Christian Math

2012-01-23T05:00:00.001-05:00

Care of Piper:

Christ's Cross + Romans 8:28 + God's sovereignty = "Every single thing that happens to us expresses God's love for us." JI Packer

Lloyd-Jones on the quest for truth

2012-01-22T09:14:00.002-05:00

From Romans 1: The Gospel of God by D. M. Lloyd-Jones:

“We have heard so much about the ‘quest’ for truth, the ‘search’ for reality. Now that is the exact opposite of the gospel. The gospel is not something that invites us to join in a great search or a great quest. It is an announcement. It is a revelation. It is an unfolding, an unveiling of something.” (295)

This quote causes me to ponder how we use use words in our society and the often unnoticed effect those words have on our beliefs. As I read this quote I immediately thought of a popular label for non-believers; seekers.

The church has been using this term for quite some time now. And really, I think it is quite misleading in the sense that nobody, apart from God's gracious hand in their lives, seeks God. And though churches may understand this, I doubt it is ever explained to the ones they have labeled 'seekers'.

Thus, there are likely a whole whack of converts who, due to this term, understand themselves to have sought out God. And instead of realizing they were apprehended by God with the Gospel, they are under the impression that they sought and found the gospel. This can quite clearly lead to some theological errors.

Is this a big deal? Really? Is it really that problematic to call people 'seekers'? Well, yes and no. It is not a big enough deal to stop the progress of the gospel in those people's lives. But then again, nothing is in terms of God's sovereignty. But, it just may well get new believers off on the wrong foot and older believers going down the wrong path.

The gospel is not an invitation to join a journey. It is a revelation of the God in the face of Christ. We do not seek Him; He sought us.

Lloyd-Jones and Spurgeon on the offense of the cross

2012-01-21T05:00:00.000-05:00

“The offence of the cross is this – that I am so condemned and so lost and so hopeless that if He, Jesus Christ, had not died for me, I would never know God, and I could never be forgiven. And that hurts; it annoys; it tells me that I am hopeless, that I am vile, that I am useless; and as a natural man I do not like it.” (Lloyd-Jones, David Martyn. Romans: An Exposition of Chapter 1 ; the Gospel of God. Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1985. Print.266)

In a sermon entitled The Offense of the Cross, C. H. Spurgeon explains the offense of the cross:

Let us enquire, first, WHEREIN DOES “THE OFFENSE OF THE CROSS” CONSIST?

Our limits forbid any attempt to be elaborate and we commence by saying that “the offense of the Cross” lies, first, in the way in which it deals with all human wisdom ... But there is something in the Cross of Christ which hurts men’s pride even more than this! And that is, it is opposed to all their notions of human ability ... And the Cross offends men, yet again, because it goes clean contrary to their ideas of human merit ... But there is another offense which is a very grievous one and the world has never forgiven the Cross that “offense” yet—it will not recognize any distinctions between mankind.

Spurgeon continues on the preaching of the gospel, or lack of it, and the ensuing offense:

If the Cross of Christ is an offense and always was an offense, what is the reason why so many professed Christians go on so easily from January to December and never have any trouble about it? Old John Berridge said, “If you do not preach the Gospel, you may sleep soundly enough. But if you preach it faithfully, you will hardly have a sound place in your skin, for you will soon have enemies enough assailing you.” How is it that we never hear of any slander against a great many ministers? Everything goes easily and comfortably with them. Nobody is ever offended with their preaching. People go out of their chapel doors and say, “What a nice sermon! It was just the thing for everybody, and nobody could be offended.” They do not fully preach the Gospel, or they would be sure to offend some people! Suppose that somebody says to me, “Do you know that Mrs. So-and-So was fearfully offended with your last sermon?” That is no trouble to me if I know that I have preached the Truth of God! A celebrated preacher was once told that he had pleased all his hearers. “Ah,” he said, “there is another sermon lost.”

The wrath of God according to D. M. Lloyd-Jones

2012-01-20T05:04:00.000-05:00

The following are a few quotes on the wrath of God from D. M. LLoyd-Jones. They occur on his commentary on Romans 1 called The Gospel of God:

“There are many people today who do not like the gospel of atonement. They say ‘We do not like this talk about the “blood”; we do not like the idea that God punished our sins in Christ.’ They reject that, and do you know why? It is because they reject the idea of the ‘wrath of God’; they reject this section of the Epistle. I argue that you cannot understand the gospel unless you understand this; but if you understand this, you will not only understand the gospel but you will embrace it immediately and thank God for it the rest of your life.” (315)

“…it is not enough that you and I should be clear about the evangel; our methods of evangelism must correspond to the Scriptures as much as our message does…He [Paul] starts with the wrath of God, not with the needs of people as such, not with the things which were worrying them, not with that sin which gets them down, which they cannot overcome; nor with their unhappiness, and so on. Not at all! He does not mention these things. Instead, he speaks of the wrath of God!” (326)

“There are many who are denying this doctrine in practice, and they are offering Christ to people as a friend or helper or sympathizer, as one who can understand them, as one who will be with them. All that is absolutely true, but you do not start with it. It is not the context of the wrath of God.” (330)

“Well, this is the cross, the death of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. There is nothing – there is nothing in history anywhere – which in any way approximates to this as a revelation of the wrath of God against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men.” (348)

“This is not a matter of discussion; this is not a matter of argument. The wrath of God belongs with the love of God, and the salvation of God in Christ. It has been revealed. Man does not like it. He never would have thought of such a thing. He hates it. But our preaching neither depends upon man, nor his reason, nor his understanding, nor his likes and dislikes.” (352)

The Word of God a hidden mystery

2012-01-19T06:02:00.000-05:00

I have shared on this blog several times before how much I enjoy and am edified by the writings of Octavius Winslow. There is something about the passion with which he writes, and the manner in which he expresses his affections alongside his doctrine, that really resonates with me.

In this excerpt from The Glory of the Redeemer, Winslow draws attention to the fact that though the Word of God is pure and perfect and profitable, apart from Christ's fulfillment of all of its words and the revelation of him in its very pages, its wonder and winsomeness are less than they could and should be.

It is so with the word of God. In itself of infinite worth and transcendent value,- containing no type, revealing no doctrine, enjoying no precept, unfolding no promise, and recording no fact which does not occupy a position of importance and beauty of surpassing magnitude; yet, until the Sun of righteousness shines upon it,- until seen in the relation which it sustains to Jesus, it remains a “hidden mystery,” its worth and beauty shaded from the eye.

The Bible is a magnificent book. But its splendor and bounty is inextricably tied up in the One about whom, and for whom, it was written. Read your Word with an eye, and an anticipating heart full of affections, for the glorious Savior to whom all the books, chapters, and verses point to.

Lloyd-Jones on the first thing to say about sin

2012-01-18T06:07:00.001-05:00

D. M. Lloyd-Jones on sin:

"...it seems to me that one of the main problems in connection with evangelism, especially today, is our failure to realize that sin primarily is disobedience. Sin is not just that which I do that is wrong, and which makes me feel miserable and unhappy; sin is not just that thing which gets me down, and which I would like to overcome. It is all that, but, my friends, that is not the first thing to say about sin; indeed, that is not the most important thing to say about it...What is sin? Sin is the transgression of the law. Primarily, it is rebellion against God."

(Lloyd-Jones, David Martyn. Romans: An Exposition of Chapter 1 ; the Gospel of God. Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1985. Print. 138)

When did God first condescend?

2012-01-17T06:34:00.003-05:00

According To Scott Oliphint, in his book entitled God With Us: Divine Condescension and the Attributes of God, there was a point at which God condescended:

There is a point, therefore-call it "before the foundation of the world"-when God determines to condescend and to create. This takes place initially in eternity. The act of God's creation includes the triune God-Father, Son, and Holy Spirit-taking counsel with himself in order to confirm and establish a covenant relationship with his creation, especially his human creatures. At that point when God determines to decree "whatsoever comes to pass", there is condescension. Because, in order to decree all things, it is necessary for the object(s) of God's knowledge to be ad extra-outside himself-there must be condescension. Any object of God's knowledge that is not God is, by definition, less than God. It requires, then, that God "stoop" in order to determine and effect what is outside of himself. This is what God does as he voluntarily condescends to be with his creation, including his human creatures. (105)

What a mighty God we serve. He is not like us. He is so beyond and above us, that even in humans being the object of his knowledge there is condescension. Not only does this point to his transcendent majesty, it is also an indication of his great love for us.

I so appreciate this book by Oliphint; it challenges the mind resulting in affections in the heart. It points to God and causes one to worshipfully contemplate the majesty of our triune God.

A multidirectional cross

2012-01-16T06:25:00.000-05:00

Robert Peterson, in his large volume on the work of Christ called Salvation Accomplished by the Son, discusses the cross in terms of its multidirectional efficacy:

The cross, therefore, is multidirectional. Taking into account all of Scripture’s teaching, the cross is directed toward God himself (in propitiation); toward our enemies, including demons, to defeat them; toward men and women to redeem them; and toward the whole creation to deliver it from “its bondage to decay” and to bring it into “the freedom of the glory of the children of God” (Rom. 8:21). Why will all of these things occur? Why will we be finally saved? Why will the Devil and evil angels not ruin the shalom of the new creation but instead be cast into the lake of fire? Why will there be a new heaven and a new earth? All of these questions have the same answer: because the Son of God died and rose again on the third day to accomplish the reconciliation of human beings, angels, and the creation itself ...

As I read this book, reviewing much I have learned and remembering much I have forgotten, I am also reveling in the much that is revealed. Studying Christ and his works will never get old and will always be beneficial.

I'm encouraged as I read this excerpt, being enlightened of the all-encompassing and all-achieving power of the cross. Considering Christ as the Reconciler; I behold his greatness in propitiating a just and holy God; defeating death, demons, the devil and sin; freeing mankind from bondage; and delivering this universe from the futile plight it finds itself in.

Let 2012 be a gospel-centered, cross-centered, and Christ-centered year in which we continue to pursue deeper thoughts and stronger affections resulting in good works, all which glorify our great God.

Justification viewed negatively and positively

2012-01-15T09:39:00.001-05:00

I have started another big book. Although I am still working my way through God's Glory in Salvation through Judgment: A Biblical Theology by Dr. Jim Hamilton The Institutes of the Christian Religion by John Calvin, I have begun reading Dr. Robert A. Peterson's Salvation Accomplished by the Son: The Work of Christ. I am enjoying this thorough investigation into all that Christ has done, particularly all that he has done for us. Some of the information is new to me, much of it is review, but beholding Christ's glory in this book is very valuable.

Here is a quote on justification that reminds us that justification has a powerful dual-perspective in terms of what it brings to us:

Justification views salvation in legal terms. God the Father, acting as Judge, declares righteous all sinners who trust Christ for deliverance. This declaration is based on Christ’s death viewed in “negative” and “positive” terms. Viewed negatively, Christ’s cross was a propitiation that turned away God’s wrath (3:25–26). Viewed positively, Christ’s cross was “one act of righteousness” (5:18) credited to the spiritual bank account of believers.

Forgiveness Plus

2012-01-14T06:55:00.000-05:00

"Paul in Romans and Galatians, and the Reformers after him, spoke of justification rather than of forgiveness. This is because justification is forgiveness plus ; it signifies not only a washing out of the past but also acceptance and the gift of a righteous man’s status for the future." - J. I. Packer in Affirming the Apostles' Creed

The Gospels

2012-01-13T05:24:00.000-05:00

Our church is reading through the New Testament together and we are currently in the middle of the Gospels. Justin Taylor shares a good quote by J. I. Packer pertaining to the Gospels:

Packer on Why We Should Meditate on the Four Gospels More than Any Other Book

J. I. Packer:

[We can] correct woolliness of view as to what Christian commitment involves, by stressing the need for constant meditation on the four gospels, over and above the rest of our Bible reading: for gospel study enables us both to keep our Lord in clear view and to hold before our minds the relational frame of discipleship to him.

The doctrines on which our discipleship rests are clearest in the epistles, but the nature of discipleship itself is most vividly portrayed in the gospels.

Some Christians seem to prefer the epistles as if this were a mark of growing up spiritually; but really this attitude is a very bad sign, suggesting that we are more interested in theological notions than in fellowship with the Lord Jesus in person.

We should think, rather, of the theology of the epistles as preparing us to understand better the disciple relationship with Christ that is set forth in the gospels, and we should never let ourselves forget that the four gospels are, as has often and rightly been said, the most wonderful books on earth.

—J. I. Packer, Keep in Step with the Spirit: Finding Fullness in Our Walk with God (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2005), p. 70, 71.

Oliphint on God's Immutability

2012-01-12T06:10:00.000-05:00

In his book on the condescension of God called God With Us, Scott Oliphint addresses the doctrine of God's immutability:

Turretin's definition is more concise [than Aquinas']: "Immutability is an incommunicable attribute of God by which is denied of him not only all change, but also the possibility of change, as much with respect to existence as to will." In other words ... immutability is understood as an essential aspect of God's character, such that not only does he not change essentially, but the very possibility of essential change is denied. This is not to affirm some outside force constraining God. Rather, it it is to affirm that God is who he is, and he cannot be otherwise. He is constrained ... by his own essential nature .

Oliphint goes on to write a few ideas entailed, but not necessarily obvious, in this doctrine of God's immutability:

Yahweh does not and cannot lie because that would imply change, and also moral decay. In connection with his care for us, his purpose for our lives, God remains ever the same. This is the central focus in the scriptural doctrine of divine immutability: the issue is not simply a metaphysical construct, but is God's unchanging faithfulness to his own being, and, therefore, to us. At the heart of this relationship lies the notion that in both blessing and cursing. God remains the same. He remains faithful to the fulness of his being, expressed in the covenant.

God's immutability is not that of a statue, which never decays and never smiles, but the changelessness of a Father whose faithfulness discloses the fulness of his being. The changlessness of God, of which Scripture speaks, arises out of the manifoldness of his character expressed in his relationship to himself and, secondarily, his faithfulness to man.

Oliphint, K. Scott. God with Us: Divine Condescension and the Attributes of God. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2012. Print.. 82-85

How do we behold the glory of Christ?

2012-01-11T06:54:00.001-05:00

We cannot behold the glory of Christ by conjuring up pictures of him in the mind and by trying to form the shape of a person in heaven in our imaginations. The way to behold the glory of Christ is by the steady exercise of faith on the revelation of this glory of Christ given to us in Scripture. It is our duty, therefore, constantly to meditate on the glory of Christ. This will fill us with joy which will, in turn, move us to meditate on his glory more and more. (Law, R. J. K. The Glory of Christ. Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1994. Print. 67, emphasis mine)

Time Well Spent

2012-01-10T05:00:00.000-05:00

We nearly tied a family record this past weekend. From Friday through Sunday our kids had 17 separate ice times. There were 12 ringette games, 1 ringette practice, and 4 hockey games. Fortunately, we have two daughters on the same team or we would have broken the old record of 18 ice times in the same time period.

My responsibilities in that myriad of matches was to chauffeur my three oldest girls to their games in a city that is about an hour's drive from home. That task amounted to 3 return trips and over 6 hours of driving. That can feel like a waste of one's waking hours, but I'm happy with how I made use of the time.

The night before the tournament I downloaded a whole conference worth of messages and question and answer periods. The content of these downloads came from a conference called Lead 2011. The theme for the conference, held in Maine on a weekend in November, was The Enduring Gospel. The conference featured two preachers whose preaching, and writing, powerfully resonates with me. From the conference's website:

RAY ORTLUND – Has received a B.A. from Wheaton College, Th.M. from Dallas Theological Seminary, M.A. from The University of California, Berkeley, and Ph.D. from the University of Aberdeen, Scotland. Pastor Ortlund served as Associate Professor of Old Testament and Semitic Languages, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, Deerfield, Illinois from 1989-1998.He was ordained by Lake Avenue Congregational Church, Pasadena, California, 1975. He currently serves as pastor at Immanuel Church, Nashville, Tennessee (an Acts 29 church) and as a Council member with The Gospel Coalition. He has been married to Jan Giles Ortlund for thirty-eight happy years, and they have four delightful children.Says, Ray: “I have the most wonderful wife, I love my kids and grandkids, and I love Immanuel Church. My dream is that God would use us for true revival in our city.”

MATT CHANDLER - Serves as lead pastor of The Village Church in Highland Village, TX. He describes his 7 year tenure at The Village as a re-planting effort where he was involved in changing the theological and philosophical culture of the congregation. The church has witnessed a tremendous response growing from 160 people to over 5000 including two satellite campuses (Denton and Northway). Alongside his current role as lead pastor, Matt is involved in church planting efforts both locally and internationally through The Village and various strategic partnerships. Prior to accepting the pastorate at The Village, Matt had a vibrant itinerant ministry for over ten years where he spoke to hundreds of thousands of people in America and abroad about the glory of God and beauty of Jesus. His greatest joy outside of Jesus is being married to Lauren and being a dad to their three children, Audrey, Reid, and Norah.

I found the preaching and Q & A sessions uplifting and enlightening and recommend them to you. They can be downloaded here.

When Your Preacher Isn't John Piper

2012-01-09T06:33:00.004-05:00

I came across this article at The Gospel Coalition website:

When Your Preacher Is Not John Piper

Many who have had the privilege of hearing John Piper preach in person would testify that it felt like a monumental event. His preaching powerfully combines truth and passion, leading to convicted and exhilarated listeners. After the sermon, certain hearers might leave wondering if they were just in the presence of a figure who will be talked about in future centuries.

Then they go back to their home church, where several things are different, including the preaching. Thankfully, the gospel is still proclaimed. In fact, the sermons are thoroughly biblical, but the ability of their regular preacher simply does not measure up to the phenomenal preaching they recently heard.

Unless you attend a church led by of one of the celebrated preachers of our day, you most likely have faced a similar situation. Either at a conference or on the internet, you have heard exceptional preaching, but each Sunday you're back in your simple little home church that hardly anybody beyond your town knows about, with its "nobody" of a pastor who will probably never preach to thousands.

What if your gospel-preaching pastor is not as good as one of the great orators of our day? Is it time to sell the house, pack up the family, and change churches? No, I don't think so. But what should you do?

Five Suggestions

First, rejoice that your preacher is a man who proclaims the gospel. In some towns, finding someone who preaches the true gospel is as difficult as locating that precious new golf ball you sliced 100 yards into the thick woods. I once endured a 40-minute sermon that consisted mainly of the preacher telling about his family's vacation. Though that might be an extreme example of non-gospel preaching, too many preachers fail to speak of the holy God, sinful humanity, and the redeeming work of Christ. But not your preacher. He speaks honestly about sin, boldly proclaims "Jesus Christ and him crucified" (1 Cor. 2:2), and then lovingly invites listeners to repent and believe. That is a reason to rejoice.

Second, recognize that certain men are uniquely gifted by the Lord to have an international ministry and appeal, but this is not the norm. The typical local church should be satisfied to appoint as pastors men who are "above reproach" in their lives, who believe the gospel and are able to teach God's Word, and who have an aspiration to serve as shepherds (1 Tim. 3:1-7; Titus 1:5-9). Most preachers will not be strikingly smooth and polished. They may never be the keynote speaker at a big conference, but this is not a tragic shortcoming in your corner of God's kingdom. It is precisely his design.

Third, if your pastor is (honestly) dull, but he preaches the truth faithfully, a little statement I once heard might be helpful for you to remember: "The mature worshiper is easily edified." When hearing lackluster (even if biblical) preaching, immature worshipers will typically not listen to the message because they wish the messenger was more exciting. Conversely, mature worshipers eagerly receive the truth as it is proclaimed, even if it sounds like the preacher is reading a phone book.

Fourth, listen "outwardly" to the preaching. Here's what I mean: Sit with your Bible open and routinely make eye contact with the preacher. An occasional nod of your head when he makes a point will encourage him and stir up his confidence. In my experiences of both preaching and listening to sermons, I can confirm that yawning listeners with glazed-over eyes make mediocre preaching worse, while eager listeners inspire better preaching.

Fifth, verbally encourage the preacher(s) in your church. Every preacher who is not extraordinarily gifted has heard remarkable preaching and moaned, "After listening to that, why do I even try?!" This is a strange phenomenon, but great preaching from the renowned teachers of our day makes many "ordinary" pastors discouraged. Here's a simple way you can buoy your pastor: After a sermon, instead of just saying "Nice sermon!" as you head out the door, take a few moments to tell him what was especially helpful and/or convicting from the sermon. In the first church I served as a pastor, one young couple would stay after the service, about once a month, conversing with me about what they learned. These helpful conversations sometimes lasted for more than an hour. Even today, I am heartened when I recall their zeal for what was taught.

We should praise the Lord for giving us outstanding, well-known preachers, but let us not forget Paul's command to Timothy, who was entrenched in a local church with pastors whose names none of us knows: "The elders who rule well are to be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard at preaching and teaching" (1 Tim. 5:17).

Reading Comprehension and Sharing Information

2012-01-08T04:15:00.000-05:00

In a recent spat of articles related to reading (here, here, here and here), I have encouraged you to begin sharing your reading with others around you. In an article entitled How to Boost Your Reading Comprehension by Reading Smarter and More Conscientiously the author had this to say,

All of these steps can help you cut back on the volume of information you consume, target your reading to your interests as opposed to your responsibilities, and use the time you saved to think critically and come up with your own new ideas about the things you've read. The next step is to take those ideas and share them with others, if you see fit. Personally, one of the biggest benefits I derive from managing the flow of information in my life as strictly as I do is that in addition to being exposed to different ideas and having the time to really think them over, I also have the time to come up with my own viewpoints and perspectives and share them with others.

Sharing those ideas with other people does something transformative for your reading comprehension. Instead of simply being a content consumer, absorbing information where you can get it, you become a content creator, offering up your own unique opinions and ideas on a topic for others to read on their own. You're suddenly in the same position as the people you read, wanting people to afford you the same courtesy of reading, thinking, absorbing, and then sharing their own ideas and alternatives (as opposed to rapid-fire reactions) and you're dependant on those people for the same constructive reasoning and passionate engagement as you're now involved in.

Even if you don't decide to add writing to your reading and critical thinking flow, sharing your ideas and thoughts about what you've read with others is a great way to enrich your conversations, learn more about the people in your life, and grow based on their ideas and opinions as well.

I continue, in agreement with the author of this article, to encourage you to share what you read with those around you. In an upcoming post, I will discuss how I blog through a book. I hope that, along with the other posts, are helpful to you.

Christian Hedonism TULIP

2012-01-07T04:18:00.001-05:00

John Piper asks:

What would the doctrines of grace sound like if every limb in that tree were coursing with the sap of Augustinian delight. (that is, Christian Hedonism)?

Total depravity is not just badness, but blindness to God’s beauty and deadness to the deepest joy.

Unconditional election means that the completeness of our joy in Jesus was planned for us before we ever existed as the overflow of God’s joy in the fellowship of the Trinity.

Limited atonement is the assurance that indestructible joy in God is infallibly secured for us by the blood of the covenant.

Irresistible grace is the commitment and power of God’s love to make sure we don’t hold on to suicidal pleasures, and to set us free by the sovereign power of superior delights.

Perseverance of the saints is the almighty work of God not to let us fall into the final bondage of inferior pleasures, but to keep us, through all affliction and suffering, for an inheritance of fullness of joy in his presence and pleasures at his right hand forevermore.

HT: Peter Cockrell

Pharoah's Heart

2012-01-06T05:00:00.000-05:00

Great stuff from Justin Taylor:

The Hardening of Pharaoh’s Heart

Does your theology have categories by which to understand both God’s hardening of Pharaoh’s heart and then Pharaoh’s subsequent self-hardening? It’s a good test-case for biblically understanding divine sovereignty and human responsibility.

Here is a quick run-down of the key biblical data:

Three times Yahweh declares that he will harden Pharaoh’s heart (Ex. 4:21; 7:3; 14:4).
Six times Yahweh actually hardens Pharaoh’s heart (Ex. 9:12; 10:1; 10:20; 10:27; 11:10; 14:8).
Seven times the hardening is expressed as a divine passive with Yahweh as the implied subject, i.e., Pharaoh’s heart “was hardened” by Yahweh (Ex. 7:13; 7:14; 7:22; 8:19; 9:7; 9:35; 14:5).
And three times we are told that Pharaoh hardened his own heart (Ex. 8:15; 8:32; 9:34).

Divine-hardening and self-hardening are interwoven, but the God’s action is primary and initiatory: the first five citations (in Exodus 4 and 7) all focus on God’s action; the important point of Pharaoh’s self-hardening only appears in the three verses of Exodus 8 and 9.

The Apostle Paul famously reflected on the theological implications of this in Romans 9, using it to demonstrate the power of God’s mercy over the human will. Note the inclusio (or literary envelope) in Romans 9:16-18, including his quote of Exodus 9:16 on God’s purpose in hardening Pharaoh’s heart:

So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy.
For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.”
So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

John Piper was teaching at Bethel College when he began working on these issues in the late 1970s. It resulted in a highly regarded book published in 1983, The Justification of God: An Exegetical and Theological Study of Romans 9:1-23. Around the same time, Greg Beale, then at Gordon-College, was making the first attempt to provide contextual exegesis of every hardening passage in Exodus 4-14. The fruit of this is in his article: “An Exegetical and Theological Consideration of the Hardening of Pharaoh’s Heart in Exodus 4-14 and Romans 9,” Trinity Journal 5 (1984): 129-154.

In his essay Professor Beale asks four questions, and then after the detailed exegesis of these passages he offers his conclusions. I’ve reproduced below the questions, followed by the answers he provides.

(1) Who is the ultimate cause of Pharaoh’s hardening?
First, our study has shown that God was the ultimate cause of all of the hardening actions throughout Exod 4-14 so that at no time was Pharaoh’s volition independent of Yahweh’s influence when he hardened his heart. This may be especially significant since the hardening may be viewed as a polemic against the Egyptian idea of Pharaoh’s deity and the belief that Pharaoh’s heart was the all-controlling factor both in history and society.

(2) If the hardening is at all associated with God, is it an unconditional or conditional judgment with respect to Pharaoh’s sin?
[I]t is never stated in Exod 4-14 that Yahweh hardens Pharaoh in judgment because of any prior reason or condition residing in him. Rather, as stated in the exegetical conclusion, the only purpose or reason given for the hardening is that it would glorify Yahweh. Therefore, the divine hardening of Pharaoh was unconditional. All that can be said is that Yahweh deemed it necessary to include Pharaoh’s disobedient refusal in the historical plan, which was to glorify himself. . . .

(3) When Paul refutes the idea that God is unjust [Rom. 9:14] in rejecting Esau rather than Jacob before they were born [Rom. 9:10-13], does he give an understandable explanation for this refutation (gar, [Rom. 9:17]), or does he merely refute the idea without offering any rationale in defense of God’s rejection?
Neither Moses nor Paul leaves room for the possibility that God was unjust or immoral in his dealings with Pharaoh or Pharaoh had a peccatum alienum [alien guilt]. Paul alludes to Exod 9:16 in affirming the justice of God: “For this very purpose I raised you up, to demonstrate my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed throughout the whole earth.” . . . Paul seems to be alluding to Exod 9:16 as a summary of the purpose of the hardening throughout Exod 4-14–that God’s name should be proclaimed “in all the world.” If God had not repeatedly hardened Pharaoh, there would have been no drawn out series of plagues and there would have been no proclamation of God’s omnipotence. Thus, Paul sees hardening as the key to the proclamation of the divine name. That Paul understands Exod 9:16 in terms of hardening is clear from his summary of this allusion in Rom 9:18b (“he hardens whom he wills”).

(4) Does the hardening involve God’s dealing with certain individuals or nations only on the plane of history or does it have reference to a general principle concerning God’s eternal rejection of man from salvation?
. . . God’s hardening and rejection of Pharaoh (and the Egyptians) does not appear to be limited to divine dealings only on the temporal, historical level, but appears to have a continuity with a rejection from eternal salvation. This may be evident from the following considerations in Exodus:

(1) hardening of the heart probably has implications in the spiritual realm affecting Pharaoh’s eternal destiny, since in the OT leb (“heart”) refers very often to the inner, spiritual center of one’s relationship with God, as is also true of “heart” in the Egyptian literature;

(2) this is supported by observing that Pharaoh’s hardening of his heart is referred to as “sin against the Lord ” for which he needs “forgiveness” (10:16-17; cf. 9:34). Therefore the hardening does not merely concern Pharaoh’s intellectual-volitional faculty, but also the spiritual center of his being, since he repeatedly disobeyed God’s command and deserves judgment. This is significant in the Exodus account, since the Egyptians viewed Pharaoh as divine and sinless while living, and believed at death he was exempt from judgment but became the god (Osiris) presiding over judgment after his death. In addition to this, other terms in the immediate context of the Rom 9 hardening statement are used there and elsewhere in the pauline corpus with reference to the eternal destinies of people, so that it would appear likely that Paul has the same concerns in Rom 9:17 and that he likewise understood the Exodus hardening. The context also points to a concern for eternal destinies in Rom 9, since Rom 8:29-39 refers to assurance of eternal salvation and Rom 10-11 focus on the problem of why national Israel is not in such a salvific condition.

Could Paul have expressed such grief about his hardened brethern and wished himself “accursed” on their behalf if issues of eternal destinies were not at stake? Therefore the hardening is not limited to unique historical situations, but is an expression of a gnomic principle of God’s eternal dealings. The principle of such dealings is based on God’s unconditional nature, as Paul’s use of Exod 9:16 has shown. That such a principle is in Paul’s mind is apparent from Rom 9:18, where he generalizes the individual OT examples of the divine dispensing of mercy and hardening; the former explains God’s dealings with the Israelite remnant and Gentiles, while the latter explains the present rejection of the majority of the Jewish nation.

2011 Reading List

2012-01-05T06:22:00.000-05:00

Here is a list of books I read in 2011. There are a few things to note about this list. First, there are a lot more fiction books here than there was in 2009 or 2010. I enjoyed adding a steady diet of fiction, mostly classic, for my reading consumption. Second, the total number of books I read is also down from '09 and '10. I'm not sure there is any explanation for that ... other than I didn't read as much. Third, I want to thank those of you who visit the blog for allowing me to interact with you over these books. That continues to be a valuable aspect of this blogs existence for me. If you have any questions about any of these books, please don't hesitate to ask. Let's hope 2012 is another year of wonderful reading.

Fiction:

1. Blood Meridian by Cormac McCarthy
2. The Count of Monte Cristo by Alexandre Dumas
3. Matryona's House by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
4. An Incident At Krechetovka Station by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
5. The Hound of the Baskervilles by Sir Arthur Canon Doyle
6. Walk in the Light and Twenty Three Tales by Leo Tolstoy
7. The Princess and the Goblin by George Macdonald
8. The Man Who Knew Too Much by G. K. Chesterton
9. The Pearl by John Steinbeck
10. Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde by Robert Louis Stevenson
11. Frankenstein by Mary Shelley
12. Three Sisters by Anton Chekov
13. Uncle Vania by Anton Chekov
14. The Seagull by Anton Chekhov
15. Ivanov by Anton Chekhov
16. The Double by Fyodor Dostoyevsky
17. Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoyevsky
18. Notes From Underground by Fyodor Dostoyevsky
19. The Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor Dostoyevsky

Non-fiction:

1. A Sincere and Pure Devotion to Christ - Volume 2 by Sam Storms
2. Note to Self by Joe Thorn
3. God With Us by K. Scott Oliphint
4. The Attributes of God by A. W. Pink
5. Work Matters by Tom Nelson
6. Suprised by Oxford by Carolyn Weber
7. Lit by Tony Reinke
8. Jesus + Nothing = Everything by Tullian Tchividjian
9. The Good News We Almost Forgot by Kevin DeYoung
10. Awaiting A Savior by Aaron Armstrong
11. The Beginning and End of Wisdom by Douglas Sean O'Donnell
12. Welcome to the Story by Stephen J. Nichols
13. A Sincere and Pure Devotion to Christ - Volume 1 by Sam Storms
14. The Deity of Christ by ed. Christopher W. Morgan and Robert A. Peterson
15. Authentically Pentecostal by David Wells and Van Johnson
16. 40 Questions About Christians and Biblical Law by Thomas Schreiner
17. Give Them Grace by Elyse Fitzpatrick
18. The Beginner's Guide to Spiritual Gifts by Sam Storms
19. God of Promise by Michael Horton
20. A Place for Weakness by Michael Horton
21. The Greener Grass Conspiracy by Stephen Altrogge
22. Note to Self by Joe Thorn
23. The Reformed Pastor by Richard Baxter
24. Life as a Vapor by John Piper
25. The Gospel Mystery of Sanctification by Walter Marshall
26. A Godward Life - Volume 1 by John Piper
27. A Habitual Sight of Him: The Christ-centered Piety of Thomas Goodwin eds Joel Beeke and Mark Jones
28. For The Fame of God's Name ed. Sam Storms and Justin Taylor

Tweeting Through a Book

2012-01-04T05:00:00.000-05:00

In an earlier post on reading, I discussed some of the reasons why I thought it was helpful to write in the margins and on the pages of a book. In that post I indicated that writing in a book was helpful for me because it allowed me to keep track of tweetable quotes that I would use when I tweet through a book. I don't tweet through all the books I read, but I do it with a fair amount of regularity.

What is "tweeting through a book"?
Tweeting through a book is the process whereby one records or demarks all the quotes the reader deems tweetable. A tweetable quote, for me, is a quote that memorable or noteworthy and has the added characteristic of being less than 140 characters in length. Generally, I like to attribute the quote to its author and this demands the quotes I use to be even shorter. Some authors have a succinct writing style that lends itself well to tweets. Others, like Jonathan Edwards, seem to rarely write a sentence that is shorter than a paragraph. I'm reminded of Sam Storms saying something to the effect of "Jonathan Edwards never met a comma, semi-colon, or colon he didn't love!" Tweeting through a book includes the noting of tweetable quotes but it also includes the actual tweeting of those said quotes.

How do you "tweet through a book"?
Here are the steps I take when tweeting through a book:

Take note of "tweetable" quotes while reading through a book. You can mark those quotes by writing in your book like I do here. Or you can use another method, that I demonstrate here, if writing in the book is not advised.
After finishing the book, I usually enter the quotes into a word document. This step could be omitted if you wanted to go straight to tweeting. Below is a picture of a cheap and simple tool to help with the gleaning of your tweetable excerpts from the book.
I transfer the quotes into tweets by cutting and pasting the quotes into Twitter via TweetDeck. TweetDeck in a platform for Twitter which I think is very helpful for this process. TweetDeck allows you to schedule your tweets. I will often schedule my tweetable quotes over the course of a week or two. This allows me to enter all of my quotes at once, even if there several dozen. This also helps your followers as they are not overwhelmed by a "twavelanche" of quotes from the book you read.

Why do you "tweet through a book"?
Perhaps I should have started with a rationale for why I "tweet through a book". But I didn't. So you get it now. First, the main reason I tweet significant quotes from the books I read is to share what I am reading with the community of people who follow me on Twitter. I remember a time this past summer, while mowing the lawn, when I was listening to a series of sermons by Arturo Azurdia on Hebrews. At one point he was discussing Hebrews 3:13 which occurs in the ESV as "But exhort one another every day, as long as it is called "today," that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin." Pastor Arturo reflected on how we might exhort one another on a daily basis. It occurred to me that one may I might do this is through sharing quotes I came across in my reading with others. Twitter seemed like a useful tool for that. I realize that the writer of Hebrews did not have social media in mind, nevertheless, perhaps this is a way to redeem this internet phenomenom.

Second, tweeting through a book allows me to interact with that book at another level. As I gather the quotes, type them out, and finally tweet them, I find that I reflect on them again. This reflection is different from my initial exposure to the words. It is a literary chewing of the cud. I think this causes the book to have a greater influence on me then it would otherwise. I also find that I am more likely to remember these passages. Thus, the reasons for tweeting through a book are twofold; for my sake and the sake of others.

I hope you will consider "tweeting through a book" in the future. I think you, like me, will find it an additional interaction with a piece of literature that is both enjoyable, and edifying for you and others. If you are interested, I tweet at @judestjohn and I'll be tweeting through my book of the year, God With Us by Scott Oliphint, in the near future.

Piper on Chesterton from the Desiring God Blog

2012-01-03T13:23:00.000-05:00

Ever since my days at Wheaton College, when I followed Clyde Kilby’s advice to read G. K. Chesterton’s Orthodoxy, it has been one of my favorite books. I think it’s the only book I have read more than twice (except for the Bible).

This is strange. Not only was Chesterton a Roman Catholic, he also hated Calvinism. So what’s up with me and Orthodoxy? I still think at least half a dozen Roman Catholic distinctives are harmful to true Christian faith (e.g., papal authority, baptismal regeneration, transubstantiation, justification as impartation, purgatory, the veneration of Mary). And I think “the doctrines of grace” (“Reformed theology,” “Calvinism”) are a precious and healthy expression of biblical doctrine.

Common Ground (“Elfland”)

But I keep coming back to Chesterton’s Orthodoxy. The reason is that we see the world so similarly, and the Calvinism he hates is not the Calvinism I love.

We both marvel that we are swimming in the same boundless sea of wonders called the universe.

We both are amazed not by sharp noses or flat noses, but that humans have noses at all.

We both think it is just as likely that the reason the sun rises every morning is not because of some so-called “law,” but because God says, “Do it again.” And that he says it more like a delighted child than a dour chief.

We both believe logic and imagination are totally compatible and that neither will be useful without the other.

We both believe that the magic of the universe must have meaning, and meaning must have someone to mean it.

We both believe that the glories of this world are like goods rescued from some primordial ruin — a ruin whose evidences are everywhere.

And we both believe that paradox is woven into the nature of the universe, and that resisting it drives a person mad. “Poets don’t go mad; but chess-players do. Mathematicians go mad, and cashiers; but creative artists very seldom. . . . The poet only asks to get his head into the heavens. It is the logician who seeks to get the heavens into his head. And it is his head that splits.”

These and a hundred other happy, world-opening agreements keep me coming back, because nobody says them better than Chesterton. Like C. S. Lewis, he sees more wonder in an ordinary day than most of us see in a hundred miracles. I will keep coming back to anyone who helps me see and be astonished at what is in front of my face — anyone who can help heal me from the disease of “seeing they do not see.”

Not the Same Calvinism

But how then can Calvinism awaken such joy in me, and such hate in Chesterton? Because they aren’t the same Calvinism. He thinks Calvinism is the opposite of all this happy wonder that we have in common. The Calvinism he hates is part of the rationalism that drives people mad. Exhibit A:

Only one great English poet went mad, Cowper. And he was definitely driven mad by logic, by the ugly and alien logic of predestination. Poetry was not the disease, but the medicine; poetry partly kept him in health. . . . He was damned by John Calvin; he was almost saved by John Gilpin.

No, Mr. Chesterton, William Cowper was not driven mad by Calvinism. He was driven mad by a mental disease that ran in his family for generations, and he was saved by John Newton, perhaps the humblest, happiest Calvinist who ever lived. And both of them saw the wonders of “Amazing Grace” through the eyes of poetry. Yes, that was a healing balm. But the disease was not Calvinism — else John Newton would not have been the happy, healthy, holy friend that he was.

The Calvinism that Grows in “Elfland”

Here’s the reason Chesterton’s bowshots at Calvinism do not bring me down. The Calvinism I love is far closer to the “Elfland” he loves than the rationalism he hates.
He would no doubt be baffled by my experience. For me the biggest, strongest, most beautiful, and most fruitful tree that grows in the soil of “Elfland” is Calvinism. Here is a tree big enough, and strong enough, and high enough to let all the paradoxical branches of the Bible live — and wave with joy in the sunshine of God’s sovereignty.
In the shade of this tree, I was set free from the procrustean forces of unbiblical, free-will presuppositionalism — the unyielding, alien assumption that without the human right of ultimate self-determination human beings cannot be accountable for their choices. When I walked away from this narrow, rationalistic, sparse tree, into the shade of the massive tree of Calvinism, it was a happy day. Suddenly I saw that this is what all the poetry had been about. This is the tree where all the branches of all the truths that men have tried to separate thrive.

What About Logic?

It is a great irony to me that Calvinists are stereotyped as logic-driven. For forty years my experience has been the opposite. The Calvinists I have known (English Puritans, Edwards, Newton, Spurgeon, Packer, Sproul) are not logic driven, but Bible-driven. It’s the challengers who bring their logic to the Bible and nullify text after text. Branches are lopped off by “logic,” not exegesis.
Who are the great enjoyers of paradox today? Who are the pastors and theologians who grab both horns of every biblical dilemma and swear to the God-Man: I will never let go of either.
Not the Calvinism-critics that I meet. They read of divine love, and say that predestination cannot be. They read of human choice and say the divine rule of all our steps cannot be. They read of human resistance, and say that irresistible grace cannot be. Who is logic-driven?
For forty years Calvinism has been, for me, a vision of life that embraces mystery more than any vision I know. It is not logic-driven. It is driven by a vision of the ineffable, galactic vastness of God’s Word.
Let’s be clear: It does not embrace contradiction. Chesterton and I both agree that true logic is the law of “Elfland.” “If the Ugly Sisters are older than Cinderella, it is (in an iron and awful sense) necessary that Cinderella is younger than the Ugly Sisters.” Neither God nor his word is self-contradictory. But paradoxes? Yes.
We happy Calvinists don’t claim to get the heavens into our heads. We try to get our heads into the heavens. We don’t claim comprehensive answers to revealed paradoxes. We believe. We try to understand. And we break out into song and poetry again and again.

From Dilemma to Unicorn

We don’t adjust the brain-baffling categories of Scripture to fit human reason. We take it as one of our jobs to create categories in human minds that never existed in those minds before — a job only God can do — though he makes us agents. For example, we labor to create categories of thought like these:

God rules the world of bliss and suffering and sin, right down to the roll of the dice, and the fall of a bird, and the driving of the nail into the hand of his Son; yet, even though he wills that such sin and suffering be, he does not sin, but is perfectly holy.

God governs all the steps of all people, both good and bad, at all times and in all places; yet such that all are accountable before him and will bear the just consequences of his wrath if they do not believe in Christ.

All people are dead in their trespasses and sins, and are not morally able to come to Christ because of their rebellion; yet, they are responsible to come, and will be justly punished if they don’t.

Jesus Christ is one person with two natures, divine and human, such that he upheld the world by the word of his power while living in his mother’s womb.

Sin, though committed by a finite person and in the confines of finite time is nevertheless deserving of an infinitely long punishment because it is a sin against an infinitely worthy God.

The death of the one God-Man, Jesus Christ, so displayed and glorified the righteousness of God that God is not unrighteous to declare righteous ungodly people who simply believe in Christ.

These are some of the intertwining, paradoxical branches in the tree of Calvinism. They do not grow in the soil of fallen human logic. They grow in the Bible-saturated soil of “Elfland.” Those who live there believe that a Dilemma with two horns is probably metamorphosing into a Unicorn.
I thank God for G. K. Chesterton. His gift for seeing the world and for saying what he sees is peerless. He opens my eyes to wonders of what is there. And what is there is the finger-work of God. He may be dismayed to hear it, but his eyes have helped me see more clearly than ever the God of Jonathan Edwards.

Writing in a Book – Special Case - Borrowed Books

2012-01-02T10:03:00.001-05:00

I hope that you have been following this series of posts that have dealt with writing in books. In the first post, I explained my rationale for writing in books and interacted with some of the things Tony Reinke wrote about the topic in his book Lit! A Christian Guide to Reading. In the second post, I discussed and demonstrated the nitty-gritty details of how I actually perform marginalia. I hope that gave you some insight into practical issues around this habit of marking up a book. In this post, I'd like to deal with a special case of marginalia, that is; how do you write in a book that you do not own?

I am fortunate enough to live in a nice neighbourhood just minutes away from my alma mater, The University of Western Ontario. Along with a massive central library, UWO has 3 affiliated colleges that are either entirely or partially seminaries. And each of these seminaries has a library attached to them. So, that means, as an alumnus, I have access to thousands upon thousands of great Christian books that I can borrow for extended periods. You can be sure that the libraries involved in extending me this privilege do not want me writing in their books.

Perhaps you are not anywhere near a library where you could borrow your books from. Nevertheless, I imagine that, from time to time, you have friends and family lend you books to read. I doubt that they would be any less upset than the university libraries if their books were returned to them with your underlining, margin-hieroglyphs, and highlighting. Are we at an impasse? Do we need to part ways from our helpful habit of writing in a book and thereby remove the benefits of such a practice from our reading experience? Absolutely not! Here is a solution I offer to remedy this special case situation of marginalia and borrowed books.

Book Darts
Several Christmases ago I came across a handy and helpful little gift in my stocking. To be honest, I think I bought it for myself. Nevertheless, it was a great little gift that I have put to good use. What was this gift? Book Darts. And what are they you ask?

According to Book Darts website, Book Darts are precision-cut, paper-thin metal line markers. They are perfect for use as non-slipping bookmarks that can even be positioned to point to a specific line. Unobtrusive and indefinitely reusable, they eliminate the need for bent corners, paper clips, underlining, highlighting, sticky papers, etc. Book Darts were developed to enrich the reading experience by allowing readers to mark important lines and easily re-find them without harming the pages.

Now let me be clear. I am in favour of marking up and writing in my own books. As I have shared, I think it is essential to my reading practice. But for certain times when writing in a book is not an option, I think Book Darts are a great tool. These little line markers can keep track of great lines or stellar passages from borrowed books until you have archived, saved, or shared those excerpts according to your purposes.

When I am reading a book from one of the nearby seminaries, I will use dozens and dozens of Book Marks to mark tweetable lines and bloggable passages. I will leave all the placed bookmarks where they are until I am finished reading the book. Then, I enter all the demarked passages into a word document. I now have all the usable material transferred and can quickly and easily remove all my Book Darts.

Book Darts are a great tool for "writing" in a book when that book is not yours to write in. This gives you an option for continuing to perform marginalia even on books you have borrowed from a friend or a library. They're also useful on books you might want to re-gift. A simple search on the internet will help you find retailers to buy these useful tools. I have picked mine up at a fun retail outlet called Lee Valley.

I hope this is helpful in your quest to become an expert of writing in books!

A few predictions for 2012

2012-01-01T09:39:00.001-05:00

I thought I'd do my best at prognosticating a few things about 2012:

2012 will be filled with the steadfast love of the Lord; it never ceases.
In 2012, grace will abound. It always does.
This year will see God reigning with meticulous sovereignty over all things. Guaranteed.
If in 2012 you should repent, you will be forgiven.
There is nothing foreseeable in the coming year that can separate God's people from his love. Nothing.
Life will be hard, but the faithful Rock of Ages will be harder still.

There are a half dozen predictions for the coming year. We'll see how accurate they are ... I'm thinking they be perfect!

Have a great year!

Of Resolutions and Gopel

2011-12-31T11:13:00.001-05:00

Over at Pressing Save, Carolyn Weber has a great post on resolutions and the gospel. Here is an excerpt:

God's Resolution for each of us is not just for a new year, but a New Life.

Because He fulfilled His resolution with His own flesh and blood. Because His Word is restorative beyond all our understanding – a Love that falls beyond the margins of our lists. The movement from womb to tomb, conception to epiphany, death to resurrection … quite the ambitious list. And yet everything on it has been crossed off (if you pardon the pun) and burned in our hearts, even the most doubting ones, for us to see.

Read the whole thing here.

Peter Cockrell, at Already Not Yet, touches upon the gospel as well:

C.H. Spurgeon:

We ought not, as men in Christ Jesus, to be carried away by a childish love of novelty, for we worship a God who is ever the same, and of whose years there is no end. In some matters “the old is better.” There are certain things which are already so truly new, that to change them for anything else would be to lose old gold for new dross.

The old, old gospel is the newest thing in the world; in its very essence it is for ever good news. In the things of God the old is ever new, and if any man brings forward that which seems to be new doctrine and new truth, it is soon perceived that the new dogma is only worn-out heresy dexterously repaired, and the discovery in theology is the digging up of a carcase of error which had better have been left to rot in oblivion.

In the great matter of truth and godliness, we may safely say, “There is nothing new under the sun.”
(HT: Trevin Wax)

Writing in a Book - How

2011-12-30T04:00:00.000-05:00

To the best of my knowledge, there is no definitive method of writing in a book. There are some methods more popular than others perhaps, but I imagine the style and means and that one uses to mark a book is left up to the whim of the reader. In an attempt to encourage you to write in your own books, I'm going to share, with visual aids, how exactly I write in a book and why I use those methods.

My Technique
Let me begin with a visual showing what my marking up of a book looks like:

As you can tell, this picture requires an explanation. So, let me explain. My technique for writing in a book has evolved to meet my needs and purposes for doing so. As you can see in this post, my main reasons for writing in a book are threefold; reflection, refraction, and reference.The impetus for employing various symbols has to do with why I want to remember, and in the future reference, something from a book. Originally, I either highlighted or underlined sections or sentences for emphasis or future use. However, I made changes to how I would write in a book for pragmatic reasons. I should note that I no longer highlight or underline key excerpts. The main reason for avoiding these types of demarcation is because I think they result in too much of a visual distraction for future readers. Notes in the margins may distract, but they don't distract as much as markings in the body of the text. The easiest way for me to explain my marginalia is to deal with each type of marking.

Margin Blocks
I draw, by hand, various different rectangular blocks in the margin of books. Again, here is a picture of what they might look like:

This picture clearly shows various types of rectangular blocks in the margins. In my process of reading and writing in a book, rectangular blocks in the margin represent larger excerpts that I consider exceptional. They are noted for the purpose of future reference. When I come across excellent writing that is several sentences to several paragraphs in length, I indicate my appreciation by drawing blocks in the margin. The number of blocks side-by-each is an indication of the level of appreciation I have for the excerpt. One block equates to modest appreciation. Two blocks is indicative of significant admiration and my ultimate acknowledgement is three blocks. Basically, any block in the margin is noteworthy with more blocks pointing towards incrementally better excerpts.

Margin Circles
I use circles in the margins, as seen above, to designate what I term "tweetables". Tweetables, in my confusing literary-reflective world, is a memorable single sentence that I might wish to tweet in the future. In another post I will describe in detail how and why I tweet through a book. For now, all you need to know is circles in the margin are evidence of a superior sentence delivered by the author.

Margin Arrows
Margin arrows are another type of marginalia I subscribe to:

Any time I find sequential ideas or thoughts shared by the author that I want to relate to each other or earlier passages, I connect those thoughts and ideas by drawing an arrow in the margin between the two. These arrows may be short, connecting two ideas on the same page, or, they may be long arrows that connect concepts several pages apart.

Margin Writing
As seen in the top two pictures, if I deem it necessary, I will write in the margins. I generally do this in two circumstances. First, if I disagree with something the author has propounded, I write my disagreement in the margin. Second, if I think there is some reason I might not remember why I thought a passage was exceptional, I'll write in the margin an indication of why was significant about the section in question.

Margin Xs
I have recently the "X" as a symbol for my marginalia. I have the opportunity to review books on my blog and I'm doing more of that now than before. I have found it useful to mark portions that will help me review a book with an "X". The "X" is functional in that it can go inside of rectangular blocks or margin circles.

Suit Yourself
I think one of the keys to becoming a top-notch marginaliaist (I made that word up) is to develop your own system for writing in a book. Try out different ideas; see what works for you. Don't be afraid to experiment in order to find out what type of hieroglyphics or chicken-scratching you find effective. Then, fine-tune your approach so that, as I indicate in this post, you can become a better reader.

Writing in a Book

2011-12-29T10:29:00.001-05:00

Writing in a Book
Tony Reinke, in his book Lit! A Christian Guide to Reading, presents the reader with a term that I cannot believe many would be familiar with; marginalia. Though I originally thought this was a made-up term, it does occur in the dictionary and is defined as marginal notes. Reinke is a proponent of marking up a book, in the margins and otherwise, and I must say that I concur with him on this point. I'd like to discuss why I mark up a book and how I do so with the hope that you will be helped in your reading. For this first post in this series, let's start with the "why" question.

Why?
In his chapter entitled Marginalia, Reinke lists ten reasons why he writes in his books. I think they are worth listing. Reinke writes in his books to,

Claim them
Acknowledge their temporary value
Highlight what he appreciates
Trace the skeleton of the book
Mark what is initially disagreeable
Weave them into his library
Express emotion
Capture thoughts
Archive personal notes
Have a conversation.

It would be well worth your while to get your hands on Reinke's book and read through his reasons for a better understanding of each point. I have focused in on a few reasons why I write in books that are mirrored in some of Reinke's.

The Three R's of Writing in a Book
Reflection – Reflection is the fixing of the thoughts on something and/or careful consideration. I find that I think and concentrate better with a pen in my hand. Pastor Garry Milley, lead pastor of Church in the Oaks, puts it succinctly, "I need ink to think!" I find that the simple act of holding a writing utensil in my hand is enough to cause me to be more engaged with the book I am reading. The act of writing in that book further solidifies the process. Reinke supports this idea stating "the markings in a book's margins are the evidence of a thinking reader" (148). This is important, if you believe as Reinke and I do, that we "don't read to read; we read to think" (148). The highlighting and denoting of important, memorable or even forgettable passages in a book are stimuli for thoughtful reflection that otherwise wouldn't occur. John Piper has said, "I do not remember 99% of what I read, but if the one percent of each book or article I do remember is a life-changing insight, then I don't begrudge the 99%." I probably remember less than that. But having a pen in hand and writing in the margins of a book helps me fight the forgetfulness and hopefully remember more of the life-changing insights.

Refraction – Light is refracted when it changes direction due to passing through one medium to another. In the case of reading, I want the light that comes to me through reading to pass from me to others. This exchange of light, or in this case the exchange of knowledge from things I read, occurs most efficiently when I mark up a book. If I am to share what I read with others-others being friends family, small group participants, work colleagues, etc.-I need to be able to access the information I have read. Highlighting, underlining, circling, and generally marking up a book will help you disperse some of the gold you have mined in the pages of a book to those around you. It will help you share the wealth. Writing in a book allows you to access that significant information and share it with others. Two of the main ways I do this are tweeting through a book and blogging through a book. Those will be topics I will deal with separately in other posts. Interestingly, as the definition suggests, light changes direction when it is refracted. Your viewpoint and interpretation will have an effect on the knowledge you share and I think that is a good thing. Limiting what you receive from the writing of others to yourself would be an unfortunate end to that information.

Reference – As well as reflecting on what I have read, and beyond refracting the light from books to others, I want to be able to access and re-access the information from good books indefinitely. For books that I own and am going to keep in my library, the simplest way of being able to store and reach that book's instruction, illumination, and ideas is to mark in the book where those things can be found. One can go to extensive lengths or archiving info in a book, but I can usually find tidbits I'm looking for by flipping through a book and skimming the excerpts I have emphasized through writing in the margins.

Writing in a book, or performing marginalia if you will, offers me the opportunity to reflect on what I'm reading by causing me to interact with written material as I read it. It helps me to refract the light I receive from books to those around me. And finally, it helps me to reference significant material in the future when it is desired or necessary. For these reasons, and many others, I encourage you to mark up your books.

Book Review - Die Young

2011-12-28T04:26:00.000-05:00

In his well-known hit about a Catholic girl and a boy fromthe wrong side of the tracks, Billy Joel crooned that he’d “I'd rather laughwith the sinners than cry with the saints/ the sinners are much more fun.../you know that only the good die young”. Joel was attempting to persuade the morally superior Virginia to walkaway from her religious and pious upbringing with the thrust of his argumentbeing that the good die young. Hayley and Michael DiMarco use their book, DieYoung: Burying Yourself in Christ, to turn the tables on this line of reasoning and encourage Christiansthat they should die young. This, ofcourse, is not a literal bodily dying; rather, it is a biblical dying to selfwhich occurs on many levels. The DiMarcos have delivered a book with fast-pacedprose and many personal reflections that introduces the reader to the seeminglynegative and somewhat paradoxical aspects of the Christian faith. Through theirfrank discussion and personal experience, the DiMarcos convey that theseseemingly negative aspects are just that; they only seem negative.

The first thing I noticed with this book is that I initiallyhad some difficulty reading it. I generally find myself reading books thatcover one topic thoroughly and they do so in a somewhat slow manner. TheDiMarcos’ style is anything but slow. Once I switched gears from a ploddingpace to a speed more in line with a sprint, I found I liked the rhythm and flowof this book. Ideas and examples, Scriptures and anecdotes are related expediently.It seems to me, this would be ideal for teensand young adults. It is my guess that the authors have targeted that group.Nevertheless, even older curmudgeon-types like me can enjoy a bit of the needfor speed.

This book is permeated with personal testimonies,reflections and anecdotes from the authors. I found these insights into theauthors’ lives enjoyable, educational, and edifying. Having a front row seat tohow the issues raised by the DiMarcos played out in their lives was an integralpart of this books appeal. Their candid confessions gave a real-life feel totheir ideas and they helped me to better relate to the concepts underconsideration.

The authors’ primary goal with this book was to introduceand enlighten the reader to some foundational truths about the Christian faiththat could be interpreted as negative and are definitely portrayedparadoxically. The potential for these ideas to be misunderstood is apparentwhen one simply considers them: death is the new life, down is the new up, lessis the new more, weak is the new strong, slavery is the new freedom, confessionis the new innocence, and red is the new white. I’ll leave it to you toinvestigate in detail how each of these conundrums is explained. Paradox,according to Scott Oliphint in his wonderful book God With Us, involves “conflicting or seemingly contradictorypropositions that themselves are presumed to be true." The DiMarcos do anexcellent job of introducing the reader to these Christian tenets that areparadoxes to our modern, fallen way of thinking. They follow this up with anexplanation of how these seeming contradictions work themselves out in theChristian walk. Their constant reference to Scripture solidifies their ideasand helps the reader formulate the ideas into their worldview.

The one area which I think would have been helpful for theauthors to address in greater detail is the practical implications of thisdiscussion. This book does not address many of the ‘how to’ questions thatmight arise. How does one, practically speaking, live in weakness or practiceconfession or die to self. Practical considerations are not entirely absent,but I thought this might be helpful particularly for younger readers.

I enjoyed reading this book particularly when I adjusted toits fast-paced prose and I found the personal stories and experiencesinvaluable. The explanations of the paradoxes covered were helpful andencouraging. I think this is a book well-worth reading.

How Candy Canes are made!

2011-12-27T10:02:00.002-05:00

Pretty cool!

Donne, Piper, and Oliphint on Immensity

2011-12-25T13:43:00.002-05:00

A Christmas Day tweet by John Piper, who you can follow at @JohnPiper, gave me direction for today's post. Piper tweeted the following:

"Immensity cloystered in thy deare wombe." John Donne

Though I do not know the context of this quote, it clearly points to the Incarnation of Christ. And I don't know a whole lot about Donne, but I think I can guess at a few things about this quote. The word immensity is worth some consideration. Many of us would see in this word nothing more than a synonym of the word "big". However, immensity is a theological term that has a specific meaning in regards to theology proper. My guess is that Donne, a member of the clergy, was using the word in its technical sense. K. Scott Oliphint, in his book of the year (according to me), God With Us, explains,

Given God's independence, it follows that he is not limited by anything, nor is he to abide by the boundaries of creation. One way to articulate this truth is to affirm that God is infinite. In line with traditional terminology, we can discuss God's infinity under two primary headings: eternity and immensity ... In terms of God's relationship to space, immensity is a good word to use. It comes from the Latin immensus, which means immeasurable. This is the best way to think about God's "where-ness." (71-80)

Thus, the word immensity characterizes God as intrinsically immeasurable which points us toward the fact that God is everywhere. Keep in mind, however, that God is not everywhere like air on earth. He is not spread thinly across the whole expanse of creation. Rather, he is "completely present everywhere. There is, therefore, a ubiquity of God's essence in which he is always and everywhere wholly and completely present." (81)

Thus, Donne was saying something more profound than there is someone really big in Mary's womb. He was articulating something more important than a figurative reference to Mary's baby being someone who would do something "big". He was pointing to a paradox of the Incarnation; the God who is immense-he is everywhere present in all of his being-has taken on flesh and now resides in a woman's womb. In using the word immensity, Donne draws our attention to the Son of God who took on a human nature and took on human flesh. Donne directs our grateful gaze to the God who condescended to save us. This is a wonderful, though somewhat mysterious, truth that we rightly focus on at this time of year.

Take some time to marvel, along with Donne and Piper and Oliphint, at the second person of the Trinity who became a man so that he might rescue, redeem, and reconcile his people.

A strange cultural moment of sleeping, gaudy unremembrance

2011-12-25T05:00:00.000-05:00

In an article in the New York Times, author Marilynne Robinson refers to the current times as "our strange cultural moment". In another unrelated piece-a poem written by Carolyn Weber on her blog- I came across these two lines: Though the world sleeps/In gaudy unremembrance . These two ideas came together in my mind as I reflected upon our society and the Christmas event. Our cultural moment, indeed our entire societal ethos, is one of sleeping, gaudy unremembrance when it comes to Christmas.

It is a momentary strangeness that our societal stupor languishes in; it has not always been so. For the preponderance of our North American society's existence, it has been a generally God-honoring culture, particularly at Christmas time. So, this moment of strangeness perhaps is just that, only a moment.

The spiritual drowsiness we find ourselves may very well be a sleep-induced state brought on by our greed and covetousness of all things gaudy. The consumerism which grips us in a sleeper-hold of UFC proportions has left us worse than forgetful, it has left us in unremembrance. To me, this points towards the fact that we really should know better.

Take a moment or two, push back the strangeness and gaudiness and unremembrance-ness of this strange moment in our culture's history, and begin to fathom the depth of love that was demonstrated when God the Son, one in essence with God the Father and God the Holy Spirit, took on a human nature and human flesh that he might redeem the world. Let his wrath-absorbing, sin-forgiving, family-reconciling life,death, and resurrection, that started on our world one day in Bethlehem, cause you great joy and greater gratitude this Christmas day.

Merry Christmas!

Mediation through Incarnation

2011-12-24T08:51:00.001-05:00

The importance of this discussion can be seen if we recognize that in condescending, God the Son, from the beginning of creation, remained who he essentially is, all the while taking to himself those properties and characteristics sufficient to accomplish his sovereign plan. In doing so, it was not simply the assumed covenantal properties, culminating as they do in the assumption of a human nature at the incarnation, that were the conduit through which he would be Mediator. Rather, the fact that God (the Son) took on these properties constituted him as the Mediator of all creation and as the salvific Mediator of his people.

(Oliphint, K. Scott. God with Us: Divine Condescension and the Attributes of God. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2012. Print. 70)

Keep drinking the coffee!

2011-12-24T07:57:00.001-05:00

This little heart-warming article appeared at healthzone.ca :

Coffee racks up points as a cancer killer

December 24, 2011

You Docs

In the war against cancer, coffee may turn out to be one of the most beneficial and surprising weapons you never suspected. In just the past eight months, coffee — often lots of it (heaven if you can’t get enough of the stuff) — has been linked to lower rates of four kinds of cancer. We’ve checked the list twice. Here’s what could keep Starbucks’ and Keurig’s businesses nice. Starting with the newest news, coffee seems to be anathema to:
• Endometrial cancer. Women who have several cups are 25 per cent less likely to develop endometrial cancer than women who don’t finish even one cup.
Dose: At least four cups a day.

• Prostate cancer. There’s increasing evidence that prostate cancer wants nothing to do with coffee. Just weeks ago, new data came in indicating that coffee — high-test and decaf — is particularly effective at shooing off the most dangerous kind of prostate cancer.
Dose: At least one and ideally up to six cups a day, with/without caffeine.

• The most common skin cancer, basal cell carcinoma. If cellular trouble has quietly started, caffeinated coffee acts to shut it down. Dose: more than three cups a day.

• Breast cancer. Heavy coffee drinkers have been linked to a lower risk of certain types of breast cancer after menopause — 20 per cent to 50 per cent lower versus women who have less than a cup a day.
Dose: At least five cups a day of regular. Decaf doesn’t do it.

Squared circles

2011-12-22T06:41:00.002-05:00

So, just to use one example, the reason God cannot square a circle is not that he is subject to some necessity outside himself or in some way constraining his character, but because he created a circle to be a certain way, and a square to be a certain way, and thus their necessity lies in his creative hand, not in something abstract and above God. (Oliphint, K. Scott. God with Us: Divine Condescension and the Attributes of God. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2012. Print. 70)

First Official Trailer for The Hobbit

2011-12-21T06:58:00.000-05:00

HT: Justin Taylor

Book Review - God With Us

2011-12-20T06:51:00.000-05:00

Book Review – God With Us by K. Scott Oliphint

My ten-year old recently read a John Piper book. “Start ‘emyoung” is what I always say. After reading the book my daughter returned itwith the admission that she didn’t understand all of it. My reponse of “Good!”left her with a puzzled look that required an explanation. I explained that Iwas of the opinion that we should regularly be reading books that were a littlebit beyond our reach; books that would stretch our minds and hearts and causeus to grow. I’m not sure if she will be returning to me for any readingrecommendations, but I hold to this idea of reading materials that seem to bedeeper and more profound than what we think we are able to ingest.

K. Scott Oliphint’s recently released book is just that sortof book for me. I am a layman. I have no degrees in theology and have nevertaken a course at a seminary or any similar institution. I serve on the boardat our church and lead a small group. I like to read and pursue my ‘theologicaltraining’ through reading book and listening to lectures and sermons. There willbe no doctorate or diploma at the end of my course of studies. So, more thanlikely, I am a reader just like you. With this in mind, let me declare that GodWith Us, subtitled DivineCondescension and the Attributes of God, is a book that will challenge thelayperson. But it does so in a healthy and beneficial way. In a manner that is accessibleto the lay person and with the glory of God clearly in view, K. Scott Oliphinthas produced a compelling and awe-inspiring exposition of the theological andapologetical significance of the condescension of God. This late 2011 releasecame out just in time to be the best book I read this year!

As mentioned above, it would be inaccurate to suggest Iunderstood every nuanced argument and followed every intricate assertion inthis book. A few times, sections required a re-read in order for me to graspwhat was being said. A very few times, a reviewing of the ideas still left me alittle short of complete understanding. Nevertheless, this book is written inan attainable fashion for the average reader. On the back cover, it is clearlypresented that this is a book for both laymen and scholars. It seems to me thatOliphint has delivered a book that will be successful in that regard. I imaginethat there are issues and ideas that are fodder for theologians. And I knowthat the book provided me with ample forage for reflective ruminations.Oliphint presents the concepts pertaining to God’s attributes and condescensionwith an approach that one can follow and in a style that reflects the grandeurof the topic.

This book was awe-inspiring. It painted a picture of Divinecondescension that brilliantly shone forth the glory of God. Displaying Christas the quintessential revelation of God, Oliphint’s Christ-exalting explanationof how the church might “understand better just who God is, what he has told usabout himself, and how best to think about him” (10) was an exhilarating lookinto an area of theology that I had not read much about; the condescension ofGod. Oliphint’s book is infused with glimpses of God’s glory that he suggestsare most clearly seen through a proper understanding of the Son of God come inthe flesh. At numerous times throughout this book I found myself contemplatingthe mysterious and magnificent attributes of God as admired through a the lensof Christ’s incarnation. This book is a prime example of how rigorous thinkingcan lead to reverent adoration of our God.

From my perspective, this exposition of ideas surrounding theattributes of God and how his condescension relates to them had a dual purpose.First, the book is clearly puts forward theology as a principle purpose.Oliphint goes to great lengths to show how comprehending God’s condescensionsheds light on a proper understanding of theology proper. We can only beappropriately informed about God’s character if we consider his condescension. Thisstudious journey walks us through God’s revelation of his own name and theramifications of this name on his essential characteristics. It treks throughthe distinctions of who God is in himself and how his condescension affectsthis. It hikes up to lofty heights in considering Christological concepts andcontroversies. It meanders through the mysteries that are unavoidable incontemplating someone who is far above us.

The second purpose is apologetical. In advancing his ideasof God’s character seen specifically in his condescension, Oliphint defends many tenets of his Reformed approach. This defense is against a full-spectrumof allies and antagonists. This book speaks polemically and irenically toeverything from open theism to early heresies to exegetical arguments. Andthough there is an argument to be considered, it is delivered with grace and anobvious humility.

As a book that elevates the exaltation of God in our headsand hearts through a thorough investigation into the character of God as seenin his condescension, I strongly recommend this book. If you are a laypersonwho wants to be challenged in your thinking about God and enlivened in youraffections for him, this is a book you should read. This volume’s profound effecton my theological understanding has earned it a place on my bookshelf and itspositive production on my affections for God has earned it a place in my heart.

Aaron Armstrong's thoughts on the Kindle

2011-12-19T07:35:00.003-05:00

I have a Kobo ereader. I very impressed with it. In this post, Aaron Armstrong shares some positives about the Kindle:

Paper vs Pixels 2: 3 Things I Like About My Kindle

Some time ago, I wrote about my experiences reading using the Kindle app on my iPhone and my Macbook Pro in an effort to sort out whether or not to go electronic with a lot of my reading. At the end of November, I finally purchased a Kindle and have been using it steadily since then for the majority of my reading (although certainly not all). Here are a few things that I’ve really enjoyed about my experience so far:

1. The Kindle is a dedicated product. It does one thing—displays books—and does it really well. Yeah, it’s got the web browser as well, but really, unless I’m connecting to wifi at Starbucks, I don’t use the thing for any web surfing (that’s what my laptop is for). The biggest advantage to this is that it prevents distraction. I can focus on reading my book without being tempted to go and fart around on Facebook or Twitter. This is very nice.

2. The e-Ink display is really easy on the eyes. My longest sitting with the Kindle has been about an hour and I’ve been really pleased that I haven’t had any issues with headaches or eye strain. I rarely go more than 30 minutes on my laptop before I have to take a break (which I hear is good for you to do anyway, but…). The text is nice and crisp and the occasional screen flashes when “turning” pages is barely noticeable. I was also surprised to find that the default font is surprisingly attractive (I kind of expected it to be really lame. Not comic sans lame, but lame nonetheless).

3. Everything is so convenient. Whether it’s accessing and sharing notes and highlights, purchasing books or digging through my existing library, this part of the Kindle experience has been excellent. The most important of these—my one “must”—has been accessing my highlights. Given that a huge amount of my reading is for review purposes, book research and professional development, I need to be able to access them easily. The Kindle allows me to do exactly that and so far no other device that I’ve seen (outside of the iBooks app, of course) makes it easy for me.

Those are the three big positive things that come to mind as I’ve been looking back on my Kindle experience over the few weeks—although the switch hasn’t been all smiles and sunshine. While none are enough the make me hesitate in recommending you purchase one if you’re considering it, there are a couple of things I struggle with when it comes to the Kindle. I’ll share those tomorrow.

Christopher Hitchens is dead

2011-12-16T05:10:00.003-05:00

I find the news of this man's death causes me significant sadness. Despite being on the 'other' team, he seemed to be an affable adversary to those who faced him in the public square. Doug Wilson has written an obit for Christianity Today here. The following is an excerpt:

Christopher knew that faithful Christians believe that it is appointed to man once to die, and after that the Judgment. He knew that we believe what Jesus taught about the reality of damnation. He also knew that we believe—for I told him—that in this life, the door of repentance is always open. A wise Puritan once noted what we learn from the last-minute conversion of the thief on the cross—one, that no one might despair, but only one, that no one might presume. We have no indication that Christopher ever called on the Lord before he died, and if he did not, then Scriptures plainly teach that he is lost forever. But we do have every indication that Christ died for sinners, men and women just like Christopher. We know that the Lord has more than once hired workers for his vineyard when the sun was almost down (Matt. 20:6).

We also know that Christopher was worried about this, and was afraid of letting down the infidel team. In a number of interviews during the course of his cancer treatments, he discussed the prospect of a "death bed" conversion, and it was clear that he was concerned about the prospect. But, he assured interviewers, if anything like that ever happened, we should all be certain that the cancer or the chemo or something had gotten to his brain. If he confessed faith, then he, the Christopher Hitchens that we all knew, should be counted as already dead. In short, he was preparing a narrative for us, just in case. But it is interesting that the narrative he prepped us with did not involve some ethically challenged evangelical nurses on the late shift who were ready to claim that they had heard him cry out to God, thus misrepresenting another great infidel into heaven. It has been done with Einstein, and with Darwin. Why not Hitchens? But Christopher actually prepared us by saying that if he said anything like this, then he did not know what he was saying.

This is interesting, not so much because of what it says about what he did or did not do as death approached him, and as he at the same time approached death. It is interesting because, when he gave these interviews, he was manifestly in his right mind, and the thought had clearly occurred to him that he might not feel in just a few months the way he did at present. The subject came up repeatedly, and was plainly a concern to him.Christopher Hitchens was baptized in his infancy, and his name means "Christ-bearer." This created an enormous burden that he tried to shake off his entire life. No creature can ever succeed in doing this. But sometimes, in the kindness of God, such failures can have a gracious twist at the end. We therefore commend Christopher to the Judge of the whole earth, who will certainly do right. Christopher Eric Hitchens (1949-2011). R.I.P.

Christian liberty

2011-12-15T05:00:00.000-05:00

I definitely agree with the sentiments in this Doug Wilson quote:

Two Ways to Look at Christian Liberty - HT: Justin Taylor

Douglas Wilson:

The way others are to view your liberty is not the same way that you should view your liberty.

Other Christians should let you do what you want unless the Bible forbids it. That’s how we guard against legalism.

But you should use your liberty differently—you should be asking what the reasons are for doing it, and not what the reasons are for prohibiting it.

Aaron Armstrong's Top Books for 2011

2011-12-14T06:58:00.000-05:00

My Favorite Books of 2011

That season has come around once again, where top ten (or in this case, eleven) lists abound! As you know, reading is one the few hobbies I have, and as of this writing, I’ve read 105 books.¹ Going through that many books in a year led to some interesting challenges as I considered which were my top picks. 2011’s reading saw a couple of abysmal reads, at least one that was rank heresy, a few “meh” titles, and a surprisingly large amount that ranged from good to great in terms of quality and content. Not all of these have been reviewed here (I’ve included, but all are ones I think merit your attention.

So, without (much) further ado, here are my top books for 2011, which, with the exception of one book, none of these are in any particular order:

Gospel Wakefulness by Jared C. Wilson (Crossway, 2011). Wilson’s exuberant passion for the gospel is on full display and will leave you further amazed at the grace of God in Christ. For more of my thoughts on this book, read my review here.

Jesus + Nothing=Everything by Tullian Tchividjian (Crossway, 2011). After reading this book, it’s incredibly encouraging to know that I’m not on crazy pills (how’s that for a teaser for my review?).

Redemption by Mike Wilkerson (Crossway, 2011). This book, offering a biblical foundation for recovery ministry, careful examines the Exodus and shows us how, through it, Jesus frees us from the shame of sin and the futility of idolatry. For more of my thoughts on this book, read my review here.

Rid of My Disgrace by Justin and Lindsey Holcomb (Crossway, 2011). This book vividly portrays the evil of sexual assault and the tragedy of its effects on its victims, but is equally vivid in detailing the hope that the gospel offers those who suffer. For more of my thoughts on this book, read my review here.

In the Garden of Beasts by Erik Larson (Crown, 2011). A captivating glimpse into the complexities of life and international politics in the early days of the Third Reich through the lens of Ambassador William Dodd and his family’s experiences in Germany in the years leading up to World War II.

Unbroken by Laura Hillenbrand (Random House, 2010). Hillenbrand’s account of former Olympic long-distance runner Louis Zamperini’s experiences during World War II, adjustment to civilian life and conversion to Christianity, is compelling, engaging and beautifully written.

If You Bite and Devour One Another by Alexander Strauch (Lewis & Roth, 2011). Alexander Strauch offers much-needed guidance in handling conflict with grace and wisdom. For more of my thoughts on this book, read my review here.

Note to Self by Joe Thorn (Crossway, 2011). A gospel-saturated, super-practical and super-helpful book—one that requires a lot of careful reading. For more of my thoughts on this book, read my review here.

Enchantment by Guy Kawasaki (Portfolio, 2011). This is a book about influence—how to gain it and how to leverage it. There’s a lot of mixed opinions on this book if you look at Amazon, but what I took away from it was extraordinarily helpful. For more of my thoughts on this book, read my review here.

Counterfeit Gospels by Trevin Wax (Moody, 2011). Trevin shows us how ugly the “counterfeit gospels”—pale imitations that fail to help, encourage and save—truly are as he reminds readers of the beauty of the one authentic gospel. For more of my thoughts on this book, read my review here.

And my top pick for the year:

Innocent Blood by John Ensor (Cruciform Press, 2011)

Why did this book—a book on abortion—make the cut as the top book of the year? Because, as I wrote in my review, Innocent Blood is and continues to be the most personally convicting and challenging book I’ve read this year. Here’s an excerpt from the review:

If abortion is a gospel issue, we must repent of our desire to keep silent. We must put away our notions that it’s a mere political topic. While it most certainly has political implications, it’s goes much deeper than politics. It’s a question of worldview.
Ensor’s greatest strength in this book is that he doesn’t shy away from this reality. In fact, he is so prophetically forcefully (and I use that term carefully, but deliberately), that we cannot help but be stopped in our tracks. If we are truly followers of Jesus, then we are not permitted to sit on the sidelines of this issue, nor can we with biblical support find defense for any other position than being pro-life.

It was a book that I avoided reading initially and much like Redemption and Rid of My Disgrace (another one that was a serious contender for this spot), is not a book that is entirely enjoyable to read but one that is one that you would do well to read.

Just for fun, here are a few of the runners-up:

Real Marriage by Mark and Grace Driscoll (Thomas Nelson, 2012—review coming soon!)
Earthen Vessels by Matthew Lee Anderson (Bethany House, 2011—reviewed here)
The Revelation of God by Peter Jensen (IVP, 2002)
Tempted and Tried by Russell D. Moore (Crossway, 2011—reviewed here)

The simplicity of God

2011-12-13T05:37:00.000-05:00

Wayne Grudem, in his Systematic Theology, defines God's simplicity-calling it God's unity-as follows: "God is not divided into parts, yet we see different attributes of God emphasized at different times." He goes on to write,

We would not want to say the attributes are only characteristic of some part of God, but rather that they are characteristic of God himself and therefore characteristic of all of God ... Nor should we think of the attributes of God as something external from God's real being or real self, something added on to who God really is ... Rather, we must remember that God's whole being includes all of his attributes: he is entirely loving, entirely merciful, entirely just, and so forth.

In his stellar book on the condescension of God, God With Us, K. Scott Oliphint also addresses the simplicity of God:

What id God was composed of parts, or of a part? Imagine goodness as part of God's character such that it is not identical to him, but in some way actually composes his character. What, now, must be true of his goodness? Since it is not identical to him, it must be something other than him. If it is something other than him, then it must be outside of him, at least initially. Not only so, but if God is essentially good, and goodness is not identical to him, then he depends on goodness to be who he is essentially. Thus, God is dependent on something besides himself in order to be who he is essentially. Were that the case, God would not be a se; he could not be independent. (64)

More top ten list from Between Two Worlds

2011-12-12T06:28:00.002-05:00

Sam Storms: Top Ten (!) Books in 2011

Guest Post by Sam Storms

The exclamation mark after the number Ten should be noted. As you will shortly see, I failed miserably in my attempt to restrict the list to precisely ten books. Perhaps I should have titled this article, “My Top Ten Categories of Books of the Year,” insofar as I’ve included several volumes that tend to fall into the same genre. In any case, there are simply too many excellent works to exclude them because of the supposed sanctity of the number Ten. I’ll start with number ten and move to number one.

(10) Historical Theology: An Introduction to Christian Doctrine, by Gregg R. Allison (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2011), 778pp.
My good friend Gregg Allison has written a companion volume to Wayne Grudem’s Systematic Theology that traces the main themes of Christian theology through the centuries of church history. It is both deep and wide and will prove to be the standard evangelical contribution to this area of study for quite some time to come.

(9) G. K. Chesterton: A Biography, by Ian Ker (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 747pp., and Charles Hodge: Guardian of American Orthodoxy, by Paul C. Gutjahr (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 477pp.
There’s a tie for number nine. These two excellent biographies are both published by Oxford and therefore are both incredibly expensive. [JT note: the Hodge one is now available in paperback, though.] But they’re worth it, especially the one on Hodge. This is in fact the first extensive biography of the great 19th century Princeton theologian, and was followed late this year by yet another written by Andrew Hoffecker (which I haven’t seen yet). When I attended Dallas Seminary in the 70′s, I read Hodge’s 3-volume Systematic Theology with a relish. I will always be indebted to his work.

(8) No Higher Honor: A Memoir of My Years in Washington, by Condoleezza Rice (New York City: Crown Publishers, 2011), 766pp.
I’ve only started to dip into this massive volume, but I’ve come to greatly appreciate Condi Rice and only wish that she had entered the race for the Republican presidential nomination.

(7) God’s Grand Design: The Theological Vision of Jonathan Edwards, by Sean Michael Lucas (Wheaton: Crossway, 2011), 224pp.
This is one of the most readable and enjoyable introductions to Edwards and his theology that you’ll find. However, I almost didn’t include it on my list, not for what it says but for what it omits. Lucas concedes “that there is a major gap in this book; there is not a significant direct reference to Edwards’s Freedom of the Will” (199). His reasons are two: First, he says “it is difficult to understand” (199), which it is. Second, he believes that it is not “very relevant to the Christian life” (199). “I know that others would disagree with me,” writes Lucas, ‘but there it is” (199). Yes, I profoundly disagree, as Freedom of the Will in many ways provides the foundation for our need of grace, explains the nature of conversion, and magnifies the sovereignty of God in our salvation. He also admits not including anything about The Life of David Brainerd. “Brainerd,” he says, “strikes me as overly morose and inward” (200). Yes, I agree, but it is still a powerful and important work. Read Lucas, but only after you’ve first read Freedom of the Will and The Life of David Brainerd!
Since I’m on Edwards, I’ll also include two more that I hope prove worthy of inclusion in a list like this. Jonathan Edwards’s Apologetic for the Great Awakening (with particular attention to Charles Chauncy’s Criticisms), by Robert Davis Smart (Grand Rapids: Reformation Heritage Books, 2011), 366pp., looks to be a winner, but I’ve only just started it. I’ve also only briefly glanced at John J. Bombaro’s Jonathan Edwards’s Vision of Reality: The Relationship of God to the World, Redemption History, and the Reprobate (Eugene: Pickwick Publications, 2012), 327pp.

(6) The Triumph of Christianity: How the Jesus Movement Became the World’s Largest Religion, by Rodney Stark (New York: HarperOne, 2011), 506pp.
This is the second year in a row that a book by Rodney Stark appears on my Top Ten list. Last year it was God’s Battalions: The Case for the Crusades, which will challenge every myth you’ve ever believed about the Crusades. In this volume, which is something of a sequel to his 1996 volume, The Rise of Christianity: How the Obscure, Marginal Jesus Movement Became the Dominant Religious Force, Stark conducts a fascinating survey of “selected important episodes and aspects of the Christian story through the centuries” and assesses them from “new perspectives” (2). He is quite clear that this “is not another general history of Christianity” (2), so don’t read it with expectations of finding a comprehensive treatment of church history. As always, Stark is controversial and challenging, but never dull.

(5) Simply Jesus: A New Vision of Who He Was, What He Did, and Why He Matters, by N. T. Wright (New York: HarperOne, 2011), 240pp.
What can one say about N. T. Wright? He is at one moment exhilarating and at another somewhat annoying. I found myself scratching my head at one moment and wanting to underline virtually every word and sentence the next. He is without question one of the most gifted writers in the Christian world. One has to be somewhat guarded in reading Wright, if only because of the unconscious tendency to embrace as true all he says simply because he says it so doggoned eloquently! In any case, this is an excellent book. It is something of a popularized merging of his massive and technical Jesus and the Victory of God and his smaller volume The Challenge of Jesus. In any case, get it. If you’ve never read Wright, this is a great place to start. You don’t have to agree with everything he says (I don’t) to profit immensely from his insights into to who Jesus is and what he did.

(4) Miracles: The Credibility of the New Testament Accounts, by Craig S. Keener, 2 volumes (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2011), 1172pp.
There’s no way to adequately explain the extent of information provided by Keener in these two huge volumes. He addresses virtually everything you might ever want to know about biblical miracles and their credibility. He responds to anti-supernatural critics and then proceeds to document hundreds of miracles throughout the modern world.

(3) What Is the Mission of the Church? Making Sense of Social Justice, Shalom, and the Great Commission, by Kevin DeYoung and Greg Gilbert (Wheaton: Crossway, 2011), 283pp.
This one has certainly been controversial since its release. I’m not sure why, because I found it entirely persuasive and extremely helpful.

(2) Practicing Affirmation: God-Centered Praise of Those Who Are Not God, by Sam Crabtree (Wheaton: Crossway, 2011), 176pp.
I simply had to include this short yet eminently practical and pastoral book by Sam. This is a book everyone should read, and then practice. I have my staff reading it and we distributed copies to all those who lead our small groups at Bridgeway. In the long run, it may prove to be the most beneficial and edifying of all those listed here in 2011.

(1) The Theology of Jonathan Edwards, by Michael J. McClymond and Gerald R. McDermott (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012), 757pp.
In case you don’t remember, or didn’t read last year’s list, I included this volume among those to look for in 2011. Its actual publication date is 2012, but I’ve got it and I’m already deep into what may well prove to be the finest single volume treatment of Edwards ever written. I’ve read virtually everything that both McDermott and McClymond have written about Edwards over the years, and it’s wonderful to see them collaborate on this incredible book. It’s big and expensive but worth every dollar!

Until next year,
Sam

The Wexford Carol

2011-12-11T05:44:00.001-05:00

HT: Justin Taylor

Allison Krauss and Yo-Yo Ma perform the Wexford Carol, “one of the oldest extant Christmas carols in the European tradition.”

Good people all, this Christmas time,
Consider well and bear in mind
What our good God for us has done
In sending his beloved son
With Mary holy we should pray,
To God with love this Christmas Day
In Bethlehem upon that morn,
There was a blessed Messiah born

The night before that happy tide
The noble Virgin and her guide
Were long time seeking up and down
To find a lodging in the town
But mark right well what came to pass
From every door repelled, alas
As was foretold, their refuge all
Was but a humble ox’s stall

Near Bethlehem did shepherds keep
Their flocks of lambs and feeding sheep
To whom God’s angel did appear
Which put the shepherds in great fear
Arise and go, the angels said
To Bethlehem, be not afraid
For there you’ll find, this happy morn
A princely babe, sweet Jesus, born

With thankful heart and joyful mind
The shepherds went the babe to find
And as God’s angel had foretold
They did our Saviour Christ behold
Within a manger he was laid
And by his side a virgin maid
Attending on the Lord of Life
Who came on earth to end all strife

There were three wise men from afar
Directed by a glorious star
And on they wandered night and day
Until they came where Jesus lay
And when they came unto that place
Where our beloved Messiah lay
They humbly cast them at his feet
With gifts of gold and incense sweet.

From Kevin DeYoung

2011-12-09T13:13:00.001-05:00

Top Ten Books of 2011

Just a reminder: this is a very subjective list. It is simply a list of the books published in the last year–Christian or non-Christian–that I found most helpful, inspiring, or entertaining. [Note: there are a couple big reference books below that I have not read in their entirety. But they are good and important books so I included them in my lists. I also felt free to include books published at the very end of 2010.]
Honorable Mentions

Tony Reinke, Lit! A Christian Guide to Reading Books (Crossway)
G.K. Beale, A New Testament Biblical Theology (Baker Academic)
Chris Brauns, When the Word Leads Your Pastoral Search (Moody)
David Helm, One to One Bible Reading (Matthias Media)

Top Ten Books of 2011
10. Andrew Ferguson, Crazy U: One Dad’s Crash Course in Getting His Kid into College (Simon and Schuster). With a breezy style and a knack for turning a phrase, Ferguson explores the madness behind college rankings, the FAFSA application, and the great lengths parents will go to get their children into elite schools.

9. Tobias J. Moskowitz and L. Jon Wetheim, Scorecasting: The Hidden Influences Behind How Sports Are Played and Games Are Won (Crown Archetype). A super fun book for people who love sports and love numbers.

8. Robert Lupton, Toxic Charity: How Churches and Charities Hurt Those They Help (And How to Reverse It) (HarperOne). If you don’t care about charity and don’t practice it in your life, don’t read this book. You could become entrenched in your indifference. But if you are passionate about helping the poor and doing good in your city, this is a must read. Get your deacons, your missions committee, and your mercy ministry advocates to embrace Lupton’s six-point “Oath for Compassionate Service.”
7. Joshua Foer, Moonwalking with Einstein: The Art and Science of Remembering Everything (Penguin Press). A crisply-written journalistic account of what goes into making a memory champion. This is an entertaining book. You’ll learn a lot and with some effort may improve your memory. A fascinating story well told. Be on guard for an assumed evolutionary view of the human person and references to (but not lurid descriptions of) lewd behavior.
6. J. Todd Billings, Union with Christ: Reframing and Ministry for the Church (Baker Academic). There are two great union with Christ books on this list. This one shows how this neglected doctrine can help us make sense of several current trends, controversies, and mistakes.

5. Robert Letham, Union with Christ in Scripture, History, and Theology (P&R). At 140 pages of text, this is not a long book, but it is dense. Letham does a masterful job of looking at union with Christ through the three lenses mentioned in the title. Special attention is given to Reformed theologians.

4. Lee Congdon, Baseball and Memory: Winning, Losing, and Remembrance of Things Past (St. Augustine’s Press). A book baseball fans will love. Toward the end of the book Congdon waxes philosophical and makes some provocative statements about the role of memory and tradition.

3. Michael Horton, The Christian Faith: A Systematic Theology for Pilgrims on the Way (Zondervan). Horton harnesses his brilliant mind and love for the church to produce this compendium of Reformed theology. This book is definitely more scholarly, more in depth, and more complex than Grudem. Whether that is a plus or minus in your column, you ought to have this book on your shelf. This is the contemporary systematic theology I turn to first when I have a theological question.
2. John M. Frame, The Doctrine of the Word of God (P&R). I think more people would pick up the book if it didn’t include 17 appendices totaling 300 pages. I was also puzzled by Frame’s chapter on preaching. But those quibbles notwithstanding, this is a terrific achievement–a powerful, readable, persuasive case for absolute confidence in the Word of God. A tremendously important book for our day.
1. Paul C. Gutjahr, Charles Hodge: Guardian of American Orthodoxy (Oxford). You don’t have to agree with every jot and tittle of Gutjahr’s analysis to find this an inspiring volume. With the author’s economical style and scholarly, yet sympathetic approach, I found myself frequently moved by Hodge’s faithfulness, discipline, and good cheer. I think I’ll be a better pastor, better student of the word, and better Christian for having read this biography of Hodge.

Why doesn't God heal?

2011-12-08T05:26:00.001-05:00

If I believe Romans 8:28, that God sovereignly orchestrates all events in my life for my ultimate spiritual good (and preeminently for his ultimate glory), I can only conclude that, all things being equal, if I'm not healed it is because God values something in me greater than my physical comfort and health that he, in his infinite wisdom and kindness, knows can only be attained by means of my physical affliction and the lessons of submission, dependency, and trust in God that I learn from it. (Storms, C. Samuel. A Sincere and Pure Devotion to Christ: 100 Daily Meditations on 2 Corinthians. Vol. 2. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2010. Print. 236)

Fascinating!

2011-12-07T08:25:00.001-05:00

New Scientific Visualization Out of Yale: From Conception to Birth

Alexander Tsiaras, chief of scientific visualization in the department of medicine at Yale University, uses micro-magnetic resonance imaging to visualize the development of the human body in the womb, from conception to birth.
In this 10-minute presentation to TED, he shows some samples:

For you formed my inward parts;
you knitted me together in my mother’s womb.
I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.
Wonderful are your works;
my soul knows it very well.
My frame was not hidden from you,
when I was being made in secret,
intricately woven in the depths of the earth.
Your eyes saw my unformed substance;
in your book were written, every one of them,
the days that were formed for me,
when as yet there was none of them.
(Psalm 139:13-16 ESV)
HT: Justin Taylor via LifeSiteNews (via Dallas Richards)

No tweaking please!

2011-12-06T04:12:00.001-05:00

We are not to address God by any other name than the name he has identified as his own. To attempt to tweak the name of God for purposes of cultural (or any other kind of) relevance is not to address God as he has revealed himself, but to address him according to how we want him to be, and thus is to come to him sinfully and in error. To put it in the most controversial way, it is not proper to address God in his nomina personalia as Mother. He has for good reason not identified himself in that way. That is not his name, and any attempt to stress that kind of address automatically calls into suspicion the authority of God to name himself and the authority of his revelation. (52)

Schaeffer on those who have not heard

2011-12-05T05:38:00.001-05:00

I came across this at Between Two Worlds:

On What Basis Will God Judge Those Who Have Never Heard?

An illustration from Francis Schaeffer:

If every little baby that was ever born anywhere in the world had a tape recorder hung about its neck, and if this tape recorder only recorded the moral judgments with which this child as he grew bound other men, the moral precepts might be much lower than the biblical law, but they would still be moral judgments.
Eventually each person comes to that great moment when he stands before God as judge. Suppose, then, that God simply touched the tape recorder button and each man heard played out in his own words all those statements by which he had bound other men in moral judgment. He could hear it going on for years—thousands and thousands of moral judgments made against other men, not aesthetic judgments, but moral judgments.

Then God would simply say to the man, though he had never head the Bible, now where do you stand in the light of your own moral judgments? The Bible points out . . . that every voice would be stilled. All men would have to acknowledge that they have deliberately done those things which they knew to be wrong. Nobody could deny it.

We sin two kinds of sin. We sin one kind as though we trip off the curb, and it overtakes us by surprise. We sin a second kind of sin when we deliberately set ourselves up to fall. And no one can say he does not sin in the latter sense. Paul’s comment is not just theoretical and abstract, but addressed to the individual—”O man”—any man without the Bible, as well as the man with the Bible.

. . . God is completely just. A man is judged and found wanting on the same basis on which he has tried to bind others.

—Francis Schaeffer, The Church at the End of the Twentieth Century, 2d ed. (Crossway, 1985), pp. 49-50.

Consider the principles set forth in Romans 2:

1 Therefore you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges. For in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, practice the very same things. 2 We know that the judgment of God rightly falls on those who practice such things. 3 Do you suppose, O man—you who judge those who practice such things and yet do them yourself—that you will escape the judgment of God? . . .

14 . . . When Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them 16 on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.

Desiring truth yet unable to find it

2011-12-04T08:08:00.001-05:00

To charge the intellect with perpetual blindness, so as to leave it no intelligence of any description whatever, is repugnant not only to the Word of God, but to common experience. We see that there has been implanted in the human mind a certain desire of investigating truth, to which it never would aspire unless some relish for truth antecedently existed. There is, therefore, now, in the human mind, discernment to this extent, that it is naturally influenced by the love of truth, the neglect of which in the lower animals is a proof of their gross and irrational nature. Still it is true that this love of truth fails before it reaches the goal, forthwith falling away into vanity. As the human mind is unable, from dullness, to pursue the right path of investigation, and, after various wanderings, stumbling every now and then like one groping in darkness, at length gets completely bewildered, so its whole procedure proves how unfit it is to search the truth and find it. - John Calvin, The Institutes of the Christian Religion (2.2.12)

Hard work of building theology

2011-12-03T08:44:00.001-05:00

Dear Self,
Your views of God and self are not small ideas of little consequence. You must carefully do the hard work of building a theology that reflects truth. Do not merely settle for the study you have already done. This is more than laziness; it is carelessness with the truth of God. What you have already accomplished is not sufficient to have arrived at a perfect "body of divinity". You need to continue to study and articulate the truth throughout your life.
- Joe Thorn in Note to Self

The stability of the covenant

2011-12-02T10:06:00.001-05:00

When we take the history of a child of God, compressed within the short period of a single day — mark what flaws, what imperfections, what fickleness, what dereliction in principle, what flaws in practice, what errors in judgment and what wanderings of heart make up that brief history — how we are led to thank God for the stability of the covenant, that covenant which provides for the full redemption of all believers, which from eternity secures the effectual calling, the perfect keeping and certain salvation of every chosen vessel of mercy!”

Octavius Winslow, Personal Declension and Revival of Religion in the Soul (London, 1962), page 169.

(HT: Ray Ortlund via Peter Cockrell)

Temptation par excellence

2011-12-01T07:21:00.001-05:00

It is the temptation par excellence for man to see himself as more exalted, or at least to desire such a thing, all the while seeking to place God on a par with his human creatures. The temptation, "You will be like God", was the undoing of humanity, and its infection continues to spread through human hearts in the course of history. (Oliphint, K. Scott. God with Us: Divine Condescension and the Attributes of God. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2012. Print. 12)

The quintessential revelation of God

2011-11-30T06:41:00.001-05:00

From Crossway's new title, God With Us by K. Scott Oliphint, comes the following:

As we will see, there is an inextricable link between the doctrine of God-his attributes and properties-and the biblical understanding of who Christ is. This should not be surprising. If indeed we know who God is by virtue of his revelation to us, the quintessential knowledge of God will naturally come by way of the quintessential revelation of God, which is given to the world in Jesus Christ. It would not be an overstatement to say that the way to a proper understanding of God and his character is given foremost in a proper understanding of the Son of God come in the flesh, Jesus Christ. (10)

This was a very encouraging excerpt for me as I am leading a small group study whose main source is A. W. Pink's The Attributes of God. This sentence, "there is an inextricable link between the doctrine of God-his attributes and properties-and the biblical understanding of who Christ is", is good fodder for encouragement in this process. I'm chomping at the bit to get further in to this book.

A proper perspective on providence

2011-11-29T06:15:00.001-05:00

In this passage from Institutes of the Christian Religion, Calvin gives us an explanation why we need not be fatalistic despite believing that God has ordained all things that come to pass.

Yet the sluggishness of our minds lies far beneath the height of God's providence, we must employ a distinction to lift it up. Therefore, I shall put it this way: however all things may be ordained by God's plan, according to a sure dispensation, for us they are fortuitous. Not that we think that fortune rules the world and men, tumbling all things at random up and down, for it is fitting this folly be absent from the Christian's breast! But since order, reason, end, and necessity of those things which happen for the most part lie hidden in God's purpose, are not apprehended by human opinion, those things, which it is certain take place by God's will, are in a sense fortuitous. For they bear on the face of them no other appearance, according to our knowledge and judgment. (1.16.9)

So, in light of God's meticulous providence of all things, what should our posture be in regards to the future? Calvin continues,

As all future events are uncertain to us, so we hold them in suspense, as if they might incline to one side or the other. Yet in our hearts it nonetheless remains fixed that nothing will take place that the Lord has not previously foreseen. (1.16.9)

Read it again if you didn't follow the first time; this is hugely important if we want to avoid a fatalistic approach to life!

Great article by Rex Murphy

2011-11-28T05:00:00.000-05:00

Rex Murphy: What the tolerant must tolerate

To be a serious Christian in modern Western culture is to be the favoured easy target of every progressive thinker and every half-witted comedian. It is to have your sensibilities and your deepest beliefs on perpetual call for taunts, mockery and desecration. At a time when all progressives preach full volume for inclusivity and sensitivity, for the utmost care in speech when speaking of others with differing views or hues, Christians, as Christians, are under a constant hail of abuse and disregard. There is nothing too low or too vulgar.

Something as inconsequential as a Christmas special, for example, will have — almost as an essential element, it being “Christ’s” birthday after all — something determinedly offensive to Christians. Russell Peters, the Canadian joker, for his special this year has invited Pamela Anderson, pinup queen and soft porn actress, to play the Virgin Mary.

Pamela Anderson as Mary the Immaculate: I know — the wit, the daring, the originality — hell, the bravery of it all. No wonder Peters is at the very top of the yuk-heap. Can it be that it’s only 30 years since Monty Python and The Life of Brian? Talk about “cutting-edge.” The casting is so, so clever — getting a lewd exhibitionist to play Mary, to call in a pop-culture tart to play the very Mother of God.

But for believers to object, well that would be irksome and stuffy and high-handed and parochial — it being another of this age’s curious predisposition that Christians are supposed, if not to like the jeers hurled at them, to at least be good enough to suffer the insults, blasphemies and mockeries in silence, if not secret approval. To actually object to Russell Peters going for a cheap, unintelligent and vulgar laugh would probably get categorized as “intolerance” or “censorship.” Go for it, Russell — Pam Anderson as the Virgin Mary will tickle the funnybone of every single digit IQ from St. John’s to Victoria.

There was another example in the now nearly defunct occupy movement. In Vancouver they lit a “sacred fire” on the lawn of the art gallery — I think the “sacred flame” itself was kept in an oil drum (a curious temple, but leave that go). When the Vancouver fire brigade arrived to put it out, there being bylaws about fires in public places, there were ululations of the most ferocious kind accusing the firemen of committing a grave offence against native spirituality.

Meantime, overseas, their occupy brethren in London were found to be defecating (I could use the vulgar term here as it so matches the act, but let us retain some respect) within — not on the steps or in the precincts, but within — St. Paul’s Cathedral. St. Paul’s — in ancient times the cathedral where John Donne preached, where Lancelot Andrews, one of the fathers of the King James Bible, was dean, a cathedral arguably second in importance in Christianity only to the Vatican — treated as a sewer.

A report for the cathedral summed up the mischiefs and abuse: “Desecration: Graffiti have been scratched and painted on to the great west doors of the cathedral, the chapter house door and most notably a sacrilegious message painted on the restored pillars of the west portico. Human defecation has occurred in the west portico entrance and inside the cathedral on several occasions.”

In short, they turned St. Paul’s Cathedral into a public toilet and used its sacred walls as a crude bulletin board. However, there was no vast outcry at the appalling disrespect, the deep contumely such acts represent. Put out a “sacred fire,” set in the first place mainly to provoke, and it’s shock and petty scandal. Defecate in St. Paul’s, and I’ll bet this is the first time many reading this have heard of the outrage.

Of episodes of this kind there is no end, and it will surely be accounted a kind of prudery or humourlessness to make objection to them. Let it be so. However, there is a radical inconsistency to the treatment afforded to Christian believers and that of most other religious groups and it is not idle to insist on this point. It would be rather nice if so many people, the Christians of the West, who offer respect, tolerance and regard for beliefs other than their own, could be treated with equal civility and courtesy.

And nice, too, if Russell Peters could see the cheapness of his ever-so-hilarious casting call.

National Post

Black Friday Book Deals

2011-11-25T11:17:00.001-05:00

If you like books and you like deals, than you may want to check out the awesome collection that Tim Challies has amassed here for Black Friday.

Five questions for self-examination

2011-11-24T06:16:00.001-05:00

In this post, we looked at a direction given by Walter Marshall, from his classic puritan tome called The Gospel Mystery of Sanctification, for the examination of our state and ways in the revealing and instructing light of God's Word. In the same section from his book, Marshall gives us some tools for examining ourselves in a balanced manner. Marshall is concerned that we neither "unjustly condemn or justify faith, by proceeding on insufficient evidences." He offers us five questions to examine ourselves with:

Are we made thoroughly sensible of our sinfulness, and of the deadness and misery of our natural state, so as to despair absolutely of ever attaining to any righteousness, holiness or true happiness, while we continue in it?
Are the eyes of our understanding enlightened to see the excellency of Christ, and the alone sufficiency and all sufficiency of His grace for our salvation?
Do we prefer the enjoyment of Him above all things, and desire it with our whole heart, as our only happiness, whatsoever we may suffer for His sake?
Do we desire with our whole heart to be delivered from the power and practice of sin, as well as from the wrath of God, and the pains of hell?
Do our hearts come to Christ and lay hold on Him for salvation, by trusting Him only, and endeavouring to trust on Him confidently, notwithstanding all fears and doubts that assault us?

Let me paraphrase these five questions:

Do we see our sin for what it is?
Do we see our Saviour for who He is and what He has done?
Do we prefer Him?
Do we desire deliverance from our sin?
Do we actually come to Christ?

Reality check time; ask yourselves these questions and the fall on the grace and mercy of Christ once again!

Grotesque

2011-11-23T05:00:00.000-05:00

For even those who have renounced Christianity and attack it, in their inmost being still follow the Christian ideal, for hitherto neither their subtlety nor the ardor of their hearts has been able to create a higher ideal of man and of virtue than the ideal given by Christ of old. When it has been attempted, the result has been only grotesque.

Father Païssy in The Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor Dostoyevsky

Love smote

2011-11-22T06:12:00.001-05:00

But all the afflictions of the believer are the effects of Divine love. They can resolve themselves into nothing else. While the same stroke, falling upon an unbelieving, rebellious, sin-loving sinner, may be the first-fruits of eternal punishment, to the saint of God it may prove the first-fruits of eternal glory. The correction which you at present consider as an argument of wrath, may be an evidence of love and an act of mercy. God will prune you, but not hew you down. The 'right hand of His mercy' knows what the 'left hand of His severity' is doing. Better for you to be a chastened son, than an undisciplined child of the devil. Oh yes! there was no anger, no vindictiveness, no vengeance in that heavy stroke which laid your heart's fondest treasure in the dust. Love smote, but love yearned while it smote. - Octavius Winslow, from "The Chastening of Love"

This week in our small group, we have decided to look at suffering and the Lord's discipline. We wanted to discuss how they relate, interact, and are defined by Scripture. In my readings I came across this article by a favourite of mine, Octavius Winslow. I was accosted by the first two lines of this paragraph. All the afflictions of the believer are the effects of Divine love. Does anything happen outside of the sovereign purview of Almighty God? No. Does God ever relate to His elect, His adopted children, as anything less than their heavenly Father? No. Therefore, it seems, every difficulty of the Christian can "resolve themselves into nothing else" than the loving, disciplining actions of a benevolent Father. To those not of the household of God, the exact same situations and experiences may be the "first-fruits of eternal punishment", but to the sheep of His pasture those trials are the "first-fruits of eternal glory".

What are we looking for in a job?

2011-11-21T05:16:00.001-05:00

When we look at our work, we often look through the lens of our own personal fulfillment. Yet the New Testament writers look at it through the lens of our own spiritual formation, an outworking of our salvation and our sanctification. It is a good and desirable thing to have work that fulfills us. There is nothing inherently wrong about pursuing a great job, but we must remember it is not necessary for God's will to be accomplished in our lives. What is necessary is that we are formed into greater Christlikeness in our work. - Tom Nelson in Work Matters

All ways are Thine

2011-11-20T08:33:00.001-05:00

A short prayer from Fyodor Dostoyevsky that comes to us through his character Alyosha Karamazov in his famed novel The Brothers Karamazov:

"God, have mercy upon all of them, have all these unhappy and turbulent souls in Thy keeping, and set them in the right path. All ways are Thine. Save them according to Thy wisdom. Thou art love. Thou wilt send joy to all!" Alyosha murmured, crossing himself, and falling into peaceful sleep.

This brief prayer speaks volumes to me. How often is my soul unhappy and turbulent? Apart from God's sovereign grace, my soul would never find peace eternally or temporally. And yet, God in His sovereignty, stands behind my turbulent times ordaining all that comes to pass and working all things together for good. He is love and will send His joy!

Warfield via Ortlund on suffering

2011-11-19T09:46:00.001-05:00

Dane Ortlund shares:

Warfield:

It is because we cannot be robbed of God’s providencethat we know, amid whatever encircling gloom, that all things shallwork together for good to those that love him. It is because wecannot be robbed of God’s providence that we know that nothing canseparate us from the love of Christ—not tribulation, nor anguish,nor persecution, nor famine, nor nakedness, nor peril, nor sword. .. . Were not God’s providence over all, could trouble come withouthis sending, were Christians the possible prey of this or the otherfiendish enemy, when perchance God was musing, or gone aside, or ona journey, or sleeping, what certainty of hope could be ours?

‘Does God send trouble?’ Surely, surely. He and he only. To thesinner in punishment, to his children in chastisement. To suggestthat it does not always come from his hands is to take away all ourcomfort.

—B. B. Warfield, ‘God’s Providence Over All,’ in Selected Shorter Writings of B. B.Warfield (2 vols; ed. J. E. Meeter; P&R, 2001), 1:110;quoted in Paul Helseth, ‘RightReason’ and the Princeton Mind: An Unorthodox Proposal(P&R, 2010), v

Michael Horton on Calvinism and the 'moral monster' claim

2011-11-18T07:57:00.001-05:00

Does Calvinism Make God a “Moral Monster”?Nov.16, 2011 byMichael Horton

Among the caricatures of Calvinism is the widespread claim that it renders God the author of evil, suffering, sin, and even the fall of humanity itself. In his recent book, Against Calvinism, Roger Olson carefully distinguishes the official teaching of Calvinism from where he thinks it logically leads. However, there are over three dozen statements in his book about Calvinism leading by good and necessary logic to a deity who is a “moral monster,” indistinguishable from the devil.

I respond to this charge directly in my companion volume, For Calvinism. A thoughtful review of my book from an Arminian perspective came to my attention today and this question again rose to the surface. (By the way, Calvinists talk so much about predestination more because of the charges leveled repeatedly against it than because of its alleged centrality.)

If God knew that Adam and Eve were going to transgress his law, why didn’t he change the circumstances so that they would have made a different choice?

Why would God create people he knew would be condemned for their original and actual sin?
The questions multiply.

However, there is one point that is worth pondering briefly: Non-Calvinist theologies are just as vulnerable on this question. Classic Arminian theology shares with Calvinism—indeed with all historic branches of Christianity—that God’s foreknowledge comprehends all future events. There is nothing that happens, nothing that you and I do, that lies outside of God’s eternal foreknowledge.

Now go back and read those questions above. Notice that they don’t refer to predestination, but to mere foreknowledge. They pose a vexing challenge not merely to Calvinists but to anyone who believes that God knows exhaustively and eternally everything that will happen. In other words, everyone who affirms God’s exhaustive foreknowledge has exactly the same problem as any Calvinist. If God knows that Adam will sin—or that you and I will sin—and could keep it from happening, but does not, and God’s knowledge is infallible, then it is just as certain as if he had predestined it. In fact, it is the same as being predestined. Then the only difference is whether it is determined without purpose or with purpose.

Roger Olson states his own view: “God is sovereign in the sense that nothing at all can ever happen that God does not allow” (100). So, if the fall happened, then God allowed it. The fall “was not a part of [God's] will except to reluctantly allow it” (99). OK, but then the fall was in some sense a part of God’s will. Calvinists acknowledge that it was not part of God’s revealed (or moral) will, but that he willingly permitted it as part of his plan. Yet Roger is looking for something in between: God “permits” it, but it is not a “willing permission” (64). Aside from the fact that any act of God in permitting something is already an act of will—a choice, my main point here is that Roger’s weaker claim is still strong enough to get him into the same hot water with the rest of us. Roger agrees that God knows everything that will happen. God even supervises everything that will happen. Nothing escapes his oversight. “I believe, as the Bible teaches and all Christians should believe, that nothing at all can happen without God’s permission” (71).

There is indeed a trail of hyper-Calvinism on the fringes of Augustinian Christianity that turns God’s decree to permit into a decree to accomplish or bring about. There, then: God is the author of sin. Next question? That certainly solves the intellectual riddle. Or, one can untie the knot in the other direction. Some have moved beyond Arminianism into the Socinian view that God doesn’t even know the future actions of free moral agents. Known as “open theism,” this denial of God’s omniscience recognizes that Arminianism and Calvinism are unable to resolve this dilemma. They rightly see that if God foreknows everything from eternity, including our free acts, then these acts are certain to come to pass. Foreknowledge entails predestination, so they reject the classical Christian doctrine of God’s omniscience.

Hyper-Calvinists and hyper-Arminians share the same impatience with mystery. Neither position bows reverently before God’s revelation, acknowledging its clear affirmations of divine sovereignty and human responsibility without answering all of our philosophical questions. Contradictions are abhorrent to the faith, but every important docrine in Scripture is shrouded in mystery. Hyper-Calvinism and hyper-Arminianism are willing even to set Scripture against Scripture, rejecting some clear teachings in favor of others, for the sake of rational satisfaction. Yet both, in different ways, represent deadly errors—indeed, blasphemies—against the character of God.
Happily, the debate between Roger and me is not hyper-Calvinism vs. hyper-Arminianism. The real difference between Calvinism and Arminianism is whether God has a purpose when he allows sin and suffering. Again, both views affirm that nothing happens apart from God’s permission. However, Calvinism teaches that God never allows any evil that he has not already determined to work together for our good (Rom 8:28). Nothing that he allows can terminate in evil. What would we say of a deity who “reluctantly permitted” a terrible disaster or moral tragedy, without a determination to overcome that evil with good? But that takes a plan and that plan must necessarily comprehend the evil that he is to conquer.

Any view that makes God the author of sin does indeed turn the object of our worship into a moral monster. However, any deity who merely stands around reluctantly permitting horrible things for which he has no greater purpose in view, is equally reprehensible. In the one, God is sovereign but not good; in the latter, God is neither. Once you acknowledge that God foreknows a sinful act and chooses to allow it (however reluctantly) when he could have chosen not to, the only consolation is that God never would have allowed it unless he had already determined why he would permit it and how he has decided to overcome it for his glory and our good. Mercifully, Scripture does reveal that God does exactly that. Roger agrees that God “chose to allow” suffering and sin (72). The Calvinist says that God chose to allow them for a reason. It’s permitting rather than creating, but it’s permission with a purpose. Permission without purpose makes God a “moral monster” indeed.

Reformed theology has maintained consistently that Scripture teaches God’s exhaustive sovereignty and human responsibility. God does not cause evil. In fact, God does not force anyone to do anything against his or her will. And yet, nothing lies outside of the wise, loving, good, and just plan “of him who works all things after the council of his own will” (Eph 1:11). That God’s sovereignty and human responsibility are true, no serious student of Scripture can deny. How they can be true is beyond our capacity to understand. As Calvin put the matter, following Luther, any attempt to unravel the mystery of predestination and human responsibilty beyond Scripture is a “seeking outside the way.” “Better to limp along this path,” says Calvin, “than to rush with all speed outside of it.”

You must belong to the local church

2011-11-17T06:15:00.001-05:00

An excerpt from Joe Thorn's book Note To Self:

To be a disciple of Jesus you must belong to and work with, for, and through the local church. You need the strengthening, encouragement, and reproof that only the church can give, and you need the church to be faithful to the command of Jesus. God calls his followers to live in community together, loving, serving, sharing, and discipling one another. The church, for all its faults, is essentially connected to God's mission and our spiritual life. You simply cannot survive spiritually on a weekly worship service, podcasts, and books. You need the community more than you probably realize. You can't make it alone; nor can anyone else.

Benefits of attributing omnipotence to God

2011-11-16T06:21:00.001-05:00

Those who attribute due praise to the omnipotence of God thereby derive a double benefit. He to whom heaven and earth belong, and whose nod all creatures must obey, is fully able to reward the homage which they pay to him, and they can rest secure in the protection of Him to whose control everything that could do them harm is subject, by whose authority, Satan, with all his furies and engines, is curbed as with a bridle, and on whose will everything adverse to our safety depends. In this way, and in no other, can the immoderate and superstitious fears, excited by the dangers to which we are exposed, be calmed or subdued. I say superstitious fears. For such they are, as often as the dangers threatened by any created objects inspire us with such terror, that we tremble as if they had in themselves a power to hurt us, or could hurt at random or by chance; or as if we had not in God a sufficient protection against them.

In this excerpt for The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Calvin puts forward two benefits to those who praise God for and exult in His omnipotence. He indicates that the recognition and resulting regard for the righteous power that resplendently resides in the Ruler of the universe results in two advantages. First, a supremely powerful God has the wherewithal to do good to those who subject themselves to Him. And secondly, superlative safety is within the purview of One to whom all harmful things, of this world or otherwise, are subservient to. God's omnipotence supports His sovereignty. He can back himself up!

Book Review - Work Matters

2011-11-15T05:00:00.000-05:00

"The worst of work nowadays is what happens to people when they cease to work.” This quote by G. K. Chesterton reveals the high regard in which this famous English writer held work. In his enigmatic style, Chesterton somewhat paradoxically praises work and the worker. Tom Nelson, pastor of Christ Community Church in Leawood, Kansas, also holds work in high regard. In his recently released book, Work Matters, Nelson embarks on a journey in which, as the book's subtitle suggests, he tries to connect Sunday worship to Monday work.

Nelson endeavours to explore work both theologically and practically. He wants the reader to perceive the profound honour of work due to its theological foundation as well as help the reader transform how he actually works.Nelson explicates a theology of vocation by considering work in light of the meta-narrative of the Bible; creation, fall, redemption, and restoration.

Simply put, “To be an image-bearer is to be a worker” (22). Nelson maintains that God is a worker, and one of the most important ways we reflect His glory is through our work. We were created for this. However, as a result of sin, work has become difficult, disillusioning, and distorted. “We must recognize that at this point in redemptive history, our work will not be all we want it to be” (47). The futility of work is not the end of this story the author reminds us. Though sin has marred and maimed work, Christ's work of redemption encompasses what we have called 'the daily grind'. Nelson informs us of the positive and negative aspects of the gospel's effects on work. We are encouraged that “as new creations in Christ ... we are again able to do the work we were created for” (58) and yet we are warned that without Christ “your work will never be all that God intended it to be” (61). Finally, the author touches upon a few ideas concerning the afterlife. Our work here on earth will be rewarded. And, writes Nelson, “if our daily work ... in some way carries over to the new heavens and the new earth, then our present work itself is overflowing with immeasurable value and eternal significance” (73).

I found this section of the book very encouraging as I considered my job and the daily work-a-day life that many of us live. These deep theological truths infuse our work with value, significance, and purpose far beyond the accumulation of money. These are the types of teachings which will indeed help us connect worship and work.

Though Nelson never leaves his theological and doctrinal moorings, he moves on to practical implications of the theology he has just demonstrated. Nelson covers topics such as the witness of our work, our sanctification through work, and common grace and our work. He also examines individual work issues such as contentment, calling, giftedness, and growth.

This was a helpful book written convincingly. It offers a solid theological basis for holding work in high regard and helps us see the inseparable connection between our lives as worshipers and our lives as workers. The truths in this book are fodder for continual application of truth from God to our lives as they are lived daily. For and educational and engaging look into vocation and its theology, I recommend this book.

Nelson, Tom. Work Matters: Connecting Sunday Worship with Monday Work. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2011. Print.

Promoting the life of faith through examination

2011-11-14T05:00:00.000-05:00

Another means to be used diligently for the promoting the life of faith is examination of our state and ways according to the Word, whether we be at present

in a state of sin and wrath,

or of grace and salvation;

that, if we be in a state of sin, we may know our sickness and come to the great Physician while it is called today;

and, if we be in a state of grace, we may know that we are of the truth, and assure our hearts before God with greater confidence, by the testimony of a good conscience (1 John 3:19, 21);

that so our hearts may be more strongly comforted by faith and established in every good work;

and that, if our ways be evil, we may turn from them to the Lord our God through Christ; without whom none come to the Father (Lam. 3: 40; John 14:6).

The Gospel Mystery of Sanctification by Walter Marshall

(line breaks mine)

I am of the opinion that we do not examine our 'state and ways' as often as we should. At least, we don't examine ourselves in light of the Word. We either make a lot of assumptions about the state of our heart and actions, or if we do examine ourselves, we use man-made standards instead of God's standards. Both of these routes will lead us into peril. But this should not dissuade us from a serious search of our inner life to see if we 'be in a state of grace' or 'if our ways be evil'.

A Mixed Bag

2011-11-13T06:42:00.001-05:00

In Work Matters, author Tom Nelson brings the following verses from Ecclesiastes to our attention:

So I hated life, because what is done under the sun was grievous to me, for all is vanity and a striving after wind.
I hated all my toil in which I toil under the sun, seeing that I must leave it to the man who will come after me, ... What has a man from all the toil and striving of heart with which he toils beneath the sun? For all his days are full of sorrow, and his work is a vexation. Even in the night his heart does not rest. This also is vanity.
(Ecclesiastes 2:17-18, 22-23 ESV)

Nelson then goes on to comment

The writer of Ecclesiastes reminds us that work in this fallen world is a mixed bag. Work is both a curse and a gift. Work greets us with both frustration and exhilaration. Our work gives evidence of our glorious creation as well as our great estrangement from God and our need for a Savior who will redeem us from sin's devastating curse. (42)

Pre-Piperian Christian Hedonism

2011-11-11T05:24:00.001-05:00

Any of you who are familiar with John Piper likely are aware that he is a proponent of and the key spokesperson for a concept he has termed "Christian hedonism". Briefly, Christian hedonism according to Desiring God-Piper's ministry-is defined and explained in this excerpt:

A "Christian Hedonist" sounds like a contradiction, doesn't it? If the term makes you squirm, we understand. But don't throw this paper away just yet. We're not heretics (really!). Nor have we invented another prosperity-obsessed theology by twisting the Bible to sanctify our greed or lust. We are simply stating an ancient, orthodox, Biblical truth in a fresh way.

"All men seek happiness," says Blaise Pascal. "This is without exception. Whatever different means they employ, they all tend to this end. The cause of some going to war, and of others avoiding it, is the same desire in both, attended with different views. The will never takes the least step but to this object. This is the motive of every action of every man, even of those who hang themselves." We believe Pascal is right. And, with Pascal, we believe God purposefully designed us to pursue happiness.

Does seeking your own happiness sound self-centered? Aren't Christians supposed to seek God, not their own pleasure? To answer this question we need to understand a crucial truth about pleasure-seeking (hedonism): we value most what we delight in most. Pleasure is not God's competitor, idols are. Pleasure is simply a gauge that measures how valuable someone or something is to us. Pleasure is the measure of our treasure.

We know this intuitively. If a friend says to you, "I really enjoy being with you," you wouldn't accuse him of being self-centered. Why? Because your friend's delight in you is the evidence that you have great value in his heart. In fact, you'd be dishonored if he didn't experience any pleasure in your friendship. The same is true of God. If God is the source of our greatest delight then God is our most precious treasure; which makes us radically God-centered and not self-centered. And if we treasure God most, we glorify Him most.

Does the Bible teach this? Yes. Nowhere in the Bible does God condemn people for longing to be happy. People are condemned for forsaking God and seeking their happiness elsewhere (Jeremiah 2:13). This is the essence of sin. The Bible actually commands us to delight in the Lord (Psalm 37:4). Jesus teaches us to love God more than money because our heart is where our treasure is (Matt. 6:21). Paul wants us to believe that gaining Christ is worth the loss of everything else (Phil 3:8) and the author of Hebrews exhorts us to endure suffering, like Jesus, for the joy set before us (Heb. 12: 1-2). Examine the Scriptures and you'll see this over and over again.

Christian Hedonism is not a contradiction after all. It is desiring the vast, ocean-deep pleasures of God more than the mud-puddle pleasures of wealth, power or lust. We're Christian Hedonists because we believe Psalm 16:11, "You show me the path of life; in Your presence there is fullness of joy, in Your right hand are pleasures for evermore."

Join us in this pursuit of satisfaction in God, because God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in him.

With that in mind, I thought I would share a quote from Fyodor Dostoyevsky's novel, The Brothers Karamazov, that hinted at some thoughts of the author that seem to support this idea of Christian hedonism.

If I seem so happy to you, you could never say anything that would please me so much. For men are made for happiness, and any one who is completely happy has a right to say to himself, ‘I am doing God’s will on earth.’ All the righteous, all the saints, all the holy martyrs were happy."

Though perhaps Piper would want to, in our current use of the language, differentiate between joy and happiness, I think Dostoyevsky, speaking through the character Father Zossima, is probably speaking to the same thing. Dostoyevsky's character is recognizing that an enduring quality of the righteous, of the saints, despite sickness and other sufferings, is a profound happiness-or joy-found in God and that this happines should be pursued.

Dostoyevsky on Repentance

2011-11-10T06:15:00.001-05:00

I am enjoying The Bothers Karamazov, considered by many to be Fyodor Dostoyevsky's finest work. I hope to share some of it with you who frequent this blog. I'll start with this excerpt on forgiveness:

"Fear nothing and never be afraid; and don’t fret. If only your penitence fail not, God will forgive all. There is no sin, and there can be no sin on all the earth, which the Lord will not forgive to the truly repentant! Man cannot commit a sin so great as to exhaust the infinite love of God. Can there be a sin which could exceed the love of God? Think only of repentance, continual repentance, but dismiss fear altogether. Believe that God loves you as you cannot conceive; that He loves you with your sin, in your sin. It has been said of old that over one repentant sinner there is more joy in heaven than over ten righteous men. Go, and fear not. Be not bitter against men. Be not angry if you are wronged. Forgive the dead man in your heart what wrong he did you. Be reconciled with him in truth. If you are penitent, you love. And if you love you are of God. All things are atoned for, all things are saved by love. If I, a sinner, even as you are, am tender with you and have pity on you, how much more will God. Love is such a priceless treasure that you can redeem the whole world by it, and expiate not only your own sins but the sins of others."

-spoken by Father Zossima in The Brothers Karamazov

God uses the sun, but needs it not

2011-11-09T06:32:00.000-05:00

No creature has a force more wondrous or glorious than that of the sun. For besides lighting the whole earth with its brightness, how great a thing is it that by its heat it nourishes and quickens all living things! That with its rays it breathes fruitfulness into the earth! That it warms the seeds in the bosom of the earth, draws them forth with budding greenness, increases and strengthens them, nourishes them anew, until they rise up into stalks! That it feeds the plant with continual warmth, until it grows into a flower, and from flower into fruit! That then, also, with baking heat it brings the fruit to maturity! Yet the Lord, to claim the full credit for all these things, willed that, before he created the sun, light should come to be and earth be filled with all manner of herbs and fruits [Gen. 1:3, 11, 14]. Therefore a godly man will not make the sun a principal or necessary cause of these things which existed before the creation of the sun, but merely the instrument that God uses because he so wills; for with no more difficulty he might abandon it, and act through himself. John Calvin, Institutes 1.16.2

A compartmentalized modern life

2011-11-08T06:52:00.001-05:00

So often we think of worship as something we do on Sunday and work as something we do on Monday. However, this dichotomy is not what God designed nor what he desires for our lives. God designed work to have both a vertical and horizontal dimension. We work to the glory of God and for the furtherance of the common good. On Sunday we say we go to worship and on Monday we say we go to work, but our language reveals our foggy theological thinking. That our work has been designed by God to be an act of worship is often missed in the frenzied pace of a compartmentalized modern life. (Nelson, Tom. Work Matters: Connecting Sunday Worship with Monday Work. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2011. Print. 27)

Desperate sinfulness and alone sufficiency

2011-11-07T05:32:00.000-05:00

The most effectual knowledge for your salvation, is, to understand these two points;

the desperate sinfulness and misery of your own natural condition,
and the alone sufficiency of the grace of God in Christ for your salvation;

that you may be abased to the flesh, and exalted in Christ alone.
- Walter Marshall, The Gospel Mystery of Sanctification

It’s (Past) Time for a Charismatic Reformation

2011-11-06T08:34:00.001-05:00

This article appeared at CHARISMANEWS:

In honor of Reformation Day, here are some complaints I’m nailing on the Wittenberg door.
Long before there was an Occupy Wall Street, Martin Luther staged the most important protest in history. He was upset because Roman Catholic officials were promising people forgiveness or early escape from purgatory in exchange for money. So on October 31, 1517, Luther nailed a long list of complaints on the door of a church in Wittenberg, Germany.

Luther’s famous 95 theses were translated from Latin into German and spread abroad. Like a medieval Jeremiah, Luther dared to ask questions that had never been asked, and he challenged a pope who was supposedly infallible. Through this brave monk, the Holy Spirit sparked the Protestant Reformation and restored the doctrine of grace to a church that had become corrupt, religious, dysfunctional, political and spiritually dead.

I am no Luther, but I’ve grown increasingly aware that the so-called “Spirit-filled” church of today struggles with many of the same things the Catholic church faced in the 1500s. We don’t have “indulgences”—we have telethons. We don’t have popes—we have super-apostles. We don’t support an untouchable priesthood—we throw our money at celebrity evangelists who own fleets of private jets.

In honor of Reformation Day, I’m offering my own list of needed reforms in our movement. And since I can’t hammer these on the Wittenberg door, I’ll post them online. Feel free to nail them everywhere.

1. Let’s reform our theology. The Holy Spirit is the third person of the Trinity. He is God and He is holy. He is not an “it.” He is not a blob, a force, or an innate power. We must stop manipulating Him, commanding Him and throwing Him around.
2. Let’s return to the Bible. The Word of God is the foundation for the Christian experience. Any dramatic experience, no matter how spiritual it seems, must be tested by the Word and the Holy Spirit’s discernment. Visions, dreams, prophecies and encounters with angels must be in line with Scripture. If we don’t test them we could end up spreading deception.
3. It’s time for personal responsibility. We charismatics must stop blaming everything on demons. People are usually the problem.
4. Stop playing games. Spiritual warfare is a reality, but we are not going to win the world to Jesus just by shouting at demonic principalities. We must pray, preach and persevere to see ultimate victory.
5. Stop the foolishness. People who hit, slap or push others during prayer should be asked to sit down until they learn gentleness is a fruit of the Holy Spirit.
6. End all spiritual extortion now. Christian television ministries must cease and desist from all manipulative fundraising tactics. We must stop giving platforms to ministers who make outlandish claims of supernatural financial returns, especially when Scripture is twisted, deadlines are imposed and the poor are exploited.
7. No more Lone Rangers. Those who claim to be ministers of God—whether they are traveling evangelists, local pastors or heads of ministries—must be accountable to other leaders. Any who refuse to submit their lives to godly discipline should be corrected.
8. Expose the creeps. Churches should start doing background checks on traveling ministers. Preachers who have been hiding criminal records, lying about their past marriages, preying on women or refusing to pay child support should be exposed as charlatans and shunned if they do not repent.
9. Stop faking the anointing. God is God, and He does not need our “help” to manifest Himself. That means we don’t sprinkle glitter on ourselves to suggest God’s glory is with us, hide fake jewels on the floor to prove we are anointed or pull chicken feathers out of our sleeves to pretend angels are in the room. This is lying to the Holy Spirit.
10. Let’s return to purity. We’ve had enough scandals. The charismatic church must develop a system for the restoration of fallen ministers. Those who fall morally can be restored, but they must be willing to submit to a process of healing rather than rushing immediately back into the pulpit.
11. We need humility. Ministers who demand celebrity treatment, require lavish salaries, insist on titles or exhibit aloofness from others are guilty of spiritual pride.
12. No more big shots. Apostles are the bondslaves of Christ, and should be the most impeccable models of humility. True apostles do not wield top-down, hierarchical authority over the church. They serve the church from the bottom up as true servants.
13. Never promote gifts at the expense of character. Those who operate in prophecy, healing and miracles must also exhibit the fruit of the Spirit. And while we continue to encourage the gift of tongues, let’s make sure we don’t treat it like some kind of badge of superiority. The world needs to see our love, not our glossolalia.
14. Hold the prophets accountable. Those who refuse to take responsibility for inaccurate statements should not be given platforms. And “prophets” who live immoral lives don’t deserve a public voice.
15. Let’s make the main thing the main thing. The purpose of the Holy Spirit’s anointing is to empower us to reach others. We are at a crossroads today: Either we continue off-course, entertained by our charismatic sideshows, or we throw ourselves into evangelism, church planting, missions, discipleship, and compassionate ministry that helps the poor and fights injustice. Churches that embrace this New Reformation will focus on God’s priorities.
J. Lee Grady is contributing editor of Charisma. You can follow him on Twitter at leegrady. He expounds on these topics in his 2010 book The Holy Spirit Is Not for Sale (Chosen).

Swimming in reality for our sanctification

2011-11-04T05:21:00.000-04:00

'Work hard' at Christianity can be a bit misleading as an imperative for sanctification. It really depends what you mean by 'work hard'. Tullian Tchividjian addresses what working out our salvation should look like. In his recently released book Jesus + Nothing = Everything, the author leans heavily on the idea that we have hard work to do in our Christian walk, but this hard work does not consist of trying to get the virtues we don't have, but rather it is the hard work of believing in Christ's work that we are called to. For example,

I’ve said before, I used to think that when the apostle Paul tellsus to work out our salvation, it means go out and get what we don’thave—get more patience, get more strength, get more joy, get morelove, and so on. But after reading the Bible more carefully, I nowunderstand that Christian growth does not happen by working hard toget something we don’t have. Rather, Christian growth happens byworking hard to daily swim in the reality of what we do have.Believing again and again the gospel of God’s free justifying graceevery day—and resting in his verdict—is thehard work we’re called to. (171-2)

Tchividjian, Tullian. Jesus + Nothing = Everything. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2011. Print.

Surprised by Oxford

2011-11-03T07:04:00.001-04:00

My wife recently met the author of Surprised By Oxford who kindly gave her a copy of that same book. I found the endorsements intriguing and began reading the book which quickly heightened my interest. Here is the description of the book to be found at Amazon:

A girl-meets-God style memoir of an agnostic who, through her surprising opportunity to study at Oxford, comes to a dynamic personal faith in God. Carolyn Weber arrives for graduate study at Oxford University a feminist from a loving but dysfunctional family, suspicious of men and intellectually hostile to all things religious. As she grapples with her God-shaped void alongside the friends, classmates, and professors she meets, she tackles big questions in search of love and a life that matters. This savvy, beautifully written, credible account of Christian conversion follows the calendar and events of the school year as it entertains, informs, and promises to engage even the most skeptical and unlikely reader.

I have really enjoyed the book so far. It is with some envy with which I read the descriptions of studying at Oxford and there rises sensations of nostalgia when the author mentions her time spent in London, Ontario and the University of Western Ontario which I share with the author as a hometown and an alma mater.

Perhaps I will blog some more on the book later, but for know, here was an insightful quote:

No individual, by the very state of existence, can avoid life as a form of servitude; it only remains for us to decide, deny, or remain oblivious to, whom or what we serve. (5)

Already in possession

2011-11-02T05:00:00.000-04:00

Becauseof Christ’s finished work,

Christians already possess

the approval,

the love,

the security,

the freedom,

the meaning,

the purpose,

theprotection,

the new beginning,

the cleansing,

the forgiveness,

therighteousness,

and the rescue

we intensely long for and,

in fact,

look for in a thousand things smaller than Jesus every day—thingstransient, things incapable of delivering the goods.

Thegospel is the only thing big enough to satisfy our deepest, eternallongings—both now and forever. (77, line breaks mine)

Tchividjian, Tullian. Jesus + Nothing = Everything. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2011. Print.

The encumberance of entitlement

2011-11-01T06:15:00.000-04:00

Contraryto what I had thought, I did not need easing circumstances, relieffrom difficulty, and distance from pain in order to be free. I waslearning that the freedom Jesus secured for me is not freedom frompain and suffering here and now. Rather, it’s freedom frombitterness, anger, fear, resentment, self-pity, offense, andhopelessness in the crucible of present pain and suffering; it isfreedom from my burdensome sense of “I deserve better,” theencumbrance of entitlement. I was realizing that only the gospel canfree us from the enslaving pressure to defend ourselves. That’sreal freedom—God-sized freedom! (76)

It is funny what we often think is freedom in reality is just more bondage and servitude. Recently, while sharing a feast of fellowship and food with friends, we had a brief discussion of a concept and strategy of investment referred to as "Freedom 55". We mused that this might better be labelled "Servitude 67" and none of us knew of any 55 year old enjoying their retirement. The race for riches-no different than the sprint for success or the marathon for money-is ultimately unsatisfying and results in our hearts being imprisoned; this is not freedom. True freedom only comes from the gospel, the cross, the Redeemer.

Tchividjian, Tullian. Jesus + Nothing = Everything. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2011. Print.

Tullian on Colossians

2011-10-31T05:54:00.000-04:00

Tullian on Colossians from Jesus + Nothing = Everything:

Pauldoesn’t teach doctrines in Colossians that we can’t also find inhis other letters. What’s special about Colossians is not itsdoctrine; what’s special about it is its dimensions. Paul’sstatements in Colossians about Christ are truly colossal—sweepingand immense, soaring beyond the boundaries of our understanding.

Aswe’ll see, this letter also has huge things to say about our sinand even larger things to say about the gospel and what itaccomplishes. In Colossians, Paul is writing to show that Jesus isbig, our sin is big, the gospel is big, God’s grace is big, and ourrescue is big. There’s nothing small at all about the truths thisbook communicates. And the epitome, the crowning point of all thisvastness, is the incalculable greatness of Jesus Christ himself. (63)

What should I look for in a local church?

2011-10-30T14:41:00.001-04:00

Mark Dever explains some of the most basic components of a healthy church.

Love Jesus? Love the church!

2011-10-29T15:49:00.001-04:00

Mark Dever explains why those who love Jesus must also love the church.

How the New Testament Describes Salvation

2011-10-28T05:28:00.001-04:00

Here is a feast for your heart and mind's consumption:

Justification – the lawcourt metaphor (Rom 5:1; Titus 3:7)
Sanctification – the cultus metaphor (1 Cor 1:2;1 Thess 4:3)
Adoption – the familial metaphor (Rom 8:15; 1 John3:1–2)
Reconciliation – the relational metaphor (Rom5:1–11; 2 Cor5:18–20)
Washing – the physical cleansing metaphor (1 Cor 6:11;Titus 3:7)
Redemption – the slave market metaphor (Eph 1:7; Rev14:3–4)
Purchase – the financial transaction metaphor (1 Cor 6:20;2 Pet 2:1)
Wedding – the marriage metaphor (Eph5:31-32; Rev 21:2)
Liberation – the imprisonment metaphor (Gal 5:1; Rev 1:5)
New Birth – the physical generation metaphor (John3:3–7; 1 Pet 1:3,23)
Illumination – the light metaphor (John12:35–36; 2 Cor4:4–6)
New Creation – the redemptive-historical metaphor(2 Cor 5:17;Gal 6:15)
Resurrection – the bodily metaphor (Eph 2:6; Col 3:1)
Union with Christ – the organic or spatial metaphor(Rom6:1–14; 2 Tim 1:9)

Inexhaustible richness. Luther was right—

If a person is without warmth about matters pertainingto God and salvation, as the common man does, then the devil merelylaughs. But if your words are aglow in your heart, you will put thedevil to flight. (LW22:357)

Thanks to Dane Ortlund for this!

The Oak Log

Irreconciable War

Implications of Psalm 110:1 on the ascension

Prepare your minds

Condescension according to Scott Oliphint

Substitute and representative

Christian Math

Lloyd-Jones on the quest for truth

Lloyd-Jones and Spurgeon on the offense of the cross

The wrath of God according to D. M. Lloyd-Jones

The Word of God a hidden mystery

Lloyd-Jones on the first thing to say about sin

When did God first condescend?

A multidirectional cross

Justification viewed negatively and positively

Forgiveness Plus

The Gospels

Oliphint on God's Immutability

How do we behold the glory of Christ?

Time Well Spent

When Your Preacher Isn't John Piper

Five Suggestions

Reading Comprehension and Sharing Information

Christian Hedonism TULIP

Pharoah's Heart

2011 Reading List

Tweeting Through a Book

Piper on Chesterton from the Desiring God Blog

Common Ground (“Elfland”)

Not the Same Calvinism

The Calvinism that Grows in “Elfland”

What About Logic?

From Dilemma to Unicorn

Writing in a Book – Special Case - Borrowed Books

A few predictions for 2012

Of Resolutions and Gopel

Writing in a Book - How

Writing in a Book

Book Review - Die Young

How Candy Canes are made!

Donne, Piper, and Oliphint on Immensity

A strange cultural moment of sleeping, gaudy unremembrance

Mediation through Incarnation

Keep drinking the coffee!

Coffee racks up points as a cancer killer

Top Reads of 2011 - The Delightful Dozen

Squared circles

First Official Trailer for The Hobbit

Book Review - God With Us

Aaron Armstrong's thoughts on the Kindle

Christopher Hitchens is dead

Christian liberty

Aaron Armstrong's Top Books for 2011

The simplicity of God

More top ten list from Between Two Worlds

The Wexford Carol

From Kevin DeYoung

Top Ten Books of 2011

Why doesn't God heal?

Fascinating!

No tweaking please!

Schaeffer on those who have not heard

Desiring truth yet unable to find it

Hard work of building theology

The stability of the covenant

Temptation par excellence

The quintessential revelation of God

A proper perspective on providence

Great article by Rex Murphy

Rex Murphy: What the tolerant must tolerate

Black Friday Book Deals

Five questions for self-examination

Grotesque

Love smote

What are we looking for in a job?

All ways are Thine

Warfield via Ortlund on suffering

Michael Horton on Calvinism and the 'moral monster' claim

You must belong to the local church

Benefits of attributing omnipotence to God