Friday, May 30, 2008
This Week in Calvinism - May 30, 2008
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Does Romans 11 Teach a Future Salvation for National Israel?
Dispensationalists believe that Romans 11:25-27 teaches a future salvation for national Israel:
Indeed, salvation was and is a present reality for both Jew and Gentile. In fact, Paul goes so far as to erase the distinction between the two in Galatians 3:28: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus."
So, no, Romans 11 does not teach a future salvation for national Israel. There was, is, and always will be one chosen people: the true Israel, the seed of Abraham, the elect, the bride of Christ.
- Lest you be wise in your own sight, I want you to understand this mystery, brothers: a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And in this way all Israel will be saved, as it is written,
"The Deliverer will come from Zion,
he will banish ungodliness from Jacob";
"and this will be my covenant with them
when I take away their sins."
- For just as you [Gentiles] were at one time disobedient to God but now have received mercy because of their disobedience, so they too have now been disobedient in order that by the mercy shown to you they also may now receive mercy. For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all.
Indeed, salvation was and is a present reality for both Jew and Gentile. In fact, Paul goes so far as to erase the distinction between the two in Galatians 3:28: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus."
So, no, Romans 11 does not teach a future salvation for national Israel. There was, is, and always will be one chosen people: the true Israel, the seed of Abraham, the elect, the bride of Christ.
Monday, May 26, 2008
Six Ways to Hinder Your Prayers
As presented by Tim Challies:
- Selfish motives
- Turning away from scripture
- Unforgiving heart
- Family discord
- Unconfessed sin
- Doubt
Friday, May 23, 2008
This Week in Calvinism - May 23, 2008
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Still a Tough Question for Arminians
I posted a variation of this last year. However, in light of recent comments from an Arminian brother, I thought it was time for a slight modification.
Imagine the following: A father allows his two-year-old son to go outside to play knowing full well that their house is next to a lake. He also knows that his son has a habit of not listening when told to stay away from the water. Still, this father doesn't want to be the kind of parent that smothers his kid. The little rascal will have to grow up sometime, so he is given great freedom to make his own choices.
Sure enough, as soon as he sets foot outside, the boy heads straight for the water. His father sees this, but does nothing. He just stares out the window and watches. The child steps onto the dock, and still the father looks on.
It isn't until the boy slips and falls into the water that the father rushes to the rescue. But he doesn't jump in after him. He takes a life preserver from the boat that's tied to the dock and tosses it to his son. "Grab it!" he shouts. The boy continues to splash and scream for help. "Grab the life jacket, son! It's all up to you. If you want to be saved, just reach out and take it."
Eventually, the young boy ceases to struggle and sinks below the surface. The life jacket floats where the father threw it. "Son!" he cries. "Can't you hear me? All you have to do is hold on and I can pull you in." No response. The father turns and heads back to the house. Words cannot describe the sadness he feels, but there just wasn't anything he could do. He offered life, but his offer was rejected, and that ultimate act of disobedience resulted in his child's death.
Now, if that really happened, there isn't a single court in the country that would let the father off the hook. At the very least, he would be found criminally negligent for his son's death. But in the minds of most people, the father would be just as guilty as if he had pushed his son into the water in the first place.
Here's the question I have for you Arminians: If a sovereign, loving, all-powerful, all-knowing God, who neither ordains nor causes bad things to happen but allows them to happen according to his permissive will, creates mankind with the foreknowledge that every human will fall into sin, then how could such a God escape responsibility for the pain and suffering of his creatures, much less the eternal damnation of those who don't respond to his free offer of salvation?
I submit that you cannot answer that question without abandoning your own Arminian worldview. You cannot answer it without resorting to the same theological gymnastics you accuse Calvinists of performing. And you certainly cannot answer it if you have a problem conceiving of a truly sovereign God who works all things for his ultimate glory.
Imagine the following: A father allows his two-year-old son to go outside to play knowing full well that their house is next to a lake. He also knows that his son has a habit of not listening when told to stay away from the water. Still, this father doesn't want to be the kind of parent that smothers his kid. The little rascal will have to grow up sometime, so he is given great freedom to make his own choices.
Sure enough, as soon as he sets foot outside, the boy heads straight for the water. His father sees this, but does nothing. He just stares out the window and watches. The child steps onto the dock, and still the father looks on.
It isn't until the boy slips and falls into the water that the father rushes to the rescue. But he doesn't jump in after him. He takes a life preserver from the boat that's tied to the dock and tosses it to his son. "Grab it!" he shouts. The boy continues to splash and scream for help. "Grab the life jacket, son! It's all up to you. If you want to be saved, just reach out and take it."
Eventually, the young boy ceases to struggle and sinks below the surface. The life jacket floats where the father threw it. "Son!" he cries. "Can't you hear me? All you have to do is hold on and I can pull you in." No response. The father turns and heads back to the house. Words cannot describe the sadness he feels, but there just wasn't anything he could do. He offered life, but his offer was rejected, and that ultimate act of disobedience resulted in his child's death.
Now, if that really happened, there isn't a single court in the country that would let the father off the hook. At the very least, he would be found criminally negligent for his son's death. But in the minds of most people, the father would be just as guilty as if he had pushed his son into the water in the first place.
Here's the question I have for you Arminians: If a sovereign, loving, all-powerful, all-knowing God, who neither ordains nor causes bad things to happen but allows them to happen according to his permissive will, creates mankind with the foreknowledge that every human will fall into sin, then how could such a God escape responsibility for the pain and suffering of his creatures, much less the eternal damnation of those who don't respond to his free offer of salvation?
I submit that you cannot answer that question without abandoning your own Arminian worldview. You cannot answer it without resorting to the same theological gymnastics you accuse Calvinists of performing. And you certainly cannot answer it if you have a problem conceiving of a truly sovereign God who works all things for his ultimate glory.
Meet John McCain's Spiritual Guide
Even if John McCain didn't make a mockery of the Constitution and virtually every other principle of liberty upon which this nation was founded, the fact that he has cozied up to this state-worshiping, warmongering pastor would be enough to convince me not to vote for the guy:
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
What Is an "Alternative Worship Experience"?
I don't know, but it probably looks something like this:
And you know what? I'm fine with that. I have no problem with churches offering opportunities for people to worship in a more relaxed atmosphere, to engage in group discussions, or for the pastor to address practical day-to-day issues in a Q&A format.
I do, however, have a problem when churches begin marketing things like this as an alternative to "normal" church. To me, it seems like an Emergent, seeker-sensitive ploy to entice the unchurched masses through the doors by supplanting expositional teaching and a strong focus on the gospel with cool music and flashy video presentations.
And you know what? I'm fine with that. I have no problem with churches offering opportunities for people to worship in a more relaxed atmosphere, to engage in group discussions, or for the pastor to address practical day-to-day issues in a Q&A format.
I do, however, have a problem when churches begin marketing things like this as an alternative to "normal" church. To me, it seems like an Emergent, seeker-sensitive ploy to entice the unchurched masses through the doors by supplanting expositional teaching and a strong focus on the gospel with cool music and flashy video presentations.
Friday, May 16, 2008
This Week in Calvinism - May 16, 2008
Monday, May 12, 2008
Are Christians Today Commanded to "Be Fruitful and Multiply"?
Adam and Eve were commanded to "be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth" (Genesis 1:28). Noah and his sons were commanded to "be fruitful and multiply" (Genesis 9:1). Jacob was commanded to "be fruitful and multiply" (Genesis 35:11). And Christians today are commanded to "be fruitful and multiply."
Or are they?
We learn from scripture that Adam and Eve, Noah, and Jacob all obeyed God's command. They were very fruitful and multiplied greatly. But does this apply to all believers?
The reason I bring this up is because there are those who will tell you that command is just as valid today as it was in the Old Testament. In fact, that is precisely why some Christians condemn all forms of birth control and try to have as many kids as possible.
My wife and I have no biological children. After two failed pregnancies, we decided to grow our family through adoption and are currently in the process of adopting three kids. But if we are indeed commanded to be fruitful and multiply, can our actions be considered obedient? After all, we weren't all that fruitful, and the method by which we are adding to our family won't contribute to our other obligation to "fill the earth," which was why God gave the command in the first place.
What do you think? Are Christians today commanded to be fruitful and multiply, or was that a specific command given to specific people at a specific time for a specific purpose?
While you ponder that, think about this: The Apostle Paul said that it was good for some to remain single as he was (1 Corinthians 7:8). Surely he must have been aware of what God had commanded, so how then could he teach singleness as a virtue?
In fact, we are commanded to be fruitful and multiply. Christ himself gave that command when he told his followers to "make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 28:19). Yes, children are a tremendous blessing, "a heritage from the Lord" (Psalm 127:3), but one could argue that the Old Testament command was merely a prelude to the Great Commission, for it is through the gospel that Christians today exercise dominion, subdue the earth, and grow God's Kingdom.
If that's the case, then I think every believer -- those with biological children, those who adopt, those without children, as well as single men and women -- can be obedient.
Or are they?
We learn from scripture that Adam and Eve, Noah, and Jacob all obeyed God's command. They were very fruitful and multiplied greatly. But does this apply to all believers?
The reason I bring this up is because there are those who will tell you that command is just as valid today as it was in the Old Testament. In fact, that is precisely why some Christians condemn all forms of birth control and try to have as many kids as possible.
My wife and I have no biological children. After two failed pregnancies, we decided to grow our family through adoption and are currently in the process of adopting three kids. But if we are indeed commanded to be fruitful and multiply, can our actions be considered obedient? After all, we weren't all that fruitful, and the method by which we are adding to our family won't contribute to our other obligation to "fill the earth," which was why God gave the command in the first place.
What do you think? Are Christians today commanded to be fruitful and multiply, or was that a specific command given to specific people at a specific time for a specific purpose?
While you ponder that, think about this: The Apostle Paul said that it was good for some to remain single as he was (1 Corinthians 7:8). Surely he must have been aware of what God had commanded, so how then could he teach singleness as a virtue?
In fact, we are commanded to be fruitful and multiply. Christ himself gave that command when he told his followers to "make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 28:19). Yes, children are a tremendous blessing, "a heritage from the Lord" (Psalm 127:3), but one could argue that the Old Testament command was merely a prelude to the Great Commission, for it is through the gospel that Christians today exercise dominion, subdue the earth, and grow God's Kingdom.
If that's the case, then I think every believer -- those with biological children, those who adopt, those without children, as well as single men and women -- can be obedient.
Friday, May 09, 2008
This Week in Calvinism - May 9, 2008
Thursday, May 08, 2008
A Multi-Ethnic Body
Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton politicize race. Jeremiah Wright offers up a race-based theology. Creflo Dollar and T.D. Jakes promote a prosperity gospel. It is sad to see African-American Christians stereotyped by these so-called "leaders" in the black community. What's even sadder is that believers end up divided along ethnic lines.
Thankfully, there are ministries that are reaching out and bringing healing to the body of Christ:
Thankfully, there are ministries that are reaching out and bringing healing to the body of Christ:
Wednesday, May 07, 2008
Our Innate Understanding of Human Nature
When we first decided to adopt from Haiti, we were told that many people there had a fear that rich foreigners might be adopting in order to use Haitian children as organ donors. We found this hard to believe. How could anyone think such a thing? Sure, we have heard of couples getting pregnant for the sole purpose of using their new baby as an organ or tissue donor, but adoption is a long, expensive ordeal. Even if someone was willing to spend the money, it didn't make sense that someone in need of a transplant would bother going through a process that requires a huge amount of paperwork, a thorough background check, a psychological evaluation, and a full medical screening, not to mention a one-and-a-half to two-year wait before the adoption is finalized. Silly, right?
Well, that's what I thought until I ran across MedicalAdoptions.com. Take a look at it for a moment. You can easily see how something like that could get wild rumors started in an impoverished, superstitious Third World country.
Admit it. You were appalled at first. But if you bothered to poke around the site for a bit, you quickly discovered that it is a hoax -- a crude one, yes, but a hoax nonetheless. It does, however, draw attention to the fact that children all over the world are objectified and treated as disposable commodities all the time. (Ever hear of embryonic stem cell research?)
Actually, it really shouldn't surprise us at all that some people would see a site like MedicalAdoptions.com and think it's legitimate. Ryan W. McMaken, blogging at LewRockwell.com, made an excellent observation: "Some people see right through the hoaxes immediately, but many are outraged and quite credulous. In the end, the fact that people are willing to believe, even momentarily, that the proposal in question is being seriously put forward, is an excellent commentary on humanity's opinion of itself."
We have known the difference between right and wrong ever since Adam and Eve ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. It's not that we are oblivious to God, it's that we actively rebel against God. The Bible merely confirms the fact that "the intention of man's heart is evil from his youth" (Genesis 8:21).
The truth is, most of us have an innate understanding of human nature. We know exactly how depraved we can be. Those who say that people are essentially good at heart are only lying to themselves. They know better.
Well, that's what I thought until I ran across MedicalAdoptions.com. Take a look at it for a moment. You can easily see how something like that could get wild rumors started in an impoverished, superstitious Third World country.
Admit it. You were appalled at first. But if you bothered to poke around the site for a bit, you quickly discovered that it is a hoax -- a crude one, yes, but a hoax nonetheless. It does, however, draw attention to the fact that children all over the world are objectified and treated as disposable commodities all the time. (Ever hear of embryonic stem cell research?)
Actually, it really shouldn't surprise us at all that some people would see a site like MedicalAdoptions.com and think it's legitimate. Ryan W. McMaken, blogging at LewRockwell.com, made an excellent observation: "Some people see right through the hoaxes immediately, but many are outraged and quite credulous. In the end, the fact that people are willing to believe, even momentarily, that the proposal in question is being seriously put forward, is an excellent commentary on humanity's opinion of itself."
We have known the difference between right and wrong ever since Adam and Eve ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. It's not that we are oblivious to God, it's that we actively rebel against God. The Bible merely confirms the fact that "the intention of man's heart is evil from his youth" (Genesis 8:21).
The truth is, most of us have an innate understanding of human nature. We know exactly how depraved we can be. Those who say that people are essentially good at heart are only lying to themselves. They know better.
Friday, May 02, 2008
Truly Together for the Gospel
"The basis for human identity," said Rev. Thabiti Anyabwile at the Together for the Gospel conference a few weeks ago, "is our unity in Adam as his biological descendants and God's image-bearers." Here is a brief clip from that session:
There are a couple of reasons why I think it is so important and timely. One is that it comes in the wake of the Jeremiah Wright fiasco. (By the way, Thabiti Anyabwile has some excellent things to say about that on his blog.) It's clear there are still a lot of misconceptions about race, and in spite all of the advances we are supposed to have made, race is still used as a weapon to divide people and stir up hatred.
Another reason I think it's important is that my wife and I have been called to grow our family through international adoption. We are currently in the process of adopting a little girl from China and a brother and sister from Haiti. As you can imagine, we anticipate certain challenges to arise.
But, praise God, we are blessed to be part of a much larger and diverse family, one that is founded on divine adoption and encompasses every nation, tribe, and tongue. No matter what our skin color, we all bear the image of God, and to allow discrimination and division to creep in would be an insult to the gospel.
There are a couple of reasons why I think it is so important and timely. One is that it comes in the wake of the Jeremiah Wright fiasco. (By the way, Thabiti Anyabwile has some excellent things to say about that on his blog.) It's clear there are still a lot of misconceptions about race, and in spite all of the advances we are supposed to have made, race is still used as a weapon to divide people and stir up hatred.
Another reason I think it's important is that my wife and I have been called to grow our family through international adoption. We are currently in the process of adopting a little girl from China and a brother and sister from Haiti. As you can imagine, we anticipate certain challenges to arise.
But, praise God, we are blessed to be part of a much larger and diverse family, one that is founded on divine adoption and encompasses every nation, tribe, and tongue. No matter what our skin color, we all bear the image of God, and to allow discrimination and division to creep in would be an insult to the gospel.
This Week in Calvinism - May 2, 2008
Thursday, May 01, 2008
Scripture for Busy Guys Who Don't Have Time to Read
This is real. It is not a spoof:
Listen. I'm as open to new ideas as the next guy, but I just don't see how this is of any real use to believers. Are we guys really so thick-headed that scripture has to be dumbed down this much?
NCV [New Century Version] Align: The Complete New Testament for Men
Product Description
Now delving into the depths of New Testament teachings is as easy as enjoying your favorite magazine! This "Biblezine" is brimming with practical insights to apply your faith to everyday life. Easy-reading NCV text Relevant articles on health, relationships, money, family, and more.
Customer Reviews
***** Reviewed by Natasha Clay (Irvine, CA), December 20, 2007
I love this format. The modern day man can take it to work, the doctors office wherever he goes. This will allow the man that doesn't normally find himself reading the bible consistently, to give him a practical way to incorporate God's word into their daily routine.
Listen. I'm as open to new ideas as the next guy, but I just don't see how this is of any real use to believers. Are we guys really so thick-headed that scripture has to be dumbed down this much?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)