Alistair at 40 Bicyles has posted some excellent links in the last 6 months or so on N.T. Wright, including some audio from Wright’s participation in Radio Talk Shows in England. Beyond that, Alistair has provided numerous helpful articles on The Sacraments. For anyone interested in great links and tremendously insightful articles on the sacraments, check out 40 Bicycles. Thanks Alistair. Keep up the good work!
The Problem with “Plain Sense” – by Dennis Bratcher
A question I often hear in Sunday School classes or in discussions about the meaning of Scripture is: Why can’t we just take the Bible for what it says, at face value, “literally”? If what it says makes plain sense, can’t we assume we have the truth? See the rest of the article
Chalk Another One Up For The Pro-Aborts:
Covenantnews.com – WASHINGTON — Attorney General-nominee Alberto Gonzales, under scorching criticism from senators, condemned torture as an interrogation tactic Thursday and promised to prosecute abusers of terror suspects. He also disclosed the White House was looking at trying to change the Geneva Conventions that protect prisoner rights.
Pressed at his confirmation hearing by senators from both parties, the White House counsel defended his advice to President Bush that the treaty’s protections did not extend to al-Qaida and other suspected terrorists. Read the rest of the story…
Links to Different Theological Perspectives on the TSUNAMI by N.T. Wright, John Piper, and Rowan Williams
Subtle Unorthodoxy
In our time, knowledge of the incarnate Christ can become very perplexing. Some who have been faithful church attendees for years still lack true orthodox understanding of who Christ is. I have been exposed to Gnosticism, tri-theism, bi-nitarianism and other forms of heresy in a church setting.
Beyond all these, I would like to mention briefly one that is fairly subtle. This is concerning the eternality of the logos (the word). The 4th century Creed of the church, the Nicene Creed, deals briefly with the matter of the incarnation when it says: … “came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the Virgin Mary, and was made man…” The Creed implicitly denies any variation on the status of the Logos prior to his incarnation. It “was made man!” When? When He came down from heaven.
James White makes this point clear when he states in the Forgotten Trinity that, “The Logos was not eternally flesh. He existed in a non-fleshly manner in eternity past. But at a blessed point in time, at the Incarnation, the Logos became flesh. The eternal experienced time (p.59).” The Apostle Paul establishes a starting point for that event when he says: ” But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of a woman, born under the law (Gal. 4:4 ESV).” Here Paul reiterates what he taught in Philippians 2 regarding the estate of the incarnated Christ. The flesh of the Son composes his hypostatic union. Indeed, we can say that the Son did not always possess two natures, but only when the fullness of time arrived did humanity become an essential part of who Jesus was and is and ever shall be.
In order to understand Christ we must realize that fleshness is a necessary requirement for his earthly mission. It was not needed prior to his entrance into the cosmos. This knowledge will keep us from falling into the subtleties of unorthodoxy.
Ligonier Ministries has a new President
Information taken from Ligonier Ministries Website
R.C. Sproul Appoints New President
Orlando, Fla., November 22, 2004 – Dr. R.C. Sproul, founder and chairman of Ligonier Ministries, a Christian educational ministry located in Orlando, Florida, has appointed Mr. Timothy A. Dick to succeed him as president of Ligonier Ministries effective immediately.
“I am proud and excited to announce that Tim Dick has been promoted from executive vice president to president of Ligonier Ministries. This move frees me from administrative responsibilities so I can devote my time to teaching and preaching,” said Dr. Sproul. “Tim knows all aspects of the ministry and has done a superb job of running the day-to-day operation for the past few years. The board and I have total confidence in his ability and his devotion to the mission of Ligonier Ministries.”
Dr. Sproul founded Ligonier Ministries in 1971 and will continue to serve as chairman of the board of directors. In addition to his teaching and preaching responsibilities both at his church and at conferences, Dr. Sproul will continue writing. He is currently working on a commentary to The Westminster Confession of Faith and a curriculum plan to help develop future church leaders.
“As I accept the responsibilities of President of Ligonier Ministries, I am humbled by the trust and encouragement the board of directors and Dr. Sproul have given me,” said Mr. Dick. “I am grateful for the opportunity to carry forward the vision of Dr. Sproul and Ligonier Ministries. Having led a restructuring effort of Ligonier Ministries over the past four years, I believe this will propel us into a future of promise as God continues to richly bless this ministry.”
Under Mr. Dick’s leadership as executive vice president for the past four years, the organization was restructured and the ministry’s financial position improved significantly. Also during that time, Mr. Dick has overseen the expansion of the ministry, which includes the recent acquisition of Soli Deo Gloria Ministries and a new product development cycle that will further underscore its commitment to serve the local church with excellent Christian educational resources.
As president, Mr. Dick plans to continue with the expansion of international translations, radio broadcasts, and the placement of strategic global distribution centers in Latin, Central and South America, Germany, and the Ukraine. “What we do is necessary for a dying world and Ligonier has the most sound and largest collection of classical Christian education materials in the world,” said Mr. Dick. “The ability to lead the ministry is a great privilege, and I believe we have many more years of exciting growth ahead.”
Prior to working at Ligonier, Mr. Dick was a technical recruiter for eleven years with his own company, the R.K. Michaels Corporation, a specialized executive search firm working in the plastics and molding industry. He holds a B.A. in Business Administration from Saint Vincent College in Latrobe, Pennsylvania.
Mr. Dick and his wife, Sherrie, have been married for 25 years and have three children, Kaki (Kelly), Ryan, and Michael. Sherrie, Kaki, and Ryan all currently work at Ligonier Ministries in various departments. The Dick family lives in Longwood, Fla.
What do you believe that you can’t prove?
As a Trinitarian Christian, apart from special revelation, I cannot prove the existence of a Triune God who revealed himself as a man who is both deity and humanity (commonly known as hypostatic union). I am not saying that God as the supreme Being and designer cannot be proven (as Anthony Flew discovered), but what I do affirm is that the God revealed in Scriptures cannot be proven. He cannot be identified through empirical data alone. Though matters of archeology, sense perception, law of causality and so on can lead us to a proper understanding of general revelation, Scriptures alone can draw us to what is not known through these methods.
This morning the New York Times had a fascinating analysis of what current thought is in the world of physics, biology, psychology and so on. This is how the question was posed: What do you believe is true even though you cannot prove it?”This was the question posed to scientists, futurists and other creative thinkers by John Brockman, a literary agent and publisher of The Edge, a Web site devoted to science. The site asks a new question at the end of each year. Here are two excerpts from the responses, to be posted Tuesday at www.edge.org.
Professor David Meyers, Psychologist, Hope College; author, “Intuition”answers the same question saying the following: As a Christian monotheist, I start with two unproven axioms:
1. There is a God.
2. It’s not me (and it’s also not you).
Together, these axioms imply my surest conviction: that some of my beliefs (and yours) contain error. We are, from dust to dust, finite and fallible. We have dignity but not deity.
And that is why I further believe that we should
a) hold all our unproven beliefs with a certain tentativeness (except for this one!),
b) assess others’ ideas with open-minded skepticism, and
c) freely pursue truth aided by observation and experiment.
Richard Dawkins
Evolutionary biologist, Oxford University; author, “The Ancestor’s Tale”
I believe, but I cannot prove, that all life, all intelligence, all creativity and all “design” anywhere in the universe, is the direct or indirect product of Darwinian natural selection. It follows that design comes late in the universe, after a period of Darwinian evolution. Design cannot precede evolution and therefore cannot underlie the universe.
Philip Zimbardo
Psychologist, emeritus professor, Stanford; author, “Shyness”
I believe that the prison guards at the Abu Ghraib Prison in Iraq, who worked the night shift in Tier 1A, where prisoners were physically and psychologically abused, had surrendered their free will and personal responsibility during these episodes of mayhem.
But I could not prove it in a court of law. These eight Army reservists were trapped in a unique situation in which the behavioral context came to dominate individual dispositions, values and morality to such an extent that they were transformed into mindless actors alienated from their normal sense of personal accountability for their actions – at that time and place.
See www.edge.org. for more quotes.
Prophets of Catastrophes and the Bishop of Canterbury
The New York Times had an article on the “blog wars” over the Tsunami disaster, which has now taken over 150,000 lives and expecting to recover perhaps double that number. The blog wars center on the reasons for the earthquake. Some in the D.U. (Democratic Underground) blogs even blamed the war in Iraq for the disaster. “Well, America is using tons of bombs over there and you can expect something of that nature to occur when our world is continually being bombed.” I don’t think I need to make any intelligent observations on this comment. But my main concern today is over the many prophetic voices rising up in the evangelical community with the last voice on the matter. As if they were saying: “See, I told you so!”
Several days ago I posted a few comments on biblical sobriety in times of disasters. It seems sobriety is almost impossible in these times. Christians are claiming divers’ visions and warning the community that Christ will return at any moment. As I bluntly told a friend of mine recently, when you find one Christian having visions about earthquakes and catastrophes, you will find another religious man making similar claim. Well, at least here is one proof of that from the New York Times’ article:
Norodom Sihanouk, the former king of Cambodia, posted a message in French to his Web site, www.norodomsihanouk.info, saying that an astrologer had warned him that an “ultra-catastrophic cataclysm” would strike the region, but Cambodia would be undamaged if the proper rituals were observed. King Sihanouk said that the thousands of dollars he spent on the ceremonies protected his nation from the disaster, and that he would donate $15,000 to disaster relief.
This morning on the Pat Campbell show (a Florida radio program) I first heard of the Bishop of Canterbury Rowan William’s remarks. He said that the: “The tsunami disaster in Asia begs the question why we believe in God, The Archbishop of Canterbury, head of the worldwide Anglican church, admitted.” He goes on to say that: “The question: ‘How can you believe in a God who permits suffering on this scale?’ is therefore very much around the moment, and it would be surprising if it weren’t, indeed, it would be wrong if it weren’t.” Though many who called in the program gave foolish answers such as “God had nothing to do with this,” others were helpful in observing that the way one views God will in essence answer the problem of evil that the Archbishop raises.
Gary Demar wrote a few days ago that this is not the biggest earthquake in history. In fact, earthquakes were occurring even in the first century. I will not attempt to give my explanation of theodicy since philosophers have already covered that sphere. However, I will make at least two bold comments that may spark some reaction. The first comment is that only a Calvinistic worldview can answer these questions adequately. Only a “sovereignty view” of life can enable Christians to see this tragedy as a reminder from God that He is still in control of the cosmos. Calvinism alone can explain that these events are not the product of chance or man-caused accidents, but they come directly from God’s supreme power over creation. Secondly, as covenant-breakers throughout history have been cursed by God, covenant breakers today will be cursed as well. In Thailand where child prostitution is the trademark of that nation; in Indonesia where most terrorists find refuge; I think these are a few of many reasons why God would cause such destruction.
For the record, has any one noticed yet that animals were largely spared from these disasters?
As a committed Christian Reformed student, I believe wholeheartedly that God acted purposefully in this dreadful event a week ago.
How do Christians suffer?
In worship this morning my elder posed a fascinating question; a question that is easily answered, but little thought of: Would you like to be like Jesus? Certainly one would reply without hesitation that this question must be answered affirmatively. However, we never stop to consider the path that Jesus chose. If we are to subscribe to a Biblical worldview then we must embrace the life of Christ. Christ’s mission was to suffer in a unique way. In fact, we read the text to say that Christ chose a path of suffering. This reality is portrayed in several passages such as Acts 14:22, Galatians 3:17, Philippians 3:10, Romans 8:19 and so on. The point of these passages is to pose the life of belief as a life of struggles. But at this point it is important to understand that the sufferings of our Lord are not to be compared to the suffering of His people. Though persecution, mockery, and wordly abuse may be part of our earthly ministry, it may not be. It is essential that we realize as Christ’s followers that suffering per se is not defined merely as a form of torture as the kind experienced in war camps, rather to suffer also entails familial animosity (as in mother being against daughter), a spiritual battle with sin, a struggle to excel in all of life for the glory of God though the whole world finds themselves pleased with mediocrity.
The form of suffering endured by our Lord was unique. It was once and for all, as the writer of Hebrews puts it. Though He was persecuted, abandoned, and condemned on our behalf, the suffering we are called to endure is a different calling or as Paul puts it a “gift from God” (Phil.1:29). It is a suffering that pales in comparison to our Lord’s, but it is a form of suffering nevertheless. The God-man had to dress himself in human flesh and suffer so that our suffering would not be as His.
First century ascetic theology taught that only martyrdom would be the ultimate form of suffering. According to some teachers in the early church, martyrdom was the way to free the body in order to truly be like Christ. We dare not err as they did. We dare not suffer as our Lord for His suffering was a holy suffering. Our suffering is a life of self-denial that places others before ourselves, that loves enemies, and that hates the misery of our sins. I guess the answer to that question is not as easy when it becomes practical, is it?
Thoughts on Post-Modernism
I have been doing some significant work on the topic of postmodernity and its application to the current theological scenario. Since the blog world has been largely important in shaping my thinking on these matters, I have here posted Doug Wilson’s blog on the current discussions on Postmodern thinking. It is a superfluous task to engage on such issues with an unfounded approach. Postmodernity is much more than a period in the corridors of history, but it is a life view. It cannot be diminished to “subjectivity” or “abstract art.”
In order to build an articulate worldview we must engage as many ideas as possible. It may even be that in the end of the day our worldview spectacles (Calvin used this language to describe worldview thinking) may be slightly blurred because of the dust from other forms of thinking that have crept into our world. Nevertheless, the only way to construct an appropriate view of life is to be willing to explore a variety of ideologies which at first may be contrary to your system of thought. At least in my tradition (Reformed) I know my limits. In my case, anything that in any way betrays a Triune foundation falls short of what I need to enhance and beautify my worldview. Without a doubt, any worldview that seeks to deny any tenet in the Apostle or Nicene Creed has already suffered considerable damage. Since thought and meaning cannot exist without divine truth, any worldview that lacks these tenets is doomed.
I do realize that in modern societas Christiana the role of experience has been diminished to a powerful indication of knowing God’s will. Something similar to “pray real hard and if you cry real hard then EUREKA!” Of course, this approach to experience is far from Biblical truth. However, on the other hand, we do not want to make experience simply a faulty didactic tool; we want to make experience a part of the wholeness of our worldview. Our fault has been in assuming that only our understanding of the text or culture is the only source of knowledge, but I propose that it is only one source of knowledge. Hence, a thoroughly Biblical worldview encompasses all forms of thinking, emotions and practices.
I believe a truly post-modern (post-modern here is used as a current phase in history, not necessarily the movement per se, though it is almost impossible to define postmodernism as a movement) dogmatic (or construction) must be tri-perspectival to borrow Frame and Poythress’ language. It should encompass right thinking (doctrine), right behavior (practice), and right experience (emotions etc.).
One last point is that a worldview formulation is not made to be individualistic, but applicational. As John Frame puts it: “Theology is only theology when it is applied.” In this sense I applaud Abraham Kuyper (Dutch thinker) in that he sought to build a Biblical worldview that could be applied to all areas of life and society. Most of the Westminster professors in the 70’s took Kline’s position on “intrusion” and assumed that society, culture and the political sphere were matters of secondary importance and the church and family should take preeminence. Kuyper, on the other hand, saw that education, politics and all aspects of society were under the lordship of Christ and, therefore, should submit to His Lordship. That is, Kuyper saw family and the church inextricably related to education and all facets of society. To him Calvinism (by that he meant much more than TULIP, but the wholeness of Calvinistic worldview thinking) was the source of all knowledge, meaning God is the foundation of history to which all of created kosmos must submit.
Though I find much Dutch apologetics nearly fideistic, I do concur with Kuyper’s application of ethics to all of life. As Bahnsen once stated: “If something is considered moral, then it must be universal.” In other words, if it is not universal it cannot be moral. Morality in America must be the same morality in Africa. All aspects of life including the government, church, and family must follow one code of law. Of course, the outworking of law and ethics to the civil magistrate and other facets are not always cut and dry, but the point still stands. Anyway, I think this is a good place to start building a proper view of life.
Knowledge and Blood by Douglas Wilson
Topic: Postmodernism
I mentioned a few days ago that we have to avoid all forms of unbelief, whether in modernist or postmodernist guise. This requires a distinctive Trinitarian epistemology. Consider this some preliminary doodling.
One of the problems with this kind of discussion is that it tends to be limited to academics, and epistemic certainty becomes something you can demonstrate (or not) in a classroom. Reduced to this, certainty becomes a function of personality, logical acumen, bombast, and so on. But what about epistemology in the Bible? While it is lawful to discuss such things in a classroom, and (with direct permission from the Holy Spirit) it might be okay to write a book on it, things look very different in Scripture.
In the Bible, when the Word comes, the faithful are described as receiving it, or as believing it, or as bearing witness to it. And certainty is measured in these life terms, measured in blood, and most emphatically not measured in terms of haunting self-doubts. When we begin with the problems of interpretation, we often never get to what the Bible presents so breezily, which is faith. When we begin with faith, we come to understanding. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, not the end of it.
How certain am I that in the observance of the Lord’s Supper, the bread and wine do not turn into the literal flesh and blood of Jesus? In a classroom discussion, how can I answer this question? I could hold my hands apart six inches and say, “This much,” or perhaps, in a rhetorical flourish, I could stretch my arms all the way out and say, “This much.” But the martyrs who suffered under Bloody Mary had a different calculus entirely (and a far more biblical one). They sealed their testimony with their blood.
Related to this (the flip side of it, really) concerns what you are willing to kill for. A number of years ago, I served on a jury in a murder trial. We convicted the accused man, and the biblical standard we were operating with was that we had to be convinced “beyond a reasonable doubt.” But note how loaded with epistemological concerns that phrase is. Beyond a reasonable doubt — what is that? But since this was a jury room, and not a classroom, we were dealing, in principle, with a man’s life. How certain must we be then? The same principles are involved in going to war, drafting certain kinds of legislation, and so on.
We are called to believe, receive, bear witness, and act. When we act, there will be costs (at least in the real world). The issues of certainty are always issues that always revolve around cost. The problem with modernism is that it was willing to act on false principles and a false foundation, not bearing witness to Christ, and therefore it has been convicted of epistemic arrogance. But the problem with postmodernism is an identical one — it is also not willing to believe the story of Christ’s actual resurrection from the dead, a story that therefore defines and subordinates all other stories. To use the jargon, if Christ’s resurrection is not a metanarrative, a reigning metanarrative, then we are all still in our sins. And since the postmodern “incredulity to all metanarratives” includes this, it is also convicted of the arrogance of unbelief.
The problem is not that some Christians are now telling us that the Bible is more than a bundle of propositions. We know that, and have been saying it for years. I myself have been pummeling the epistemology of the Enlightenment (with shouts of exuberant joy) for some time now. But then along come some evangelical poseurs, using the obvious faults of modernism as a pretext for adopting something just as bad and twice as silly. So I says to myself, I says, let us rise up and smite that thing, hip and thigh. Let us hew it to pieces before the Lord.
The Bible presents a grand story, a narrative. But here is the rub. We believe the story, we receive it. We bear witness to it. It is the story. It is the ultimately true story.
This is a Trinitarian epistemology because Jesus is the full revelation of God, the exact image of His being. God revealed Himself in Christ. If you have seen Me, Jesus said to Phillip, you have seen the Father. And Jesus, among many other things, was the First Witness, the Faithful Witness, the Preeminent Martyr. How certain was He of His identity? How firm was His grasp of those tricky passages in Isaiah about the suffering servant? And when the voice came from heaven, and others heard only thunder, how can we measure His response? In short, how do we evaluate Christ’s epistemology? His blood not only saved His people, but His blood also showed us a way of knowing. We are to imitate Him.