Posts

Posted on

James White versus Dave Hunt

Many of us have probably accompanied James White in the last few years as he has been an able defender of the Doctrines of Grace. Though I have strong disagreements with James (doc) on issues of ecclesiology, sacraments and probably several other issues; however, I am in strong agreement with his exegesis of Scriptures when defending Calvinism. Once again today he and Dave Hunt debated on the topic of Calvinism. It is unfortunate that the moderator was so unfair and spent the first three minutes giving a silly, unlikely and foolish illustrations in order to prove how Calvinists prefer to worhsip Calvin than Jesus. Oh, by the way, if you ever find one of these guys that worship Calvin more than Jesus please let me know.

I don’t want to give a summary of the debate since I still have not heard all of it. However, I think Arminianism is summarized by Dave Hunt’s summation of his position. Here is the direct quote:

Is God sovereign? Of course He is sovereign!  Was He sovereign when Satan sinned/rebelled? When Adam and Eve rebelled? Of course! The fact that God is sovereign does not mean that everything he desires is going to happen.

Suddenly, I think I have been misled on the definition of sovereignty… or have I?

Posted on

5 minutes after Jeopardy…Ken Jennings finally loses

The rumors were true! After winning over 2.5 million dollars, Ken Jennings finally lost. I don’t remember exactly the question, but the magic answer was H&R Block. With 74 victories, this makes Jennings the greatest winner in the history of televised game shows. As Alex said in the end of the show, ” all good things must come to an end.” Tomorrow morning ABC will air an interview with Jennings on “Good Morning America.”
For those of you interested here is a paragraph from the blog page that leaked the info:

Set your TiVos and VCRs…it looks like Ken Jennings will finally lose on Jeopardy on Tuesday, November 30. His 72nd appearance aired yesterday (he won another $50,000), the 73rd will be today, and his final win will come on Monday. As reported here back in September, Jennings loses his 75th game after winning $2.5 million. No one from the show has confirmed this, so it may be wrong**, but we’ll find out on Tuesday. (If it ends up being wrong, I will commit seppuku by falling on my TiVo remote for my role in misleading everyone.)

** Just to be more specific, I have recently received confirmation from a very reliable source that Ken has indeed lost, but that source didn’t confirm (or deny) the specific timing.”

Posted on

4 quick updates

#1 For anyone interested in a great movie to rent in the next few weeks you will be pleased to watch: Man on Fire. Undoubtedly, this has made my top 10 list. Denzel Washington takes on Mexico City’s corrupt police in a thriller that will blow you away. This is a must!
#2 James White will be debating Dave Hunt in a radio program this Wednesday. The topic will be Calvinism… I am sure you guessed that one. Check Dr. White’s homepage for information.
#3 With three rounds left to go in the Brazilian Soccer League, things are getting less clear. With Atletico PR (#1) and Santos’ (#2) unfortunate ties yesterday, Sao Paulo (#3) benefited tremendously by defeating Internacional 2 x 1 on Saturday. Here are the top four with three games left to play:
1) Atletico PR – 82 points
2) Santos – 80 points
3) Sao Paulo – 78 points
4) Sao Caetano – 77 points
Next round will be played this coming weekend.
#4 Are you looking for a good introduction to Systematic Theology that kinda runs against the flow? See Professor John Frame’s first classic : The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God. This classic reflects a growing trend in Reformed circles to see theology as perspectival. Frame, of course, has pioneered this camp bringing a vast richness to Reformed Theology in the last 10 years. Check bestbookbuys.com for best deals

Posted on

Happy Thanksgiving!

I will be gone for the next few days, so there may not be any blogging. Anyway, I thought James White’ s posting of George Washington’s Yhanksgiving proclamation was appropriate, so here it is for those who have not read this great founder:
George Washington’s 1789 Thanksgiving Proclamation

Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor; and Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me “to recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness:

“Now, therefore, I do recommend and assign Thursday, the 26th day of November next, to be devoted by the people of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the signal and manifold mercies and the favorable interpositions of His providence in the course and conclusion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty which we have since enjoyed; for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enable to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national one now lately instituted’ for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and, in general, for all the great and various favors which He has been pleased to confer upon us.

And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech Him to pardon our national and other transgressions; to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a blessing to all the people by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all sovereigns and nations (especially such as have show kindness to us), and to bless them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science among them and us; and, generally to grant unto all mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as He alone knows to be best.

Given under my hand, at the city of New York, the 3d day of October, A.D. 1789.

(signed) G. Washington

Posted on

America’s Neo-Gospel by David Alan Black

As the church struggle in the United States continues unabated, the witness of Bible-believing Christians to the necessity of biblical law and constitutional government remains alive and well. Their message that Americans – “Christian” Americans included – need conversion will continue to be heralded. American Christians might not think of themselves as needing conversion, but this is precisely the situation in which the church in the United States finds itself.

It is not easy to challenge the status quo in the manner adopted by some of these individuals. They are compelled, however, to proclaim the radical implications of the kingdom of God for society. This is nothing new. Church history is replete with instances where prophetic movements have arisen to challenge both the church and society in ways similar to that being done today. 

Posted on

Sabbath Sermon: Mark 7

This morning at St. Paul’s Presbyterian, Rev. Mike Malone continued his series on Mark 7. Today he suggested that we look at Fallujah as a metaphor for our internal conflicts. We  shift our attention to our own lives and realize that we are always inclined to inflict pain on others. Just as the internal conflicts in Fallujah, we have our internal conflicts as well.
The question asked is, “Does change come from the outside in or inside out?” According to Mike Malone the gospel of Mark chapter 7 serves as a mirror to our lives. In verses 1-8 it starts at the surface of hypocrisy. It exposes the Distortion of the Law. The Pharisees sought moral reform in the nation. They wanted to apply the law. They sought to emulate the practices of the holy men in the Old Covenant. At first it began as a noble goal, but soon they began to abuse the law of God by redefining the law by imposing their own interpretation. Their purpose was to use their “version” of the law to exalt their lifestyle and further exalt themselves.

In verses 9-13, there is a Disregard for the Law leading to disobedience. The Scribes and Pharisees betrayed the commands of God for their own tradition. Finally, in verses 14-23 there is a Depth of the Corruption of their own hearts. The application of this penetrating text is that the defilement is in the heart; it is internal. It is what comes out that defiles the heart.

There are at least 2 measures to be taken in this text that directly applies. First, we must stare at Mark 7 right in the face. We must face the truth about our needs. We are desperate beings who are constantly in need of grace and mercy. Our hearts are troubled. Secondly, we must recognize that only Jesus can heal us. We are told to seek Jesus as the only One who can deal with our sins. We heal this virus by relentless confession and consistent trust in Christ.

Posted on

Why I am an Augustinian

In Alister McGrath’s Historical Theology there is an entire section on the Donatist vs. Augustine controversy. Let me explain the issues that caused this controversy in the early church. One of the great dilemmas for the early church was how to deal with those Christians who had lapsed during persecution, that is, those who gave in and bought the libellus or who just simply offered sacrifices to idols in order to keep their lives. The Donatists believed that the Church was a body of saints within which sinners had no place. They argued that the “traditores” (lapsed) had to be excluded from the Church. This began the Donatist Controversy into which Augustine poured so much effort. Augustine responded by saying that the church was a mixed body with both sinners and saints. This initial concept of a mixed Church would be incorporated centuries later by the Westminster Divines who brought about the distinction between the Visible and Invisible Church.

According to Augustine, the Church was no place for saints alone and was not established by saints alone. It was made by all who partook of the Sacraments. Augustine’s idea of the Lord’ Supper led to even more division with the Donatists who believed in “ex opere operantis” which teaches that the validity of the Sacraments are based on the integrity of those who administer it. Whereas for Augustine “ex opere operato” was a more accurate approach to the Sacraments since the validity of bread and wine does not depend on the one administering them, but depends on the One who bestows the grace to the elements. This reveals a stark contrast between both views spoused in this controversy. The Donatists in the tradition of Pelagianism, believed that Christianity is a religion of autonomy where man in and of himself can accomplish his salvation outside of any intervention by God. Augustine, of course, believed that man could not do anything without God’s grace (John 15:5).

My commitment to Augustinianism is the commitment of the Reformers who stood entirely with the necessity of grace in all of human existence, in life and in death.

Posted on

A Confession

Yes, I admit it! I am a Postmillenialist. I have been for over 2 years. There is a lot of story behind why I became a postmillenialist, but this is not what I am concerned about here. I am concerned about the majority of the Amillennial population, specifically in the PCA. It appears that to be associated with Postmillennialism today is to be automatically associated with the so-called “Radical Theonomists.” Well, perhaps “Theonomy” will be part of another confessional blog. So in order to not associate themselves with Postmillennialism they carry on their lectures speaking of the grand accomplishments of the gospel in the world both geographically and spiritual in this age, but yet maintain the label of Amillennialism.

Perhaps, some are not aware of strong Postmillennialists such as Ian Murray, Keith Matthison, or R.C. Sproul who are not theonomic in their outlook. The misunderstanding comes in defining Postmillennial eschatology. This misunderstanding stems from the erroneous association of modern Postmillennial thought with the eschatology of the Puritans. The Puritans were also Postmillennial in their view, but they took the 1,000 years of Revelation 20 as a literal reference. Whereas, current Postmillennial eschatology held by Gary Demar and Ken Gentry see the thousand years as symbolic of a fructiferous age in Christendom.

In Postmillennialism, sin will not be eradicated, people will continue to die and –believe it or not– Jews will still be saved by gospel. Ok, now that we know what it isn’t, can we take a step of faith?

The reason this is becoming such an issue to me is that this week alone I have talked to a prominent PCA minister and a prominent theologian in the PCA who are committed to an optimistic view of the church but continue to wave their Amillennial banners. I think they need to re-evaluate their labels and renounce their traditional flag and embrace a new one. Well, at least that’s what I think.

Posted on

Is Islam inherently violent?

Today I had a most helpful discussion in class. As I has mentioned earlier, I had a debate on the topic of Islam, specifically is ” Islam inherently violent?” I took the pro position affirming that Islam is inherently violent on the basis of the Koranic writings, the expansion of Islam, their treatment of apostates, treatment of women, Muhammad’s example, and the application of Shari’a (Islamic Law) in nations all over the world. Though these arguments were forceful I was astounded by some of the consequences of this line of thinking. For instance, to affirm that Islam has grown through military conquest is also to affirm that in Israel’s history there was conquest through military extermination of entire cities.

Further, I have probed into the idea of how this affects my ideas on law and ethics in a thoroughly Christianized society in which the law of God reigns supreme in all the earth. If Muslisms and other non-Chistian religions must bow down to the law of God, then does it not follow that this is a form of violence, since imposition by nature is violent?

The excellent question raised by the defender of the con position was in regards to the very definition of “inherent.” That is, does the question ” Is Islam inherently violent” have any meaning since “inherent” is defined as a quality without which a religion cannot exist? The answer to this question at the outset would indicate that the entire discussion carries no real fruit since most would recognize that violence is not central to Islamic theology. But, I believe it is important to realize that “violence” is in fact necessary to Islamic theology, since if there were no initial military conquest there would be no expansion and if there were no expansion then the religion of Islam today would have been nothing more than a passing fad in the corridors of history. We would have discussed another religion this morning.

There is certainly much more work to be done in this topic, but for now I am convinced that the corruption of Islam is found in its main pillar, which is faith in the Islamic Creed which says, “There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his prophet.” It is in the application and lack of submission to this mandate that the topic of violence becomes even more pertinent.

Proudly powered by WordPress