More servicesWindows Live
HomeHotmailSpacesOneCare
 
MSN
Sign in
 
 
Spaces home  Neither Right Nor LeftPhotosProfileFriendsMore Tools Explore the Spaces community

Neither Right Nor Left

Deuteronomy 5:32-33
Prayer, Praise, and Details on our move to Louisville
April 20

Waking up to an Earthquake

On Friday morning, our home was rattled by the largest earthquake ever experienced in the Louisville area - 5.2 on the Richter scale.  There was no evidence of damage to our place.
 
Amazingly, my brother who lives in California experienced the biggest shake of his life...in Kentucky!  Here are the news reports and a picture from near our church.
Louisville Earthquake
April 18

T4G '08 - John MacArthur

John MacArthur's message was entitled "Total Inability: Unwilling and Unable".  He began by tracing the theme of total inability throughout John's Gospel.  John 5:39-40 - those who search the sCriptures for eternal life with the view of Jesus Christ cannot do so. 
John 6:44 - all who come to Jesus are drawn.
 
The doctrine of total depravity is attacked because it is the most despised; it is contrary to all views of man because all other views are works-rightesousness oriented; it is a distinctively Christian doctrine.
 
It is a contrary doctrine because it is contrary to human beling's deception of self.
 
It is a paradoxical doctrine - people who are so bad have to admit that they deserve judgment; they are so deeply sinful that apart from God, they are hopeless.  John Bunyan said, "My best prayer had enough sin in it to damn the whole world."
 
Every movement that has rejected this doctrine has badly skewed soteriology; yet this is an historical doctrine.  It is not rooted in John Calvin, but was a biblical and historic doctrine of the church.  MacArthur showed some examples from church history.
 
The Bible speaks with the language of death - it expresses language of total inability.  But modern evangelicalism makes it sound like God loves people so much and sits in heaven almost irrtated that people don't come to him.  Eph 2 shows that we are by nature (literally, by birth) objects of wrath, we all inherited death from Adam; in Eph 2:4 it is grace that changes this; grace makles the dead alive.  Eph 4:18 - we are darkened and excluded from God.  The sinner cannot recover on his own.
 
John 1:12-13; John 3:3ff - you can't birth yourself (water and spirit in John 3 is a reference to the new covenant in Ezekiel).  John 3:8 - the wind blows where it pleases, so it is with the Spirit, who is absolutely free.  John 5:21 - the Spirit and the Son agree - it is a work of divine, sovereign power.  John 8:36 - the Son is the one who sets people free; John 6:44 - the sinner is drawn by the Father.
 
The sinner is unwilling and unable (2 Cor 4:4; 1 Cor 12:3), and is compounded by teh blindness, which can only be remedied by the gospel (2 Cor 4:5).  What comes out of man is uncleanness, which proceeds from within & defile him (Rom 3:1-18).  You can do no good, for depravity affects the heart, mind, and soul.  Contemporary thought believes that there is some residual goodness in humanity; and the sinner considers it his right, unaided by the Holy Spirit to make the first move toward God.  The problem is that the sinner will make a false move toward God based on fallen desires. 
 
But in regeneration, we neither resist nor co-operate.  2 Tim 2:24-25 - God grants repentance.
 
The implications of total inability:
1.  Historical - denial is a staple in modernism and liberalism and has destroyed the church.  The Emergent Church is neo-liberalism; church growth movement has argued that methods must change to draw sinners.  But the fallen sinner is unable and the biblical approach shatters his self-confidence.  The gospel awakens the sinner; and we must not appeal to fallen desires that only further enslaves the sinner.
2.  Never change the message from one cultural group to another - all hearts of sinners are the same; all need the same message.
3.  We should be so meek becasue we can't take any credit for what has been acomplished.
4.  Paul made himself and lived as a personal sacrifice - he never changed the message.  The gospel advances not by changing the message, but by personal sacrifice.

T4G '08 - Thabiti Anyabwile

Thabiti's message was entitled Bearing the Image: Identity, the Work of Christ, the Church.  It was one of the best of the entire conference.  Here is the overview of Thabiti's message:
 
Our problem is that we operate with a view of race that is fundamental to our worldview.  We have unbiblical assumptions about our identity and minitry and these need to be reformed.
 
1 - Our unity in Adam: What we call "race" doesn't exist.  We have solidarity with Adam in his sin.  But we are all geneological and biological descendants.  We were made in the image of God (Gen 1:26-28; Gen 2:22-24).  In Gen 3:20, there is a biological unity of humanity.  In Gen 1-11, the Bible shows how Adam and Eve become the father and mother of all humanity.  Gen 5:1ff Adam is made in God's image, SEth is in Adam's image; Seth is not a different image; Gen 9:5-6 shows that all men descend from ADam, Noah.
 
But ethnology arose to explain aboriginals in the New World.  By late 18th century, slavery was justified by using Gen 10 to explain people's differences.  What was read into Gen 10 was the table of nations.  Gen 10: 1 & 32 show that there is a biological unity, not the diversity.  So this is a rise of ethnicities, not races. 
 
Race is a theory that assumes that there are essential biological differences.  But ethnicity is fluid through language, nationality, citizenship, etc...  Ethnicity is not rooted in biology or skin color; People can look the same but be radically different.  Scripture notes our oneness, our continuity through Adam.  Therefore race as a category to explain differences is a concept that does not really exist.
 
There are 6 problems if we adopt the category of race:
1. Abuse of people and Scripture that have come from race - emphasizes people's differences and suggests that people are different because of biology.
2.  It is a small step from race to racism.
3.  Allowing categories of race prevents meaningful engagement with others.  Race is inherently ad hominum.
4.  Removing race as a category is necessary because it undermines the authority and sufficiency of Scripture because race then defines us and gives us our identity instead of God's word.
5.  Holding on to this unbiblical doctrine may be resisting the Holy Spirit.
6.  This category may undermine the gospel itself.  If all are not from Adam, then not all are under Adam's sin and not redeemed by the cross for Adam's race.
 
Therefore, we should emphasize our common ancestry in Adam and deny anything that sounds like race as a category.  What happens in people's minds is that they look for someone like them, assume they are safe, seek benefits from them, and believe there are joys to be shared.  The opposite of the last sentence is also true in why we avoid people.  We should see people as all "like me", fallen sinners, sharing our heritage in Adam and therefore cross these bridges.  We won't get to character if we emphasize race.
 
2.  Our unity in Christ - we are all made in the image, are fallen, and are in need of grace.  Our union ith Christ gives us a basis for relationships with others.  Union with Christ must shape us and our identity.  John 17:20-26 - The Father is in the Son, the Son in us, and we are together.  when we come to Christ and join him, we are brought together in Him, transformed into newnewss of life.  2 Cor 5:14-18 - our view is changed from worldly to heavenly.  Christ's blood creates a deeper lineage than our genes.  This is because we are being changed into the image of Christ: Col 1:15, Heb 1:3, Rom 8:29; 2 Cor 3:18; Col 3:10.  On the basis of our union in Christ, there is no Jew/Greek, salve/free.  Even our ethnic differences are minimal because our identity is shaped by Christ's person and work.  We do not make ethnic shrines by holding on to a majority status that is seen in our holding on to our priviledged status.  We should embrace Christ, and then we will inevitably embrace others. 
 
3.  Our unity in the Church - where this newness is displayed (penultimatly), ultimately seen in the age to come; but we have not fully lived in the already.  Eph 2:14-18 - the past tense of verbs show how our unity in the church has been accomplished at the cross; the present tense is that he is our peace, that is in his body, the Church - something to be experienced and worked on now.  Eph 3:6 shows that our spiritual union with Christ impacts us and this is seen in Eph 4:1-6 - unity is not limited; Churches are to be the display of God's glory in our diversity and union in Christ.  Let us love one another in our differences and not seek out familiarity.  Thabiti read Article 17 of the T4G Affirmations and Denials. 
 
4.  Our unity in Glory - Rev 5:9-10 - every tribe, tongue, language around the throne praising God.
April 16

T4G '08 - Ligon Duncan

Ligon Duncan began Together for the Gospel '08 with his message "Sound Doctrine: Essential to Faithful Pastoral Ministry".  His message is summed up in three points:
 
1.  The ideas of doctrine, theology, and systematics are under duress.
2.  Systematic theology is necessary, important, and essential.
3.  What doctrine and systematic theology are important for.
 
1.  He began the message by reflecgint on how we live in an age that is anti-doctrinal and anti-theological (or at least thinks it is).  He then proceeded to list several dangers when doctrine and systematic theology are undermined:
a.  For Joy: John 17:13-17 - Jesus prays that his disciples would be built up in the Father's Word for their joy.  To denegrate doctrine is to denegrade joy.
b.  For growth: Matt 28:18-20 - Jesus tells his disciples to go and make disciples, teaching them everything  that he taught them because it is for their growth
c.  For a life of love: 1 Tim 1:1-3 - Paul tells Timothy to instruct people not to teach bad theology because it does not produce a life of love; rather, it destroys them.
d.  For ethics: 1 Tim 1:8-11 - Life, ethics, and morality are tied to doctrine, and evil deeds finds its root in the rejection of sound doctrine.  The gospel is connected to a life of obedience.
e.  For godliness: 1 Tim 6:2-4 - Doctrine promotes godliness
f.   For knowledge that leads to godliness: Titus 1:1 - truth matters and doctrine matters.  Theology is the science of living in the blessed ever after. 
 
Postmodernity says that we should reject doctrine and embrace narrative.  We should not accept this, but reject it.  We should celebrate doctrine and out-live and out-rejoice our critics.
 
There are some phrases popular in Christian circles that undermine doctrine: "Christianity is a life, not a doctrine."  This saying is commonly heard among evangelicals, but originated with liberals.  "Deeds, not creeds" is pruported because what is pruported as truth can kill.  Therefore the only way we can live among one another, PM argues, is toleration by denying that there is Truth.  Instead, doctrine fosters true toleration.
 
Some have said that the diversity of systematic theologies disburb us and that no language can contain all truth.  Added to this, some say that God revealed not a systematic theology, but a narrative.  This is not true: the Bible is not a storied narrative, but is a complex book made up of many genres; and language not containing all we need is not a concept found in the Bible.  Rather, it is post-Kantian and neo-nihilism.  The Bible is clear - the words of Jesus matter, and they are passed on.  Loving stories is not new - everyone loves stories.  But people approach pastors all the time and ask them "What does the Bible say about _____?"  What they want is a brief summary of what the whole Bible teaches about a topic, not a story.  Systematics views all doctrine together as a whole.
 
2.  Why Systematic Theology is Important - everyone is a theologian; are you a good or bad one?
 
The Bible has many examples of systematic theology.  Consider Luke 24:25-27 - Jesus shows the disciples on the road to Emmaus all things concerning himself - the person and work of Christ - from the Old Testament.  IN Acts 18:24-15, Paul explains about Jesus from the OT.   We see other examples in Romans 11, Hebrews 1 & 11.  Systematic theology is not the product of alien forms.  It is in the Bible.
 
3.  Doctrine is important for several reasons:
a.  the glory of God - Rom. 11 - even the doctrine of perdition is for the glory of God.
b.  for our assurance - John 15:5-6 - election is taught because the disciples would all abandon him and they needed assurance that the Father had chosen them knowing all things, including their impending failure.
c.  for marriage - Eph 5:25 - ethical observations are drawn from the atonement.  Learn how to love in light of the atonement.
d.  for joy - Phil 3:1 - Paul has all confidence in Christ and non in the flesh, and this gives him great joy.
 
Truth matters.  Doctrine matters.  Theology is for life.
April 13

Penal Substitution II - The Heart of the Atonement

           Second, penal substitution is necessary for a holy God to justify sinful humans.  Because humanity is trapped in sin, there is no way for any human being to save oneself.  God’s standard is perfect righteousness by complete obedience to his law.  And complete obedience to his law is necessary because “the norms of the law express God’s character, the beauty and holiness of his person.[1]  Paul speaks of this standard in Galatians 3:10 where he says, “For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, ‘Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them.”  One transgression, James says, makes a person a lawbreaker (Jas 2:11).  In light of God's radical holiness, "God demands perfect obedience, and no one has met that standard."[2]
            At the same time, the Scriptures speak that God justifies the ungodly (Rom 4:5).  Proverbs
17:15 says, “He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous are both alike – an abomination to the LORD.”  As John Piper rightly points out, “At the heart of the Christian gospel stands the sentence: God justifies the ungodly (Romans 4:5).  He acquits the guilty.  That is the gospel.  But how can it be right for God to do that?”[3]  Sin must be punished.  If it is not, God’s moral character is compromised, specifically his holiness and his moral integrity.  Therefore some punishment of sin is required for sinners to be justified.  And this is precisely what happens.  Romans 3:24 says that the ungodly are “justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.”  In the death of Christ, sinners are justified, and the justice of God is upheld.[4]



 

                [1] Schreiner, "Penal Substitution", The Nature of the Atonement, 77.

 

[2] Ibid., 76.

 

                [3] John Piper, The Pleasures of God (Sisters, OR: Multnomah, 2000), 163.  See his outstanding discussion on the intra-trinitarian love relationship between the Father and the Son as the foundation for the salvation of humanity.  The Pleasures of God, 157-178.

 

            [4] Schreiner notes that “The question about God’s justice that Paul answers [in Romans 3:21-26] would not even be raised in therapeutic, exemplary or Christus Victor views of the atonement," in "Penal Substitution" 89. 

 

April 10

Not Greatness, but Goodness: Jim Elliot

I have been reading Shadow of the Almighty and have been profoundly challenged by the life of Jim Elliot.  Tonight, as I was reading, I came across this entry from Jim Elliot's diary, dated August 21, 1949, and it encouraged me as I feel a similar struggle in my heart quite often:

I sense tonight that my desires to be great are likely to frustrate God's intents for good to be done through me.  O Lord, let me pray again with earnest, honest heart: I will not to be great - only, God, grant to me Thy goodness.
April 09

Penal Substitution I - the Heart of the Atonement

Support for Penal Substitution

 

            In light of God’s holiness and humanity’s sinfulness, it is abundantly clear that the Scriptures teach that Christ died for our sins, suffering as a substitute for humanity’s punishment, in order that he might bring us to God.  The entirety of redemptive history points to Christ’s substitution for sinners by suffering the penalty they deserved.  This is borne out in several ways.

            First, penal substitution is the radical solution to humanity’s sinfulness.  Apart from penal substitution, humanity has no way of salvation.  Because of Adam and Eve’s disobedience to God, they were found guilty for breaking the command of God and deserved to die.  Through the sin of one man, the entire human race was condemned (Rom 5:18).  All have sinned and fallen short of God’s glory (Rom 3:23) and no one has given the glory that is due to God alone.  Because every good and perfect gift is from God (Jas 1:17), anything that is good and praiseworthy is to be ascribed to the Lord (Ps. 29:1-2). Yet humans do not give honor to God, nor are they inclined towards giving him glory.  Instead, humanity spurns God’s glory and rejects his law (Jer 6:19).  Their eyes are blinded from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God (2 Cor 4:4).  The human condition and nature, therefore, is in opposition to God, and deserving of just condemnation and wrath (Eph 2:3). 

            Throughout the Old Testament, God’s people disobey and fail to keep his law, and this becomes problematic: “the continuing sinfulness of God’s people makes it impossible for the holy God to dwell with them without endangering them.”[1]  As Schreiner notes, “Human beings need atonement, then, because they are sinners, because they have failed to measure up to God’s law.”[2]



 

                [1] Jeffery, Ovey, and Sach, Pierced for Our Transgressions, 43.

 

                [2] Schreiner, "Penal Substitution," 76.

April 05

Theories of the Atonement III: Kaleidoscopic View

Kaleidoscopic View
            While there are many metaphors that are used in the Scriptures to describe the atonement, the kaleidoscopic view argues that each view is a valid expression that describes how the atonement meets a particular redemptive need.[1]  To argue that one should be predominant is dismissed, for each biblical writer may vary on which theme of the atonement is predominant.  Paul stresses substitution to the Romans while Revelation stresses the victory of Christ over evil. 
            Since the biblical writers found it necessary to describe the atonement with various theories, it is argued that one metaphor is insufficient to describe all that was accomplished by Jesus’ death.  Joel Green argues that “[t]his is due first to the universal profundity of Jesus’ death as saving event, to the variety of contexts within which Jesus’ death required explication and to the variety of ways in which the human situation can be understood.”[2]  What happened at the cross had universal significance – defeating the power of Satan, dealing with the penalty for sin, and even reconciling the entire cosmos back to its Creator (Col 1:15-20).  The cross reconciles humanity to God (2 Cor 5:18-19), to other human beings (Eph 2:11-18), and to the entire cosmos (2 Cor 5:17).  In light of the biblical references to what the cross accomplished, Green notes that “[t]he message of the atonement is all-encompassing.”[3]
            In the opinion of those who hold to the kaleidoscopic view, no single model of the atonement is able to address every instance in the human dilemma.  However, with the various models of the atonement, Christians can “find context-specific ways to make the word of the cross accessible and challenging to varied audiences.”[4]  The intention of leaving the numerous views is to create a symphonic sound that speaks to the entirety of the human situation: “Heard together, their harmony is sometimes delicate.  At other times the effect is more complex, with wonderful hints of powerful melodies contending with countermelodies.  That all belong in the same choir is nonetheless assured.”[5]


                [1] Joel Green, “The Kaleidoscopic View” in The Nature of the Atonement (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2006), 167.

 

                [2] Ibid.

 

                [3] Ibid.

 

               

                [4] Joel Green and Mark Baker, Recovering the Scandal of the Cross: Atonement in New Testament and Contemporary Contexts (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000), 221.

 

                [5] Ibid., 86.

 

April 04

Theories of the Atonement II: Penal Substitution

Penal Substitution View

            The penal substitution view is the response to the basic question of how sinful humans can relate to a holy God.  Penal substitution contends that “God gave himself in the person of his Son to suffer instead of us the death, punishment and curse due fallen humanity as the penalty for sin.”[1] 

            The penal substitution view begins with the problem of humanity’s sin and the holiness of God.  God had told Adam that he was forbidden to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and that disobedience to this command would result in the punishment of death (Gen 2:17).  But Adam and Eve’s disobedience caused them and their offspring to be alienated from God because God is holy, and in him there is no imperfection, no evil, and no sin (1 John 1:5).  God’s holiness cannot overlook one sin, for the wages of sin is death (Rom 6:23).  Rather, in his holiness he punishes sin, for “sin is failing to give God his due; [it] take[s] from God what is rightfully his and dishonor[s] him.”[2]  God alone deserves all glory and honor, yet humans act in defiance and rebellion against their Creator, defying his law and rejecting his ways (Rom 1:18ff).  As a result, God’s wrath is stored up for the day of judgment against sinful humanity (Rom 2:5).       

            Yet God, who is rich in mercy, and out of his unconditional love for human beings (Eph 2:4), had planned, along with his willing and obedient Son (Isa 53:10; John 10:18), to offer his Son has a propitiation for sin (1 John 4:10).  Christ is offered as the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world (John 1:29), appeasing God’s wrath by taking upon himself the sins of human beings and offering to those who respond in faith his perfect righteousness, accomplished by his sinless life (2 Cor 5:21).  In offering his life, Christ’s propitiating death is the only means by which “God as the holy and righteous judge can forgive sinners who have personally rebelled against their sovereign Lord.”[3]



                [1] Steve Jeffery, Michael Ovey and Andrew Sach, Pierced for Our Transgressions: Rediscovering the Glory of Penal Substitution (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2007), 21.

 

                [2] Erickson, Christian Theology, 797.

 

                [3] Thomas Schreiner, “The Penal Substitution View” in The Nature of the Atonement (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2006), 93.

April 01

3-2-1 Penguins Up, Up, and Away!!!

An amazing discovery was released by the BBC today.  From the London Telegraph:

Free Image Hosting at allyoucanupload.com