Mobile Site

Monday, August 29, 2005 

Great Classical Theology

still in class...

Don't you just hate how those classical (read: bigoted, prejudiced, and ignorant) theologians have such a stale, stoic view of God?

Art Thou wholly every where, while nothing contains Thee wholly?

What art Thou then, my God? what, but the Lord God? For who is Lord but the Lord? or who is God save our God? Most highest, most good, most potent, most omnipotent; most merciful, yet most just; most hidden, yet most present; most beautiful, yet most strong, stable, yet incomprehensible; unchangeable, yet all-changing; never new, never old; all-renewing, and bringing age upon the proud, and they know it not; ever working, ever at rest; still gathering, yet nothing lacking; supporting, filling, and overspreading; creating, nourishing, and maturing; seeking, yet having all things.

Thou lovest, without passion; art jealous, without anxiety; repentest, yet grievest not; art angry, yet serene; changest Thy works, Thy purpose unchanged; receivest again what Thou findest, yet didst never lose; never in need, yet rejoicing in gains; never covetous, yet exacting usury. Thou receivest over and above, that Thou mayest owe; and who hath aught that is not Thine? Thou payest debts, owing nothing; remittest debts, losing nothing. And what had I now said, my God, my life, my holy joy? or what saith any man when he speaks of Thee? Yet woe to him that speaketh not, since mute are even the most eloquent.

Oh! that I might repose on Thee! Oh! that Thou wouldest enter into my heart, and inebriate it, that I may forget my ills, and embrace Thee, my sole good!


From Augustine's Confessions, Book I


It would be a lot easier to argue with emergents, open theists, Progressives, and Megashift types if they would use less strawmen and read the Ancients more.

|

 

I'm Famous

Justin Taylor writes about me here.

Ok, ok, he only writes about me by association, but you know what I mean.
The articles he links are excellent.
School starts today.

|

Wednesday, August 24, 2005 

Covenant & Dispensational Theology: A Comparison

Here's a simple chart that analyzes the differences between Covenant theology as promoted by Reformed theologians (especially the classic, Dutch continental variety), and Dispensational theology - as advocated by its American classical proponents.

It will be posted at Thunder Speak.

There may be some that Progressive Dispensationalists take issue with. If that is the case, the comment section is always open. Let me hear about it!

The link for the download is here.

|

 

A Van Til in the hand is worth a Kant and Hume in the bush

Justin Taylor points out a helpful site over at Reformation 21 (the blog of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals). I thought I would make much of the material available here as well. It deals with Cornelius Van Til.

Van Til is widely known in the Reformed world as an arch-philosopher/apologist. His work on ideas such as presuppositional apologetics, the Transcendental Argument for God, his views on the creator/Creature distinction, etc., have all made his theories a force to be reckoned with by antagonists of the Christian faith and Christians who hold to various forms of epistemology and apologetics.

This shows how Van Til would diagram the Christian and non-Christian worldviews in his class lectures, as a former student recounts:

"Van Til . . . always taught that a Christian worldview should be represented by two circles (for Creator and creature), clearly distinct from one another, with the larger one (representing God) on top. One circle alone referred to the non-Christian worldview, in which man and God (if he exists) are on the same level, part of one reality."
-- John Frame, Cornelius Van Til: An Analysis of His Thought, (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing, 1995), p. 27

By taking more of what Van Til thought, we can fill out the circles to form this picture.

Here are some priceless quotes by Van Til on the fixed antithesis between these two fundamental worldviews. (This was a concept that I learned from, among others, Van Til. There are only, and can ever be only, two distinctions amongst humanity. We cannot divide people by conservative/liberal, moral/sinful, Republican/Democrat, or Iowegians/the rest of us; there is only one division that the Bible makes: the seed of the Woman and the seed of the Serpent.)

"The Pragmatist thinks it quite possible to ask: 'Who made God?' Back of God lies mere possibility. Possibility is a wider concept than actuality. God and man both dwell on the island called Reality. This island is surrounded by a shoreless and bottomless ocean of possibility and the rationality that God and we enjoy is born of chance. The Theist thinks it impossible to ask: “Who made God?” God is for him the source of possibility: actuality is a wider concept than possibility. The little island on which we dwell rests upon the ocean of the reality of God; our rationality rests upon the rationality of God. Pragmatism maintains a thorough metaphysical relativism, while Theism will not compromise on the conception of God as a self-conscious absolute personality."
-- Christianity and Idealism (Philadelphia, PA: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1955), p. 8

"Kant’s phenomenal realm is but an island, and that a floating island on a bottomless and shoreless sea. After all, the human mind can furnish at most a finite schematism or a priori. We do not admit that the human mind can furnish any a priori at all unless it is related to God. But suppose for a moment that it could, such a schematism could never be comprehensive."
-- Christian-Theistic Evidences (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1978), p. 37.

"It is upon the basis of this presupposition alone, the Reformed Faith holds, that predication of any sort at any point has relevance and meaning. If we may not presuppose such an "antecedent" Being, man finds his speck of rationality to be swimming as a mud-ball in a bottomless and shoreless ocean."
-- Christianity and Idealism (Philadelphia, PA: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1955), p. 138.

"Modern science boldly asks for a criterion of meaning when one speaks to him of Christ. He assumes that he himself has a criterion, a principle of verification and of falsification, by which he can establish for himself a self-supporting island floating on a shoreless sea. But when he is asked to show his criterion as it functions in experience, every fact is indeterminate, lost in darkness; no one can identify a single fact, and all logic is like a sun that is always behind the clouds."
-- Christian-Theistic Evidences (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1978), pp. 147-48.

Here is a quote about the idea of human reason being a clearing in the middle of a forest:

"If we compare the realm of the phenomenal as it has been ordered by the autonomous intellect to a clearing in a large forest we may compare the realm of the noumenal to that part of the same forest which has not yet been laid under contribution by the intellect. The realm of mystery is on this basis simply the realm of that which is not yet known. And the service of irrationalism to rationalism may be compared to that of some bold huntsman in the woods who keeps all lions and tigers away from the clearing. This bold huntsman covers the whole of the infinitely extended forest ever keeping away all danger from the clearing. This irrationalistic Robin Hood is so much of a rationalist that he virtually makes a universal negative statement about what can happen in all future time. In the secret treaty spoken of he has assured the intellect of the autonomous man that the God of Christianity cannot possibly exist and that no man therefore need to fear the coming of a judgment. If the whole course of history is, at least in part, controlled by chance, then there is no danger that the autonomous man will ever meet with the claims of authority as the Protestant believes in it. For the notion of authority is but the expression of the idea that God by his counsel controls all things that happen in the course of history."
-- The Defense of the Faith (Philadelphia, PA: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1955), p. 143.

Another area of thinking, this time classic philosophy, that has lent to Van Til’s immortal relevancy, is his work on the One and the Many.

Particulars and universals are eternally related in God. Creation is a finite reflection of God.
v.
Allegedly, a string with no ends (unity abstracted from all particulars) combines with beads with no holes (particulars abstracted from all unity) to create the intelligible world.

Philosophers of all stripes have always tried to reconcile these two tensions found in nature.


The non-Christian assumes that unity and diversity, law and fact, are originally independent of each other. The universe furnishes the diversity, and the mind furnishes the unity. But each apart from the other cannot be an object of knowledge; they amount to chaos (particulars with no unity) and a blank (unity with no diversity). Either way, the irrational is ultimate. And these two irrational elements cannot come into positive relation and create rationality because, by hypothesis, they exclude each other—as if one tried to string beads without holes onto a string with no ends.

The Christian view is that God is the source of all unity and diversity, all laws and all facts. The One and the Many never exist in complete abstraction from each other. God is an eternally existing "concrete universal." God's plan for the world is comprehensive of all individual facts that ever exist. He is omniscient. The absolutely rational is ultimate.

More quotes:

"[I]t may be said that for the human mind to know any fact truly, it must presuppose the existence of God and his plan for the universe. If we wish to know the facts of this world, we must relate these facts to laws. That is, in every knowledge transaction, we must bring the particulars of our experience into relation with universals. So, for instance, we speak of the phenomena of physics as acting in accordance with the laws of gravitation. We may speak of this law of gravitation as a universal. In a similar way, if we study history instead of nature, that is, if we study the particulars of this world as they are related to one another in time as well as in space, we observe certain historical laws. But the most comprehensive interpretation that we can give of the facts by connecting the particulars and the universals that together constitute the universe leaves our knowledge at loose ends, unless we may presuppose God back of this world. . . . As Christians, we hold that in this universe we deal with a derivative one and many, which can be brought into fruitful relation with one another because, back of both, we have in God the original One and Many. If we are to have coherence in our experience, there must be a correspondence of our experience to the eternally coherent experience of God. Human knowledge ultimately rests upon the internal coherence within the Godhead; our knowledge rests upon the ontological Trinity as its presupposition."
-- An Introduction to Systematic Theology (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1974), pp. 22-23.

"If then, on Kant’s basis; science is to be saved from having to do with, on the one hand, an infinite number of unrelated particulars—like beads that have no holes in them and, on the other hand, having to do with pure abstract logic—like an infinitely long string which has no ends and certainly no end that can be found by man—then science must be saved by this very same man who does not understand himself and who never will understand himself."
-- The Protestant Doctrine of Scripture
(Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1968), p. 17.

"A scientific method not based on the presupposition of the truth of the Christian story is like an effort to string an infinite number of beads, no two of which have holes in them, by means of a string of infinite length, neither end of which can be found."
-- The Protestant Doctrine of Scripture (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1968), p. 2.

"[A]ccording to all non-theistic thinking, the facts and the laws that are supposed to bind the facts together into unity are first thought of as existing independently of one another and are afterward patched together. It is taken for granted that the temporal is the ultimate source of diversity. Accordingly, Reality is said to be essentially synthetic. The real starting point is then an ultimate plurality. And an ultimate plurality without an equally ultimate unity will forever remain a plurality. It is this that is especially apparent in all forms of pragmatic thought."
-- A Survey of Christian Epistemology
(Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1969), p. 217.

Alright, enough from me. I'll let the good doctor finish out on two more subjects: the idea of "The Great Chain of Being," and the relationship of faith and reason.

The Great Chain of Being

"Arthur Lovejoy speaks of this hierarchy as The Great Chain of Being. Lovejoy points out the internal contradiction that lies at the heart of this idea. On the one hand, the world of the Absolute is said to be wholly other than the world here below. The idea of the Absolute is obtained by the process of negation. The Absolute is therefore a timeless, static something of which man can only say that it is not this and not that. On the other hand, the Absolute is thought to be the originating source of all that takes place in our world of change."
-- The Great Debate Today (Nutley, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1971), pp. 22-23.

"The Thomistic notion of the mind of man as potentially participating in the mind of God, leads to an impersonal principle that is purely formal, and as such is correlative to brute factual material of a non-rational sort. It follows that it is only by abstraction from individuality that the facts can be known. The whole scheme of the philosophy of nature is made into a 'Chain of Being' idea, fitted into a pattern of ever-increasing universality. Inasmuch as anything is higher in the scale of being than something else, it is to that extent less individual. All knowledge is of universals. And, as already observed, it is the mind conceived of as ultimate and as correlative to these facts, that has to abstract from particularity in order to know them."
-- The Reformed Pastor and Modern Thought (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1980 [1971]), pp. 89-90.

"The Greek view appears clearly in the philosophy of Plotinus, the last of the great Greek thinkers. On the view of Plotinus man as an individual hovers between a world of pure abstract rationality and a world of pure abstract non-being or contingency. To be himself, man must, on this view, be constantly torn in opposite directions. He is drawn upward toward pure rationality, lest his individuality, derived as it is from pure non-being, lead to his annihilation. But he is, at the same time, drawn down toward non-being, lest his individuality be swallowed up into abstract impersonal rationality and he thereby lose his identity."
-- Is God Dead? (Philadelphia, PA: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1966), 3.A.

"I know what the analogical being of Aristotle is. I know that it is based on a supposed interaction of pure form and pure matter on a continuum of levels, a chain of being. I know that, with his idea of being as analogical, Aristotle tried to mediate between the abstract eternal essences of Plato’s thought and the utterly unrelated particularism of Sophistic thought. I know that the effort of Aristotle was a failure. His lowest species was still of the same nature as was the highest essence of Plato. For Aristotle, as well as for Plato, knowledge is of universals only. Aristotle’s concept could do nothing but drift on a bottomless and shoreless ocean of chance that was pure matter. Holding firmly with Plato and with Parmenides to the adequation of thought and being, Aristotle was unable, for all his supposed empiricism, to attribute any significance to history and its individuality."
-- The Reformed Pastor and Modern Thought (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1980 [1971]), p. 217.

"Evil is thus mere negation, non-moral in character, found as it is within the realm of those things that are possibles by the law of logic. It is by making of man a moral amoeba near the bottom of the scale of being that Thomas hopes to escape the charge of determinism. It is by thinking of the will of God as pure identification with abstract rationality, and by making man’s will the principle of moral indeterminacy, and then bringing both of these concepts to bear upon the moral acts of man that Thomas hopes to escape both determinism and indeterminism. If, when deciding to act morally, man places before himself the ideal of the vision of deity, he will more and more participate in the being of God. And on his part, God, by spreading abroad his goodness widely but thinly at the bottom of reality and more narrowly and heavily toward the top of reality, opens the way of opportunity for man to approach God himself in intensity of being and goodness, and enables man to do what of himself without such grace he could not do. . . . "Looking at the doctrine of the will in man as Thomas develops it, we see at once that real freedom for him is absence of being. On the other hand, nothing but being can be a cause of anything. “But only good can be a cause, because nothing can be a cause unless it is a being, and every being as such, is good.” * To the extent that man has being he participates in the being of God and as such is good. According to the extent that he has being, man may be said with God to be the giver of the rule, the lawgiver. Here again is the principle that the moment the individual speaks, this individual has lost his individuality."
-- The Reformed Pastor and Modern Thought (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1980 [1971]), pp. 102 & 104. * Summa Theologica, I, Q.49, A.1.

Faith-Reason

"All too often it has been presented as though there is, first of all, that which Christianity has in common with all non-Christian ethics, and then there are special requirements that pertain to Christianity alone. The first may be spoken of as the first story of a house. So Roman Catholicism argues as though Christianity took the four cardinal virtues of Greek ethics as a first story, and merely added to it the three virtues of love, hope, and faith as a second story. But this is not true. The structure of Christian ethics is something that is different from all other systems of ethics. The first story of Christian ethics is built of different material from that of which non-Christian ethics is built, as well as is the second story. And it is to the difference of the first story that we must turn first. . . . This difference is clear as far as the standard of ethics is concerned if only we keep in mind that, according to Christian ethics, the moral consciousness of man has never functioned apart from God, while according to all non-Christian ethics, the moral consciousness has always functioned apart from God."
-- Christian-Theistic Ethics (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1980), pp. 127-28.


"Looking back we recall that we started our discussion of the Protestant doctrine of Scripture by an analysis of the views of Warfield and of Bavinck. Both men view the place of Scripture as imbedded in their total outlook on life. They do not build the first story of their house by reason in order then to add a second story built by faith. Their outlook on life is a living whole. For convenience we speak of this total outlook on reality as a world and life view."
-- The Protestant Doctrine of Scripture (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1968), p. 103.


"How then is the Christian believer to proceed as he seeks to win sinners to accept the Christian point of view? Roman Catholicism answers this question as follows. . . . Christians must offer their own position as something additional to what the non-Christian already believes. The Christian must tell the non-Christian that there is no defect in what he says about life but that he has not said enough. The Christian must tell the non-Christian that he has only half of the orange and that Christianity has the whole orange. On this view Christianity is presented as though it were the second story of a house, the first story of which has already been built and built well, by the Greeks."
-- "Scripture And Reformed Apologetics," from The New Testament Student and Theology, edited by John H. Skilton (Nutley, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1976), 3:150–59
.


"On the other hand faith for Kant pertains to what he calls 'the noumenal realm.' Of that realm man cannot intellectually know anything. If there is to be any contact with what is in that realm, it must be by irrational or non-rational means. In general, it is said to be faith by which we know what is there. And God is said to be there. But then the God who is there is indeterminate. The contact between the two realms is, from both directions, a partially rationalist and partially irrationalist affair. The idea that God has made man in his image, that Adam at the beginning of history knew God by direct revelation in his own constitution and in his environment as well as by direct communication is, on this basis, impossible. Nothing that happens in history, on the days and weeks and years of the calendar, can bear a direct revelation of God. The Son of God cannot come into history on a certain day and die or be raised from the dead on a certain day in ordinary history and thereby effect the reconciliation of man to God."
-- The Theology of James Daane (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1959), Ch.4, § 5

You can visit the site here.


|

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 

Excellent Christology, Paul's Kerygma, and My New Statement of Faith

This is an excerpt from Ridderbos’ Paul: An Outline of His Theology.  What follows is the conclusion of his chapter entitled “Fundamental Structures: Christ the Exalted and Coming Kyrios.”  Enjoy.


Bultmann has posited, in his work History and Eschatology, that Paul’s basic picture of history and of eschatology is interpreted entirely on the basis of his anthropology.  The result is said to be that history and the consummation of the world vanish from his sight, and that their place is taken by “the historicity of man,” even though he retains the traditional representations along with it.  It is our conviction that there is here a reversal of the real and deepest structures of Paul’s preaching.  However much attention the apostle devotes in his preaching to the significance the divine activity in Christ has for human existence (as will appear from what follows), the decisive viewpoint, even of his expectation for the future, is nevertheless a different one, namely, that of the theocentric significance of the divine redemptive work manifested and coming to consummation in Christ.  The whole exaltation of Christ is present and in the future is directed toward this, that God shall be all in all (I Cor. 15:28), and that at the name of Jesus every knee shall bow, of those in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father (Phil. 2:10; cf. Rom. 14:11).
     This theocentric point of view is also inherent in Christ’s all-embracing significance for the future of creation and humanity.  In him, the Beginning and the Firstborn from the dead, the Fullness was pleased to dwell, in order through him to reconcile all things to himself (Col. 1:19, 20).  And in him as the second Adam will the new humanity rise, be justified, and manifested (I Cor. 15:22; Rom. 5:19, 21; Col. 3:4).  We shall have to go further into the various facets of Paul’s expectation for the future, particularly as these are expressly raised in I Thessalonians 4:13 – 18; II Thessalonians 2:1 – 12; and I Corinthians 15.  But this future expectation itself, of which Christ forms the central point, is the indispensable termination of the whole of his preaching; it functions there not as a traditional addition to a spiritualistic or existentialistic Christology, but stands in closest relationship with the center of his kerygma.  The revelation of the mystery, the summary and the fundamental pattern of Paul’s whole proclamation of Christ, will not be completed before Christ shall have been manifested in glory with all his own (Col. 3:4), the last mystery shall have been disclosed (I Cor. 15:51; Rom. 11:25),and the creation now groaning and in travail shall have been redeemed from the bondage of corruption into the liberty of the glory of the children of God.  It is for the revelation of that great day that the Spirit himself prays and groans and comes to the help of the church in its weakness (Rom. 8:21ff.).

Amen.

|

 

Sermon Preparation

This Sunday, I have the opportunity to preach at Elm Creek Community Church in Maple Grove. As I have been preparing the sermon, I thought I'd give a basic outline of how I go about composing it. Click the title for a link to my screen resources.

After much prayer (and continued prayer throughout), I settle on a text. Its best if I'm preaching through a pericope or book, which forces me to deal with the next verses. I think this a strong antidote against preachers manipulating their congregations and merely preaching whatever is on their minds.

First, (in true TBI fashion) I translate the text from the original languages, diagram their sentence structure, and finally arc the clauses prepositions to get a feel for the logical consistency of the text. This gives me an excellent idea what the author is trying to get at. I analyze the text first from a grammatical-historical perspective, and then follow that with a redemptive angle. The redemptive comes logically after, though receives the emphasis. I have a series of syntax questions that I put the text through, attempting to glean more details and enthymemes from the text.

Externally, I run word searches for key nouns and verbs, and look for similar constructions in the original text. If I need to, I may cautiousy consult Kittel's TDNT or TLG for help with a particular word. Following this, I begin to consult the commentaries: usually Matthew Henry, Calvin, and modern writers that I trust. After this, I will browse theological works that may apply. One I often turn to (when preaching from a Pauline text) is Ridderbos' Paul: An Outline of His Theology. Before I finish, I run the text through another set of questions, these being a bit more theologically oriented. I analyze the text for any cardinal doctrines taught. Finally, I analyze how this particular text employs a Law/Gospel hermeneutic, and then, a la Spurgeon, I make a beeline to the cross, no matter the text.

Resources I have used so far:
  1. Piper sermons
  2. Calvin's Commentary
  3. James M. Boice
  4. J. Ligon Duncan
  5. R. Gaffin Resurrection & Redemption
  6. Ridderbos Paul
  7. McKnight's Commentary


While there is still composition and rhetoric to consider, as well as the flow of the sermon, these are the basic categories I employ. This week I'm preaching on Philippians 2:9 - 11:

Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.


I'll put up more of my resources after the weekend. Here is an appetizer.

|

Monday, August 22, 2005 

The True Use Of The Law

Martin Luther

It is no small matter then to understand rightly what the law is, and what is the true use and office thereof... we reject not the law and works, as our adversaries do falsely accuse us... we say that the law is good and profitable, but in his own proper use: which is first to bridle civil transgressions, and then to reveal and to increase spiritual transgressions. Wherefore the law is also a light, which sheweth and revealeth, not the grace of God, not righteousness and life; but sin,death, the wrath and judgement of God... the law, when it is in his true sense, doth nothing else but reveal sin, engender wrath, accuse and terrify men, so that it bringeth them to the very brink of desperation. This is the proper use of the law, and here it hath an end, and it ought to go no further.

From Martin Luther's commentary on Galatians

To be discussed at a later time.

|

 

More Flash Fun

Hopefully, some of you have already enjoyed the fun from this post.

The website this short was hosted at has two other short films, "The Fall" and "The History of Natural Man." They are both quite good, and are recommended. Here are some links for each:

The Fall

The History of Natural Man

|

 

The Historic Doctrine of Justification
Topic: Download

I can remember when it first dawned on me that perhaps not every Christian had become one by asking Jesus into his heart and praying "the sinner's prayer." The thought that I might be doing something new or novel was terrifying to me (so I'm not a typical Gen-Xer. Sue me).

The Reformed have long held to the principle that Scripture teaches humanity has its only hope of salvation in Christ's merits alone; applied by grace alone through faith alone. These comprised three of the five solas of the Reformation (the others being Scripture alone, and God's glory is the only allowed - man receives no credit).

So what if Christians in other eras weren't being justified by faith alone, as we Reformed hold? What if justification by faith was a novelty introduced by the Reformers, who were guilty of reading their own experiences and struggles onto the text of Scripture, and thus coming up with a new doctrine?

This idea has been and is being propounded throughout much of academia and even amongst some churches today. So how would we answer such a question: is the doctrine of justification by faith alone a truth taught by Christians of every generation? The way to answer it is to go back and trudge through the tomes of literature compiled and generated by the early church leaders and fathers. You would need to brush up on your Koine and classical Greek, rehearse your Latin paradigms, and wade in to oceans and seas of parchment and scrolls, paper and books, and look to see what the Early Church was teaching.

Or you could read James Buchanan's The Doctine of Justification: An Outline of Its History in the Church and Its Exposition From Scripture. This marvelous scholar has done a good deal of the work for you. I have reposted here an excerpt from "Lecture III: History of the Doctrine in the Times of the Fathers and Scholastic Divines."

You can get the download here.

|

 

Drawing Black Lines that Skip, Tumble & Rhyme

Reading: Sermon prep
Enjoying: Black
& Gold on briar
Listening: Still Tschesnokoff... I'll put a link up soon

Here are some diamonds from T. S. Eliot. All selections from The Waste Land and Other Poems (Penguin Books, 2003).

The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock (79 - 98)
Should I, after tea and cakes and ices,
Have the strength to force the moment to its crisis?

But though I have wept and fasted, wept and prayed,

Though I have seen my head (grown slightly bald)

brought in upon a platter,

I am no prophet - and here's no great matter;

I have seen the moment of my greatness flicker,

And I have seen the eternal Footman hold my coat,

and snicker,

And in short, I was afraid.



And would it have worth been it, after all,

After the cups, the marmalade, the tea,

Among the porcelain, among some talk of you and

me,

Would it have been worth while,

To have bitten off the matter with a smile,

To have squeezed the universe into a ball

To roll it towards some overwhelming question,

To say: "I am Lazarus, come from the dead,

Come back to tell you all, I shall tell you all" -

If one, settling a pillow by her head,

Should say: "That is not what I meant at all.

That is not it, at all."


Portrait Of A Lady (41 - 55)
Now that the lilacs are in bloom
She has a bowl of lilacs in her room
And twists one in her fingers while she talks.
"Ah, my friend, you do not know, you do not know
What life is, you who hold it in your hands";
(Slowly twisting the lilac stalks)
"You let it flow from you, you let it flow,
And youth is cruel, and has no more remorse
And smiles at situations which it cannot see."
I smile, of course,
And go on drinking tea,
"Yet with these April sunsets, that somehow recall
My buried life, and Paris in the Spring,
I feel immeasurably at peace, and find the world
To be wonderful and youthful, after all."


Whispers of Immortality (29 - )
And even the Abstract Entities
Circumambulate her charm;
But our lot crawls between dry ribs
To keep our metaphysics warm.

|

Sunday, August 21, 2005 

Free Mini-Church Growth Seminar

If anyone is under pressure to quickly grow their church to astronomical attendance numbers, or just feels that the local zieitgeist is far too quickly passing them by, the obvious, only solution is to get educated in the new science of "churchgrowthology."

But if the latest courses at the hippest propaga- I mean, educational centers are either too far away (we're not all in South Cali, Rick) or too expensive (not everyone can afford Willow Creek pricing) or you just don't think you have enough purpose or Jabez's in your church... never fear. What the Thunder Said... is here for you.

Now, for a limited time offer, an absolutely free course that is guaranteed to grow your church is being offered online for free (of course, you could make any extra "love donations" out to the web site. And you don't have to only do that for this offer!). Simply click on this link, and enjoy!

This is too funny.

Requires flash.

|

Saturday, August 20, 2005 

CampOnThis: The Law and the Gospel
...and The Threefold Use of the Law by Sproul/Calvin

An important and excellent post on the topic. Steve Camp is to be congratulated for devoting to such an important part of the exegetical package.

|

Friday, August 19, 2005 

Diptych: A Tale of Two Women
Topic: The Long War

Peter Leithart gives an incredibly insightful post that is of utmost importance to men.
Proverbs 8 follows Proverbs 7. In chapter 7, Solomon records the speech of Lady Folly, the adulteress, who entices the simple to her house for a night of love-making. In chapter 8, Solomon records the speech of Lady Wisdom, who offers herself as the means to rule, honor, and wealth. The two speeches form a diptych (Waltke), and contrast two paths that are set before the young man, the hero of the romantic drama of Proverbs. Lady Folly offers immediate pleasure, instant gratitifaction on a bed of spices; her speech is smooth, seductive, enticing; but following her leads to poverty, shame, and death. Lady Wisdom’s speech is initially less appealing: She calls the simple to prudence, speaks what is riht and straight and not what is prverted and crooked. But those who follow her receive wealth, honor, power, and ultimately life in the most complete sense. The key contrast of the two paths, the two women, comes in 8:35-36: “he who finds me finds life, and obtains favor from Yahweh. But he who misses me injures himself; all those who hate me love death.”
Read the rest of the article by clicking on the title.

This is incredibly important for today's biblical man. We are not merely to be denying the lust of the flesh and fighting against our sinful tendencies, but we are also to be cultivating Godly passions. The way the world chases after Lady Lust (Folly) is the way Christian men should pursue Lady Wisdom of Proverbs 8. The question isn't whether or not to pursue a feminine ideal, but rather which feminine will you pursue? Lust or Wisdom?

The practical dividends are endless. Briefly:

Fathers should be teaching their sons the beauty and value of courtship from a young age. For a time, boys don't like cootie infested girls, and until then, they should be taught the value of pursuing wisdom. But the age will come, and then teens will have a biblical matrix to copy from. "Son, in the way that I have taught you to pursue wisdom is the way you are to interact with the girls your age at school and church."

Lessons will abound, chiefly that what our sons pursue are feminine, and not masculine. There are some women that are to be pursued, who model Lady Wisdom, and their are trampy girls who model Lady Lust. Lets teach our boys to pursue a certain sort of woman a certain sort of way from their infancy, so that when they grow old, they would not depart from it. This will be immensely helpful in the fight against lust and pornography that is enslaving the men in our churches.

The night is falling, and winter is upon us. Look to your arms, and ready yourselves. Brace yourself; prepare for the Long War.

|

 

Here I Am, Send Me

Reading: R.L. Dabney's "What Is A Call To The Ministry?" and the latest Credenda/Agenda
Enjoying: #2 of 5 Onyx
Listening: I've got some of my old music re-uploaded - Tschesnokoff "Salvation Is Created"

A few comments, on what I've been browsing.

First, if you're like me, you're a bit frustrated with your future vocation. You grew up in pietistic fundamental evangelicalism (fundagelicalism), and you feel a deep burning to be a minister of Word and Sacrament. (With that last part, you also prove you are no longer apart of said fundagelicalism, which never uses swear words like "sacrament.") However, you are keenly aware that being a minister is not like being a mechanic, or math teacher, or doctor. If you are good with numbers, enjoy teaching, and other people think you could get paid to do it, the deal is sealed - you ought to be a math teacher. However, if you enjoy the Bible, have a good grasp of theology and how the Law and Gospel are to be handled, and wish to see others come to a grasp of the Lord - you may be a good Christian, and that's it. Being a poimen (shepherd) takes a call of the Holy Spirit, and those aren't to be had by just anyone.

So you can imagine the emotional and skeptical demons that plague a person as to whether all his time in seminary and studying is really what he is supposed to be doing. So when an article like R. L. Dabney's "What Is A Call To The Ministry?" comes along, it is truly a breath of fresh air. Here is an eminently biblical, sound theologian to be trusted, who wants to answer the question by saying, "What does the Bible have to say about such a calling?"

Dabney lists several promptings that a man may take for signals and signs from the Spirit:
  1. A call to preach is not complete until the Holy Spirit has uttered it, not only in the Christian judgment of the candidate himself, but in that of his brethren also. One should feel the promptings of the Holy Spirit within and hear them echoed on the lips of holy brothers who admonish him to pursue the office.
  2. The principal Scriptures that deal with the office, explicitly I Timothy 3 and Titus 1:6 - 9, and all texts that commend a man to offer himself whole heartedly to the service of the Lord, bear deeply upon his soul.
  3. The kind providences of God should be looked upon to see only as a guide, and not a determinant. Providence should be looked at in hindsight, viz., what has already happened, and not guessed at in the future. If, then, the young Christian is surrounded with outward hindrances, it is his duty to ask: “Is it possible for me lawfully to conquer them by the most strenuous exertions of my best faculties, nerved by deathless love for Christ?” If it is, then it may be his duty to preach.
  4. The Scriptures which define the necessary qualifications of the minister may be digested in substance into the following particulars: He must have a hearty and healthy piety, a fair re­putation for holiness of life, a respectable-force of character, some Christian experience, and aptness to teach. Let us repeat the re­mark that these particulars are given by the Holy Spirit as a rule by which the church is to judge in calling, as well as the candidate in obeying the call. And let us remark also, with emphasis, once for all, that the young Christian, in concluding whether he possess these qualifications, should attach much weight to the opinion of judicious Christian friends, yea, even more than to his own, because men are often more in the dark, by reason of self-love,, concerning their own characters, than their acquaintances.
  5. In keeping with Matthew 9:37, a potential candidate is to consider the needs of the church at the present moment, as well as the natural law of supply and demand to see where he may be most needed.
  6. Let us gather up the sum of the matter. The Divine will is to be learned from these teach­ings of the Scriptures, and of events interpreted by Scripture, all studied under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, obtained through prayer.
  7. Sincere and deep prayer must be offered to know better the will of our gracious Lord.
I wanted to conclude with the final exhortation Dabney gives:
We conclude with this final caution. The claims of the min­istry on Christian young men are so strong that in many cases the head cannot misunderstand them, though the reluctant heart may shrink from them. Such cases often result thus: the un­decided Christian says, “I will investigate farther; I will give myself time, and meantime I will teach or seek some temporary business;” or he says, “I will preach; I cannot dispute the duty; but I am young; two or three years hence will be time enough.”
And then, under this deceitful plea, he plunges un­necessarily into secular business, till its trammels, or the new affections of married life, or some fancied necessity, settle the question, and the man never preaches. Show us the case where such a retraction of the better resolution is not evidence of, yea, synonymous with, spiritual decline. Ah, how many are there now in the secular professions, keen, money-loving lawyers, busy politicians, indolent dilettanti, fallen drunkards, degraded repro­bates, who were once promising Christians, and whose apostasy began just in this way?
Look, young, hesitating professor, at the dire fate of a Balaam. He professed to seek the Lord's will, and he received an expression of it which he dared not dispute. Well would it have been for him if he had then ceased inquiring and gone at once to obeying. But the deceitfulness of his heart prompted him to what he supposed was a middle course. “He would not proceed in the teeth of the Lord's will; oh! no, not he! not for worlds! But he would inquire again;” and the re­sult was that he got no answer from God better than the first, but he secured the damnation of his own soul. To say that you will “consider farther of the matter,” after God has made an end of consideration by giving light enough to settle the question, is but virtual disobedience.
There is then no time to consider; it is time to act. If you are prepared at present to
preach, and God calls you to preach, then he calls you to preach now. If you have preparation to make, and God calls you to preach, he calls you to begin that preparation now; for a per­ishing world needs you now; while you causelessly hesitate souls drop into hell. “today, if ye will hear his voice, harden not your heart.”
My own opinion of Dabney's article is very impressed. I think he does an excellent job of balancing extreme nitpicking with his ardent exhortation at the end. Perhaps I, and the circles I run in, have too much to do with introspection, rather than understanding and obedience.
***
Lastly, I just have to mention Credenda/Agenda. This publication is well known, and is infamous as it is put out by Doug Wilson and Christ Church in Moscow, ID. I've found that I'm always comfortable giving it this recommendation:
Credenda/Agenda is always entertaining, and often edifying.
They came out with a new issue recently, "A Case of the Blues." If you are in the right mood, go read the article about the cheetahs, half way down. It is terrific. I love this ministry.

Have a blessed weekend, and enjoy the Lord's Day in Christ.

|

 

Epistemology
Topic: Philosophia Christi


Reading: R.L. Dabney's "What Is A Call To The Ministry?" and the latest Credenda/Agenda
Enjoying: #2 of 5 Onyx
Listening: I've got some of my old music re-uploaded - Tschesnokoff "Salvation Is Created"

Some of you may know my difficulties with the externalism/internalism debate. For those of you on the outside looking in, two things: 1) you're not missing that much, and 2) its about a debate amongst epistemologists.

Basically, this debate is about how we know things, and how we know what we know. Epistemology was a favorite issue of mine during my undergrad. Sooner or later I'll post a paper I presented about Plantinga and hard core externalism over Thunder Speak.

So back to what we're talking about today. A good definition of internalism would be:

that belief b is to be epistemically justified if and only if all the factors necessary for belief for a given person be cognitively accessible for that person;
where;
cognitively accessible is understood in that ideas obtain internally through introspection or reflection.


And a good definition of externalism would be:

that at least some of the justifying factors need not be thus accessible [that is, cognitively], so that they can be external to the believer's cognitive perspective, i.e., beyond his ken.
So for some of you, this is no doubt ridiculous. These are attempts at answering, "What is knowledge, and how do we know something?" The way this has been most faithfully answered is, "In order to *know* something, a person must be justified, it must be true, and it must be believed." Thus, for a person to have "warrant" to "know" something, we speak of justified true belief (JTB). But then this guy named Gettier comes along, and he throws everything out of whack. Let me give you an example of what has come to be known as "Gettier problems."

Your Aunt Eunice, a wondeful lady in her sixties, has always been one of your favorite relatives. Her husband died a decade ago, which led to her spending much more time with you and your sister as you were growing up. You've always thought your aunt a bit wild and free-spirited, and prone to do crazy, fun things. Soon you learn that Eunice is going to London. You volunteer to giver her a ride to the airport. You drop her off at the terminal, say your good byes, and head for home - knowing that in eight hours she will be in the London airport.
However, what you didn't know is that your Aunt Eunice had developed a raging heroin addiction. Once you dropped her off at the airport, she threw away her phony tickets for London that she had bought off a guy on the street, and took out her real tickets for Las Vegas where she was going to meet up with a dealer and his fence named Redfoot to buy a large cache of heroin. She boarded the airport for Las Vegas, and the flight was going smoothly. That is, until over St. Louis terrorists overtook the cabin, held the passengers at gun point, and forced the pilot to turn the plane around and head for London. Seven hours later, your Aunt Eunice disembarked from the plane into the city of London.


Now, you are thinking at home that, "Well, Aunt Eunice is in London by now." So you *know* she is there. But is it fair to say that you *knew* she was going to London? All Gettier problems are narratives with two twists: one that invalidates the justification of knowing, and a second twist to leave the content true. (Scary that I can think of these kind of stories, huh?)

Externalism and internalism help philosophers deal with these kind of things. Currently, I tend toward extenalism, but I'm still probing and reading.

Anyway, I got some help in my thinking from The Puritanboard.
First, here is a helpful definition:
'Belief' is: a positive cognitive attitude towards a proposition, an action guiding mental state on which a person relies (whether intermittently or continuously) in his theoretical inferences or his practical actions or plans.

This comes courtesy of Paul Manata. He has a great blog that everyone needs to read often.

Also, I got some good help in seeing how it is possible to confuse *understanding* an idea, and *knowing* its truth-ladenness. That is,
I can understand a position or doctrine without believing it, but I can't in this case be said to know that the doctrine or position is true. The conflation is related to a similar one. For any proposition, p, I can be said to know the truth of second-order propositions *about* proposition p, even if I don't believe p itself. (I realize some of this language is technical, but bear with me.) I don't believe any of the propositions that constitute Arminian theology, but I do know (and believe) many propositions about the propositions of Arminianism, e.g., that Arminianism consists of doctrines x, y, and z, that these doctrines have certain logical relations, and so on. In such cases, I can be said to know *about* Arminian doctrine even if I don't know that Arminian doctrine is true. I can be said to believe propositions about Arminianism even if I don't believe the propositions *of* Arminianism.

So anyway, especially in philosophy, so much of our dueling must be carried on proper semantics. I hope some of this was as helpful to you as it was to me.


|

Thursday, August 18, 2005 

Of the Reading (and distributing) of Books, There Is No End

Reading: G.I. Williamson's commentary of the WCF
Enjoying: Nothing but the worshipful company of my wife
Listening: The A/C unit

I think every pastor,and several other people as well, should have a list of books that they recommend for various situations. For instance, John Piper's Seeing and Savoring Jesus and Future Grace are two important works to have on hand for the normal Christian life. For believers struggling with sin, the abridged Sin and Temptation by John Owen (forward by J.I. Packer) is a must have resource for mortification. When people move into a new house, Doug Wilson's My Life For Yours is a great gift, as well as his books on marriage and husband/wife roles. New Christians should be handed The Gospel For Real Life by Jerry Bridges in a package with a new ESV Bible (preferably the Reformation Study Bible...). For engaged and newly weds, Gary Thomas' Sacred Marriage is the book to give.

I think you get the picture. Sometime I'll add to this list of all the ones I'd like to be able to give away. And on top of this, it would be ideal if, as a pastor, I had about ten copies of each title in boxes to just hand out to people who come in with questions, etc. Then you'd just have the best title on hand so that they could get going on it right away.

Recently, one title that has rocked my married life in an incredibly positive way is The Family Worship Book by Terry L. Johnson. It is a phenomenal book that is the definition of complete package, and the quintessential book to have on a list such as the one I'm producing. It provides a compelling philosophy and rationale for family worship, followed by practical and easily applied ideas for getting started. It has various lists and a sample guide to help the reader visualize family worship playing itself out in his family, and help him accomplish this. To aid a family even more, creeds, hymns, psalms, and prayers are included to give a family all they need to begin family worship. The Bible plus this book will immediately have a family worshipping in a distinctively biblical, Reformed, historically orthodox manner. This book gets five stars, and Terry Johnson is to be commended for the service he has done Christ's church and Her families.



Compliments of Brian's hp iPAQ 5550.

|

 

Kierkegaard On Christian Scholarship

Reading: A. Rosenberg Philosophy of Science
Enjoying: Ginger ale and nothing
Listening: Yellowcard "Gifts and Curses"


Kierkegaard: "Christian scholarship is the Church's prodigious invention to defend itself against the Bible, to ensure that we can continue to be good Christians without the Bible coming too close . . . We would be sunk if it were not for Christian scholarship! Priase be to everyone who works to consolidate the reputation of Christian scholarship, which helps to restrain the New Testament, this confounded book which would, one, two, three, run us all down if it got loose."

|

Wednesday, August 17, 2005 

ELCA Update

Reading: Catching up on a bit of blogging, as well as Berkhof's Systematic Theology
Enjoying: Muenster cheese and starbursts
Listening: Some classical orchestra aria. I screwed up the download, and now the title reads in gibberish. Its gorgeous listening, however.


I wanted to take a moment and (belatedly) update and weigh in on the recent decisions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America.

Chiefly, the 2005 Churchwide Assembly voted on three proposals: a churchwide call to unity and charity, a policy pertaining to the celibacy of gay clergy, and a final policy on the blessing of same-sex unions. (On What the Thunder Said, it is impossible to use "same-sex" and "marriage" in connotation since this defies this website's definition.)

Of the three proposals, the first rousingly passed, while the latter two fell short of the two - thirds majority needed to pass an addendum. Specifically, this means that the ELCA will pursue love and unity, it opposes the ordination of practicing gay & lesbian clergy, and it opposes the blessing of same-sex unions by the church herself. The results have left several questions in the minds of those within the ELCA and those watching from the outside.

Consider Dr. Al Mohler from a few days ago:
It appears that the denomination avoided taking a clear stand either way... The denomination rejected "formal rites for blessing couples in same-sex relationships," but left churches virtually free to come up with their own... Once again, the ELCA has decided not to decide -- or at least to avoid making any decision that clearly affirms a biblical concept of marriage, sexuality, and ministry. The denomination did adopt a "unity" resolution that called on ELCA churches to remain united, despite "widely differing beliefs on homosexuality." What kind of unity remains after a biblical consensus is gone?
For more on what happened at the assembly, go here.

For a perspective from more "conservative" Lutherans, try here.

I agree that such a display leaves the church on questionable and shaky footing at best. At worst, they have merely prolonged what they have already set about in their hearts to do. Though I am thankful to the Lord for the rejection of the final two proposals, I am afraid the unity displayed in the sealing of the first will carry the denomination where they should not go.

In my last post on this topic, I found myself running into sticky ground. Does acceptance of homosexual relationships relegate a church or denomination to the status of apostate? Should the ELCA, or the Anglican/Episcopal branches, affirm homosexual relationships as allowable/appropriate, are they in the same category as Rome? It is one thing to say a church is dead and apostate, and another to say most of the members of said church are going to hell. But at what point do pews full of reprobate equivocate apostasy?

Let's start with first things. The Roman Catholic church is understood to be a false church because she has denied the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. Specifically, in denying that justification is by grace through faith, she falls under the apostolic curse of Paul:

Galatians 1:8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed (anathema, ἀνάθεμα).
When the Reformers broke from Rome, it wasn't due to the denominationalism rampant in today's Protestant Christianity; it was to continue the true, Apostolic church, which had died in Rome's denial of the Gospel. While any such apostasy is a progressive event, deformation accumulated at the Council of Trent. In refusing to understand faith as related but necessarily distinctly identifiable apart from works (viz., love), the RCC added to the Gospel, and the Protestant church was born. (Now, whether or not Rome or Protestantism has changed its tune is an altogether other, hotly contested animal. I won't pursue that lemming trail here.)

Now back to our Lutherans. Granted:
  • Most in the ELCA aren't "protesting" anything, and can scarcely be called Protestants.
  • Some in the ELCA shouldn't even enjoy the term "Christian," despite whose Name they were baptised into and I-don't-care-how-objective-Doug-Wilson-thinks-the-covenant-is.
  • The homosexuality issue, even IF unconclusive in itself (and that is a Grand Canyon sized 'if'), is an issue that is demonstrative of a deeper, viral condition of potent filth lying beneath the veneer of denominational bureacracy and politics.
I grant all the above. However, I wonder if it isn't typical of pietistic evangelicals to judge people/denominations on actions rather than ontologies. (For all of you who know my position on Levinas and onto-theology, just hold up a sec. I've got a point coming.) We think we are in trouble with God for our sins, rather than because we are sinful. We think we will go to heaven because of "evangelical sacraments" (i.e., the "sinner's prayer," walking forward for the altar call, signing a card, raising a hand, etc.), rather than an inward transformation that has taken place by the work of the Holy Spirit on account of Christ's sacrifice and resurrection. Therefore, we think the ELCA bankrupt since it affirms these awful actions, though we cannot see their true state.

Compare the two. We are shoulder to shoulder with Rome in our fight against abortion, marriage, bio-ethics, and everthing else "culture war." But when a Protestant denomination starts to sin like the ELCA does, we are ready to throw out the baby with the bathwater. There is Rome, standing there with all her good deeds (pro-life, pro-abstinence, anti-liberalism, etc.) and absolutely failing at the Gospel, and here is the sodomitic ELCA, but at least proclaims that justification can be had for all who will simply believe. Are we truly Protestant?

Despite having said all that, I ultimately disagree with the idea that the ELCA is upholding the Gospel (should an affirmative vote go through on homosexuality. Actually, in an attempt to be more judicious, she is already on shaky ground with or without said vote). Though the ELCA may not be tampering with the language of justification (i.e., solus Christus, sola gratia, sola fide), she is denying the Gospel. For as a matter of fact, we destroy the power of the Gospel if we teach it so as to impair the godliness that is to follow (I Timothy 6:3). The Gospel is received without works, though it is no Gospel at all that does not produce good works. The only kind of trees that do not produce fruit are dead trees (John 15:1-5).

It is true that the ELCA is not (at least in this author's mind) yet an apostate church. Churches and denominations can recover from malignant and deep sin. The turn-around the Southern Baptist Convention made against the liberalism inflitrating its ranks, and the slavery practices that had imbedded itself into Southern Presbyterianism are proof that gross sin in a denomination, while grave, is not the death knell. Nevertheless, if the ELCA does not walk away from this Gehenna, it will surely rot and die here.

I look forward to talking with some of my friends from the ELCA and get their reactions on this issue.

Falling under the category "bewildering":
"Hanson said that he was pleased by the "respectful tone" of both the voting members and the visitors," despite the fact that

"a silent protest took place during the debate. In the early afternoon, some 100 persons wearing rainbow scarves around their necks walked slowly to the front of the podium, spread across the convention area, facing the voting members. Hanson requested the group return to the visitor section, but the group remained in place until the end of the Aug. 12 afternoon session. Once it was understood that the protesters were going to remain, Hanson invited the assembly to continue business.

Labels: ,

|

Sunday, August 14, 2005 

Thunder Chess X

In case you needed it, here's one more reason YOU should be playing Thunder Chess X:

Several large projects have found that people who are more educated, have more
intellectually challenging jobs and engage in more mentally stimulating
activities, such as attending lectures and plays, reading, playing chess and
other hobbies, are much less likely to develop Alzheimer's and other forms of
dementia. (emphasis added)

So play already.


Black pawn C7 to C6.

White rooking with rook H1.

Black pawn H7 to H8.

White to move.

Labels:

|

Friday, August 12, 2005 

Pray for the ELCA

Herald.com | 08/12/2005 | Lutherans pass first of three resolutions

In my mind, it is imperative that the ELCA not pass the remaining two articles. Well, I should qualify that. Blessing same-sex unions does not necessitate a denial of the gospel. However, its pretty close.

I have friends who are devout believers in the ELCA who are horrified by what is happening. I'll be praying for all of you.

Labels: , ,

|

 

Covenant, Law, & Gospel


Reading: Nestle-Aland 26th
Listening: Gods and Generals Soundtrack
Enjoying: The thought of my wife coming home later tonight!

I just put up two new articles at Thunder Speak.


There are few things of higher importance to me right now on my theological horizon than these three things. A crucial article that helped me with this appeared in ModernReformation awhile ago... one site EVERYONE should have bookmarked is Reformation Ink. It is a superb site run by Shane Rosenthal, who has worked closely with the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals and ModernReformation.

I hope you enjoy these articles, and they stimulate your thinking on this issue. If the Law/Gospel distinction is new to you, while these articles are helpful, I would wait on reading them. The same if covenant theology is novel. First go read some of the articles at Reformation Ink, or better yet, read the article by Ligon Duncan here. Of course, if you do all that reading, you won't need to come back for these, but, oh well.
Enjoy!

Labels: , ,

|

 

Repentance
Downloads

I've finally figured out how to post downloads. In reality, this is what I've been wanting to do for a long time now: have a way to make things I have available for download to friends and strangers who may find value in this. So to that end, if you ever wanted to know more about Romans 2:4 and how Paul uses repentance in that text and its larger pericope, this could be a source for you. Or, if you knew I had done this, and wanted to check up on it, now its available as well.

Most of the downloads I upload will be made available at Thunder Speak simply to keep categories clean. This way I can host sermons, pictures, papers, and research there.

As for this paper, I apologize for the Greek text. Somewhere between my switching from Biblework's font and "Greek parse" used by Gramcord, and then converting it to a PDF file, I think I goofed. I appreciate your patience as I continue to work out bugs. Also, Appendices A, C, & D are not currently listed. I'll have to see if they are scannable, and perhaps they will be up in the future, Lord willing.

Soli Deo Gloria

Labels: ,

|

Thursday, August 11, 2005 

Immortality
Theology, Sceptrum Ab Hominem


Reading: Just browsing the blogosphere and the WSJ. Too tired for anything serious.
Enjoying: Onyx out on the porch.
Listening: KKMS 980 AM I caught the tail end of Alistair Begg, and all of R.C. Sproul.

I finished up some bidding over at eBay, and bought another pocket pc that I think already has a home, though I'll have to check. Its another Axim (what's with that?), and in good condition too, I think. Perhaps I'll put up more over at Thunder Speak.

I came home late from work, since we had taken a few residents out for pie at Baker's Square. Though my new home that I assist in is difficult and not always as much fun, I'm thankful for the opportunity to do this. I really do feel that what I do at ACR (as much as I may disagree with the company) is kingdom work. By taking of these people, and helping them live decent lives, I help proclaim Christ's lordship a bit more effectively, especially when I do it lovingly and cheefully. But anyway, that's why I'm up late blogging.

Tomorrow (today!) my wife comes home, and it will be good to have her home. I've missed her, and I can't wait to hear all about NY. She starts a new job on Monday, so I'll be looking for ways to help her in this new transition of life.

Since she was gone, I mentioned I'd grabbed some movies I wouldn't normally have had a chance to watch. One of the other's that I had rented was Gods and Generals.
The man pointing with the scroll is Stephen Lang, phenomenally portraying "Stonewall" Jackson. This movie is the sequel (?) to Gettysburg, and emphasizes historical accuracy, and a profound look at the spiritual lives of several of the prominent figures.

One of the best scenes in the movie occurs in scene #12, "We Must Never Forget." A battle has just finished (which the Confederates won), and Stonewall Jackson and his men are surveying the battle field and attending to the wounded.

Captain: "General, how is it that you can keep so utterly serene with a storm of shells and bullets whirling about your head?"
Jackson: "Capt. Smith, my religious belief teaches me to feel as safe in battle as I do in bed. God has fixed the time of my death; I do not concern myself with that."

That is a man I would like to be like.

Labels: ,

|

Wednesday, August 10, 2005 

Thunder Chess X
WTTSstuff


Here we go some more. Looks like its getting interesting.

Black knight G8 to F6.
White knight G1 to F3.

Black rooking right rook.

White bishop F1 to D3.


Still could use some help.

Labels:

|

 

A New Venue into the Waste Land
Blogging



I'm opening up Thunder Speak, to show photo albums, techno-stuff, and downloads I'd like to make available. It will progress probably a bit more slowly than this blog, but that's ok by me.

Labels: ,

|

 

Wednesday's montage
Blogging, Theology, Philosophy

Reading: Witsius, Herman The Economy of the Covenants
Enjoying: Nothing, and I'm starved.
Listening: Bach, J.S. "Cello Suite No. 1 in G major" Allemande

From the blogosphere

Doug Wilson et al are enjoying their Trinity Fest 2005, and from the reportings, it sounds wonderful. It prompted me to reflect on the value of large corporate gatherings of the baptized, and its foreshadowing of heaven. Nevertheless, as much as we may enjoy such amalgamates, they must also leave a longing in us, as the Groom is not fully with His Bride in the way He soon will be.

The iMonk weighs in helpfully on guiding the Christian artist, and then gives a remarkable self-disclosure of his own journey, hurt, and fractured relationship with the local (read small) church. I would also love to get my hands on his architecture.

If you were to ask me (which, oddly enough, no one has) who is the best resource for understanding current racial relationships in America and the American church... I wouldn't know. But I do know who has done a ton of reading, and blogging, on this: Justin Taylor. Here's another great look he takes at it, with helpful info and links.

The Pyromaniac is always in rare form. After Johnson laboriously detailed his hero feat against his new Dell laptop that took 2+ days to get setup, get this:
Sean Higgins, on the other hand, crows about the fact that his new Titanium PowerBook G4 took him only three hours out of the box to set up. Yeah, well, my GameBoy wasn't too hard to configure, either. Have fun with it.
He also wrassles with "Jus Divinum" over at Triablogue regarding the merits of evangelicalism. Though their argument is different from one I would enter into, I see no benefit in holding "evangelicalism" - the moniker, the movement, the fraternity - any longer. Of course, my sounding its death knell isn't too new for cyberspace, its just that I never thought it existed in the first place. Fundamentalist smoke and mirrors. I'll devote more of my thoughts on this later.

***

Though it barely seems mentionable now, the missus and I had a terrific weekend with the newly married Tachicks on Friday, and Gally and Kelly on Saturday. Friday night we had the priviledge of watching the Twins womp on my guilty pleasure Bo Sox. Brad Radke was terrific, and the Twinkies remembered to bring the wood for this game. It was fun to watch, as opposed to Sunday's nightmare when Joe Mays COULD NOT FIND IT for the life of him. Hats off to Kyle Lohse for a game he should have earned a W for. The only redeeming factor from Sunday's loss? Bottom deck seats behind home plate with Grandpa, uncle, friend, and father. Good times.

Saturday with Ryan and Kelly comprised of Saturday night worship at church (Gally had to go home to Cali on a flight the following day. I think he visited WSCal yesterday). Our pastor preached one of his best, most gospel-centered sermons I've heard in a long time. Thank you Lord.
After that, it was out to Uptown for some very cosmo Green Mill pizza (meat lovers and supreme, if I remember). We also enjoyed an art fest going on, and Gally and I ate up the bookstores while the gals chatted.

Since my glory (wife) is off to NYC, I decided to get some movies I wouldn't normally get to see. One of them was Primal Fear, with Richard Gere and Edward Norton (*****). I had visionally imbibed that optical and emotional feast a few years ago, but decided I had forgotten too much of it, and wanted to see it again. I realized that I remembered it more as a thriller with a huge twist at the end, rather than the legal brief with deception that I take it for now. I had also completely forgotten the subplot dealing with Chicago's Southside and its interpower logistics.

I love the idea presented at the end of the movie, when Gere's character overtones something to the effect that, "So. I guess Roy never existed." Norton's character verbally berates him, and replies that no, it was Aaron Stampler who never existed.
This idea of multiple personalities, or schizophrenia, is very interesting to me. I think Batman is schizophrenic. But the great theme in Batman is that Bruce Wayne is the conjured up personality. These slightly darker psychological themes (more fully developed in stories with Two Face) perplex and challenge me.
Now, I think I need to be careful, since I'm dealing with fictitional, glamorized instances of terrible, horrible diseases that play havoc with the mind's of God's children. But at the same time, I think I (and maybe several of us) sense a bifurcation of character in us. I'm not especially talking about Paul's flesh/spirit antithesis (e.g. Romans 8). I think I am far more Platonic than Paul. The Apostle's flesh/spirit antithesis occurs in a unity; I sometimes honestly think I am a duality. Now my theology doesn't let me travel too far down this road, but my experience looks for footprints on the path. Sometimes more than others, I keenly feel the distance between my projected self before my wife, my job, my mirror, and the one I fight to suppress.
By the way, this is why I like Batman so much. In the mythos of Gotham, Batman is one of few who has truly come to grips with his whole self. I need to go see Batman Begins again...

A big "woohoo" and hearty congratulations to Aaron Robertson and Erica "Soon-to-be-a-Robertson" Gernand on their recent engagement.
Now to him who is able to keep you from stumbling and to present you blameless before the presence of his glory with great joy, 25to the only God, our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion, and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen.
Jude 24 - 25

Labels: , , ,

|

Monday, August 08, 2005 

Labels:

|

Transplanted from the artic blight of Minnesota to the sunny paradise of SoCal, I am attending school and learning to say "dude." I like to think of myself as equal parts surf rash, Batman, heavy metal, Levinas, poetic license, and reformational. Other than creating blund blogs, I enjoy reading, sporting, and socializing with serious and funny people.
My profile



Web Blog

About

Email:

FAQ - Author|Site
Upcoming Events |30 Boxes|
blund Frappr Places
Looking for Poem|Eliot information?

Thunder Sites

Thunder Mobile
Thunder Photo Album
Thunder Media
Thunder Frappr Map
Thunder Directory



Popular and Favorite Posts
Liturgical Bingo: BBC
Updated Video Roundup
Levinas and the Inner Demons

Categories

under construction

Recent Posts


Thunder Comments

under construction

Links & Blogs

Websites
CRTA
Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals
WSJ Opinion Journal
The Bethlehem Institute
ModernReformation
Westminster Seminary
Liberty Classical Academy
Monergism
ACR Homes
Heritage Charter School
MN Reformation Society
Mobility Today
Christian Classics Ethereal Library
Desiring God
A Puritan's Mind

Blogs Du Jour
Gospel Driven Blog
Building Old School Churches
PastorHacks.Net
Cranach
Keener Living
Cyrene Ministries: Anthony Carter
League of Reformed Bloggers
Westminster Seminary Blog Ring
WSC & Alumni Blog Ring
Voice of the Martyrs

Friends
Syond of Saints
Chris & Steph
Pilgrim in Progress
Josh Carney
Seeing and Savoring
Through A Mirror Dimly
Robert Recio
The Cameroonian Three
Deus Dixit
Morrow's Words
The Normal Christian Blog
The Fire and the Rose
M. Joel Tuininga
Mayor Loebs
The Griffiths Family Blog
One Day in the Life
יהוה צדקנו•
Off the Wire
Claus' Xanga
Sweetened Christological Syllabus
Molesky Tribe
Shane's Blog
Jesse & Kelly Torgerson
Zach & Sarah

blund web comments

under construction
  • more web comments

  • noteworthy posts


    Archives


    Subscribe













    BlogMailr Enabled
    Get Firefox
    Get Thunderbird



    Subscribe in Rojo
    Add to My Yahoo!
    Subscribe with Bloglines
    Subscribe in NewsGator Online

    Subscribe with Pluck RSS reader
    Add 'What the Thunder Said...' to Newsburst from CNET News.com
    Google Reader
    Add to My AOL
    del.icio.us What the Thunder Said...
    Subscribe with myFeedster
    Furl What the Thunder Said...
    Feed Your Feeds
    Kinja Digest
    Solosub
    MultiRSS
    Rmail
    Rss fwd
    Blogarithm



    Thunder Maps

    Thunder Frappr Map


    ClustrMap Visitor Map Locations of visitors to this page

    Adsense


    Thunder Bookshelf


    by J. R. R. Tolkien


    by Flannery O'Connor


    by Herman Bavinck


    by Peter A. Lillback

    Banners

    For proper use please use
    Get Firefox! Get Thunderbird!



    Purevolume.com

    Weblog Commenting and Trackback by HaloScan.com

    Desiring God

    MN Wild Hockey



    Bethlehem

    30 Boxes

    Oceanside URC

    Send Me A Message

    Mission OPC



    Westminster Seminary, California

    Statcounter.com

    Christ PCA Temecula

    MN Twins Baseball



    Clustrmaps.com






    Powered by Blogger







    How does Rowling and the "Harry Potter" series stack up against Tolkien and "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy?
    Rowling is the new dreamweaver. She is reigniting literature and fantasy as we know it.
    Tolkien is the undisputed favorite. We have not yet seen a match for his philogistic skill.
    This is apples and oranges. You might as well compare ping pong with Halo. Two different animals.
    Rowling wins, but only by one quidditch goal.
    Tolkien still stands, but only barely.
      
    pollcode.com free polls






    Firefox 2