Psalm 127:3

Whether it was intentional or not, the anti-abortion message is loud and clear:

This Week in Calvinism - March 14, 2014

• Three months ago, John Piper addressed the question, "Where's the Arminian John Piper?" Roger Olson, the inspiration for that particular episode of "Ask Pastor John," finally responds.
  
  
• David Murray explains why he thinks every politician should be a Calvinist.
  
  
• Turretinfan shares his thoughts on the allegation that the New Living Translation is too Calvinistic.
  
  
• John Piper responds to an outrageous charge in Austin Fischer's book Young, Restless, No Longer Reformed.
  
  
• Austin Fischer responds to Piper.
  
  
• Roger Olson responds to Piper's response to Fischer.
  
  
• Denny Burk reviews Jeremy Walker's book The New Calvinism Considered: A Personal and Pastoral Assessment.
  
  
• From whence cometh New Calvinism? Tim Challies has provided a handy infographic.

Everyone's a Theologian: A New Book from R. C. Sproul

Every Christian, by definition, is a theologian to some extent. That is why R. C. Sproul has written a new book for the layperson, titled Everyone's a Theologian: An Introduction to Systematic Theology:


Here is an excerpt:

Systematic theology is based on certain assumptions. The first assumption is that God has revealed Himself not only in nature but also through the writings of the prophets and the Apostles, and that the Bible is the Word of God. It is theology par excellence. It is the full logos of the theos.

The second assumption is that when God reveals Himself, He does so according to His own character and nature. Scripture Tells us that God created an orderly cosmos. He is not the author of confusion because He is never confused. He thinks clearly and speaks in an intelligible way that is meant to be understood.

A third assumption is that God's revelation in Scripture manifests those qualities. There is a unity to the Word of God despite the diversity of its authors. The Word of God was written over many centuries by many authors, and it covers a variety of topics, but within that diversity is unity. All the information found in Scripture--future things, the atonement, the incarnation, the judgement of God, the mercy of God, the wrath of God--have their unity in God Himself, so that when God speaks and reveals Himself, there is a unity in that content, a coherence.

God's revelation is also consistent. It has been said that consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, but if that were true, we would have to say that God has a small mind, because in His being and character, He is utterly consistent. He is the same Yesterday, today, and forever (Heb. 13:8).

Order your copy here.

A Call for Grace in the Midst of Controversy

Dr. James Galyon reminds us how important it is to remain gracious in the midst of controversy by posting a letter penned by John Newton:

John Newton (1725-1807)

Of all people who engage in controversy, we, who are called Calvinists, are most expressly bound by our own principles to the exercise of gentleness and moderation. If, indeed, they who differ from us have a power of changing themselves, if they can open their own eyes, and soften their own hearts, then we might with less inconsistency be offended at their obstinacy: but if we believe the very contrary to this, our part is, not to strive, but in meekness to instruct those who oppose. “If peradventure God will give them repentance to the acknowledgment of the truth.” If you write with a desire of being an instrument of correcting mistakes, you will of course be cautious of laying stumbling blocks in the way of the blind or of using any expressions that may exasperate their passions, confirm them in their principles, and thereby make their conviction, humanly speaking, more impracticable. ...

... If we act in a wrong spirit, we shall bring little glory to God, do little good to our fellow creatures, and procure neither honor nor comfort to ourselves. If you can be content with showing your wit, and gaining the laugh on your side, you have an easy task; but I hope you have a far nobler aim, and that, sensible of the solemn importance of gospel truths, and the compassion due to the souls of men, you would rather be a means of removing prejudices in a single instance, than obtain the empty applause of thousands. Go forth, therefore, in the name and strength of the Lord of hosts, speaking the truth in love; and may he give you a witness in many hearts that you are taught of God, and favored with the unction of his Holy Spirit.

Read the full post here.

Isaiah 40

One of my favorite scenes from one of the greatest films ever made:

This Week in Calvinism - March 7, 2014

• You can listen in on Dr. James White's discussion with Austin Fischer, author of Young, Restless, No Longer Reformed.
  
  
• Dr. White continued his response in two sermons.
  
  
• Benjamin J. Wetzel, a Ph.D. Candidate in history at the University of Notre Dame, reviews Fischer's book.
  
  
• Joe Aguillard, who bravely stood up to the attempted "Calvinist takeover" on the campus of Louisiana College, is looking forward to having his contract renewed.
  
  
• Join Tim Challies in 31 Days of Purity, spending the month of March thinking about and praying for sexual purity.
  
  
• This month, Reformation Trust is giving away the eBook edition of How the Gospel Brings Us All the Way Home, by Derek Thomas. Download it here. Offer expires March 31.

Should We Repent of Lent?

"If we fulfill our personal law," writes Brian Lee, "we have confirmed ourselves in the conceit that we aren't so badly off after all." He discusses why traditions like Lent can often be detrimental to our faith:

The standard reply, of course, is that the penitence of Lent is not about scoring brownie points, but about meditating on the passion of Christ, and joining in his suffering. The ashes are applied in the shape of a cross to remind us of the cross, and the death we must each die to our sins and our bodily passions.

Two problems present themselves with this view. First, it underestimates our sin. Remember, Jesus listed pride and deceit as two of the things that bubble up from within our hearts. As sinners, we can’t help taking pride in the things we do to give our salvation a little push, so engaging in such self-prescribed spiritual disciplines just gives us more sin — the sin of pride — to repent of.

Second, and more fundamentally, is the uniqueness and purpose of Christ's sufferings. Jesus didn't die to purify his own soul, but ours. He fasted for forty days in the wilderness on our behalf, so we wouldn't have to; not as a model, but as a substitute. His passion was not a discipline that made his heart pure in its love for his Father, it was the price to be paid for our sins, and he paid it in full.

Christians are called to suffer as Christ suffered, that is, with the same purpose. We are called to suffer not for ourselves, but for others. When we engage in fasting in his image, but for the purpose of purifying ourselves, we invert that image. Such penitence is ultimately focused on self, not on the other.

Read the full post here.

Translation of Kenneth Copeland's "Tongues" Prayer for Pope Francis

This Week in Calvinism - February 28, 2014

• Daniel Jones writes, "If you consistently and deliberately choose to believe what Calvinism teaches, you will leave Christ behind in favor of the darker, smaller, weaker, pettier God that Calvin helped invent."
  
  
• Dr. Michael Brown interviews Austin Fischer about his book Young, Restless, No Longer Reformed. They discuss why some people are drawn to Calvinism and why some leave it behind.
  
  
• Mike Leake reviews The New Calvinism Considered, by Jeremy Walker.
  
  
• Calvinists call themselves Reformed. But is Arminianism Reformed? According to Dr. Roger Olson, it all depends on what you mean by "Reformed."
  
  
• Calvinist Tim Conway (no, not that Tim Conway) preaches a sermon entitled "When Calvinism Goes Bad."
  
  
• Download The Best of WorshipMatters.com, a free e-book from Bob Kauflin. The folks at Sovereign Grace Ministries believe it "will be a valuable resource for worship leaders, musicians, and anyone desiring to grow in their understanding of Biblical worship."

Asking Christians to Violate Their Conscience

"You conservative Christians who are complaining about being forced to provide services to same-sex couples need to grow up. If Jesus wouldn't have a problem baking a cake for a gay wedding, then neither should you."

That pretty much sums up the message of a recent article in The Daily Beast by Kirsten Powers and Jonathan Merritt. The article was written in response to legislation passed in Arizona (which has since been vetoed) allowing businesses to refuse service to same-sex couples (and, presumably, polygamists, pedophiles, etc.) on the basis that providing such services would constitute a violation of conscience.

According to Powers and Merritt:

Many on the left and right can agree that nobody should be unnecessarily forced to violate their conscience. But in order to violate a Christian's conscience, the government would have to force them to affirm something in which they don't believe. This is why the first line of analysis here has to be whether society really believes that baking a wedding cake or arranging flowers or taking pictures (or providing any other service) is an affirmation. This case simply has not been made, nor can it be, because it defies logic. If you lined up 100 married couples and asked them if their florist "affirmed" their wedding, they would be baffled by the question.

The authors are implying two things in their analysis. First, by saying "nobody should be unnecessarily forced to violate their conscience," they are suggesting there are times when it becomes necessary to force people to violate their conscience. Current laws and court cases do just that.

Second, since one's conscience can only be violated if one is forced to affirm something in which one doesn't believe, and since providing services to same-sex couples in no way affirms their lifestyle (or, if you prefer today's accepted terminology, "the way God made them"), then there is nothing about which one can complain. They seem to be saying, "You conservative Christians have already lost on this issue, so the sooner you get used to it, the better."

Strangely, conservative Christians seem to have little interest in this level of analysis and jump right to complaints about their legal and constitutional rights. It's not that these rights don't matter. Rather, they should be a secondary issue for Christians. Before considering legal rights, Christians wrestling with this issue must first resolve the primary issue of whether the Bible calls Christians to deny services to people who are engaging in behavior they believe violates the teachings of Christianity regarding marriage. The answer is, it does not.

Well, a lot of Christians would argue that it does. Romans 1 comes to mind. After all, what is a gay "wedding" if not a celebration and endorsement of sin?

Veto aside, the legislation would have been completely useless in defending religious liberty. It had a built-in loophole that allowed government to "substantially burden a person's exercise of religion" if it could be demonstrated that one's exercise of religion prohibited the "furtherance of a compelling governmental interest." What exactly is a "compelling governmental interest"? That's one of those vague terms lawmakers like to slip into pieces of legislation with the intention of having it clarified in future court cases, usually resulting in the growth of government power. Nevertheless, simply because a few conservative Christians viewed initial passage of this legislation as a win for their side, the gay rights supporters were upset.

Never mind the fact that there are plenty of other business owners who would step up to accommodate same-sex couples denied service by closed-minded Christian bigots. This is about tolerance, dang it, and we simply won't tolerate intolerance!

That anyone, especially professing Christians, would have a problem with defending private property rights is very telling. We are no longer a society seeking justice and equality; we are a society that seeks to remedy any perceived social "injustice" by granting one particular and very small group of people special rights and protections above everyone else.

It is clear that Powers and Merritt see themselves as the stronger sister and brother, and they are only trying to assure the rest of us, those of weaker faith, that it's OK to go against our conscience if our conscience is misinformed. They conclude:

Rather than protecting the conscience rights of Christians, this [legislation] looks a lot more like randomly applying religious belief in a way that discriminates against and marginalizes one group of people, while turning a blind eye to another group. It's hard to believe that Jesus was ever for that.

No, what's hard to believe is that two Christians would ignore 1 Corinthians 8 and chastise their brothers and sisters in Christ. Their problem isn't with government forcing Christians to go against their principles; the problem is that Christians aren't going along with a clear conscience.

Inhuman: Undercover in America's Late-Term Abortion Industry

"Inhuman" is a series of videos from Live Action, documenting the horrific truth inside America's culture of infanticide. Here is one example:


Check out other videos here.

Gene Simmons Defends Tim Tebow

In an interview a few months ago, rocker Gene Simmons announced that he was trying to sign Tim Tebow for his arena football team, the L.A. KISS. He voiced his opinion of those who mocked the quarterback for his faith:


Tebow has since taken a job with ESPN as a college football analyst.

This Week in Calvinism - February 21, 2014

• Did you know that Calvinism is a cult? We know this to be true because someone who doesn't have the foggiest idea of what Calvinism is said so.
  
  
• Sure, Calvinism is popular, but it's not sexy.
  
  
• Is New Calvinism just a fad?
  
  
• Eric Carpenter is "bored beyond words" with the whole Calvinisim-Arminianism debate: "The doctrine of the unity of Christ's church is far more important than the doctrines of God's sovereignty and man's responsibility."
  
  
• Dave Miller is likewise "sick of Calvinism discussions."

Beating the State: Third Century Christianity in the Third World Today

Most Christians in places hostile to the gospel aren't confined to buildings, and they don't rely on First World support. The churches in those areas are growing because they are mobile and hard to find, much to the chagrin of government officials.

Gary North discusses these "guerrilla" tactics:

This has received little attention in the West, because this strategy relies on invisibility. The West's intellectuals suffer from a myth of modernism: "If bureaucrats cannot count something, it cannot be important. It it cannot be computerized, it cannot be socially relevant." Call it the NSA's blind spot. Call it the IRS's nightmare.

The strategy is simple to describe: no permanent real estate. There are no permanent church buildings.

If you can't find it, you cannot tax it. If you cannot find it, you cannot regulate it. If you cannot find it, you cannot subsidize it. If you cannot tax it or regulate it or subsidize it, the state cannot suppress it. It's simple. And it is working, just as it worked from Nero to Diocletian. ...

... Consider the challenge of India. There are about 1.2 billion people in India. There is no way to generate capital sufficient to build enough churches to evangelize India in a generation. The same holds true for China. It has to be done with a house church system. There is no other way.

The tremendous advantage that the Communists gave to Protestants in China is that there was either persecution of the church under Mao or the Three-Self movement, which is a government-approved church, whose members meet in buildings that can be monitored by the Communist hierarchy.

This led to the creation of house churches. All over China, Protestants create house churches. Sometimes the government arrests the pastor, but he is replaced immediately from inside the congregation. We don't know how many Protestants there are in China today, but a common estimate is 120 million. In 1973, there were probably fewer than 3 million. We know now what happened. All of this came as a result of the fact that the Communists either tried to stamp out Protestantism, or else they tried to control it by confining it in buildings, where the government could monitor what was going on. This has led to the largest, fastest evangelism explosion in the history of the church.

In terms of percentages, 120 million is 10% of the Chinese population. But Protestant evangelists were in China from the 1860s, and there was not much growth until the serious persecutions began in the aftermath of the cultural revolution of the mid-1960s.

Mao drove all the Western missionaries and pastors out of China in the early 1950s. That was the making of the Protestant church in China. That exodus freed the Chinese church from the legacy of seminary-trained pastors, church buildings, and large congregations.

We're seeing the greatest evangelism movement in the history of the world, yet we're not seeing it. We're not seeing it, because it has no buildings, no seminary-trained pastors, and no hierarchical organizations...yet. There are only local organizations, and they multiply under persecution. They don't have any money, but they don't need any money, so they multiply.

A very interesting read. Check out the full article here.

This Week in Calvinism - February 14, 2014

• Tim Challies reviews Jeremy Walker's book The New Calvinism Considered.
  
  
• William Hill interviews James Anderson on the topic "Calvinism and the Origin of Sin."
  
  
• Donal Macleod doesn't believe Scotland is or ever was a Calvinist nation:

  There have been very few periods (and these themselves very brief) when anything resembling Calvinism was the dominant influence in Scottish life and culture. Even at the Reformation the Scottish Parliament refused to endorse Knox's First Book of Discipline. The nobility had no intention of handing back the ancient ecclesiastical lands to pay the stipends for ministers, build schools, and provide relief for the poor. Knox never saw in Scotland anything remotely resembling his vision of the Godly Commonwealth.

  
  
• Michael Horton discusses John Calvin's many ailments.
  
  
• Desiring God shares an excerpt on pain and suffering from Horton's forthcoming book Calvin on the Christian Life: Glorifying and Enjoying God Forever.