Today In TheologyRelating Theology To Our World Today! |
|
||||||||||
|
|
Hold the FireworksPosted by Frank Turk - July 3, 2008 on 2:55 pm | In Christian Mind, Evangelical Perspective | No Comments by Frank Turk I was chatting with Dan about Phil's posts on the subject of church and politics. What he said made me think hard about the exchanges going on here on this topic: he, frankly, isn't sure that he exactly grasps the shape and implications of my position. Let me say that if there is anybody on earth who is bright enough to follow even the most ponderous argument, it's Dan -- so if he can't follow the ball here, maybe I better step back and start over. Dan's starting point in reasoning here is utterly practical: let's imagine that he and I are standing on a street corner, arguing about whether it's tenable to call God's work over time "dispensational", and across the street a woman shrieks because two thugs are attacking her. Dan's view (and I think he's right) is that he and I would bound across the street and ... do what? Break out the book of Ephesians and start preaching the Gospel to these misguided, lost souls? No: we would make them stop by any means necessary. And in doing so, we would be doing something inherently Christian. I am sure there are some who would take a sacrificial, passivist view in this situation and not employ violence -- they might throw themselves on a knife or a gun, or simply find a way to obstruct at all personal costs, but they would intervene. They would do something. In that, I think all of us agree on something: we know who our neighbor is. That is, when we read the parable of the Good Samaritan, we aren't trying to justify our stupid question to Jesus about what the greatest commandment is by asking a further-stupid question like, "yes, but...?" We are reading what is a ridiculously-obvious story about the fact that anyone walking down the street knows when someone has been wronged, and anyone walking down the street can do something of immediate necessity which will offer right-minded aid. We know who our neighbor is. We know -- by virtue of both the revelation in creation and the revelation in God's word -- how to offer aid to those who need it. Now, from there, Dan would reason, "so what do we do about the government when it is handing out knives with which to slaughter the unborn?" A simple technique of arguing from the lesser to the greater, right? And who wouldn't follow him at least to the place where he would answer that question? Personally, I'm not ready to leave the neighborhood where the woman got attacked yet.  I want you to imagine for a moment that it is your neighborhood in which this woman got attacked, and where the Pyros intervened and, at least, got her purse back -- because the example is not the right scope yet to reason from lesser to greater. The example is one of practical immediacy, and it is seeking to reason up to an example of systematic injustice -- and the two are not necessarily analogous. While Dan would argue that he and I should offer first aid to the woman if she is injured, for example, I am not sure he would argue that the government should then provide universal health care -- the analogy breaks down quickly when we try to change a matter of personal moral action into a model of systematic political philosophy, and I would argue that it breaks down in the previous example in the same way it breaks down in this example: the government is not tasked to do everything the individual is tasked to do. In fact, it's tasked to do some things that the individual is not tasked to do -- like holding trials and conducting court to settle grievances.The example of personal responsibility does not translate into the example of governmental responsibility -- especially in the experiment of the American republic. Our system of government separates branches in order to restrain human power because, among other things, we recognize that government is really just men, and men are (at best) fallible and weak. The Constitution begins like this: We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.And I post that not to make a theological point, but to circle-back my rabbit trail here and say that while this intention is broadly phrased, it is also narrowly conceived and bounded by the bill of rights which places certain political categories out of the reach of the federal entity. That is: the Constitution recognizes that there are some things which the Government ought not to do. Now listen: I bring that up because I'm trying to clarify, for Dan's sake if not for the rest of you, what I am talking about when I speak to the matter of church and politics. There are some things the Government ought not to do -- I think all of us would agree with that in premise, even if the particulars would vary depending on where we would fall out on the political spectrum.  For example, I think we would all agree that the police should not be able to come into our backyard and start searching for stolen money or dead bodies unless they have some kind of justifiable reason, right? And your neighbor probably would do well to mind that rule as well, right?But your neighbor has the right to look out his back window, and perhaps see you burying that big black sack in your back yard. So unlike the police who cannot be everywhere, your neighbor -- the one you would cross the street to help if he was in trouble -- has a right which you wouldn't give to the police. You wouldn't give the police carte blanche to check your back yard at any hour of the day, but your neighbor has that right insofar as he has a view from his window into your yard. So it is that citizens of a country, particularly in our constitutional republic, have the ability to do things which are not rightly called the work of the government which leads them by consent. The government is not merely the sum of the parts: in fact, in some ways it has (ought to have) fewer rights to take some actions to temper the greater rights is has to actually conduct the business of governing. And, in reasoning from the lesser to the greater, if this is so for a human-established government, can it be true of the Church, which is established by God? That is, is the church supposed to be everything that all humans inside it can and will do, or is the church constituted (you Baptists might prefer the word "commissioned"; the Presbyterians among you will prefer "covenanted") to do something specific which God has ordained, and which does not include all the things which individual believers might rightly do? The example I gave when this came up in the meta under Dan's post previously was the same neighborhood we were talking about above -- and after the one robbery was thwarted, the question was considered whether the local church ought to then take up a mission of volunteer service to interdict crime in the community -- and I believe Dan's answer was "yes". If the community is crime-ridden, the church ought to step in and do something -- including patrolling the streets and petitioning the local government for better policing. And the real irony is that I think it would be absolutely brilliant for those who live a community to own their community, and do what it takes to improve (which is an interesting word here) their community. Even if it included wielding meat chubs. The problem is when they take to the streets to do this as the church of Jesus Christ rather than the citizens of a crime-ridden city. And the problem is that the church is not commissioned to govern the world. The church has the spiritual authority to declare to men that their sin separates them from God; that God's wrath is waiting for them; that God has sent his son Jesus to receive the wrath due to sin for those who repent and believe. It declares to men a higher law than human government, and declares to them a greater good than mere civil peace. And it does this through the preaching of the word, the administration of the ordinances (you might say "sacraments" if you are a presbyterian in good standing), and the discipline of the body by rightly-qualified elders. And in this way, it is the manifestation of the kingdom of God, which is frankly not of this world. And I have two examples of this which, I think, those who have a different opinion about this subject than I do have overlooked pretty significantly. I also have to finish the riff on why the distinction between church and state is (especially for us baptisses) not only good but necessary, and what it means to have personal Christian responsibility as well as an active and healthy church life. But I have already bored most of you to tears. Take a break and come back tomorrow. Comments are closed until I finish this little exposition on whatever it is I'm talking about here. 
God Is Not DeadPosted by Adrian Warnock - July 3, 2008 on 11:10 am | In Christian Mind, Evangelical Perspective | No Comments Post by Collin HansenChristianity Today's July cover takes its cue from the famous Time magazine cover from 1966 that asked, "Is God Dead?" CT responds "not yet" (?) with an article by William Lane Craig. He writes, "To paraphrase Mark Twain, the news of God's demise was premature. For at the same time theologians were writing God's obituary, a new generation of young philosophers was rediscovering his vitality." Craig sees a turning point in 1967 with the publication of Alvin Plantinga's God and Other Minds: A Study of the Rational Justification of Belief in God. The cover package also includes Craig's recommended reading on the existence of God.
Six Faces of New PaganismPosted by Challies Dot Com - July 3, 2008 on 10:05 am | In Evangelical Perspective, Think Christian | No CommentsAs I mentioned in a brief post yesterday, I have begun making my way through Bruce Waltke's Old Testament Theology. It is a massive book and is perhaps just a bit intimidating, but I have been enjoying it a lot. It is my first attempt to read an Old Testament theology and even through the opening chapters I can see that there is much to learn. After six introductory chapters, Waltke turns to Old Testament theology proper in a chapter entitled "The Gift of the Cosmos" and here, as we might expect, he discusses God's work as creator. He argues here that it is critically important that we read the opening chapters of Genesis properly, acknowledging the author's intended literary genre. Though he eventually argues that this section is meant to be read as "ancient near eastern cosmogony," which in turns leads to supporting his views on theistic evolution (a view I do not support) I found something very useful in this section. He explains how a wrong reading of the creation account leads to further and deeper problems. He shows how culture's refusal to acknowledge the creator necessarily leads to the anti-God worldview so apparent in society around us. "Christians now live on a mission field with worldviews that besiege the message of ethical monotheism." He says that this new paganism has six faces and one proceeds from the one before it. 1. The common worldview of the Western world since the time of the enlightenment has been materialism. This philosophy says that matter and its motions constitute the entire universe. Everything in the universe has to be regarded as due to material causes. 2. There is an implication to materialism. Since everything is material, ideally and theoretically, everything is subject to empiricism. Here he quotes Alan Reynolds who says, "empiricism, which insists that all knowledge is based on observation, experimentation, and verification, has led to belief in a self-sufficient universe that can be understood on its own terms, without any need of the transcendent or of God." 3. Together materialism and empiricism entail a belief in an inherent coherence within nature between cause and effect. This, in turn, has led to belief in determinism, which understands reality as mechanical and without inherent value. Life's origins and the nature of humanity have natural rather than divine causation. 4. Secularism is a political or social philosophy that embraces each of these "-isms"--materialism, empiricism and determinism. It embraces natural causation and and rejects religious faith and worship in the public square. Nature, society, and government become instruments dedicating only to fulfilling our material desires which masquerade as "rights." This is fast becoming the dominant worldview among Western intellectual elites. 5. Secular humanism is a system or mode of thought or action in which human interests, values and dignity are predominant. This leads to a kind of intense pragmatism that calculates everything in terms of its benefit to humanity. There is no acknowledgment of God and his rule of the created order. 6. Post-modernism or New Ageism marks what is really a return to old-fashioned paganism, though with a distinctly modern twist to it. New Ageism takes distinctives of Eastern religion and distorts them with Western concepts. Post-modernism replaces the objective reality of God as revealed in special revelation with subjective deifications of individual expressions of spirituality. Waltke says, "it rejects the notion of a revealed moral code and instead tests truth by its therapeutic value." In this worldviews there are no better or worse cultures but merely differences between them. I was able to see through these six faces of the new paganism how important it is that we get Genesis right! The irony, I suppose, is that I am not at all convinced that Waltke is correct in his views on creation. Still, he acknowledges the creator, of course, and acknowledging God as He reveals Himself in the Bible is a safeguard against the post-modern, secular humanistic viewpoint that pervades society. Those in our society who refuse to admit the existence of this God are soon left with materialism and from there empiricism and all that these -isms entail. Advertisement:
God-glorifying rescue!Posted by Terry - July 3, 2008 on 9:43 am | In Christian Mind, Evangelical Perspective | No CommentsNext week we welcome approximately 5,000 people from over 50 nations to our conference in Brighton, Together on a Mission. A week before they were due to go to Calcutta to get visas to be with us in Brighton, John and Esther Pradhan, who are church planting in Nepal, had a terrifying experience. John and Esther had gone to a graveyard for the funeral of a child in the church, with their daughter, Aradhana, who is 2½. Aradhana fell down a narrow and very deep crevasse nearby. Newspaper reports say it was 60 metres deep at least. Because it was so deep and dark they were unable to see anything. At first they could hear her crying out, but after a while there was no sound. The police were called in, and then the army, but the crevasse was so narrow, it was impossible to tunnel down. By now, darkness was closing in. To add to their fears, it was monsoon season, and if it rained, water could rise in the hole adding another terrible possibility of drowning. Many prayed all night An expert team was dispatched from Kathmandu, who encountered another hazard: a huge boulder inside the pit further impeded access, yet to break it up could be very risky. Aradhana could be hit by falling rock. To their great joy, around 3 a.m., Aradhana’s voice was heard again, and attempts were made to lower food and water to her. By morning light, some progress had been made in digging, but it was disheartening to discover that the crevasse was in an L shape, and the food and drink had failed to reach her. The rescue crew kept everyone away from the spot, but Nepal TV were covering their efforts. All adult men were too big to squeeze through the narrow aperture but just before noon, a young boy of 12 or 13 volunteered to be lowered down. He managed to crawl over to where she was and found her curled up in a corner, alive. “Who are you?” she asked innocently. He helped her to crawl along to a space where she was visible to the team and they dropped down a harness which the boy strapped on to her, and they were then able to lift her out, covered in mud but otherwise unharmed. She had been in the pit for 22 hours without food, water, and limited oxygen. Her father, John, held her in his arms, tears pouring down his face. “Don’t cry, Papa,” she said, “I’m fine.” National TV The family is full of thanksgiving to God for preserving Aradhana, and desire to honour all who helped in rescuing her, especially the boy. They are also grateful to all who poured out their hearts in prayer. You can see dramatic pictures on What a mighty and merciful God we serve. It will be great to worship Him together with the thousands next week at Together on a Mission.
A La Carte (7/3)Posted by Challies Dot Com - July 3, 2008 on 8:40 am | In Evangelical Perspective, Think Christian | No Comments Thursday July 3, 2008Interview with ObamaRelevant has an interesting interview with Barak Obama that focuses on issues of particular importance to Christians. Obama the Christian? And speaking of Obama, this article from BP News collects some of the ways Obama has described the Christian faith. Things like "I believe there are many paths to the same place, and that is a belief that there is a higher power, a belief that we are connected as a people." New Logo for Walmart I am totally underwhelmed by Walmart's new logo. So is everyone else, I suspect. Optimism Growing in Iraq An article in Spiegel of all places says "There is an unexpected air of normalcy prevailing in Baghdad these days, with consumption flourishing and confidence in the government growing." Where are Europe's Babies? Dr. Mohler pens an interesting article looking at the phenomenon of incredibly low European birthrates. He says "There are countless issues connected to these questions, but in the end, this represents a spiritual problem." Advertisement:
Bonhoeffer: The Cost of FreedomPosted by JT - July 3, 2008 on 8:13 am | In Christian Mind, Evangelical Perspective | No Comments I've mentioned before how highly I think of Focus on the Family's Radio Theatre--audio dramatizations on CD with superb acting and excellent production.One in particular to get is the 3-CD set, Bonhoeffer: The Cost of Freedom. Here's the description: With faith comes a price. What are you willing to pay? That's the question explored in Bonhoeffer: The Cost of Freedom. Chronicling the life of German theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer, this provocative Peabody award-winning dramatization shares the story of one man's battle against the evils of Nazism, a decadent culture, and compromising church--something that's not so foreign to society today. Challenging and compelling, it's entertainment with a message!
Paul Tripp, “Whiter Than Snow”Posted by JT - July 3, 2008 on 7:58 am | In Christian Mind, Evangelical Perspective | No Comments I've just started reading Paul Tripp's new book, Whiter Than Snow: Meditations on Sin and Mercy. The book contains 52 meditations on Psalm 51.The following is from the first meditation, and I found it especially helpful and convicting. Tripp is recounting the time a friend confronted him about some sin in his life. It wasn’t a big deal in one way. Just a small conversation that had turned a bit ugly. It wasn’t a dramatic life-altering moment. It was in the privacy of my home with one of my family members. But maybe that’s the point. Perhaps it’s very important because that’s where I live everyday. You see, you and I don’t live in a series of big, dramatic moments. We don’t careen from big decision to big decision. We all live in an endless series of little moments. The character of a life isn’t set in ten big moments. The character of a life is set in 10,000 little moments of everyday life. It’s the themes of struggles that emerge from those little moments that reveal what’s really going on in our hearts.Here's a video of Tripp reading an excerpt from his writing and talking about the book:
Don’t Call It a ComebackPosted by Adrian Warnock - July 3, 2008 on 7:39 am | In Christian Mind, Evangelical Perspective | No Comments Post by Collin HansenChristianity Today reports on "A New Day for Apologetics." The articles says "it is the best of times" for apologists such as Lee Strobel, William Lane Craig, Ben Witherington III, Darrell Bock, and J. P. Moreland. I just finished Tim Keller's The Reason for God, and I'm currently reading Craig Blomberg's The Historical Reliability of the Gospels. I thank God for these powerful responses to those who deny the truth and power of the gospel.
Prayer and the might-not-have beensPosted by DJP - July 3, 2008 on 5:55 am | In Christian Mind, Evangelical Perspective | No Comments by Dan PhillipsSome Calvinists have never struggled with prayer in any way. Others of us have struggled with it in almost every way. Number me with the latter. One conundrum bogged me down when I was a very young  Christian — and long before I was much of a Calvinist. In its simplest terms, it is: how can our prayers make any difference?If God knows what He is going to do, and has known since before the first tick of the cosmic clock, and if His will is settled and absolute and unalterable, then what possible impact can our prayers have? And even more to the point, what possible purpose could they serve? I've made sufficient peace with that issue on two fronts:
Instances where prayer factors in to God's plan
There are also other examples that I might call OTOH examples — examples where God announces a decision, is asked to change that decision, and refuses to do so. Instances where prayer is flatly rejected
For instance, what would have happened if Eve had asked God how to respond to the Serpent, rather than blundering on into gawping rebellion? What if, after Eve's sin, Adam had asked God what to do about Eve? We could go on and on.  Here, in one final enumeration, is what I take from this:
Flag Day is comingPosted by Collin Brendemuehl - July 3, 2008 on 5:33 am | In Evangelical Perspective | No Comments
Sufficiency and InsufficiencyPosted by Collin Brendemuehl - July 3, 2008 on 4:21 am | In Evangelical Perspective | No Comments
More from the Obama WatchPosted by Adrian Warnock - July 2, 2008 on 8:55 pm | In Christian Mind, Evangelical Perspective | No Comments Post by Collin HansenSorry for posting so much about Sen. Obama, but the guy keeps making news, since he's in the middle of a media push to court evangelicals. Relevant has posted one of the better interviews I've seen with the Democratic candidate. He explains why he would not allow faith-based organizations to hire and fire based on faith, contrary to the earlier AP report I posted. He also lays out when he would support banning late-term abortions, and why he voted against a bill that would require doctors to try and save babies who survived abortions.
Does the Pill Kill?Posted by JT - July 2, 2008 on 3:15 pm | In Christian Mind, Evangelical Perspective | No Comments At the Life Training Institute Blog Rich Poupard (a very sharp pro-life advocate) has been posting on the issue.Below are some of the links with excerpts: The Dangers of Overstating our Case There is a real controversy regarding this issue, and science does not have all of the answers. Let me state this plainly: anyone who believes they know absolutely that OCs cause endometrial changes that result in "chemical abortions" is simply wrong. They don't. I don't know for sure either. Cool web sites and T-shirts do nothing to change this fact. Pro-lifers who overstate this case are acting very irresponsibly. What if breastfeeding kills? By endorsing a campaign such as "The Pill Kills" and overstating the case for a post-fertilization effect of OCs, we leave ourselves vulnerable to being hypocritical regarding possible dangers to an embryo. There are many reasons to question the use of oral contraceptives, and we should inform women to the best of our ability so they can make an educated choice. However, overstating dangers helps no one. Does a Thin Uterine Lining Support the "Pill as Baby Killer" Theory? . . . if a thick, receptive uterine lining is necessary for implantation, and we can show that OCs thin the lining, it almost has to effect implantation. This is the predominant reasoning used by those who support the abortifacient theory. However, this only covers the issue very shallowly. In order to understand what it really occurring, we have to go deep. This can be complicated and confusing, but I will do my best to simplify it where I can.
One Meeting OnlyPosted by Adrian Warnock - July 2, 2008 on 1:34 pm | In Christian Mind, Evangelical Perspective | No Comments Post by Collin HansenOver at the 9Marks blog I found this post by Mark Dever from last week. Capitol Hill Baptist Church is known for strong community among members, and Dever doesn't think it's a coincidence that the church has steadfastly stuck to one Sunday morning service. Certainly CHBC cuts against the grain of multiple campuses and multiple services.
Doug Wilson on Productive PloddingPosted by JT - July 2, 2008 on 1:24 pm | In Christian Mind, Evangelical Perspective | No Comments A very helpful post here from Doug Wilson. Be sure to read the whole thing. He provides brief principles and shares the particulars from his own life and schedule.The basic principles are: (1) redeem the fifteen minute spaces; (2) maintain boundaries for everything, boundaries that suit the circumstance; (3) measure progress by the extended video, not the snapshot; (4) use and reuse everything.
Quote - Inexcusable HubrisPosted by Challies Dot Com - July 2, 2008 on 1:05 pm | In Evangelical Perspective, Think Christian | No CommentsI have recently been reading Bruce Waltke’s (rather large!) Old Testament Theology and came across this quote. It seemed appropriate in light of all of the attention being give to The Shack and its distinctly feminine portrayal of God. Waltke argues here that it really does matter how we think of God and how we address Him. Advertisement:
Donate Books to the American University of IraqPosted by JT - July 2, 2008 on 10:45 am | In Christian Mind, Evangelical Perspective | No CommentsChristopher Hitchens is making an appeal to donate books, helping to build the university library in Iraq. So here's what to do. Have a look at the university's Web site. Get some decent volumes together, pass the word to your friends and co-workers to do the same, and send them off to:Read the whole thing. I'm sure Hitchens wouldn't want you to donate Christian books of any kind (!), and it'd probably be inappropriate for the university to receive devotional-type books--but donating academic books related to Christianity would seem entirely appropriate and helpful.
Book Reviews - “A Book You Will Actually Read” SeriesPosted by Challies Dot Com - July 2, 2008 on 10:05 am | In Evangelical Perspective, Think Christian | No Comments
The “A Book You Will Actually Read” series is a growing collection of short books (under 100 pages) written by Mark Driscoll and addressing various foundational aspects of Christian theology. These are books that you will actually read and books that you can read in just about an hour. “The hope is that the big truths packed into these little books will make them different from the many other books that you would never pick up or would pick up only to quickly put down forever because they are simply too wordy and don’t get to the point.” They are meant to be a quick infusion of theology that invites the reader to investigate further. The first four titles available are On Who Is God?, On the Old Testament, On the New Testament and On Church Leadership. On Who Is God?This volume is divided into five sections: Knowledge about God (how we can know God exists), Perspectives about God (how different people relate to God), Nature of God (the attributes and names of God), Incarnation of God (prophecies of God’s incarnation and their fulfillment in Christ) and Worship of God (how we are to worship God). A lengthy appendix offers a list of books appropriate for further study. Driscoll says “This modest book is an attempt to briefly and simply explain who God is through the lens of both philosophy and theology. Certainly this book could be an entire library of books explaining in great detail the person and work of God, and this is therefore not intended to be exhaustive, but rather introductory in nature.” On the Old TestamentOn the Old Testament seeks to provide an overview and basic understanding of the Old Testament scriptures. The first section of the book answers nine common questions about this portion of the Bible (e.g. Who Wrote the Old Testament? What Is the Central Message of the Old Testament? Why Are There Different Bible Translations?) while the second section offers advice on how to read each of the literary genres. Driscoll explains this book’s genesis as being his own growing understanding of the Old Testament in the months immediately following his own conversion to the Christian faith. On the New TestamentOn the New Testament mimics the pattern established in On the Old Testament. Once again the first section of the book answers nine common questions about form, format and theology of the New Testament (e.g. Can Books of the New Testament Be Written Today? How Were the New Testament Books Chosen as Scripture? What Principles Can Help Me Interpret the New Testament?) while the second section offers advice on how to read each of the literary genres. Driscoll says, “My intent in writing this book is to be of service to you as a pastor. I have had to read a great number of books and spend thousands of hours in study since my conversion in order to arrive at the conclusions that I’m sharing with you. I wish someone would have given me this book as a non-Christian or new Christian because it would have been quite helpful to me. I pray that you will find it helpful as well.” On Church LeadershipWhatever the agenda of Driscoll’s critics, they always seem to raise the issue of his complementarian understanding of church leadership. In On Church Leadership he outlines his understanding as clearly and thorough as he has ever done. He does so in six brief chapters entitled Pastor Jesus, Elders, Women in Ministry, Deacons, Members, Leadership Teams. Driscoll explains that he wrote this book to address the fact that so few of the people converted through the ministry of Mars Hill Church had any real understanding of leadership and gender roles within the church. “To help our people understand how we are governed, I wrote a booklet that we published internally to answer their questions.” The books live up to the claim that they can be read in just about an hour. In fact, I read all four of them in a single five hour flight with time left over to read the airline magazine I found in the seat pocket ahead of me. In general I found them valuable reading. They are, by design, only a basic overview of the topics, but they still manage to cover those topics well. In most cases I found the appendices nearly as valuable as the books themselves. This is especially true for On the Old Testament and On the New Testament where the appendices (which are nearly the same) contain a great deal of excellent information on improving Bible study and building a study library. There is much wisdom to be gleaned. If there is a weak spot in the series, I would have to point to On Church Leadership which I felt did not deal as well with the subject matter as did the other volumes. Two things should be noted. First, there is a fair bit of overlap in the books and several times the reader will find sections that have been copied and pasted from one to the next. But since the books are not necessarily meant to be read in sequence, this is more a note than a critique. Second, the reader will want to bear in mind that these books were written by a pastor specifically to his own congregation. Hence, while the theology is generally sound, the teaching and the format may not be transferable in all cases. The books may well be appropriate for placement in church libraries and elsewhere, but it would be wise for pastors and leaders to read the books carefully to ensure that they are suitable for that specific congregation. Writing about these books Bruce Ware says, “Mark has a gift of taking weighty ideas and expressing them in clear and lively language” while D.A. Carson says the books are, “serious, informed, reverent, but not technical discussions of great themes.” I agree with both of these men. These books are uniquely valuable in their lively and relevant discussions of important theological themes. I look forward to further entries in the “A Book You Will Actually Read” series. You can purchase them, of course, at Amazon
Bill GrahamPosted by Adrian Warnock - July 2, 2008 on 9:15 am | In Christian Mind, Evangelical Perspective | No Comments Post by Collin HansenHere's something unusual, from The New York Times: "[McCain] met Sunday with one of the country’s best-known evangelicals, Bill Graham, and his son, Franklin, for what was described as an 'excellent conversation' but secured no endorsement." Has anyone ever referred to Billy Graham as Bill? Maybe the aged evangelist let Sen. McCain know that he had finally outgrown the 'y.' The Los Angeles Times reports that McCain said, "Bill Graham recalled that during the Vietnam War when I was in prison, he visited my parents in Hawaii twice and he and my mother and father prayed together for me, and I expressed my appreciation for that a long time ago.…I am very grateful for the time they spent with me." Every other site I've seen, however, quotes McCain calling him Billy. Are there really journalists out there who apparently haven't heard of Billy Graham?
A La Carte (7/2)Posted by Challies Dot Com - July 2, 2008 on 9:00 am | In Evangelical Perspective, Think Christian | No Comments Wednesday July 2, 2008John Eldredge Leaves Thomas NelsonJohn Eldredge becomes just the latest big-name Christian author to sign a deal with a mainstream publisher. In this case, he has signed with Doubleday. The mainstream publishers are realizing how much of a market there is for this kind of book! The Death of Life Writing An interesting story in the Guardian suggests that the age of great biographies is coming to a close. "Seen close up, and with an eye to proper detail, biography appears in rather a bad way. 'Crisis' would probably be putting it too strongly, not least because it suggests a certain convulsive energy. 'Sclerosis' might be nearer." Birthday Party Snub "An eight-year-old boy has sparked an unlikely outcry in Sweden after failing to invite two of his classmates to his birthday party." Oh boy... Trust A great photo from Iraq. Advertisement:
Poythress: He Makes the Winds BlowPosted by JT - July 2, 2008 on 8:38 am | In Christian Mind, Evangelical Perspective | No Comments I don't read World Magazine any more (mainly due to their restricted web access), but I did notice that they now have Vern Poythress writing a column--apparently they are short meditations on a theme from a biblical perspective. This is a great move!Here's his article reflecting on the recent hurricanes from a God-centered point of view: He Makes the Winds Blow.
Socialism’s CreepPosted by Collin Brendemuehl - July 2, 2008 on 6:43 am | In Evangelical Perspective | No Comments
A month of memoriesPosted by Phil Johnson - July 2, 2008 on 2:01 am | In Christian Mind, Evangelical Perspective | No Comments by Phil Johnson uly and August are looking impossible for me schedule-wise. Pecadillo is getting married in Seattle July 18 (I don't think he's coming back to the blogosphere for awhile; we're going to need a new mascot); I have two or three deadlines coming due within 2 weeks after that; and then I'm going to Cape Cod to speak at a conference there in mid-August. So I'm way overbooked and have no extra time to think about writing new blogposts.Here's what I'm gonna do: For the next month or so, all my posts are going to be reposts of classic material from the original PyroManiac blog. (Warning: some of it is highly flammable.)  Salvaging some of the posts from my original blog and getting them into the permanent record here is something I have wanted to do since we moved to a gangblog. (To make that material searchable on one site with the rest of my bloggage.) Dan Phillips's repost of his "Sister, Have Mercy" post last week settled it in my mind. I've never before posted the same exact blogpost twice (at least not purposely), but Dan has given me the boldness to do it.Yeah, I know all that stuff is already online (no fair rummaging through it now in quest of previews), but I'm going to pull as much of it as possible over here in the next couple of months. I know we have a lot of readers nowadays who don't remember the glory days of the original PyroManiac blog, so this will be fun and interesting. Back then I was still feeling my way around in the blogosphere, and believe it or not, I used to tick off a lot more people than I do now. So fasten your seat belts. To take us back to the very start, here's my first-ever substantive blogpost, which for two years or so held the record for being my most commented-on post of all. I had announced my intentions to start blogging about 2 months before I posted this, so a lot of people prolly thought I had been tooling up for this opening salvo for all that time. Truth is, I was burdened with a similar time-crunch then, under a big deadline for a book manuscript coming due June 1 that year. I delivered the manuscript (on time) the day before this entry posted, and then I wrote this post in about 45 minutes' time before going to bed that evening. Everything else is history. Quick-and-Dirty Calvinism Bashing Calvinism is the latest fad in blogdom. My turn.   hree years ago Rob Schläpfer had the best Reformed website and book business bar none. It was the place to go if you were looking for material responding to Dave Hunt. Schläpfer's online magazine, Antithesis, was the best-looking and most consistently interesting website I knew—and it was thoroughly Calvinistic.Michael Spencer, aka the Internet Monk, runs one of the most successful group blogs around. It's a lively theological discussion cast as a virtual tavern. The iMonk gained fame earlier this year by "outing" Joel Osteen's frivolous non-gospel. One of the iMonk's famous early blog entries was titled "Why Calvin Is Cool." Judging from the network of links, the iMonk's group blog, The Boar's Head Tavern (BHT), has attracted a lot of Calvinist readers. But last year with little warning, Schläpfer renounced all things Reformed and started giving rave reviews to almost every postmodern oddity and "emergent church" manual that the evangelical publishing houses could crank out. With a bit of fanfare, Schläpfer's mail-order company dropped some of the best Reformed books from their line. Meanwhile, Schläpfer was posting some fiery blasts both publicly and privately against Calvinists and Calvinism. (Some of them—including one sent to me personally—were pretty much in the spirit of Mark 14:71.) Recently, the iMonk followed suit with a controversial essay, "I'm Not Like You . . . (Calvinists especially)." He closed it with a paragraph that began, "I am not like you. Every day I wander further from the safety of Calvinism into the wideness of God's mercy." Although the text is still in the process of deconstruction at the BHT, it seems like the iMonk and his drinking buddies have decided postmodernism is a lot cooler than Calvinism. Schläpfer and the iMonk are by no means alone. More serious Calvinist leaders, including John Armstrong and Andrew Sandlin are saying similar things, albeit usually with just a smidge more subtlety. Jumping off the Calvinist bandwagon and lobbing rotten eggs at the attitudes and culture of "Reformed" folk is clearly le dernier cri in the blogosphere and beyond. Before we vivisect these gentlemen and their views (something I may eventually want to devote some bloggage to), I think it would be helpful to ponder why Calvinism, which seemed to be the flavor of the month not so long ago, has suddenly become so odious to so many of its one-time friends. I have to say with all candor that I can somewhat understand the feelings expressed by some of Calvinism's recent critics. Sniff around some of the Calvinist forums on the Internet and it won't be long before you begin to think something is rotten in Geneva. But I hasten to add that I don't think the problem really lies in Geneva, or in historic Calvinism, or in any of the classic Reformed creeds. I especially don't think the stench arises from any problem with Calvinism per se. In my judgment, the problem is a fairly recent down n' dirty version of callow Calvinism that has flourished chiefly on the Internet and has been made possible only by the new media. Internet Calvinism and historic Calvinism sometimes have little in common. Consider:
The upsurge of Calvinism on the Internet in the 1990s seems to have spawned a large and unprecedented movement of jejune Calvinists who wear arrogance as if it were the team uniform. That kind of hotshot, shoot-from-the-hip Calvinism is ugly. I don't blame anyone for being appalled by it. I'm worried about those who think it's a good thing. Obviously those criticisms are mostly generalizations, and they don't necessarily apply to every Calvinist on the Internet. But (and here's the hard part) I'm willing to admit that there have been times when every one of those criticisms could be legitimately applied to something I wrote or posted to a public forum somewhere. I'll especially confess to my shame that I'm too much of a polemicist and not enough of an evangelist. Historic Calvinism is not supposed to be that way. Yes, Calvinism is virile; it's relentless when it comes to truth; and it's not always easy to swallow. But it is full of truths that should humble us and fill us with compassion rather than swagger and conceit. The best Calvinism has always been fervently evangelistic, large-hearted, benevolent, merciful, and forgiving. After all, that's what the doctrines of grace are supposed to be all about. Until we get back there, some of the lumps the Reformed movement is currently taking are well-deserved. And meanwhile, my advice to young Calvinists is to learn your theology from the historic mainstream Calvinist authors, not from blogs and discussion forums on the Internet. Some of the forums may be helpful in pointing you to more important resources. But if you think of them as a surrogate for seminary, you're probably going to become an ugly Calvinist—and if you get hit in the face with a rotten egg, you probably deserve it. 
Witherington on “Pagan Christianity”Posted by JT - July 1, 2008 on 10:32 pm | In Christian Mind, Evangelical Perspective | No Comments The best kind of reviews not only critique, but also instruct. Such is the case with Ben Witherington's informative in-progress chapter-by-chapter dismantling of Frank Viola and George Barna's book, Pagan Christianity.Thus far, see part 1 and part 2. HT: James Grant
What Every American Should Know About the Middle EastPosted by JT - July 1, 2008 on 10:14 pm | In Christian Mind, Evangelical Perspective | No Comments Daniel Miessler:Most in the United States don’t know much about the Middle East or the people that live there. This lack of knowledge hurts our ability to understand world events and, consequently, our ability to hold intelligent opinions about those events.Read the whole thing. HT: Joe Carter
Another addendum on evangelicals as a voting blocPosted by Phil Johnson - July 1, 2008 on 10:12 pm | In Christian Mind, Evangelical Perspective | No Comments by Phil Johnson ere's someone  else who evidently disagrees with my opposition to transforming the evangelical movement into a political lobby:Brian McLaren, a former pastor who spent 24 years in the pulpit and is now an informal adviser to the Obama campaign, believes that a significant portion of evangelical voters are ready to break from their traditional home in the the Republican Party and take a new leap of faith with Obama.  I'm inclined to think McLaren's numbers are inflated ("between a third and half of evangelicals" voting for Obama)—unless you take George Barna's and Christianity Today's broad and fairly meaningless definitions of what constitutes an "evangelical." But I'm quite sure McLaren is right that the tide is turning, especially among younger churchgoers. No wonder. Evangelicals have been doing practically everything but teaching doctrine for the past 50 years—ranging from entertaining themselves to picketing Disney. So it's no surprise at all if the generation Brian McLaren appeals to most wants to look for deeper meaning in Obama's notions of "justice."
Gagnon DVDs: Love, the Bible, and Homosexual PracticePosted by JT - July 1, 2008 on 8:09 pm | In Christian Mind, Evangelical Perspective | No Comments If you're looking for a good resource on thinking about homosexuality, you probably can't do much better than this new 4-hour, 3-DVD set by Professor Robert Gagnon, entitled, Love, the Bible, and Homosexual Practice. (It's $35, plus $7 for shipping and handling. If you live outside the US, you have to order by phone: 615.507.4166. The DVD set is in NTSC form.)DVD 1: What's at Stake & What Are the Closest Analogies (83 min.) Treats why we disagree in the church about homosexual practice; what's at stake in this debate; why the oft-cited, alleged analogies to Gentile inclusion, slavery, women in ministry, and divorce and remarriage are not in fact good analogies to the Bible's prohibition of homosexual practice; what the main problem with homosexual practice is; why adult-committed incest and polyamory are the closest analogies; and responses to audience questions. DVD 2: The Witness of Paul on Homosexual Practice (72 min.) Treats the witness of Paul, showing how Paul opposed homosexual practice absolutely by looking at: echoes to the creation texts in Romans 1:24-27 and 1 Corinthians 6:9; the meaning of Paul's argument from nature in its historical context; the case for identifying Rom 1:26 with an indictment of lesbianism; the conception of caring homosexual unions in the ancient world; the condemnation of even such caring unions by some Greek and Roman moralists; and the case for identifying the terms for homosexual practice in 1 Cor 6:9 and 1 Tim 1;10 with homosexual practice per se. DVD 3: The Witness of Jesus & the OT on Homosexual Practice (76 min.) The first 11 minutes completes the discussion of Paul by showing why the "orientation argument" (i.e. had NT authors known about sexual orientation it would have changed their view on homosexual practice) doesn't work. The next 19 min. are devoted to discussing the witness of Jesus; 8 min. to the witness of Genesis; 7 min. to Sodom and related texts (Ham & Noah, the sacred cult prostitute texts, Levite at Gibeah, commentary on Sodom in Ezekiel, Jude, and 2 Pet); 5 min. to the Levitical prohibitions and the problems with alleged analogies to menstrual law and cloth mixtures; 2 min. to David and Jonathan; and 23 min. to responding to questions from the audience. CD: The Importance of Sexual Ethics in the NT (72 min.) You can also get the three DVD presentations on audio CD, along with the CD above, for $20 plus $5 shipping and handling.
Population LossPosted by Adrian Warnock - July 1, 2008 on 5:12 pm | In Christian Mind, Evangelical Perspective | No Comments Post by Collin HansenStan Guthrie at CT comments on a New York Times Magazine article about staggering population loss in Europe. Guthrie writes, "The hypothesis [journalist Russell] Shorto presents is that nations that have only half-heartedly embraced modern society’s welcoming of women into the paid workforce by failing to provide state financial incentives or career flexibility inadvertently end up providing strong disincentives for couples to have children." Unfortunately, according to Guthrie, Shorto failed to interact with the counter-trend among religious traditionalists.
Tradition or Bigotry?Posted by Adrian Warnock - July 1, 2008 on 4:41 pm | In Christian Mind, Evangelical Perspective | No Comments Post by Collin HansenReading the results of a significant poll on religion and public life conducted by the Paul B. Henry Institute of Calvin College, I was a little bit surprised by what the poll reveals about evangelical attitudes regarding abortion and gay marriage. Significantly fewer evangelicals support same-sex marriage (21 percent) than who back legal abortions (35 percent). The results become more interesting when you analyze the so-called modernist evangelicals, who attend church less frequently and hold more liberal theological views than traditionalist evangelicals. Among these modernists, a whopping 62 percent believe abortion should be legal and solely up to the women to decide. But only 42 percent believe gays and lesbians should be permitted to marry legally. For all the talk about anti-abortion views among evangelicals, there is much more unified opposition to same-sex marriage. I share this observation in the context of Senator Obama's recent letter to the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club in California. Obama said he supports "extending fully equal rights and benefits to same-sex couples under both state and federal law. That is why I support repealing the Defense of Marriage Act [DOMA] and the 'Don't Ask Don't Tell' policy, and the passage of fully inclusive laws to protect LGBT Americans from hate crimes and employment discrimination. And that is why I oppose the divisive and discriminatory efforts to amend the California Constitution, and similar efforts to amend the U.S. Constitution or those of other states." The New Republic reports that these stands make Obama far more favorable to gay rights than were the Democratic running mates in 2004, Sen. John Kerry and Sen. John Edwards. Hugh Hewitt weights in with the doomsday scenario: "If Obama is elected and he leads majorities in the House and Senate to repeal DOMA, eight judges in two states--California and Massachusetts--will have reversed 3,000 years of law and culture in the West." Peter Wehner criticizes Obama for equating support for traditional marriage with bigotry. "He has now taken a position that strikes me as fairly extreme: same-sex marriages ought to be imposed by the courts, even if the citizens of that state object–thereby making an already-contentious social issue even more contentious." Needless to say, Obama's policy positions complicate his well-publicized efforts to gain evangelical support. It can't help his campaign that this letter went public just as he announced a beefed-up faith-based initiative.
Packer Interview, Post-GAFCONPosted by JT - July 1, 2008 on 3:56 pm | In Christian Mind, Evangelical Perspective | No Comments J. I. Packer was interviewed at All Souls regarding GAFCON. You can read the entire transcript here.Asked to summarize his counsel to them, Packer--who has frequently reminded us that he's Packer by name, packer by nature--said, "Keep the faith, resist Liberalism, do not act the ostrich, hiding your head in the sand." HT: Kevin Cawley, who has collected other links as well
What is Science?Posted by Collin Brendemuehl - July 1, 2008 on 3:20 pm | In Evangelical Perspective | No Comments
Florida OutpouringPosted by Adrian Warnock - July 1, 2008 on 12:14 pm | In Christian Mind, Evangelical Perspective | No Comments Post by Collin HansenThe Good News newspaper in South Florida reports about the Florida Outpouring, a healing revival led by Canadian evangelist Todd Bentley. As with other such events, however, some Christian leaders are doubting this revival's validity and biblical warrant. A closer look at the event reveals a number of causes for concern. “We increase our scrutiny of people like Hugh Hefner, and we decrease our evaluation of people like Todd Bentley just because he comes in the name of Jesus,” Tullian Tchividjian told The Good News. “Hugh Hefner is not nearly as dangerous to the church as someone like this.” “I would pay much more attention to those people who have stood the test of time. I would pay very little attention to anyone who comes and says, ‘God told me something that he’s never told anyone else, and you can’t find it in the Bible.’ It’s a lie, it’s that simple.”
Reasonable Faith: Third EditionPosted by JT - July 1, 2008 on 12:10 pm | In Christian Mind, Evangelical Perspective | No Comments The third edition of William Lane Craig's classic apologetics textbook, Reasonable Faith, is now available. This book holds a special place in my heart and mind, given that the Lord used it in some significant ways early in my undergraduate years at a studies of religion program at a state college. There's nothing else quite like it on the market. Even if you don't agree with all of the arguments and perspective, I've long thought that every Christian family should own at least one copy.A web-based companion to the book has been set up online. Here are some blurbs for it. "It is hard to overstate the impact that William Lane Craig has had for the cause of Christ. He is simply the finest Christian apologist of the last half century and his academic work justifies ranking him among the top 1 percent of practicing philosophers in the Western world. Besides that, he is a winsome ambassador for Christ, an exceptional debater, and a man with the heart of an evangelist. I know him well and can say that he lives a life of integrity and lives out what he believes. I do not know of a single thinker who has done more to raise the bar of Christian scholarship in our generation than Craig. He is one of a kind and I thank God for his life and work." J. P. Moreland, Distinguished Professor of Philosophy, "Bill Craig is one of my personal heroes! He is among today's very finest defenders of Christianity. He offers a powerful mix of authentic faith, intellectual firepower, debating skill, and the gentleness and respect that the Bible requires" Lee Strobel, Best-selling author of The Case for Christ "Especially regarding his breadth of scholarship, no contemporary Christian apologist surpasses Bill Craig. Some of Bill's wide range of interests are evident in this third edition of Reasonable Faith. To be introduced to crucial topics such as God's existence, creation, Scripture, and the historicity of Jesus, including his deity and resurrection, all under one cover, is an enormous treat. Not a singlestudent of apologetics should miss this volume by a major scholar. Crossway Books deserves much credit for continuing its strong tradition of Christian textbooks." Gary R. Habermas, Distinguished Research Professor and Chair, Department of Philosophy and Theology, Liberty University (www.garyhabermas.com)
"Whenever I pick up a book by William Lane Craig, I know I will be treated not just to a feast of rational insight, but also to a tutorial on how good thinking is done. I can always count on a thorough, charitable, even-handed, and intellectually elegant analysis.Reasonable Faithis a classic example of these virtues." Gregory Koukl, founder and president of Stand to Reason (www.str.org), author of Tactics—A Game Plan for Discussing your Christian Convictions, and co-author ofRelativism— "A much-needed book for our times. It overflows with cogent and compelling argument presented in accessible and irenic language. University and seminary students will find this book especially helpful in exposing the fallacies and lack of evidence in the many and various challenges that have been leveled against historic Christian claims. I highly recommend this book." Craig A. Evans, Payzant Distinguished Professor of New Testament, "As a former student and now collaborator with him in writing and in ministry, I am one of the numerous beneficiaries indebted to William Craig and his stellar work in the philosophy of religion and Christian apologetics. He has been a model, a mentor, and an inspiration through his scholarship and his commitment to God's kingdom. His newly-updated Reasonable Faith continues to be the gold standard for apologetics texts: vital historical discussion of issues and arguments; rigorous reasoning and state-of-the art scholarship; and highly relevant, personal application—all permeated with an evident passion for the cause of Christ." Paul Copan, Professor and Pledger Family Chair of Philosophy and Ethics, Palm Beach Atlantic University and President, Evangelical Philosophical Society (www.paulcopan.com)
"William Lane Craig is both an absolutely topnotch, world-class scholar and a man with a warm heart for apologetics and evangelism. This astute book combines both passions. It gives rigorous and well-documented argument which are aimed at producing a rational faith that can be commended and defended before the watching and waiting world. Bravo (for the third time)!" Douglas Groothuis, Professor of Philosophy, Denver Seminary "William Lane Craig is arguably one of the finest Christian philosophers of our time. His knowledge and skill have placed him on platforms on every continent, engaging the most notable skeptics in dialogue and debate. Reasonable Faith will provide only increased opportunity and impact as he makes his mark on our time with a timeless message." Ravi Zacharias, Founder and Chairman, Ravi Zacharias "The third edition of William Lane Craig's Reasonable Faith is simply a masterpiece. It combines clarity and applicability without sacrificing depth. Each chapter has three major parts. First, the topic is introduced with an extensive discussion of the historical development of the arguments and objections to the arguments. Second, Bill leads the reader into the depths of the most contemporary discussion. He treats the leading versions of the arguments for Christianity as well as the best of the objections. He has taken great care to achieve a thoroughness that is rarely found in apologetics texts. Third, he explains, through many personal examples, how the arguments in the chapter can be appropriated in personal evangelism. Combining these three elements is enough to make this text unique. The depth and quality with which each step is accomplished makes it indispensable." Gregory E Ganssle, Lecturer, Department of Philosophy,
Obama Pledges to Boost Faith-Based InitiativePosted by Adrian Warnock - July 1, 2008 on 9:52 am | In Christian Mind, Evangelical Perspective | No Comments Post by Collin HansenFrom the Associated Press: “Reaching out to evangelical voters, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is announcing plans that would expand President Bush's program steering federal social service dollars to religious groups and — in a move sure to cause controversy — support their ability to hire and fire based on faith.”
It’s a Fact, Eh? - Canada DayPosted by Challies Dot Com - July 1, 2008 on 9:30 am | In Evangelical Perspective, Think Christian | No Comments
Today is Canada Day and I, like just about every other Canadian, am taking the day off from work. But it does give me a good opportunity to add a new article to the “It’s a Fact, Eh?” article archives. Every year on July 1, Canada pauses for one day to focus on our nation. Though often compared to America’s Independence Day, Canada Day celebrates something quite different. The day marks the anniversary of the joining of the British colonies of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and the Province of Canada into a federation of four provinces. At this time what had previously been the Province of Canada was divided into Ontario and Quebec. This all happened on July 1, 1867. However, even at this time Canada did not become entirely independent and it was not until 1982 that Canada fully and finally severed political ties with Great Britain. Though Canada Day (or Dominion Day as it was known then) was first instituted in the 1860’s there is no record of any substantial celebrations being held at that time. The Canadian citizens still considered themselves British and saw little reason to mark the occasion. In fact, the day really only became an important national holiday in the middle of the twentieth century. The centennial celebrations in 1967 really kicked off the tradition of marking the day in a special way. This year marks the 141st anniversary of Confederation and also the 400th anniversary of the founding of Quebec City, which also marks the founding of Canada. It is a good day to celebrate Canada. Today many Canadians will mark the day by attending public events or celebrations—parades, festivals and the like. Most towns will hold public fireworks displays when night falls (around 10 PM in this area). The “official” ceremonies will be held on Parliament Hill on Ottawa and this is where our Prime Minister will make his Canada Day appearance. The province of British Columbia is celebrating in a very strange way by instituting a carbon tax that will raise the already-high gas prices by 2.4 cents per litre (10 cents per gallon) this year, rising to almost 8 cents per litre by 2012. Personally I prefer our plans, which involve heading to a local park and watching the kids have fun in the splash pad over there. Then we’ll probably enjoy lunch at McDonald’s (well, the kids will enjoy it) and head on home for a quiet afternoon. Because the fireworks are so late and because my girls are absolutely terrified of them, we’re unlikely to take in any of the local shows. We’ll have to wait until the kids are a little older before we do that. And, of course, we’ll pause to celebrate one of the greatest things about being Canadian—we’re not American. Enjoy your Canada Day! Advertisement: |
In his rather unique ministry, Mark Driscoll has come across some rather unique challenges. Among these challenges has been finding a way of addressing some of the fundamentals of the Christian faith with a fast-growing church body comprised primarily of men and women who have no Christian background whatsoever. Because Driscoll sound found that he would not able to meet with each of these people one-by-one, he began to write booklets which were subsequently distributed by the thousands. Crossway happened upon these books and entered into a publishing agreement to print and distribute this series they’ve called “A Book You Will Actually Read.” The booklets are part of the literature ministry of Resurgence, called Re:lit (which, in turn, is a ministry of Mars Hill Church). 
.
The strains of hyper-Calvinism that are flourishing today are more harsh and more hyper than any of the historic hyper-Calvinists ever thought about being.
