Theologymnasium

Chicago Bears - Preseason week 2

2011-08-22T19:01:00.002+01:00

Just feel like blogging about American Football tonight. Someone who cares might read it one day.

Chicago Bears (my team) made it to the NFC Championship game last year, which most commentators call an over-achievement. Add to this an unspectacular draft and free agency (so far) and you have a team set for a bad season, right?

Well, maybe. American Football is very hard to predict until the games that count start. But has the talent in Chicago improved or diminished since 2010?

Offense

QB: Cutler is still there, looking fitter, with more experience and better footwork. Hanie and Enderle are better backups than Collins and Hanie last year (and better prospects for the future). +1

RB: Forte is fitter than ever, Barber will push Taylor out of the squad and we've got a better RB core. +1

WR: Aromashodu out, Williams, Hurd (& Sanzenbacher?) in. Aromashodu is talented and will do well elsewhere, but for Martz's system, this is a +1.

TE: Olsen out, Spaeth in, with Davis taking over the main role. Olsen was probably more talented but these guys fit the system more. =

OL: Kreutz out, Carimi and Spencer in, and musical chairs going on. It's hard to believe, but this is actually an improved line. Webb played better than people think vs. Bills but Louis was poor. A good bunch of run blockers and with some time they may turn into a decent unit. +1

Defense

DL: Harris has gone, Paea, Okoye, Gholston are in and Melton's looking superb. OLs are going to have real trouble working out who to double team, no matter which lineman is rotated in. A definite upgrade to an already strong group. +1

LB: You'd never call a group with Urlacher and Briggs weak, but there's not much reliable depth at the moment and an injury could cause problems, despite promising signs from rookie J.T. Thomas. -1

CB: Peanut Tillman is getting older and although Jennings is an excellent tackler we're not blessed with great depth at the position. DJ Moore is a good and improving nickelback.-1

Safeties: Daniael Manning has gone but Chris Harris is a quality player and two promising third round picks, Wright and Conte are in training. Steltz has had an excellent camp. I was a bit harsh on the corners so we'll leave this as a =.

Special teams

Maynard gone, Podlesh in, probably not much change there. Manning was an excellent returner but Knox is a Pro Bowl returner and Hester is the best of all time. Davies has gone, Hurd is in but other key contributors are still in the squad. =

Overall

By my reckoning, 5 personnel groupings have improved, 2 weakened and 3 stayed roughly the same. That's a +3 overall. I'm still happy with the 32-1 odds I got with a free bet during the lockout.

Review: Gospel-Centred Family by Ed Moll and Tim Chester

2011-07-13T22:43:00.004+01:00

Ed Moll and Tim Chester have written Gospel-Centred Family, a book/workbook for Christian parents.

Ed is a vicar who blogs at Journeyman Preacher, who I was able to serve with on a CPAS venture last summer. Tim Chester is well known as an author and for his involvement with the Crowded House church planting initiative.

The book is twelve short chapters long, each including a short Bible study and questions for thought/application.

I'll readily admit that I'm not the target audience for this book, being married with no children. Nevertheless, I think this is a highly valuable book for parents, which throws a couple of sticks of gospel dynamite under the idols of our heart bound up in the issue of family. It consistently applies the gospel to all sorts of areas of Christian family life with the occasional surprising result.

Some particularly helpful topics covered include your ambitions for your children, enjoying them, and the importance of belonging to a family (the Church) beyond your family. This last point is particularly important to me, and I have experienced wonderful kindness from Church families in the past when they have included me in their lives. Chertsey Street Baptist Church in Guildford is remarkably good at this, incidentally.

I do have some minor quibbles/suggestions for improvement. This is still the most helpful book I've seen on the subject, and available at approximately £5 it's a steal. Before I mention my reservations, you really should go ahead and order it.

Buy it from the Good Book Company or 10ofThose now.

Done? Good.

There's a helpful review of the book at Reformissionary which touches upon one piece of advice in the book that I wonder about. But here are mine:

Definition of the family: In the introduction, the authors state that families come in all sorts of different sizes, although no acknowledgement of no-children-yet families. Of course, since this is a parenting book that's not the biggest deal (although it leads to serious problems when considering public policy). However I wonder if this is the root cause of the second (and to my mind main issue):
Male/Female Roles: Clearly, if you're writing for all sorts of family units, you might well refrain from talking too much about Mother and Father. But this is the normal family unit, established by God. A couple of times the authors get close to talking about this but seem to shy away.

I think that both the authors would take complementarian positions on male and female roles in family and Church, but it doesn't seem to matter enough to make it into the book. But there are important questions about this area, which are close to the gospel concerns the authors clearly show.

If we are to raise boys to become men who sacrificially love their wives like Christ loves the Church, our parenting may be different to them, than to girls who are to develop different skills and strengths (not to mention attractions, etc.)

This may well be partly/largely due to Tim Chester only parenting girls and Ed Moll only parenting boys, which I believe is the case (from the back cover).

Also relevant here is the potentially different roles of Mother and Father, in how they relate to each other in front of the children, and what differing roles they may play in parenting (e.g. discipline).

These aren't obscure doctrines that make no practical difference, nor are they easily separated from gospel-centredness, being as they are, so closely related to the story of Christ and his bride.

Some of these issues are covered briefly in the talks from Emmanuel Evangelical Church (Southgate)'s 2011 Family Conference. Listen to the mp3s here for extra credit.
Extended family: by which I mean other people from Church. I've already mentioned that the points raised in chapter 11 are particularly good and helpful. This is really just an add-on that I'd like to have seen in the book. What do you do with childless couples (particularly those who want to have children, like myself and Adele, but who haven't yet been able to conceive)?

Make sure you invite them too. They can even cook for you all at your house. Ask them to babysit (if they're anything like us, they'll be keen).

I wonder if we can apply this more smartly in our church structures. Why do we need to organise small groups in Churches when God has organised them for us in families? Make sure everyone in the Church is adopted by a family and get them to eat Sunday lunch together each week. Make sure you talk some Bible while you're there (even if it's just going over the morning service's teaching). This would kill a lot of birds with one stone.

Nevertheless, this is an excellent book that I highly recommend. If every Christian parent in the UK read and tried to practise half of what's in this book, reformation would come quickly to our Church and country.

Top 5 Google Products

2011-07-03T09:50:00.002+01:00

While people are all getting excited over Google+ (hopefully Google's new Facebook killer), here's my countdown of the 5 most revolutionary Google products so far:

Honourable mention: YouTube

YouTube doesn't count for the list as it was well known before Google acquired it. No doubt, videos of cats and Rick Astley have changed the internet forever. But even now, it remains an arm's length from other Google products through branding. And I could think of 5 other important innovations...

5. Adwords

Google invented adverts that didn't annoy its users. The adverts are typically useful and not distracting. Not to mention being the source of revenue for Google's vast empire.

4. Docs

Docs was originally powered by some Google acquisitions, but Google made it their own and popularised it. Taking Office applications to the cloud is thought of as a Google thing.

3. Chrome

Chrome has hit 20% market share today, under 3 years since its announcement. A sizeable feat in an already competitive market (Firefox was slowly eating into IE at the time). But the key revolution Chrome sparked was making browsers faster, more secure and putting tabs at the top. IE and Firefox have had to up their game and copy Google design decisions.

2. GMail

Free web mail accounts used to have storage limits of 2-10 Mb. GMail blew that away with fast, searchable, 1Gb accounts. Also cool is that they made dots optional in email addresses. So experts.exchange@gmail.com can double up as expert.sex.change@gmail.com, all in the same inbox.

1. Search

Google made bookmarks nearly obsolete. You could actually find good content quickly on the internet. We easily forget just how hard this was PG (pre-Google). Remember web circles? Remember link sites on a topic that would send you to 20 other sites on a topic, half of which would also be lists of links? Google made the internet work.

What did I miss?

Android, Calendar, Translate, Books, Scholar? What deserves to be here that I haven't included?

Free will

2011-06-22T22:22:00.005+01:00

Free will and God's sovereignty have been touched upon many times on this blog. I promise I'm not obsessive over it but nevertheless, here we go again.

Last time I checked, 'free will' isn't a phrase in the Bible. Yet it's often appealed to in order to solve difficult questions.

Why did God allow sin?
How do we reconcile God's sovereignty and human responsibility?
Why isn't everyone a Christian/going to heaven?
What's the name of a series of films about a whale, with the last letter taken off?

Two observations:

Free will 'solves' these issues in people's minds because it takes the blame for things away from God. But it makes me ask 'What kind of loving God lets people suffer excruciating pain eternally, for the sake of 'free will'? If I saw someone out of their mind, trying to commit suicide I'd try to stop them. Why wouldn't God?
The typical answer to this is that we can't truly love God otherwise - we'd just be robots, programmed to love God which isn't real. But why would God be so determined to receive this 'real love' from humans? Is he deficient in some way? Are Father, Son and Spirit not enough? Is the power of the inter-trinitarian love derived from the possibility that one could, of free will, decide to abandon the others? That smells fishy.

Teachability

2011-06-22T22:15:00.004+01:00

Who would you rather have listening to you?

Someone who is easily swayed, who will shift their opinion without too much effort?

Or someone stubborn, who doesn't give up their ways of thinking quickly and causes frustration?

My natural instinct is towards the shifters. Less argument, more like-mindedness.

But I've been blessed to interact with a number of the stubborns in the last couple of days. The stubborns test you along the way and when (if?) you win them over, they're more useful.

Arise, Sir Brucie

2011-06-11T11:50:00.003+01:00

So Bruce Forsyth has been knighted. And if anyone deserves recognition for services to gameshows, it's Brucie.

I've been working on a database of the House of Lords lately, and wondering what title would suit me best. Would I like to be a Baron? I rather like the sound of Lord Huxley of Lindfield.

We all want to achieve greatness and be recognised for it. From cleaning the kitchen to winning thousands of souls for Jesus.

But whose glory do we want? Seek the glory from God, not men, says the Bible.

There was once a lawyer, who knew the right people, made the right friends and became a Peer. The lawyer's mentor in the Faith was not ashamed to stand up for Jesus in public life, making all kinds of enemies in the process, and never received an honour.

But on the Last Day, things will change.

Resurrection Science

2011-06-08T13:36:00.006+01:00

Please do not view this as a resurrection of the blog - I'm working on some other web projects, and combined with being out of the house 12 hours a day, I have no time to regularly blog.

I was discussing creationism, young/old earth etc. with some work colleagues (Christians) this morning. One point that came up is the scientific/naturalistic/materialistic worldview's presuppositions - assumptions that are taken on faith.

For example, science assumes that the rules which govern the universe are the same today as they will be in a thousand years time, or thousands of years ago.

It's a very practical assumption that is very pragmatic - it works. It helps us explain our universe as it is, leading to technological advances of all kinds that have benefited mankind.

But it has problems predicting the future and problems understanding the past. We've only had accurate measuring instruments for a couple of centuries (being generous), which is a very small sample compared to the 13 billion years scientists claim. Nor is it an unbiased sample - it's restricted mostly to the surface of the earth in a universe so much larger than the earth that vocabulary fails us.

You see if there is any discontinuity whatsoever in the laws of science, as they have worked throughout the centuries, science's conclusions beyond that point become very dubious. For example, we know that acid + base -> salt + water. But maybe in 2000BC acid + base -> Cheese + Crackers + Port -> bliss. Were it true, science would have to be revised so dramatically that science would have to be much more limited in its conclusions.

The example above is silly. But what would a talking donkey do to biology? What would wine made from water do to chemistry? Darkened skies for astrophysics?

What if a man rebelled against his creator, causing thorns to grow? What if another man wore a crown of thorns, and, dying, took the curse on himself?

Where would that leave science?

What if a man died, was buried and on the third day rose again?

Burning Korans for fun and profit

2010-09-09T13:02:00.004+01:00

Before the death threats roll in, let me clarify: I would prefer not to burn Korans.

Terry Jones, Pastor of a 50-strong church in Florida is due to burn copies of the Koran on Saturday, the 9th anniversary of the World Trade Centre attacks. I have no desire to duplicate his deeds, which is really a mere publicity stunt which could indeed bring danger many Christians and Westerners across the world.

Jones represents virtually no one, yet his intended actions have invited reprimands from Obama, Petraeus and Christians across the whole world. Many of these have been perfectly fair but we have to look at culpability.

Is Jones or his church culpable if Muslims riot, kill, threaten, terrorise etc. people in response to what he does? I once burned my English GCSE anthology on a bonfire (after the exams); so if my English teacher responded by beating up my friends or throwing a brick threw my window, who would be culpable?

The Koran burning is no more significant. It's paper and ink on a fire. It'll make a few churchgoers feel manly/significant, release CO2 into the atmosphere, warm a few people up and boost the prophets profits of some Koran publishers.

The President of Pakistan said:

"It will inflame sentiments among Muslims throughout the world and cause irreparable damage to interfaith harmony and also to world peace,"

How is burning paper and ink (which presumably belongs to the church) going to cause irreparable damage to world peace? Answer: It isn't. If some Muslims react violently it tells you only about them, their conduct, their emotional fragility and their religion (since the Koran does condone slaying unbelievers).

Terry Jones and his church are obeying the laws of their land and threatening no one, even if their actions are selfish and foolish. Radical (historical) Islam and its followers are the only threat in this situation, and we must bear that in mind as we respond to the situation.

----

Some qualifications, since I am too poor a writer to make these kinds of things clear in the main text:

1) Not all Muslims are aggressive/violent/terrorists etc. In fact most of them aren't.

2) Muslims of all kinds would be upset by the burning of Korans. That's totally legitimate, and it may well be unloving of Jones to make a show of such an event.

3) Nevertheless, violence and threat is no legitimate response by any individual to the burning of any book, assuming that the book belongs to the one who burnt it.

4) I attempt to base my opinions on morality based solely on what God says, revealed in the Bible. I do not expect secularists or Muslims to agree, since they base their moral opinions on thin air and Islam, respectively.

5) The opinions on this post, like all my others, are entirely my responsibility, and are not necessarily endorsed by anyone else.

6) I agree with Sarah Palin and Tony Blair. Palin said "People have a constitutional right to burn a Koran if they want to, but doing so is insensitive and an unnecessary provocation – much like building a mosque at Ground Zero." which I agree with wholeheartedly. I would also like to point out that Christians are not responding to the Ground Zero mosque by threatening violence against Muslims. Blair said: "Rather than burn the Koran, I would encourage people to read it." Blair thinks that it'll inspire us, but I think it will repel us.

Stephen Hawking outs himself as a fool

2010-09-02T14:00:00.004+01:00

Story: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11161493

Verse: http://www.gnpcb.org/esv/search/?q=Psalm+14 (verse 1)

... or perhaps it's just shameless self-promotion.

Apart from the theological reason, again we have a public voice speaking about something they simply don't understand. Normally it's Bishops talking about economics, but this is just as embarrassing.

I'm not a Times subscriber so I haven't read the full extracts, but his argument reported by BBC simply pushes the question one stage further back. Even if gravity makes things like Big Bangs necessary, why is gravity necessary? Why is gravity-that-leads-to-such-scenarios necessary?

I don't use the fine-tuning argument much for other reasons, but not only does Hawking's argument not work but it can't work. Like an annoying child, we can just ask 'why?' one more time. And as long as scientists/atheists still proceed from empirical evidence and assumptions, even with a complete theory, science cannot have the answer.

I'm going to keep rambling on. If science says "who made God", I point out that the God I am proposing is definitionally non-created. So they can then say the same about gravity; non-created. So now we're talking about two different kinds of God, one tri-personal, deliberate, creator God, and one impersonal scientific theory. Both are omnipotent and omnipresent.

You can pick your story, choose your god. There'll be other arguments that settle it. But Hawking's illogical comments reveal more about his heart than the realities of the universe

Run, fat boy, run.

2010-07-09T11:35:00.002+01:00

I am running 10 million millimetres on Sunday.

If anyone reads this blog who doesn't know this anyway, you are warmly invited to donate to Kidscape via the link.

Memorising the Psalms

2010-07-06T19:30:00.002+01:00

How long do you think it would take?

Around 5 years?

Since I can sing Tom Lehrer's Element song from memory, and I'm getting better quickly at LeCrae's Don't Waste Your Life it seems silly to be largely ignoring the Bible (other than what I naturally absorb).

Why Psalms?

They're the heart of Biblical worship... and therefore useful for church, prayers, songs, etc.
They're the biggest book of the Bible... if I can do this, I can do any other book of the Bible.
They cover a ton of theology, some of which is not too familiar to 21st century western Christians, which will provide some food for thought.

Anyone else up for it?

The New Atheist Morality

2010-05-15T10:51:00.002+01:00

The 'New Atheists', like Dawkins and Hitchens, get very touchy when you use the (transcendental) moral argument for God, which goes something like this:

'If there is no God, and everything happened by accident, there is no reason to value human life and no one can say objectively that what _______ (insert dictator of choice) did was wrong.'

The point is then made by the Christian that the Atheist is borrowing from the Christian worldview to get his morals, and that if Christianity is thoroughly rejected (say, by a whole country), expect eugenics and so on.

The Atheist normally blusters his way through saying "how dare you say I have no morals?" and "look at what God did in the Old Testament" and missing the point entirely in a variety of other ways.

Richard Dawkins recently posted about his mate Dr Evan Harris losing his seat in Oxford West and Abingdon, bemoaning the fact that voters didn't like being represented by a man who thought we should allow people to bump off the elderly, murder the unborn, create animal-human hybrids, and so on.

This is the point: Dawkins, Harris and others see nothing wrong with these things. In debates, they claim that you can be a wonderful, moral person without Christ, and yet as soon as any difficult topic comes up, they haven't a leg to stand on. Christians know Christ, know that these things are wrong. More importantly, God knows and will judge.

So don't let your village atheist/secularist* off next time they say they can have morals without Christ. Ask them about these things and they'll soon show themselves as amoral.

* 'village atheist' is a term coined by John Frame for an atheist who lost very badly in a public debate with Greg Bahnsen. There are, in fact, plenty of atheists who are against abortion, euthanasia etc. but the vocal ones nearly always aren't. This difference of opinion between the two shows even more clearly why atheists have to have relative morality, which is no morality at all, rather preference.

Review: The White Horse King by Ben Merkle

2010-02-17T19:50:00.004Z

Benjamin Merkle's 'The White Horse King' explores the life of Alfred the Great, King of Wessex in the 9th century. If you were expecting a great Tonkeinesque novel, as my uneducated ears would have, this book will disappoint you. Not in the heroic-acts-of-bravery department, nor the twists-in the-plot aisle. This book will disappoint you because it's true.

In saying that it's true, I must confess that the extent of my expertise on the topic of Alfred the Great is the 234 pages of this book. However, I briefly talked to Ben in a queue for a toilet once, and he seemed like the kind of guy who knew what he was talking about. Who better, then, to tell us all the things we never knew, and didn't know we wanted to know, about King Alfred?

Merkle introduces us to Anglo-Saxon Britain at the time when the Vikings began their looting. Soon, we find the young Alfred battling the Vikings and protecting his country. The story of his life is too exciting for me to spoil, but his achievements as a warrior, a law and education reformer and as a Christian make him truly worthy of the title 'great'.

The book is unashamedly written from a Christian worldview, although it is in no sense 'preachy'. Reading, you get the sense that Merkle thinks that we could do a lot worse than have Alfred as our role model.

For me, educated in British history only from 1066 onwards, it was at times difficult to digest all the necessary facts. Thankfully, I carried on reading and it all started slotting into place (and helpful reminders were periodically given).

If you already know plenty about King Alfred, this book will tell you little that you don't already know, although you may find yourself surprised by some of Merkle's takes on the man and the history.

If, like me, you don't know Alfred from Arthur, I strongly recommend this book as enjoyable, educational and inspirational.

In the name of decency, I should add that I got this book free in the www.booksneeze.com review program. But frankly I had no idea that this book would be as fascinating as it is. Two thumbs fresh.

The Book Depository has it for £6.58:

http://www.bookdepository.co.uk/book/9781595552525/The-White-Horse-King

Amazon has it for £9.85:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/White-Horse-King-Alfred-Great/dp/1595552529

Quote of the Day

2009-12-14T21:22:00.002Z

Just picked up Owen's The Glory of Christ (having stopped reading it about 3 years ago and never reading it since) and read this beaut:

"[Christ] in himself, or his own divine person, was 'over all, God blessed for ever', yet he humbled himself for the salvation of the church, to the eternal glory of God, to take our nature upon him, and to be made man: and those who cannot see a divine glory in his so doing, do neither know him, nor love him, nor believe in him, nor do any way belong to him".

The Pollutant that causes Global Warming

2009-12-09T10:08:00.002Z

Dev made a great comment on Glen's blog.

Actually… it’s pollutants too [paul: causing global warming, not just God]..
but just one kind…

Hosea 4:1-3 Hear the word of the LORD, O children of Israel, for the LORD has a controversy with the inhabitants of the land. There is no faithfulness or steadfast love, and no knowledge of God in the land; 2 there is swearing, lying, murder, stealing, and committing adultery; they break all bounds, and bloodshed follows bloodshed.

3 Therefore the land mourns, and all who dwell in it languish, and also the beasts of the field and the birds of the heavens, and even the fish of the sea are taken away.

Anthropogenic (human-caused) global warming basically says:

1. Adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere should heat it up.
2. CO2 records going up roughly correlates with global temperature increases.
3. Therefore anthropogenic global warming is true.

Anthropoharmatiagenic (human-sinning-caused) global warming says:

1. We know that the world suffers when people murder each other.
2. As we've been murdering foetuses, embyros, babies, civilians and soldiers on unprecedented scales, global temperatures have increased (which we think is the world suffering).
3. Therefore anthropoharmtiagenic global warming is true.

Global warming activists say "reduce your carbon footprint". God says "reduce your sin footprint". Repent and believe.

Conspiracy or Incompetence?

2009-12-08T13:20:00.000Z

There's a fine line between conspiracy and incompetence. Given how the Labour party has governed over the last 12 years, it sure looks like a conspiracy to destroy the United Kingdom. But as TV shows like 'The Thick of it' remind us, sheer incompetence, combined with a few egos and people-pleasers gives much the same effect. And Occam's razor reminds us that, very often, the simplest explanation is the correct one.

Climate change sceptics and alarmists alike could do well to remember this. Sceptics see apparent manipulation of data and jump straight to conspiracy. Alarmists see sceptics making mistakes and assume they're being poisoned by materialism/ paid by oil companies/ in love with capitalism. Much more likely is that both sides are convinced in their own minds and willing to do whatever it takes to prove themselves right.

The same can go for the evolution/intelligent design debate and just about every other controversy. Say the Federal Vision one (skip this paragraph if you don't know what I'm talking about). When people tear apart the Federal Vision without bothering to ask its promoters for clarification, read quotes in context and so on, it's tempting to think that they must be evil. The heresy hunters, on the other hand, see occasional FV quotes that could be misunderstood and assume them to be proof that the FV-proponents are really a bunch of legalistic judaizers.

Jesus of Nazareth:

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

Why I'm a 'Denier'

2009-12-07T17:17:00.005Z

To make the case for the kind of madness going on at the Copenhagen summit, those trying to limit emissions need to show that:

The earth has been warming.
This has been happening at unprecedented levels.
This has happening because of human interference.
The earth will continue to warm, if our emissions continue as projected.
This will, overall, have a negative effect on the state of the world.
Cutting emissions will make a difference (given how far we're in already).
Government can, through various forms interference, force emissions down.
This interference is worse than the negative effect of point 3.
This interference is better than aid solutions (preparing third world countries for these negative effects of warming).
This interference is better than geo-engineering research/efforts.

The certainty of these claims range between near-100% (eg. 1, 7) to near 0% (eg. 6,8, 9).

So please would the politicians, media, alarmists, greens and socialists out there please stop pretending this debate is between noble, world-loving scientific upholders of 'Truth' and baby-eating flat-earthers who want Bangladesh wiped off the planet.

Besides, if Bangladesh was wiped out, who else would England be guaranteed to beat at cricket?

Justice for Duke

2009-12-03T12:13:00.002Z

Duke Amachree, a homelessness prevention officer in Wandsworth, London was dismissed for mentioning God to a client. Find out more at: http://www.justiceforduke.com/

(I work for the organisations supporting him).

At Last, it's Official

2009-11-03T12:22:00.000Z

Climate change is a religion.

The Lost Trinity

2009-09-17T12:07:00.003+01:00

Glen Scrivener, blogging at Christ the Truth, defrosts an old article today: The God who is… (extra points for using the ellipsis character rather than being lazy...)

Glen says that the God who is, the true God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit, revealed to us in Jesus. This is fundamental doctrine. So his blog is always talking about Christ as the one who reveals God to us and proper explanation of the trinity.

The trinity is not a popular teaching these days (has it ever been?) but it is a very important one. As evangelical churches are stopping using set liturgies, there's a real danger of ignoring the trinity even more. If the Book of Common Prayer, or Common Worship are used in a service, you will get Trinitarian worship, guaranteed. But with so much off-the-cuff or seeker-sensitive/sensible, introducing people to the trinity (the God who is) is far too easily sidetracked.

Trinitarian worship is not an often among many. It is the only way to worship God (John 4:23; worship God in spirit (the Holy Spirit) and truth (the Son). Let's not attempt to do otherwise.

The Crossless Christ?

2009-09-10T13:39:00.000+01:00

Speaking about a new production of Ben Hur, Philip Horne of the Telegraph writes:

It is still a “Tale of the Christ”, as Wallace had it, even if (unlike the novel) it ducks the crucifixion by ending on Palm Sunday.

Google Chrome: A Year On

2009-09-03T17:24:00.003+01:00

When Google Chrome was released a year ago, I made predictions:

After this initial buzz (e.g. a month from now) things will settle down, and not much will have changed. But behind the scenes we'll see a lot of work on Chrome, or other browsers imitating its new design features. Web developers will start supporting its features, but we won't see an awful lot.

A year or so from now, Chrome (or derivatives) will have closed most of the feature gap between it and FF, with plugin support, bookmarks, RSS and so on. If by then its competitors haven't done something special themselves, we'll start seeing Chrome eating into Firefox and Internet Explorer's market share.

So, was I right?

Well, Opera has come out with Opera Unite.

Firefox has lots of CSS3/HTML5 support and everyone has sped up Javascript performance (and is now considering aping the Chrome-style tabs for Fx 4). Chrome development has been slower than I anticipated, but it has triggered off real browser wars, which is good for everyone.

All in all, I think I was right on generalities, wrong on specifics. I feel like making more predictions...

A year from now, everyone will be using Google Wave, Boris Johnson will rule the world and the England Cricket team will have learnt not to play football during warm-ups.

A Treat for those feeling Patriotic after the Ashes

2009-08-24T18:35:00.003+01:00

On this version, they ommitted the best verse:

"And all the world over, each nation's the same
They've simply no notion of playing the game
They argue with umpires, they cheer when they've won
And they practice beforehand, which ruins the fun".

I also wrote a limerick a while ago, about a particular Australian fast bowler. Unfortunately, he turned out to be one of the best bowlers of the series. But, I reproduce it in full here, for your amusement:

"There once was a bowler named Siddle
Who couldn't perform in the middle
Though he huffed and he puffed
The selectors weren't chuffed
So he ended up working in Lidl."

Connections (a fairy tale in a field)

2009-08-22T14:36:00.003+01:00

A man finds some treasure in a field, he covers it up, joyfully buys the field and gets the treasure.

Does that sound familiar?

That's right. It's the plot of the book Ruth.

A man, Boaz, finds a treasure in a field (2:4), he covers it up (implied by 3:9), joyfully buys the field (4:9-10) and gets the treasure (4:13).

Of course, you'll recognise the story from Matthew 13:44.

In the circles I'm in, we're quick to point out that Boaz is a type of Christ, redeeming his people (sometimes understood corporately, sometimes singularly, ocassionally referring to the gentiles). However, the parable in Matthew 13 is always us, finding the treasure of the gospel, giving up everything we have for the Kingdom of heaven.

Because the God is three-in-one, I don't have a beef with either of these, nor having multiple correct understandings of the same passage. But I think we could do with some sharper thinking on Matthew 13.

This post partly sponsored by 'who the man?' on Christ the Truth.

Do you not know that we are to judge angels?

2009-08-21T22:01:00.000+01:00

From James Jordan:

Now the Bible tells us that the Old Creation was superintended by angels, while the New Creation is superintended by redeemed humanity. To save space, and because this essay is designed as a Bible study, I won't be writing out the passages. You must look them up yourself. Start with 1 Corinthians 6:3, which establishes that at the end of the New Creation we shall judge angels, not vice versa. Then, as regards the Old Creation consider Hebrews 2:2 and Acts 7:53. Turn next to Galatians 3:19, and then read Galatians 4:1-7. These passages show that in the Old Creation we were considered as children, and the angels were our tutors. The chief tutor originally was Lucifer, but he betrayed his calling in the Garden. So the Son of God entered as the Angel of the Lord to guide humanity toward maturity. Before He was the Second Adam, Jesus was the Second Lucifer. Throughout the Old Creation, we see the Angel of the Lord and His spirit angels supervising and judging humanity. Now, however, the man Christ Jesus has ascended to rule the angels, and in union with Him we also rule them.

- A Brief Readers Guide to Revelation

Review - Notes from the Tilt-A-Whirl (N.D. Wilson)

2009-08-04T13:47:00.003+01:00

Notes from the Tilt-a-Whirl trailer from Gorilla Poet Productions on Vimeo.

Just remember that you're standing on a planet that's evolving,
And revolving at 900 miles an hour.
That's orbiting at 19 miles a second, so it's reckoned
A sun that is the source of all our power.
The sun, and you and me, and all the stars that we can see,
Are moving at a million miles a day,
In an outer spiral arm at 40,000 miles an hour
Of the galaxy we call the milky way.
(from Monty Python's The Meaning of Life)

N.D. Wilson and Monty Python have something in common; they recognise how unbelievably small we are, and how ridiculous it is that we can ride Earth at such speeds without falling off or even getting dizzy.

Wilson's Notes from the Tilt-A-Whirl is like a joke. Trying to explain what it is, or why it works only detracts from the wonder. Subtitled 'Wide-eyed wonder in God's Spoken World', the book is poetic, philosophical, evangelistic apologetics. Don't say I didn't warn you.

Taking God's creation, one season at a time, Wilson points us to the obvious, describing the Tilt-a-Whirl and laughing at people who think too much of themselves (primarily himself). The Problem of Evil is tackled, alongside the Problem of Kittens, and Hamlet, Prince of Denmark even chips in a chapter on the non-existence of William Shakespeare.

The only other books that I've read as slowly as Notes from the Tilt-A-Whirl are by the puritan John Owen. With Owen it's because I have to read every sentence 3 or 4 times to work out what he's saying. But with Wilson it's because every sentence is a canapé that requires a proper tasting.

The book combines argument with description, not just telling you why a Christian doctrine of creation makes sense, but showing you why it's beautiful. Take off the sugar-coating, and most of the arguments will be familiar (and sound) if you know your presuppositional Calvinism. If you don't, or know someone who doesn't, this could hardly be a better introduction, so long as they don't gulp down each sentence too quickly.

The style of writing is apparently haphazard and disjointed, one could call it proverbial. But as each chapter, and the book itself draws to a close, the jigsaw fits together and you see the big picture. I'm no expert to judge the quality of writing, but to my taste, it's as good as I've ever read. Unlike my moribund text, the scenes and arguments come to life, and you start noticing things in everyday life that would previously have passed you by.

The setting is nice, with some nice typefaces and ligatures. The only sadness for me is that it's printed on cheap paper. I'll be first in line if they do a leather-bound collector's edition.

Wilson's written a captivating book that reminds us our miniscule size in God's universe, yet far-more-absurd significance in a finely tuned work of art, imaging the triune God.

If you can, you must read this. Buy it from the links below. Unless you happen to be a friend of mine, in which case you're probably getting a copy for birthday/Christmas, etc.

Buy from Amazon UK marketplace.

If mankind hadn't fallen...

2009-06-26T22:42:00.001+01:00

When we'd invented cricket, would there have been dropped catches or edges that went for four?

How John Piper Stays Relevant

2009-06-25T21:14:00.001+01:00

Excellent and interesting article here:

Clicky

Praise God for Google Mail

2009-06-23T23:18:00.002+01:00

If it weren't for the technological geniuses at Google, I'd have assumed this really was from the reformer himself.

Missional Trinity

2009-06-20T10:35:00.002+01:00

God has always existed as Father, Son and Holy Spirit, a community of love, a dance.

But God created the universe that we see, and saw that it was good. The triune God extended his love outwards to creation.

He started with Adam and Eve who were to multiply and go out to heavenise and fill the earth.

After the flood, Noah and his family were called to do the same.

Abraham was to be the father of a nation. It would be a nation of priests, whose offspring would bless the world. Those who blessed the Abrahamites would be blessed. Those who cursed would be cursed.

For the sake of time, fast forward to Jesus' 12 disciples/apostles. They would, like Jacob's 12 sons, become a nation of priests, the church. They would expand outwards to take hold of the whole earth with the gospel of Christ, as we have consistently seen for 2000 years now.

God, in human history, works inside-out. He starts small, they spread out and in doing so, multiply (look at how this happens in Acts).

Some churches are 'attractional' in focus; they put on a good show and try to bring the crowds in. Other churches are 'missional', not so much trying to get people in as to send people out (whether to other countries or the sports club down the road).

It seems to me that if we have to pick (which, I think, most churches have to/ought to do) then the latter is much the more Biblical and profitable.

Who's most likely to believe in the Bible's Inerrancy?

2009-06-17T14:30:00.002+01:00

(in the UK)...

Anglicans, Baptists, Independents, Methodists, Pentecostals or Others?

I have a ComRes Poll in front of me from which I see this result:

1. Pentecostals
2. Others
3. Independents
4. Baptists
5. Anglicans
6. Methodists

Interesting that it's those who believe in modern day prophecy that most believe that the Bible's free from errors.

On the encouraging side, all of them had a majority of inerrantists apart from the Methodists, whose results were a complete reversal of all the other groups.

50p / Month Internet Contribution

2009-06-16T18:20:00.002+01:00

Blogging has been light/non-existent but here's an annoyance:

Today's 'Digital Britain' report announces a 50p/month tax for all homes with a landline to pay to upgrade infrastructure. What annoyed me, though, is this quote from BBC News:

"It is a contribution which we are asking people to make - it's six pounds a year - offset, as we make very clear in the report, by the likely continued reduction in headline prices because of the competitive market we have in this country," said report author Lord Carter."

It is not a contribution they are asking people to make, it is one they are forcing people to make. It is a tax, not a freewill offering. It's the internet's equivalent of a TV License. Lord Carter should be honest.

Politics from the Pulpit

2009-05-28T16:49:00.002+01:00

Church leaders have been keen to warn their flocks not to vote BNP due to their racist ideology.

Will they have the guts to tell people not to vote for those who would have us exterminate unborn babies?

We Rest on Thee, Our Shield and Our Defender

2009-05-23T22:15:00.002+01:00

I was reading some 2 Timothy earlier and was reminded of Relay conferences and the times of singing at them. Which reminded me of this great battle-hymn which I copy in full from Net Hymnal:

We rest on Thee, our Shield and our Defender!
We go not forth alone against the foe;
Strong in Thy strength, safe in Thy keeping tender,
We rest on Thee, and in Thy Name we go.
Strong in Thy strength, safe in Thy keeping tender,
We rest on Thee, and in Thy Name we go.

Yes, in Thy Name, O Captain of salvation!
In Thy dear Name, all other names above;
Jesus our Righteousness, our sure Foundation,
Our Prince of glory and our King of love.
Jesus our Righteousness, our sure Foundation,
Our Prince of glory and our King of love.

We go in faith, our own great weakness feeling,
And needing more each day Thy grace to know:
Yet from our hearts a song of triumph pealing,
“We rest on Thee, and in Thy Name we go.”
Yet from our hearts a song of triumph pealing,
“We rest on Thee, and in Thy Name we go.”

We rest on Thee, our Shield and our Defender!
Thine is the battle, Thine shall be the praise;
When passing through the gates of pearly splendor,
Victors, we rest with Thee, through endless days.
When passing through the gates of pearly splendor,
Victors, we rest with Thee, through endless days.

Describing God

2009-04-26T22:06:00.003+01:00

During a prayer meeting yesterday, we spent some time listing some characteristics of God, and then praising God for them. It was a great time but two things said a lot about how we think as moderns.

His triune nature / Him being Father, Son and Spirit didn't come up
All but two of the descriptions were adjectives (caring, loving, just, humble, holy, etc.)

Considering the enormous theological and historical importance of the trinity, it's telling that it didn't come up (although it was prayed). And I'm pretty certain that God is described more often as metaphorical nouns (rock, father, bridegroom, tree, lamb, etc.) than adjectives.

Complete James Jordan Collection

2009-04-17T17:22:00.003+01:00

Apologies for the fanboy post...

My birthday present arrived yesterday. It took 47 days to get here after ordering from the US. It contains all of James Jordan's teaching for a number of years, along with pretty much everything he's ever written.

I've backed it all up onto a computer in case the DVDs fail and have checked how much material there is there. I've worked out that if I spent 35 hours a week listening non-stop to the collection, and then read all of the written material at the rate of two books per day, I'd finish around November.

It'll last longer than a series of 24 anyway.

Good is an Understatement

2009-04-10T19:03:00.003+01:00

Good Friday was such a good Friday, no language really has words suitable to describe it. I'd be a fool to try. Today is a good time to be English and understated, but only if we know the magnitude of that understatement.

A Fairytale Ending

2009-04-09T12:08:00.004+01:00

This Sunday, Christians will celebrate Easter Sunday, resurrection day. The day that Jesus Christ, fully man, fully God, physically rose from the dead.

If the life of Jesus were a film it would get rubbish reviews from "expert film critics". They'd prefer to wallow in the unjust death of a good man. They want to stay at good friday forever, never making it to the beginning of a new week.

But that's not the good news that God shows us in the Bible. Jesus rose again, the perfect punchline to the real-life shaggy dog story of the Old Testament. Tears are replaced with belly-laughs. God is alive.

Evangelical Alliance Slipstream Synchro Blog

Westminster Confession of Faith - help, anyone?

2009-04-03T19:41:00.003+01:00

In the first chapter, on scripture, the Wesminster Confession of Faith says:

"IX. The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself: and therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly."

2 Peter 1:20 is the scripture proof for this. The jist of the confession seems to be that scripture is interpreted by scripture so you can't interpret any part of it to be in contradiction with any other part.

Here's my question - what does the confession mean by the true and full sense of any scripture being one, and not manifold?

Is it ruling out pluralistic understandings (eg. your average bible study - "what does this passage mean to you?") or does it mean that one passage can only mean one thing at once. Is it ruling out eisegesis (putting whatever meaning you want on the text) or broad exegesis (where a single text can say lots of things at once)?

I don't know any experts on the WCF so maybe there's one on the internet who'll get in touch...

Review - The Baptized Body

2009-04-01T15:53:00.006+01:00

Paul Huxley reviewing a Peter Leithart book is rather like the runner-up of Lindfield Primary School's year 3 sack race critiquing Usain Bolt's running technique.

Nevertheless, since I've read the book, I offer a few thoughts.

The Baptized Body, by Peter Leithart is an investigation of what baptism does to the baptised. We know that baptism is to be practised by the church, but why? What does it do?

According to Leithart, amongst other things, baptism unites us to Christ, saves us, and is the washing by which we are justified and sanctified (p31).

Steady on there old chap- that sounds pretty... Catholic. Well, you'll have to read the book, or take my word for it that he is not launching an attack on any great protestant doctrine. What Leithart intends to do is take seriously the passages in the Bible that say things like "Baptism ... saves you" (1 Peter 3:21). In what sense does baptism save you? I could attempt to explain Leithart's views but you'd be better off if I didn't.

The positive teaching on baptism, the church, apostasy and the cultural and sociological observations in this book are superb and will open as many eyes as read it. It's certainly given me much food for thought and helped me read the new testament passages regarding baptism with more confidence.

Although this is a short, quickly written polemical book, I think it could have benfited from a bit more substance to show why he's not denying or challenging key reformed soteriological doctrines. The preface points makes it clear, and later in the book he spends a little time defending his Calvinist credentials. But I think a full chapter of "why I'm not a heretic" could have been really helpful. Instead I'll have to work things through systematically to try to get to grips with how his teaching relates to, in particular the "5 points".

The book is jargon-heavy and isn't recommended for all, but for those who have a solid footing in the Reformed tradition will have their minds well-stretched by this book.

Two thumbs fresh.

Buy it from:
Canon Press
Amazon

Concerning Church Websites

2009-03-27T18:57:00.004Z

My job at the moment involves looking at a lot of Methodist church websites in the UK. About 600 so far. I don't think that's healthy to be honest.

A lot of them are predictably terrible (as virtually all church websites are) but one caught our eye, such an exquisite an example of a church website that it couldn't remain unlinked. Clicky and enjoy.

These things aside, a lot of people seem to think that it's necessary to stick letters after their names on websites. You know... 'The Reverend Ebenezer Squigglesworth BA, MDiv.' and so on. I'm a little unsure why people do that.

MPs vote 328 votes to 174 to get rid of Free Speech Clause

2009-03-25T19:42:00.006Z

See here.

Next step: Ban unauthorised publications (like blogs).

Wordless Evangelism?

2009-03-21T13:36:00.002Z

Stuart Dean is dishing out lines for those who think it's possible.

I got 100 lines in year 5 - "I must be more responsible with glue". If you ever read this, Giles Harris, sorry about the trousers.

Easter Sunday Videos

2009-03-19T21:07:00.002Z

Request - can anyone point me in the direction of videos that might be appropriate for an Easter Sunday service?

Review - Dandelion Fire

2009-03-17T21:43:00.004Z

Dandelion Fire is the second book in the 100 Cupboards (review here) series.

For those catching up, Henry is a boy who lives in Kansas with his Uncle, Aunt and three female cousins. He sleeps in the attic, and he discovers that behind the plaster are 100 cupboards leading to all kinds of different worlds, places and times. Through exploring these cupboards he finds out things he'd never imagined about himself and the world he lives in.

N.D. Wilson (Nathan) is the author of the book, and is also the managing editor of the superb and deeply entertaining Credenda/Agenda; a Christian magazine whose link you will find in the sidebar.

The book is Christian fiction in the best sense; not a tacky, formulaic story with Christian bits hammered on, but a rich descriptive story with real characters, always consistent with a Christian worldview. It's creepier and quicker-paced than Harry Potter, as rich as Narnia and easier reading than Middle Earth. If you like the genre I don't see how you could fail to love these books.

Dandelion Fire explores the theme of real-world magic; caterpillars turn into butterflies, cars get from A to B by exploding hundreds of times, enormous, billions of people stay stuck to the earth despite being spun round and tremendous speeds; just because we have an idea how these things work doens't make them less magical. Wilson doesn't so much want you to wish you were living in the magical worlds of the cupboards - he wants you to see the magic of the grass growing between your toes.

The story is excellently told; scary people are genuinely terrifying, danger is made to feel dangerous and enormous battles are appropriately epic. Mysteries left unexplained from the first book are uncovered, which is much more satisfying than the Harry Potter books were, but there's still plenty to find out in the third book, The Chestnut King (coming out next year).

These books are excellent imagination food for people from 8 years up.

100 Cupboards (book 1) - buy from the Book Depository or Amazon
Dandelion Fire (book 2) - buy from the Book Depository or Amazon

Read Mugglenet's review here (minor spoilers). If you know me and ask nicely I may just let you borrow them...

24

2009-03-14T23:54:00.006Z

1. Hours in a day
2. Great show

3. Tribes plus apostles

4. Lots of factors (highly composite, better than perfect)

5. Pieces of chocolate in some chocolate bars
6. Was a leap year

7. Chromium
8. Number of Chopin's Preludes

9. Because it's the number of major and minor keys
10. Letters in Greek alphabet
11. 11000 in binary
12. Carats in pure gold

13. Unlucky in Cantonese culture
14. X in the alphabet
15. The year Clement Freud and Robert Mugabe were born
16. Beethoven's 9th Symphony premiered
17. Blenheim Palace was constructed
18. Martin Luther's Translation of the Bible burned by the pope
19. Criticising Aristotle becomes a death penalty in France
20. I'm really starting to struggle here
21. Maybe I should give up and pretend I'm younger than I am
22. Did you notice where the spare lines are?
23. One more than 23.
24. Did I mention it's a great show?

Who's the best modern-day superhero?

2009-03-12T19:26:00.003Z

Dr. Gregory House, Jack Bauer, Dr. Mark Sloan, Professor Charlie Epps, Dr. Temperance Brennan, Vic Mackey, Buffy Summers, DCI Gene Hunt ... etc. No characters from Heroes permitted.

Who do you think's the best* and why?

I'm torn to choose between some of them, and others, although the show's interesting are pretty boring as characters.

House, Bauer and Mackey are my favourites from those. House is a walking mess, Bauer is a good guy who does bad things, Mackey is a bad guy who does good things.

*define best however you want to...

Deborah 13 - Servant of God

2009-03-12T00:43:00.005Z

We've just watched this documentary on BBC, available for a little while on iPlayer (UK only). For UK Christians this is almost a must-watch, and at least a highly-recommended-watch.

Deborah's 13, has been brought up in a rural area with 10 siblings and is a passionate evangelist, believing in hell and salvation. The program looks at her life on the farm and has her visiting her brother at university and getting pretty much her first taste of the outside world.

I could point out a few flaws here and there with this family (whether theologically or culturally - and I'm sure they could do twice as many back with 100 hours of documentary filming), but to do that would be to miss the point completely. The next reformation will come to Britain when Christians start thinking and living generationally and faithfully like this family. Please God, send us more Deborahs.

edit: Her website is here and you can find her on Twitter. She follows Mark Driscoll, Adrian Warnock and Ubuntu bugs amongst many other things. I think that makes her even more cool.

"We're prepared to lose it to win it"

2009-03-10T15:38:00.002Z

Andrew Strauss on the England Cricket team's aim for the test match against the Windies. But it could be talking about something else...

When Blaming the Banks...

2009-03-09T22:21:00.003Z

Remember that if people hadn't borrowed well beyond their means, lots of this wouldn't have happened. It's greedy borrowers and bankers borrowing from Blair and Brown's Brainless Britain.

A Psalm for the pro-choice West?

2009-03-05T00:32:00.004Z

Psalm 137 contains a particularly violent sounding final verse:

"Blessed shall he be who takes your little ones
and dashes them against the rock!"

We have a tendency in Christian circles to hide these bits of the Bible from non-believers. But maybe we shouldn't; after all, killing babies in this country is perfectly acceptable if they're under 24 weeks old. One could even call it seeker-sensitive.

Of course, the Psalm may not be quite as horrific as it may sound.

I've forgotten what this post was going to be about

2009-03-04T15:09:00.002Z

I quickly logged onto Blogger to post some captivating thoughts on something-or-other, and then completely forgot what I was going to say.

Oh wow, I've just remembered... how exciting!

All Saints' Lindfield (our home church) has a new website which works and gives useful information. Huzzah!

You can download a few sermons (oddly in four parts... no idea why) so far, including the legendary Stuart Silk* on Ephesians 6:1-9.

I'm off to change the sidebar link.

* Disclosure: I am a former member of Silky Stu's Lindfield Crew

Sing the Psalms (6) - More free songs

2009-03-03T14:09:00.002Z

Head over to my musical Myspace for two more Psalms (19 & 1-2), done Huxley style.

I'm a glutton for approval so tell me how much you hate them...

Sing the Psalms (5) - Free songs!

2009-03-02T22:20:00.004Z

Right. Here we are again. Psalm-singing good. Never Psalm-Singing bad. Glad we cleared that up.

For a while I've been trying to write musical settings of Psalms specifically for contemporary corporate worship. I've got 4 or 5 in the bag now.

I've just uploaded two songs to Myspace, Psalms 117 and 121. They're very rough recordings but do check them out and let me know what you think. If you want to download them, Myspace isn't letting you do that at the moment, even though I've enabled it. So you can either be patient or e-mail me and we can sort something out. The same applies in the unlikely possibility that you want some sheet music.

Psalms 1-2, 19, 119 will be around one day.

We need a few more 'freaks' round here

2009-02-26T18:27:00.002Z

Mike Kendall has written a helpful post on abortion here.

In UK evangelical churches we're big on the gospel (good) and big on evangelism (good). But often this means we find it very hard speaking loudly about issues that don't seem altogether related to the gospel, that we know will offend people. Whether that's Biblical Chronology, gay issues, abortion or homeschooling.

We could do with a few more Jesus Freaks (as DC Talk would put it) around here. Not graceless peddlers of their own hobby-horses but men and women of courage who really are ready to be hated. Because the gospel is very big. Everything is connected to it, because, as Piper says, God is the gospel. We can't truly proclaim these things unless the gospel flows through them like the blood in our bodies. And we can't truly proclaim the gospel to our culture and ignore our culture's pet idols.

Of course, trouble comes when people do this. Much of it from other Christians. James Jordan, in an old Biblical Horizons newsletter gave this as a good reason why it's wise for a preacher to have a trade to fall back - so that he'll have something to do when 75% of his congregation leave.

This has been a theologically/culturally eclectic post, so it's fitting that Neal Morse should have the finishing line:

"God can change the world with just one willing soul
Who will stand up for the truth and give him starring role"

The Worship Service as Battle

2009-02-12T22:44:00.004Z

As all historic optimists know, the gates of hell will not prevail against the church.

1. There is a battle going on between hell and the church.
2. The church wins (slava na Boga!).

One thing that's remarkable about this is that the church only meets together formally for about 2 hours a week. This means that 98.8% of the week is spent with the old order attacking the church*. We only get to retaliate with the other 1.2%

Corporate worship, in a church is our weekly D-Day. We gather together to fight all God's enemies by the humble means of praying, preaching, singing and sacraments.

That means the way we pray, the way we sing, the way we preach/listen and practise the sacraments matters.

We need more training, more commanders and more warriors who will take their Sundays seriously.

*No I'm not buying into secular-sacred divides. The church is always attacking the enemy, just as the enemy loves to attack us by destroying our Sunday meetings. But every army attacks better with training, formation, co-ordination and numbers. it is the same way with the church.

Gospel Hypocrites

2009-02-11T05:57:00.004Z

Pretend you have a friend called Billy. Billy is addicted to porn, gambling and booze. Billy hears the gospel, believes and is baptised.

What are you expecting to see change in his life?

Maybe not Mother Teresa overnight, but you'll expect to see change, right? Because Christ is in Billy, and Billy is in Christ. How could there not be change?

How is Billy different to you? You believe in Christ, you are in Christ, Christ is in you. You know that you sin. You know that you have a (secret?) problem with lying, gossip, lust, greed, laziness. An area you don't want to let the gospel touch. "It'd be too messy." "Too many people would be hurt if I came clean."

Yet you know Billy giving up his binge-drinking, pornography and gambling addiction is clearly going to be good news for him. He'll be free from the slavery of those sins.

Jesus is powerful, and full of grace and truth. Why would you try to keep him out of any part of your life?

When BoingBoing starts wondering...

2009-02-04T10:06:00.002Z

...whether global warming is man-made you know the game's nearly up.

Climate Heresy 1
Climate Heresy 2
Climate Heresy 3

For those who don't know, BoingBoing is a popular blog/website which, politically speaking is a mixture of lefty liberalism with a love for personal freedoms. I'm highly surprised but glad to see that they're at least questioning climate change orthodoxy.

What Fun the Minor Prophets would have had...

2009-02-02T13:17:00.002Z

The 'healthcare' system that allows, encourages and expects babies to be chopped up by their staff suspends a nurse for offering to pray. HT Cranmer.

Why 'And Can it Be' is a bad hymn

2009-01-31T08:21:00.003Z

And it starts with the word 'and'. Fine for sentences but pretty weird for hymns
It's long
The tune goes all over the place
Full of Christian jargon
It relies on punctuation (eg. in the fourth line) to change the meaning of the words you sang in the third line.

... yet we'd all agree that it's one of 'the greats', right?

Worship leaders/music directors beware - you may be throwing out a great.

Around the World of Worship

2009-01-28T22:29:00.003Z

1) Sovereign Grace will have a sale on in February - $6 per CD and half price international shipping. If you have been living in a cave, go and bookmark the Sovereign Grace CD page.

2) Resound Worship has been launched (when, I don't know but it's only just been brought to my attention (HT: Marc Lloyd).

It's worth reproducing their vision statement in full:

RESOUNDworship.org is a group of British based worship songwriters, seeking to resource the church with heartfelt, crafted, accessible worship songs (for contact details click here). We believe these should be birthed in the local church, and then refined by a peer critique process, if they are to benefit the wider church. We want to share these with as many people as possible, through a free internet download service offering quality mp3s, sheet music and chord charts.

The group meets on a regular basis to critique each other’s songs, and the conversations continue through a web forum, where we post and refine material. Once they have been through this process, and the songs have been tested on our home churches, we send the lyrics to an external theological critique group.

Our core values for worship songs are

Biblical – not necessarily straight from the Bible, but reflecting the breadth of biblical teaching. Theologically robust, but not dry or overly wordy.

Content Driven – songs which say something to or about God, and/or our response to him. A strong central theme helps with this.

Inclusive – songs which avoid jargon, outdated language, gender exclusivity, or feelings which may not be shared by a majority of the congregation.

Honed – songs which have been refined through discussion, critique and revision. Music which is singable whilst remaining interesting, and provides a fitting match to the words.

Contemporary – fresh and original songs, reaching a new generation of worshippers. This doesn’t mean “faddish” or complicated.

Sounds like a great step in the right direction. I'd like to see one further development here: release the songs under a Creative Commons license. This would be unlikely to affect CCLI returns as any church that fills in their returns properly would likely put it through anyway.

CCLI (Christian Copyright License International) is a great organisation/resource for the situation at the moment, allowing churches to do all kinds of things that would otherwise be illegal. But complete freedom of use would be better.

3) To that end, I've fiddled with my blog a bit. On the right now, you'll see a Creative Commons License. If for some strange reason you want to reuse any material of mine posted on this website, you are entirely permitted to do so, on only 2 conditions (as per the Creative Commons Share-Alike License) - you make any derivative works under a license at least as permissive, and that appropriate acknowledgment of its original author is made (eg. my name and a link, if on a website, just my name if printed/projected, and so on.

Now that's all well and good, but is there anything worth using? Maybe not yet, but I've been working on a few settings of Psalms that someone might find useful. 2 are complete, 2 are almost complete, all need to be recorded and properly typeset. But look out for those in the upcoming decade.

And now for something completely different...

2009-01-22T23:12:00.001Z

Check out this loser getting smacked by high-velocity fruit.

Getting God off the Hook

2009-01-22T08:52:00.003Z

Unconditional Election - the belief that God chooses us based on his own purposes alone (and not based on the foreknowledge of any decision we would make) is a tough one to come to terms with, along with its sister Irresistable Grace.

Jesus said "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him." (John 6:44) and in verse 65 repeats "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.".

I'm not going to try to use that as a prooftext for the whole system of Calvinism. However, the order clearly present in Jesus' mind here is that our belief is dependent on God's choosing.

Can anyone show me a verse that even hints at God's choosing based on his foreknowledge of our free will choice to come to him. Romans 8:29 is the closest I can think of but it most certainly doesn't teach that:

"For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers." - Romans 8:29

Notice its those whom he foreknew, not those whose decisions he foreknew. And foreknew here is using knowledge in the wider, biblical sense (like how Adam 'knew' Eve).

Unless anyone can provide me with such a verse, it seems to me that the attempt by non-Calvinists (or non-Augustinians) to move away from a plain meaning is in order to salvage God's character. It's trying to get God off the hook. The argument goes something like this:

If God chooses all the people whose hearts he'll change before the foundation of the world, not based on any kind of foreknowledge, then why doesn't he choose everyone to be saved? And if you Calvinists say "for his glory", doesn't that make God a tyrant, an egocentric dictator?

It's a powerful argument and one I wrestled with for some time, even after believing the Calvinist position. It can feel a lot nicer staying in the "it's a mystery" zone than facing up to Romans 9.

But what's the alternative belief? Say we go with a typical 'Arminian' position that God's choosing is simply based on foreknowledge of a decision to follow Christ. Man was depraved until God gave prevenient grace (to every man) which enabled each person who heard the gospel to believe it or reject it. Some believed, and God's choosing before the foundation of the world was a simple assent to the fact that they would make that free will decision.

Leaving aside whether this is logically consistent, has it salvaged God's character at all? No. God chose to create a universe in which he knew that many would reject him and burn in hell forever. It only moves that fact one stage further back. God could have created a universe where everyone would freely (no coersion, Arminian-style) choose to follow Christ, having received prevenient grace. But he didn't. Arminianism doesn't get God off the hook one bit. So why fuddle predestination?

There are only two options that might get God off the hook. One is Open Theism, where God simply doesn't know the future (it doesn't exist to be known, they say). Most people can spot this is an absurd suggestion from scripture. The other is universalism, where everyone gets saved in the end anyway. Again, if you can't spot the falsehood of that you need more than a blogpost to fix you.

We try to get God off the hook, but God doesn't want to be let off the hook. Neither he, nor the human writers of scripture, see any problem in asserting the primacy of God's choosing us. How this fits into other parts of this debate is a question for another day.

Heavenly Misplaced

2009-01-21T11:30:00.007Z

I just received the hard copy of Heaven Misplaced, which I reviewed on Christmas Eve.

The aesthetics of the final product had to be displayed here...

The front cover

It's a hardback with a dust cover. I normally throw away dust covers but this one might be pretty enough for me to keep it. My copy came with a sticker signed by the author, with a place to write who the book belongs to. Nice touch. It does not, however, come with a free dismembered fingertip.

Not too thick and with a sturdy feel to it.

Here you can see nice decorative patterns behind the chapter headings.

Very few footnotes, just sidenotes explaining terms and breaking the text up. One of the footnotes recommends Pierced For Our Trangressions, yay for Oakhill.

Nice dropcap and smallcaps on the back cover, along with slightly increased spacing (for white text on black background). The only thing it's missing that I'd have loved is fi ligatures...

Normal fi on the left, fi ligature on the right.

This book makes you feel glad you own it, and invites you to keep reading. That's how good Christian books should be. So go and buy this one from

Amazon or Canon Press while you remember. If you're still not sure, go and read some reviews, or read the introduction and first chapter.

Restoring Broken Societies

2009-01-21T11:12:00.004Z

Theo Hobson's written a good blog at the Spectator Coffee House on the religious nature of Obama's inauguration.

Listen to how he describes Rick Warren's contribution:

The pastor who said the inaugural prayers, Rick Warren, was like an unexpectedly charismatic vicar at a wedding, refusing to be a mere holy prop. This 'religious bit' isn't ceremonial background, his big voice insisted. There was no retreat behind antique religious language, as you get in our grand occasions of state. There was plainness, directness, sincerity – a shocking lack of shame about public religion.

I'm not a fan of the purpose-driven bandwagon (there's a title for his next book...) but he did a good job. God draws straight lines with crooked sticks and God has converted ungodly emperors before. Let's pray for Barak and Rick.

Hobbs' final paragraph is worth quoting in full:

The idea that religion and politics are separate things is a necessary fiction. America knows this better than us, on two fronts: it knows that legal separation is necessary, and it knows that the overlap of religion and politics must sometimes be openly asserted, for politics to be renewed. America has always known this, of course. But Obama has internalised the knowledge, built his political identity on it. He believes that the machinery of government can only do so much to fix social problems, what David Cameron calls the broken society. Its deep fixing will take a change of heart – religious rhetoric is appropriate. The British response at this point is to back off a bit, rhetorically, to remember with a tight smile that the machinery of government is all that a politician has at his disposal. Not so, says Obama's tradition: the politician also has rhetoric, which is no respecter of boundaries between politics and religion - and he has the right and duty to use it, to change the hearts of his hearers.

Is government machinery or rhetoric going to put the "broken society" back together?

No, but the gospel will. That's one thing I love about St Richard's @ 4, our church plant (website coming soon). We're all about proclaiming the gospel, and through the power of God's Word, seeing broken lives and societies put together, as the result of a right standing with God by faith.

Please pray for us.

A Shot in the Foot

2009-01-16T20:05:00.003Z

What are these atheists up to?

In case you've been living in the blog/media equivalent of a cave on Mars, you'll know that some Atheists have funded an advertising campaign on buses in London. The wording is:

"There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life."

If I were a lapsed Christian, or an agnostic, I think those words would have the same as:

"Your house is probably not on fire." or "You probably didn't leave your front door unlocked."

I would never have thought about the possibility until you raised it. Now you've said that I can't stop worrying that I forgot to lock up/turn the oven off.

And I thought Christians were bad at advertising/marketing.

Mike Reeves - The Word of God

2009-01-16T19:59:00.002Z

Bish has already pointed this out, but Mike Reeves' talks on the Word of God are outstanding and freely available here.

The most helpful 2 hours you'll spend on the subject. Plus you get to hear Bish laughing at the beginning of the first one.

Is it Wrong to Be a Competitive Bible Reader?

2009-01-10T10:55:00.002Z

Adele and I are reading chronologically through the Bible this year, not doing set readings each day, but reading through as fast as we want to.

Adele is ahead of me by Leviticus and about 10 chapters of Numbers* - should I be competitive about this?

*Yes, she's read Gen., Ex., Lev. and Job already - over 15% of the Bible by my calculations - and she only started last Sunday.

Review - 100 Cupboards

2009-01-05T20:46:00.004Z

So the first book I've read this year is N.D. Wilson's 100 Cupboards*. It's the first in a trilogy of books about a boy who discovers 100 cupboards that are portals to other places, times and alternate realities.

It follows in the line of many children's fantasy books involving an orphaned child living with people other than his parents discovering magical things. (Narnia, Lemony Snicketts, Harry Potter come to mind). It's a creepy but (and?) enjoyable read, consistently, but not explicitly Christian. The author, N.D. (or Nathan, Nate) Wilson is the son of the pastor/author/theologian Doug Wilson and is himself the editor of Credenda/Agenda among many other things.

Adele and I eagerly await its sequel, Dandelion Fire, and recommend 100 Cupboards to anyone who loves Narnia/Lemony Snicketts/Harry Potter but wants something new.

*Not counting Genesis or Job. Calvin's Institutes are yet to arrive so I've got some catching up to do.

Study Bible Comparison - ESV vs. Reformation

2008-12-31T12:09:00.003Z

So you've heard the buzz over the ESV Study Bible and you're an old enough blogger to remember the buzz around the Reformation Study Bible a few years back. How do they compare?

Size

The Reformation Study Bible (RSB from now on) is just about small enough to take to church/small groups without looking like a swat. The ESV Study Bible (ESVSB) is bulkier and I can't really imagine taking it along anywhere unless a) I couldn't find any other Bibles in a rush b) I had a particular reason to use it.

The RSB has the upper hand here, being a little more portable.

Binding

I have the RSB in hardback and burgundy leather, and the ESVSB in Tru tone. The hardback is slightly better for sticking in a rucksack, but aesthetically and practically the leather/tru tone is better. The ESVSB is also available in leather but tru tone does the job perfectly well and is as nice to me, as the RSB leather cover.

ESVSB wins by a hair, since it provides the tru tone option.

Appearance

RSB is pretty straightforward, two columns to a page, notes at the bottom. It's comparable to newspapers, in the way they cram as much information on a page as possible. This obviously pays off, in that it reduces the weight and size of the Bible. However, it is trickier to read and concentrate than it could be.

The ESVSB goes a different way, with the study notes in two columns but the Bible text spaciously set in single columns. This, of all things was the wow factor when I first looked through the Bible. The layout is altered depending on the genre, with the Proverbs in bite-sized chunks and the epistles in full paragraphs. The ESVSB also contains colour for certain illustrations and maps giving it the upper hand.

In one final area the RSB is the better of the two. The text is, or at least appears larger in the RSB than the ESVSB. That applies prinicipally to the notes, but the font used for text is more to my taste in RSB. It's a small, subjective thing but worth mentioning. Also, in the course of reviewing, I've discovered a few printing errors on the ESVSB (one small inkblob, and half of Ephesians 2 looks like a Magic Eye puzzle). That's disappointing, but I've heard of no one else with the same problem.

Overall the ESVSB wins on appearance due to its more spacious typesetting and use of colour.

Contents

Both Study Bibles come with the expected introductions to each genre/book, study notes, cross references and a partial concordance.

The RSB also contains mini articles on mostly systematic theology that pop up near relevant passages.

The ESVSB tends to have more details in the notes and introductions, more maps and illustrations, but lacks the articles of the RSB. Instead it has around 250 pages of notes at the end, introducing various topics related to the Bible.

Although the RSB has occasionally helped me by placing articles next to the relevant passages, the ESVSB is less distracting when reading scripture itself, and since all the resources are kept together it's easier to quickly find what you're looking for.

The ESVSB is the clear winner here.

Theological Position

Since both Study Bibles (and the translations) had J.I. Packer on the editorial team there is not a world of difference as there might be between the Schofield Study Bible and the Geneva Bible.

However, the RSB sees itself as in spiritual continutity with that Geneva Bible and is aimed to showcase the richness of Reformed Theology. The ESVSB is wider, theologically and stands between the RSB and the various NIV Study Bibles.

So from the RSB think Desiring God Conference speakers (Piper, Sproul, MacArthur) and for the ESVSB think UCCF Doctrinal Basis. Only the ESVSB is a little more certain on theological issues such as regeneration and male/female issues.

Since the Study Bibles have different purposes here, it's like comparing pomegranates and jaffa cakes - both delicious but incomparable.

Quality of notes/extra resources

I've obviously not read and compared all the notes in the two Study Bibles, and since the extras are different in nature, they are hard to compare.

The RSB's articles on systematics are truly excellent, getting to the heart of the matter quickly and referring to appropriate passages in scripture. Where there is debate on an issue they are fair to the different viewpoints.

I haven't got round to reading the ESVSB's extra resources but looking at who's written them I cannot imagine myself being disappointed. In fact the articles are perfectly matched with the people writing them (in particular - Poythress on Salvation History, Ryken on Bible as literature, Powlison on Reading the Bible for Personal Application etc.) so very well done Crossway.

Comparing the Study notes themselves I read through both sets of notes on Zephaniah (the book I know best), a few cherry-picked Psalms and a few other well known parts of scripture.

The ESVSB notes tend to be more detailed and are more designed to help you as you exegete the text. The RSB notes tend either to focus on pet 'Reformed Theology' topics, or simply throw some relevant information your way. In this respect the ESVSB is more useful for beginners and the RSB better for those who want to do the work themselves.

On Zephaniah, the two sets of notes tend to tred the same ground, but RSB is better for pointing out the fulfillments of those prophecies in Christ.

The same is to be said about the Psalms. I looked at Psalm 1, 45 and 102, all messianic Psalms in varying degrees of obviousness. Again, the RSB was quicker to point out Christ's fulfillments of the words, although both take the view that they were originally about something else, and ultimately fulfilled in Christ. I think that's back-to-front, but what do I know?

On the tough passages around which debates are formed, the ESVSB seemed to be more fair-handed, yet still strong enough to point out the obvious which is often missed in these debates. For example it makes it very clear what Ephesians 5 and 1 Timothy 2 say on the role of women in marriage and church, without going beyond the text, but not allowing nonsense on the Greek work kephale, for example.

The final thing to mention is that whereas the RSB names the contributors on each testament, the ESVSB says who is responsible for each book and article. This is very helpful and I wish the RSB had done it.

Overall, I've not read enough of them both to get a fair representation. However, from what I've read, I'd put the RSB a gnat's crochet ahead of the ESVSB.

Misc. Extras

The ESVSB comes with an online version accessible anywhere. I suspected that this resource would be an extra unthoughtfully added onto the meatspace version. But kudos to Crossway, it's nicely thought-through and laid out, making it a useful addition to the hard copy.

Summary

Overall, the score is 4-2 to the ESV Study Bible. Its clear, thoughtful and attractive appearance, along with its depth of content makes it a great tool for bedside reading or a library/study. However, the RSB is by no means useless, as it is more portable and the notes are slightly better overall.

The two are both helpful resources for slightly different audiences and purposes. Decide for yourself which one suits your needs more, or, just get them both.

Fantasy Study Bibles '09

2008-12-31T02:41:00.004Z

I've been playing with my Reformation Study Bible (ESV) and ESV Study Bible, comparing notes on the two and will hopefully compare-review them soon.

What Study Bible would you like to see in 2009? Here are my top picks:

The Symbolism Study Bible, ed. Leithart, Jordan

Peter Leithart and James Jordan are amongst the contributors pointing out, where appropriate all the stuff us post-enlightenment people don't get.

The Christocentric Study Bible, ed. Keller, Scrivener

A study Bible which actually treats Messianic Psalms as messianic and shows us Christ in all scripture.

The Funny Stories about Theologians Study Bible (aka Merrie Theologiane Study Bible) ed. Reeves, Hames

The stories would have nothing to do with the scriptures but provide interesting distraction during boring sermons.

Worship Leader Study Bible, ed. ???

Every text marked up with lyrics, copyright details and music of most popular and well known musical adaptations. Psalm 150 is about the size of the ESV Study Bible. Exodus 15 is missing.

Pyromaniacs Study Bible

Fiercely sticking to the text of the Bible, this contains no notes, but comes complete with matches, fireworks and flammable liquids in small sachets so that if the debate with your Arminian friend turns sour, you can deal with them promptly. (No reference to Servetus intended).

So, book publishers, let's get these books written and on Monergism Books.

What Study Bibles would you like to get for Christmas '09?

I Wanna Be a History Maker (a.k.a. a ramble on eschatology)

2008-12-27T11:21:00.004Z

The Delirious song History Maker is one of those memorable songs that you love for some reasons and hate for others. On the hate side, well, for me it's mostly Martin Smith's voice on the song. It's just not my cup of coffee.

However the song has a relentlessly optimistic view of the future. Here's the second verse and chorus:

"Is it true today that when people pray
We'll see dead men rise
And the blind set free
Yes it's true and I believe it
I'm living for you

I'm gonna be a history maker in this land
I'm gonna be a speaker of truth to all mankind
I'm gonna stand, I'm gonna run
Into your arms, into your arms again
Into your arms, into your arms again"

Martin Smith, here, is a believer of Christ's Kingdom here on earth. He believes that God answers prayer, even in spectacular ways. He says we'll see miracles, and we'll see kings and queens shake.

And if that's the case the obvious step is that we want to be history makers. We want to be part of God putting the broken world and broken lives back together. I think an optimistic view of the future is a major motivation to evangelism and the social change that comes with it. And history backs me up on that.

How do you persuade a pessimist (e.g. primillennial/amillennial) to get out there and change the world (by evangelism, voting, feeding the poor, discovering cures for diseases)? The world's going to pot anyway, why not hide in a huddle and pray for God to quickly whisk you up to heaven or hurry up and destroy the world so peace can reign again?

Of course, Christian pessimists don't do that. God tells us to change the world. Why would he do that if he was going to destroy it anyway?

Another question for the pessimists... why is the Father waiting to send Jesus back? Why did Jesus ascend in the first place? Perhaps you'll say he's waiting for every people group to have a gospel-witnessing church... but you can't believe that and believe that Jesus could return any moment, since there are yet unreached peoples.

Pessimism about the world makes no sense to me anymore.

Review - Heaven Misplaced by Douglas Wilson

2008-12-24T09:57:00.003Z

How wrong he was...

"Things can only get better" - said the song New Labour rode to election victory. But what about the earth God created, and the church Christ established there? With economic conditions as they are, and the Christian faith appearing to die out in this country, U.K. Christians not naturally inclined towards optimism.

But Doug Wilson would have us think otherwise, and has written a book to pursuade us.

Heaven Misplaced is the latest title from Canon Press to feature stained glass windows and comes with the aim of getting Christians to believe their Christmas carols all the year round. Or to put it more helpfully, when Christ returns to renew the earth, he'll find not only the church in good shape but the whole world transformed by the gospel. Wilson helpfully calls this 'historical optimism' but for those who like words with many syllables (and signifying... nothing), Wilson is a postmillennialist.

This is only an introduction to the subject and so many books have been written about these things that only the most gargantuan volume would be able to deal with every objection. This is not that book, but rather shows off the Biblical evidence in favour of historical optimism and encourages us with its pastoral application.

So is it any good? Does it achieve its stated aim?

I came to this book on a journey. Some time ago, my theological tuesday buddies and I had a good think about eschatological positions and after some time and reading we all came down on the side of amillennialism. The thing that tipped me over from post- to a- was an article by Vern Poythress on his website.

But before reading this book I was already on a journey back thanks to other bits of Wilson, David Field and a few others. This book was perfect for someone in my position who wanted the main gist of the arguments so I could then look deeper into the Bible and other writings to see if they held up under scrutiny. Heaven Misplaced is full of humour, and a warm, positive spirit that matches the theme of the book. It's mercifully jargon-free and real fun to read.

There are a few weaknesses that were at least present in the review copy I was sent. Sometimes the argument was difficult to follow, not because of complexity but because the writing was slightly back to front. Like this:

Fact 1
Fact 2
Conclusion
More conclusion
Argument

Wilson doesn't present alternative theories in the strongest light possible, which is a mixed blessing. On the positive side, it keeps the book short, interesting and funny, but negatively, it brings about accusations that Wilson is fighting straw men. I don't think Wilson is, but is being the populariser and allowing people who want the dense arguments to read other books.

I'm convinced by the position this book argues for, that Christ's birth, death, resurrection and ascension have made the big difference in the history of the world and that Jesus is currently making "the nations prove the glories of his righteousness" as "he comes to make the blessings flow far as the curse is found".

I've been greatly encouraged by this book and it's message, and let's face it, we could all do with a bit of encouragement at a time like this. Even if you're drop-dead certain that us historical optimists are wrong, give the book a read and it'll sharpen your thinking and encourage you, even if you don't change your mind.

This book is 2.5 thumbs fresh*!

I recommend Daniel Newman's review for a bit more depth on the review.

Pre-order the book at Amazon or Canon Press.

*To explain my thumbs fresh rating...

0 thumbs fresh - nothing to see here
1 thumbs fresh - some people might find it useful
2 thumbs fresh - great for some, useful for most
3 thumbs fresh - freakishly good

Eschatology Ruins Everything

2008-12-22T14:18:00.002Z

The exceptional Stuart Dean gave us 'Glory Days' by Julian Hardyman for Christmas and naughty as I am I've already started reading it.

In the introduction, we're told a fictional story of a student who becomes a Christian and is slowly worn down by his Christian friends at CU, starting off as a lively student engaging with life and his studies before being worn down into an identi-clone. Hardyman is quick to say that no CU he knows is like that, although I'm pretty much sure that I have either met or been responsible for many of the attitudes the new Christian meets.

One of the attitudes that the student meets is summed up by a quote from Rick Warren's "Purpose-Driven Life': "Your mission (i.e. evangelism) will last for ever; the consequences of your job will not". Now amongst Christians in the UK who really get on with living their lives for God, and believing every word of the Bible this kind of quote sums up their beliefs.

Now it's true that someone converting to Christ is experiencing a change that will last forever. And a change from death and hell to life with Christ. But the phrase "the consequences of your job will not" bothers me. Warren (and many of us, very often) forget that we will live with Christ on earth once he returns. A renewed earth for sure, but does that mean all human achievements through the ages will disappear overnight? The pyramids, the Eiffel tower, the great wall of China and the greatest wonder of them all, the Millennium Dome all gone overnight?

Christians in the UK don't think much about eschatology. We're mostly pan-millennialists (everything will pan out in the end) and if not, amillennialists by default. The only thought most non-trained Christians in the UK have about end times is either ridicule or uncritical acceptance of the Left Behind series.

I think that's one reason why we are so suspicious of Christianity dabbling in politics, engaging in the arts or academia in this country. We don't see that Jesus is coming back to the earth, not to replace it but to renew it.

When the revolution comes to the UK again, there will have been a renewal of good eschatology immediately beforehand.

A book to help you with this is Douglas Wilson's Heaven Misplaced. I'll review it by Christmas, D.V.

Dissing John Piper

2008-12-16T22:38:00.003Z

Glen has been stirring up controversy over John Piper.

A word of advice to him; Always beware of dissing the Piper. He who calls the tune of Piper, pays.

Of course Glen (as you can see from his post, which you really must read first) is not dissing John Piper, I just wanted my fair share of controversy. He remains greatly thankful for all God has done through him for the church and him personally. And it's the same for me.

However, let me weigh in on the discussion- quoting a mini-catechism of Piper's...

"Q 2: Who is the most God-centered person in the universe?
A: God."

But God is three persons...

I probably would have defended Piper up to about a year ago. But I think I agree with you now. However, those statements are like Hillsong songs. They're not quite what you want them to be but if you take a deep breath, you can normally defend every line, one way or another.

I don't think that anything Piper says there is irreconcilable with nice trinitarian theology. Each trinitarian person longs to bring glory to the others, and in that sense God, the only triune God is bringing glory to himself. But removing it from the trinity is dodgy because it does leave open questions of narcissism etc.

Piper answers that question by saying that only God ought to be glorified so his self-exaltation is the best and only right thing to do. But then how does the doctrine of the glorification of the saints fit in? That's the triune glory of God spilling out onto his chosen people in Christ. What's God playing at?

Now if Piper saw (and proclaimed this) his message would be even more appealing. Because God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in him. Somewhere or other, Piper approvingly quotes Jonathan Edwards, along the following lines:

"It is no argument against the fullness of a fountain that it is inclined to overflow".

If only John connected that with the life of the trinity I think we'd be there.

In the meantime, I remain
John Piper's biggest fan ;)

P.S. Shock horror, I've never tagged anything with 'trinity' before. Sorry Glen, Mike and Dan.

Joy to the World

2008-12-15T09:43:00.002Z

Joy to the world, the Lord is come!
Let earth receive her King;
Let every heart prepare Him room,
And Heaven and nature sing,
And Heaven and nature sing,
And Heaven, and Heaven, and nature sing.

Joy to the earth, the Savior reigns!
Let men their songs employ;
While fields and floods, rocks, hills and plains
Repeat the sounding joy,
Repeat the sounding joy,
Repeat, repeat, the sounding joy.

No more let sins and sorrows grow,
Nor thorns infest the ground;
He comes to make His blessings flow
Far as the curse is found,
Far as the curse is found,
Far as, far as, the curse is found.

He rules the world with truth and grace,
And makes the nations prove
The glories of His righteousness,
And wonders of His love,
And wonders of His love,
And wonders, wonders, of His love.

Joy to the World is a much undersung carol amongst churches from my background. It has some fabulous theology in verses 3 and 4, although it could do with a bit of explaining. Hence this blog post.

"No more let sins and sorrows grow,
Nor thorns infest the ground;
He comes to make His blessings flow
Far as the curse is found."

Sins, sorrows and thorns infesting the ground is the result of the fall, way back in Genesis 3. Prior to God coming in the flesh, the human race was expanding but so was its iniquities, its wrongdoing, its sin. But Jesus came to reverse the curse and throughout his earthly minstry we see the effects of the fall being undone. That is the nature of Christ's Kingdom, and since it has now come on the earth, it is spreading and will do so to the final day. Jesus comes to make his blessings flow as far as the curse is found. How?

"He rules the world with truth and grace,
And makes the nations prove
The glories of His righteousness,
And wonders of His love."

He (Jesus) rules the world (not Bush, Obama, the Illuminati or the devil) with truth and grace. And as those blessings flow as far as the curse is found, the nations will prove the glories of his righteousness and the wonders of his love. How? By turning to him in repentance and being recreated as part of the new world order- Christ's Kingdom.

Some of these thoughts have been inspired by Douglas Wilson's new book (which I'll shortly have a review of) Heaven Misplaced. It's an enormously helpful book for Christians in dark, dreary, Godless England. But that can wait for another time.

Leithart on Missions

2008-12-02T22:19:00.003Z

One of my stated ambitions is to one day understand one of Peter Leithart's blog posts. I realise this may be a long time coming, but thankfully he's written a cracking article on missions. This is one to read that'll get your biblical-theological heart racing.

NewsBiscuit on the Lego Bible

2008-11-29T14:09:00.002Z

Bad news if you're thinking of buying a Lego Bible this Christmas.

How do we know that Christians are Delusional?

2008-11-28T10:11:00.002Z

I just saw this video and it tickled me somehow...

If you don't have ten minutes, let me save you some time. The argument is that Mormonism is clearly delusional; Joseph Smith and his magical disappearing plates telling a story about a people who never existed. Muslims are also delusional, believing in a magical horse ride to heaven. The video then suggests Christianity is just the same with:

A magical ghost impregnating Mary
A magical son (Jesus)
A magical star (pointing to Jesus)
Magical miracles
Magical resurrection
Magical ascension

The video claims that all these superstitious claims, with no evidence to back them up are just a fairytale.

And basically, the video's right in this aspect: without evidence it's in the same category as Jack and the Beanstalk. That's why Paul says that without Christ's resurrection we are still dead in sins and to be pitied above all men. But of course, there is plenty of evidence surrounding these things. And plenty of reasons for them all as well.

The video actually does a superb job (unwittingly) of showing how superior the Christian faith is to those other two faiths. Basically, if you remove the words magical and imaginary from all the descriptions (including Mormon/Muslim) and let them stand on their own, you'll see that Christianity is in a completely different league.

I'd love to produce a sequel to this video. Featuring:

A magical big bang
A magical multiverse creator
A magical 4th, 5th, etc. dimension
A magical rationality
A magical primordial soup
A magical morality

and so on for all the other things that atheists can't account for, in one way or another.

This blogpost should be footnoted quite a lot as there are caveats and explanations to put on those arguments... if you want explanation feel free to comment.

True Belief

2008-11-26T18:17:00.003Z

In John 6:47, Jesus says:

"Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life."

These days, in our gospel presentations we normally move one of those words. We sound more like:

"Truly, I say to you, whoever truly believes has eternal life."

What kind of belief isn't true? Why do we add that extra true? What does that achieve that leaving it out doesn't?

I think that it tends to batter the consciences of good Calvinists. The thinking goes:

"Am I saved? Well, if I am elect I am saved. But am I elect? Well, those who are elect are those who truly believe. Do I truly believe? What if my belief isn't true belief but is like that of those who fall away and never truly belonged to the tree of faith? Well, if I am truly part of that tree of faith, then I will surely bear fruit. So all I've got to do is bear some fruit, and then I'll know I'm saved."

Or at least that's where my thinking has ended me up many times before. Trusting my sanctification (in systematic theology terms) for my justification. Which of course ruins any hope of assurance I may have ever had as a good Calvinist. And worst of all, that thinking is entirely missing Christ, who is our only hope.

Now not all of that happends simply because we constantly (habitually) say 'truly believe' - it's our tendency to legalism or, as Luther might say curve in on ourself. And we have understandable reasons for adding the 'truly' - we don't want to falsely assure anyone that they're saved.

But in doing so we go further than Christ himself. Jesus would rather have people misunderstand belief and be falsely assured, than lure thousands upon thousands of Calvinists into tormenting themselves as to whether they believe or not, simply because they said a bad word once, or something equally trivial.

Isn't it great that it's just belief-faith (not in mere Doctrines, but in Christ) by which God chooses to unite us to his Son? The puritans were fantastic but reading many of them from the modern day, I can't help but feel that their solution to assurance was to look inward, rather than upward. If I look inward, I only see sin and despair. If I look upward, I see Christ "who made an end of all my sins". Of course, not all the puritans read like this though: Robert Murray M'Cheyne famously said "For every look at self, take ten looks at Christ."

So if me, you get hung up on that 'truly', just remember, Jesus put it at the beginning of the sentence. "Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life."

Ephesians 2:11-22 - Blessed is the Peacemaker 3/3

2008-11-24T16:00:00.000Z

So if Paul first showed us life before Christ, and then what Christ has done, the last few verses show us what he is doing now. He uses three images to describe it; we are now citizens, family, and a temple.

See verse 19, we Gentiles are no longer strangers and aliens, but citizens with the saints. All of what we used to lack has been given to us – think back to verse 12 – now we are citizens, we have hope, we have promises, we have God, and most of all we have Christ. Carrying on in verse 19, we're now members of God's household. We're family together, and, verse 21 are being built up into a temple of God. A true rags to riches story.

Verse 20 tells us two things about the architecture of this temple. First, its foundations are the apostles and prophets. These were the first people to declare God's good news, the gospel, after Jesus went up to heaven. Their teaching and preaching formed the foundation of the church as they spread the message about Jesus all over the world and made disciples. And the cornerstone is Jesus. I know precious little about architecture but here's what Paul's trying to get across: the whole building is built on top of Christ, supported by Christ and the shape of the building is determined by Christ.

So we have a kingdom of which we're citizens, a family in which we're children and a temple in which we're bricks.

But there's we could act as though Christ hadn't torn down every dividing wall. The fundamental division of the world is not between Jew and Gentile, between American or Russian, Western or Middle Eastern. It is between those who are in Christ and those who are separated from Christ. There is no place in Christ's church for national, racial or cultural prejudices. Jesus died to put an end to that. Old, young, french, american, goth, chav, gypsy, commuter, clever or thick, if they are in Christ, they are your brother or sister. Any less and you are denying what Jesus has done.

Think of the pictures there in verses 19-22; the church is a kingdom, God's kingdom and if we choose to fight over cultural, national or racial differences we dishonour God. The church is a household, God's household, and we are family; there's no place for bitter prejudices. And the church is a temple, a dwelling place for God, holy ground. We don't spill blood on the temple floor by infighting.

And it's encouraging to look around at those at St Richard's at 4. It's encouraging seeing what Christ has done in us all to throw out our prejudices and make us one. And he will continue this work in us as he builds his temple here in Haywards Heath, through us and the other churches in town.
So let's remember what we were, remember what Christ did, and watch what he's doing now.

Ephesians 2:11-22 - Blessed is the Peacemaker 2/3

2008-11-24T12:00:00.000Z

So what exactly has Jesus Christ done to change all of this? Well the next few verses tell us; verse 13 - 'now in Christ Jesus, you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.' The gentiles were both geographically and spiritually far off. Here in Haywards Heath we're thousands of miles from the Promised Land, from Jerusalem, and from where God performed mighty acts to save Israel. And spiritually we were far off too, as we've already seen. But Christ's blood has brought us near to God. To see what he means by near to God, let's skip ahead to verse 17 – 'And he (that's Jesus) came and preached peace to you who were far off, and peace to those who were near'. That's a quote from Isaiah in the Old Testament, which immediately referred to Jews, both those who were scattered in surrounding countries and to those who were in the land itself. So when Paul talks of us as brought near by the blood of Christ, he means at the very least we're as close as Israelites themselves. Gentiles, who had previously been left out of God's purposes have now been made equal members with the Israelites.

With our 21st century hats on it's hard to see how significant this is. We don't see how enormous the divide was between Jews and Gentiles. The hostility knew no bounds. The Israelites had indeed been chosen by God, which the Gentiles resented and the Jews boasted in. For example, some Jews said that Gentiles were only created by God as fuel for the fires of hell. A Jew who married a Gentile would be considered dead and their funeral was carried out. And the hatred went both ways.

So remember, we gentiles were alienated from both Israel, and alienated from God. And in verses 14 – 16 we'll see that Christ's blood solves both problems. Let me read:
“For he himself – [that's Jesus]-- is our peace,
who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility.”

So Jesus is our peace, and he's done it by making us both one, verse 14, or as he says in verse 15, he's created one new man in place of the two.
We're always hearing about one humanity, the brotherhood of man. Lots of methods have been suggested about how to get there, where everyone treats one another as if they were brothers – whatever their skin colour or nationality. The Beatles said that 'All you need is love'. John Lennon said 'imagine no religion, no hell, no heaven, then the world will be as one.' Will the EU, Barack Obama, Tony Blair or Bono usher in this great new era where everyone gets along?

No, says Paul here, for only Jesus can. All human efforts will fail, for He is our peace, the dividing wall of hostility has been broken down in his flesh, and the new man has been created in him. The Jew and the Gentile were divided primarily by circumcision, one of the Old Testament ordinances. But Jesus abolished it in his flesh, that is, on the cross, or by his blood, so circumcised or not, Jew or Gentile, clean or unclean makes no difference at all. All that matters is if we are in him or not. Are we in this new man, this new creation?

Note what Jesus didn't do; Jesus could have solved the problem by telling all the Gentiles to get the snip and become Jews. But Jesus fulfilled all the requirements of the law, so that anyone who is united to him by faith, Jew or Gentile has had every requirement of the law performed on their behalf. There's nothing that either one of them lack. Let's remind ourselves what this union with Jesus means.

When we believe in Jesus Christ, we are put in him, rather like Russian dolls... so if Jesus did something, it is as if we've done it too. So if Jesus was circumcised, which he was, anyone who believes in him has been circumcised too. So there's no longer any reason to exclude Gentile Christians from God's purposes. For in Jesus, they are as circumcised as any Jew. This is why Paul was so negative about physical circumcision back in verse 11 – it's made in the flesh by human hands, but the only true circumcision comes from being united with Christ.

And of course, union with Christ goes right to the heart of the human problem; not only are all dividing walls between Jew and Gentile torn down, but Jesus has lived a complete and perfect life for us, so as verse 16 says Jesus has reconciled us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility.

So without Christ and his cross, there's hostility and alienation between Jew and Gentile, and between people and God. And now Christ has done this marvellous act, he has made peace between Gentile and Jew, and peace between God and man. For through him, as verse 18 says, we both have access, in one Spirit, to the Father.

If you have not yet put your faith in Jesus, let me spell out your situation. Like me and the rest of mankind, you have fallen short of living as good a life as God requires. There is therefore hostility between you and God; you've fought and struggled against him, and he's angry with you. You need a perfect peacemaker who will step between you and God. You need God to punish him on your behalf, and you need God to treat you as if you had been perfect all along. There is only one such man; that peacemaker is Jesus, God's own son, and as verse 18 says, through him we have access to the Father.

And if you're already a Christian, let me encourage you to remember this. Remember life before Christ. Remember Jesus Christ, who is our peace.

Ephesians 2:11-22 - Blessed is the Peacemaker 1/3

2008-11-24T09:00:00.001Z

Remember, remember the 5th of November, Gunpowder, treason and plot, I see no reason the gunpowder treason should ever be forgot. Whatever you think about bonfire night, you have to admit, it's a catchy phrase. And although I frequently struggle to remember the birthdays of my immediate family, I don't think I'll ever forget when bonfire night is.

Our passage this week starts with a call to remember, there in verse 11, and again in verse 12. We humans have an incredible capacity to forget; whether it's why I went into the kitchen, or what Stuart's been talking about for the last 7 weeks. So let's quickly remind ourselves what's been going on in the first 10 verses of this chapter.

First we see that all of us were dead in trespasses and sins. Not physically dead, although that would be the ultimate result; we were spiritually dead, slaves to sin, and living in rebellion against the God who made the world. But God didn't leave us in that desperate state, but out of his great love for us made us alive; he intervened in saving us through faith by grace; and we take no credit for this whatsoever. And this blessing, that is only for those who have faith in Jesus Christ comes to us with a purpose; see verse 10 – we've been created in Christ Jesus for good works.

So then Paul, who wrote this letter, tells the Ephesians to remember their situation before Christ intervened. He mentions 5 problems that were true for all Gentiles before Jesus did something about it. They're there in verse 12; they're separated from Christ, alienated from Israel, strangers to the covenants of promises, without hope, and without God.

We'll dig into those in just a minute, but first, you might be wondering what a gentile is. Well, before Jesus came to earth, God had a chosen people, a nation called the Israelites. They were to represent God to the rest of the world, to be a light from God to all the other nations, to be distinct from the rest of the world. That meant the nation was set up according to very precise laws that are found in the old testament, at the beginning of the Bible. And the way this nation was marked out was by circumcision. All the male babies at 8 days old would get the snip and that would be a symbol that they belonged to this nation.

Think of the England football team. They wear white tops, and on the front, there are three lions. Those three lions, and the rest of the kit show that those players belong to the English nation, rather than any other. They are English citizens and when they wear that badge, they represent us.

Similarly, circumcision marked out who was part of this nation, the Israelites from the rest of the world. And the word Gentile refers to anyone who did not belong to this nation, who was outside God's chosen people.

And their situation here in verse 12 is utterly desperate. Gentiles were alienated from the commonwealth of Israel as we've already seen, but that means that they were strangers to the covenants of promise. You see, God had made the people of Israel, his chosen people, a whole bunch of promises over hundreds of years, starting with Adam and Eve at the very beginning, through Abraham, Moses, David and others. God had promised a saviour who would deliver the nation from its enemies, and fix everything that was messed up by sin. That promise was made to Israel, and to no other nation. Gentiles were excluded. Not only were they dead in trespasses and sins, see verse 1, and children of wrath by nature. But unlike the Jewish people, the Israelites, they had no promises that God was going to fix the situation.

No wonder that Paul then describes them in verse 12 as without hope and without God. All of this is to flesh out what he said at the beginning of verse 12 there – the Gentiles were separated from Christ. All of God's blessings come to us through his son, Jesus Christ. Without Christ, we are also stateless, friendless, hopeless and Godless. Or to put it another way, we were alienated from the Jewish people, Israel and alienated from God.

And Paul wants the Gentile Christians in Ephesus, and us too, to remember that this is what life before Christ was like. In the words of the great poets, Take That - “Never forget where you've come here from”. Or to adapt another rhyme, Remember remember, that you weren't a member, God's people you were not. Paul sees no reason that life in this season should ever be forgot.

If you're a believer today, then you'll know that God has done something about this, we'll see exactly what in the upcoming verses. But we must realise that this is not just your situation before Christ, but is true at this very moment about anyone who is separated from Christ. They're Christless, stateless, friendless, hopeless and Godless. That's a motivation for you to tell people about Jesus; friends, families, people at work, school, college. Whether or not they feel like its true, this is their desperate state. And it was yours and mine too until Jesus Christ came. Remember, remember.

A Return and a Newcomer

2008-11-23T22:42:00.004Z

First, let me join Marc Lloyd in welcoming the slightly Reverend Stuart Dean to the blogosphere. He's our deputy headpastor at St Richard's at 4 (under the headpastor, Jesus). He's blogging 'collected ramblings and reflections' of his own, along with 'collected wisdom of those greater than I'. Which gives him a great reason to not link to me.

In other news, internet is back up again at long last. I preached for the first time in church today, I'd post the audio except it's enormously hissy as I had the gain on the microphone wrong. Unfortunately Stuart videoed the whole thing and will no doubt force me to watch what everyone else had to watch. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

However since many of you post your scripts on your blogs, I shall assume you intend me to do the same, so I'll post it chunk by chunk over the course of Monday.

I don't know how to end this blog post.

Internetless

2008-11-10T23:36:00.004Z

Due to all kinds of bizzare and complicated UK broadband regulatory procedures I have had no internet for some time and the brief moments I've had on the internet have been catching up with e-mails and job searching. Hence no blog posts. You can see the latest on twitter on the right.

In other news, I'm posting a link to (nearly) double my chances on a giveaway. But the mixed motivation doesn't change the fact that these guys sell great, practical clothes for little girls. If you're wondering why I'm entering, I want the tea towel, Adele wants the clothes!

The stench no-one talks about

2008-10-22T17:48:00.003+01:00

The English are reserved folk, and only some of us are proud of the smells we make having eaten too many baked beans. So when, in otherwise polite company, someone depressurises their lower intestine and a none-too-delightful odour travels around the room, it is rare that the gaseous emission gets a mention.

(Augustine, incidentally appears not to have been so shy. Wikipedia notes:

In St. Augustine's The City of God, Augustine, not otherwise noted for his levity, makes mention of men who "have such command of their bowels, that they can break wind continuously at will, so as to produce the effect of singing." That mankind in general has lost this ability he attributes to the first sin of Adam and Eve and its consequences with respect to body control. (The City of God Against the Pagans, ed and trans Philip Levine (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1966), XIV.24.)

Now imagine a country with a declining church and legal genocide performed on a daily basis. Here the genocide is like that smell, something unpleasant to most but no-one ever talks about it. The church in said country fails to do more than give this genocide an occasional mention. Even though there's freedom of press, religion and speech.

The church wonders why it is declining. Would you perhaps, note that it is failing to speak out on the big issue of its day, and has therefore lost all relevance? Not to mention being judged by God.

When the saved people of God look back at history today, what will they remember? Will it be the global economic crisis? Or will it be legalised abortion and all manner of wicked practices involving embryos? I'll give you a clue, what do people remember more, the German Nazis holocaust, or their success with the economy?

There is a stench in America by the name of Roe vs Wade. And it's obvious because the Christians over there keep pointing it out. Unfortunately they're heading fast in our direction thanks to misguided Christians who think that voting for Obama is acceptable (note: I do not mean for one second that voting for McCain is compulsory). but there is a bigger stench in this country and only a small bunch of us are willing to point it out.

I did one, tiny thing today, attending a prayer vigil in London organised by Christian Concern For Our Nation. I am not a shining example of an activist, I merely hurt my arm holding up a placard and hurt my throat singing a capella hymns much too high. But it is our church that has lost its voice in this country, and unless we start talking about the stench, we can expect God's judgment to remain on us.

And a quick word to those who think we need to get the gospel straight before we do anything. I agree. The gospel, Biblically defined is 'Jesus Christ is Lord of all'. That means no more legalised murder. You won't find the gospel by ignoring this issue of life and death.

Internet Church

2008-10-21T11:08:00.000+01:00

Lots of the church tech/church marketing blogs have been talking about internet campuses lately and it's got me thinking.

If you're not already aware, lots of megachurches (including Mars Hill, Seattle and Bethlehem Baptist Church) have been meeting as one church in more than one location, at different times. They've used video technology to record the pastor's sermon at one of the services, which is then played at the other services which the pastor cannot get to.

There is (kind of) historical precedence for this in the Church of England of all places. Thomas Cranmer, the first protestant archbishop of Canterbury edited a book of homilies which were prewritten sermons on various topics that clergy would read out instead of preaching sermons.

Now, the theory goes with many other megachurches (not the two mentioned above), if you can send the preaching to the congregation by video, why not anything else? Why can't we do the whole thing by video, and stream it straight to people's laptops - no need to even get out of bed! And of course, through text, audio and video chat, other laptop-in-bedders can talk, share prayer requests, and so on, providing the community aspects. It seems a pretty great way of getting people into church without getting them out of their beds.

But is it really church? Every aspect of a worship service apart from the smell of student who hasn't showered in weeks can be sent digitally via the internet. The only difference is physical location. But that's a big thing, Biblically speaking, even if it's not

I've not thought this through enough to give you answers but I have some questions.

If you're a traditional churcher, with single campus, and no internet campus, what reasons would you give for not prodiving an internet campus? (I mean theological ones, not that your techiest member is a 72-year old who knows how to switch the organ on).

If you're a multi-campus churcher who'd resist having an internet campus, what's the difference between preaching by video and everything else by video?

If you're in an internet campus church, or would like to be, is it a genuinely corporate act of worship (are you being church) or is it just individual worship experiences with God (doing church)?

SRA4 Progress Report

2008-10-20T23:34:00.003+01:00

St Richard's at 4 (our church plant) is moving along nicely. It's hard work and gets tiring but is nevertheless encouraging.

Our first defector, a certain young lady named Jemima is moving to Newcastle in a month's time. This means we lose our chief sparkly box maker, trained monkey (on laptop and djembe), and source of sarcastic comments directed at me (which coincidentally also keeps me grounded). She is, of course, much more than that but I wouldn't be doing my brotherly duty if I said anything else nice about her.

However, we have a replacement already lined up, a 4-day old by the name of Esther Joy who joined us on Saturday. We'll have her trained on the drumkit in no time.

My main area of responsibility, Music, is being held together miraculously by God. Sovereign Grace Music is an immense blessing here... I find a song related to the passage/theme of the passage, we learn it quickly, play it badly, but sing it loudly and because of the doctrinal truth and pastoral application people seem to join the dots and worship God.

Marvellous.

Salvation by Pain

2008-10-09T18:04:00.004+01:00

...not to be confused with the excellent band Pain of Salvation...

Nowadays on earth, stuff sucks. A lot of it does. Mental and Physical illness, war, work, people. This is pretty obvious. My readers will be aware that this is because of the fall. We sinned in Adam, and became sinners through Adam. The world is messed up.

And for some, it's more messed up than others for sure. We have friends going through cancer treatment, recovering from and preparing for brain surgery and many more things.

As Christians we're aware that there are people worse off than us most of the time. And in our church plant, we have plenty of problems going round. So it's very hard to speak up when your relatively minor, but nevertheless significant problem comes along. After all, life doesn't suck so much for you, why should you burden your friends with it? Isn't that just selfish? It's very easy to shut up and suffer it by yourself.

I'm not convinced this is right. I pretty much want to ban the phrase "I know so-and-so is having a much harder time but...". People are real, problems are problems, big or small. The attitude of that phrase is that so-and-so needs God's and everyone's help, I'll just get through this on my own, I should be able to handle it really. It's pride.

Likewise, if you're the one having the really sucky experience right now and that means everyone else's pain is miniscule by comparison, stop believing in salvation by pain. You are no better than them simply because you suffer. You are no more important, and their needs may well be very real.

Romans 12:15 says 'Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep.' If you had won the jackpot on the lottery and your mate had won £1000, would you tell him 'that pales in significance to what's happened to me- why are you wasting everyone's time by suggesting we should thank God for your win too?'.

I fail to see how it's different for weeping. If we're going to fulfill Rom 12:15 we really ought to be honest, drop the pride and say what we're going through and how difficult we find it. I know some people who would be unphased by cancer but the thought of caring for a spouse with dementia would be terrifying. And I know other people who would have it the other way round.

If you're suffering, the type and degree of it doesn't change your identity or significance. Your response is the important bit.

His Glorious Inheritance in the Saints

2008-10-09T09:53:00.002+01:00

I've just been reading Ephesians 1:15-23:

For this reason, because I have heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus and your love toward all the saints, I do not cease to give thanks for you, remembering you in my prayers, that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of him, having the eyes of your hearts enlightened, that you may know what is the hope to which he has called you, what are the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints, and what is the immeasurable greatness of his power toward us who believe, according to the working of his great might that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come. And he put all things under his feet and gave him as head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all.
(Eph 1:15-23)

I'd read it and at least thought I'd generally understood it until I went back to pray through it. And I choked when it came to verse 18: 'his glorious inheritance in the saints'. I'd seen inheritance and assumed it was something we get, what the Father gives us as adopted children. This is no doubt the sense of the word inheritance in many places in the Bible.

But on the pray through, I realised it could well mean that we, the saints, are his glorious inheritance. And to my mind, that makes a lot of sense of the passage and connects to verse 23, which says that the church, Christ's body is the fullness of him who fills all in all. The church completes Christ, not because Christ is lacking but because it is his body.

It turns out that the commentators differ on this one. Stott's not sure, Calvin and Henry, amongst others think it's our inheritance, Storms and some other more recent commentators say that we're the inheritance. I prefer Storms' reading but am not really in a position to say.

All of this demonstrates something important. For once in my life, I spent enough time in the Bible to challenge my presumptions about what it said. If quiet times were graded (which they most certainly are not), I would probably be working towards level 1. But thanks to God, today I saw something amazing in the Bible that I would have missed had I not been praying through it.

Simply reading the Bible and getting to know the story without getting bogged down in details is very important and we don't need to feel guilty about not having deep quiet times. But thank God with me for this, and let's not presume to know what a particular passage says before we read it.

Review - A Primer on Worship and Reformation

2008-09-30T23:47:00.005+01:00

A Primer on Worship and Reformation: Recovering the High Church Puritan perhaps isn't the snappiest title for a book, but when you find the author is Douglas Wilson it starts to get a bit more interesting.

Doug Wilson is Pastor at Christ Church, Moscow, Idaho, and controversy has followed him through much of his ministry, both in Federal Vision/Auburn Avenue theological controversies and within the community of Moscow. He is an atypical man in an atypical church, and when he says something unusual, you can't help but listen.

A Primer on Worship and Reformation (APOWAR from now on) is published by Canon Press, and like a number of their books features a photo of a window on the front. Adele pointed this out when looking at our copies and it begs the question: are they subliminally advertising a well known operating system? We'll be the first to let you know if we find out.

So what exactly is the book about? Christians are always talking about renewal and reformation, and rightly so given the state of the church and countries (U.S. and U.K. in particular). Every good Calvinist knows that only God can provide it, but different answers are given about how we're going to get there.

Mark Driscoll and the marketeers (this seems to be the main distinction for these churches, as they're halfway between emerging and seeker-sensitive) wrap up the gospel and old, reformed theology in pop culture wrapping paper. Others are more of the 'sit in the church and wait' school of thinking.

Wilson, in APOWAR is looking to provide the Biblical answer. Reformation, like judgment begins with the House of God. Wilson assesses the state of the church these days and advocates High Church Puritanism as the answer.

High Church Puritanism? Yes, that's what he wrote. As Wilson says:

"Because the word [puritanism] by itself has been so badly handled, it is impossible to say Puritan without qualifications and still have any hope of being understood. Because he is high Church, he does not behave like a schismatic, separatist, independent, or individualist. He has a high view of the covenant, and of our corporate identity with one another. Because he is a Puritan, he intends to be a theological cavalier, and he fights for the integrity of obedience."

The rest of the book lays out what this means, practically. I'll spare you the details, but the subjects covered include Covenant Renewal, Psalm-singing (a pet issue of mine), and Feasting and the Sabbath. These sections tend to read like independent articles, varying in length, and have probably popped up in Credenda Agenda somewhere along the line.

Wilson is never boring to read, so let me serve you with a few tasty morsels from the book.

On Christian Schlock:

"...in the conservative and evangelical wing of the Church, vibrancy and activity always seem to cluster around cash registers."

On Veggie Tales:

"The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, including all moral wisdom, and that fear cannot be effectually made obsolete by means of cute cartoon characters."

On schismatism:

"Presbyterians adjudicate every dog fight up to the General Assembly, followed by a church split, while the Baptists are far more efficient and have the church split right away, and with far less paperwork."

On hermeneutics:

"The New Testament creates a dilemma for the tight exegesis of scientism. As conservative ministers of the Word, we are fond of affirming the sufficiency of the Word for all things, and in all things. We do not need supplementary help from secular psychiatry, secular astro-physics, or any other branch of secular whatever in order to supplement the scriptures. The problem is that we abandon this admirable stance when it comes to our method of getting at the Word of God."

The book is short, but there's plenty to digest here. It is only a primer, so if you've read The Lord's Service by Jeffrey Meyers you'll be mostly treading old water. The target audience is people with theological training, and some paragraphs collect 4+ syllable words like a philatelist collects stamps. If that puts you off, don't worry; these are always followed by clearer explanations that can be followed without too much difficulty. (Adele says: If I can follow them, anyone can...)

Wilson is also writing primarily to an all-American audience, so as a member of the Church of England, applications can differ at times. Very few of us evangelical CofE types are schismatic; or else we would be long departed from the CofE. We have a hard task of figuring out exactly where that line is, and if we're already past it. Nevertheless, the book still has a lot of value for U.K. Christians.

APOWAR is a great book for those who are new to, or curious about Wilson's theology or Covenant Renewal Worship. He accurately diagnoses several problems with the state of Christian culture today, and is convicting at times. Adele has been greatly helped by the chapter on weekly communion. As a historic optimist (more on that in my next review of his book Heaven Misplaced) he also holds out great hope for the future of the church, with faith that Jesus is reigning over earth, and will make his enemies his footstool.

All in all, a very helpful book that I'd recommend to anyone with an interest in the church and reformation, as an introduction to these issues. This book is two thumbs fresh.

Buy it from: Amazon UK - Amazon US - Canon Press

Thanks to Canon Press for the review copy and to Adele for her contributions.

Seven Things

2008-09-17T17:57:00.000+01:00

1. 'twas the week of bad Christian music/worship dance. Proof here, here and here (my favourite).

2. Also, top East Sussex blogger, Glen Scrivener confronts his personality type. This rings true of me. Posts 1, 2 and 3.

3. J Macarthur and J Piper both work for my company. What are the odds that T Anyabwile doesn't?

4. On the Thabiti front... a helpful post here for Christian political bloggers.

5. Yet more from Thabiti here. 37 mp3s covering everything you need to know about musical worship in church (from theology to bass guitarology).

6. How to pray for Anglicans.

7. Ninja Cat (ht Dizzy)

A New Chance to Make Me Feel Popular

2008-09-12T17:30:00.003+01:00

I've taken down the poll section because I couldn't be bothered to update it (as you probably noticed). It may be resurrected if I have some burning issue I need answered.

In its place is a twitter feed. I envisage all the boring stuff about me going on there in the future and all the fun stuff sill remain here. I have no idea what'll come of it, but that's par for the course with a sporadic blogger like me.

So I invite you all to become my devoted 'followers' on Twitter or browse the exciting sidebar here. You will find out such goodies as 'rockbadger is burning an Ubuntu CD' at the moment. Probably followed in an hour or so by 'rockbadger has broken his computer'.

Doug Wilson's Marriage Advice

2008-09-09T13:53:00.002+01:00

Nearly verbatim:

"Become the kind of person that the kind of person you want to marry would want to marry"

Not snappy, but true.

I, on the other hand, just got lucky.

100 Push Ups Update

2008-09-08T11:22:00.003+01:00

It's the post you've all been waiting for, I know.

I've completed week 4 of the program (having repeated week three twice), which theoretically leaves two weeks left. I've now done 41 in a row (although I wasn't totally warmed up, I could probably have done 50 otherwise). Week 5 looks painful, so I think I'll be repeating a few times.

As reward for reading this post, I offer up this link as something to think about.

Systematising Scripture

2008-09-05T13:42:00.002+01:00

Most (conservative) preachers in the UK preach X-point sermons; they divide a section of scripture up, figure out a few main points and everything in their sermon pushes in those directions. This a tried, tested and passed-with-flying-colours technique.

Now suppose God had given us the Bible in that form. A list of 'points' that he wanted us to get/do. Every book of scripture given its own heading, saying exactly, and all of what God wanted us to believe. Or, if God had given us a Bible that was so clear about everything it said that there was no misunderstanding about anything it said, and all that theologians did is arrange it in helpful ways.

Would anyone actually bother reading the thing? Would it be at all helpful? Surely people would skip reading the Bible and go straight to the systematised versions; it'd be quicker, more helpful, easier to translate. Got a problem with your behaviour? Just look up the ethics section, p. 788, half way down the second column and there's your answer.

The point is, God didn't give us the Bible like that. Small bits of it are like that (e.g. the ten commandments). But not its entirety.

And God wrote it his way for his reasons. God is not an abstract truth, void of character. Christianity is not a belief system. God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit and Christianity is following Christ. And with a simplified, systematised Bible, that would make no sense whatsoever.

These things have their place, in fact, a crucial place but we're fools to follow them in place of Christ.

First Thoughts on Google Chrome

2008-09-03T09:36:00.003+01:00

Since Monday, the interwebs has been buzzing about Google Chrome, Google's newly announced and released browser.

The best all-round review I've seen is here, courtesy of Ars Technica.

Here's what it means for right now: nothing.

It's fast, pretty stable, secure and polished. Like Konquerer, Firefox (Iceweasel), Opera, Safari, Epiphany, Lynx. The downside, is that unlike the likes of Opera and Firefox, it lacks an awful lot of features - solid bookmarking, RSS support, gestures, plugins and so on. The only thing it has to offer over those is a nicer user interface and speed; but it's not as if the others are tortoises. So though people like me will have a look round and play a while, lack of features will send most of them back to Firefox.

Here's what it means for the future: a lot.

Chrome is built for Cloud Computing: doing most of your straightforward tasks through your browser. It's raised the bar a long way with separate processes for tabs, proper security, better Java support, it's own version of Task Manager, and so on. Expect this to take off.

They're open sourcing it, which means that even if Google don't push it forward, other developers surely will, adding features that are currently lacking. The challenge will be to avoid bloat as the minimalistic design is one of the best features of Chrome.

Predictions

After this initial buzz (e.g. a month from now) things will settle down, and not much will have changed. But behind the scenes we'll see a lot of work on Chrome, or other browsers imitating its new design features. Web developers will start supporting its features, but we won't see an awful lot.

A year or so from now, Chrome (or derivatives) will have closed most of the feature gap between it and FF, with plugin support, bookmarks, RSS and so on. If by then its competitors haven't done something special themselves, we'll start seeing Chrome eating into Firefox and Internet Explorer's market share.

The Theology Bit

People who make predictions normally make fools of themselves. I'm quite willing for this to be the case. God's hand is normally predictable, with seasons coming and going (Gen 8:22), actions having consequences and so on. But God is not an automaton, but a personal community of Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and we can never talk about the future with certainty. but that doesn't stop us talking about the future. So that was my effort.

It's the same with prayer; we ought to pray expecting God to act; this is an act of faith. We believe God's promises to act on our behalf out of faith, not a nagging spirit. But none of that ties down God to a particular course of actions. He knows and governs things better than we ever could. Nevertheless we can faithfully expect God to answer prayers.

Faith in Faith

2008-08-29T12:12:00.003+01:00

Dan Hames writes stuff that I wish I'd written.

A quote:

So in all our doubt and questions about our faith: its strength, goodness, quality, genuineness, and whatever we're encouraged to be pretty down on it. It's not good. We're not good! But I don't have faith in my faith, my faith is in the One who alone is good and true. Indeed, '...because we find we have nothing at all to hang on to but the bare truth of God's word, which we scarcely feel we believe, and indeed we mostly feel we don’t believe. And the only comfort is that this word is true, despite our desperately inadequate faith. Let God be true and every man a liar—including myself. Let me recognize as clearly as I may that my own heart is full of lies and unbelief; nonetheless God speaks the truth. That I can believe, even when I don't believe I believe.'

Faith in my own faith cripples me. Faith in God frees me.

What I Want for Christmas

2008-08-28T09:51:00.004+01:00

Finally, I too can play guitar along with the greats of contemporary Christian music!

(via BoingBoing)

My Beijing Heroes

2008-08-26T13:06:00.002+01:00

The Beijing Olympics and the stunning performances of Michael Phelps, Usain Bolt, and closer to home, Rebecca Adlington and Chris Hoy have greatly tested the media's ability to use superlatives, and rightly so; they have achieved great things.

But my favourite performances were the British women in the marathon. How anyone can even run over 26 miles in one go is beyond me. But all three GB women were impressive.

Yamauchi came in 6th with a consistent performance, joint best women's marathon placing for GB athletes. She impressed me by knowing her limits and running as hard as she could within them.

Liz Yelling was looking strong early on but had a nasty fall and ran the rest of the marathon (16 miles) with what could have been a fractured rib (I've been unable to confirm what's happened to her since). She came 26th.

And Paula Radcliffe who, frankly, had rubbish preparation (through no fault of her own) and ran the race to win it (which ordinarily she is well capable of). She was virtually limping the last 6 miles, clearly in huge pain but was determined to make it to the end. And she eventually did, in 23rd place.

The apostle Paul, a little while ago, wrote this:

Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one
receives the prize? So run that you may obtain it. Every athlete exercises
self-control in all things. They do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an
imperishable. (1 Cor 9:24-5)

The Christian life is a race, and we will receive a great prize - God himself. Therefore with all of our strength (supplied by Christ himself) let's run the race right to the end. Like these runners, through many tribulations we must enter the kingdom of God (Acts 14:22) and on our deathbeds we get to say, with Paul:

I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith. (2 Timothy 4:7)