Regarding the Term “Fundamentalist”

1 11 2007

In case you missed it, this is a story from today’s foxnews.com:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,307058,00.html

In short, this church goes around the US protesting the funerals of gay soldiers holding up signs that read things like “I’m glad he’s dead.” Fox News simply identifies the church as a “fundamentalist” one. Now, obviously no fundamentalist I know would claim them as their own, and I am not even sure they would call themselves fundamentalist. What I am trying to say in this blog is that that doesn’t matter. If you check out their website (google it — Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, KS — you’ll die when you read the name of the site) you’ll notice that they are unashamedly 5-Pointers. Do they soil the good name of Calvinism–sure. But here’s the point: Fox News doesn’t call them Calvinists. They call them fundamentalists. If they had called them Calvinists (I doubt very many people at Fox could tell you what a Calvinist is anyway) I would would hesitate ever using that label again. I could argue all day long that they don’t represent REAL Calvinism and would get nowhere. After my rant they would ignore me and still call them Calvinists. It would be time to abandon my label no matter how much great tradition was associated with it. Just a thought.

 Since we are on the subject of fundamentlism, check out JP’s recent response to the FBFI’s resolution against him.

http://www.desiringgod.org/Blog/891_praise_god_for_fundamentalists





Vacation Pictures

31 10 2007

Janelle will have more pictures, but here are two.

Beautiful place…….

hantenjoch-small.jpg

……..but deadly if you happen to be a 16th century Anabaptist.

hutter-small.jpg





Priceless

29 10 2007

papelbon.jpg 

 Plane ticket to Europe…….$500

Ear phones for in-flight movie…….$5

Getting to Austria, waking up at 2.30am every night, and watching the Sox win the Series with my die-hard Red Sox fan dad……….priceless





I always knew I was a bit edgy….

18 10 2007

free dating sites

But how in the world did Baylor’s blog only get a G rating???





Micah: Canonically to Christ

5 10 2007

I’ve been wanting to put the “Preaching Christ from the OT” from a previous post to the test and have the opportunity to do so this Sunday. I am going to attempt preaching Micah 6:1-8 in a canonical way to arrive at Jesus.

The passage itself is pretty straightforward. God calls Israel into His courtroom and asks, “How have I wearied you?” Israel responds, “What do you want? How can we get you off our backs? You want sacrifices—fine. You want the best of our flocks—fine. You want thousands of sacrifices and rivers of oil—fine. Hey, even if you want us to sacrifice our firstborn for you—fine. Just get off our backs.” Then God famously replies, “I’ve told you what I require of you—do justly, love lovingkindness, and walk humbly with Me.”

I’ve actually preached this sermon before. My message was: Silly Israelites, God didn’t want their sacrifices—God wanted their heart. So my application for today would have been something like: Change your heart attitude towards God because that’s what He really wants, not your extravagant gifts. Yes you guessed it–that’s not gospel, that’s law.

So how do you preach an OT Text canonically and bring it to Christ? Just take it back to the heart of OT theology—Deuteronomy. In Deuteronomy, Moses sets before Israel life and death. Obey God and you live and are blessed. Disobey Him and you are cursed and die. Pretty simple. Except that Moses also tells the people, after he tells them to choose live, that they will in fact NOT choose life. They will fail. All the curses will come to pass. He even composes a song (ch. 32) that is basically an “I-told-you-so.” When they are in captivity, after they have failed to choose life, they are to remember the words of this song.

 Micah 6 is actually pretty easy to bring back to Deuteronomy because 6:8 is a clear adaptation of Deuteronomy 10:12 “And now, Israel, what does the LORD your God ask of you except to fear the LORD your God by walking in all His ways, to love Him, and to worship the LORD your God with all your heart and all your soul?” Interestingly, Moses tells them how they will be able to fulfill this requirement a few verses later. They are to “circumcise their hearts” (v. 15).  The only way Israel could “choose life” is to receive a heart-circumcision. In Deuteronomy 10 this act was given as a command—Do it! This change of heart is necessary if Israel wants to live. But they don’t choose life—precisely because they do not have this necessary heart circumcision. The good news of Deuteronomy is in 30:5. Here God promises that after He restores Israel, He Himself will circumcise their hearts—then they will love Him. What was before an imperative that could not be obeyed is now a future promise. This is the gospel—God Himself doing for His people what He requires of them to do but what cannot do for themselves.  

Back in Micah, the requirement of 6:8 is, therefore, not a reprieve for Israel. It is not that God “only” wants a good attitude. The point is that they COULD have given Him tens of thousands of sacrifice. They COULD have sacrificed their firstborn to make God happy. But God demanded more—acts and attitudes that are the results of heart circumcision. He is not letting them off the hook—he is asking the impossible. In this light, all of the monergistic promises of Micah make a lot of sense—I will destroy your idols, I will tear down your poles, I will gather, I will assemble.  

This future hope was fulfilled, of course, in the “Consolation of Israel” (Luke 1:25). Jesus Himself brought grace and truth. He did justly. He loved mercy. He walked humbly with His Father. Thus, the only way the cursed that were promised in Deuteronomy and re-affirmed in Micah will not fall upon a person is if that person is in union with Christ (the essence of the Gospel).  

Colossians 2:11-14   In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ,  12 having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead.  13 And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses,  14 by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross.





Atheism’s Dismantling of Arminianism

4 10 2007

Arminianism apologizes for God. It tells the world, “No, no, God is not unfair—He gives everybody a free choice to love Him.” The following is reason 1 of 4 from Richard Carrier’s “Why I am not a Christian” which can be found on www.infidels.org.  It is a stab into the heart of the Arminian gospel. Everything Carrier says is painfully true if one holds to such an emasculated gospel.

  

The Top Four Reasons I Am Not a Christian Are…

1. God is Silent

If God wants something from me, he would tell me. He wouldn’t leave someone else to do this, as if an infinite being were short on time. And he would certainly not leave fallible, sinful humans to deliver an endless plethora of confused and contradictory messages. God would deliver the message himself, directly, to each and every one of us, and with such clarity as the most brilliant being in the universe could accomplish. We would all hear him out and shout “Eureka!” So obvious and well-demonstrated would his message be. It would be spoken to each of us in exactly those terms we would understand. And we would all agree on what that message was. Even if we rejected it, we would all at least admit to each other, “Yes, that’s what this God fellow told me.”[2]Excuses don’t fly. The Christian proposes that a supremely powerful being exists who wants us to set things right, and therefore doesn’t want us to get things even more wrong. This is an intelligible hypothesis, which predicts there should be no more confusion about which religion or doctrine is true than there is about the fundamentals of medicine, engineering, physics, chemistry, or even meteorology. It should be indisputably clear what God wants us to do, and what he doesn’t want us to do. Any disputes that might still arise about that would be as easily and decisively resolved as any dispute between two doctors, chemists, or engineers as to the right course to follow in curing a patient, identifying a chemical, or designing a bridge. Yet this is not what we observe. Instead, we observe exactly the opposite: unresolvable disagreement and confusion. That is clearly a failed prediction. A failed prediction means a false theory. Therefore, Christianity is false.Typically, Christians try to make excuses for God that protect our free will. Either the human will is more powerful than the will of God, and therefore can actually block his words from being heard despite all his best and mighty efforts, or God cares more about our free choice not to hear him than about saving our souls, and so God himself “chooses” to be silent. Of course, there is no independent evidence of either this remarkable human power to thwart God, or this peculiar desire in God, and so this is a completely “ad hoc” theory: something just “made up” out of thin air in order to rescue the actual theory that continually fails to fit the evidence. But for reasons I’ll explore later, such “added elements” are never worthy of belief unless independently confirmed: you have to know they are true. You can’t just “claim” they are true. Truth is not invented. It can only be discovered. Otherwise, Christianity is just a hypothesis that has yet to find sufficient confirmation in actual evidence.Be that as it may. Though “maybe, therefore probably” is not a logical way to arrive at any belief, let’s assume the Christian can somehow “prove” (with objective evidence everyone can agree is relevant and true) that we have this power or God has this desire. Even on that presumption, there are unsolvable problems with this “additional” hypothesis. Right from the start, it fails to explain why believers disagree. The fact that believers can’t agree on the content of God’s message or desires also refutes the theory that he wants us to be clear on these things. This failed prediction cannot be explained away by any appeal to free will–for these people have chosen to hear God, and not only to hear him, but to accept Jesus Christ as the shepherd of their very soul. So no one can claim these people chose not to hear God. Therefore, either God is telling them different things, or there is no God. Even if there is a God, but he is deliberately sowing confusion, this contradicts what Christianity predicts to be God’s desire, which entails Christianity is the wrong religion. Either way, Christianity is false. So this theory doesn’t work. It fails to predict what we actually observe. But even considering atheists like me, this “ad hoc” excuse still fails to save Christianity from the evidence. When I doubted the Big Bang theory, I voiced the reasons for my doubts but continued to pursue the evidence, frequently speaking with several physicists who were “believers.” Eventually, they presented all the logic and evidence in terms I understood, and I realized I was wrong: the Big Bang theory is well-supported by the evidence and is at present the best explanation of all the facts by far. Did these physicists violate my free will? Certainly not. I chose to pursue the truth and hear them out. So, too, I and countless others have chosen to give God a fair hearing–if only he would speak. I would listen to him even now, at this very moment. Yet he remains silent. Therefore, it cannot be claimed that I am “choosing” not to hear him. And therefore, the fact that he still does not speak refutes the hypothesis. Nothing about free will can save the theory here.Even when we might actually credit free will with resisting God’s voice–like the occasional irrational atheist, or the stubbornly mistaken theist–the Christian theory is still not compatible with the premise that God would not or could not overcome this resistance. Essential to the Christian hypothesis, as C.S. Lewis says, is the proposition that God is “quite definitely good” and “loves love and hates hatred.” Unless these statements are literally meaningless, they entail that God would behave like anyone else who is “quite definitely good” and “loves love and hates hatred.” And such people don’t give up on someone until their resistance becomes intolerable–until then, they will readily violate someone’s free will to save them, because they know darned well it is the right thing to do. God would do the same. He would not let the choice of a fallible, imperfect being thwart his own good will.I know this for a fact. Back in my days as a flight-deck firefighter, when our ship’s helicopter was on rescue missions, we had to stand around in our gear in case of a crash. There was usually very little to do, so we told stories. One I heard was about a rescue swimmer. She had to pull a family out of the water from a capsized boat, but by the time the chopper got there, it appeared everyone had drowned except the mother, who was for that reason shedding her life vest and trying to drown herself. The swimmer dove in to rescue her, but she kicked and screamed and yelled to let her die. She even gave the swimmer a whopping black eye. But the swimmer said to hell with that, I’m bringing you in! And she did, enduring her curses and blows all the way.Later, it turned out that one of the victim’s children, her daughter, had survived. She had drifted pretty far from the wreck, but the rescue team pulled her out, and the woman who had beaten the crap out of her rescuer apologized and thanked her for saving her against her will. Everyone in my group agreed the rescue swimmer had done the right thing, and we all would have done the same–because that is what a loving, caring being does. It follows that if God is a loving being, he will do no less for us. In the real world, kind people don’t act like some stubborn, pouting God who abandons the drowning simply because they don’t want to be helped. They act like this rescue swimmer. They act like us.So we can be certain God would make sure he told everyone, directly, what his message was. Everyone would then know what God had told them. They can still reject it all they want, and God can leave them alone. But there would never be, in any possible Christian universe, any confusion or doubt as to what God’s message was. And if we had questions, God himself would answer them–just like the Big Bang physicists who were so patient with me. Indeed, the very fact that God gave the same message and answers to everyone would be nearly insurmountable proof that Christianity was true. Provided we had no reason to suspect God of lying to all of us, Christianity would be as certain as the law of gravity or the color of the sky. That is what the Christian hypothesis entails we should observe–for it is what a good and loving God would do, who wanted us all to set right what has gone wrong. And since this is not what we observe, but in fact the exact opposite, the evidence quite soundly refutes Christianity.Despite this conclusion, Christians still try to hold on to their faith with this nonsense about free will–but they haven’t thought it through. Meteorologists can disagree about the weather forecast, but they all agree how weather is made and the conditions that are required for each kind of weather to arise. And they agree about this because the scientific evidence is so vast and secure that it resolves these questions, often decisively. It can’t be claimed that God has violated the free will of meteorologists by providing them with all this evidence. And yet how much more important is salvation than the physics of weather! If God wants what Christianity says he wants, he would not violate our free will to educate us on the trivial and then refuse to do the same for the most important subject of all. Likewise, if a doctor wants a patient to get well, he is not vague about how he must do this, but as clear as can be. He explains what is needed in terms the patient can understand. He even answers the patient’s questions, and whenever asked will present all the evidence for and against the effectiveness of the treatment. He won’t hold anything back and declare, “I’m not going to tell you, because that would violate your free will!” Nor would any patient accept such an excuse–to the contrary, he would respond, “But I choose to hear you,” leaving the doctor no such excuse.There can’t be any excuse for God, either. There are always disagreements, and there are always people who don’t follow what they are told or what they know to be true. But that doesn’t matter. Chemists all agree on the fundamental facts of chemistry. Doctors all agree on the fundamental facts of medicine. Engineers all agree on the fundamental facts of engineering. So why can’t all humans agree on the fundamental facts of salvation? There is no more reason that they should be confused or in the dark about this than that chemists, doctors, and engineers should be confused or in the dark.The logically inevitable fact is, if the Christian God existed, we would all hear from God himself the same message of salvation, and we would all hear, straight from God, all the same answers to all the same questions. The Chinese would have heard it. The Native Americans would have heard it. Everyone today, everywhere on Earth, would be hearing it, and their records would show everyone else in history had heard it, too. Sure, maybe some of us would still balk or reject that message. But we would still have the information. Because the only way to make an informed choice is to have the required information. So a God who wanted us to make an informed choice would give us all the information we needed, and not entrust fallible, sinful, contradictory agents to convey a confused mess of ambiguous, poorly supported claims. Therefore, the fact that God hasn’t spoken to us directly, and hasn’t given us all the same, clear message, and the same, clear answers, is enough to prove Christianity false.Just look at what Christians are saying. They routinely claim that God is your father and best friend. Yet if that were true, we would observe all the same behaviors from God that we observe from our fathers and friends. But we don’t observe this. Therefore, there is no God who is our father or our friend. The logic of this is truly unassailable, and no “free will” excuse can escape it. For my father and friends aren’t violating my free will when they speak to me, help me, give me advice, and answer my questions. Therefore, God would not violate my free will if he did so. He must be able to do at least as much as they do, even if for some reason he couldn’t do more. But God doesn’t do anything at all. He doesn’t talk to, teach, help, or comfort us, unlike my real father and my real friends. God doesn’t tell us when we hold a mistaken belief that shall hurt us. But my father does, and my friends do. Therefore, no God exists who is even remotely like my father or my friends, or anyone at all who loves me. Therefore, Christianity is false.The conclusion is inescapable. If Christianity were true, then the Gospel would have been preached to each and every one of us directly, and correctly, by God–just as it supposedly was to the disciples who walked and talked and dined with God Himself, or to the Apostle Paul, who claimed to have had actual conversations with God, and to have heard the Gospel directly from God Himself. Was their free will violated? Of course not. Nor would ours be. Thus, if Christianity were really true, there would be no dispute as to what the Gospel is. There would only be our free and informed choice to accept or reject it. At the same time, all our sincere questions would be answered by God, kindly and clearly, and when we compared notes, we would find that the Voice of God gave consistent answers and messages to everyone all over the world, all the time. So if Christianity were true, there would be no point in “choosing” whether God exists anymore than there is a choice whether gravity exists or whether all those other people exist whom we love or hate or help or hurt. We would not face any choice to believe on insufficient and ambiguous evidence, but would know the facts, and face only the choice whether to love and accept the God that does exist. That this is not the reality, yet it would be the reality if Christianity were true, is proof positive that Christianity is false. 





Manly Men Doing Poetry

20 09 2007

At what point did manly men surrender the art of poetry to tofu-eaters? Sure, there are exceptions of respectable men writing and reading poetry. For the most part, though, poetry is thought of as something for the artsy-fartsy, effeminate, badminton players. Manly men drive trucks, eat steak, play football, use power-tools, and kill their own venison. They don’t read poetry. Seriously, can you picture Rodney Harrison penning a quick sonnet during half-time? Or Jim from According to Jim? Or Tim the “Tool Man” Taylor?

 

This apparent disconnect between manliness and poetry has not always existed. Consider David, for instance. Here’s a guy who attacks lions, bears, and giants with sticks and stones. His future father-in-law who just threw a javelin at him asks for 100 Philistine foreskins as a dowry. So what’s David do—he brings him 200. No question—this guy is a manly man. If we’re picking teams in gym class, David goes first every time. But check out what David wrote in his down time (Ps. 29):

 Ascribe to the LORD, O heavenly beings,

ascribe to the LORD glory and strength. 

2 Ascribe to the LORD the glory due his name;

worship the LORD in the splendor of holiness.

 3 The voice of the LORD is over the waters;

the God of glory thunders, the LORD, over many waters. 

4 The voice of the LORD is powerful;

the voice of the LORD is full of majesty. 

5 The voice of the LORD breaks the cedars;

the LORD breaks the cedars of Lebanon. 

6 He makes Lebanon to skip like a calf,

and Sirion like a young wild ox.

7 The voice of the LORD flashes forth flames of fire. 

8 The voice of the LORD shakes the wilderness;

the LORD shakes the wilderness of Kadesh. 

9 The voice of the LORD makes the deer give birth and strips the forests bare,

and in his temple all cry, “Glory!” 

10 The LORD sits enthroned over the flood;

the LORD sits enthroned bas king forever. 

11 May the LORD give strength to his people!

May the LORD bless1 his people with peace!

Not bad for a manly man.