Postscript Posthaste

Ordinary Means Has Moved!

2009-05-01T13:41:00.005-04:00

We are right in the middle of moving the Ordinary Means podcast over to a Word Press site. What that will mean for you, our faithful listeners, is that listening to the podcast will be easier than ever. So what are you waiting for? The May podcast is already up!!!

Head on over to the link below, readjust your RSS readers, and we'll do our best to finish moving all the furniture from the old site.

ordinarymeans.wordpress.com

Let us know if you have any questions about using the new site.

OM Podcast: The Gospel and the Ordinary Means, Part 3

2009-03-31T13:27:00.001-04:00

Are the ordinary means mere rote duties Christians are to perform? Or are they something more? This month, Matt and Shaun conclude their examination of the relationship between the Gospel, grace, and the ordinary means. This is a series you won't want to miss.

Let your friends know you can listen over at ordinarymeans.com, download directly from this link (right click and save), or as always subscribe to our iTunes feed.

OM Podcast: The Gospel and the Ordinary Means, Part 2

2009-01-08T12:04:00.004-05:00

Are the ordinary means mere rote duties Christians are to perform? Or are they something more? This month, Matt and Shaun continue to examine the relationship between the Gospel, grace, and the ordinary means. This is a series you won't want to miss.

Let your friends know you can listen over at ordinarymeans.com, download directly from this link (right click and save), or as always subscribe to our iTunes feed.

OM Podcast: The Gospel and The Ordinary Means

2008-12-06T12:51:00.002-05:00

Are the ordinary means mere rote duties Christians are to perform? Or are they something more? This month, Matt and Shaun examine the relationship between the Gospel, grace, and the ordinary means. This is one you won't want to miss.

Let your friends know you can listen over at ordinarymeans.com, download directly from this link (right click and save), or as always subscribe to our iTunes feed.

OM Podcast: On Peter Leithart and Presbyterianism

2008-11-01T20:08:00.003-04:00

This month, Matt and Shaun are joined by Jason Stellman, pastor of Exile Presbyterian Church (PCA) and chairman of the committee tasked to examine the views of Peter Leithart.

The reports of the committee are available here.

Let your friends know you can listen over at ordinarymeans.com, download directly from this link (right click and save), or as always subscribe to our iTunes feed.

OM Podcast: Questions and Answers

2008-10-01T15:23:00.001-04:00

This month, Matt and Shaun take time to answer your questions.

Let your friends know you can listen over at ordinarymeans.com, download directly from this link (right click and save), or as always subscribe to our iTunes feed.

OM Podcast: Efficacy of the Sacraments

2008-08-07T14:33:00.000-04:00

This month, Matt and Shaun are joined by Stephen Lewis (Evergreen PCA in Salem, OR) to discuss the Colloquium on the Sacraments that was held in June bringing together those on both sides of the Federal Vision debate.

Presenters included Will Barker, Rob Rayburn, Ligon Duncan, and Jeff Meyers.

Stuff to download:
All the papers presented at the Colloquium
All the presentations in mp3 format

Stuff you might like to read:
Given for You: Reclaiming Calvin's Doctrine of the Lord's Supper by Mathison, Keith A.
The Consensus Tigurinus

Let your friends know you can listen over at ordinarymeans.com, download directly from this link (right click and save), or as always subscribe to our iTunes feed.

OM Podcast: Baptists and Presbyterians Together, Part II

2008-05-31T19:34:00.000-04:00

This month we return to April’s topic of the relationship between Reformed Baptists and Presbyterians. Joining us is Stefan Lindblad, currently serving alongside his father as pastor of Trinity Reformed Baptist Church (Kirkland, WA). We had a great discussion and trust you will enjoy thinking further about these things.

Let your friends know you can listen over at ordinarymeans.com, download directly from this link (right click and save), or as always subscribe to our iTunes feed.

Prince Caspian Review

2008-05-28T11:19:00.001-04:00

My review of the latest Narnia film is up at Reformation21.

OM Podcast: Ligon Duncan on Ordinary Means

2008-04-30T21:59:00.000-04:00

This month, Matt and Shaun get replaced by Ligon Duncan. Okay, so we just let him do the talking. This month’s message is the opening talk from this year’s Twin Lakes Fellowship on the heart of an ordinary means ministry. Have a listen.

Let your friends know you can listen over at ordinarymeans.com, download directly from this link (right click and save), or as always subscribe to our iTunes feed.

OM Podcast: Baptists and Presbyterians Together

2008-03-25T14:33:00.000-04:00

This month, Matt and Shaun cover the controversial topic of whether or not Presbyterians and Baptists can be members together of the same churches given the beliefs that divide them, particularly their respective views on baptism.

Let your friends know you can listen over at ordinarymeans.com, download directly from this link (right click and save), or as always subscribe to our iTunes feed.

Mentioned Materials and Links:

Bethlehem Baptist Church, Membership and Baptism
Grudem’s Change of Mind in his Systematic Theology
Piper’s Response to Grudem
Grudem’s Response to Piper
Dennis Johnson, A Letter to My Daughter Webpage PDF Word

OM Podcast: Private Communion

2008-01-30T15:35:00.000-05:00

New podcast. Old issue. Is it appropriate to take communion to those who could not attend worship due to illness? Church history gives a host of differing opinions on the matter. Even our own Westminster Confession argues that private communion is against the nature of the sacrament. Have a listen, and be sure to leave you feedback on this one.

Let your friends know you can listen over at ordinarymeans.com, download directly from this link (right click and save), or as always subscribe to our iTunes feed.

OM Podcast: An Ordinary Means Ministry

2008-01-02T11:55:00.000-05:00

Happy New Year!

This month, Matt and I look at just what makes a ministry “ordinary”. Intrigued? Give it a listen.

Here are the requisite links:
Building Old School Churches
Ken Myers on the Dangers of Contextualization
Pursuit of Holiness, Jerry Bridges
Simple Church, Thom Rainer

If this podcast is of benefit to you, feel free to let your friends (or enemies for that matter) know about it. You can listen over at ordinarymeans.com, download directly from this link (right click and save), or as always subscribe to our iTunes feed.

OM Podcast: Baptism

2007-12-12T17:12:00.000-05:00

Thank you for your patience while the site has been down. Everything is back up and running, meaning our most recent discussion is available for your listening ears.

This month, Matt and I address of a couple questions listeners have sent us recently related to the topic of baptism. I think you’ll find we cover the gamut and answer all the questions church history has every raised on this sticky topic--all under 60 minutes. (Note: Tongue planted firmly in cheek.)

As always, thanks for listening. If this podcast is of benefit to you, feel free to let your friends (or enemies for that matter) know about it. You can listen over at ordinarymeans.com, download directly from this link (right click and save), or as always subscribe to our iTunes feed.

Apologies

2007-12-05T15:14:00.000-05:00

As you’ve likely already discovered, the Ordinary Means site is down. Our hosting company assures me they are doing everything possible to get it back up ASAP. December’s podcast is sitting here on my hard drive waiting to be uploaded and I will do that just as soon I am able.

I apologize for the inconvenience (I know it isn’t Christmas without Ordinary Means and all that), and thank you sincerely for listening.

OM Podcast: Preaching and preaching

2007-10-30T11:12:00.000-04:00

No, that is not a typo in the title. This month on the Ordinary Means podcast, we address the difference between what preachers do (namely, preach) and what every Christian is called to do (namely, preach). How hard and fast should we draw the lines twixt the two? We discuss this very thing.

You can listen over at ordinarymeans.com, download directly from this link (right click and save), or as always subscribe to our iTunes feed.

Related Tags:

OM Podcast: Sanctification By Grace

2007-09-29T20:33:00.000-04:00

The Ordinary Means podcast for October deals with the necessity of seeing sanctification as a divine work, or as the Westminster Catechism puts it, “a work of God’s free grace”. So often we talk about justification in this light, but fail to see that every day of our life is filled with the gracious working of God to conform us to the image of His Son. Enjoy.

You can listen over at ordinarymeans.com, download directly from this link (right click and save), or as always subscribe to our iTunes feed.

Related Tags:

History as Power Play

2007-09-20T09:19:00.000-04:00

Propaganda can be inspired.

We’ve know for some time that the books of First and Second Chronicles are essentially Davidic propaganda (and I mean that in the nicest way possible). Contrast this to the books of First and Second Samuel that aim to point out the great failings of the kings so that Israel (and we) might see with new eyes their great sin of choosing an earthly king over a heavenly one.

I am currently teaching a Medieval History course at a local Christian Study center and we are reading through Eusebius’ Church History. Talk about propaganda. While much of his history is straight from the pages of holy writ, much of the rest is steeped in traditional ideology, making the players in his history often seem larger than life. While God’s Word takes great pains to show us the sins of good people, Eusebius often strives to make bad people better. Remember, Eusebius had a patron by the name of Constantine and therefore is no stranger to the effects of power upon history.

On this theme, here is John Vincent from his book, The Intelligent Person's Guide to History:

History is about the rich and famous, not the poor. History favours the articulate, not the silent. History is about winners (including those losers who were eventual winners), not about losers. History is about assessing distortions, not copying out truths. History has to live with, is indeed the child of censorship: the censorship by one culture of it predecessor, the censorship by a great modern bureaucracy of its own overproduction of records, the censorship of astute reticence by those aware that the eye of posterity will watch them. History has much to say about the way the powerful handle power, for power engenders records. History is almost silent (so far) on psychology, but copious on sociology in the sense of social structure (less so, perhaps, on sociology as values). History is hopeless on love, but excellent on hatreds. Such a state of things may not please all, but then it was never meant to please. One-sidedness lies at the heart of historical knowledge.

We would do well to read history with a view to the true nature of man so that its propaganda might teach us humility.

(Quote via Mohler)

Related Tags:

Happy Birthday to Me

2007-09-15T21:01:00.000-04:00

And for those who are curious how old I am today, here’s a hint:

Related Tags:

OM Podcast: Q & A

2007-09-05T12:04:00.000-04:00

It’s podcast time again! Matt and I use this month to catch up with some of the questions you’ve asked over the course of the year. We cover everything from what to do when there isn’t a decent church in town to what it means to “examine ourselves” during communion to questions on the necessity of a profession of faith. We hope it is of benefit to your walk with Christ.

And for the anxious, sorry for the delay in posting. I’ve spent the last week with a mission team assessing the earthquake damage in Peru. Despite the media’s quick change of focus from Peru to hurricanes, please don’t forget to pray for the people of Peru whose homes were leveled by the 8.0 quake. There is still a great deal of need there, as well as opportunity for the kingdom of God to grow.

You can listen over at ordinarymeans.com, download directly from this link (right click and save), or subscribe to our iTunes feed.

Related Tags:

More on That Baptism Thing

2007-08-09T16:38:00.000-04:00

Grudem has responded to John Piper’s letter. But this Presbyterian isn’t satisfied with his answer. (Thanks, Justin, for posting all of this fascinating discussion.)

Grudem, in his response, argues that since baptism is required for church membership (with which I agree), therefore a church that does not believe someone is baptized cannot receive them into membership without baptizing them. For example, a Baptist cannot receive a Presbyterian sprinkled at birth because they don’t believe it was a valid baptism. A Presbyterian in a Baptist’s eyes is unbaptized.

Makes sense so far.

In fact, this explains why Presbyterians have no problem receiving Baptists into membership, but not vice versa. A Presbyterian church might receive a Baptist couple into membership. No problem. Their adult baptism is more than adequate. If they have children and decide not to baptize them at birth, then their children cannot become members until they do receive baptism (at time of profession). Again, no problem. Presbyterians don’t count children as full communing members until they are old enough to make a profession. By that point, the baptism is valid to a Baptist.

But in the Baptist churches, they view Presbyterians as having been baptized way too early (pre-profession) and so our profession isn’t good enough nor is our baptism valid. They want nothing short of a post-profession water event. Never-mind that there has already been a pre-profession baptism which is now validated by our profession.

Now stay with me. Let’s apply this logic to the Baptists themselves.

Following this logic, every Baptist church would also be required to re-baptize every adult who thinks that they were not “actually saved” when they made their first profession. How many of us have wondered if our conversion came after our actual joining of a church and baptism? Lots! Well, Baptists, get out the water and fill up the jacuzzi, because their pre-profession baptism wasn’t sufficient. Hundreds, if not thousands, of your members have been invalidly baptized! They were baptized like, heaven forbid, Presbyterians (pre-profession).

As you can see, this logic is pure silliness. Grudem has wrongly identified the issue. It isn’t an issue of baptism being required for membership. No. We all agree on that. The issue for Grudem is whether or not our baptism proceeded or followed our profession. Chronology, for Grudem, is what makes a baptism valid. If we have a belief in the sovereign grace of God over and against our human works, we should not be relying on peccadilloes like “which came first” to determine who we welcome into our fellowship. Baptism is merely a sign and seal administered by human hands. Chronology of baptism and profession should not be given such weight. Both baptisms should be treated as what they are: baptisms. After that, faith in Christ should be the only deciding factor.

Sorry, Wayne, I’m still with Piper on this one. (And your wife.)

Related Tags:

The Future of Computing

2007-08-09T11:25:00.000-04:00

As a former programmer myself and counting sociology as a hobby, I was very interested to hear Google’s CEO, Eric Schmidt, define what he believed to be the future of internet applications and software in general. The geeks and marketing gurus will be calling it Web 3.0.

Let’s review. Small, fast, customizable applications that run on mobile devices and are distributed by viral marketing. In short, the future of computing is the iPhone. Way to go, Apple.

Related Tags:

That Whole Baptism Thing

2007-08-09T09:08:00.000-04:00

This response to Wayne Grudem by John Piper is worth reading:

If you don't know, Wayne Grudem is a Reformed Baptistic Charismatic whose Systematic Theology is (yes, I know that sounded odd) one of the better "modern" systematics. It is the "go to" Systematic for many evangelicals. He recently revised his chapter on baptism.

Funny, I remember debating the old version of that chapter in college with folks who knew I was paedobaptist. Even back then I found the chapter insufficient and uncompelling. According to Piper, it has become even less so.

Piper is arguing for what the PCA already does: admit baptistic Christians into membership while continuing to hold that their view on baptism is not correct. He'd like to see the same in Baptist churches, but has had some degree of difficulty in seeing that change occur in his own church.

Having just preaching last week on Peter’s vision of the sheet being lowered from heaven, the whole theme of what makes for unity in Christ has been at the forefront of my thinking. The point of the vision was that Peter should not allow his religious traditions (dietary laws, Gentile uncleaness) to keep him from admitting a God-fearing Gentile into church membership. Is it time for Baptists to stop calling sound, God-fearing Presbyterians unclean? (And vice versa.)

Related Tags:

Breaking News: Porn Bad; Modesty is Hot!

2007-08-01T20:54:00.000-04:00

The New York Magazine gets it right with this article on the effects of pornography on our culture. Back in the pre-internet days, it was thought that more porn meant greater abuse as women became increasingly objectified. We were wrong. Rather, increased access to pornography has created a sexual culture in which men want nothing less than the imaginary and whose real women just can’t compete. What real woman can live up to the impossibly idolatrous expectations that porn creates?

The onslaught of porn is responsible for deadening male libido in relation to real women, and leading men to see fewer and fewer women as “porn-worthy.” Far from having to fend off porn-crazed young men, young women are worrying that as mere flesh and blood, they can scarcely get, let alone hold, their attention.

But the article’s author, Naomi Wolf, takes things a step further. The answer, she contemplates, is found not in women becoming more like their pornographic counterparts, but rather less like them and asking their men to cease and desist.

The ubiquity of sexual images does not free eros but dilutes it.

Other cultures know this. I am not advocating a return to the days of hiding female sexuality, but I am noting that the power and charge of sex are maintained when there is some sacredness to it, when it is not on tap all the time. In many more traditional cultures, it is not prudery that leads them to discourage men from looking at pornography. It is, rather, because these cultures understand male sexuality and what it takes to keep men and women turned on to one another over time—to help men, in particular, to, as the Old Testament puts it, “rejoice with the wife of thy youth; let her breasts satisfy thee at all times.” These cultures urge men not to look at porn because they know that a powerful erotic bond between parents is a key element of a strong family.

Such a pro-family culture is rightly emphasized, according to Wolf, in Israel where no one but a woman’s husband is allowed to see beyond a woman’s face, not even her hair.

I will never forget a visit I made to Ilana, an old friend who had become an Orthodox Jew in Jerusalem. When I saw her again, she had abandoned her jeans and T-shirts for long skirts and a head scarf. I could not get over it. Ilana has waist-length, wild and curly golden-blonde hair. “Can’t I even see your hair?” I asked, trying to find my old friend in there. “No,” she demurred quietly. “Only my husband,” she said with a calm sexual confidence, “ever gets to see my hair.”

When she showed me her little house in a settlement on a hill, and I saw the bedroom, draped in Middle Eastern embroideries, that she shares only with her husband—the kids are not allowed—the sexual intensity in the air was archaic, overwhelming. It was private. It was a feeling of erotic intensity deeper than any I have ever picked up between secular couples in the liberated West. And I thought: Our husbands see naked women all day—in Times Square if not on the Net. Her husband never even sees another woman’s hair.

She must feel, I thought, so hot.

Related Tags:

OM Podcast: The Federal Vision with Jack Kinneer

2007-07-30T15:50:00.000-04:00

Having discussed the Federal Vision in last month’s podcast, Matt and I felt there were still some questions that needed answering. This month we chatted with Dr. Jack Kinneer, New Testament professor at RPTS, about some of the ways the Federal Vision separates itself from the clear teaching of God’s Word.

In addition, Dr. Kinneer has kindly drafted two short essays on this topic. The first essay on Monocovenantalism answers the way in which the Federal Vision appears to make our relationship with God as works-oriented as Adam’s was. The second essay on Election and Covenant addresses whether or not the Bible allows us to consider all baptized persons elect and justified.

Again, thanks to all of our listeners!

You can listen over at ordinarymeans.com, download directly from this link (right click and save), or subscribe to our iTunes feed.

"He wasn't just trying to get people saved."

2007-07-11T14:12:00.000-04:00

Wonderful post on Schaeffer. (Thanks, Carl.)

[May we] remember throughout our lives that in God's sight there are no little people and no little places. Only one thing is important: to be consecrated persons in God's place for us, at each moment. Those who think of themselves as little people in little places, if committed to Christ and living under his Lordship in the whole of life, may, by God's grace, change the flow of our generation.

Homeschooling Recognized By Supreme Court

2007-07-11T11:23:00.000-04:00

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas in Morse v. Frederick offers home schooling as a viable option for parents.

“If parents do not like the rules imposed by those schools, they can seek redress in school boards or legislatures; they can send their children to private schools or home school them; or they can simply move.”

Appears Evangelicals and Catholics Aren't As Together As Some Thought

2007-07-11T10:50:00.000-04:00

I applaud the current Pope for his consistency by bringing his public policy in line with his theology.

Almost.

Saying that the Protestant Church is “defective” and not “proper” certainly ups the ante, but has Ratzinger forgotten completely about the whole anathema thing? I was under the impression that Protestants are not only defective according to Catholic dogma, but damned to hell for believing in justification by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone and sola Scriptura.

Maybe I’m confused. Let me head over to see how Martin is doing in his grave.

OM Podcast: The Federal Vision

2007-06-27T12:05:00.000-04:00

This month Matt and I thought it would be appropriate to address the declarations made recently by our denomination (PCA) with regard to the false teachings of the movement known as the Federal Vision.

You can listen over at ordinarymeans.com, download directly from this link (right click and save), or subscribe to our iTunes feed.

And here’s all the stuff we referred to:

The Current Justification Controversy, O Palmer Robertson
New Perspective on Paul Audio Lecture, Sinclair Ferguson
Holiness By Grace, Bryan Chapell
Anything and Everything by Guy Waters (we cannot recommend this “Guy” too highly)
PCA Study Committee Report, byFaith Online
Summary of Report, byFaith Online
Heidelberg Catechism, Questions 16 and 17
Baylyblog on disagreeing with the Confession

No More Paris Hilton Stories

2007-06-27T11:50:00.000-04:00

MSNBC's Mika Brzezinski refuses to talk about Paris Hilton on Morning Joe. Multiple times in a row. When I saw this, I just had to link to this video and share the joy.

Seriously, Mika needs to be honored for this. I’ve waited a long time for a journalist to stand up against the pointless slop that the news has become. The only reason I even know this happened is because I now get only the news I want on the internet. I filter out all things Paris, yet I’m so glad this one slipped through the cracks.

Probing the Federal Vision

2007-06-27T11:05:00.000-04:00

David Bayly asks some really good questions of the proponents of the Federal Vision. Did I mention they were really good?

The Idol of Safety

2007-06-21T11:08:00.000-04:00

Have you ever considered that one of the biggest things we worship--yes, worship--today is safety. Often, bowing to the god of safety means we don’t do something that should be done because it wouldn’t be “safe”; or we fail to use or enjoy the creation God has given us because to do so would involve “risk”; or we simply hide away in our shell-like tract homes failing to minister to or evangelize others because of the unsafeness of it all.

In that light, this article on the reduction of our children’s “play space” over the course of four generations is very telling. Give it a read, go read one of the Gospels or Acts, and then take some time to repent of your worship of safety.

Report Condemning Federal Vision/NPP Passes By Overwhelming Majority

2007-06-13T18:21:00.000-04:00

The PCA GA, just a couple hours ago, passed this report by an absolutely huge margin. Scott Clark blogged the substance of the debate (including what will become R.C. Sproul’s famous joke about the applause he received after speaking).

One thing Scott doesn’t make clear in his post is that twice the opportunity came for debate on this issue to continue and twice the Assembly voted to close debate. What this signifies is that our denomination has no desire to debate the doctrine of justification as held by these groups. We believe that both the Federal Vision and the New Perspective on Paul get justification wrong and therefore are outside both our Confession of Faith and the clear teaching of Scripture.

Should We Be Sending Aid to Africa?

2007-06-07T20:10:00.000-04:00

Here is an enlightening interview with Kenyan economics expert James Shikwati on why sending aid is exactly what we should not be doing.

I think that Shikwati’s point that too much aid creates a dependence detrimental to leadership is particularly important as we consider missions work. All things being equal, rather than sending Americans to pastor in foreign countries, we really should be focusing our efforts on training national pastors to lead their people.

The Efficacy of Baptism

2007-06-07T20:03:00.000-04:00

In light of the Federal Vision report coming next week for my PCA readers, the Baylys have helpfully posted some of Samuel Miller’s work on baptismal efficacy (what the outward administration of water conveys to those who receive it).

In short, Samuel Miller states “when it is administered to the persons, or the offspring of those, who are entirely destitute of faith, there is no pledge or certainty that it will be accompanied with any blessing.”

Why? Because without faith it is impossible to please God.

Though the author of Hebrews makes it clear that there are some who “taste of the heavenly gift” yet fall away (Hebrews 6:4-6), and Jesus teaches in the parable of the sower that there are those who receive the Word and fall away (Matthew 13:20-21), even so both are temporary, incomplete, and destitute of blessing. Without true faith no man is a participant in the blessing of God that comes through union with Christ for only faith can unite us to Jesus. Anything else is merely external. As is the case with the Lord’s Supper, so baptism apart from faith results only in condemnation, not in blessing.

OM Podcast: On Baptism

2007-05-28T16:30:00.000-04:00

Matt and I are at it again, this time talking baptism. iTunes and download links are as usual.

More at ordinarymeans.com!

Creation Museum Opens Monday

2007-05-26T22:27:00.000-04:00

I see Ken Ham and Answers in Genesis made the news. Their new Creation Museum is about to open its doors to the public. Note the derogatory statements in the piece by an evolutionist followed by statistics that say half of Americans don’t believe evolution. The media really has no idea what to do with something like this.

On the other hand (the hand holding my wallet), at $19.95 a person, I’ll have to save up a little before our family figures out just what to do with it. At least now I’ve got another reason to visit Kentucky.

China Fights For Their Children

2007-05-26T22:16:00.000-04:00

This is what it means to be pro-life in China.

Local officials eager to meet population quotas have frequently been accused of forcing women to submit to abortions or sterilizations to keep the birthrate down. But the problem in the Bobai area was that lax enforcement of the policy over the years led to a high number of families with several children -- and suddenly the local family planning bureau wanted to collect its fines or else.

"The people who didn't have money, they threatened to knock their houses down, or punch holes in the roof," a resident said.

But the farmers of Bobai and nearby towns have been known since the Qing Dynasty for resistance to highhanded rulers. True to their legacy, they rose up against the collection teams, whom they decried as bandits. Backed by their sons, thousands of peasants and townspeople encircled government and birth control centers across surrounding Bobai County, residents here said, stoning riot police brought in to quell the unrest and, in some places, trashing local offices.

This article in the Washington Post poses a deep ethical question. Is there, at base, really a difference between taking up arms to protect our children’s lives and taking up arms to fight fines imposed on us for having “too many” children?

Trading iPods

2007-05-25T14:17:00.000-04:00

This is what happens when an almost 40 and a barely 30 switch iPod shuffles (yup, the ones that give you no idea what you are listening to) for a couple days. Here’s a taste. See if you can guess who is who.

Dave: Next song is about a two-headed boy. I have no clue. Very depressing. Just heard something about an accordion and a needle. The singer is yelling at me now. Not sure I'm following this. Does the two-headed boy play accordion? Bam! There we go again - another reference to being naked. Third one today. I think the two-headed accordion player is naked now. Brian, is there anything you want to talk about?

Brian: KT Tunstall. "Suddenly I See": This music is like furniture: functional, attractive and unobtrusive in the background. It utterly fails to engage or challenge the listener.

"Better Together." More Jack Johnson. What's up with you and this guy? "Broken." JJ yet again. Is this on continuous or shuffle? "Wrong Turn." Again, JJ. Is this all you listen to? This is music to dust your bookshelves to. This sounds like the acoustic output from other artists that I hate, like Dave Matthews, David Gray or John Mayer, but with a bottle of white wine and a Rohypnol in it. It's the blandest, least-offensive soccer-mom music ever. It should run for president.

The Federal Vision: Keyhole of the Catholic Church

2007-05-22T20:40:00.000-04:00

Scott Clark points us to this excellent examination of the Federal Vision from a Catholic perspective, that of Taylor Marshall, who follows the “debate in the Reformed realm of theology with great interest”.

The Federal Vision movement is so termed because it stresses the foedus, Latin for “covenant.” They are covenantal theologians par excellence. Fundamentally, Federal Visionists reject the bi-covenantal structure of the Scriptures taught in the Presbyterian articles of the Westminster Confession of Faith. In other words, the universe does rotate on covenantal axis of "Works" and "Grace." Federal Visionists would say that obedience and works are not opposed to grace. They rightly point out that before the fall, Adam worked, obeyed, and received the grace/favor of God. Grace and obedience are not opposed to one another.

It is not a surprise then that Federal Visionists believe that justification is best understood as “union with Christ” and not as the imputation of righteousness in a strict merit/demerit transaction. Very biblical and very Catholic.

Federal Visionists believe that the sacrament of Baptism actually accomplishes union with Christ – not in a nominal way, but in an ontological way. Again, very biblical and very Catholic. A person is Christian if they are baptized – they are either a “good Christian” or an “apostate Christian.” This somewhat approximates the way Catholics understand being in a state of grace or mortal sin.

Federal Visionists understand “election” primarily in terms of sacramental participation, much as the Catholic Church does.

For these reasons, Marshall concludes, the Catholic Church is where those in the FV will find themselves most at home.

Ultimately, I think that younger Presbyterians will gravitate toward what the Federal Vision offers. Many will sink their teeth into it and many will find it wanting. Many will discover that the Catholic Church is their true home, and many will discover her in a great moment of joy. This Federal Vision is really only a peek into the keyhole of the Catholic Church. The Federal Visionist has a vision of the beautiful things inside, but they have not yet appreciated the warmth of a true home.

Must Be the Sociologist in Me

2007-05-22T13:15:00.000-04:00

This article fascinated me this morning. It attempts to answer the question of who all those people are filling up the streets from 9 to 5 when they should be sitting in a cubicle somewhere, holding down a steady job. He met quite a few interesting personalities in his search to find out, but then he is in San Fransisco.

I noticed, however, that the journalist met no stay-at-home moms. Presumably, they were at home.

Jesus is the Messiah

2007-05-22T10:11:00.000-04:00

Here is an interesting story about a rabbi who, prior to his death, wrote the name of the Jewish Messiah on a piece of paper. That note was recently opened to reveal the Messiah to be none other than...

Shortly before he died, one of Israel's most prominent rabbis wrote the name of the Messiah on a small note which he requested would remain sealed until now. When the note was opened, it revealed what many have known for centuries: Yehoshua, or Yeshua (Jesus), is the Messiah.

Having only just preached on the stoning of Stephen, I was struck particularly by his son’s reaction, which matched that of the Sanhedrin in response to Stephen’s declaration of Jesus as Lord.

He was shocked. “Oh no! That’s blasphemy. The people could understand that my father pointed to him [the Messiah of the Christians].”

The article concludes by mentioning the rabbi’s particular fondness for crosses.

Israel Today was given access to many of the rabbi's manuscripts, written in his own hand for the exclusive use of his students. Most striking were the cross-like symbols painted by Kaduri all over the pages. In the Jewish tradition, one does not use crosses. In fact, even the use of a plus sign is discouraged because it might be mistaken for a cross.

But there they were, scribbled in the rabbi's own hand. When we asked what those symbols meant, Rabbi David Kaduri said they were “signs of the angel." Pressed further about the meaning of the “signs of the angel," he said he had no idea. Rabbi David Kaduri went on to explain that only his father had had a spiritual relationship with God and had met the Messiah in his dreams.

(via Challies)

The Man Hug

2007-05-18T10:06:00.000-04:00

Sheer brilliance from YouTube and VideoJug. (via Challies)

Spurgeon on Necessity of Conversion in the Young

2007-05-17T10:20:00.000-04:00

“But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man” — Galatians 1:11

So I note that not one among us has received the gospel by birth-right. We may be the children of holy parents, but we are not therefore the children of God. To us it is clear that “that which is born of the flesh is flesh,” and nothing more. Only “that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.” Yet we hear of persons whose children do not need conversion. They are spoken of as being free from natural corruption, and born children of God, having a grace within which only needs to be developed. I am sorry to say that my father did not find me such a child. He found out early in my life that I was born in sin, and shapen in iniquity, and that folly was bound up in my heart. Friends and teachers soon perceived in me a natural depravity; and assuredly I have found it in myself: the sad discovery needed no very minute research, for the effect of the evil stared me in the face in my character. This tradition as to our being born with a holy nature is gaining foothold in the professing church, though contrary to Scripture, and even to the confessions of faith which are still avowedly maintained. Certain preachers hardly dare formulate it as a doctrine; but it is with them a kind of chaotic belief that there may be productions of the flesh which are very superior, and will serve well enough without the new birth of the Spirit. This tacit belief will lead up to birth-right membership; and that is fatal to any Christian community, wherever it comes to be the rule. Without conversion, in certain fellowships, the young people drift into the church as a matter of course, and the church becomes only a part of the world, with the Christian name affixed to it. May we never in our churches sink into that condition! That religion which is a mere family appendage is of little worth. The true seed are “born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.” We have not received our faith by tradition from our parents; and yet some of us, if true faith could be so received, would certainly have thus received it, for if we are not Hebrews of the Hebrews, yet according to our family-tree we are Puritans of the Puritans, descended throughout many generations of believers. Of this we make small account before God, though we are not ashamed of it before men. We have no father in our spiritual life but the Lord himself, and we have not received that life, or the gospel, by any carnal parentage, but of the Lord alone.

"It makes one wonder why he put so much time, effort and money into political organizing when with his other role as preacher he shared a message about a King and a Kingdom that was better able to change people for the better than either political party could ever hope to do."

2007-05-16T09:03:00.000-04:00

Cal Thomas on Rev. Jerry Falwell who passed away this week.

Does God Exist?

2007-05-10T17:18:00.000-04:00

The debate between The Way of the Master hosts Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort and the Rational Response Squad can be watched here. Slate summarizes it this way:

If Nightline wanted to host an enlightening discussion about religion, it would have invited some intelligent believers to mount a defense of faith and to talk about why faith and proof of it are mutually exclusive.

I tend to agree. You can’t prove God without a reasonable discussion of faith, which made this debate flawed from the start. That said, however, I thought they did a remarkably decent job of representing Christianity with intelligence and dignity. When you compare the gentle, kind Cameron and Comfort with the edgy, name calling “Brian and Kelly” (who didn’t even use their real names--a ploy to make you think Christians are terrorists and want to kill those who hate God) you really are left preferring those who believe in God.

After all, we will be known by our love. (Which proves God exists, right?)

Note: Was it just me, or did ABC turn the volume up louder when folks clapped for the Atheists? That noted, the host of the show was much fairer to the Christians, I thought.

Clown Worship

2007-05-10T11:48:00.000-04:00

I never thought I’d see the day I’d type that. Yes, these folks make worship a matter of ridicule. And, just in case you can stomach it, there is a video of the--gulp--service. (HT: Challies)

Leading Roman Catholic Scholar Converts to Protestantism

2007-05-09T13:34:00.000-04:00

And that man is John Calvin.

Erasmus expressed the strongest measure of disappointment saying, "It seems that another son of the church has been persuaded by Luther's De servo (On the Bondage of the Will). I had hoped to moderate that movement but I guess it isn't happening." LeFevre was less critical saying only, "Calvin is a bright young man. I have high hopes for him."

A Little More Likely To Be In the Grave

2007-05-09T09:06:00.000-04:00

They’ve found Herod’s tomb.

Modern Ref Revisited

2007-05-08T08:51:00.000-04:00

Modern Reformation’s website has been oh-so modernized.

Spurgeon on Weekly Communion

2007-05-03T10:07:00.000-04:00

“So with the Lord's Supper. My witness is, and I think I speak the mind of many of God's people now present, that coming as some of us do, weekly, to the Lord's table, we do not find the breaking of bread to have lost its significance—it is always fresh to us. I have often remarked on Lord's-day evening, whatever the subject may have been, whether Sinai has thundered over our heads, or the plaintive notes of Calvary have pierced our hearts, it always seems equally appropriate to come to the breaking of bread. Shame on the Christian church that she should put it off to once a month, and mar the first day of the week by depriving it of its glory in the meeting together for fellowship and breaking of bread, and showing forth of the death of Christ till he come. They who once know the sweetness of each Lord's-day celebrating his Supper, will not be content, I am sure, to put it off to less frequent seasons. Beloved, when the Holy Ghost is with us, ordinances are wells to the Christian, wells of rich comfort and of near communion.”

OM Podcast: Interview with Dr. Peter Jones

2007-05-01T09:42:00.000-04:00

Last month, at this year’s Twin Lakes Fellowship, Matt and Shaun sat down for a few minutes to talk with author and scholar Dr. Peter Jones. To listen, you can head over to the main site or iTunes.

PCA Study Report on New Perspective and Federal Vision

2007-04-25T16:46:00.000-04:00

Here is the PCA’s study report critiquing the New Perspective on Paul, made popular by men like N.T. Wright, and the Federal Vision, held by men like Doug Wilson, Peter Leithart, and Steve Wilkins. This report will be presented for adoption at the PCA General Assembly in June.

From the closing declarations:

In light of the controversy surrounding the NPP and FV, and after many months of careful study, the committee unanimously makes the following declarations:

1. The view that rejects the bi-covenantal structure of Scripture as represented in the Westminster Standards (i.e., views which do not merely take issue with the terminology, but the essence of the first/second covenant framework) is contrary to those Standards.

2. The view that an individual is “elect” by virtue of his membership in the visible church; and that this “election” includes justification, adoption and sanctification; but that this individual could lose his “election” if he forsakes the visible church, is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

3. The view that Christ does not stand as a representative head whose perfect obedience and satisfaction is imputed to individuals who believe in him is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

4. The view that strikes the language of “merit” from our theological vocabulary so that the claim is made that Christ’s merits are not imputed to his people is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

5. The view that “union with Christ” renders imputation redundant because it subsumes all of Christ’s benefits (including justification) under this doctrinal heading is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

6. The view that water baptism effects a “covenantal union” with Christ through which each baptized person receives the saving benefits of Christ’s mediation, including regeneration, justification, and sanctification, thus creating a parallel soteriological system to the decretal system of the Westminster Standards, is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

7. The view that one can be “united to Christ” and not receive all the benefits of Christ’s mediation, including perseverance, in that effectual union is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

8. The view that some can receive saving benefits of Christ’s mediation, such as regeneration and justification, and yet not persevere in those benefits is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

9. The view that justification is in any way based on our works, or that the so-called “final verdict of justification” is based on anything other than the perfect obedience and satisfaction of Christ received through faith alone, is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

Hope In Grieving's Midst

2007-04-20T11:15:00.000-04:00

In light of current affairs in Blacksburg, Ligonier Ministries has graciously made their timely April issue of TableTalk on grief available online in PDF.

How "Real" is Global Warming?

2007-04-20T10:46:00.000-04:00

According to Michael Crichton, about as real as aliens.

The Sins of the Preacher

2007-04-18T09:35:00.000-04:00

As I mentioned here, Colin Adams continues his interviews with well-known preachers. Phil Ryken’s answers are here, and here is Voddie Baucham. Baucham makes a particularly good point about the sins of the preacher.

7. What are the greatest perils that [a] preacher must avoid?

Laziness, pride and the fear of men. Laziness will keep us from plumbing the depths of the Word. Pride will keep us from prayer, and the fear of men will keep us from preaching the hard things.

(via Justin)

How People Think About God

2007-04-04T22:32:00.000-04:00

Want a good sampling of how people from all walks of life think about God? Go to this page at Digg entitled “Who Killed More People in the Bible? God or Satan?” and just start reading the comments.

WARNING: It’s not pretty, but there is some good internet evangelism going on.

Truth Being Stranger Than Fiction: George Orwell and the Cameras of London

2007-04-04T17:20:00.000-04:00

It may be a few years later than 1984, but George Orwell’s vision has now manifested itself in his own home town.

Use of spy cameras in modern-day Britain is now a chilling mirror image of Orwell's fictional world, created in the post-war Forties in a fourth-floor flat overlooking Canonbury Square in Islington, North London.

On the wall outside his former residence - flat number 27B - where Orwell lived until his death in 1950, an historical plaque commemorates the anti-authoritarian author. And within 200 yards of the flat, there are 32 CCTV cameras, scanning every move.

Orwell's view of the tree-filled gardens outside the flat is under 24-hour surveillance from two cameras perched on traffic lights.

The flat's rear windows are constantly viewed from two more security cameras outside a conference centre in Canonbury Place.

In a lane, just off the square, close to Orwell's favourite pub, the Compton Arms, a camera at the rear of a car dealership records every person entering or leaving the pub.

Within a 200-yard radius of the flat, there are another 28 CCTV cameras, together with hundreds of private, remote-controlled security cameras used to scrutinise visitors to homes, shops and offices.

The message is reminiscent of a 1949 poster to mark the launch of Orwell's 1984: 'Big Brother is Watching You'.

Click here to see a map of the camera placement around Orwell’s former flat.

Asking Preachers About Preaching

2007-04-04T09:56:00.000-04:00

Thanks to Justin Taylor for pointing out this fellow who has sent an email to several well-known pastors asking them ten questions about preaching. This week, Tim Keller responds. Brief, but worthy read.

I understand Phil Ryken is waiting in the queue.

Eugene Peterson Adapts John Owen

2007-04-03T09:59:00.000-04:00

Brilliant! (via Justin)

Mars Hill Audio Gets to Work

2007-04-02T19:48:00.000-04:00

From Ken Myers:

One of the persistent themes of our work is the danger of various forms of dualism whereby the "spiritual" is pitted against the "material." Such dualism takes a lot of forms. For some, the work of Christ in redeeming us has nothing to do with our lives in the messy world of space and time. For others, the Gospel informs our everyday lives, but only in guiding our temperament or attitude; Christian belief affects our manners, but not the substance of how we ought to live. For many Christians, there is a wall separating Church and Work. For such people, the 9-5 jobs they have are simply a means to a paycheck, a mechanism enabling sheer physical support and financial support of churches and other Christian ministries.

To this end, Mars Hill Audio is offering a conversation with Paul Marshall (A Kind of Life Imposed on Man) and Os Guinness (The Call) entitled “Life Work: On the Christian Idea of Calling” (in mp3 format) for $5.

Those at View Crest will find this a valuable resource to supplement what you’ve been learning in our adult Sunday School class.

Eating Books Is Good For You

2007-04-02T13:29:00.000-04:00

Al Mohler has an excellent piece today entitled You Are What You Read in which he interacts in great part with David McCullough’s 2003 Jefferson Lecture. Here’s a snippet of McCullough:

We are what we read more than we know. And it was true no less in that distant founding time. Working on the life of John Adams, I tried to read not only what he and others of his day wrote, but what they read. And to take up and read again works of literature of the kind we all remember from high school or college English classes was not only a different kind of research, but pure delight.

I read Swift, Pope, Defoe, Sterne, Fielding, and Samuel Johnson again after forty years, and Tobias Smollett and Don Quixote for the first time.

I then began to find lines from these writers turning up in the letters of my American subjects, turning up without attribution, because the lines were part them, part of who they were and how they thought and expressed themselves.

Ordinary Means Podcast: The Christian Experience of the Lord's Supper

2007-03-31T17:33:00.000-04:00

The April podcast of Ordinary Means is up and ready for download or iTunes listen. This month, Matt and Shaun delve into the tricky waters of experiential theology, asking the question, “What we should ‘feel’ when we participate in the Lord’s Supper?”

Materials referenced include:

What Can Miserable Christians Sing?, Carl Trueman (in Wages of Spin)
I Won’t Let You Go Unless You Bless Me, Andree Seu
Communicant’s Companion, Matthew Henry
The Lord’s Supper, Thomas Doolittle
Owen on the Supper, Jon Payne
“At Least Weekly” and “Mysteries of God and Means of Grace”, Michael Horton

Conventional Church Dress?

2007-03-29T21:18:00.000-04:00

Or, why Derek Thomas will be wearing floral designs this Sunday.

My point is to relate a sense of sadness at the loss of certain conventions. No one can convince me that it is a form of legalism to engage in convention (even of dress). We all have conventions. Ask the youth why it is they must have the latest style of jeans and you will see that conventions rule in every sphere. They may be changing conventions, but they are just as demanding – perhaps more so.

The trend (in Emergent Churches and West Coast PCA churches) is for ministers (called by their first name and never ‘ministers’) to wear a Hawaiian shirt. The message is casual, fun and definitely hip! Hmm. But sacred?

But, if someone insists that we cannot be holy without black suits, white shirts and ties – I’m going with Paul and saying, hand me the Hawaiian shirt! Aloha.

Couldn’t resist the opportunity to quote Derek out of context.

Televangelists, Theonomy, and the Federal Vision

2007-03-23T12:04:00.000-04:00

What do they all have in common? They all misread the law of God.

I received an email a couple days ago regarding Deuteronomy 28. You know, the whole “blessings if you obey” and “thumbscrews if you don’t” thing. Well, this person was curious how to work out a theology of Deuteronomy 28, particularly he was concerned about how it seems to serve as a televangelist play-ground.

Wanna be healthy? Try a little obedience. Especially some of that green obedience in my direction. Wanna be happy and blessed? You just need to work harder at paying for my Malibu home.

Is this kind of thinking justified? Of course not. We all know that instinctively as believers. Ironically, though, the Federal Vision posits a similar stance as the televangelist. By over-objectifying God’s covenant of grace and making anybody who has been externally baptized “in” the covenant, they then go looking for a way to get all the apostates “out,” “unjustified,” “unelect,” etc. That’s easy, they say: Deuteronomy 28. If you obey the covenant--remain faithful--in you stay. If you disobey, you’re as good as gone.

Wanna stay justified and elect? Try a little obedience.

The problem is that this directly misapplies the biblical understanding of God’s law. In fact, it sounds more like a Dispensational view of the covenant than a Reformed one.

Now, I don’t disagree that saved people will do the good works that God has prepared for them to do, but the Federal Vision’s emphasis on obedience as the determining, objective factor goes well beyond what the Reformed have classically termed “sanctification”. In fact, the FVers posit sanctification back into one’s justification in a way that sounds remarkably similar to Roman Catholic justification by infused righteousness.

The truth is that the only reason anyone gets to stay “in” is because the Spirit’s work of grace keeps us in. That was the point of the law: to show us our sin--to present undeniable proof that we could never ever hope to achieve blessing through obedience.

We need to see Deut. 28 in the context of the whole of redemptive history. Was the point of blessings for obedience and vica versa to teach us how to stay on God’s good side, justified, and in the club? Or was it to show us that we could never by our obedience stay in the covenant?

Yup, the second one IS the correct one. At least, it was the Apostle Paul’s answer.

“Tell me, you who want to be under law, do you not listen to the law?” (Gal. 4:21) “You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace. For we through the Spirit, by faith, are waiting for the hope of righteousness. For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but faith working through love. ” (Gal. 5:4-6)

And again, “if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly.” (Gal. 2:21)

The only way your righteousness is going to be any more than filthy rags is if it is grounded in Christ. No, not just grounded. It must BE the righteousness of Christ. And that is what makes the Beatitudes so radical. They transform Deut. 28!

“Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted.
Blessed are the gentle, for they shall inherit the earth.
Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied.
Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy.
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.
Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward in heaven is great; for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.” (Matt. 5:3-12)

Do you see it? They turn Deut. 28 on its head. It isn’t what we do any longer. It is what we don’t do. It is what Christ does. The Beatitudes are Deuteronomy 28 seen through the lens of the cross. The way we receive blessing under the covenant of grace is not through our obedience (though obedience is still there), but through our mourning for our sin, poverty of spirit, meekness, a hunger for righteousness, our identification with Christ, our declaration of our need of mercy...in short, blessing under the New Covenant comes by repenting of our sins and believing in Christ who is our righteousness.

Obedience is not set aside. Rather it is established in all its Deuteronomy 28 fullness--not by us so that we might stay in, but by Christ working in us to keep us in by His power.

Is this just a matter of perspective? No, it is the Gospel.

Marvelous grace of our loving Lord,
Grace that exceeds our sin and our guilt!
Yonder on Calvary’s mount outpoured,
There where the blood of the Lamb was spilled.

Grace, grace, God’s grace,
Grace that will pardon and cleanse within;
Grace, grace, God’s grace,
Grace that is greater than all our sin.

Sin and despair, like the sea waves cold,
Threaten the soul with infinite loss;
Grace that is greater, yes, grace untold,
Points to the refuge, the mighty cross.

Dark is the stain that we cannot hide.
What can avail to wash it away?
Look! There is flowing a crimson tide,
Brighter than snow you may be today.

Marvelous, infinite, matchless grace,
Freely bestowed on all who believe!
You that are longing to see His face,
Will you this moment His grace receive?

And You Would Want to Take Your Wife's Last Name, Why?

2007-03-23T10:46:00.000-04:00

I have just learned that some men find it manly to give up their heritage and place themselves solely under the auspices of their wife’s geneology.

The Salingers broke a patriarchal tradition so ingrained in American society that many women's studies researchers have yet to study it.

"I'm sure somewhere there's some anthropologist or someone who has looked at this, but I don't know of any," says Nancy Lutkehaus, chair of the Gender Studies program at the University of Southern California. "It hasn't been a large enough social phenomenon that it's hit the radar as something to be studied."

That may be coming. The California Legislature is set to consider a bill this month that would allow men to change their surnames upon marriage as seamlessly as women now can. Only seven states now allow a man who wishes to alter his name after his wedding to do so without going through the laborious, frequently expensive legal process set out by the courts for any name change. Women don't have to do so.

And the reason is because men have never sought to do this. It goes against nature (Adam and Eve and all that.) I mean unless you have a name like this, why would you?

“Because she told me to.”

My point exactly.

Pontificating on the Meaning of Life

2007-03-23T10:34:00.000-04:00

Found this list of “things it takes us most of our life to figure out” to be humorous and enlightening:

1. The badness of a movie is directly proportional to the number of helicopters in it.
2. You will never find anybody who can give you a clear and compelling reason why we observe daylight-saving time.
3. You should never say anything to a woman that even remotely suggests you think she's pregnant unless you can see an actual baby emerging from her at that moment.
4. The one thing that unites all human beings, regardless of age, gender, religion, economic status or ethnic background, is that, deep down inside, we ALL believe that we are above-average drivers.
5. There comes a time when you should stop expecting other people to make a big deal about your birthday. That time is: age 11.
6. There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
7. People who want to share their religious views with you almost never want you to share yours with them.
8. If you had to identify, in one word, the reason why the human race has not achieved, and never will achieve, its full potential, that word would be "meetings."
9. The main accomplishment of almost all organized protests is to annoy people who are not in them.
10. If there really is a God who created the entire universe with all of its glories, and he decides to deliver a message to humanity, he will NOT use as his messenger a person on cable TV with a bad hairstyle or in some cases, really bad make-up too.
11. You should not confuse your career with your life.
12. A person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter/janitor, is not a nice person.
13. No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously.
14. When trouble arises and things look bad, there is always one individual who perceives a solution and is willing to take command. Very often, that individual is crazy.

Yes, 7 and 10 are questionable, yet strangely true. If we listened a bit more, folks might be more open to our views (given the Spirit’s working). As for 10, I know folks who have come to Christ through channel 40 programming, so I guess it falls into the category of “if God can use a donkey...”

The Positive Effects of Children on Fathers

2007-03-21T11:51:00.000-04:00

From Phil Ryken today...

Educator Allan Shedlin has recently conducted a series of 100 interviews documenting what fathers can learn from being fathers. According to Shedlin, being a dad

-- reminds fathers of what is really important, of what needs are fundamental;
-- exposes them to a new, deeper kind of love;
-- diminishes their self-absorption;
-- demonstrates the value of asking good questions;
-- helps them appreciate the responsibilities and obligations of power;
-- reminds them of the value of playfulness, imagination, enthusiasm, and wonder; and
-- makes them laugh.

Regarding Ted Haggard: We Saw It Coming and Did Nothing

2007-03-19T09:17:00.000-04:00

The Los Angeles Times reports on the Ted Haggard situation. As the review board met, they came to the conclusion that Ted’s sins had shown themselves in various ways previously.

They have had four months to reflect, and the senior staff of New Life Church can now look back and see the warning signs.

Not one suspected that their high-profile pastor, the Rev. Ted Haggard, had been secretly visiting a male prostitute. But they see now what they should have seen then: that Haggard talked too much about sex; that he could be crudely suggestive; that he seemed to have a need to push boundaries.

And that no one ever called him on any of it.

"His loose discussions about sexuality might have seemed refreshingly raw and real, especially since church had always been so stuffy and prudish in the past," said Rob Brendle, associate pastor of the megachurch in Colorado Springs, Colo. "In retrospect, some of his comments and interactions that at the time seemed edgy, but innocent enough, now seem questionable."

It’s a good reminder that we need to be keeping our brothers and sisters in Christ accountable all along the way. The big sins always begin with little sins.

Weekend Humor: Squirrel Twirling

2007-03-16T08:51:00.000-04:00

You’ve heard of cow tipping, but what about squirrel twirling? And it keeps those pesky (albeit cute) critters off your bird feeders. The question is, how long till PETA gets involved?

Does Family Trump Church?

2007-03-15T09:57:00.000-04:00

Al Mohler asks the question, and it is a good one. In an America where “family” and “Christian” are virtually synonymous, we need to reconsider Jesus words:

“He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me.“ -Matthew 10:37

Remember Commodore?

2007-03-15T09:51:00.000-04:00

Yes, the makers of the now antiquated VIC-20 and Commodore-64. They’re ba-ack, don’t you know?

Do the Clothes Make the Man?

2007-03-15T09:43:00.000-04:00

American Spectator is running a spot on article on the damage the sixties did to clothing styles. (via Veith)

We revered something called "authenticity" back in the Sixties. Dressing neatly, grooming ourselves, even basic hygiene -- all such activities were condemned as "plastic." Conformist. Hypocritical. Real beauty sprang from the heart, we told each other, and anyone blind to such beauty had, like, no soul, man.

In any case, today the "Now Generation" of the Sixties is entering its own sixties, and the percentage of us whose bodies bear close inspection has... well, I just had supper and I'd rather not think about it.

But no duty of elders, it seems to me, is more vital to the common weal on a day-to-day basis than that of simply dressing decently. An old man in a neat suit (preferably with a hat. Extra points for a cane) is a walking civic improvement. By contrast, an old fart in baggy shorts and a Budweiser tee-shirt is a sight from which small children should be shielded. By force of law if necessary.

All my life I’ve heard people speak of a cosmic, universal cultural pendulum. "The pendulum swings one way," people told me when I was young, "then it swings back. People are experimenting with new ways of doing things today. Tomorrow they'll want to go back to the traditional ways."

Well, I've been waiting.

Ligonier National Conference Free Webcast

2007-03-12T17:15:00.000-04:00

My inside source at Ligonier tells me that this week’s Ligonier National Conference, Contending for the Truth, is being webcast for free. Yes, absolutely free. Just click here to be taken directly.

That gives you two options if you aren’t planning on being in Florida at the end of the week:
1. Read the live blog from the keyboard of Tim Challies, or
2. Watch it live via FaithPass.

Here is the schedule for the conference. Thanks, Ligonier!

Fathers, Daughters, and Pooh

2007-03-09T13:35:00.000-05:00

It’s been a while since I quoted anything from over James Lileks’ way. No reason. He hasn’t offended me or anything. “Still like ‘ol James,” as they say. (Whoever they are.) But Mr. Lileks is not a they. He’s a he and so therefore speaks for all mankind (and their daughters) when he waxes eloquent on Winnie (emphasis mine).

The one character [my daughter] liked on Pooh was Piglet, and you can understand why: small and kind and pink and good-hearteded. Every kid identifies with Piglet. Pooh is your best friend, Owl the local librarian; Eeyore is Dad in the morning before he’s had Coffee. Kanga is Mom, Roo is a baby, and Tigger is the naughty kid you like to be around for a while until it gets serious and uncomfortable. Piglet? That’s every kid. Christopher Robin is the bridge to this world, and once you’re there you really don’t need him. When I was very young I wanted to take his place, and it seemed an easy thing to do, since he had no qualities of his own. Nevertheless, the name has a certain persistent power – it’s almost an incantation, a line in a childish liturgy that summons up the 100 Acre Wood. He was a real boy, you know.

In any case, Christopher Robin is dead; he perished in 1996. But the idea of Christopher Robin is dead as well; the very notion of a thin little English boy as a relevant instructive model is old-fashioned, and you might be pleased to learn he has been replaced. This year the new Pooh series will introduce a six-year old girl in Christopher’s stead. I’m sure she’s spunky and adventurous and kind and empowered, and I’m just as sure my daughter will find her boring, because kids can smell pedantic condescending twaddle nine mile off. (It’s one of the reasons many girls love Arthur – his little sister is sixty-five pounds of smart, devious, narcissistic, naughty sass.) Here’s the part that makes me truly sad:

The little girl wears a bike helmet.

Because you could fall down in the 100 Acre Woods and hurt yourself.

I swear, they’re going to put airbags on Barbie’s Pegasus next, and require thick corks on the point of all unicorn horns.

Anyway: I don’t mind that they’ve introduced a girl into the 100 Acre Woods, and as the father of a daughter I fully support the addition of female characters with whom my daughter could identify. But I know how I’d feel if I had a young boy. There are 100 acres. There’s not room enough for both?

Eschatology Before the End: Controversy at the Shepherd's Conference

2007-03-07T21:04:00.000-05:00

Looks like John MacArthur chose to use his opening sermon at this year’s Shepherd’s Conference to argue that all good Calvinists must be Pre-Millennial.

Well we weren't expecting John MacArthur to begin the conference this way. He decided to forego his usual opening sermon and speak instead on a touchy topic. His lecture was titled (and I'm not sure how much this is tongue-in-cheek) "Why Every Self-Respecting Calvinist is a Pre-Millennialist."

I, like many in Mr. Challies comments section (and pretty much all the rest of the Reformed world), am not quite certain what to do with this. That MacArthur goes on to suggest that Amillennialism is essentially Arminian is the icing on the cake. Now, don’t get me wrong. I love John MacArthur. His lecture at a certain Reformed seminary I attended was among the better guest lectures while I was there. I’ve been to his Shepherd’s Conference and have benefitted enormously from his teaching over the years. Heck, I even preach from a very nicely bound NASB that has “Shepherd’s Conference” emblazoned on the side. But...

Well...

Um...

Oh, I’ll just say it. Making that kind of statement is akin to Charles Ryrie’s ridiculous arguments in Basic Theology that Calvin, Luther, the Puritans, and all the rest of them Reformed folk were Dispensationalists because they used the word “dispensation” in their writings. Are we to presume that because Reformed people talk about Israel, we believe there is a future earthly kingdom prepared for them? Hello, logical fallacy. This just seems so incongruous for a man who holds to the other positions MacArthur does.

Now, I know MacArthur is a Dispensationalist, so we should expect some of this, but he’s one of the newfangled, progressive kind with strong ties to men like Sproul, Ferguson, and Mohler. He’s never been one, to my knowledge, to identify with the Old School Scofield Dispensational division of the Church and Israel. He knows very well that everything in the Old Testament is fulfilled in Christ and that the Church is where it is at be you Jewish or Gentile.

But still he takes this hard stance.

Well, most of the time he does. An Amillennial friend of mine played for a certain football team out Los Angeles way and attended Grace Community Church. Through a gal he was dating at the time who had family ties to the MacArthurs, he found himself one Sunday afternoon sitting in a living room with MacArthur. At the time, MacArthur had been preaching through Revelation and my friend (did I mention he’s Amil?) began to ask him some questions about his Pre-Millennial views. John MacArthur’s response?

“You don’t need to change your views. Yours are correct.”

Similarly, when Tim Challies talked with MacArthur after the lecture, MacArthur seemed to have softened, saying, “he was really hoping that this speech would just spur people on to think about the issues surrounding eschatology.”

Fellow speaker C.J. Mahaney’s response was priceless:

"Regardless of your eschatology I don't think anyone saw this coming!"

Atheists for Christian Education

2007-03-07T20:39:00.000-05:00

Newsweek introduces a new slant on the the “what to teach in the public schools” debate. Boston University professor Steve Prothero is suggesting that old time religion is just the thing our postmodern schools need in his new book "Religious Literacy."

In spite of the fact that more than 90 percent of Americans say they believe in God, only a tiny portion of them knows a thing about religion. When he began teaching college 17 years ago, Prothero writes, he discovered that few of his students could name the authors of the Christian Gospels. Fewer could name a single Hindu Scripture. Almost no one could name the first five books of the Hebrew Bible. Prothero, who went to Yale in the early 1980s and speaks of his all-night bull sessions on politics and religion with reverence, realized that to re-create that climate in his classroom, his students first had to know something. And so he made it his job to (1) figure out what they didn't know and (2) teach it to them. He began giving religious literacy quizzes to his students, and, subsequently, to everyone he knew. Almost everybody failed.

The book proposes a solution that is at once controversial and familiar: teach religion in public schools. Prothero believes that before graduation from high school, every American should take a Bible course and a world-religions course—dispassionate humanities courses whose purpose is not to catechize or evangelize but to educate. In colleges, he argues, we have science requirements, so why not religion? When Harvard decided recently not to make religion part of its core curriculum, "it missed an opportunity," he says.

Maybe it is just me, but I thought many secular universities already did this. Newsweek agrees that Prothero seems to be missing the bigger picture with his book, but his purpose isn’t far from the truth.

The book is repetitive in spots and, perhaps as an indication of how fast the religion conversation in America is moving, can feel outdated. "The hard-core atheist," Prothero writes, "once a stock figure in American life, has gone the way of the freak show." Well, except for Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins and Daniel Dennett, whose books on atheism have topped the best-seller lists for two years. In Prothero's utopian world, Americans would have enough religious knowledge to debate ethics positions using holy texts, to understand Biblical references in political speeches, to question their own beliefs about God—and to encourage others to question theirs. Only then will we enjoy one of the greatest privileges of the educated, which is to change our minds.

Apple Reinvents Reinvention

2007-03-06T21:50:00.000-05:00

Whether or not you are an Apple fan, you’ve got to appreciate the Onion’s take on the way Apple announces its new products.

At a highly anticipated media event Tuesday at San Francisco's Moscone Center, Apple Inc. CEO Steve Jobs introduced a new Apple product he said would "revolutionize" the process of unveiling new products throughout the world.

The iLaunch, as the new product is called, was then raised up from below the stage, prompting the audience of technology journalists, developers, and self-professed "Apple fanatics" to burst into a five-minute standing ovation.

"Get ready for the future of product introduction," said Jobs, looking resplendent in a black turtleneck and faded jeans. "The iLaunch will be able to make announcements from this, or any other stage, making human participation in generating consumer awareness almost entirely unnecessary."

Post-launch reaction has been even more ecstatic.

"Before today, I couldn't imagine paying $12,000 for a product-unveiling product," CNET editor Jasmine France said after the presentation. "Now I can't imagine living without it."

Shortly after Jobs' address, Microsoft announced that they are working on a similar product, the Launch-O, due to debut in 2009.

Relationships, Relationships

2007-03-05T10:09:00.000-05:00

Do you remember the high school dating scene? Perhaps, you’ve chosen to forget. Well, these guys writing in the American Journal of Sociology actually went to work to map the relationships that high school dating yields. The result was a very interesting graph that makes you feel sorry for some of the kids who really need to study more.

Ordinary Means: March Podcast

2007-03-03T20:09:00.000-05:00

The March podcast of Ordinary Means is up and ready for download or iTunes listen. This month, Matt and Shaun talk about what it means to fence the Table of our Lord.

Indulging in the Green

2007-03-01T10:45:00.000-05:00

In case you missed this one, the ecologists are now selling indulgences.

Carbon offsetting has become an ultra-fashionable way for the wealthy middle classes to assuage their green guilt by use of a little cash and equally scant thought. The theory behind carbon offsetting is simple: you can repair the damage created by your flight - in the form of emissions of carbon dioxide (the main man-made greenhouse gas) - or other profligate consumption, such as driving a gas-guzzling car, by paying an offset firm to fund the cutting of CO2 production elsewhere, for example by planting trees.

Which begs the question, “Is living without an SUV purgatory?” (via SomeGuyNamedScott)

Confusing the Muslims

2007-03-01T09:39:00.000-05:00

Ever wonder what America does with radio stations in non-democratic countries once we’ve introduced democracy? Well wonder no more. Rather, be shocked. The answer is that we fill the air with the likes of Eminem, J. Lo and Britney Spears. Why? Because, as Veith puts it, we’ve become convinced that “the moral license projected by the pop music industry is the same thing as freedom.”

To which God responds,

Is. 5:20 Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!

At Least Someone's Mad About Divorce

2007-03-01T09:32:00.000-05:00

Al Mohler today comments on what he calls a “powerful essay” with “prophetic force”.

The prophetic force of Lowe's article is concentrated on the pain of divorce. Those who doubt that divorce hurts children need only to read his pain-filled prose. He offers a severe indictment of his parents' generation and calls upon his generation to do better."

Here’s Lowe’s article. It’s not pretty and you won’t agree with all of his conclusions, but you can’t miss the fact that divorce has an effect whether we like it or not. In short, divorce solves nothing.

I've had occasion to think about another subject I think is pertinent to people [of] our age. Those of us on our way out of Northern Illinois University are getting to the point in our lives when we start looking for spouses and thinking about kids.

My advice today is not to have them. At least, not yet.

If there's one thing I need no citation or research to prove, it's that our parents have done a pretty horrendous job bringing us up. I mean this as a whole, and not necessarily every single parent individually. And though I need no citation, I'll do it anyway, just to rub it in to those readers who disagree. According to a Jan. 16 New York Times article, 51 percent of U.S. women now live without a spouse. The Census Bureau's 2005 American Community Survey also found that married couples have become the minority in our country.

Since the Baby Boomer generation has gotten so much fun out of naming us hurtful and insensitive things like "Generation Me," "Generation Why," "Generation A.D.D." or the "Entitlement Generation," we should perhaps return the favor and start calling them "Generation Divorce."

What does this mean for the children we're going to have -- and that we're going to subject to our messy divorces? I have experienced divorce myself from the child's point of view, and it isn't anything I'd care to inflict on anybody else.

My prediction of the outcome for our age group and our children is not a happy one, if we repeat the misbehavior of our parents. I foresee a lot of broken, unhappy households that ultimately end in separation, with another generation of kids that are going to look at us spitefully for being dysfunctional and petty people who refuse to work things out because we can just call up a lawyer and have divorce papers served.

Our parents were so repulsed by the idea of the scrubbed-clean "Pleasantville" 1950s nuclear family that they have divorced in record numbers, and the lesson I see they've taught us is that compromise and fidelity are no longer in vogue. We're seeing it with more women marrying older, couples staying in long-term relationships without committing to marriage, crippling divorce rates and the ideal family now becoming a minority in our country.

I realize I paint a bleak picture, but I'm only doing it with statistics, which don't always tell the whole story. I earlier said not to have kids -- not yet at least. That's because I believe that while we can't fix what's wrong with marriage -- an institution historically based on financial gain for the families and surefire misery for the betrothed -- we can change how we view the definition of family. Politicians are foaming at the mouth with rage over gay people asking for marriage rights. Let them foam. They're all past childbearing age and you and I and our whole age bracket can fix this by ourselves while they're still talking nonsense at each other.

Marry late, and marry once, and don't have kids until you can love them, nurture them, pay for them and teach them there is such a thing in life as two people who cannot be severed. Don't feel pressure from your friends or your parents, and try to ignore it from yourself. We're young and strong and college-educated -- we can all wait for the right person, and I think we might even have the good sense once we find them to make sure we don't have a reason to put an end to a good thing and leave our kids listening to us shouting in the other room.

Kenneth Lowe
Northern Star
Northern Illinois University
U-Wire

Sizing Down

2007-02-28T15:43:00.000-05:00

I’m not a big fan of lots of stuff. Each year for me is a contest to see if I can get rid of more than I have acquired. For that reason, when I see these I think, “Yes, that’s where I’d like to live.”

Now, where to put the kids.

Bones Found, Church Cancelled, Worship O.J.

2007-02-27T16:52:00.000-05:00

I received a call last night from an elder in our church wondering if we were going to go ahead and have services this Sunday seeing as, well, they found Jesus and all.

Oh, he didn’t mean it. Who could actually believe something they heard on television? Can you imagine the impact, though, if what James Cameron suggests is true?

The film examines a tomb found near Jerusalem in 1980 which producers say belonged to Jesus and his family. Speaking in New York, the Oscar-winning Titanic director said statistical tests and DNA analysis backed this view.

But Mr Cameron's claim has been attacked by archaeologists and theologians as unfounded. Archaeologists said that the burial cave was probably that of a Jewish family with similar names to that of Jesus.

But Mr Cameron said the combination of names found on the tombs convinced him of their heritage.

If it were true, the impact would be huge. Larger than Cameron probably even realizes. The Apostle Paul pretty much sums it up when he says, “If Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless, you are still in your sins.” (1 Cor. 15:17)

In other words, Mr. Cameron is going for the jugular. The problem is that his blade isn’t very sharp. I’m not even certain we’ll feel a prick at all. Anyone with half a brain and a knowledge of Discovery Channel programming can tell you exactly what to expect. Oh, they’ll find “professionals” to substantiate their hypothesis. It’s not hard to find scientists who don’t like the idea of the resurrection. Those professionals won’t have much respectability after this, though. Most scholars find this whole thing ridiculous.

Cameron claims to have DNA. Problem is, they are basing their findings on the presumption that the DNA of his Jesus belongs to our Jesus, one of the most common names in Biblical times. At least with O.J. Simpson, we had O.J. to compare the DNA to. This time there’s zippo because, if you recall, there is no body. (Maybe they should steal a piece of the Shroud of Turin. Then we could disprove two myths at once.) It’s too bad the name O.J. was not popular back then, then we could prove that he was resurrected. In truth, there’s about as much evidence for that theory as there is for Cameron’s.

Cameron is basing everything around Jesus being married to Mary Magdelene, since those names both occur in this tomb. But that is an idea suggested by Dan Brown’s novel The Da Vinci Code and not by any actual historical documents, making this all one big (and expensive to be sure) act of silliness. I’m not even sure why I’m giving it attention here except for the feeling of vindication when it is all over.

Come on, not even the main stream media is buying into this one.

The people who are doing this are looking for the same thing the people who suggested O.J. tell how he killed Nichole...or, how he would of if he had: money and ratings. In this case, it’s how we’d find Jesus if there was a body to find. Be certain they’ll mix as much CSI stuff as they can with their lie, but nevertheless, as Josh McDowell pointed out so well in Evidence That Demands a Verdict, “there is more evidence that Christ was raised from the dead than for any other court case that has ever been tried.” Cameron may have some similar names, but does he have 500 eye witnesses? Cameron would be thrown out of court.

I remember reading Paul Maier’s A Skeleton in God’s Closet years ago and being struck with the sense of depression that would stem from learning that Christ had not been raised. Fortunately, however, the book had pretty much the ending we can expect from this venture: it was all a hoax. (Sorry, to spoil the read for you.)

But just in case you need a little reminder of exactly what kind of ground you stand on, Christians, here’s some excellent links for thinking this through.

Who’s Writing the Fiction Here?, Paul Maier
Titanic Theory Sunk from Start, Ben Witherington
Gene Veith on The Empty Tomb
Hollywood Hype: The Oscars and Jesus’ Family Tomb, What Do They Share?, Darrell Bock (via JT)
The Jesus Tomb, Andreas Kostenberger (via JT)
Looking for the Living Among the Dead, Phil Ryken
'Lost Tomb of Jesus' Claim Called a Stunt, Washington Post (via Veith)

UPDATE: Here’s a pretty thorough listing of responses. Thanks, Denny!
UPDATE2: Here’s a compilation of quotes from Pulpit Magazine.
UPDATE3: And how did it all end? (via Veith)

Departing from normal procedures, the cable network didn't tout its big ratings win. The network also scheduled a last-minute special that harshly criticized its own documentary, and has yanked a planned repeat of "Tomb."

I especially liked this anonymous comment on Veith’s post, so I’ll close with it. It pretty much puts this whole thing in a nutshell.

It's like finding a gravestone of two people named John and Paul and thinking to have discovered the Beatles.

See you in church this Sunday.

Big Brother Can't See Your Homeschooler

2007-02-23T12:45:00.000-05:00

A survey in England by the Department of Education attempted to determine how many children are being home-schooled. Their conclusion? Between 7,400 and 34,400. I can’t even guess what the margin of error would be on numbers like those.

...the study, commissioned by the Department for Education and Skills, concludes there is no accurate picture of the extent of home educating.

But this study's attempt to find out how many children are being taught this way was inconclusive - not least because there is no obligation on families to tell their local authorities that they are home educating.

But the study concludes that even a full national survey would not be likely to deliver a reliable figure, because many home-educated children would remain unknown to local authorities and home-education organisations.

That’s England, the home of cameras everywhere. Rest assured, Big Brother can’t see you. Now, God can, but that’s another blog piece.

Friday Humor: IKEA Has A Really Big Monitor

2007-02-21T11:43:00.000-05:00

Sometimes, it’s best to make sure everything is working on your little computer before posting it to the big one. (Don’t miss the additional pics in the comments.) My guess is they just upgraded to Vista.

How Would You Vote?

2007-02-21T11:35:00.000-05:00

Came across two strangely related posts this morning. One suggested, based upon a Gallop Poll, that Americans would prefer a homosexual president to an atheistic one. The other, from Gene Veith, reminded readers of Luther’s apparently apocryphal statement that he’d rather be ruled by a wise Turk than a foolish Christian. Which leaves us with one question: how would you vote?

Analyzing the Federal Vision

2007-02-20T12:22:00.000-05:00

Joseph Pipa, Carl Robbins, and Guy Waters recently participated in a conference at Woodruff Road PCA on the Federal Vision. The lectures are available free via iTunes.

Their summary statement on the Federal Vision is available here. (via Heidelblog)

Letting Your Hair Down

2007-02-20T12:00:00.000-05:00

BBC News today has an article on why women shaving their heads is so shocking. Of course, they are doing this because Britney has gone Sinead, but you have to laugh at some of the reasons given. Here are some of the better excerpts.

Zoologist Desmond Morris suggests that women traditionally have long hair because their ancestors, the aquatic apes, developed long hair to give their babies something to hang on to. In recent times, he argues, that women have styled their hair to reflect their self-image, with long hair suggesting a certain availability.

"Thick, healthy, long, glossy hair or fur is seen as a sign of good hormonal health and is one of the things animals use to select a mate - humans are no different," says evolutionary psychologist Nick Neave, of Northumbria University.

"When a woman does something like shave her head it is not what society would expect of her, or dictates to her," says psychologist Simon Moore. "People don't like it because they don't know how to act, they don't know what it means.“

Hair is often used as a prop to declare a change and the start of a new chapter in a life - it is just a very extreme way of doing it. But then Britney's life, played out in front of us all, has never been normal.

Still, I think the best reasoning for why it just doesn’t seem natural for a woman to be shaven comes straight from God’s Word.

Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him, but if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her? 1Cor. 11:14-15

Isn’t that precisely what the BBC is going to sociologists, psychologists, and evolutionists to prove?

"Hair is so significant because of what it is and where it is," says Dr Martin Skinner, social psychologist at the University of Warwick. "It is part of us, much more intimate than things like clothes. If you cut it away, you are cutting away a bit of yourself. Whatever we do with it is very much part of our identity."

Exactly.

Children and Television

2007-02-20T08:20:00.000-05:00

A study published in the journal Biologist is suggesting that “ watching television inhibits the production of the hormone melatonin, which affects the immune system, sleep cycle and the onset of puberty.”

But that’s not all.

Among the study's findings are that early childhood television viewing:

-- may be a trigger for autism;
-- appears to be a key cause of permanent eyesight damage;
-- may be a bigger factor in causing obesity than diet or exercise.

The study also found that the risk of developing Alzheimer's disease increases with each extra daily hour of television viewing among people aged 20 to 60.

TV watching is associated with irregular sleeping patterns among infants and toddlers, and it significantly increases the risk of developing type 2 diabetes.

Well, I guess that settles it. I’m dying early.

Reactance or Rebellion?

2007-02-14T16:58:00.000-05:00

Okay, so the topic today seems to be the depravity of our hearts. Guys, have you ever wondered why, when your wife asks you to do something, you suddenly feel like that is the last thing in the world you want to do? Well, wonder no longer. In fact, feel guilty no longer because psychologists are here to justify your sin. It seems the answer is not that we are too wild at heart, but rather that we all suffer from “reactance”.

New research findings now appearing online in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology show that that people do not necessarily oppose others' wishes intentionally, but even the slightest nonconscious exposure to the name of a significant person in their life is enough cause them to rebel against that person's wishes.

Psychologists call this reactance: a person's tendency to resist social influences that they perceive as threats to their autonomy.

"Psychologists have known for some time that reactance can cause a person to work in opposition to another person's desires," Chartrand said. "We wanted to know whether reactance could occur even when exposure to a significant other, and their associated wishes for us, takes place at a nonconscious level."

I know, they said “rebel,” but don’t let the heavy connotations of that word get you down. After all, you aren’t “opposing their wishes intentionally.”

In the first experiment, participants were asked to name a significant person in their lives whom they perceived to be controlling and who wanted them to work hard, and another significant and controlling person who wanted them to have fun. Participants then performed a computer-based activity during which the name of one or the other of these people was repeatedly, but subliminally, flashed on the screen. The name appeared too quickly for the participants to consciously realize they had seen it, but just long enough for the significant other to be activated in their nonconscious minds. The participants were then given a series of anagrams to solve, creating words from jumbled letters.

People who were exposed to the name of a person who wanted them to work hard performed significantly worse on the anagram task than did participants who were exposed to the name of a person who wanted them to have fun.

See, what we all need is people in our life who will tell us to have a little more fun. Then we’ll be okay and good, right?

Right?

To their credit, the study does suggest that something needs to be done.

"The main finding of this research is that people with a tendency toward reactance may nonconsciously and quite unintentionally act in a counterproductive manner simply because they are trying to resist someone else's encroachment on their freedom," Chartrand said.

The researchers suggest that people who tend to experience reactance when their freedoms are threatened should try to be aware of situations and people who draw out their reactant tendencies. That way, they can be more mindful of their behaviors and avoid situations where they might adopt detrimental behaviors out of a sense of rebellion.

The Heart is Desperately Wicked

2007-02-14T14:18:00.000-05:00

Did you hear the one about the pastor who sold the church right out from under his congregation’s feet?

For nearly a decade, members of Ripon's First Congregational Church bared their souls to Pastor Randall Radic. But clearly it didn't work both ways. There were certain things he wasn't telling them.

That became obvious a year ago, when Radic pleaded guilty to betraying his flock and secretly selling the church and its rectory out from under them. He used the money to buy himself a brand-new black BMW and a laptop -- exploits he later chronicled in a cheeky, almost gleeful blog about his double life as a sinner.

"We didn't know anything until we got a call from the bank that he had bought a BMW," said David Prater, who led the church board during Radic's tenure.

So, what do we make of this kind of stuff. It’s easy to judge, to declare the hypocrisy. Just read here. I wonder, though. Do we see the fact that our hearts are all desperately wicked? There is no justification for what he has done and the fact that he is no longer a pastor is wise and good. A man like that is not qualified. But if it was you or I, if the circumstances were right, if we had the freedom to be so selfish, wouldn’t we do it to too? Doesn’t the temptation of money affect us all?

It seems to me that the question isn’t “Why did he do it?” but rather, “Why aren’t more people doing that?” The answer is that the Lord has restrained them (1 Samuel 25:26). Might he continue to do so.

Reepicheep to Play Nikabrik

2007-02-08T13:37:00.000-05:00

Now, only a Narnia fan will understand that title, but word on the street is that Warwick Davis (you know, R2D2 the Ewok), will be playing Nikabrik the Red Dwarf in the upcoming Prince Caspian film. If you haven’t seen him as Reepicheep in the BBC version of the same, let me just say, you are missing something. No one else can call Eustace a “Paltroon“ like Warwick.

Playing to Our Differences

2007-02-06T15:06:00.000-05:00

J. Todd Billings, in Christianity Today, points out that removing the name “Presbyterian” from your church’s sign and avoiding that “P” word (predestination, of course) might not be the best thing for your flock. Getting rid of the “old” or “outdated” might actually work against the growth of the Church.

Doctrines aren't "dispensable" because they provoke controversy. Consider how the early church debated Christ's identity as true God and true human. Even such a central teaching hasn't been immune to dispute. So when it comes to an issue like the sacraments, silencing voices of conviction is not the way forward. Instead, honest yet charitable discussions about our differences can deepen faith. We should not jettison disputed doctrines just because they can be divisive.

Even as tradition helps theology address contemporary issues, it also prevents us from succumbing to "the spirit of the age." Insights from other times, cultures, and places can bolster our fight against superficial belief. C. S. Lewis diagnosed the problem of eschewing tradition as "chronological snobbery," "the uncritical acceptance of the intellectual climate common to our own age." In its place, theological traditions open up the wisdom and possibilities of the "cloud of witnesses." Like us, these witnesses faced dire challenges in trying to teach and live out the gospel in an inhospitable world. Many of their challenges are bound to appear again and again: Is Jesus Christ a prophet (like Muhammad) or the eternal Son of God? What is the relationship between Israel and the church?

Not only that, but creeds and traditions can be ways to protect our fidelity to the Bible rather than subvert it. This is how Reformers like Calvin regarded the extrabiblical Trinitarian language in the Nicene Creed.

I wonder, could the Reformed church face the threats to justification it is facing today without the clarity of the Confessions?

And then there was this little quote that caught my attention for its irony:

My friend sent her the Heidelberg Catechism to introduce her to his Reformed theological tradition. Her response surprised him. She wrote back saying that her nondenominational church uses the Heidelberg Catechism all the time. It is one of her church's key resources for educating people in the faith. Consider the irony: While many Reformed churches push their own catechism to the side, this large nondenominational church discovers the same catechism to be a profound tool for teaching the Christian faith.

I suppose if we shut up our confessions, even the rockers will cry out.

Screwtape To Become a Film

2007-02-05T09:11:00.000-05:00

Veith reports that it has all the necessary cast of characters. IMDB places it in 2008.
Now, if only they could get the Hobbit worked out.

Coffee, Coffee, Coffee

2007-02-03T16:09:00.000-05:00

Need that cuppa joe to kick off the day right? Thinking Starbucks, because...well...you’re a Soccer Mom and that’s what Soccer Mom’s do? Why not stop by McDonalds for a high end brew?

Consumer testers in the US have declared coffee from McDonald's better than the brew at Starbucks. The burger chain's Premium Roast was chosen as the tastiest by Consumer Reports magazine.

It also beat the offerings at Burger King and Dunkin' Donuts.

The trained sippers found the $1.55 Starbucks coffee ``strong, but burnt and bitter'', according to the New York Post.

But the cheaper McDonald's caffeine fix, costing $1.35 was ``decent and moderately strong''.

``Although it lacked the subtle top notes needed to make it rise and shine, it had no flaws,'' the magazine said.

Burger King got a roasting for a drink that ``looked like coffee but tasted more like hot water'', while the beverage at Dunkin' Donuts was ``inoffensive, but it had no oomph''.

You know, I’m always looking for those “subtle top notes” too. Took the words right out of my mouth.

Whipping Hollywood Into Shape

2007-02-02T12:17:00.000-05:00

Here’s one more for the culture file. It seems Harrison Ford is threatening to walk off the set of the latest Indiana Jones flick.

Not enough money? Doesn’t like the script? Nope. Nothing like that. It seems they won’t let him use his whip. Rather than violate Hollywood Safety Code NCP4456-2, they’d rather just digitally edit it in later.

It appears that Ford is not so hip on CG as Lucas and Spielberg.

No Blasphemy in Massachusetts

2007-02-01T16:44:00.000-05:00

Massachusetts may be the hot bed of liberalism in America, but don’t get caught using God’s name in vain or you’ll be serving jail time.

Spurgeon on the Church

2007-01-31T11:37:00.000-05:00

Phil Ryken is quoting Spurgeon today. I’m not sure if that means I’m now quoting Charles or Phil or Phil quoting Charles. You decide, but whatever you do, take his words to heart.

From Charles Spurgeon, "The First Cry from the Cross":  "These places of worship are not built that you may sit here comfortably, and hear something that shall make you pass away your Sundays with pleasure. A church in London which does not exist to do good in the slums, and dens, and kennels of the city, is a church that has no reason to justify its longer existing. A church that does not exist to reclaim heathenism, to fight with evil, to destroy error, to put down falsehood, a church that does not exist to take the side of the poor, to denounce injustice and to hold up righteousness, is a church that has not right to be. Not for thyself, O church, dost thou exist, any more than Christ existed for himself. His glory was that he laid aside his glory. . . . . To rescue souls from hell and lead to God,, to hope, to heaven, this is [the church's] heavenly occupation. O that the church would always feel this!"