This post was too good to pass up - it highlights the importance of creeds that you actually subscribe to - in other words you stay standing. (Episcopal Life - Feb 2008)
The Rev. Tom Woodward of Santa Fe, N.M., once devised a startling way to show a congregation its belief, unbelief, and the value of community. He calls it "an experience with the Nicene Creed."
After explaining that they would be reading through the creed phrase by phrase, Woodward would give the charge: "When the phrase is something you understand on one level or another, and believe, stand up or remain standing. When the phrase is something that makes no sense to you, or is something you do not believe, sit down or remain sitting."
The resulting dance, he said, appeared to be something akin "to a rebellious exercise class," with folks popping up, sitting down and squirming to watch their neighbors as they stood and sat and stood again.
At the end, Woodward would ask what they had observed. "The answers were always the same: No one stood all the way through the creed, and no one stayed seated all the way through, and there was always someone standing for every phrase."
Martin Downes over at Against Heresies points out another disturbing trend with “minimalist doctrines” (broad but minimal statements of faith) which he laments as the a-historicizing of Christianity:
Phil Johnson ...referred to the short life-span of theological views held by the people in their twenties. Every eighteen months or so some people go through a revolution in their thinking, a paradigm shift that leaves behind one view and is off touting a new one...
Hence, some people change their theology more often than Madonna changed her image in her illustrious pop career. The point at issue is not of course the exact time frame involved but the short term exposure to, and grasp of, a particular view or church tradition.
Some think that if we would just use “minimalist doctrines” we’d avoid “creedal gymnastics”. True, but wouldn’t we be left with congregations that could remain standing but all to ready to hop to the next doctrine (heresy) that comes along? Maybe that would be the new definition of “Hip-Hop” in relation to doctrine - congregants ready to hop to the next doctrine every 18 months, in order to stay standing to their minimalist “creed”.
How far removed is Joel Osteen's message to his Lakewood Congregation from our attempts at self-sanctification - with a little help from God? Why do you think Joel Osteen's message is so popular with Christian audiences? Watch this and ponder - 60 minutes interview with Joel Osteen.
For an excellent set of resources and an article Mike Horton wrote after his interview about Osteen with 60 minutes go here. Make sure to download and read Joel Osteen and the Glory Story.
Bob Newhart, Jesus and D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones agree
An excellent example of mortification of sin. I believe D.Martyn Lloyd-Jones would agree with Bob Newhart's demonstration of what Jesus commands. (previous post).
We don’t place the Standards over the Scripture, of course (WCF 1.10). The Standards and other faithful summaries of Christian doctrine allow us, as a friend of mine once put it, to “check our homework,” to compare our studies in the Scripture with those of competent and recognized students of the same.
I'm also watching a series of lectures on the Federal Vision given at Woodruff Road in February. Dr. Waters is one of the lecturers. He proves his point - the Westminster Confession of Faith allows us to "check our homework" as we look at errors such as the Federal Vision.
One of the complaints at the PCA General Assembly was that the study report on the FV needed more exegesis. But, if the study report is drawing from the Westminster Standards, we can have a level of confidence that a thorough exegesis has been done, unless of course we are looking to amend the Standards. Which may be the question for FV advocates.
Most of my friends don't have a clue what the Emerging/Emergent Church movement is - but they do share some of the same concerns that the Emerging church has with Reformed/Presuppostional Theology. My friends (and I) like narrative. As Paul Helm points out:
What happens is that in this effort to combine a narrative and a logical approach to theology the narrative approach invariably wins out. Stories are so much more fun than logical deductions and discriminations.
Donald Miller, known for his lived or hated "Blue Like Jazz", and his influence in the Emerging Church movement says in this month's issue of Christianity Today:
"Truth is rooted in story, not in rational systems. The Christian mission is not well served when we speak in terms of spiritual laws or rational formulas. Propositional truths, when extracted from a narrative context, lack meaning. "The chief role of a Christian," he says, "is to tell a better story."
The tension between the two is magnified on both sides - presuppositional apologetics vs. emerging metanarratives. I like Helm's piece because it highlights the strength of Biblical Theology and Systematic Theology.
Yes, I would agree that great minds like Helm and even Miller (in very different ways) probably can't hold the tension between the two. Me, I like my Biblical Theology with a strong dose of Systematics thrown in - my small mind has no problem holding the two as compatible.
In our study of the Westminster Confession we've been sharing our conversion stories. Conversion narratives bring home God's work and grace in saving us. We've used the Ordo Salutis to highlight each part of God's plan of salvation. In doing this we've struggled to narratively explain that regeneration precedes faith, that faith and repentance go together and are two sides of one coin, that justification, regeneration, and effectual call are instantaneous. It all gets rather confusing - but it's important that we see each part - as we relate the whole.
Paul Helm gives a helpful illustration at Helm's Deep::
Let us take an illustration. The ordo salutis (Rom 8.28 etc.) is a sequence, part of the grand narrative of redemption. But the concepts introduced into our understanding of that sequence, and the distinctions between them, between regeneration, conviction of sin, penitence, faith, assured faith, the external call, effectual calling, justification and sanctification etc. are logical distinctions. Do they all also record temporal distinctions as well? Is justification an event? And is sanctification another, coupled to the carriage of justification and pulled along by it? Is the carriage of justification in turn pulled along by the carriage of faith? Where does adoption fit in? Has it to be squeezed in somewhere between regeneration and faith? Or between faith and justification? Or is adoption simply another description of one or more of these elements? And what about union with Christ: is this also part of the temporal sequence of separately-identifiable occurrences? If so, can we find a gap for it, a spare carriage for it to occupy? Is the decree of God, eternally foreknowing the redeemed, also an event?
Later he quotes from Geerhardus Vos:
In Biblical Theology the principle is one of historical, in Systematic Theology it is one of logical construction. Biblical Theology draws a line of development. Systematic Theology draws a circle.
The Ordo Salutis for each of us is a circle with a our line of narrative drawn through it. Helpful illustration.
I've been working so long and hard on Pulpit Search Committee, Women in the Church, Bible Study, the church website as well as being a mother and wife I had to take a long break from blogging. But I'm back briefly. I had to share this great quote from R. Scott Clark. This week we are reviewing current challenges to the doctrine of justification so I've been non-stop reviewing what little I know about the New Prespective on Paul and Federal Vision. Hope to share this quote with the women - they'll have a chuckle.
The definition and nature of the gospel is fundamental to the existence of the Protestant church. It was a Reformed theologian, J. H. Alsted who said that the doctrine of justification is the article of the standing or falling of the church. In that case, we should attend to the NPP and Federal Vision questions immediately just as a physician would attend to a heart attack immediately. To torture the metaphor further, it also turns out that the patient has bone cancer and is in desperate need of long term treatment. The patient needs an immediate bone marrow transplant from Martin Luther and John Calvin. Next, the patient will need after-care provided by Francis Turretin and Johannes Wollebius. Finally, the patient needs to make immediate lifestyle changes. He must stop eating Bill Hybels and the Purpose Driven Life for lunch. These are the theological and ecclesiastical equivalents of the worst sort of cholesterol.
Read the whole Clark interview at Against Heresies - it's terrific.
We are about to enter a new battleground - our Christian faith, everything we believe about Jesus Christ - divine Son of God, our very Biblical foundation - will be challenged. Vulnerable post-modern society with no foundational beliefs will be susceptible. The Doctrine of the Authority of Scripture in Chapter 1 of the Westminster Confession of Faith will be turned on its head. Dr. Mouw writes:
As a Christian, questions about who Jesus is are not for me matters of mere curiosity. They have to do with the most basic issues of life. I believe that he is exactly who the Gospel writers say he is: the heaven-sent Savior, the eternal Son of God who appeared in the flesh to do for us what we could never do for ourselves; it is only because of Jesus that sinners can get right with God and receive the gift of eternal life. If Dan Brown’s story is accurate—even only a few key details of his plot are true—my faith is fundamentally misguided.
How do we get ready for this challenge - read Richard Mouw.
It’s been a few weeks since I’ve posted. We’ve been studying God’s Eternal Decree. A difficult area that has taken me full-time to the books. Even in 4 weeks - we left so much to uncover. Maybe next time....
Meanwhile - for deeper study on the Infralapsarianism and Supralapsarianism issue this link will get you started. Here Jason Robertson has posted some helpful charts and lists. Make sure you click on the B. B. Warfield chart at the bottom. Don’t spend to long on this - your brain may cramp up!
Over at this same blog Fide-o - I found this interesting quote:
There, I am persuaded, I shall see dear Mr. Wesley convinced of election and everlasting love. And it often fills me with pleasure to think how I shall behold you casting your crown down at the feet of the Lamb, and as it were filled with a holy blushing for opposing the divine sovereignty in the manner you have done.
-- excerpt of the famous letter from Whitfield to Wesley
At one of my favorite blogs, Reformation Theology, Rev. John Samson posts on Ordo Salutis in the Reformed and Arminian camps. He effectively shows the difference between the placement of regeneration and faith.
Lastly, I can’t recommend enough some of Sovereign Grace Ministries music. Today we listened to The Look - which reminds of Christ’s pure atoning grace. I really like 2 CD’s, Songs for the Cross Centered Life and Upward: The Bob Kauflin Hymns Project. You can listen to clips of all the songs at their website. They are also available in ITunes.
That’s it for God’s Eternal Decree - so much to say, but almost impossible to blog about. As we move on to Creation and Providence expect more!
This week on Westminster around the Web we'll focus on the doctrine of Trinity. Let's see what is being blogged concerning this great doctrine:
The Da Vinci Code is popular and now being made into a big Hollywood movie. One of the key claims of the The Da Vinci Code is that the doctrine of the Trinity and the deity of Christ was a creation of Constantine. Here, James White (who wrote a terrific book, The Forgotten Trinity) - is currently doing a multi-part review of the Da Vinci Code. James White translates a sermon preached approximately 145 years prior to Nicea, and 130 years prior to Constantine's battle where he allegedly saw the sign of the cross in the sky and the phrase, "in this sign, conquer". This sermon was preached on Passover around 180 A.D. by Melito, bishop of Sardis.
And so he was lifted up upon a tree and an inscription was attached indicating who was being killed. Who was it? It is a grievous thing to tell, but a most fearful thing to refrain from telling. But listen, as you tremble before him on whose account the earth trembled!
He who hung the earth in place is hanged.
He who fixed the heavens in place is fixed in place.
He who made all things fast is made fast on a tree.
The Sovereign is insulted.
God is murdered.
The King of Israel is destroyed by an Israelite hand.
This is the One who made the heavens and the earth,
and formed mankind in the beginning,
The One proclaimed by the Law and the Prophets,
The One enfleshed in a virgin,
The One hanged on a tree,
The One buried in the earth,
The One raised from the dead and who went up into the heights of heaven,
The One sitting at the right hand of the Father,
The One having all authority to judge and save,
Through Whom the Father made the things which exist from the beginning of time.
This One is “the Alpha and the Omega,”
This One is “the beginning and the end”
—the beginning indescribable and the end incomprehensible.
This One is the Christ.
This One is the King.
This One is Jesus.
This One is the Leader.
This One is the Lord.
This One is the One who rose from the dead.
This One is the One sitting on the right hand of the Father.
He bears the Father and is borne by the Father.
“To him be the glory and the power forever. Amen.”
As James White says, "...rejoice, as I rejoice, at the thought of this ancient believer and the fact that he reveled in the truth about the God-man Jesus Christ just as we do today! Oh that we had more preaching like this in our land today!"
We continue to work through Chapter 1, "The Doctrine of the Holy Scriptures", learning more about the inspiration and sufficiency of Scripture. Let's start our tour around the web this week with a look at the meaning of : "All scripture inspired by God.", than move on to "'God told me', and the Sufficiency of Scripture". We'll wrap up our tour with some links to a complete discussion of why the Apocrypha is not the inspired Word of God and is excluded from the canon; and then, fun links to how-to memorize the books of the Bible.
Let's start with an awesome view of God's inspired Word. Inspiration, literally means God breathed. John MacArthur says it best in his sermon on 2 Timothy 3:16-17:
"All scripture is inspired by God." That's where we get that word "inspiration." Now this is pasa graphe theopneustos. The word theopneustos is God breathed, it's translated inspired here. It means God breathed. If you didn't have any air you couldn't speak. If you couldn't bring out air you couldn't vibrate your vocal chords, you couldn't make any sound, couldn't form your words. What this is saying is God breathed out Scripture. God spoke it. It is the very breath of God. And not just in the sense of breath but in the sense of blowing out breath in a way that goes past the vocal chords, vibrates the vocal chords, past the mouth which forms the enunciation and God produced exactly what He wanted said. God spoke it.
I was dumbfounded (a pretty rare occurrence).This fellow had just told me that his supervisor had assigned him the task to make a master-plan for a new church plant, and that when he prayed about it God told him just to use the words of Jesus. Let me be clear. He said that God told him that in his planning for this new church, he was only to consult, reflect upon, quote the words of Jesus.
This fellow was a full-time employee of a Christian organization. He was evidently himself a Christian. Too, unlike other employees of this organization, he had a Masters of Divinity. And that from an evangelical seminary. He had been then, we are to assume, carefully trained in the Bible and theology. We should also assume that he had provided credible and helpful leadership to a local church somewhere, if he was now in the very responsible position that he was in. And it was this person who stood there and told me in all sincere piety and simple trust that God told him only to consult the words of Jesus when planning for a new church.
When we look to discern God's will for us, for our church, for our families does God talk directly to us? In the doctrine of the sufficiency of Scripture we have studied that the Bible is clear and sufficient for our instruction, with the help of the Holy Spirit. Yet we often hear (all to often) that God is talking directly to our brothers and sisters as they try to discern the will of God. As Ann asked, are we limiting God? This is an important doctrine - again, comments are open.
There were a couple of questions about the Apocrypha. Being raised a Protestant I too am not familiar with these extra-biblical writings. Here's a link to a very complete history and answer to The Apocrypha from A Puritan's Mind.
Lastly, do you know the books of the Old and New Testament in order? Did you when you were young, or have you never learned? Well, here are a couple of links to help you out. Singing is a great tool in memorizing. Here are a few songs to help you memorize. Look for the one that is set to the tune "Ten Little Indians". That's the one I remember the most. Ready to move on? Here is a link to a visual memory system that will have you saying all 66 books in order. (Warning: you need a sense of humor to appreciate this technique). Now you are ready for a quiz. This website will give you a number of games and quizzes to test your skill.
Long tour around the web this week. Thanks to all of you for your great questions and discussion - it keeps me busy searching for answers!
Still on Chapter 1 of the Westminster Confession of Faith where we are dealing with Scriptual Authority, Scriptural Sufficiency and the Doctrine of the Word of God. Is this doctrine settled, old or stuffy? Well, let's tour the Web and see who's blogging about these issues.
No doubt you've heard of the Jesus Seminar. A group of scholars who got together to prove (they said they were objective) that Jesus didn't really say anything that is reliable. That's old news.
Now we have The Davinci Code, by Dan Brown. A fiction novel that claims it is fiction, but at the same time claims it is factual when speaking of the historical Jesus, the gospels, and history of the New Testament. Dan Brown uses non-cannonical sources to prove his points, but dismisses the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.
Mark D. Roberts, pastor of Irvine Presbyterian, and a Ph.D in New Testament from Harvard has blogged about both the Jesus Seminar and The Davinci Code. Now he is blogging a wonderful series called, Are the New Testament Gospels Reliable? If you've been faced with questions - this is a good place for the laymen to start.
Another blog I'd like to recommend is Reformation 21, this is the blog of The Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals. They have insightful posts that are Reformed, current and often touch on Westminster issues. Currently Rick Phillips is taking a tour through B. B. Warfield's writings on divine revelation. If you haven't gotten to Warfield yet, these posts will give you a deeper understanding on how God has revealed himself to us. The post I really like is Modes of Revelation.
That's it for today's tour of Westminster on the Web.
