oddXian: Challenge the Consensus

Great article from Puritan Board member JerusalemBlade: We know there are two Jerusalems: the apostle Paul puts it like this, “…Jerusalem which now is…is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.”[f] Elsewhere the Scripture speaks of “the heavenly Jerusalem”[g], and “the holy city, the new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of Heaven.”[h] Is there a Temple in the Jerusalem above? The 21st chapter in Revelation tells us “the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.”[i] Is not the Temple with which Jesus’ brothers and sisters have to do this very one? For Scripture says, “But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem…and to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.”[j] Do we not now “enter into the holiest”[k], and is not our mercy seat the very “throne of grace”[l] where mercy is lavished on tho...

Many thanks to Steve Camp for the video and the following Scriptures . ...... 1Tim. 6:3 ¶ If anyone advocates a different doctrine and does not agree with sound words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and with the doctrine conforming to godliness, 1Tim. 6:4 he is conceited and understands nothing; but he has a morbid interest in controversial questions and disputes about words, out of which arise envy, strife, abusive language, evil suspicions, 1Tim. 6:5 and constant friction between men of depraved mind and deprived of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of [material or financial] gain. 1Tim. 6:6 But godliness actually is a means of great gain when accompanied by contentment. 1Tim. 6:7 For we have brought nothing into the world, so we cannot take anything out of it either. 1Tim. 6:8 If we have food and covering, with these we shall be content. 1Tim. 6:9 But those who want to get rich fall into temptation and a snare and many foolish and harmful desires which plunge men int...

Why is it that atheism is seen as default "religious neutrality"? In the linked article, a group of atheists are quoted as saying exactly that, and the writer then rightly points out what Van Til had to say on the topic. Oklahoma Atheists and Religious Neutrality ...... I would even add that the atheists who claim that their position is the default "religiously neutral" position, are committing the usual host of errors. 1. Firstly, for atheists to be neutral, assumes a religious position to begin with. Religion is that which one is devoted to, and atheism clearly has its devotees. They consequently assume that religion is indeed valid, but it just needs to be "neutral". Of course, the belief system that they are devoted to is seen as superior, as every devotee of every belief system would propose. 2. Following from 1. the assumed superiority of their belief system somehow implies that they are in a position to judge the validity of all other belief systems...

New Documentary on Islam is sure to draw attention. The question is: Will people PAY ATTENTION?

From John Stott's book on preaching, Between Two Worlds. The whole article is on Joshua Harris' website . How To Prepare a Sermon 1. Choose your text and meditate on it. 2. Ask questions of the text. 3.Combine diligent study with fervent prayer. 4. Isolate the Dominant Thought of the Text. 5. Arrange Your Material to Serve the Dominant Thought 6. Remember the Power of Imagination--Illustrate! 7. Add Your Introduction 8. Add Your Conclusion 9. Write Down Your Sermon 10. Edit it Again 11. Pray over Your Message

From the Internet Monk: We need a gospel that makes us so hungry for reformation that we can’t stand ourselves and our churches to be the same. We need a gospel that makes a preacher a joke if he doesn’t preach it. We need a gospel that plants questions right where we aren’t used to asking them and breaks us on the rocks of integrity and holiness. We need a Gospel that will save us, and that we will will savor. read more

Ben Stein on the root of much evil : Money, it’s now believed, will make us as gods. In fact, this belief, that having a lot of money is going to drastically change our lives for the better, might well be called the root of almost all civilized Western and Eastern (and Northern and Southern) life. Being rich will solve everything, or so the popular mind tells us.

A visit to a "Christian Lifestyle" store: I've come to realize that what I recoil from in that store is what repulses me about myself, the manner in which I commoditize and cheapen Christ. I chip away at Him until He fits my lifestyle, so that He is stylized, so that He fits on a shelf, or between the covers of a book, or on a bookmark. I parse Christ until He is tame. I view Him through the lens of my wants, rather than viewing myself through the truth of who He is. read more

And now for something completely different - a neat little flash game

One thing to notice in religious debate today is how some in the name of "tolerance" or the pretense of "community/dialogue" are actually hiding behind deception by which they not only seek to disguise their own intentions but also to avoid confrontation with the truth ... the gospel truth. Recently, I've noticed statements on the part of unbelievers (one an agnostic, another a "pluralistic Hindu) in dialogue (/debate) with Christians such as: ..."I appreciate the fact that you are nice to me. Please don't change." Another stated "I am very much impressed by you. My hats are off for being very COOL and not getting angry when you write your theories about God and salvation." What's interesting is that in both cases, while the debate began on this note, as soon as the debate advanced to include anything related to the exclusive nature and demands of the gospel, ... the attitude and tone of those who previously had set such a ...

A Good Review of Hitchen’s “God is not Great” by Steven Hays From The Chalcedon Foundation "One of the ironies of his work, which is typical of this genre, is the combination of intellectual pride with an anti-intellectual performance. He affects a tone of rational and moral superiority, but without the supporting evidence to justify his pretensions..." Read More...

From the Confessing Evangelical: Andrew Rilstone saves the rest of us the trouble by providing a major-league, must-read fisking of Richard Dawkins’ book The God Delusion . Douglas Adams fans will enjoy the list of post titles: Where Dawkins went wrong Some more of Dawkins’ greatest mistakes Who is this Dawkins person anyway? Well, that just about wraps it up for Dawkins

From Marc Driscoll over on the the Resurgence Blog: Today a debate rages about the question of origins and where creation and humanity came from. Much of the passion that surrounds this question is because the question of origins has implications for everything else. For example, Genesis says that there was a beginning to history which means there will be an end. Genesis says that creation comes from God which means it belongs to God. Genesis says that people come from God which means that people will stand before God in the end. Within Christianity there had not been a widespread debate on the nature of creation until the sixteenth century. Nor was there much of a debate about the length of the six days of creation until the nineteenth century. This is because if someone simply read the account in Genesis 1–2 and the primary summary accounts throughout the rest of their Bible (e.g., Exodus 20:11; Psalm 136:1–9), they would likely believe that God made creation out of nothing in s...

Interesting article: John Calvin, William Perkins and George Gillespie, who link the miraculous gifts with the earliest period of the Church's development, are open to the possibility of a re-occurrence of extraordinary offices and their gifts in extraordinary circumstances. For them the cessation of these gifts meant that they had ceased to function as an ordinary part of church life, not that they had ceased altogether. But Warfield's argument that these gifts were linked with the apostolic office and therefore ceased with the disappearance of this office is consistent with both history and Scripture. Perhaps the insights of both viewpoints can be combined in the recognition that the gift allowing some of God's people to do extraordinary works for God at their will has disappeared, but that God may still use human agents to do wondrous works in extraordinary circumstances. More here

Do lawmakers realize what they have done in opening the door (not only allowing but by their action endorsing) a Hindu prayer on the floor of the Senate? WHO's NEXT??? ... a Muslim cleric (who's participation would only encourage and advance Islam/"radicalism" in the U.S.), or a new ager, a Satan worshipper, an atheist, etc.? And just who is it, and upon what principles is the decision going to be made? I see several problems with what's taken place, and though it appears senators thus far are supporting the problem (even if by not addressing the issues), this is a change in which Christians need to not only demand an accounting from our leaders, but be intimately involved in the development and outcome of all that progresses related to this matter. Here are the problems: 1. The Purpose of Prayer By endorsing a pattern that implies that it doesn’t matter “WHO one prays to” or “ON WHAT BASIS one’s prayers are acceptable” or even “WHAT one prays for” is ultimately...

I found this and wanted to share it - from Cornelius van Til's " My Credo " My understanding of the relationship between Christian and non-Christian, philosophically speaking. 1. Both have presuppositions about the nature of reality: a. The Christian presupposes the triune God and his redemptive plan for the universe as set forth once for all in Scripture. b. The non-Christian presupposes a dialectic between "chance" and "regularity," the former accounting for the origin of matter and life, the latter accounting for the current success of the scientific enterprise. 2. Neither can, as finite beings, by means of logic as such, say what reality must be or cannot be. a. The Christian, therefore, attempts to understand his world through the observation and logical ordering of facts in self-conscious subjection to the plan of the self attesting Christ of Scripture. b. The non-Christian, while attempting an enterprise similar to the Christian's, at...

In the recent years, I've heard alot here in the U.S. about "progressive Catholism" (primarily in discussions concerning the grounds and instrument of salvation, i.e., faith vs. faith&works, etc.) For all those who think the Catholic church is so progressive, note the present declarations of Pope Benedict XVI concerning not only the government but the identity of the true church. Nothing new here... but something worth noting. Seems some errors continue to be propagated and passed down. Regarding the primacy of the Pope,...consider Scripture's own word: Referring to Jesus Christ, Paul writes in Col 1:18 "And HE is the head of the body, the CHURCH;..." Again, in Eph 1:22 it is written "And God placed ALL things under his feet and appointed him to be HEAD over everything for the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way." Note believers: the pope is stating that if we are not members of the church (the ...

p1 - Paul commands singing psalms. hymns and spiritual songs to God - inarguably including the 150 Psalms - in public worship p2 - The 150 Psalms command a new song to be sung to the Lord c1 - Paul's command includes provision for new songs to be composed and sung, as well as the 150 Psalms, in public worship

Interesting article on CNN about widows in India . How is it that widows should be treated? Some toss them aside, some see them as a drain on society, some go to the other extreme and in the name of being "liberal" would create conditions that encourage sin. Note the good, balanced, and wise perspective of the Scripture: "Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world." "Give proper recognition to those widows who are really in need. But if a widow has children or grandchildren, these should learn first of all to put their religion into practice by caring for their own family and so repaying their parents and grandparents, for this is pleasing to God. The widow who is really in need and left all alone puts her hope in God and continues night and day to pray and to ask God for help. But the widow who lives for pleasure is dead even whil...

While many in the church today, who having bitten off the principles of the world rather than swallowing the word of God, fail to recognize it, ...the truth remains that CHRISTIAN SKEPTICISM is not only our great HERITAGE and long standing TRADITION, but ALSO our Christian CALLING! For just a short sample of what I'm saying, permit Robert Haldane to stir your soul: "Many religious persons have a dread of controversy... and wish truth to be stated without any reference to those who hold the opposite errors. Controversy and a bad spirit are, in their estimation, synonymous terms. And strenuously to oppose what is wrong is considered as contrary to Christian meekness. Those who hold this opinion seem to overlook what every page of the New Testament lays before us. In all the history of our Lord Jesus Christ, we never find Him out of controversy. From the moment He entered on the discharge of His office in the synagogue of Nazareth till He expired on the cross, it was an uninter...

One of the top posts on Wordpress the last few days was this one: Don't ask me to read your holy book Having just gone through a light discussion with a couple of atheists, I came across the little gem above, which seems to typify the current mode of thinking among non-believers. The premise seems to be that reading a "holy book" is nothing but circular reasoning, since the "holy book" is the thing that validates itself. Since the issue seems to be circular reasoning, we read on. ...... Let me quote from our non-believer: " Let me reiterate what I consider myself to be. I am a skeptic. I am a naturalist (i.e,. I look for natural, as opposed to supernatural causes). I’m not a scientist in the sense that I work with science, but I’m a fan of the scientific method." and "Naturally, I can’t find out if the premise is true by assuming the premise. That would be circular reasoning. " and "This is some elementary advice to theists who wish to j...

Two of the CS team slug it out with a couple atheists - link here . Great job, guys!