Here is a good quote from Mark Driscoll‘s book ‘Confessions of a Reformission Rev.’;
“Being cool, having good music, understanding postmodern epistemology, and welcoming all kinds of strange people into the church is essentially worthless if at the bedrock of the church anything other than a rigorous Jesus centered biblical theology guides the mission of the church.” (Confessions of a Reformission Rev.; page 78)
Here is a link to his blog.
Douglas Sweeney and Mark Rodgers recently wrote a good brief history of the ‘altar call’ for Christianity Today. I have quoted the article in this post;
If you have ever attended an evangelistic church you (more than likely) have experienced the ‘invitation’, when the pastor calls for a response. I think it is interesting to know the history of altar call, how it was popularized by frontier camp meetings and Charles Finney’s “anxious bench,” and later became on of the evangelistic staples of American church. There is much debate over the proper use of altar calls among theologians. At the very least, I thought I would bring the topic up, with some follow up post’s to come.
At first, the altar call was used as an efficient way to gather spiritually interested people together for counseling after a sermon. In the early camp meetings, which were organized mass meetings for the purpose of evangelism, ministers used an “invitation to the altar” as a visible way to measure people’s response to their message. It was Charles Finney however, who “did more than anyone to establish altar calls as an accepted and popular practice in American evangelicalism.” According to Finney, the altar call was a very persuasive tool to move the human will. ”
Sweeney writes, “Iain Murray describes many opponents of the altar call who “alleged that the call for a public ‘response’ confused an external act with an inward spiritual change.” Moreover, Murray says, the altar call effectively “institute[d] a condition of salvation which Christ never appointed.” Critics argued that altar-call evangelism resulted in false assurance, as a high percentage of those who went forward to “receive Christ” soon fell away.”
This is a good introduction to the discussion. I will follow up with some thoughts later. Click here to read the whole article.
Also, see Andy Naselli.
Brief Outline of the ‘Proslogion’ by Anselm of Canterbury
Preface
Anselm’s purpose for writing Proslogion is to find “a single argument which would require no other proof than itself alone…to demonstrate that God truly exists.”
Chapter’s I – XXVI
The argument starts with a statement that man was created to see God, that man has an innate hunger to know his creator. This hunger exists because man was created with implanted ‘understanding’ that God exists, even though the fool argues that God does not exist. Anselm argues that all men , if honest, must admit that there is something, ontologically, “which nothing greater can be conceived to exist.” For this reason God cannot even be “conceived not to exist.” To prove this statement Anselm calls to attention the presence of good in ascending degrees of goodness, which ultimately leads to a supreme good, or source of all other goods, which is God. For all things can be traced back to the existence of God, since “they cannot exist at all without” God.
On Behalf Of The Fool– An Answer to Anselm’s Argument By Gaunilo
Gaunilo replies to Anselm by making a distinction between the ‘real object’ and the ‘understanding’. He argues that “the real object is one thing, and the understanding itself, by which the object is grasped, is another.” He then calls for a proof, beyond his own assumptions that this object truly does exist. Gaunilo likens Anselm’s argument that although one can imagine the most beautiful island it does not prove that such an island actually exists.
In Reply To Gaunilo’s Answer– In behalf of the fool
In answering this objection Anselm applied Gaunilo’s logic to any other object of understanding in creation and argues that “if it can be conceived at all, it must exist” in some sense or another. Anselm makes the distinction between that which exists, and that which is necessary for all other things to exist. He argues that “using the lesser good to the greater” argument, we can form a considerable notion of a being than which greater is inconceivable.” For Anselm the scripture attest to this line of logic in Romans 1:20, “For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.”
Key Quote
“Teach me to seek you, and reveal thyself to me, when I seek you, for I cannot seek you, except you teach me, nor find you, except you reveal thyself. Let me seek you in longing, let me long for you in seeking; let me find you in love, and love you in finding. Lord, I acknowledge and I thank you that you have created me in this thine image, in order that I may be mindful of you, may conceive of you, and love you; but that image has been so consumed and wasted away by vices, and obscured by the smoke of wrong doing, that it cannot achieve that for which it was made, except you renew it, and create it anew. I do not endeavor, O Lord, to penetrate your sublimity, for in no wise do I compare my understanding with that; but I long to understand in some degree your truth, which my heart believes and loves. For I do not seek to understand that I may believe, but I believe in order to understand. For this also I believe, that unless I believed, I should not understand.”
In many ways Anselm’s Proslogion is a philosophical devotional. To adapt the words of C.S. Lewis, ‘hard doctrine or philosophical theology are often more helpful in devotion than the modern idea of devotional readings’. Proslogion is more a philosophical work than a devotional, but has devotional value for the Christian thinker.
In short, Anselm sought to provide one argument for the existence of God that required no other proof beyond the argument itself. The end result was what has now come to be known as a classical example of the ontological argument. Proslogion is truly a good model, within certain boundaries, of ‘faith seeking understanding’, or an ‘example of meditation on the grounds of faith.’
Anselm’s argument style is philosophical, in that he attempts to argue proof of God from following the rules of logic. The devotional qualities are obvious from the preface, Anselm calls the reader to cast aside all other cares and “enter the inner chamber of your mind; shut out all thoughts save that of God…and seek him.” Anselm’s heart is clear, “let me seek you in longing, let me long for you in seeking; let me find you in love, let me love you in finding.” For Anselm, “there is…so truly a being than which nothing greater can be conceived to exist, that it cannot even be conceived not to exist; and this being you are, O Lord, our God”, and “no one who understands what God is can conceive that God does not exist.” Anselm attempts to prove that all men understand that God exists, whether they acknowledge it or not.
It seems well to mention the only boundary that this author might add to sober Anselm’s argument. One must never assume that reason is neutral, reason has, like all other things, been devastated by sin. Therefore, it is not by reason alone that one may truly find God. While reason may point to God, Romans 1:20, it may never remove the separation caused by sin. Gaunilo argued this in his response to Anselm, “for it should be proved first that this being itself really exists somewhere” beyond mere “hypothesis.” Yet Gaunilo may over step his argument by qualifying the former statement in adding that the existence of such a being must be proved “to such a degree that it cannot be conceived not to exist.” Again, some might argue that both writers are resting their final arguments on reason alone, and ‘proofs’ that demand such belief. At the very least, these arguments can bring an atheist to an agnostic position.
The philosophical elements of this work are well balanced with devotional overtones. Anselm writes at the end of the first letter, “I pray, O God, to know you, to love you, that I may rejoice in you. And if I cannot attain to full joy in this life may I at least advance from day to day, until that joy shall come to the full. Let the knowledge of you advance in me here, and there be made full. Let the love of you increase, and there let it be full, that here my joy may be great in hope, and there full in truth.” While this work is heavy philosophically it is not devoid of devotional elements. Proslogion is, literally, a philosophical discourse on the existence of God. While Anselm himself acknowledges that his “understanding cannot reach” God alone, he does illustrate the use of reasoning in removing the intellectual walls that hinder one from acknowledging the existence of God.
When read alongside of Romans 1, Anselm has provided a good example of philosophical reasoning; in that ‘being’ points to the existence of something greater, the Supreme Being, namely God.
Part 2: Athanasius ‘On the Incarnation’
The issue of abortion, and the issues surrounding abortion have been at the heart of many pro-life advocates for the past few months. I thought I would pass on this blog post from Justin Taylor,
“Consider signing the Fight FOCA [Freedom of Choice Act] Petition.
No matter your political persuasion or feeling on the role of politics, it’s a simple thing you can do to help fight against this legislation, which would:
eradicate state and federal laws that the majority of Americans support, such as:
- Bans on Partial Birth Abortion
- Requirements that women be given information about the risks of getting an abortion
- Only licensed physicians can perform abortions
- Parents must be informed and give consent to their minor daughter’s abortion
FOCA would erase these laws and prevent states from enacting similar protective measures in the future.”
For more background information on the Freedom of Choice Act, please see his post here.
To sign the petition, CLICK HERE
I came across a post of interest on “The Scriptorium Daily” this morning. One of the subjects that I enjoy studying is beauty, and its relationship to theology (Click Here).
The post was written by John Mark Reynolds, who is the founder and director of the Torrey Honors Institute, and Associate Professor of Philosophy, at Biola University. In 1996 he received his Ph.D. in Philosophy from the University of Rochester.
The post deals with “Beauty and the Existence of God.” Here is an excerpt;
“The existence of beauty suggests that a God exists and that He is good. It is not a sufficient proof for the existence of God by itself, but a confirmation of His existence to those with other reasons and personal experiences that suggest His reality.”
Click here to read the whole thing.
I recently finished reading John Piper‘s book ‘Let the Nations Be Glad’. I thought I would share the main point of the book and its strengths. The central thesis of John Piper’s book “Let the Nations Be Glad” is very clear in the first chapter. Piper writes; “missions is not the ultimate goal of the church. Worship is. In fact “missions exists because worship doesn’t”, therefore “worship is the fuel and goal of missions”.
Piper rightly argues that Christian missions are the means that bring about true worship. The central theological theme of this book is that God’s desire for people to glorify Him as their highest treasure motivates the Christian’s desire to see God glorified. Piper writes, “the ultimate foundation for our passion to see God glorified is his own passion to be glorified”. Piper rightly perceives how this idea might be misconceived and argues that it is not megalomania for God to desire His own glory. This gets into the missional theme of the book, when humanity begins to recognize “true value for what it is and…enjoy it in proportion to its true worth” they experience true satisfaction. Since God is of supreme value we should desire that all men know and worship Him for their ultimate satisfaction. The essence of worship is “the experience of being satisfied with God in Christ”. Therefore, we should aim “all we do to maximize our satisfaction in God”, because “God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in him”, and we should also labor in order that others would experience this satisfaction. So it is this zeal “for the glory of God that motivates world missions”.
When it comes to the task of missions this means ‘liberation’, the simple “fact is that the message we take to the frontiers is that people everywhere should seek their own best interest”. But this liberating mission comes at a cost, and it’s often hard, “missions and ministry are war”. Piper gives the sober reminder that times of war often leave loss. Yet there is hope in “loss and suffering”, when joyfully accepted for the Kingdom of God, they “show the supremacy of God’s glory more clearly in the world than worship or prayer”.
Piper rightly brings this difficult task into perspective with prayer proclaiming that it “is for the accomplishment of a wartime mission”. While Satan’s aim is that no one would be saved, “the purpose of prayer is to make clear to all the participants in this war that the victory belongs to the Lord”. And when we pray, we are asking “God to do for us through Christ what we can’t do for ourselves- bear fruit”. Piper also makes an important distinction in saying that the work of missions is “the proclamation of the gospel in word and deed”, with the aim of bringing “about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all nations”. He argues that God’s will is “that every people group be reached with the testimony of Christ and that a people be called out for his name from all the nations”.
Furthermore, the passion of missions “is to honor the glory of God by restoring the rightful place of God in the hearts of people who presently think, feel, and act in ways that dishonor God every day, and in particular, to do this by bringing forth a worshiping people from among all the un-reached people of the world”. Piper then concludes that the motive for missions is “mercy for man and glory for God”, which is one coherent goal.
John Piper provides a steady diet of ‘theocentric’ arguments in all of his books, and this one is no exception. Piper seems to always draw a clear line in the sand and call for a radical response. He writes to inspire “generations of world Christians who are willing to lay down their lives to make the nations glad in the glory of God through Jesus Christ”. One of the crucial strengths of this book is the absolute necessity of the Gospel to the central thesis. Without a devoted stance on the Gospel this book would make no sense, it is the “saving faith…coming to Jesus for the satisfaction of your soul thirst” that provides foundation for all of Piper’s arguments. The gospel is not only the foundation, but the persuasion behind this book, “God’s goal to be glorified will not succeed without the powerful proclamation of the gospel”. Let the Nations Be Glad is refreshing in a market full of books that teach technique, and strategy. This book is loaded with scripture! The biblical and theological arguments that thread through this work give it a timeless value, and while this work is timeless it is also timely. Piper does not neglect the critical issues facing the church today such as materialism, annihilationism, and universalism.
I am not talking about physical weight,
In David Wells book “God in the Wasteland: The Reality of Truth in a World of Fading Dreams”, he makes the following observation about modern society,
“It is one of the defining marks of Our Time that God is now weightless. I do not mean by this that he is ethereal but rather that he has become unimportant. He rests upon the world so inconsequentially as not to be noticeable. He has lost his saliency for human life.
Those who assure the pollsters of their belief in God’s existence may nonetheless consider him less interesting than television, his commands less authoritative than their appetites for affluence and influence, his judgment no more awe-inspiring than the evening news, and his truth less compelling than the advertisers’ sweet fog of flattery and lies. That is weightlessness. It is a condition we have assigned him after having nudged him out to the periphery of our secularized life. . . . Weightlessness tells us nothing about God but everything about ourselves, about our condition, about our psychological disposition to exclude God from our reality.”
Something to chew on…
This is an excellent post from C.J. Mahaney! He provides a sobering look at ‘being busy’. We live in a world where we have endless options, and what seems to be, millions of things to do. So take a few minutes, a break, and read this pastor’s heart…here is an excerpt;
“I forget now who first brought these points to my attention. But the realization that I could be simultaneously busy and lazy, that I could be a hectic sluggard, that my busyness was no immunity from laziness, became a life-altering and work-altering insight. What I learned is that:
Recognizing the sin of procrastination, and broadening the definition to include busyness, has made a significant alteration in my life. The sluggard can be busy—busy neglecting the most important work, and busy knocking out a to-do list filled with tasks of secondary importance.”
To read the whole thing click here!
Last night I traveled to the North Carolina Baptist State Convention to hear Mark Dever. Dr. Dever is the pastor of the Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington D.C. A Duke graduate, Dr. Dever holds a M.Div. from Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, a Th.M. from The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and a Ph.D. in Ecclesiastical History from Cambridge University. Dr. Dever is also the president of 9Marks Ministries.
Dr. Dever made some observations on Christian leadership out of the book of Jude.
“It was also about these that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied, saying, “Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of his holy ones,to execute judgment on all and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness that they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things that ungodly sinners have spoken against him.” These are grumblers, malcontents, following their own sinful desires; they are loud-mouthed boasters, showing favoritism to gain advantage.
But you must remember, beloved, the predictions of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ. They said to you, “In the last time there will be scoffers, following their own ungodly passions.” It is these who cause divisions, worldly people, devoid of the Spirit. But you, beloved, building yourselves up in your most holy faith and praying in the Holy Spirit, keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ that leads to eternal life.”
Here is an outline of his message,
1. Christian leaders should not be self seeking, but self giving.
2. Christian leaders should not self confident to the point of arrogance, but humble.
3. Christian leaders should not be troublemakers, but peacemakers, actively seeking to build and not blame.
4. Christian leaders should not be anti-Christian (non-believing), but solid/sound in teaching from God’s word with a strong commitment to Christ and the Gospel.
5. Christian leaders should not be immoral but disciplined, and self-controlled.
These were good observations/meditations on Jude. But there was one statement that Dever made, one statement that stuck with me;
He said that “all pastors must live in the tension between 1 Timothy 3:1 and James 3:1“.
Brief Outline of ‘The Pastoral Rule’ by Gregory the Great
Purpose for Writing: To argue “what rashness it is for the unskillful to assume pastoral authority, since the government of souls is the art of arts!” (134).
Part 1: No Title Given
1. The unskillful should not venture in approaching the office of authority.
2. None should enter a place of government when not practicing in life what they have learnt by study.
3. On the weight of government; and that all manner of adversity is to be despised, and prosperity feared.
4. For the most part the occupation of government dissipates solidarity of mind.
5. Of those are able to profit others by virtuous example, but fly from it in pursuit of their own ease.
6. Those who fly from the burden of rule through humility are truly humble when they resist not the divine decrees.
7. While some laudably desire the office of preaching, others, just as laudably, are drawn to it by compulsion.
8. Of those who covet pre-eminence, and seize on the language of the Apostle to serve the purpose of their own greed.
9. That the mind of those who wish for pre-eminence for the most part flatter themselves with a feigned promise of good works.
10. What manner of man ought to come to rule!
11. What manner of man ought not to come to rule!
Part 2: ‘Of the Life of the Pastor’
1. How one who has, in due order, arrived at a place of rule ought to demean himself in it.
2. That the ruler should be pure in thought.
3. The ruler should always lead in action.
4. The ruler should be discreet in keeping silence and profitable in speech.
5. The ruler should be a near neighbor to everyone in compassion, and exalted above all in compassion.
6. The ruler should be, through humility, a companion of good livers, but through the zeal of righteousness, rigid against the vices of evildoers.
7. Rulers should not relax his care for the things that are within his occupation among the things that are without, nor neglect to provide for the things that are without in his solicitude for the things that are within.
8. The ruler should not set his heart on pleasing men, and yet ought give heed to what to phase them.
9. The ruler ought to be careful to understand how commonly vices pass themselves off as virtues.
10. The ruler’s discrimination should be balanced between correction and connivance, between fervor and gentleness.
11. How intent the ruler ought to be on mediations in the sacred law.
Gregory argues that “no one presumes to teach an art till he has first, with intent meditation, learnt it”. The Pastoral Rule is Gregory’s own estimate on the heaviness of pastoral care, with a contemplation of the expectations and implications of taking such an office. “For certainly no one does more harm in the Church than one who has the name and rank of sanctity, while he acts perversely”.
While Gregory’s Rule was composed in the 6th century, the overall principles considered reach across cultural constraints and still have much value for evangelical pastors today. The overall thread in Gregory’s argument seeks to prove humility as the key to unity in the church and effectiveness in the pastoral office. To accomplish this Gregory makes known how “vices assail us” and “how well-guarded virtues strengthen us”.
Gregory warns pastor’s of being ‘mastered’ by too many things. When occupied in many affairs the heart becomes distracted in “divers directions”. Gregory likens this condition to one on a journey who forgets where he is going. Yet the other extreme is considered with the same circumspect eye. There is equal danger in dwelling solely within the “contemplative life”. The pastor who ‘neglects his neighbor’ is equally misguided, “whoever abounds in virtues” and “refuses to feed the flock of God” is convicted. Gregory made much of the tension in the pastoral office, being both active in ministry to others and active in the personal contemplative life. The balanced fusion of public and private life illustrates the ideal pattern for spiritual devotion. This is a principle well heard in an age of perpetual distraction.
Gregory also attacks the vice of pride. He writes, “he that seeks, not the ministry of good works, but the glory of distinction, is himself a witness against himself”. The vice of pride is exposed in that “while he [the pastor] delights himself in his place of honor, he becomes the curse of ruin to his subordinates”. Therefore, “let everyone measure himself wisely” lest he reign unto condemnation. This word is useful today, seeing that the CEO/celebrity pastor model, which is often desired, lends to the bred pride in place.
Gregory calls for men aspiring the office of authority to “be pure, in action chief; discreet in keeping silence, profitable in speech; a near neighbor to everyone in sympathy, exalted above all in contemplation; a familiar friend of good livers through humility, [and] unbending against the vices of evil-doers through zeal for righteousness”. While desiring to be an example, those desiring pastoral office ought to show these qualities in the very gravity of life. Knowing that actions speak louder than words Gregory argues that virtue is shown in walking “better through example than through words”. Yet, whoever “enters the priesthood undertakes the office of herald”, therefore he must also be wise with words. How much more pertinent is this today when secular culture and skeptical seekers wait and bait for pastoral failure? “Let rulers, then, maintain outwardly what they undertake for the benefit of others: let them retain inwardly what makes them fearful in their estimate of themselves”.
Lastly, Gregory warns that coveting “being loved by the church instead of” God may lead to smoothing “down with flatteries the offence of his subordinates which he ought to have rebuked”. The fear of His eternal judgment should outweigh any temporal human judgment that might come in offending ones brother. This truth rages against the self esteem protective sentimentalism of today’s church, and speaks to the need of the renewed place of church discipline. Gregory prescribes that one must “meditate daily on the precepts of Sacred Writ, that the words of Divine admonition may restore in him the power” of God to undertake the office of pastor. This rightly places the word of God at the center! While Gregory’s Pastoral Rule was written in the 6th century it is very relevant for the church of today.
Matt Capps 