The Rise of Evangelicalism

I recently finished reading Mark Noll's book, The Rise of Evangelicalism.


This is my review for Amazon.com:

This book was very handy for me in getting a good big picture of the beginnings of Evangelicalism. Dr. Noll's narrative stitches together a clear story, which is easy enough to follow despite the movement's spread across the Atlantic and separation into various (sometimes rivaling) groups. I was especially helped by the comprehensive breadth of the work. Being raised in nondenominational Evangelical Christianity, I had a fuzzy picture of much of the early denominational history of the movement, especially of the Wesleyans and Moravians. I appreciated Dr. Noll's insight into how these groups related to each other and to the Calvinistic wing of Evangelicalism. Another particularly interesting segment was the discussion of the movement's complex relationship with the religious establishment, especially in Britain and New England. I found this placed the whole movement in a clearer setting of American and English history. I look forward to getting hold of the rest of the series.

So, I've moved on through The All-New Square-Foot Gardening book and What to Drink with What You Eat, which I got for Christmas. Maybe I'll review those too, since we have internet now.

Approaching a Method for Interacting with Media

I have a method in mind for guiding my interactions with media, and I will lay out something of that method ahead of time here:
Questions
I began with a list of questions. It was about 3 pages long, and no where near long enough to really get at what an artistic, informational, entertaining work is all about. I would need ten or more pages before I really had the makings of the questions we ought to be asking of the things we watch, listen to, or read. This was not working out very well. I went to sleep after typing those questions in a bit of a tizzy, because I knew that no one, including myself or my kids, would want to sit down with a wall of questions getting between them and the most recent Deadliest Catch. This was not going to work.
After a day or two of running various errands, I was going to bed last night, lamenting to Amelia that I had no means of approaching my goals of critical, involved, Christianly media feasting. I said, “I need something organic.” That is, I needed something which lined up with our minds' aesthetic; which made simple sense and could 'click' with most people. So we talked for a while, and began thinking about the basic processes that need to be in place for a mind to really begin to engage the world in the way I had fuzzily envisioned. So, in the end, I have scrapped the questionnaire idea, and I am trying to move on with the concept of a tool-set for critical engagement in media interactions.
Tools
So, I will try laying out a few of the tools which are necessary for these interactions. First, there is the goal of a Holistic Experience. I mean that my interactions with the world via media should intentionally seek to include, not only the physical sensations of watching or listening, but also some types of mental, emotional, and volitional engagement. (I obviously take this from the great commandment, “Love the LORD your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength.”) I think that I will be able to break down these four spheres of personal involvement in life in the ensuing few posts, and thereby find some of these tools with which to arm ourselves.
So, we can look at the cycle of inductive and deductive processes, the layers of context in which every datum resides, and the steps of interpreting a document (Kay Arthur-style: observing, interpreting, and applying, but with major adjustments). These would all be part of our mental interaction with media. We could also try to analyze and better understand our emotional interaction by looking at the way different media approach our hearts, and we can look at what Scripture and Scriptural theology teach us about why our hearts respond to certain messages. I would also like to break down the physical elements of various media, and see how our wills are affected by the media with which we interact. In all things, I would like to be seeking this holistic experience, in which these various spheres come together in a whole-self interaction with things outside ourselves, all in happy obedience to the great commandment.


There is the goal for this study, and the beginning of a method. Perhaps God will be pleased to see us through to some profitable outcome for his people.

Goals and Guideline, 2

As we attempt to Christianly interact with media, I believe we need to strive after the following: finding media outlets and providers which entertain us; worshiping God; living blamelessly; and learning about God and the world he has made.

Seeking Entertainment

I will try to illustrate what I mean by this by contrasting it to a pair of errors. These appear to be related, in that I think that the first error will usually lead to the second.
The first error is a type of asceticism. This is the practice of flogging oneself with the need to abstain from pleasure. Not many Christians in America function as ascetics, but a great many people hold such asceticism to be a Christian ideal, and feel guilty whenever they partake of simple pleasures. This asceticism leads to the second error, that of intentional tastelessness. Working under the presumption that he is already acting unspiritually in entertaining himself, the Christian will form his media diet wholly from the vast stores of junk food presented him. The attempt to develop good taste is useless and possibly ungodly, says this error.
However, I do believe that we ought to look hard for those things which cause us pleasure, and I think that developing good taste in this can help us to keep our brains engaged while watching tv or reading blogs. A gourmet restaurant needs only to serve a small serving of very rich food to satisfy a gourmand, who will then ruminate on that dish's interplay with the wine, its place in the meal, and its development in his mouth. Similarly, we can learn to spend less time turning off our brains with massive quantities of media if we learn to seek out the highest quality of entertainment.
I could note that this is what true Epicureans have always been about. Epicurus did not teach that we should simply fill our lives with excesses of food and drink, but that we should educate ourselves in the very best of life, seeking the most pleasurable moments possible by careful study of ourselves. I believe that Epicurus was right in this regard, though I think he missed the mark when he missed the fact that knowing God himself (and being known by him) is the highest and best pleasure possible. In fact, I think we ought to find that it changes all our other experiences of pleasures, invigorating them with new life.

Worshiping God

The goal of worshiping God should be a part of everything we do. If God is our highest joy and worshiping him is our aim, shouldn't we just listen to worship music and watch sermons? How can we waste our time on secular media?
The answer is that media are not grouped by God into secular and spiritual boxes. These categories are artificial and usually arbitrary. The Christian ought to worship God in everything he does. When he sees a great singer or chef on tv, it should be clear in his mind that all her cleverness is but a reflection of God's creativity on display. If we are reading a Marxist interpret history, we can praise God for his creative use of language and ingenious working of the data, even if we disagree with his conclusions. In fact, the reading of history is a particularly instructive way to partake of media, since we can glorify God in the workings of his providence, we can praise him for the gifts of the historian, and we can even see God's Law working on the conscience of many unsaved historians, as they drive to discover truth and to make moral judgments on the decisions which men of the past have made. In all these things we can worship God while we educate and entertain ourselves. If this is true for history books, I believe we can apply a similar grid to watching sports or listening to music.

Living Blamelessly

This should always be a Christian's goal. We were made (in part) “for good works,” according to Ephesians 2:10. God's grace teaches us to live “soberly, righteously, and godly in this present age,” says Paul in Titus 2:11-12. Peter exhorts the saints to be holy, since God who called us is holy (1 Peter 1:15). A Christian's life is not a life of unrepentant profligacy, but one of growth in holiness. Therefore, a Christian's interactions with media need to be guided by this line (this guideline, if you will) of holy, blameless living. If we enjoy Foxnews, we should critically engage our brains as we watch a little O'Reilly Factor, but if it makes us frustrated with the world so that we kick the dog, we should not watch it.
This obviously applies to the areas of violence and sexual sin in tv, movies, fictional books, and increasingly in newscasts and histories. I would caution strongly against setting rules for other believers to follow in their entertainment choices, but I try to keep a few for my own benefit. When it comes to Harriet Alice Rodgers, I will be trying to shield her from a lot of this garbage until she is ready to set some boundaries on her own (with guidance from her folks, I hope). When our minds are actively involved in media interactions, we will be better equipped to deal with the sinful behavior displayed on the screen or in print. However, it is wise to avoid a steady diet of coarse and careless language (not only cussing, but loud and disrespectful arguing like on all the cable news channels), of violence (even historically-accurate violence can be gratuitous), of sexual temptation (which commercials have to an art, and sitcoms are probably the worst offenders of all, imo), and of blasphemy (an easy one to forget in a pluralistic society, but we need to remember that God takes blasphemy seriously).
We ought to be careful to avoid sin, and we need to know that such attempts are far from the legalism the Bible condemns. As long as we humbly remember that these guidelines do not make us more spiritual than our brother, we will be in good shape to set up rules to help us stay blameless in our interactions with media.

Learning About God and His World

The final goal I lay out for interactions with media is a greater knowledge of God and his world. Every Christian desires to know God better. We can see him most clearly in his Scriptures, which we see as speaking primarily about his Son. However, there is a great deal we can learn about him from the world around us. We can learn about who is (and especially who is not) by learning about other religions and philosophies, and comparing them with Scripture. We learn about what he has done in observing the beauty, grandeur, and intricacy of creation and its history. We can learn a great about the places where the Bible took place by visiting Israel, but we can also learn by watching some of the excellent Christian- and non-Christian-produced programs in that land. Our study of God's care over his church is greatly enhanced as we partake of media surveying church history and its interplay with the rest of world history. We can compare scientific grasping after the great questions of “why?” to the Scriptures' clear statements of God's purpose in his design. And we also see a lot of God's hand in seeing how he has guided mankind's course on the earth. All these things should be seen within the framework of the Bible's teaching about Jesus Christ, and in that framework we can learn even more about God and his World.
So, with these goals in mind, I will attempt to lay out a set of guidelines of interactions with media. I will try to find questions we can ask as we interact, and hopefully this will help Harriet and Amelia and me (and maybe other people too) to critically engage the world around us.

Goals and Guidelines, 1

When setting Guidelines for Interactions with Media, which I will endeavor to do today, there should be some sort of a goal in mind. Possible goals include: keeping our minds free from the pollutant of sin; learning the culture, so we can reach the culture; or establishing an image (especially with musical media). I will lay out a few reasons why I shy away from these goals and prefer the following: finding media outlets and providers which entertain us; worshiping God; living blamelessly; and learning about God and the world he has made.

What the goal is not

1. The goal is not to be freed from the pollutant of sin.
There is an object lesson that illustrates this idea of sin as a pollutant. If we were offered a cup of lemonade with just the tiniest bit of poop in it, we would not knowingly drink it, because even the tiniest bit of poop makes a glass of lemonade worthless. Similarly, we should not watch a tv show or read a book with the tiniest bit of sin it, since that would taint the whole thing. The object lesson is effective, but is it biblical?
I answer “No!” In fact, if sin were a pollutant in this way, we could never read the Bible itself, since it discusses sinners and even details their sin extensively in several places. When it speaks of sins which we would not usually consider dirty, like self-righteousness, the Word uses word pictures to bring an even clearer understanding of God's view of the dirtiness of such sin. Thus, all our righteous deeds are dirty menstrual rags, according to the prophet.
Another problem with this view is that it would exclude all dealing with sinners whatsoever. If the fictional character's sin is a pollutant, then how much more will the tax collector or prostitute's sin “get on me” if I talk to him? At the very least, we would need to make sure any such interactions would take place on the established basis that I am a much holier and cleaner person, one who knows no language but that of handing out Chick Tracks to the dirty sinner. If that sounds like Christlikeness to you, you probably need to spend a little more time in the Gospels.
I should mention that sin is a terrible thing, that it pollutes us, and that we must be constantly aware of its dangers. However, my point is that sin does not so taint the world that we can no longer interact with it. So, if you are watching something that tempts you to sin, turn it off! Don't let yourself be led away into sin! But the mere fact that sin may be involved in a broadcast, book, or blog does not mean that you will be tempted to sin by it. Rather, if we engage these media with our minds and the keep our hearts attuned to the Scriptures, we can enjoy the world around us in these media. To try to exemplify this view of sin in media: if the football game cuts to the cheer-sluts, I will look away, and look back when the shot is over, but I am not going to watch an hour-long program on the cheer-sluts.
2. Learning the culture, so we can reach the culture.
Another false goal in our interactions with media is posited in evangelistic, even missional terms. It is said that we can only reach the culture once we know the culture. In an extreme form, it seems that some folks think that unless we can sprinkle Eminem, Bono, or Oprah quotes (depending on your class) liberally into our conversation about Jesus, people will not understand what we are talking about. It is supposed that the Scriptures themselves are incomprehensible to folks not familiar with what is called “Christianese.” I have two points of contention with this goal for interacting with media.
First, this is a gross underestimation of both the noetic (i.e. mental) effects of sin and the work of the Holy Spirit in overcoming those effects. It is true that the natural man is not capable of understanding the Scriptures, or “receiving the things of God” (1 Cor. 2), but that is not because Christians are not working hard enough to contextualize the Gospel. It is because the mind of the natural man cannot receive the things of God without the Holy Spirit giving him a spiritual mind. While Christians should attempt to bring the Gospel to others as clearly as possible, it is not necessary to force the Scriptures into the mindless drivel of pseudo-psychiatric platitudes popularized on daytime talk shows in order to reach someone watching such shows. What such a sinner needs is a call out of that mindset, to obey the Gospel of Jesus Christ and trust in him for their salvation from sin's penalty and power.
The second point I have is simply that this goal for interacting with media is simply mercenary. The “contextualizing,” “missional,”crowd has been politically active, leftist, rightest, hippie, bourgeois, down-home, suburban, inner city, un-schooled, and academic elitist in its turns. The leaders have been about 31 theological flavors to go with the many different cultures they are trying to reach. All this sounds more like a presidential candidate on the campaign trail than a man with biblical convictions, secure in his identity in Christ, preaching a timeless message to the dying world. Not only does this divide Christians for utterly foolish reasons and tend to ignore theological questions in favor of arguments about political parties, musical styles, or marijuana, but it also shows the world that a great many peoples' “cultural engagement” is in fact a means to trick folks into coming to Church. (That is the Evangelical version of such mercenary culture-mongering; there are many who just want sinners to accept them and say nice things about them and Jesus.) This mercenary-style interaction will look very phoney to unbelievers who are genuinely interested in various media, and it will look very familiar to “posers,” who are trying to look like they are interested in various media because they think people will like them more if they are. That is goal #3, though...
3. Establishing an image.
The final goal I will try to steer around is that we should engage the culture in order to establish our image as, say, tasteful artist-types with a good sense of humor and irony. I will not deal at length with this, because it is not a goal many people would own up to in their interactions with media. I suspect that many people who claim goal #1 or goal #2 would have a degree of this in the back of their minds. The fact is, we all do (and should) want to belong to a diverse, friendly, accepting group of people. The group that we actually hope for is called the Church. Or, if you are a Dispensationalist, then the Church and redeemed Israel. :) In either case, what we really long for is that community pictured in Revelation, who sing together forever the praises of the Lamb, in the united song of every tribe, tongue, and nation. Since this is a real and deeply-felt need, it is not surprising that Satan attempts to invert it. He gets us (especially as unbelievers, but often as Christians too) to establish our fellowship, not on the basis of our universal adoration of the glories of the Lamb, but on just about anything else. This is the importance of our image. If I'm with the rockers, or the hiphop...ists?, or the gangstas, or preacher-boys, or granola homeschoolers, or jocks, or whatevers, then I have my loving community. I define myself by whatever will get me that “fellowship,” in contrast to any other community's dress, music, or other demographics. This is a very tempting goal in interacting with media, but it leads us very easily to break our fellowship over very foolish issues of media taste, and often to a need to accept freely and uncritically anything that comes out from “our” media outlets.
As we attempt to Christianly interact with media, I believe we need to set these goals aside. Rather than any of these goals, I propose we strive after the following: finding media outlets and providers which entertain us; worshiping God; living blamelessly; and learning about God and the world he has made.

Guidelines for Interactions with Media

Whenever I logged into the intranet at my last job, the main page had a link called, “Guidelines for Interactions with the Media,” or something to that effect. They were concerned that we lowly factory workers, on being confronted by the next great American news reporter, would soon reveal a slew of company secrets and say nasty things about executives. Therefore, we were told to recite a 100-word description of our operation and direct all questions to a manager.

The Worldly Hydra

I am thinking that is a good title for this post, which will hopefully give me a chance to restart my charge into the world of Video Games. The “media” I have in view are not the Cronkite wannabes that populate 6 o'clock newscasts, but rather the varied heads of the worldly hydra which poke into our homes every day. These heads are prominently represented in my circles by:

• Blogs
• Foxnews
• Movies
• Books
• YouTube
• Facebook
• Sermon Downloads
• TV series
• Planet Earth
• and Video Games.

I suppose that to call these things “heads of the worldly hydra” is a little intense. I will admit that the “world” here is not the evil world of Satan's designing, but merely the world outside the Christian family, containing positive and negative influences all around. So, the hydra in this metaphor is not to be viewed too harshly. He's just a hydra, doing his thing. Some of his heads are speaking nonsense and lies and filth, some proclaim the truth, and all of them need to be engaged by an active Christian mind in order to make the interaction with the hydra worthwhile.

Cutting off Heads

To abuse the metaphor a step farther, I will say that cutting off the hydra's heads is a mistake of mythic proportions. Though an individual Christian could possibly cut himself off from the rest of the world for a time, each time he cut a head off, he would have new ones to deal with. Not only is it virtually impossible for an individual to keep his life media-free, but this hydra will still be hanging around when the next generation of that individual's family are growing up, and they will have no ability to interact cordially with him. Succeeding generations will be forced to choose between the Herculean task of head-chopping, or just taking everything that the media-heads say without engaging their minds in their listening. It does not take long in a Christian community to see this trend, as a couple of separationist Christians rear a litter of worldlings with no ability or desire to critically engage the media surrounding them, but who rather become more un-Christian than a child brought up in a pagan home.

Critically Engaging Media

I have some hope that this is not a typical Christian home. I was not brought up chopping off hydra-heads. Neither was my wife, though our parents were all more or less separatistic at times during our upbringing. Still, we were taught to critically engage both new and old voices speaking to us through various media. Therefore, I am endeavoring to teach my daughter Harriet (and any other little folks God may give) to use her little noggin when she interacts with the hydra. We will not be screening everything in our house according to some arbitrary standard (e.g. “no Rated-R movies” - as if the movie raters have any clue what my kids should watch...), but we will be trying to give her an ability to exercise her mind. Of course, there ought to be some guidelines when approaching such a powerful beast, and I hope here to begin to establish a few.

So, we will seek some Guidelines for Interactions with Media.

Luther's 95 Theses

Here are my reflections on the 95 Theses, which I recently read for my Reformation and Modern Church History class. Just some thoughts...

Warfield (from class notes): "The strength and purity of the evangelicalism of the Theses is manifested in nothing more decisively than in their clear proclamation of the dependence of the soul for salvation on the mere grace of God alone."

I agree with Warfield. Luther's evangelical leanings seem to show through in theses such as 36, “any truly repentant Christian has a right to full remission of penalty and guilt...” Another move away from traditional Catholicism can be in Luther's treatment of the pope. While he still supports the pope and carefully avoids an outright criticsim against him, Luther's tone seems to gain an edge near the end of the document as he balances the pope's approval of the indulgence racket (thesis 73) with a call to protect “holy love and truth” (thesis 74). He gives voice to “the shrewd questions of the laity” in theses 81-90, and claims that these “very sharp questions” need to be answered reasonably and not merely hushed up.

While there was a long way to go for Luther to actually reject the pope's authority, he showed in the theses that a man's hope is to be placed in the Cross of Christ and his repentance and contrition are sufficient means to be assured of forgiveness. The pope's indulgence could not forgive sin, but only remove penalties which the church had placed on sinners. Also, there is a hint in the many theses which are phrased as questions from the laity that Luther believed the church was accountable to satisfy the faithful by demonstrating with Scripture and clear reasoning its teachings and practices were from God.

Favorite Theses

1. When our Lord and Master Jesus Christ said, “Repent,” he willed the entire life of believers to be one of repentance.

28. It is certain that when money clinks in the money chest, greed and avarice can be increased; but when the church intercedes, the result is in the hands of God alone.

36. Any truly repentant Christian has a right to full remission of penalty and guilt, even without indulgence letters.

43. Christians are to be taught that he who gives to the poor or lends to the needy does a better deed than he who buys indulgences.

44. Because love grows by works of love, man therefore becomes better. Man does not, however, become better by means of indulgences but is merely freed from penalties.

45. Christians are to be taught that he who sees a needy man and passes him by, yet gives his money for indulgences, does not buy papal indulgences but God's wrath.

55. It is certainly the pope's sentiment that if indulgences, which are a very insignificant thing, are celebrated with one bell, one procession, and one ceremony, then the gospel, which is the very greatest thing, should be preached with a bells, a hundred processions, a hundred ceremonies.

62. The true treasure of the church is the most holy gospel of the glory and grace of God.

63. But this treasure is naturally most odious, for it makes the first to be last.

90. To repress these very sharp arguments of the laity by force alone, and not to resolve them by giving reasons, is to expose the church and the pope to the ridicule of their enemies and to make Christians unhappy.

Web List

A few final items to include in the list are web-based audio resources that have been a big part of my thought life recently:

• Francis Schaeffer lectures from Jerram Barrs, these are from Covenant Theological Seminary professor Jerram Barrs, who worked with Schaeffers in Switzerland and later helped start and run the English branch of L'Abri. His stories are littered throughout these 45-60 minute lectures, which range from biographic details of the Schaeffers' lives and how God used them and brought them to start L'Abri, to in-depth discussions of their books and the criticisms which have been laid on Francis' philosophy and theology. Dr. Barrs' insights in the later lectures, dealing with the divide between the "upper and lower stories" in the modern mind and the crossing of the "line of despair" by philosophy, have plain application in discussing current topics in Evangelicalism and Western culture at large.
• 50 Factors Within Nations that Determine Their Wealth or Poverty by Wayne Grudem. I listened to a shorter version of these lectures which I think was available through Gordon-Conwell Seminary's iTunesU page, and found it a very interesting study. Grudem showed how the biblical principles which were part of the worldview in the development of this nation are responsible for its subsequent prosperity.
• Doctrine: What Christian Should Believe by Mark Driscoll. This series of sermons at Mars Hill Church in Seattle, WA formed the basis for the book discussed above. Pastor Driscoll lays out a great deal of information in each of the 13 hour-long videos, and provides a 15-20 minute summary version of each as well. We have used these summaries for our Bible study on Sunday nights for the past several weeks. Tonight we are watching and discussing "Fall: God Judges", and Amelia wants to play ultimate frisbee afterward.
• White Horse Inn Podcast. This podcast, hosted by Michael Horton, Rod Rosenblatt, Kim Riddlebarger, and Ken Jones, who all teach in seminaries and/or preach in churches in Southern California, is dedicated to helping people know what they believe and why they believe it. The free podcast is supplemented by the (not free) magazine Modern Reformation, which is published six times each year. This year, both the podcast and the magazine are dedicated to issues concerning Scripture, including textual criticism, inerrancy, the formation of the canon, and hermeneutics. If you sign the guest book at their website, they will send you a free copy of the current Modern Reformation and a CD of WHI classic material.

And that's most of it. 

Reading List

So, on we go. I only had 7 in the previous post, not 8. Oh well.

1.  Introducing Covenant Theology
2. Advent of Evangelicalism
3. A History of the American People
4. Kinda Christianity
5. Just Do Something
6. Monstrous Regiment
7. Galahad at Blandings
8. Basics of Biblical Greek, by Bill Mounce. I am basically just listing this because I have technically gone through the first 4 lessons, so I'm technically in the middle of it. Realistically, though, I need to get on this piece if I'm going to be ready for school in January. There it is though.
9. Rick Steves' Europe Through the Back Door 2004. Why the 2004 edition? Because that was the one that was available on Paperback Swap the day I checked. Rick Steves has to be around our home because he reminds us of how lovely it would be to be able to go see Europe in its glory someday. I'm very glad that Amelia and I are agreed on this point.
10. Rick Steves' Ireland Guidebook 2006. Amelia got this guidebook when she went to Ireland in 2006, and likes to reminisce about the sights. I glanced through most of what is written here, and I agree with her that Ireland would be a wonderful place to be most of the time. If only they were clamoring for forklift drivers...
11. The Killer Angels by Michael Shaara. This is the historical novel on which the movie Gettysburg is based. It shows the events immediately before and throughout the battle from the points of view of the soldiers and commanders involved. The primary protagonists are Generals Longstreet and Lee of the Army of Northern Virginia, and General Buford and Colonel Chamberlain (of Little Round Top fame) of the Army of the Potomac. Shaara spends a good deal of time detailing how he thinks Lee came to decide to fight at Gettysburg, and seems to play up Longstreet's understanding of the situation until he becomes something of a prophet. I read this a long time ago, but I misplaced it after a couple of days of rereading it and it just turned up again.
12. The Good War by Studs Terkel. Brotha Steve Koch (my brother-in-law) placed this book in my hands while I was in California and gave it high praise. I don't think I ever got started reading it out there, but I have recently got a copy and am setting out upon it. The generation of men and women who fought and worked and won World War Two are given the microphone in this book, and so far I've enjoyed reading the many different perspectives from which they came to their posts in the Pacific Islands, on the European mainland, or in the States.
13. Five Red Herrings by Dorothy Sayers. I got about halfway through this book after reading the first several of Sayers' Lord Peter books, and I got muddled up and have yet to return. However, it'll get done eventually. Lord Peter is an ever-amusing fellow, and Amelia insists that I get to know him.
14. Baptism: Three Views edited by David Wright. The "three views" mentioned in the title are: 1) Credobaptism, presented by Bruce Ware, 2) Paedobaptism, presented by Sinclair Ferguson, and 3) Dual-Practice Baptism, presented by Anthony Lane. In the end, Ferguson won the argument, in my view, but I am still not a paedobaptist. Although Ferguson's defense was winsome and I thought Ware's points were somewhat weak, I still did not see enough  in the paedobaptist view to change my doctrine. Thus, Harriet remains unsprinkled. I will keep trying to figure out whether that is the biblical practice, however, as this book has made me think quite a bit.
15. The New Testament: Its Background, Growth, and Content by Bruce Metzger. Dr. Metzger's study of the New Testament has helped me to understand the means by which critical scholars seek to understand the writing of the New Testament autographs, particularly in the Gospels. I am constantly challenged as I read this to try and think through just what inerrancy and inspiration mean, and to determine how the Gospels ought to be harmonized.
16. Doctrine: What Christians Should Believe by Mark Driscoll and Gerry Breshears. This book has been helpful in refreshing my mind with the constant reminder of what our faith is all about. Driscoll and Breshears give several interesting bits of information, drawn from recent archaeological and biblical studies, which help set this theology apart from the older systematic theology we used in Bible school. Their emphasis is on teaching, if not "Mere" Christianity, at least a fairly firm orthodoxy which can be agreed upon by all Evangelicals. Their Christological focus and conviction shine throughout, and their topics are ordered along the lines of progressive revelation, from God in eternity, to Creation, the Fall, the Incarnation, the Cross, the Resurrection, the establishment of the Church, and finally ending in the coming Kingdom. All told there are 13 chapters in this study, and it fills about 450 pages.

So much for books.

what I've been reading...

I have decided today to use this web log to log something on the web. Since most anyone who ever reads this would tend to be a fairly close friend or family member, I figure you wouldn't care to know somewhat of what I'm up to. So here's what I've been reading and listening to for the past several months.

1. I just a few moments ago finished Introducing Covenant Theology by Michael Horton. I bought this book a few weeks before Amelia and I got married, and it's taken me several goes to get through it. The biggest difficulty I had was with his first 4 chapters, in which Horton lays the exegetical foundation for his theological insights in the remaining five chapters. I found that, fairly often, I could not follow the flow of his argument. Whether this was lack of ability on my part or of clarity on Dr. Horton's, I leave to history to decide. In the meantime, his fifth chapter, on Covenant Theology as a system, and the sixth, on the doctrine of Providence and common grace, in which he details the "two kingdoms" view of Christianity and culture, were very helpful. These chapters and his denial of supercessionism in later sections made wading through the heavier material at the beginning worthwhile- even if I felt at times that Horton could have used a chart or some subheadings in those exegetical discussions.
2. At the same time that I bought the above monograph, I also ordered The Advent of Evangelicalism edited by Michael Haykin and Kenneth Stewart. I am not done with this anthology yet, but it has been very exciting to pick up and read for little bits at a time. It is a series of essays challenging the "Bebbington Thesis," which places a great emphasis on the ties between Evangelicalism at its inception with the Enlightenment. A lot of the claims by the Pomo crowds are given a veneer of scholarship by clinging to this kind of a linkage, so it is good that a great many scholars could be rounded up to challenge Bebbington's claims. The final entry is a brief response by David Bebbington himself, and maybe someday I will actually get there. I am dog-eared in at the beginning of chapter 12, Jonathan Edwards: Continuator or Pioneer?, by Douglas Sweeney and Brandon Withrow. That means there are only seven chapters to go!
3. Another book which I have nibbled on since leaving home for Calvary Bible College in January 2009 is Paul Johnson's History of the American People. I stole this from my Dad's shelf while I was home for Christmas, and I have slowly managed to reach the 20th Century, so I must be about two-thirds of the way through. It's been about 10 months since I last read any further in it.
4. I read two books during a trip to St. Louis a few months back. One of them Amelia read aloud in the car. It was Kinda Christianity by Ted Kluck and Zach Bartels. It was kinda funny, but really short.
5. The other was Just Do Something by Kevin DeYoung. It was a very quick, balanced take on decision-making, marked by a challenge (especially to young men) to "just do something." DeYoung showed how a great many young people use a mystical quest for God's hidden will as an excuse to sit around and ignore the opportunities God has given them. He says that such folks need to use God's Word and their sanctified reason to find someone to marry, or to choose a career, or to make any big decision. While DeYoung spends a chapter of the short book pointing out that God can and sometimes does interrupt our cerebral will-finding with occasional moments of supernatural leading, we should not use the lack of such leading as an excuse to sit and contemplate our navels. On the whole, the book was helpful.
6. Terry Prachet's Monstrous Regiment was sitting on our bookshelf downstairs and I picked it up and read it throughout last week. It was a pleasant enough story, though I liked the characters and pace of the only other Discworld novel I have read, Going Postal, better.
7. I also ran through P.G. Wodehouse's Galahad at Blandings last week. It was pleasant and quick. Wodehouse is a lot of fun, whatever he's doing.

So, that's the first 8. I'd better get these up before Blogger's terrible posting program dumps all of my links again.

A baby robin is a good chance to teach on the difference between merciful lordship over creation and mere sentimentalism in environmentalism

The baby robin is a good chance to teach on the difference between true mercy in our lordship over creation and the mere sentimentalism of

the cake is a statistic

   With a few things happening in recent weeks, I have not posted on the topic of video games again yet. However, I have not forgotten this commitment! 
   Now, as Amelia is sleeping and I am awake (though I did manage to go to sleep at about 1am my first night off. That is a pretty remarkable achievement. I will probably be taking a nap whenever she gets up writes her blog post, but still it is nice to see the morning for the first time in about a week (besides the five minutes it takes from walking out of the warehouse to plopping into bed).
   Finding myself at the computer, I will proceed to tackle the beginning issue here, that of a Typical Christian's Response to the Idea of Video Games. But first: A note on that word, “typical”


   I am aware that many Christian brothers and sisters make a fair amount of a ruckus at the prospect of statistics and numbers and polls and the like. I do not usually invest myself very heavily in these things. I do not trust statistics, and I will not be making use of many throughout my life time, I expect. 
   What a statistic says is that, if a small number of people will behave in such a way, then a large number of people will behave in a basically similar way. The problem with this is that people are not at all consistent. You can interview 10% of America about their view of baseball's importance in feudal Europe (about 30 million people, which would be a much bigger test than any poll I've ever heard of... besides the census, I guess) and run your numbers, but you will not necessarily get that good a picture of what the whole 100% of Americans would think about the importance of baseball in feudal Europe. Actually, you will know what 30 million individuals who happen to be sitting around with absolutely nothing to do think about this issue. Actually, you will know only what they say they think about it. Actually, you will know only what your questionnaire allows them to say about what they say they think about it. And that is where your very data is going to be flawed. Then, just start to interpret and apply that data, and you have left the realm of science for some arcane, alchemical mysticism.
   So, all statistics are guesses at best, though they are more often lies. And so, I do not care to use them.
  Now, I am to proceed with a description of “typical” Christian responses to video games. This is based on 0% statistical analysis. I have no idea what fraction of the Christian base might lean one way or another, but that does not matter. My case rests on the fact that most one or more of these responses to the idea of video games will sound familiar to each one of us that has grown up with them around, even those who did not grow up playing them. I will try to leave aside inhuman statistics floating in ethereal nebulae (redundant though that phrase may be), and will attempt to focus on a picture of one fellow with his Christian commitment firmly placed in his affections, sitting down on the couch or at his desk, and considering whether he ought to go get a video game of some sort to occupy his attention for a while. I guess if he has time to sit and consider this, maybe he has time to fill out a questionnaire for the Barna Group.


That was on my mind as I was considering how to start this. Maybe it is good enough to post. Amelia is asleep, so I'll check with Florianus.


He said that the post was up to my usual standards. I am not sure what that means, but he also wanted me to include a picture, even a picture of my faithful dachshund. So I figured that was a good enough idea.

Video Games and the Christian

   A good deal of my thinking gets done in the car. I suppose that driving is an expression of freedom, in which I direct the car whichever way I will it to go. The environment out the windows changes drastically as the Broncito takes me from Nebraska's plains to mountains, rivers, and coastlines of the great American landmass. However, the car also forms in itself an exact, almost unchanging environment. It supplies its own white noise with the road and engine, creating a set background of sound to the conversations I have with myself or my wife. Perhaps it is because of this constancy amidst diversity that we seem always to return to the same few topics of conversation. These are:

1. Kvetching about relationship stresses
2. Baby topics
3. Rehashing old hobbies and happenings
4. Video Games, their use, abuse, and place in society and our own lives (mostly my life)

   As we drove along NE-2 East of Broken Bow, recently, Amelia and I got onto that topic of video games, once more. I think it is because I grew up playing games like Commander Keen and Jetfighter 2 on our old 486. Though I never became a very intense gamer, due primarily to the fact that I did not get a real job until I was finished with Bible school, I always enjoyed various types of virtual entertainment.
   Now I am married, and my wife Amelia is not at all a gamer. She grew up reading a lot, and doing crafty things, and generally taking care of everyone around her and being a productive individual. This, it seems, was antithetical to the acquiring and playing of video games. Thus we discuss the history and evolution of games on consoles and pcs, and my personal experiences with various games, and at times even find spiritual significance in some of the parallels which games make to real life. On this particular afternoon, we reached the topic during a discussion of guilty pleasures.
   Guilty pleasures are those activities which, while not bad of themselves, make us feel guilty when we enjoy them. Video games have often played this role in my life, softening the cry of my heart for closeness with God and my fellow man by keeping my brain occupied for a few hours. However, the annoying thing about this guilt I felt was that I really could enjoy video games in what I thought to be a perfectly righteous way. I could enjoy relationships with fellow humans, exercise my mind (and occasionally a muscle or two), and delve into a deep and involving story, all while enjoying the art and craftsmanship of an industry filled with energy and talent. So, how could we redeem the use of these pleasures from their guilt?
   The key, we felt, was in exercising our minds to prevent the wrongful use of video games. The principles of this were pretty similar to those by which we can enjoy any other media, whether it is attending live theater, strolling through a gallery, listening to music, or watching television. Essentially, we exercise our minds and attempt to understand what the artist is trying to convey (not only cerebrally, but what he wants me to feel or do, to), then we compare that with what Scripture says about reality, and we evaluate what we've seen. More often than not, in today's world, we will usually find the message of a film, game, or canvas to be very far off from the Message of the Scriptures, but we can still see glimmers of God's image in the artist's attempt to make his worldview correlate with what he knows ought to be true. This engagement with the art and the artist will be beneficial to the Christian and to society, Lord willing.
   So, as we continued to discuss things, Amelia and I hashed out a few major points, which I decided would be worth posting on for a little bit. Perhaps this will provide the sort of mission I can keep writing about. We thought about writing reviews of some of the games coming down the pike, so hopefully in the future I can do that and exemplify some of this interaction with games that I would like to promote. The following points will serve as an outline for our introduction to the topic, after which I will try to tackle some of the biggest games around nowadays, and perhaps explore the different uses of games in the various genres of gaming.

• Typical Responses of Christians to the Idea of Video Games
• The Danger of Guilty Pleasures
• Reasons to Play a Video Game or Two
• A Christian's Unique Perspective on Gaming... and Everything Else

   And with that, I will sign off for now.

Setting up a pc

There is something inherently soothing about setting up a pc, whether it is a new pc with a bunch of factory nonsense software to root out or an old one that just needs to be freshened up for continued life. I am enjoying this today, and thinking about the wonderfulness of AVG Free and trying out the excitement of Google Chrome. Good windy, cloudy day fare.

...crickets chirping...

It's been a while since I posted last. This four days off should be a good time to get back onto the PC and whatnot. I think I have managed to completely avoid this sad, empty blog for the entire period in which Amelia and I have had internet in our home. That's what you call ironic.

Genesis 1.1 and Work

I have finally got around to beginning some notes on Work. It's been a busy couple of weeks here in Nebraska, but I have a weekend at home this week. We shall begin with a contemplation of Genesis 1, but it seems wise to start with a look at Luke 10, in order to put some of the rather polemical themes of my thinking into proper perspective.

In Luke 10:40-42, Jesus speaks to Martha about Mary:

Luk 10:40-42
(40) But Martha was distracted with much serving. And she went up to him and said, "Lord, do you not care that my sister has left me to serve alone? Tell her then to help me."
(41) But the Lord answered her, "Martha, Martha, you are anxious and troubled about many things,
(42) but one thing is necessary. Mary has chosen the good portion, which will not be taken away from her."

The tendency of many sermons I have heard from this passage is to treat with this word from Christ as a general principle: it is better to "sit at Jesus' feet" than to work. Or, true worship is best expressed in a meditative experience of quiet introspection of the Jesus within... that might be overstating things slightly. However, I think that it is plain that, for many, 'work' has become the antonym of 'worship'. Genesis 1 ought to color our interpretation, methinks.

Gen 1:1
(1) In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.

God, in creating the world, shows that, though he was glorious without any material creation and perfectly happy in Triune fellowship, yet he glorified himself in creating. Mere contemplation of his own excellencies was now complemented by the beauty and might of his deeds in the creation. Matthew Henry articulates six aspects of the glory of God's creative acts in his commentary:

In the visible world it is easy to observe,
[1.] Great variety, several sorts of beings vastly differing in their nature and constitution from each other. Lord, how manifold are thy works, and all good!
[2.] Great beauty. The azure sky and verdant earth are charming to the eye of the curious spectator, much more the ornaments of both. How transcendent then must the beauty of the Creator be!
[3.] Great exactness and accuracy. To those that, with the help of microscopes, narrowly look into the works of nature, they appear far more fine than any of the works of art.
[4.] Great power. It is not a lump of dead and inactive matter, but there is virtue, more or less, in every creature: the earth itself has a magnetic power.
[5.] Great order, a mutual dependence of beings, an exact harmony of motions, and an admirable chain and connection of causes.
[6.] Great mystery. There are phenomena in nature which cannot be solved, secrets which cannot be fathomed nor accounted for. But from what we see of heaven and earth we may easily enough infer the eternal power and Godhead of the great Creator, and may furnish ourselves with abundant matter for his praises.

So, God's work in creation is seen to be a means of glorifying himself. In fact, it is eventually one of the chief means of furnishing his creatures' minds with “matter for his praises.” God did not think it unbecoming of himself to start making the heavens and the earth; he did not think that such work was mere busy distraction, and choose instead to stop and think about himself. He chose to create, and glorified himself in that creation.
To bring this back to the "Work vs. Worship" discussion, we see that it is wrong to think that work is meant only to provide our most basic needs, as a radical Stoic might profess. It is wrong to think that work is a means merely to keep us alive in order to worship at Jesus' feet more fervently. Rather, God, who needs nothing, glorifies himself in this awesome work of creation.

As Mike Rowe might say, "Work is not the enemy."

Christians in the Workplace

I have been thinking a lot about Christians and their vocations, and I will start by examining some of the texts that I find relevant and throw in some topical discussions based on it. Are there any particular passages or topics that ought to be covered? I was planning to hit up at least the following:

• Genesis 1 - 3
• The story of Joseph
• The Law and its teaching on property and slavery
• The promises in the Pentateuch and the work required in them
• Jesus' teaching on masters and slaves
• Masters and slaves in Ephesians and Colossians
• Service to masters and government in Peter's epistles

So, those are the places to which I am particularly eager to turn, but maybe there are some other such and such as it comes up. I had a list of the topics, but I set it down somewhere and I will have to find it.

Lewis on "new" interpretations

From "Why I Am Not a Pacifist":

If Our Lord's words are taken in the unqualified sense which the Pacifist demands, we shall be forced to the conclusion that Christ's true meaning, concealed from those who lived in the same time and spoke the same language, and whom He Himself chose to be His messengers to the world, as well as from all their successors, has at last been discovered in our own time. I know there are people who will not find this sort of thing difficult to believe, just as there are people ready to maintain that the true meaning of Plato or Shakespeare, oddly concealed from their contemporaries and immediate successors, has preserved its virginity for the daring embraces of one or two modern professors. But I cannot apply to divine matters a method of exegesis which I have already rejected with contempt in my profane studies. Any theory which bases itself on a supposed "historical Jesus" to be dug out of the Gospels and then set up in opposition to Christian teaching is suspect. There have been too many historical Jesuses - a liberal Jesus, a pneumatic Jesus, a Barthian Jesus, a Marxist Jesus. They are a cheap crop of each publisher's list, like the new Napoleons and the new Queen Victorias. It is not to such phantoms that I look for my faith and my salvation.

Kung Fu Panda and progressive sanctification

A few weeks ago, I watched Kung Fu Panda with six lttle Hajdas and Amelia at the Tiffany Theatre in Broken Bow for $4. That was quite an adventure. While Kids' Movie Day was primarily an oasis of activity in a desert week of babysitting, I was actually taken in a bit by the film, particularly one scene.
It was when Chifu, emboldened by his conversation with Master Ugwe, approached Po and told him that he would train him to defeat Tai Lan. Po's response communicated the deepest lesson that the movie had to offer. He asked of Chifu, "How are you gonna change *me* into the Dragon Warrior?" He pressed his point, demanding, "How?" three times. Finally Chifu admits, "I don't know." I could not help comparing this to the Christian's walk of faith.

Po's question is similar to what Christians ask of their own lives, often while studying Galatians 5:22 or 2 Peter 1. "How?" we ask, "How do I become the sort of person the Bible says I am to be?" We, like Po, seek constantly for someone, some book, some program or class, to make us into the Dragon Warrior... or, rather, to make us Christlike, mature believers. However, the problem with our question, like Po's, is a failure to recognize ontological realities. For Po, the reality was that Chifu was not *making* him into the Dragon Warrior- he already was the master, and had only to realize what was already written in the stars for him. Similarly we can focus so hard on working to *become* like Christ that we fail to consider the change which God already worked at salvation, when he imputed our sin to Christ on the cross and imputed Christ's righteousness to us. The ontological change has already taken place in the believer's spirit, even if there are changes yet to come in his heart, soul, mind, and body.

I also mused on a later scene, when Po discovered "There is no secret ingredient." He found that there really was nothing left to do to be the Dragon Warrior, he was ready to face Tai Lan as he was, because of who he was. This reminded me of how the chastisement for our peace has already been spent on the Cross. There remains nothing for us to do to win God's favor.

A final thought came to me as I watched the video on Peter's birthday. It is especially poignant that, although Po needed to stop trying to become the Dragon Warrior and needed to just be the Dragon Warrior, that did not mean he did not have to work hard, under the discipline and training of a mentor. Thus we watch a ten-minute training montage, with Po mastering his gluttony and self-pity, becoming a strong, heroic Panda. However, this was all a result, not the cause of his position as the Dragon Warrior.
So, one can say, the christian strives to resemble Christ, not in order to become a Christian or even to become spiritually mature, but as a necessary result of his true identity. As Paul said, the believer is crucified with Christ. His identity with Christi is thus complete, and his righteousness is perfect in God's sight. However, as he continues in Galatians 2:20-3:3, Paul's point becomes even clearer.
Identifying himself as having been "crucified with Christ," Paul said,

"The life I now live I live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. I do not nullify the grace of God, for if justification were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose."

The next few verses at the beginning of chapter 3 continue this thought, saying in essence that, if this is how justification was wrought to bring us to Christ, then this is how it will continue to work out. By grace, not by working under the law. So, do Christians live in sin, forgetting the law of God entirely? No, rather he is moved by the Holy Spirit from the inside to obey God's law (the law that the Christian obeys is another issue or two, but basically I think this is the royal law, loving your neighbor as yourself). To sum up the last couple chapters of Galatians, the seesaw of Resting in Christ versus Striving to be holy seems to be balancing on the fulcrum of the Holy Spirit's ministry in the believer's life. He bears witness in our spirits that we are the sons of God, and his presence and activity in us brings forth his fruit.

Hmmm, I that seems to have gotten more convoluted the longer I have steeped in it. What say ye?

Instant Gratification?

Splish-splosh. I'm mopping the floor at Runza again, wondering if we'll have any more customers between now and the blessed hour of 4pm when I make my way back to the coziness of Home. I glance up at the TV screen and see the headline:

Starbucks to Cash in on Billion-Dollar Instant Coffee Market

I gasp. What? Starbucks making...gulp... instant coffee? Instant coffee? My mind jumps to a few evenings prior when Steve and I were digging around in my parents' pantry for ground coffee.
"Nope, nothing," I sigh.
"Wait...what's this?" Steve reaches for a small container on a high shelf. I stop him as his hand touches the container.
"Oh, no. That's instant coffee."
Our simultaneous shuddering indicates that we would rather drink nothing at all than that...brown liquid. Now, here in Runza, I am informed that the reliable, consistent, mood-lifting Starbucks has betrayed my coffee snob sensibilities and gone over to the dark side.

As I continue my responsibility to the mop bucket, I begin to process why this is such an unpleasant development. It seems that the foremost difficulty is taste. Like a pre-packaged apple pie from a gas station, instant coffee is but a faint resemblance of the robust, warm flavor of the real deal. But the instant coffee in question is from Starbucks. Surely the taste wouldn’t be compromised.

Perhaps there is a greater issue at hand. We live in a time-oriented culture. Each day begins with an alarm clock signaling the time to rise and prepare for the day. The majority of our jobs begin and end according to a time-clock, not upon the completion of a project. Arriving late at a meeting or for church results in condescending glances. When we live as if we will pay for every moment lost, it makes sense that something like instant coffee would appeal to the masses. Who has time to stop and wait in a drive-thru while Ashley brews an espresso?

Interestingly, coffee is grown in traditionally event-oriented cultures, like South America or Africa, while popular coffee and espresso beverages have their origin in the predominantly relaxed cultures of Italy or France. Older cookbooks like The Fannie Farmer Cookbook or Irma Rombauer’s The Joy of Cooking feature extended discussions on the importance of taking the necessary time and paying the required attention to brew a good pot of coffee. Too often the enjoyment of drinking a quality beverage is thwarted by the perceived inability to simply wait.

In a sense, Starbucks is a franchised attempt to merge an event-oriented beverage into a time-oriented culture. In purchasing coffee from Starbucks we sense that we have participated in something greater and more elite than the normal routine of grabbing a quick cup of joe from the nearest grocery store. Now the production of Starbucks instant coffee reminds that not even this is immune from the hurried state of American lives. Herein lies the great difficulty.

But who am I to ramble on in this vein? I stand in a fast-food restaurant waiting for…beep! The drive-thru signal sounds in my headset. Someone wants a cheeseburger (plain), a large fry….