Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Reformed’ Category

Editor’s Note: I (“SlimJim”) am away in a family trip and this is a pre-scheduled post.  It is written by our guest Russ M.  He is currently in the Marines.

keep-calm-and-drop-the-cliches

The purpose for writing this article is that of the issues of biblical versus unbiblical worldview. In some cases modern evangelicals have lost our identity. There is an identity crisis not realizing that our true identity is found in Christ and God’s word. We died with Christ 2,000 years ago and we also resurrected with Him that we now walk in the newness of life (Romans 6:4). As Paul stated, “I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me…” (Galatians 2:20 NASB)

In light of our present world, the church of Jesus Christ has been relying on their own thoughts and ideas revolving around popular culture, that they seldom consider the words of Scripture. By failing to analyze common pop culture opinions without the accordance of Scripture we are vulnerable to the prince and powers of this world (Ephesians 2:2). Even the devil masquerades as an angel of light (2 Corinthians 11:14 NASB), producing words of light that affects even Christians, because they do not guard their hearts with Scripture.

Though the war is won at the cross the battle still rages in the fight for souls. It is our responsibility. “Watch over your heart with all diligence, For from it flow the springs of life.” (Proverbs 4:23)

How do we watch with all diligence?

By examining it, “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.” (1 John 4:1 NASB).

Shell of God’s truth stuffed with the Devil’s lie.

 

1. “Christianity is not a religion, it’s a relationship.”

Is Christianity a religion?

If you mention the word, “religion” in any circumstance with popular culture, almost automatically there are negative connotations associated with that particular word; in the Western civilization the word, “religion” has become a curse word. Words that associated with “religion” are as follows; narrow mindedness, blind faith, dogmatic, fundies, just to name a few.

But in laymen’s terms religion can be defined as, “man’s attempt to reach God”, like the ladder of Babel theology, which God cursed in Genesis 11. It is true that Christianity is not a religion because Christians are not attempting to reach God. Also, Christianity is God not attempting to reach man, but God purposefully saving specific men and women through the God-man Jesus Christ. While it is noted that Christianity is not a religion, is actually biblical.

 

Is Christianity a relationship?

The latter of the statement, “…it’s a relationship” is too generally stated. When our cultural thinks about a relationship they think about earthly relationships with feel-good sensations. Our culture relates a relationship with a father/mother parenting their children, they think about their best earthly friend on the planet, or some might even fantasize in creating an ideal relationship with a god to their likening; quoting words like, “Jesus is my homie.” With this broad terminology of relationship and the combination of not rooting our theology can be disastrous and can lead many astray worshipping a god of their imagination.

Everyone has relationship with the God of the universe. There are two relationships that God has with every individual on this Earth and is define in John 3:36

“He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.” (NASB)

The one who believes in Christ Jesus has eternal life, and the one who do not has wrath of God abiding in them. Earlier in the 3rd chapter of John we see the characteristics of eternal life, “unless one is born of water and the Spirit,” in (John 3:5) and is sandwiched with, “unless one is born again” in verse 3 and “You must be born again in verse 7. Being born again is not just saying I have a relationship with Christ, but demonstrating new desires of holiness, desires of witnessing to the lost, and desires of becoming more like the Christ of Scripture. Another question that must be asked is, “What is a Christian’s relationship with sin? Do they love to sin? Do they relish sin? Do they enjoy sin?” If they do say yes then they are still slaves to sin. “Do you not know that when you present yourselves to someone as slaves for obedience, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin resulting in death, or of obedience resulting in righteousness” (NASB). Therefore, you can have a wrathful or eternal relationship; there is no grey area here.

It’s not justification through relationship? It’s Justification through faith in Christ trusting in the holy sacrifice. (Ephesians 2:8-9).

What kind of relationship should we have with the God of the universe?

“Christianity is not a religion; it’s more than a relationship. Christianity is about submitting to the lordship of Christ can conforming to His image daily. (Romans 12:1-2)”

 

2. “God loves the sinner, but He hates the sin.”

In my youth I recall this phrase being used in a Christian rap artist’s lyrics and in the preaching of the pulpit during an evangelistic crusade endeavoring to win the lost. But where do we get such theology? Do we get it from t-shirts? Do we get our theology from photographic memes? Or do we get our theology from the unadulterated truth found in Scripture?

Yes, God does love sinners (John 3:16). Yes Jesus came to seek and save that which is lost (Luke 19:10) Yes, Jesus is a friend of sinners (Mark 2:13-17). Yes all true, but the statement, “God loves the sinner, but He hates the sin.” is only half-true, and half-truths are nothing more than deadly lies.

But imagine if someone close to you were murdered in cold blood for no reason. Would it bring justice to say, “I love the murderer, but I hate the murder?” Does God really love the nouns, but hate the verbs? Does God love the thief, but hate the thievery? Does love the homosexual, but hate the homosexuality? Does God love the adulterer, but hates the adultery?

Yes, God does hate those actions, but He even hates those who commit does actions. Yes, God hates the sinner and the sin.

“There are six things which the LORD hates, Yes, seven which are an abomination to Him: Haughty eyes, a lying tongue, And hands that shed innocent blood, A heart that devises wicked plans, feet that run rapidly to evil, A false witness who utters lies, And one who spreads strife among brothers.” (Proverbs 6:16-19 NASB)

When we look at these six things the LORD hates, they are all nouns, showcasing the body parts that connects to the sinner that commits the sins or verbs:  haughty (verb-sin) eyes (noun-sinner), lying (verb-sin) tongue (noun-sinner), hands (noun-sinner) that shed (verb-sin) innocent blood, heart (noun-sinner) that devises (verb-sin) wicked plans, feet (noun-sinner) that run rapidly to evil (verb-sin), and A false witness (noun-sinner) who utters lies (verb-sin)

 

Here are more verses that support God hating the sinners.

 

“The boastfull shall not stand before Your eyes; You hate all who do iniquity.” (Psalm 5:5)

 

“The LORD tests the righteous and the wicked, And the one who loves violence His soul hates.” (Psalm 11:5)

 

Still in unbelief? Does God punish sin in hell? Or Does God punish sinners in hell? The corresponding NT Greek word associated with hell is Gehenna, occurring 12 times in the NT Scripture, 11 out of the 12 came from Jesus own mouth. No sin is in hell, but only sinners weep and gnash (Luke 13:28), not sin.

 

There is no beating behind a bush around this, this timeless truth is uncomfortable yet when sinners are confronted with the gospel they will either cling more to the cross of Christ or continue to live an unrepented anti-God lifestyle.

 

We are naturally God-haters from the moment of conception, but once a sinner recognizes their exceedingly sinfulness, then they will see how amazing grace really is, because they were formerly wrath abiding citizens, but now are children of light, they will truly see the love of God, and they will abide in Christ through trails, tribulation, persecution, and even death.

 

We must not have an itching ear virus lecturing to our felt needs; bad theology runs rapid with the gross amount of false teachers. Let us go back to the word of God and sift any lumps of coals and be careful to examine the words that you hear in pop culture. Let us not be lax and test everything with the Scripture. “[The word of God is] more desirable than gold, yes than fine Gold; Sweeter also than honey and the drippings of the honeycomb.” (Psalm 19:10 NASB)

Read Full Post »

Editor’s Note: I (“SlimJim”) am away in a family trip and this is a pre-scheduled post.  It is written by our guest Ben Holloway who is a brother in Christ that is working on a PhD with Dr. Greg Welty .

Ben Holloway

The key to good apologetic strategy is knowing where to begin and where to end a debate. It requires getting at the heart of an objection and knowing what one is going to argue for in response.

The best way to find the heart of an objection is to watch out for key words or phrases. Whereas traditional apologetic methods rely on answering questions directly, presuppositional methods emphasize an indirect method, asking what would have to be the case to make the objection intelligible.

For example, take the question, “why should I believe the Bible is true?” A traditional response would be to give evidence for the trustworthiness of the documents making up the Bible. Presuppositionalists take a different tack. The issue is truth, not whether or not the Bible is true, but what would have to be the case in order for anyone to know any truth or for there to be such a thing as truth.

Knowing the key idea leads to developing a conclusion or a goal to one’s argument.

In the case in question the presuppositionalist should aim for an argument from truth to God. She might respond by arguing, “because if the Bible was not true, there would be no way to know if anything was true.” This is only the conclusion to the argument and would involve several steps to get to it, but it helps to know what one is going to argue for.

This method works as long as one spots the assumption behind the question and is able to show how such an assumption is only possible because Christianity is true.

Take another common and slightly more postmodern objection: “Christianity is a particular community’s interpretation of reality, but it is not necessarily true.” It is tempting to respond by showing that Christianity is true, but the objection is not concerned with truth (at least not in the correspondence sense). The objection focuses on the ability of human beings to interpret experience within particular linguistic communities. Consequently, the presuppositionalist may argue something like: “the interpretation of reality by communities using language is only possible because Christianity is true. Language did not emerge in human confrontation with events, but pre-existed in the intra-trinitarian language game of God. If it did not then there would be no meaning to language.” Again, there are multiple steps required to reach this conclusion, but the key is to be clear in one’s aim.

Another common objection relies on a moral assumption: “Christians have carried out many evil actions in history.” A common presuppositional response to this is: “Actions could only be judged as good or evil if Christianity is true. Human moral judgement relies on an absolute moral judgement determined by the nature of God.” It is crucial to note what that response presupposes. The objection refers to an observable event–an “evil action”–but the response refers to a conceptual framework by which one is able to asses actions. The action of kicking a soccer ball and the action of kicking a person is the same action, but what one needs in order to judge one action to be evil and the other to be good is a moral concept. Presuppositionalists do well when they show how the two are connected, in this case by the ability to judge actions according to moral concepts. Moral concepts would only arise if there is a prior standard by which human beings can discern between good and evil. And such a prior standard requires a moral judgement that is binding from God who is Holy and sets the standard of moral law.

Many objections that unbelievers have are related to what we can know from the Bible. Consequently, when asked what grounds one has for belief it is legitimate to cite one’s source. Consider the question, “what makes you think that Jesus is the only way to heaven?” This objection does not require one to show, philosophically, why it is rational for there to be only one way to heaven or to show empirically that Jesus rose from the dead thus verifying his claim to uniqueness. Rather, it requires an explanation of one’s source or grounds for believing that Jesus is the only way to heaven. In short, because the Bible tells me so. To argue that there is sufficient warrant for a belief provided by scripture is a legitimate line of response. However, one should be prepared to answer the follow up objection–“What makes you think that the Bible is true?”–to which one might respond giving the answer I gave at the top of the post.

Sometimes the word one is looking for is hidden or implied. For example, an unbeliever might suggest, “given the preponderance of evil in our world the likelihood that God exists is small.” The issue at hand is related to empirical evidence. “Likelihood” is a probability statement related to something we can observe. Therefore, one might reply that the human ability to observe, analyse and draw conclusions from empirical evidence is only possible because God exists and Christianity is true. The human ability to observe, analyze and draw conclusions relies on the predictability and intelligibility of the world and the matching human ability to assess probability and “likelihood” of the existence of certain objects. In this case the existence of a sovereign and omniscient God is the necessary condition for such a situation.

Often apologetic debate can be stifled by an objection that contains multiple starting points. In this case it is always best to seek to find out what underlying objection one’s interlocutor is wanting an answer to. Consider the objection, “aren’t all religions the same?” The objection sounds like it requires the refutation, “no, there is one true religion and many false religions.” However, it is unclear as to how one defends this answer. I have found that a conversation with someone committed to religious pluralism is difficult because there are so many lines of objection. Take the standard Hickean thesis: There are many different religions. Most people are equally rational and living in the same world. Therefore, all or most religions are equally warranted. Hick’s argument relies on several assumptions, each requiring a different response. Is the objection about justice? (It is not fair that God chooses some and not others). Is the objection about culture? (religion is a cultural product and no one chooses into which culture one is born). Many pluralist objections are rooted in epistemological skepticism. Their basic objection is that no one really knows what religion is true. Each of these objections starts with a separate (if related) assumption and it is worth exploring what is most important to one’s interlocutor.

Many apologetic debates get derailed by an inattention to what the heart of an objection is and an unclear goal in response. Perhaps you might light to practice your strategy with more common objections to the Christian faith. Try a search for “common objections to Christianity” and try to identify the key idea behind the objection and work out what you want to argue for. Then think through how you would get there.

Read Full Post »

m8Ntl3y

These are our collection of Presuppositional apologetics’ links from around the World Wide Web between August 1st-7th, 2014.

Enjoy!

1.) Atheism Fails as a Worldview: It Lacks Objective Moral Values

2.) BAHNSEN: YOU CAN PEEK INSIDE OF THE QUR’AN TO FIND ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO DESTROY ALL OF ISLAMIC THEOLOGY (VIDEO)

3.) Why Materialism Cannot Object to The Miraculous

4.) Cornelius Van Til’s lectures on Modern Theology

5.) Late week’s installment of Presuppositional Apologetics’ Links 

Read Full Post »

Dogmatic Theology Vol. 1 by W. G. T Shedd

Boy there’s a lot of great books now available online for free–even systematic theology books!  In the past I have blogged on Louis Berkhof’s Systematic Theology.  Now we have William Shedd’s Dogmatic Theology, courtesty of Monergism!

Monergism has announced this week the availability of this classic.  Part of the Preface is as follows:

The immediate preparation of this treatise began in 1870, when the author was called to give instruction for a year in the department of Systematic Theology, in Union Theological Seminary. The work was resumed in 1874, when he was elected to this professorship, and was prosecuted down to 1888. But some general preparation had been made for it, by previous studies and publications. The writer had composed a History of Christian Doctrine in the years 1854-1862, which was published in 1863; and also a volume of Theological Essays containing discussions on original sin and vicarious atonement, and a volume of Sermons to the Natural Man predominantly theological in their contents. The doctrinal system here presented will be found to be closely connected with these preceding investigations; and this will explain the somewhat frequent references to them as parts of one whole. The Dogmatic History is the natural introduction to the Dogmatic Theology.

The general type of doctrine is the Augustino-Calvinistic. Upon a few points, the elder Calvinism has been followed in preference to the later. This, probably, is the principal difference between this treatise and contemporary ones of the Calvinistic class.

To download it as a EPUB, to download it as a MOBI for Kindle.

Read Full Post »

free-ebook_620_08Aug2014-SurprisedBySufferingLigoner Ministry has made available for free R. C. Sproul’s book on Suffering for the month of August!  Here is the book’s description from their website:

In Surprised by Suffering, R.C. Sproul argues that we should expect pain and sorrow in this life. Some are actually called to a “vocation” of suffering, and all of us are called to undergo the ultimate suffering of death. God promises in His Word that difficult times will come upon us, but He also promises that He allows suffering for our good and His glory, and He will never give us more than we can bear with His help.

Surprised by Suffering offers biblical counsel and comfort for those undergoing suffering and for those who minister to the suffering, counsel that can help believers stand in times of trial with faith in a God who is both loving and good.

You can get download the book in the following three format:

Read Full Post »

For the World Essays in Honor of Richard L. Pratt Jr

I first heard of Richard Pratt when I discovered his Third Millennium Ministries and not too long after that I read his short book on Presuppositional apologetics and some assorted articles that he wrote.  This particular book is a festschrift in honor of Dr. Pratt.  I really enjoyed how various contributors throughout the book gave readers their portrait of the man and his ministry; it was quite encouraging for me given how I have benefited from his writing but didn’t know much about him.  As a result of reading this book I have a greater respect for Pratt for his desire to make theological education cheap and affordable for the rest of the world through his online ministry.  In many instances these multimedia resources are available in many languages for free!  I did not fully realize how great an impact Third Millennium Ministries was until I read this book.  It has also lead me to pray for this ministry to increase many fold!

I also found the various essays within the volume stimulating with its various topic dedicated to Dr. Pratt and his field of interests, some of the highlights which I shall discuss below.

The second chapter of the book was titled, “Saying It Anew: Strange-Making as a Pedagogical Device” in which the contributor Scott Redd talked about the pedagogical device of defamilarization.  Defamiliarization is a technique in which someone says something strange for the sake of the learner to think more carefully about a certain truth.  As Redd explained, “Ironically, defamilarizatoin can result in clarity, in part because, when skillfully applied, defamiliarization causes the hearer to encourage the idea in a new way, as if for the first time, thereby bringing its elements into stark relief” (21).  This chapter also defended this idea biblically, nothing the various use of literary devices and also nuance word order in the Bible was meant to draw the readers’ attention with something unusual so as to slow them down and make them think more carefully.  I thought defamilarization can be a useful tool for pastors, Bible teachers, professors, evangelists and the apologists.  Certainly it has made me more conscious of incorporating defamiliarization as a way of being a clear and fresh communicator of God’s timeless truth.

The chapter on “Redeeming the ‘R-Word:’ Paul against and for Religion” was intriguing and relevant since it addressed the contemporary Christian cliche that “Christianity is not a religion.”  Reggie Kid, the author of this essay, noted how Paul was against bad religion (what in the Greek is called asebeia) but this in no way implies that Paul or the Bible ever pit Christianity against religion per se.  There is, biblically speaking, room for good “religion,” and good religion is one which adheres to right doctrines and also right practices.  The author made a good point that whatever value and advantages gained in using the mantra that “Christianity isn’t a religion,” it can in the long run be counter-productive against the church’s effort in evangelism and discipleship.  Hipster Christians need to read this chapter!

The book also had a good chapter on metanarrative by the editor Justin Holcomb which is probably the only chapter I was most critical of; nevertheless I found his essay helpful because it helped me to think more clearly and precisely as a result of interacting with what he has to say.  Holcomb argues that Christian scholars have used the term metanarrative incorrectly when they call the Christian faith a metanarrative.  Technically, the term metanarrative as originally used by Lyotard (who brought the term to prominence) meant something more along the lines of a story that is used by people to justify autonomy and man-centered institutions which oppressively silence others, etc; Holcomb argues that Christian must be against autonomy and also against the justification of wicked institutions so we shouldn’t be describing Christianity as the very thing that Christianity is against.  While I agree that the term metanarrative as Lyotard employed it does not describe Christianity, I also think this might be an instance of how the use of a term over time can have a different shade of meaning than how it was originally used.  I doubt most people today in popular parlance use the term metanarrative as narrowly as Lyotard originally used it so I don’t have as much of a problem with Christians using that term in describing the Christian worldview so long as it is qualified and explained.  I did appreciate Holcomb describing how Postmodern were not necessarily all about relativism but that there was some good coming from this camp in their critical assessment of modernity’s autonomy and arrogance; but sadly at the end of the day I don’t think Postmodernism has managed to escape the problem of autonomy either.  Furthermore, since Holcomb discussed quite extensively about Lyotard, I wonder if a secularist using Lyotard’s definition of metanarrative might not call Christianity a metanarrative despite Holcomb’s wishes since Christianity presents the story that justify the Cosmic institution of the Church.

The book also had a helpful chapter on youth ministry in which the contributor David Correa argues that in light of many young people’s search for meaning beyond themselves with the realization that things are not the way it should be, this should be an opportunity for youth ministry to present our theology to make sense of the world, where it is going and how we fit in, in light of God’s Kingdom.

For those involved in teaching theological education in the context of missions and/or to another cultural setting, the discussion in various chapters on the need to make theological education “fit” for the situational context of non-Western audience sets the right direction for the future.  What is neat is to know that Richard Pratt has made a significant inroad with his ministry towards that end which readers can praise God for.  I appreciated John Frame calling for a theological education that is more “boot camp,” that is rigorous also in practical application in ministry; then there is the mentoring-in-ministry discussion by Gregory Perry.

I recommend the book for those who has appreciated Dr. Pratt’s ministry and teaching.  I wished there were more Old Testament contribution within the book besides the one by Waltke in light of the fact that this is a festschrift for an Old Testament professor!  Those unfamiliar with Dr. Pratt and are involved with theological education can also benefit from the essays found within it.

NOTE: This book was provided to me free by P&R Publishing and Net Galley without any obligation for a positive review. All opinions offered above are mine unless otherwise stated or implied.

 

Read Full Post »

van til edited

I have found over at Sermon Audio a series of lectures that Christian Reformed apologist Cornelius Van Til gave on the topic of Modern Theology.  I don’t know the original context of when and where it was delivered but it seem that it his primarily audience were young people.

I know many people have come to embrace Presuppositional apologetics not so much directly from Cornelius Van Til as it is more likely “mediated” through his disciples (or disciples’ disciples).  Think of his student Greg Bahnsen.  John Frame.  K. Scott Oliphint.  Then there’s others who never personally knew Van Til such as James White, Jason Lisle, Sye Ten Bruggencate, the guys over at Choosing Hats, etc.  In light of this, I thought it was neat to hear Van Til himself teach–and teaching specifically not so much seminarians but young people!  It’s the closest I suspect one might come to see Van Til breaking it down for the general Christian audience.

Here are the five part series:

PART 1

PART 2

PART 3

PART 4

PART 5

I myself was surprised at how funny Van Til was (and so did the audience).  I was also surprised to see how much of biblical theology of redemptive history shape his apologetics’ presentation especially in the beginning and I also appreciated his survey of the history of philosophy, which shape the method of “Modern” theologian during his life time.

Read Full Post »

1439706391_d0c20d3970_z

Here are links gathered between July 21st-31st, 2014.  Enjoy!

1.) Significance For Reformed Apologetics

2.)Mind and Body Dualism: You Are Not Your Brain

3.) Paul Draper on God and the Burden of Proof

4.) The Question of Apologetics by Francis Schaeffer

Read Full Post »

books

It’s my goal that in the next nine years I would read at least one commentary for every book in the Bible–so I can recommend a good commentary for the books in the Bible.

It is partly as my own devotional reading through the Scriptures and partly because of being asked what good commentaries I’ve read that I would recommend for certain books.  Since I realized I need to read more Bible commentaries, I thought this might be a good project on Veritas Domain.

Sometime this week I’ll post up a page that list out what has already been done.  I will be reviewing expository and exegetical commentaries.

Read Full Post »

John-Frame

We have been posting daily quotes from John Frame’s Doctrine of the Christian Life on our facebook and twitter account.  This morning I want to share an extended lengthy quote from John Frame on the relationship of the intellect, will and emotions.  John Frame is at his best when he explores the inter-relationships and/or inter-dependence of things and here is no exception.  People often have a wrong conception of the relationship between will and the intellect so the following is helpful.

Traditionally, will is contrasted with intellect (reason) and emotions.  In some accounts, it almost seems as though will, intellect, and emotions are little beings up in our heads who vie for supremacy.  Arguments have been made both about which of these three faculties is superior to the others and about which one ought to be superior.  Philosophical movements have been identified by views on this alleged conflict: Aquinaas has been called an intellectualist, Scotus a voluntarist, and Kierkegaard an emotionalist.

My own view, however, is that we make decisions as whole persons, and that intellect, will and emotions are perspectives on the whole persons, not subsistent entities.  The intellect is the person’s ability to think, the will his his capacity to decide, and the emotionsa re his capacity to feel.  We are talking about three abilities that people have, not three independent entities within them.  That I think is a more biblical perspective, for Scripture never distinguishes these three capacities or make any general statements about the superiority of one or the other.

In my view, the three abilities are interdependent.  You cannot make a decision (will) unless you judge (intellect) that it is the right thing to do.  On the other hand, you cannot make the right judgment (intellect) unless you choose (will) to make it.  The will is certainly involved in our intellectual judgments.  As Paul teaches in Romans 1, certain people choose to disbelieve in God, despite the sufficiency of the evidence of his existence.  Other people choose otherwise.  In both cases, belief is a choice.  The intellectual judgment is a decision of the will.  That is one reason why I have emphasized that the intellectual realm has a moral dimension, that there is an ethics of knowledge.

So will and intellect are dependent upon one another, and so are choice and reason.  They are not independent entities, but perspectives on the mental acts of human beings.  In everything we do, there is thought and choice.  And we think about what to choose, and we choose what to think.  And we choose what to think about what to choose.  We accept reasons because we choose them, and we choose them because we find them reasonable.

(John Frame, Doctrine of the Christian Life, 368).

I find the above helpful.  I would add that not one of the above faculty is morally superior to another.  Our sinfulness has corrupted all our faculty.  So we sin with our mind, our choices, and have sinful emotions, etc.  This has implication for apologetics that we have unpacked on our blog elsewhere; certainly the most obvious is that our mind is not a neutral arbiter of facts, nor does appealing to our intellect alone would necessarily lead someone to Christ if the sinful will chooses not to do so.   How much more do we need the grace of God.

Read Full Post »

What He Must Be If He Wants to Marry My Daughter Bauchman

Among the many Christian books on family, courtship and fatherhood that I have read, I think this book has become one of my top five.  While the book was intended to address fathers to encourage them to think biblically of what to look for in a man who wants to marry their daughter, nevertheless I think others can benefit from reading this book too such as single mothers evaluating those interested in their daughters, or the young man who want to become a godly husband in the future.  A young woman who wants to understand her father’s responsibility in the area of courtship and Pastors who wishes to teach a biblical view of courtship to their church will also benefit from reading this work.

The author Voddie Bauchman is a big advocate of a biblical view of family and has previously authored Family Driven Faith.  I find the emphasis in the book on the role of parents and especially that of fathers in the courtship of young Christian couples to be refreshing since it seems as if many contemporary Christian books on courtship hasn’t explain as clearly as this one did of the role of fathers in their child’s courtship.  Bauchman packs many practical advice and exhortation in this book that is biblical and wise.  As a father of two young daughters both of whom are under three years old at the of this review, this book made me realized that I can’t be too early in thinking about and preparing my daughter for marriage (let me add the caveat that preparing and training them for marriage now doesn’t mean I’m gong to have them marry at this moment!  I do think we must do so in a way that is age appropriate).  I appreciate the opening chapter on the multigenerational vision in the Bible that goes beyond the topic of courtship and about the family, church and society.  Bauchman uses his own background of broken family in the book to point to us the importance of doing family God’s way rather than what our society says.  I also appreciated how the author skillfully went through some of the passages from the Bible that I have not thought of in connection to fathers and daughter’s relationship and the broader topic of courtship—he even navigated exceptionally well through Old Testament passages in which he acknowledges the original recipients were Jews while maintaining that there are some wise principles to gain from looking at them even when the civil force of these laws are currently not enforced.  I also appreciate how Bauchman is realistic to realize the pool of godly candidates to marry our daughters are probably small and in chapter ten he gives us instruction of how, by the grace of God, we can go “build” godly men ourselves in the local church.  Here we see the importance of making disciples of younger men by older men does have some earthly blessing.

I won’t want to give away the whole book in this review.  Looking at my book and seeing all the highlights reminds me there is many things I could have talked about.  Go and get this book.

Read Full Post »

Psalm2-TH1

The incredible blogger Jeff Downs has shared with us several weeks ago of a resource regarding a Biblical Worldview.  Reverend Christian McShaffrey of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC) has preached a series titled “A Psalm 2 Worldview.”

The description of this series is given below:

A “worldview” is a philosophy of life which determines how a person sees the world. Everyone has a worldview, but most people simply “catch” their worldview and assume that it is correct.

As Christians, we simply cannot afford to be thoughtless when it comes to understanding the world around us and interpreting the events which occur in it. Rather, we need to allow the light of scripture to illuminate and interpret reality. It is only in this that we will find hope and peace in this world.

Pastor McShaffrey presented the basic principles of a Christian Worldview by explaining and applying Psalm Two during the Fall of 2013.

Here are the audios:

10/20/13  –  The Raging of the Heathen (Psalm 2:1-3)

10/27/13  –  The Disposition of God (Psalm 2:4-6)

11/03/13  –  The Inheritance of Christ (Psalm 2:7-9)

11/10/13  –  The Invitation to Nations (Psalm 2:10-12a)

11/17/13  –  The Blessedness of Christians (Psalm 2:12b)  

Enjoy!

Read Full Post »

article-2673211-1F30482400000578-326_964x641

Here are some links on Presuppositional apologetics gathered between July 15th-21st, 2014!

1.) Biblical Apologetics: Practical and Workable

2.) Book Recommendation: Inerrancy and Worldview by Vern Poythress

3.) Atheist Peter Boghossian Loathes Christians: “Reprogram Them!”

4.) Proving God’s Existence: Would You Believe If He Showed Up at Your Door?

5.) 

6.) Is the mind an emergent property of the physical brain?

7.) Last installment of Presuppositional apologetics’ links

 

Read Full Post »

Chance_comps.indd

Earlier this year Crossway published a 368 page book by Dr. Vern Poythress titled Chance and the Sovereignty of God: A God-Centered Approach to Probabiliy and Random Events.  I appreciate how Dr. Poythress has made many of his books  available to the public for free as a PDF.  This new book is now among them!

You can download the PDF by clicking HERE.

The description of the book on the publisher Crossway’s website is as follows:

What if all events—big and small, good and bad—are governed by more than just blind chance? What if they are governed by God?

In this theologically informed and philosophically nuanced introduction to the study of probability and chance, Vern Poythress argues that all events—including the seemingly random or accidental—fall under God’s watchful gaze as part of his eternal plan. Comprehensive in its scope, this book lays the theistic foundation for our scientific assumptions about the world while addressing personal questions about the meaning and significance of everyday events.

Here’s the table of content:

Table of Contents

Introduction: Experiences with Unpredictable Events
Part 1: The Sovereignty of God
1.  The Bible as a Source for Knowledge
2.  God’s Sovereignty
3.  Unpredictable Events
4.  Disasters and Suffering
5.  Human Choice
6.  Small Random Events
7.  Reflecting on Creation and Providence
8.  God’s Sovereignty and Modern Physics
9.  What Is Chance?
Part 2: God as the Foundation for Chance
10. Regularities and Unpredictabilities
11. Trinitarian Foundations for Chance
12. Responding to Chance
13. Chance in Evolutionary Naturalism
14. Chance and Idolatry
Part 3: Probability
15. What is Probability?
16. Predictions and Outcomes
17. Theistic Foundations for Probability
18. Views of Probability
19. Subjectivity and Probability
20. Entanglement of Probabilities
21. Probabilistic Independence
22. Independence and Human Nature
23. Is God Probable?
Part 4: Probability and Mathematics
24. Pictures of Probability
25. Mathematical Postulates for Probability
26. Theistic Foundations for Some Properties of Probability
27. Limitations in Human Thinking about Events and Probabilities
28. Conclusion
Appendices
Appendix A: Why Gambling Systems Fail
Appendix B: The Real Problem with Gambling
Appendix C: A Puzzle in Probability
Appendix D: Interacting with Secular Philosophical Views of Probability
Appendix E: Permutations and Combinations
Appendix F: The Birthday Problem
Appendix G: Diseases and Other Causes
Appendix H: Proofs for Probability
Appendix I: Statistics
Appendix J: The Law of Large Numbers versus Gamblers

Enjoy!

Read Full Post »

b052a51c197b55e0ea8bd0c1665b7fa5a0b75625

Here are links on Presuppositional apologetics gathered from July 8th-14th, 2014.

1.) Clearing the Presuppositional Malaise

2.) Theological Memeology: Don’t Push ‘Religion’ on Me!

3.) VAN TIL CIRCLES AND THE MEANING OF LIFE

4.) The Biblical Basis for Presuppositional Apologetics

5.) Biblical Apologetics: Exegetical and Theological

6.) Militant Atheist Peter Boghossian Wants to Reprogram Christians into Atheists: Reeducation Camps is His Solution to Religion

7.) Book Recommendation: What’s Your Worldview? by James Anderson

Last Week’s: Early July 2014 Presuppositional Apologetics Round Up

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 793 other followers