ESV Bibles & Cambrdige Craftmanship

The acclaimed English Standard Version is now available in quality Cambridge bindings. Looks like more editions/options are also on their way.

Click on this link for a better look at the picture.

As with all Cambridge products, the prices are high--but what a wonderful treasure!

Preaching Hell to Postmoderns

Have you ever found it challenging to speak about hell? I recently ran across a wonderful article by Tim Keller on this very subject. He urges the necessity of preaching this message, despite its unpopularity. Keller writes,

"The loss of the doctrine of hell and judgment and the holiness of God does irreparable damage to our deepest comforts—our understanding of God's grace and love and of our human dignity and value to him. To preach the good news, we must preach the bad."

Yet he also maintains that two different groups--traditionalists & postmoderns--"hear" hell-language very differently. He urges pastors to take our hearers' starting points into consideration as we preach about eternal torment. This is an excellent document with wise advice on how to discuss the reality of Hell in a postmodern age.

Tim Keller on Preaching about Hell.

More info on Keller with links to other articles.

JG

The Doctrines of Grace - Total Depavity

TOTAL DEPRAVITY

Sometime ago I was invited to speak at a college-age Christian retreat. My discussion had nothing to do with Calvinism, but during one the breaks several college students invited me to participate in a ‘round-table’ discussion. They had several theological/biblical questions they wanted to discuss. As I sat down, a young lady jumped right to the point, “I hear you’re a Calvinist. How can you believe that sinners can’t choose God?” I smiled and gently said, “Where did you hear that? Calvinists do believe people choose God.” Quite intelligently, she replied, “But you don’t believe people choose God by their own ability”. “That’s right”, I said, “because without God’s intervention how can something that is evil ever choose a good God?” I continued to ask her questions: “Do you believe all people are born sinners?” Yes. “Do you believe sin makes us an enemy of God?” Yes. “Do you believe sin affects our hearts, souls, bodies, and minds? Yes. “Do you believe sin makes us unable to save ourselves? Yes. “Do you believe it makes us unwilling to be saved?” Well, not always. I think many people recognize their sinfulness and turn to God. I replied, “Therein lies your problem, you rightly recognize the reality of depravity, but not its totality.”

The spectre of Pelagius still haunts the majority of Christendom. Radical Pelagianism denies the inherent evil of mankind. It claims whatever effects sin may have had, many exist for who salvation is not necessary. Even if someone has fallen into sin, they are both able and (many times) willing to save themselves.

While orthodoxy has rightly claimed such a teaching heretical, Roman Catholicism and much of contemporary Evangelicalism has never fully moved away from this idea. All Christian groups today teach the reality of depravity—that doctrine which states that mankind is born into sin and separation from God. Our hearts are inclined to evil and at enmity with the Lord. They strongly disagree with Pelagius’ assertion that human beings are able to save themselves, but they agree with him that many are willing to be saved.

If sin has truly distorted every dimension of the human person, it must have also affected our wills (what we want) and our minds (what & how we think). In other words, we do not desire God, we do not want God, and we will not allow our minds to turn us toward God. There is no such thing as the ‘noble pagan’ who, of his own power, recognizes his sinfulness and cries out to God for assistance. Certainly pagans do cry out to God, but it is by God’s power alone that this is possible.

Both Arminians and Calvinists recognize the reality of depravity, but only Calvinists recognize its totality.

Update: Thanks to those who noticed the error in the post graphic (which referred to the 5 solas). It's a sad day when a Reformed pastor can't tell his solas from his Tulips. LOL.

Celebrating Christmas with the Puritans

For some time now I have been an avid reader of Puritan literature. Their reformed understanding of Scripture was deeply held and sincerely lived out for the glory of God. Yet today the Puritans are considered "killjoys" and prudes because of their negative stance towards entertainment.

The issue of Christmas was particularly troublesome for the Puritans. They objected to the holiday for several reasons. First of all, it has no biblical mandate. Firmly adhering to the Regulative Principle in regards to worship, the Puritans recognized this celebration was not ordained by Christ and therefore maintained it should not be part of our Christian worship. Second, Christmas contradicts the historical record as Christ certainly wasn't born on December 25th. Third, the holiday has pagan roots. The Catholic Church had invented Christmas to compete with the ancient Roman festival honoring the bull-god Mithras. Its pagan roots was clearly evident by the fact that most only gave lip-service to Christ and instead used the holiday for self-indulgent revelry. Fourth, it reminded them of the Church of England and the Roman Catholic Church, which they were trying to escape. Fifth, the holiday celebration usually included drinking, excessive feasting, and playing games - all things which the Puritans understood as being antithetical to true worship. One such tradition, "wassailing" occasionally turned violent. The custom entailed people of a lower economic class visiting wealthier community members and begging, or demanding, food and drink in return for toasts to their hosts' health. If a host refused, things could occasionally turn violent (and even if it didn't, the custom would most certainly end in drunkenness).

Yet today conservative Christmas are the most vocal advocates of Christmas. We hear repeated refrains to "put Christ back into Christmas". Isn't it odd that faithful Christians of one century would almost universally oppose Christmas while those of another would unanimously promote it? Pity the poor pastor today who would dare to challenge celebrating this merry-making holiday.

Personally, I find the Puritan's arguments convincing. Don't misunderstand--my family still celebrates Christmas. Three days ago we set up the Christmas tree and took our yearly trip to a little outlet store where each of our three children picked out an ornament. We purchase a gift for each of kids and a few more for the entire family. On Christmas day we will gather for a gigantic feast and spend much of the day as a family. I just paid 20 bucks to the local Boy Scouts troup for a wreath to hang on the garage.

Yet, I cannot shake the Puritan viewpoint. It's too logical and too biblical to be simply ignored. The fact is that Christmas was and is a pagan holiday. In my own sketch of church history I cannot find a period in which Christmas was ever truly celebrated (universally) as a day of faithful worship to the King of kings. It was always tainted with self-indulgence and debauchery.

For the past few years we have celebrated Christmas with the Puritans. By that I mean that my wife and I consciously make the effort to mimimalize ourselves and maximize Christ. Each child receives only one present, which we open on Christmas eve (keep in mind that we cannot control the grandparents, so the kids usually receive more). The day of Christmas is reserved soley for Christ. In the morning we assemble at the "family altar" for prayer, worship, bible reading. At the meal we spend most of our conversation talking about Christ. Here we ask the children questions from the catechism and inquire what they have been learning about Jesus from Sunday school. We explore ways to make Christ the center of our lives in a variety of areas. In the evening, we assemble together again for worship and a sermonette that covers the Gospel story (creation-fall-redemption).

To be honest, neither the Puritans nor most contemporary Christians would approve of what we do as a family for Christmas. But the reason for disagreement is very illuminating: many Christians would object that we have taken the fun out of the holiday. The Puritans would object that we risk displacing Christ by having any fun at all.

We have chosen a middle path--but if forced, I would side with the Puritans.

- Josh Gelatt

Sproul Interviews Ben Stein

Sproul Interviews Ben Stein: http://www.chalcedon.edu/blog/2008/12/sproul-interviews-ben-stein.php

"What a great interview. Watch until the end. You'll enjoy the praise Stein heaps on our own R.C. Sproul. Bahnsen may have passed on, but R.C. is still on duty. Let's always pray for him."

This is a worthy post even if it is not from me personally.

Ken Clouse
Glennie, Mi.