Pastoral Musings

Thoughts, essays, and miscellanea…

God’s Word, Salvation, And Sanctification

Posted by Pastoral Musings on 6th August 2011

Quadruple combination opened to the Book of Is...

Image via Wikipedia

What good is Scripture?

It is good to lead us to salvation which is through faith in Christ Jesus.

It is good to direct, correct, and perfect us that we might fill the place that God would have us to fill.

“But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; and that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. ” (2 Timothy 3:14–17)

The Scriptures which led Timothy to Jesus are the same which will lead him to sanctification.  Scripture is sufficient to do that for us.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Bible | Comments Off

Revival

Posted by Pastoral Musings on 16th July 2011

Cover of "Revival"

Cover of Revival

Never has there been a revival but that some of the people, especially at the beginning, have had such visions of the holiness of God and the sinfulness of sin, that they have scarcely known what to do with themselves.

pg 157 Revival, Martin Lloyd-Jones

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tags: , , ,
Posted in ministry | Comments Off

Bob Hayton on Piper/Warren Interview

Posted by Pastoral Musings on 31st May 2011

Sitting in a room where John Piper is intervie...

I hope this scandal is behind us now. God will be (and is) the judge. We can rest in His sovereignty. Until then, remember, we’re not ministering on behalf of Piper or Warren or anyone else. We have to be faithful with where God has put us. I’m not of Piper or of Warren. I’m of Christ. But I respect both of these men and pray God’s continued blessing on their ministry.

via John Piper Interviews Rick Warren « Fundamentally Reformed.

Wise words, Bob.

Thanks

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in church issues, Uncategorized | Comments Off

Adrian Warnock on John Piper And Rick Warren

Posted by Pastoral Musings on 31st May 2011

Pastor Rick Warren at Saddleback Church.

Image via Wikipedia

Many dismiss Warren for purely stylistic issues. They do not know of his avid devouring of Biblical theology. They are not aware of his love for God’s Word. They see a style that seems focussed on practical issues, and very simple teaching. They do not appreciate that there is a very clear and thought-through method that lies behind the way Warren communicates, nor that it is so much harder to explain things in a straightforward way.

Piper is very different stylistically to Warren. Yet I love the fact that he appreciates him so much. In the introduction to the video Piper is very clear that he values Warren’s efforts in the social action arena. He is not afraid to say that he is concerned that doctrine be at the foundation of all we do. Warren agrees with him on this and states that it is doctrine that drives him.

via John Piper interviews Rick Warren on doctrine and the Purpose Driven Life.

This sounds interesting.  I’m not sold on Warren, but I hope to learn more as soon as I can see the video to which Warnock refers.

The Christian Post has an article about the interview.

Desiring God’s interview page.

Scribd archive of the transcript.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in church issues | Comments Off

Francis Schaeffer’s Works Online in MP3 Format

Posted by Pastoral Musings on 29th May 2011

Francis Schaeffer

Image via Wikipedia

Wow!  I’m sure that I’m running behind, but I just found Francis Schaeffer’s works available as free MP3 downloads.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in apologetics | Comments Off

Historic Fundamentalism part 5

Posted by Pastoral Musings on 28th May 2011

Carl F. H. Henry

Image via Wikipedia

In my mind Historic Fundamentalism as a movement was a good thing.  Sure, there were probably excesses.  Human are normally people who go to extremes in almost everything they do.  The goal and the purpose seems to have been honorable, however.

What went wrong?

Why is fundamentalism now distrusted and maligned?

Why is “fundamentalist” synonymous with “extremist”?

One of the issues is the fact that separation became an issue.  Some decided that they would rather not separate from error, but dialogue with those in error in an attempt to win them over.   Personally, I don’t think this has as much to do with the demise of fundamentalism as a movement as the following issues do.

Fundamentalists began to retreat from culture.  Instead of engaging and transforming culture, fundamentalists began to isolate themselves.  They did so to such an extreme that Carl F. H. Henry wrote a book entitled “The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism”.  His contention was that the fundamentalists’ understanding of the Scriptures should have led them to social activism in a redemptive context.  They failed in that respect.

In their retreat from culture and their separation from those in error fundamentalists began to separate from one another over various non-fundamental issues (dress, hair, Bible translations, music, etc.).  They committed a sort of intellectual and spiritual incest by creating their own institutions of learning and actively resisted learning from evangelicals or anyone else, choosing to recycle their students by bringing them into their faculty.  (This is a generalization, but it is an observation from this writer’s experience.)  This led to further isolationism, a clannish spirit within fundamentalism, as well as a growing anti-intellectualism.

Here we are today with fundamentalists struggling to find their identity.  They wonder what a fundamentalist is.  What does he believe?  And, should we even care?

It is this preacher’s contention that it does matter, and that we should care.

It is for this reason that we have this blog.  We long to call people back to the fundamentals of the faith.  We long to help those who have been hurt by extremism.  We long to point out error for the sake of helping those who are in error.

We have been down the extremist route, but we are Fundamentally Changed, though we are Fundamentally The Same.  We are fundamentalists with a capital “F”.  We have not abandoned that.  We have abandoned legalism.  May we encourage you, dear reader, if you are in legalism, to do the same?

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in biblical criticism, church issues, doctrinal issues, doctrine, exegesis, extreme fundamentalism, Fundamentals, hermeneutics, higher criticism, history, Inerrancy, King James Only, kjvo, liberalism, modesty, morality, music, origins, pastoral issues, Preaching, Scripture, Social, textual issues, theology | Comments Off

Historic Fundamentalism part 4

Posted by Pastoral Musings on 27th May 2011

Hudson, in Religion in America notes that fundamentalism had many moderates at the first.  Later, he states, there arose militant fundamentalists who sought to take over denominations, and were prepared to fight for what they held to be true.

Hudson does not seem to speak of any fundamentalist with favor, but these are certainly not highly esteemed by him.

He later goes on to state that there was not a large revival in the US as a result of fundamentalism.  On the other hand, in less secularized portions of the population, yet the holiness movement was the one that profited the most.

It is interesting to see these things, because it illustrates the tie between revivalism and fundamentalism.   Sadly, much of fundamentalism has drifted more and more into emotionally driven worship and preaching.  At the same time, there has been much neglect of the life of the mind.

Though there were many well educated fundamentalists, there are becoming less and less.  Emotionalism is becoming more prevalent, and fundamentalism more fragmented.  The fighting spirit seems to have dominated the studious heart.

Historically, though connected to revivalism, fundamentalism still held a seat in the university.  There are those who are seeking to recover the intellectual emphasis while retaining a passionate love for God.

May their tribe increase.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in biblical criticism, church issues, doctrinal issues, doctrine, extreme fundamentalism, Fundamentals, hermeneutics, higher criticism, history, liberalism, theology | Comments Off

Historic Fundamentalism part 2

Posted by Pastoral Musings on 25th May 2011

Cover of "Fundamentalism and American Cul...

Cover via Amazon

The late nineteenth century was characterized by upheaval. The War Between The States caused much disturbance in the nation. At the same time there was much disturbance to the state of Christendom in the U.S.A. Darwinism was being accepted by many leaders in Christian churches and universities. Attempts were being made to reconcile the Bible and Darwinism. Shifts were occurring that were subtle, and some that were not so subtle.

George Marsden, in Fundamentalism And American Culture, speaks of divergence at this time. There was the Protestant ethic and reverence for the heritage of Protestantism. There was also the romantic, emotional sentimentality of the day.

Henry Ward Beecher was one who was a preacher, writer, progressive, and one whose thinking was greatly influenced by the sentimentality of the day. He was also greatly influenced by the new, Darwinistic thought. One thing he was not, was a theologian. Beecher softened truth without totally denying it. He began to accommodate those who did deny truth saying, “..we are neither to disown them as Christians, nor discipline them for believing as they do…” (Marsden, Fundamentalism And American Culture, NY, Oxford, 1980 pg 24)

Later Beecher fully embraced evolution. Marsden claims that Beecher interpreted God through human experience and sought to subordinate even Scripture itself to the authority of the modern age.

By this time “theology was no longer viewed as a fixed body of eternally valid truths. It was seen rather as an evolutionary development that should adapt to the standards and needs of modern culture.” (ibid pg 25)

Truth was being attacked by three things: evolutionary naturalism, higher criticism of the Bible, and an idealistic philosophy and theology which seems to have divided God and science by putting God beyond the realm of reason and rationality while putting science out of the reach of God.

Sadly, at this time, it seems that morality mattered more to many of the conservative evangelicals than the life of the mind and theology. This seems to be one of the reasons that fundamentalists later separated from culture instead of seeking to redeem it. Moralism without theology can only be maintained by separating from negative influences. A Biblical theology, however, leads to Christian practice and morality that will have a positive effect on culture without separating from it altogether.

In 1895 the Niagara Bible Conference issued a statement in support of “five ‘essential’ points of Christian doctrine- the verbal inerrancy of Scripture, the deity and virgin birth of Christ, the substitutionary atonement, the physical resurrection of Christ and his bodily return to earth.” (Hudson, Religion In America, NY, Scribners, 1965, pg 283) In 1909, The Fundamentals was published. In 1910, the Northern Presbyterian General Assembly issued a statement similar to that of the Niagara Conference.

It is against this backdrop that historic Fundamentalism must be viewed.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in church issues, doctrinal issues, doctrine, extreme fundamentalism, Fundamentals, higher criticism, liberalism | Comments Off

The Best Apologetic of All

Posted by Pastoral Musings on 15th May 2011

Cornelius Van Til

Image via Wikipedia

Apologetics, if they are actually effective, serve the church more than they serve the unbelievers.  That is my opinion, but I must ask how many people have come to Christ through learning that Noah’s ark could indeed hold all of those animals?  That would seem to serve to confirm the faith of a person more than convert an unbeliever.

No.  What we need to help us reach the unbeliever is something stronger than an argument for the existence of God.  We need something stronger than creation science, or worldview conferences, though they are certainly helpful for those within the fold.

We need something strong enough to convince a person who is hostile to the faith.

We need something strong enough to overcome the hostility to Christianity and Christians.

We need Spirit-filled Christians.

We need Christians who live out their convictions.

We need Christians who are genuine, sincere, and obviously real.

In short, we need true Christians, and not the anemic hodge-podge that we have are today.

 

“Beloved, I urge you as sojourners and exiles to abstain from the passions of the flesh, which wage war against your soul. Keep your conduct among the Gentiles honorable, so that when they speak against you as evildoers, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day of visitation. ” (1 Peter 2:11–12)

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in apologetics | Comments Off

If You Wish to Speak Against Fundamentalists, Read Fundamentalists

Posted by Pastoral Musings on 12th May 2011

A the top of the Biblioblog top 50 is Jim West.  I happen to think that Jim is an intelligent and nice guy.  We’ve had a few good exchanges, and I hope to read his book on Zwingli when it is released.  Sadly, Jim has an issue with Fundamentalists and is myopic in that he thinks all Fundamentalists are the same.  That is sad, because it prevents us from having the relationship that Christian brothers should.

Though somewhat strongly worded (I know no other way to deal with it), I’m hoping that the statement below will cause Jim to reconsider his words.

 

Jim said,

a fundamentalist in iowa is the same as a fundamentalist in islamabad.

 

Sorry, Jim.  Christian Fundamentalism is not Islamist fundamentalism.  After all, the term Fundamentalist came out of the Niagara Bible Conference.  It is first of all a Christian term.  You can read some brief articles about Christian Fundamentalism here.

You may use it as a pejorative, yet you do so either in ignorance or with spite.  I make no assertion which it is.

I distinctly recall someone saying that one needs to read theologians of other traditions before condemning their theology.

What is at stake here?   A misrepresentation of historical Fundamentalism.   Christian charity.  Something that we need more of.

It’s time to stop the skewering of those who disagree with you, Jim.  Disagreements don’t have to be fights.  Straw men don’t help us fellowship.  It’s also time to stop acting like the extremists that you call fundamentalists: those dudes don’t walk in the footsteps of the historical Fundamentalists such as Machen, Torrey, and G. Campbell Morgan.  While despising them, acting like them brings you to their level.

NOTE: This is not about fighting with Jim.  It is about hoping for reconciliation by Jim giving us the same courtesy that he expects to be given to himself and to others.

 

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in extreme fundamentalism, Fundamentals | Comments Off

 

Switch to our mobile site