MENU

Scribblings
Category

On July 12, 2015 By In Scribblings

Love Gov – New Libertarian Satire Series

The Independent Institute has released a very timely, bold, new satirical video series on liberty—Love Gov: From First Date to Mandate.

Premiering on YouTube, Love Gov personifies the increasing folly, cost, and intrusiveness of government in the lives of everyone, especially the young.

The 5-part video series depicts the federal government as an overbearing boyfriend—Scott “Gov” Govinsky—who foists his “good intentions” on a hapless, idealistic college student, Alexis.  Each episode follows Alexis’s relationship with “Gov” as his intrusions wreak comic havoc on her life, professionally, financially, and socially. Alexis’s loyal friend Libby tries to help her see “Gov” for what he really is—a menace. But will Alexis come to her senses in time? Tune in to find out!

Love Gov is a funny and compelling way to help anyone understand the federal government’s expanding reach into our lives. It’s a lighthearted approach to reach audiences on a personal level and inspire them to learn more and take action.

Watch the trailer here.

Read more

On July 11, 2015 By In Scribblings

When did the Church Come Into Existence?

bapt

I find Tom Holland’s work to be the near-perfect balance of creative yet careful, original yet faithful. While many talk about theological exegesis—Dr. Holland actually does it, and he does it well. To whet your appetite for his indispensable Contours Of Pauline Theology, here is Holland interpreting the church’s baptism into Christ through the lens of Israel’s baptism into Moses. In so doing, he answers the deceptively tricky question “when did the church come into existence?”[i]

“Alongside the baptism into Christ is the type of the baptism of the Israelites into Moses in their Exodus. All Jews, according to Gamaliel the second, of all preceding and subsequent generations, were present in the coming out of Egypt, and shared in the baptism that made Moses their leader. It was then that Israel became the son of God and the Spirit was given to her to lead her through her wilderness journey.

This explains why Paul has been so decisive in his use of the preposition sun. There is no unity of believers, either with each other or with Christ, until they have been united together through baptism. Paul has been careful to define this baptism in terms of its occasion, for it was a baptism into Christ’s death. As Moses, in the Exodus from Egypt, took out the people of God, for they were united with him through baptism, so Christ takes those who have been baptized into union with him from the realm of Sin and death. It was a baptism into his death that all believers experienced, in the same historic moment.

There was no union, either with each other or with Christ, until it had been created by the Spirit. It was this baptism that brought the covenant community into existence. Therefore if one asks when did the church historically come into existence, the answer is at the moment of Christ’s death, for it was then that the Spirit baptized all members of the covenant community into union with their Lord and Savior. Once this union had been established, Paul was free to use the preposition en (in), which speaks of the fellowship of believers in Christ. From then on, in terms of ultimate reality, no believer could experience anything apart from all other believers, for their union with Christ is such that all other believers were also partakers in Christ’s saving work.

What I am arguing for is that the baptism passages which we have considered are speaking neither about water baptism nor even of Christ’s baptism into his sufferings, even though these are important related themes, but about a baptism modelled on the baptism of Israel into Moses when Israel came into a covenant relationship with Yahweh through the representative he had appointed. In Romans 6 (and in 1 Corinthians 12:13, Galatians 3.:5ff, Ephesians 4:6 and 5:25-27) Paul is demonstrating how the old order has been brought to an end and how the new eschatological order has come into existence. It is because believers have shared in the death of Christ, with the consequence that they have died to all the covenant demands of the old relationship that bound them mercilessly to Sin and Death (Satan), that they are now free to live lives unto God who made them his own through Christ his Son.”

Holland concludes:

“Once again we have seen that Paul has stayed within the corporate categories of the Old Testament. He has modelled the creation of the New Testament community in the same terms as Israel’s inauguration when she was brought out of Egypt. In reverting to the original Exodus Paul has not abandoned the New Exodus motif, he has simply merged the two exoduses of the Old Testament to form his model. This allowed him to use the Paschal sacrifice of the Egyptian Exodus to interpret the death of Jesus. The Babylonian Exodus was not based on a sacrificial rite and therefore needed augmentation. He joined the sacrificial element of the Egyptian Exodus with the promises of the prophets of a New Covenant to produce his New Exodus paradigm. It was this merger that was unique to the New Testament, for the Jewish material did not look for a suffering Messiah whose death would bring about the salvation of the new covenant community. Paul saw the death of Jesus to be his exodus and identified the moment of the birth of the community under its new representative to be in the moment of its Messiah’s death. Thus all Christians have been baptized into his death. To be outside of that event is to be outside of Christ. Again we see the clear use Paul made of the prophets’ New Exodus model that had been enriched by the sacrificial threads of the original Exodus and fulfilled in the death and resurrection of Jesus.”


[i] Holland, Tom. Contours of Pauline Theology: A Radical New Survey of the Influences on Paul’s Biblical Writings. Fearn: Mentor, 2004. Pg. 150-154

Read more

On July 11, 2015 By In Scribblings

Ten Quotes on Leadership

I really enjoyed Al Mohler’s book The Conviction to Lead. I have  read it twice and I am sure I will keep coming back to it over the years. Here are ten quotes from the book. I might post more later. I would recommend the book for any Christian in any leadership position whether pastor, school administrator, professor, leader of a small group, owner of business, father, etc. Mohler’s personal experience as a young leader who reformed Southern Baptist Theological Seminary adds weight to what he says.

“When a leader walks into the room, a passion for truth had better enter with him.”

“I believe that leadership is all about putting the right beliefs into action, and knowing, on the basis of convictions, what those right beliefs and actions are.”

“There are plenty of very intelligent people who have virtually no ability to lead.”

“The most important truths come alive through stories, and faithful leadership is inseparable from the power and stewardship of story.”

“Leadership is the consummate human art. It requires nothing less than that leaders shape the way their followers see the world.”

“Disciplined thought requires the leader to think clearly about how things connect and how reality is to be analyzed.”

“Until conviction is transformed into action, it makes no difference in the world.”

“True credibility rests in the ability of others to trust what the leader can do.” (Emphasis his)

“Every single day, the faithful leader must be aware that credibility is the essence of leadership, and that it can be both earned and lost.”

“Leadership doesn’t happen until communication happens.”

Read more

On July 9, 2015 By In Scribblings

Stop Playing the Victim

There are few characteristics as central to American culture today as that of being a victim. We automatically assume in most situations we have been victimized. There are real victims, of course. There are people who have hurt, maimed, harmed, reputations destroyed, families broken, children abused, etc. But what I am talking about is that American mindset of being perpetually offended. The students blame the teacher. The teacher blames the students. The parents blame the children. The children blame the parents. The conservatives blame the liberals. The liberals blame the conservatives. We lost the game because of the referees. We lost the election because it was rigged. Our grades are low because our school district doesn’t have enough money. We could pick any race, any economic category, any social status, any topic and we will find the same pattern. We are united in our belief that someone else is to blame.

For Christians, this is a devastating mindset because it causes us to excuse our sin and keeps us from repentance. We look out at all the things someone else has done to us, real or imagined, and then we say, “It is not our fault.” I was raised by bad parents so the command to honor my parents does not apply to me. My neighbor played loud rock music last night, so the command to love my neighbor does not apply to me. My seminary professor gave me a low grade therefore the command to give honor where honor is due is excised from the Scriptures. My wife was sharp with me last night therefore the command to be kind is cut out of the Bible. My husband does not love me well enough so I do not need to respect him. And on and on it goes. Even if the sin against us is real, it does not excuse our own sin. We can never place the blame for our sins upon someone else. But this is exactly what a victim mentality does. We ought to know better.

Stop shifting the weight of your sins onto the shoulders of your parents, children, teachers, government, spouse, pastor, congregation or whoever else you think is at fault. Stop blaming others for your sins. Stop evading responsibility. Realize that the blood is on your hands because you plunged the knife in. Then flee to Jesus, the sinless victim, who carried the weight of your sins. Only at the Cross can your sins be rolled away. Trying to place them on others will only end in bitterness and pain.

Read more

On July 6, 2015 By In Scribblings

Happiness is Eating God

In Mere Christianity, C. S. Lewis proposes the Fall of Adam and Eve occurred when they tried to “invent some sort of happiness for themselves outside of God, apart from God.” From this has flowed all the sinful acts and all their ill effects throughout the course of human history. Our history is “the long terrible story of man trying to find something other than God which will make him happy.”

However, as a motor designed to run on fuel cannot run without it, so the human being, designed to feed on God, cannot be happy without him. Lewis goes so far as to say, “God cannot give us a happiness and peace apart from Himself, because it is not there. There is no such thing.”

Lewis wasn’t making this stuff up. Jesus said, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink.” (John 6:53-55)

It is no small coincidence that the first temptation revolved around food, the consummation of all things happens around a meal, and in the interim we commune with God around His table. God is the source of all pleasure and all fulfillment, but not a source producing things which, once imparted, make us happy. He gives us himself. He is the fuel. He is the food. He, himself, is the fulfillment. “God cannot give us a happiness and peace apart from Himself, because it is not there. There is no such thing.”

Read more

On July 3, 2015 By In Scribblings

Meditation on the 4th of July

We are nearing the 4th of July. It is a time of joy and celebration. And we hope to satiate our hunger tomorrow with good drinks, good food, and good friends. But beyond all the fireworks, parades, and the good and healthy national festivities, we will also remember that in 1776, the Declaration of Independence was approved by the Continental Congress, setting the 13 colonies on the road to freedom as a sovereign nation. Sovereignty is good. It is right. And I believe there was much wisdom in that threefold pursuit of Life, Liberty and Happiness. Undoubtedly we have not followed those principles too well in this nation. We have despised life by disposing of unborn infants, we have forgotten that God has set us free from ourselves and from the tyranny of sin, but we have also forsaken the liberty given to any nation whose God is the Lord. Therefore, we receive the just punishment we deserve, and that means the majority of our politicians and their policies. Washington has become a place of secret handshakes, unwarranted transactions, political elitism, sophist rhetoric, and cowardice. And finally, the happiness that we should certainly pursue is largely devoid of any form of Trinitarian rationale. Happiness–which is the pursuit of righteousness– without Nature’s God is temporary and unsatisfying.

We are first and foremost heavenly citizens. Our pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness are not granted by this nation, but by a heavenly nation that this country has largely ignored. But this should not be the case. We are not pessimists. We know that even in the darkest moment of this country’s history, God is still on the throne, and He did not hit the pause button on his kingdom advance.

Be good citizens of this nation. Sing Psalms so loudly that the enemies will think there is an army of giants coming at them. Speak truth so firmly that Washington will be unable to shut her ears. Stand strong that nothing will deter you from marching on. Love so convincingly that godly marriage would be honored. Obey the Lord your God and petition his mercy that God would spare. True patriotism rejoices when our country does right, and weeps when she chases after false gods.

Read more

On June 27, 2015 By In Scribblings

The Starting Point of Reformed Theology

god hand

In chronicling the unique contribution of Reformed Theology to Theology proper (i.e. the Doctrine of God), T.F. Torrance describes Calvin’s project as being in “full revolt” of the Latin system. Medieval theology, says Torrance, begins with the “being of God,” conceived of in primarily philosophical categories. Reformed Theology, in contrast, begins not with a philosophical ontology, but with the ways in which God has chosen to reveal Himself—namely, His Word, written and incarnate. Says Torrance[i]:

“In contrast, then, to Medieval theology, the Reformed doctrine of God can be set out in four main lines.

(1) God is He who is known only though His Word, who is indeed unknowable except as He gives Himself to be known, but who has as a matter of fact condescended to reveal Himself to us familiarly in our human speech and in our creaturely world in such a way that we are drawn into conversation, that is personal relation, with Him.

(2) This is essentially the living, active, Creator God of the Biblical Revelation, who made the world out of nothing, so that all creaturely reality is utterly distinct from Him, though entirely dependent upon His goodness for its existence and being and order and goal. As such He is utterly free, transcendent and incomparable in His Divine Life and Being. He really is the Supreme Eternal, Infinite Being, and reveals Himself as such through His active intervention and works in creation and redemption.

(3) This God, is ‘a God in Covenant,’ as the Westminster Larger Catechism admirably put it. He is not a God who wills to live alone but who has created man for communion with Himself and bound man in Covenant promises which He actively fulfils within creation and history. He is the God who intervenes in history, who is mightily active in the Covenant people, as well as the nations of the world, in the fulfilment of His redemptive purposes.

(4) He is the God and Father of Jesus Christ, the Saviour, to whom we in Christ may pray, ‘Our Father.’ It is this knowledge of God in Christ which governs all, which tells us that God is eternally Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, so that all the perfections of God are of the Three Persons of the Godhead, so that God’s relation to the creature, in creation and in redemption, is the relation of this God who became incarnate and creaturely man, and yet remains very God on the throne of His Kingdom. There is no God except He who has shown us His Face in Jesus Christ, so that we cannot go behind the back of Christ to find God, or know anything about Him apart from this God, for there is no other God than this God. Here then, it is not some prior ontology, but Christology which is all-determining in our knowledge of God.”


[i] Torrance, Thomas F. The School of Faith: The Catechisms of the Reformed Church. London: J. Clarke, 1959. Print.

Read more

On June 27, 2015 By In Scribblings

C. S. Lewis Comments on SCOTUS Decision

“For the wise men of old the cardinal problem had been how to conform the soul to reality, and the solution had been knowledge, self-discipline, and virtue. For magic and applied science alike the problem is how to subdue reality to the wishes of men: the solution is a technique; and both, in the practice of this technique, are ready to do things hitherto regarded as disgusting and impious.”
–C. S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man

Read more

On June 18, 2015 By In Scribblings

Adventure Trumps Safety

I enjoyed Edwin Friedman’s book A Failure of Nerve. In it he attacks several common leadership ideas and replaces them with a different paradigm. One key idea in the book is that leaders take risks. An environment which limits risk ultimately limits leadership.  Risk means the possibility of failure and pain. Risk is not doing something you know everyone agrees with and will be happy about. A lot of us think we are taking risks, when really we are not.

He also hammers on what he calls “displacement.” What he means by this is people refuse to take personal responsibility, but instead “displace” their responsibility by blaming someone or something else. He points out that often the thing blamed is important, but it becomes too important in the person’s emotional well-being. He ends this section with this quote, which is thought provoking.  The bold is mine.

Today the issues most vulnerable to becoming displacements are first of all, anything related to safety: product safety, traffic safety, bicycle safety, motorboat safety, jet-ski safety, workplace safety, nutritional safety, nuclear power station safety, toxic waste safety, and so on and so on.  This focus on safety has become so omnipresent in our chronically anxious civilization that there is the real danger we will come to believe that safety is the most important value in life. It is certainly important as a modifier of other initiatives, but if a society is to evolve, or if leaders are to arise, then safety can never be allowed to become more important than adventure. We are on our way to becoming a nation of “skimmers,” living off the risks of previous generations and constantly taking from the top without adding significantly to its essence. Everything we enjoy as a part of our advanced civilization , including discovery, exploration, and development of our country, came about because previous generations made adventure more important than safety.

Perhaps one of the reasons we have so few real leaders is that safety is the greatest virtue. How many  times have we heard, “He is the safe candidate. Vote for him?” How many times has the church leader taken the safe route instead of the risky one?  How many business owners refuse to take risks? Yet when we look back on history and in our favorite books, who do we admire most? We admire men who took risks. Men who did not play it safe. A man cannot lead if he is constantly worried about his own safety.

Read more

On June 12, 2015 By In Scribblings

Evil, Lies, and Ugly: Thoughts on Privation

by Marc Hays

In The City of God, Augustine of Hippo wrestled with the problem of evil. Augustine summarized his thoughts with the now famous maxim: “Evil has no positive nature; but the loss of good has received the name ‘evil.’” Evil is not a thing; it is a privation—a lack of a thing, namely goodness.

The qualities of being have been aptly summarized in classical philosophy in the triad commonly referred to as the “transcendentals”—namely “goodness, truth, and beauty.”  Augustine has relegated the definition of evil to a privation of the good; the very existence of evil is ultimately contingent upon the existence of the good, for evil cannot describe any act except the one that does not attain unto goodness. Consider for a moment an extension of Augustine’s maxim to the other two of the three, ancient transcendentals: truth and beauty.

Truth is often considered under the realm of knowledge, and most of us hold to the notion the truth is “that which corresponds to reality.” We also know, however, that truth can be embodied, enfleshed, and incarnated for Jesus Christ said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life.” So truth is more than a logical correspondence with reality, but it is nothing less than that.

Continuing with Augustine’s idea of privation, a “lie,” would be a description of that which does not correspond with reality. There is no category for “lie” unless there is a “truth” to be misrepresented, twisted, corrupted. Borrowing Augustine’s axiom, a lie would be a privation of the truth. A lie stands between the knower and that which is to be known, casting a shadow.

Following this line of thought, the third of the transcendentals, “beauty,” ought to be considered within the same category of goodness and truth, while “ugliness” would fall into the category of evil and falsehood. Following Augustine again, that which is ugly is a description of that which does not attain unto the standard of beauty.

There is no apt description of ugly unless beauty is the canon, the standard, the rule. There is nothing easier than to believe with our culture that “beauty is in the eye of the beholder.” We have replaced “beauty” with “preference” and we sleep easy at night believing that the transcendental triad is fine as a duo. We fight for objective goodness, and we fight for objective truth, all the while affirming with the spirit of our age that beauty is up for grabs. The longer the church affirms that there is no such thing as objective beauty, the more ugliness will be preferred, both within the church and without.

Read more