MENU

Reformation
Tag Archive

On December 20, 2017 By In Podcast, Theology

Episode 23: RC Sproul

Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 19:00 — 11.6MB)

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Google Podcasts | RSS

In this episode of the Kuyperian Commentary Podcast, Pastor Uri Brito and Dustin Messer discuss the life and legacy of the late Dr. RC Sproul. On December 14, 2017, at 78-years-old Dr. Sproul passed away and went to be at home with the Lord.

Dr. R.C. Sproul (1939–2017) was founder and chairman of Ligonier Ministries, an international Christian education ministry located near Orlando, Fla. In addition, he was copastor of Saint Andrew’s Chapel, first president and chancellor of Reformation Bible College, and executive editor of Tabletalk magazine. a

 

  1. https://www.ligonier.org/about/rc-sproul/  (back)

Read more

On October 28, 2017 By In Culture, Theology, Worship

Does ‘Sola Scriptura’ Mean What You Think It Means?

“This is the only book I need,” says the evangelical, holding up his Bible. “We don’t recite creeds at my church,” says another, pointing to hers. Anyone who has spent much time in low-church Protestant circles will be familiar with these Bible-only sentiments. But how well do they square with the Reformation idea of Scripture alone? Is this what the Reformers meant? (more…)

Read more

On October 21, 2017 By In Culture, Theology

Sola Fide: The Problem With the Sinner’s Prayer

I am a Reformed Protestant, and I don’t believe we are saved by faith alone. Neither do I believe we are “once saved, always saved.” Do those statements seem strange to you? Then you’ve probably fallen prey to one of the great distortions of Protestant and evangelical theology. Read on, and I’ll explain.

Both the material cause of the split between Rome and the Reformers (Sola Fide, or “faith alone”), and the formal cause (Sola Scriptura, or “Scripture alone”), suffer from widespread distortions and misunderstandings, even among Protestants who claim to espouse these principles. As we approach the 500th anniversary of the Reformation, I want to debunk some popular myths about these two of the Five Solae.

The Pseudo-Sacrament of Conversion

Let’s start with Sola Fide, as it’s commonly embodied in evangelical circles: as a sort of confession of guilt and pledge of allegiance to God known as “the sinner’s prayer.” It usually goes something like this: (more…)

Read more

Martin & Katharina w/ children

On October 14, 2017 By In Family and Children, Theology, Worship

On Living As if God Is Real

Guest post by G. Shane Morris

Last night I watched PBS’s new full-length documentary, “Martin Luther: The Idea That Changed the World,” and was impressed. As soon as Carl Trueman showed up, I knew it was going to be good, but this thing is an achievement. It gets Luther right, warts and all, even if it does try a little too hard at the end to connect him with secular sensibilities. You will be more thankful for the Reformation this Augustinian monk started and better prepared to appreciate its 500th anniversary after watching this. If you’re fuzzy on the details of Luther’s life and work and don’t expect to get a good biography before November, this program is for you. (more…)

Read more

On October 31, 2014 By In Scribblings

Luther on the Glories of Christian Fatherhood

Any consideration of the Protestant Reformation in general–and Martin Luther specifically–would be incomplete without mention of Brother Martin’s views on the Christian family and his affection for children. Consider the following excerpt from Luther’s treatise (published in 1522) entitled The Estate of Marriage:

Now observe that when that clever harlot, our natural reason (which the pagans followed in trying to be most clever), takes a look at married life, she turns up her nose and says, “Alas, must I rock the baby, wash its diapers, make its bed, smell its stench, stay up nights with it, take care of it when it cries, heal its rashes and sores, and on top of that care for my wife, provide for her, labour at my trade, take care of this and take care of that, do this and do that, endure this and endure that, and whatever else of bitterness and drudgery married life involves? What, should I make such a prisoner of myself? O you poor, wretched fellow, have you taken a wife? Fie, fie upon such wretchedness and bitterness! It is better to remain free and lead a peaceful. carefree life; I will become a priest or a nun and compel my children to do likewise.

What then does Christian faith say to this? It opens its eyes, looks upon all these insignificant, distasteful, and despised duties in the Spirit, and is aware that they are all adorned with divine approval as with the costliest gold and jewels. It says, “O God, because I am certain that thou hast created me as a man and hast from my body begotten this child, I also know for a certainty that it meets with thy perfect pleasure. I confess to thee that I am not worthy to rock the little babe or wash its diapers. or to be entrusted with the care of the child and its mother. How is it that I, without any merit, have come to this distinction of being certain that I am serving thy creature and thy most precious will? O how gladly will I do so, though the duties should be even more insignificant and despised. Neither frost nor heat, neither drudgery nor labour, will distress or dissuade me, for I am certain that it is thus pleasing in thy sight.”

A wife too should regard her duties in the same light, as she suckles the child, rocks and bathes it, and cares for it in other ways; and as she busies herself with other duties and renders help and obedience to her husband. These are truly golden and noble works. This is also how to comfort and encourage a woman in the pangs of childbirth, not by repeating St Margaret legends and other silly old wives’ tales but by speaking thus, “Dear Grete, remember that you are a woman, and that this work of God in you is pleasing to him. Trust joyfully in his will, and let him have his way with you. Work with all your might to bring forth the child. Should it mean your death, then depart happily, for you will die in a noble deed and in subservience to God. If you were not a woman you should now wish to be one for the sake of this very work alone, that you might thus gloriously suffer and even die in the performance of God’s work and will. For here you have the word of God, who so created you and implanted within you this extremity.” Tell me, is not this indeed (as Solomon says [Prov. 18:22]) “to obtain favour from the Lord,” even in the midst of such extremity?

Now you tell me, when a father goes ahead and washes diapers or performs some other mean task for his child, and someone ridicules him as an effeminate fool, though that father is acting in the spirit just described and in Christian faith, my dear fellow you tell me, which of the two is most keenly ridiculing the other? God, with all his angels and creatures, is smiling, not because that father is washing diapers, but because he is doing so in Christian faith. Those who sneer at him and see only the task but not the faith are ridiculing God with all his creatures, as the biggest fool on earth. Indeed, they are only ridiculing themselves; with all their cleverness they are nothing but devil’s fools.

Notice that Luther’s vision of the Christian family does not presuppose an absentee father who sees the care of infants as “women’s work” that is somehow beneath him. Rather, Luther’s assumption is that the man who is following hard after Christ will take pleasure and gain sanctification as he rocks his newborn, washes it’s diapers, loses sleep giving baby comfort, and cares for baby’s mother in all tenderness. Luther also assumes that the man who does these things will inevitably face some scorn from what he calls “devil’s fools.”

As we pray for God to grant further reformation to the church in our day, we should pray that one of the evidences of that reformation would be men that mimic Luther’s views on tender caring toward their wives, their newborn children, and overall servant leadership in their households.

—-

Derek Hale has lived all of his life in Wichita, Kansas and isn’t a bit ashamed about that fact. He and his wife Nicole have only six children–four daughters and two young sons of thunder. Derek is a ruling elder, chief musician, and performs pastoral duties at Trinity Covenant Church (CREC). Derek manages a firmware lab for NetApp and enjoys reading, computers, exercising, craft beer, and playing and listening to music. But not all at the same time. He blogs occasionally at youdidntblogthat.tumblr.com.<>mobile rpg gamesкейсы продвижение ов

Read more

On October 31, 2014 By In Scribblings

Martin Luther’s Baptismal Prayer

Almighty, Eternal God, Who, according to Thy righteous judgment, didst condemn the unbelieving world through the flood and, in Thy great mercy, didst preserve believing Noah and his family; and Who didst drown hardhearted Pharaoh with all his host in the Red Sea and didst lead Thy people Israel through the same on dry ground, thereby prefiguring this bath of Thy baptism; and Who, through the baptism of Thy dear Child, our Lord Jesus Christ, hast consecrated and set apart the Jordan and all water as a salutary flood and a rich and full washing away of sins: We pray through the same Thy groundless mercy, that Thou wilt graciously behold this [child] and bless him with true faith in spirit, that by means of this saving flood all that has been born in him from Adam and which he himself has added thereto may be drowned in him and engulfed, and that he may be sundered from the number of the unbelieving, preserved dry and secure in the Holy Ark of Christendom, serve Thy Name at all times fervent in spirit and joyful in hope, so that with all believers he may be made worthy to attain eternal life according to Thy promise; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.<>реклама в google недорого

Read more

On September 1, 2014 By In Books

Should Reformed People Read N.T. Wright?

It doesn’t happen quite often, but once in a while when I recommend a book or a quote by N.T. Wright on facebook, I will receive a question that goes something like this:

“Do you approve of N.T. Wright? Do you think it’s fruitful to endorse N.T. Wright? Or don’t you know that N.T. denies Justification by faith alone?”

I addressed the first question on facebook and I thought I’d make it available here. My response goes like this:

I think the question ought to be more nuanced. In other words, humans and their ideas, especially new humans recreated by God, ought to be analyzed more carefully and charitably. As a pastor I recommend Wright to my parishioners with the same enthusiasm I would recommend C.S. Lewis, Schmemann, and Martin Luther. I have disagreements with all of them, but charity allows me to communicate with these great thinkers and gain from what they offer, while expressing sometimes strong disagreements on some of their contributions.

Yes, Reformed people, in fact, Christians of all stripes should read Professor Wright. His profound insights, his vision for a renewed humanity in Christ, his invaluable defense of the bodily resurrection of Jesus, and his commitment to the historical, Biblical Jesus make him one of the most gifted teachers and scholars of our time and The Jesus Seminar’s worst nightmare.

But what about justification? Shouldn’t we stand for the principal article of the Church? And by standing shouldn’t we reject anyone who denies it?

First, N.T. Wright has written and clarified many of his statements. He stated again and again that he does not deny justification by faith alone. I take him at his word. But hasn’t he been unclear? To those who think so, he will always be. I and many others find Wright’s overall project to be fruitful, despite having disagreements with him at points. I find Kevin J. Vanhoozer’s humorous, but yet serious points on the Wright vs. Piper debate to be very helpful, and from what I hear from reliable sources, Wright agrees and finds Vanhoozer’s attempt to bridge the two paradigms extremely beneficial.

Secondly, the Reformation did not settle every issue. There are contemporary issues that still must be handled within our context. The Reformers did not exhaust the fullness of justification. There is indeed a robustly corporate view of justification that the Reformers–rightly preoccupied with Romish theological abuse–simply did not address explicitly in the 16th century. In this sense, Wright needs to be read and listened to attentively.

Thirdly, when one poses the question of whether we should eliminate such an author from our library because he is wrong on an issue, no matter how important the issue may be, he is betraying the charitable nature of the Christian vision and our personal libraries. Of course, he may choose to avoid Wright, and other authors who also had some questionable theological presuppositions (like C.S. Lewis), but his theological vision will be narrow, and his ability to articulate a vision of the world will stop at the wardrobe (to borrow from Lewis). Those of us who appreciate Wright prefer to open the wardrobe and see Narnia in all its beauty.

Finally, the West’s over-emphasis on the individual is tragic. The individual matters, but Adam himself knew that the individual is not alone. Just as the Trinity is not alone, so too man needs to be a part of something greater. “Community” is not just a buzzword no matter how often hipster Christian groups use it. In its biblical sense, community is the essence of the Christian experience. Paul’s vision was highly ecclesiastical. The individual who divorces from the community loses his ability to be truly human. He breathes and eats as a human, but his breathing and eating desecrates God’s intention to incorporate him into  a multitude. N.T. Wright offers immeasurable contributions on this subject.

Naturally, there is the possibility of over-emphasizing community, but that hardly seems to be the problem in our day. The reality is if you stress the community you get the individual, if you stress the individual you don’t get the community.

Should we read N.T. Wright? Yes. Read him often with the eyes of discernment. But again, discernment is the Christian’s best friend in any human activity.<>siteособенности текста для а

Read more

On September 17, 2013 By In Worship

How Should We Pursue Maturity in Worship Music?

       

The Psalms 2

 There are two temptations that nip at our heels as we pursue reformation in worship. The first is to believe that older is automatically better. This group clings to the past like it is a magic charm. To them it is a window to better days when the church was “more pure.” There is no maturing in the church for this group. For this group, worship music is largely culturally defined, but the culture is an older one. The second temptation is to assume that newer is automatically better. The culture has moved on from “Holy, Holy, Holy” and if the church is to reach the culture she must move on as well. There is very little to learn from the early church for this group. For this group, worship music is to a large degree culturally defined, but the culture is the newest one. Let’s be clear, while the first error does exist, it is the second error which is the great temptation of our age. We must move on. We must be relevant. The great sin of our age is to look old.

            We should aim to avoid both these errors.  As we pursue reformation in church music here are some things to remember.

  1. We should be grateful for what we have. We live in an age of complainers. We whine about everything, including church music. Yes, there is always room for improvement. Yes, we all cringe at certain songs. Yes, it would be nice if we had the Psalms that were not paraphrased. Yes, it would be nice if we had better contemporary music. But God has been good to us. We have a great musical heritage from Ambrose to Luther to Wesley. We have more and more Psalms being set to music every year.  Growth comes from gratitude not from grumbling.
  2. Any reformation in church music must be built on the foundations of love for Christ and love for his people. If we seek reformation because we want to be “traditional” or because we want to be “relevant” or because we want to be “exciting” we are going to make fundamental mistakes.  Love for Christ and love for the Church form the center. Without love our songs are empty and vain.
  3. Musical growth is dictated by God’s Word not by our current culture or a past culture. That means our primary means of evaluating our singing will be the Bible.
  4. We should want to thoroughly ingest the older songs and the older ways of singing. These men are our fathers in the faith. We should sit at their feet before we seek to stand on their shoulders. This does not mean we will like all their songs or methods. But it does mean that each church should seek to live within the stream of Christian tradition. No church should sing only new hymns and choruses and completely reject the older tradition. This only shows arrogance.
  5. We should seek out new, theologically sound music to introduce to the congregation. No church should only sing older stuff. I do think a lot of newer stuff is weak, if not heretical, but not all of it is. There are God-honoring songs being written.  We should not be afraid of incorporating these into our local church music.
  6. We should be cautious in accepting worship music advice or songs from theologically inept musicians, whether they are on a church staff or in the pew. Here is why a lot of contemporary worship music is weak: worship music in the modern church has ceased to be overseen by the elders of the local church.  I am not saying elders must do everything.  But they must oversee it all. Music is a teaching ministry. If the church is to have theologically robust songs they must have theologically robust men writing them and evaluating them. The elders are the guardians of God’s Word. Yet for some reason they leave one of the most potent parts of worship up to other men (or women) who are not fit. Here is what Titus 1:9 says an elder must do.  “He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.”  Too many worship leaders and those who write church music do not fit this description. Also many elders do not read and study enough to know what God requires of a church’s music ministry.
  7. Each church can and should have its own local sound that uses local talents and resources, but still functions within the tradition of the broader, historic church.  If you have a piano player, then don’t grumble because you don’t have drums or guitar. If you have a guitar player, use him. Two churches separated by thousands of miles should sing songs that have similar content and doctrine. This comes from faithfulness to God’s Word. But these same two churches may sound very different.
  8. This does not mean sound is irrelevant. Some sounds are inappropriate for worship.  Some tunes do not match the words they are being sung to. Some types of music drown out the voice of the people. Or they are designed to create false emotional responses. Or they are designed to highlight the musician instead of the people. Or they are associated too closely with worldliness. The musical sounds in our churches will vary, but that does not mean any sound is acceptable for corporate worship.

<>оптимизация а под поисковые запросы

Read more