AUDIO: Sylvania C&C Sunday - "Between My People and Your People" (Ex. 8:20-32)

After 1,232 days of imprisonment, released: Yang Xuan

Yang Xuan was released in April according to Voice of the Martyrs. Continue to pray for our brothers and sisters in China.

From the Twitterverse...

Paul David Tripp (@PaulTripp): You don't rest in the stability of your character, but in the unchanging holiness of the character of your Lord.

Classical Arminianism: Imputed Sin and Total Inability

Interesting article this morning on the Founders Ministries blog. Tom Hicks highlights a book by a Free Will Baptist on the agreements between Classical Arminianism and Calvinism. Specifically, there is overwhelming agreement on the issues that the sin of Adam was imputed to all mankind, condemning all mankind, and that the human race in total is totally unable to please God and cannot come to God without the drawing power of the Holy Spirit. (John 6:44; Romans 8:7-8; Ephesians 2:1-3)

Both Calvinism and Classical Arminianism start from an Augustinian framework and reject as heresy Pelagianism and Semi-Pelagianism.

According to classical Arminian theologian, Roger E. Olson, “In 431 A.D. Pelagianism was condemned in Ephesus by the third ecumenical council of Christianity because it affirmed natural and moral human ability to do God’s will apart from the special operation of divine grace. Arminius rejected this teaching, and so do all of his followers. Semi-Pelagianism was condemned by the Second Council of Orange in A.D. 529 because it affirmed human ability to exercise a good will toward God apart from special assistance of divine grace; it places the initiative on the human side, but Scripture places it on the divine side. Arminius also rejected semi-Pelagianism, as have all of his faithful followers. Arminians consider both Pelagianism and semi-Pelagianism heresies.” Roger E. Olson, Arminian Theology: Myths and Realities (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2006), 81

Of particular interest to me is where this leaves the so-called “Traditional/non-Calvinist” Southern Baptist.  Note Article Two of “A Statement of the Traditional Southern Baptist’s Understanding of God’s Plan of Salvation” which says in relevant part:

We deny that Adam’s sin resulted in the incapacitation of any person’s free will or rendered any person guilty before he has personally sinned. While no sinner is remotely capable of achieving salvation through his own effort, we deny that any sinner is saved apart from a free response to the Holy Spirit’s drawing through the Gospel.

Perhaps I’m a little dense, but I’m not sure how those two sentences fit together logically. How can “free will” that is as free after the Fall as it ever was before the Fall leave no person “remotely capable of achieving salvation through his own effort”? If a will is free from all incapacity to do good and is neutral in its affections, why couldn’t a person’s free will choose to perfectly live a righteous life and achieve salvation through his own effort? If I flip a neutral coin, why wouldn’t it be remotely possible for the coin to show up heads again and again?

Mysteries abound in the reasoning of the “Traditional” Southern Baptist...

Light? Gosnell guilty

Kermit Gosnell Found Guilty on Three First-Degree Murder Charges

Look again: Mithras isn't a match

Those Pre-Christian Deities Aren’t Much Like Jesus After All

AUDIO: Sylvania C&C Sunday - "A heart fully set" (Ex. 8:1-19)

Well, I’ve pegged the time allowed on SoundCloud, so there are only two deep showing. I am trying to figure a cheap free way to put these online and am open to suggestions. Even so, here is our discussion from yesterday. I hope it is helpful.
 

In which Dan Phillips argues against the National Day of Prayer...and I think I agree with him

Dan updates a previous post from 2009 entitled: National Day of Prayer: in which I disagree with Shirley Dobson and everyone. Here are a few excerpts.

If one turns away his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer is an abomination (Proverbs 28:9) “Abomination,” it says. Something that — so far from pleasing God and bringing His blessing — repels, disgusts and offends God.

[On the call to “Acknowledge God”] When God says “God,” He certainly never means “However you define that word.” He always means “However I define that word.”

For us as a nation to pray, lifting up our bloody hands and asking God to pile yet more material blessings and protections on our openly defiant heads, is an atrocious insult to God.

I think Dan is right, and it bothers me because generally I look at these kinds of events as a reconfirming of our nation as being founded on Christian ideas. However, if we are given the ministry of reconciliation, and we are, then why would we encourage unbelievers to engage in duplicity that actually condemns them more?

What you believe about the end matters...

It has been rightly said that we are all theologians. We either do it well or we don’t.

Several months ago, some of the other Elders at Sylvania wanted us to present a series of talks on Eschatology, or what the Bible teaches about The End, and try to address why it matters. This is an issue to which I have not attended thoroughly, but I have formed some opinions.

I was a little hesitant to say the least. However, as these things generally follow, I thought it was a good series and certainly drove me to my Bible to study it more thoroughly.

Here are the topics covered with links to them in Sermon Audio. The last session was a round table discussion in which each of the Elders of Sylvania fielded questions submitted by members. It was a great set of questions.  I safely moderated...

1. Eschatology Part 1 (An Overview) - Phillip Dancy
2. Millennial Viewpoints of the Second Coming, Tribulation and Rapture - Dave Rowlett
3. Eschatology, An Overview of Perspectives on Israel - Kevin Rhyne
4. The 1,000 Year Reign of Christ - Len Teague
5. Worldview and the Clarity of Scripture - Kevin Rhyne
6. Eschatology & Politics - Phillip Dancy
7. Eschatology & Missions - Dave Rowlett
8. Eschatology - Round Table Discussion - Phillip Dancy, Paul McClung, Len Teague and Dave Rowlett

Tom Nettles explores why Adam sinned in the first place

The Positive Purity of the Original State of Man

Surprised?

Study: CNN Covered Collins Nine Times More in 24 Hours Than It Did Gosnell In One Week

Some are just more equal than others, I suppose...

AUDIO: Sylvania C&C Sunday - "Life to life, death to death" (Ex. 7:14-25)

AUDIO: Sylvania C&C Sunday - "Swallowed Up" (Ex. 7:8-13)

What harm would it do to legalize gay “marriage”?

So, what is the big deal after all?

For my money, the greatest harm in this untethered cliff-dive to the rocks below is the entrenched chaotic rebellion against the created order of marriage and the Creator of that order. First, sanctioning same-sex relationships with the status of “marriage” is a blasphemous middle finger to the Trinitarian nature of God Himself: unity in plurality.

Second, such approval by a society publicly states that society’s hatred of Christ and the picture of His love for His people. (Eph. 5:25-32) A particularly poignant point on Good Friday. Which leads to the next reason.

Third, it is public celebration of a nation’s self-love, where society giddily rejoices for those who are given over to a mirror-image worthy of Narcissus rather than a complementary person. I find it ironic that a society that has a militant fascination with “diversity” would be so hell-bent on enshrining ultra rights for sameness in the fundamental relationship of a culture.

I think these reasons are profoundly more important than the effect it would have on the fertility of a nation because they point to a deep-seeded cosmic rebellion from which it is rare for a culture to return.

I tire of the “that’s just your religion, don’t push it on the rest of us” tripe I keep hearing on this matter.  And secularism is not a religion?  And the devotion to the whims of man is not a religion? Such statements show hypocrisy at its most brazen.

Having said all that, here is an article filling in the details of what this chaos entails for generations to come.

What if we were talking about Meth addiction instead of SSM? Is it still loving to heartily approve it?

Me neither...