Every Square Inch

Revivalism, pt. 7

2011-11-15T20:47:00.000-08:00

1. Revivalism has failed. It fails because it steers us away from what God wants and towards ourselves--our emotions and felt needs.

2. Revivalist techniques, emphases and content need to be self-consciously avoided, and that which revivalism displaced should be embraced and emphasized in our worship.

3. This is not to manipulate people but to reorient our worship toward what God says He wants.

4. This will bring reform to the Church.

5. This in turn will reform the culture.

6. It will be opposed even from unlikely sources.

7. Because it is what God says He wants, it will happen, after us if not with us. This should encourage us in the face of resistance.

Lent 2011: The Death of Lily and Adam's Sin

2011-03-29T18:17:00.000-07:00

I've always had a lot of empathy for our first father, Adam. I've listened to many foolish brothers run him down for what he did, and for the consequences which his sin brought into the world. My knee-jerk response has always been, "You'd have done it too, probably sooner. Honor thy father."

Whenever I read of the Fall, my thoughts inevitably lead to considering what must have been Adam's profound regret, a sorrow which would last the better part of a millennium. I grieve over what it must have felt like to watch mankind multiply and fill the Earth, only to sicken, fight, and die, knowing that each person is your offspring and every death is your responsibility, even down to the lowliest inhabitant of a creation subjected to futility.

This year, during the "bright sadness" of Lent, just the barest inkling of that experience has intruded into my life, as I watched our dear cat Lily Belle die on the vet's table.

Lily came to us at an Evening Prayer service at our home with some of our Church family. I was playing drums at another Church that evening, and so came home late after everyone had arrived. Immediately, my wife and friends started telling me of a stray "kitten" who had walked out of the bushes and onto our doorstep, trying to come in each time another guest arrived. Later, I met her too: tiny, dirty, flea-ridden, and emaciated, with the saddest little face. My heart melted, and after feeding her we made her a little pallet in the garage.

We explored shelter options, but I soon discovered that she was deaf. That settled it: we would cross the two-cat limit and become "those people." Our vet informed us that our "kitten" was actually a sweet little old lady, somewhere around seventeen years old!

Lily Belle came home and fit right into our life. She was content to eat tons of Fancy Feast and rest in a couple of comfy spots. Occasionally she'd explore but she was happy with the claim she had staked to the living room. She arrived at detente with the two boys with a minimum of complaining from either side.

A sweeter cat you'll never find. Lily maintained a constant, gentle purr whenever her people were present. She was at home and pleased in our presence and loved to have her little head stroked. She wasn't particularly playful (either old age or life on the street had killed those impulses) but sometimes we'd walk into the room to find her sitting in a paper bag or cardboard box reserved for the younger cats' use.

But the way of all flesh crept upon Lily Belle, and her little kidneys began to give out. She stopped eating, became dehydrated, and grew more and more lethargic. After attempts on our part to give her subcutaneous water and syringe feedings, it became apparent that there would be no prolonging the end results of the disease. We would either watch her suffer or euthanize her before her tiny body began to shut down.

Most of us know the pain of that trip--that agonizing last car ride, the tearful goodbye, the lonely drive home and the sting of every reminder around the house. It's heartbreaking.

But what lies behind that heartbreak? Is it merely a severed emotional attachment, the loss of a companion, the interruption of a comfortable home life? Is there more, something that gives the deaths of our beloved pets meaning?

I believe so. I believe so because I believe that my father Adam sinned, and in him I sinned.

Before the transgression our father was given charge of the entire creation, and interestingly that mandate has never been repealed. Rather, it was restated several times to his descendants, and recorded for the rest of us. We have inherited a position of kingly stewardship over all the other creatures but now the glory of our authority is tainted by the curse, and our relationship to them is strained and marred by death.

We haven't lost it all. I also believe our delight in our animals derives from our exercising loving dominion over them. Taking responsibility for their lives, for their care and well being, brings deep satisfaction to our souls, because in that we imitate the God Who cares for all. A wise man regardeth the life of his beast, and acting in wisdom always brings blessing.

The tragedy of the Fall is that the blessing of owning responsibility for our pets' lives involves owning responsibility for their deaths as well. We brought Lily Belle into our lives knowing she'd be leaving us. We took on that grief the day we opened our door to her.

But we did open our door. We knew what it would cost, yet we esteemed loving her, nurturing her, doing what we could to restore her as a thing worth the pain of having to watch her die. As two among the many commissioned to restore the world, we did what we could.

I think in the end that's my Lenten lesson. As I live through another cycle of the Church year — at this time owning my own sin even while I'm forgiven — I live through the pain of the curse while working my small part in its undoing. I grieve the pain in the world with my eyes set firmly upon the wiping away of every tear. I know my Redeemer is making all things new, and I thank Him for our Lily Belle and for giving us an achingly brief charge over her life. I take comfort and joy in that the creation's groaning is ever so slowly giving way to singing.

I heard a bit of both this year, and was greatly blessed in it.

Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi, pt.2

2011-02-18T09:09:00.000-08:00

Read this. This is a perfect set-up for this series of blog posts, and a reminder to me to get on it. Stay tuned.

More on (!) That Last Post

2010-10-07T09:06:00.000-07:00

What would be some legitimate reasons for someone to buy and watch a video of a worship service from five years ago? I can think of a few.

1. Mere anthropology.
2. Liturgical interest.
3. Instruction in playing the music. A video hymnal, if you will.

...

Can't think of any others. Are any of these represented by a significant percentage of the consumers of these products?

Excursus: Some might answer "So I can worship along at home." This is not a "legitimate reason," in my opinion, because as a son of the Reformation I reject the idea of the private Mass. Also, the use of the video as a devotional tool would seem to be equally questionable in that the videography itself would be a distraction, at least as edited in common usage.

Worshiping Entertainment

2010-10-06T10:15:00.000-07:00

I might be speaking to a group of worship-leading drummers soon, and on a long drive last night I was considering what I might say.

One of the things that I thought to bring up seemed blog-worthy, and it is this:

I can purchase DVDs of so-called "worship events" (let's just call them worship services, okay?) from a number of large Churches or para-church organizations recorded over the past several years. I can sit on my sofa and watch a worship service from 2006.

Stop here and take a moment to ponder how ridiculous that is.

Think about that a little more.

A little more.

That little twinge you should be feeling right now is the creeping feeling that something ain't right.

Please do keep coming back to my blog...

Revivalism, pt. 6

2010-09-14T19:02:00.000-07:00

1. Men become like that which they worship.

2. Worshiping a vague, truncated "God" who is generally awesome produces vague and truncated men with no definable sense of awe.

3. Worshiping a cosmic boyfriend produces girly, needy men.

4. Worshiping a "God" who needs ever-increasing gimmickry and hype produces jaded, unsatisfied men.

5. Worshiping a "God" whose presence alone isn't sufficient to attract worshipers produces irreverent men.

6. These all demonstrate the vital need to diligently monitor and evaluate the content of our songs, the structure of our services, and the focus of our outreach.

7. The weight and complexity of crafting these things is virtually impossible to overstate.

Koran Burning

2010-09-07T09:01:00.000-07:00

I have some friends who were involved in the occult. Not the buying tarot cards from a hippie in a head shop kind, but the real and scary stuff, the kind that God says you should execute people for. Those brothers repented and got right with the Lord, and as an act of contrition burned their books of magic. They had to pray over them to get them to burn, but that's not important here. Burning as a valid method of idol disposal is.

A lot of folks are upset over a fundamentalist Church hosting a "burn a koran" day this September 11th. I think they could find better use of their time, but there is some overreaction to the extent of "Christians shouldn't burn korans." I can't agree with that; I can think of several situations in which it would be a wonderful thing to do.

Imagine a family or large group of former Moslems who have just been liberated by the Gospel. They gather around the fire and throw that wicked, twisted book into the flames, rejoicing with wine, kissing their newly unveiled wives, praising God.

Picture a modern day Boniface in a village somewhere picking up a koran and throwing it into the fire saying, "Let's see allah do something about that."

Who could argue with that?

Closer to the point, even burning a koran as an act of contempt is not sin, and is always a better thing than building a mosque anywhere.

Now. Burning a koran as either an act of provocation or rah-rah patriotism is more often than not not a desirable act, because it is giving the finger to people to whom one ought to be more concerned with preaching the Gospel. We are to be bold, challenging and confrontational, but our goal is never to seek to insult. And that's where this Church is getting it wrong.

Glenn Beck's "Restoring Honor"

2010-08-27T09:13:00.000-07:00

I'm a Glenn Beck fan. I like his radio show a lot; I subscribe to the podcast and listen to a lot of it most weekdays. Politically, he's almost as far to the right as I am, but the main reason I like to listen is that he and his producers are great broadcasters. It's just a well-produced show.

The gigantic "restoring honor" rally he's hosting in D.C. tomorrow is something I could totally get behind were it not for the religious aspect of it. It's because of that that in my opinion no Christian conservative ought to take part in it.

Beck routinely talks about how we as a nation need to return to both "God" and the Founding Fathers. I agree, but the issue is complicated by the fact that Glenn is both a Mormon and kind of a syncretist in his speaking of "faith." He speaks of the profound differences between competing religions in our society as "just theology" and claims we can come together around "God." He is hosting a separate event more specifically geared toward that, inviting several members of various clergy to read re-worked (read, "de-Jesused") versions of the sermons of George Whitefield. And the rally proper is described by him as a "God-event" rather than a "Christian-event."

On this issue, Christ's people can not compromise. Yet hundreds of thousands of them (attendance estimates are wildly low IMO) are going to, and more are going to listen in via the internet. Most are going to get weepy and give their assent to what is said.

This is idolatry.

Beck is a Mormon, and when he speaks of "God" he has in mind a being wholly other than the One to Whom an orthodox Christian prays. The "heavenly Father" he often invokes is one who through his works evolved to that state; and the Jesus of whom he speaks is a created being, brother to Satan.

Likewise the "God" to whom invited Jews and Muslims will offer their prayers.

Now, it is possible for orthodox Christians to be present at this thing in a valid way, offering up prayers of repentance to the Triune God on the nation's behalf, acting as witnesses, but that way cannot include being numbered with the idolaters. That would be like worshiping the golden calves of Bethel and Dan. It will lead to nothing but the opposite of that which it seeks.

I encourage my fellow Christians to keep this in mind, and take careful note of Evangelical conservative leaders (so-called) who point to the unitarian "God" of this rally and say "That is Yahweh." And pray to the Living God to spare us His judgement for our Churches who take part in this affront to Him.

The Mosque Thing

2010-08-26T09:09:00.000-07:00

I'm back! I'll be posting more this week.

Let's talk about Cordoba House, shall we?

Of course, as a Christian man I am opposed to any house of idolatry being built anywhere in the nation. Why? Because the Lord hates it. It isn't that Cordoba is some kind of "bad" mosque; any mosque, temple, synagogue, or ashram is abominable to Christ. One must consistently believe what one believes.

Of course it is a finger in the eye to the nation and the victims of 9/11's families. This is not accidental. In fact, it is a dark funhouse-mirror version of what Christians have always done: build our Churches on top of former pagan temples, announcing that Jesus is Lord of that place now. The difference is that we evangelize and persuade the former worshipers themselves to tear down the pagan temples and their idols and build a Church.

Now, we have a problem here and it goes way back. Under our present polity, especially since the War Between the States, State and local governments do not enjoy the freedom they once did under the Constitution, strictly interpreted. "Congress shall make no law..." but New York City surely can.

They will not assert their rights because of the real problem, which is this: We are a polytheistic society. "Tolerance" and "pluralism" are simply wussy ways of saying what it really is. And we Christians have embraced that. Not content with the Biblical ideal of tolerance, we have embraced the twisted egalitarian interpretation. Contented to have Jesus as our "personal Lord and Savior," we have not proclaimed Him as Lord of Manhattan and Everywhere Else.

And if that's who we're going to be, then let the Moslems build their mosque. It's not their fault they are taking the advantage we have handed them. To many it will stand as an insult to the victims of the 9/11 attacks, but what it really stands as is a testimony to the spinelessness of the American Christian man.

Revivalism vs. ____?

2010-07-21T11:13:00.000-07:00

I'm going to continue posting my thoughts about revivalism (I'd like to make it to 7 parts) and then I'm going to be posting some thoughts on what I believe is revivalism's antithesis. Borrowing from Nevin, I'm going to call it "catechism."

It's still percolating around but I should be into it soon. Home life is nuts this week.

Independence

2010-07-03T21:47:00.001-07:00

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

— John Hancock

New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton

Massachusetts:
John Hancock, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery

Connecticut:
Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott

New York:
William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris

New Jersey:
Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark

Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross

Delaware:
Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean

Maryland:
Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia:
George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton

North Carolina:
William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn

South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton

Georgia:
Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton

Thoughts on This Morning's Study

2010-06-24T17:25:00.000-07:00

Reading through Isaiah chapter 11 today. We hear this every Advent and I think we sometimes don't pay a lot of attention because it's so familiar.

There shall come forth a shoot from the stump of Jesse,
and a branch from his roots shall bear fruit.
And the Spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him,
the Spirit of wisdom and understanding,
the Spirit of counsel and might,
the Spirit of knowledge and the fear of the LORD.
And his delight shall be in the fear of the LORD. He shall not judge by what his eyes see,
or decide disputes by what his ears hear,
but with righteousness he shall judge the poor,
and decide with equity for the meek of the earth;

So far so good, huh? We all understand this to be talking about Jesus, and what He is going to do when He comes into the world.
Next:

and he shall strike the earth with the rod of his mouth,
and with the breath of his lips he shall kill the wicked.
Righteousness shall be the belt of his waist,
and faithfulness the belt of his loins.

Not so gentle Jesus meek and mild, is it? All kinds of cross references come to mind here; think of Revelation 19 or Psalm 2. Jesus' word strikes the wicked of the Earth, and this comes from His righteousness and faithfulness (He is called Faithful and True).

His striking the earth and killing the wicked results in:

The wolf shall dwell with the lamb,
and the leopard shall lie down with the young goat,
and the calf and the lion and the fattened calf together;
and a little child shall lead them.
The cow and the bear shall graze;
their young shall lie down together;
and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.
The nursing child shall play over the hole of the cobra,
and the weaned child shall put his hand on the adder’s den.

We know this cannot be heaven or the Resurrection. Why? There are children. Whether this animals-gettin'-along business is literal or symbolic, there is no doubt that Christ's rule is to result in amazing peace. So much so that:

They shall not hurt or destroy
in all my holy mountain;
for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD
as the waters cover the sea.

Here are the promises of God concerning what will happen when He sends His Son into the world. We have already been told that when He comes the increase of His government and of peace will have no end. Here is the glorious "millennium" of His reign and the result of the fruition of its increase.

Wonderful.

Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi, pt. 1

2010-05-27T13:12:00.001-07:00

Another series of posts. I want to explore what for us Anglicans is kind of a guiding principle. Lex orandi, lex credendi means "the law of prayer is the law of faith." It works in two ways: What you pray, the way you worship, shapes the content of your belief; and the way you worship shows forth what you really believe.

You can learn a lot about what is important to a Church by observing its liturgy, and you can kind of predict where it's going. I'm not going to name names, but I'm wanting to ask some questions.

If you know me, you will probably be able to guess where some of my examples come from. Please, no one take offense, because I am not going on a "heresy hunt." I'm just wanting to ask provocative questions.

Revivalism, Pt. 5

2010-05-17T17:12:00.000-07:00

1. Worship is transformational.

2. This is inescapably true of both acceptable and unacceptable worship.

3. It is therefore very important to make sure we are leading the congregation in acceptable worship.

4. This calls for very careful Bible study and a very different set of goals than may be found in typical American Evangelical Churches.

5. Meeting the preferences and felt needs of a target "audience" is not a worthwhile goal.

6. This is because it is precisely their needs and desires which are to be transformed by worshiping God acceptably.

7. By carefully structuring our worship on Biblical precepts, principles, and examples, we will over time create a body of worshipers joyfully engaged in the liturgy, but only as a side effect of a more worthy goal--offering God what He says He wants.

Ascension Day(s after)

2010-05-15T12:21:00.000-07:00

So, last Thursday was Ascension Day. Did you celebrate it?

I feel very blessed to belong to a Church and a tradition in which the Ascension of Christ is still thought of as a holiday, and worth having a special worship service for. But even for us, turnout was minimal.

Now, I'm not going to chastise the parishoners who stayed home, nor any of y'all whose Churches don't celebrate at all. I am going to bust on leaders, past and present, for their failure to teach and to lead concerning this most important day.

First, though, it's worth noting what the lack of importance of the holy day to most Evangelicals says about our view of Christ's Ascension. I think it highlights a couple of things: one, we don't really think Jesus is King of anything in any meaningful way; and two, we don't understand just what is accomplished in His "riding up the heavenly way."

Jesus ascended into Heaven to reign until all His enemies are made into His footstool, until the last enemy is put down. He didn't ascend into Heaven to wait around until He gets to be the King of Everything; he is and has been for nearly two millennia now. Obviously, He has always been the Ruler of all as God, but we are talking about His going up as Messiah to receive all authority in Heaven and Earth, as Daniel foresaw.

But a lot of us don't believe that. Want to know why I hate Dispensationalism? That's why. It teaches that the devil is ruling the world and Jesus hopes He gets to come take over soon. No. Let us read our Bibles a little more carefully, and see what Jesus said He was doing and came to do the first time. Let us note that He is the Ruler of the kings on Earth, and holds all authority. This is the very basis for the Great Commission! He says "therefore go and make disciples of all nations." Jesus' current Kingdom is muy importante.

And we fare no better if we take a radical "two kingdom" approach which limits the extent of Christ's rule to the hearts of His people. This the Bible simply does not teach. Jesus is not Lord of vapor. Every *ahem* Square Inch of the Universe is His. He came to save it, He paid for it in His Blood, He asked of His Father, He beat up the "strong man" and took his stuff. Everything is His, and we ought to joyfully acknowledge it and worship Him.

Further, it is Jesus' ascended humanity that is the veil through which we have access to the Holy of Holies in Heaven. It is only in His Ascension that He goes into the Temple as High Priest to offer His blood as an intercession and propitiation for us. For Evangelicals, whose worship centers on their own personal salvation, to miss how big of a deal this is is baffling. Humanity, in its unfallen state, is taken up into the realm previously reserved to God and the angels. Wonder of wonders! And in going up in His body, our Lord takes us there with Him, and seats us there in Himself. Ponder that. Understand what it says about Sunday morning.

Are these glories not worthy of at least the treatment we give to Christmas? Or even Thanksgiving? Fourth of July? Presidents' Day?

Those who have a duty to preach the Word, all of it, and teach us to live in these truths have for generations dropped the ball. Most of us truly know no better. We can't blame each other for that. But see, I have told you. Let us joyfully come to our great King and glory in His Coronation next time its day comes around. Let us live in its implications every day.

"Engaging" Cutlure

2010-05-10T15:44:00.000-07:00

It's cool among Christians to talk of engaging culture, engaging with culture, etc. I want to start looking at that.

I want to ask, "Are we at a place where we can?" while acknowledging that it really doesn't matter if we are, because it's something we have to do anyway.

But first, what do we mean? "Engaging" can mean "taking part in," or it can mean "taking on." Both are inescapable but in our day, the latter is to be primary. We live in a time in which the prevailing culture is flowing from from a cultus of paganism. Though we still ride the momentum of Christendom's wave, that is not what is driving society these days.

That means we are "engaging" in a struggle over who determines the direction of culture, because someone is going to.

Part of the reason I believe Christians in our land are not prepared for this fight is because we don't even all agree that there is a fight. Many do not believe that it is up to Christians to set the cultural course.

Part of what I see my life's work as is to do my small part to convince those in my small circle that we are called to exercise cultural dominion. Or, at the very least, begin to lay a foundation for a generation that can.

Revivalism, pt.4

2010-05-06T17:58:00.000-07:00

1. Music is a tool for the worshiper, not a tool to be used on the worshiper.

2. Worship music should serve as a vehicle for ideas and feelings to be lifted up to the Lord.

3. The music should be directed God-ward; if He decides to use it to stir up feelings or responses in people, that is His prerogative.

4. Worship leaders don't have sufficient knowledge or insight into a congregant's soul to know what he needs to do or feel.

5. They therefore ought not plan what they do around manipulating anyone into a response.

6. They do have sufficient knowledge (revealed in Scripture) to know what God requires in worship: reverence, Godly fear, thanksgiving, praise, a broken and contrite heart, etc.

7. They therefore ought to plan what they do around providing the means for the congregation to offer those things.

A Jennifer Knapp Excursus

2010-05-04T10:00:00.000-07:00

The public announcement by Jennifer Knapp that she is a homosexual has resulted in the usual freak-outs, most of which I am not terribly interested in. One detail of the commotion though provides an opportunity to examine something a lot of Christians in the conversation are sure to miss.

Miss Knapp points out that those who are using the Scriptures' commandments against homosexuality to call her to repentance are not keeping the Biblical laws against eating shellfish, mixing fibers, and other "holiness" laws.

This is a really common tactic, which I addressed to an extent in the last Theonomy Primer post. In this usage, however, it's being done to make the lady's critics out to be hypocritical.

There's an obvious response which I doubt many will make, because of of the tacit antinomianism in the Evangelical circles.

The response is this: God has by subsequent revelation told us we are not to keep the holiness laws in that fashion, Christ having come. The issue of diet specifically is addressed with a divine commandment: "Kill and eat." Further instruction in how to handle the ceremonies is given in the Epistles. Yet no where is the issue of proper sexual relations modified in the slightest from that originally given in God's Law. Rather, it is specifically reinforced.

This highlights what our proper understanding is to be: God's commandments stand as they are given unless and until He alters them by subsequent revelation. Any other understanding leads to confusion, as in the case of this poor woman.

Revivalism, pt. 3

2010-04-30T12:23:00.000-07:00

1. God saves sinners.

2. Men cannot save themselves by anything that they do or say.

3. Repeating a prayer, making a commitment, or walking an aisle accomplishes nothing unless God the Holy Ghost regenerates a man's heart.

4. There is therefore no reason to seek to manipulate people into doing those things.

5. When a worship service is oriented around provoking the congregation into these responses, it may be said that they are the ones being worshiped, because their perceived needs and desires are driving the service.

6. The goal of a worship service is worship, not evangelism.

7. True worship is far more attractive to the regenerate sinner than a revivalistic meeting.

Revivalism, pt. 2

2010-04-27T15:48:00.001-07:00

1. The Second Great Awakening was neither great, nor an awakening.

2. It resulted in the opposite of what it was claimed to be--burned-over districts and the rise of various heretical cults.

3. Charles Grandison Finney was a heretic who, along with others, replaced sacraments and catechizing with emotional manipulation and coercive techniques.

4. The adoption of those techniques by orthodox Christian denominations has borne bad fruit everywhere it has been tried. They continue to have the same results they had in Finney's day.

5. They therefore ought not be used in the Churches.

6. The liturgy (whether formal or informal) is to be oriented towards God's desires and feelings, not ours. God's response should be the one we care about. And He cannot be manipulated.

7. God-honoring worship through Word and Sacrament is the only means of true national awakening.

Revivalism, pt. 1

2010-04-27T07:50:00.000-07:00

1. God is to be worshiped on His own terms, and the "success" of a worship service is to be measured by how He is glorified according to those terms.

2. The Bible reveals that Christians can offer both "acceptable" and "unacceptable" worship. It defines both.

3. Worship is not an individual encounter with God.

4. The emotional response of an individual worshiper is not always a determining factor of the acceptability of his worship.

5. It is therefore not a worthwhile goal in planning a worship service.

6. This does not mean that emotional investment by the congregation is not a consideration.

7. We must seek to lead the congregation in involving/investing their emotions in a healthy, Biblically proper way.

I've Got My Fist, I've Got My Plan, I've Got Revivalism

2010-04-23T09:02:00.000-07:00

I'm going to start posting a series about revivalism. This will be looser than my apologetics and theonomy posts, because I don't have a real destination to arrive at--I just want to toss around some ideas. Maybe I'll post them as theses for discussion in the comments.

Revivalism is, IMO, a cancer on the worship and mission of the Church in our day and time. It has infected almost everything I see Evangelicals do, and it's high time we tried to cure it.

Presuppositionalism Primer, pt. 7

2010-04-20T16:33:00.001-07:00

Again, since it's been forever and a day, here are links to: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5 and Part 6.

We have seen how our approach to doing apologetics, presupposing the truth of God's Word, places us in direct opposition to not only the unbeliever's particular religious opinions, but to his entire view of the world and our relation to it. We have seen that on his own assumptions about the universe, the very conversation we are having with him would be impossible. We have considered a few of the many transcendentals necessary for reason and logic to operate in the world and noted that only the Bible's world-view can account for those things. We've pointed out a few examples of how this plays out in conversation.

The next step in our reasoning is to discern and point out what the unbeliever is forced to do, no matter what non-Christian philosophy or religion he professes, namely, act as if the world is what the Bible says that it is, even while he says otherwise.

Here's the thing: the world is God's world, and it only works His way. In order to make any sense of it one has to reason according to the laws He has provided, which can only exist because He does and that reflect His mind. In using them at all, one is acting on the fact that He is there, and that things work the way He has revealed them.

So, having pointed out to our friend how his reasoning does not line up with the way he claims the universe works, we then turn to show him how he's subconsciously taking our assumptions for granted and basing his thinking upon them.

For example, our agnostic friend who says there is no absolute truth, acts as if there is in thousands of ways. Or our atheist friend, who claims morality is subjective, turns around and calls something "immoral" as if that moral rule applies universally to everyone. Or our Hindu friend, who claims all is one, makes distinction between himself and us, or one word and another.

The popular way of phrasing this is "borrowed capital." It's actually stolen, but I digress. He's stealing from us only what he needs to make his argument, then denying everything that follows from what he's taken.

This highlights some things the Bible says about unbelieving man. He knows there's a God, and what He is like, but he suppresses what he knows so that he can try to be his own god. His failure is primarily ethical, not intellectual. Also, because he knows, we have a way to make contact with him on common ground. We all act as if the world is what the Lord has revealed it to be in the Bible. We can't do otherwise. His Word is the only way to make sense of it--It is a light to our path.

By showing all this to our friend, we then give him the call we've been waiting for, which I will explain next time.

Theonomy Primer, pt. 6

2010-04-20T09:30:00.001-07:00

Balking at the Law.

Since it's been a bazillion years since I last posted, here are links to:
Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, and Part 5.

When discussing the role of the Law in the lives of believers, the discussion very soon turns toward the penal sanctions given in Old Testament case law. The usual "extreme" examples are brought out as a way of demonstrating the (supposed) absurdity of keeping God's Commandments in our (again, supposedly) more enlightened modern times. The laws regarding slavery, reviling parents, or sexual crimes are brought up as ridiculous, barbaric examples of...well, of God's cruelty, if the reasoning is followed out.

And sadly, many of us follow the reasoning. Christians are either embarrassed into silence or into retreating to a kind of soft Gnosticism, believing that the God revealed in the Old Testament is a meaner one than the one revealed in the New.

I don't have space to deal with each one of the "offending" laws, but there is a broader point anyway. The simple questions are these: "Who defines what is criminal," and, "Who defines what is a just punishment for crime?" I should hope that answer is obvious to the Christian mind. So the next question needs to be, "If God's punishment for x sticks in our craw, who has the problem here, us, or God?"

Can it really be that, say, the cursing of parents by a delinquent son really is enough of a threat to society, and an affront to God, that it would deserve the death penalty? Dare we think such things?

The point to ponder until next time ought to be, "Dare we presume to judge God's Law?"

Resurrection!

2010-04-12T09:29:00.000-07:00

Yeah, I haven't blogged since August.

Starting it back up, and intend to stay regular.

Wait, that sounds gross.

Well, I do.

Perception, Reality, etc.

2009-08-17T12:11:00.000-07:00

Excellent interview with the excellent Derek Webb at Patrol's website.

One quote caught my eye, though, and I had a coupla thoughts about it:

My main problem was, well, for example: a study done over the last few years identified a pretty outrageous statistic, with 15- to 35-year-olds who were asked, “What’s the main thing that comes to mind when you think of the word ‘Christian’?” 90-some-odd percent said, “Somebody who hates gay people.”

I have talked to a handful of people who, like you said, have told me “I’m a Christian, and I don’t hate gay people, and I think you’re exaggerating.” That all may be true, and I don’t doubt it—I know a lot of sensitive and nuanced, well meaning work that’s being done. What I’m concerned about is that perception about Christianity. In the world we live in, perception is as good as reality to some degree. So I think we need to work on that.

Let me get all the annoyingly obligatory qualifications out of the way: I don't hate homosexuals ("gay people" is a stupid term IMO and one which we ought not adopt), I think the "God hates fags!" people are ridiculously uncharitable and ought to repent, and I hold that the Church needs to embrace homosexuals with the love of Christ and preach the Gospel that will save them, for such were some of you and all that.

Now.

Is it really an outrageous statistic? And why is the percentage so high? I take Derek to be drawing the conclusion that the reason the statistic is high is because Christians have not been kind enough to homosexuals, and that is the reason that "world we live in" has the perception of us that it does. But is that the reason? Surely it is to some degree.

But there are other possibilities. One is that homosexuality is simply one of the current main areas of conflict between humanism and Christianity, with all the homosexual marriage talk and all. In that conflict, humanists will always interpret any opposition to homosexuality as "hate." When Christians en masse fail to embrace the latest item on the humanist agenda, it is always portrayed as our hatred of whomever the supposed beneficiary is.

It's almost certain that the perception of the surveyed group is due to some extent both to Christians' lack of charity toward homosexuals and to the bristling of homosexuals and other antinomians at any disapproval of their perverse actions.

Christians need to be kind to any homosexuals they meet, and treat them with all the charity due to one made in the Lord's image. They must never be dismissively condemned, but rather told with gentleness and humility the whole counsel of the Lord: their sin is as detestable to Him as ours, and He has provided a way to be free of it.

My second line of thought is pretty brief. Who cares what the world's perception of us is? Seriously, who cares? What is Jesus' perception of us? That's all that matters. Chances are, if we're pleasing Him, the world will think we're a load of moralizing backwards weirdos who are a threat to the state. And they'll want us killed.

Par-tay.

2009-07-07T07:59:00.001-07:00

Get the John Calvin birthday clock at Calvin 500

You Can't Apologize if You Didn't Do It

2009-06-19T18:59:00.000-07:00

The Senate has passed (unanimously) a resolution to apologize for slavery. The country is falling apart around us, and this is what they are working on? I suppose it's good to keep them distracted from ruining the economy further. Let's talk about apologies.

I do not apologize for slavery; I hold no slaves. The federal government owes no apology; they hold no slaves. There are no former slaves to whom anyone can apologize. Does this need to be pointed out? Really? Is someone of the African-descended persuasion's lot in life improved by Tom Harkin feeling sorry? Should it be?

Kidnapping, according to Scripture, is a capital offense. Those who rounded up Africans and forced them into servitude should have been executed for it. But they weren't. And instead of the proper course of action, we gave 600,000 lives and the Republic that was founded on July 4th, 1776. It is enough.

Someone in the Senate going to apologize for John Brown? How about for Lincoln?

Waterboarding

2009-04-22T08:17:00.000-07:00

This came up on a friend's Facebook page, but I don't want to be a comments-monopolizer so I'll post my thoughts here.

If someone can make a Biblical defense of waterboarding, I'd like to read it. I can't imagine how that could be done.

There are two defenses of this procedure that I have heard. The first is that it doesn't really endanger or harm the recipient, and is therefore not torture. The second is that it has produced the desired results, and saved American lives.

Regarding the first point, does it matter if no real harm is done? You're inflicting torment on a guy to make him talk. He's suffering as if he were drowning. That's torture. If the practice is Biblically justifiable, then don't be a wuss and call it what it is and do it. If it is not justifiable, don't do it, ever.

The second point is simply the ends justifying the means. That trick never works. If God forbids this sort of thing, then obedience to Him is not going to result in disaster, and disobedience to Him cannot result in anything but disaster. Let those of us who are Calvinists think Calviny thoughts: God is sovereign.

I'm open to having my mind changed. To the Law and to the Testimony! Someone persuade me.

The Revelation

2009-04-08T11:55:00.000-07:00

As I posted earlier, eschatology keeps rearing its head in several areas of my life lately (more on that later), and so I undertook another detailed look at the Revelation, this time transcribing it and working through Chilton's magnificent commentary on the book.

Just a few thoughts:

1. The book has very little to say about the end of the world.

2. The book has a lot to say about the end of the world--the old world, that is. It is so very obviously primarily concerned with the fall of Jerusalem and the end of the Old Covenant.

3. The similarities and parallel structure to Ezekiel's prophecy are staggering. Why was I never taught this?

4. I tend to agree with the hypothesis that the prophecy was meant to be read liturgically and not all at once.

5. Once one is familiar with the Bible's style of prophetic symbolism (another post on that soon too), the Revelation is not confusing in any way. It's actually very, very clear.

6. It's also very complex, in that the information communicated is very compact. There's much more to it than a quick reading will bring to mind, at least for those of us who aren't as Biblically literate as we should be (like yours truly).

7. There is no "battle of Armageddon." It doesn't ever happen, and there is no place called "Armageddon."

8. Chapter 19 ain't the Second Coming. John sees heaven opened, and Jesus seated on a horse. He doesn't "come" (go) anywhere.

9. The whole point is that Jesus rules, NOW, and we will be victorious in this present age.

10. We're very obviously living in the so-called "millennium." I don't see how anyone can not get that.

Bonus: Man, Dispensationalism is kooky. ;^)

Holy Week

2009-04-06T15:32:00.001-07:00

Ride on! ride on in majesty!
Hark! all the tribes hosanna cry;
O Savior meek, pursue thy road
with palms and scattered garments strowed.

Ride on! ride on in majesty!
In lowly pomp ride on to die;
O Christ, thy triumphs now begin
o'er captive death and conquered sin.

Ride on! ride on in majesty!
The angel-squadrons of the sky
look down with sad and wondering eyes
to see the approaching sacrifice.

Ride on! ride on in majesty!
Thy last and fiercest strife is nigh;
the Father on his sapphire throne
expects his own anointed Son.

Ride on! ride on in majesty!
In lowly pomp ride on to die;
bow thy meek head to mortal pain,
then take, O God, thy power, and reign.

Presuppositionalism Primer, pt. 6

2009-03-18T16:18:00.001-07:00

Last time (way back when the West was young), we looked at some of the conditions that must exist for our conversation with an unbeliever to take place. Remember, we ask, "What must be true in order for us to have this debate?" I listed a few of them.

The next step is to see if our unbelieving friend's stated worldview (and the assumptions which underlie what he has said) can give any sort of basis or an accounting for these conditions. Again, this is not a checklist, but more a demonstration of the method.

For example, our atheistic friend, who is going to be coming at us from a materialist point of view (only that which has material form exists; there is no supernatural realm) is also going to claim his position is based on empirical evidence and the scientific method.

So, we need to step into that position and take a look around. In a materialistic universe, do immaterial ideas like the laws of science truly exist? They have no form or material substance. Are they mere conventions? Are they the chemical reactions in the brains of apes? If they are simply arbitrary, they can not be said to prove anything.

Does the atheist have empirical evidence that the information conveyed to him by his senses corresponds to the universe outside himself? No; his senses themselves would be involved in any experiment. Does he have empirical evidence that the (immaterial and therefore non-existent!) laws of logic are universal and do not change? No; he would need to have observed the entire universe throughout all time (or know Someone Who has!).

As a materialist, he believes in brute facts. Things simply exist, and we come around some 15-30 billion years after the Big Bang and start making connections between things. All is therefore ultimately many, and our connections and categories are entirely arbitrary. They do not really exist.

You see how this works? Whatever the non-Christian position is, we examine it on its own terms, and see if on those terms reason and coherent communication between us and the unbeliever is even possible. If it isn't, we have refuted the system.

Now this all requires that we know or can infer what the underlying presuppositions of various belief systems are. It takes some work but one can learn how to do it--there are really only a few.

The next step involves demonstrating two things: that the Christian worldview does provide these essentials, and that our friend already assumes so, even if he does so subconciously.

Sheer, Unbridled Bloggery to Follow.

2009-03-02T08:20:00.000-08:00

I've had neither time nor inclination to blog much, but I seem to be getting a little more of both.
Coming up:

New installments in the Presuppositionalism and Theonomy series.

More eschatology talk--this has come up in several areas of my life; I, uh, have some things to say about that.

Tinfoil-hat political commentary.

Drumming and music stuff.

I know all four of you are very excited by this.

An Interesting Juxtaposition

2009-01-26T12:01:00.000-08:00

Crazy-ass House Speaker Pelosi wants federal bailout money to go toward "contraceptive services," while the Japanese begin to wise up and try to have more babies.

Year Seven Begins Today

2009-01-11T06:51:00.001-08:00

Today is my sixth anniversary of being married to Jenni. It may be cliche' to repeat the same thing every year, but these words don't get old:

Jenni, many daughters have done well, but you exceed them all.

Let Heaven and Earth witness that I renew our covenant today, to love, honor and cherish you in all things. I love you. Happy Anniversary.

A Postmillennial Advent (remix)

2008-12-03T12:04:00.000-08:00

I blogged about this last year, but wanted to add some more to it. I also had to change our home Advent liturgy somewhat because we bought a new tree!

We're really concerned with keeping a proper Advent each year, not only in reaction to the rampant consumerism of the "Christmas season" (which starts Hallowe'en around 6:00 p.m.), but also because most of the Evangelical world has abandoned the practice, which to me is not only sad but dumb. A season of preparation, self-examination and spiritual discipline seems only right in preparation for a great feast. You clean up and make ready for a big party, right? How much more when the guest is the King?

Advent is a time to remember not only our Lord's coming as a humble Child, but also His coming return as our Judge. And since I hold so strongly to the Postmillennial viewpoint about that glorious and dreadful Day, I believe it's appropriate to enact those beliefs in our Advent-keeping.

So the tree goes up, bare but for lights this first week. Next, the purple glass ornaments signifying the Kingdom in the world and the penitence and fasting of its people. The third week we will hang the silver ornaments, to my mind not only signifying the blessings the Kingdom is bringing into the world, but also coinciding with the Joy candle. The fourth week, we will hang some of the star ornaments we have, not only recalling the star which heralded Jesus' birth, but also the defeat of the principalities and powers in the heavenlies. Finally, on Christmas Eve, we complete the decorating and joyfully place the Pantocrator icon on top of the tree, welcoming the coming of our great King.

Reformation Day!

2008-10-31T08:05:00.001-07:00

Thanks be to God! What a great day to mock the devil.

OITLIA, Part Two

2008-10-17T10:00:00.000-07:00

Jenni interviews Sandra McCracken some more...

YES.

2008-10-16T20:26:00.001-07:00

Ron Paul on Third Party Voting

2008-10-13T17:31:00.000-07:00

The Office.

2008-10-10T09:16:00.000-07:00

Through God's kind Providence my home studio is mostly complete. I moved in this week and could not be giddier. Working from home is going to be an ever-increasing blessing as the years go on.

One Incredibly Talented Lady Interviews Another

2008-10-10T09:06:00.000-07:00

My lovely wife interviewed Sandra McCracken for the Curator. Check it out.

Tonight.

2008-09-26T18:39:00.001-07:00

Rally for the Republic

2008-09-03T15:11:00.001-07:00

I think it moved...

The Curator

2008-08-29T08:17:00.000-07:00

My lovely wife has a new writing gig. Check it out.

Hi, I'm Johnny. I Spend Too Much Time on the Internet

2008-08-24T17:18:00.001-07:00

Closer...

2008-08-22T14:56:00.001-07:00

They Get It

2008-08-14T08:04:00.000-07:00

But we increasingly don't. Read up a little on Georgia today.

Why She Walked Out of Church

2008-08-11T18:56:00.000-07:00

From loneprairie.net.

Saints

2008-08-06T12:40:00.000-07:00

See if you can read this without crying. I believe young William is my new hero.

I don't have the words for both the evil and the grace in this story.

Must-Watch Video

2008-08-02T09:15:00.000-07:00

Gary DeMar on eschatology:

New Tools/Playground

2008-08-01T18:44:00.001-07:00

Thanks to Paul Mason of Tempus Drums, I'm celebrating my 20th year as a Tempus man with a brand new dream drumset. Here it is at my studio:

But wait, there's more! Soon the kit will move to its new home--my home. Half my garage is becoming my new drum studio:

I'm a very happy man (pronounced, "happiman").

Letter to the Corinthians? What Letter to the Corinthians?

2008-06-30T19:21:00.001-07:00

Jenni posted some incredibly hot photos of herself from '93, so here's my proof that I had bigger hair than my wife back then. Merry Christmas, rocker boy.

Trent Reznor in the Times

2008-06-10T09:04:00.000-07:00

Johnny fave Trent Reznor is interviewed in the New York Times. Way cool. I don't know why I like that guy so much. I pray for him a lot; he needs the Gospel.

I wish there was a substantial number of Christian artists who were as honest and sincere as he is with his his music.

In the Last Days

2008-06-05T18:42:00.000-07:00

You have probably heard about this particular "sign" that we are approaching "the end times," from Paul's epistle to Timothy:

But understand this, that in the last days there will come times of difficulty. For people will be lovers of self, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, heartless, unappeasable, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not loving good, treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power.

Problem: Paul's next sentence to Timothy is:

Avoid such people.

Paul cannot possibly be talking about the days at the end of history.

Another Frackin' Five

2008-05-24T07:15:00.000-07:00

Okay, I'll do it, because Ross thinks I won't.

What were you doing 5 years ago?
Learning to be a husband, and I had actually just finished tracking demo material for Atomic Opera's still-in-the-works next album.

What are 5 things on your to-do list today (not in any particular order)?
Trim the hedges.
Prepare Sunday school class on the fall of Jerusalem.
Print bulletins (power point is for fags).
Go to Spec's for martini olives.
Watch insane amounts of Battlestar Galactica.

What are 5 snacks you enjoy?
Taro chips
Veggies when I'm being healthy.
Good white corn chips/Strobel's salsa.
Pistachios. (props to Ross)
Pistachio ice cream (Sabbath treat)

What 5 things would you do if you were a billionaire?
Tithe
Take as many local families off of public welfare as I could.
Build a survivalist's/musician's dream house in either Idaho or West Texas.
Fly around the world taking lessons from the drummers I admire.
Plant churches in India.

What are 5 of your bad habits?
Procrastination
Cussin'
Wasting time.
Blurting out the first thing that comes into my head (never a good idea).
I pick at my callouses.

What are 5 places you have lived?
League City, TX-parents
LC, TX-Mom
LC,TX-Dad
Houston SW
Houston W

What are 5 jobs you've had?
I haven't had 5. I've been a janitor (at 13!), a grocery store employee ('til 18) then it's been drums all the rest of the time.

What 5 people do you want to tag?
It's over! Now my prayers won't come true!

Trinity Sunday

2008-05-17T09:04:00.000-07:00

Tomorrow is the day set apart in the Church's calendar specifically to teach and celebrate the glorious mystery of the Holy Trinity. God, from Whom and to Whom are all things, has revealed Himself to us as the One Lord in Three Persons. The Lord our God, the Lord is One! And He is the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

This fact is necessary to every aspect of our lives. Neither the world or we ourselves could not exist if it were otherwise.

We confess, with the entire Church throughout time, the Blessed, Glorious, and Holy Trinty:

The Athanasian Creed (Quicunque vult)

Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic Faith.
Which Faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.
And the catholic Faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity;
Neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Substance.
For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost.
But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one: the glory equal, the majesty coeternal.
Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost.
The Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, and the Holy Ghost uncreated.
The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost incomprehensible.
The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Ghost eternal;
And yet they are not three eternals, but one Eternal.
As also there are not three incomprehensibles, nor three uncreated, but one Uncreated and one Incomprehensible.
So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Ghost almighty;
And yet they are not three almighties, but one Almighty.
So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God;
And yet they are not three Gods, but one God.
So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Ghost Lord;
And yet not three Lords, but one Lord.
For as we are compelled by the Christian truth to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord;
So are we forbidden by the catholic Faith to say there are three Gods, or three Lords.
The Father is made of none, neither created, nor begotten.
The Son is of the Father alone, not made, nor created, but begotten.
The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son, neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.
So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts.
And in this Trinity none is before or after other; none is greater or less than another;
But the whole three Persons are co-eternal together and co-equal.
So that in all things, the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshiped.
He therefore that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity.

Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting salvation that he also believe rightly the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.
For the true Faith is that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man;
God, of the Substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and Man, of the Substance of his Mother, born in the world;
Perfect God, and perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting;
Equal to the Father, as touching his Godhead; and inferior to the Father, as touching his Manhood.
Who although he is God and Man, yet he is not two, but one Christ;
One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking of the Manhood unto God;
One altogether, not by confusion of Substance, but by unity of Person.
For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and Man is one Christ.
Who suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, and rose again the third day from the dead;
He ascended into heaven; he sitteth on the right hand of the Father, God Almighty, from whence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.
At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies, and shall give account for their own works.
And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting; and they that have done evil, into everlasting fire.
This is the catholic Faith, which except a man believe faithfully, he cannot be saved.

Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost;
As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be,
world without end. Amen.

Think About It

2008-05-11T11:26:00.000-07:00

Happy Mother's Day!!!

By which I mean, "Happy Pentecost."

Just in Case

2008-04-07T20:42:00.000-07:00

...there are those among you in doubt that Robin Zander is the best and coolest rock and roll vocalist EVER.

Wonderful; Yea, And Even More Wonderful

2008-04-06T12:06:00.000-07:00

Anne Rice, in her second novel in the Christ the Lord series, has outdone herself. Today I'm overwhelmed by the way she has woven a story that accomplishes something remarkable--namely glorifying the Lord Jesus in how He might have acted in certain circumstances of His earthly sojourn. Rice freely acknowledges that this is not the real Jesus and this is not real history. But knowing Him, knowing Who He is, has allowed her to tell a story of what such a One would do in these circumstances. And she delivers an astounding picture of the immeasurable love and self-giving of our Lord, in such a way that we are not moved toward love for a character in her novel, but toward the real Jesus, Who is even more wonderful than a writer of her staggering talent could ever hope to tell.

This is Huge

2008-04-04T13:30:00.000-07:00

Canon Press is putting their catalog online at google books. YOU CAN READ ENTIRE BOOKS FOR FREE. Y'all now have no excuse for not reading Peter Leithart's Against Christianity. Read it now. Now!

He's Number One, All Right

2008-04-02T12:12:00.000-07:00

Get to know God's holy warrior in this article. Especially note what I've pointed out before: SIX MILLION Moslems convert to Christianity per year.

That is glorious, and this man is credited with a lot of it. Pray for him.

Theonomy Primer, pt. 5

2008-04-02T11:28:00.000-07:00

Crime and Punishment.

All transgression's of God's commandments are sins, but not all of them are crimes--at least in the sense of them being infractions against the social order punishable by the civil authorities. But when a crime is committed, God, being the One who defines both sin and crime, is the only legitimate source of authority for how such crimes are to be punished. His administration of justice in the civil realm involves two overarching concepts: equity and restoration. I want to look at these generalities and then in the next post or two get into the nitty-gritty.

God's judgements are perfectly just and equitable. The punishment fits the crime, every time. Unlike sinful man who more often than not punishes far in excess of the crime committed, God doles out temporal punishment that gives the criminal his due. The principle is lex talionis, "an eye for an eye."

I need to digress here to deal with a common misconception (with which our Lord also dealt on the Sermon on the Mount). "Eye for an eye" in the Old Testament does not refer to personal vengeance. That was the mistake of the Pharisees of Jesus' day: applying the commandment as a license to get back at one's enemy. The commandment is actually a restraint on the State. It prevents punishment in excess of the transgression (think of the Moslems cutting off the hands of thieves).

The lex talionis metes out fair and equitable justice to the criminal; no more and no less. The criminal reaps exactly what he sows, and no more. Every transgression receives a just punishment. God is a just Judge and men are responsible to image His justice in the civil realm.

The next principle is that of restoration. God's civil punishments are always designed to restore the victim to his position before the crime. What he has lost is repaid. Thieves must always make restitution to the victim for both the stolen item and all the other losses incurred by its theft. Injured parties are always made as whole as possible. In the case of capital crimes, the ultimate victim of those crimes, God, demands the ultimate payment for those transgressions. God loves and is concerned with the victims of the world, and the civil magistrate is to love them as well. Notice that He is not concerned primarily with any injury or debt to "society." Concern for the actual victim is paramount.

These two principles of justice are evident in all the penal sanctions of the Law. Next posting, I'll begin to tackle the examples given which most often trouble Christians and non-Christians alike.

Presuppositionalism Primer, pt. 5

2008-03-29T11:05:00.000-07:00

Last posting I wrote of how the apologist cuts to the chase when answering an unbeliever by taking a transcendental approach in his argumentation. We question whether the universe the non-Christian believes he inhabits is one in which the reasoning he is trying to use is possible. We're asking if the conditions which are neccesary for us to have the conversation exist if the world is what he claims it to be.

I'd like to give some examples of those conditions. This is not a checklist to simply spew out in all our conversations, but it's some common issues that come up in the typical apologetic conversation. Most of the sorts of debates we find ourselves in in our society take the same relative shape, centering on science. logic, etc.

The first conditions are universality and predictability of the physical realm. It's taken for granted that the Universe is a uni-verse--physical laws operate the same everywhere. It's also assumed that they will continue to do so. The rules won't change overnight. Things are predictable and so we may connect what happens this instant to what will happen in the next. This allows us to reason from one instance to another--you see something fall to the ground and you can reasonably expect other things to fall to the ground all the time if they're dropped too. And this is true in every place where the gravity is the same.

The next set of conditions are the existence, universality and predictability of immaterial abstractions. By this we mean things like the laws of logic, math, physics, etc., things which have no material substance yet are real, universally applicable, and constant. They aren't mere conventions, but are true whether or not one denies them. If I choose not to believe the law of noncontradiction, I still can't be both Johnny and Not-Johnny at the same time. These factors allow us to categorize the things we observe.

The next assumption is that both individuality and universality have meaning. Singular things are really singular and corporate groups are really corporate. In philosophy this is called the "one" and the "many." Both concepts are assumed to have real meaning, which means that each must be ultimate, equally. You can't say that at bottom "all is One," because then many-ness isn't really true. And vice-versa. This allows us to speak of individual facts and broad categories.

Those are just a few things, but they're big things. Without these conditions, one couldn't connect any of the facts of one's experience together in a coherent way. Rational thought would be impossible.

So then, after asking, "What has to be true for the unbeliever's argument to fly?" the next step is to see if his point of view can account for those conditions. Next post we'll look at that.

Ennui

2008-03-28T13:42:00.001-07:00

What Are We Doing?

2008-03-28T10:55:00.000-07:00

My friend SRHoyle is kickin' butt posting on worship and liturgy at his blog, Desiderant Angeli.

WOW.

2008-03-27T17:15:00.000-07:00

Chris Ortiz of Chalcedon quotes a little Dabney:

"The best argument for any creed is the godly living of its professors. Protestantism used to have a grand and victorious advantage on that point. She is ceasing to wield it. The wealth begotten by her very virtues of industry, thrift, and probity has debauched many of her children. 'Jeshurun has waxen fat, and kicked.' And unbounded flood of luxury sweeps Protestant families away. A relaxed and deceitful doctrine produces its sure fruits of relaxed and degraded morals. Church discipline is nearly extinct. Meantime spurious revivalism, relying upon all species of vulgar clap-trap and sensational artifice, upon slang rhetoric and the stimulating of mere animal sympathies, instead of the pure word and spirit of God, is hurrying tens of thousands of dead souls into the Protestant churches. These evils have gone so far that a profession of faith in these churches has come to mean nearly as little as a professed conformity to Rome means."

Easter Day

2008-03-23T05:30:00.000-07:00

Ye choirs of new Jerusalem,
your sweetest notes employ,
the paschal victory to hymn
in strains of holy joy.

How Judah's Lion burst his chains,
And crushed the serpent's head;
And brought with him, from death's domains
The long-imprisoned dead.

From hell's devouring jaws the prey
Alone our leader bore;
His ransomed hosts pursue their way
Where he has gone before.

Triumphant in his glory now
His sceptre ruleth all;
Earth, heaven and hell before him bow
And at his footstool fall.

While joyful thus his praise we sing,
His mercy we implore,
Into his palace bright to bring
And keep us evermore.

All glory to the Father be,
All glory to the Son,
All glory, Holy Ghost to thee,
While endless ages run.

Holy Saturday

2008-03-22T20:06:00.000-07:00

For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, in which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, because they formerly did not obey, when God’s patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water.

The Lord Jesus, having triumphed over the principalities and powers on His holy Cross, went to where the fallen angels who had sought to pollute the gene pool of the Messiah were held in chains, and proclaimed His victory to them. Part of that "proclaiming" involved leading the saints out of Sheol, and, tradition has it, He began with Father Adam and Mother Eve. I love that. Amen and amen.

Good Friday

2008-03-21T19:26:00.000-07:00

The Reproaches

O My People, what Have I done to thee? Or wherein have I wearied Thee? Answer me. Because I brought thee out of the land of Egypt, thou hast prepared a Cross for thy Savior.

Holy God, Holy and Mighty; Holy and Immortal; have mercy upon us.

Because I led thee through the wilderness forty years, and fed thee with manna, and brought thee into a land exceeding good, thou hast prepared a cross for thy Saviour.

Holy God, Holy and Mighty; Holy and Immortal; have mercy upon us.

What could I have done more for thee that I have not done? I planted thee indeed My choicest vine, and thou hast turned Me into exceeding bitterness: thou gavest vinegar to quench My thirst, and pierced with a lance the Side of thy Saviour.

Holy God, Holy and Mighty; Holy and Immortal; have mercy upon us.

For thy sake I scourged Egypt with its firstborn: and thou didst deliver Me to be scourged.

O my people, what have I done to thee? Or wherein have I wearied thee?

I brought thee out of Egypt, drowning Pharaoh in the Red Sea; and thou didst deliver me to the Chief Priests.

O my people, what have I done to thee? Or wherein have I wearied thee?

I opened the sea before thee: and thou opened My side with a spear.

O my people, what have I done to thee? Or wherein have I wearied thee?

I went before thee in a pillar of cloud: and thou leddest Me before Pilate’s judgment seat.

O my people, what have I done to thee? Or wherein have I wearied thee?

I fed thee with manna in the desert: and thou didst fall on Me with swords and staves.

O my people, what have I done to thee? Or wherein have I wearied thee?

I gave thee drink of the Water of Salvation from the Rock; and thou gavest me gall and vinegar.

O my people, what have I done to thee? Or wherein have I wearied thee?

For thee I smote the kings of the Canaanites: and thou didst smite my head with a reed.

O my people, what have I done to thee? Or wherein have I wearied thee?

I gave thee a royal scepter; and thou gavest My Head a crown of thorns.

O my people, what have I done to thee? Or wherein have I wearied thee?

I exalted thee to great honor; and thou didst lift me upon the Cross.

O my people, what have I done to thee? Or wherein have I wearied thee?

We venerate Thy Cross, O Lord, and praise and Glorify Thy Holy Resurrection: for by virtue of the Cross joy has come to the whole world!

God be merciful unto us and bless us: and show the light of his countenance, and be merciful unto us.

We venerate Thy Cross, O Lord, and praise and Glorify Thy Holy Resurrection: for by virtue of the Cross joy has come to the whole world!

O Saviour of the world, who by Thy Cross and precious blood hast redeemed us: save us, and help us, we humbly beseech Thee O Lord.

HT: SRHoyle

2008-03-16T06:24:00.000-07:00

"The mission of amusement produces no converts."

C.H. Spurgeon

New Twist on a Classic Serve

2008-03-15T20:23:00.000-07:00

The Drambuie Manhattan.

Two parts Drambuie
Half part dry vermouth
2 dashes bitters
Add ice, stir, strain into a cocktail glass.

I'm just sayin.'

If You're Gonna Do It, Do It

2008-03-06T21:24:00.000-08:00

The Lord of Song

2008-02-28T08:08:00.000-08:00

Okay, okay, I'm a Doug Wilson fanboy. I think he rocks. So here's yet another posting of his that I think is absolutely fantastic, and I would like you to read it and then come discuss it with me here in the comments.

Blog homework: brought to you by Every Square Inch.

From President St. Clair:

2008-02-20T12:07:00.001-08:00

"I foresee the day when rights will subsume responsibilities, when the poor and the despised will become wage-slaves of the elites; and the mercantilism that we have fought against, and the tyranny that we have stood against, will be swallowed by the average American citizen, and they will call that 'freedom.'"

Why Frank Rocks

2008-02-19T08:59:00.000-08:00

This is reason number 613.

Very Helpful Analogy From DW

2008-02-14T08:41:00.000-08:00

In a post about the Church of England, Doug Wilson says,

A formal, established liturgy is like an ornate fireplace. Warm, edifying, exegetical, Christ-centered preaching is like a fire. The Church of England is filled with cold fireplaces -- very beautifully done, but cold. You can look at them there behind the velvet rope for a donation of three pounds. And so in reaction to this, actual believers in Scripture have found themselves setting fires in various places around the house -- on the couch, on the coffee table -- places where it is easy to find fault with them, but at least they know there is supposed to be a fire. I want a fireplace, but I also want a fire in it. And to get that, you are going to have to conduct thoughtful, charitable discussion among English evangelicals over the course of the next number of years.

Pretty much sums up how I feel about things over here. I want both, and then I want to make popcorn. Or maybe s'mores.

Um, No.

2008-02-13T19:34:00.000-08:00

Todd wrote this post about a new manga version of the Bible that an Anglican priest wannabe has written to make the Scriptures hip and dangerous. Specifically, he wants to present Jesus as being "a hard guy, seeking revolution and revolt, a tough guy.”

I commented that the last thing on Earth Jesus was seeking was revolution and revolt. I want to develop that comment here.

Jesus gets presented this way all the time, especially in youth groups and in the emergent-kinda groups which develop after the youth group guys go to college. Thousands of youth meetings and camps called Revolution!™ happen across the country.

The problem is that Jesus came to restore that which was corrupted, to put down the powers which were in revolt, and to establish God's Law which had been made of no effect by those who perverted it.

In His Church, He began the overthrow of those principalities and powers which had tried to place themselves above the Lord. The Apostles and their followers took those against which they were pitted down slowly, methodically, and systematically. Where the Church has won Her great victories, it's been done in that way.

And it is in exactly that way that Jesus is spreading His reign in the Earth. All of His enemies are being made into His footstool. He's been subduing them in a steady, most un-revolutionary fashion for going on 2000 years now.

Jesus is seeking regeneration and reformation, not revolution. He doesn't simply wipe out the old order and bring in the new. He changes the old into the new gradually and patiently. Y'know, like yeast through the lump.

It's all because He is so very kind.

Case in Point

2008-02-04T20:35:00.000-08:00

President Bush said Monday his $3.1 trillion budget plan will keep the U.S. economy growing and protect the U.S. militarily...
...Bush said his plan would boost money for education, health, housing and helps make the tax code fairer.

"American conservatism is merely the shadow that follows Radicalism as it moves forward to perdition." R.L. Dabney.

AMEN.

Bully!

2008-01-18T09:24:00.000-08:00

Last night, we cranked up our gas-log fireplace for the first time. I sat in my chair by the fire sipping cognac and reading Morris' extraordinary biography of Theodore Roosevelt. Truly a highbrow moment compared to the night before in which I was laying on the sofa watching Justice League.

Five Years of Blessing

2008-01-09T20:09:00.000-08:00

He who finds a wife finds a good thing
and obtains favor from the LORD.

A wife of noble character who can find?
She is worth far more than rubies.
Her husband has full confidence in her
and lacks nothing of value.
She brings him good, not harm,
all the days of her life.

Blessed are you, Jenni Leanne Simmons. Many daughters have done well, but you exceed them all. Thank you for these past five years.

This, Not This.

2008-01-02T19:55:00.000-08:00

Not

Relax. It's funny.

2007-12-21T19:03:00.000-08:00

Downe in Yon Forest

2007-12-13T20:38:00.001-08:00

Antediluvian Origins of Music

2007-12-08T16:12:00.000-08:00

Cain knew his wife, and she conceived and bore Enoch. When he built a city, he called the name of the city after the name of his son, Enoch. To Enoch was born Irad, and Irad fathered Mehujael, and Mehujael fathered Methushael, and Methushael fathered Lamech. And Lamech took two wives. The name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah. Adah bore Jabal; he was the father of those who dwell in tents and have livestock. His brother’s name was Jubal; he was the father of all those who play the lyre and pipe. Zillah also bore Tubal-cain; he was the forger of all instruments of bronze and iron. The sister of Tubal-cain was Naamah.

Here we see the birth in human society of three industries important to the life of men: agriculture, the arts, and technology. I'd like to point out two interesting things.

First, notice that art, specifically music, is as primal and as important as the other two industries.

Second, notice that all these things were given to mankind by God through the increasingly pagan line of Cain, which would eventually be wiped away in the Flood. The knowledge of them was preserved through Noah and his sons. It's important to realize that that which the pagans come up with that is legitimately useful may be appropriated by God's people for their use, and benefit.

So one can't automatically rule out the Christian's use of certain forms or styles of music merely because they have pagan origins. If the musical structure may be put to obedient use, it's valid. Certain pagan musical inventions can't (think of what "chance music" says about the sovereign God), but they are few.

A Postmillennial Advent

2007-12-02T20:19:00.001-08:00

Jenni and I try to keep a proper Advent each year. We put up the tree on the first Sunday and leave it bare until we return home from Church on Christmas Eve, then decorate it and leave it up from Christmas Day until Epiphany.

Advent is traditionally a penitential season in which we remember the time of preparation before our Lord's first Advent, and also think to how we are doing as we labor before His Second Coming.

Well, I think it is theologically sound, given my view of the progressive spread of the Kingdom in history, to make the Advent season a time of growing beauty until the Lord comes on Christmas Day. So, this week, the tree went up. Next, we will light it. Then our purple glass ornaments, followed by the silver ones. Finally on Christmas Eve the Lord will come as the Pantokrator icon I top the tree with will go up, and all the other ornaments will joyfully meet Him as He arrives.

HT: This actually started as a joke by my friend Frank.

Return of the Son of Numbers

2007-12-01T21:02:00.000-08:00

Actually, Deuteronomy. A look at the structure of one of my favorite books of Scripture.

Listen here.

Son of Numbers

2007-11-24T10:21:00.000-08:00

Part three in our walk through the book at Holy Trinity.

Is the Gospel in the Gospels?

2007-11-23T07:33:00.000-08:00

Jeffrey Meyers asks that question, and answers it beautifully in the first of a series of postings.

Read, then let's discuss.

Numbers, the Sequel

2007-11-16T20:08:00.000-08:00

The second class in my study of Numbers at Holy Trinity.

Well, We All Knew It Already, Yes?

2007-11-15T19:08:00.001-08:00

More Worship According to Hoyle

2007-11-12T21:29:00.000-08:00

Yeah, everybody always wants to "define worship." But my friend does it better than most.

In a Nutshell

2007-11-10T18:45:00.000-08:00

Theonomy simply defined: Saying "Jesus is Lord" and really meaning it.

A Sobering Reminder

2007-11-10T18:43:00.000-08:00

“If often surprises people to learn that God is not always pleased when people worship him. We might be inclined to think that God should be thankful for any attention we give him out of our busy schedules. But worship is not about God’s thanking us; it is about our thanking him. And God is not pleased with just anything we choose to do in his presence. The mighty Lord of heaven and earth demands that our worship- indeed, all of life- be governed by his word.” ~ John Frame

HT: Hoyle

I Feel Like A Number

2007-11-04T21:08:00.000-08:00

I'm teaching a quick look at the book of Numbers (and an even quicker trip through Deuteronomy) at Holy Trinity this month. Lesson One is here. Sorry, but I'm out of the public speaking habit, and thus the huge "y'know" count.

Trick-or-Doodle-Doo

2007-10-31T15:45:00.001-07:00

Yes, this is Harley in a rooster hat. Yes, dressing your animals up is highly gay. So, what's the deal, you ask?

Harley has started meowing and rustling the blinds in our bedroom shortly before sunup. Passing this "costume" in Target gave me a wonderful, if ineffective, idea. If the young master wants to act like a rooster, then perhaps he should look the part.

It won't earn me any more sleep, but at least I'll be giggling as the sky starts to lighten.

Happy Reformation Day!

2007-10-31T13:13:00.001-07:00

I Am...The GRILLMASTER!

2007-10-30T18:41:00.000-07:00

Tonight's dinner all cooked outside on the grill:

Prosciutto-wrapped chicken breast with garlic, basil, oregano, rosemary, thyme and pepper
Green and red bell peppers
Yellow and zucchini squash
Asparagus

Nightcap: a Rusty Nail (Scotch (Glenrothes) and Drambuie).

God is kind.

Watch the Kingdom Spread

2007-10-20T17:46:00.000-07:00

Here is a historical map of the growth of the great world religions. Watch the water spread over the sea. The glorious postmillennial vision in full effect.

The Christian Holiday of Halloween

2007-10-18T21:00:00.000-07:00

James Jordan sets the record straight. "Fall Festival," indeed.