Wednesday, December 23, 2015

Praising God for His Impassibility

I just finished an article by Kevin DeYoung on the Impassibility of God. That is, God's attribute that affirms His inability to suffer involuntarily or be acted upon externally. The article was written for the breakout session that he spoke at Together for the Gospel 2010. The fifth point in the article makes me want to break out and worship God. It's amazing! Here are two paragraphs:
Listen to Hebrews 2:9: ―But we see him who for a little while was made lower than the angels, namely Jesus, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone. This is a purpose statement. The Son of God had to be made for a little while lower than the angels so that he might taste death. Apart from the incarnation, the Son could not die, because God by definition is immortal.
and
Do you see the connection in all of this with the doctrine of impassibility? If God as God can suffer then the incarnation is robbed of its glorious condescension. There‘s no mystery and no majesty in the incarnation apart from impassibility. Why become a man if God is capable of experiencing all that needs to be experienced in order to save men?
I hope you see the wisdom, mercy, and love of God in the incarnation of Christ. Look at that, just in time for Christmas.
Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways!
“For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counselor?”
“Or who has given a gift to him that he might be repaid?” 
For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen.
Romans 11:33-36 

Same Words, Different Meanings

I just came across a link to an amazing video performed by this person, Lindsey Striling. She is definitely a very talented violinist. At the end of the video, she gives a very inspiring message of her hope. Of the gospel, of Jesus Christ:
You know, I have realized that a lot of times I have failed to see the beauty that is in the moments and people that surround me every single day. And this video is actually a really humbling experience, and it reminded me of a time where I honestly felt that no one could see the beauty in me. And maybe that's something you can relate to. Maybe you think that no one sees the beauty in you. But there is one person that, I have learned, always sees the beauty in us. And that's our Savior, Jesus Christ. And this is the time of the year that we have the opportunity to celebrate his birth. He was the greatest gift that we've ever been given, and his gospel allows us the knowledge to know that we can be with our loved ones forever. And in my darkest moments, Jesus Christ has given me hope. If you want to see more about this message, you can click on this video, A Savior is Born. Please share it, watch it, and please know that there is a gift inside of you. He sees it, I see it. I really hope that you can see it. I just want to thank you guys for seeing the gift in me.
But which Jesus Christ is she referring to? Striling is a Mormon. The Savior she refers to is not the one the Bible teaches. The Jesus she knows is Lucifer's spirit brother, a created being. The gospel she refers to does not save. Their emphasis on family and "be[ing] with our loved ones forever" is their gospel. My gospel, the real gospel, reconciles sinful man to a holy God.

I'm very surprised that the words Mormon or Latter Day Saints didn't appear anywhere in the video or article. If one doesn't know better, one could have easily fallen into thinking she is a Christian. This goes to show how one religion can use the same terms, but define them completely different from another.

Monday, October 12, 2015

Cessationism: Clarifying Some Terms

From time to time I would read online, or hear someone say something about Cessationism that leaves me scratching my head. Cessationism is putting God in a box? Experiencing miracles disproves Cessationism? Does this guy actually understand the doctrine of cessation?

As defined by Wikipedia in the hyperlink above, the doctrine of cessation states that the "extraordinary" gifts of the Spirit (i.e. Prophecy, tongues, miracles, and healing) ceased (and I would amend) with the close or shortly after the Apostolic age.

Generally, there is no definite time of when the gifts ceased. It varies depending who you ask. However, with the death of the last apostle there is no need to validate new revelations because the Faith has been delivered (2 Corinthians 12:12; Ephesians 2:20; Hebrews 2:3-4; Jude 3). A quick scan through my mind of redemptive history, it seems these extraordinary gifts were given during times where new revelation was given. Hence, the "400 years of silence" between the two Testaments.

In saying that the gifts have ceased, I mean we should not be expecting it as a norm for today. It pleased the Lord to stop bestowing the gifts after the Apostolic age. But perhaps from time to time in church history He decides to give it to some, but that is not a norm. Some would argue we should never expect it. I would not hold that though. How my view plays out is that I would be skeptical to test that gift before concluding it is actually the real gift. Which, I believe, is a biblical thing to do (1 Corinthians 14:29; 1 John 4:1).

"Cessationists are putting God in a box!"
Am I putting God in a box if I say He cannot lie? Of course not! The Bible sets the parameters and if He says He cannot lie (Hebrews 6:18), then He cannot lie. It wouldn't be putting God in a box if in fact, in His word, God shows how He works in redemptive history. Admittedly, it's not as obvious and clear as "God cannot lie", but those who argue against must understand that from the Cessationist's point of view, God defined the parameter.

"Holding to Cessationism would mean to deny the experience of millions who experienced miracles."
Experience is important and must subject itself to the word of God. But that's not the point here. I find that most who claim to have experienced miracles would jump to conclude that the gifts are present. Here's where the terms must be defined. Cessationists believe God works miracles, but they would deny that God still bestows the gift (as a norm) to people today. That means, whatever miracle the millions experienced, it would probably not be the gift of miracle/healing. If anything, it would be God working a miracle through the person in answer to his prayer.

I have some notes on the gifts in 1 Corinthians 12 in an earlier post.
For more resources on Cessationism, here's "The Ultimate Cessationism Resource".

Monday, August 31, 2015

Lessons from Ashley Madison

In light of the whole Ashley Madison news, I came across two posts that I really liked because I learned something from each one.
  1. Pastor Jeff Durbin of Apologia Church's Facebook post
  2. Tim Challies' wife's appeal to all Christian men
One taught me to balance God's grace and God's standard toward other brothers and sisters in Christ. The other encouraged me to continue to mortify sin because it is important.
For this is the will of God, your sanctification
1 Thessalonians 4:3

Friday, June 26, 2015

Peter's Logic


I'm currently reading through an amazing book by Dr. Michael Kruger that I bought from the Shepherds' Conference. The Question of Canon is a book that pokes holes in the extrinsic model of the canon. Before I explain the models, "canon" must be defined.

Canon comes from a Greek word meaning "measuring rod", "standard", or "rule". In regards to the Bible, the term canon refers to the 66 books of the Old and New Testaments because they act as the authoritative standard (canon) for the Christian.

In his book, Kruger gives two models for the development of the New Testament canon:
  1. The Extrinsic Model:
    “[T]he canon was, to some degree imposed upon the Christian faith.” (p. 18)

  2. The Intrinsic Model:
    “[The canon was] not something imposed from the outside but develops more organically from within the early Christian religion itself.” (p. 21)
In raising some problems with the extrinsic model, Kruger paves way for the intrinsic model. One way in which he does that is his argument against the claim that the NT writers did not know they were writing Scripture, therefore there is no evidence of an authoritative source other than the OT until later on in history.

One of the examples given was that Peter* knows he is writing Scripture. Here's the flow of thought summarized from pages 150-151:
  1. Claims apostolic texts to be authoritative (2 Pt. 3:16)
  2. His readers should submit to apostolic authority (2 Pt. 3:2)
  3. Calls himself an apostle (2 Pt. 1:1)
  4. Recounts his own apostolic credentials (2 Pt. 1:16-18)
  5. Therefore his letters are authoritative
*There are scholars who do not believe in Peter's authorship of 2 Peter and a different author for 1 Peter. But as noted in the book, authorship is irrelevant here. The point is whether the writer of this epistle is aware that he is claiming apostolic authority and therefore is writing, what we call, Scripture.

Sunday, April 12, 2015

Shepherds' Conference 2015 - Day 3


It's been over a month since Shepherds' Conference at Grace Community Church (March 3-8, 2015). Around 5000 men flew from all over the world to attend this historic event. Historic because it is different than the past conferences in that it was a summit. The conference was 4 days (when it was 3 before), the number of people that attended doubled from before, the number of General Sessions doubled also, there were many more speakers than before, and the topic was Inerrancy. That is, the inerrancy of Scripture. The Scripture does not have any errors in its original writings.

My two highlights from day three:


Dr. Steve Lawson opens up the morning with the sermon titled The Invincible Power of the Inerrant Word. In it, he goes through 7 symbols/analogies that the Bible refers to itself as, giving the listener a greater reverence and confidence in the inerrant Scripture. 
"It is an inerrant word that gives infallible guidance."

Dr. Derek Thomas then preached later that day on 2 Peter 1:16-21. Expounding from this text, Dr. Thomas gives an amazing message on the doctrine of Scripture. The sermon is structured around three questions.
  1. What does Peter say the Bible is?
  2. How is the Bible written by human instrumentality?
  3. To what extent can we be certain that the Bible is God's word written?

Saturday, March 21, 2015

Worship

I grew up thinking that worship is the time at church where we sing songs to God. When I walk into a church service we worship, then it's scripture reading, and then the sermon, sometimes communion, response, announcement, doxology, and then silent prayer and dismissal. During our fellowship gatherings, we may have worship, the program, announcement, and then go home.

That thinking didn't stick with me for too long. When I was around 12 or 13 years old, I decided to join the youth fellowship worship team. It was mandatory to attend worship training. And in that training, an older sister in Christ taught us the theology behind worship from the passage in John 4. From verse 23 and 24 I learned clearly that worship is not just singing songs. It is a lifestyle expressed by our spirit in light of the truth. I thank God that He has corrected my thinking about worship since then.

My thinking was changed but I still referred to the people leading the songs as a worship team. When I was 17, I served on the worship team as a guitarist at a conference. At my university, we had a worship cell group where we meet together, learn, jam, and talk (I didn't attend a lot of the meetings). In my life, whenever there is a worship team, there will always be an A/V team that would help with the audio when the sound gets fed through the mic to the speakers.

When I talk about worship, I realize there is a broader meaning than just music. But sometimes I don't want to appear too picky, since this is just a semantics issue and everyone refers to the music stuff as worship, so I would use that term when I converse and understand that when people say "worship" they mean the music most of the time (depends on the context).

However, I don't know what in me finally clicked. I never bothered changing that terminology before because I was so used to calling it worship, or worship team. Something finally clicked in me and it became my pet peeve. It bothers me that worship is so often used synonymous to singing and/or music. I don't like to call it worship team anymore. If I want to call something a worship team, then everyone serving at that service (music, A/V, ushers, preacher, etc.) is the worship team.

For those leading us in music, I feel more comfortable calling that a praise team, leading us in a time of praise to God. Music team? Musical aspect of worship? That still sounds better than worship team. That word is too broad to be narrowed down to one of its many aspects. So whoever is reading this, maybe you should consider changing the way you use the term worship, too.

Some may say it's just semantics, so it doesn't really matter. Maybe. But ask yourself, are you holding onto tradition or are you convinced from Scripture that this is the best way to refer to the people who lead you in singing praises to your God?

Tuesday, March 17, 2015

Shepherds' Conference 2015 - Day 2


Two weeks ago (March 3-8, 2015) was Shepherds' Conference at Grace Community Church in California. Around 5000 men flew from all over the world to attend this historic event. Historic because it is different than the past conferences in that it was a summit. The conference was 4 days (when it was 3 before), the number of people that attended doubled from before, the number of General Sessions doubled also, there were many more speakers than before, and the topic was Inerrancy. That is, the inerrancy of Scripture. The Scripture does not have any errors in its original writings.

Day two were full of highlights. 


Dr. Miguel Núñez started the day off speaking on Inerrancy and the Great Commission. Preaching from Matthew 28:16-20 with a focus on inerrancy. A great resource for those who are mission-minded. 

Dr. Carl Trueman then gave a lecture, Inerrancy from the Reformers. With great examples of the saints before us who affirmed inerrancy even before the term "inerrancy" was coined. This was a very informative session.

Ian Hamilton and his tender preaching on John 10:22-39. Like a grandfather, he reminded us firmly to hold to the truth of inerrancy and submit to it. That is, to work it out in actions, not just our heads.
"We need to be careful lest we drift into reformed pharisaism."

Dr. Mark Dever closing the night with the reading of the whole Psalm 119 and preaching through this amazing passage. Teaching us about the word of God and the Word of God.

Monday, March 9, 2015

Shepherds' Conference 2015 - Day 1


The past week (March 3-8, 2015) was Shepherds' Conference at Grace Community Church in California. Around 5000 men flew from all over the world to attend this historic event. Historic because it is different than the past conferences in that it was a summit. The conference was 4 days (when it was 3 before), the number of people that attended doubled from before, the number of General Sessions doubled also, there were many more speakers than before, and the topic was Inerrancy. That is, the inerrancy of Scripture. The Scripture does not have any errors in its original writing.

Anyway, I will be sharing my highlight sessions from each day. Everything can be accessed on the Shepherds' Conference website:

Day 1

Alistair Begg's sermon was titled Let the Lion Out, taken from a quote from Charles Spurgeon. In it, he preaches from 2 Timothy 4:1-5 encouraging everyone in this conference (comprised of pastors and leaders) with the charge of preaching (and teaching) the word of God to the end.

Ligon Duncan preached from 2 Timothy 3:16-17 reinforcing the Scripture's inspiration (God-breathedness) and therefore its inerrancy. He goes through the text and expounded on the purpose of this inspired text, and the effect thereof. The sermon ended with a call to be doers of the word: 
"O brothers, let us not old to the word in word, let us hold to the word in what we love and how we live."

Sunday, February 22, 2015

Listening to Sermons

How did God speak to you? Has always been a question I hear when we discuss a sermon from church or somewhere else. Generally people (and I tried too) to rephrase the question to, "Did anything from the sermon jump out or stick out to you?".

I mean, that's not a bad question to ask because the Holy Spirit does work in our hearts and sometimes only one thing from the sermon really speaks to us. But the more I think about it and how people struggle to give a response to a vague and general question like that, the more I realize I may not be asking a very helpful question.

If the pastor is faithful in preaching the word of God, then God will be speaking through the pastor on every point he makes, so long as it is consistent with the scripture (The Second Helvetic Confession, Chapter 1). And if that is the case with the preaching I hear, then what I hear from the preacher is what God is speaking to me about, whether it is immediately relevant or not.

So maybe the better questions are:
  • What did God say? (i.e. What was preached in the sermon?)
    • This is to refresh the mind with the contents of the sermon.
  • What did you learn?
    • Similar to the "anything jump out?" thing, sometimes the person may say "nothing new" and to that you can ask...
  • What did the sermon exhort you to do?
    • To recall the "application" part.
  • Are you doing it?
    • Many hear the application but it doesn't "jump out" at them because it's nothing new, but if God has told us what to do and we're not doing it, then we're merely hearers of the word (James 1:22-25) and we're disobedient.
Thats it. Perhaps this is one of the less general/vague ways to approach a sermon discussion. Truth is important and the content should be examined, but we cannot merely be hearers of the word.

Thursday, February 19, 2015

What is Love

A good reminder on love. Lord, help me love.



http://www.paultripp.com/articles/posts/23-things-that-love-is

Saturday, January 17, 2015

Newsweek Hit Piece Response Resources

On December 23, 2014 Newsweek published an article by Kurt Eichenwald pretty much attacking the integrity of Scripture (along with lots of other claims about Christians). The article titled The Bible: So Misunderstood it's a Sin (here).

Just want to post some resources I found addressing this issue:

  • Dr. Albert Mohler's response on his blog and on The Briefing
  • Dr. Michael Kruger's two part response (part 1 and part 2) with Eichenwald himself commenting!
  • Dr. James White's response on two episodes of The Dividing Line (part 1 and part 2)
  • Dr. James White's update on Eichenwald's continual ignorance 
  • Dr. Daniel Wallace's blog response
  • Dr. Michael Brown's article response on Newsweek
I trust these will be useful to... myself.