Any thinking American Christian should run toward Calvinism for the simple reason that American liberties are built on the back of this theological system. For example, it was John Adams who said, “Let not Geneva be forgotten or despised. Religious liberty owes it much respect, Servetus notwithstanding.” Part of the reason for this was that Calvin sought to conform the culture according to the Word of God and hence the great American experiment. Interestingly enough, though, this was not always Calvin’s approach. In fact, having been influenced by Luther, the young Calvin sought to formulate a theory through the use of the Lutheran theory of the two kingdoms. However as he matured he out grew the two kingdoms and began to think in more intergrated terms, blurring the Lutheran lines between the kingdoms. For those whose appetite has been whetted, you will want to check out The Reformation of Rights: Law, Religion, and Human Rights in Early Modern Calvinism (Cambridge University Press, 2007) by John Witte, Jr.
According to one researcher, Moses was probably high on drugs when he had his religious experiences on Mount Sinai. You can read about it here.
Last Sunday the church reviewer and writer for the San Diego Reader did a review of our church. I think it is favorable and at times insightful. Please take a look here.
That’s right. You read it correctly. In a recent post I said that the singing of Psalms are a way for us as a church to emphasize our unity with the church present and past. There are other ways too. We can sing songs that have good doctrine. One of the contemporary songs we love to sing is “In Christ Alone.” Be sure to read this recent CT interview with the authors of that great contemporary song.
(HT: Justin Taylor)
This week I got a mass mailer from this local church (if you can stomach it you should watch the sneak peek: messages). I got to thinking about the badge of honor that many churches wear called “non-denominational.” Then I came across this paragraph from theologian Simon Chan in his book, Spiritual Theology: A Systematic Study of the Christian Life (IVP: 1998). Speaking of some of the percuilar problems of denomational churches in Asia, he goes on and says
But a more serious defect is found in the nondenominational agencies that produce churches without any sense of history or tradition. These churches are no more than collectives of individuals who profess Christ as savior. The primary reality is the individual’s relationship with God. The church is just an ancillary entity that exists to serve the spiritual needs of the individual…There is little sense of the church as a corporate, spiritual reality existing in and through time, worshiping God with the apostles, prophets, saints and martyrs together with angels and archangels and all the heavenly host (p.103, emphasis mine).
So then, how can we overcome the individualism of the modern “non-denominational” church? Simple. We can begin by defining and determining our theology(there’s a novel idea), aligning with others that share it and embrace it, reciting the creeds and confessions, singing Psalms, not made up worship songs that are different in every culture and come and go with every generation, reading and preaching the Bible and having weekly communion. That’s a good start. All of these things unite us to those who have gone before and link us to those who are here today, regardless of what color they are or language they speak. And in so doing the strongman’s hold of individualism and autonomy is progressively weakened to the glory of God.
UPDATE: Be sure to read the comments of Hammer below. They are quite enlightening. The hits just keep on coming.
This list includes a non-covenantal book and varying approaches and positions on baptism within the Reformed community. One should also be sure to consult good systematic theologies.
James V. Brownson. The Promise of Baptism: An Introduction to Baptism in Scripture
and the Reformed Tradition (
Douglas Wilson. To A Thousand Generations: Infant Baptism, Covenant Mercy
for the People of God (Moscow: Cannon Press, 1996) 123 pages.
John Murray. Christian Baptism. (Phillipsburg: P&R, 1980) 90 pages.
Benjamin Wikner, ed. To You and Your Children: Examining the Biblical Doctrine of
Covenant Succession. (
Peter Leithart. The Baptized Body. (
Greg Strawbridge ed. The Case for Covenantal Baptism. (
Cornelis Harinck. We with our Children: A Commentary on the Form of Baptism. (Grand
Rapids: Reformation Heritage Books, 2006) 193.
Thomas Schreiner and Shawn Wright eds. Believer’s Baptism: Sign of the New Covenant
in Christ. (
Chapter four takes up the topic of the state, its nature, purpose and limitations. He helpfully defines the state as only one of many different institutions (p. 81). And, in contrast to the contract theory of the state, he affirms that the state is actually a gift from God (p. 82). Furthermore, he also affirms with Aquinas and Calvin, that the state is not only negative, but also has a positive purpose, namely the promotion of good (p. 83). Similarly, the state is also to provide space for the proclamation of the gospel, according to Sider.
His discussion turned troubling at the topic of the state’s limitation. Sider recognizes that historically Christians have advocated a limited state because if the state is up in everyone business and making all the decisions, it will become practically impossible for individuals to carry out the creation mandate of freely molding the material world and shaping history in the steps of the great Creator. Unfortunately, he takes away what he had just given us because for Sider the opposite of “limited” is “more than me.” In other words, his limited is not that limited. For example, he says the state should guarantee that all children have access to quality education and ensure that all citizens enjoy an appropriate level of health care (p. 93). Further yet, the state should provide resources to encourage other institutions to play their proper role (p. 93; 90). In common vernacular, the church will baby sit for you and if you don’t like her babysitting skills, she will pay for one you like better.
Another troubling element of this chapter was the discussion on what the church should legislate. He raises the questions: About what things should the state pass laws that the police and courts enforce? His final answer? “To a significant degree, laws must be grounded in fairly widespread cultural agreement or they cannot be enforced” (p 94). Put a bit differently, “…it is unwise to legislate what is essentially unenforceable.” This is the most troubling aspect of the book I have come across and is nothing sort of a cultural relativism that will eventually destroy any nation that adopts it.
The chapter ends with an odd discussion about pacifism and whether or not a pacifist can or should engage in politics. Sider is clearly a pacifist. And the discussion was interesting about how a pacificst may try to be a politician today in the war time climate we are living it. Regardless, it seemed out of place.
According to Bill Clinton it does. He makes the comment: “If you were really pro-life you would want to put every doctor and every mother in prison as an accessory to murder.” This kind of rhetoric is supposed to silence the critics. But if we really believe that abortion is in fact murder, why should we even blink at the idea of imprisoning the parties involved in the crime?
Over at the Relevant Church (no that’s not a joke) they are having a 30 day sex challenge. Evidently the challenge is for non-married people of the church to not have sex for 30 days and for the married folks to have sex every day for 30 days. Hence the 30 day sex challenge. The challenge rightly recognizes that sex is metaphysical as well as physical. However, with the crude admonition to “just do it” for 30 days, they take away what they had already given. So here is the American church. But at least they are relevant!
Whenever I tell people that heaven is going to be on earth and that earth is going to be heaven, I get a look like I am crazy. Such a notion is hard swallowing for those of us who have been fed a steady diet of Gnosticism cloaked in Christian clothing. Sider got it right when he said
Many evangelicals have an understanding of Christ’s return and life eternal in “heaven” that is simply heretical. It comes from Plato, not the Bible (p. 71).
For this reason the piece in Time by N.T. Wright should be joyfully welcomed. Sure, some will tune it out because it is Wright and nothing he says can be right. But even for the Wright skeptic this is worth reading