On Andy Stanley’s “Deep and Wide” – C.Trueman

The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie – Reformation21.

Last night I received in my email box the latest article by Dr.Carl Trueman posted at “Reformation21″. Immediately I started reading, as his articles rarely disappoint. With sharp wit and equally sharp Reformed apologetics, Trueman exposes all that’s bad in modern evangelicalism and modern culture today (As you will have noted from my frequent references to his writings.).  And, not to my surprise, I discovered another great Trueman piece in this new article.

This time he goes after popular pastor Andy Stanley and his new book. Needless to say, Trueman’s review is sharp and stinging. But it needs to be. And when you read what both of these writers have to say, you will understand why. Below is the first part of the review. Read all of it at the “Ref21″ link above.

For this month’s column, I thought I would offer a few reflections on Andy Stanley’s recent book, Deep and Wide: Creating Churches Unchurched People Love to Attend. Here’s a classic passage which represents in miniature an entire universe of erroneous thinking.

People are far more interested in what works than what’s true. I hate to burst your bubble, but virtually nobody in your church is on a truth quest. Including your spouse. They are on happiness quests. As long as you are dishing out truth with no here’s the difference it will make tacked on the end, you will be perceived as irrelevant by most of the people in your church, student ministry, or home Bible study. You may be spot-on theologically, like the teachers of the law in Jesus’ day, but you will not be perceived as one who teaches with authority. Worse, nobody is going to want to listen to you.

Now, that may be discouraging. Especially the fact that you are one of the few who is actually on a quest for truth. And, yes, it is unfortunate that people aren’t more like you in that regard. But that’s the way it is. It’s pointless to resist. If you try, you will end up with a little congregation of truth seekers who consider themselves superior to all the other Christians in the community. But at the end of the day, you won’t make an iota of difference in this world….

With so much promising material, where should one start the critique? Perhaps with the unintended irony of a man warning his readers about feeling superior while at the same time assuring them that he has better insight into the way their spouses and congregations think than they do? Or with the odd way in which he berates his audience for making the mistake of assuming that other people are just like them rather than realizing that they are actually all just like Andy Stanley? Sorry to – as you would put it – ‘burst your bubble’, Andy, but the people I know are not on a happiness quest. I suspect they are not that ambitious: they simply want to find a decent bottle of cognac so that they might temporarily dull the pain of existence with a little touch of old world class. At least, I have always assumed they are just like me.

One might also look at the travesty of scriptural teaching it contains. The problem of the teachers of the law, for example, was not that they were spot on; it was that they were completely wrong. That is why Jesus spent such a lot of time berating them for their errors of interpretation. And as to Jesus playing to people’s expectations of happiness, one wonders why he made such ‘play’ of the havoc which following him would wreak on families, of the need to take up one’s cross, and of the expectation of persecution to come.

Dr. Carl Trueman is Paul Woolley Professor of Church History at Westminster Theological Seminary and pastor of Cornerstone Presbyterian Church.

What We Talk About When We Talk About God – Rob Bell Reviewed at “Ref21″

What We Talk About When We Talk About God – Reformation21.

Perhaps you have heard – the infamous postmodern “Christian” (heretical) teacher Rob Bell has a new book out: What We Talk About When We Talk About God (HarperOne, 2013). Perhaps you don’t care, based on his previous heretical publications. But you should, not because his book is “must reading”, but because we should know what postmodernists like Bell are doing to and saying about the Christian faith. Indeed, we must defend the faith against those on the outside (such as the new atheists) but also against those on the inside (heretics), who claim to speak for the Lord and for His church. Bell does not, and he must be exposed as such.

As a brief introduction to this book, this is how the publisher describes it on the back cover:

How God is described today strikes many as mean, primitive, backward, illogical, tribal, and at odds with the frontiers of science. At the same time, many intuitively feel a sense of reverence and awe in the world. Can we find a new way to talk about God?

Pastor and New York Times bestselling author Rob Bell does here for God what he did for heaven and hell in Love Wins: he shows how traditional ideas have grown stale and dysfunctional and reveals a new path for how to return vitality and vibrancy to how we understand God. Bell reveals how we got stuck, why culture resists certain ways of talking about God, and how we can reconnect with the God who is with us, for us, and ahead of us, pulling us forward into a better future—and ready to help us live life to the fullest.

What I have linked you to above (top of the post) is a solid, straight-forward review by Dr.Michael Kruger, President and professor of NT at Reformed Theological Seminary in Charlotte, NC. It appeared yesterday (May 6) at the “Reformation21″ website. Here are a couple of points Kruger makes (Read all of his review at the “Ref21″ link above.):

…Of course, Bell’s method of defending Christianity is not by stripping it of its supernatural elements (that was the issue in Bultmann’s day). On the contrary, Bell is quite keen to remind the reader of the supernatural–God is everywhere, busy at work, in us and in our world.   Instead, Bell’s makeover method is to change Christianity into a broad “spirituality.”  His book downplays (and in some instances, simply ignores) many of the key doctrines that make Christianity distinctive. He simply turns Christianity into vague, general, theism. Whereas Bultmann demythologized the faith, Bell has detheologized the faith.

…In the end, my overall concern about this volume is a simple one: it is not Christian. Bell’s makeover of Christianity has changed it into something entirely different. It is not Christianity at all, it is modern liberalism. It is the same liberalism that Machen fought in the 1920′s and the same liberalism prevalent in far too many churches today. It is the liberalism that teaches that God exists and that Jesus is the source of our happiness and our fulfillment, but all of this comes apart from any real mention of sin, judgment, and the cross. It is the liberalism that says we can know nothing for sure, except of course, that those “fundamentalists” are wrong. It is the liberalism that appeals to the Bible from time to time, but then simply ignores large portions of it.

Bell’s book, therefore, is really just spiritualism with a Christian veneer. It’s a book that would fit quite well on Oprah’s list of favorite books. What is Rob Bell talking about when he is talking about God? Not the God of Christianity.

C.Trueman on Rome, Justification, and Lord’s Day 1

In the eightenneth chapter of his book Fools Rush In Where Monkeys Fear to Tread, Dr.Carl Trueman treats not only areas of (rare) agreement between the Roman Catholic Church and Protestants but also the areas of obvious disagreement, including the authority of Scripture, the sacraments, justification, and assurance. That last one may surprise you, but it is significant, and at the end of his treatment of this point of difference with Rome Trueman makes a great reference to Q&A 1 of the Heidelberg Catechism. Here’s the relevant quotation:

But the difference on justification leads to a fundamentally different view of the Christian life. For the Catholic, assurance of God’s favor is a non-issue; indeed, assurance can be a dangerously subversive thing, encouraging moral laxity and poor churchmanship. For the Protestant , however, it is absolutely crucial: only as we are assured of God’s favor can we understand his holiness without despairing, and do good works – live as Christians! – in a manner that is not servile but rather affiliative and familial. Catholics and, indeed, Protestants who have a faulty understanding of justification, are at the very least losing out on the sheer joy and delight of the assured Christian life.

…If, however, you value the Protestant tradition on justification, and its concomitant pastoral point, that of the normality of the individual’s assurance, you may, indeed, you should, appreciate much of what Catholicism  and Protestantism share in common, but you should remain at Geneva and not head to Rome. For me, the right to claim Question One of the Heidelberg Catechism as my own, as the most profound statement of a truly childlike faith and ethic, is too precious to cede either to the numpties of postmodern evangelicalism or the geniuses of Rome, even the great Newman….

And then he quotes that first Q&A of the catechism, which I will also do, only from the long-standing English edition (used by the PRC):

Question 1. What is thy only comfort in life and death?

Answer. That I with [a] body and soul, both in life and death, [b] am not my own, but belong [c] unto my faithful Savior Jesus Christ; who, with his precious [d] blood, hath fully [e] satisfied for all my sins, and delivered [f] me from all the power of the devil; and so preserves me [g] that without the will of my heavenly Father, not a hair [h] can fall from my head; yea, that all things must be [i] subservient to my salvation, and therefore, by his Holy Spirit, he also assures me [j] of eternal life, and makes [k] me sincerely willing and ready, henceforth, to live unto him. 

[a]: 1Cor. 6:19,20
[b]: Rom. 14:7,8,9
[c]: 1Cor. 3:23
[d]: 1Pet. 1:18,19
[e]: 1John 1:7
[f]: 1John 3:8; Heb. 2:14,15
[g]: John 6:39; John 10:28,29
[h]: Luke 21:18; Matt. 10:30
[i]: Rom. 8:28
[j]: 2Cor. 1:22; 2Cor 5:5
[k]: Rom. 8:14; Rom. 7:22

“When God is Not Enough” – Scotty Smith

When God is Not Enough by Scotty Smith | Reformed Theology Articles at Ligonier.org.

As I continue to use and profit from Tabletalk magazine, one of the rubrics I have grown to look forward to is “Heart Aflame”, which contains articles directed to the Reformed Christian’s heart. The new April issue contains an article by pastor Scotty Smith (PCA) under the title “When God is Not Enough”. In this fine article he addresses the matter of idolatry, which, as he shows, begins in the heart. He bases his thoughts on Ezek.14 and speaks to our hearts, which is what God does in this passage.

Here is a portion of his article; you will find the rest at the link above.

The new hearts we have in Christ are yet-to-be-perfected hearts, and when God is functionally “not enough,” our anxieties and fears take over; then we go on the hunt for designer gods and pseudosaviors. What does this look like?

At the beginning of Ezekiel 14, we get to eavesdrop on a fascinating conversation that took place between the prophet and God. Here’s the back story: Instead of showing and telling God’s story of redemption to the nations, Israel had progressively been drawn into the worship of the gods of the surrounding nations.

Israel’s drift into idolatry didn’t happen because the people became bored with the liturgy of their temple, enamored with the music of the worship bands in pagan temples, or impressed with the oratory of the new Canaanite prophet who had just moved into the neighborhood. No one in Israel went looking for a new worship service, but for new gods to service them. The center of their worship shifted from God to themselves. They began to worship worship more than they worshiped God—that is, their relationship with God became utilitarian rather than doxological.

When the glory of the one true living God is no longer our principal passion in life, worship becomes a pragmatic vehicle for fulfilling two basic quests in life: provision and protection. Instead of living for God’s glory and looking to Him to meet our needs, we exist for our glory and look for gods who will meet our demands.

Rev. Scotty Smith is founding pastor of Christ Community Church in Franklin, Tennessee, and he is author of Everyday Prayers: 365 Days to a Gospel-Centered Faith.

Is Love A Reason To Support Same-Sex Marriage?

Is Love A Reason To Support Same-Sex Marriage?.

Rex Rogers, former President of Cornerstone University in Grand Rapids, MI, had this good commentary on two recent high-profile statements affirming homosexuality. We are all too familiar with the argument (ad nauseam!) that approves homosexuality on the basis of love – even God’s love. Rogers speaks to this in this article posted on his own website (March 19, 2013). Click on the link above to read all of it; below is the introduction to his thoughts.

Ohio Senator Rob Portman recently announced his support for same-sex marriage. Why he adopted this view is more interesting than the fact he is the first Republican in the United States Senate to publicly do so.

The Senator recently learned his now 21-year-old son is gay. “Knowing that my son is gay,” the Senator said, “prompted me to consider the issue from another perspective.”

In another public announcement recently Mr. Rob Bell, former pastor of Mars Hill Bible Church in Grand Rapids, Michigan and the author of the controversial Love Wins, told an audience in San Francisco that he now endorses same-sex marriage. He justified his position by saying, “I am for marriage. I am for fidelity. I am for love, whether it’s a man and a woman, a woman and a woman, a man and a man.”

So twice in a month notable leaders claim love is the reason they now endorse same-sex marriage. According to Senator Portman and Mr. Bell, love explains their dramatic change of heart. Apparently for them, in the words of the Beatles, “Love is all you need.” But is it?

I Confess (Part I) – C.Trueman at Reformation21

I Confess (Part I) – Reformation21 Blog.

Dr.Carl Truman, who recently had a book published on creeds and their importance to the Christian and to the church (The Creedal Imperative, Crossway, 2012), has started a short series on the “Reformation21″ blog on the creeds. His title is simply “I Confess”, and it would be worth your time to read the first two (brief) installments. The first is linked above and quoted from below. The second may be found here.

In this first online article Trueman shows how confessional Christians are “disciplined” by their creeds, and he gives an interesting example to demonstrate his point – an elder who may question the sovereignty of God in this midst of some personal crisis. Here is how he opens the example and his point. Be sure to read the details of how this elder is “disciplined” by his confession.

Take an elder in a confessional church.   He has taken public vows before the church to uphold a particular set of theological tenets, for example, the sovereignty of God  as articulated in the Westminster Confession of Faith in Chapter 5 (Of Providence).   That vow binds his public teaching to the standards outlined in the Confession, and by ‘public teaching,’ I mean anything he might say either from the pulpit or while standing at the coffee machine after the service.

Perhaps this elder wakes up one morning to find that some terrible tragedy has intruded into his life: bereavement, serious illness, loss of material goods or status.  Such an event might well have a traumatic effect not just on his emotional psyche but perhaps also on his faith as well.  Perhaps there are moments, or even an extended period of time, when he questions whether God really is in control.  I pray that I never experience it, but I imagine that standing by the grave of a beloved child must be a very hard moment to believe in God’s loving sovereignty and care for his people.

This is where the discipline of a confession is important.  This elder has no right to share his doubts with the world in general.  Of course, he can speak confidentially to a ministerial friend for counsel; but he must not teach (in any sense of the word) against the content of the vows he has taken.

Are the Church’s Confessions Valuable? – Douglas Kelly

The Value of Confessions by Douglas Kelly | Reformed Theology Articles at Ligonier.org.

The above-linked article was another profitable one I read yesterday before Sunday worship. Writing for the rubric “For the Church”, Dr.D.Kelly addresses the great value of the church’s creeds and confessions, especially for our doctrinal-despising, relativistic, and pluralistic age. And surprisingly – at least to me – Kelly dares to take on theistic evolution and its denial of the early chapters of Genesis! It will be worth your while to visit the link above and read the entire article. Below is a part of it to whet your appetite.

Many evangelicals, in order to avoid the clear teachings of these confessions (which are based on the supernatural claims of the Bible) and not offend the reigning relativism of our culture (which, at the end of the day, is anti-supernatural), employ a sort of “nominalistic” interpretation of the standards. A “nominalistic” interpretation means avoiding the plain teaching of these biblically based confessions by formally subscribing to them while employing clever and painful endeavors to make them say something else; something that will be less offensive to the secular culture.

One instance is how theistic evolutionists engage in a sort of “Jesuit casuistry” to force the first three chapters of Genesis to say precisely what they preclude—that there was sin before the fall of Adam and that life gradually developed by chance.

A great value of the Westminster Confession’s teaching on creation, for example, is that in following it, we are not prey to changing paradigms of philosophical science (which is not the same thing as empirical or operational science, which, in my view, is fully compatible with the teachings of Genesis). Here the standards can help us greatly (if we abide in them realistically, rather than nominalistically evading their meaning): they plainly tell the church what the Bible has always said on creation rather than leading us on a wild goose chase of post-Enlightenment philosophies. They help the church to see that approaches such as theistic evolution come not from the Bible but from somewhere else, and need to be identified as such.

The 2013 Book Awards – Christianity Today

The 2013 Book Awards | Christianity Today.

CT has announced their awards for the best books of 2012 according to their judges. There will still be a few of these lists being publicized, so we will take note of them as they appear. And because “CT”‘s awards represent a broad evangelical perspective, it is always an interesting list to peruse.

Below is the introduction to the selections by Matt Reynolds, an associate editor at “CT”. Click on the “CT” link above to browse the list.

The late Christian philosopher Arthur Holmes proclaimed confidently that “all truth is God’s truth.” Holmes’s epigram came to mind as I was tallying up our judges’ rankings, encountering one surprise after another. Would Christianity Today really bestow top honors on a Roman Catholic New York Times columnist? On a Roman Catholic Ivy League professor? Or on a satirical novel lampooning contemporary evangelical culture?

Well, why not? If God is indeed the Author of all truth, we needn’t be too choosy about those earthly authors whose truth-telling we recognize. Yes, most of this year’s honorees (take a bow, Tim Keller!) fit more or less comfortably in an evangelical milieu. (Fearless prediction: Richard Dawkins will never win a CT book award.) Still, it’s nice to remember that, whatever the source, truth (to say nothing of goodness and beauty) is always a cause for rejoicing.

Now the envelopes, please. From an initial crop of 455 titles submitted by 68 publishers, we’ve selected 10 winners, and 9 notables, that offer insights into the people, events, and ideas that shape evangelical life, thought, and mission. Here they are, along with comments from the judges. —Matt Reynolds, CT associate editor

Swimming the Tiber to Rome? – Mark Jones

Swimming the Tiber? by Mark Jones | Reformed Theology Articles at Ligonier.org.

Under the rubric “For the Church”, Reformed Presbyterian pastor Mark Jones penned this excellent article I read yesterday from this month’s Tabletalk. In it he writes about the dangers Rome poses to those Protestants who would consider leaving evangelicalism for the RCC and warns us that while Rome promises much, she delivers nothing – for she leaves us without Christ. Here is Jones’ introductory and final paragraphs; you are encouraged to read the rest of his brief article at the Ligonier link above.

The Roman Catholic Church poses several attractions for evangelical Christians. Whether their motivation is Rome’s apparent unifying power, its claims to be semper idem (“always the same”), its so-called historical pedigree, its ornate liturgy, or the belief that only Rome can withstand the onslaught of liberalism and postmodernism, a number of evangelicals have given up their “protest” and made the metaphorical trek across Rome’s Tiber River into the Roman Catholic Church.

…In the end, our controversy with Rome is important because Christ is important. Christ alone—not He and Mary (LG 62)—intercedes between us and the Father; Christ alone—not the pope (LG 22)—is the head of the church and, thus, the supreme judge of our consciences; Christ alone—not pagan “dictates of conscience” (LG 16)—must be the object of faith for salvation; and Christ’s righteousness alone—not ours (LG 40)—is the only hope we have for standing before a God who is both just and the Justifier of the wicked. To move to Rome is not only to give up justification and, thus, assurance— even more so, it is to give up Christ.

Newsweek vs. the New Testament — It Must Be Christmas – Al Mohler

AlbertMohler.com – Newsweek vs. the New Testament — It Must Be Christmas.

Dr.Al Mohler has another good commentary on a recent major U.S. magazine cover story on Christmas – with the main article penned by a man known for his rejection of the veracity of Scripture! This has become commonplace in the media in this country, especially during those seasons when Christians celebrate significant events in the life of our Lord (his birth and his resurrection, e.g.). Mohler’s evaluation of Newsweek’s story is worth reading, and I encourage you to read all of it at the link above. Here are a few of his thoughts to get you started.

The major festivals of the Christian year often prompt major cover stories in the nation’s weekly news magazines. Time,Newsweek, and US News & World Report all regularly feature major articles timed for Christmas and Easter. The days of these cover articles may soon be over, however, since US News & World Report is no longer publishing a print edition, and Newsweek’s final print edition will be dated December 31, 2012.

In years past, these cover articles had featured the work of reporters who interviewed a range of scholars and authorities from several theological perspectives. More recently, both Time and Newsweek have instead featured essays written by a single author.

Timed for this Christmas, Newsweek just released a cover essay by Bart D. Ehrman, who is well-known for his belief that the New Testament is largely historical fiction. “Who is Jesus?” is the question on the cover. “The Myths of Jesus” is the headline on the essay itself.

After presenting Ehrman’s teachings, Mohler has this to say:

…But the New Testament does not present itself merely for the purpose of theological reflection. It makes unvarnished historical claims and direct statements of fact. Ehrman attempts to sideswipe this truth, stating that the New Testament contains writings identified as “gospels” rather than “histories.” But the word “history” in that sense is a fairly modern invention. The gospels do contain interpretation and theological elaboration, but all four gospels, including Matthew and Luke, contain explicit and pervasive historical material — the bedrock historical claims of Christianity itself.

Christianity stands or falls on the truth concerning Jesus, and thus it also stands or falls on the authority and truthfulness of the Bible. What you believe about historical truth defines what you believe about Jesus Christ. Without the revealed truths of the New Testament, there is no Christianity, just superstitions and fantasies about Jesus.