Victory is Inevitable

In the Kingdom expansion enterprise, there can be only victory, distraction, or cowardice; failure is not an option because failure is not possible. The glory of God is at stake.

What Is Truth and Why Does it Matter?: "The thing that is either true or false is not a sentence, but a proposition."

This idea is great: a proposition, whether spoken or written, is (or at least can be) a truth-bearing proposition. If scripture is God-breathed--"what more can he say than he hath already said?" God's word (whether logos or rhema) bears truth. Very cool.

-----
Words connect us with the outer world. If I wish to tell someone about a chair, they must know the word by which I refer to the external object. If they do not know the word, they cannot recieve the thought--no communication has occured. Names stand between us and objects. If you move away names and words, we cannot connect to external reality, and we cannot communicate about anything. Words are the conduits of thought, and they must be 'public' as Walter proposed. Words as raw materials must start in the place of meaning-agreement before they can be assembled into propositions that express a thought from one mind to another.

-----
To be 'true' is to be 'real.' If there is no absolute truth, there is no absolute reality. If there is no reality, all is lost. (like this train of thought).

-----
At bottom of the postmodern system, 'truth' depends on man.

-----
To assign a meaning to a text that was not the author's is to steal their intellectual property and use it for your own good. "Thou shalt not steal." It belongs to the author. Either accept his meaning, or write your own text. There is no other option.

John Frame: Preaching, Ethics, and Biblical Theology

John Frame: Preaching, Ethics, and Biblical Theology

This is good.

Robert Kemp on Art

Robert Kemp on Art

I don't know if I blogged my ideas about art or journaled them, but many of my ideas are presented in this article. Kemp said "Non-believers might distort, mutilate and manipulate God’s revelation in their work, but I believe there will be some elements of truth conveyed." I thought of Jackson Pollack; there is no order, symmetry, or harmony. There is, as far as shapes and patterns and relationships are concerned, nothing of truth or beauty present or communicated in his art. And so what is left? Nothing but colors; all of which were created by God, and therefore speak something of God's nature and beauty and order, etc. So Pollack's art is as the old altars God mandated: no hands of man may shape and arrange the raw materials: all that is is what god made: and it will glorify me alone. So it is with Jackson Pollack: what is present and displayed in his art is nothing more than the many and splendid colors of God's creation; intermingled and unspoiled by shaping and carving. In this, God is glorified and Pollack has added nothing more; Pollock gets no credit. What is odd is that if a man were to bring in a rock, untouched by the mind or hands of man, and call it art, and get credit for, it the entire room would burst into laughter at the naked emporer.

And so even at the basest levels, God is glorified. Pollock may decide which direction to throw the paint, or how much or with how much force, but all that is expressed in the final product is the manifold colors of God's creation. And pollock should get only as much credit as the child who points out a rainbow, or who spills his paints on the floor.

Defending the Faith (Apologetics)

Defending the Faith (Apologetics)

Apparently the idea of "taking every thought captive" is a pretty common one in the world of apologetics...check out book titles here.

hm. oh well.

John Frame: Unregenerate Knowledge of God

This is the first time I've ever seen (I think) anyone use 1 Corinthians 10:5 in this way--as not inner thought life control, but on the offensive and against ideas and worldviews that conflict with Christianity. See page 3; first full paragraph. (Pretty cool!)

just a thought.

Last night I was so close to giving up on nearly all things in life save breathing. I read myself to sleep with Elliot's Slow and Certain Light; with that and my God singing over me as I slept, I awoke this morning greatly refreshed, renewed, and at peace.

I awoke with the thought, "where, Lord, is the great battle of today? When we look back at this day in history, where will the great battle(s) have been?" I thought of the attacks on biblical truth (open theism, universalism, Armenianism), I thought of frontier missions, I thought of the classroom and the courtroom, I thought of local church ministry, and I thought of the workplace as well. And though I do think that frontier missions has a higher place among these, there really is no hierarchy among the rest--except as it comes to influence, I suppose. And so influence would determine hierarchy. And so, the battle is raging all around us: everywhere we look there is opporunity to join if we will choose to do so. The 'front line' is anywhere the Kingdom of Heaven (which is in our hearts) confronts the kingdom of darkness; anywhere where a loyal subject of the High King is in contact with a loyal subject of the evil one. There the battle rages; but we do not war after the flesh: the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds; casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ: Truth in Love (they must not be, and really aren't, two, but one), prayer, witness. These are our weapons. (We can kill unbelief with our Words and our Love and our prayer and our witness: its in their unbelief that the devil's head peeks out of hiding, and in their unbelief that we must attack him and not them.)

And I thought further that there is no battle so fierce as the one that rages daily in my own mind, heart, and flesh. This is the first and most violent of the battlefields, where the cost of losing is perilously higher to me than anywhere else: for what shall it profit a man if he should gain the whole world, and yet lose his own soul? The reward for victory is also greatest here: for greater is he that rules his own soul than he that takes a city.

Thy Kingdom come; thy will be done: on earth as it is in heaven.

This morning I am humbled, peaceful, thankful, and seem to have somewhat of a re-opened line of communication with the High King. I prayed for more than a few short seconds: rejoice with me, for that which was lost has been found. The hill which I've rolled down is yet to be re-climbed, but this morning I feel as though I have taken the first step back up. Perhaps more importantly, that I can and (and because) he will.

Praise your name, LORD, that though [your] anger [endureth but] a moment; in his favour [is] life: weeping may endure for a night, but joy [cometh] in the morning and praise you that your mercies are new every morning, because your compassions fail not; great is thy faithfulness! You are my portion, says my soul, therefore I will hope in you! For you are good to those that wait for you; to the soul that seeks you. And so I will both hope and quietly wait for your salvation, O LORD. It is good. Lamentations 3:22f. May I know you again and anew as Jehovah-jireh today.

--
I have lived out what Bonhoeffer warned: my faith in Christ turned to faith in the doctrine of Christ. A proposition, though vital, necessary, and true, has not love for me. It is only the living Christ that has love for me. Truth can only be loved rightly when that Truth is a person--the person of Christ. Relationship with mere propositions brings death: the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life: for He has come that we might have life, and that more abundantly. Christ is all! Restore me, O LORD, to a living, breathing, vibrant relationship to and with you, for thy name's sake! Great are you, LORD! And greatly to be praised! Amen!

some (quiet, smoking-flax and bruised reed, but hopeful) thoughts

Jim Elliot Sermons, 1951

I listened to 'resurrection,' a sermon he preached at age 24. He makes a very insightful point, that the simplicity of the gospel is in the resurrection of Christ Jesus. The idea of resurrection seems also to be behind a lot of the letters of Paul. "Dead, thou shalt die."

Very humbling. Very insightful. Surely, one whose faith I should follow. Adoption occurs at the resurrection...very interesting...perhaps N. T. Wright was on to something...

I do not buy that some people, when discussing their disagreement with the doctrine of election, "don't understand it." The propositions set forth are quite intelligible: "Jacob have I loved; Esau have I hated." "It is not of him who wills or runs, but of God...that his purpose according to election might stand."

I think the problem is with the place of Scripture in their walk with God. It does not have a place of primacy. It is subject to and supplemental to their experiential, non-corporeal "relationship." Scripture does not guide and direct and dictate their relationship with Christ; instead it merely 'supplements' their relationship with Christ.

This is a huge difference. I suppose it all comes down to grace: perhaps they are wrong because God has not revealed his truth to them. Perhaps, on the other hand, it is I who am wrong because God has not revealed the truth to me.

Presuppositions will dictate where one falls on this matter. "Direct revelation" to some is some experiential thing; to others it is the written Word of God.

Curious...and vital.

It seems a vicious circle: the holy spirit doesn't speak today so we must rely only on the finished bible for direction. The finished bible tells us that the holy spirit has ceased speaking, so we mustn't look for guidance elsewhere.

doesn't looking only into scripture for the answer to the question 'does God lead only in scripture' assume what it sets out to prove? Unless the purpose is to clear away any potential obstacles to this idea. Blackaby? Friesen? Elliot?

Romans 12:2 [ESV] says that we are to discern the will of God by testing. What does that mean?

I think Friesen's view falls out naturally from sola scriptura and cessationism. And I think Blackaby's view falls out from...something else...I guess the Keswick Movement and Murray, etc., fwiw. It would seem to me that the Elliots followed/follow Friesen's method. The rigorous application of scipture is amazing--and I think correct. Did they miss something with the Holy Spirit? Was there something more they could've had? Hard to believe J. E. "missed it." I think he and the 9 others "got it" in the best of all possible ways--and they were counted worthy. I wept more than 6 times today when I read J. E.'s diary entries in the first chapter of Through Gates of Splendour. I did not weep loud or long, but it was soul-deep. I felt as though the core of my being was spoken to; no: what I felt was sehnsucht. Plain and simple: sehnsucht. The deepest I've felt--perhaps ever.

--
on another note: I read Bonhoeffer's chapter on The Hiddenness of Prayer in The Cost of Discipleship today and was cut down harshly, sharply, abruptly. Painfully. I felt naked and as though my heart had been laid bare and brought out from darkness into the brightest of lights--and I saw that I was naked and I was ashamed. How piercing! How terrifying...how helpful. I do not despise it, Father...

some (more) thoughts.

"Surely there is more to preaching Christ crucified than saying 'Christ was crucified'!" - Martin Luther, De Servo Arbitrio

Finished John Owen's Brief Declaration and Vindication of the Doctrine of the Trinity today (appendices excepted). It was very helpful--very clarifying of the real issues: i) what does the bible say? ii) do I believe it?

Jesus was crucified for blasphemy. They took up stones to kill him because in his words they heard "I am Jehovah." If this was not his meaning, it would be a grievous error and misunderstanding on their part which he would have quickly corrected, as did the angel in Revelation, see thou do it not! And yet he did not correct them, he only rebuked them for not believing it.

Surely if Jesus was not God and therefore not be worshiped as God he would absolutely not permitted it to happen without the harshest of rebukes for idolatry and sacrelige such as his get thee behind me, Satan! Of all men (were he a man only), being sinless and "always about his father's business" and "doing always the things that please the father," he would be as violent in defending his Father's name as he was his temple.

Yet Scripture shows no such rebuke. The closest is "Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is, God." Surely he was not insinuating that he was not good--else there is no ground for his perfect satisfaction of sin's requirement. Clearly, he meant "and so you must decide; either I am God, or I am not good." The wording of the NASB and ESV do not allow for this, though.

=====

The question of the place of scripture and how we can know God at all plagues me today. I am tempted to think that Scripture only records the words of men under inspiration ("men of old spake as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit") yet is not itself fully inspired. That it is mere accurate history of God's dealings, which continue to this day. It is meant as a guide, not the only means of God communicating to us today. And so today I have contempt toward Luther's statement that God speaks to us only through the external Word. Granted, it is a guide and rule against which we measure our own experience, but it itself is not the sole experience. I realize the problems with this...and the benefits...and the dangers. But all I can see possible to prove of scripture is its historical accuracy, and the inspiration of the prophecies in it. Absolute Inerrancy must be presupposed. And so tonight, at least, I find myslef saying that the Bible contains the Word of God; that is, a history of His Words to men which are true, and (therefore) applicable to all men everywhere, yet not alone.

A sea of subjectivity awaits those who turn away such as this. But is not God sovereign? What a paradox.

I wonder if WTS in frame would utterly destroy me or if it would build me up.

I am eager to get to Edwards' Freedom of the Will, and his Defense of Original Sin, and to Elliot's Through Gates of Splendour and Shadow of the Almighty and Jim Elliot's Journals and so many more...I don't know why there is such urgency to read. I wonder if it is from the lust of the mind, or hunger of the mind, or from spiritual starvation or complete lack of intellectual stimuli. I nearly went insane from boredom last night.

Tomorrow I must preach and have no motivation or inspiration. I should not preach without a word. And I may not not preach. And so I must get a word.

I should know better than to stay up so late and eat so late and to drink so much coffe--it always lands me in this frame of being. Unacceptable.

Some (frustrated and desperate and confused and vain) thoughts.

Just had a wonderful time with the Hiltzes. Without question a God-honoring conversation--all three of us have been greatly encouraged and edified and humbled at what the Lord has done in our lives. I am also greatly encouraged at what he is doing and will do in my own.

I shared--at length--my testimony and am very thankful to the Lord for allowing me to rehearse his faithfulness in my life. I found myself remembering how little certainty there was for me when I took the position here in Biddeford; how I was guided by applying the scripture that records when the Lord delivered Saul into David's hand to do with as he saw fit, and yet gave him no clear direction as he had in the battles. David then made a decision on his own based upon the wisdom and knowledge God had given him. After praying for a couple of weeks without any clear direction, I applied this and made a decision on my own hoping that my decision would honor and please the Lord (though there were other motives mixed in, to be sure).

In retrospect, I know that I was to be here for (at least) this season. And so, as I find myself in a similar situation--with no clear external direction from the Lord--I find myself making a decision based upon the wisdom and knowledge God has given me. Though I still (and can't) know the outcome of this decision, there is a level of peace in it now.

Thank you, Lord, for reminding me of the faithfulness you've so graciously extended me throughout my life. I have done nothing to deserve it, and everything to deserve losing it. My mouth is stopped, and I again fade out of the picture leaving only you to be seen and glorified.

Some (peaceful and reassuring) thoughts.

Yesterday I had my phone trial to decide whether or not I would lose my right to operate a motor vehicle in the State of Maine for 15 days (due to point accumulation). I think I may have made it appear that giving teens rides was part of my job requirements rather than something subsidiary.

My conscience has convicted me in shading the truth; I have not lost my license, but I have lost my clean conscience. I stand before God tried and convicted--condemned as a Covenant-breaker. It is no wonder that the chapter I came to last night in Bonhoeffer's Cost of Discipleship was "The Truth"--and was all about letting our "Yea be yea and our neigh be neigh," and the sinfulness of swearing by something in heaven or earth or taking any kind of oath. "The oath is the refuge of the lie; the lie takes it captive and puts it to use for its purposes."

I have been living in lawlessness. Lord, forgive me. Give me grace to obey and to love. For You are all.

some (unsettling and repentant) thoughts.

I don't know if I noted it here or not, but one of the things I was most impacted by in Elisabeth Elliot's Passion and Purity was how they both so rigorously studied and applied scripture to their lives. It was the application of scriptural principles they'd gleaned out of rigorous study that was so new to me. Not that I didn't know that it was done or even that it was to be done--what seemed (and seems) so new is how they did it.

And noticing that along with reading Edwards' thoughts on the leading of the Spirit in Religious Affections and Friesen's book--I wonder if I'm coming upon something wonderful, or being led into something terrible.

I wonder if this new-to-me method of scriptural study and application is 1) the one the Elliots predominately used and 2) is the one outlined, defended, and encouraged in Friesen's book.

I am eager to read it. Major decisions await and I--I now feel--am ill-equipped to face them. I am too dangerously low in grace--both in prayer, and in the Word.

God, help me.

some (weary and hungry) thoughts.

Cessationism | Grace Online Library.

If Spiritual Authority is placed in a book, then the study of that book becomes absolutely vital to the world and life view of every Christian. And that study should be in the original autographs--or at least as close as possible. This view would undermine and destroy outright any ideas of apostolic succession. It is inorganic. And what if the clear testimony of exegesis is that the charismata has ceased?

The Reformers (and those that followed in their tradition) seemed to see the evangelistic and frontier-mission necessity (or at least use) of the charismata. Did they think the world had been reached? Was there no significant missionary movement until after the Reformation? Was it the theology of the Reformation (panta ta ethne) that fueled the missionary drive, that should've been mixed with the powerful work of the Spirit--especially in the supernaturally-concious third world? "All these things ye shall do; and greater." That they may know that I am the Lord!

Paul dealt with veritable barbarians. So do we--both in the unreached jungles and the unreached city streets. Post-modern America and Post-whatever UK are pagan nations. They need the power and wisdom of the gospel--not the word only. The prayers of Acts (confirm our word with power) were prayed so that the lost, barbarian greeks and heathen would see and know that Jesus is Lord--how do we not have the same situation today in nearly every nation?

If, however, Spiritual Authority is not placed in a book but in a man (apostolic succession), protestants may be guilty of rebellion such as that of Aaron and Miriaim--not that the Pope is the default apostolic successor. But the "spiritual authority" taught by Nee and Bevere and most of the Pentecostal/Charismatic groups seems to have elements of this deeply woven into their ecclesiology. "Pastoral Infallibility," I call it.

George Whitefield's remark ("quintessence of Enthusiasm...") is good, but not good enough. And why go to WTS, an institution that 'emphasizes the biblical theology of Geerhardus Vos' (a cessationist)--if I do not accept that the Holy Spirit does nothing, speaks nothing, today? Would my mind take over my being?

Haunting questions--ultimate questions. Lord, grant me guidance. I wonder if Friesen will be too convincing...I am shocked and uneasy at the propsect that God would speak to me "only" through the external, written Word of God. I am troubled by the idea that He does not lead by impressions and as by a sixth sense or a still, small voice. Elliot's Slow and Certain Light I hope will help.

some (troubling, urgent, important) thoughts.

So much has happened in the past month or two that I can't possibly record it all. With the speed of thought being what it is, it's an impossible task. We will spend a portion of (for lack of better expression) eternity just reviewing thoughts, I'd bet. I'm glad I've been journaling like mad lately. Perhaps one day I'll transfer some of the handwritten journal here.

Suffice it to say that the freight train I heard in the distance some 6 months ago is finally in sight. I announced my 'resignation' about two and a half weeks ago. It was unthinkably difficult to stand up there and say those things, and more so to stand there while they stood to their feet and applauded my sorry efforts (and God's evident work). Josh stepped out of the crowd and gave me a great big bear hug. Most of the rest followed.

I will miss them dearly; not that I will no longer be a part of their lives, but because I won't be as much a part of their lives.

From here--Lord willing--I will go to New York with Adam and work on my debt situation until late Spring. Then, as of tonight (this morning), it's on to Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia, PA. There I will work toward my M.Div in Biblical Studies in hopes of teaching at the College level. My co-aim is to spend my summers on the mission field--in the hard places.

Last week I was on vacation in Northern Maine at my parents' camp. I don't know if I've ever had such an amazing time devotionally and spiritually. I suppose I have had higher heights, but this was--by far--the most restful, refreshing, peace-instilling time I've ever had. I read a month's worth of daily bible passages from The Navigator's Discipleship Journal Daily Reading thing. I must've written 6-8 pages per day in my journal. Not to mention the books I finished--nearly 500 pages total. I am thankful to God for that time.

The LORD searched my heart about my motives for ministry, teaching, seminary, missions, moving, study, and celibacy. The latter was particularly revealing and humbling--and relieving. I was honest before the LORD and He graciously granted me peace. If I marry, I marry. If I don't, I don't. Bottom line, it came down to a lack of trust in God, rather than a hunger for Him above all things--as I'd prided myself on thinking (almost as much as I have [and still do, admittedly] pride myself on saying). "Sure I want kids...of course I want a wife. I just want something else more." What a farce! I realized I didn't trust God to lead me how to lead her. I didn't trust Him to work out the details. I didn't trust Him to keep me faithful and interested and loving. I didn't want to be 'found out' by someone getting that close to me--what an utter disappointment she would find! Oh! I couldn't live with that. But it may very well be that I will have to marry to overcome these issues--how ironic! So, fear and pride were (and, in large measure, are still) at the bottom of my pursuit of singleness; not desire.

It was actually a twisted affirmation of all I was declaring to have denied! If there is no great love, there is no great love to give over! If there is no Isaac to lay on the altar, there is less of a cost. To sacrifice a faceless, nameless no-thing is truly an offering far too small. How dare I attempt to get credit for an empty sacrifice! This emperor had no clothes--his garments of celibacy were stained with idolatry! As if they are too precious for me to love and lose for the sake of the cross! How cowardly! How devious! How treasonous and arrogantly deceitful! I have been in such a fog. I know intellectually that singleness is better, and that Christ--undivided--is infinitely better. But my reasons were pagan. Offer something which costs much in theory only, and there is no heartache! And the fear and pride issues can hide behind the skirts of a straw-woman. Rather, a "wood-hay-and-straw-woman" to be burned up on that great day, leaving me with nothing whatsoever!

These issues linger, and only prayer and deep, painful, intimate soul-surgery will do the trick. These idols have deep, cancerous roots; and the blood vessels are wrapped tightly all around. Oh how devious is the self! A master of espionage--master of disguise!

And yet, as I think and write these things, I feel no condemnation--conviction, to be sure--but no condemnation. I feel as though the LORD looks upon me with loving concern; an "I'm concerned, but I'm not going anywhere, child." demeanor; yet with the Word-scapel held at attention in an able and ready hand. I lay here, knowing He will perform a perfect procedure for his name's sake, and He stands over me ready to begin the surgery. There is a peace that He is able to complete what he's begun; that he is able to keep that which I am committing to Him until that great day.

A mere taste. The divine light is painful, and reveals much--but there is peace. And there is (costly) grace to bring me to higher levels of obedience and love to God. Make it so, Lord--make it so.

some (humbling yet hopeful, breaking yet building, comforting yet constraining) thoughts.

I've recently finished the following books:
- The Pleasures of God, by John Piper. Excellent book. The first half is heady, the second half is hearty. Excellent chapter 7.
- Seeing and Savoring Jesus Christ, also by John Piper. Short, but good. Some chapters were terribly worded (and wordy) and confusing. Others were outstanding. Overall, worth the time.
- The Religious Affections, by Jonathan Edwards. [FINALLY!] Absolutely amazing work. Most impacting to me was his take on what the "witness of the Holy Spirit" is and is not--it's not a whisper. This is obviously a more reformed view of the Spirit's leading in the life of a believer--and I am almost convinced of its scriptural accuracy. (more below)
- The Doctrine of Scripture (In Defense of the Faith Volume 1), by Cornelius Van Til (still working through the Appendices). A difficult read, though thought provoking. As one not very familiar with all the issues, it was hard to get through. I'm not yet convinced of the presuppositional apologetic method.
- Passion and Purity, by Elisabeth Elliot. [re-read]. I am amazed at the depth and determination with which they both not only studied, but understood and applied, scripture to their decision-making process. Perhaps this is a perfect application of the *new* view of discerning God's will a la Edwards and Friesen. Regardless, it was an amazing read (again).

I'm now working my way through Dietrich Bonhoeffer's classic work, The Cost of Discipleship, and plan to tackle Piper's Future Grace next. I also agreed to go through Gary Friesen's Decision Making and the Will of God with Joe (which I came across this evening while looking for Elisabeth Elliot's The Journals of Jim Elliot, which will be coming up soon on the list). I thumbed through Friesen's book, which contrasts the "Traditional View" of discerning the will of God for one's life. It was basically a defense of the view I discovered in Edwards. So I found that interesting, and I look forward to going through it. My main concern, however, is that his conclusions might be based upon a foundation of cessationalism; which is a red flag for me. My calvinism seems to be seeping outside the bounds of my soteriology; should it do battle with my charismata, there'll be sparks.

Sarah bought me a copy of Brian Greene's The Elegant Universe, which I'm also looking forward to getting through. Some other hopefuls: Bonhoeffer's Ethics, Life Together, and Creation and the Fall & Temptation.

In the past week, I've purchased a few more books (just what I need):
- A Severe Mercy, by Sheldon Vanauken (8.20)
- Through Gates of Splendor, by Elisabeth Elliot (8.31)
- God's Guidance: A Slow and Certain Light, by Elisabeth Elliot (9.1)
- Decision Making and the Will of God, by Garry Friesen (9.1)
- A Christian Manifesto, by Francis Schaeffer (9.1)

Holy smokes: I think I suffer from a serious and nearly blinding case of booklust.