Reform the Romans

Theology of Economics

2009-02-10T13:22:00.005-05:00

Is there such a thing as theology to be found in economics? Do the two subjects have anything to do with one another or are they mutually exclusive? Is Tertullian's statement "What does Athens have to do with Jerusalem" apply here? I think not. One of the biggest problems in this current economic mess is the failure to realize the underlying causes of all economic turmoil. This lack of thought or lack of perception of the true reality is causing nothing but half baked self serving solutions.
When I was in undergrad my finance professors would always tell me that the market works perfectly. Arbitrage was fantasy and that unless you had illegal information everything you knew about a company was already factored into its price. How naive this thinking truly is. However, today the pendulum has swung and equally as naive statements are being made about the government. What is the real answer? Can anything be done? Is capitalism really dead? Is socialism really the answer?
All of these questions have false premises and therefore do not really address the problem, let alone offer any sort of solution. Right now we are being told that the greedy capitalists on Wall Street have been fleecing all of us ignorant folk for years and that has placed us in the situation we are in today. Government on the other hand will fix these problems and bring about a right order.
On what basis can we believe this... the government is no different. Greedy people looking out for their own self interests are equally entrenched in government as well as Wall Street. This is not a liberal conservative issue. It is an issue of human nature. The fixing group (in this case the government) wants us all to believe that they are better than the alternative. Why... because they just are? No real reason is given nor is any real reason sought to be found.
The problem is that we are all greedy and out for ourselves. The bailout is not what is best for us, but we do not want to suffer the consequences of all of our actions. Our incessant spending into debt, lack of saving, and constant desires to have all our eyes desire is the root cause.
The Bible tells us all about this... however, it could not possibly be consulted or thought of in anyway as relevant (Ha). Notwithstanding, the Bible answers the current economic crisis quite clearly. Our total concern about that which is passing away has caused us to miss our purpose and sell out for temporary nothingness of the now.
How can we as Christians expect anything different from the private or public sector when they do not know Jesus. We expect these plans and theories to work somehow and we expect them to obey our ethics, yet we do not expect them to share our presuppositions.
Therefore, we never enact real change but instead just become complainers about the state of things and offer no real solutions. My hope is to start a discussion on this topic and others facing our culture from a Biblical perspective...

Bailout Bill

2008-09-30T14:24:00.003-04:00

I have never written about a political or economic issue on this blog. However, the gravity of the current situation demands clear responses. With all the fearmongering going on in the media, people have to see through to what the truth really is. So this will be a clear explanation of the current mess and how to fix it.
I. How did this happen???

It is fairly simple to explain how the problem has arisen. This is not a Republican or Democrat failure. It is a failure of Government PERIOD. There are three main causes of this problem. First, Congress (republican) and the President (democrat) in 1999 decided to allow insurance companies to be banks. There were very good reasons why these were separate businesses. These assets cannot be mixed. It causes huge conflicts... what if State Farm insures your house as well as covers it with insurance. What happens if it burns down? Repossessed? What if its your money in your savings account backing the insurance policy on your house? Conflict of interest at best, disaster at worst. Ask AIG.

That was a problem, however, a bigger contributor was Alan Greenspan. He began to lax the rules for lending for all lending institutions. Enabling people who had no business getting loans to get loans. Interest only loans for example were given to people or less than interest only. So, these people could actually owe more on the loan every month. Who could not see that these people would default on their loans????

Third and finally Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. These institutions were/are implicitly backed by the government. Furthermore, they were also being manipulated by politicians. So what happened? These institutions were told to loan money to and buy mortgages from people who were at very high risk of defaulting. They were told at these institutions not to use INCOME as a determining factor on loans!!!!!!! Now after these institutions were fully governmentalized we are on the hook to service these bad loans.

II. Why is Wall Street freaking out???

When farmers over plant one crop and the price drops farmers want to be bailed out... instantly. Now because all this money is tied up in bad loans (one crop) Wall Street wants their money back instantly from the government to encourage them to continue making poor credit decisions. This is absolute madness. They do not want to live with the consequences of their poor decisions.

III. Can I still get a loan???

Yes and no... If you are a poor credit risk right now you cannot get a loan. This is a good thing. Hold on to your money, save it, wait, you do not need whatever you were wanting to buy anyway. Get yourself into a better position financially. If you have good or excellent credit you will most certainly get a loan. Do not listen to the doomsday predictors on TV. Someone will always provide money when their is an opportunity for profit. So, why are we so concerned that people who do not deserve loans are not getting them???

IV. Government Manipulation

The question is being begged at this point... If the government has been meddling thus far helping create this disaster how will more involvement from them fix the problem???
If you were asking yourself this question... good for you. They will continue to make it worse. Imagine this... four years from now June 2012. The economy is not doing so well and everyone in office wants to get re-elected. What will they do? Time to manipulate the mortgage rates and applications that the government now controls. People get houses they cannot afford... again. They economy takes off for awhile and then collapses for the same reason yet again. Only how will the government get bailed out???

V. Taxes

Where does everyone think this money is coming from to pay for this??? The government can either print money (Causing inflation), sell bonds (the rates are at a point where no one wants them right now) or raise taxes. Even if they other two options are used, the time will come when taxes will be raised to pay for the other two stop gap measures. In other words because of the bad decisions made by these institutions both public and private. Some because they were forced and some because they were allowed, we most certainly WILL be footing the bill for this bailout.

VI. Socialism

This is indeed a socialist plan. The government will control the mortgage market if this bill passes. Do not be naive. If they lay out $700 billion, do not think they do not want to control it, and control it forever. You will have politicians and bureaucrats forever deciding what is appropriate for you to pay for mortgages and perhaps whether or not you could even get a loan. Maybe you will be the wrong gender, religion, or skin color and they have quotas to fill. Plus when has the government ever run anything well? Imagine all the headaches you have now when you have to deal with the government... now imagine them controlling the largest asset you will ever attempt to own.

This is by no means exhaustive in describing the problem. However, hopefully it is enough to move you to write your congressman and tell them to vote NO if this comes up again. The solution is to leave this alone and it will correct itself and people who made bad decisions will remember not to repeat them because they have had to live with the consequences. You will only touch a hot stove once. The free market does work when it is truly free.

Street Evangelism

2008-03-28T09:39:00.003-04:00

I feel that the method espoused by Ray Comfort and used here by Kirk Cameron has many strengths. It does a very good job of marrying law and gospel. My only concern/question is, Why does there seem to be no follow up opportunity made? Witnessing should always lead to discipleship. Talking to someone about Jesus and even posing to them the necessary questions to have them consider their need for Christ is good, however, Kirk just left him. He needed to meet with him again, again, and again if necessary. Get this fella plugged into a church and getting discipled. Follow up is perhaps the most important part, for it forms relationship. However, it often times is the most neglected part as well.

Ray Comfort

2008-03-25T21:32:00.001-04:00

I would like to hear some thoughts on Ray Comfort's style of evangelism... I will give my opinions soon

2008-03-25T21:30:00.000-04:00

Roman Catholics Come Home

2008-03-10T09:10:00.004-04:00

I do not know how many people have seen these commercials from the Roman Catholic Church (RCC). I do not know if they are showing them all across the country or not. However, I must say the ones I have seen are excellent. They are real to life. They do not discuss any of the extemporaneous items and beliefs of the RCC. They discuss our problem as humans and how Jesus is the only one who can fix it. How basic and grand. I wish evangelicals had thought of this first. They are wonderful commercials that I am sure will resonate with many people, regardless of whether they have ever had any affiliation with the RCC. I hope that this is a sign of a change in direction for the RCC and that they are going to go back to the Gospel that created the Church and leaving the many man-made "rituals" created by the RCC magisterium.

Global Warming

2008-03-04T13:58:00.002-05:00

I am beyond tired of the constant global warming drumbeat. Anyone who believes we are in a post-modern culture, need only to hear this pied piper's flute to know that modernism is alive and well... just not optimistic. I saw a T-shirt the other day that I am endeavoring to own myself. It has the Kool-Aid man on the front and a design on the back begging people not to drink the green fool-aid. How true indeed. It is always amazing to me how those who act as though they are very educated and look down upon those who have "faith" are able to be so blind to their own truly blind faith in scientific postulates. Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle seems to apply to many things outside of quantum physics. We know there is climate change... however, we do not know what causes it, nor do we know which way it is going (warming or cooling). However because money and power are at stake there are many who would love to tell you all about it. I personally do not worry about global warming, but I instead worry about what will happen because of the "green religionists". I am confident that all things are underneath the control of the Creator God of the Bible and we are not wreaking havoc that is out of His hands. I do not seek to pollute. I try to be a good steward of the things in which I have been entrusted (I recycle, I use CFLs and I am typing on a Macbook Pro from a fairly green company). However, not to the point where I elevate man to the Almighty or the earth to the be all end all. The people of the "green religion" are usually those who are perpetrating tolerance and love or at least their version of it. They do not deliver any of these though. Instead they deliver fear for their power in a sort of Foucaltian revolution. As John says in his first letter. Perfect love drives out all fear because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love. Therefore, we have a good deal of work ahead of us still to fulfill the great commission.

Why do we preach?

2008-03-03T08:35:00.002-05:00

I had the rare opportunity yesterday to attend and hear a sermon other than my own on a Sunday morning. I was gravely disappointed. Why do we meet together on Sunday mornings? I believe it is for the gathering of the people of God to sing, pray, fellowship, and most importantly hear from His Word. Some of these things did certainly occur. However, there was no sermon. There were some interviews. We watched a video, which was a parody commercial. That was it. More amazingly after all of this people joined the church. I would have loved to interview them to find out what was drawing them to this particular church. Jesus was not preached. The Gospel was not given. The glory of God, The depravity of man, the substitutionary atonement of Christ... none of this was discussed in anyway. Without the Gospel there is no salvation. There may be people moving their letters to the church from another congregation, but there is no heart change without the Gospel. I hope this is not the norm at this particular church. If this is where American churches are or are headed, we are in grave trouble. The moment we sacrifice the Gospel for entertainment, or to transform to the culture around us, we lose what makes us unique and we are no longer performing our duty of the Great Commission and the good works which he prepared beforehand for us to perform.

Defense of Mark Driscoll

2008-02-29T08:05:00.002-05:00

It seems as though the attack dogs have been let loose. It's amazing to me how ravenous some people can be. I am not going to enter into the conversation about what goes on behind closed doors with Mark Driscoll. However, neither should the people who commented on my post yesterday. I will say the following things about Mark.
1. He delivers the Gospel straight and true when he speaks... he does not mince words, nor does he water it down depending on the audience.
2. He has been a bold church planter. His Acts 29 network is one of the best things happening on the American church scene today. Many many many excellent churches have come to exist do to his faithful work through the creation of Acts 29
3. He is definitely a rough fellow. However, if anyone has read any of his books they will know that he is the first to admit this. He says that he sucks at counseling. At least he admits this while tons of pastors who suck at counseling continue on, pride fully in tact.
4. No one knows what truly goes on behind closed doors... EXCEPT THE PEOPLE WHO WERE ACTUALLY THERE
5. I took some time (more than i should have) to read these accusations that are coming from disgruntled people in Seattle. There seems to be nothing there but hurt feelings over an issue that was an elder decision.
6. Rule no.1 of becoming famous... someone will always be after you to bring you down
7. Rule no.1 of being a pastor... people, sadly supposed Christians are some of the most vile forked tongue people on earth. Who seem to have more time for gossip and hatred than Christ and their mission to make fully obedient disciples.

I do not know Mark personally. However, I am quite an avid follower of his and I had a few professors that do know him well. None of this really adds up against him. I hope this does not harm his wonderful ministry of the Gospel to a city that desperately needs Christ.

Mark Driscoll

2008-02-28T09:33:00.002-05:00

I usually do not take this space to plug books. However, I will make an exception for two reasons. One... google analytics is a beautiful thing. It tells me that people still read my blog after 11 months of inactivity so people will actually get this. Two, anytime Mark Driscoll takes time to write we should listen. He is the voice for Generation X Christians in America. He speaks in a way in which we understand and he does not put up airs. I love him for his directness and forthrightness on many issues. He is equally loved and hated, however he is honest and does not mince words. So, I highly recommend "Vintage Jesus" which came out this week. Another minister and I who get together for lunch every week bought it and discussed it yesterday and we just wish we had the courage to speak as Mark Driscoll does so eloquently. "Vintage Jesus" is a great book describing the real Jesus to a post-modern, post-apathetic, and just begging for change generation.

Science v. Christianity???

2008-02-27T13:40:00.002-05:00

Why is it that so many Christians and scientists think that its an either or proposition. Either you can believe science or you can believe the Bible. I find it amazing that so many otherwise intelligent people believe that they are mutually exclusive of one another. Perhaps we are just born Kantian. However, I think that this is a false suggestion. Christianity and science are complimentary of one another and are (in their purest forms) out to answer different questions to the same puzzle. Neil Turok in a piece this week out of WIRED made a statement that I have been screaming for years. Science is in the business of answering how and religion (Christianity) is in the business of answering why. So very true. Yet each side continues to make claims to answer the questions that their manuals are not equipped to handle. The Bible exists to tell us about the triune God and that He made the Heavens and the Earth good, we screwed it up, but He did not leave us to perish but sent His perfect Son Jesus to redeem us if we would but believe. Science on the other hand "can" tell us how these Heavens and Earth were created, but can absolutely add nothing to the conversation of their purpose. Thus science and Christianity together offer a fuller picture of the same puzzle. Christianity gives us purpose, science tells us how it plays out temporally. Thus we should be working together and not against one another in our constant pursuit of the the truth.

Christian Passivism

2007-01-12T12:19:00.000-05:00

I have leanings on the subject. We all do, on any subject, at least if we are honest. However, this is a subject upon which I do not have a definite opinion formed yet. At both of the seminaries I have attended, the concept of just war is believed, as strongly as any other theological position. Furthermore, the guys holding these positions are no dummies either. I sat through quite a few lectures from John Frame, listening to his defense of just war. I am just not sold on it. The problem is, I do not really like the alternative either. We are certainly responsible to defend Truth (the Gospel) at all costs, even our lives. The question is: How do we do this? We are definitely commissioned to defend the Paschal event with all we have, however, I do not think we are called to repeat it. Mainly because that is the point of Christ's necessity, we could not, Christ could and did. With all this is mind, Christ won through the appearance of losing, but is that our call as well? I do not mean we go Charlemagne and bring the Gospel with the sword, but when if ever is it OK as Christians to defend ourselves through violence? I will pose it like this. One of my ethics professors, who will go unnamed, stated that we are to live by the platinum rule. He explained this rule like so... if your are interrogating a suspected terrorist, to find out where a bomb is, you may torture him. The reason... because if he (the terrorist) were a Christian, he would tell you, and if you maim him, and one day in the future he becomes a Christian, he would thank you for maiming him, so as to force him to do the right thing (telling where the bomb is located). I am very interested for other people's opinions on the subject. It seems very relevant given the war on terrorism, the war in Iraq, and George Bush's take on these things being that he says he is a Christian.

Topical Preaching

2007-01-08T11:18:00.000-05:00

I understand that there are definitely occasions within a pastor's career in which topics will come up on the fly that need to be dealt with in the church. Such as a death or a cataclysmic world event. However, is topical preaching antithetical to the Gospel itself. In Acts we see the apostles proving Jesus was the Christ time and time again by expositing the Scriptures. Also, Jesus on the road to Emmaus proved He was the Christ from the Scriptures. So, how do topical sermons on building buildings, getting a promotion at work, how to raise your kids, etc. That may mention a verse of Scripture move the Gospel and Kingdom of God forward with the Church. If Christ is not the center of the gathering of God's people together as the Church, are they really the Church at all?? Is the sole mission of the Church not to make disciples? Can we make disciples if we do not teach people about Christ? Will prosperity from motivational speaking keep people from an eternity burning in Hell? Am I being too harsh with this? I am just so disheartened at the fact that so many churches have abandoned the Gospel, to fit in with the culture they are supposed to be reforming.

Saddened

2007-01-05T13:24:00.000-05:00

I am greatly saddened, not surprised, just saddened. Many of you who read this blog and are Southern Baptist will know who Ed Young is. He is the former 2 time president of the SBC. His son is pastor of a very large church in Dallas, TX. I was sent an e-mail this week directing me to his site. His newest sermon series is titled "Living larger than Life." There is nothing noteworthy or shocking about this title. Many churches today are preaching the pseudo-gospel of success and fame these days. What is disturbing is the video "advertising this sermon series." Ed Young, Jr. goes to none other than Hulk Hogan's house to explain the series. That's right the wrestler. For those of us that were kids in the 80s the guy on Saturday morning ripping his shirt off for all you Hulkamaniacs. I am not here to cast a decision as to Hulk Hogan's salvation. What disturbs me is the video goes through his elaborate house, and Ed Young describes Hulk as larger than life, saying implicitly that this is what you are to aspire to be. I do not recall that being found in Scripture anywhere. Hulk was entertaining, and I am sure he will still bring a crowd. However, not one mention of Jesus was made in regard to the series. I find this to be a growing disturbing trend. A church without Jesus, is just a club that meets on Sunday. If we do not preach condemnation, if we do not preach the cross, why will anyone think they need Jesus at all? For if we can be "Larger than Life" without Him, what did He really redeem us from anyway??

Losing our Uniqueness

2006-12-28T10:46:00.000-05:00

I enjoyed Christmas this year. One of my favorite things about Christmas is that it is the one day of the year where everything is closed. It's fantastic. Even Wal-Mart was closed! There is and should be something unique about Christmas. It is the celebration of God's gift to mankind and His dwelling among us in human flesh. Culture to some extent gets the uniqueness of Christmas, at least the being off from work part. No other holiday can say that. However, all the pundits have been pontificating for the last week or so, saying "What is Christmas, really?" Well last year you may recall a good many churches stated that Christmas was nothing more than spending time with family, so they canceled services. What a wonderful message, God came into the world so we could spend time with family, be off from work, and worship and imaginary fat man who lives in most God forsaken part of the earth. Merry Christmas! Just curious, is that part of Jesus' discussion to Nicodemus? If we do not teach the radical difference between our belief in the one true God and salvation through Christ, as opposed to secularism, Islam, Buddhism, and everything else, then we will see Christmas and the Church continue to be marginalized as "just another religion,"and Christmas as "just another holiday." Christmas is the beginning of our uniqueness and Easter is the consummation of it. We must emphasize sin, salvation through grace alone, and the need for Christ. No other belief system preaches the message of the pure Gospel. So, if the church does not preach and live the Gospel, how will the dying world know Jesus. Is this not what Paul says in Romans 10? So, be bold for the Gospel. Do not be scared to discuss sin. If people do not like it, that's good, they shouldn't, I don't like sin either and neither does God, so much so that He sent His only Son into the world as the only way to redeem us from it. That is Christmas, redeem it from the rest before it becomes just another "Happy Holiday"

Where is the love pt. 2

2006-12-18T15:28:00.000-05:00

So, what then is the church supposed to do? First, we must begin preaching the cross, sin and redemption again. If all Jesus has to offer people is salvation from kids soccer games, wives that nag, 42" plasma TVs instead of 50" LCDs, and relief from credit card payments, then He does not offer much. What if instead we supposed that Christ saved us from ETERNAL torment. You know the kind that NEVER ends. What if we explained that sin is so evil so vile so putrid so repugnant that, that to get rid of it required nothing less than the crushing of the very Son of God Himself. Nothing short of this would even make a faint scratch. Anything less than Christ would have been like attempting to put out a forest fire by continually spitting on it. This is the chasm that had to be breached. We cannot not preach the lie that everyone is basically OK, and Christ just gives us a little push in the right direction (Also do not forget this very teaching was declared heretical by numerous synods in the 400s) We must preach the radical difference between God and man, sin and sinlessness, true good and human perceived good. Faith, Hope, and Love are not satisfied or based on good pay, nice home and a sweet ride. These are produced from the radical knowledge of knowing from what we are redeemed. Before we are regenerated we are not neutral to God. We would nail Him to the cross again and again if we could. God saves the unregenerate despite this disposition. This is merely the beginning of placing the Gospel back in the church. Funny how Barbra Walters knew this when interviewing Joel Osteen, but he did not.

What happened to REAL love in the Church??

2006-12-15T12:16:00.000-05:00

The most frequently discussed topic on church signs as I drive by them seems to be acceptance or love. Sermons deal with how to accept people as they are, do not judge one another. Do not discuss sin for it is not loving. Do not discuss any controversial or taboo topics, for they may offend. Is this the new definition of love. We must be careful in our cultural context to define the terms we use. Is love allowing people to be anything and everything they want to be, thus being accepting of them so they feel "love" towards you? Well obviously even people in this belief system would put limits upon the anything and everything. For example, they would not say its loving to let someone be a murderer, or rapist and tell them that's OK its just the way you are. However, as grave as that example is, I believe the Church is performing a far greater disservice to believers and non-believers alike. In our quest for big numbers, big buildings, and happy sermon topics, we have lost real love. If your children said "If you love me you will let me play in the street" how would you respond? Would you say "Your right honey, play in the street," and when they are hit by a car would you exclaim "I do not understand why this happened." In contrast, would you say "No, you cannot play in the street BECAUSE I love you."
I contend that as crazy as the first answer seems, this is exactly what we seem to be doing. We do not preach redemption... For no one has really done anything wrong. We do not preach the cross... because it is too disturbing, and honestly how is that going to get the people in the pews a promotion or how will the church raise the money for the new building if they preach about the condition of man and his dire need for a savior. Perhaps even scarier, Will preaching about these topics cause some people to leave my church? Now I am not saying this pseudo-love is being preached and taught universally, but it is far too prevalent. How do we solve this problem? Can the church attract people without showing movies, serving coffee in corporate worship, and just doing its best to entertain people? Is Jesus really attractive when the whole counsel of Scripture is used to describe Him and His teachings? I hope to answer these questions in my next blog... so stay tuned

What we believe

2006-09-08T12:53:00.000-04:00

I have been taking a class this semester on the beliefs of the Roman Catholic faith. As a side note it has been fascinating. My professor did post-doctoral work in Rome for three years while working with various Cardinals and Bishops. Back to the point. I wonder how many Christians (protestants and roman catholics) really know what they believe. What percentage of RCs (roman catholics) can actually articulate what is in their Catechism? Consequently, as most protestants have decided that creeds and confessions are bad, can most prostestants articulate anything. Creeds and confessions are not the end answer to the problem. Just because somebody has one, does not mean they will use it. However, they certainly do help convey the truths of the Bible. I wonder how many "christians" could name me 10 famous sports figures. Now, how many of those same people could name 3 truths of the Bible. How did it get like this? What can we do to change it? For if we do not know the Christ found in Scripture are we really christian?

The gloves are off

2006-08-25T12:43:00.000-04:00

In the name in of "peace and love", ever since Driscoll decided to be vocal with his theology the tolerant branch of the emergant movement has been after him with venemous rage. All it takes is for someone to stand up for truth and the "tolerance" movement becomes anything but. Its funny, how they give him such a hard time saying that he just spews unreasoned hate with every breath. So, in response, do they deal with his ideas, nah, that would be a losing proposition. Instead, they call him names. Just so we have this straight. They do not like Driscoll because he stands up against people with bad ideas, and confronts THEIR IDEAS. Hopefully, we will see some of the "love" bunch get some cahonjes and back up their ideas with Scripture, or anything other than their feelings. I am waiting with baited breath. I challenge, no i DARE them to enter the realm of ideas, and discuss these various issues without resorting to emotions. Check out where im talking about here...http://cleave.blogs.com/pomomusings

Posted to a "Emergant" blog today

2006-08-09T16:33:00.000-04:00

It's always interesting to me that members of the "tolerance" movement no matter what guise it may come under are only tolerant to what they believe. Therefore, if Driscoll disagrees and takes a stand for something he believes is true, but is in disharmony with the pervailing "tolerant" wind then he is intolerant. I'm sorry but the real underlying problem is that Emergant culture will not admit that the ideas they are putting forth are indeed propositions all truth is propositional. So when people like Grenz and McLaren make comments saying they do not know something and therefore nobody else does either, that is in and of itself a proposition. In conclusion, to get back to the homosexuality issue. The Bible is clear, it does not mince words (in fact sexual sins are usually when found in a list, listed first) homosexuality is wrong. This does not mean we should be hateful to them. I have two gay family members, so I have experienced the relational side of this sin. However, it is a sin, no greater no less than any other. Therefore, if repented of, must be forgiven like any other sin. Its time to quit reading our Bibles through our political and social lenses.

The single element of importance for the church

2006-06-09T14:49:00.000-04:00

There will... if anyone is still reading, no doubt be much debate over a question such as this. I am confident many opinions will be expressed. So, first I will state my position, and then state why I feel other things that are indeed important stem from this element. I propose and believe that the reading, teaching, and preaching of the Word is that which is most important to the church. Now, most of my "proof" for this proposal will indeed come from the Bible. I will not apologize for this fau pa. While this could be considered circular, I am an unabashed presuppositionalist, and all my arguments for Christianity begin and end with "thus saith the LORD." First, an example of the importance of the giving of the Word to the people. In Acts 6 we see the creation of the office of deacon. The reason for this creation is so that the apostles can go out and preach the Gospel. Are deacons important? Of course, in their proper supporting role of taking care of the sick, widows, and poor, so that the Gospel can be preached to the sheep. Second, where else are we to know the how or why of our beliefs other than by the Scriptures themselves. You may believe that the church should first take care of the poor, or first take care of theology, or first take care of missions. However, where would you get your defense for your arguments. Well hopefully from the Bible. So, all things that we have a duty to do and perform should have their roots in Scripture. Some may ask, what about the ordinances? Well, of course the Lord's Supper and Baptism are indeed important to the life of the church. However, from what place other than Scripture would you be able to garner the knowledge of their importance. So, while the ordinances are crucial, their foundation is laid in Scripture. Lastly, this is a blog not a paper or book so this is short, Jesus is the Word incarnate. All of Scripture points to Him, speaks of Him, and tells us of our relationship with Him. How can we live out or spread the Kingdom of God, without studying that very Word which gives us life? So many times we get caught up in the secondary importances of the church that we forget the single foundation upon which we stand. Without a knowledge of whom we worship... the rest is meaningless. For it is not the act of sacrifice that God wants from us, but the rightness of heart. How can we know what rightness of heart is, or how to give God the Glory if we do not read, and hear His Word.

Question about the Church

2006-06-09T14:35:00.000-04:00

What is the single most important element to the church? I will give about a week for discussion, and then I will give my thoughts on the subject.

Sola Gratia

2005-10-26T18:09:00.000-04:00

Of all of the Solas of the Reformation this one is assuredly the most offensive to the pride of man. The sovereignty of God is, and has been under attack, for as long as man has been sinful. The pride of man wants and feels need to say that he is in control over Creation. God has shown us by his Word that he is the ruler over all Creation and he saves his children by grace alone.
Ephesians 2:1-8

1 And you were dead in the trespasses and sins
2 in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience-
3 among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.
4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us,
5 even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ- by grace you have been saved-
6 and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,
7 so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.
8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God,
9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast.

We are saved by the grace of God alone... this is not of ourselves, but is due merely to the unmerited favor of the Lord. His grace makes us into a new creation capable of giving glory to the Lord. This is completely the work of the Holy Spirit changing our hearts. As demonstrated time and time again throughout Scripture, man when left unto himself never chooses God. One of my favorite arguments against Grace Alone is that anyone who saw the miracles performed in the Bible today would then believe. This could not be more false. Think of the Isrealites in the desert standing before the Red Sea. Think of all the miracles that they had seen performed on their behalf to free them from the Egyptians. What is their reaction? Disbelief and hatred toward God and Moses. So, was God waiting for the sinful "love" of his people to be genuine so that he could save them? May it never be! God tells the Israelites to stand still and see salvation the Lord will perform for them. How were they saved? By the unmerited favor of the Lord. Next, someone may say that wasnt the same type of salvation as the salvation talked about in the NT. Oh, but the book of Exodus is exactly that... a road map of how God by himself and for his glory saves his people from bondage. We continually see the grace of God alone is what saves through his covenants. God is the God of the covenant in that this is how he has chosen to reveal himself to his people. With Abraham, Noah, and David, they are required to do nothing for God to fulfill his promises to them. What about the covenant of the Law? Notice two things. One God saves his people from bondage (sin i.e. Egypt) before he requires their obedience. Secondly, the purpose of the Law as told to us by Paul was never meant to be salvific, but knowing we would fail God's standard he sent Christ in our stead to fulfill the Law for us. So, in all covenants God is the holder and sustainer of our lives, by Himself.
Romans 3 tells us the destestable state of mankind before we are saved. Paul goes on in Romans as his argument builds to chapter 9 to tell us that God choses based upon his will, not upon any forseen merit in us. For if there were any forseen merit in us then it would be deserved, and would no longer be grace, but he in fact chooses us when we there is no reason in us... thus grace... thus Romans 5:8.
The Amazing in Amazing Grace is that we cannot figure out why in the world a Holy God would ever take unto himself... through pain and death, a people who not only are wicked, evil, and hateful... but actively work against him.
Romans 11
33 Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways!
34 "For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counselor?"
35 "Or who has given a gift to him that he might be repaid?"
36 For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen.

I realize I did not cover everything in Sola Gratia... this is a blog not a book. Secondly, I would ask that responses to this refer to Sola Gratia and not Sola Fide which will be dealt with, Lord willing, next week. Finally, I trust those things I left out will be fleshed out through discussion in the coming days.

Soli Deo Gloria!

Solus Christus

2005-10-19T09:37:00.000-04:00

13 He has delivered us from the power of darkness and conveyed us into the kingdom of the Son of His love,14 in whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins.15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him.17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist.18 And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence. Colossians 1:13-18

Christ is the sole meaning of the Bible and the sole reason that the Church exists. From the moment that Adam and Eve sinned we see in Scripture that Christ was coming to redeem. The Covenant promise God makes with Abraham sees its fulfillment in Christ. (John 8:56) Christ is the fulfillment of the Law (Matthew 5:17-18) Christ is the King that is sitting on David's throne forever (2 Samuel 7:13) Christ is the fulfiller of making God our God and we his people (Jer 31:33, Ezek 37:27, 2Cor 6:16, Heb 8:10) Christ is the bringer of the Kingdom of God, the 2nd Adam, the Son of God. To Him is ascribed, all power, glory, and majesty forever. He has set us free from our bondage by taking our sins upon his back and conquering sin and death at that moment once and for all. He is our High Priest, but he only had to make one sacrifice not continual like the priests of old, or as some practice today. (Heb 9:23-28) Christ alone is our mediator. NO ONE ELSE! Peter himself declares this (Acts 4:11) In Hebrews 7:23-28 we see that Christ intercedes on our behalf to the Father, who else do we need! No man or woman, saint or sinner, could bring us better intercession than Christ Alone. All believers approach the Lord as we are now his people and he is our God (1Peter 2:4-10) Finally, He alone is whom, we the Church, his bride are founded upon. The bedrock of the Church is not in man or tradition (t or T) but alone in Christ the Son of the Living God (Matt. 16:16-18). May all glory be to Jesus our Lord and Savior alone, with no one does he share his title, aparabatos.
Soli Deo Gloria!

Sola Scriptura Pt. II

2005-10-16T21:30:00.000-04:00

One brief old comment then on to the new. I have not posted any websites into this discussion, any quotes or lists are from books in my library. I do not want to cheapen this discussion. Now to the real discussion. Traditionalism begins where adding to or removing from the Word of God begins (Deut 4:2) To subtract is to contradict or neglect Scripture's Teaching. To add places human teaching equal to Scripture which belongs to God alone (Isaiah 29:13-14, Matthew 15:8-9). This is a problem not only with Roman Catholicism, but also Islam, Mormanism, Jehovah's Witnesses, and liberal theologians. (RC's I believe are christians while the others are not) This is not to say that no one anywhere at anytime other than the Author's of the Bible have had a correct theology. It is to say that, their teachings should never be held as an equal to the Holy Bible. Augustine, Ireanus, Origen, Jerome, Aquinas (yes Aquinas), Luther, Calvin, Edwards, so on and so forth (there are others) have had wonderful contributions to the Christian faith. They, however, are mere men whose commentary upon the Bible, and help for a Christian life are much appreciated at times, but not held at the equal as God's Word. If we as Protestants held or used their beliefs, without ultimately holding Scripture as our final authority, then we would be no different than the RC's or the Eastern Orthodox which each have separate different traditions they hold equal with the Word of God.
Traditionalism has weakened the rational basis for Christian Theology, in as much as it has replaced exegetical arguments with historical/traditional ones. In Christianity ultimately only Scripture is authoritative.
Sola Scriptura is the cure:
Do not add to what I command you, and do not subtract from it, but keep the commandment of the Lord your God that I give you (Deut 4:2, Deut. 12:32, Joshua 1:7, Prov 30:6, Rev. 22:18-19.
These people draw near me with their mouth and honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. Their worship of me is made up only of rules taught by men (Isaiah 29:3 and Jesus quotes this in Matthew 15:8-9)
Scripture does not tell us everything we need to know in life like how to ride a bike or how to build a house. Scripture does tell us everything God wants us to know concerning all things, for His glory, man's salvation, faith and life. So while Scripture does not tell us how to ride the bike it tells us to ride it to the glory of God "in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to the Father through him" (Col 3:17) and working at it with all our hearts "as working for the Lord not for men" (Col 3:23)
Some would argue that the Church preceded Scripture, in some senses it did. From Adam to Moses there is no clear written record of revelation, but when God gives his written revelation to Israel it stands as his covenant with his people and that covenant document is to be the highest authority for God's people, the Word of the Living God Himself. Open to any page in Deuteronomy and your likely to find a verse to obey all the commands, testimonies and judgments of the Lord, i.e. God's Law the written Law.
The New Covenenant is subject to the Scripture of the Lord as well (2 Tim 3:16-17). No human wisdom must take precedence over Scripture, by allowing what Scripture forbids or by forbidding what Scripture allows. Thus, the wisdom of men actually makes the yoke of Christ heavy when he in fact made it light. May God enlighten us to his Word, and use us for His Glory. I must thank my former professor Dr. John Frame, for his teaching to me was most inspirational on subjects such as these
Soli Deo Gloria!

The 5 Solas

2005-10-12T15:16:00.000-04:00

The time has come to remember why we are called protestants, and why we broke away from the Roman Catholic Church. The reformers called into question Roman Catholic teachings based on 5 principles. Each week for the next 5 weeks I will discuss one of the 5 Solas of the reformation. The first is Sola Scriptura. This Sola has been very much in discussion over the last century. With the creation of "higher criticism" causing Scripture to be treated as any other piece of literature, to the defenses created by evangelicals and Roman Catholics to defend against them. The Sola Scriptura mantra of the Reformers was originally used as a defense against the Roman Catholic belief of Scripture, Tradition, and Magisterial edict as equals. Luther and Calvin chopped the last two legs of the three legged stool of Roman Catholicism out. What is the reason for this? Do they and in turn modern day Protestants have an authority for doing this? Yes, Scripture itself is our basis for this. 2 Tim 3:16 tells us that Scripture is all we need for correction, reproof and teaching. A Roman Catholic response to this is that the Scripture is no more than another tradition of the Church. This however, elevates tradition to the presupposition or basis for all belief for the Church. This could not be more backwards or man centered, also it fails to separate Scripture from other traditions such as the Koran or the Vedas, when dealing with "higher criticism." The Protestant, God centered belief, is that we believe that not only is the Scripture true, but is our entire rule for life. Our belief is based on four simple words, "Thus saith the LORD." This response is two fold. One it answers the higher criticism arguments by saying that we don't treat Scripture as any other book, because it is God breathed. Second, it answers the Roman Catholic argument because Scripture being God breathed is above man made tradition, and magisterial edict, which bend Scripture to the whims of the day. Furthermore, many traditions, church counsels and magistrates have set down many rules that do not fit with the central theme of Scripture, which is... The triune God exists, created the whole world, and despite the world's rejection of him, Christ was sent in whom all Scripture is fulfilled to his sheep's salvation. There is much more to be said, however, I will now take comments and we shall tackle the other issues as they arise.

Interesting

2005-08-09T10:20:00.000-04:00

Read this article... http://www.drudgereport.com/flash1.htm Interesting isn't it that the Gospel of John is telling the truth about the pool, yet something else in the gospels that is exactly right. However, Jesus was just another "pilgrim" coming to Jerusalem. So John was telling the truth about the pool, but not Jesus being the Son of God? Nice prof. to quote from Princeton.

Encouragement

2005-08-09T09:43:00.000-04:00

Jonathan Edwards once said that the most encouraging thing for believers to hear about are the stories of other people being saved themselves... I am just asking for encouragement for everyone, that anyone who still reads this blog would post encouragement, the stories they have of other people being brought into the Lord's Kingdom. I agree with Edwards that this is indeed the best form of encouragement for other believers, and maybe the best way to experience an awakening such as he experienced.

Response about the Emerging Church

2005-07-17T21:42:00.000-04:00

Justin Tapp is correct about a couple of things, the church in America does not look like churches overseas, and furthermore a great deal of things we do at church are nowhere mentioned in scripture. However, I will have to say and I am not saying that Mr. Tapp is saying the opposite of this, but while Sunday School, "Church Clothes", hymnals, and organs are not mentioned in the Bible, there are many things in American churches that are done correctly. For starters, Paul tells us in the book of 1 Timothy about the organization of the church including Bishops, Elders, and Deacons. This letter was written after the churches Peter started in Acts. The Acts churches are 1st generation believer churches. However, Paul through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit knew that organization was required to prevent chaos. He tells that the Pastor should be paid. He talks about discipline and the Sacraments. While Sunday School or the day of the week meeting should take place I will defend the reason for the both. However, the rest of the things we do the music, and clothing I have come to think are a matter of taste to each congregation. Sunday School while not technically found in the Bible, is good I feel for the following reasons. First, it builds a since of community with the small group meetings. This helps the body of Christ. Small groups also field subjects and questions that may not be able to be addressed in corporate worship. They also help with accountability and with ministering to people in the church because the small group usually makes for more intimate relationships. As for the day of the week. I dont believe anyday of the week is particularly the the Sabbath. Jesus says that the Sabbath was created for man not man for the Sabbath. God knows we need a day off. In American society this day is Sunday because of cultural mores. The day of the week we devote to the Lord should be the day of the week we can devote the entire day. Thus in our culture, say Thursday wont work, but in China it may, I dont know. Church on Sunday is good in our culture because our society has been setup to have Sunday off from work, therefore, it makes for a good day to worship the Lord. I realize I have left some holes in some of my arguments because it is short. I hope some comments will fill them in. If not I will answer them as I have time.

Trying to figure out all this "emerging church" stuff... Reply soon

2005-07-15T16:32:00.000-04:00

A very thought provoking post has been made by JTapp. I encourage all readers of this blog to read it as well. I will give my answer soon after I have given his post more thought.

Missons or Theology Part II

2005-07-14T11:21:00.000-04:00

There appears to be some miscommunication in regards to my last post... allow me to clarify. I was not nor was the Internet Monk referring to how the missionaries are or are not trained in the denomination. I was instead talking about the general thrust or push, that which the denomination feels is most intergral to its being. Case in point is the "Everybody Can" slogan to win a million souls this year. This is a missional only, not theological, goal or push. My contention is that while the missional people such as Bobby Welch have contempt and distrust for the theologians, that good theology is indeed necessary before we can have any real missions impact. This is a witness centered drive by the Dr. Welch. Nowhere in the Scriptures will you find a call to witness and win anyone. This is the problem when theology is excluded from a missional push. However, if scripture is included in the missional equation we find that we are to indeed not witness but make disciples of the nations. Discipling is so much more than witnessing. Witnessing, especially when there is a human goal to be met is very shallow. Conversations tend to be short, involve total strangers, and if they believe the person talking with them may not know a church where to direct them, or perhaps may never see them again. Jesus knew when he said disciple that we were relational beings. He knew that we are far more influenced by someone who invests in us, cares for us, spends time with us. Just as He was with his disciples. These are the type of relationships we are to develop in order to truly disciple the nations. God will take care of the rest. We cannot make the Gospel "fast food". We have become lazy and do not want to take the time to develop the relationships that are necessary for effective discipling. When good theology precedes mission work then you have more effective servants for Christ and a healthier more scripturally based denomination.

Does it have to be Doctrine OR Mission??

2005-07-01T12:32:00.000-04:00

It seems the Gauntlet is about to be thrown down in the SBC over the question of theology and its role in SBC life. The internet monk seems to be suggesting that the SBC has really never had any theology, and has been pastor led, with no time for theology. For the last 50 years of its history I agree, what theology we have had has merely been that God exists, he loves you, and your parents and pastor will tell you the rest. Go... Go quickly only with this knowledge and save others. This has been the battle cry of the SBC the last 50 yrs and this year was no different. However, there is a small but growing minority of people in the SBC just like Paul of Tarsus, who believe in doctrine first, to hold us together, and this will lead to stronger missions. The Seminaries of the SBC have the Great Commission as their mantra, interestingly, as demonstrated by the Convention this year we have no interest in discipling people. WIN them is what we are told. How to have a relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ, through as discipling relationship... apparently not our concern. Let the pastors answer the tough questions, because we cant, we have been too lazy. With our, all missions no doctrine philosophy, we have become a denomination of congregants, who cant even answer the most basic of questions about our faith, and we refer to what our parents taught us, or our pastor. Interesting isnt it that the very thing we faught for in the Reformation... Sola Scriptura and preisthood of the believer, we have given up by saying the pastor can think about God for us. Sounds Roman Catholic doesnt it. No, I think a new doctrinal push in the SBC will be great, make us better missionaries, possibly change our reputation as the know nothing denomination and keep us from losing our members hand over fist to the cults. This will only come though, if we can get changes in the congregations' mindsets that they dont have to read their Bibles. Only when the members have a doctrine of any kind that they can defend, will we get a true missional movement that will make disciples of the nations

Who Let The Theologians In Here? (The SBC, that is.)

2005-06-29T15:46:00.000-04:00

www.internetmonk.com/archives/2005/06/019930.html

Goto this website and read the blog... i will give comments soon... interested to hear everyone else's

Doogie Howser M.Div

2005-06-27T09:39:00.000-04:00

For all of those who saw Joel Osteen on Larry King Live... I am sorry, but I must talk about the "interview" The operative phrase for the rest of this blog is... "I don't know" Before this interview Osteen was nothing more than a nuisance... now he could potentially be a heretical problem, maybe, I don't know. That is the problem, the fact that he says "I don't know" to any question that might possibly be devisive. For example, and this one is the worst example or best, When a caller asked Osteen what his stand was on Christ saying that He is the only way to Heaven, and that she had never heard him take a position on the issue (really no position from Osteen, Shocking) he comes out with some backbone and says that's what I believe. Notice I say some backbone, not real backbone, because even here he should not be qualifying that by saying that is what "I" believe, but instead he should of said that is what is correct. What little backbone he had soon succumbs to the "I want everyone to like me Monster" Larry King then asks, "what about Jews, and Muslims are they not going to Heaven?" Osteen folds like a card table after a garage sale. Larry "I don't know" he says. I can't judge their hearts, God judges hearts, they could be in Heaven. Larry then asks what about atheists are they going to Heaven. This should be a softball for old Doogie, but he strikes out. Larry, again "I don't know" they might, I can't judge people's hearts. Other softballs were lobbed up by Larry in the interview such as "Does God love the Devil", and " What bothers you most in life, what do you wish you could change" His response is a powerful... "I don't know"Larry tries to help him and says "what about depression?" To which Osteen showing his disconnect with things not prosperous says "Well some of it is chemical i guess, but it's a choice really for most people and in my book I tell people how to let go of the past" Thanks Doogie I wasn't depressed until I heard you tonight, but I will choose not to be later by letting go of the memory of this interview. I guess what Doogie does know is that he has built his ministry on the premis of being liked and being prosperous... and correct answers to these questions could cause the leaves to fall off the money tree. He's an embarrassment to Evangelicals everywhere. He is the modern day example of the Superapostles of Paul's day. The worst part for those who know little or nothing of Christ see on the bottom of the screen during the whole interview "Evangelical's Rising Star" Hopefully, we will wake up and see that his gospel is not the saving Gospel of Jesus Christ. More to come on this subject...

SBC

2005-06-23T23:28:00.000-04:00

I went to the convention this week... not knowing what quite to expect. The Pastors' Conference for the most part was impressive. Voddie Baucham was excellent, his logical expository sermon on how to defend one's belief in the Bible was great. Who would have believed that using the text in the context which God placed it, would be edifying. His attack of the weak defenses of the Gospel was harsh, but necessary. Saying that the Bible works for you, does not work for anyone. Explaining to someone how the Bible is historically reliable is however very powerful. Ergan Caner, well the man is charged, he brought the heat in the 1st inning and closed just as strong. From his calling out of the Prosperity Driven evangelists "Doogie Howser M.Div" that was just classic and telling us that the Muslims are purpose driven too. Besides his clever antecdotes, he made a strong point for not watering down the Gospel. Despite the gasps from the crowd it was something we all needed to hear. I just pray that the 1million baptisms in a year goal, does not make people believe we can control God and his purposes, or that we can somehow expand his Kingdom without his help. Everyone can and I'm it, forgets one crucially important fact, only with the Grace of God as our help. We cannot do it alone. If God shall so bless us praise the Lord if he does not, praise the Lord... for he is mighty and his ways are better than our own, and the Lord only knows how best to expand his Kingdom.

The Gospel Driven Life

2005-04-04T14:15:00.000-04:00

As I sat awake last night trying to sleep, angry with the idea of the Purpose Driven Life, I thought how can we have the church return to transforming the culture around it. The answer it seems to me would be to return to a Biblical Gospel Driven Life. The purpose and lifeblood of the church is delivering and spreading the Gospel. In order to do this, however, we must live the Gospel first. How, you might say. It starts with how we view life. Most of us take a view in which we think about ourselves first and ANYTHING else second. We must change our view. God must come first in all aspects of thinking. We have all heard this cliche, but a truer statement there could not be. The 1st question of both the larger and shorter Westminster Catechisms asks, "What is the chief and highest end of man"? The answer is to glorify God and enjoy him forever. So the question to ask yourself is whether or not you are glorifying God on a daily basis. Are you living a Gospel driven life? This is not about what God can or will do for you because you asked, even if performed Jabez style. It is about, is this edifying to the Lord. What are you doing to further the Kingdom? If you concern yourself with matters involving the furtherance of the Kingdom, through study, actions, and discipling. The other matters: money, love, good job, good kids and all of the other wonderful things every American Jabez deserves from God will fade in the blinding light of the Lord. We may always petition our King, but ask yourself, when Christ petitioned the Father, or Paul petitioned the Lord, were their requests similar to those of the "Purpose Driven Jabez"? Instead as Christ says "Not my will, but your will be done" If we follow this we will live a life with more "purpose" whether or not the world understands that is unimportant. We must focus on the goal of the Gospel, and through the Gospel Transform ourselves and the culture through the renewing of our minds.

Christ Transforming Culture?

2005-03-31T14:30:00.000-05:00

As I watch the modern day church in America flounder, I constantly think to myself "How have we let it come to this?" My answer to this question is that we have not taken Paul's charge in Romans 12 seriously and have decided that we should have culture dictate to us how we should communicate to them. It is true that the church must be relevant in order to change lives, but when we sacrifice our message to become attractive we lose that relevance we so badly seek. Today's church has become very concerned with keeping people in the pews, not offending, and being sensitive. All which are not bad things unto themselves. However, Christ, Paul, and for that matter any man of God in the Bible, was not in the least concerned about people's or the cultures feelings. If we as the church wish to enact change we must quit following the latest trends, and begin setting Biblical trends ourselves. Some will say that we will turn people away if we aren't fun and inviting. I say we are turning people away now because we have no message. Christ transforms us as Christians and we are scared to show this to our society. We must pick up and read our Bibles and preach the Word. We must teach the unchangeable Biblical truths, and not worry about the latest trend. If we are faithful to God's Word he will bestow gracious blessings to his church of which the empty "Seeker Sensitive" and "Mega-Church" movements will never see. We must trust that God as the Creator knows his Creation better than we do and that his transcendant Word can and will effect change even in today's society. His sheep always hear his voice, and if we preach his Word, Christ will transform the Culture!

1st Post

2005-03-30T13:33:00.000-05:00

I am currently in limbo, as I have just withdrawn from law school. I am currently pursuing alternate paths, which could lead to teaching or preaching. I plan on writing and proposing questions on this blog as I deal with them over the coming months. These questions will primarily deal with theology, philosophy, and politics. If interested everyone is free to respond.