Posts from — September 2003

The presuppositional apologetic is highly effective. In fact, it is the only way we can make any sense of the world, and the arguments for God’s existence (and, ironically, the arguments against His existence).

However, meatheads applying presuppositional apologetics are not effective. They do nothing by drive people away from the faith, and think that’s a good thing.

I just read on a messageboard, a young man (read thunder puppy) arguing with an atheist. The T.P. is a christian, and a seminarian of Westminster west. He has a lot of head knowledge, and knows that everyone has the knowledge of God written on their heart. He knows the atheist he is talking to is doing everything he can to deny God, and the honor He is due. These things are all true, and knowledge of them ought to be taken advantage of in the argument. But this guy is so harsh, so abrasive in his method, that the atheist is only more confirmed in his dislike of Christianity.

Now, it’s true that the atheist may go this way regardless, but it’s a shame when it’s our fault they do it, and not God’s. It’s one thing if God hardens their heart, and something else entirely if we harden their heart.

And the really sad part is that the young christian man is happy with himself and his behavior, and thinks he has done well. “The atheists further hardening, is, of course, just because he doesn’t like God’s truth… he just isn’t one of the elect”, he says to himself. And in so doing, denies any responsibility for his neighbor’s rejection of the faith.

All too often we reformed think that since God is sovereign, we don’t have anything to do with other people’s salvation. And this is a lie, planted by the devil himself.

whew!

What in the world?! Right now… my blog is someone else’s. I hope this post fixes it!

I just learned some exciting news (for me anyhow…)

Sunday, November 9, Doug Wilson is preaching at our church.

Lucy Zoe’s latest post reminds of the time a radio host and a caller were celebrating the fact that their kids were going back to school. Ugh.

Speaking of Cheers, you remember Norm Peterson? He was the big guy that was always drinking beer.

Well, I’ve spoken to ‘ol Norm. George Wendt. He called my apartment one time, when I was in college.

My roomate was a theater major, and was wanted to get into the business. His father went to school with George Wendt, and was also an admiral in the Navy. His high rank and slight connection to Mr. Wendt enabled my roommate’s father to contact him. He asked him to give my roommate some advice on how to break in. So he called, and I happened to answer the phone.

At the time I had no idea who George Wendt was. I knew Norm, sure. But not George. He asked to speak to my roommate. Normally I’d have just said, “sure, hang on” and that would be the end of it. But for some reason – I don’t know why – this time I asked who was calling. And I heard George… something or another. I couldn’t understand the last name.
“I’m sorry?”, I said, asking him to repeat his name.
“George Wendt.”
“George When?
“George Wendt.”
“Wind?”
“Wendt.”

This last response from him had a touch of frustration in it. Now, I was ready to figure this guys name out, but at this point, my roommate came walking into the room, looking at me funny. With my buddy all concerned like that I decided against it. I said to George, “um.. just a second”, and gave the phone to my roommate, who dissappeared into his room for half an hour or so.

Afterwards he explained to me who it was, and then I was able to place the voice with the face.

via This Classical Life, aka The Stewarts:

ISTJ – “Trustee”. Decisiveness in practical affairs. Guardian of time- honored institutions. Dependable. 6% of the total population.

Take Free Myers-Briggs Personality Test

Read more about my type here. Not all of it is accurate for me, I don’t think. But it’s still interesting. Plus, it’s written by a guy named…. Joe Butt.

And here’s something fun…

Famous ISTJs:

Thomas (Christ’s disciple)

U.S. Presidents:
George Washington
Andrew Johnson
Benjamin Harrison
Herbert Hoover
George H. W. Bush

Paul Coverdale (U.S. Senator, R-GA)
Jackie Joyner-Kersee (U.S. Olympic athlete)
Evander Holyfield, heavyweight boxing champion
Jack Webb (Joe Friday)

Fictional ISTJs:
Mr. Martin (hero of James Thurber’s Sitting in the Catbird Seat)
Eeyore (Winnie the Pooh)
Fred Mertz (I Love Lucy)
Puddleglum, the marshwiggle (Chronicles of Narnia)
Cliff (Cheers)

Comparisons
G.K. Chesterton

If I set the sun beside the moon,
And if I set the land beside the sea,
And if I set the town beside the country,
And if I set the man beside the woman,
I suppose some fool would talk about one being better.

My membership in the covenant is my objectively knowable relation to God. That is what our children have, and so I call it covenant membership. There is no point at which they do not have this relationship, and so I deny that there is a transition from outside the covenant to inside it. After a child’s baptism, this relationship is objectively knowable because of his baptism. Before his baptism, this relationship is no less objectively knowable because of who the child’s parents are. It is like human parent-child relationships: right now, the child inside my wife’s womb is objectively known to be a Colvin because of who his parents are; later, he will be born and we will name him. His membership in the Colvin family will then be objectively knowable because of his birth certificate.

A Snip:
“In the context of developing the case for paedocommunion, I think all of this is very significant. As long as we are sitting in our “cone of silence,” neither seeing nor being seen, it is easy to fail to identify (and identify with) the body of Christ around us. But open your eyes as you eat. The Lord’s Supper is the “family meal” of the body of Christ. As you look around and see the family members, you will see people whom you sometimes struggle with – these are your fellow members of Christ’s body. And you will see baptized children – these too are your fellow members of Christ’s body. And I dare say that seeing these faces, week after week (God grant that we may once again commune weekly!), you will have an increasingly difficult time eating the family meal in front of them while they go without. The Supper is an affirmation of the unity of the body, of the communal participation of the saints together in Christ, and these members are being barred. I hope that we are not too numb to make the connection.”

Read it all.

Answers In Genesis, in my opinion, is the very best biblical creationist website. While they deal primarily with science, what sets them a part from other creationist resources is that they know why they can deal with science.

Here’s an example of what I mean, from an article recently posted. In response to an atheist’s comment that “belief in God is irrational”, Dr. Jonathan Sarfati replies,

This presupposes that it is irrational to believe anything without proof. However, according to the fundamentals of basic logic, all belief systems start with axioms, which by definition are accepted to be true without proof. This applies to atheism, science, mathematics, and propositional logic itself. And there are also many other propositions in everyday life that people believe without mathematically rigorous proof, e.g. that the sun will rise tomorrow, that a mother loves her child, etc. Therefore it is perfectly logical for Answers in Genesis to use the propositions of Scripture as axioms. This is our bottom line�although the above arguments for God�s existence can be helpful, we believe that the Scriptures are their own authority. We do not ultimately try to prove the Bible with science, for that would place science in authority. See Creation: �Where�s the Proof?�

The difference between the Christian�s axioms and the atheist�s is that ours are self-consistent, make good sense of the evidence, and are consistent with the arguments proposed above. Conversely, the atheist�s axioms are ultimately self-refuting�perhaps the greatest form of irrationality is to believe in rationality when that rationality was supposedly ultimately produced by non-rational random combinations of chemicals. The great English writer and converted atheist, C.S. Lewis, pointed this out�see quote.

Shortly followed with,

In conclusion, there are two main worldviews that are diametrically opposed: atheism and Christian theism. Evolution and creation science are really different interpretations of the same data because of the different axioms (and therefore biases) of these rival worldviews. In reality, the leading evolutionary propagandists chide creationists not for believing in different facts, but for not following their self-serving rules, i.e. materialism�see The Rules of the Game. It is vitally important to realize that neither side is neutral, and that both sides interpret the data according to their underlying presuppositions. Similarly, Christians should not meekly play by rules made up by atheists for debating the question: �Does God Exist?�

Mother Kirk highlights the importance of teaching and preaching as the center of pastoral ministry. That is hardly surprising, since this book comes from a classical Calvinist. Some Calvinists, however, leave the impression that the church would function much more smoothly if it were not for the people. Doug Wilson is not that sort of Calvinist. He understands that the church is people, and that people can be governed and led only by other people. He realizes that the ministry of the Word must be incarnated in the life of the pastor. He has observed that the biblial qualifications for elders focus on character. He knows there are no paper pastors.

Perhaps the most impressive thing about this book, and certainly one of the most impressive things about Doug Wilson’s own very impressive ministry, is his realization that Jesus is the Head and Lord of His Church. Every Christian would agree, but few have grasped as profoundly as Wilson the flip side of this confession: If Jesus is the Head of His Church, that means I’m not and you’re not. And that means that there is no place in the church’s leaedership for the domineering benefactor, the manipulative wheeler-dealer, the prima donna, the agenda-monger. There is room only for those willing to become servants to all, those willing to lay down their lives for (sometimes intractable) sheep, for those willing to bear the slave yoke of Christ with humility, grace and gladness. Only such leaders will bring genuine reformation, because only such leaders labor in faith, confessing that the future of Mother Kirk is in the Lord’s hands and not their own.

- Peter Leithart, in his foreword to Douglas Wilson’s book, Mother Kirk

And I expect this quote to be tossed about cyberspace as much as this one