Medicine of Immortality "It's a cold, and it's a broken, 'Hallelujah!'"

On Being RelevantPosted by Rick on September 20th, 2003

Yesterday, I had a good conversation with Kristen about being relevant. In a lot of circles, Reformed people are trying to build themselves into mighty warriors of the faith. They sit in their training facilities lifting theological weights and sparring with theological swords. Sometimes they make some weapons, and they ship them to other training centers around the country. But what do they do when they get out of their training centers? Well, not much at all. They never actually engage the enemies. The may become a trainer at one of the training centers. They may talk with others about their good ole days at the training center. They impress others with how well they can swing a sword. But have they ever used it against an enemy? No way. Going up against an enemy would put them and their families in danger’s way. Do they form armies? No, there are not enough good soldiers to form an army, and we’d hate to invite lesser trained soldiers into our armies (even though they will actually fight). Honestly, are you relevant? Or are you training for a battle you will never fight? Or are you training to show off? Or are you training to be a weapon maker or a trainer?

Building culture is well and good, but you have to destroy the enemies’ camp to have room for a good foundation. And you’re going to have to fend off enemies while you build. You can’t build a cathedral in a factory.

ReversalPosted by Rick on September 20th, 2003

On the one hand, I don’t find it humorous. I mean, in the way that it’s sin. But on the other hand, I find it hilarious. I can’t describe the humour I get out of it. It’s like the humour that Credenda/Agenda readers get from watching Doug Wilson rail on evangelicals. It makes you laugh, but at the same time, you feel a bit twisted for laughing. It makes me laugh in the same way I laugh at people that see “race problems” where they don’t exist or the people that see male oppression displayed in male leadership. Yes, it’s the older single woman that expresses bitterness towards any male that doesn’t meet her standards. She is the critic that criticizes young men for being critical. She doesn’t have to be old. Some of them are eighteen. Some of them are thirty-three. Most of them wise up by the time they hit fifty. Still, some of them don’t. They spend their time hurting other people simply because other people don’t meet up to “God’s standards” (i.e. their standards). They make me laugh, but I guess, most of all, they make sick.

PS-I haven’t met Spokane’s shrew yet.

AnticipationPosted by Rachel on September 19th, 2003

We’re having Jambalaya, cornbread, and plenty pitchers of sweet tea tomorrow for supper.

Kristen’s Questions for mePosted by Rick on September 19th, 2003

1. What is your all-time favorite thing about Rachel?

I guess I’m supposed to say that it’s her godliness. That’s all well and true, but cliche. Throw out the character issues, and it’s really easy. Her smell. She smells so nice all the time. Sometimes, I sit at home, and I just wish I could sniff her. Is that weird? She stanks good.

2. If you had to choose a seminary today, where would you go?

There are way too many factors in this question. Generally, somewhere I could have a solid church and a solid job. I’d like to be challenged exegetically.

3. What is the coolest thing about teaching at Whitworth?

Easy. I can talk about my faith without wondering if I’m going to offend someone. It’s nice to be able to read a piece of literature and talk about its connection to, say, the Book of Exodus, and actually have students be interested too.

4. If you got offered a full-time job as a cantor in a ELCA church, would you take it?

Nope. I’m not really that talented musically. I can sing okay, but Rachel usually has to help me learn new pieces.

5. What would your ideal liturgy look like for a Sunday morning?

Well, after the processional, the bishop would tip his mitre and stick out his signet ring…no, no…I don’t really have any opinions on liturgy. I just like to whine about it.

Um…seriously, I think it would depend on so many things, season, day, type of service, etc.

I can say a few things.

Worship should be full bodied and have momentum. Worship should not be self-controlled. It should be God-controlled. We should be able to smell it. We should be able to taste it. Our bodies should show it when we kneel. It shouldn’t be bogged down by long lectures. It should be joyous and mostly sung. It should be adorned with colors. It should be regal. We’re worshipping the King.

::If you would like to participate too, here are your instructions:
1. Leave me a comment saying “interview me.”
2. I will respond by asking you five questions (not the same as you see here).
3. You will update your blog/site with the answers to the questions.
4. You will include this explanation and an offer to interview someone else in the same post.
5. When others comment asking to be interviewed, you will ask them five questions.

And the cycle continues, on and on and on::

John, you confuse mePosted by Rick on September 19th, 2003

A recent email from our friend, John Robbins:

Friends,

Reconstructionist Andrew Sandlin, disciple and defender of Norman Shepherd, has just announced a conference to be held next March at a “Presbyterian” church in Illinois.

Sandlin:

I was reared a fundamentalist, and what appealed to me about the CRM was its vigorous attention to the whole of the Bible: on this, the CRM “out-fundamentaled” the fundamentalists! Like many other young, intelligent Christians, I wanted a fully explained view of life based on a careful reading of the Bible. Only later did I learn (painfully) that a fully explained view of life is a form of rationalism to which the Bible itself objects. We live by faith, not by sightand certainly not by a biblical ideology (or “idol-ology,” as someone once put it). Those who want to change the world (as I wanted) are easily attracted to ideologies. So were the Marxists. In this vein, Clark Pinnock was right to label the CRM the liberation theology of the right. I was deeply into liberation, and the CRM was a great vehicle for liberating the shackled world. I’m still into valid forms of liberation (and hope I always will beJohn 8:36); but I no longer pin my hopes on a movement; I pin them on God and his good timing in his providence…So, I say farewell to the CRM, and my spirit is not “Good riddance,” but rather, “Thanks for the memories.”

The speakers include Baptists, Presbyterians, and Roman Catholics, who seem to agree on one thing: salvation by the sinner’s own performance.

The conference is themed: “Trust and Obey: An Examination of Gospel and Law in Covenantal Perspective.” It is cosponsored by John Armstrong’s misnamed “Reformation and Revival Ministries” (if truth-in-advertising laws applied to ministers, most would be in jail), and Sandlin’s also misnamed “Center for Cultural Leadership.”

Who are the scheduled speakers, besides Armstrong and Sandlin, of course?

Thomas Baima, a Roman Catholic priest, and denier of justification by faith alone;

John Frame, a longtime defender of Norman Shepherd, denier of justification by faith alone;

John Frame:

The advantage of Christian ethics is the authoritative norm, as I indicated, and also an adequate motivation for ethical behavior: not to earn one’s salvation, but as a grateful response for God’s gift of forgiveness in Christ.

Don Garlington, devotee of the New Perspective on Paul, which denies justification by faith alone;

Don Garlington:

So when Paul says that we are not justified by works of the law he is saying that being Jewish, being zealous for the law has nothing to do with it. Maintaining Israels distinctiveness has nothing to do with justification, because it is sola fide. It is by faith and faith alone in the Christ who has removed the law.

Patrick Henry Reardon, another priest and denier of justification by faith alone;

Steve Schlissel, disciple of Norman Shepherd and denier of justification by faith alone;

Steve Schlissel:

We Reformed have been a people who have lived lawfully without seeking justification by merit. It is obvious, therefore, not only from the Bible but from the lives of those who believe it, that the fears of bedlam overtaking a freely justified people were unwarranted.

Norman Shepherd, denier of justification by faith alone.

Norman Shepherd:

Faith alone justifies that is Pauls doctrine. Faith looks neither to itself nor to its own working for justification. Faith lays hold of Jesus Christ and his righteousness and the righteousness of Jesus Christ is imputed to the one who believes. This is the distinctive function of faith in justification, which it shares with no other grace or virtue. The righteousness of Jesus Christ is imputed to the sinner the moment he believes. He believes and is justified. (The Call of Grace)

One must ask: What sort of culture are these men leading us toward? The same sort that kept Europe in spiritual darkness for a thousand years, because the Roman Church had denied the Gospel and persecuted those who believed it. That is their idea of “cultural leadership,” and “Reformation and revival.”

John Robbins
The Trinity Foundation
www.trinityfoundation.org
September 13, 2003

As Lawrence Taylor told us in The Waterboy: Next lesson, kids: Don’t smoke crack.

Red light special at Wal-MartPosted by Rick on September 18th, 2003

Apparently, Wal-Mart employees have been invited to pose for Playboy. When Playboy owner Hugh Hefner was asked why he chose Wal-Mart over, say, McDonald’s, he responded, “What do you think we are? Some trashy magazine?”

This should be interesting…Posted by Rick on September 18th, 2003

I received the e-note update from Mid-America Reformed Seminary. Here’s an excerpt:

Mid-America Reformed Seminary is offering an evening class in October entitled, Daddy, May I Take Communion?: Questions Regarding the Sacraments. Dr. Venema’s class will ask and answer questions such as: Does baptism save our children? May little children take communion? Should the Lords Supper be administered weekly?

Another ChristmasPosted by Rick on September 17th, 2003

And I’m alone yet again sigh No one to dance with, and no one with whom to share the baking of cookies.

Hm.Posted by Rick on September 17th, 2003

It’s sad, but the internet is completely lacking of interesting things.

Theonomic Lutherans, the Second Trinity, and SmitingPosted by Rick on September 17th, 2003

Rachel: how did canting go?
Rick: okay i guess
Rick: we had some tempo issues
Rick: and i sang “Jesus Krite you are the light of the world.”
Rachel: LOL
Rick: nothing like messing up on the second word to get rid of worrying about messing up
Rachel: what do you mean by tempo issues?
Rick: much less on our Saviour’s name
Rachel: lol
Rick: she played really slowly
Rachel: oh, I see
Rachel: did you follow her?
Rick: but…afterwards, we all talked about it, and we decided that it’d be best if we sped it up
Rick: well, sometimes
Rick: kinda back and forth
Rachel: lol
Rick: i don’t think it sounded too bad to the congregation, but man was i feeling stupid
Rachel: how did it generally go?
Rachel: lol why?
Rick: well, they wanted me to come back
Rick: well…i couldn’t tell if i was with the music or not
Rick: and sometimes I would listen and notice i wasn’t with the music
Rick: she was a bit behind me
Rachel: oh
Rick: and then i’d slow down, and she’d speed up
Rachel: she should follow you, but oh well
Rick: yeah, well, that’s what they said
Rachel: so they admitted fault?
Rick: yes, but it’s a hard piece of music to play that fast
Rick: well the congregation said it was her fault
Rick: then they stoned her
Rick: poor old lady
Rick: theonomic lutherans…who woulda known?
Rachel: LOL
Rachel: STOP
Rick: there was some questioning about Jesus Krite and his place in the second Trinity*
Rick: I think they got it.
Rachel: lol
Rick: after that i was like, “can’t get much worse than that”
Rick: cept when i said…
Rick: “And Satan said, ‘I am the servant of my God.’”
Rick: at least that was theologically correct
Rachel: LOL you did not
Rick: im a bit mixed up today
Rick: I mean, getting the two Trinities messed up?
Rick: Man.
Rachel: LOL
Rachel: I love you
Rick: will God smite me for this conversation?

*the Second Trinity is kinda an inside joke with Rachel’s family. While once attempting to say that Jesus is the “second person of the Trinity,” Rachel’s father said “Second Trinity.” It’s been all downhill since then.