Eternal Perspectives

OK, so, in an effort to resolve my besetting headache - the aggregators (except for Bloglines? Blogstreet?) not picking up my RSS feed - I’ve just switched hosting services. I was on Blogs About Hosting and am in the process of moving to eChristian Webhosting (thanks to Dory, whose ad linked me to the service).

Who knows what disasters await me during this move? I’m hopeful that everything will go swimmingly and there won’t be so much as a minor glitch in the transfer - after all, I must be in God’s will now that I’m using a Christian service. Doesn’t that, like, obligate God to bless my blog?

I tried laying hands on my laptop, to no avail; anointing with oil caused huge problems, and the elders at my church refuse to pray over my RSS feed. So either this works or . . .

Please do not pray for this process: I would be embarrassed to stand before the bema seat and have Christ ask, “So, you wanted me to be a sys op, is that it?” Jesus the Geek? I don’t think so. Pray for my character - or lack thereof - perhaps, but not for my blog.

I mean, really: I just got a newsletter from Voice of the Martyrs and read about the horrible persecution of believers in Vietnam, and I’m concerned about my blog!?!?!!! I must be spiritually insane, i.e., not know right from wrong.

Stay tuned for more developments.

Jn 19.22

 

Since leaving Blogspot a couple of months ago - at the time it seemed like a really good idea - I have been virtually invisible to just about all the aggregators. At best, I am picked up once or twice a month by most or once a week - at most - by a few others.

Given the extremely limited audience I’m able to reach, it’s becoming increasingly difficult to justify the time I spend on most of my posts. I usually try to be careful with what I put up, especially when I’m dealing with Scripture or theology, and it requires no small amount of study. The time I spend studying is easily four times that spent writing.

I very much enjoy blogging but it comes down to a matter of stewardship: is this the best use of my time? The answer seems pretty obvious.

So I’m going to spend some time switching my template and seeing if I can’t get picked up once again by the aggregators. I actually paid someone to help me with it but even they were not able to figure it out. It doesn’t look promising. If the switch doesn’t help, I’m going to have to make a hard decision.

Posting is likely to continue to be sparse while I work on the site. Whenever I make a decision, I’ll post it here.

Thanks for bearing with me.

Jn 19.22

 

Jeff Miller of Trinity Bible Church (Richardson, TX) has graciously allowed me to post his Bible, Theology, and Apologetics Assessment Test. You can download the test for your own use at Biblical Studies Foundation’s site.

It’s not supposed to be an open-book test, so see how you do without help first. The answers are here.

Bible, Theology, and Apologetics Assessment Test

By: Jeff Miller , Th.M.

Old Testament
Multiple Choice

1. The man who wrestled with an angel at Peniel was:

a. Jacob
b. Joshua
c. Noah
d. Samuel

2. The life of Abraham is found in the book of:

a. Judges
b. Exodus
c. Genesis
d. 1 Kings

3. The man whose donkey spoke prophecy was:

a. Jacob
b. Balaam
c. Ephraim
d. Jephthah

4. The following item lists events out of chronological order. Which letter indicates the order in which the events actually occurred:

a. Isaac to be offered as a sacrifice by Abraham
b. Joseph is made a ruler in Egypt
c. Sodom destroyed
d. Jacob wrestles with the angel
e. “You meant evil against me, but God meant it for good”

a. b,e,a,c,d
b. c,d,e,a,b
c. d,a,c,b,e
d. c,d,a,b,e
e. c,a,d,b,e

5. Which of the following is NOT a book in the Old Testament:

a. Obadiah
b. Hezekiah
c. Zephaniah
d. Ezra

6. “Have you but one blessing my father? Bless me, even me also, O my father.”

a. Cain
b. Jacob
c. Esau
d. Joseph
e. Isaac

Matching

7. ______ One of the twelve tribes of Israel.

8. ______ The fourth king of Israel.

9. ______ The man who did not experience normal death.

10. ______ King of Judah who came into power at the age of eight and about whom the Scriptures say, “He did right in the eyes of the Lord.”

11. ______ One of Eli’s two sons who was punished by death.

12. ______ The first judge of Israel, following the period of Joshua’s leadership.

a. Othniel
b. Phinehas
c. Samuel
d. Josiah
e. Rehoboam
f. Gad
g. Bartholomew
h. Matthias
i. Enoch

True/False

13. T F Ruth was the great grandmother of King David.

14. T F Habakkuk is classified as a minor prophet.

15. T F Manasseh is remembered as one of the good and faithful kings.

16. T F Gomer is the unfaithful wife of the prophet Joel.

17. T F The ten plagues against the Egyptians are recorded in the book of Exodus.

18. T F The first king of Israel was David.

19. T F The man who assumed leadership of Israel after Moses was Joshua.

20. T F The ten commandments are recorded in Exodus.

Arrange the persons or events in chronological order by placing an “a” before the earliest, then a “b,” etc.

21. _____ The giving of the law on Sinai.

22. _____ The building of the temple by Solomon.

23. _____ The call of Abraham.

24. _____ The Babylonian captivity.

25. _____ The Exodus from Egypt.

From which book: Write the Old Testament book from which the quotation comes. A book may be used more than once.

26. __________________ “Blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked …”

27. __________________ The Ten Commandments (name one of the two books).

28. __________________ “When Haman saw that Mordecai would not kneel down or pay him honor, he was enraged.”

29. __________________ “Meaningless! Meaningless! Utterly meaningless! Everything is meaningless.”

30. __________________ “In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit.”

31. __________________ “Seventy sevens are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression.”

32. __________________ “There the angel of the LORD appeared to him in flames of fire from within a bush. Moses saw that though the bush was on fire it did not burn up.”

33. __________________ “One day the angels came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came with them.”

34. __________________ “See, I will send my messenger, who will prepare the way before you.”

35. __________________ David’s sin with Bathsheba.

36. __________________ “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge.”

37. __________________ “This whole country will become a desolate wasteland, and these nations will serve the king of Babylon seventy years.’”

38. __________________ “I charge you, do not arouse or awaken love until it so desires.”

39. __________________ “Go to the great city of Nineveh and preach against it, because its wickedness has come up before me.”

40. __________________ “For forty days the flood kept coming on the earth, and as the waters increased they lifted the ark high above the earth.”

New Testament
Multiple Choice
(more…)

Jn 19.22

 

Adrian has posted ten questions that he will be asking the translation committee of the English Standard Version (ESV) Bible. The ESV committee approached him to see if he would be interested in doing the interview! Now, that’s cool!

Well, thanks to everyone for their suggestions and help for me in this unique opportunity I have been given to interview the ESV translation committee.

Here are my choice of the questions submitted and quite a few more of my own thrown in for good measure! Watch this space for the answers coming soon . . .

Take a look and what he’s come up with and suggest some additional ones of your own.

More importantly, be sure to check back to see his interview and the answers to his questions.

Two of my own questions would be why, when the ESV is so close to the updated (1995) New American Standard Bible, the committee felt there was a need for a new version? And, where do they see significant differences between the ESV and the NASB? I’m not saying there are not important differences (I’m not yet all the way through my free ESV - which is quite nice, really) but it seems so close in most places to be almost redundant.

Having said that, however, I do like the ESV very much and would recommend it without reservation.

Jn 19.22

 

Just in case you had any doubts:

---

You scored as Divine Command. Your life is directed by Divine Command: Your god and religion give you meaning and direction. “Know therefore that the LORD thy God, he is God, the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his commandments to a thousand generations.” –King James Version of the Bible More info at Arocoun’s Wikipedia User Page… Divine Command 100% Justice (Fairness) 55% Existentialism 50% Kantianism 40% Utilitarianism 30% Hedonism 20% Apathy 15% Strong Egoism 10% Nihilism 0%

What philosophy do you follow? (v1.03)
created with QuizFarm.com

---

This must be true because I took the test online and it took me all of three minutes.

Jn 19.22

 

A Pew(ny) Commentary

It was approximately 40 days ago that I began this commentary on the Book of Jonah, the same amount of time that likely has passed since our patriotic prophet first began preaching in the streets of Nineveh. The climax of the events in the book seems to have already been reached: Jonah was called to preach, refused, was called again and obeyed, and the people of the city repented and judgment was spared. Happy ending; end of story.

But it does not end with three chapters, instead spilling over into four and alerting us that there is more to the book than just a chronicling of a prophet’s adventures in ministry. In Chapter Four we are allowed to view the heart of the prophet and, far more significantly, the heart of God.

1 But it greatly displeased Jonah and he became angry.
2 He prayed to the LORD and said, ‘Please LORD, was not this what I said while I was still in my own country? Therefore in order to forestall this I fled to Tarshish, for I knew that You are a gracious and compassionate God, slow to anger and abundant in lovingkindness, and one who relents concerning calamity.
3 ‘Therefore now, O LORD, please take my life from me, for death is better to me than life.’”

In order to appreciate Jonah’s attitude, it is necessary to re-read the last verse of Chapter Three:

10 When God saw their deeds, that they turned from their wicked way, then God relented concerning the calamity which He had declared He would bring upon them. And He did not do it.

There is a striking contrast between God’s mercy and compassion in His dealings with the Ninevites and Jonah’s unhappiness and anger. When God sees the repentance of the people, He responds by not destroying them; when Jonah observes that same repentance, he burns in anger.

What Jonah says next sheds light not only on his petulance but on the entire book: his flight from God suddenly makes sense given his unloving attitude. Jonah had a clear and proper understanding of God’s character; his Theology Proper was pristine. The problem was that the prophet did not have a corresponding heart of love and compassion. God is about to cure that in this chapter.

Jonah knew what God was like and what He was likely to do: he describes God as gracious, compassionate, longsuffering, full of lovingkindness, and forgiving. He not only knew God to be this way through his education but also through his experiences, for God had demonstrated these very virtues in His dealings with Jonah in the first three chapters of the book!

(more…)

Jn 19.22

 

I am a member of the Grace Evangelical Society, an organization whose purpose statement is:

The aim of GES is to promote the clear proclamation of God’s free salvation through faith alone in Christ alone, which is properly correlated with and yet distinguished from issues related to discipleship.

While I am neither an advocate of nor adherent to what is called “lordship salvation,” I try to keep from labeling or misrepresenting those who do believe this teaching. I do not find it to be heretical or “another gospel,” but rather a blurring of the inseparable-but-distinct issues of salvation and sanctification. Those who believe in lordship salvation are my brothers and sisters in Christ.

I have read and studied Charles Ryrie, Lewis Sperry Chafer, Zane Hodges, Jody Dillow, and others who disagree with lorship salvation. One complaint I have had and continue to have with some representatives of the “faith alone” contingent is that a biblical truth is sometimes pushed to an illogical conclusion. But, by and large, I agree with this doctrine.

What has troubled me in many areas, however, is the misrepresentation and vilification of opposing camps. I have certainly been guilty of this in the past, but not knowingly or malaciously. I find it hard to reconcile this approach with Christlikeness and sometimes am guilty of dismissing the teaching because of the disposition of the teachers. The error of ad hominem, I suppose.

I recently received the current issue of Grace in Focus, a publication of GES, and was saddened by the lead article. Written by Bob Wilkin, it is a response to criticism leveled by Dr James White of Alpha & Omega Ministries. Buried in Wilkin’s article is the following clarification regarding some of Dr White’s comments, which I believe is worth noting at the onset:

Let me say that White does not represent all five-point Calvinists. People like John Robbins of the Trinity Foundation are deeply offended by comments like these.

Dr White’s post can be read in full here; I’ll reproduce Dr Wilkin’s article “Does Faith Need Dressing Up?” below or you can read it online at the GES site here. The point of all of this is simply to ask for civility.

Less than two weeks from the time I am writing this I will be debating Dr James White, an apologist for a form of 5-point Calvinism, on regeneration, faith, and perseverance. On his website he recently criticized my view of saving faith, saying I believe in what he termed ‘naked faith’ as the sole condition of justification. While I plead guilty, I’d like you to see precisely what he wrote.

Does Faith Include Repentance and Discipleship?

‘One of the upcoming debates that is sort of “flying below the radar” is my encounter in April in Oklahoma City with Dr Robert Wilkin . . .

Dr Wilkin is a leading anti-Lordship advocate. From my perspective, his position is grossly imbalanced because it insists upon only a single element of the truth to the exclusion of everything else. “Faith alone” becomes “faith separated from the work of regeneration, the Spirit, the new nature,” etc. Faith without repentance (all repentance passages are consigned to discipleship), belief without discipleship. It is a very imbalanced perspective, one that comes from an over-reaction to a works-salvation mindset.’

I know of no one in the Free Grace camp who advocates ‘anti-Lordship.’ I surely advocate the Lordship of Jesus Christ. I tire of such perjorative language. We don’t call their view the ‘anti-grace’ view. We call it what they call it, Lordship Salvation.

It is White, not I, who separates faith from the work of regeneration. He specifically says that regeneration precedes faith. Thus for him faith is the result of regeneration, not the condition of it.
(more…)

Jn 19.22

 

A post by Andy, one of my earliest friends in the blogosphere, caught my attention awhile ago and triggered some thoughts. You can read his full declaration at SmartChristian; here is the relevant paragraph:

I am thinking emergent these days. Why? Because those engaging in the Emerging Church Movement are at least asking relevant questions and not settling for the church status quo (Churchianity).

Just before running across Andy’s statement, I had finished Love Your God with All Your Mind by J.P. Moreland (a very good book, BTW). In his chapter Recapturing the Intellectual Life in the Church, he writes:

Third, we need to make a careful distinction between forms and functions in the church. A New Testament function is an absolute biblical mandate that every church must do - for example, edify believers, worship God, evangelize the lost, and so forth. Functions are unchanging nonnegotiables.

“By contrast, a form is a culturally relative means of fulfilling biblical functions. Forms are valuable as a means to accomplish those functions and should be constantly evaluated, kept, or replaced in light of their effectiveness . . .

“Serious harm has been done to our churches by confusing forms and functions and by clinging to the former just because we have always done them a certain way. We have no right to adjust our functions, but we have a duty to examine constantly our forms. A church that does not do this will have a lot to answer for at the judgment seat of the Head of the church.”

These cautions have applicability to the emergent church movement. Andy is correct when he says the movement is “at least asking relevant questions”; my concern is with the answers some are providing for those questions. The line between form and function has been blurred.

The function of the church is inseparable from the content of its message, emphases, and destiny. The form can and should change, as Moreland says, but the function must be intact if a local church is to keep its lampstand (Rev 2:5). When issues such as the content of the gospel, holiness, and others are compromised - or when a philosophy is adopted that is antithetical to absolute truth - then that church or movement is headed in a perilous direction.

It is not necessary to adopt the function that some emergent church leaders advocate in order to adapt the form to a particular church. To the extent that the questions being asked by the emergent church movement are focused on form, then every church should be examining itself to see if it, too, needs to change. But when the questions - or, rather, the answers - begin to alter the function of the church, it is time to be very discerning.

God has given us remarkable freedom when it comes to form. He basically says, “Do church however you want.” But He has also been careful to give us answers to the function of the church, and to meddle or modify these commands and imperatives is to trample on holy ground.

Jn 19.22

 

Adrian has selected me to be the most recent recipient of his “Warnie Award,” an honor he bestows periodically on those blogs that he (and his readers) believe to be representative of what Godblogging can be in its better moments.

He denies that my having previously begged him for one had anything to do with my inclusion in the FWOTWA (Former Winners Of The Warnie Award - pronounced “phhffwhhaetttwwhffueh”) .

The support and encouragement is much appreciated, but I must disagree with one comment made about my win :

This one may be the most worthy yet. Outstanding choice, Adrian. - [Name withheld - although you can go here to find out the identity of this witness-protection-program blogger.]

“Yet”? What is it with the “yet”? Like somebody more deserving is going to come along!?! Oh, puh-leeeeze!!!

Seriously, though, I do appreciate the inclusion in the group of FWOTWA. This is an excellent group of bloggers and I am honored to be listed with them. Hopefully, I can live up to the hype in future posts!

And I would be remiss if I did not especially thank those who have kept me on the radar the past couple of months (I am invisible to the aggregators for some reason): David at Jollyblogger, Andy at SmartChristian, Tim at Challies, John of Blogotional, Chad at The Minor Prophet, and others whose names escape me at the present. No one, however, has been better at linking to me and supporting me than Milton at Transforming Sermons. More than I deserved, he repeatedly linked to me in his roundups of posts he felt were noteworthy. He exemplifies all that is good and right about Godblogs, and not just because he’s nice to me: Milton is nice to everyone! And, as a FWOTWA, his blog is outstanding.

Now, since Milton linked to me again today (!), I need to go finish my commentary on Jonah: Chapter Four awaits!

Jn 19.22

 

The following was emailed to me by a colleague; perhaps you have read or heard it before:

Young King Arthur was ambushed and imprisoned by the monarch of a neighboring kingdom. The monarch could have killed him but was moved by Arthur’s youth and ideals. So, the monarch offered him his freedom, as long as he could answer a very difficult question. Arthur would have a year to figure out the answer and, if after a year, he still had no
answer, he would be put to death.

The question? What do women really want?

Such a question would perplex even the most knowledgeable man, and to young Arthur, it seemed an impossible query. But, since it was better than death, he accepted the monarch’s proposition to have an answer by year’s end.

He returned to his kingdom and began to poll everyone: the princess, the priests, the wise men and even the court jester. He spoke with everyone, but no one could give him a satisfactory answer.

Many people advised him to consult the old witch, for only she would have the answer. But the price would be high; as the witch was famous throughout the kingdom for the exorbitant prices she charged.

The last day of the year arrived and Arthur had no choice but to talk to the witch. She agreed to answer the question, but he would have to agree to her price first.

The old witch wanted to marry Sir Lancelot, the most noble of the Knights of the Round Table and Arthur’s closest friend!

Young Arthur was horrified. She was hunchbacked and hideous, had only one tooth, smelled like sewage, made obscene noises, etc. He had never encountered such a repugnant creature in all his life.

He refused to force his friend to marry her and endure such a terrible burden, but Lancelot, learning of the proposal, spoke with Arthur. He said nothing was too big of a sacrifice compared to Arthur’s life and the preservation of the Round Table.

Hence, a wedding was proclaimed and the witch answered Arthur’s question
thus:

“What a woman really wants is to be in charge of her own life.”

Everyone in the kingdom instantly knew that the witch had uttered a great truth and that Arthur’s life would be spared.

And so it was, the neighboring monarch granted Arthur his freedom and Lancelot and the witch had a wonderful wedding.

The honeymoon hour approached and Lancelot, steeling himself for a horrific experience, entered the bedroom. But, what a sight awaited him. The most beautiful woman he had ever seen, lay before him on the bed. The astounded Lancelot asked what had happened.

The beauty replied that since he had been so kind to her when she appeared as a witch, she would henceforth, be her horrible deformed self only half the time and the beautiful maiden the other half

Which would he prefer? Beautiful during the day….or night?

Lancelot pondered the predicament. During the day, a beautiful woman to show off to his friends, but at night, in the privacy of his castle, an old witch? Or, would he preferhaving a hideous witch during the day, but by night, a beautiful woman for him to enjoy wondrous, intimate moments?

What would you do?

What Lancelot chose follows. But, make your choice before you read below. OK?

Noble Lancelot, knowing the answer the witch gave Arthur to is question, said that he would allow her to make the choice herself.

Upon hearing this, she announced that she would be beautiful all the time because he had respected her enough to let her be in charge of her own life.

The moral to this story?

If you don’t let a woman have her own way, things are going to get ugly!

Ladies, I just want you to know how upset and angry I am that such a terrible, misogynistic, despicable, demeaning falsehood would be uttered. Not only is it being emailed around the world but now - thanks to me - it is being spread around the blogosphere!

Oh, the humanity!

I am so upset.

Jn 19.22

 

David at Jollyblogger, having a bit of fun with all his friends who have challenged other bloggers to do this or that, is asking for donations of $25-$100 for absolutely no reason whatsoever. He’s just hoping for a quick buck: since there are millions and millions of bloggers, he stands to make $75,000,000 or more if just half the folks pony up for their share.

Someone chided him for poor marketing and advertising, so I thought I’d help him a little bit. I suggested something like the following:

Send me $100 or I shoot the dog!

(Big thanks to Mark’s Very Large National Lampoon Site.)

Admittedly, my idea is a rip-off of possibly the greatest magazine cover of all time: National Lampoon’s January 1973 issue. In the following edition they said that they did shoot the dog because of all the heartless people out there who refused to buy the magazine.

David, however, is more moral than I and refuses to extort money. He’d rather you just give it so he can spend it with a clear conscience!

He didn’t leave an address, however, so . . . let’s see, where did I put that PO Box number of mine?

Jn 19.22