You are here: Home / Archives for ox
by on 10.8.08

deny the gospel by deeds

I mentioned earlier that I am listening to Kevin Bauder’s sessions at International Baptist College. I still recommend them to you in order to understand Bauder’s thinking. As I listen, I find myself mostly in agreement with his exegesis, but I do have significant differences with him on several non-exegetical points. I’ll talk more about that later.

Tonight, I’d like to comment on a point Bauder makes several times in the lectures, but doesn’t appear to elaborate on. (I am almost finished with lecture 8 of 10 lectures.)

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Fundamentalism, Infidelity, Issues, Separation
by on 10.6.08

are we immune?

Are we (Fundamentalists) immune from the entrance of savage wolves (Ac 20.29) or the rise of men from our own selves, speaking perverse things (Ac 20.30)?

I am listening to Kevin Bauder’s series of lectures at International Baptist College in Tempe, AZ. His whole presentation is exhaustive (and perhaps exhausting!). Some will strenuously disagree with his ecclesiology [though I do not]. Regardless of your views on that topic, his presentation is worth listening to. I have not yet made it to the end, but if you want to understand how Bauder himself arrives at his conclusions, his presentation is well worth your careful attention.

I have no comments or critiques as yet on his work here since I haven’t made it completely through to the end. I may make some comments later, I am sure I will have an opinion!

But a comment in the seventh lecture in the series got me thinking about the questions with which I commence this post.

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Fundamentalism, Issues
by on 10.5.08

10.5.08 – gbcvic sermons

A New Perspective or an Old Lie? (Rm 2.13)

In our message today, we look again at Rm 2.13, a passage that is much misinterpreted by the false teachers of the “New Perspective on Paul”. In this message, we briefly summarize these false teachings and point out the subtlety that unstable Christians may miss in the teachings of these or any false teacher. One goal of local church ministry is to stablish the saints so that they might be better equipped to notice when teaching goes subtly awry.

Two Dark Valleys

This week we had a brief review of a couple of points from last week’s lesson and began to look at Christian’s progress through two valleys. The first involves his encounter with Apollyon, where Christian wins the day by virtue of his humility and use of the Word of God. The second is the Valley of the Shadow of Death where Christian must navigate between the ditch of false doctrine and the quag of cloying and defeating temptations.

Strange Fire is Not Good (Lev 10) [Communion]

Our Communion service brings us back to Leviticus where we consider the death of Nadab and Abihu, Aaron’s eldest sons, on the first day of Aaron’s priesthood. The shocking death of these two priests, for what appears to be a minor deviation, illustrates God’s exacting standard for worship. This standard is not reduced in the New Testament, but heightened – no longer external and ritualistic, the standard is now internal and spiritual, a standard that requires more than we can possibly perform and calls, in the end, for the grace of Our Lord to save us.

~~~

It was good to be back in the pulpit again this Sunday. We enjoyed a good day worshipping the Lord, one visiting couple from Montreal, our first visitors ever from that city, I think.

don_sig2

Filed Under: Sermon Summaries
by on 10.3.08

calvinistic secret society? UPDATE: nope

I got three hits on my blog today from a discussion forum called “Spurgeon Underground“.

One of them is from Anniston, Alabama, who viewed, according to Sitemeter, my main page, my about page, and then went over to my church site. This visitor spent 3:31 on oxgoad.

Another, briefer visit was from Mobile, Alabama, just a quick hit and gone.

The first visit was from the UK, 1:56, with an “out-click” on my link to the Pulpit Magazine article concerning Piper, Driscoll, and harsh language.

This group is a private forum for members only. From their about page:

The Spurgeon Underground Fellowship is a small group of like-minded, committed Christians who strongly hold to the doctrine of sola scriptura. We believe that the Bible is our sole authority for all doctrine and practice. We do not reject biblical commentaries and other writings by committed believers, but we hold them accountable to the “whole counsel of God” as found in the Scriptures. Because we believe in the doctrine of salvation as taught by the Scripture, we are also strongly committed to what is commonly called the Doctrines of Grace or Reformed Theology.

This group was created for fellowship, prayer, and interaction for those who hold these doctrines. These doctrines are not politically correct, nor are they readily accepted in the majority of the Christian churches in our day. This fellowship is a haven in the midst of a stormy sea. As such, membership is by invitation only and only extended to like-minded, like-spirited men. If you would like to know more about the fellowship, you can read our fellowship guildelines posted below in Adobe Acrobat format. You may also email the Forum Administrator.

What gives with this? Why the secrecy, fellows? How does clandestine spirituality promote the body of Christ?

And why the mis-spelling of “guidelines”? It occurs twice on the about page, both in the comment above and in the link to the “guildelines” document. Is this just an accident or is it somehow a subliminal play on the word “guild”?

Count me mystified.

don_sig2

UPDATE: One of the members of this group enlightens me in the comments. I meant my comments to be taken lightly after a rather tense week, so I hope our brethren who are involved in this group aren’t offended. I wish them all well in their various ministries. By the way, you might want to check out their group blog, linked in the comments below.

Filed Under: Blogosphere, Fun and games
by on 10.3.08

well…

Now that the dust has settled a bit, what shall we say?

First, I think that Chris was rightly offended at the category tag I put on my earlier post. He was right, I was wrong. The tag has been removed.

But what about the substance of my complaint? Chris dismisses my complaint and thinks I should take down my post since he was merely offering a citation, nothing more.

A citation?

ci·ta·tion      (s?-t?’sh?n)  Pronunciation Key
n.  

  1. The act of citing.
    1. A quoting of an authoritative source for substantiation.
    2. A source so cited; a quotation.

[citation. Dictionary.com. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/citation (accessed: October 03, 2008).]

This is the headline of the post in question:

Driscoll on the Emergent Church

By Chris on Mark Driscoll

Prominently displayed is a picture of Driscoll himself (apparently while ‘preaching’.)

There are a few other citations in the post, it is true. But what is the post about? It’s about Driscoll. He is the centrepiece and his mp3 is the main point of the post.

Side Note: There is an attitude among some who wear the label ‘fundamentalist’ that seems to think it ‘cool’ to show how cutting edge they are by talking up and quasi endorsing men who are not fundamentalists. It’s real cool when you can promote someone like a Driscoll and yet say you still hold your fundie bona fides. Am I right or wrong, my readers, to say that such an attitude exists?

Now, in my mind, what Chris did with his post was more than citation, it was promotion. My perceptions are admittedly affected by Driscoll’s most recent outrage, but I have been repeatedly asking (and no one has really been answering) if the Christian church should do anything but shun Driscoll for his blasphemous talk?

The outrage in our little circle has been directed instead at me, for expressing my dismay at what seems to me to be promotion, not just citation. I have argued with Chris in the past concerning his support and promotion of conservative evangelicals. I have a great deal of misgivings about what Chris says and does in that respect, but Driscoll is (and has been) far further afield than a conservative evangelical. Am I right in saying Chris’ post is promotion not citation? (I realize opinions will differ here.) Am I right in thinking that it is at best highly questionable if not completely inappropriate to promote Driscoll in any way? Or in this way?

Now then, what should we do? Chris wants me to take down my post, and I still find his strongly objectionable.

These posts are probably all archived by now on Google, I am sure. But if Chris is willing to take down his (both of them), I will take down mine (both of them). That would mean, of course, dear readers, that all your immortal comments would be lost. Can you live with that?

don_sig2

Filed Under: Issues
by on 9.29.08

9.28.08 gbcvic sermons

Unfortunately, I was out sick this weekend, the second time in 25 years of ministry. I led our men’s breakfast Saturday morning then went to my study and proceeded to feel increasingly terrible. By the time the day was out my temperature had soared over 100 degrees and I could barely get two thoughts together in succession (when it I am well, it is a challenge once I get past those first two thoughts!!). In any case, two of our men stepped in for me in our services. We cancelled our afternoon service, but that meant an extended time of fellowship for our people as my wife and daughters didn’t arrive home until almost the usual time on Sunday afternoon.

By the way, after a couple of days of sleeping (and zero interest in eating), I am back to normal and out and about. We had the stump removed at church today and the sewer is almost hooked up. (Video will follow soon, I promise! The removal of the stump was quite a sight, the excavator operator did it in about two hours.)

Anyway, to the summaries:

Witnessing to the Blind (2 Cor 3.16)

For only the second time in 25 years of ministry, Pastor Don was ill and unable to fill the pulpit this Sunday. He thanks God for the willing hearts of the men of our church to stand up in his place and bring God’s Word to God’s people.

Today’s message comes from one of our deacon’s, Harry Lloyd. This message appeals simply to the sinner concerning the veil that lies over the sinner’s heart and prevents him from seeing Christ. It also appeals strongly to the believer to be a faithful witness and prayer warrior to friends and loved ones (and unknown ones) who live still behind the veiled heart. It is a fine message and well worth your time.

Pastor’s note: I am very deeply moved in hearing this message from my brother and friend. I have known him since before the Lord removed the veil from his heart and praise God for His wonderful work! To God be the Glory, great things He hath done. (3 Jn 4)

The House Beautiful [Pilgrim’s Progress]

Another one of our deacon’s, Bill Miner, led our Pilgrim’s Progress study this week due to the pastor’s absence. This session dealt with Christian’s time in the House Beautiful, a picture of the local church. He is guided by four sisters who equip him with the armour of the Spirit to protect him against the fiery darts of the wicked one.

Read the handout for this session as you listen.

Note: we also have a handout with answers for those who might like to use our material as teachers. All of our previous messages have been likewise updated.

Pastor’s note: I want to thank the Lord for brother Bill’s willingness to step in the gap for me today. He is the son of a missionary and a beloved brother in the Lord. We are blessed to have in our little assembly men and women who give evidence of God’s glorious grace. My recent illness was not serious or long lasting, but gave us an opportunity to see and experience the grace of God evidently at work in the hearts of our people through the men who stood in the gap today.

don_sig2

Filed Under: Sermon Summaries
by on 9.29.08

I am dismayed

… at this.

In light of this, this, and especially this.

Dismayed. Disappointed. Disheartened. Discouraged.

Let’s say Chris Anderson has just been busy and hasn’t had time to read the recent news. Even so.

What excuse could there be for positively referencing the crass crude and vile Driscoll even two weeks ago, before the latest outrage? With only the mildest of disclaimers… “I don’t agree with much of what he says…” Is that all?

don_sig2

Filed Under: Fundamentalism, Issues
by on 9.28.08

profanity and logs

I wrote recently about problems with the current Desiring God conference and the silence of FINOs with respect to it. As an update, you should check out another post by Steve Camp, Steve Camp’s outrage over Mark Driscoll. The culpability of Piper et al with respect to the blasphemous Driscoll grows with each passing day. No rebuke from anyone? Will the Piper groupies, any of them, turn in their Fan Club badges?

I must say, however, to Steve Camp, when we are speaking of profaning the holy, how is Driscoll’s language any worse than your music? The sound of the bar and the disco isn’t the sound of the choirs of heaven, is it?

I agree with everything Steve has written in these posts about profane speech. But profanity (making things common) occurs in more ways than just by speech. The church culture that ultimately produced a Mark Driscoll is one that has been profaning holy things for a long time.

May we all repent of our sins and plead our unworthiness before our Holy Saviour.

don_sig2

Filed Under: Driscoll, Issues, Music, Personalities, Worldliness
by on 9.22.08

silence reigns in FINO land

Scott Aniol alerts us to a raging discussion over in the realms of conservative evangelicalism. Nathan Busenitz, managing editor at Pulpit Magazine wrote an article published on the 17th of September entitled “John Piper, Mark Driscoll, and Harsh Language“. Busenitz rightly takes Driscoll and Piper to task for Driscoll’s foul language. In the comments, we discover in a post by Steve Camp that Driscoll isn’t the only one to use bad language in connection with the Desiring God conference. No, Paul Tripp likewise has a foul mouth. You can read about it (and see the associated video, if  you care to) at Steve’s blog, “PAUL TRIPP-ING – HE REALLY LIKES TO SAY THE ‘S’ WORD …has Piper lost his mind or just forgotten his Bible?”

It is instructive to read the comments on both posts. And equally instructive to read the execrable Doug Wilson come to Piper’s defense, ironically, in his post “A Temporizing Baa-Lamb“. Quite frankly, his comments are shameful. It is hard to believe that people become so devoted to such men that many objectionable statements, positions, and actions are just overlooked.

While this debate rages in the conservative evangelical realm, FINO land remains serene in its silence. Could it be that no one has read these posts? Surely not. Where is the response? Will anyone ever admit that perhaps there is something not quite right about Piper et al on this? At least the MacArthur camp is taking a stab at it, however mild.

don_sig2

UPDATE: Nathan Busenitz follows up with a still too weak rebuke of Driscoll and no rebuke of Piper. It seems to me that Piper is the one more worthy of rebuke, because his invitation to Driscoll and his public affirmation of him is only serving to enable Driscoll’s continuing bad behaviour. Were Piper to really rebuke Driscoll and refuse association with him, it might have had some real impact. Piper’s comments last year seemed to start working in that direction, then Piper backed off. For shame.

Filed Under: Driscoll, Issues, Personalities, Piper, Separation, Worldliness
by on 9.22.08

missing the key point as usual

The crowd at the FINO blog, Sharper Iron, are falling all over themselves to debate the anti-Calvinist feature article of John Davis, “Calvinism on the ‘N’ Train“. Of course, such a reaction is to be expected since Calvinism is the theology-du-jour of the neo-Calvinists. Any critique that challenges its tenets must be answered.

But it isn’t really the theology of the article that is most problematic, and the theology, in the end, is unanswerable. The points argued back and forth have been argued back and forth for hundreds and hundreds of years. It is quite unlikely that lightweights like me and any others commenting on the subject are going to solve these theological questions any time soon.

It really is quite amusing to see some say “Scripture forces me to be a Calvinist.” If that were true, all Bible believers would be Calvinists.

But as I said, that isn’t the part of the article that is most problematic… and certainly not the part that needs serious comment and discussion.

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Fundamentalism, Issues
« Previous Page
Next Page »