who said it?

Can you identify the source of this quote? What about the date and publication?

Today, fundamentalism is said to be in an identity crisis. It is allegedly trying to discover what it is. New self-definitions are being heard which say that a fundamentalist is one who is faithful to expository preaching, practices church discipline, repudiates easy believism, and is aggressive in evangelism. Or some imply that a fundamentalist is one who believes in inerrancy and does not cooperate with Roman Catholics, or is one who believes the “fundamentals” but is less militant and separatistic than formerly thought. The truth is that these are things that new evangelicals and self-proclaimed non-fundamentalists also believe and practice, leaving a distinctly fundamentalist self-identity completely vacuous. This all points up the fact that many are simply confused, and this includes would-be leaders as well as followers and well-wishers. Judging by some of the prevalent ambiguity, one is sometimes tempted to ask, Will the real fundamentalist please stand up?

don_sig2

the Christian and drinking

Randy Jaeggli, The Christian and Drinking: A Biblical perspective on moderation and abstinence (Greenville, SC: Bob Jones University Press, 2008).

I want to recommend a little book by my friend, Randy Jaeggli. Entitled The Christian and Drinking: A Biblical perspective on moderation and abstinence, it appears that Randy is going to be spending his summers writing short books on various topics. I reviewed a short book by him here. Love, Liberty, and Christian Conscience was last summer’s project. I am pleased that this year’s installment carries Randy’s autograph inside the front cover. My son picked it up at the Seminary retreat for me. Randy asked him if I would be reviewing his latest. We aren’t sure if this was simply an effort to boost sales, or not!

Well, regardless of Randy’s motivation in getting my son to buy the book, I hope this review does boost sales. I can heartily recommend Randy’s treatment of the subject.

The book is broken into these chapters:

  1. Old Testament Teaching on Alcoholic Beverages
  2. New Testament Teaching on Alcoholic Beverages
  3. Historical Views of Alcohol Consumption
  4. Medical Views of Alcohol Consumption
  5. Christlikeness and Drinking

[Read more…]

shall a man use this means?

I am working ahead of our people on Pilgrim’s Progress and just ran across a passage concerning Mr. By-Ends, a man who uses religion for his own advantage.

Mr. By-Ends proposes a question to his friends:

Suppose a man, a minister, or a tradesman, etc., should have an advantage [have a chance, an opportunity] lie before him to get the good blessings of this life, yet so as that he can by no means come by them, except, in appearance at least, he becomes extraordinary zealous in some points of religion that he meddled not with before; may he not use this means [religion] to attain his end, and yet be a right honest man?

Mr. By-Ends friends are Mr. Hold-the-world, Mr. Money-love, and Mr. Save-all. Mr. Money-love assays to answer this question:

[Read more…]

a little eclectica

I am in the midst of rebuilding my lawn after having a new $eptic $y$tem installed, so I am too busy for blogging. But let me note a few things of interest to me lately…

Nasa is Taking Shots at the Moon

There are places on the Moon where the sun hasn’t shined for millions of years [sic]. Dark polar craters too deep for sunlight to penetrate are luna incognita, the realm of the unknown, and in their inky depths, researchers believe, may lie a treasure of great value.

NASA is about to light one up.

For Church History Buffs
  • Christianity Today’s Liveblog provices a list of favorite Church history sites. Two I knew about, but three are new and look promising.
So, what do you think of Video Games?
  • The Canadian Christianity site has an article that raises some concerns about the addiction of many to gaming. A real concern, I think, but a typically too weak response in our child-centered era. (I think every branch of conservative Christianity is too weak on this, including Fundamentalism.)

And last, for now…

What gives with this Muslim-Christian conference?
  • And did the Christians involved give away too much in the process? And what should a prominent Minnesota Baptist pastor say to another prominent Minnesota Baptist pastor this time? [Probably he should say more than he will say, I reckon.]

don_sig2

the importance of the Old Testament

My brother returned from a family vacation to Italy and the British Isles with a book for me. In exchange, I took care of his alleged dog. The book made it worth it!

The book he brought home for me is Adolph Saphir’s Christ & The Scriptures. In the first chapter, I find this eloquent quote:

From the Jewish Scriptures we must learn what is meant by his being the Son of David and the Son of Abraham; what the words ‘Son of Man’ imply, and the word ‘Anointed,’ ‘Messiah,’of whom Moses and the prophets spake. For the history of Jesus does not begin with his birth in Bethlehem. The first verse of Matthew sums up the Old Testament history; nor can the sequel of the Gospels, Epistles, and Apocalypse be understood without it. His goings forth are from of old. He who understands not the election of Abram, the exodus of Israel, the Angel of Jehovah, the types of the Tabernacle, the High Priest, and the Sacrifice, the meaning of the shepherd-king, the son of Jesse, and of the sure mercies of David, must find insuperable difficulties in the life of Christ. All attempts to understand Jesus Christ, separate from the Old Testament, are most unphilosophical, and can tend to no satisfactory result. For Jesus Christ is the fulfilment of Moses and the prophets. He is not the Christ of history, but of a special history – the divine history of Israel. True, He is the Light of the World, He is the Desire of all Nations, He is the Centre and Life of Humanity; but He is all this because He is the Son of David, the Son of Abraham, for salvation is of the Jews. The Gospel narrative is like a high table land, but we cannot be spared the ascent from Genesis to Malachi.

How much value do you put on the Old Testament? If you are a preacher, how much of the Old Testament have you taught?

I would encourage you to make understanding the Old Testament with its promises, figures, and prophecies a matter of deepest concern. As Saphir says, ‘All attempts to understand Jesus Christ, separate from the Old Testament, are most unphilosophical, and can tend to no satisfactory result.’

don_sig2

an old timer on social action

Jon Trainer and Champ Thornton are talking about social action and whether there is a mandate for the church to engage in such activities. You can read some of their articles here, here, and here.

I am not sure where Jon and Champ will end up on this question, but for myself I see  no mandate at all for social action as a ministry of the church (except perhaps direct help for church members in crisis). As a Christian individual, I believe I should be kind and helpful to all as I come in contact with needs, but this really isn’t the mission of the church.

While I was working away on Romans today, I ran across a little essay in one of my commentaries on the social gospel. It is by William R. Newell, one-time assistant superintendent of Moody Bible Institute (under R. A. Torrey) and a fine Bible teacher and evangelist in his own right.

Newell left Moody in 1910 to take a Presbyterian pastorate in Florida. He published his commentary on Romans in 1938. He died in 1956.

This essay is from the Romans commentary.

William R. Newell, Romans verse by verse, pp. 46-51

TO THE PREACHERS OF “THE SOCIAL GOSPEL”

This is the doctrine that Jesus Christ came to reform society (whatever “society” may be!); that He came to abate the evils of selfishness, give a larger “vision” to mankind; and, through His example and precepts, bring about such a change in human affairs, social, political, economic and domestic, as would realize all man’s deep longings for a peaceful, happy existence upon earth, ushering in what these teachers are pleased to call, “the Kingdom of God.”

[Read more…]

characteristics of revival

A bit more from my Church History notes. We were nearing the end of the semester when we discussed revival and revivalists. The heading of this lecture is the subject line of this post, “Characteristics of Revival”. Here they are:

  • Interdenominational (but not undistinguished cooperation between infidelity and fidelity)
  • Prominence of prayer

[Read more…]

a brief history of the wcc

In an earlier post, ‘stages in the history of visible church unity‘, I left off on the point noting the emergence of the World Council of Churches on the one hand and the International Council of Christian Churches on the other. What follows is a bit of an expansion on that, again from my 28 year old Church History class notes.

Edinburgh 1910 – World Missionary Conference

  • Turning point towards WCC
  • International Missionary Council

[From this also flowed two conferences…]

[Read more…]

stages in the history of visible church unity

I’d like to resume my notes from Church History class. I am taking a break from my break from blogging – largely related to working out my taxes… I hate doing taxes. Reality is so depressing! Far better to live in the imprecise haze of not knowing exactly where one stands! In Canada, our tax day is Apr 30, so we have a bit longer to dither than our USA friends. (Of course, if you don’t have to pay, they are in no hurry for you to get your refund!)

So a little R & R… blogging!

The lecture I am entering today comes under a header entitled:

The Ecumenical Movement

Next comes a quote – may not be exact words, but something was said that struck me:

Be aware of the difference between my will, Satan’s wiles, and the Spirit’s wooing.

Now for the main lecture:

[Read more…]

discerning and eschewing new evangelicalism

In my Church History notes folder I have the reprint of an article written by Dr. Panosian in 1963 for the Nov/Dec issue of Voice of the Alumni, the news-magazine for BJU alumni. The article has a picture of a very young Dr. P. It was written a bare six or seven years from the Billy Graham 1957 New York crusade, the moment when lines were starkly drawn and personal decisions for or against the new evangelicalism had to be made.

Dr. P summarizes the definitions of other men for the (then) new movement. Among those cited are William E. Ashbrook, Harold J. Ockenga, Charles Woodbridge, Bob Jones, Jr., and Robert C. Brien. From these, Dr. P distills this definition:

So Neo-Evangelicalism is a movement, an approach, a group, a theological position, a practice, an attitude, a method and a mood. It prefers positivism without negativism, liberalism to fundamentalism, infiltration to separation, results to principles, scholarship to Revelation, ‘Preaching the Gospel’ without contending for the faith, ‘love’ to Truth, and ‘unity’ to loyalty to the Word of God. Ignoring the injunctions of the Epistles, concerning the believers’ reaction to error, infidelity, and apostasy — mark them, avoid them, rebuke them, have no fellowship with them, reprove, exhort, receive not, try them, from such turn away — the Neo-Evangelical has already been judged by God’s Word. He needs no other judgement.

A few thoughts flow from this…

[Read more…]