Borrowed Light: Today in Blogworld 03/25-26

Mike Leake 1 Comment

I have not gotten a chance to listen to this yet, but am looking forward to it later; Dan Kimball is interviewed by C. Michael Patton. He asks some really good questions, I am anxiously awaiting to hear Kimball’s responses. You can listen here.

The Thirsty Theologian tells us the fourth reason that he is a Calvinist. Today he discusses the doctrine of the Atonement. This is probably the most rejected point in the TULIP, David does a wonderful job of explaining it.

Dr. James Galyon points us to J.I. Packer’s discussion of Calvinism. You can read the Intro, Point 1, and Point 2.

Ben Stein, yes that Ben Stein, discusses Creationism with R.C. Sproul. Again, I have yet to view this video, but will try to later. I am interested in what Stein has to say though.

Great discussion at Pyromaniacs started by Dan Phillips. The discussion is centered around the question of Legalism.

I would like to personally thank all four of you that have voted for Borrowed Light in the SBC Blog Madness. Apparently, in the entire tournament field I am close to the least influential. Humbling. In case you have not yet voted, you can go here and vote. Be certain not to vote for me…I’m enjoying my thrashing.

The Call

Mike Leake 1 Comment

I remember waiting for THE CALL, when my grandmother was dying with cancer a few years ago. For the past week we have been waiting for it again. Tonight we got it. Nikki’s grandmother passed into eternity. We are not sure that she knew Jesus. Be praying for the family, as there are several others in her family that do not know the Lord. Pray that Nikki’s father (as well as her and I) will be faithful to Christ and His gospel during this crucial time.

Nikki is doing as good as can be expected, she is sleeping now. I got back up and am now working on finishing the sermon for tomorrow night. Posting might be a little slow around here. The best way to keep updated is add this website to your Google Reader. You can do so on the sidebar.

The Godly Man’s Picture Chapter 4 (Part 3)

Mike Leake

It is March 24th and I am on chapter 4 and have about 200 pages to go. Anyone want to bet I do not get this finished by April 1st? Fortunately, I have already read Burroughs’ (our book for April). I should finish this by the first week or so in April and then move to blogging through Burroughs excellent work.

Today we will deal with the third part of the fourth chapter in Watson’s Godly Man’s Picture. We will cover the topic of being like God in holiness and being reverent in our worship of God.

Canvas:

A godly man is like God. Could there be a more obvious statement? Yet, how many would claim to be godly yet not reflect Him in holiness? This is Watson’s concern in this section. A man is not truly a Christian unless he is said to be holy. How then do we know whether or not we are holy? Watson gives two principle evidences: 1) in hating ‘the garment spotted by the flesh’ and 2) in being advocates for holiness.

There are two uses of this truth. The first is that holiness is exposes whether we are believers or not. Secondly, it ought to cause us to strive to be like God in holiness, because:

  • This is God’s great design he drives on in the world
  • Holiness is that alone which God is delighted with
  • Holiness fits us for communion with God

Not only is the godly man holy but he is also a “true worshipper of God”. One will not fully understand this section unless you put yourself in the historical situation that Watson found himself. The Puritans were not only fighting a battle with the Church of England being swayed toward “Romanism” but also the “Papists” themselves. In this section, you can hear the warning of Watson to his fellow nonconformist, and also his countrymen’s Church of England, not to adulterate the true worship of God.

Watson may seem to come off a little strong here in regards to the regulative principle. Yet, his four consequences to “making a medley in religion” serve as fitting warnings to us today:

  1. Those who will add to one part of God’s worship will be as ready to take away from another
  2. Those who are for outward commixtures in God’s worship are usually regardless of the vitals of religion
  3. Superstition and profanity kiss each other
  4. Such as are devoted to superstition are seldom or never converted

In this section Watson does give a very strong defense of not adding “strange fire” to our worship. “And no wonder he is so highly incensed at it, for it is as if God were not wise enough to appoint the manner in which he will be served. Men will try to direct Him, and as if the rules for His worship were defective, they will attempt to correct the copy, and superadd their inventions”.

Discussion:

This is not really a matter of discussion, more informative. The word calumniated on page 33 is another word for slandered. I had to look it up. Maybe I was the only one.

Does Watson’s statement, “A godly man will not go as far as he may, lest he go further than he should”, nullify Christian freedom or actually strengthen it?

Do you like how Watson makes holiness “God’s great design for which he drives the world”? Should it not be His glory? Or is Watson correct and simply saying that his glory is his holiness?

Watson says that if God does not “see this stamp [holiness] upon us, he will not own us”. Do you think he is referring to the imputed righteousness and holiness of Christ imparted to us, or is he referring to actual holiness that is produced as a fruit from our union with Christ?

In the section on worship, what are examples of things we have added to “worship”? It is my opinion that the Puritans get this correct. They understand, rightly, that true worship is about God and not us. Whenever we make it about us, or worse yet, unbelievers, we are moving from the center of worship. God has directed how He wants to be worshipped, why should we add to that? Or is this too narrow, and actually an unbiblical, way of thinking?

Watson says that, “Those who will introduce into God’s worship that which he has not commanded, will be as ready to blot out that which he has commanded”. Do you find this experientially true?

Strokes of Genius:

“Holiness defends the godly, and they will defend holiness; it defends them from danger, and they will defend it from disgrace.” (p33)

“Where God sees his likeness, there he gives his love” (p35)

On to Part 4…

Guinness on Relevance

Mike Leake

By our uncritical pursuit of relevance we have actually courted irrelevance; by our breathless chase after relevance without a matching commitment to faithfulness, we have become not only unfaithful but irrelevant; by our determined efforts to redefine ourselves in ways that are more compelling to the modern world than are faithful to Christ, we have lost not only our identity but our authority and our relevance. Our crying need is to be faithful as well as relevant.

-Os Guinness, Prophetic Untimeliness, page 15

In my opinion understanding Guinness’ plea will determine whether missional (emerging, contextualizing, whatever title you use) churches are “successful” 15 years from now. If they uncritically pursue relevance or “coolness” at the expense of faithfulness we will be having the same dismissal of the seeker-sensitive movement.

What Guinness is saying in this book is that being faithful to be biblical gospel will bring about our relevance. Here is a question for you…is Guinness’ quote at odds with this quote by Stetzer?

“It may sound uncharitable, but we do not mean it to be so. But…many will say that theses shifts, and a book like this, do not matter. They are convinced if you just ‘preach the gospel’ and perhaps ‘love people’ that your church will reach people. They are wrong, and their ideas hurt the mission of the church. Communities across North America are filled with churches led by loving gospel preachers–most of whom, if statistics are true, are not reaching people.”

Ed Stetzer, Breaking the Missional Code, page 14