Today in Blogworld 08.27.15

Mike Leake

3 Things to Remember Before You Criticize Someone’s Theology

With a little help from others, Justin Taylor gives us three exhortations to consider concerning criticism.

Ashley Madison and Who You Are Online

I haven’t followed this Ashley Madison thing too much…but I do know that what Tim says here has always been true. Who you are online ought to match who you are in real time.

Stop and Enjoy the Ordinary

You know the rule, kids. Tom Schreiner writes something. We read it. This is no exception.

How To Avoid Getting Caught in Adultery

There is one sure fire way to never get caught…the answer might surprise you.

I didn’t watch the actual Republican Debate, but it sounded pretty enjoyable:

Twelve Helps For a Hardened Heart

Mike Leake 4 Comments

I’ve never really wished for a hard heart. But there are seasons when my heart begins to get a bit crusty. Perhaps there are things so deep and dark and painful that I don’t feel equipped to handle them. Which translated means—perhaps there are things which seem so powerful that I don’t trust the Lord to be big enough to handle them. Or maybe a choice sin has wrapped its tentacles so tightly around me that I’m deadening my own heart so as not to feel deep conviction.

Regardless the cause of the hardened heart it is a dangerous thing. To be “unmoved, unaffected, and disobedient” is not where one wants his heart to be. The Puritan, Richard Baxter, summarizes the hard heart quite well:

And that is the hard-hearted sinner, that will not be wrought to a love of holiness, nor let go his sin, when God commandeth him; but after all exhortations, and mercies, and perhaps afflictions, is still the same as if he had never been admonished, or took no notice what God hath been saying or doing to reclaim him.

That’s a terrible spot to be in. To prevent this and perhaps to shake believers out of the doldrums of a hard heart, Richard Baxter offers twelve helps for dealing with hardness of heart. I’ve modernized and summarized these, but I believe I’m being faithful to the original.

  1. Remember the majesty of the One you are hardening yourself against. You dare not respond to a king with such indifference—how much more the Living God?
  2. Consider the seriousness and nature of eternity.
  3. Ponder your deathbed and the judgment of Christ. “No man will stand before the Lord in the day of judgment, with a sleepy or a senseless heart.”
  4. Think often of the love of God in Christ.
  5. Look upon the end of your hardened heart; namely, the death of the soul.
  6. Take notice of the sad effects in the world which comes from a hard heart.
  7. Sit under passionate preaching and get around passionate Christians.
  8. Let tender-hearted Christians instruct you, and not be a witness against you.
  9. Avoid company which tends to harden your heart.
  10. Take heed of willfully sinning against knowledge.
  11. Be cautious of a dull familiarity with the powerful means of grace.
  12. Go to a graveyard or to a deathbed.

You really need to read the whole thing and not just my summary. Baxter is a helpful physician of the soul and the way he walks you through hardness of heart will likely enliven your heart to Christ. Here you can read it for free.

If you’d like to read a thousand more of these types of directions consider purchasing Baxter’s A Christian Directory. (It’s one of the most helpful books in my library).

—

Photo source: here

Today in Blogworld 08.25.15

Mike Leake

8 Reasons Why We Should Want Change

I love David’s first sentence here.

God Does Help Those Who Help Themselves

Interesting.

Guardian Angels?

This is a solid treatment of the question: Does each believer have an individual guardian angel?

Don’t Hate the Phone Call, Hate the Phone

I don’t know if this fits my reason for loathing the phone, but nonetheless.

You’ll likely see yourself in one of these driving stereotypes:

Is the Apocrypha Scripture?

Mike Leake 1 Comment

“Why do you guys reject certain books of Scripture?”

That was a loaded question if I ever heard one, but still my Catholic friend had a good question. Why do we Protestants not accept some of the books that they have in their Bible?

The books in question were all written by Jews in what is known as the “inter-testamental” period (430 BC-AD 40). Some of these books can be helpful for understanding the history during this time. Other books are entertaining stories. Some sound like typical biblical Wisdom texts like the Psalms or Proverbs.

So why don’t we accept them as Scripture? There are 5 main reasons, but first I think its important to understand a fundamental difference in the way Roman Catholics view the formation of the canon and the way we Protestants view the formation of the canon.

For Protestants the canon is not an authorized collection of writings (in that the church conferred authority or approval upon a list of books). Rather, the canon is a collection of authoritative writings. In other words something isn’t Scripture because the Church says it is. Something is Scripture because God wrote it. In forming the canon folks weren’t giving authority to the Scriptures—they were just acknowledging the fingerprint of God.

So for Protestants we are able to say we don’t believe these works are Scripture because we don’t believe they are God-breathed. But why? Here are 5 reasons that have been given:

  1. The Apocrypha does not claim for itself the same kind of authority as the OT. If this was the only argument we had it’d be on shaky grounds. There are other works in the OT (like Esther) that doesn’t seem to claim for itself the same kind of authority. So this one isn’t definitive.
  2. The Jewish people did not regard the Apocrypha as God’s words. This to me is a nail in the coffin. The very ones who wrote the books did not consider them to be on the same plane with the God-breathed Scriptures.
  3. It was never cited by Jesus or the NT authors, whereas almost every OT book is cited by the NT. If one considers the way that Jesus referred to the Scriptures on the Road to Emmaus one would notice that he left off these particular books.  
  4. It contains teaching inconsistent with the rest of Scripture (praying for the dead, etc.) and clear factual errors. Again if this was the only argument we had then it wouldn’t be decisive. It sounds as if one is saying, “We don’t consider this Scripture because we don’t like what it says”. But when considered with the other arguments this one is helpful.
  5. The acceptance of the Apocrypha was slow, irregular, and unfortunate. It was not accepted by the Roman Catholic church until the Council of Trent in 1546—and this may have had more to do with a reaction against Protestantism than anything else. History tells us that we probably have the Apocrypha alongside the OT and NT because of St. Jerome. He placed it in his Latin Vulgate. He was unsure of whether to accept it and leaned towards not including it—but because he felt that it was somewhat beneficial he put it in the Vulgate. So, over the years it just kind of slipped in alongside the others, but remained disputed until the Protestants firmly rejected it and the Roman Catholics warmly embraced it.

It is also important to keep in mind that these aren’t the same books as the Gnostic books like The Gospel of Thomas. Many times when we are discussing this we confuse the NT Apocrypha with the Apocryphal books that Roman Catholics accept. Roman Catholics do not accept the NT Apocrypha as legitimate Scripture. There is a massive difference between the two.

But for us Protestants we don’t accept either—because we don’t believe they contain the fingerprint of God.