Free Music

That's right--I like free as much as the next guy.

But I like free things that are also useful and high quality (such demands!).

And by God's grace, I have found two sources of free stuff that's useful and high quality.

For myself, I like good background music when I write. I could use my CD player in my computer but I like mixing things up (multi-CD player anyone?). So, for a while, I ripped most of my old tapes and a few CDs. But that takes time. Then you have to pick a number of MP3s for the mediaplayer to rotate through.

Ha! Why even do that much work when Pandora or Slacker Radio does it for free!

Slacker radio is streaming music based upon genre selection. All you need is a free account (give 'em your junk email address--you do have one, right? Use hotmail for that). And then you pick a station (based upon genre) or look up a song or artist and turn it into a "station". The songs will flow from similar artists and songs.

You are able to pause or skip the current song. You are given so many "skips" before you run out. You can also tag favorite songs or reject the bad ones. It has some visual ads and occasional audio ads too. [A PR from Slacker reminded me, "Once you have created a great station, you can share it via email, Facebook, or even embed the station on your website or blog."]

I ran across Pandora two years ago. And I have never looked back. It is based upon a Music Genome Project that organizes songs by 40 different characteristics. This means that its stations are not so much genre centered as organized by the greatest number of similar characteristics as defined by the Project.

Even so, I prefer Pandora over Slacker. It has fewer ads (I think) and you not only get to skip songs (a limited number of times of course!) you can bookmark the better ones, use them to create a new station or order them.

You can also mix stations (can't in Slacker). Or mix by genre. Or individually chose stations within a genre mix. You can delete stations if they start mixing in songs that detract from your original intent.

And as an added bonus...if you have Firefox you can add the Prism app.  This wonderfully amazing app (yes, I like it) can convert any website into an independent web-browser, with a desktop icon. I just double-click the shortcut on my desktop in Windows and up pops Pandora without having to open a new tab in Firefox. (It's also good for email or google calendar).

I think even non technophiles will enjoy these goodies.

FV Friday: Reply to the Joint FV Profession, Part 8

Reply to the Joint FV Profession, Part 8 - The FV Denies the Law/Gospel Distinction

 
The Joint Federal Vision Profession, written by Douglas Wilson and signed by PCA Pastor Jeff Meyers, denies the historic Protestant distinction of law and Gospel. It says:

We deny that law and gospel should be considered as hermeneutics, or treated as such. We believe that any passage, whether indicative or imperative, can be heard by the faithful as good news, and that any passage, whether containing gospel promises or not, will be heard by the rebellious as intolerable demand. The fundamental division is not in the text, but rather in the human heart.

This is a blatant denial of the law/Gospel distinction. They do not believe it is in the text itself.

This denial of the Biblical distinction between law and Gospel is basic to the whole Federal Vision system. They believe that the law and Gospel are fundamentally the same. As Steve Schlissel said, "The law as God gave it is the Gospel" ("The Monroe Four Speak Out," pp. 1-2). This has also been confirmed by Doug Wilson:

When we say that all of God's word is perfect, converting the soul. When we don't divide it up into law and gospel, when we don't say law over here, gospel over there, when we say it's all gospel, it's all law, it's all good ("Visible and Invisible Church Revisited", p. 21).

Thus, there is no law/Gospel distinction except in the way that people may take the passages. It is not in Scripture itself, though they admit there's a difference between the Old and New Testaments.


The Reformed View [continued here]

"Faith healing" & Christianity

Sadly, a Wisconsin couple was charged with second-degree homicide in the death of their child. It was sad that a child with a treatable condition died and it was sad that the family was confused about healing.

Historically, the Christian church has never publicly endorsed so-called 'faith-healing' in her official documents (the Six Ecumenical Creeds and the Protestant Confessions of Faith). Although prayer is commanded, required and useful it was never understood to be a replacement for legitimate medical means. In fact, the leading scientists of the 1600s were Protestants and vaccines are encouraged by the likes of the Puritan leader Cotton Mather.

Unfortunately, many detractors of Christianity are unaware of these facts. With the American news source interested in what sells instead of what informs, such cases make headline news.

The Bible writes of medicine and physicians in a positive light. The writer of the Gospel of Luke was a physician (Colossians 4:14). In Christ's parable of the Good Samaritan, the one who rescued the hurt man used bandages and not 'faith-healing' (Luke 10:34). Yes, one should pray, but one should also use the means of health, even a "little wine for your stomach's sake and your frequent infirmities" (Paul, 1 Timothy 5:23).

The Bible also writes of faith and healing. Yet the Christian understanding makes a distinction between the great extraordinary redemptive acts of the Bible-times and the ordinary redemptive salvation of today. During the the time of Christ for example, to have the very Son of God in the midst of His people is to invite miracles. And those miracles have a specific place of testifying the truthfulness of Christ and of the Bible (Acts 2:22). Now that Christ is risen in heaven and the Bible is complete the miracles that attested them are no longer needed.

Today Christians are called to faith in the Person and Work of Christ but not to any accompanying miracle. This is an ordinary time of ordinary means. And God works through ordinary means.

If such is the case, then Christians today should not expect miracles as a matter of course. They should not doubt their possible existence either (note how the news-media uses the word 'miracle' in many medical mysteries). Nor should they seek out leaders with supposed healing abilities. Prophecies have ceased, tongues are gone and so are miracle-workers (1 Corinthians 13:8).

It should be enough to know these historic beliefs in order to put this awful event into perspective: they are a tragic and misguided couple that ought to be pitied and not harassed.

Growing up environmental and Christian

I grew up environmentally active.  And never knew it.

I was taught to pick up trash. My parents even warned me they would stop the car and make me walk back to pick up any defenestrated trash (it never happened, because I believed them.).

I also walked everywhere. I mean everywhere: schools, friends' homes, stores and work. And then I got a bike and cycled everywhere. I even took the RTD to downtown Denver and walked the 16th Street Mall. I didn't get a car until my father suggested I get a job to buy a car to learn responsibility (reducing pollution).

I eventually purchased a used car (that's recycling done right) in my seventeenth year of life. And I paid in cash instead of credit (thus saving on needless paperwork).

In fact, being raised lower middle class (border-line poor) during the greedy eighties really hampered my childhood (or so I have been told). With no computer, big tv, stereo system or large home, my energy consumption and geographical footprint was minimal. And we recycled aluminum cans with a vengeance.

I was green before green was hip.

And I owe it to my Christian upbringing.

Specifically, my upbringing was not always explicitly Christian but it was informed by generations of Christian practice that still undergirded much American culture. Greed and excessive spending were frowned upon. Flaunting wealth (large houses) was a social taboo. And I was always to take care of other people's property and certainly God's property: the Earth.

Such residual Christian thinking is a sane bulwark between the excesses of laissez faire capitalism and guilt-ridden environmentalism. Man does not own the earth. It is not man's to raze nor man's to worship. The earth and all that is in it is God's.

Money, technology, houses and our bodies are owned by God. And accountable to God. Thus, there is an objective and immutable basis for a correct approach to environmentalism.

Pet Diaries

Excerpts from The Dog’s Diary:

8:00 am – Dog food! My favorite thing!
9:30 am – A car ride! My favorite thing!
9:40 am – A walk in the park! My favorite thing!
10:30 am – Got rubbed and petted! My favorite thing!
12:00 pm – Lunch! My favorite thing!
1:00 pm – Played in the yard! My favorite thing!
3:00 pm – Wagged my tail! My favorite thing!
5:00 pm – Milk bones! My favorite thing!
7:00 pm – Got to play ball! My favorite thing!
8:00 pm – Wow! Watched TV with the people! My favorite thing!
11:00 pm – Sleeping on the bed! My favorite thing!

Excerpts from The Cat’s Diary:
Day 983 of my captivity…
My captors continue to taunt me with bizarre little dangling objects.
They dine lavishly on fresh meat, while the other inmates and I are fed hash or some sort of dry nuggets. Although I make my contempt for the rations perfectly clear, I nevertheless must eat something in order to keep up my strength.
The only thing that keeps me going is my dream of escape. In an attempt to disgust them, I once again vomit on the carpet.
Today I decapitated a mouse and dropped its headless body at their feet. I had hoped this would strike fear into their hearts, since it clearly demonstrates what I am capable of. However, they merely made condescending comments about what a ‘good little hunter’ I am.

There was some sort of assembly of their accomplices tonight. I was placed in solitary confinement for the duration of the event. However, I could hear the noises and smell the food. I overheard that my confinement was due to the power of ‘allergies.’ I must learn what this means and how to use it to my advantage.
Today I was almost successful in an attempt to assassinate one of my tormentors by weaving around his feet as he was walking. I must try this again tomorrow—but at the top of the stairs.
I am convinced that the other prisoners here are flunkies and snitches. The dog receives special privileges. He is regularly released – and seems to be more than willing to return. He is obviously stupid.
The bird has got to be an informant. I observe him communicating with the guards regularly. I am certain that he reports my every move. My captors have arranged protective custody for him in an elevated cell, so he is safe. For now…

FV Friday: The Federal Vision Gospel

The Federal Vision Gospel

"The law as God gave it is the Gospel." Steve Schlissel

Read my critique of the Federal Vision's denial of the classic Protestant distinction of law and Gospel here.

The Reformers Use of the Mosaic Law

Here is a facinating article in the Journal of Ecclesiastical History (1975). 

It is titled, “Moses and the Magistrate: A Study in the rise of Protestant Legalism”

FV Friday: Doug Wilson Denies Sola Fide?

Here is a post of a man who has reversed his view on Wilson.

Calvinism is back?

"Welcome to the austere – and increasingly embraced – message of Calvinism. Five centuries ago, John Calvin's teachings reconceived Christianity; midwifed Western ideas about capitalism, democracy, and religious liberty; and nursed the Puritan values that later cast the character of America.

"Today, his theology is making a surprising comeback, challenging the me-centered prosperity gospel of much of modern evangelicalism with a God-first immersion in Scripture. In an age of materialism and made-to-order religion, Calvinism's unmalleable doctrines and view of God as an all-powerful potentate who decides everything is winning over many Christians – especially the young."

[An interesting and useful article continued here]

FV Friday: Lies & the FV

Lies and the Federal Vision

This post is going to seem extremely over the top for many. We want to give people in the Church the judgment of charity and rightfully so.

However, we must be careful not to ignore evidence that there are significant problems. This is true in every case. It is especially true in regard to Federal Visionists.

Why is this the case? Because, in the view of at least one FV advocate, lying is a tool that you can use to defeat tyrants. This is what the Federal Visionista patriarch James Jordan teaches in his book Primeval Saints.

He writes on p. 86 of this book: [continued here]

The Catholic Prespective on the Federal Vision

Here is a fascinating post:

"I was a young Calvinist who set to reading the post-Theonomy authors (James Jordan, Jeffrey Meyers, Peter Leithart, Ray Sutton, et al.) They were on the edge of things – robes, weekly communion, Old Covenant typology, realized eschatology, high ecclesiology, etc. This is the same pond that produced the covenantal Catholic theologian Scott Hahn, which nearly all American Catholics have celebrated."

[more here]

Federal Vision Friday: Outside Perspective on the Siouxlands FV Controversy

For the next few months Fridays will include writings from my fellow pastor, Wes White. These articles are mostly informative and sometimes provocative. I cannot speak of some of the issue first hand, but I implicitly trust his research (since I researched the FV issues a few years back first hand).

This article in particular is the place to start to know the happenings out West:

"The article below was published in The Standard Bearer, Vol. 86, Issue 11, 3/1/2010, the denominational magazine of the Protestant Reformed Church. Rev. Spronk provides such an excellent critique of the issues in Siouxlands that I asked their permission to republish it on my blog. They agreed. Here it is.

Update: Federal Vision on Trial in the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA)


[continued here].

FV Friday: Discerning Federal Vision's Roman Catholic Tendencies

My friend and fellow minster, Wes White, has had providential opportunity to investigate Federal Vision first hand. And he has given me permission to reprint his postings.

Here is the first post--a personal post:

Discerning Federal Vision's Roman Catholic Tendencies When They Hit You in the Face like a 2X4

Back in the 1990's, I went down to Monroe, Louisiana because I was "courting" a girl there. I really enjoyed my time down there. I stayed at the Wilkins' home, and they were very gracious hosts. I was thinking of doing seminary at the Dabney Center there in Louisiana. I got to know some of the people. I also visited Auburn Avenue's sister Church, Knox PCA in Ruston, Louisiana (about a half an hour away). I remember sitting in the Church talking to their Pastor, Jeffrey Steel. These Churches were closely aligned. It seemed to me that Steel was the right hand man of Steve Wilkins in the Louisiana Presbytery.

Well, things didn't work out with the girl down there. So, I didn't end up moving down there. The next year, though, I met a wonderful woman in Grand Rapids where I lived, and we got married. I decided to go to one of the closest Reformed seminaries, Mid-America Reformed Seminary. I was firmly in the FV camp when I went to Mid-America. I was even on the Biblical Horizons list, per the suggestion of John Barach. I began to realize that the Reformed Church was not the place for me. I started seriously considering the Reformed Episcopal Church. At some point, I actually called Jeffrey Steel to ask him about the Episcoapl Church because he had some connection to it, which I cannot remember.

Well, I found out today the sad news that Jeffrey Steel has joined the Roman Catholic Church. I found the report on a site by Kevin Branson. Branson was a former member of Auburn Avenue who became Roman Catholic. He linked to Steel's page where Steel gives some information. I'm reproducing Branson's report here because it is so telling: [continued here]

The Five Points of Political Calvinism Summarized

"A summary from a Dartmouth historian Herbert Foster about a century ago noted the following as hallmarks of Calvin’s political legacy, and most are exhibited by the works of his closest disciples referenced above:

(1) The absolute sovereignty of God entailed that universal human rights (or Beza’s “fundamental law”) should be protected and must not be surrendered to the whim of tyranny.

(2) These fundamental laws, which were always compatible with God’s law, are the basis of whatever public liberties we enjoy.

(3) Mutual covenants, as taught by Beza, Hotman, and the Vindiciae, between rulers and God and between rulers and subjects were binding and necessary.

(4) As Ponet, Knox, and Goodman taught, the sovereignty of the people flows logically from the mutual obligations of the covenants above.

(5) The representatives of the people, not the people themselves, are the first line of defense against tyranny.

I have summarized the five points of political Calvinism slightly differently, referring to:

Depravity as a perennial human variable to be accommodated;
Accountability for leaders provided via a collegium;
Republicanism as the preferred form of government;
Constitutionalism needed to restrain both the rulers and the ruled; and
Limited government, beginning with the family, as foundational.

The resulting mnemonic device, DARCL (though not as convenient as TULIP), seems a more apt summary if placed in the context of the political writings of Calvin’s disciples."


David Hall

(full article here)

Hysterical Health Care

The recent vote in the House on health care is already being christened "historical".

What the media and others miss is that this event should be dubbed "hysterical".  And I do not mean funny ha-ha.

I mean that socialized health care is being pushed through by a hysteria--an almost uncontrollable outburst of the fear of death.

Romans chapter one should remind Christians that such flagrant disregard for God's Law is at root a spiritual problem.  All men and women know that God is their Creator and especially their Judge. And that they are sinners themselves, making excuses for their transgressions.

And unbelievers do more than make excuses, they sometimes create entire fairytales to flee the reality of the coming judgment. In verse twenty-one and following Paul declares that men know God but reject that knowledge by worshiping the creation rather than the Creator.

This worship of false gods is an approach to life that that seeks physical and spiritual health from anyone and anything other than God and His way.

And communism, socialism and other -isms that Americans flirt with are religions disguised as philosophies, but false religions nonetheless. And these modern false economic and political religions promise a healthy world and a healthy life.

And why promise a healthy life? So that they can avoid judgment now and in the life hereafter.

For many today's health care issue reflects a fundamental problem. It is a problem of historical proportion, all right, but also a problem of hysteria--of an outburst of fear and loathing, reflecting a nation's desire to save their physical health even as they lose their souls.

The Faith of Atheists

Everyone has faith--even atheists.

Naturally, this observation relies on the definition of 'faith'.

There are different meanings and usages of this word. In a cynical sense, faith is but an excuse to do whatever one desires. Sometimes it refers to an innocuous belief about a trivial subject (I believe that to be the case...). Atheists may use the word to describe irrationality--that which has no proof, justification or reason. Or, more humorously, “Faith is believing what you know ain’t so.”

The online Webster dictionary has a range of meanings:

"2 a (1) : belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) : belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust
3 : something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs"

When it is asserted that atheists have faith, point 3 is in mind. Many atheists have a strong conviction about the non-existence of God or believe in the value of the empirical method, etc. At other times atheists are convinced of the integrity of researchers they quote or the methods they use. Another way to write this is to assert that atheists have a belief--a belief in their worldview. Belief is a synonym for faith. Webster's definition of belief is similar to faith:

"3 : conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon especially when based on examination of evidence."

It is interesting that the definition of faith appends "a system of religious beliefs" and the entry on belief omits this phrase. The use of the word "especially" does not mean "uniquely". In fact, the third definition of faith includes the word 'belief'. And belief should be based on reasonable evidence. (For those more philosophically minded, the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy has an in-depth article on belief--that attitude we have about what we regard as true).

This usage of the word(s) is important because when this claim is made it is not meant to be a vacuous idea. There is substance to the claim. Faith--conviction or trust based upon reasonable evidence--is common to all mankind because of creaturely finitude. It is meant to remind the detractor that the debate between Christians and non-Christians is between competing faiths--worldviews--between different evidences, proofs and justifications and the very philosophy of knowledge and justification itself.

It is unfortunate that too many Christians present faith in antithesis to reason. They are using faith in a way that traditional Protestant leaders and creeds have not. Reason is a tool. And its usage and limits are determined by the framework in which it is used and defined.

Yet it is hoped that atheists and others may realize that many a Christian (leader) do believe there are good and sufficient reasons for Christianity and Christianity's God. Although the faith of a Christian must include trust and rest in Christ, faith as such is not irrational by this definition. When faith is defined as irrational at the outset of a discussion (thus defining out of existence intelligent Christians), it must be vigorously denied.

All men and women believe in truth as they understand it. Atheists have such a faith. And so do Christians. The debate between the two is over which faith is best justified.

Some Interesting Military-Civilian Developments

This is a transcript of the issue of using military (instead of local civilian police) for "crowd control". It is from 2008 but it is something that ought to be known.

Here it is.

Political Cartoons

Recession

Debt

Spending

More global warming hypocrisy

God Preserves His People (John 6:44)

No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day.

John 6:44

In this verse alone the mystery of God's sovereignty is revealed to His servants.

It is a verse that many reject at face-value; and many more simply do not know it at face-value.

To better understand the import of this verse patience is need to survey the background context. The opening verses of chapter six describe the miracle of the bread and fish. Having but little food to feed the multitudes, Christ miraculously feeds them, with food to spare.

The people were amazed, ready to "take Him by force to make Him king"(v.15). But it was an earthly king they sought and not the heavenly King who should rule their hearts. In fact, when they tracked Him down later (v.24), they were not seeking spiritual bread either. Christ rebuked them accordingly (v.26, 27):

"Most assuredly, I say to you, you seek Me, not because you saw the signs, but because you ate of the loaves and were filled. Do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to everlasting life, which the Son of Man will give you..."

Thus begins the famous Bread of Life discourse.

And the people still did not understand, asking: "What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?" It was the same old question about what they could do to inherent heaven by doing works pleasing to God. And Jesus answered: "This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent" (v.29, see my posting).

He tells them to eat the heavenly bread. They ask for this bread. And Jesus rebukes them again: "I am the Bread of Life...but I said to you that you have seen Me and yet do not believe. All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out." (v.35-37).

Here, in verse 37, we have a similar statement to verse 44. It is the Father who gives the Bride to Christ, and that Bride will come to Him. The verb 'will' (cp. 2 Pet. 3:10) means just that: God will bring His people so that they will cling to Christ. This is in marked contrast with the crowd surrounding the Bread of Life yet still seeking food from heaven.

Verse 39 echoes verse 44 as well: "of all He has given Me I should lose nothing," but shall raise them up on "the last day." Verse 40 similarly promises that Christ will raise them up. This clearly refers to the Resurrection and the Great White Throne of Judgment. And as with the previous verses, it is God who is acting upon, preserving and otherwise guaranteeing the salvation of the saints.

In contrast, it is not the saints who are said to preserve themselves. Elsewhere in the Bible, saints are described as striving to be faithful to God but that is because God is faithful to them. They persevere because God preserves them.

Christ states these facts succinctly: "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day."

God's people will come out of the kingdom of darkness to the light of Christ's Gospel only if the Father draws them to Christ. That is the meaning of this verse.

A host of questions certainly arise from many Christians: how can this be? Do I not have free will? What about God's promise to save everyone? and the like.

Dear reader, it is not uncommon that we have more questions than the answers given in the Word. For the Bible was not created for our idle amusement but as a declaration of God's truth. And the truth and mystery of God's mighty power in our salvation is the point of these verses.

Consider: the fact of God's active preservation and protection of His people is asserted by Christ (who cannot lie) in vs. 37, 39, 40 and now in verse 44. If you are God's and He is yours, then you will be raised at the last day unto everlasting life. You are given to the Son by the Father. And you will come to Christ (v.37).

Although Christ does not answer these questions directly, the face-value reading of verse 44 is bore out by the context I carefully summarized. In fact, the persistent unbelief of the Jews--seeking an earthly king, earthly food and earthly works--simply reinforces the proper reading of this text. Men are so dead in their sins that when Christ is before them in the flesh they will not believe (Eph. 2:1,2; Rom. 3:10ff.).

But the evidence of God's sovereign might drawing His people with bands of love is not complete.

After the disciples complain about these hard saying, Christ reminds them that the flesh (physical eating) profits nothing but " 'the words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life. But there are some of you who do not believe.' For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who would betray Him." (v.63ff.)

And Christ continues: " 'Therefore I have said to you that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted to him by My Father.' 66 From that time many of His disciples went back and walked with Him no more."

What amazing words! What a stupendous mystery. When Christ says 'therefore' he is connecting their unbelief with the fact of God's sovereignty: they cannot come to Christ unless such a movement has been granted to them by the Father.

Dear Christian, do you praise God for His marvelous mercy in granting you the ability to come to Christ? to persevere until the last day? Do you hope to enter heaven because God is drawing you or because you are drawing yourself?

I pray the wonderful love of the Father will draw you yet closer to His Son.