"Is your Christian education based upon evolutionary and secular thinking? It is if your church practices the usual age-segregated Sunday school according to a new church movement...."
continued here.
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
Meyers, FV and the Missouri Presbytery
The latest decision concerning the complaint against the exoneration of Jeffrey Meyers is posted at Wes White's blog, here.
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
The Thorn: reasons not to attend this play
"Many Denver area churches are following some traditions of the high Middle Ages.
With a plethora of "passion plays" slated for this Easter, these churches are imitating their Roman Catholic counterparts. And this year one play stands out: The Thorn.
This Colorado-based production is described as an "extraordinary passion play-meets-Cirque-du-Soleil event" (Denver United). It was a local play originating at New Life church in Colorado Springs. And it is slated to play in Denver at the Magness Arena on April 22-23.
And I will not be there..."
[continued here]
Monday, April 11, 2011
A Review of Peter Enns’ Bible Curriculum [Wes White]
"...Further concern was raised over the fact that the publisher, Olive Branch Books, is part of Peace Hill Press which is directed by Susan Wise Bauer and Jessie Wise. Susan Wise Bauer is well-known and well-respected within the homeschooling community for her history series, The Story of the World, and book, The Well-Trained Mind. Olive Branch Books has released a statement in which it begs parents to read the curriculum for themselves instead of relying on secondhand accounts.
So, that is what I’ve done. I received my copy of the parents’ guide to Telling God’s Story, and I have now finished reading it. I also read Dr. Enns’ book, Inspiration and Incarnation, to help me understand his views..." [continued here]
Thursday, April 07, 2011
Wednesday, April 06, 2011
Eritrea rejects UN aid
Fox news reported on the reasons why one of Africa's poorest nations is refusing most UN aid.
What does "The Institutional Church" mean? A Response
A fellow Christian blogger, Arthur Sido, has problems with the "institutional church." And he has graciously responded to my inquiry about his definition of the "institutional church" (over at pastor White's blog). This post is my humble attempt to better understand his concerns.
I suspect Arthur is unaware that his article is chockablock with assumptions and stereotypes. At least, it comes across that way to a reader (like me) who is not aware of his background and beliefs. So, I found his "what I believe" and read it. It, too, was chockablock with assumptions and stereotypes--or perhaps a language of description that I find unclear.
Even so, perhaps this dialogue will help express what is implied and draw both parties to more faithfulness to Christ.
First of all, he provides a tentative definition: "The institutional church, at its most fundamental, is the most visible and culturally recognizable manifestation of organized religion that finds its primary definition and purpose in the weekly Sunday morning meeting."
I find the phrase "the most visible and culturally recognizable manifestation" most curious. I take it he is allowing for other "visible and culturally recognizable" manifestations of "organized religion" besides Sunday worship. If so (say daily fellowship), then why can these other visible manifestations not be fundamental to an institutional church?
The definition then climaxes with a questionable assertion: the institutional church's "primary definition and purpose [is] in the weekly Sunday morning meeting."
Now Mr. Sido may define things and words any way he wishes. Of course, communication becomes quite hard if this ability goes unchecked. In this case, the definition simply misses its mark: if he wishes to mark all non-organic church organizations, such as, say, all Reformed churches, as "institutional churches," then he needs another definition.
The Reformed churches do not define the institutional church's primary mission, action or goal as the "Sunday morning meeting." The institutional church is but a part of the whole idea of the church visible.
To take only the Westminster definition of the church visible: "The visible church, which is also catholic or universal under the gospel (not confined to one nation, as before under the law), consists of all those throughout the world that profess the true religion; and of their children..." (WCF 25.2).
In fact, the visibility of the church is not confined to Sunday worship: "God is to be worshiped everywhere, in spirit and truth; as, in private families daily, and in secret, each one by himself; so, more solemnly in the public assemblies..." (WCF 21.6)
At the end of the day, I think Mr. Sido has something more specific in mind than the opening definition. He writes:
"Furthermore, the Protestant/Evangelical institutional church is by and large a modification of the Roman Catholic institutional church. The theology is radically different but the practices remain much the same: a formal and rigidly scheduled weekly gathering, mute observance by most of the church during that gathering, a ritualistic observance of the Lord’s Supper, a clerical class that is distinguished from the laity by extra-Biblical educational standards and that derives its financial support from the offerings of that same laity, and finally a focus on performance instead of mutual edification."
Now, since the opening definition does not work to identify Reformed churches, does this more extensive definition work better? It is closer if only because it clearly brings to the fore traditional anabaptistic arguments against certain elements of institutional churches--elements not necessary for any and all institutional churches. One can have an institutional church without financial support or ritualistic observance, for instance.
But then this all turns on how institutional, ritual, etc. are defined. The pejorative use of the words ritualistic, rigidity and formal all hinge on an understanding of what is proper worship. I do not know Mr. Sido's ideas about worship so it is hard to exactly evaluate.
If he believes that the Lord's Supper could involve cool-aid and cheez-its while people eat and wander about in their pajamas, then anything short of that could be labeled ritualistic, rigid and formal!
But there are more clues that some other idea of institutional church is at play here:
"Many of these institutional churches meet each week, go through the religious rituals and pay their bills but accomplish little else...In fact, the best measure of the spiritual state of someone is what happens outside of the church meeting. It is ironic that in the one place that Western culture agrees is “the church” is the same place that you are least likely to see the church functioning as it should."
I strongly suspect that our author is critiquing Christians that "play church." They come to church on Sunday, follow the motions, smile politely and pay their tithe and so feel good about themselves while accomplishing little for God's kingdom during the week. To that I say amen!
If that is his driving concern, then the institutional church is not the problem. The external form is rarely ever the root problem rather it is the internal problem of sin. If Mr. Sido concedes that organic churches can also "go through the motions" then he concedes the whole case and must critique the church organized (institution) upon different grounds.
His opening definition is insufficient to mark all my test-cases, Reformed churches, as institutional churches in the pejorative sense. His paragraph-long descriptive, on the other hand, seems to fit depending on what view of worship he believes. And if his true goal is to denounce superficial Christianity then we may well be closer in thought than either of us realized.
I suspect Arthur is unaware that his article is chockablock with assumptions and stereotypes. At least, it comes across that way to a reader (like me) who is not aware of his background and beliefs. So, I found his "what I believe" and read it. It, too, was chockablock with assumptions and stereotypes--or perhaps a language of description that I find unclear.
Even so, perhaps this dialogue will help express what is implied and draw both parties to more faithfulness to Christ.
First of all, he provides a tentative definition: "The institutional church, at its most fundamental, is the most visible and culturally recognizable manifestation of organized religion that finds its primary definition and purpose in the weekly Sunday morning meeting."
I find the phrase "the most visible and culturally recognizable manifestation" most curious. I take it he is allowing for other "visible and culturally recognizable" manifestations of "organized religion" besides Sunday worship. If so (say daily fellowship), then why can these other visible manifestations not be fundamental to an institutional church?
The definition then climaxes with a questionable assertion: the institutional church's "primary definition and purpose [is] in the weekly Sunday morning meeting."
Now Mr. Sido may define things and words any way he wishes. Of course, communication becomes quite hard if this ability goes unchecked. In this case, the definition simply misses its mark: if he wishes to mark all non-organic church organizations, such as, say, all Reformed churches, as "institutional churches," then he needs another definition.
The Reformed churches do not define the institutional church's primary mission, action or goal as the "Sunday morning meeting." The institutional church is but a part of the whole idea of the church visible.
To take only the Westminster definition of the church visible: "The visible church, which is also catholic or universal under the gospel (not confined to one nation, as before under the law), consists of all those throughout the world that profess the true religion; and of their children..." (WCF 25.2).
In fact, the visibility of the church is not confined to Sunday worship: "God is to be worshiped everywhere, in spirit and truth; as, in private families daily, and in secret, each one by himself; so, more solemnly in the public assemblies..." (WCF 21.6)
At the end of the day, I think Mr. Sido has something more specific in mind than the opening definition. He writes:
"Furthermore, the Protestant/Evangelical institutional church is by and large a modification of the Roman Catholic institutional church. The theology is radically different but the practices remain much the same: a formal and rigidly scheduled weekly gathering, mute observance by most of the church during that gathering, a ritualistic observance of the Lord’s Supper, a clerical class that is distinguished from the laity by extra-Biblical educational standards and that derives its financial support from the offerings of that same laity, and finally a focus on performance instead of mutual edification."
Now, since the opening definition does not work to identify Reformed churches, does this more extensive definition work better? It is closer if only because it clearly brings to the fore traditional anabaptistic arguments against certain elements of institutional churches--elements not necessary for any and all institutional churches. One can have an institutional church without financial support or ritualistic observance, for instance.
But then this all turns on how institutional, ritual, etc. are defined. The pejorative use of the words ritualistic, rigidity and formal all hinge on an understanding of what is proper worship. I do not know Mr. Sido's ideas about worship so it is hard to exactly evaluate.
If he believes that the Lord's Supper could involve cool-aid and cheez-its while people eat and wander about in their pajamas, then anything short of that could be labeled ritualistic, rigid and formal!
But there are more clues that some other idea of institutional church is at play here:
"Many of these institutional churches meet each week, go through the religious rituals and pay their bills but accomplish little else...In fact, the best measure of the spiritual state of someone is what happens outside of the church meeting. It is ironic that in the one place that Western culture agrees is “the church” is the same place that you are least likely to see the church functioning as it should."
I strongly suspect that our author is critiquing Christians that "play church." They come to church on Sunday, follow the motions, smile politely and pay their tithe and so feel good about themselves while accomplishing little for God's kingdom during the week. To that I say amen!
If that is his driving concern, then the institutional church is not the problem. The external form is rarely ever the root problem rather it is the internal problem of sin. If Mr. Sido concedes that organic churches can also "go through the motions" then he concedes the whole case and must critique the church organized (institution) upon different grounds.
His opening definition is insufficient to mark all my test-cases, Reformed churches, as institutional churches in the pejorative sense. His paragraph-long descriptive, on the other hand, seems to fit depending on what view of worship he believes. And if his true goal is to denounce superficial Christianity then we may well be closer in thought than either of us realized.
Tuesday, April 05, 2011
US interest, Libya and the Bible
He who passes by and meddles in a quarrel not his own is like one who takes a dog by the ears.Proverbs 26:17
Monday, April 04, 2011
Wednesday, March 09, 2011
NPR dabacle: does this surprise anyone?
The Washington Times reported more on the undercover tapes. This time quoting the co-worker with Mr. Schiller, Betsy Liley.
But seriously folks...whose mind will be changed but such revelation? Perhaps a number of average Americans. But those with influence to cut NPR funding, will they understand the bias here? Not just the science angle but the birther movement (with its own problems) is silenced by NPR.
If it's about the "debate" (like climate change) why not cover it? It would be a very large debate! The why is unknown. But the fact is known.
But seriously folks...whose mind will be changed but such revelation? Perhaps a number of average Americans. But those with influence to cut NPR funding, will they understand the bias here? Not just the science angle but the birther movement (with its own problems) is silenced by NPR.
If it's about the "debate" (like climate change) why not cover it? It would be a very large debate! The why is unknown. But the fact is known.
Thursday, February 17, 2011
The vanity of God?
My last posting answered questions that Christians may encounter in Denver.
The next few articles will answer more questions Christians might encounter in Colorado--specifically, questions by a reader of a recent article. The questions stem from digging deeper behind the answers given--answers which did properly answer atheist questions. But as with all answers, there are more assumptions that can be unearthed.
Here is the first question:
1. "You say God doesn't need anyone, that he is self-sufficient. But if that's the case, then why does he require glorification? Why does he need people to glorify him? By your description, he only made everything just to glorify himself. Isn't that vanity by any Christian definition?"
[continued here]
The next few articles will answer more questions Christians might encounter in Colorado--specifically, questions by a reader of a recent article. The questions stem from digging deeper behind the answers given--answers which did properly answer atheist questions. But as with all answers, there are more assumptions that can be unearthed.
Here is the first question:
1. "You say God doesn't need anyone, that he is self-sufficient. But if that's the case, then why does he require glorification? Why does he need people to glorify him? By your description, he only made everything just to glorify himself. Isn't that vanity by any Christian definition?"
[continued here]
Saturday, February 05, 2011
Science catches up with biblical nurture
Those ornery Puritans were right after all: self-control is paramount for healthy adulthood.
A recent study strongly indicates what Christians believed and practiced for centuries.
A recent study strongly indicates what Christians believed and practiced for centuries.
Friday, January 14, 2011
Monday, January 10, 2011
Many atheists ignorant of Christianity
"Over the last few years I have encountered more atheists than I can shake a stick at.
Whether they are young atheists at the Auraria campus in downtown Denver or in an interview with a leader in Boulder, they all have one thing in common: ignorance...
...of Christian doctrine and practice."
Whether they are young atheists at the Auraria campus in downtown Denver or in an interview with a leader in Boulder, they all have one thing in common: ignorance...
...of Christian doctrine and practice."
Thursday, January 06, 2011
Revival of Rousseau [repost]
"But when mothers deign to nurse their own children, then morals will reform themselves, natural feeling will revive in every heart, the state will be repopulated"
"It is only in our father's home that we learn to love our own, and a woman whose mother did not educate her herself will not be willing to educate her own children."
"There is no more charming picture than that of family life..."
What do homeschooling and Rousseau have in common?
Much in many ways.
Rousseau endorsed homeschooling as the ideal system of education.
(continued here)
"It is only in our father's home that we learn to love our own, and a woman whose mother did not educate her herself will not be willing to educate her own children."
"There is no more charming picture than that of family life..."
What do homeschooling and Rousseau have in common?
Much in many ways.
Rousseau endorsed homeschooling as the ideal system of education.
(continued here)
Tuesday, January 04, 2011
More government intrusion into our food?
Here is an interesting article on potential expansion of government into our food supply.
Thursday, December 30, 2010
Most popular apologetic articles of 2010
Colorado was a busy state this year. From atheistic billboards denouncing Christmas to pedophiliac books there was plenty to write about and engage the readers of Denver.
However, a few of these issues stood out in highly read or highly commented articles. And thanks to my inquisitive readers, one article had about 2000 hits in one day!
Well, here they are... (continued here).
However, a few of these issues stood out in highly read or highly commented articles. And thanks to my inquisitive readers, one article had about 2000 hits in one day!
Well, here they are... (continued here).
Monday, December 27, 2010
Faith and Redemption...the game!
"Faith and Redemption is a Christian game where players gain followers throughout their epic journey from the Garden of Eden to Judgment Day. As players gain followers, they are granted prayers and miracles that help them overcome the ever-present temptation of sin.
Although Faith and Redemption represents a fallen world, redemption is always possible and forgiveness is never more than a prayer away..."
i feel like i'm in an alternate Christian reality...
Although Faith and Redemption represents a fallen world, redemption is always possible and forgiveness is never more than a prayer away..."i feel like i'm in an alternate Christian reality...
Thursday, December 23, 2010
The battle behind the war on Christmas
"Using the worn-out and misused phrase, "separation of church and state," hundreds of atheists in Denver rejoice in their recent cultural salvo against religion..."
(continued here).
(continued here).
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
The group behind Denver's anti-Christmas billboards
"Who is this mysterious out-of-state group paying for anti-Christmas billboards in Denver?" (continued here.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)