If Not Calvin, Then Who? Yourself?

I found the picture above on FB, posted by an Arminian who started an FB group about refuting Calvinism (or something to that effect).

What the picture seems to be saying is that Calvin's massive theological contribution to the Body of Christ was, and is, a source of idolatry among its adherents. What this argument fails to realize is that: if not Calvin, then who?

No one approaches Scripture tabula rasa. No one can read and understand Scripture, at least as it should be read and understood, without the aid of the understanding of those who have gone before. This is not to say that Scripture is not perspicuous, it simply is a testament to the nature of knowledge. The relationship of induction and deduction in epistemology is perichoretic. One's understanding of fact must necessarily be based on an already-established conceptual system to which that fact belongs, and conceptual systems are established based on gathered facts.

In reality, what this picture is merely saying is that "I am the source of all valid knowledge; I am autonomous and, with me and my Bible, I'm ready to go places!" It actually implicates the self as both the subject and object of idolatry in its misdirected stab at Calvinism.

From Mega, to Small, to Shallow

Found this hilarious vid over at Old Life:




While Bible study groups are often the seeds that grow into organized churches, the evangelical notion of the "small group" is quite a different entity altogether.

Mostly an aftermath of the megachurch phenomenon, wherein it is impossible for the pastor to know and be available for each and every member, the small group is the accommodated solution to the problem of pastoral inaccessibility.

A small group leader is selected, more often than not, based on some vague notion of "leadership" ability and charisma. Theological knowledge is preferred but not mandatory. Life experience is highly valued, and the more crises one has gone through, the greater one's eligibility.

This small group would be a closer-to-home caterer to one's "felt needs." Of course, there would be Bible lessons, but these would not be sessions of biblical exegesis, wherein the redemptive-historical import of passages are brought to the fore for knowledge, faith and life, as much as moralistic extrapolations designed to either scare you into action or woo you into an ear-to-ear smile. Sometimes, the time would just be spent gossiping.


******

Meeting together to study God's Word outside of the Lord's Day assembly is profitable. May more Reformed Bible studies blossom into Reformed churches, where the whole counsel of God is preached, the Sacraments are administered, and discipline is enforced.

Cornelius on the Caveman's Club

While the unregenerate, the natural man, knows of the true God (not some notion of generic "deity", cf. Rom. 1:18-20) by virtue of being created in the image of God and by the testimony of the Decalogue engraved in the human heart, he suppresses this knowledge in wickedness, desiring autonomy and the liberty to judge metaphysical, epistemological, and ethical truth on his own terms.

In light of this, only the Reformed apologetic is meet for the task of toppling down these erections of hubris. Cornelius Van Til states:

"It is but to be expected that only in the Reformed faith will we find an uncompromising method of apologetics. Calvinism makes no compromise with the natural man either on his views of the autonomy of the human mind or on his views of the nature of existence as not controlled by the plan of God. Therefore Calvinism cannot find a direct point of contact in any of the accepted concepts of the natural man. He disagrees with every individual doctrine of the natural man because he disagrees with the outlook of the natural man as a whole. He disagrees with the basic immanentistic assumption of the natural man. For it is this basic assumption that colors all his statements about individual teachings. It is therefore this basic assumption of the natural man that meets its first major challenge when it is confronted by the statement of a full-fledged Christianity" (Cornelius Van Til, Christian Apologetics [New Jersey: P & R, 2003], ed. William Edgar, 146).

Only the Reformed ray gun is capable of blasting away the club from the caveman's hands.

    

Idelette

Calvin wrote the following letters after the death of his beloved wife:

To Farel, April 2, 1549:

PCUSA's Ordained Queergy

The news is out of the closet: PCUSA has now broken down the "wall of hostility" against the ordination of gays to official positions in the church. They are now open to having a body of ordained queergy rule the Body of Christ.

What this means is that this denomination accepts those whom Scripture deems as outside the covenant (excommunicated by virtue of living in unrepentant sin) as meeting the qualifications set forth by Paul in 1 Tim. 3:1-7. Paul also says:

"Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God" (1 Cor. 6:9-10).

Those who will not inherit the kingdom of God can lead the present visible representation of the kingdom of God on earth?! NOT!

Calvin, in his commentary on the passage above, notes:

"By effeminate persons I understand those who, although they do not openly abandon themselves to impurity, discover, nevertheless, their unchastity by blandishments of speech, by lightness of gesture and apparel, and other allurements. The fourth description of crime is the most abominable of all — that monstrous pollution which was but too prevalent in Greece."

If I understand Calvin correctly, even the limp-wristed falls under the charge of homosexuality; and isn't it the case that the gay mannerism is universal, manifesting itself consistently across national and racial boundaries?

"Truly, I say to you, it will be more bearable on the day of judgment for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah than for that town" (Matt 10:15). I wonder if it would be more bearable for PCUSA as well.

The Rolling Stones Were Onto Something

Despair is the friend of everybody. The day a human being first sees the light of the sun is the day he gives despair an all-access pass to his life. That's just the way it is this side of the Fall.

When Adam transgressed and violated the terms of the Covenant of Works, we were there transgressing with him, and it was no less than Van Til (and I believe Bavinck as well) who surmised that Adam was so inextricably linked to the rest of the created order that the Curse fell on the natural world just as it did on him. Every creature is in covenant with God by virtue of creation, mandated to reflect the glories and excellencies of God in analogical fashion.

What If Manny Pacquiao Was Reformed?

Another win for the Pacman and it seems like there's no end in sight. His boxing victories have made him a household name internationally, secured for him a position in the Philippine government as a Congressman, and fattened his wallet astronomically—so much so that to say he is wealthy is like saying Jughead loves hamburgers (ain't it obvious?! LOL).

The Hard Road is the Happy One

It's a day away from Mother's Day, and though the article reproduced below is about a dad, I believe it captures well the spirit that animated my mom as she and my dad strove to provide the best kind of life that they could muster for me and my three younger sisters.

I think it would be no disrespect to my dad to say that it was my mom who was the hard-hitter in terms of finding out ways to come up with resources when perhaps the demand exceeded the supply. It was no small feat for them to have put me in the best school for boys in the country—perhaps, the whole of Asia (Xavier School, Greenhills)—and my three sisters in the best school for girls (Assumption Antipolo) when a middle class income would have rendered this close to impossible. To cut things short, me and my siblings were provided the best education possible and all of us now are in good, decent occupations. They may not be leaving us with an inheritance comprising of a hefty bank account when the time comes, but all that blood, toil, sweat and tears—especially my mom's—secured for us a happy future that we are living in today.

Thank you, Lord, for your providence in bringing me to the world through my mom!

A Primer on Guido de Brès, Father of the Belgic Confession

After reading through his letter to his wife, and after having the fact of his faith that expressed itself in martyrdom hit home further, I now have a "man crush" on Guido de Brès.

Reproduced below is a brief biography:

The Love Letter of All Love Letters: Guido de Brès to His Wife

This year marks the 450th anniversary of the framing of the Belgic Confession. This historic church document is unique in that it is the only one of its kind written by a martyr—Guido de Brès.

Knowing of his impending martyrdom, de Brès wrote a letter to his wife that I can only describe as probably the best love letter that I've ever read: God-glorifying, God-dependent, full of faith and assurance, full of Scriptural truths, and expressing the kind of selfless love that a husband must have for his wife (in imitation of Christ's love for His Bride, the Church).

Great Minds Think 2K

Given some of the anti-2K rhetoric floating around on the blogosphere in light of the recent eradication of the top Islamic terrorist kingpin, it is a ray of sunshine to see a great mind like Carl Trueman NOT failing to see the 2K import behind the headlines.

Trueman says, "I am a patriotic Englishman myself and, even as a resident alien, felt a flush of satisfaction when I heard about Sunday's special operation -- but it should have no place in the church...we need to make sure that national agendas and patriotism are checked at the church door."

'Nuf said!

Gone Berserk on bin Laden

Still on the bin Laden issue, I'd like to showcase two blog posts that highlight the stark difference in opinion that inevitably ensues from a non-recognition and a recognition of the two distinct ways (two kingdoms) by which God rules the affairs of men, respectively.

First off, we have this post by James Jordan, a Federal Vision bigwig:

"Now, I have to say that I'm not happy with how Osama was killed. The Bible is fairly clear about this. If we look at the examples in Judges and how Samuel dealt with Agag, it is likely that Osama should have been captured, brought to Washington, and then stood up in front of the President. The President should have then said, 'In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, it is my privilege and joy as a minister of vengeance (Romans 13) to avenge my people.' After all, serving as God's avenger is surely a privilege and a joy, for serving in any calling is a privilege and joy. Then the President should have pulled out a .44 Magnum, which as you may know is the world's most powerful handgun, and blown Osama's head off. Yes, it's hard to imagine The Fool doing this, or even his predecessor. But it's what the Bible shows should have been done. It is his job, not the job of some soldier or underling."

Secondly, this one by Michael Horton, a proponent of 2K theology:

"Cultures are the most dangerous when they invoke holy texts for their defense of holy land through holy war. However, Christians have no biblical basis for doing this in the first place. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus clearly abrogated the ceremonial and civil law that God had given uniquely to the nation of Israel. Now is the era of common grace and common land, obeying rulers—even pagan ones—and living under constitutions other than the one that God gave through Moses. As Paul reminds us in Romans 13, secular rulers are given the power of the temporal sword—finite justice—while the gospel conquers in the power of the Spirit through that Word 'above all earthly pow'rs.'"

I think even the light of nature would move the cursory reader to conclude that the former position, the one of Jordan, is a bit wacko. Theologically, though, it loses even more ground. Kim Riddlebarger shares some of the basics of Two Kingdoms theology here, and Michael Horton answers some questions here.

  

Osama bin Laden and Anthropomorphism

It seems everyone is ecstatic about the news of Osama bin Laden's demise. The primary instigator of terrorism against America is now dead. Should we, as Christians, join in the party?

Proverbs 24:17 admonishes us, "Do not rejoice when your enemy falls, and let not your heart be glad when he stumbles." Why? As analogues of God, and even more importantly, as a people united to Christ, we must think God's thoughts after Him. What might be the Lord's sentiments in this case? Ezekiel 18:32 tells us, "For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Lord God; so turn, and live." In another part of Ezekiel, the Lord says, "Say to them, As I live, declares the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live; turn back, turn back from your evil ways, for why will you die, O house of Israel?" (33:11).