This old Saturday Night Live skit really captures the heart of the issue between the Senate "spenders" and Jim Bunning's simple point that spending legislation should be funded, i.e. paid for (not to mention it's funny)...
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Friday, February 26, 2010
N.T. Wright and Redeemer Church in NYC
Redeemer Church's (pastored by Tim Keller) Center For Faith and Work is hosting a talk to be given by N.T. Wright in April. I find this a disheartening bit of news given the confusion Wright has sown in some as regards the gospel of God's salvation of sinners by His grace through faith in Christ alone. Below is an email I sent to CFW expressing my concerns:
Dear fellow Christians,
I saw the bulletin note regarding the upcoming N.T. Wright speaking engagement that Redeemer is sponsoring. This troubles me, in as much as so many Christians have rightly looked to the ministry of Tim Keller and Redeemer Church. My concern regards what is the subtle change in emphasis and direction of the New Testament gospel message epitomized by Dr. Wright's innovations. I know you must be well aware of the critiques on his NPP and his less than reformed teaching on justification by faith and the righteousness of God. By sponsoring his conference, Redeemer by extension, will be seen as endorsing his errant perspective.
By the way I am a reformed Anglican, a member of one of the continuing Anglican churches in the U.S. My concern can be best highlighted by commenting on this excerpt from your web page advertising Dr. Wright's talk:
It's easy to become preoccupied with who gets into heaven; the real challenge is how we are going to live in the here and now.
Two things:
It seems this statement presents what is a false choice (as Wright oftentimes does) by suggesting that "preoccupation" with who gets to heaven and by extension 'how' - somehow precludes also focusing on how one is "to live in the here and now." The implicit message is 'don't focus on those peripheral personal salvation issues', thus weakening a Biblical teaching that one should be rightly "preoccupied" with their salvation... not in some self-centered pursuit of spirituality but by growing in our trust in Christ's death for our sins, His merit and obedience for our justification, and in a thankful obedience to His commands. Secondly, Dr. Wright's teaching advances the idea that the gospel is not about how one gets saved from sin (by grace through faith in Christ alone), rather refocusing God's purpose on building the kingdom of God here on this earth by righting wrongs and countering injustice in society. Though there are important things to be taught regarding our deeds unto others in this world, this shift in emphasis by Dr. Wright subtly moves the believer away from the gospel as it has been understood and taught by the New Testament writers, by Augustine, by the Reformers, as well as many today in the Anglican, Reformed, and Evangelical denominations.
From N.T. Wright:
"For Paul, what he means by ‘the gospel’ is not, despite some of our current usage, the description of a way of salvation... ‘The gospel’ is not, in particular, identical with the doctrine of justification. ‘The gospel’ is not itself the same thing as the revelation of God’s righteousness; that revelation takes place within the gospel, so that when the gospel is announced God’s righteousness is indeed unveiled; but ‘the gospel’ itself refers to the proclamation that Jesus, the crucified and risen Messiah, is the one, true and only Lord of the world... [Paul] has presented his gospel, not as a message about how individuals get saved from sin and death, though that is of course taken for granted, but as the message about how God has brought Jew and Gentile together into one body."
http://www.ntwrightpage.com/Wright_Auburn_Paul.htm
This is Wright employing (which he frequently does) straw man arguments, in order to redefine the gospel. How?... by undermining the gospel message of justification by faith - that righteousness comes through faith alone. No reformer identified "the righteousness of God" as the same thing as the gospel. As a response to Wright's wrongs - Paul did present his gospel as good news for sinners as to their salvation from sin and death precisely because it does proclaim how God in Christ justly justifies the ungodly... Paul did not take the gospel for granted, for it was constantly under assault. And no reformer presented Paul's gospel as the "message about how God has brought Jew and Gentile together into one body." But once those interpretations are subtly established, one can be moved away from the gospel of God's grace through faith in Christ's merit alone for our salvation as the heart of the Good News.
I doubt you will reconsider this event, though I wish you would. So I hope that, at least, someone will be present during the Q & A to help clarify and rectify the confusion that Dr. Wright is likely to bring with his gospel.
Dear fellow Christians,
I saw the bulletin note regarding the upcoming N.T. Wright speaking engagement that Redeemer is sponsoring. This troubles me, in as much as so many Christians have rightly looked to the ministry of Tim Keller and Redeemer Church. My concern regards what is the subtle change in emphasis and direction of the New Testament gospel message epitomized by Dr. Wright's innovations. I know you must be well aware of the critiques on his NPP and his less than reformed teaching on justification by faith and the righteousness of God. By sponsoring his conference, Redeemer by extension, will be seen as endorsing his errant perspective.
By the way I am a reformed Anglican, a member of one of the continuing Anglican churches in the U.S. My concern can be best highlighted by commenting on this excerpt from your web page advertising Dr. Wright's talk:
It's easy to become preoccupied with who gets into heaven; the real challenge is how we are going to live in the here and now.
Two things:
It seems this statement presents what is a false choice (as Wright oftentimes does) by suggesting that "preoccupation" with who gets to heaven and by extension 'how' - somehow precludes also focusing on how one is "to live in the here and now." The implicit message is 'don't focus on those peripheral personal salvation issues', thus weakening a Biblical teaching that one should be rightly "preoccupied" with their salvation... not in some self-centered pursuit of spirituality but by growing in our trust in Christ's death for our sins, His merit and obedience for our justification, and in a thankful obedience to His commands. Secondly, Dr. Wright's teaching advances the idea that the gospel is not about how one gets saved from sin (by grace through faith in Christ alone), rather refocusing God's purpose on building the kingdom of God here on this earth by righting wrongs and countering injustice in society. Though there are important things to be taught regarding our deeds unto others in this world, this shift in emphasis by Dr. Wright subtly moves the believer away from the gospel as it has been understood and taught by the New Testament writers, by Augustine, by the Reformers, as well as many today in the Anglican, Reformed, and Evangelical denominations.
From N.T. Wright:
"For Paul, what he means by ‘the gospel’ is not, despite some of our current usage, the description of a way of salvation... ‘The gospel’ is not, in particular, identical with the doctrine of justification. ‘The gospel’ is not itself the same thing as the revelation of God’s righteousness; that revelation takes place within the gospel, so that when the gospel is announced God’s righteousness is indeed unveiled; but ‘the gospel’ itself refers to the proclamation that Jesus, the crucified and risen Messiah, is the one, true and only Lord of the world... [Paul] has presented his gospel, not as a message about how individuals get saved from sin and death, though that is of course taken for granted, but as the message about how God has brought Jew and Gentile together into one body."
http://www.ntwrightpage.com/Wright_Auburn_Paul.htm
This is Wright employing (which he frequently does) straw man arguments, in order to redefine the gospel. How?... by undermining the gospel message of justification by faith - that righteousness comes through faith alone. No reformer identified "the righteousness of God" as the same thing as the gospel. As a response to Wright's wrongs - Paul did present his gospel as good news for sinners as to their salvation from sin and death precisely because it does proclaim how God in Christ justly justifies the ungodly... Paul did not take the gospel for granted, for it was constantly under assault. And no reformer presented Paul's gospel as the "message about how God has brought Jew and Gentile together into one body." But once those interpretations are subtly established, one can be moved away from the gospel of God's grace through faith in Christ's merit alone for our salvation as the heart of the Good News.
I doubt you will reconsider this event, though I wish you would. So I hope that, at least, someone will be present during the Q & A to help clarify and rectify the confusion that Dr. Wright is likely to bring with his gospel.
Monday, February 22, 2010
Some thoughts on the Christian life...
Although Christians, trusting in Christ's merit alone for their justification, may sin less than before conversion, yet never are they any less a sinner.
And although Christians, recipients of a regenerate heart through the Holy Spirit, may by His grace in thankful obedience to Christ's commands exhibit the fruit of godliness on many occasions, yet never within themselves do they own inherent godliness.
Godliness and salvation are in Christ alone, received and held through faith in Christ alone by God's efficacious work of grace in our hearts. No work of merit on our part secures them nor maintains them.
And although Christians, recipients of a regenerate heart through the Holy Spirit, may by His grace in thankful obedience to Christ's commands exhibit the fruit of godliness on many occasions, yet never within themselves do they own inherent godliness.
Godliness and salvation are in Christ alone, received and held through faith in Christ alone by God's efficacious work of grace in our hearts. No work of merit on our part secures them nor maintains them.
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Observation for the day...
Re: The Left's growing disillusionment with Obama...
Misguided utopia-seekers will be misguided (and always disappointed) by similarly misguided, cynical utopia-peddling politicians. Eventually reality intrudes (thank God).
Misguided utopia-seekers will be misguided (and always disappointed) by similarly misguided, cynical utopia-peddling politicians. Eventually reality intrudes (thank God).
Monday, February 8, 2010
Sometimes I Get To Wondering...
My second oldest daughter (I have three) got married in 2001. When her older daughter got married I sang a song to her on her wedding day. It was a partial rewrite of an old Impressions' song. Well, this time around I decided to write an original song. By the way, I wrote and sang an original song for my youngest girl a year later at her wedding. But that's another story.
It is a huge moment to see one's daughter all grown up and getting married (and btw again, they all married great guys). I wanted to seize the moment for each of them; to share something of my heart, my thoughts, and my love through a song that I don't think I could have done otherwise.
I originally recorded the song in the summer of 2004. That version can be found here under the title How I Love You So. So here is a video I recently completed, made up of moments of that event, remembrances through the years, and some shots of me singing to my daughter Christie that evening. Accompanying the video is a new recording with just guitar and vocal, as it was that evening in December 2001:
It is a huge moment to see one's daughter all grown up and getting married (and btw again, they all married great guys). I wanted to seize the moment for each of them; to share something of my heart, my thoughts, and my love through a song that I don't think I could have done otherwise.
I originally recorded the song in the summer of 2004. That version can be found here under the title How I Love You So. So here is a video I recently completed, made up of moments of that event, remembrances through the years, and some shots of me singing to my daughter Christie that evening. Accompanying the video is a new recording with just guitar and vocal, as it was that evening in December 2001:
Saturday, February 6, 2010
Needed words from the past...
It's been said that history often repeats... or at least rhymes. And it is also said that those that fail to learn from history are destined to repeat the mistakes of the past. With that in mind, a hat tip to Ace of Spades HQ for this first inaugural of Ronald Reagan in 1981. Nothing more to say. Just listen, mark, and adjust course as necessary...
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Obamanomics common sense deficit...
Great e-mail from a reader at The Corner.:
Thanks for that post. You hit the nail on the head. As the owner of a 16 year old wholesale computer parts company with about 50 total employees here and in England, I can tell you it’s not about easy loans and tax credits for hiring.
As you say, it is risk aversion. It is the knowledge that my taxes are going to go up and also we just don’t see other businesses willing to take inventory positions right now.
$5000 tax credit to hire someone? That really sounds like a proposal from someone who has never hired a single person in the private sector.
Small business will start to hire when one big thing happens.
Sales Growth. End of story.
It is amazing to me that they don’t get that if they did one thing, cut the corporate tax rate, business growth would happen almost immediately.
The original post referred to above is by Stephen Spruiell.
Thanks for that post. You hit the nail on the head. As the owner of a 16 year old wholesale computer parts company with about 50 total employees here and in England, I can tell you it’s not about easy loans and tax credits for hiring.
As you say, it is risk aversion. It is the knowledge that my taxes are going to go up and also we just don’t see other businesses willing to take inventory positions right now.
$5000 tax credit to hire someone? That really sounds like a proposal from someone who has never hired a single person in the private sector.
Small business will start to hire when one big thing happens.
Sales Growth. End of story.
It is amazing to me that they don’t get that if they did one thing, cut the corporate tax rate, business growth would happen almost immediately.
The original post referred to above is by Stephen Spruiell.
Friday, January 29, 2010
Worship & The Book of Common Prayer...
As a follow up to my last post and comments, here is an excerpt from an article in the Sept./Oct. 1999 Touchstone Magazine entitled “Common Prayer, Common Faith” by Louis R. Tarsitano:
It cannot be stated strongly enough that the intention of the original Reformers, whatever has become of the ecclesiastical jurisdictions that look back to them, was the conservation of the pre-medieval understanding of authority, of the scriptural doctrine of the Fathers and the undivided Church, of the local use of the common prayer in a language understandable to the people of the Church, and of spiritual communion based on one baptism into the one Body of Jesus Christ. From the beginning of the Reformation, some national churches were more successful than others in pursuing this goal of conservation. And it is worth noting that the precise cause of the appalling division among today’s non-Roman Christians in the West is the abandonment in subsequent generations of the Reformers’ traditional religion, elevating “protest” and “diversity” to ends in themselves.
Nevertheless, an exhibit remains of the Reformers’ true intentions, an embodiment of the reformed Catholic faith that they struggled to recover, not out of malice toward Rome, but for a greater love of God, of the truth of Holy Scripture, and of the faith and practice of the undivided Church. It is the Book of Common Prayer of the Church of England, which has become in over 150 different languages and local editions the chief formulary of some sixty to seventy million Anglicans in national churches around the world.
The entire article can be found at The Continuum.
It cannot be stated strongly enough that the intention of the original Reformers, whatever has become of the ecclesiastical jurisdictions that look back to them, was the conservation of the pre-medieval understanding of authority, of the scriptural doctrine of the Fathers and the undivided Church, of the local use of the common prayer in a language understandable to the people of the Church, and of spiritual communion based on one baptism into the one Body of Jesus Christ. From the beginning of the Reformation, some national churches were more successful than others in pursuing this goal of conservation. And it is worth noting that the precise cause of the appalling division among today’s non-Roman Christians in the West is the abandonment in subsequent generations of the Reformers’ traditional religion, elevating “protest” and “diversity” to ends in themselves.
Nevertheless, an exhibit remains of the Reformers’ true intentions, an embodiment of the reformed Catholic faith that they struggled to recover, not out of malice toward Rome, but for a greater love of God, of the truth of Holy Scripture, and of the faith and practice of the undivided Church. It is the Book of Common Prayer of the Church of England, which has become in over 150 different languages and local editions the chief formulary of some sixty to seventy million Anglicans in national churches around the world.
The entire article can be found at The Continuum.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Some random thoughts on Christ, Law, and Gospel...
1. A number a years ago sitting with my wife on a Sunday morning in an evangelical church I wrote down the following on the bulletin sermon notes insert, concerning modern church services:
When one takes away the Liturgy [referring specifically to Thomas Cranmer's BCP] with its content (which is Christ and Scripture centered), it is difficult, if not impossible to replace it with something that doesn't fall short of a holy worship; a definite problem for the modern Church.
Newer and "more relevant" is not necessarily better when it comes to the faith once delivered and to what the Church has been called to as it gathers to worship Christ. One need only read through portions of the Book of Common Prayer (1928 or earlier) to be impressed with this.
Though the old style English is a bit foreign to our modern ear, the weightiness and focus is nonetheless apparent. Here is an excerpt from the Holy Communion (BCP 1662):
O LORD and heavenly Father, we thy humble servants entirely desire thy fatherly goodness mercifully to accept this our sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving; most humbly beseeching thee to grant, that by the merits and death of thy Son Jesus Christ, and through faith in his blood, we and all thy whole Church may obtain remission of our sins, and all other benefits of his passion. And here we offer and present unto thee, O Lord, ourselves, our souls and bodies, to be a reasonable, holy, and lively sacrifice unto thee; humbly beseeching thee, that all we, who are partakers of this holy Communion, may be fulfilled with thy grace and heavenly benediction. And although we be unworthy, through our manifold sins, to offer unto thee any sacrifice, yet we beseech thee to accept this our bounden duty and service; not weighing our merits, but pardoning our offences, through Jesus Christ our Lord; by whom, and with whom, in the unity of the Holy Ghost, all honour and glory be unto thee, O Father Almighty, world without end. Amen.
2. William Willimon, a bishop in the United Methodist Church in the U.S., writes concerning the preaching from the pulpit in today's churches:
"Unable to preach Christ and Him crucified, we preach humanity and it improved"
Today, preaching Law and Gospel from Scripture is considered antiquated and something that all too many preachers (and Christians) think only relevant to those congregations of the long forgotten Reformation and not appropriate for our "advanced age." But man's condition hasn't changed. The preaching of Christ and Him crucified has never been fashionable. The Law, rightly presented, diagnoses man as he is - born into Adam's sinful race and willfully alienated from God as an enemy of righteousness... helpless to change or free himself from the bondage of sin. This resonates with the one who hears, as it is consistent with what is the reality within the hearer's conscience. The Gospel presents Christ Jesus as the only propitiation for man's sin and our only means of salvation; a salvation that by God's grace is obtained through faith and repentance in Christ alone; His merit of a holy life lived as man, His loving offering of Himself as the full satisfaction for our sins upon the cross, and His resurrection from the dead being the sole basis of our justification and sanctification before a just God; and that is freely offered to all who believe in Him. He takes our sin away and then accounts to us His righteousness unto eternal life. This is good news; and as saints who are yet still sinners we need to hear this constantly.
When one takes away the Liturgy [referring specifically to Thomas Cranmer's BCP] with its content (which is Christ and Scripture centered), it is difficult, if not impossible to replace it with something that doesn't fall short of a holy worship; a definite problem for the modern Church.
Newer and "more relevant" is not necessarily better when it comes to the faith once delivered and to what the Church has been called to as it gathers to worship Christ. One need only read through portions of the Book of Common Prayer (1928 or earlier) to be impressed with this.
Though the old style English is a bit foreign to our modern ear, the weightiness and focus is nonetheless apparent. Here is an excerpt from the Holy Communion (BCP 1662):
O LORD and heavenly Father, we thy humble servants entirely desire thy fatherly goodness mercifully to accept this our sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving; most humbly beseeching thee to grant, that by the merits and death of thy Son Jesus Christ, and through faith in his blood, we and all thy whole Church may obtain remission of our sins, and all other benefits of his passion. And here we offer and present unto thee, O Lord, ourselves, our souls and bodies, to be a reasonable, holy, and lively sacrifice unto thee; humbly beseeching thee, that all we, who are partakers of this holy Communion, may be fulfilled with thy grace and heavenly benediction. And although we be unworthy, through our manifold sins, to offer unto thee any sacrifice, yet we beseech thee to accept this our bounden duty and service; not weighing our merits, but pardoning our offences, through Jesus Christ our Lord; by whom, and with whom, in the unity of the Holy Ghost, all honour and glory be unto thee, O Father Almighty, world without end. Amen.
2. William Willimon, a bishop in the United Methodist Church in the U.S., writes concerning the preaching from the pulpit in today's churches:
"Unable to preach Christ and Him crucified, we preach humanity and it improved"
Today, preaching Law and Gospel from Scripture is considered antiquated and something that all too many preachers (and Christians) think only relevant to those congregations of the long forgotten Reformation and not appropriate for our "advanced age." But man's condition hasn't changed. The preaching of Christ and Him crucified has never been fashionable. The Law, rightly presented, diagnoses man as he is - born into Adam's sinful race and willfully alienated from God as an enemy of righteousness... helpless to change or free himself from the bondage of sin. This resonates with the one who hears, as it is consistent with what is the reality within the hearer's conscience. The Gospel presents Christ Jesus as the only propitiation for man's sin and our only means of salvation; a salvation that by God's grace is obtained through faith and repentance in Christ alone; His merit of a holy life lived as man, His loving offering of Himself as the full satisfaction for our sins upon the cross, and His resurrection from the dead being the sole basis of our justification and sanctification before a just God; and that is freely offered to all who believe in Him. He takes our sin away and then accounts to us His righteousness unto eternal life. This is good news; and as saints who are yet still sinners we need to hear this constantly.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Coakley Witnesses Assault on Reporter...
carried out by one of her campaign aids/consultants (Michael Meehan) and does nothing but scurry away! Wake up Mass. Democrats... attack a reporter who asks a tough question?! And isn't Democrat candidate and current Mass. Attorney General Coakley complicit in that she witnessed and left the scene of an assault and battery against a member of the press (simply asking a question) committed by one of her people acting on her behalf? Full story at The Weekly Standard and at Boston Herald.com.
Video of the incident:
UPDATE #1: Here's the latest by Daniel Foster from National Review Online...
Michael Meehan, the man accused of strong-arming Weekly Standard reporter John McCormack for asking a tough question of Massachusetts Senate candidate Martha Coakley, was nominated by President Obama for a seat on the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), a semi-autonomous government body that oversees U.S. civilian international broadcasts such as Voice of America and Radio Free Europe....
... Meehan is not mere campaign muscle, but a well-connected political operative who worked for a number of high-profile national Democrats. According to a POLITICO bio, he has held top communications posts at the Democratic National Committee (DNC), Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), and Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC). He has also worked as an adviser to Sens. John Kerry (D., Mass) and Barbara Boxer (D., Calif.), as chief of staff to Sen. Maria Cantwell (D., Wash.), and as political director for former Democratic Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle.
According to his LinkedIn profile and a web bio at Virillion Strategies, where he serves as senior vice-president, Meehan worked for NARAL Pro-Choice America in 2003, as “Vice President of Strategy and Politics.”
Meehan was reportedly on-loan to the Coakley campaign from the DSCC to “assist the Coakley camp with messaging.”
UPDATE #2: Coakley says, "Are you going to believe me or you're lying eyes??"
She claims she knows nothing about this incident and didn't see it happen...
Uh, see photo above^
UPDATE #3: After many reports by the MSM that he did not shove or trip The Weekly Standard reporter John McCormack, Michael Meehan admits and apologizes to McCormack:
Last evening I was a little too aggressive in the confusion of trying to help the Attorney General get to her car and catch a flight.
I clearly did not intend to cause John McCormack to trip and fall over that low fence. As the video shows and he confirms in his blog, I stopped to help him up and make sure he was OK.
I talked with Mr. McCormack this afternoon and apologized for my part.
... I wonder if Democrat candidate Coakley is still in the dark about what happened?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)