The Gospel Coalition

David Van Biema of Time puts “the New Calvinism” as #3 on his list of 10 ideas changing the world right now.

Carl Trueman on the dangers of celebrity culture… even in Christian circles.

Collin Hansen on blogs as a window into our souls.

Ten years out: a retrospective on the Emerging Church

Michael Spencer on the “coming evangelical collapse.” Michael Patton responds with an evangelical bailout package.

Take a look at the great line-up of speakers for this year’s Pastor’s Conference at the SBC meeting in Louisville. Someone is obviously thinking about us younger guys…

Nathan Finn on Baptist origins. He’s leading us out of the simplistic “either/or” categories (of English separatism or Anabaptism) to a “convergent” view.

The Coral Ridge – New City merger looks like it’s about to go forward.

Will the church walk alongside those struggling with same-sex desires?

Justin Buzzard on how the psalms have revitalized his prayer life.

Is seeing really believing?

Top Post this Week at Kingdom People: A Worthwhile Documentary on the Abortion Debate

Growing up as a kid in the Bible Belt, I enjoyed the Focus on the Family radio series, Adventures in Odyssey. Radio drama may not be very popular today, but it is alive and well in many Christian circles.

These children’s programs are impeccably produced. The stories are well-written. The sound effects help along the listener’s imagination. The ongoing storylines are often suspenseful. And the moral lessons the programs teach are biblically sound and mostly helpful for Christian parents.

Old fans of Adventures in Odyssey will enjoy looking through 550+ page book about the series, Adventures in Odyssey: The Official Guide: A Behind-the-Scenes Look at the Stories, Actors, and Characters. Every episode is recapped. Every story is told. And many behind-the-scenes tidbits are recorded. The book features cast interviews and pictures of the cast and crew.

I lost interest in the second half of the book, probably because I had already stopped listening to Odyssey by the time they replaced most of the original characters back in 1997. But I am already looking forward to listening to these shows with my kids when they get a bit older. If you’re a fan, you’ll find that Adventures in Odyssey: The Official Guide provides a fun-filled look at a show that has been going on for 20 years now.

written by Trevin Wax  © 2008 Kingdom People blog

It has become evident in recent years that some evangelicals are attracted to Roman Catholicism. For some, this attraction occurs because of the Catholic Church’s intellectual tradition or  institutional stability. Others are attracted to the Church’s apologetic certainty or beautiful liturgy. Whatever the reason, it is clear that some evangelicals come to see evangelicalism as inferior to the deeper, richer Christianity they find in Rome.

In Is Rome the True Church?: A Consideration of the Roman Catholic Claim (Crossway, 2008), authors Norm Geisler and Joshua Bethancourt seek to build a response to this growing number of evangelical converts to Catholicism by mounting serious arguments against the Roman Catholic claim of being the one true church. Anyone who is involved in apologetics regarding the Roman Catholic Church (whether for its exclusivity or against) will find this book to be a helpful resource that lays out the issues at stake and explains the areas of disagreement between the two sides.

The book begins by explaining the Roman view of exclusivity and the historical development of this idea. Then, the writers seek to dismantle the arguments that hold the Roman view together: the primacy of Peter, the infallibility of Peter, and apostolic succession. The weight of their argument goes something like this: If one link in the chain comes out, the entire Catholic claim collapses upon itself.

What I appreciate about Geisler and Bethancourt’s book is that they seek to carefully describe the Roman Catholic view. They do not set up straw men that they can tear down. They are careful to describe actual Roman Catholic dogma before explaining their reasons to reject the Catholic claims. The appendices are especially helpful in giving additional resources for those interested in these arguments.

Yet there were two frustrating aspects to this book. First off, large sections dealing with the infallibility of Peter are repeated almost word-for-word in later chapters dealing with apostolic succession. The book is intended to have a logical flow, but because of the repetition, it reads more like a book of essays.

The other frustrating aspect of the book is something that frustrates me in Roman Catholic apologetics as well: the tendency to quote from Church Fathers and make assumptions and inferences about subjects they were not specifically addressing. Both Catholics and Protestants are guilty here. Why not instead recognize the tendency to make the early fathers say or deny things they were not intending to make statements about? It is anachronistic to read our own battles back into the Fathers.

Readers of Is Rome the True Church? should understand that this is a free-church, Anabaptist response to Roman primacy. Geisler and Betancourt do not merely seek to unravel the Catholic claim for apostolic succession; they also seek to show how the episcopal form of church government is unbiblical. (This is most curious when considering that Betancourt received his ordination as a clergyman from an Anglican bishop!) Likewise, Geisler argues for the value of creeds, but does not see them as binding – a suggestion that will raise the eyebrow of a good many readers within other streams of the Reformation.

I do not believe that Is Rome the True Church? will cause Catholics to turn to evangelicalism. At the most, it might draw back a few evangelicals who are waffling on some of these issues. It will strengthen the Protestant (and Eastern Orthodox) reasons for rejecting Roman primacy. Geisler and Betancourt recognize that evangelicals do not convert to Catholicism after having been persuaded by the kind of arguments contained in this book, which makes one wonder exactly why the book focuses solely on the intellectual arguments against Catholicism.

At any rate, Is Rome the True Church? is well worth reading for Catholics and Protestants alike who are interested in the issues at stake and the reasons for the Protestant view.

written by Trevin Wax  © 2009 Kingdom People blog

Related Articles:
Conversations with a Catholic
Justification – the Defining Doctrine of the Reformation

My wife and I recently rented a 2007 documentary about abortion in the United States entitled Lake of Fire. It is directed by Tony Kaye, a British filmmaker who spent 15 years putting this documentary together.

Let me say up front that everyone interested in the debate over abortion in America should rent this documentary. Let me warn you in advance that there are some gruesome images, including footage of three abortions. There is also an indecent scene featuring a pro-abortion woman’s rock band that you will want to forward past.

But here are some of my thoughts on the film:

One of the important quotes in the film is that “when it comes to abortion, everybody’s right.” Kaye shows a surprising amount of sympathy for the pro-life movement, but he also empathizes with the women who choose abortion and the people who provide abortions as well.

The first half of the film seems to lean towards the pro-life view. By the end of the film, the balance has shifted in favor of abortion choice. The people that Tony Kaye chose to interview on the pro-life side turn out to be rather radical. And they are all men. So for the most part, the fanatics he films are on the pro-life side (although he does offer some footage of fanatical pro-abortion people as well).

The second half of the film is less helpful. Kaye spends an inordinate amount of time interviewing people who think Christian conservatives are seeking to reconstruct a Christian society based upon Old Testament laws. The conspiracy theories fly left and right, and they are never contradicted by any sane evangelical Christian.

There are also some ridiculous statements accepted at face value. Take for example the statement that “The Roman Catholic Church never had a position on when a fetus becomes a person.” (Did Nancy Pelosi happen to view this documentary before her embarrassing comments about Catholic theology?) 

Or the statement of Noam Chomsky, who at one point says that “Everyone agrees infanticide is wrong.” Not true, Noam! Professor Peter Singer, one of the very people Kaye interviews for this documentary, believes that infanticide is acceptable. But we are never alerted to extremism on the left, only on the right.

But let me give Kaye some credit. He has the guts to show an abortion. The first abortion video is especially horrific. The cameras zero in on the doctor piecing back together the baby after the abortion is completed. At one point, we briefly see the doctor measuring the baby’s dismembered foot and head. (Unfortunately, the fact that Kaye chose to film the documentary in black and white mutes the horror of seeing the bloodbath taking place in the abortion clinic.)

Kaye also interviews Norma McCorvey (Jane Roe), who explains her role in the legalization of abortion. She then explains how she came to the pro-life position. She mentions a friend who worked in an abortion clinic and once opened up the freezer. “They were babies, man!” Norma cries. It is one of the most powerful scenes in the film.

The Problem with Kaye’s Documentary

Kaye spent fifteen years making this film, which means that the majority of footage he has of pro-life activists are those of the early 1990′s. He focuses exclusively upon the people protesting abortion clinics, and those who are responsible for bombing abortion clinics and murdering abortionists.

Never once does Kaye enter a crisis pregnancy center to talk to women who are helping other women through difficult circumstances. The only compassionate women in this film are those on the pro-abortion side. The only angry men in this film are on the pro-life side.

Kaye spends a great deal of time “exposing” the Right’s agenda to reconstruct a Christian society (a conspiracy theory that may be true of a tiny group of extremist Christians). But never does he point to the deception of Planned Parenthood, including the frequent cover-ups of statutory rape. Neither does he give us any history of Planned Parenthood, or the cause of eugenics promoted by founder Margaret Sanger.

The Problem with the Anti-Abortion Protesters

Then, there is the problem of the pro-lifers in Kaye’s film.  While they do not represent the majority of pro-life activists today, they exist. And they shine light on many of the problems that plague the pro-life movement.

Problem #1: They are all Law and no Gospel.

You don’t see the anti-abortion protesters ever offering grace or forgiveness or mercy. You do not see compassion. You see anger. And you see an abberant view of the Old Testament Law that needs to be corrected. Some of the protesters believe we should execute homosexuals, abortionists, blasphemers, etc. In other words, “all the sinners deserve to be executed.”

Never once do we catch a glimpse of the grace revealed in the cross of Jesus Christ, in which our Savior was executed in our place. Simply put, there is no gospel here. I wonder how many of these people have actually experienced the grace of God.

Problem #2: Conflating Too Many Issues

Kaye may not be fair in pairing up extreme right-wingers with nice-looking, moderates on the abortion side. But I can’t blame him for exposing the agenda that comes across in his conversations on the pro-life side. The protesters talk about the NRA and the need to abolish the IRS. They condemn homosexuality and say we need to go “back to the Bible.” They talk about the founding of our nation by Christians.

In other words, they conflate too many issues. Instead of focusing on the abortion issue as a matter of justice for the oppressed, they link abortion to all the other perceived societal woes of America and use abortion as a springboard to condemn all the sins in the land. I wish that Kaye had found people who could articulate the pro-life view in a winsome way and with the ability to make careful distinctions.

Conclusion

Do I recommend Lake of Fire ? Yes. It is a thoughtful documentary that shows the worst of both sides. It is less biased than one might expect. Despite the flaws in Kaye’s presentation, Lake of Fire wrestles with the issues at stake and does not shy away from the hard truths that people on both sides of this debate face.

written by Trevin Wax  © 2009 Kingdom People blog

“Just so, I tell you,
there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents
than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance.”
- Jesus to the Pharisees “The Lost Sheep” (Luke 15:7)

Let’s face it. People are self-centered. You, me, everyone. People tend to think of themselves and their own needs before those of others. Even after we become Christians, we can invert even the good gifts of God manifested in our lives, turning blessings into evidence that the world really does revolve around us. This kind of attitude then leads us to neglect the work of God in the lives of others because we are foolishly concentrating only on what God does for us

Jesus concluded His parable of the lost sheep by emphasizing heaven’s joy over the repentance of one while downplaying the significance of the already-saved. Unquestionably, God is pleased when we live for Him and bring others to Himself. Scripture reveals God as One who rejoices over His children who walk in His truth.

Yet in His discourse to the Pharisees, Jesus was combating a dangerous mentality, prevalent among the religious people of His day. Self-centeredness. Exclusivism. Legalism. Even today, it is easy to think you have the corner on God. Easier still is to stand back and take stock of your apparent ”good” deeds and believe that God’s delight must be directed only to you.

Jesus’ startling conclusion of the parable dashes that theory to pieces. Battling the prideful and pompous ideology of the religious leaders, Jesus turned the tables by proclaiming God’s interest in the single sinner, lost and forgotten by the self-indulgent Pharisees. Puffed up because of what they believed God must think of them, the Pharisees heard Jesus reveal God to be like the shepherd who is rejoicing over the one who has turned to Him.

In our lives today, we must beware of thinking that God revolves around us and what we do for Him, and instead remember that He is also involved in the lives of those around us, seeking to save that which is lost.

written by Trevin Wax  © 2009 Kingdom People blog

O God, early in the morning I cry to you.
Help me to pray,
and to concentrate my thoughts on you:
I cannot do this alone.

In me there is darkness,
But with you there is light;
I am lonely,
but you do not leave me;
I am feeble in heart,
but with you there is help;
I am restless,
but with you there is peace.
In me there is bitterness,
but with you there is patience;
I do not understand your ways,
but you know the way for me …

Restore me to liberty,
And enable me so to live now
that I may answer before you and before me.
Lord, whatever this day may bring,
Your name be praised.

- Dietrich Bonhoeffer

From Prayers of the Martyrs

We are currently looking over options for the cover of my new book, Holy Subversion: Allegiance to Christ in an Age of Rivals, to be published by Crossway.

Here are 5 possible covers. Below these covers is a poll. Please choose the one that would most appeal to you should you come across this book in a bookstore somewhere. Feel free to leave a comment if there is a cover that you definitely do not like as well. I’d also be interested in knowing your second choice. Thanks for your input!

OPTION #1

OPTION #2

OPTION #3

OPTION #4

OPTION #5

Hilarious video!

Crossway is offering the ESV Study Bible online for free for a limited time.

Ed Stetzer interviews Andy Stanley on communication (part 1, part 2)

Union University: Renewal out of Rubble – incredible video!

Tim Challies on how endless choice brings endless discontent

Russ Moore on love, sex and mammon during this economic crisis.

Killing Sermon Cockroaches

This kind of pulpit plagiarism makes me sick.

John Piper on the right way to be rich

Top Post this Week: Christ vs. Caesar – Did the Apostles Deliberately Subvert the Roman Empire?

Back when the Peter Enns controversy erupted at Westminster Theological Seminary, I realized that a major theological battle was taking place. After all, Westminster has been known to be a bastion of conservatism. If a professor that denied, questioned or redefined inerrancy were to remain on the faculty, the seminary could face serious accusations from its conservative supporters.

On the other hand, if a professor had to resign for simply illuminating and expounding on an existing definition of inerrancy, then there would other consequences, not least of which would include a substantial narrowing of what constitutes “evangelical orthodoxy”.

After hearing about the Enns controversy, I printed out the extensive reviews of Enns’ book, Inspiration and Incarnation: Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old Testament by D.A. Carson and G. K. Beale – along with Enns’ responses and rejoinders, in order to understand what the controversy was all about. I summarized the issues in a brief blog post back in March.

G.K. Beale, professor of New Testament at Wheaton Graduate School and one of the strongest critics of Enns’ work has compiled his reviews and added some additional essays into a new book published by Crossway, The Erosion of Inerrancy in Evangelicalism: Responding to New Challenges to Biblical Authority. In this new book, Beale makes the case that a number of evangelical scholars have begun adopting views that contradict the traditional understanding of inerrancy.

The book begins with a fictional discussion between two Bible scholars about the authorship of Isaiah. The conservative argues that Isaiah is the author of the entire work that bears his name. The progressive argues that the second part of Isaiah was written by someone else. The progressive maintains that his view upholds the traditional view of inerrancy, while the conservative worries that he is smuggling errors into Scripture under the umbrella of “inspiration.”

The first half of the book contains Beale’s reviews and rejoinders to Peter Enns. Enns’ responses are not included; they are summarized by a third party.

The second half of the book deals with the issue of Isaiah’s authorship as a test case of biblical fidelity. Beale then spends two chapters on Old Testament cosmology and argues that the OT depictions of the world were described in phenomenological and figurative ways and should not pose problems for the traditional view of inerrancy.

Those who are heavily invested in the debate at Westminster over Enns’ resignation will want to consult this book. The discussions become highly technical at times. Few readers will have the stamina to persevere through the intricate arguments that Enns and Beale set forth. This book was frustrating for me at times, as the continual review/response/rejoinders tended occasionally to degenerate into a “you said/I said” debate.

In the end, I believe Beale is right to point out the chronological snobbery inherent in Enns’ view that the biblical writers were consciously intending to record history, but were actually documenting legends from that period of time. But the most helpful chapters are not focused on Enns. Beale’s chapters addressing Old Testament cosmology clarify issues for Bible students puzzled by some of the depictions of our world.

The Erosion of Inerrancy in Evangelicalism is not for the faint of heart. Most people will find the fine-tuned arguments of Beale to be deep waters. But as history has shown us time and time again, our view of Scripture matters enormously. If Beale is right and the traditional understanding of inerrancy is being redefined, then we should expect to see more controversies akin to the Enns issue in the future.

written by Trevin Wax  © 2009 Kingdom People blog