In a recent sermon, I said that I was deeply concerned about the understanding of the Gospel that I hear among adult Christians and especially preachers. I was not just making noise. With every passing year, I’m amazed that the level of Gospel understanding seems to be lower and lower among Christian adults. This isn’t just a failure to hear the Gospel in the terms and definitions I prefer. No, it is an ever lowering articulation of the Gospel, a replacement of the Gospel with other concerns and, perhaps most distressing of all, a replacement and confusion of the Gospel-centered mission itself.

I expect that this emphasis on my part will not endear me to some people, mostly on grounds that I am failing to see the significance of things like moral issues, behavior change and political causes. I’ve come to the point that I realize a discussion of the Gospel is going to have a predictable shape:

1) We all know the Gospel. It’s basic.
2) Once you’ve preached or taught the Gospel, then you need to deal with other things.
3) If you are constantly trying to bring the Gospel to the forefront as the main concern, you’re missing the importance of things like behavior change and obedience. [Continue reading]

1. Why did you start using the term “post-evangelical?” Aren’t you aware of how that term is perceived in the discernment blogosphere?

This will seem hard to believe, but I simply wanted a way to say I was moving past evangelicalism to something else, but that something else wasn’t what would cause me to say “non-evangelical,” at least using the generally accepted understanding of evangelicals. I wasn’t in any way trying to identify with post-modernism or the emerging church. The Ancient-Future Evangelicalism of Robert Webber really described me, but that label was unclear to me at the time and I still see it as being more ambitious than I ever want to be with “post-evangelical.”

The discernment blogosphere use of the term is synonymous with “apostate liberal in sheep’s clothing.” I notice a graphic at teampyro that says something about tours of the post-evangelical wilderness. Well, my post-evangelicalism is a way of navigating through the evangelical wilderness with the resources of the broader, deeper, more ancient church. I think the discernment blogosphere is talking about Mclaren, Bell, etc. [Continue reading]

Matt Chandler spoke at my alma mater this week (yes SBTS alumni, class of ‘84 and more). You can watch the message here, but one of the Thinklings excerpted part of Chandler’s message and the words were very familiar.

Chandler’s quoting Eugene Peterson, he who created the much vilified paraphrase “The Message” and who most recently endorsed The Shack with a glowing comparison to Pilgrim’s Progress. Suffice it to say you won’t read a lot of Peterson quotes at 9 Marks or hear his name dropped at Together for the Gospel. Classic mainline liberal, fiery prophet of learning from Dickinson and poets no one can pronounce, renegade translator of the original languages into even more original language, a curmudgeon who lives in Montana and doesn’t answer the phone, unapologetic advocate of “spiritual direction” and “contemplation,” and without question the most passionate advocate of the role of the classic Protestant pastor and the most fearsome critic of whatever it is that passes for a pastor today.

Chandler was reading from page 5 of the most underlined book in my library, Peterson’s nuclear attack on the contemporary re-invention of the pastor, Working the Angles: The Shape of Pastoral Integrity. If you think you are a pastor or might want to be, this book cannot be avoided. [Continue reading]

A church-planting friend just wrote me about a conference he’s attended in one of our state Baptist conventions. Plant those churches, boys, was the rallying cry, but stay out of those pubs.

Take the Gospel into the world, but stay out of anyplace that serves beer. That’s someone’s version of how the Gospel applies to church planting. Go to jungles, mountains, into the tribes of cannibals or the roughest ghetto, but stay out of O’Charley’s.

Here’s my current theory: it’s not that we are simply ignorant of the Gospel. We can stop announcing that the church needs to hear the Gospel for the first time. It’s more than that. I think most people in most evangelical churches have heard it more than adequately. (Though I am not disagreeing with myself or anyone else that many in evangelicalism’s darker corners haven’t heard the Gospel with accuracy, understanding or personal application.) They may not have your footnotes on justification memorized and they may not be wrath-anxious enough for some of you, but a lot of Christians understand the Gospel.

The problem isn’t simple ignorance. It’s primarily cowardice.

Here’s the Gospel. Here’s life. Let’s apply the Gospel to life, to sin, to church, to ideas, to boundaries, to traditions, to power, to the accepted way of looking at everything. [Continue reading]

Point: evangelicalism contains within itself some almost irresistible itches from its fundamentalist DNA. From time to time, the urge to scratch is almost overwhelming. These itches would include:

“Must say that Catholics are not Christians….”

“Must say that all things ecumenical are bad unless it’s guys on our team writing books or putting on a conference….”

“Must say all mainline Christians are apostate….”

“Must find ways to say our church actually has the pure Gospel others don’t have….”

“Must point out heretics like the emerging church and N.T. Wright…..” [Continue reading]

UPDATE: Support the monks of St. Meinrad, who make a great wooden casket/urn at a reasonable price. Will look much better under the tree

Stand by America, Wal-Mart is selling caskets. And urns. I’m not joking.

Any of you with a small funeral home in your community might want to consider two things: Just how far in advance you want to buy that pre-planned service and what is the meaning of the phrase “Some unanticipated future charges may be necessary.”

What Wal-Mart has done for Main Street USA in small town America it is now going to do for the funeral industry in those same towns: deliver what the public wants. irresistably heap. (If you know anything about casket prices, these are quite inexpensive.)

If you buy stock, I’d take a look at whoever made this deal. It’s a brilliant piece of 21st century capitalism. America is SO ready for the Wal-Mart casket.

If it bothers you to spend eternity in a box made by children in China, you might want to see if you can special order. [Continue reading]

I’ll never pass as an apologist for Douglas Wilson’s (or Mark Driscoll’s) views on gender. I was turned off to his rhetoric long ago. At the same time, I’m the kind of person who can not like his views on gender and very much like his debates with Chris Hitchens and his books on church life. I’m the guy who has the views on grace that you like and the views on inerrancy you don’t like. I am all about the Gospel and I don’t believe in the rapture. I’m the guy who got followed to the car a few months ago by a good friend who said, “You’re such a good preacher; it’s a shame that you’re so wrong on Genesis.”

I have things I like about Piper and things I don’t. Same with Driscoll. Same with Wright. When my book is out there, it will be the same with me if you’re actually thinking and not just being a shill or a sheeple. [Continue reading]

Despite what you may have read in the kinder, gentler corners of the blogosphere recently, you would all be surprised how un-contentious I am most of the time. In my real life, I regularly run from situations where I’m being pressed for my opinion. I much prefer print as the medium of debate. In real life, I’ll nod, blink, shrug, excuse myself, suddenly remember an uncompleted task, etc. rather than get into a tug-of-war about who is right.

But I’ve also learned what it is that snags me, and it’s not always the big issues. It’s usually one word. Yes, one word can throw my switch and give me an almost irresistible yearning to argue my point.

Three examples from the last 24 hours:

1) A debate is going on several places on the blogosphere around this question: “Are the doctrinally obsessed missing the heart of Jesus?”

My answer is a simply “yes,” and the reason is one word: obsessed. You said it. Not me.

Obsessed isn’t doctrinally interested, doctrinally aware or doctrinally correct. Doctrinally obsessed isn’t someone who makes doctrine a priority or who even brings it up frequently. Obsession is….obsession. Single mindedness. Idolatry. Loss of perspective. [Continue reading]

A speech about saving America and the church, in case you just don’t care enough actually watch the clip before you comment.

Anytime someone tells me the “Creation museum” is a museum I want to run this piece out. Ham’s organization owns this “museum.” It’s goal is to get the public in and discredit any science that doesn’t come to the conclusions of fundamentalists. You can get all four sessions of this “State of the Nation” speech in the Youtube sidebar. Don’t think that Creationism is a matter of agenda? Watch this talk and get back to me. Tell me that the kids being taken to this “museum” are learning “science.”

Ham believes that the reason young people leave the church is they aren’t taught AIG’s apologetics and views on science. That’s why young people leave the church: failure to teach creationism. (BTW, ask George Barna if his research shows young people want to be taught creationism to answer their questions.)

And what does the creationist dialog with contemporary science sound like? Like this:

All seven sessions can be found at the Youtube site. This is a lobbyist for a Conservative political group redefining science and declaring what the only acceptable attitude toward science can be. Listen to the discussion of “evidence.”

Now let’s be clear: I’m happy for creationists to take whatever approach they wish in their discussions, but I’m deeply concerned that this is being presented as the only true and Biblical “Christianity.” It’s not Christianity. It’s a kind of Christianity and it doesn’t speak for millions of us. I’m not precommitted to a view of science. My religious faith is the Apostles’ and Nicene Creed, not Ken Ham’s philosophy. Science disproves, advances, questions, disproves, advances and on and on. That’s a whole different business. If your science equals “the Bible is the only valid science and the only valid politics,” then say so and cut the “museum” act.

What you are listening to is the culture war. Politics. Not scientific inquiry of any kind, and I’m not sure what a person would have to be to actually miss that point.

(or Why Waste All That Time Considering Evidence When You Can Announce Your Presuppositions and Be Done With It)

I’ve been monitoring a discussion at a prominent Calvinistic blog regarding Richard Dawkin’s defense of evolution in his new book, The Greatest Show On Earth.

I do a unit on the New Atheists in my Advanced Bible class, so I get several hours of Dawkins vs John Lennox each fall. I’m always amazed at how naive Dawkins is regarding any kind of religion that isn’t the backwoods, book burning variety. He seems to think that those who aren’t creationists or fundamentalists aren’t cooperating sufficiently with his certainties of what religion is doing to the world. I could easily do six posts on goofy conclusions Dawkins draws about religion, i.e. there is a logical connection between religion and violence, but there is not a single case where he can see a logical connection between atheism and violence. Mmmmkay.

On Darwinianism, however, I find Dawkins to be a voice worth listening to. He does understand the significance of Darwin’s theories- something that Christians who reject evolution should still appreciate- and he represents well that shrinking minority of atheists who believe science necessarily leads to atheism. [Continue reading]

UPDATE: Vilesidious has appeared at IM before, writing a young protege on the subject of Christian schools.

The transcript of the following lecture was secured through means that cannot be revealed, but as C.S. Lewis said, are readily available to those who learn a few basic techniques. The general conclusion is that the following lecture is part of an advanced demonic curriculum specializing in leading Christians to abandon their faith.

Transcript of Class Discussion. Advanced Tactics for Apostasy Seminar. Professor Vilesidious presiding.

If you would please turn to page 853 in the teal binder. We’re looking at the outline and readings regarding “Advanced Techniques for Apostasy.”

***noise, pages turning, conversation***

It would be important at the outset to continue emphasizing the focus of this seminar: moving professed and generally assumed Christians to the point of abandoning the faith. Those of you selected for this seminar should be completely aware that much of what you learned in the basic curriculum is of questionable value at this level. A survey of case studies, such as Ehrman 32 for example, will reveal that failure in the basics of preventing a profession of loyalty to the enemy is of often the preparation for greater success in abandoning a very public and influential Christian influence. For that reason, apostasy is far preferable for our Father’s overall goals for the human race. Those of you who are able to assimilate this material and put it into practice will find your advancement in the lowerarchy to be substantially accelerated.

My own experience in advanced apostasy is available to you in the syllabus. I would not want to leave the impression that the considerable accomplishments you will observe there were simply the result of academic study. Far from it. I have made apostasy a passion and I cannot imagine any more satisfying contribution to the Kingdom of Darkness than to accomplish the discouragement of hundreds, even millions on the basis of one person’s renouncing of faith in the enemy. [Continue reading]

Bill Kinnon shot this talk by Dr. Denis Alexander on “Evolution and the Church.” Dr. Alexander is with the Faraday Institute on Science and Religion. This is NOT a creation/evolution talk, but on how Christians might understand evolutionary biology from their own perspective. Heavy for some IM readers, but others will like it. Thanks to Bill Kinnon for the video. Power Point slides are now included in this footage.

Dr. Dennis Alexander on Evolution & the Church from Bill Kinnon on Vimeo.

This is most (not all) of an IM essay written during the early years of this web site (2001 I think.) My children were up to their ears in Ham/Hovind videos and I was feeling very alone in my own reading of Genesis. Things are better now, though the seeds of young earth creationism have borne their inevitable fruit. Hopefully, it will encourage some of you to continue thinking about these issues.

The Roots of My Problem

I have been reading creationist materials since high school. I bought The Genesis Flood when I was a very young Christian. I was converted in a fundamentalist church that contained very few college educated members, but they were aware of the challenge posed by the teaching of evolution. Darwin’s theories were skewered and preached against, in traditional fundamentalist fashion, by preachers who had never read Darwin or sat through a college biology course. [Continue reading]

UPDATE: Jeff’s comment is so profound it needs to be read by everyone:

The wedge contemporary evangelicals are driving between young and old is incredibly short sighted and deadly. Doesn’t the Bible itself say that the older should teach the younger? We’ve turned things around so that anything new (even if unproven) and appealing to the not yet mature, still developing young is trotted out as appropriate worship. More experienced, mature Christians who should be teaching the young about and sharing with them their great Christian heritage are instead asked to “get with it” or “get out.” The evangelical church will die if all it can do is try to keep up with secular culture and make its focus offering whatever the latest fads or glitz it can to “attract” the young as if the church were somehow dependent on a Christian advertising machine rather than God to draw people to Him.

I took Denise to morning mass at Stella Maris (”Star of the Sea”) Roman Catholic Church in Moultrieville, SC. Almost 50 in attendance, of every age. Two priests. Two acolytes and two altar boys. Traditionalist. Ad orientem. Eucharist offered in one kind and most didn’t receive it in the hand. Lots of other traditionalist stuff happening. Several Latin masses during the month. All the little things.

I’m watching a father bring his 5 year old (?) to mass, take his hand and dip it in the water, make the cross for him, then take him to his seat and show him how to genuflect. Teenagers around me- apparently on retreat- are immersed in the various actions of Catholic worship, as are all the worshipers of every age this morning. Of course, adults of every age. Plenty of men. At least half or more of the congregation was male. [Continue reading]

UPDATE: Comments closed.

I wrote a bit about this person earlier this month on the “Praying to Mary” discussion.

I’ve been teaching Ethiopian Orthodox students for as long as I’ve been teaching Bible- 17 years.

In all that time, I’ve only met a handful of students who could even begin to explain to me anything about their religion. One student was planning on becoming a priest and was quite knowledgeable and willing to provide information. The others were students who were fasting or practicing some other part of their faith and could explain their practice. I’ve had many good conversations about worship and especially the Christian year.

These students have been quite passive in their approach to the interaction of their faith with the Baptist evangelicalism of most of our faculty and staff. No one was out to convert anyone and no one balked at the Gospel our ministry communicates.

Until this year.

This year I’m experiencing something quite different- an Ethiopian Orthodox student zealous for her version of her faith and eager to challenge the Christianity of others over issues that are important to her. [Continue reading]