Is the Apostolic Preaching of the Cross "Insane?"

By Albert Mohler
AlbertMohler.com

What Dr. John repudiates is precisely what the Bible teaches. The Bible does not merely assert that Christ died on the cross for our sins -- it goes on to explain why this substitutionary death was necessary. In Romans 3, the Apostle Paul explains that God put forth Jesus on the cross as a propitiatory sacrifice for our sins. God's love is demonstrated in the fact that, even as his own righteousness demanded a perfect sacrifice for sin, He determined to send the Son as that perfect sacrifice. In Paul's words, this means that God is both just and the justifier. He rightly demanded an acceptable sacrifice in order to satisfy His wrath, but He also provided that same sacrifice. (more)

This Next Presidential Election 2/6: Direct and Dispose the Hearts of all Christian Rulers

By John Mark Reynolds
Scriptorium Daily

I hope to vote the way I pray, sensibly. Prayers are often for the ideal, but politics functions in the fallen world as it is.

My prayers inspire me to hope, but my vote must go beyond hope to deal with a fallen reality. I can pray for the not-yet, but must vote for the can-be-now.

It is this possible-now that guides my voting.

...

Rights come from the Creator, as the Declaration of Independence points out, and include the right to life, liberty, human flourishing (or happiness). Government should be limited as much as possible to the protection of these basic rights (to avoid as much as possible harming the conscience of people who dissent from truth).

Fortunately in most cases, there is little dissent about these basic human rights. In fact, if I were of a different religion or point of view it is perfectly possible (using natural law and reason) that I could come to many of the same conclusions. Oddly, this means a bad Christian could easily be a worse ruler than a good atheist.

...

A Christian naturally wishes to vote for someone who is also Christian (family ties!), but must vote for the person who has the ability to govern well. The most competent ruler is the most like Christ (as ruler), even if the candidate is an atheist. (more)

This Next Presidential Election 1/6: Voting as We Pray

By John Mark Reynolds
Scriptorium Daily

If Jesus is lord, then He must be lord of my vote. I am an American, but the King’s man first. My King Jesus wishes to see justice on His earth and I must vote (imperfectly and without hope of utopia until His return) in a measured way for this justice.
...

The fear, of course, for some non-Christian reading these words that this is the imposition of a theocracy.

Nothing could be further from the truth. God already reigns, of course, but in this age His followers are no more to be trusted than His foes. We are all fallen and to give too much power to any men (even those proclaiming themselves Christians) is foolish. (more)

This Next Presidential Election 3/6: Truly and Impartially Administer Justice (or Why Mitt Romney Should Never Be King of England!)

By John Mark Reynolds
Scriptorium Daily

We beseech thee also, so to direct and dispose the hearts of all Christian Rulers, that they may truly and impartially administer justice, to the punishment of wickedness and vice, and to the maintenance of thy true religion, and virtue.

This old English prayer nicely sums up the traditional Christian consensus on a praying man’s view of God and government. If our goal is to live what we pray, then it is helpful to reflect occasionally on those prayers.

...

Some people know the truth and live it. Some people reject the truth and still live it. In this life, there are very few people from whom I cannot learn. The implications for my vote this election is to look for a man that knows the limits of government and its nature. Will a man try to make the government the church? Will he try to impose on my family? Will he trespass the role of voluntary civil organizations (like the Boy Scouts)?

We pray that our rulers will be competent and even good examples but we should not confuse their job with that of the church or family. Government is not here to produce children, show us the way to Heaven, or even to make us happy.

...

Human happiness used to be understood (in the Declaration of Independence or Aristotle) as flourishing as a human. To be happy was to exercise all the gifts of mankind, especially the intellect. To do this one had to learn to be virtuous. Traditionally government acts to provide the space and the chance for this to happen. It cannot think for us (!) or make us happy, but exists to give us the chance to achieve this blessed state for ourselves.

...

But to simply cast out any person who has a view I think “weird” is sad, limiting, and dangerous.

It is sad because it lacks the humility that should cause us to be as charitable as possible in our view of our neighbor. It is limiting because it narrows our field of candidates too much in this present age. It is dangerous because it threatens to over expand the role of the Church or because it (perversely) implies that the government should be involved in so many things that I can only trust a man who agrees with me on nearly everything.

...

I am happy to evangelize my Mormon neighbor and argue with Mormon professors. I am happy to examine any candidates view of what it means to “truly and impartially administer justice.” I would not vote for an Orthodox Christian who got the Nicaean Creed right, but the Constitution of 1789 wrong. I could (though I don’t know if I will) vote for a Mormon who gets the Creed wrong, but justice right. (more)

He is Risen! The Testimony of the Women of Holy Week Is True!

By John Mark Reynolds
Scriptorium Daily

Don’t accept any nonsense about this story. Ask the most important question: “Is it true?”

If it is true, then death has been conquered.

To put it mildly that would be more important than anything else you will consider today.

Crucified men in the first century didn’t survive Roman torture and roll away the stone of their guarded grave to live again unless something amazing had happened.

First-century people were not credulous dupes, ready to believe in anything. If you doubt that, read the account in Mark again. The friends of Jesus had too little faith, not too much. They were afraid and did not understand what was happening. It was hard for the women of Easter to believe, because it was such a huge event.

...

Jewish women expected a resurrection at world’s end, but of all men and not just one. This empty tomb and this God-Man was unexpected.

...

If you don’t believe Jesus is alive, then you have failed to follow the facts to the proper conclusion.

Jesus actual resurrection is a fitting ending to His extraordinary life. It was unexpected at the time, but makes sense, perfect sense, in retrospect.

Extraordinary claims may require extraordinary evidence, but for this Man to conquer death was not so extraordinary.

He was extraordinary and this was just the final extraordinary thing He did.

Jesus actual resurrection explains the empty tomb, the compatible (but not identical) reports of eye witnesses, the existence of the Gospels, and the Church.

The Gospel accounts contain details that fit the times, make theological points, but are not overly theological. If their only purpose was theological, then why the details such as the name of Joseph of Arimathea (almost surely historical) who helped bury Jesus?

Skeptics like to point to the difficulty of a total harmony of the Gospel accounts, but scholars note that it can be done and that eye witness accounts are often difficult to harmonize. It is only the carefully fabricated lie that is perfect from one “witness” to the next. (more)

On Envy and Temperance

By Greg Peters
Scriptorium Daily

The medieval author Richard of St. Victor wrote, “The duty of the true preacher consists of two things; instruction in truth and exhortation to virtue” (The Mystical Ark, Appendix). In this post I hope to do the latter by continuing my musings on the vices and the virtues. Please recall that a virtue is a habitual and firm disposition to do good; specifically, to pursue good and to choose it in all concrete actions. The goal of the virtuous life is to become like God. A vice is the opposite of a virtue: doing what is bad instead of what is good, pursuing that which is against good and choosing to do it. The result of a vice is alienation from God. The virtues are those characteristics of a godly life that we must highly desire and greatly esteem.
...

Finally, the results of envy are something that we should not desire. Proverbs 14:30 tells us that “A heart at peace gives life to the body, but envy rots the bones.” Further, Job 5:2 says, “Resentment kills a fool, and envy slays the simple.” In light of this, what should be our response? Simply put, we need to obey the tenth commandment: “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his manservant or maidservant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor” (Exodus 20:17). By not coveting we do not give in to the vice of envy for “For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also” (Matthew 6:21). Also, we need to counter the vice of envy with the virtue of temperance.

Temperance is the virtue that moderates the attraction of pleasures and provides balance in the use of created goods. It ensures the will’s mastery over instincts and keeps desires within the limits of what is honorable. The temperate person directs the appetites of the flesh toward what is good and maintains a healthy discretion. As one ancient writer said, “Do not yield to every impulse you can gratify or follow the desires of your heart” (Ecclesiasticus 5:2) and “Do not let your passions be your guide, but restrain your desires” (18:30). In the New Testament, temperance is often called “moderation” or “sobriety.” For example, in his letter to Titus, Paul commands us “to live sober, upright, and godly lives in this world” (2:12). Likewise, 1 Corinthians 15:34a says, “Become sober-minded as you ought, and stop sinning” and 2 Timothy 4:5a says, “But you, be sober in all things.”

...

Recorded here is the account of the queen of Sheba’s visit to Solomon after hearing of the magnificence of the temple that Solomon had constructed. The queen was so amazed at what she saw that “she was overwhelmed” (v. 5). It is obvious from this passage that the queen herself was a very wealthy monarch. Yet, she was overwhelmed at Solomon’s temple. Surely, her temptation could have been to desire to have such a temple for herself. Or, out of desire, to attack the Israelite’s and make the temple her own property. Interestingly, she chose neither of these envious actions. Rather, she praised the Lord (v. 9) and “she left and returned with her retinue to her own country” (v. 13). You see, the queen of Sheba rejoiced with Solomon for the Lord’s blessing upon him and the nation of Israel. She did not become envious, she became expressively joyful. This is the attitude that we are to have when others are blessed by God. Instead of envying those whom God chooses to bless, we must rejoice with them. This demonstrates that we are temperate persons who are not giving in to the vice of envy. (more)

Fertility, Faith, & the Future of the West

A conversation with Phillip Longman
Christianity Today

It's fair to say that most self-described "progressives" don't agree with me that low fertility is a problem. Many environmentalists, for example, believe that fewer people means a cleaner environment. Other progressives suppose that a decline in population would increase the amount of food and other resources available to the poor. Many feminists, gays, and "childless by choice" people in general feel threatened by suggestions that society needs more children. And when it's pointed out that the lowest birthrates are generally found among the most "progressive" people, then the conversation gets really heated.

On all these counts, I believe progressives are in denial. Today in the United States, for example, we have far cleaner air and water than we did in the 1940s, when the population was just half its current size. That's no paradox. Population growth is a spur to more efficient and cleaner use of resources, so our cities are no longer choked with smoke from steam engines and our cars get far better mileage and are far less polluting. Similarly, population growth is what drove us as a society to find far more productive ways to grow food. Thanks to increased crop yields, per capita food production is higher than ever, even as world population surpasses 6 billion. At the same time, there is more forested land in the United States than in the 19th century because so much less acreage is needed for farmland.

Progressives also tend to forget that many of their positions on human reproduction, such as a "woman's right to choose," only won widespread support when fears of overpopulation began to pervade the culture in the 1960s and '70s. Until then, bans on abortion, birth control, and homosexuality, for example, were justified in many people's minds by fears of underpopulation, which left questions of human reproduction too important to be settled by individual "choice." They also forget that if progressives themselves "forget to have children" then the future belongs to people who have opposing values. Finally, progressives forget that without a growing population, such "crown jewels" of the welfare state as Social Security lose their financial sustainability. (more)