The central motivating factor in my ministry over the last ten years has been the need for Christians to engage the intellectual side of the faith with more confidence, hope, and joy. I began The Theology Program in 2001 which now is in hundreds of churches and has effected tens of thousands of people. I can barely keep up with the demands of this ministry as its need and potential becomes more evident each and every day.

The intellectual side of Christianity.

With all of this success, one inevitably finds those who continue to place much needed anchors in my mission. While I believe what I am doing has been given to me by God, I also understand that the intellect is not all there is. In fact, while I want to produce more confidence, hope, and joy in the lives of believers, I also want to instill a deep sense of humility. Theology done right should always produce a confident humility. Theology done wrong produces an ironically insecure emotional confidence that is made up of what I call “cut-and-paste” theology and apologetics (”just give me the answers, I don’t care how we get them”). Continue Reading »

Join us in reclaiming the mind for Christ. Start The Theology Program in your church.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Interesting observations Zach makes in light of some ways blogging can be counterproductive to the Christian community:

1. Practice writing. Writing is a skill just like anything else. The more you do the better you get. The ability to formulate ideas and thoughts in a concise and understandable way is a foundational facet of our civilization that I seek to improve in. The truth is though I don’t have that many great things to say (if ever), so I usually point to great things that others have said. But when I do choose write my own thoughts I find that this a valuable process to hone the skill of writing.

2. A place to document my thoughts. Oftentimes I don’t know how I feel about an issue until I actually articulate it in a way that someone else could read and understand (as I am doing right now). It forces me to think specifically and concretely about something as opposed to just have this amorphous blob of thinking about an issue rolling around in my brain. In terms of documentation, I also have a blog all about my kids that tracks their development. It functions like a baby book but better because I can upload pictures, videos and write out quickly and easily things that they said or did that we’ll want to remember in 20 years. For certain, grandparents who live hundreds of miles away greatly value this blogging.

Read the rest.

(There’s a link for you Zach )

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

I know that the title is provocative, but please understand that I am serious in this question. At this point, I believe that it is very difficult for Roman Catholics who hold to Transubstantiation (is there any other kind of Roman Catholic!) to find harmony with a basic principle in the Definition of Chalcedon. In other words, I believe that Catholics are at odds with some essential elements of orthodox Christology.

Having said that, it may be that I am misunderstanding things (this would not be a first).  So I write this post with the intention of informing my audience of a very intriguing issue, giving them a better look at Chalcedonian Christology, and giving an opportunity to Catholics to give an answer to this issue (if there are any that happen by—and there usually are).

I am going to explain the issue and I want all of you to hang with me through some deep waters. I will try to navigate you to a point where you understand why I believe (tentatively) that Catholics deny Chalcedon because of their view of Mass.

Component #1:

Orthodoxy has historically claimed that Christ is fully God and fully man. This is not an arbitrary pronouncement or belief, but is one that is central to an understanding of the Gospel.

Short history lesson. Continue Reading »

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

In the beginning, God created man. When he was created, he was pure and holy. He was created for a purpose. God, the one true sovereign and benevolent being, created man in order to give of His loving nature. But man was deceived by evil and fell into sin. This sin affected man and all of his offspring to the point that he was no longer able to serve God as he was created to. He hated God by nature. . .

But God did not abandon man. Nor did He abandon all the hopes and plans that He had for man. Instead, He made a promise. This promise involved a covenant to redeem man from his fall into sin and restore him to the dignity and hopes that He had originally desired. He told Eve (the first woman) that, despite the fall, He would send One who would crush the head of the serpent, even as the serpent crushed his heel (Gen. 3:15). This promise was to send a Redeemer who would, essentially, clean up the mess by undoing what they had done.

In order to accomplish this, many years later, He made another promise to an idol worshiper named Abraham. He promised Abraham that he was going to bless the world through him. He said that kings and rulers would come from him. Most importantly, He said that the Redeemer would come through his line. Through Abraham, God created a nation and called it Israel. To this nation, God made a covenant to be their God and to spread His Word through them. They were the entrusted vessels of God’s message. Through the nation of Israel, God further confirmed and extended His promise through a young shepherd boy named David. To David, God gave the kingdom of Israel. He also covenanted to send the Redeemer through David’s line.

In spite of the rebellion and constant betrayal of His chosen people, Israel, God covenanted yet again, and, again, further extended the blessing that began in the Garden. This time He said that He was going to change people’s hearts by making them become more like Him. In His words, “I will write my law upon their heart and I will be their God” (Jer. 31:31-33).

Five hundred years later, God sent the One whom He had covenanted to send, and this One, as it turned out, was His own Son. He was both everything that God is and everything that man was, yet without sin. To the dismay of many, He did not set up the Kingdom as they thought He came to do, but He first set up a Kingdom in the hearts of His people by dying on a cross and purchasing their redemption from sin and betrayal. After His death, He rose again, showing that the redemption was accomplished. He undid what Adam had done.

After His resurrection, He sent the Holy Spirit, the third Person of the Trinity, who is also everything that God is, to indwell all those who believed and followed the Redeemer, so that they would have power to spread the message of redemption. He entrusted to them the Gospel message, as it came to be known, and called them the Church.

The Church, made up of both Jews and Gentiles, is now the bearer of the Good News of God’s covenanted redemption. They are His representatives here on the earth. God the Son told the Church to tell others about Him until He comes back. When He comes back, He will then set up His Kingdom and destroy all evil and death, the final foe. The Church now eagerly awaits His coming, as they fight for the Kingdom.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

A guest post by Daniel Eaton at Theologica. Being from Dallas Seminary, we were breed to loath seeker churches. Yet I do have my thoughts as well that I will follow this up with. I look forward to your interaction.

I think there is a growing schism in the American church. The schism isn’t over theology, but methodology. A growing number of “seeker friendly” churches are on one side, and a firmly entrenched group of traditional churches are on the other. The increasing shrillness about the “seeker friendly” format somehow reminds me of church splits over what kind of music or musical instruments in the church. I think a lot of it comes down to a view that if it worked for my Grandad’s generation, then three hymns, a choir number, a sermon about the dangers in our society, and 27-stanzas of Just As I Am should be sufficient today. It’s the old “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” mentality.

But the problem is that it *is* broke. That format no longer appeals to the masses. That method is becoming harder and harder to use in order to get the message out. The sad truth is that the average tattooed or pierced unsaved person does not feel welcome or accepted if they attend the traditional church. It is an atmosphere of condemnation of those that don’t dress or look like everyone else there. This unsaved Seeker isn’t going to stick around. Instead, he is going to leave with a sense that the Christian church is full of a bunch of condemning hypocrites. Continue Reading »

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Fall 2008 Semester
please note, this is online students only

to find out more about the online program, go here

Spread the word!

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

I have heard this since I was a very young Christian. It seemed somewhat reasonable as it was explained to me by pastors in sermons and by Christians as they explained the seriousness of sin. The claim goes something like this:

All sin is so bad that even the smallest of sins deserves eternal punishment in hell. It does not matter if it is losing your temper at a lousy referee, not sharing your Icee, or speeding 36 in a 35, every sin deserves eternal torment in Hell. Why? Although it may seem unreasonable to us (as depraved as we are), it is fitting for a perfectly holy God who cannot be in the site of sin, no matter how insignificant this sin might seem to us. In fact, there is no sin that is insignificant to God. Because He is infinitely holy, beyond our understanding, all sin is infinitely offensive to Him. Therefore, the punishment for all sin must be infinite.

I have to be very careful here since I am going against what has become the popular evangelical way to present the Gospel, but I don’t believe this is true. Not only do I not buy it, I think this, like the idea that all sins are equal in the site of God, is damaging to the character of God, the significance of the cross, and I believe it trivializes sin. Let me explain. Continue Reading »

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

I know that it is very common within popular evangelicalism to say that all sins are equal in the sight of God. Most find this theological concept very appealing and accept it, I am afraid to say, without doing much homework. I think this tendency comes by means of two influences.

1) A reaction by Protestants against the Roman Catholic distinction between mortal sins (sins that kill justifying grace) and venial sin (sins of a lesser nature that do not kill justifying grace) and

2) a tendency within our church culture to find a way to say that we are all equally in need of God’s grace and that all sin is extremely serious in God’s eyes (which is true).

However, I don’t believe that all sin is equal in God’s sight. I also believe that telling people that it is does great damage to the character of God and the seriousness of certain sins. There are many reasons for this, but let me start with a reductio ad absurdum and them move to a biblical argument. Continue Reading »

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

If you are like me, you are concerned about the future of the church and its ability to define and distinguish itself (most particularly, the Evangelical church). While God is in control of all things, we have a responsibility as Christians to see to it that we are doing everything we can to discharge the Gospel in a faithful way. We are to make disciples, not simply converts.

We are suffering from the dumbing down of truth in favor of entertainment, professionalism, and a general apathy toward truth and intellectual discipleship. Being so concerned with what the outside world thinks the moment they enter the church, we have lost site of who they are years later.

We are scared of big words, concepts, and intellectual challenges because we fear that those who hear them will cry “arrogance” or will simply leave our gathering in favor of one that plays the game at a elementary level. We fear our passions believing that they will facilitate a separatist mentality that will not be accepted among our postmodern youth who value a pluralistic approach to truth rather than the previous generation’s exclusivism.

I am not saying that there is not value in entertainment. I like to laugh and have fun. I am not saying that we should not value the excellence of professionalism. We should do all things to the best of our ability to the glory of God. And I am not saying that we should not be sensitive to the culture and its general suspicion of all truth claims. We all have been burnt in the past. But when we live in fear of those whom we are supposed to lead, the leader becomes the follower and the follower becomes the leader.

more to come…

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

How does one determine if someone is a heretic? Is this a word that should be used today when Christianity seems to be so pluralistic with regards to levels of commitment, beliefs, and practices?

Today’s theological word of the day (which I write ) says this about heresy:

“An opinion, belief, or doctrine that is in variance to an established belief of a particular tradition. In Christianity, a heresy can have a historic value (more serious) or traditional value. In other words, a belief can be considered heretical to Baptists (e.g. paedeobaptism), but is not heretical in the historic sense. To be a historic heresy, it would have to be in variance to that which has been believed by the majority of Christians of all time (e.g. the deity of Christ).”

Because many of us use the word heresy in such a cavalier or domineering way, it has begun to lose its value. At least once a day, it seems, I hear someone calling someone else a heretic for something that is not really deserving of the term. These will say someone is a heretic for being too strong of a Calvinist, for believing theistic evolution, for saying that drinking alcohol is not a sin, for denying inerrancy, or for denying their version of free will. Soon, I am sure I will hear that jumping too high on the trampoline will be considered heresy. Continue Reading »

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Here is the Apologetics course that Rob Bowman taught last semester. Please feel free to listen or download. It is the entire course! (here is the syllabus if you want it)

Enroll in the Methods of Apologetics online course taught by Rob Bowman that starts next week.

 

 Introduction to Apologetics Session 1a [47:28m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (687)

 

 Introduction to Apologetics Session 1b [38:31m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (425)

 

 Introduction to Apologetics Session 2a [46:43m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (418)

 

 Introduction to Apologetics Session 2b [45:13m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (373)

 

 Introduction to Apologetics Session 3a [50:41m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (408)

For some reason the podpress plugin will not let me post them all the same way so the rest are just links here: (right-click to download) Continue Reading »

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

1. Strong teaching of Scripture: This is of first importance. If the seminary does not graduate students who know the Bible and know it well, then they don’t emphasis its importance or do not have a competent faculty to do so. This usually involves the combined effort of three departments: Biblical Studies, New Testament, and Old Testament. The Biblical Studies department will take one though the entire Bible, book by book. You will not only read through the entirety of Scripture, but you will learn each books purpose, structure, genre characteristics, and argument. In the New and Old Testament departments you will learn how to do “exegesis.” Exegesis involves more detailed interpretive issues including a study of the text in the original languages (Greek for the New Testament, Hebrew for the Old Testament). Without these, can it even be called a seminary?

2. Balanced Theology Department: One of the biggest problems with many seminaries is that they don’t have balance in their presentation of theology. Their agenda is to make you a particular type of theologian. I don’t have too much of a problem with a seminary having a confession or reputation of holding to a particular tradition or sub-tradition (e.g. Reformed, Baptist, Dispensational). The problem arises when their passions for this tradition cause them to skew the theological landscape to their favor. This type of intellectual dishonesty has no place in the training of leaders. The theology department must be confident enough to give people a balanced perspective, representing all relevant views with the clarity of its adherents. By doing so the seminary creates an atmosphere where true learning and true conviction can take place. It also keeps its graduates from becoming unnecessarily divisive over non-essential issues, keeping the focus on the Gospel. The Holy Spirit will create the convictions for his purpose when truth is taught with balance. The seminary needs to trust him enough to do so. Continue Reading »

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

For those of you who want to take the Online Introduction to Theology course but don’t have the money to enroll ($100), we have scholarships that have been donated by some generous donors. These are available on a first-come-first-serve basis. Tell your friends or anyone you know that might be interested. Classes start next week!

To find out more about this course, go here.

Contact Carrie Hunter to inquire.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Earlier this summer, Brian Burgess, our Minister of Outreach, taught a two-part series on “Things God Never Said About Evangelism.” He did an outstanding job and I encourage you to listen to his remarks from both messages. In last night’s Equipping University, we learned that one of the things God never said is “Since I am sovereign, I don’t need your help in evangelism.” Of course, this raised a few issues and probably not a few hackles. One question was asked early and any reformed theologian worth his salt knows exactly which question it was:  “Well, if God is sovereign and He has already chosen who will be saved, then why should I bother to witness?”

When Brian and I discussed this over lunch prior to the class, I told him that no orthodox believer is really going to think God ever said such a thing. Now, a hyper-Calvinist will believe that ridiculous statement but Hyper-calvinism is not Christian. By the way, a hyper-Calvinist is not a Calvinist who really believes the doctrines of Calvinism. With that in mind, we must note that believers will fall into different categories as to WHY they think God would never utter that sentence. Some would say that God is sovereign but has freely “given up” (not the best choice of words) part of that sovereignty to ensure that man engages Him of man’s own libertarian free will. I, on the other hand, would reject that sentence because while God is sovereign He gives up none of it. Yet that same extensive sovereignty in no way interferes with that fact that man is responsible for his sins. Let these three statements be true: God is sovereign in all of salvation, man is responsible, and Christians are to witness and pray. Continue Reading »

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Here is an mp3 of the sermon I preached this Sunday at Crossroads Grace Community Church (what a great church!).

I will follow up with the lesson that I taught during the seminar “Orthodoxy and the Emerging Church.”

Hope you enjoy.

 

 The Problem of Evil, Suffering, and Pain [47:59m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (4703)

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Here is an email question that I just received with the response to follow:

Good Afternoon:
I am writing to you under emotional pangs, as I wrestle with the Scriptures, and what I hear from certain others who are Christian.

The husband of a friend of mine committed suicide. My friend, I know well, and her love and defense of the Scriptures. But I only know of her husband’s belief by what she tell me, and his attendance to church. She said he prayed a lot and loved God, her and their children.

But he yielded to suicide. And from what I understand, this was a long term fight to avoid that. He subsequently said he was going for walk, and he was found in a park, after shooting himself.

Here is a man who “claimed” to love Jesus, but his actions to me, deny his having made Jesus Lord and Master over his life. Rather, he must have had Satan as master.

I used to believe in “free will” but after a long study of the Sovereignty of God, I changed my mind. That study took several years. So I can’t say this man had free will unless he remains outside of God’s Lordship, where he does what the flesh does…. denies the power, promises, and love that God has living within us.

The pastor at the services said what my friend said, he is in heaven, due to the Grace of God.

But how can a person be tempted to kill himself then actually follow through with it, if he has Life in him? And Hope. These reign over Death and Hell.

My Response

Thanks for the questions. These are very good questions, and necessary to struggle with.

You said: “But how can a person be tempted to kill himself then actually follow through with it, if he has Life in him?”

How could David have killed Uriah? How could Peter have denied Christ. How could John have fallen down and worshiped an angel? How could Paul struggle with sin the way he does in Roman 7? Why would Paul exhort Christians to “walk in the spirit and therefore not carry out the deeds of the flesh” if it was a foregone conclusion that Christians cannot walk in the flesh? How could the Galatians (whom Paul considers “brethren”) have turned back toward the law after knowing Christ? How could the Corinthians live as spiritual babes, living in strife, jealously, and envy? Continue Reading »

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Just in case you wanted to know, there is a Christians for beer facebook page.

Also, be sure to join the Reclaiming the Mind Ministries and Parchment and Pen facebook pages.

If you have yet to figure out what Facebook is for, don’t ask me. I just join when people ask and approve friend request of people I don’t know!

Oh, one last thing…check out the redesigned Christians in Context blog. Nice!

I will be out of town all weekend so keep things nice and don’t forget to go to Theologica.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

In a previous post I described the five ways Christians can evidence emerging characteristics. One of them was to “emerge ecclesiologically.” This is the way I described it:

This characterizes an attempt or desire to return to some traditional elements of the Christian faith that draw upon a more experience based worship. Many times this will be evidenced by a less formal structure of gatherings or formal church time, allowing freedom of expression without the traditional restraints of more program oriented gatherings.

Examples:

• Less tendency to have a traditional (post-reformation) church program structure
• Movement toward house churches
• Disdain for mega-churches
• Lord’s supper/Eucharist practiced every week
• Artwork as expressions of faith
• Candles and incense
• Traditional prayers and creeds
• Prayer walks

Here is a quote that I found interested out of Stories of Emergence. In speaking about today’s typical church service, the author says:

“Today’s modern service is orchestrated so nothing disturbing, uncomfortable, controversial, or shocking occurs. The music is edited to eliminate mediocre musicians or off-key singer. Solo numbers are assigned to the best. Prayer requests are screened or relegated to the bulletin where they can be carefully worded. Testimonies are screened to guarantee they won’t make anyone uncomfortable or go on for too long. They sermon is inviolate. No interruptions are allowed, questions can’t be asked, assumptions can’t be challenged, disagreements can’t be voiced.” (Stories of Emergence, p. 17) Continue Reading »

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

I received this email today. It is a story about a Christian, named Virginia who left the faith after 23 years.

Here it is along with my comments:

“Christianity thrives on human suffering and yearn for community. It was precisely under these circumstances that I committed myself to Christ at 19 years old, when my family got into serious trouble — father filed for bankruptcy, my parents separated.”

Yearn for community? This is what pushed her over the edge to become Christian 23 years ago? I yearn for community as well, but if we become Christians because of this, aren’t we setting ourselves up for a fall? Isn’t the circumstance that should cause us to become Christians the reality of our sin, the Cross, and the conviction of the resurrection of the God-man? Community may or may not be a continuous by-standard of our beliefs. It is the beliefs and trust that provide the genesis of our Christianity.

With all the yearning for care and love upon the utter shattering of my family, my high school pals who were Christians befriended me.

The illustration of need for community again.

I began fervently witnessing Christ, became a cell group leader on Bible study, witnessed to friends and relatives about Jesus and the salvation, using the tracts supplied from my church.

I was active in church and in my college years, also leaded evangelizing activities witnessing Jesus. However, I sensed in the entire ethos of this set of belief, some incompleteness.

I would imagine that the “incompleteness” comes from a rising realization of “cognitive dissonance.” Cognitive dissonance describes a physiological condition where a person’s beliefs are in contradiction to other beliefs or the way they live. Often people’s habitual patterns do not harmonize with their intellectual convictions. In Christianity, it is often the case where people live according to a Christian worldview due to traditional bents without ever experiencing a true cognitive or intellectual conversion to such. This produces a dichotomous life of dissonance—inconsistency in their beliefs and practices. I would imagine that this is the case with Virginia. Continue Reading »

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

By Jeff Spry . . .

Bookmark this page for some great theological resources. Thanks Jeff!

________________________

The various creeds of Christendom have aided the Christian church in the formulation of our faith through the centuries. They are not the Bible and they have never been considered equal with Scripture in any way by any orthodox believer. They are systematic commentaries on biblical doctrines. They are not authoritative unless they truly represent the teachings of sacred Scripture.  Any teaching which is orthodox concerning the Sacred Scriptures should be heeded by all for all time.

It is often remarked that creeds should not be held to or heeded because they are not authoritative, and not inspired by God. However, the history of the church and the creedal formularies they have made were never thought to be inspired in the first place, but rather to define and express cogently what is inspired.  If the Bible teaches that all men must wear white shirts, then the creedal statement of faith which explains this succinctly is attempting to teach Christians that the Bible says this, and that any false teaching (such as all men must wear black shirts) is erroneous.  The Inspired Scriptures are commented on by every able and true minister of the Word each Lord’s Day, but that does not make their sermons inspired.  Christians read books defining certain theological concepts but that does not make the book inspired, just helpful to the edification of the Christian. Continue Reading »

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!