Dear Friends, readers, and ministry partners,

Reclaiming the Mind Ministries is close to opening its first local branch that is devoted to theological education!! I don’t know of anything in the last ten years that has brought our ministry team more excitement. Please allow us to explain.

Introducing CREDO - HOUSE OF THEOLOGY

Credo - House of Theology is a proposed new headquarters in Edmond Oklahoma that would not only facilitate our current ministry, but also allow us to take the ministry to the next level in so many ways without falling outside of our current monthly budget.

Think ”evangelical theological hub.” Better, think of Francis Schaffer’s L’Abri Fellowship and you will catch some of the vision. Here is what it will be used for:

The Theology Program: An evangelically neutral place to hold The Theology Program courses. This is greatly needed as people are often more receptive to come to a facility like this rather than a particular church.
Reclaiming the Mind Headquarters: The need for the ministry to be permanently planted in a stable physical location cannot be overstated. Existing in churches and virtual campuses over the years has stabilized our ministry, but we need a home-base to organize our efforts more strategically.
Pastoral Training: Training local pastors who have never had the chance to go to seminary or who desire continuing pastoral theological education.
Children’s Theology: Teaching children theology as a co-op program, especially valuable for home-schoolers. Edmond has a very large homeschooling market which is always looking for avenues of education that can supplement its teaching with a biblical worldview.

Special Seminars: Multiple events will be held bringing in the best speakers on the most important topics from all over the country. Credo House will be a place for local Converse with Scholars events!
Broadcasting and Recording: For some time now a place has been needed where new theological material can be produced. From Theology Unplugged to new courses in theology for children, Credo House will serve as a central broadcasting and recording area for all local Reclaiming the Mind Ministry events.
Theological Fellowship: The Credo House will be open all day (and many nights) for anyone to come in have a cappuccino and discuss theology. The theological library will be available for all.
Theological Store: From The Theology Program DVDs, systematic theologies, Greek New Testaments, theological pens and t-shirts, to our recommended theological books and DVDs, the Credo House will have a humble selection of materials that you probably cannot find elsewhere. This will serve as a resource for our students.
Volunteer Home Base: While we have dozens of virtual volunteers all over the world, we need  a home base to bring some more order to our operations. We already have many local volunteers (lay-people and church leaders) who are willing to put much time and effort into the Credo House. This group will ensure that people will be able to focus their energy on their God-given gifts.

Many pastors and church leaders in the area including Sam Storms and Mark Hitchcock are partnering with us and will serve as founding members and help direct the project.

Bringing theology back into prime-time is a desire of Reclaiming the Mind Ministries!

Our ministry has a long track record of theological integrity. Our commitment is to the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the teaching of the Scriptures, believing that the incarnate truth of Christ in the Gospel changes lives at the most profound level. But we must pursue this with all of our hearts, souls, and minds (Matt. 22:27). This will be a place that is truly committed to reclaiming the mind for the glory of Jesus Christ.

We need your help.

The first proposed Credo House can be opened in Edmond, Oklahoma in early 2009 but ONLY if we can raise the funds needed to complete the project quickly.

For this reason, for a short time, we are offering special memberships to all who join us in this mission:

Special Offer:

Charter Membership to Credo

A donation of $1000 to the project.

• Lifetime access to all the courses of The Theology Program offered at Credo (or anywhere Michael Patton is teaching, including online). This includes family members (children only until they are 20 years of age).
• Full access to the fellowship house including library, coffee bar, and a $50 gift certificate to the store for TTP materials.

Charter Theologue Membership to Credo:

A donation of $3000 or more to the project.

• Lifetime access to all the courses of The Theology Program offered at Credo (or anywhere Michael Patton is teaching, including online). This includes their family (children only until they are 20 years of age).
• Full access to the fellowship house including library, coffee bar, and a $50 gift certificate to the store for TTP materials.
• Lifetime access to all electives and seminars that are offered at Credo (or online). This includes their family (children only until they are 20 years of age).

These special memberships will only be offered for a limited time.

In order to get this project secured, $35,000 in pledges is required.

With that said, your quick response to this message using the email below with a commitment to pledge for one of these memberships being offered would be greatly appreciated. You will be contacted shortly thereafter for your donation.

If you have any questions at all, please don’t hesitate to contact me at michaelp@reclaimingthemind.org or call at 405-410-3039.

Below is description, complete with pictures, graphs, and purpose.

Included:

• Office space
• Recording studio
• Coffee bar
• Large presentation area
• Multiple lounge areas
• Library/study area
• Theological Store

Don’t fail to read the “uses of the Credo House.” It will give you a better understanding of our vision.

You can click on the image to enlarge.

*Please note, this is a five-year lease that our board is proposing, not a purchase. The cost for the build-out cannot be rolled into the lease without extending our budget beyond our comfort level. That is why we need the initial funds for the build out.

We hope that this will serve as a model for Credo Houses all over the country.

God bless,

Michael Patton
President, Reclaiming the Mind Ministries

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!

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

Having just come from the annual Evangelical Theological Society (ETS) conference, I want to propose something for discussion concerning the doctrinal statement currently ascribed to by ETS. Whether you are familiar with ETS or not, this conversation will be beneficial to you, especially my students.

First, I want to make clear that I hold to inerrancy. I sign with good conscience the ETS doctrinal statement which is founded upon a confession of inerrancy. I have written on this issue here on this blog and defended what I call “reasoned inerrancy” as a hermeneutical motif for Christian hermeneutics. Therefore, this is not a post about any problem that I have with the doctrine itself.

Second, I want to make it clear that this is not a formal proposal of any sort. Although I am a voting member of ETS, I do not have any aspirations right now of taking this any further than this blog discussion.

Having been involved in ETS for the last eight years, I have come to appreciate what it is about. At least what I think its original and abiding intent is.

From the ETS website:

“Founded in 1949, the Evangelical Theological Society (ETS) is a group of scholars, teachers, pastors, students, and others dedicated to the oral exchange and written expression of theological thought and research.”

“Oral exchange and written expression of theological though and research.” What this means is that ETS, while decidedly Evangelical, desires to provide a forum where Christian scholars can exchange research for peer review. ETS is not an official Evangelical magisterium in any sense, and it should never be seen as such. It is simply a place to “do” Evangelical scholarship. Continue Reading »

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

One of the dozens of reasons I am a Calvinist has to do with the tension that is allowed within the Calvinistic system that is not allowed in other options. You see, the issues of Calvinism primarily center on one issue: predestination. While the sovereignty of God has its place, it does not ultimately determine where one lands. An Arminian can believe that God is sovereign to a similar degree as a Calvinist. But an Arminian cannot believe in predestination the same way as Calvinists.

Both Calvinists and Arminians believe in predestination. In other words, whether or not God predestines people is not the issue. All Bible believing Christians believe this doctrine. The issue has to do with the basis of this predestining.

The Calvinist says that God’s predestination has no founding in the predestined in any sense. God did not choose people based on any merit, intrinsic or foreseen. This is called unconditional predestination because there are no conditions in man that need to be met. It does not mean that God did not have any reason for choosing some and not others, but that the reason is not found in us. Continue Reading »

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

EDIT: PLEASE NOTE ADDITION AT THE BOTTOM

Considering the activity on my recent blog posts and Theology Unplugged podcasts on the will of God and Barack Obama, I though I would squeeze this lemon one last time (and pour some salt). No, that does not mean take a shot of tequila before reading this!

My basic argument was that whatever faults one may be inclined to find in Barack Obama, he was elected president. In this, it was, in some very real sense, the will of God.

While I was a singles’ pastor for six years, I often dealt with issues from those whom I had married. I had these issue in both premarital counseling and post-marital counseling. In post-marital counseling things got interesting. I would often sit in the presence of a discouraged wife or husband whose marriage was less than happy. For some, things just weren’t clicking. For others, the problems were more serious. Much of the time people would suggest that they had made a mistake. In their mind, they simply married the wrong person and their “soul-mate” was still out there waiting.

These type of things quickly become a matter of theology—very practical theology. The question is this: Is it possible to have married the “wrong” person? Continue Reading »

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

1. Cosmological Argument: Also called the argument from universal causation or the argument from contingency, the cosmological argument is probably the most well know and well loved among theistic apologists. The basic argument is that all effects have an efficient cause. The universe and all that is in it, due to its contingent (dependent) nature, is an effect. Therefore, the universe has an cause. But that  cause cannot be an effect or one would have to explain its cause. Therefore, there must be an ultimate cause, an unmoved mover, an uncaused cause that began the process. This cause must transcend time and space in order to transcend the law of cause and effect. This transcendent entity must be personal in order to willfully cause the effect. This ultimate cause is God.

2. Teleological Argument: (Gr. telos, “end” or “purpose”) This is also know as the argument from design. This argument moves from complexity to a necessary explanatory cause for such complexity. The universe has definite design, order, and arrangement which cannot be sufficiently explained outside a theistic worldview. From the complexities of the human eye to the order and arrangement of the cosmology, the voice of God is heard. Therefore, God’s existence is the best explanation for such design. God is the undesigned designer.

3. Moral Argument: This argument argues from the reality of moral laws to the existence of a necessary moral law giver. The idea here is that if there are moral laws (murder is wrong, selfishness is wrong, self-sacrifice is noble, torturing innocent babies for fun is evil), then there must be a transcendent explanation and justification for such laws. Otherwise, they are merely conventions that are not morally binding on anyone. Since there are moral laws, then there must be a moral law giver who transcends space and time. This moral law giver is God. Continue Reading »

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

A 16th century German sect of Anabaptists led by Nicholas Storch who believed that all knowledge, even knowledge of the alphabet, prevents people from a true knowledge of God. Abecedarians believed that God would provide all necessary understanding through divine means such as visions and ecstatic experiences. According to them, all theology and “academic” learning amounted to an idolatrous abandonment of the Christian faith. Their name, Abecedarians, comes from their denial of the ABCs.

Working in my field, I often wonder if we don’t have more modern day Abecedarians in the Evangelical church than we know.

What do you think?

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

From The Theological Word of the Day

(Gk. theos, God + tokos, “parturition, childbirth”)

Theotokos is a historic designation given to Mary in relation to her role as the mother of Christ. Theotokos means “God bearer.” This designation was approved by the third Ecumenical Council held at Ephesus in 431. Nestorius apposed the use of the term theotokos, preferring christotokos (”Christ-bearer), believing that Mary was the mother of the human nature of Christ, not the divine nature. Most, however, felt that this would divide Christ into two persons. Led by Cyril of Alexandria, the council chose theotokos to acknowledge a belief in the dual-nature of Christ. It is important to note that this designation was not meant to venerate Mary, but to make a theological statement about Christ. He must be fully God and fully man if man is to have redemption.

Read Cyril’s letter to Nestorius defending theotokos.

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

Question 52, Article 4

Whether Christ was the cause of His own Resurrection?

Objection 1. It seems that Christ was not the cause of His own Resurrection. For whoever is raised up by another is not the cause of his own rising. But Christ was raised up by another, according to Acts 2:24: “Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the sorrows of hell”: and Romans 8:11: “He that raised up Jesus Christ from the dead, shall quicken also your mortal bodies.” Therefore Christ is not the cause of His own Resurrection.

Objection 2. Further, no one is said to merit, or ask from another, that of which he is himself the cause. But Christ by His Passion merited the Resurrection, as Augustine says (Tract. civ in Joan.): “The lowliness of the Passion is the meritorious cause of the glory of the Resurrection.” Moreover He asked the Father that He might be raised up again, according to Psalm 40:11: “But thou, O Lord, have mercy on me, and raise me up again.” Therefore He was not the cause of His rising again.

Objection 3. Further, as Damascene proves (De Fide Orth. iv), it is not the soul that rises again, but the body, which is stricken by death. But the body could not unite the soul with itself, since the soul is nobler. Therefore what rose in Christ could not be the cause of His Resurrection. Continue Reading »

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

As a Evangelical Protestant, I come from a tradition that believes strongly in the priesthood of all believers. What does this mean? Among other things it means that I reject a formal sacerdotal system. What is this?

From the Theological Word of the Day:

“Sacerdotalism

(Lat. sacerdos, “priest”)

Sacerdotalism is the belief in an established hierarchy that separates man from God. In such a system the priesthood stands as an essential mediator between God and man. This priesthood, according to sacerdotalists, is a necessary component in worship, receiving communion, confessing sin, baptism, and other acts of administering grace. This “caste” system is generally rejected by most Protestants who traditionally hold to the doctrine of the “priesthood of all believers” (1 Pet. 2:5). Protestants believe that the only mediator between God and man is Christ (1 Tim. 2:5). Advocates of sacerdotalism reference the priesthood established in the Old Testament which was sacerdotal. Opponents will emphasize the difference between the New Testament church and the Old Testament theocracy, believing that the Old Testament sacerdotal system is completely fulfilled in Christ and, therefore, no longer necessary (Heb. 10:19-20).”

The priesthood of all believers is primarily illustrated as the veil of the temple was rent from top to bottom (Matt. 27:51), symbolizing the fulfillment and overshadowing of the old temporary sacerdotal system. Now, you and I as believers don’t need any representation to God other than the God-man, Jesus Christ.

What does this mean?

Continue Reading »

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

This is saying the same thing I said a few weeks ago about a demotivated work force. Punish the rich and you may not get your beer at all.

Source Unknown (if you wrote it, claim it).

Our Tax System Explained: Bar Stool Economics

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that’s what they decided to do.

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. ‘Since you are all such good customers,’ he said, ‘I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20.’ Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. Continue Reading »

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

Most of you would agree without any argument that one of the greatest crisis that American Christianity faces today is nominal Christianity. If not, you should!

Nominal Christianity is defined by those who proclaim the name Christian, yet remain uncommitted in any real sense. One of the distinctions that the term “evangelical” has sought to claim over the last fifty years is just the opposite of nominalism. Evangelicals have hoped to distinguish themselves as those that not only believe the essential truths of historic Christianity, but live according to those beliefs. Although the relevance of the term “evangelical” as a bearer of this distinction is the subject of great debate, the understanding of its opposite, nominalism, is still a problem. (Although I would credit the problems within Evangelicalism not only to commitment, but to a deteriorating distinction in our worldview).

The nominalist is very difficult to understand.

Some who are nominal Christians are such and don’t recognize that they are bearing a name without bearing the beliefs associated with that name. In other words, “Christian” is not a very distinct term anymore. One can believe themselves to be a Christian because they are American, have been baptized, go to church, have a conservative worldview, or vote Republican. This type of nominal Christian may live for years without ever really understanding what it means to be a Christian. They may have never made a personal commitment to Jesus Christ in any sense.

Some who are nominal Christians know themselves to be such and just don’t know how to make the “turn” to a passionate commitment to Christ. Frustration, confusion, doubt, skepticism, and just a general lack of passion can all be seen as symptoms of this type of nominalism. I know of someone who is very close to me who simply cannot understand why they don’t have as much commitment to Christ as they do to other things that fill their thoughts. Nominalism is best expressed by a lack of commitment, or better, commitments that are more important to them than their commitment to God.

In your experience among the people you know who are nominal in their commitment to God (and this could be you), what do you believe the reasons are?

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

Life often seems to be a series of dichotomistic events that don’t harmonize with each other. What do I mean? Sometimes it seems that it is raining in the front yard while sunny in the back. Sometimes our lives seem to be so full of joy and success in certain restricted areas while painful and full of sadness in others.

My life has been such for some time now. For the past five years the sun has not exposed its light in my front yard, but when I go to the back yard, there is not a cloud in sight. These are two areas of my life that are at odds. My family situation starting with my sister who took her life five years ago and my mother who’s mind has been lost due to the aneurysm three years ago is dark and sad. My dad is falling now. Each time I step out into the front yard, the storms continue ferociously. I keep looking for a break in the clouds, but it never comes. Depression, anxiety, fatigue, and hopelessness fill the atmosphere. The smell is a smell of death. The mourning delayed turned mourning denied provided by my mother’s condition keeps the clouds overhead in great anticipation, but alludes my hopes of the security her death would provide were it to come. In these conditions, I understand the Psalmist’s cry and contend with him in anxiety:

Psalm 22:1-2 My God, my God, why have You forsaken me? Far from my deliverance are the words of my groaning. O my God, I cry by day, but You do not answer; And by night, but I have no rest.

If I am able to separate myself from the perpetual hopelessness of the happenings in the front yard, I can go to the back and see a different perspective altogether. The clouds of pain are not to be found. God’s joyful presence and power are continually evident here. I walk out into the backyard each day. I find the fruit of labors changing people’s lives and encouraging souls through ministry. As well, my immediate family bring me such a joy and they are all healthy. In these conditions, I understand the Psalmist’s praise and contend with him with confidence: Continue Reading »

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

I am quite disturbed by this video. Not simply because of its obvious liberal appeal to emotions but because of its misguided glorification and present appeal to an unprepared coming leadership.

Let me explain through a few observation:

Could some one tell me how on earth that these people are already “poised to lead”? This is obviously about a young generation. In 2016 they will be of voting age. I actually had to look up “poised” in the dictionary because I thought that I had been using it wrong for years. Here is what it said, “marked by balance or equilibrium; absolutely ready.” Say what? Excuse me but can I ask what is in your pipe?

I would really like to know what is this generation’s definition of wisdom is. To whom can we credit for their “poising”? Are they born “poised”?

Why aren’t these kids asking for mentors rather than making an implied claim that they should be the mentors of everyone else? I would rather the video have these kids saying “Could someone please educate me. We need mentors, guides, and fathers and mothers. We don’t think that Hollywood academy is the best mentorship program.

This whole ad is, in my opinion, a good example of an argumentum ad populum. (Hey, I just wrote about that last night). We should listen to (heel) to the ideas of this generation under 18? I am glad that no one, much less a whole country, bowed to my ideals at 16. God help us if they did.

Will these people be looking back in thirty years with red faces because they thought they had everything figured out, but now that they have lived a few years they can see that there are bigger issues?

Besides all this, I seriously doubt that this is representative of the millennial generation. If they are truly concerned about these things to the neglect of others, I am sure that some other group is behind it (you define the group). It seems very manipulative.

Don’t get me wrong, I am not saying that these are not important issues, or that any voice is irrelevant, but I promise you that you won’t find the little karate girl talking about this stuff without mass indoctrination. And . . . she does not really care right now even with the indoctrination.

Anyone of these children worried about the breakdown of the family, the divorce rate, declining morals, relativism, chemical dependency, or the 115,000 children that are being killed in their mother’s womb every day? If they were, I did not catch that. If they are not, please make this video go away.

Am I missing something or am I just in a right wing mood, suffering from my own adolescent indoctrination?

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

Though I question the theology of using a Mac for anything and I question the salvation of those who use anything Apple, we at Reclaiming the Mind Ministries have caved to peer pressure and committed a sin that we hope God will use for his glory . . . (greater good theology)

The Theology Program is now on ITunes—in its MP3 entirety.

Truthfully, this is the best one stop way to get the entire MP3 library downloaded and on your . . . ahem . . . IPod.

Here is a link: http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=288947192

Also, don’t forget to give TTP a review while on ITunes.

As well (more exciting news) . . .

You can access the entire Theology Program, videos, MP3s, Workbooks, and all from one page. Here it is: http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/ttp/media.

Please spread the word.

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

I often tell the story during my Introduction to Theology class of an experience that I had that deeply implicated me and has affected the way that I “listen” to God’s movements in my life. It concerns an event that happened in 2003 with my sister Angie. It has to do with how experience can seem to say one thing, but be very misleading.

When my sister was sick with depression, the entire family was perpetually in fear of what she might do to herself. Her depression overcame her literally overnight. She was fine on a Thursday, never having experienced depression and anxiety before, then Friday morning she was a different person. She said to me on Friday, “Michael, I don’t know what has happened. Something is the matter with my brain. I think that I have gone insane. I can’t think right and I don’t think it will ever change.” After a few hours, her conversation continued, ”This is just the way I am now and I am so scared that Drew [her two year old son] will live the rest of his life with his mother in an insane asylum. I don’t think I can live with that.” I did not take her too seriously. “Angie,” I said, ”it will be over tomorrow. Don’t be ridiculous.”

When it was not over the next day, we tried to continue to encourage her. On Monday of the next week, her “episode” had not ceased. My mother called me from Oklahoma and told me that she had been unable to get a hold of Angie all day and was scared that she might have “done something to herself.” Since Angie lived only fifteen minutes from me in Texas, I was the man to go look for her. I drove over to her house and, to make a long story short, found her overdosed on pills in her room. She survived, but the depression survived as well.

Over the next year and a half, I had many calls from my mother to try and find Angie. We often lost contact with her during the day and we would panic thinking she was going to take another attempt at her life. All and all, I had to go over to her house seventeen times to see if she was alive. In great dread, I would always imagine how I might find her dead. Continue Reading »

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

I was watching football with some people this weekend. This is what I do . . . don’t bother me on Saturdays (unless OU is doing bad then I am too depressed to watch any football). I had a fellow whom I have been coming to know over the last few of months join us for the game over at my sister’s house. He is an outgoing guy who seems to be very genuine. He is not a Christian, but comes to me with religious questions each time he and I are together. Once he gets a few too many beers in him, I become the Pope . . . at least to him.

He is different. He is very different. Not so much because he is an odd fellow, but because he has absolutely no knowledge of Christianity beyond the basic folklore you catch on TV shows and the world news. When we talk, I find that I am having to rethink my approach each time. It is not a matter of dumbing things down (for he like to talk deep theology), but it is a matter of making sure that I am not assuming a marraige to the Christian way of thinking that I am so used to assuming. Christianity does not even form the background music to his worldview anthem. I am finding this more and more common.

As we were talking, he said that he needed to get high. He left his pot out in the car so he had to get up to go get it. He asked me with hardly a hesitation, “Do you get high?” I politely declined his invitation and he was back within fifteen minutes.

Maybe it was because I was having some beers while watching the game, but he did not assume anything on me—the religious guy he was talking to—either. We were both building a relationship without any assumptions. I think that this was the biggest shock that I had. Christians and non-Christians alike are losing their stereotypical binding to a passing “Christian culture.” We are starting over and this is not such a bad thing.

Really, many times I feel like I am on a mission trip in a foreign country introducing them to Christianity for the first time. They don’t know me and I don’t know them. And this is in Oklahoma—smack in the middle of the Bible belt of America!

Things have changed. We are in a fresh mission field and we need to be trained for this mission. If we don’t begin to understand this, we are going to have to have other nations sent their preachers here. (Oh wait, they already do). Continue Reading »

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

17. Belief that Jesus will come again - 2

I don’t see why any Christian would ever deny that Christ is coming again . . . wait, scratch that . . . I forgot about the Preterists. Preterists say he has already come. Preterists: your Gospel is seriously lacking in its fullness. Just because it is an eschatological issue and just because eschatological issues are heavily debated does not get you off the hook. The one thing the history of the Church has been united on, even amidst all the end-times controversy, is that Christ is coming back to judge. My advise: join the communion of the saints on this one. Your doubts don’t have enough serious leverage to challenge the traditional belief. I know, I have considered them.

18. Belief that Jesus rose bodily from the grave - 1

No resurrection, no Gospel. Read 1 Cor. 15.

19. Belief in imputed sin (i.e. that we are held guilty by God for the sin of Adam) - 3

I really want this to be a 2, but I will have to go with 3 (considering the Orthodox denial of this). However, I do think that there is a trickle down theological effect here. Paul argues in Rom. 5:12-21 that Christ’s imputation of righteousness is parallel to the academic imputation of sin. I know that the word “condemnation” is loaded depending on where you are coming from, but you need to just listen to me. Stop by the Credo House of Theology for a cup of joe, I will explain it for you. (Coming to a city near you—you think I am kidding?)

20. Belief in personal sin (i.e. that all people have sinned) - 1

If you don’t believe you have sinned, then there is no Gospel for you my friend. A recognition of personal sin is absolutely essential to Christianity.

21. Belief in the penal substitutionary view of the atonement (i.e. that Christ death on the cross was a substitute penalty required by God for payment for your sins) - 2

I know, we have the Orthodox issue again. No time to explain, but I believe that this was assumed in an unarticulated form prior to Anselm. However, we may talk past each other on this issue. If you say that Christ died for me, I am usually satisfied. The “for” (huper) implies substitution in Greek and English. After all, does anyone really know what took place on the cross?—really?

22. Belief in monotheism (i.e. there is only one God) - 2

Ouch…I know. Can there be a Christian polytheist? Well, I can’t get over the Israelites Henotheism (they believed that Yahweh was the greatest God among other gods). Even Solomon fell into this trap. Then there are the Corinthians who believed that the idols that the meat was sacrificed to actually existed. Isn’t that polytheism coming from a Christian? Don’t believe me? Read 1 Cor. 8. Focus your attention to verse 7 and get back to me.

23. Belief in sola Scriptura (i.e. that the Scripture is our ultimate and only infallible authority and that no council or pope is infallible) - 2

I could put this at number 3 since it is possible that God could send an inspired prophet today. I have never seen one, but wouldn’t his (or her) presence automatically negate sola scriptura? Either way, I think the Roman Catholic view of authority, as it has developed, is outside the bounds of Protestant orthodoxy, if not historic orthodoxy. Ah, what the heck, I am going to move this one to 3. No, back to 2.

24. Belief that homosexuality is a sin - 2

Any denial of the sin of homosexuality puts one well outside the historic Christian faith on this issue. It would be no different than me saying I am a Christian but I don’t believe that adultery is wrong. Let’s be sensitive to the issues, but let us no, in our sympathies, smother the truth.

25. Belief that abortion is a sin - 2

To the degree that a belief that murder is ok, is the same degree that I would place this issue on the orthodox scale. Now, of course, there can be those who are educated so poorly, physiologically and theologically, that they really don’t believe that abortion is killing a life, but this most certainly is the exception. We need to continue to educate Christians on this subject. Pastors, don’t be afraid to bring this us any more than you are afraid to teach on the fifth commandment.

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

Here is the summary of our Bible study this morning:

“Live in such a way where the only thing you have left to do is die.”

May God grant us such a life today.

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

Continuing the previous post.

8. Belief that Christ is fully God and fully Man - 1

Again, I am not trying to enforce a Chalcedonian articulation on your belief, but I don’t believe that someone could say that Christ was not man and have any sense of understanding of the true Gospel. This would be a serious deviation from a christological basic which defines Christianity.

9. Belief that the book of 2 Peter should be part of the New Testament canon -2

I waver here between 2 and 3. While I most certainly believe 2 Peter should be included in the canon, I understand the arguments that some sincere scholars have over its inclusion. Nevertheless, we must fall into the arms of those who have gone before us and trust the Lord’s guidance. If one has a Bible without 2 Peter, I would say that they are outside of orthodoxy, but I would certainly not call them a heretic in the proper since (I primarily leave that to Christological issues).

10. Belief that the Gospel of John should be part of the New Testament canon - 2

Come on, what possible reason would a Christian have for rejecting this?

11. Belief that the doctrine of purgatory is false -2 or 3

It really depends on what your view of purgatory is. If it is an instantaneous cleansing of the believers soul upon death, then fine . . . not too big of a deal (but you should really call it final sanctification or something like that), but if you believe that you are suffering for your sins as has been traditionally taught by the Roman Catholic church, then I would say that this is outside the bounds of orthodoxy since it causes a definite redefining of the benefits of the work of Christ.

12. Belief in the doctrine of the Trinity (i.e. there is one God who eternally exist in three distinct persons, all of which are fully God, all of which are equal) - 2

I teach the Trinity every chance I get when I visit churches. Every time, it seems, I am converting people—Christians—from a heretical position to an orthodox position. This is a serious issue. Those who deny the Trinity normally do so and redefine theism completely. If this is the case, it is no different than denying the deity of Christ. We need to take a denial of the Trinity very seriously. We also need to be correcting ignorance about the subject.

13. Belief in the inspiration of Scripture - 2

I don’t believe that anyone has to believe in the inspiration of Scripture to be saved, but, once saved, why wouldn’t someone believe what Christ said about the Scripture? How you define inspiration is a different story and is somewhat open for discussion.

14. Beliefs about the age of the earth - 4

While I think that this is a very interesting issues, people need to lighten up. The two issues in theology I like to discuss least is the beginning and the end. Everyone thinks they have it all figured out. Your belief about the age of the earth is not a litmus test in any way. Keep the conversation going, but be careful that your passions don’t make you imbalanced.

15. Belief that Adam and Eve were real people, not simply symbolic of mankind - 2

Sorry folks. This has massive theological implications. If you deny the literal representation of the first Adam, your Christology is going to be effected. I am not saying that this is not open to some interpretation, but, in the end, Adam had to fall as our federal head. Read Roman 5:12-21 and get back to me.

16. Belief in the eternal security of the believer/perseverance of the saints (i.e. that a true believe can never lose their salvation) - 3

I really, really want to put this a 2, but there are too many historical issues. Twist my arm and I will go there.

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