Year: 2007

Patristic Exegesis

Tony Reinke Church fathers

Michael A. G. Haykin argues the Patristic authors are exegetically significant today in his new article (“Why Study the Fathers”) at reformation21. He writes,

“… the Fathers may also, in some cases, help us to understand the New Testament. We have had too disparaging a view of Patristic exegesis, and have come close to considering the exposition of the Fathers as a consistent failure to understand the New Testament. For instance Cyril of Jerusalem in his interpretation of 1 Corinthians 7:5, which concerns temporary abstinence of sexual relations between married couples for the sake of prayer, assumes without question that the prayer is liturgical and communal prayer. Cyril may be guilty of an anachronism, for he was a leader in ‘the hallowing of the time,’ that is, the observance of holy seasons. Nonetheless, there is good evidence that such communal observances, in some form or other, are quite early. The liturgical life of the Church of Jerusalem in the fourth century was not that of Corinth in the first, but nevertheless there were links. Possibly it is the Protestant commentators who are guilty of anachronism when they assume that Paul meant private prayer; such religious individualism is more conceivable in the Protestant West than in first-century Corinth.”

2007 Sovereign Grace Ministries Leaders Conference PICS

Tony Reinke 2007 SGM LC, C.J. Mahaney, David Powlison, R.C. Sproul

All photos (c) 2007 by Janelle Bradshaw. Thank you Janelle for sharing!

C.J. Mahaney

C.J. Mahaney (Redskins) and R.C. Sproul (Steelers)

C.J. Mahaney

David Powlison

C.J. Mahaney

R.C. Sproul

—–

—–

 

—————

Related 2007 SGM LC sessions:

1. 2007 Sovereign Grace Ministries Leadership Conference

2. R.C. Sproul: “The Holiness of God”

3. Rick Gamache: “Watch Your Devotional Life”

4. Mark Dever: “Watch the Past: Living Lessons from Dead Theologians”

5. David Powlison: “‘In the Last Analysis…’ Look out for Introspection”

6. C.J. Mahaney: “Trinitarian Pastoral Ministry”

7. 2007 Conference photographs

Lawson on Whitefield’s rock

Tony Reinke George Whitefield, Steven J. Lawson

Mike Abendroth and Steven Lawson found their way to George Whitefield’s rock in Brookfield, MA. According to my research, Whitefield preached here at Foster Hill on Oct. 16, 1740 to between 400-500 souls. If this date is correct, this is within a few days from the time Whitefield would first meet (face-to-face) Jonathan Edwards (see Dallimore’s biography, 1:537). Interesting.

HT: IrishCalvinist

Islamicization and individual rights

Tony Reinke Islam

“The Reformation brought about a renewed understanding of the importance of the individual based on the sanctity of life and the imago dei, that every individual is created in the divine image. In Islam, particularly in the Sharia, you have group rights. Rights are not based on the individual but rather on who you are on the basis of religion or on the basis of your sex (whether you are male) and this defines treatment.

And here is a real dilemma: If we institutionalize Islam, then at the end of the day, the very thing that had made you [America] so great and so important — which is your Judeo-Christian faith and your Judeo-Christian ethic which is at the very heart of the understanding of human beings — then [individual] rights will be removed. Now, you say ‘Is that possible?’ I point you to one issue that has just occurred.

Why is your government introducing Sharia-compliant mortgages? Now, some would say this is irrelevant. If Muslims are being prejudiced against in their fiscal arrangements in buying a house then why not allow them room for purchase of a home to function within their own religious/legal tradition? In the UK we have Sharia-compliant mortgages, Sharia-compliant pensions, we now have Sharia in schools, in prisons and a whole variety of ways from food to holidays. So what are individual rights?

When our government tried to introduce a bill on religious hatred in the UK, it was the Barnabas Fund that fought it initially (and I was the chairman). On two occasions we fought the government and we won both times. On the third occasion I just couldn’t cope with it anymore but thankfully we did win. Now, why was I so passionate in fighting against a religious hatred law? Because, as the Muslim community itself argued, this would have protected Mohammad. So if the law of the land protected Mohammad, what of Jesus? I would argue, protect Jesus as well. But every night on our television Jesus’ name is blasphemed but never once is Mohammad’s name to be blasphemed. At that point there would have been an inequality existing within our country, and Britain would have been equivalent to Pakistan on its blasphemy law. And it had to be fought.

So my fear is that de facto by degrees Islamic law and its position in society, through government action and others, is being established as a system. And if that happens then I fear for your [America’s] future. I think for the UK it is virtually hopeless to put it back and only a matter of time before we succumb.”

– Dr. Patrick Sookhdeo, Henry Forum at Capitol Hill Baptist Church (Washington, D.C.) 1:03:00-1:06:33. Whether you agree or not, this is a thought-provoking address. Listen here.

Listen to the full audio here:

Review: Instruments in the Redeemer’s Hands

Tony Reinke Biblical counseling, BR > P&R, Paul David Tripp, spurgeon

Instruments in the Redeemer’s Hands: People in Need of Change Helping People in Need of Change by Paul David Tripp (P&R: 2002) is one of the best contemporary Christian books. For more information, read my review posted today at TakeUpAndRead.com. To celebrate, Monergism Books is running a special deal (50-percent off!). But it will not last long.

If you plan to attend the Banner of Truth Minister’s Conference next month, let me know (click here for more info).

Blessings! Tony

Atheism, the Cross and Revelation

Tony Reinke Atheism, Atheist, Cross of Christ, Culture, God

Many debates between a Christian and atheist go something like this:

Christian: “God exists because we see the influences of a Creator all around us. Only His existence can make sense of everything else.”

Atheist: “Okay, so God exists. Now why are you a Christian and not Jewish or Mormon or Islamic?”

Christian: “Ummm” (insert awkward relativism like: “For me Christianity makes the most sense”) …

If you don’t think this fumbling happens, I would encourage you to listen to the recent McGrath/Dawkins debate. When a Christian debates an atheist – as you hear in this and many other debates – there comes a moment when the debate takes an awkward turn. The question changes from the existence of God to why the Christian has chosen his/her religion over all the others. It’s an awkward moment because it reveals that the Christian was debating from rationalism, not pleading obedience to God’s revelation. This misunderstanding gets exposed with one simple question.

So you believe in God. What makes Jesus Christ your god of choice? It seems the only objective answer to this most pressing question is to say God is found in His Son as revealed in His Word. It’s here that the wisdom of God will get you laughed out of an academic debate. But Scripture makes this point clear in several places:

1 John 2:23 “No one who denies the Son has the Father. Whoever confesses the Son has the Father also.”

1 John 4:15 “Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God.”

1 John 5:1 “Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God, and everyone who loves the Father loves whoever has been born of him.”

2 John 1:9 “Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son.”

In other words, if you have not persuasively turned sinners toward Jesus Christ and the Cross you have not persuaded sinners to God! Even if you can prove God exists — if this is where you end — you have won nothing. When Christians dialogue with atheists/skeptics/agnostics, the discussion must move beyond the mere existence of a god (and the skeptic knows this!).

Attempts to prove the existence of God make it very easy to forget the message of the Cross of Christ. Keeping the Cross central in our conversations with atheists demands that we have a firm handle on the revelation of God that breaks into our hearts and is confirmed by the power of the Holy Spirit.

I’m not supposing we should disengage the debates. Certainly not! The church must continue to engage culture (and atheism is a growing segment of our cultural fabric in America). I’m arguing that a successful debate cannot be defined as the persuading of others of the existence of God. Rather, God is here, He is angry towards sin every day and sinners must bow and repent from their sin. Especially when we enter the philosophical and academic centers of the world God calls us to follow in the footsteps of the Apostle Paul (Acts 17:30-31).

If we have not (by God’s grace) persuaded skeptics to the Cross, neither have we persuaded them to God. The Cross — not Deism — is the goal.

—————–

As I finished this post, Jon Bloom posted an excellent comment on another post that fits here. Thanks Jon!

“The person who is certain, and who claims divine warrant for his certainty, belongs now to the infancy of our species.” – Christopher Hitchens.

“I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to little children” (Matt 11:25). “Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven” (Matt 18:3). – Jesus

We will always be the infants of our species. Thank you, Tony!

Indeed, Jon. Thank you!