Author: fundyreformed

Self Updating Categories for Blogger–At Last!

~ fundyreformed ~ 6 Comments

happycomputer.jpg

I love Blogger. Hey, it’s free! But I disliked the fact that it does not let you have categories. I tried to work around this by updating my own auxiliary blog where I had posts with running lists of each post in the category. Now I came across different blogger hacks and tricks (a good list of them is available here) out there and discovered various methods to get categories by using tags and del.icio.us (a free bookmarking service similar to what FlickR does with photos and tags)–see here for one way to do categories with del.icio.us). But I wanted something simpler.

At first my idea of an auxiliary blog was working great, but the facts of life soon reared their ugly heads. Updating an auxiliary blog takes time, and is far too easy to put off. The result? An inaccurate list of my categories which frustrates more than helps my readers.

But then I discovered another solution to categories! It is so simple really: why didn’t I think of it? Anyway, I am very thankful for the person who did. Now my category links in the sidebar, go to a Blogger Blog Search for the name of the category. Since I have subtitles, with the category name for each post, a complete list of the posts in a particular category is the result! And it self updates!!!

Some people may want to use this trick with the titles for their categories in their post titles. But if you have very unique category titles, like I do, there is no need.

Now I can go on my way overjoyed that I need never trouble over categories again (other than adding the subtitles and postscripts to each post)! If anyone else is interested in how this is done, check out this link.

Update: As of July 16, 2006, I said goodbye to Blogger and hello to WordPress.com. Categories are cake in WordPress!

∼striving for the unity of the faith for the glory of God∼ Eph. 4:3,13 “¢ Rom. 15:5-7

Palms and Praise: Worship Traditions for Palm Sunday

~ fundyreformed

 

For the second year in a row (at least), my church has done something wonderful for Palm Sunday. They had the combined children’s choirs enter the worship service holding and waving palm branches while the congregation was singing the hymn “All Glory, Laud and Honor”. Then later, the children sang a choral arrangement of “Hosanna”.

This tradition at Bethlehem Baptist beautifully focuses our hearts on the day we are remembering each Palm Sunday. Does anyone else know of any other worship traditions which honor Palm Sunday?

∼striving for the unity of the faith for the glory of God∼ Eph. 4:3,13 “¢ Rom. 15:5-7

The Proof Is In: Jesus Walked On Ice!!!

~ fundyreformed ~ 5 Comments

My brother pointed out an absurd article which claims that Jesus could have walked on a patch of floating ice on the Sea of Galilee! The article is interesting, and seems to gather this conclusion from a grasping-for-straws approach to the evidence. Yet my brother, Dave Hayton, makes some poignant observations I would like to share with us all:

This is the height of absurdity. It is interesting to observe what depths scientists and news-casters will stoop to in order to make Christianity seem implausible or foolish. At the same time, it is a caution for we who believe: that we take care not to base our faith [or even spread our faith] on observable, scientifically-regulated “evidences.” Let’s make our priority to speak the Gospel boldly and lovingly, and watch the Holy Spirit do His supernatural work of change of mind & conversion. God doesn’t need to be “proved”; He “needs” to be prized.

∼striving for the unity of the faith for the glory of God∼ Eph. 4:3,13 “¢ Rom. 15:5-7

"Whosoever Will" and Calvinism

~ fundyreformed ~ 15 Comments

Recently in a forum I read, this question was posed:

QUESTION:
Acts 10:13 states For whosover shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
Rev. 22:17 whosover will let him take the water of life freely
Acts 2:21 states whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be savedThe Bible states several times that it is a whosoever will salvation. How can calvinism be true without updating the definition of the word whosoever?

If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in thine heart that God has raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved. The only two conditions are belief and confession. There is no you must be elected first. It is whosoever will May Come!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I posted a response which I felt I should share here too. This is a common objection, and perhaps some of my readers will be benefited by my brief and I think helpful response.

RESPONSE:
Good question. This is a real argument in many people’s minds. Let me try to explain.

The above verses along with John 3:16 and others use the term “whosoever”. Do Calvinists have to redefine that term in order for their position to be true? Not at all. First let us notice what these verses say, and then look at what Calvinism says.

These verses say who so ever calls (Acts 10:13 and 2:21), wills (Rev. 22:17), or believes (John 3:16) will be saved/drink of water of life freely/receive everlasting life. In other words they say who ever wants to be saved may do so, or who ever believes/repents/chooses to receive salvation can. In fact Jesus said in John 6:37b “him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.” So these verses are affirming that anyone who comes to Jesus, anyone who truly wants to come to Jesus will be received and thus will be saved.

Calvinists have absolutely no problem with that at all. What Calvinism addresses is the “behind the scenes” root cause in all of this. In other words, Calvinism seeks to answer this question, “why do some people want to come or want to believe and others do not?” The only reason Calvinism is interested in that question, actually, is because many passages of Scripture speak to that very issue. For instance John 6:37 (a & b) says, “All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.” The Calvinist sees this verse as teaching that anyone who comes to Jesus was first given to Jesus by the Father. They also were first drawn by the Father (Jn. 6:44). And further they were enabled to come by the Father (Jn. 6:65).

This is why Calvinism does not at all have to squelch evangelism. In fact, historically, many of the great revivals and great evangelistic endeavors of the Church have been initiated by diehard Calvinists. Calvinists see no incongruity between “whosoever will may come” and “all who come were chosen before the foundation of the world”. Calvinists simply preach the gospel to everyone, since God’s word assures us that people will come to salvation from every people group (Rev. 5). They preach and when people respond, Calvinists see those people as evidencing the fact that they were first elect and then given a new heart by God’s Holy Spirit. Calvinists see that while all are invited to come, no one will come (or even want to come) apart from the work of God (see Rom. 3:10-12; Rom. 8:7-8; 2 Tim. 2:24-26; 2 Cor. 4:1-6; etc.). But Calvinists are greatly convinced that God is at work in the world and thus can have confidence in His Sovereign ability to give increase to the seed of the gospel in every situation where we are called to labor (1 Cor. 3:5-7). This actually gives added strength for ministry endeavors in hard areas where fruit is not quickly evident. (For instance, a Calvinist, Adoniram Judson, labored for seven years in Burma before seeing his first convert.)

So I affirm that Calvinism in no way needs to redefine “whosoever” in order for its claims to be true.

If you are interested in following the discussion (if one develops), you can see the thread here. Update: the same question was posed as the beginning of another thread which has had some discussion–you can see that here.

More on Redemptive Historical Interpretation of Scripture

~ fundyreformed ~ 1 Comment

Lately I have been thinking alot about hermeneutics. I have been contemplating the merits of the redemptive historical interpretation of Scripture. (Learn what that means here, in a previous post.) The article by my friend Nathan Pitchford, linked to in the post mentioned above, points out that the literal, grammatico-historical hermeneutic of the Reformers is different that that of today. And the reason this is the case, is the growth of rationalism due to the pervasive influence of the Enlightenment. (Be sure to read that post, I have mentioned!)

Anyway, last week I heard a presentation by someone on hermeneutics which dealt specifically with the parable of the Good Samaritan. The speaker was teaching that we should not allegorize the parable at all, but that it only conveys a main basic point that Christ was attempting to draw from it. Yet in his presentation, (I suppose to show how this allegorizing kind of interpreting can get out of hand), he quoted many different leaders throughout church history, and only John Calvin did not give an allegorical view of this parable. The first person to push for the interpretation this guy was advancing was in the late 1800s and was a German intellectual. This presentation seemed to push me the other way, totally! It sure seemed to illustrate how rationalistic thinking has changed our hermeneutics. Now granted there have been some extreme examples of rampant allegorization, but by and large a Christ-centered hermeneutic has been employed throughout church history. I cannot bring myself to conclude that the “enlightened” modern (and post-modern) world has finally been able to recover sound hermeneutics, and that the Holy Spirit was somehow unable to bring Christ’s church to unity in a true and sound hermeneutic until He was helped by the Enlightenment.

In thinking through this issue, I came across a good (and brief) article which gives a “how to” plan for interpreting Scripture (specifically OT Scripture–which is where the differences of opinion are strongest, today). As you will see when you look at it, this article does not throw out many of the advances made in interpretation today, particularly greater understanding of the different genres and forms of literature the Bible contains, etc. These insights are very helpful for interpreting the text correctly. However, it stresses that we must compare the teaching of each OT passage with all of redemptive history, particularly the gospel of Christ. Only then can we learn all that God intends for us with this Scripture. The article is called, “How a Christian Can Read Any Old Testament Passage” and is by Robert A Lotzer. [He draws from Beale and Greidanus among others.]

Stay tuned, for more posts on this topic. I think it is as important as any topic I discuss here. May God bring us all to a better understanding of and a clearer apprehension of Christ through His Word.