Tag: Carl Trueman

Bob’s Blog Finds: Tiger Woods, the Manhattan Declaration, Blogging Arrogance & More

~ Bob Hayton

In my blog finds I highlight some of the best articles I’ve found online recently. You can see all my blog finds in my sidebar, under the Bob’s Blog Finds & Bob’s on Twitter sections.

Tiger Woods Controversy

I don’t relish the media’s obsession with all the gory details of things like this. Thankfully, I’ve missed most of such coverage. I did come across a couple really good treatments of the issue from a Christian perspective and wanted to share them here for your benefit.

  • Albert Mohler: “The force of public outrage directed at Tiger Woods’s admission of marital infidelity indicates that the American public conscience remains more deeply rooted in its biblical origins than many secular observers would expect or appreciate…. For Christians, there is an even deeper concern. The current travail of Tiger Woods points far beyond his need for marital recovery, career consultation, or brand management. Tiger Woods needs a Savior. I am praying that this devastating experience, caused so classically by his own sin, will lead Tiger Woods to understand that he is not so self-sufficient as he thinks…. In the end, all this must remind Christians of the universal need for the Gospel. We must remember our own sin and our utter dependence upon the grace and mercy of God made ours in Jesus Christ. Without question, this is the most important lesson drawn from the travail of Tiger Woods.”
  • Curt Harding: “The truth is he’s no better or worse than you and me. You can talk yourself into believing you’re superior, but you’re not. There’s no leader board for sin and Tiger’s not at the top of it…. The good news for Tiger is that this can be done. Peace can be his again. God wants to put us all back together.”

The Manhattan Declaration

I’ve already blogged a little about this. But R.C. Sproul recently explained why he is not signing the declaration. I thought his post was really good and worth the read.

However, true reformation and revival within the church and the winning of our culture to Christ will come only through the power of the Holy Spirit and our clear, bold proclamation of the biblical gospel, not through joint ecumenical statements that equivocate on the most precious truths given to us. There is no other gospel than that which has already been given (Gal. 1:6–8).

The Manhattan Declaration puts evangelical Christians in a tight spot. I have dear friends in the ministry who have signed this document, and my soul plummeted when I saw their names. I think my friends were misled and that they made a mistake, and I want to carefully assert that I have spoken with some of them personally about their error and have expressed my hope that they will remove their signatures from this document. Nevertheless, I remain in fellowship with them at this time and believe they are men of integrity who affirm the biblical gospel and the biblical doctrines articulated in the Protestant Reformation.

Blogging Arrogance

Carl Trueman has some important words for those of us who engage in social media and blogging:

Let’s stop there a minute. This is madness. Is this where we have come to, with our Christian use of the web? Men who make careers in part out of bashing the complacency and arrogance of those with whose theology they disagree, yet who applaud themselves on blogs and twitters they have built solely for their own deification? Young men who are so humbled by flattering references that they just have to spread the word of their contribution all over the web like some dodgy rash they picked up in the tropics? And established writers who are so insecure that they feel the need to direct others to places where they are puffed and pushed as the next big thing? I repeat: this is madness, stark staring, conceited, smug, self-glorifying madness of the most pike-staffingly obvious and shameful variety.

A Gospel-Centered Response to Blog Attacks in Bandit Country

~ fundyreformed ~ 3 Comments

Carl Trueman has a great post on dealing with web critics or blog attacking bandits. I thought his advice was spot on, and his example of a Gospel-centered response to criticism quite helpful. I took the liberty of quoting Carl at some length, but I encourage you to read the full article.

This raises the question of whether one should respond to individual blog attacks. My advice is no, never, not under any circumstances. Now, one of the reasons I do not read these things (in addition to having a real life with real friends, real problems etc) is because I know that, if I did so, there would be times when the temptation to respond would be overwhelming, and that would be fatal. As soon as one responds, the attacker grows parasitically stronger, gaining an audience and a credibility previously denied him. And the victim has lost because he has taken the rant of some nutjob seriously enough to acknowledge it; he has granted it a status which it simply does not merit in and of itself; and in his efforts to refute it, he has perversely made it important, given it a constituency it did not possess. Look, to repeat: the web is bandit country. Let the wild and the whacky compete with the sane and the measured, the incoherent and rambling with the logical and well-argued, the extreme with the moderate. If people believe you are really a lizard from the Planet Iguanadon who has assumed human form and infiltrated a church or a seminary to make it the base for an Iguanaman takeover of the entire Christian church, then let them do so. Nothing you can say to the contrary will do anything other than convince them of the depth and sophistication of the extraterrestrial reptilian conspiracy. Their emotional and psychological needs are clearly more serious than your own; and if you respond to such nonsense, you give it credibility and allow the parasitic nature of the attack to succeed. Ignore it and it may not go away, but sane people will see it for what it is and walk by, slightly embarrassed, on the other side of the virtual information highway.

There is, however, a spiritual dimension to blog attacks which is, ironically, conducive to spiritual health and growth. Here I have learned much (as elsewhere) from the master theologian, churchman, public figure, and normal Christian believer, Martin Luther. It is well-known that in his writings in table conversation Luther would often refer to visits from the Devil, how the Devil would come to him and whisper in his ear, accusing him of all manner of filthy sin: “Martin, you are a liar, greedy, lecherous, a blasphemer, a hypocrite. You cannot stand before God.” To which Luther would respond: “Well, yes, I am. And, indeed, Satan, you do not know the half of it. I have done much worse than that and if you care to give me your full list, I can no doubt add to it and help make it more complete. But you know what? My Saviour has died for all my sins – those you mention, those I could add and, indeed, those I have committed but am so wicked that I am unaware of having done so. It does not change the fact that Christ has died for all of them; his blood is sufficient; and on the Day of Judgment I shall be exonerated because he has taken all my sins on himself and clothed me in his own perfect righteousness.’

…Those disturbed by web attacks on their good names should not be so. Believe me, you are much worse than they say, and God is much greater and more gracious than they imagine. It’s bandit country out there on the web but sane people know lunacy when they see it: let the nutters do their nutjobby thing; let the psychos babble; and let the vicious vent. And then, in the tradition of Luther, thank God for bandit country and use the malice you find there to help you appreciate Christ

Appreciating and Assessing Fundamentalism

~ fundyreformed ~ 3 Comments

Nine Marks Ministries, a conservative evangelical ministry aiming to strengthen churches by emphasizing Biblical rather than pragmatic approaches to ministry, recently released their March/April 2008 e-journal. This month the topic was unity and separation, with an emphasis on fundamentalism.

The journal was kind to fundamentalism. While it recognized a need to balance separation with unity, it gave fundamentalists like Dr. Dave Doran (pastor of Inter-City Baptist Church in Allen Park, MI and president of Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary) and Dr. Mark Minnick (pastor of Mt. Calvary Baptist Church in Greenville, SC and NT faculty member of Bob Jones University) an opportunity to defend their fundamentalist viewpoint.

The journal brought together some of the best articles on the issue of Biblically-based separation and unity. I particularly thought that the articles by Mark Dever, Albert Mohler, and Wayne Grudem were excellent. See this link where Justin Taylor provides links to all the articles in the journal. Or download the pdf version of the journal. Also, don’t miss out on the audio lecture by Iain Murray (of Banner of Truth) on “George Whitefield and Catholicity” (catholicity meaning Christian unity with the universal church).

Perhaps the most interesting part of the journal was the “Pastors’ and Theologians’ Forum on Fundamentalism“. It is a round-table discussion of sorts, where 19 different men were asked to answer this question: “What can we learn from the Christian fundamentalists?” For the most part, the answers focused on the positive contributions fundamentalism has made to evangelicalism. And while the faults of fundamentalism were sometimes mentioned, the overall feel of the discussion was one of a great appreciation for fundamentalists.

Ben Wright, a pastoral assistant at Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington, DC (home of Nine Marks Ministries), at his blog Paleoevangelical (which I would consider a reforming fundamentalist blog), asked for people to comment on which round-table answer they thought was the best. Ben of course expects his commenters to choose his own answer, as he contributed both to the roundtable and the journal (providing one article). I thought the idea was fun and could encourage some good conversation on these matters.

As I thought about responding, I felt I should just make my response into a post. So here goes….

I think the two best overall answers were Bob Johnson‘s and Carl Trueman‘s. And I appreciated some phrases and thoughts from other answers. I should also note that I learned a new derision of fundamentalism: “No fun, all da**, and not enough mental”. I should say that this was given tongue in cheek, and the 2 contributors who mentioned it were not bitter at the “fightin’ fundies”. I still thought it was funny, even though I recognize it is not true of many good fundamentalists I know.

Besides that line, I thought the following quotes were worthy of consideration:

…What it does is reassert a lost world, a once intact but no-longer-taken-for-granted cultural reality. In doing so, it both romanticizes the past and radicalizes the present with its overlay of psychological defiance and cultural militancy. Herein lies its danger to followers of Jesus: the cultural overlay grows more and more alien to the call of Jesus to his disciples…. (by Os Guinness)

In a day when Protestants seem to be as easily impressed by smooth-talking television preachers, beautiful liturgies administered by women and gays, or smart popes, we could use Fundamentalist suspicion. (by Darryl Hart)

I also was pleased to see someone make the same point I did about the place of the Gospel as it relates to extreme separation.

Sometimes, their practical applications appear to be as important as (or even more important than) the gospel. (by Matthew Hoskinson)

So what are your thoughts on the journal, or the round-table discussion?