Saturday, May 30, 2009

inspiration of scripture

RC Sproul on the inspiration of Scripture:

The Reformers held to a high view of the Bible’s inspiration. The Bible is the Word of God, the verbum Dei, or the voice of God, the vox Dei. For example, John Calvin writes:

When that which professes to be the Word of God is acknowledged to be so, no person, unless devoid of common sense and the feelings of a man, will have the desperate hardihood to refuse credit to the speaker. But since no daily responses are given from heaven, and the Scriptures are the only records in which God has been pleased to consign his truth to perpetual remembrance, the full authority which they ought to possess with the faithful is not recognized, unless they are believed to have come from heaven, as directly as if God had been heard giving utterance to them.

“As if” does not mean Calvin believed that the Bible had dropped down from heaven directly or that God himself wrote the words on the pages of Scripture. Rather “as if” refers to the weight of divine authority that attends the Scriptures. This authority is rooted and grounded in the fact that Scripture was originally given under divine inspiration. This claim agrees with the Bible’s own claim to authority: “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Tim. 3:16–17).

Paul’s declaration of Scripture’s inspiration refers to its origin. He uses the Greek word theopneust, which means “God-breathed.” Though the word is usually translated “inspired,” which means “breathe in,” technically theopneust refers to a breathing out, which might more accurately be translated “expired.” Paul is saying that Scripture is “expired” or “breathed out” by God. This is not a mere quibble. It is obvious that for inspiration to take place there must first be expiration. A breathing out must precede a breathing in. The point is that the work of divine inspiration is accomplished by a divine expiration. Since Paul says that Scripture is breathed out by God, Scripture’s origin or source must be God himself.

When Calvin and others speak of Scripture’s inspiration, they refer to the way in which God enabled the human authors of Scripture to function, so that they wrote every word under divine superintendence. The doctrine of inspiration declares that God enabled the human writers of Scripture to be agents of divine revelation, so that what they wrote was not only their writing but in a higher sense the very Word of God. The origin of Scripture’s content is found ultimately in God.

Much debate has raged concerning the exact mode or method of this divine inspiration. Some have contended for a mechanical inspiration or dictation, reducing the human authors to robotic machines or passive stenographers who merely record the words dictated to them by God.

But the Scriptures themselves make no such claim. The mode or precise manner of divine inspiration is not spelled out. The crucial point of the biblical claim to authority is that God is the source who breathes out his word. It is clear from a study of the Bible itself that the authors’ individual styles remain intact. The inspiration of the Bible refers then to the divine superintendence of Scripture, preserving it from the intrusion of human error. It refers to God’s preserving his Word through the words of human authors.

Technorati Tags:

sola scriptura

I seriously doubt my friend Geoff is being led astray by Peter Rollins but he is dancing with some folks that I think I'd try to avoid - at best, I find them confusing. These particular folks seem to be writing a lot lately about the demise of Sola Scriptura. One person, Blake Huggins is celebrating it although I'm not completely sure what he thinks Sola Scriptura means or how his replacement, Prima Scriptura, is different. Interestingly, at one point I thought he was defending Sola Scriptura and thought he was simply on the fade-wagon of attacking things traditional. I don't know. I doubt his heart is motivated that way. So without judging him or others writing in that vein, I'll offer what I understand about the topic. My intent is to not enter into debate. It is only to share what I understand Sola Scriptura is.

Martin Luther, at the Diet of Worms said these great words, "Unless I am convinced by Sacred Scripture or by evi dent reason, I will not recant. My conscience is held captive by the Word of God and to act against conscience is neither right nor safe.”

Sola Scriptura simply means “by Scripture alone” declaring the idea that only the Bible has the authority to bind the consciences of believers. Protestants recognized other forms of authority but they saw these authorities as derived from and subordinate to the authority of God. All other authority is capable of error. God alone is infallible.

The difference between Protestant and the Roman Catholic Church was, “Is the Bible the only infallible source of special revelation?” Roman Catholics taught that there are two sources of infallible special revelation, Scripture and tradition. Since they attributed authority to the tradition of the church, they did not permit interpretation of the Bible in a way that was contrary to tradition. Which is exactly what Luther did.

The Bible is inspired by God. Church creeds and pronouncements are the works of men. These may be accurate and brilliant, overflowing with insight, but they are not the inspired Word of God.

Technorati Tags:

come to me

Ray Ortlund posted this great piece yesterday ...

"Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest." Matthew 11:28

The sacred center of Christianity is Christ himself. Coming personally to the Person. Coming directly to the Mediator. No one but Jesus can call us with such authority, and no one but Jesus can encourage us with such a promise. No one else can give us rest.

If our functional purpose in church is to connect with one another and build community, that's what we'll get -- one another. And we'll end up angry. Only Jesus gives us rest. If we will put him first and come to him first, we'll have something to give one another.

If our functional purpose in church is outreach and mercy and justice and all those good missional things, we'll end up exhausted and empty. Only Jesus gives us rest. If we will put him first and come to him first, we'll be renewed for endless mission.

Only One has ever said and can ever say, "Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest."

His offer stands. But he comes first.

Friday, May 29, 2009

what is faith

Michael Patton writes an interesting piece “YOU ASK ME HOW I KNOW HE LIVES . . . HE LIVES WITHIN MY HEART” AND OTHER STUPID STATEMENTS. In it he succinctly defines three aspects of faith, i.e., notitia, assensus, and fiducia, as follows:

1. Notitia: This is the basic informational foundation of our faith. It is best expressed by the word content. Faith, according to the Reformers must have content. You cannot have faith in nothing. There must be some referential propositional truth to which the faith points. The proposition “Christ rose from the grave” or “God loves you” for example, provide a necessary information base that Christians must have.

2. Assensus: This is the assent, confidence, or assurance that we have that the notitia is correct. Here we assent to the information affirming it to be true. This involves evidence which leads to the conviction of the truthfulness of the proposition. According to the Reformers, to have knowledge of the proposition is not enough. We must, to some degree, be convicted that it is really true. This involves intellectual assent and persuasion based upon some degree of critical thought. While notitia claims “Christ rose from the grave,” assensus takes the next step and says, “I am persuaded to believe that Christ rose from the grave.”

But these two alone are not enough according to the Reformers. As one person has said, these two only qualify you to be a demon for the demons both have the right information (Jesus rose from the grave) and are convicted of its truthfulness. One aspect still remains.

3. Fiducia: This is the “resting” in the information based upon a conviction of its truthfulness. Fiducia is best expressed by the English word “trust.” We have the information, we are persuaded of its truthfulness, now we have to trust in it. Christ died for our sins (notitia). I believe that Christ died for my sins (notitia + assensus). I place my trust in Christ to save me (fiducia). Fiducia is the personal subjective act of the will to take the final step. It is important to note that while fiducia goes beyond or transcends the intellect, it is built upon its foundation.

And he then adds, "The Church today seems to lack #2. Nominal Christianity lacks #3. Postmodernism lacks #1 and #2." In general, I don't disagree.

Technorati Tags:

Thursday, May 28, 2009

pop tarts

Technorati Tags:

muscle memory

At my daughter's rowing exhibition this past weekend I overheard a coach confronting the kids regarding their form as they returned to the dock after a race. It was for their form at that moment, not during the race. I commented to him that good form is always important. His reply was that proper form needs to be practiced all of the time to avoid laziness and to cause it to become "second nature".

I was reminded of my son who plays piano. As he practiced I would constantly remind him, "Slow down if you need to in order to play it correctly. Your focus right now is to learn to play it the right way. Be careful not to practice it the wrong way. You can speed up once you have it."

Any good coach in any discipline will promote the same. Practice the fundamentals until they become natural, you perform it right all the time. It's the way that feels right. You don't teach wrong technique in hopes to avoid it. You teach right so that wrong will seem foreign.

The same with counterfeit money. The training is on what is right. The fake is spotted and called out (I'm not one of these people that won't call a spade a spade) but the training, the focus, the repetition is on what is right.

This is not to say we never take time out to understand the affect of the wrong motion, etc. but it's not the focus of our training.

I think the same is true of spirituality and therefore I remain confused as I once again heard someone seemingly defending their carnal nature.

Monday, May 25, 2009


Homer: "Donut?"
Lisa: "No thanks. Do you have any fruit?"
Homer: "This has purple stuff inside... Purple is a fruit."

Technorati Tags:

loving gospel

Haughty, condescending proclamation of Christ, with no feeling of brokenness or servanthood, contradicts the gospel. And silent servanthood that never speaks the gospel contradicts love. ... We tell people the good news of Jesus from a life of service and a heart of love. ~ John Piper in Finally Alive p167


At the heart of revival is Christ made known to repenting sinners. ~ Stanley Voke, Personal Revival (Waynesboro, Ga.: OM Literature, nd), 78.


Technorati Tags:

Sunday, May 24, 2009


“If my life is motivated by an ambition to leave a legacy, what I would probably leave is a legacy of ambition. But, if my life is motivated by the power of God’s spirit in me and the awareness of the indwelling Christ, if I allow His presence to guide my motives, that’s the only time I think we leave a great legacy” - Rich Mullins


As we were speaking of the urgency of the eternal state of those around us a friend of mine said they struggled with the concept of speaking of hell. They said they, "just wanted to introduce people to Jesus." I agree with the need to introduce people to Jesus but with urgency rather than a casual/unintentional introduction. Eternity is in question here.

I realized some things as I spoke with my friend. They were reacting to those who only spoke of guilt rather than speaking of redemption found in Christ. Unfortunately, in their reaction to this wrong they (1) decided they need not speak to truth and (2) over time had become universalists. These over-reactions seem to be all around me.

The simple truth for my friend is clear in John 5.28-29 but this person could not take their eyes off the hurt caused by false religion and therefore they themselves missed the truth.

carnal nature

As I read Titus 2.12-15 this past week, I thought more about this carnal nature thing that I previously touched on here and here. I think Paul is clear.

... renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age, waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works. Declare these things; exhort and rebuke with all authority. Let no one disregard you.

This is what we preach. We need not teach stumbling. Instead we teach our goal and His strengthening to achieve it. We are eager to do what is good as we wait for our blessed hope ... this is what we teach! Those who are wise will shine like the brightness of the heavens, and those who lead many to righteousness, like the stars for ever and ever (Dan 12.1-4)

Saturday, May 23, 2009

messy people

“Jesus does not say, ‘Come to me, all you who have learned how to concentrate in prayer, whose minds no longer wander, and I will give you rest.’ No, Jesus opens his arms to his needy children and says, ‘Come to me, all who are weary and heaven-laden, and I will give you rest.’

The criteria for coming to Jesus is messiness. Come overwhelmed with life. Come with your wandering mind. Come messy.”

—Paul Miller, A Praying Life


Friday, May 22, 2009

the town

My friend Vince is doing some church planting ... if you have an interest in Vince, Fort Collins, or church planting in general, I encourage you to support him in his Kingdom work. The video embedded here is long if you are not interested but I liked it and appreciated the opportunity to get a glimpse into Vince's heart and mind.

everybody hurts

The Corrs doing Everybody Hurts by REM ... thanks David for bringing this to my attention ...

Technorati Tags:

Wednesday, May 20, 2009

plan for beth ann

If you feel so led, here is the site of a wonderful lady in need of cash to pay for a life saving treatment. Beth Ann Fortwendel is suffering from scleroderma and needs help. There are a couple of ways you can give.

global warming

Don't yell at me ... I couldn't resist ...

Technorati Tags:

Tuesday, May 19, 2009

swine flu

I wasn't initially following the swine flu thing but now that the first celebrity has been struck down ... well, it has my attention now ...

Technorati Tags:

Thursday, May 14, 2009

Tuesday, May 12, 2009

stand by me

Playing For Change | Song Around The World "Stand By Me" from Concord Music Group on Vimeo.

Technorati Tags:

election v reprobate

Some clear thinking from Dan Phillips:
  • If an elect person were finally and actually to leave Christ, he would be damned; and...
  • If a reprobate (non-elect) person were vitally to exercise repentant faith in Christ, he would be saved.
  • However, neither can do either; which is to say:
  • If any professor finally leaves Christ, he was never elect; and...
  • If any denier exercises repentant faith in Christ, he is not reprobate.

Technorati Tags:

carnal nature removed

The Scriptorium posted a piece from R.A. Torrey's, The King's Business they entitled, Want Your Carnal Nature Removed? Too Bad. Some of the points were good, e.g., "The Holy Spirit, whom they received and to whom they surrendered control to their lives, 'the Spirit of life,' made them free in Christ Jesus 'from the law of sin and death' (Rom. 8:2)."

The dilemma is as I tried to note a couple of days ago regarding who is the wretched man from Rom 7.17. Torrey confronts the the notion that, "the carnal nature or inbred sin or the sin principle was taken out.” He is correct that this is a misperception but I think he fails to acknowledge is the reason is because this sin nature is dead. It has no power save from the affects of its rotting decay and our familiarity with it. This body of flesh is not who I am, it's who I was, but it is now dead. So while it is ever present, it is not me and it cannot control me.

My sense is that Torrey's approach leads to strained logic. That is, he imagines that some first accept Christ but do not fully surrender. I'm not sure what that means. Is Christ not Lord? He then adds that they "did not receive the Holy Spirit and enter into a life of daily victory over sin." I am of the understanding that the Holy Spirit indwells all believers - in fact it is He that enables us to call on Christ at all. Torrey has set up a scenario of "carnal Christians" verses "Spirit-filled Christians" for which I cannot find satisfactory support. Better to understand that while the body of flesh is still affecting us, it is dead and it does not define who we are. We are able to not sin because of who we are in Christ.

Monday, May 11, 2009

real change

All change comes from deepening your understanding of the salvation of Christ and living out of the changes that understanding creates in your heart. Faith in the gospel re-structures our motivations, our self-understanding, our identity, and our view of the world. Behavioral compliance to rules without heart-change will be superficial and fleeting. ~ Timothy Keller, The Prodigal God

Sunday, May 10, 2009

savoring the glory

The deepest longing of the human heart is to know and enjoy the glory of God. We were made for this. “Bring my sons from afar and my daughters from the end of the earth. . . whom I created for my glory,” says the Lord (Isaiah 43:6-7). ... We were made to know and treasure the glory of God above all things; and when we trade that treasure for images, everything is disordered. The sun of God’s glory was made to shine at the center of the solar system of our soul. And when it does, all the planets of our life are held in their proper orbit. But when the sun is displaced, everything flies apart. The healing of the soul begins by restoring the glory of God to its flaming, all-attracting place at the center. ~ John Piper, Seeing and Savoring the Glory of God

Fully to enjoy is to glorify. In commanding us to glorify Him, God is inviting us to enjoy Him. ~ C.S. Lewis, The Joyful Christian

I'm with David on this one ... Psalm 84.10 - "For a day in your [God's] courts is better than a thousand elsewhere. I would rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God than dwell in the tents of wickedness." This is why I am created and this is why I have been redeemed; to glorify Him forever (Eph 1.11-14).

first and then second

Put first things first and we get second things thrown in: put second things first and we lose both first and second things. ~ C.S. Lewis, God in the Dock

Friday, May 08, 2009

a calvinist responds

I thought Phil Johnson (orange text) provided some good response to these points raised from an Arminian perspective (purple text).

I have a few verses I would like to get a Calvinist interpretation of. To me they don't seem to be compatible with many of the Calvinist doctrines; they deal with God commanding us to repent and turn to him and with us forsaking Him after we have been following Him.

Why would God command something that is impossible?

1) God clearly does command us to do that which is impossible for fallen sinners: "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect" (Matthew 5:48). Moreover, the law of God itself demands to be obeyed perfectly, flawlessly (James 2:10)—thus demanding a level of obedience that has proven utterly impossible for every person who ever lived, except Christ.

2) Therefore the fact that God commands us to do something is no proof that we have intrinsic power in our fallen state to obey Him. (Cf. Romans 7:15-16).

3) One major reason God gives us moral standards we cannot obey is to reinforce our knowledge of our own spiritual impotence, so that we have no option but to turn to His grace as we seek salvation from our sin. (Cf. Luke 18:13-14).

4) Nothing but sheer arrogance and a blindness to one's own spiritual poverty would lead anyone to think he is capable of obeying God or saving himself through human will power. (cf. Luke 18:11; Romans 10:3.)

5) It is also a serious mistake to imagine that inability nullifies responsibility in the moral realm. The fact that sinners are spiritually dead and therefore morally unable to obey God does not remove them from the moral obligation to obey Him.

6) I think you misunderstand the Calvinist objection to "free will." Every true Calvinist believes sinners are responsible moral agents, free from any external force or coercion in the choices they make. They choose freely. But they inevitably choose wrong, because their choices are determined by their own nature and their nature is sinful and corrupt. We can discuss this further if you're interested, but the point is simple: A call for the sinner to "choose" something good is in no way incompatible with Calvinist theology.

Job 34:4: "Let us choose to us judgment: let us know among ourselves what is good."

Scripture often calls us to make choices that involve a decision for good rather than evil. That in no way suggests that we are morally neutral, or inclined neither to evil or to good. Choosing "good" goes against the sinner's nature (Romans 8:7-8), so unless God graciously intervenes to awaken and empower us, we will always make the wrong choice (Jeremiah 13:23). And we do so without any external force or compulsion. In that sense our choices are perfectly free. But apart from divine grace we would be hopelessly enslaved to our own lusts (Romans 6:20). So the sinner's "choice," though free in every meaningful sense, is always predictably wrong.

Job 33:27-28: "He looketh upon men, and if any say, I have sinned, and perverted that which was right, and it profited me not; He will deliver his soul from going into the pit and his life shall see the light."

Note that this verse plainly teaches it is God who enlightens and saves the sinner; the sinner doesn't turn himself around apart from God's enablement. I don't know what in this verse you imagine is incompatible with Calvinism.

Job 40:14: God states; "Then will I confess to you that thine own right hand can save thee."

Well, just read what goes before this verse. The Lord speaks to Job out of the whirlwind and says, "Do you have an arm like God?" (v. 9). Can you thunder with a voice like His? Can you deck yourself in majesty equal to His? (v. 10). Can you disburse your wrath in a way that humbles all who are arrogant? (vv. 11-13). If you can do all that in the same way God can, "Then I will also confess to you That your own right hand can save you."

In other words, God Himself is saying it is arrogant to think you can save yourself. That's exactly the same point I made above.

Deuteronomy 30:19: Moses tell them to choose life rather than death. If there is no choice in the matter why would he say this?

See above. They do have a choice. They just can't make the right choice without God's gracious enablement.

1 Samuel 15:11: Saul "turned back from following" the Lord, so he had to have been following Him at some point in time. As far as what I have learned one of the doctrines that Calvinists teach is the irresistibility of grace. Here it does not seem to irresistible.

Again, you don't understand Calvinism very well. God's grace toward His elect will always ultimately triumph over their resistance. (In other words, "irresistible grace" does not mean God's grace is never resisted, because many of us resisted it at first, but it ultimately proves irresistible.) However, God's goodness to the reprobate ("common grace")—which is what you see operating in Saul's case, I believe—is always rejected and resisted.

Joshua 23:8-16: Joshua warns Israel to cleave to the Lord their God as they have done and not to turn back. If they could not turn back in the first place why would God have Joshua warn them in the first place?

God's warnings are often the means He uses to secure our perseverance. See John Murray's comments on this in the chapter on perseverance in Redemption: Accomplished and Applied.

Galatians 4:9, 11: Paul asks the Galatians why they would desire to be in bondage again by turning to the weak and beggarly elements after they have been known of God. If grace is irresistible why would they have to be warned?

See previous answer. The warning itself is a manifestation of grace.

Jude 24: The expression is "able to keep us from falling"; not "will keep us from falling." Able in Greek means "maybe" "might" "can" anything but "will."

Wrong. "Able" in Greek is from a root that means "power"—dunamai. Literally, "God has the power to keep you from falling." Moreover, Peter makes it explicit: we "are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time" (1 Peter 1:5). God's own power is the keeping agent, not my own weak and fragile "will power."

Technorati Tags:

Thursday, May 07, 2009

right v. wrong

David Rudd lists some good questions we might ask in determining if something is right or wrong.
  • What is commanded by God?
  • What is expected by God?
  • What does God say is necessary?
  • What is forbidden by God?
  • What is loving?
  • What is wise?
  • What will support my mission (and God's)?
  • What is beneficial?
  • What is profitable?
Unrelated to this, Tim Challies recently posted some criticism toward "blogs that specialize in sharing bad news. They share stories and videos and anecdotes about Christians and churches and supposed Christians and supposed churches. Day after day they offer examples of all that is wrong in the church. They may vary what they offer a little bit, but what is true of them is that they offer a steady diet of negative content related to the church in general or perhaps related to just one person or one ministry."

I agreed with his point. Many did not. Interestingly I could see, whether intentional or not, that Challies applied thoughts similar to those articulated by Rudd to his post. To me, those that disagreed with him (as well as those he was critiquing) did not.

Wednesday, May 06, 2009

more cardboard

I don't care how many of these things I see, there's still something about a changed life that moves me ...

Cardboard Testimonies from Granger Community on Vimeo.

bubble creek canyon

If God wasn't omnipresent, he'd probably live here ... Bubble Creek Canyon ...

Technorati Tags: ,

Monday, May 04, 2009

counterfeit gospels

Tullian Tchividjian posts seven counterfeit gospels found in How People Change.

  • Formalism. “I participate in the regular meetings and ministries of the church, so I feel like my life is under control. I’m always in church, but it really has little impact on my heart or on how I live. I may become judgmental and impatient with those who do not have the same commitment as I do.”
  • Legalism. “I live by the rules—rules I create for myself and rules I create for others. I feel good if I can keep my own rules, and I become arrogant and full of contempt when others don’t meet the standards I set for them. There is no joy in my life because there is no grace to be celebrated.”
  • Mysticism. “I am engaged in the incessant pursuit of an emotional experience with God. I live for the moments when I feel close to him, and I often struggle with discouragement when I don’t feel that way. I may change churches often, too, looking for one that will give me what I’m looking for.”
  • Activism. “I recognize the missional nature of Christianity and am passionately involved in fixing this broken world. But at the end of the day, my life is more of a defense of what’s right than a joyful pursuit of Christ.”
  • Biblicism. “I know my Bible inside and out, but I do not let it master me. I have reduced the gospel to a mastery of biblical content and theology, so I am intolerant and critical of those with lesser knowledge.”
  • Therapism. “I talk a lot about the hurting people in our congregation, and how Christ is the only answer for their hurt. Yet even without realizing it, I have made Christ more Therapist than Savior. I view hurt as a greater problem than sin—and I subtly shift my greatest need from my moral failure to my unmet needs.”
  • Social-ism. “The deep fellowship and friendships I find at church have become their own idol. The body of Christ has replaced Christ himself, and the gospel is reduced to a network of fulfilling Christian relationships.”
Wow - I'm not sure if this captures all of our perversions but it's a spooky list. One needn't look around too hard to see these.

Saturday, May 02, 2009


Dwayne Forehand gleaned 7 lessons in manliness from Tom Brokaw's The Greatest Generation.
  • Lesson # 1: Take Personal Responsibility for Your Life
  • Lesson #2: Be Frugal
  • Lesson #3: Be Humble
  • Lesson #4: Love Loyally
  • Lesson #5: Work Hard
  • Lesson #6: Embrace Challenge
  • Lesson #7: Don’t Make Life So Damn Complicated
Excellent stuff.

irresistible grace

This is what we mean when we use terms like sovereign grace or irresistible grace. We mean that the Holy Spirit is God’s Spirit, and therefore he is omnipotent and sovereign. And therefore, he is irresistible and infallibly effective in his regenerating work. Which doesn’t mean that we don’t resist him. We do. The Bible is plain about that (Acts 7:51). What the sovereignty of grace and the sovereignty of the Spirit mean is that when God chooses, he can overcome the rebellion and resistance of our wills. He can make Christ look so compelling that our resistance is broken and we freely come to him and receive him and believe him. ~ John Piper


Technorati Tags:

coffee and worse

Love this from Bonnie at Intellectuelle. 3493425847 C6Cec26Bee But then I found this and ... well I think you can figure out the rest ...

Technorati Tags: ,

mueller quote

It ill becomes the servant to seek to be rich, and great, and honoured in that world where his Lord was poor, and mean, and despised. ~ George Mueller

states of man

James Grant has an interesting post regarding the fourfold state of man. He sees our existence as follows:
  • Innocence—possible to sin or not to sin
  • Fall—not possible not to sin
  • Grace—possible not to sin
  • Glory—not possible to sin
3494077650 35E14Afdc8

Friday, May 01, 2009

worship stars

Todd Rhodes just keeps finding these pearls ...

Technorati Tags: ,

small group dynamics

Technorati Tags:

contextualization again

I love this thought from Tyler Kenny ... it's about teaching children but I think the point is more universal ...

Let's take a little people group called three-year-olds, for instance. If I only use words they don't know, they obviously won't learn anything. But if I only use words they do know, they won't learn anything either.

So contextualization isn't the most important thing with kids. The most important thing is concept creation. Children need to be given new categories of thought in order to learn.

Technorati Tags: