As many as 50 Muslim villagers armed with clubs and axes recently attacked a showing of the 'Jesus' film near Sargodha, Pakistan, injuring three part-time evangelists and four Christians in attendance.
Two of the evangelists were said to be seriously injured. The Muslim hardliners also damaged a movie projector, burned reels of the film and absconded with the public address system and donations from Christian viewers in Chak village, about 10 kilometers northeast of Sargodha.

Officers at the Saddr police station refused to register a case against the Muslim assailants, sources said....

The evangelists said a Muslim cleric instigated the Muslim villagers, who were armed with clubs, spades and axes.

WHO: Dr. James White, writer and founder of Alpha & Omega Ministries

WHAT: Winter Bible Conference - A Faith Worth Defending

WHERE: Rockdale Community Church, Conyers, GA (DIRECTIONS)

WHEN: Feb. 5th-7th, 2010 (Friday 7pm - 9:30pm & Saturday 9am - 5pm)

WHY: Because we are all commanded to be prepared to give a defense

CONFERENCE SCHEDULE

REGISTRATION: Registration for this conference is free and open to anyone. As the Lord leads, donations in any amount will be accepted at the conference in lieu of a set fee. Please check out the Conference Schedule and be sure to fill out the Registration Form if you plan to attend. Make sure you complete a separate registration for each person who will be coming.

NOTE: Sunday, Feb. 7th is not actually a part of the Conference schedule, but Dr. White will be teaching a joint Sunday School class that morning before delivering the sermon during morning worship. You are more than welcomed to return Sunday and join us for Sunday School and worship if you would like. FYI, we observe the Lord's Supper every week at RCC, and wanted to let you know so that you can be preparing your heart and mind for that portion of the service if you decide to join us on Sunday.

We hope you will make time for this great opportunity to focus on the subject of defending the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints. May we all contend earnestly for that faith.

Contact Brian Thornton for more information.

9:29 Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

Read a synopsis in one year by reading one pericope [a gospel unit] every day! By coincidence, the synopsis has 367 pericopes (That is, all four gospels combined contain 367 units.) If you read one pericope a day next year, plus two additional days, you will have read all 367 units of all four gospels in a full year. The edition that I recommend for English is the Synopsis of the Four Gospels Edited by Kurt Aland.

I take it you are distancing yourself from the Nicene creed since you know the "One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church" of the creed has a different meaning to Catholic and Orthodox, than to Protestant denominations?

Will you distance yourself from the bible also, since Catholic and Orthodox sign off on it? If I can get a Catholic to sign off on the 1689 confession, can I get you to withdraw from it too?

18 “If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. 19 If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. 20 Remember the word that I said to you: ‘A servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you. If they kept my word, they will also keep yours. 21 But all these things they will do to you on account of my name, because they do not know him who sent me. 22 If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have been guilty of sin, but now they have no excuse for their sin. 23 Whoever hates me hates my Father also. (John 15:18-23)

I asked George several times if he was really hoping to ground a mass movement in abstract principles of reason so at odds with the prevailing culture. It was a bet, he said, on his conviction about the innate human gift for reason. Still, he said, if there was one critique of his work that worried him, it was the charge that he puts too much faith in the power of reason, overlooking what Christians describe as original sin and what secular pessimists call history.

It is a debate at least as old as the Reformation, when Martin Luther broke with the Catholic Church and insisted that reason was so corrupted that faith in the divine was humanity’s only hope of salvation. (Until relatively recently, contemporary evangelicals routinely leveled the same charge at modern Catholics.) “This is a serious issue, and if I am wrong, this is where I am wrong,” George acknowledges.

Over lunch last month at the Princeton faculty club, George noted that many evangelicals had signed the Manhattan Declaration despite the traditional Protestant skepticism about the corruption of human reason. “I sold my view about reason!” he declared. He was especially pleased that, by signing onto the text, so many Catholic bishops had endorsed his new natural-law argument about marriage. “It really is the top leadership of the American church,” he said.

“Obviously, I am gratified that view appears to have attracted a very strong following among the bishops,” he went on. “I just hope I am right. If they are going to buy my arguments, I don’t want to mislead the whole church.”

I have had a growing awareness over the past number of years of the beauty and harmony of Christian truth as it is revealed in divine Scripture. God's truth is not expressed to us in modern, Western, text-book fashion, with an index in the back so you can skip past the stuff you don't care about, read a few paragraphs, and be good to go. Divine truth is a tapestry, woven in the mind of God, expressed over time through His dealings with His people, the Incarnation, the Cross, the building of Christ's Body. The echoes and reverberations of the great themes of Scripture are to be heard in even the most obscure corners of the Scriptural revelation, at least, for those with ears to hear.

Sometimes my own work in apologetics gets in the way of my hearing those divine echoes. Constant is the temptation to find "the" answer to every objection, "the" reply that will shut the mouth of the skeptic. But the fact is, there are elements of divine truth that are shut off from the haughty rebel. God does not grant entrance into the inner sanctum of His truth and fellowship to those who hate Him. And it is truly an example of casting pearls before swine to attempt to express the Spirit-borne confidence one has of divine truth to the railing atheist or the self-righteous religionist. While the task of giving a reason for the inward hope does lead one to see this beauty, it is more often in the quietness of contemplation of the truths you have learned in that defense that you are taken aback by the generation-spanning harmony and consistency of the Word.

Nowhere is it more important to see the harmony of the woven fabric of God's revelation than when speaking of the gospel. Modern Western minds, prone to analysis and separation of facts into disconnected categories, far too often misses the forest due to over-attention to the individual trees, or limbs, or even leaves. Seeing one's belief in God, the Trinity, the Church, the gospel, all in one panoramic view, is a rare experience for many in the West. Some find it very uncomfortable to have the various elements of their belief system brought into close proximity with one another, for the obvious reason that issues of inconsistency and contradiction are often seen as a result.

The gospel, while identifiable and definable, is likewise complex, in the sense that there are a number of divine acts that together comprise the gospel. The gospel, for example, is Triune, in that it finds its origin and source in the divine decree, love, and mercy of the Father, is accomplished in the perfect work of the Incarnate Son, and brought to fruition in the life of the elect believer by the Spirit. Likewise, the gospel brings into focus the moral law of God, His wrath against sin, the necessity of punishment. This leads to the categories of atonement, substitution, and forgiveness. Add to this regeneration, adoption, sanctification, glorification, and you can see how the gospel, while simple in its call for repentance and faith, is complex as well.

I am reflecting on this topic due to the recent Manhattan Declaration discussions. I am very concerned about the "Mere Christianity"/Least Common Denominator style of "Christianity" that has become so very prevalent amongst Evangelicals in our nation. The abandonment of the gospel as a definitional aspect of the faith is not just troubling, it is disastrous. But part of the reason for this move seems to be the chicken coop theology that plagues so many today. Let me explain.

24/7 Catholic radio is now beaming across metro Phoenix and beyond thanks to the newest station to come on line in the ever-expanding Immaculate Heart Radio network. This follows the recent launch of another powerhouse Catholic radio station in Salt Lake City, which is now broadcasting 24/7 Catholic programming across the great State of Utah.
If I remember correctly, a couple of the more bumptious Protestant pop-apologists live in Phoenix. So it warms my heart to know that they will now be able to enjoy listening to Catholic preachers, apologists, and commentators such as Scott Hahn, Marcus Grodi, Tim, Staples, Father Corapi and, of course, the ever-popular "Catholic Answers Live" show, practically any time they want, in the air-conditioned comfort of their cars, homes, and offices. Or even when riding a bike! I've heard that well-equipped bike shops carry portable AM radios to help thoroughly furnish cycling enthusiasts

Once you grasp the concept of middle knowledge, Lucy, I think you’ll find it astonishing in its subtlety and power. Indeed, I’d venture to say that it is one of the most fruitful theological concepts ever conceived. I’ve applied it to the issues of Christian particularism, perseverance of the saints, and biblical inspiration; Tom Flint has used it to analyze papal infallibility and Christology, and Del Ratzsch has employed it profitably in evolutionary theory.

Oh may God by His Spirit continue to drive men to their knees before His awesome sovereign power, and in so doing expose all the vain attempts men propose to draw a veil across His glory.

In the midst of the needed and meaningful discussions prompted by the Manhattan Declaration, and especially due to the light it has cast upon the degradation of a commitment to the gospel as the means of changing hearts and minds in our world today, it is educational to listen to Roman Catholic apologist and writer Mark Shea demonstrate true ecumenism in response to RC Sproul's concern over the gospel:

Of course, not everybody signs off on this. RC Sproul, for instance, goes on living in the 16th Century's passion for diagrammatic Calvinism by declaring that he will not engage in practical acts of love if this do not comport with his favorite theological schematic:

The Roman Catholic Church has a long history of using studied ambiguity in order to win over opponents. Let me be unambiguous: Without a clear understanding of sola fide and the doctrine of the imputation of Christ’s righteousness, you do not have the gospel or gospel unity (1 Cor. 1:17; 2 Cor. 5:21).

Cuz, as Jesus clearly says, "Enter into the kingdom which my Father has prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was threatened with abortion and you held firm to a clear understanding of sola fide and the doctrine of the imputation of Christ’s righteousness and did nothing to stop it."

Whatever.

Yes, you read that correctly. Unless you rely upon numbers and politics and Rome, you are "doing nothing" to stop abortion. What utter hubris, but then again, this is Mark Shea, so that is to be expected.

It was a year ago this week that I first mentioned the Ministry Resource List. Since then, this little idea has been a tremendous encouragement to us. Those of you who have assisted with resources through this means don't know how edifying it is to know that there are folks out there who want us to continue pressing forward doing what we are doing. My sincerest personal thanks to all who have participated!

We received this e-mail this morning:

Quit talking about the manhatten declaration. who cared...revelation says the millenium is 1000 years. amillenialism is false.

Well there you go, folks! Bret Zagar has his priorities straight! Let's not worry about that gospel stuff, let's get that eschatology stuff right! I confess, I am thankful Bret noted that it is "Revelation" not "Revelations." That's a major plus. And yes, it specifically says a thousand years. What that means is, of course, the issue of debate, but something tells me Bret has already decided that controversy. So my apologies for wasting your time with discussions of the gospel and life and marriage and freedom and all that irrelevant side stuff. Let me drop this textual study I'm doing, forget about Beckwith and justification, and see if I can't find a copy of Left Behind somewhere around here...wait, didn't I leave my copy right next to The Prayer of Jabez?

I have been away this week attempting to do some studying on various topics, and writing on projects that I have simply not been able to get to while at home. I am working on a chapter in response to Frank Beckwith's arguments in denial of sola fide, and I am also working on the expansion of the book refuting Harold Camping. Here is a brief snippet from what I've been able to get written on both of these topics.

There are two regular statements by Roman Catholic apologists and polemicists that truly gall me. The first is when they attempt to defend notoriously unbiblical beliefs (such as the Marian dogmas) through the grossly deceptive parallel to the divine doctrine of the Trinity. Such a blasphemous form of argumentation is worthy of the judgment it will bring upon its practitioners, to be sure. But the second common argument involves the straw-man caricaturization of the doctrine of justification as a “mere legal fiction” or, as Beckwith repeats it, “mere imputed righteousness.” Any man who claims to have once been a true evangelical who can then turn around and thusly describe his former beliefs plainly never believed the gospel I believe. Every fiber of honesty would have to be removed from my being for me to be able to describe the hope of my soul, the anchor of my salvation, as “mere imputed righteousness.” The very term “mere” is blasphemously shallow, for we are talking about the imputed righteousness of the incarnate God-man Jesus, the Messiah, whose free and purposeful self-giving is intimately tied not only to His perfect life and sinlessness, but to His role as High Priest, Intercessor, Mediator, and therefore the one who is able “to save completely all of those who draw near to God by means of Him, seeing He ever lives to make intercession for them” (Hebrews 7:25). The use of “mere” in such a context is clearly meant to be deceptive and demeaning, and as such is unworthy of any truth-loving person.

Yes, yes, I know. I left my politically correct, post-modern filter at home. And on to Camping:

Mr. Camping has adopted a whole new array of false teachings, all of which demonstrate the central error that has driven him for decades now: a trenchant, stubborn unwillingness to submit to the Word of God by interpreting it in a meaningful, consistent fashion. All the while claiming careful allegiance to the biblical text, Harold Camping’s refusal to utilize any meaningful method of interpretation has led him, and his followers, farther and farther into error. No aspect of the Christian faith is safe once the firm foundation of an unchanging and meaningfully interpreted text is abandoned. It is not overly surprising that Camping has abandoned a belief in eternal, conscious punishment of the wicked. This is a very distasteful belief, and apart from a close connection to divine revelation and an understanding of the holiness of God, many find ways of jettisoning that particular doctrine. But his idiosyncratic teaching that Jesus actually died twice, once in eternity past, and once as a memorial upon the cross in time, is truly an eisegetical novum, proving that his connection to the text of the Bible, and to the teachings of the Christian faith of the past, is completely severed. All he has left is his own system, his own authority as a teacher, and that is surely not a sound foundation.

As to my reading, yesterday I spent some time on the "fig tree" synoptic parallels issue between Matthew and Mark, working through a lengthy and excellent paper submitted by one of my students, and I am taking a very serious look at the arguments in favor of the Byzantine text platform as enunciated by Maurice Robinson. His recently published article on the NA27 as a "test-tube text" without any historical manuscript witness is very challenging, and given that unbelieving textual critical scholarship has in essence completely abandoned the field (Ehrman being a good example) one is left wondering. It is good to think through such challenges fairly and honestly.

Don't forget that, Lord willing, we will be back to our regular DL schedule next week!

Oh, really enjoyed John MacArthur's no-holds-barred blast of the travesty that is TBN.

Many had been wondering when RC Sproul would comment on the MD, and as most of you know, he has finally broken his silence. He strongly asserts a direct connection between the MD and the ECT, citing from comments made by Colson which I had not read. Colson, one of the leading voices bringing confusion to the nature of the gospel in America today (along with Timothy George, both crafters of the MD and signers of ECT), wrote regarding the MD:

Just imagine what could happen if we could say to the world that a million Christians have made this pledge—that we will not compromise the faith, no matter what. I think that would have an extraordinary impact on American culture.

And just as important, I believe the Manhattan Declaration can help revitalize the church in America. One great weakness of the Church today is its biblical and doctrinal ignorance. This document is, in fact, a form of catechism for the foundational truths of the faith.

Once again we see that for Charles Colson, the gospel is no longer a part of "the faith" that he refuses to compromise. That is, "the faith" has been boiled down to a skeleton of basic beliefs (Trinity, resurrection) that can unite varied and disparate religious traditions into one big (and politically powerful) group. This Least Common Denominator (LCD) form of "Christianity" is what is needed, evidently, to "revitalize the church in America." I cannot help but shake my head in disbelief as someone promotes a gospel-less Christianity and says this is what the church needs to be "revitalized" today. But it is truly a matter for deep concern that Mr. Colson believes this document is a "form of catechism for the foundational truths of the faith." How can this gospel-less document be a catechism for anything other than cultural Christianity? Without the gospel, you cannot change hearts and minds. So while the document mentions the gospel and says we must preach it in its fulness, evidently, that fulness does not include the very doctrinal precision demanded by the inspired Scriptures themselves. Paul, and all who would follow his example today, have gone overboard, evidently, and missed the great unifying impact of allowing anything and everything to fit under the banner of "the gospel." Somehow, we are asked to believe that this document, with its noble words regarding life and marriage and freedom, but which lacks any warning of the wrath of God, the holiness of God, punishment of sin and sinners, the cross, redemption, repentance, and the once-for-allness of the substitutionary atonement of Christ, is an antidote to "biblical and doctrinal ignorance." If abandoning these vital revelations of God is what is needed for me to get in line with the new enlightened and unified "Church of today," may I ever remain in dismal ignorance.

I, too, refuse to compromise on life, marriage, and freedom. I hereby let the world know that my allegiance is first and foremost to God and the Lordship of Jesus Christ, King of kings and Lord of lords, and with all those who this day suffer around the world under the hatred and persecution of those who hate the gospel (whether they be atheistic communists, Muslims, or Hindus), I will refuse to bend the knee to any government's demands in these areas. But apart from, in clear distinction from, those who crafted this document, I add that I even more clearly and firmly refuse to compromise the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I refuse to boil it down to an inoffensive minimalism that allows all the falsehoods of Rome to pass for the pristine, soul-saving gospel once for all delivered to the saints. I refuse to blaspheme that gospel by identifying such things as the Mass as a propitiatory sacrifice, purgatory, indulgences, the Marian dogmas, and the identification of the Roman priest as an alter Christus, as mere "differences of opinion" that do not fundamentally deny the gracious nature of the gospel. I hereby promise to remain steadfast in seeking to clarify, not confuse, the gospel message, and to hold forth even those elements of the gospel that the world finds most repelling and distasteful, including the wrath and holiness of God, and the coming judgment upon all who refuse God's gracious offer of salvation solely in and through Jesus Christ. I call upon all who likewise love and honor the gospel to refuse to join in any man-made movement that would remove the gospel from the definition of the Christian faith, but instead to demonstrate their steadfastness in their profession of the faith, in their lives, and in their cultivation of a vital, active Christian worldview.

Finally, I call upon those who have been caught up in the euphoria of "joining together" at the cost of the gospel to withdraw their signatures from the Manhattan Declaration, but to do so only in conjunction with a clear affirmation not only of the noble elements of defense of life, marriage, and freedom, but to do so in the context of an open and public profession of the centrality of the gospel as the sole means by which the hearts of men and women can be changed to God's glory. I call upon pastors and elders to give serious consideration to this matter, and to address it openly, in light of the concerted effort of Colson, George, and others, to promote this document and its ever clearer compromise of the gospel itself.

Now, I have criticized, strongly, the apologetic methodology of William Lane Craig. I would debate Dawkins quite differently than Craig would. But that aside, it is fascinating to observe the level of hubris, simple personal self-deception and arrogance, that defines Richard Dawkins as a human being who has dedicated his every moment of existence to his leadership of, and membership in, τῶν τὴν ἀλήθειαν ἐν ἀδικίᾳ κατεχόντων, those who suppress the truth in unrighteousness (Romans 1:18). Dawkins' published works have been juvenile in their philosophical, historical, and biblical errors, yet, being a "scientist" overshadows all of that, of course. Hence, he will not debate the very people who would be able to expose his numerous errors. Behold the creature in denial of his Creator: