Showing posts with label Theology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Theology. Show all posts

Thursday, 1 July 2010

The Pursuit of God


Sorry it has been a while since I have written anything! But I have some great news! Christian Audio are giving away 'The Pursuit of God' by A W Tozer absolutely free!!! I read this book a few months back and found it fascinating and really important because as Tozer said "What I believe about God is the most important thing about me."

The Promo Code to get this book for free in JUL2010 click here to get it now!

Saturday, 22 May 2010

We ought to hate it with a deadly hatred!



I get a daily devo sent to me from Grace-Gems these devos are great.

You should sign up...

Heres a bit of Saturday's:

"You who love the Lord, hate evil!" Psalm 97:10

How much we ought to hate sin! Instead of . . .
loving it,
cleaving to it,
dallying with it,
excusing it,
playing with it--
we ought to hate it with a deadly hatred!

Sin is the great murderer, and thief, and
pestilence, and nuisance of this world!

Let us make no peace with it!

Let us wage a ceaseless warfare against it!

Thursday, 20 May 2010

What if God wrote a book? Harvest Bible Fellowship

Dont have a church you can call home?

Harvest Bible Fellowship 2010 from HBF Church Plants on Vimeo.



If you live in Glasgow visit www.harvestglasgow.org
To find a location near you outside of Glasgow visit http://www.harvestbiblefellowship.us/

Thursday, 29 April 2010

The Holy what, eh?


First thing is first, a little of my background. The church that I grew up in was cessationist. The preaching was great the people were great and sometimes the praise was great. I often felt that not just in my church but many evangelical and baptist churches like mine had perhaps replaced the Holy Spirit for the Holy Bible. I by no means want to negate the importance of the Word! It is essential and it must be preached in an expository manner.

In my teens I started to infrequently attend some charismatic churches with some friends. I felt like they had something that perhaps my church was missing, however it was pretty much always done in an un-biblical manner often made me feel uncomfortable. But still I felt like I was missing something...

Over the past few years iv really been challenged to study the work of the Holy Spirit and His role today in the church. I'm still wrestling this one through to be honest. I feel like we are often to scared to talk about him in-case something crazy happens like on the God Channel (don't bother watching it). Surely there has to be some balance thou? Right? Is it possible to be a 'Charismatic Calvinist'? I think it is, but what does this look like?

I realise I'm asking a lot of questions here. However I think its something us reformed guys have to work through. Its been put to the side too often. I have seen the Holy Spirit move in power during street preaching in Chicago where a guy ripped of his stookie (cast for you yanks) because his arm was healed. Is this supposed to be normative? I don' know...

Don't get me wrong the most amazing work of God was to save a wretched sinner like me and to continually sanctify me even though in my pride I often don't live according to his will.

Now here is the challenge.

Anyone who is up for it, lets read together this short e-book published by the guys at Resurgance and see if it helps us in our understanding of the Spirits role today. If it happens that we are wrong (my self included), lets repent and change.

Feedback is encouraged.

Thursday, 1 April 2010

Piper and Warren

So it a appears that in the blogsphere that there is a lot of debate about John Piper inviting Rick Warren to Desiring God Conference. I have not heard a great deal of Warrens preaching nor have I read a lot of his books, so I'm not really able to comment. However what I will say is that I love and respect Piper. His preaching has convicted me and challenged me and I haven't heard any error come from him. Ultimately I trust the guy, so I'm looking forward to hearing the audio of the DG Conference.

Piper speaks on the subject:

Thursday, 11 March 2010

Good Rap V Bad Rap

Good Rap

Lots of great theology there right...

Bad Rap

Tuesday, 9 March 2010

Whats wrong with NOOMA???


In light of Rob Bell coming to Perth to speak in the next few weeks I thought it would be fitting to post about some of his material. I firstly want to say that I have not read all his books nor have I watched all the Nooma videos. However I do have a problem with some of the stuff I have encountered. Ultimately there is no cross- that's a big problem, no cross = no Gospel!

Greg Gilbert from 9 marks reviews Nooma:

“The gospel as Bell communicates it in NOOMA runs something like this: All of us are broken, sinful, selfish, and prideful people. We carry around the baggage of our hurts, our resentments, and our jealousies. As a result we are just a shell of the kind of people God intends us to be. But our God is a loving God who accepts us and loves us just as we are. He can comfort us, heal us, and make us whole, real, authentic, living, laughing people. Not only that, but Jesus came to show us how to live revolutionary lives of love, compassion, and acceptance. By learning from his teachings and following him, we can live the full and complete lives that God intended.

And that’s about it. That’s not just the introduction that leads to an explanation of the cross, atonement, the resurrection and salvation, either. So far, at least, that’s what NOOMA holds out as "The Gospel." Full stop.
In the videos I watched, there’s almost no exposition of the cross. I only remember it being mentioned twice, once to say that Caesar killed Jesus and once when Bell says, "The cross is like God saying, ‘I don’t hold your past against you.’" Well, kind of. But that hardly exhausts the meaning of the cross, does it? At the very least, he ought to have continued that sentence by saying something like, "I don’t hold your past against you, because I held it against my Son." But then I suppose that sort of uncomfortable thought would have destroyed the smoothness of the presentation.

Even the resurrection—which usually plays an enormous role in Emergent theology—doesn’t get much emphasis here. NOOMA is all about "Jesus’ teachings," but only a select few of those. You won’t hear Bell talking about the teachings of Jesus that focus on ransom, blood, new covenants, and rebirth—much less judgment, sheep and goats, and "Depart from me." For Bell, Jesus’ teachings are apparently limited to his ethics, and Bell’s gospel is evidently limited to a call for people to embrace those ethics and "live like Jesus."

I have a theory about why Emergent church types seem to be able to communicate so well with "our generation," why they’re able to relate so well to people who have always been hostile to the gospel. You can chalk it up to some kind of "authentic" style if you want, but I’d contend that a big part of their ability to communicate the gospel without offense to people who have always been offended by it is that they leave out all the offensive parts!”


Too read the full review click here

Sunday, 7 March 2010

Some thoughts about 'Limited Atonement'

So, most of you will know that I have a keen interest in reformed theology. I got and agreed with 4 points of Calvinism, the points are:
T- total depravity
U- unconditional election
L- limited atonement
I- irresistible grace
P- perseverance of the saints

The one I had an issue with was 'Limited Atonement', about six months ago I realised it was entirely correct. The reason I had an issue with the doctrine was due to my own pride. Perhaps the name is an issue, there is nothing at all limited about the doctrine 'Limited Atonement'. Perhaps the better name as some have suggested is 'Particular Redemption'.

The Theological Dictionary defines 'Limited Atonement' as “The teaching held in Reformed (Calvinist) circles of Christianity that Jesus bore only the sins of the elect, and not that of the entire world. It maintains that the sacrifice was sufficient for all, but intended for the elect.”

The first step to me truly understanding and grasping this doctrine was in reading Mark Driscoll's 'Death by Love'. Here Driscoll defines the doctrine as Unlimited Limited Atonement he basically teaches that the Atonement was ultimately for the elect but there was benefits for everyone i.e. The church 'the elect' have brought about health care, education etc... and ultimately there has been a blessing in the atonement for everyone. However in my study and in conversations with friends I have realised what Driscoll calls 'Unlimited Limited Atonement' really is just the true doctrine of 'Particular Redemption'.

For moe info on this doctrine visit Kevin DeYoung's blog he did an awsome post on this last week.