I grew up in a Christian home under the godly discipline of two loving parents. I would classify our beliefs as generically evangelical, not leaning too much either way toward Arminiasm or Calvinism. God was over all, but the specifics of election and predestination didn’t mean too much to me. Over the past year and a half, though, my faith has been radically transformed as I have read about and studied Reformed theology. Whether it’s reading books or listening to messages by Anyabwile, Dever, Driscoll, or Piper, or, most importantly, reading the Bible and examining it deeply, I have come to see God’s entire role in my salvation, in my regeneration, justification, and sanctification. It has opened up my eyes to evangelism, seeing my role as simply sharing God with others and trusting the Holy Spirit to work on them, not having the actual responsibility to getting someone to “say the sinner’s prayer.” It is in the midst of this growth that I have read with great interest some of the recent dust-ups over Calvinism / Reformed theology.

Scot McKnight is a New Testament scholar at North Park University, the author of the recent book The Blue Parakeet: Rethinking How You Read the Bible, part of the leadership team of The Origins Project, and a leading Emergent thinker. He has recently written and spoken about the “NeoReformed”, his term for many active in the current Reformed resurgence. Here is his blurb from N.T. Wright’s Justification God’s Plan and Paul’s Vision

“Tom Wright has out-Reformed America’s newest religious zealots–the neo-Reformed–by taking them back to Scripture and to its meaning in its historical context. Wright reveals that the neo-Reformed are more committed to tradition than to the sacred text. This irony is palpable on every page of this judicious, hard-hitting, respectful study.”

He also recently posted two articles on his blog Jesus Creed. In Who are the NeoReformed? he wrote

The NeoReformed, for a variety of reasons, some of them good, don’t recognize that evangelicalism as a village green. Instead, they want to build a gate at the gate-less village green and require Reformed confessions and credentials to enter onto the village green. Put differently, they think the only legitimate and the only faithful evangelicals are Reformed. Really Reformed. In other words, they are “confessing” evangelicals. The only true evangelical is a Reformed evangelical. They are more than happy to call into question the legitimacy and fidelity of any evangelical who doesn’t believe in classic Reformed doctrines, like double predestination.

and in his followup Who are the NeoReformed? 2 he wrote

If I had to sum it up I’d put it this way: the NeoReformed are those who are obsessed with God’s holiness and grace and have not learned that grace makes people gracious. These folks are America’s newest religious zealots and they are wounding, perhaps for a generation or two, evangelicalism.

Both of these articles caused quite a stir among many of the Reformed blogs that I read. In the first article, I particularly disagreed with McKnight’s assigning to classic Reformed theology the “doctrine” of double predestination, that God actively chooses some for salvation and actively chooses others for eternal judgment. I can find no biblical warrant for such an idea. In fact, we are all due eternal judgement due to our active and willful disobedience and rejection of God and it is only through His life-giving mercy that some are saved. R.C. Sproul writes of it this way

The decree and fulfillment of election provide mercy for the elect while the efficacy of reprobation provides justice for the reprobate. God shows mercy sovereignly and unconditionally to some, and gives justice to those passed over in election. That is to say, God grants the mercy of election to some and justice to others. No one is the victim of injustice. To fail to receive mercy is not to be treated unjustly. God is under no obligation to grant mercy to all — in fact He is under no obligation to grant mercy to any. He says, “I will have mercy upon whom I will have mercy” (Rom. 9). The divine prerogative to grant mercy voluntarily cannot be faulted. If God is required by some cosmic law apart from Himself to be merciful to all men, then we would have to conclude that justice demands mercy. If that is so, then mercy is no longer voluntary, but required. If mercy is required, it is no longer mercy, but justice. What God does not do is sin by visiting injustice upon the reprobate. 

Some people think that McKnight was referring to people like John Piper and John MacArthur in both the book blurb and in the “NeoReformed” group, but he never offered clarification. That seems both a cop-out and a classic straw-man argument, building up an imaginary opponent only to strike him down quickly and thoroughly.

In the second article, McKnight refers to the NeoReformed caring more about God’s grace than His command to be gracious to others. I also find little evidence in my reading and listening, especially since McKnight offers no specific names. “Gracious” here also seems to imply the idea of “tolerance”, where everyone’s ideas, beliefs, and doctrine are okay since they are their own and who are we to judge? One of the things that I have greatly appreciated about many of the Reformed believers that I read and listen to is their absolute devotion to Christ and examining all things in light of God’s revelation through the Scripture. One of my concerns with the Emergent movement is their willingness to stray from what I see as clear Biblical teaching on issues like homosexuality and gender roles in favor of a trajectory hermaneutic, looking at where the Bible seems to be going, not where it actually is and was. McKnight writes about gender roles in The Blue Parakeet, arguing for the full inclusion of women in all church offices, even though I see clear evidence in the Bible to the contrary (1 Timothy 3:2 and Titus 1:6 ). If “graciousness” means glossing over and ignoring differences where Scripture is clear, then I’m not sure “graciousness” should be our goal. McKnight also closes the second article by writing that the NeoReformed are “wounding, perhaps for a generation or two, evangelicalism”, which I greatly disagree with, as does Time Magazine. Wait, Time Magazine?

Yes, Time Magazine. In their March 23, 2009 issue they list the 10 Ideas Changing the World Right Now. When I was alerted to this list by a Tweet from Pastor Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill Church (Seattle), I couldn’t believe what was #3 – The New Calvinism. Author David Van Biema writes

Calvinism is back, and not just musically. John Calvin’s 16th century reply to medieval Catholicism’s buy-your-way-out-of-purgatory excesses is Evangelicalism’s latest success story, complete with an utterly sovereign and micromanaging deity, sinful and puny humanity, and the combination’s logical consequence, predestination: the belief that before time’s dawn, God decided whom he would save (or not), unaffected by any subsequent human action or decision.

All in all, the article is a pretty fairly written one, which is pretty incredible since its competition, Newsweek, seems to have gone off a cliff with denouncing Christians. In contrast to McKnight’s dire predictions that the NeoReformed are “wounding evangelicalism”, Van Biema quotes Ted Olsen, a managing editor at Christianity Today, saying

“everyone knows where the energy and the passion are in the Evangelical world” - with the pioneering new-Calvinist John Piper of Minneapolis, Seattle’s pugnacious Mark Driscoll and Albert Mohler, head of the Southern Seminary of the huge Southern Baptist Convention

I have to say I agree with Olsen. Whether it’s Together for the Gospel filling a convention center in Louisville with pastors waiting to hear gospel-saturated messages, or the Acts 29 Network seeking to raise up 900 men to plant churches throughout the world, the New Calvinism is seeking to proclaim a great God who calls all to repentance and reconciliation to Him available only through the crucification of His Son Jesus on the cross and the Holy Spirit’s regeneration of hearts. It’s too bad that some people, including Scot McKnight, continue to caricature Reformed believers by assigning unbiblical heresies to them. There is plenty of room in evangelicalism for people who disagree on secondary issues (mode of baptism, mode of communion, music style), but as the distinctions begin to move into areas of clear biblical teaching, the true challenge will be to include or exclude those who differ from what God reveals in His Word. May we seek after humble orthodoxy, not announcing our disagreements for the world to see and hear, but petitioning God through prayer to change people’s hearts.

These are some big names in skating preaching and living the gospel. Praise the Lord for He is good!

From Lukas Naugle, writing at DesiringGod.org

My friend Tyler Johnson, a pastor at East Valley Bible Church in Gilbert, AZ, made my day today. He told me about a new music project called Page CVXI.

With music for modern ears, they are seeking to make hymns more accessible and known to the church again.

They are sharing their recent recordings for free to bless the wider church. You can listen and download them at their site.

(For those curious, I’m told that CVXI is the page number where Aslan sings Narnia into being.)

Peep #3. The New Calvinism: David Van Biema on Calvinism as a new destination religion for conservative Christians 

I’m very, very interested to read the article and see if Time treats conservative Christians any better than Newsweek does.

From EditorandPublisher.com via Mark Driscoll’s Twitter feed.

*Update*

The article doesn’t have much new. Much better is Mark Driscoll’s post on TheResurgence.com about New Calvinism vs. Old Calvinism

1. Old Calvinism was fundamental or liberal and separated from or syncretized with culture. New Calvinism is missional and seeks to create and redeem culture.
2. Old Calvinism fled from the cities. New Calvinism is flooding into cities.
3. Old Calvinism was cessationistic and fearful of the presence and power of the Holy Spirit. New Calvinism is continuationist and joyful in the presence and power of the Holy Spirit.
4. Old Calvinism was fearful and suspicious of other Christians and burned bridges. New Calvinism loves all Christians and builds bridges between them.

From KixandtheCity.com

Romans 16:25-27

²⁵ Now to him who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery that was kept secret for long ages ²⁶ but has now been disclosed and through the prophetic writings has been made known to all nations, according to the command of the eternal God, to bring about the obedience of faith— ²⁷ to the only wise God be glory forevermore through Jesus Christ! Amen.

Ephesians 3:20-21

²⁰ Now to him who is able to do far more abundantly than all that we ask or think, according to the power at work within us, ²¹ to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, forever and ever. Amen.

Hebrews 13:20-21

²⁰ Now may the God of peace who brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, the great shepherd of the sheep, by the blood of the eternal covenant, ²¹ equip you with everything good that you may do his will, working in us [1] that which is pleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ, to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen.

Jude 1:24-25

²⁴ Now to him who is able to keep you from stumbling and to present you blameless before the presence of his glory with great joy, ²⁵ to the only God, our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion, and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen.

From Randy Bohlender, who created the Zoe Foundation, which “exists to further the cause of adoption as a positive alternative to abortion in America”

The most common objection we hear about adoption involves the cost. It seems a lot of people have a heart for adoption but not the stomach for the cost.   While some fees can be avoided (that’s a long post for another day), adoption is often expensive. That said, I’ve never met an adoptive parent who regretted plunking down the money either.

What most people are feeling is inadequate when it comes to raising the funds. Their fees might range from $15,000-$35,000 but it’s essentially immaterial. To a family living month to month, $15,000 might as well be the size of the government stimulus package. Anything more than they have is out of reach….except for a few important details. God has all the silver and Gold.   God likes adoption. A lot of people like God. Those people and God talk…see where this is going?

If you’re looking towards adoption but wondering how to pay for it, let me give you a couple of suggestions on fundraisers.

Think big.

Often times, people go the bake sale and car wash route. Unless you’re planning on washing every car in your city at a hundred bucks a pop (and charging extra for trucks), you will ever wash enough cars. And as for bake sales, even at a dollar a muffin, can you sell thirty thousand muffins?   The surprising truth is that it doesn’t take much more work to do a large scale dinner or auction than it does to do a car wash or a bake sale…but the return on your work will be a hundred fold.

For our first adoption, we held a benefit dinner. My first inclination involved a bucket of chicken and a case of bottled water. My smart wife and our friend convinced me this wasn’t the best idea. “Hokey” I think was the word they used. We ended up catering a $25/person meal at a nice restaurant in a fun location. We sold tickets that let people pick their price – $50, $75, $100, $250 and up.   I don’t think we sold a single $50 ticket. Most were $75-$100 with plenty that sold for more than that.    We raised $13,000 that night. You’re not going to do that on your best car wash….

Think broadly.

It’s too easy to think “We don’t know anyone who would help us adopt….”. You need to think beyond who you think might help you to every living soul you’ve ever met, and their rolodex, and their friends’ rolodex.   We got the word out using the internet, word of mouth, and mailed invitations. We also gave a stack of invitations to the connector types in our world – the kind of person who can’t get through a restaurant without talking to five people.   Those people really delivered for us.

There was a second wave of people who heard from friends, and in the end, a significant chunk of our first adoption’s finances came from strangers.    I can’t speak strongly enough about the importance of blogging your adoption journey – when you’re back against the wire, people you do not know who have followed your story will step up and help financially because they want to see this story to completion.

Think boldly.

You are not asking for a birthday present for yourself, or even a trip to Disney for your child. You are asking for help in changing the life of a human being for eternity.   Anyone with any sense will know that even with an expensive adoption, the long term cost of raising a child far outweighs the upfront expenses you’re trying to cover. You are the one taking the majority of the workload – getting the baby home is just step one.

Thinking boldly means asking for specific amounts, through specific ticket costs, etc. The agency will not ask you to ‘do whatever you can’….they’ll have a solid number.   Granted, you’d take $10 from someone as quickly as you’d take $10,000, but the people you’re asking for help from need to know that the numbers have five digits, not two.

Most people are looking to do something commensurate with the need, not the minimum they can get by with.   That’s why so few people bought $50 tickets – once they saw what we were really needing, most of them stepped up further than they would of had we been vague about it.

It is not easy to raise the necessary funds, but it’s doable. Don’t let fear stop you from doing what is right. Life depends on someone’s willingness to step beyond fear into the heroic.

From Jonathan Dodson, via his Creation Project Blog. His Church Planting Novice blog is highly recommended.

How should we pray when we suffer? Honestly and with humility. Boldly but with confidence in his blessing. Desperately with our eyes, not on our escape but upon our Lord. Hopefully, by directing our hope to the grace that comes through a cross, not a courtroom. Repentantly, as we let go of sinful demands for vindication and cling to his provision in self-sacrificing propitiation. Pietistically, wanting more than anything a deeper communion with Him. Lovingly, seeking to obtain that mercy for our suffering in order to turn it into a grace for our attackers. Thankfully, for his perfect design and provision in our suffering to bring us the greatest good. Worshipfully, acknowledging that Christ alone is sufficient for our failures and our sufferings.

Challenging article about pacifism from Evangelical Village. I will admit to feeling drawn to pacifism, but I agree with many of the concerns below, which is causing me to reassess my “commitment” to pacifism.

One of our contributors preached a great sermon recently asking the question:

Is War Reconcilable with the Teachings of Jesus?

You can listen to the whole sermon in the link above. Below I am going to give you the main points of the sermon.

There has ben a recent surge of pacifism within Christianity. This surge has mainly found itself within the movements of the Emergent church and Red Letter Christianity. I, personally, along with the sermon at the top, feel that there are some very serious errors with pacifism. Let’s go through some of them:

1) Pacifism fails to distinguish between individual and civil conduct. In Matthew 5 Jesus is very clearly speaking on an individual bases, not civil. Romans 13 gives a clear command to the government to ‘bear the sword.’ There is not a command in Scripture that tells individuals to punish those do evil, but there is a command in Scripture that tells the government to punish those who do evil. Scripture clearly distinguishes between individual and civil.

2) Pacifism suffers from a naive optimism about the nature of man.

3) Pacifism if consistently applied cannot lead to anything, except anarchy. If violence or any type of forceful mean is never a viable option from civil authorities for justice then we have to get rid of police! If we follow the logic of pacifism we wind up with no type of civil authority than can establish justice. Without that authority anarchy is inevitable.

4) Pacifism fails to treat members of the military like Jesus and the Apostles treat members of the military. Every time Jesus and the Apostles interact with people from the military they never mention the military being wrong, ever. Multiple times people of the military are being commended for their faith. Cornelius is described as an upright, God fearing man. If serving in the military is wrong then why do we never see Jesus or the Apostles condemning the practice? Why do we see no one repenting of their military service when they encounter Jesus or are saved? Such as Cornelius and the military man that Jesus says, ‘I have never in all of Israel seen someone with such faith.’ In Luke 3 soldiers walk up to John the Baptist and ask what they should we do in order to follow ‘the way’ that John speaks of… John responds by telling them ‘not to extort money from anyone and be content with their wages.’ That is all he says. If we were to view military service as wrong and sinful, as most pacifists do, then John would of had to tell them to repent of their sin of being in the military in order to follow the way of Jesus. But he doesn’t. he only tells them not to extort and be content with their wages. If a murder were to walk up to John and ask the same question it would be foolish to think that John wouldn’t say, “Stop your lifestyle of murder.”

5) Pacifism poses a problem with the communication of the New Testament. There is Scripture all throughout the New Testament that uses military language. We are told to be ‘good soldiers in Christ.’ There is a pattern of military language that is used to describe a believers life. You would never, as a communicator, use an unrighteous analogy to make a righteous point. If being a soldier and being in the military is wrong, it is rather ridiculous for Paul to use language that calls us to be ‘good soldiers in Christ Jesus.’

6) Pacifism forces you to love your enemy at the expense of your neighbor. The pacifist is forced to say, ‘we will not act because we are to love our enemies.’ Which means they see it as wrong to try and stop, with force, tyrants such as Hitler, Stalin etc… Why? Because we are to love our enemies. But what about the millions of innocent people that were slaughtered at the hands of Stalin and Hitler? Is sitting by and doing nothing really following the command of Jesus to love our neighbor as these millions are slaughtered? I think not.

This post by Ed Stetzer is so on-point that I’m quoting it in its entirety.

1. Elementary is a “Danger” and Not a Goal

You are supposed to “go on” to maturity and “leave” some of the basics. But many don’t–that is why they are commanded to do so.

As church planters, we want to keep it simple. We want to engage the unchurched. We want to reach seekers. And, all of that is good.

But, remember, “elementary” is a danger and not a goal.

Too often, simple (which is good) gets replaced with simplism, which reduces the gospel from what it really is.

In your church plant, you can tell people to:

• pray this prayer
• come to these meetings
• give this amount, and
• serve in this job

all while not obeying the central command of the Great Commission: to make disciples.

“Therefore, leaving the elementary message about the Messiah, let us go on to maturity” (Hebrews 6:1).

Some of us pride ourselves on being accessible to the unchurched by keeping it simple–but God calls us to leave the elementary.

“Keeping it simple” while “leaving the elementary” is a hard balance.

How do you do it? First, it starts with you in your own spiritual growth.

1. Recognize your propensity to get busy serving that you forget knowing God. You are NOT naturally spiritually contemplative.
2. Pastor yourself.
3. Pastor your family.
4. Lead your people to maturity.

If you pastor a great big church but end up a personal spiritual midget, the plant will fail, and (more importantly) your spiritual life will fail.

Do not make it a value to say that you will “never go deep.” Instead, find ways to go deep and, at the same time, make it clear and accessible to outsiders.

The reality is that it has become normal for us to NOT grow. We studied over 2500 church attendees in the LifeWay Research study only 3.5% of those we surveyed over the course of a year displayed any measurable growth. But, 55% of those we studied perceived themselves to have grown spiritually.

God has a strong word for the spiritually stuck:

“Brothers, I was not able to speak to you as spiritual people but as people of the flesh, as babies in Christ. I fed you milk, not solid food, because you were not yet able to receive it” (1 Corinthians 3:1-2).

So, you don’t want that to be you! You don’t want that to be your church plant.

Instead, we want to move ahead, grow deeper, and experience a fuller spiritual life.

“We have a great deal to say about this, and it’s difficult to explain, since you have become slow to understand. 12 For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the basic principles of God’s revelation. You need milk, not solid food” (Hebrews 5:11-12).

So, are you a grower, shrinker, or stuck? Let’s take a moment and think about it because there are some big issues at stake here. A vibrant spiritual life or a shrinking and dying one. You must have a robust spiritual life.

Then, you have to lead your church to have a plan for robust spiritual growth.

That involves:

1. Moving from decision to disciples.
2. Providing a pathway to spiritual maturity in your church.
3. Spending as much time planning your discipling strategy as you do your launch, assimilation, and worship strategy.

2. God Wants You and Your Church on a Clear Path to Spiritual Growth

If the central command of the Great Commission is to make disciples, and you have a plan for marketing, facilities, and organization, but not plan for discipleship, you have missed the point.

“For this reason also, since the day we heard this, we haven’t stopped praying for you. We are asking that you may be filled with the knowledge of His will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding, 10so that you may walk worthy of the Lord, fully pleasing to Him, bearing fruit in every good work and growing in the knowledge of God” (Colossians 1:9-10).

Notice the progression.

Knowing → Being → Doing

We can observe from Scripture a clear pattern that spiritual transformation begins with exposure to the truth. As God’s revealed Truth (the Word) penetrates the mind it leads to the transformation of heart and character. The Apostle Paul expressed it this way:

“Do not be conformed to this age, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may discern what is the good, pleasing, and perfect will of God” (Romans 12:2).

The renewal of the mind, enabled by the inner working of the Holy Spirit, brings about spiritual growth.

Here you can see the pattern of knowledge leads to understanding (knowing), which leads to walking worthy (being), which leads to bearing fruit (doing).

It starts with knowing.

That is why in our research we found that the number one statistical correlation to spiritual maturity was the practice of reading the Bible. There was a strong relationship between those who grew spiritually and the practice of reading the Bible.

You don’t need to get your people thinking you are clever, you need to get them thinking that the word of God is sufficient.

People sit around in a creative planning meetings and ask, how can we communicate this in a way that is clever?

A more important idea: how can we get them to think they only place they see the Bible is on a big screen at church.

God provides both a process for spiritual growth and the means for this transformation.

3. God Involves Us in Our and Our Church’s Spiritual Growth

Unlike in conversion, we “work toward” spiritual growth. But, like conversion and all things with God, he is the source and power of it.

Only God can cause true spiritual formation.

Referring before to their lack of spiritual maturity:

The Apostle Paul said, “… God was causing the growth. So then neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but God who causes the growth” (1 Corinthians 3:6-7).

There is this tough balance on this. I was speaking at John Piper’s church when he reminded us that God builds his church. He emphasized point by point I – Will – Build – My – Church. (See that message here.)

If you think it is all on you, then you have placed your work in place of God’s promises.

But it is also clear that God places responsibility upon us for our spiritual growth and the spiritual growth of our church. There is an important balance here.

“So then, my dear friends, just as you have always obeyed, not only in my presence, but now even more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. For it is God who is working in you, enabling you both to will and to act for His good purpose” (Philippians 2:12-13).

How much energy are you spending on working our your salvation?

This is not something you do once.

The gospel is not something you get over, it is something you live out.

You have to learn to live out the implications of the gospel.

God enables us to grow, but we have to “work out” our salvation.

Many church planters are spiritual bankrupt and strategy rich. It is time to declare bankruptcy and not pass it on like a Ponzi scheme to your people. It will all eventually come crumbling down.

You need a plan and your church needs a plan.

Over dinner a couple of months ago with Rick Warren, he talked about their process for spiritual maturity and he listed off the number of people committed to having daily quiet times, the number committed to serving, the number committed to this or that. Why? Because they have a discipling plan. You may not like it because you have an aversion to a baseball diamond, but you need a plan of your own.

4. God Calls You and Your Church To Be Spiritual Learners

“Be conscientious about yourself and your teaching; persevere in these things, for by doing this you will save both yourself and your hearers” (1 Timothy 4:16).

Guard your life and doctrine well. That is probably not something you hear at a lot of church planting conferences. But, maybe we should. And, discipleship is my topic and you can’t talk discipleship without talking about you being a learner, and that includes guarding your life and doctrine.

Example of the Bereans: this s why you have lots of churches called “Berean” and none called “Thessalonicans.” (That, and “Thessalonican” is hard to say.)

“The people here were more open-minded than those in Thessalonica, since they welcomed the message with eagerness and examined the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so” (Acts 17:11).

Open minded means ready to receive.

As church planters, we are not a naturally contemplative people. But, we need to guard our lives and our doctrine well and have a plan to lead our church to do the same.

Is discipling part of your planting strategy? If not, you are building a strategy around organizational momentum and not spiritual maturity.

Do you people see you as a great leader or a godly pastor. Hopefully both, but pick godly over great.