Pastors & Headship

I've been thinking a lot about the pastor's responsibility of shepherding the church, and how he is only effective to the extent of, firstly, the Father shepherding him, and secondly, the measure of his shepherding his own family. And I believe this is so right because the pastor does not make the church! The Church belongs to Christ! The Good Shepherd cares for each individual believer. The Christian life is not meant to be lived out in solitude so the Father's design is inthe oneness of the marriage relationship (God, husband, wife), which is based on the oneness of the Trinitarian relationship (Father, Son, Holy Spirit). Just as the Father decrees what will be, the Son carries out the will of the Father, and the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father given by the Son to carry out the will of the Father and the Son (the Spirit only does the will of the Son and the Father) in the hearts of believers, so the husband seeks to do the Lord's will as he leads/guides/directs his family as he is the head of his family as the Father is in the Godhead and Christ is the Head of the Church. Anyways, by the power of the Spirit, the pastor submits to God, the Father Almighty, and fixes his eyes on Christ. In doing so, as the God-appointed head of his wife and family, he shepherds them to carry out the will of the Father, in the power of the Spirit with heart and mind set on heavenly things where Christ is seated at the right hand of the throne of God. Likewise, he shepherds his church most assuringly glorifying God in the power of the Spirit and face set like flint on Jesus Christ, the Author and Finisher of our faith. So future pastor, do you bear the burden of your wife and children? Do you find rest for your soul in Jesus? Future pastor, you do that, and your church will be a God-glorifying, Spirit-empowered, Christ-exalting, Gospel-saturated, cross-centered, soul-winning, mission-driven, disciple-making movement crushing the evil one in its path and going to the ends of the world. All this, from the Father's command, the Spirit's empowerment and for the glory of Christ. Pray for me to continually lay my worldly cares at the feet of King Jesus and bear the burdens of Meghan, Jack, Isabel and Schaeffer as Christ does for the Church so we may all see how great our God really is and know of his holy justice and loving-kindness.

L'Abri(ish)

Hey guys, just thought I'd share this with you. You know how the Schaeffers and the story of L'Abri have influenced my philosophy of ministry. Well, I met someone today who was influenced in a similar way. Dr. Parker, Professor of Worldview and Culture at SBTS, caught the vision of L'Abri early on in his academic career, and ten years ago, he started the Trinity Institute in Texas. Here's the website- www.thetrinityinstitute.org. I'm encouraged to see someone be effected by God's work through the Schaeffers and try something similar though not exact. Lord-willing, I hope we will do something like it someday (probably not in Texas!).

Elliot on Femininity

I would be the last to deny that women are given gifts that they are meant to exercise. But we must not be greedy in insisting on having all of them, in usurping the place of men. We are women, and my plea is Let me be a woman, holy through and through, asking for nothing but what God wants to give me, receiving with both hands and with all my heart whatever that is. No arguments would ever be needed if we all shared the spirit of the "most blessed among women."

-Elisabeth Elliot

I pray for a renewed passion for biblical femininity among women like that of Elisabeth Elliot and for a strong foundation of biblical masculinity among men on which it may thrive.

Who is a romancer?

I've been reading a book (Romancing Your Child's Heart) that qualifies what it looks like to really show your child who God is and what he has done. The deeper I get into the book the more I realize this is not just about parenting. It's about all of life. Jesus did it for the disciples, and the disciples kept it going... yada, yada, yada... church history. I love books that show a depth greater than their acual content. So, who is a romancer? A romancer is one who naturally affects those around them with the very passion they possess for someone or something. That's my abstraction. If you want to see it in the flesh, then you must simply come over to my house and ask me for a cup of coffee (in all seriousness). This is my formal offer. Take it or leave it.

Here are Monte Swan's characteristics:

A Childlike Heart
Simple Faith
A Courageous Spirit
Joy
Laughter
A "Glad Game" Spirit (think "glass is half-full" sort of)
Finding Beauty With the Eyes of Love
Trustworthiness
A Passion for Truth

There is so much more to this book. For instance, think how incremental the art of storytelling is in our world. That's all for now. If I continue, I may just have to quote the book at length.

John Piper, Saint Augustine, and Pornography

vera tu et summa sauvitas - Augustine

I love Augustine's view of God. I love John Piper's view of God. Their view of God comes from the Bible. The Bible's view of God works for me very well.

The Travels of William Li

Let me direct your attention to a new blog listed on this site- William Li's Travels. Will is journeying to Japan to spend one year there studying. The dude has a heart for Jesus and a passion to spread the gospel to the world. While his intention is to study in Japan, he believes God will use him for more than that during his time there. I will be frequenting this site to see how his time goes.

Phillip Johnson's Darwin on Trial

In the epilogue, Johnson updates the reader on the impact the book has made in the scholarly community as well as in the public domain. He asks the questions: what is a critic of evolution and why is criticism so unusual? He emphasizes that for him it is not a Bible versus science debate. He is interested in what scientific investigation has to tell us about the origin and history of life. The main argument of his book has been to recognize that we know a great deal less than has been claimed in evolutionary science. He points out that he is a critic of evolution because he distinguishes between naturalistic philosophy and empirical science and that he opposes the former when it comes cloaked in the authority of the latter. He poses that naturalistic evolution is not merely a scientific theory; it is the official creation story of modern culture.

Johnson brings up Stephen Jay Gould’s responses to much of these questions and notices how dangerously close he comes to admitting bias and prejudice in conducting scientific study. Gould unwittingly laid into destroying the argument of Darwin on Trial, but Johnson was elated because he realized he had struck a nerve in America’s most prominent Darwinist. In one place Gould was even self-refuting on the relationship of science and religion. Johnson goes on to retell his interaction with Michael Ruse, a philosophical Darwinist, where they debated on the campus of Southern Methodist University. About a year later, Ruse was asked to speak at conference about Darwin on Trial, without the presence of Johnson, in which he mentioned his previous discussions with Johnson to be “quite constructive.” The audience it seems was stunned with silence. They obviously did not know what to do with his statement. To this Arthur Shapiro remarked that Ruse was fully conceding to Johnson. Johnson notes that Shapiro’s remarks illustrate a misconception about theism as though one has to abandon science to recognize supernatural reality. His primary goal in writing Darwin on Trial was to legitimate the assertion of a theistic worldview in the secular universities. Johnson is certain that one can not be a theistic evolutionist because the mind can not serve two masters. People need to be willing to challenge false doctrines with clear-minded, reasoned arguments.

To read more of this summary, email me.