Bibledex on Romans

Tonight we will be discussing the book of Romans.  In preparation of that, here is the Bibledex video on the book of Romans.  As always I don't agree with every argument that is laid out but I do find these videos stimulating forcing us to ask important questions.  Hope to see everyone tonight.




For more:
Bibledex on 2 Corinthians
Bibledex on Ephesians 
Bibledex on Philippians
Bibledex on Colossians 
Bibledex on 2 Thessalonians  
Romans:  The Just Shall Live By Faith - Every link regarding the book of Romans from our previous in-depth study of it.

July 25, 2010 - Revelation 2:1-7 - All You Lack is Love: The Danger of a Cold Faith

I went back and re-recorded the sermon in order to post it online.  I had a lot of fun (as I always do) at Glen Dean Day.  The food was good.  The fellowship was great.  We have been blessed.

Audio 
Notes 


For more:
The Creation of the Statue of David  
2009 Glen Dean Day message
   Audio - Psalm 23:1:  The Peace of Contentment
   Notes - Psalm 23:1:  The Peace of Contentment

The Creation of the Statue of David

I used this in this mornings message.  I found this from watching my all-time favorite show LOST.  Here is the clip.  Clearly the character John Locke delivers it a lot better than me!

July 11, 2010 - Matthew 6:19-24: Investing in the Kingdom of God

Here is the audio and notes for yesterday's message.  We will not be at church next week (which is no excuse to play hooky!) and so we will finish chapter 6 of Matthew two weeks from now.  I have really enjoyed our study of the Sermon of the Mount so far.  I can't wait for chapter 7.

Anyways, here are the links:



Audio
Links


For more:
Bonhoeffer on Treasures in Heaven     
Treasures in Heaven and the Great Commission:  An Important and Timely Sermon  
Calvin on Treasures in Heaven 
DC Talk - Things of This World 
January 17, 2010 - Matthew 5:1-12 - If Your Joyful and You Know It . . . 
January 24, 2010 - Matthew 5:13 - Stuck Between Salt and Manure:  The Call to Preserve the Gospel 
January 31, 2010 - Matthew 5:14-26 - Its Dark in Here:  The Call to be the Light of the World 
February 7, 2010 - Matthew 5:17-20 - Medium Rare is Unbiblical or What Do Christians Do with the Law
February 14, 2010 - Matthew 5:21-22 - I Am a Murderer . . . And So Are You 
February 21, 2010 - Matthew 5:23-26 - Resetting What Was Broken:  The Necessity of Reconciliation
February 28, 2010 - Matthew 5:27-30 - America's Pastime: Our Lust for Lust 
March 7, 2010 - Matthew 5:31-32 - The Gospel and Divorce:  What Does the Bible Say?
March 14, 2010 - Matthew 5:33-37 - Allergies to Toast, the Gospel, and Integrity
March 21, 2010 - Matthew 5:38-42 - I Surrender!  I Surrender!
March 28, 2010 - Matthew 5:43-48 - Love God as He Loved You
May 23, 2010 - Matthew Thus Far:  Matthew 1-5 
January 17, 2010 - Matthew 5:1-12 - If Your Joyful and You Know It . . . 
January 24, 2010 - Matthew 5:13 - Stuck Between Salt and Manure:  The Call to Preserve the Gospel 
January 31, 2010 - Matthew 5:14-26 - Its Dark in Here:  The Call to be the Light of the World 
February 7, 2010 - Matthew 5:17-20 - Medium Rare is Unbiblical or What Do Christians Do with the Law
February 14, 2010 - Matthew 5:21-22 - I Am a Murderer . . . And So Are You 
February 21, 2010 - Matthew 5:23-26 - Resetting What Was Broken:  The Necessity of Reconciliation
February 28, 2010 - Matthew 5:27-30 - America's Pastime: Our Lust for Lust 
March 7, 2010 - Matthew 5:31-32 - The Gospel and Divorce:  What Does the Bible Say?
March 14, 2010 - Matthew 5:33-37 - Allergies to Toast, the Gospel, and Integrity
March 21, 2010 - Matthew 5:38-42 - I Surrender!  I Surrender!
March 28, 2010 - Matthew Thus Far:  Matthew 1-5 
January 17, 2010 - Matthew 5:1-12 - If Your Joyful and You Know It . . . 
January 24, 2010 - Matthew 5:13 - Stuck Between Salt and Manure:  The Call to Preserve the Gospel 
January 31, 2010 - Matthew 5:14-26 - Its Dark in Here:  The Call to be the Light of the World 
February 7, 2010 - Matthew 5:17-20 - Medium Rare is Unbiblical or What Do Christians Do with the Law
February 14, 2010 - Matthew 5:21-22 - I Am a Murderer . . . And So Are You 
February 21, 2010 - Matthew 5:23-26 - Resetting What Was Broken:  The Necessity of Reconciliation
February 28, 2010 - Matthew 5:27-30 - America's Pastime: Our Lust for Lust 
March 7, 2010 - Matthew 5:31-32 - The Gospel and Divorce:  What Does the Bible Say?
March 14, 2010 - Matthew 5:33-37 - Allergies to Toast, the Gospel, and Integrity
March 21, 2010 - Matthew 5:38-42 - I Surrender!  I Surrender!
March 28, 2010 - Matthew 6:1-4 - Camouflaged Gold:  Why Christians Should Give In Secret
May 30, 2010 - Matthew 6:5-8 - Jesus on Prayer:  Our Inward Motivations  
June 6, 2010 - Matthew 9-13 - The Model Prayer 
June 13, 2010 - Matthew 14-15 - The Forgiven Forgive:  The Inseparable Reality of the Gospel of Forgiveness 
June 20, 2010- Matthew 6:16-18 - The Gospel of Self-Denial:  Why Fasting is Biblical and What it Says About Our Faith 

Bonhoeffer on Treasures in Heaven

We return once again to Dietrich Bonhoeffer whose book The Cost of Discipleship is insightful and a good read and covers the Sermon on the Mount.  I have mentioned the book before on this site and so I won't go into more detail here (see the links at the bottom for more).  I particularly liked and wanted to highlighted what Bonhoeffer had to say about our text this week, Matthew 6:19-24:


The life of discipleship can only be maintained so long as nothing is allowed to come b/t Christ and ourselves – neither the law, nor personal piety, nor even the world.  The disciple always looks only t his master, never to Christ and the law, Christ and religion.  Christ and the world.  He avoids all such notions like the plague.  Only by following Christ alone can he preserve a single eye.  His eye rests wholly on the light that comes from Christ, and has no darkness or ambiguity in it.  As the ye must be single, clear and pure in order to keep light in the body, as hand and foot can receive light from no other source save the eye, as the foot stumbles and the hand misses its mark when the eye is dim, as the whole body is in darkness when the eye is blind; so the follower of Christ is in the light only so long as he looks simply to Christ and at nothing else in the world.  Thus the heart of the disciple must be set upon Christ alone.  If the eye sees an object which is not there, the whole body is deceived.  If the heart is devoted to the mirage of the world to the creature instead of the Creator, the disciple is lost. -173-174


For more:
Treasures in Heaven and the Great Commission:  An Important and Timely Sermon  
Calvin on Treasures in Heaven 
DC Talk - Things of This World 
Bonhoeffer on Matthew 5:7-9 
Bonhoeffer: The Meaning of Poor In Spirit and the Joy of Being Spiritual Bankrupt
Bonhoeffer:  "By Willing Endurance We Cause Suffering to Pass" 
Weekly Recommendation: "The Cost of Discipleship"
Bonhoeffer: Truth and the Cross

Calvin on Treasures in Heaven

I came across several good quotes from the French Reformer John Calvin in his commentary on Matthew 6:19-24.  In particular, his discussion on treasures in heaven in contrast to treasures on earth (Matthew 6:19-21) is insightful.  Furthermore, his words regarding our slavery to our own lust for more is well worth our read:

Matthew 6:19 - "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal." 


This deadly plague reigns everywhere throughout the world.  Men are grown mad with an insatiable desire of gain.  Christ charges them with folly, in collecting wealth with great care, and then giving up their happiness to moths and to rust, or exposing it as a prey to thieves.  What is more unreasonable than to place their property, where it may be carried off by men? Covetous men, indeed, take no thought of this.  They lock up their riches in well-secured chests, but cannot prevent them from being exposed to thieves or to moths.  They are blind and destitute of sound judgment, who give themselves so much toil and uneasiness in amassing wealth, which is liable to putrefaction, or robbery, or a thousand other accidents: particularly, when God allows us a place in heaven for laying up a treasure, and kindly invites us to enjoy riches which never perish. -332

Matthew 6:21 - "for where your treasure is, there your heart will be also." 

By this statement Christ proves that they are unhappy men who have their treasures laid up on the earth: b/c their happiness is uncertain and of short duration.  Covetous men cannot be prevented from breathing in their hearts a wish for heaven: but Christ lays down an opposite principle, that, wherever men imagine the greatest happiness to be, there they are surrounded and confined.  Hence it follows, that they who desire to be happy in the world renounce heaven. -333

Matthew 6:24 - "No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to one and despise the other You cannot serve God and wealth." 

For the greater part of men are wont to flatter themselves with a deceitful pretense, when they imagine, that it is possible for them to be divided b/t God and their own lusts.  Christ affirms that it is impossible for any man to obey God, and, at the same time, to obey his own flesh . . . [W]here riches hold the dominion of the heart, God has lost his authority.  True, it is not impossible that those who are rich shall serve God, but whoever gives himself up as a slave to riches must abandon the service of God: for covetousness makes us the slaves of the devil. -337

DC Talk - Things of This World

My favorite all time band is DC Talk.  The three members of the group are now on solo projects (and have been for 10 years now).  Many may be familiar with Toby Mac who has been really successful and Michael Tait is now the lead singer of the Newsboys.  Kevin Max is the lesser known of the three.

Well over 15 years ago, the trio came out with a song about riches and greed that really focuses in our text for Sunday morning.  We'll be discussing Matthew 6:19-24 regarding Treasures in Heaven and heavnely investments.  Their song "Things of this World," is a perfect summary of the content there.  What follows is the lyrics and then the audio of the song (remember, the song came out in 1992).

LYRICS 

70 years is all we got
To accumulate goods that seem to mean a lot
For the first 20 years, you're off to school
Learnin' principles and learnin' the tools
To make lots of money, the ultimate goal
Gain the whole world and yet lose ya soul
Huh, humanism is on a roll
20 gets the the knowledge, 30 years to apply
and just 20 years left for askin' why
I didn't realize what it was all about
And, was there any use in this rigorous route because

[chorus:]
Things of this world are passin' away
Here tomorrow, but they're sure not here to stay
Things of this world are passin' away
So lay your treasure above
And start to live for Him today

All done for self in this world will pass
And all done for Christ in this world will last
Sounds like a simple task...
But everyday life seems to get in the way
No time to serve, barely time to pray
Our focal points lost and we get tossed
In the wind, cold facing the cost
Of fallin' without stallin' or even callin' the Lord
While you were blackballin'
He was waitin' for you to see the light
And find for yourself, these things are trite

[chorus]

[vamp:]
Our mind transforms a want to a need
A simple process that we call greed
Ya say ya like to have money, well I do too
The problem starts when the money has you
Workin' overtime to keep up with the pace
A lifestyle that you want to embrace
But it's 2 steps from where your needs are met
You're keepin' up with the Joneses, but your all in debt
Which will lead to stress, not meeting the bills
While ya sportin' a Benz with all the thrills
The domino effect's gotcha life in check
A temporary stitch and ya livin' a wreck

[chorus x2]

Don't lay up your treasures upon this Earth
They'll soon pass away
And all return to dirt [x4]

Things of this world are passin' away
Here tomorrow, but they're sure not here to stay
Things of this world, things of this world
The things, the things, the things of this world

Don't lay up your treasures upon this Earth
They'll soon pass away
And all return to dirt [x2]

AUDIO 

Treasures in Heaven and the Great Commission: An Important and Timely Sermon

Throughout the week I listen to countless sermons and lectures on whatever text we study on Sunday morning, Sunday night, Sunday School, or Wednesday night.  I am now sitting in my office studying for Sunday morning and find myself listening to an important sermon by Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary professor Dr. Al Jackson on Matthew 6:19-24.

What makes this sermon important isn't just the great exposition of the text but also with how it applies to the Great Commission Resurgence.  The GCR is an Southern Baptist movement to take the gospel to the nations.  The title of the sermon is The American Dream as an Obstacle for a Great Commission Resurgence.  So if you have an extra 40 minutes I encourage you to listen to this sermon and think seriously about the text and how it applies to our giving to the Cooperative Program and missions.  Will we store up for ourselves treasure and earth which are temporal or treasures in heaven (and sow the gospel among the nations) which are eternal?



Al Jackson - The American Dream, an Obstacle for a Great Commission Resurgence from Southeastern Seminary on Vimeo.

Repost: The Immutability of God: Its Truth and Relevancy - Theological Applications

We have finally come to our final post and look at the theological subject of God's Immutability.  We've discussed its importance, its biblical foundation, biblical challenges, and various theological challenges, and now we must discuss its application.  Since all theology is practical, we have not done our job until we have applied our theology.  Theology was meant to be practiced and the doctrine of immutability applies directly to our lives.

This is a vital point that deserves much attention.  Many consider the study of theology to be a hobby for those who live in ivory towers or for geeks who have too much time on their hands.  I believe that part of the reason the Church is anemic is because we have failed to see the connection between theology and practice.  This is why we see many self-help and Christian living books at the local Christian book store while the theology books are somewhere in the back.  I want us to see that instead of simply looking to see what the Bible says about our sex lives or how to balance our checkbook, let us take the time to dig deeper into Scriptures theological truths and then see how they apply.

So in what ways is the doctrine of the Immutability of God applicable to me?  First, if God is immutable (and thus does not change), then His words, declarations, truths, and revelations are eternal.  This means that Scripture remains applicable for today.

In a world of news cycles, it is tempting to see God's Word revealed in Scripture to be only temporarily.  To do so turns the Bible into a fable or at the very least a document that is out of touch with our society.  Unfortanetly many (even among Christians) hold to this view.  For example, some would argue that due to recent scientific and historical evidences, portions of the Bible are outdated and irrelevant to today.  They knew nothing of microscopes, nuclear weapons, sexual orientation, or evolution.  To think that shepherds, farmers, ancient kings, desert prophets, fishermen, local-eating baptizers, or amateurish historians is relevent to today is simply foolish.

But if Scripture is God's Word and God Himself is immutable then the Bible is transcendent.  The message and meaning (not to mention application) of Scripture is not limited to age, time, or culture.  Since God does not change and does not contradict Himself, then what was morally wrong in the past remains so today.

What we really have here is a revelation of our true motivations.  The reason we wish to write the Bible off as out of touch is in order to justify our immorality and impurity.  Just as atheism is oftentimes a strong motive for vice, so too relegating the Bible to ancient literature and nothing more is a strong motive to ignore its moral implications.  If the Bible is not relevant, then neither is the gospel or the "thou shall nots."  But, as we have established, if God is immutable then we are accountable to what He has revealed.  Jesus was right when he said, "This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil.  For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed" (John 3:19-20). Our desire to remain in darkness (thus veiled) remains strong.

Secondly, if God is immutable then His promises are certain and we can have assurance of our salvation.  One of the unfortunate theological debates that Christians have had (and continue to have) throughout history is the debate over the assurance of salvation.  The question is this:  if a person gets "saved" and then lives in sin, can or do they lose their salvation?

The question really misses the point of salvation.  For one, salvation is by grace through faith alone apart from our works.  Therefore, if works had nothing to do with our salvation in the first place then how can it rob us of our salvation after we've been redeemed?  This is no excuse for immorality (as many claim).  Instead, those who do fall away clearly never understood the gospel in the first place.  The problem here isn't assurance, then problem is with cheap grace.

But apply immutability to this issue.  If God had declared one justified will He then change His mind?  To suggest that one can lose their salvation either suggests that they gained in the first place (which is blasphemy) or that God changes His mind with the wind (which is theologically unfounded and contradictory of Scripture).  The argument in favor of assurance begins and (should) ends with God's immutability.  When God declares something He does not go back on His Word.  If Scripture is eternal, then so is our salvation.  Since it is God who declares us righteous, then only God can declare otherwise after the fact and since God does not change, neither will our standing before Him.

This means that we can have full assurance that though we make mistakes we are still in the arms of God.  Again, this is no license to sin and we must always be asking ourselves if we are truly redeemed and checking to see if we bear the fruits of redemption.  But for those who are justified by God will always be justified by God.

Thirdly, and very importantly, if God is immutable then the gospel is transcendent.  Virtually every major liberal attack on orthodox doctrine is a fundamental attack on the immutability of God and the transcendence of the gospel.  If God is immutable then His gospel has to be transcendent and not limited or redefined because of changes in culture, language, nations, or technology.  The same message that saved the sinners at Pentecost continues to save us today.  The cross and resurrection of Christ remains the fundamental message of Christianity and the gospel itself today.  For more on this subject, read my previous article and/or listen to a sermon I gave on the subject.

Any attempt to change the gospel or to update it for the 21st Century (which seems to be the goal of any and every heresy these days) is at its core a fundamental attack on the immutability of God. 

Finally, if God is immutable then the future is certain and we have no reason to fear.  Here we see God's Immutability connected with His Sovereignty and Providence.  Since God has already written the future, then we can be certain that His glorious plan will be fulfilled.  We will be redeemed.  Sin will be judged.  Righteousness will be rewarded.  We will be resurrected.  Justice will reign forth.  Since and injustice will end.  The effects of the Fall will be conquered and be no more.  Violence will cease.  The promises made to Israel will be fulfilled.  Satan will finally and forever overthrown.  And we will dwell in the house of the Lord forever (Psalm 23:6).

This means that when I turn on the news, though I might be disheartened, I need not be afraid.  I know how the story ends. I need not be surprised by the events around me.  I need not fear that all is lost and there is no hope.  I am confident that God is still in control and knows what He is doing.  Whether it be the smallest of concerns to the greatest of unforeseen tragedies, we can have confidence that God is in control and we can rest at night.  God's soveriegnty and providence can only be possible if He is immutable.  God wins.

These are only just a few (and a drop in a bucket) of applications one can make from this wonderful doctrine.  I believe it is time for Christians to take it more seriously.  If God is Immutable then when have real hope, real joy, real contentment, real peace.  If Christians would become more willing to think through these issues and study the attribute of God we will be much better off than we are today.

In conclusion, I am reminded of a brief conversation Carl FH Henry had with Karl Barth.  The story goes that Henry was being introduced at an event for Barth as the editor of Christianity Today.  At that announcement Barth declared, "You mean, Christianity Yesterday!"  Without hesitation or thought Henry replied, "Christianity, Yesterday, Today, and Forever!"

Let us have confidence and let us boldly proclaim not just the Christianity of yesterday, today, and forever, but also the God and His Son Jesus Christ yesterday, today, and forever.



For more:
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Introduction (Part 1)
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Scriptural Foundation (Part 2)
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Scriptural Challenges (Part 3)
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Theological Challenges (Part 4)
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Practical Implications (Part 5) 
Sermon Podcast - April 26, 2010 - The Immutability of God 
Sermon Podcast - November 29, 2009 - The Transcendence of the Gospel
Theology - The Stipulation that Paralyzes:  Tony Jones and the Limits of the Emergent Worldview
Theology - Orthopraxy is Rooted in Orthodoxy - The Postmodern Return to Rome
Commentary - Accomodationism Breed Irrelevancy:  Why Liberalism Fails and the Transcendent Gospel Triumphs 

Repost - The Immutability of god: Its Truth and Relevancy - The Challenge of McLaren and Process Theology

In recent weeks, we have discussed in some detail the important (and often ignored) doctrine of God's Immutability.  We have established its importance, its Biblical foundation, a number of Scriptural challenges, a recent rejection (in Tony Jones, but more could be give), and now we turn to perhaps the most prominent theological movement that stands in contrast to this wonderful doctrine, namely Process Theology and Open Theism.

Process Theology argues that God is always changing, or progressing.  Open Theism is primarily concerned with getting God off the hook over theodicy (or the problem of evil).  If God is good then why is there so much evil, suffering, war, injustice, poverty, and death in the world?  Both beliefs argue that since the world is always changing (and evolving), then so does God.  God is always changing, adapting, and progressing.  He is not yet what He will one day be.  The God of yesterday is not the same God of today.

Another common thread that is important here regards human free will.  It is believed (similarly to Pelagianism) that God does not mess with human free will.  Such a belief ultimately challenges God's sovereignty (and even His personal relationship with His creation).  If God is Sovereign, then He is intimate, personal, and in control.  If humans are completely free (especially in the Pelagian school of thought), then God is more distant and sort of spectator watching (and progressing with us) His creation.

As one can see, such a theology flies in the face of God's Immutability and the clear teaching of Scripture.  To adopt progressive theology and/or open theism is to reject the immutability of God.  One cannot hold to either of these theologies and still affirm that God does not change.

But instead of tracing the thought out more, I want to focus on a particular theologian whose recent writings sound eerily similar to Process Theology and Open Theism.  That man is Brian McLaren who has become one of the main faces of the Emergent Church Movement.  Though McLaren, as far as I have been able to tell, has never defended either of these theologies outright or spoken of God as evolving, He has comes close.

In his latest book, A New Kind of Christianity Brian McLaren  suggests that the Bible itself tells of an evolution.  What we are witnessing in the Bible is a conversation among characters and writers on their undestanding of God.  In the Old Testament, God is possessive, nationalistic, and even angry, but in the New Testament God is less racial and more loving.  It isn't necessarily that God has changed, but the conversation about God has changed.

In his book McLaren writes that our ancestor’s images and understanding of God continually changed, evolved, and matured over the centuries. God, it seemed, kept initiating this evolution (99).  McLaren is not directly implying that God evolves with history and human culture, but that instead of God directly revealing Himself to the Biblical authors, the authors are actually conversing among themselves. Therefore, in the Bible, the image we get of God is always evolving.

The problem with this view should immediately be apparent.  What do you do with a book like Job in which God is a major narrative-bending character in the story.  In response, McLaren suggests that God in the Bible is not the real God, but another character.  To understand Him as the real God is to lean towards the abuse of interpreting the Bible literally.  God doesn't order entire nations to be wiped out.  God doesn't favor one race or people over others.  God doesn't murder rebellious children and husbands who sleep with their wives while on their menstrual period. Therefore, when such atrocities are committed, it isn't that God Himself commands such things to happen (because God is not violent), rather during the evolution of ancient man's understanding of God they wrote a character named God and put Him into the story.

How convienant!

So in the case of Job, God is only a character reflecting the authors understanding of God.  But that understanding of God has evolved over time. 

If one were to read the Bible all the way through, McLaren would argue, the character, will, and actions of God evolve.  For example, the image of God moves from violent, retaliatory, given to favoritism, and careless of human life in the OT to loving justice, kindness, reconciliation, and peace in the NT.  He goes on to say that over time, the image of God that predominates is gentle rather than cruel, compassionate rather than violent, fair to all rather than biased toward some, forgiving rather than retaliatory.

So what do you do with Jesus?  McLaren argues that Jesus isn’t God per se, but only like God bringing us to a new evolutionary level in our understanding of God (114).  He adds:

The historic Christian doctrine of the divinity of Christ does not simply mean that Jesus is like God. It is far more radical than that. It means that God is like Jesus . . . [this insight] is an unspeakably precious gift that can be offered to people of all faiths. The character of Jesus…provides humanity with a unique and indispensable guide for tracing the development of maturing images and concepts of God across human history and culture. [The character of Jesus] is the North Star…to all people, whatever their religious background. The images of God that most resemble Jesus, whether they originate in the Bible or elsewhere, are the more mature and complete images. -114

In other words, Jesus is just another part (though the climax) of man's evolutionary understanding of God.  Jesus is like God, but not (in the literal sense) God.  God is a character in the Bible and Jesus wears the costume the best.  McLaren sees in Jesus the ultimate and closest thing to the character of God being lived out in this world.  If one wants to be like God, then we ought to look at the example of Christ.

So what McLaren offers isn't process theology or open theology in the strictest sense, but he certainly raises an interpretation similar to that and is equally dangerous.  The theological challenges this brings forth are numerous.  To begin, if the Bible is nothing more than a conversation about God rather than direct revelation from God, then we still do not know who God is or what He expects of us. In other words, everything we know about God is an educated guess.

This is postmodernism at its best.  Turning the Bible into a conversation allows me, based on my experience and preconceived adulterated assumptions, to pick and choose the aspects I want to believe and to fashion God in any image I want.  If I want God to be love, then I will find such a God in the biblical conversation.  Or if I want to turn God into a postmodern, enlightened deity, then I will see the Bible as an ancient book in where religious people from all walks of life tried their best to understand God but fell far too short as all of us do.  At this point I am free to emphasize God's unworkability without any effort on my part to try to understand Him in any way.

This means that if we don’t know who God is, then we do not know what He demands.  And if we do not know what He commands of us, then we are not responsible for actions.  This is the wholesale rejection of God's holiness, righteousness, jealousy, and wrath.  After all, such concepts in the Bible were just part of a conversation, not real revelation about who God really is. Likewise, if the Bible is simply a conversation then we do not know the gospel by which we can be saved.  Therefore, what is our message?  Finally, all Biblical doctrines are abstract truths that we cannot be certain making the church a collection of seekers of mystery instead of a place for those seeking the truth since the truth cannot be known.

 Though McLaren would likely reject some of these points, it is the logical conclusion of his theology.  McLaren wants his readers to follow the example of Christ, but why bother since even Christ (though came close) was nothing more than an imposter.  If Christ is not God, then how does one live in the manner of God?

This theology fundamentally undermines the biblical doctrine of sin.  In this understanding of Scripture, sin is not necessary sin because God never directly revealed what is sin and what isn’t. Since God is only a character in the biblical narrative, then we can never take that characters word for truth.  Just because that manifestation of the character of God condemned adultery, homosexuality, murder, and violence does not necessarily mean that they are actually sins.  Again, McLaren would reject such an understanding (though he is OK with homosexuality, but not with injustice and violence), but apart from personal beliefs, where in the Bible can we turn to for truths if it is only a conversation instead of direct and divine revelation?  How do I know what is right and wrong unless I turn to some relativistic, experiential, un-transcendent message.  In other words, truth and morality is the by-product of human imagination instead of revelation if the Bible is nothing more than a conversation.

McLaren and others in the Emergent conversation would add that moral truths (and even theological truths) are determined through community and conversation among equals that unite racial, gender, national, and age boundaries.  Until we hear from every walk of life, we cannot have any certainty, but since truth is never anchored, what is true today will not necessarily be true tomorrow.  This means that by their acts McLaren clearly rejects God's immutability (and he has said so elsewhere).  If God is immutable, then His Word and its message is immutable, and any communities' conclusion about truth or morality is irrelevant because God has spoken.




Clearly modern theologian are assaulting this fundamental truth of Scripture.  God is immutable and has declared so in His Word.  Though we may jump through hoops, we cannot miss the reality that God does not change and we are thus accountable for His standards and definitions of truth and morality.  By fundamentally rejecting the immutability of God, theologians like McLaren have rejected the gospel of Jesus Christ. 


Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Introduction (Part 1)
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Scriptural Foundation (Part 2)
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Scriptural Challenges (Part 3)
Theology - The Immutability of God:  Its Truth and Relevancy - Theological Challenges (Part 4)
Sermon Podcast - April 26, 2010 - The Immutability of God 
Sermon Podcast - November 29, 2009 - The Transcendence of the Gospel
Theology - The Stipulation that Paralyzes:  Tony Jones and the Limits of the Emergent Worldview
Theology - Orthopraxy is Rooted in Orthodoxy - The Postmodern Return to Rome
Commentary - Accomodationism Breed Irrelevancy:  Why Liberalism Fails and the Transcendent Gospel Triumphs
Theology - A Fad Within a Movement:   What is the Emerging Church and Where is it Going?
Reviews - "A New Kind of Christianity"