It’s coming to a bookstore near you . . .

Good to see this coming out again! Does this mean my first edition copy goes up in value?


It’s been a while coming but finally the new printing of The Federal Vision is at the printers and will be arriving in bookstores soon.

But, before it does, Athanasius Press is giving you an opportunity to purchase this new printing at a special pre-publication price of $16!

(That’s 35% off the retail price)

A new foreword has been added along with all the original essays.

All you have to is click here and place your order.

But do it soon so you don’t miss out!

View original post


The Weak god of Liberal Christianity

I guess I shouldn’t be surprised that Zack Hunt agrees with Pat Robertson that young earth Creationists (YEC) are morons.
After all, he’s gone to great lengths to make it clear he doesn’t believe in Calvin’s God; for those of you keeping score at home, that’s the God of the Bible.
See, Mr. Hunt, and Rachel Held Evans, and all the other liberal celebrity Christians, have invented a god that they can be comfortable with. One who doesn’t disagree with them. A weak, powerless, pathetic deity.
So if Mr. Hunt wants to stand against 6000 years of great Christian thinkers (Calvin) and scientists (like Newton and Maxwell) he’s perfectly free to do so. But his god is deaf, dumb, and blind. And therefore so is he.
I’m glad I worship the God of the bible and not Hunt’s and Evans’ and Robertson’s deaf, dumb, and blind god.


There was a recent article on that caught my attention (of course it did, I read it almost religiously (no pun intended)). The article was titled “5 Insane Lessons from My Christian Fundamentalist Childhood” and featured a guest writer who had had bad experiences as a child in a cultic quasi-religious group called Quiverfull. I’ll be honest – even though I know a bit about fundamentalism (and why it’s not really Reformed, biblical theology), I’d never heard of Quiverfull. But it was an interesting article and a good insight into the minds of people who turn the Bible into a basis for a cult.

As a Christian myself, I’m naturally defensive of attacks on fundamentalism, even though I poke plenty of fun at them behind the scenes. Fundamentalism (not cultism, mind you) is still a billion times better than something like nondenominationalism, which is merely relative therapeutic moralism (like Rachel Held Evans believes).

My usual response to things like this is “WHAT?? Sinful people made mistakes??” The article (and other material by the author) insinuates that the entire concept of fundamentalism (believing…what the Bible says, I guess?) is wrong. However, merely because some men turn Christianity into a power religion (Islam, Mormonism, Romanism) doesn’t make Christianity itself wrong. It just makes them wrong.

Fundamentalism is not built on racism and colonialism. Quiverfull might be. But Christianity isn’t, and none of the “fundies” that I know believe that. We believe that we have been blessed with things like A/C and running water and an advanced civilization firstly because of God’s grace, and secondly so that we might have the resources to reach those in need of the Gospel. I laughed at a quote that said:

The “10/40 Window,” aka every country that needs Jesus more than clean water or a stable government.

As it happens, he who drinks will thirst again…(John 4:14), and stable government is based on…wait, don’t tell me.

For all the bad things that no doubt were inflicted upon the author, Christianity is not some vast conspiracy by men to keep women under control. That’s what Islam is and we’ll have none of that. Children are a blessing from the Lord because they bring joy when viewed rightly.

Feminists like Hännah Ettinger and Rachel Held Evans are reactionaries against a patriarchy that exists mostly in their minds. There are (of course!) abuses of power, but it’s easy to blame someone when you’re just butthurt at having to give up your own desires in order to follow Christ.

When mortal men are given power, they are tempted to misuse that. But the solution is not to flush the Epistles down the drain because you think that’s the problem. No – you’re the problem. The man is the problem. The “patriarchy” is not the problem. The problem is that neither of you is reading Romans, Hebrews, Timothy, et al. correctly. Sorry, but if you reject Paul, you reject He who sent him.

This was also funny:

Hännah Ettinger…runs a magazine for survivors of fundamentalist homeschooling.

Wow. If I’d known I could pull a “persecuted!” card because I was homeschooled, the world would have been my oyster! As it turns out, I’m thankful to have had parents that loved me and God enough to train me up in the way I should go, and it hasn’t hurt me one little bit.

It’s really sad to see people who claim to be Christians calling Christianity a “horrible ideology.” I’m sorry if Christ offends them. Instead of rejecting the Bible, maybe they should read it sometime. You want to fix problems in the Church? Go to church on Sunday, baptize your children, build a biblical family, teach them the Bible, teach them how to live as befits a follower of Christ.

But everyone who rages against “the Man” eventually loses. Sorry.

Aronofsky’s Noah

Currently the best review of the Noah movie.

Fog On Pleasant Hill

Last night I had the pleasure of watching Darren Aronofsky’s Noah on the big screen over in Pullman.

I entered the theater with the highest of hopes, and a great deal of trepidation. The past several months, and the past week in particular, has featured an unceasing onslaught of uncharitable pre-reviews, quotes taken out of context to damn the director, and pure, irrational, outrage and hatred. Christians who a few weeks before had gathered together to proclaim their loud support for L’oreal Jesus in a hastily re-cut movie salvaged from what was meant to be an entire season’s worth of Gospel retelling, spewed bile at a skilled director who was absolutely in love with the story he wanted to present, and who had spent decades working up to it. We neither knew this, nor cared to find out. The truth of the situation was not our concern next to the…

View original post 3,026 more words

Sagan and Tyson and Nye, Oh My!

Recently we’ve seen quite a rash of “celebrity scientists.” Most everyone knows this started with Carl Sagan and his popular, newly revamped show, Cosmos. Bill Nye and Neil Tyson have stepped up to fill his celebrity role as a scientist who is also good at speaking.

In case you think I’m picking on materialists, Ken Ham could probably be considered a celebrity scientist as well.

But that’s the thing. Most of these men stand in direct, outspoken opposition to the gospel. Can a Christian in good conscience appreciate The Science Guy or the new (or old) Cosmos? We may agree with some of the science presented here – but a great deal of it is not science at all; rather it is propaganda carefully crafted by fools (who say in their heart, there is no God) and falsely called science.

I like science. I like knowing weird things like how gravity might work and what relativity means. It’s temptingly refreshing when a man like Tyson brings that sort of thing into public opinion and makes it popular.

Despite that, despite how much I want to say I enjoy Nye and laugh at Tyson’s jokes and sit in awe of Sagan, I can’t. If I am of Christ, I cannot ally myself with men who have spit on his Name. That’s all there is to it.

“Sure, Hitler committed terrible crimes, but his paintings weren’t half bad, so I’m a big Hitler fan.” (The best defense against Godwin’s Law is to admit it right away)

These men are militant atheists. We are the Body of Christ. How can we who died to sin live any longer in it?

Yes, of course a business owner should have the right to refuse service to gay people

The Matt Walsh Blog

gay bill

We critics of modern society tend to run into a problem very similar to the one you encounter when you go to a bar with 27 different beers on tap.

Sometimes, we just don’t know where to begin.

That’s how I feel when I read about the progressives working themselves into a lather over that religious freedom bill in Arizona. The legislation simply solidifies a business owner’s right to act according to his or her religious beliefs (I say “further solidifies” because the First Amendment already covers this ground pretty thoroughly). “News” outlets like CNN, engaging in blatant editorializing (surprise!), refer to it as “the anti-gay bill,” because part of religious freedom is the right to not participate in activities which you find mortally sinful.

It’s not that business owners want to “refuse service” to gays simply because they’re gay; it’s that some business owners — particularly people who work in the wedding industry…

View original post 1,660 more words

Your Opinion Doesn’t Count

One of the easiest cop-outs in any argument is “that’s your opinion.” Once you pull out this little gem, the opponent’s entire argument is invalidated based on the fact that you can think for yourself, thanks very much, and please stop pushing your personal views on the subject onto other people.

The problem is that opinions have very little to do with the truth. In fact, they have nothing do with truth or facts. An opinion is how you feel about the truth. An opinion can be based on something that is true, or it can be based on something that is false.

But, you say, doesn’t that have everything to do with what you believe to be the case about the given issue? To that I answer, “Greg Bahsen,” and retire for the evening. Merely believing that something is the truth does not mean it is the truth – there is only one Truth, and you are possibly (in fact likely) deceiving yourself about what it is you believe.

Pulling the opinion card usually happens because we don’t like to admit that the other person is right (or we’re just tired of arguing to begin with). If they’re right and I’m wrong, that at the very least indicates if not demands that I need to change the way I think about the world and the way I act.

Now, it is a certain sure thing that everyone disagrees on everything all the time. How do we sift through the opinions and find the truth?

  1. Stop using the word “opinion” and use the word “belief.” That’s what we really mean anyway, and a belief can be argued. An opinion is never true or false and thus it is useless. A belief is always true or false and thus is infinitely necessary in shaping how we view the world. This is the key distinction. Even a belief that seems trivial belies a deeper worldview that informs and determines our thoughts and actions. For example, my personal belief that God created the world ~6000 years ago is not an opinion (because it is either true or false). Furthermore, this belief is girded by my faith that the God who exists revealed Himself through His Word, and that in turn girds (or should gird) my every action and additional belief.
  2. Check all beliefs against Scripture. All of them. If you belief gravity is what holds us to the earth and keeps the planets in motion around the Sun, check it against Scripture. The Scripture bears up all that is true, and without the Word there can be no sure truth. To repeat my example, that belief is true because it is corroborated by all of Scripture. Arguments about “what Scripture really means” can always be resolved with enough study in the Word, submission to its Authority, and prayer that the Spirit would be sent to open our hearts.

None of this is to say that opinions do not exist. You might hold the opinion that setting the AC down is more personally preferable than setting it up. Arguments still arise from this (many times), but the fact of that opinion stands (because it is subjective and therefore unverifiable, which oddly enough means there is no necessary reason to doubt it). If you think that a cold environment leads to a hardier immune system, that’s a belief, and one that’s not necessarily true.

So do everyone a favor and stop saying “that’s your opinion.” Instead, offer to dive into the Scriptures alongside your disagreeing opponent and search out matters that God has hidden.