Wednesday, May 18, 2011

Interrupting the Series to Close Some Browser Tabs

1. It must feel pretty cool to see John Piper say you wrote the book Jonathan Edwards wanted to write.

2. Little known facts: "The SBC only truly exists two days a year. It is not a denomination, it is a collective of free churches choosing to partner together for mission."

3. Don't tell me there's no "emerging middle."

4. This offers a great look inside the mind and mood of Christianity Today.

5. Though I've disagreed with Scot McKnight on many points, he's dead on in his critique of George Ladd's yearning for "a place at the table." Here's the conclusion:
I don’t believe our goal as Bible or theology scholars is to be deemed among the finest of scholars or to find a place at the table, but to be faithful to Jesus Christ and to the gospel and to orthodox theology and to academic rigor. Yes, we are to work to discover and to be creative, but the driving passion to prove ourselves at the feet of others falls short of a true Christian telos. I’d put it this way: we are called to be faithful, whether we are accepted or not.
6. And finally, Russell Moore published a provocative analogy to romance novels today:
Pornography is based on the illusion of a perfectly willing, always aroused partner without the “work” of relational intimacy. Often romance novels or their film equivalents do the same thing for the emotional needs of women that pornography offers for the erotic urges of men.
But to be fair, my wife's and my friend, Beth Spraul, said it first! [PDF]:
Let me start with a somewhat provocative, but reasonable comparison. Among thoughtful Christians, one will hear significant concern for how the culture of pornography harmfully affects men by distorting their view of sex and women. . . . I’d like to suggest that culture attacks women similarly — it is just a bit more subtle. The lies told to women are introduced at the level of women’s emotions (less harmful, right?), in how they dream about men, and in what they long for relationally. Like pornography, chick-flicks take a good gift from God (romance, relational intimacy) that women are created to desire, and distort it by presenting as “normal” an unbiblical and unrealistic picture of men, love and marriage. And just like men who buy into the lies of pornography, women who believe that their husbands and marriages should always be like what they see on the screen will be sinfully dissatisfied with God’s good gift to them of a “normal” husband and marriage.


d4v34x said...

Wow, Piper and Warren reunion event (ASPIRE) hosted by the SBC?

Ben said...

One more thing: Harold Camping still has a program schedule online for Sunday.

d4v34x said...

So awesome. :eyeroll:

Anonymous said...

The SBC is "not a denomination" the way that Fundamentalism is "not a network".

I have no problems with denominations (in fact, I think they are a positive good), so my point is not to bash the SBC because it is a denomination.

My point is, "A rose by any other name . . ."

If SBCers want to say they are not episcopal -- point taken. Not presbyterian -- absolutely not. Not a denomination -- come on.

Baptists love to equivocate by saying "denomination" but meaning "episopal or presbyterian."

Anyway . . . good links.


Don Johnson said...

Ok, so I won't tell you there's no emerging middle.


Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

Anonymous said...

There can't be an emerging middle because anyone who is a part of the phenomenon some describe by that term will be defined out of fundamentalism by the old school fundies (everyone should stop using "right" and "left" and "conservative" and "liberal" in these discussions).

To the card carrying fundies, any evidence of an emerging middle actually isn't evidence of that at all. It's evidence of "pragmatism" (the most ironic criticism ever) or "compromise" or something similar on the part of those fundamentalists working with the dread evangelicals.

That's been the case for a long, long time, and it's the reason many, many people long ago quit worrying about how they are regarded by the card carriers.

Alas indeed


Tim Batchelor said...

Hi Ben,

Was the 9Marks link supposed to be about Matt Schmucker's travel and ministry in Uganda?

Ben said...

Dave, I don't think it's right to say that the Pastor's Conference is "hosted" by the SBC. It's closely connected, but a host pastor is elected every year, and most (if not all) of the funding comes from an offering and the remainder falls to the host pastor/church/whoever.

Keith, LOL. True. There's a meaningful technical sense in which it's not a denomination in the same sense your denomination would be. Though, it's pretty common for SBC people to call it a denomination. What's important about that statement is how it's not a denomination in the sense that independents often stigmatize them.

Don, thanks.

Tim, yes.

d4v34x said...


I stand clarified.