2. I've been told that a particular brand of children's pirate CDs now lead children through the "sinner's prayer" at the end. Aarrrrrrrghhh! Can anyone confirm yea or nay?
3. None of these arguments actually support the author's conclusion. One or two of the arguments aren't even true. Let me quote a wiser man than I once again:
If we wanted to devise a plan to turn out as many legalists as we could, how would we go about it? One way that we might do it is to offer some sort of of a carnal or this-worldly inducement for performing spiritual exercises.4. Any idiot can throw rocks at Joel Osteen, so that's not my point here. He's simply ahead of his time. This sort of spineless attempt to maintain some veneer of biblical fidelity while accommodating secularists' incredulity is going to be the temptation the people in our pews face. Sooner or later, if not already. And, frankly, probably our temptation too. As David Wells has said in this outstanding book, "Engaging the culture is not the same thing as capitulating to it" (92).
5. And speaking of a look into the future, here's what Apple thought the future looked like back in 1987:
1 comment:
On No. 3, I think Bauder's thought is incomplete. I wish he would engage this to clarify. The statement by itself is false. There is absolutely nothing unbiblical about rewarding your child for things.
Good behavior, athletic competitions, etc, are all rewarded and the NT speaks of such positively. Before it is argued that it isn't the same thing, I would say in many ways it is.
At present I am coaching 3 sons in baseball. I want them to all be the best player on the best team. I want them to be rewarded for that. However, I want them to learn valuable lessons from the sports world that are helpful in preparation for life. I don't want them to only play for the trophy.
I gladly send my children to AWANA. I want the Word of God to penetrate their hearts because it can (Heb 4:12). I don't want them to only be excited about candy, cookies, or trinkets, but why must it be excluded?
Bauder presents it as either/or. I appreciate what he is trying to communicate, but he has overstated his case. Frankly, he should know better than to adopt the Augustinian attitude toward the idea of carnal. That is another matter though.
Post a Comment