Sunday, April 28, 2013
Thursday, April 25, 2013
Tuesday, April 23, 2013
No one should be surprised to hear an SES professor like Richard Howe objecting to presuppositional apologetics. In fact, I would be shocked to hear if Howe were not concerned. Like Howe, I am also concerned about apologetic method. Apologetic method is the product of theology and as such, it goes to the soundness of one’s theological understandings. Since theological understanding is the product of biblical exegesis, and God Himself speaks to us in Scripture, we are talking about what God says. Specifically, when we say that apologetics ought to be carried out in a certain way, we are actually saying that God says that apologetics ought to be carried out in a certain way. And if that method is contrary to what God says, we have every reason to be concerned. Therefore, I do not find any fault in the fact that Howe is concerned about apologetic method per se.
Howe is to be commended for putting it so succinctly. This is indeed the question. Sometimes, believe it or not, we can’t even agree that a “proper” way for apologetics even exists in the first place. Some Christians think that it really doesn’t matter. All that matters is that we are out there doing something. I agree with Howe that there is a proper way for doing Christian apologetics.
Saturday, April 20, 2013
- Christians must oppose abortion
- Christians must see abortion as murder
- Christians must hope for and seek the abolition of abortion
- Churches must actively oppose abortion in their teaching, preaching, and discipleship
- Churches must encourage their members to stand against abolition where they can
- Christians do not have to oppose abortion the way AHA opposes abortion in order to oppose abortion
- Parachurch ministries have no authority to rebuke or correct local churches
- AHA has no right to protest in front of local churches
- It is highly unwise and objectionable to carry pictures of mutilated babies especially in front of other children
- Abortion clinic activities are not wrong, but in my view, are not the best approach to address abortion
- AHA is does not flow from a local church because it was not organized and authorized by a local, establish church
- AHA apparently refuses to submit to a local church, asserting that its only authority is Jesus Christ - given every opportunity to identify his ministerial authority, Hunter refuses
- AHA’s ecclesiology is defective, creates confusion in the body and is divisive
- AHA’s leaders who refuse to come under authority are schismatics in the body and should repent and submit to local elders and pastors
- Finally, it would be rank hypocrisy for anyone to openly reject God's command for submission to your elders in the local Church while pointing your fingers at other Churches who don't oppose abortion strenuously enough to someone else's personal standards
In short, AHA has the following dilemma:
If it is true that we don't need to "oppose abortion" using specific AHA methods, then their methods are reduced to preferences. No one should set up their preferences as commands or even contend they are superior to all other options unless they can prove this to be true. Moreover, this means that AHA's specific message to other churches and pastors that we all must oppose abortion in a very specific manner is specious because who is to say that my method is not superior to their method. Either the Church is in great sin by not adopting the AHA methods or she is not. If she is, then AHA's existence proves necessary and the Church should repent. If she is not, then AHA's existence is reduced to the preference of men regarding the matter of methodology for opposing abortion. The preferences of men are not the commandments of God. The burden of proof is squarely on the shoulders of AHA. The final kicker is that all this is only true, and should only be considered if AHA were a legitimate work of the Church, having been formerly authorized by the Church and currently under the supervision of the Church. In addition, this authorization and supervision should be true of each chapter and all activities in all locations. Moreover, the project should move from one church to another church. In other words, one group of elders should share the ideas with other groups of elders and so on and so forth. In addition, materials and activities should be under constant scrutiny so as to avoid foolishness and scandal. Our hearts are prone to foolishness and scandal because we are all sinners in need of grace and of one another.
Tuesday, April 16, 2013