Jonathan Leeman continues blogging through Willow Creek's REVEAL. Today he gives us Part 9.

Denny Burk responds to Rick Warren on The Colbert Report. So do I.

There is also a very good disussion on praise songs at Old Truth. There is some very good information on the history of praise songs. It would be interesting to contrast this with the history of hymns. I find it quite funny that sometimes our arguments over praise songs are the same as they were 250 years ago with hymns. Nonetheless, the point is really good that our music should be heady and hearty.

Steve Camp has a great article on the Sinfulness of Original Sin, along with a song [poem] in the post.

Mark Driscoll offers help to preachers setting a preaching schedule. (HT: Micah)

I think you are going to be seeing quite a bit of discussion coming out of Bethlehem in the coming days concerning interacting with Muslims. Piper offers answers to "How shall we love our Muslim neighbors". As always Christ is at the center.

Something that is pretty cool is the 9Marks report card. Very interesting stuff. Much can be learned in the first couple of pages as well. (HT: JT)

In other 9Marks news I can't help but wonder how Dever's statement, here,will fly in the SBC. Apparently Dever will continue cooperating with Acts29. His statement is excellent.

Dr. Mohler discusses an often ignored voice in the abortion debate, it is the voice they do not want to hear, the dad's.

I was wondering when someone was going to pick up on this. Two nights ago Rick Warren was the guest on The Colbert Report. I wanted to post quickly on this but felt it wise to wait until someone else "broke the story". This morning Denny Burk did just that. It is with much trepidation that I offer my critique. I do not want to be unfair to Rick Warren, and have my critique lost on the person or even worse turn into sinful slander. After watching this it broke my heart. I was infuriated, full of pain, and all sorts of emotions. I want to use such strong words as, "Rick Warren abandons the gospel", but I am not sure that is wise or totally accurate. Nonetheless I urge you to watch the clip. Here are my critiques:

There are a few minor critiques that taken by themselves probably would not have necessitate a post. These are not major issues, but still in my passion to be ever truthful I must mention them.

1. Warren's conclusion on God's purpose for Creation is typical modern evangelicalism. God created the world just for me and so he could love me. Now, God did create the world with a secondary purpose of creating us to display and give His love to us (not to mention other attributes). But the primary purpose (which Warren does not mention) is that God created the world and the galaxies and everything to display His splendor and His worth. When we put ourselves as the central purpose for Creation we open the door for neutering the gospel.
2. This is very minor and really a point of semantics, but I did not appreciate Warren's definition of fundamentalists as "someone that stops listening". It depends on what you mean by fundamentalist. Do you mean going back to the fundamentals and keeping essential these fundamentals? If so, then Warren is saying that the framers of the Apostle's Creed and the Nicene Creed are people that stop listening. Carl Henry is a person that stops listening. The list could go on and on, so his definition is not helpful and can be harmful to the discussion.
3. Warren's doctrine of eternity is also suspect. I am not certain where he gets the idea that life is a practice ground so we are not a doofus in heaven.
4. His statement about his book being historical Christianity made simple is very debatable. Saying there is nothing in that book that historical Christianity has not taught for 2,000 years is actually a little off. Actually, as we will see in a moment, the problem so often is not that he says things that are unorthodox; it is that often he fails to say things that are orthodox.
5. Warren saying I have connections at the end about getting Jesus on the show. I understand that he was just joking, and I'm sure given the situation I may have made the same joke. Perhaps I was just so upset at this point that it caused me to boil over, but I found the way he said that highly arrogant.

There are also a few major errors in Warren's presentation. Most of which lie in what Warren failed to say. Bryan Chapell tells a story in his book Christ-Centered Preaching that has stuck with me. Many times in his seminary classes Chapell has played a tape of a preacher's morning meditations. They all nod in agreement. When Chapell says that this man is the leader of a local cult, his students are always astonished. They argue that he clothes his heresy. Then Chapell says, "The radio preacher has not hidden his heresy; he exposes it every time he speaks in what he fails to say. The real problem is that evangelical preachers inadvertently and so frequently present such similar messages that Christians fail to hear the difference between a message that purports to be biblical and one that actually is."(p.267-268, First Edition) What did Rick Warren fail to say?

1. Jesus. The only mention of Jesus came from the lips of Colbert when he asked, "If we ask Jesus to come into our life will he?" To which Warren responded, absolutely. That's good, and maybe this should be in the minor section. Because we do not always have to mention the name of Jesus (although it certainly would be a good practice). Where I have a problem with his lack of mentioning Jesus is in the next points
2. Twice it was as if Stephen Colbert (or perhaps the Holy Spirit) were begging Rick Warren to preach the gospel. When Colbert asked, "Am I living my purpose", or "what is the purpose of everyday" that was an invitation to preach the biblical gospel. Warren could have easily spoke of Creation (but again remember his purpose for Creation is not God revealing His glory, but us) then moved into our sinning against our Creator. (This would not have been as awkward as it seems because you could have easily used Colbert's "am I living my purpose" as a launching point). After briefly (it would have to be brief, yet pointed, given the format) discussing the aspect of sin you could preach the Cross. Fairly easy within about a minute. Yet what did Warren do? He did not even mention Jesus, sin, God's glory nothing. He told Stephen Colbert that as long as he is being a good doofus then he makes God smile. What?!? Where does he get the notion that God gets enjoyment out of watching you be you? Colbert being Colbert would be blaspheming God and trampling His glory. God does not enjoy that!

That is enough of a critique. Where does this philosophy come from and what can we do not to slip into it? I believe it is a rejection of the truth behind 1 Corinthians 1:18-2:5 as well as a rejection of the many places in Scripture that we see God's Word and His Gospel is His power unto salvation to those that believe. Warren has the underlying philosophy that we have to "make the gospel simple". There is a part of that which is true, but what often happens is that in "making the gospel simple" we neuter it of any value. In which case we end up preaching on things like purpose and fail to mention the name of Jesus nor be faithful to the biblically revealed Gospel. When men feel like they have to dress up the gospel to make it attractive interviews like this are all you are going to get.

Earlier I mentioned Denny Burk breaking the story. His belief is that Warren should not have even attended the show, so as not to cast his pearls before swine. That very well may be true, but Warren did not cast any pearls. This may be controversial but I am also not so sure that Colbert is swine. I am not sure I would go so far as to say Warren should not have appeared on the show. Maybe not. Maybe. What I do believe is that if were going to go on the show he should have not felt the need to clothe the gospel and preach it unadulterated. I've rambled enough, here is the video, tell me what you think:

I was very excited to see that C.J. Mahaney has entered the blogosphere. Tony Reinke from the Shepherd's Scrapbook will be assisting him in this endeavor. I have been very blessed by the ministry of Mahaney the past few months and look forward to many thought provoking, Christ-centered posts. It doesn't look like they have comments yet but I hope they allow them soon. That's one thing I wish DG's blog offered more of.

Noel Piper gives 7 steps to becoming a better writer.

Nathan Busenitz from Pulpit magazine shares with us a few quotes on ministry. I remember awhile back reading the one on there by John Owen that kicked me in the face. "A minister may fill his pews, his communion roll, the mouths of the public, but what that minister is on his knees in secret before God Almighty, that he is and no more."

Trevin Wax has a very thought-provoking thank you to his parents for not letting him dull his mind with Nintendo.

Randy Alcorn continues his series on longing.

Chapter 11 begins a new section in Sibbes work. We now move from the bruised reed and the smoking flax to consider Christ's gracious government. This gracious government is where Christ will set up "absolute government in us which shall prevail over all corruptions." The chapter will serve us to make certain that we do not get the cart before the horse. Sibbes reminds us again that justification leads to sanctification and not the opposite.

Quick Outline:

• Christ's Judgement Established in Us
• Christ's Mildness and His Government
• Pardon Leads to Obedience
• Justification Leads to Sanctification

Summary:

What is meant by the text in Isaiah 42:3..."he will faithfully bring forth justice" (or in the KJV that Sibbes would have used, "he will bring forth judgment unto victory)? Sibbes believes that it is speaking of Christ's rule in the believers heart. As Christ is seated on the throne of our hearts (keep in mind this was written before the Spirit-Filled Life tracts), his judgments become our judgments. What is taking place is that the Spirit of God is changing our affections.

Sibbes then sets forth to show various conclusions from this text. The first will be dealt with in this chapter and the others later. That first conclusion is that, "Christ is mild in the way that we have seen so that he may then set up his government in those whom he is so gentle and tender over". The reason then for our pardon is to secure our obedience. This then is a fitting judgment as to whether or not we can claim the mercy of Christ; are we desiring to follow Christ in obedience? As Sibbes says, "None ever did truly desire mercy for pardon but desired mercy for healing."

The chapter closes with the truth that justification leads to sanctification. Even in this title we can discern two things. One, justification comes before sanctification. Therefore, sanctification can never be the grounds for justification. Two, justification will lead to sanctification. Therefore, justification will never be alone. Sibbes expounds upon this and cautions us to remember four things.

1. The first and chief ground of our comfort is that Christ as a priest offered himself as a sacrifice to his Father for us.
2. When we are overtaken with sin we must remember to come back to Christ for mercy
3. When we become cold in affection the best way to warm ourselves is at the fire of Jesus' love and mercy.
4. We are ruled by a spirit of love. His subjects are voluntaries.

As he closes Sibbes has a little doctrine to teach about the last (and actually preceding) points. Loving Jesus and freely following him and taking up his yoke is not something that natural man will do or can do. "Our disposition must be changed...they seek for heaven in hell that seek for spiritual love in an unchanged heart."

Discussion:

I really appreciate this chapter and Sibbes' desire to make certain that we not get the cart before the horse. I also am very thankful that Sibbes concluded with reminding us that unless our hearts are regenerate we will never love Christ. That is what will keep all of these things turn into legalistic duties to perform. It is only out of regenerate heart, and living that springs from that heart, that we will be able to love Christ as we ought.

I have not studied in depth Isaiah 42:1-3, but I do wonder if Sibbes' interpretation of this verse is accurate. Is this "rule" speaking of Jesus' government in our heart? What do you think?

Also, on page 80 when Sibbes says, "This also shows that those are misled that make Christ to be only righteousness to us and not sanctification, except by imputation, whereas it is a great part of our happiness to be under such a Lord...", who do you see as his "enemy" in this section? Who is the polemic against? Is it Catholicism? Or is it those that make grace cheap?

Pearls and Diamonds:

"...it is most necessary that the Spirit should alter the taste of the soul so that it might savour the things of the Spirit so deeply that all other things should be out of relish."

"None ever did truly desire mercy for pardon but desired mercy for healing."

"They seek heaven for hell that seek for spiritual love in an unchanged heart."

"This is a point that our generation cannot afford to ignore. Why is it that we constantly parade Christian athletes, media personalities, and pop singers? Why should we think that their opinions or their experiences of grace are of any more significance than those of any other believer? When we tell outsiders about people in our church, do we instantly think of the despised and the lowly who have become Christians, or do we love to impress people with the importance of the men and women who have become Christians?"

D.A. Carson, The Cross and Christian Ministry, p.29

Amen! I fear that those of us in the "Reformed Camp" can gravitate towards the same thing. Some follow Piper, some follow Sproul, some follow Carson, some follow Christ...(By no means is this anything against Piper, Sproul, or Carson). We must be careful not to make "stars" out of our heroes of the faith. Remember that their light is borrowed. Let us magnify the grace of God in the life of a high school janitor as much as we do in the life of our first baseman. Let us boast in the Cross through the lives of the clean-up crew as much as the keynote speaker.

UPDATE: Also, I want to point out what I mean by the title. I am not saying that one cannot be a "star" and a Christian at the same time. What I am saying, and believe Carson is saying, is that at the point in which the "stardom" is the attracting power it fails to be Christian.

When I first received this book I became very excited about reading Chapter 10. I have always wondered what the apostle meant by quenching the spirit. It was my hope that Sibbes would exposit that and lead me into this truth. I am a little disappointed that my original hopes were not granted, yet at the same time Sibbes has done a wonderful job of presenting for us ways that men "offend deeply against this merciful disposition of Christ".

Quick Outline:

• False Despair of Christ's Mercy
• False Hope of Christ's Mercy
• Resisting Christ's Mercy
• Presuming on Christ's Mercy
• Seeking Another Source of Mercy
• Mistreating the Heirs of Mercy
• Strife Among the Heirs of Mercy
• Taking Advantage of the Bruised
• Despising the Simple Means of Mercy

Summary:

Sibbes has been very gracious in his words up to this point. He has labored to portray the astonishing grace and mercy of our Savior. He has said such sweet things as, "there is more mercy in Christ, than sin in us". Yet there are those that "offend deeply against this merciful disposition". Sibbes now discusses the various ways that we might offend Christ deeply.

All of these listed have one thing in common, they reject Christ in his mercy. Whether it be disbelieving him to be merciful, presuming upon his mercy while living in sin, or treating others without mercy. All of these have at their foundation a misunderstanding, or even outright rejection, of the mercy of Christ.

The man that has a false despair is not trusting in Christ's mercy and is therefore quenching the Spirit. The man that has a false hope of Christ's mercy is drawing further away from Christ into the shackles of sin, and is therefore quenching the Spirit. Some even go so far as to resist the mercy of Christ, because they will not be troubled with the light of these sparks of grace. Others will presume upon Christ's mercy. Much like those that have a false hope, because of our carnal disposition we can still struggle with presuming upon his mercy.

Even in the midst of our spanking Sibbes stops to remind us of the mercy and power of Christ in holding us. Sibbes reminds us of all the "means whereby Christ preserves grace": Holy communion (in which I believe Sibbes is referring to fellowship with other believers, especially at the Lord's Table), holy duties, the gospel ministers of Jesus and His gospel, and the fact that grace is strengthend by the exercise of it. Yet all of these are not what sustains us but the means that Jesus uses to do so; therefore let us glory and boast in Him!

After Sibbes reminds us again of the keeping power of Jesus he takes up again pointing out the ways that we can quench the Spirit. Some men will forsake the mercy of Christ by searching out other sources. Did not the Israelites do this often? Do we not still? Another way that we deeply offend the merciful disposition of our Lord is in our merciless acts towards other believers. This seems to be Sibbes point in the last few pages of this chapter. And finally, he points out that we are quenching the Spirit when we despise the simple means of mercy.

Discussion:

This is a great chapter. Timmy Brister has some excellent discussion on this chapter as well. There are a few things left for us to discuss from this chapter. It is a longer chapter (especially for Sibbes) and it is packed with thoughts. Here are a few questions for us to ponder:

1. In his section on resisting Christ's mercy, Sibbes seems to be suggesting that the Holy Spirit can be resisted. We know that Sibbes was a Puritan that held dearly to the doctrines of grace. What then would be his thought on irresistible grace? Does this statement not contradict irresistible grace: "If men appeal to their own consciences, they will tell them that the Holy Spirit has often knocked at their hearts, as willing to have kindled some holy desires in them. How else can they be said to resist the Holy Ghost, but that the Spirit was readier to draw them to a further degree of goodness than was consistent with their own wills?"
   Our understanding of this question will reveal whether or not we really understood what the Puritans and early Reformers meant by irresistible grace. If we fail to preach as Sibbes did here, I believe we abandon what the Scriptures reveal that there is a sense in which the Spirit of God is actively rejected and resisted. Yet, we must also understand as Sibbes did that there is an effectual drawing of men that will not be resisted. Thoughts?

2. When Sibbes says, "what spirit shall we think them to be of that take advantage of the bruisedness and infirmities of men's spirits to relieve them with false peace for their own worldly ends...", do you see modern evangelicalism, or even the SBC? (I point out the SBC because that is where God has planted me). Are we not doing what Sibbes says here if we take sinners that are bruised and weak and we quickly lead them through a prayer and do whatever we can to alleviate their bruising even if it means giving them false peace? Are we not sometimes very quick in bringing men on to make "decisions" so that we can pad our numbers? Sibbes begins railing against popery. My question is, are we that far removed from popery?

Pearls and Diamonds:

"None are damned in the church but those that are determined to be..." (p.67)

"...all comfort should draw us nearer to Christ" (p.68)

"Infirmities are a ground of humility, not a plea for negligence, nor an encouragement to presumption." (p.71)

"One word spoken in season will do more good than a thousand out of season." (p.74)

I was shocked to see my name at the bottom of Timmy Brister's self-disclosure meme. What an honor! I am supposed to disclose 7 facts about myself that few people would know and then tag 7 other people to do the same. This actually is more difficult than I had imagined. So, even though this will probably serve no grand purpose here are my 7 things:

1. I used to love books as a young child then in junior high I began to abhor books and the whole process of learning. I was not a very good student in high school, and had probably did not read an entire book until my senior year. I still suffer consequences from my lack of paying attention. (If anyone is ever annoyed by my inappropriate uses--or lack of--commas, this is why). Only by the grace of God using a professor named Dr. Barrett did my early passion for learning reignite.

2. Along the same lines I had no clue what the word "meme" was until this little project. If you asked me what a meme was I probably would mispronounced it and said that it is a character on the Drew Carey Show. Which leads to my third thing...

3. I am a pretty big fan of Drew Carey. His show really goes in the gutter and he is a somewhat vile man himself, but for some reason I like him. I used to watch a few episodes of the Drew Carey Show every day in high school. I guess I did not have much of a life because...

4. My first girlfriend was in 8th grade, and that was not serious. I really never had a serious girlfriend until my junior year. I wish I had never had a girlfriend until my wife, but God's grace is sufficient.

5. I used to dream of being a professional athlete. Which is kind of funny if you know that I am 5'8, 150 pounds. (Probably around 125-130 in high school and college). I practiced baseball for hours a day, throwing a baseball against a concrete slab while standing about 3 feet from it to help my reflexes. It did seem to work, I could have played college baseball for a couple of minor schools. However, the Lord saved me and had different plans for my life.

6. When the Lord first began working in my life I was a huge fan of TBN, Jesse Duplantis, etc. I even remember thinking that I should as an act of faith not wear my contacts on my drive to school. That would have been really dumb because I cannot see the big E on the eye charts. I would have killed myself or someone else, probably. I was also a passionate Arminian and was not "converted" to the doctrines of grace until college when I tried writing a scholarly paper to refute it. So I used to be passionate about many things I now passionately oppose.

7. At one point in my life I owned a cd of 2Pac , the Spice Girls, New Kids on the Block, Kris Kross, Ozzy Osbourne, DC Talk, BB King, The Bee Gees, and Vince Gill all at the same time. This may be 8 but along the same music lines; I once stole a piece of candy from Ten Shekel Shirt, a Christian band. So, if you ever read this...sorry!

So, there you go. 7 things about me that you probably did not know. There is probably much more. I have done many stupid things in my life. Now I have to think of 7 other people, some that probably do not know me but I read their blogs.

Garrett, Jimmy, Brian Thornton, Ray Ortlund, Jr., Tom Ascol, Tony Reinke, and has anyone tagged JT yet?