Showing posts with label Regulative Principle. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Regulative Principle. Show all posts

16 April 2022

Some of the Lameness of New Calvinism on Display

https://g3min.org/why-is-the-organ-relevant-for-major-league-baseball-and-irrelevant-for-local-churches/

One has to chuckle when one considers that the author of this G3 article considers himself to be a 'hardcore' or die-hard Calvinist – a real old school type.

And yet as the article makes clear his thinking is in fact terribly divorced from Church history and the historical theology surrounding the larger Calvinist movement and in particular its views on the issues of worship.

31 July 2017

Redeemer PCA: Men in Tights

This video is generating a lot of reaction within Reformed circles.... a lot of people are saying, wait a minute, what are we doing here? This is particularly problematic within the Confessional sphere. The bulk of their churches have abandoned their historic doctrines when it comes to liturgy and its Scriptural regulation. They're left scrambling in trying to come up with solid arguments against some of the abusive forms of modern innovative worship.

18 May 2017

Fatima Veneration as Adiaphora: John Paul II and Evangelicals

John Paul II took up the office of Pope during the waning years of the Cold War. As the Christian Right sought to expand its political and cultural influence they found common cause with the Polish Pope who seemed to stand for conservative cultural values and was an ally in the war against the Soviets and Communism.
In other words, John Paul II was a bridge between the Evangelical and Roman Catholic worlds.

19 December 2016

Federalist Author's Lies about Santa Claus Facilitated by LPR's Issues Etc.

http://issuesetc.org/2016/12/06/3415-incorporating-the-real-santa-claus-into-the-celebration-of-christs-birth-holly-scheer-12616/

This 14 minute piece was completely misleading on multiple fronts. Contrary to Scheer, Santa Claus is not merely a secularised version of the Roman Catholic St. Nicholas and thus in today's context a bankrupt and hollow form of virtue-appeal minus the theological substance. It's a convenient narrative but one that is less than accurate.

31 October 2016

Halloween Compromise

http://www.desiringgod.org/articles/christians-this-is-our-night

This article is making the rounds. It's the same argument Evangelicals have been making for years.

Evangelicalism and its 'desire' to be relevant is a creature and vehicle of worldly compromise. This article represents scripture manipulation at its finest but somehow manages to ignore the point... what is the argument against Halloween? The article never bothers to interact with the notion. It instead assumes the Dominionist line about conquering and redeeming the culture and it hides its cowardly compromise by pretending to have a robust theology.

13 December 2015

Evangelical Rejections of Sola Scriptura, Guns and the Loss of Gospel Ethics

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/12/jerry-falwell-jrs-troubling-remarks-on-guns/419019/

This indictment all too well demonstrates the bankruptcy of American Evangelical claims regarding authority. To their shame, this secular author calls out and rightly identifies figures such as Falwell Jr. and DeMint as rejecting Scripture as their doctrinal foundation. He's right in arguing they have utterly abandoned it and in fact did so long ago. This article more or less restricts the conversation to violence, retaliation and guns, but the cancer which infects American Evangelicalism is in fact terminal and has metastasised to almost every aspect of doctrine, thought and action.

25 November 2015

American Thanksgiving: Civic Deism at Best

http://us7.campaign-archive2.com/?u=010a95d4b48dd7b0a7d1b401f&id=01ebe1e14b&e=60d11585a1

This showed up in my inbox. We use this organization for our standardized tests that we have to turn in every few years. I appreciate that service but little else about them. They proffer Theonomic heresies and I receive not a few of these disappointing emails. I've written them back but to no avail. Every year or so, when we buy a new test for one of our children, we're back on their miserable list. I do find some satisfaction in the fact that I 'share' their emails, but not in the way they would wish.