First, let me apologize for my absence, but the amount of time that this internship is taking up on my part (at least right now) is unreal. I’ll be posting as I’m able to.
Now, on to our subject for today: Jason Stellman’s abandonment of justification sola fide, and the doctrine of sola scriptura.
For those of you not of the Reformed and Presbyterian stripe, this is the latest “controversy” to rock our little corner of the broader Christian swimming pool. Pastor Stellman was the pastor of Exile Presbyterian Church, is the author of Dual Citizens, and prosecuted Dr. Peter Leithart for holding views of baptism that were beyond the pale of the Westminster Confession of Faith.
Several weeks ago, he posted his “Farewell Letter” over at his blog Creed Code Cult, and the blog’s combox has exploded with comments, most of which coming from the Reformed side of things fall into the “decidedly nasty and unhelpful” category. Most of the comments from the Roman Catholic/Eastern Orthodox side of things tend to be gloating. Neither reaction is terribly helpful.
This past week will officially go into the books as one of the worst in recent memory.
Early in the week, my parents-in-law’s next door neighbor’s son (was that complicated enough for you) was killed in a car wreck. He was the passenger in a car driving the wrong way which hit the car of an off-duty police officer, killing the police officer and the neigbor’s son. I don’t know much about Officer Hoefler, but the neighbor’s son was only 32.
I’ve posted once before on this topic, which can be found here.
Now that the “Traditional View” of Southern Baptists on Salvation has been published far and wide, there are some other voices joining the conversation, and most of them are playing a lot nicer than I did. Ligon Duncan has put in his two cents, as has Dr. R. Albert Mohler. But what is most interesting to me is that Roger Olson has gotten into the mix as well.
I want you to see and image taken from my wall on Facebook that helps shed some light on why this is an issue:
Dr. Olson isn’t know for being a friend of Calvinist soteriology, so when even he steps up and says that there’s a problem…much less that the problem is Semi-Pelagianism (!), that, my friends and readers, is really bad.
I’m trying to keep this little mini-series on preaching going for a few more posts; today I’m asking the question, “Whatever happened to expository preaching?”
But before I can answer the question, the first thing I must do is define precisely what I mean by expository preaching. The definition found over at Wikipedia is horrendous, so I’ll be sure to make very clear both what expository preaching is and what it isn’t.
As a general rule, I’m a fairly easy person to get along with; in fact, it takes a good bit to get me riled up, but the latest anti-Calvinist screed that has been pumped out by some of those in the Southern Baptist Convention has gotten my dander up. You’ll note that the following post contains some sharp language; if you’re easily offended, you may want to pass by this particular post.
Just about the time I sincerely hoped the Caner brothers had entirely dropped out of sight, after the Ergun Caner debacle starting almost 2 years ago and the resultant “Great Evangelical Coverup”, facilitated by Veritas Evangelical Seminary and Dr. Norman Geisler, along comes Emir Caner as a signatory to the pile of rubbish titled “A Statement of Traditional Southern Baptist Understanding of God’s Plan of Salvation.” To that I say, “Horse-feathers and poppy-cock, my good man.”
I’ve been engaged in a good bit of sermon preparation this week, trying to make sure I’m staying about three weeks ahead of myself. Last evening, I decided to re-read the Greek text for the sermon I’ll be preaching on the 10th of June. While reading Galatians 1:6-10, a particular portion of the text sort of jumped out and grabbed me. I’m going to provide both the Greek text of the Nestle-Aland 27th edition and my translation as well.
John A. Broadus, second president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.
This will seem an odd post to some of those reading this blog. I am trying to ask a series of questions regarding the state of preaching in the United States as a whole, but specifically in Reformed and Presbyterian pulpits.
I’ve already asked the question, “Whatever happened to Reformed preaching”, in this post. Today I want narrow the topic down to one that will seem esoteric to some: “Whatever happened to extemporaneous preaching?”
For those who are uninitiated, there are really three methods of preaching. There are those who prepare a full manuscript which they then take in to the pulpit and then read. A good example of this would be Thomas Chalmers. Then there are also those who prepare a full manuscript and present it memorata – that is, the memorize the whole thing! Finally, there is the extemporaneous method. Each is not without its drawbacks.