foto friday

celebrating the conclusion of another summer and baseball season

trey asks a question

bonus, “i can’t look”

while we are on the topic

while we are on the topic of the babies, here is Randy Alcorn’s recent post about why is voting for 98% pro life McCain rather than 100% pro-abortion Obama.

I’ve also been angrily challenged as to why I don’t care about other needy and dying children, only the unborn. Actually, all the royalties from all of my books go to help the needy, including feeding and clothing and relieving the suffering of children all over the world. We give to prolife work, but far more to famine relief and development. By God’s grace, over four million dollars has been distributed for people-helping causes in the last number of years, much of it to children.

It’s curious that because I’m expressing concern about unborn children, people assume I don’t care about children who are already born. I do. But neither of the two major presidential candidates is advocating the legalized killing of already born children. However, one is advocating the legalized killing of unborn children. Since it is already illegal to kill the born, I’m talking about the rights and needs of the unborn.

and further down an analogy/illustration:

However, in an imperfect world I do think there’s a difference between being completely wrong about abortion, like Giuliani, and mostly right but partly wrong about abortion, like John McCain. Nanci and I have wrestled with this, and just as we agreed in the past to vote for a third party candidate, in this case we agreed, though reluctantly, to vote for McCain in light of the only electable alternative.

Let me try an analogy to show you why. Suppose in the town you live in, there’s a lake where, for the last thirty-five years, children have been taken by parents to be drowned. Say that every day 100 children are brought to this lake.

As a town citizen, you are presented with two candidates for mayor. (You can vote for a third party, but clearly one of these two candidates will be elected.) One candidate publicly states that he believes the right thing is that the children not be brought to that lake. They should be allowed to live, except the one or two conceived by rape. By longstanding town law the 100 daily drownings are all legal, and the mayor can’t change the law. However, this mayoral candidate has publicly stated that the law should be changed, and he hopes to appoint judges who help that happen, so that 98 or 99 of the 100 children would live rather than die.

Now, the deaths of those one or two children conceived by rape should rightly disturb you. And if until now zero children had been killed at the lake, it would be evil to vote for a man willing for one or two to be legally drowned. But for thirty-five years, 100 children have been killed there each day. This man is trying to move the town in the right direction, even though he has stopped just short of a 100% reversal. No additional children will be killed if his position were in place, because those one or two children would have been killed anyway under existing law. But 98 or 99 a day would be rescued from the death they will face if his position isn’t put in place.

and don’t miss this bit on “winning.”

One of the commenters on my last blog said, “God didn’t call us to win. He called us to do what is right.” Well, to me this has never been about us winning. I don’t even know who us is. To me, it’s certainly not about Republicans winning, or John McCain winning. My concern is whether unborn babies will be protected. Sure, I want to be able to sleep at night because I did the right thing. But I also want millions of babies to sleep (or cry) at night, because my vote actually helped them live. That, I believe, is the right thing for me to do—not to vote for an ideal unelectable candidate, but to do what I can to help children live even if I have to vote for a flawed candidate to do so.

The whole thing is very long, but very well written and argued with photos. Please take some time and go read it.

Alcorn has been writing very good long pieces on this topic since October 16. Here they are:

Not Cool: Obama’s ProAbortion Stance and Christians enabling him.

Abortion Reduction by the Freedom of Choice Act?

I’m not Voting for a Man, I’m Voting for Generations of Children and their Right to Live

Al Mohler on the babies

here is Al Mohler’s take on the babies. Go read all of it.

I can understand the fatigue and the sense of frustration. On the other hand, we have witnessed a growing respect for life as ultrasound technologies have opened the womb to view. We have seen the Supreme Court allow that some abortion procedures can be ruled outside the law. We see pro-life convictions growing among the young. This is a moral conflict that might take a century or more to run its course.

I can understand the desire to reset the equation, to transcend the tired divisions. I can even understand the desire to move on, to go on to other issues of great and grave concern. I can sense excitement about a candidate who represents generational hope, and whose election could do so much to heal racial lines of division.

But I just cannot get past one crucial, irreducible, and central issue — the moral status of those unborn lives. They are not mine to negotiate. If abortion were a matter of concern for anything less than this, I would gladly negotiate. But abortion is a matter of life and death, and how can we negotiate with death? What moral sense does it make to settle for death as “safe, legal, and rare?” How safe? How rare?

Our considerations of these questions will reveal what we really think of those millions of unborn lives. Do we consider the battle for their lives permanently lost?

Those fighting for the abolition of slavery pressed on against obstacles and set backs worse than these because, after all, these were human lives they were defending. What if they had listened to those who, after Dred Scott and the Missouri Compromise, said that the battle was “permanently” lost? What if they had been intimidated by critics accusing them of “single-issue” voting?

If every single fetus is an unborn child made in the image of God, there is no moral justification for settling for a vague hope of some reduction in the number of fetal homicides. If the abortion fight is “permanently lost,” it will be lost first among those who claim to be defenders of life — those who tell us that the argument is merely changing.

emphasis added.

Hat tip to Vitamin Z.

Tim Keller

Tim Keller has a new book out called The Prodigal God.

he explains what it is and why he wrote it here. a sample:

What’s the book about? It’s about being ‘prodigal.’ The word ‘prodigal’ is an English word that means recklessly extravagant, spending to the point of poverty. The dictionaries tell us that the word can be understood in a more negative or a more positive sense. The more positive meaning is to be lavishly and sacrificially abundant in giving. The more negative sense is to be wasteful and irresponsible in one’s spending. (Some people think prodigal means ‘wayward,’ but there is no dictionary that indicates that the word means ‘immoral.’) The negative sense obviously applies to the actions of the younger brother in the Luke 15 parable. But is there any sense in which God can be called ‘prodigal’? I think so.

go read the rest. Good stuff. and it looks like another (short) book is on my list.

hat tip to Vitamin Z

New Bible?

Ligonier Ministries is celebrating Reformation Week by giving away a Reformation Study Bible with a donation of any amount. Hurry, offer ends on October 31.

I have one of these Bibles and it is an excellent resource.

hat tip to the Foolish Galatian.

Christless Christianity

I am going to read this book in the near future.

Challies has reviewed Christless Christianity by Michael Horton and the review is awesome.

Take a little time and go read the whole review. here is a bit from the beginning but the whole thing is a must read:

In Christless Christianity Michael Horton argues that such denial of Christ may not be too far from home. More and more evangelical churches, he says, are now essentially Christless. “Aside from the packaging, there is nothing that cannot be found in most churches today that could not be satisfied by any number of secular programs and self-help groups.” Many churches have tossed out Christ and continue on without him, sometimes not even realizing that he has been lost along the way.

This is not to say that American evangelicalism has already reached a point of no return or that every church has rejected Christ. “I am not arguing in this book that we have arrived at Christless Christianity,” says Horton, “but that we are well on our way. … My concern is that we are getting dangerously close to the place in everyday American church life where the Bible is mined for ‘relevant’ quotes but is largely irrelevant on its own terms; God is used as a personal resource rather than known, worshiped and trusted; Jesus Christ is a coach with a good game plan for our victory rather than a Savior who has already achieved it for us; salvation is more a matter of having our best life now than being saved from God’s judgment by God himself; and the Holy Spirit is an electrical outlet we can plug into for the power we need to be all that we can be.” Jesus has become supplemental instead of instrumental to the church. As the church has focused on “deeds, not creeds” she has become increasingly irrelevant and unfaithful. Church has become just another area in which Americans can live out the American dream. “In my view, we are living out our creed, but that creed is closer to the American Dream than it is to the Christian faith. The claim I am laying out in this book is that the most dominant form of Christianity today reflects ‘a zeal for God’ that is nevertheless without knowledge–particularly, as Paul himself specifies, the knowledge of God’s justification of the wicked by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, apart from works.”

this is the day that the Lord hath made

I will rejoice and be glad in it.

Walking out of Bible study this morning trying to get a reflection picture and boy did God give me one!

the power of prayer

R.C. Sproul has a two part series on the power of prayer over at the Ligonier Ministries Blog.

power of prayer part 1.

power of prayer part 2

these answer further the question of “why pray?” In Part 1, Mr. Sproul uses a Hebrews 11 format to list some things that were accomplished through prayer in the Bible.

By prayer, Esau’s heart was changed toward Jacob, so that they met in a friendly, rather than hostile, manner (Genesis 32).

By the prayer of Moses, God brought the plagues upon Egypt and then removed them again (Exodus 7-11).

By prayer, Joshua made the sun stand still (Joshua 10).

By prayer, when Samson was ready to perish with thirst, God brought water out of a hollow place for his sustenance (Judges 15).

By prayer, the strength of Samson was restored. And he pulled down the temple of Dagon on the Philistines, so that those whom he killed as he died were more than all he had killed in his life prior to that (Judges 16).

By prayer, Elijah held back the rains for three and a half years. And then by prayer, caused it to rain again (1 Kings 17-18).

By the prayer of Hezekiah, God sent an angel and killed in one night 185,000 men in Sennacherib’s army (2 Kings 19).

By the prayer of Asa, God confounded the army of Zerah (2 Chronicles 14).

And time would fail me to tell of Abraham, who prayed for and received a son at the age of one hundred years; and Moses, who received help at the Red Sea; and the Israelites, who were delivered from Egypt after much prayer; and David, who escaped the treachery of Saul by prayer; and Solomon, who received great wisdom as the result of prayer; and Daniel, who was able to interpret dreams after prayer. People were delivered from peril, healed from diseases, saw loved ones cured, and witnessed innumerable miracles as the result of fervent prayer.

why pray? see the list above.

the good news of the Gospel

Challies has an excellent summary of the gospel message as it is really compared to how it is usually preached. (my previous post on this topic is here)

First the real bad news according to the Bible:

But the gospel reaches its ultimate offense when it tells us that we are utterly unable to do anything about all of this. None of our deeds, however noble and good, are able to make the least dent in the debt we owe to God. Furthermore, none of us would pursue any kind of reconciliation with God were it not for his prior action in our hearts. We are, in our heart of hearts, God-haters. Without God’s grace we are helpless and hopeless.

then the not so bad news man centered version:

This is some exceedingly bad news. And this is why so many churches seek to soften the news. It’s better, they think, to welcome into church the many people who will accept a softened message than the few who will accept such a tough message. And so they tamper with it, taking the edge off. Yes, we have sinned, but let’s think of it as just doing bad things or making mistakes. And though God has noticed these mistakes, he is willing and eager to overlook such offenses. What kind of Father would he be if he really insisted that we face eternal damnation for some mistakes? Soon the message is watered down into watery, tasteless baby food.

the not so good man centered news follows directly from the not so bad news:

If you turn to God, you can have your best life now. He will bless you richly, giving you all the things you want and need. He will make your life better and promise you the reward of heaven where you will be reunited with all of the people and the things you held dear here on earth.

the real unadulterated Biblical truth is stark by comparison:

When we understand–truly understand–the precariousness of our position; when we understand just how badly we have offended God and how we justly deserve his wrath, the good news becomes so much sweeter. Gone is the man-centered view of the benefits of God’s salvation and in its place arises an understanding that the greatest benefit of salvation is Christ himself!

Are you satisfied with finding Christ himself? Or do you want/expect Jesus to help you with your health, finances, relationship issues etc. etc. etc?

That is the question that Satan posed to God about Job in Job 1:8-11. “Does Job worship you because he treasures you or does he worship you because you give him stuff?”

8 Then the LORD said to Satan, “Have you considered my servant Job? There is no one on earth like him; he is blameless and upright, a man who fears God and shuns evil.”

9 “Does Job fear God for nothing?” Satan replied. 10 “Have you not put a hedge around him and his household and everything he has? You have blessed the work of his hands, so that his flocks and herds are spread throughout the land. 11 But stretch out your hand and strike everything he has, and he will surely curse you to your face.”

Job answered the question by saying that God was enough. Job passed the test.

20 At this, Job got up and tore his robe and shaved his head. Then he fell to the ground in worship 21 and said:
“Naked I came from my mother’s womb,
and naked I will depart. [c]
The LORD gave and the LORD has taken away;
may the name of the LORD be praised.”

22 In all this, Job did not sin by charging God with wrongdoing.

Satan then upped the ante by claiming that Job treasured his own life and health more than God.

4 “Skin for skin!” Satan replied. “A man will give all he has for his own life. 5 But stretch out your hand and strike his flesh and bones, and he will surely curse you to your face.”

Again Job passed the test.

9 His wife said to him, “Are you still holding on to your integrity? Curse God and die!”

10 He replied, “You are talking like a foolish [b] woman. Shall we accept good from God, and not trouble?”
In all this, Job did not sin in what he said.

How about you? Are you like Job and the Apostle Paul? Do you count the things of this world as garbage compared to the goal of pressing on to know Christ?

IS JESUS WORTH MORE TO YOU THAN YOUR MONEY? MORE TO YOU THAN YOUR HOUSE? MORE TO YOU THAN YOUR FAMILY? MORE TO YOU THAN YOUR HEALTH? MORE TO YOU THAN YOUR VERY LIFE?

do you want him to be? Really?

He said that if we follow him we have to hate our mother our father and even our own life. This means that everything else that we love has to be so far distant in our affections that it might as well be hatred.

Jesus said his followers have to “deny themselves, take up their cross and follow him.”

Is that what you signed up for when you prayed the prayer? are you willing to sign up for it now?

I think that the reason people don’t share the gospel is because they don’t know the gospel. They don’t know that God has promised them the glorious gift of Himself and that this gift makes every earthly thing pale in comparison. We don’t understand that God has called us to trust Him with everything we have and be ready to give it up every day for His sake because He is worthy of praise, honor, glory, sacrifice and first place preeminently in our affections.

Most of us never were told the really bad news about the precariousness of our situation outside of Christ and we never understood the magnificently wonderful news about the free gift of Himself that God is offering to us.

what he said

Richard Baxter quoted at Pulpit Magazine.

Oh, if you have the hearts of Christians or of men in you, let them yearn towards your poor ignorant, ungodly neighbours. Alas, there is but a step betwixt them and death and hell; many hundred diseases are waiting ready to seize on them, and if they die unregenerate, they are lost forever.

Have you hearts of rock, that cannot pity men in such a case as this? If you believe not the Word of God, and the danger of sinners, why are you Christians yourselves? If you do believe it, why do you not bestir yourself to the helping of others? Do you not care who is damned, so you be saved? If so, you have sufficient cause to pity yourselves, for it is a frame of spirit utterly inconsistent with grace. . . .

Dost thou live close by them, or meet them in the streets, or labour with them, or travel with them, or sit and talk with them, and say nothing to them of their souls, or the life to come? If their houses were on fire, thou wouldst run and help them; and wilt thou not help them when their souls are almost at the fire of hell?

(Cited in I. D. E. Thomas, A Puritan Golden Treasury [Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1977], 92–93)

the two sentences that I bolded in the second paragraph are exactly the two questions that christ followers today must seriously ask themselves.

or if you prefer, you can boil it down to one simple deadly serious question.

“if you really believe it for yourselves, then why not for others?”

free books

John Piper and Justin Taylor’s book Stand: a Call for Endurance of the Saints is available for sale or by free downloadable pdf.

Hat tip to Said at Southwestern where the book is also reviewed.

Also the first nine chapters of Mark Driscoll’s Porn Again Christian are now available at Resurgence. The whole thing will be a free downloadable pdf when it has been uploaded in its entirety.

my morning this fine Sunday(before church, of course)

Sparkly

I just love making sparkly light pictures.

package arrived

I had a package waiting for me after work today. an innocuous brown box.

As anyone would do, I opened it only to find another box. this one white and much less innocuous.

I opened the white box to discover a bit of shrink wrapped brown papery goodness.

removed the wrap.

opened it up.

Hmmm. this is going to be fun. The TruTone is soft and flexible. The Bible is HUGE. I haven’t read much of the study material yet, but what I have read is good. The timelines are very helpful.

The Bible opens completely flat with no effort, so you can read it easily on a table or desk. Plus, it included a code to access the online version of the ESV Study Bible which, depending on your laptop is less bulky than the physical version.

All in all a great package to have waiting.

Now, one more arrival next year sometime if the funds permit.

Just Look

after all the talking gets talked and running gets ran, this is what I think this election is about. (like I said before).

Just Look

The picture on this page is an untouched photograph of a being that has been within its mother for 20 weeks. Please do me the favor of looking at it carefully.

Have you any doubt that it is a human being?

If you do not have any such doubt, have you any doubt that it is an innocent human being?

If you have no doubt about this either, have you any doubt that the authorities in a civilized society are duty-bound to protect this innocent human being if anyone were to wish to kill it?

If your answer to this last query is negative, that is, if you have no doubt that the authorities in a civilized society would be duty-bound to protect this innocent human being if someone were to wish to kill it, I would suggest—even insist—that there is not a lot more to be said about the issue of abortion in our society. It is wrong, and it cannot—must not—be tolerated.

witnessing

a review of a 42 year old book that has been re-released begins:

“Witnessing is that deep-seated conviction that the greatest favor I can do for others is to introduce them to Jesus Christ . . . . But, many Christians are ineffective ambassadors because they’re not sure of the content of their message and are unable to communicate it clearly to others.” So writes Paul Little in How to Give Away Your Faith, which is certainly one of the most widely-read and successful books on evangelism ever written.

42 years ago, the two problems he cites might have been the main ones. Now, I think the problem is more fundamental. I think a large number of nominal Christ followers don’t have the deep seated conviction that people need Jesus. Its that simple.

photo phriday

Doug Wilson on the Shack

here is bit of Doug Wilson’s take on the Shack by William Young. Powerful and true words from Doug:

And this brings me to the way in which this book was simply terrible, blasphemous. But before going on, I have to hasten to add that it is a peculiar form of evangelical blasphemy, one that is well-intentioned and naive. I remember one time I was at a conference where the group I was with was sharing the venue with another group. So one time I sat in on the chapel services of that other group, and they began singing “Spring Up, O Well,” which was fine with me. But since the song involved water, somebody had developed hand motions, and jumpy-up-and-down-motions. So there was this room full of adult Christians jumping up and down while they were singing, splish splashing along. But then they got to a verse where it was all about the blood of Christ instead of water, and they continued right on with the hand motions and the jumping, and the only thing missing was the rubber ducky, and nobody blasphemes like an evangelical can.

In a book clearly written to deal with the pain of fatherlessness, how does Young go about it? He makes God the Father, “Papa,” a large beaming African American woman (p. 82). The Holy Spirit is a shimmery Asian woman named Sarayu, mysterious and “way out there.” Jesus is simply Jesus, and is masculine after a kind, but in that unique way possessed by camp counselors and youth ministers with muscular forearms.

Here is a taste of the down home weekend retreat-like relationship that is going to fix Mack.

“Mack followed her soft humming down a short hallway and into an open kitchen-dining area, complete with a small four-seat table and wicker-backed chairs. The inside of the cabin was roomier than he had expected. Papa was working on something with her back to him, flour flying as she swayed to the music of whatever she was listening to. The song obviously came to an end, marked by a couple of last shoulder and hip shakes. Turning to face him, she took off the earphones” (p. 90).

Meet God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth. Now Young is by no means of dunce — he is very clear that this is just an appearance, an accommodation. But the image, the metaphor, the feel of this whole book is warm and maternal, cozy and nonthreatening. The center of the discussions is the kitchen. The need is a deep father hunger, but this is not met by a father, but by the enveloping warmth of a comfort mama who makes a lot of comfort food. This symbolism is not incidental to the message of the book. It is the central message of the book.

And this reveals the bedrock problem with the whole thing. There is no way we can hide from ourselves that we have a need for a father, but we cannot bring ourselves to repent, and have our hearts turned back to actual fathers. We cannot bring ourselves to honor our (admittedly sinful) fathers, so that our lives might go well for us in the land that God gave to us. This means that we are stuck. We know that the problem is fatherlessness, but we have no intention of honoring real fathers, the way they should be honored. This is because the sin of fatherlessness is one that is shared by both fathers and children. And repentance, when it is given, is bestowed on both sides of the generational divide.

“Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse” (Mal. 4:5-6).

This generation of evangelicals really is fatherless and adrift. They know that, they ache over it, they cannot pretend not to know it, but they have no intention of turning back to their fathers. And that means repentance has not yet been given.

hat tip to challies

MacBook touch?

Is there a MacBook touch coming to Macworld Expo 2009? that is the persistent and intriguing rumor. MacDailyNews links to the New York Times bits blog with this statement “Or is it the “MacBook touch” about which we reported on July 22, 2008? We hear that Macworld Expo 2009 is going to be very interesting.”

the bits blog has this nugget in it:

However, [steve jobs] gave a more nuanced answer to the question of whether Apple plans to jump into the “nascent” market for netbooks, essentially restating his comments on the question from last week at the Macbook introduction in Cupertino by saying the company was taking a wait-and-see attitude.

At the same time, he noted that the company already had a powerful entry in the category: the iPhone. (By that standard, Apple is already the dominant netbook manufacturer by orders of magnitude.)

Mr. Jobs also said the company “had some pretty interesting” ideas if the category continues to evolve.

UPDATED: That would seem to confirm findings that a search engine company shared with me on condition that I not reveal its name: The company spotted Web visits from an unannounced Apple product with a display somewhere between an iPhone and a MacBook. Is it the iPhone 3.0 or the NetMac 1.0?

Why the ESV?

this is a topic that has been well covered by many others.

I don’t have much to add, except that as I explained below, it is very important to study scripture in a literal translation as close as possible to the original languages.

There are several literal versions. The one I grew up with is the King James. A more recent model is the New American Standard. Both are very good Bibles and I have used them both. I also like the Holman Christian Standard for being literal most of the time. The text helps that it uses such as bolding Old Testament quotes in the New Testament are invaluable.

However, I primarily use the ESV and have done so for a little more than two years. There are two primary reasons for this.

One is the fact that the ESV translators had available to them more ancient manuscripts that were discovered after but written before the manuscripts relied on by Erasmus when he wrote the greek new testament that later became known as the Textus Receptus. The Erasmus greek new testament was the basis for the KJV.

The ESV translators had more manuscripts available to them and thus were able to make a more complete translation with the best information. In addition, the ESV translators use generous footnotes when there is a slight variation between the two main bodies of ancient manuscripts so that the student of scripture is aware of what choices were made. The result is a trustworthy english text based on all of the information instead of part of the information.

Two is the effort made by the ESV translators to use english poetry and prose to match the beauty and style of what was written first in Hebrew and Greek. In other words, the english itself is beautiful. The one knock I had on the New American Standard was that it was clunky to read out loud to a Sunday School Class. The ESV mostly flows when read aloud.

As I have read and studied the ESV as my primary translation over the last two years or so, I have fallen more deeply in love with it all the time. I have learned that it is a trustworthy window into the original languages of scripture. I love it. I love reading it, studying it, and teaching from it.

UPDATE to address Bryon’s concerns linked below.

Bryon has posted on his blog about alleged misinformation that I have in my “why the ESV” post.

I certainly want to be accurate and to communicate clearly. It sounds like Bryon’s fuss is more with Crossway and/or Good News Bible Publishers. All I can go on is what they say since I was not involved in making the ESV.

I will direct anyone interested to ESV’s side of the story on these issues and let that be that. This will be cross posted as an update to the original “why the ESV” post as well. Each one of the links below goes to a Crossway page with more information. Here is the text of the entire preface to the ESV Bible for anybody that wants to read it.

here is more on the translation philosophy.

The ESV is an “essentially literal” translation that seeks as far as possible to capture the precise wording of the original text and the personal style of each Bible writer. As such, its emphasis is on “word-for-word” correspondence, at the same time taking into account differences of grammar, syntax, and idiom between current literary English and the original languages. Thus it seeks to be transparent to the original text, letting the reader see as directly as possible the structure and meaning of the original.

here is more on the original manuscripts used.

Each word and phrase in the ESV has been carefully weighed against the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, to ensure the fullest accuracy and clarity and to avoid under-translating or overlooking any nuance of the original text.
….
Throughout, the Translation Team has benefited greatly from the massive textual resources that have become readily available recently, from new insights into biblical laws and culture, and from current advances in Hebrew and Greek lexicography and grammatical understanding.

here is more on the previous English versions used and relied on.

The words and phrases of the ESV grow out of the Tyndale-King James legacy, and most recently out of the RSV, with the 1971 RSV text providing the starting point for the ESV text. Archaic language was brought to current usage and significant corrections were made in the translation of key texts. But throughout, the translators’ goal was to retain the depth of meaning and enduring language that have made their indelible mark on the English-speaking world and have defined the life and doctrine of the church over the last four centuries.

and here is more on the translation notes.

The footnotes that accompany the ESV text inform the reader of textual variations and difficulties and show how these have been resolved by the ESV Translation Team. In addition to this, the footnotes indicate significant alternative readings and occasionally provide an explanation for technical terms or for a difficult reading in the text.

also, as I mentioned, I love the ESV and primarily use it for my reading and study. However, any serious Bible student will use several versions in any preparation for a lesson and I do. I really enjoy having a variety of translations to compare and I feel like we are blessed to live in a time when the Bible is so readily available to us in so many forms and translations.

The Bible Gateway is just an invaluable resource as is Blue Letter Bible.

If you aren’t reading the NET bible and its notes, (or here for another interface) then you are missing a very important and useful resource that is freely available to anybody with an internet connection.

Like I said before, the best Bible for you is the one that you will actually read rather than one you will leave in the car from one Sunday to the next.

Get one and then read it. Please.

Bible translations and study

as I said before, I am kind of a nut about Bibles. The bottom line is that I think everyone should get one that they will read and then read it for all its worth.

Having said that, at Bible study yesterday morning the importance of using a literal translation in your study became apparent. (in my next post above, I will explain why I use the ESV as my primary translation) We were looking at Colossians 1:24 as a case study for how to approach a difficult verse.

Here it is in a literal translation, the ESV:

“24 Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church,”

Paul is telling the Colossian church that Christ’s afflictions lacked something and he is filling up that lack with his own suffering. Wow. That is a presumptuous thing to say. It sounds arrogant and borderline blasphemous. Time to wrestle with the text and figure out what he is saying.

Now look at the same verse in a paraphrase, the NLT:

“24 I am glad when I suffer for you in my body, for I am participating in the sufferings of Christ that continue for his body, the church.”

Do you see the difference? In the NLT, the interpreters have already done the wrestling with the text for you. They decided that what Paul meant was that he was participating in Christ’s continuing sufferings through His body the church. Then that is how they wrote the verse.

I think it is a very important part of Bible study for each individual christian to see the text in as close to the original languages as possible. The Berean Jews examined the scripture for themselves to see if what Paul said was true. They couldn’t do that if somebody else had already interpreted away portions of the text and put into the text what they thought it meant.

If this verse is studied as it is rather than how it is interpreted to be, then a student might go to Philippians 2:27-30 and find a similar locution by Paul. They might see that what Paul believes was lacking in the service by the Philippian church and in Jesus’ perfect sacrifice is delivery of the message. Then the student could see the beautiful thing that Paul is saying. That he is willing to put his own body on the line in much physical suffering in order to make sure that the colossian church and other churches like them all over Asia minor and Greece get to hear about Christ’s sufferings. The student might then reflect on the verse in Romans 10 where Paul, quoting Isaiah, called the feet of gospel messengers, “beautiful” and think about what those feet actually looked like after walking hundreds of miles to share the gospel. Dirty, blistered, gnarled, calloused, feet with bone spurs are beautiful because they are part of the suffering that completes Christ’s incomparable affllictions on the cross.

As part of the priesthood of the believers one of the spiritual sacrifices that we offer is sincere, disciplined, serious, regular study of the book that God breathed out for us.

In order to perform this task most effectively, we must study the text that we have that is as close to the one God breathed out as possible. I love the Bible.

The Bible you will actually read is the best one for you. Too many christ followers never pick up a Bible at all except to take it to church for an hour on Sunday morning (or Saturday night or whenever their group assembles in a big box with the chairs all facing same way). So first and foremost, get one that you can read and one that you will read.

But in order to do what Paul told Timothy to do, to engage in a disciplined effort to study scripture and get to know God better, you need to find and study a literal translation rather than a paraphrase where somebody else has already made decisions about the meaning of a difficult verse.

another one

yet another shining entry into the increasingly crowded “you don’t replace something with nothing files.”

Just wow. I don’t know how it is possible to even parody something so incredibly extreme and foolish.

Hat tip to Jonah Goldberg. As he says, there is “nothing remotely creepy” about this, nothing at all.

UPDATE: the reformed chicks babbling wonder….

I wonder if Obama’s disciples will rip off all our Christian hymns? How about, “A Mighty Fortress is our Barack?” Or “The Solid Barack?” Or “A Barack that Stands Forever?” Or “All Hail the Power of Obama’s Name?” I could do this all day 🙂 The possibilities are endless, there’s 2,000 years worth of songs sung to our Savior to rip off.

UPDATE II: Jonah also embedded the video on his Liberal Fascism blog where he put up an email from a democratic acquaintance that says in part:

But what makes all this worship ultimately an “Obamination” is two-part. One, it transparently reveals the secular Left’s need for some form of religion – be it environmentalism or Obama-worship. And two, these types of Obama videos, protester activity, etc. is the most frightening realization of your book Liberal Fascism. The smiling jackbooted totalitarians who under a smiley face stamp on your face for daring to question their status quo.

emphasis added.

The first point above is why I keep saying that this phenomenon proves that you don’t replace something with nothing.

UPDATE III: Check this out from DailyKos via Gateway Pundit

Entitled “what if Obama is the second coming of Jesus Christ?”

I’m not a religious person however I’d like to point out a funny irony that would be better suited for a cartoonist.

What if all of the religious nuts were bashing the second coming of their Christ and they didn’t even know it? Fathered by a Kenyan Muslim profit who left after his task was done. To seed a woman who in the heartland of America(a country who “is losing its way”). Then takes him on a journey of awaking across the world, then back home to spread the word of the lord through a process of education an then actions in the community.

The bible says “the lord shall come as a man whom blind followers will not see”.

So next time you run into a religious nut and they start talking about all of this deep mystical Muslim / African non-sense. Just remind them where Jesus came from, and where the human race came from. Then make up a bible quote like the one I posted above.

emphasis added.

at least they admit the quote is made up.

Weird weird times.

Mark Driscoll

here are a couple of clips for your Tuesday. First is Driscoll’s take on calvinism v. arminianism.

the second is his message at the Desiring God national conference on “How Sharp the Edge?”

J.I. Packer

here is a J.I. Packer quote for your morning as posted by Reformation Theology.

….For to Calvinism there is really only one point to be made in the field of soteriology: the point that God saves sinners.

“God – the Triune Jehovah, Father, Son and Spirit; three Persons working together in sovereign wisdom, power and love to achieve the salvation of a chosen people, the Father electing, the Son fulfilling the Father’s will by redeeming, the Spirit executing the purpose of Father and Son by renewing.

“Saves – does everything, first to last, that is involved in bringing man from death in sin to life in glory: plans, achieves and communicates redemption, calls and keeps, justifies, sanctifies, glorifies.

“Sinners – men as God finds them, guilty, vile, helpless, powerless, unable to lift a finger to do God’s will or better their spiritual lot. God saves sinners – and the force of this confession may not be weakened by disrupting the unity of the work of the Trinity, or by dividing the achievement of salvation between God and man and making the decisive part man’s own, or by soft-pedalling the sinner’s inability so as to allow him to share the praise of his salvation with his Saviour. This is the one point of Calvinistic soteriology which the “five points” are concerned to establish and Arminianism in all its forms to deny: namely, that sinners do not save themselves in any sense at all, but that salvation, first and last, whole and entire, past, present and future, is of the Lord, to whom be glory for ever; amen.”

J.I. Packer, “Introductory Essay,” in The Death of Death in the Death of Christ, by John Owen (London: Banner of Truth, 1959) 4-5.

Aren’t you glad that God saves sinners?

only in America

I love this country because it raises up entrepreneurs like the Revells. Doing what they love and making money at it. Bonus quote “before it was like a lotta people didn’t know about it.”

hat tip to John Miller.