New Books on Baptism

B&H Publishing has just released a major book on believer's baptism entitled Believer's Baptism: The Covenant Sign of the New Age in Christ. Justin Taylor interviewed the main editor here.

Also, in February, Zondervan will be publishing a book entitled Understanding Four Views on Baptism. John D. Castelein, Robert Kolb, Thomas J. Nettles, and Richard L. Pratt Jr. will be contributing, explaining their views from Christian Church/Church of Christ, Lutheran, Baptist and Reformed perspectives.

Reformed Theological Seminary's Recommended Reading

You can find Reformed Theological Seminary's Recommended Reading List for aspiring seminarians here. The top three books are J.I. Packer's Knowing God, Vaughan Roberts' God's Big Picture: Tracing the Storyline of the Bible, and O.S. Guiness' The Call. I've only read one of those (Knowing God), but I plan to read Roberts' book next month with a group.

A very much extended recommended reading list is found here. There are dozens of books on the list, divided up into categories like Systematic Theology and Apologetics, with further divisions of Essential Reading, Further Reading, and Advanced Reading under each category. Even if you just read the Essential Readings, you would have 60 books... so this list would be quite an undertaking. Overall there are 186 books on that list, and I've read a whopping 10.

It does seem the list is heavily biased towards newer books, though, with a few exceptions (like Bondage of the Will by Martin Luther, Institutes of the Christian Religion by John Calvin, or Confessions by St. Augustine). For instance, how about some older books in the Church History list, e.g. Fox's Book of Martyrs or Fair Sunshine? But to be fair, the list is really meant for people preparing to study at RTS, as is obvious by the large amount of books by RTS professors.

ALSO: The Church Report today released a list of the Top 50 Most Influential Christians in America, as chosen by its readers. I'm sure the #1 pick will be a blessing to your heart...

Third Millenium vs. Ligonier Ministries

I reference Dr. Richard L. Pratt and his Third Millenium Ministries fairly often on the blog, so I thought I'd take a post to show exactly what IIIM is. Explained by one staff member on IIIM's forums:

Though both complement the other and are Reformed, Ligonier primarily reaches through TV (Renewing Your Mind), radio, and regional conferences, Tabletalk, etc. In addition, they own Soli Deo Gloria Publishing and thus produce works — most of which are in English. If I am not mistaken they have a translation team within the Ukraine translating Sproul’s books, and a military Chaplin outreach. This is a valuable outreach and ministry (St. Andrews Chapel is not PCA, though I believe presently their elders like Burk use the South Florida Presbytery for their credentialing)! Ligonier.

IIIM on the other hand is working with more than just one author’s works and translating and producing educational materials in English, Arabic, Chinese, Russian, and Spanish at present. More than just producing a Bible, IIIM is to complete a 54-hour accreditable masters curriculum consisting of 540 hours of video lessons (IIIM is not a seminary, but is producing professional curriculum). Progress report.

Ra McLaughlin, IIIM's content director, explains in the same post:

Target Audience

Historically, Ligonier has tended to target the motivated layperson. This is apparently changing with their work in Ukraine, but their focus for decades has been the American layperson.

By contrast, Third Millennium's primary goal is to educate pastors who have no other means of obtaining seminary training. And many of these pastors have less training than motivated American laypeople, so there is some natural overalp in content.

We might also describe this difference by saying that Ligonier has traditionally focused on the established and American church, whereas Third Millennium is focused on newer churches in developing areas.

Media

Generally speaking, Ligonier focuses on traditional media (books, radio, tv, video), since that is the most effective way to reach its target audience.

Third Millennium uses some similar media, though we tend to emphasize "high tech" rather than "traditional." So, we don't raise money for radio, except where radio is cutting edge or reaching people groups that don't have access to seminary training. We prefer to use media that is easily piratable (internet, DVD), and we believe strongly in the pedagogical value of imagery over audio alone. We affirm and make use of traditional media, but have focused our efforts on those media that are most easily transportable and replicable in underprivileged settings.

We have also placed more emphasis on the internet because (1) it is a means to access developing nations, and (2) the internet itself is, in a sense, a "developing area."

Content

Ligonier's content is essentially designed as ongoing education for adult Christians. It tends to offer introductory perspectives on a wide variety of topics that would be of interest to adult Christians. During my time at Ligonier, I was never under the impression that Ligonier had a particular, definable end goal in mind. Rather, they seemed to be a perpetual, growing ministry to adult Christians.

By contrast, Third Millennium has a particular, definable end goal: to provide materials that can take a person from an uneducated level to seminary graduate level. So, we have some materials that are very basic -- probably more basic that Ligonier's most basic materials. But we also have materials that are more advanced than anything Ligonier does.

Our initial goal is to provide a "seminary in a box" in five langauges, selected to achieve the broadest global coverage possible. After that, we will probably continue to add elective courses in those languages, and we will certainly attempt to add more languages. We will also continue to build supplementary materials to support our "seminary in a box," and to increase chanels of distribution.

It should also be noted that IIIM runs the Reformed Perspectives Magazine, Reformed Answers, and Reformed Sermon sites that are listed on the sidebar. Finally, as an added bonus, the difference between IIIM's Spirit of the Reformation Study Bible (NIV) and Ligonier's Reformation Study Bible (ESV), also from their forums:

1. A very clear difference is the volume of notes. The SRSB has far more note content in it. That was because we tried to comment on all the significant passages. The NGSB/RSB does not always offer comments on passages that are commonly used in the church and/or by theologians.

2. Our study helps are quite different. Aside from things like maps and concordances at the back of the Bible, and in-text maps and charts, all of which tend to be stock elements from the publisher, ours has the Westminster Standards and the Three Forms of Union. Also, there is a reverse index to these historical documents throughout the study notes. This reverse index comprehensively covers the footnoted/indexed Scripture references in the Westminster Standards and the Three Forms of Union. Our Bible also features what is, to my knowledge, the only "parallel" version of the WCF. Especially for this project, we created a system of notation that specifies the differences in the WCF between the 1647 critical version and the various versions used by the PCA, EPC, OPC, and ARP. The book intros are also expanded (e.g., the OT books all have a "Christ in [name of book]" feature).

3. The theological articles in the NGSB/RSB are copied from Concise Theology by Packer. The ones in the SRSB are tailored to this particular study Bible. We retained some of Packer's, significantly altered others, and wrote many new ones. Our goal was to address the questions people might look to a study Bible to answer, rather than to provide a brief summary of systematic theology (we felt the standards did that part fairly well on their own).

4. We also worked hard to harmonize the notes. The original contributions were quite varied both in theology and quality. Some appeared to be little more than Sunday school outlines, some were clearly not Reformed, and others were quite good. Some of the notes even contradicted others. We tried very hard to bring all the notes up to a respectable scholarly level, to update the scholarship (new ideas and discoveries had been made since the notes were originally written), and to ensure that the entire Bible presented the same theological position.

5. As a result of (4), the general thrust of the SRSB is unified. It presents a centrist, conservative, traditional Reformed position, and adds an emphasis on literary analysis that was lacking in the original (detailed book outlines throughout the actual study notes, awareness of literary concerns, literary interpretations, etc.). In the tradition of semper reformanda, it does suggest some new twists on old readings here and there. But the stance of the notes themselves is very conservative as a whole. It is hard to compare this to the NGSB/RSB, since that was a far less integrated work. The NGSB/RSB is hard to characterize "as a whole." It is much easier to comment on any of its given parts or sets of notes.

I still don't have a Spirit of the Reformation Study Bible (I do have the Reformation Study Bible), but I hope to get one at some point...

On Lawsuits Against Believers

For a few months now a very small but very vocal group of people at Bellevue Baptist Church have decided to wage an all-out campaign against the church's new pastor, Dr. Steve Gaines, who so happens not to be Dr. Adrian Rogers. I have not made Savingbellevue.com an issue on this blog yet, because quite frankly I have found much on the website and its affiliated forum to be pure gossip, spread by people with critical attitudes. My concerns are fourfold:

First, people on the forum continue to bring up things which Dr. Gaines has already apologized for (such as talking about the controversies at Bellevue while speaking at another church), and even refuse to accept apologies for things such as Dr. Gaines' handling of the music minister leaving. Second, much of the disputes on the forums seem ridiculous to me. So what if Dr. Gaines sends his children to a Calvinist school, and so what if one of the minister's sisters was seen drinking alcohol? Third, some people on the forums have even expressed their desire that Dr. Gaines make more mistakes so that pressure will build for him to resign, which I find completely against the Bible's instruction that we ought to pray for our leaders and not hope that they stumble. And finally, certain people on the forum were becoming frustrated with the media's inattention to the matters at Bellevue, and began writing to the media in hopes that they would air their grievances. This goes squarely against Savingbellevue's mission statement ("It is regrettable that non-members will also have access to the issues as they are brought before the church, but with almost 30,000 members of record, any other means of bringing the issue before them was impractical.") It certainly doesn't seem like they regret nonbelievers having access to the website anymore.

Now I don't mean to be overly negative, as certain people on the forum have indeed tried to participate in a godly manner. But I can't ignore something which has recently surfaced on savingbellevue.com - and that is, a suggestion that it might be time to file a lawsuit against certain ministers at Bellevue.

1 Corinthians 6 says, "When one of you has a grievance against another, does he dare go to law before the unrighteous instead of the saints? ... Can it be that there is no one among you wise enough to settle a dispute between the brothers, but brother goes to law against brother, and that before unbelievers?"

This passage has long been considered a prohibition of believers filing lawsuits against other believers for a couple of reasons. First, they are bringing their case before unbelievers. This point is very important, and is something that really should not be missed. As Dr. Richard L. Pratt (formerly of Reformed Theological Seminary, now of Third Millenium Ministries) says in his commentary of the passage, "Because Christians should see things in light of the kingdom of God, and have true, spiritual wisdom (1:24,30; 2:6-8; 3:19), any Christian should have greater wisdom and be a better judge than even the wisest unbeliever... Unbelieving human law simply does not reflect true wisdom, true godliness, or true justice. Regarding public courts it might be said that justice is blind, not because it treats all men equally, but because it can’t see the truth." Dr. John McArthur also notes in his Study Bible, "When Christians have earthly quarrels and disputes among themselves, it is inconceivable that they would turn to those least qualified (unbelievers) to resolve the matter."

But not only is filing lawsuits against believers wrong because it brings matters before unbelieving judges, but because it brings disgrace upon the Christian community by airing its sins in public light. As Dr. Pratt goes on to note, "Bringing the disputes of the Christian family into the public eye damages the reputation and witness of the church. The gospel is supposed to reconcile believers in fellowship with each other in Christ. What will the world think when it sees Christians appealing to those without the gospel to solve the problems that the gospel should be correcting? Naturally, the world will think the gospel is ineffective. Even if a church court were to misjudge a case, this would be preferable to damaging the credibility of the gospel by going to public court." Similarly, Dr. McArthur does not mince words when speaking of these matters: "Such conduct as suing a fellow believer is not only a sinful shame, but a complete failure to act obediently and righteously. Christians who take fellow Christians to court suffer moral defeat and spiritual loss even before the case is heard, and they become subject to divine chastening." Now, some may counter that the community already knows of the issues at Bellevue, but there is no need to further drag its name in the mud.

Now, in taking issue with this teaching of the Bible, one writer at SavingBellevue, James Sundquist, wrote a letter saying that this passage only refers to trivial matters, referring to verses 2-3 of 1 Corinthians 6, which says, "Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try trivial cases? Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, then, matters pertaining to this life!" Now, by not fully quoting these verses, Mr. Sundquist does his readers a disservice because it deprives them of the full context of the verse. As Dr. Pratt points out, Paul defines what "trivial cases" are in the next verse -- "matters pertaining to this life." While certainly there are some very weighty issues here on earth, they are all trivial compared to the upcoming judgment of the world and even the angels, at which point some will be eternally cast into hell.

Now, I can't completely blame Mr. Sundquist for coming to this conclusion, as it is echoed in the Matthew Henry Commentaries, though it must be noted that the 1 Corinthians commentary is not written by Matthew Henry as he says - instead, it was written by other ministers, because Matthew Henry died after writing the commentary on Acts. However, conservative scholarship in the past few hundred years has differed from the Matthew Henry commentaries (though, I do agree with the commentaries when it says, "Christians should never engage in law-suits till all other remedies have been tried in vain"), and I do think Mr. Sundquist is misunderstanding the heart of this passage. It's not just an arbitrary rule made by God against bringing "trivial" cases to court; it has to do with the unbelievers' inability to judge truth.

Prattosaurus Grows Up

Over the past 48 hours, my beloved dinosaur, Prattosaurus, passed through infancy (see my Jan. 1st post) and adolescence until finally arriving at its adult stage. The instructions said the dinosaur would take 24-96 hours to grow, and it seems that just under 48 hours has done the trick for him. So, for those of you who weren't able to experience his growth (which would be all of you), I now present to you the remainder of Prattosaurus: A Life in Pictures.





NOTE: For an enlarged view, click on the photo. To find out what time each photo was taken, simply move your cursor over the image.

Through the Bible with Matthew Henry

This year, along with the ESV site's prescribed Through the Bible in a Year program (which has worked well so far; you read a passage from the Old Testament and New Testament every day, and there is even an option to listen to the passage), I'm also reading Matthew Henry's Commentaries, which I recevied as a six-volume box set for Christmas. So far I have thoroughly enjoyed every page of the commentaries.



Some complain of Matthew Henry's language being too stitled (after all, the commentaries were written over 300 years ago). And though certainly he doesn't speak twenty-first century English, I don't find the commentaries hard to read at all. The commentaries are not meant to be at too advanced of a level (and thus there is not a lot of discussion of the Greek text), but they provide much rich theological insight, as well as practical application, which make this an ideal commentary set for the layman. You can find Matthew Henry's commentaries online for free; however, if you find you like it online, you'll probably like it even more in the form of a book. Reading from a printed book is much easier than from an online webpage, and it allows me to highlight and make notes on certain passages that I've found helpful. MonergismBooks.com have the commentary set for sale at $50 -- a very good deal, since its original price is $120 and the set comes with a CD containing several versions of the Bible, Bible dictionaries, Topical Bibles, and other helpful information.

Anyway, I've talked up the commentaries enough. I'll leave you with a few things I've highlighted.

(On Genesis 2:21-25). "Observe that Adam was first formed, then Eve (1 Tim. 2:13), and she was made of the man, and for the man (1 Cor. 11:8,9), all which are urged there as reasons for the humility, modesty, silence, and submissiveness, of that sex in general, and particularly the subjection and reverence which wives owe to their husbands. Yet man being made last of the creatures, as the best and most excellent of all, Eve's being made after Adam, and out of him, puts an honor upon that sex, as the glory of the man, 1 Cor 11:7. If man is the head, she is the crown. ... Observe also that the woman was made of a rib out of the side of Adam, not made out of his head to rule over him, nor out of his feet to be trampled upon by him, but out of his side to be equal with him, under his arm to be protected, and near his heart to be beloved."

(On Genesis 4:9). "Note, A charitable concern for our brethren, as their keepers, is a great duty, which is strictly required of us, but is generally neglected by us. Those who are unconcerned in the affairs of their brethren, and take no care, when they have opportunity, to prevent their hurt in their bodies, goods, or good name, especially in their souls, do, in effect, speak Cain's language."

(On Genesis 5:24). "To walk with God is to set God always before us, as to act as those that are always under his eye. It is to live a life of communion with God both in ordinances and providences. It is to make God's word our rule and his glory our end in all our actions. It is to make it our constant care and endeavour in every thing to please God, and nothing to offend him. It is to comply with his will, to concur with his designs, and to be workers together with him. It is to be followers of him as dear children."

Prattosaurus the Dinosaur

So my ever-clever friend Alan sent me a Christmas card this year that included a small dinosaur named "Prattosaurus" (named after, of course, Richard L. Pratt of Third Millennium Ministries). You put the dinosaur in room temperature water and, over a period of 24-96 hours, it will grow 600% of its size. I thought it would be fun to post pictures of its progress on the blog -- starting, of course, with the pictures before and just after Prattosaurus is placed into the water glass.



I'll keep you updated on its progress.

John Frame on Christians and Entertainment

Some food for thought on this New Year's Eve:

Some Christians may wonder how a fellow believer can give any support to the film industry, notorious as it is for anti-Christian bias and moral relativism. I would note that there is also a view on the opposite extreme: some Christian critics of culture insist that all Christians have a responsibility to become culturally aware, to become knowledgeable about cultural trends in art, music, literature, film, drama and so on.

I reject both of these extremes. A more balanced position, I think, is to recognize that Scripture tells us to be "in" the world, but not "of" the world. That means that we not only may, but must, be willing to live amid secular (anti-Christian) influence without ourselves compromising the faith. In this respect, it doesn't matter whether that secular influence comes from film, or from involvement in business, labor, neighborhood, politics, or whatever. Nor, within the general realm of media entertainment, does it matter whether we are talking about Beethoven or modern rock, Jane Austen or William Faulkner, Ernest Hemingway or Jackie Collins, news or business magazines, TV or film, Disney films or films by Martin Scorsese. To avoid non-Christian influence altogether, we would have to live as hermits (assuming that we could even find some place in the world beyond the reach of modern communications and government). In all modern experience there is a heavy component of anti-Biblical teaching and influence. But complete isolation is not an option for biblical Christians. Even the Christian hermits of the ancient and medieval periods justified their existence as a life of prayer, and thus a life that was spent in and for the world. How can we pray for a world we know nothing about? We must not seek to isolate ourselves from the world, but rather to be salt and light in our fallen culture, to carry out our Lord's Great Commission.

That balance of being in but not of the world is sometimes difficult to maintain. One's choices in this area should be based in part upon his or her own moral and spiritual maturity. Some people, especially children, or those young in the faith, or those with special problems like alcohol addiction or unusual susceptibility to sexual temptation, should limit their exposure to secular culture in appropriate ways. But at the same time they should be trained in Christian maturity, so that eventually they can enter more fully the secular arena, not fearing that they will be compromised by the culture, but expecting to influence the culture positively for Christ.

Ra McLaughlin also notes John Frame's distinction between "hearing" and "hearkening":

John Frame offers a helpful distinction between “hearing” and “hearkening” that we can apply to lyrics and other aspects of music that influence us. Specifically, it is not wrong to listen to sinful ideas (cf. 1 Cor. 5:9-10), but it is wrong to adopt, follow or obey them (1 Cor. 15:33). If listening to the music tends to cause one to sin, then one ought not to listen to the music.

It is also worth noting that music tends to influence us in emotional ways that we cannot necessarily describe or analyze satisfactorily. Some music makes us angry, some arouses our libido, some makes us tired, some fills us with energy, etc. All of these influences can be used for good or for evil. But not everyone is moved in the same way by any given piece of music, and not everyone “hearkens” to what he “hears.” Whatever the feelings we get from music, we must use those feelings for good and not for evil. If we cannot avoid using them for evil, then we ought not to listen to the music that inspires them.

Boom Goes the Dynamite

It's good to take a break from all serious posts once in a while. So, check out what is quite possibly one of the funniest things you'll see in your life...

Thanks to Between Two Worlds for the tip!

On Francis Schaeffer and Presuppositionalism

Over twenty years after his passing, Francis Schaeffer's impact on the evangelical world can be clearly seen. His ministry to the troubled youth of the 1960's - characterized by a reliance on prayer and the working of the Holy Spirit - is a model for many ministries today. His books, from the trilogy of The God Who is There, Escape from Reason, and He is There and He is Not Silent, to works like True Spirituality, are still widely read. And his many students, ranging from Os Guiness to Nancy Pearcey, remain very visible in the evangelical community. Yet many Reformed scholars over the years have questioned his apologetical approach, and Schaeffer's style of apologetics and evangelism is one Bryan A. Follis seeks to clarify in his new book, Truth with Love: the Apologetics of Francis Schaeffer.

Being a student of Cornelius Van Til at Westminster Theological Seminary, it is important to note that there is much "common ground" between Schaeffer and advocates of presuppositional apologetics that is often overlooked. One of Schaeffer's favorite methods in dealing with non-Christians is "taking the roof off" -- putting oneself in the position of the non-Christian for argument's sake to show them the logical conclusions of their worldview, as Proverbs 26:5 says, "Answer a fool according to his folly, or he will be wise in his own eyes."

And though many accuse Schaeffer of being a "rationalist," his reliance on prayer and the Holy Spirit to see lost people come to L'Abri and, ultimately, to Christ, is undeniable. In The God Who is There, Schaeffer answers the question "Where does the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit fit [in apologetics]?" by saying that no one will "believe without a work of the Holy Spirit." Thus though many apologists today seem to place such primacy on the human intellect, Schaeffer says that without the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit, no one will come to Christ - something any presuppositionalist will be quick to agree with.

However, it is clear that Schaeffer saw some downsides to the presuppositional method of apologetics. Many presuppositionalists seem to follow a very rigid approach in dealing with non-Christians, and at times seem to be arguing a philosophical point just for the sake of it. However, Schaeffer believed that "each man must be dealt with as an individual, not as a case or statistic or machine," and therefore he believed that no one apologetic fits the needs of all people.

Schaeffer also saw presuppositionalists as seemingly committing some of the same crimes as the existentialists. As anyone familiar with his writings will know, Schaeffer talks often about Kierkegaard's proposed "leap of faith" to non-reason which existentialists make because they see the hopelessness of their own worldviews and thus make a nonrational leap of faith in something else - whether drugs, music or religion. Presuppositionalists' insistence that nonbelievers believe in Christian claims without any rational judgment of their own certainly seems like a "leap of faith." Of course, presuppositionalists will say this is not what is being done - instead of the nonbeliever putting faith in Christ himself, the Holy Spirit works faith in the nonbelievers' heart so that he or she may become a Christian - but to the outside observer, Schaeffer says, it certainly seems like nonbelievers are being asked to take their own leap of faith to Christianity.

Follis notes, "In contrast [to presuppositionalists], Schaeffer believed in the importance of rational discussion not only for explaining the Christian faith to others, but also for helping to ensure that the faith they express - if they come to belief - is real. Schaeffer maintained that since Christian faith is turned outward - to the person and the work of Jesus Christ - it is a faith that 'rests on content. It is not a vague thing which takes the place of real understanding, nor is it the strength of belief which is of value.'"

How can Schaeffer reconcile his belief that rational discussion is necessary with the Bible's claims that man actually knows there is a God, but suppresses this truth by his unrighteousness, and therefore, as presuppositionalists say, man's real need is to abandon his autonomy and submit himself to the Scriptures? Schaeffer believed that the Holy Spirit works in the nonbelievers' heart as he engages in rational discussion. As Follis says, "He did not believe that you established by rational argument that Christianity is true, and then (and only then) did the Holy Spirit take over to lead you into faith. For Schaeffer there was 'a constant interchange of faith and reason all the time.' It was never either/or; rationality and the Holy Spirit always interacted." Schaeffer's belief in rational discussion along with the work of the Holy Spirit, Follis argues, puts him in a league of other Reformed theologians, from Jonathan Edwards to John Calvin (presuppositionalism did not really develop until the 1900's with the writings of Abraham Kuyper and Cornelius Van Til).

Nevertheless, whatever one's beliefs about apologetics, it must again be emphasized that Schaeffer put ultimate hope in an individual's salvation on the Holy Spirit, and that Schaeffer was no evidentialist, as the book goes on to discuss. In the end, Schaeffer's primary concern was not academic apologetics but evangelism - the task of speaking the truth with love, as the title of Follis' book suggests. And this is actually the heart of Follis' book -- Schaeffer had great compassion for the many youth that came through L'Abri and believed apologetics was futile if its end goal was not the unbeliever submitting himself to the Lordship of Christ.

Having said all these things, should you buy the book? If you are an admirer of Schaeffer, have ever wondered about Schaeffer's opinions on apologetics, or are interested in academic debates about apologetics, then you should certainly read this book. Though the book sometimes lacks focus, jumping from one author's criticism of Schaeffer to the next, overall Follis presents a very interesting and informative portrait of one of the twentieth century's most fascinating evangelists. But otherwise, you probably won't get much from this book. The book's targeted audience is obviously very specific (so specific that I have never seen it any bookstores -- I had to buy it online), and it is at a high reading level (it was originally a doctoral dissertation but has now been expanded and revised for book format). But, the rule of thumb here is that if you are interested by what you read in this review, you will probably enjoy the book.

A Primer to Presuppositionalism

A few days ago I posted a primer to presuppositionalism over at allofgrace's SB Discussion Forum. Much of the material comes from Richard L. Pratt's Every Thought Captive, which I highly recommend for any further reading on the subject.

Revelation and Prophecy

I recently read Dr. Richard L. Pratt's paper, "Historical Contingencies and Biblical Predictions." Pratt, the former Professor of Old Testament at Reformed Theological Seminary and currently the head of Third Millenium Ministries, suggests that the book of Revelation ought to be read in light of our understanding of Old Testament prophecies. Currently, most evangelicals treat the book of Revelation with an approach of wooden literalism, and try to read current events into the Bible. Even Reformed scholars generally have believed that though much of Revelation is symbolic, it is a book of things that will certainly happen in the future, with a belief that prophecies which do not come true are false prophecies.

However, an honest look at the Old Testament shows that many of the prophecies did not come true. Instead, they prophesy what MIGHT happen if people act a certain way. Few of the Old Testament prophecies were absolute decrees, and even these did not put in detail the timing or the manner of their realization. Thus, what if Revelation simply tells of what might happen if the seven churches in Asia did not heed God's warnings to them? The paper presents some interesting ideas and is worth a read.

Abandon All Hope, All Ye Who Enter

Here's my 500th shot at creating a blog that will last more than a couple weeks. I think this could happen, though.