Justinroy

I just received my Passion 2010 Tickets and i’m stoked.

Check out Passion’s Vision and Core

From the beginning Passion has been rooted in the confession of Isaiah 26:8: “Yes Lord, walking in the way of Your truth we wait eagerly for You, for Your name and renown are the desire of our souls.”*
As a result, Passion seeks to gather college and university students across the nation and around the world to seek the face of God, asking Him to ignite in our souls a passionate pursuit of Jesus Christ and a desire to spread His fame to everyone on earth.

We believe God is calling out a generation of college students committed to the glory of His name in all things. God longs to bring awakening to every campus, mobilizing the students of today to finish the task of global evangelization in this generation. God is calling us out for this purpose, in this moment, for His renown.

*This version of Isaiah 26:8 is a combination of the NIV and NASB translations.

Far too often I’m guilty of only reading popular authors. So I’m trying to establish some consistency in reading puritan works, hopping to fall in love with a few of them. That’s why I picked up “the doctrine of justification” by John Owen.  It’s a terrifying book. It frightens me a little. The language and spelling are not contemporary; long and complex sentences subdue the inattentive reader; but the treasure, the painstaking clarity of careful exposition with a mind and heart devoted to the person of Jesus, makes this book a necessary read for anyone studying the doctrine of justification.  Here are a two quotes.

for the doctrine of justification is directive of christian practice, and in no other evangelical truth is the whole of our obedience more concerned; for the foundation, reasons, and motives, of all our duty towards God, are contained therein.

—————

Whether it be anything in ourselves, as our faith and repentance, the renovation of our natures, inheret habits of grace, and actual of righteousness, which we have done, or may do; or whether it be the obedience, righteousness, satisfaction and merit of the Son of God, our mediator and surety of the covenant, imputed to us. One of these it must be, namely something that is our own, which, whatever may be the influence of the grace of God in it, or causality of it, because wroght in and by us, is inherently our own in a proper sense; or something, which being not our own, not inherent in us, not wrought by us, is yet imputed unto us, for the pardon of our sins, and the acceptation of our persons as righteousness; or the making of us righteous in the sight of God.

Here’s a valuable resource when searching for Commentaries. Bestcommentaries.com

This was a facebook note regarding the The Liberty Way.

I thought it was worth reposting. This was posted on a liberty student’s facebook page. I know him personally but I did remove his name from the post for security reasons.

I have come to the point in my Liberty University career where I simply do not care about the irrational hair and dress code. I have been told by RAs and even a professor numerous times this semester to get a haircut. I must concede and confess this is simply not going to happen. I have been okay with these petty rules for the last three years, but now I am just to the point where I cannot stand it any longer. The leadership seems to care more about the trivial matter of the length of my hair and the type of shirt that I am wearing than they do about my spiritual condition. I hear more about getting a haircut from the “spiritual leaders” of the campus than I do about spiritual things. There simply seems to be a disconnect here. I concede that there are probably some helpful things contained in the Liberty Way, although I struggle to think of any, but by-and-large it seems that the Liberty Way only propagates long-held dogmatism that is based upon crappy exegesis and even worse critical reflection. We are told we must wear collared shirts to look more professional. If this were only true… If they are going for professionalism then why are jeans allowed? Why can we have our shirts untucked? Flipflops? How are flipflops professional? Now I am definitely not advocated we move to a more professional dress code, but let us simply act with a shred of rationality. When it comes to the hair code I have never actually ever heard a compelling reason in favor of it. It seems to me that it simply boils down to the dogmatism that ruled the 1970’s when the University was founded. The hippies and stoners had long hair, so Christian men shouldn’t. When you ask an RA why there is a hair code the normal answer is that they don’t know, but we must obey just because it is a rule. Duty for duty’s sake. Give me a break. The Principle of Sufficient Reason anyone? The truth is that there is no sufficient reason for the rule. I pay out thousands of dollars per year only to have RAs badger me about my hairstyle. There’s my two cents.

I am constructing a deductive argument in my mind that will hopefully prove positively that the standard of dress and hair at Liberty University is irrational. Wonder if this will work?

Oh well. Looks like I will suck it up until I graduate. But I will not back down. I will not get a haircut until AFTER this semester is over. I will get a haircut on my own terms and not some power hungry RAs.

April Fools From Google!

Introducing CADIE
Research group switches on world’s first “artificial intelligence” tasked-array system.

For several years now a small research group has been working on some challenging problems in the areas of neural networking, natural language and autonomous problem-solving. Last fall this group achieved a significant breakthrough: a powerful new technique for solving reinforcement learning problems, resulting in the first functional global-scale neuro-evolutionary learning cluster.

Autopilot E-mail from Cadie

They’ve had better, but the autopilot email is funny

Who is Tim Killer?

Luckily he has his own wiki. I need my own wiki.

I’m just asking, does the format on sunday mornings matter, or is it a non-issue?

If we “break” the exposition into 3 parts, with singing in between, does it help or hurt the teaching of the word?

Does it help people pay attention, or is it a better way to “entertain” the audience?

What is the goal of the format? (promote worship/promote exposition /Does exposition lead to worship?)

What would induce a change? (i.e. genuine care, kicks and giggles, staying true to God’s word, relevance)

Just some questions to think about.

If you don’t have time to read finally alive, click the above link and download Piper’s sermons on the new birth. They’re very helpful. Click the picture above to download all the sermons. It’s roughly 250 megabytes

The Civil Heretic – Freeman Dyson – Profile – NYTimes.com.

Freeman Dyson is “coming out of the closet as far as global warming is concerned.” It’s interesting that Times admits the “orthodoxy” of global warming in scientific academia.

Dyson says he doesn’t want his legacy to be defined by climate change, but his dissension from the orthodoxy of global warming is significant because of his stature and his devotion to the integrity of science.

I’m sure al gore and tipper are a little frustrated with this….. but let’s abandon orthodoxy in science.

The warming, he says, is not global but local, “making cold places warmer rather than making hot places hotter.” Far from expecting any drastic harmful consequences from these increased temperatures, he says the carbon may well be salubrious — a sign that “the climate is actually improving rather than getting worse,” because carbon acts as an ideal fertilizer promoting forest growth and crop yields. “Most of the evolution of life occurred on a planet substantially warmer than it is now,” he contends, “and substantially richer in carbon dioxide.”

If you have time on your hand, read the whole article. It’s very interesting.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDSj8sv0uKs]

So, I’ve started a postcard series. It’s pretty much  the halmark of Christian satire.

The first entry goes in reference to dorm room theology’s open discussion on Christians and drinking.

thanks for the open discussion drew! I hope this card from god helps your decision making process

I’ve started making Bible verses into desktop backgrounds.

I know, I know Tim Challies was the first to do it, but If you like what you see, you’re welcome to take the background and use it for yourself

One of the clearest examples of God showing his glory was when Moses wanted to see God’s glory, and he said, “Show me your Glory.” (My initial reaction to this verse was to pop in an old Third Day album and listen to Mac Powell sing like a songbird,  but I resisted).

But, back to the subject at hand…(really, you can stop laughing now) God answers Moses by saying, “I will cause my goodness to pass in front of you and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion” (Exodus 33:19). Just so we’re on the same page, Moses wants to see God’s glory and God says he will cause his goodness to pass in front of him.

Then, God fulfills his promise to Moses. Moses stood on Mt. Sinai and “the lord came down in the cloud and stood there with him and proclaimed his name the lord. And he passed in front of Moses proclaiming “the lord the lord, the compassionate and gracious god, slow to anger abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands and forgiving wickedness, rebellion, and sin (Ex 34:5-7).

The two important Hebrew words are hesed (variously rendered; steadfast love, mercy, covenant love, graciousness) and met (truth or truthfulness).  hased and met are used over and over to describe God’s compassion or goodness in the Old Testament.

The essential thing to grasp is that God’s glory is supremely his goodness

Now, fast-forward to John’s allusion to Exodus in John 1:14.  John already has the reader in Exodus; a Greek speaking Jew would have read the beginning of 1:14 more like this, “the Word pitches his tabernacle, or lived in his tent, amongst us” (carson). So, John is already taking his readers to chapter 25, but then he states,  “and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.”  John has seen “his glory” glory that can only be from the father, and the only one who can possess this glory must be from the Father (Jn 1:18)

Grace and truth is John’s  word pairing that relates back to hesed and met. Carson seems to think that John is moving his readers back to Exodus and that the glory (goodness) passing in front of Moses was now incarnate, dwelling among them, and they have seen his glory, word-made-flesh……. God’s ultimate self-revelation.

So, how does this relate to the Cross?

It relates to the cross because Jesus, the God-man, is most glorified in the cross, (John 7:39; 12:16; 13; 31-32) therefore, God is most glorified in the cross.  And, what did we say God’s glory was? His goodness. God’s ultimate glory was in the cross because he displayed the ultimate good.  This is why Jesus Christ is the true/real/ultimate revelation of God  (jn 1:9).

With this in mind, when we read that God loves the world  ( Jn 3:16) we should view it in light of God’s character because it took the ultimate revelation of God to display his love for a world that did not know Him. John 3:16 shouldn’t give us warm fuzzies, as if we were lovable, but it should testify to God’s character— that he loved a world that hated him.

In short, God’s glory is found in the cross of Christ because the cross displays the perfect goodness of God’s character, in that, Jesus, the perfect and spotless lamb of God, substituted himself for a people who were in rebellion against him.

Just for a second, think of God’s glory (Ex 24:16/ Is 6) …. How majestic He is and how zealous He is for his own glory (Isaiah 48:9-11)…

Now think of the amount of glory God has (if it could be quantitative) and relate it to how much goodness it took for God to redeem his people. It’s sobering…….(Rom. 3:10-12; 14:23: Heb. 11:6)…… It took nothing less than the God who is necessarily perfect in goodness and power to redeem such a lost world.

Dwell on God’s goodness in view of his awesome glory, and we’ll begin to understand 1 Corinthians 1:29 “so that no one may boast in God’s presence.

How are we to evaluate preachers and preaching?  is it needed?

Evaluating sermons is a touchy subject and most evaluations come in this statement ” I get so much from his sermons/ I get nothing from his sermons.” These statements are not necessarily evil, but they’re very unclear and focused on the wrong issue.

When a person makes that statement  I still have no idea what he means.  He could mean that the sermon was not entertaining, or he could mean that there was no pointed application.  In-fact, if our goal is to “get something” maybe we should go to wal-mart, I’m sure they’ll have it. Let’s grade pastors on their ability to exposet and communicate scripture, not what we “get” out of it.

YES! real thoughtful sermon evaluation is  needed.  There are those who want to “distort the gospel of Christ” Gal 1: 6; the most precious thing we have! Why would we be anything but outraged when a gospel is preached that is not the gospel of Christ,  because it’s not even a gospel….. It’s not good news.  And, we must not  evaluate based on sincerity because even pastors can be sincerely wrong!  Just because your pastor is a “good ole boy”  or a composed  orator who does everything “right,” it’s our responsibility to test the pastor’s words against scripture. Don’t be fooled.

Here’s some helpful pointers in evaluating sermons and pastor; this is from monergism.org

* Authoritative – this “text” is binding upon believers and not to be demeaned.
* Logical – the train of thought is followed easily and well structured.
* He preaches BOTH the indicatives and the imperatives. The NT uses indicative statements when discussing the certainties of what God has done, is doing or will do for us. Imperative statements (on the other hand) are commands declaring from God what we should do. What God commands us to do (the imperative) as Christians is always based upon what He has done, is doing or will do for us in Christ (the indicatives). For example, the first three chapters of Ephesians are indicatives, declaring the foundational grace we have in Christ, while the following chapters, which say “therefore …” (live this way), are imperatives. Selecting a preacher who understands this should be a number one priority because this is the clearest indicator of whether he is preaching a full-orbed gospel, avoiding both legalism and antinomianism. What God has done for us in regeneration & justification results in preaching faith and obedience, because it is God working in us that makes this a reality.
* Exegetical accuracy (including Christocentricity). In his sermons, does he demonstrate the significance of every text in the light of Christ and his cross? Does he demonstrate the centrality of Christ in both Testaments and in all different genres of the Holy Scriptures?
* Doctrinal substance: Fear of man plays no role in how preaches the text. If a Text speaks of an unpopular doctrine, he does not avoid it simply in order to maintain peace. It is the preacher’s job to communicate the fullness of God’s message.
* In the pulpit doesn’t spend a lot of time talking about self – for the most part, leaves “me” of the message – He points to Jesus Christ. Although an occasional testimony to the power of God’s grace in his life, tasteful confession of personal struggles, etc., if it does not detract from the message of the gospel, may be appropriate.
* Pointed application – What is the message about, and what is the listener to learn and remember for the day/weeks ahead?

To be honest, I think most pastors rise and fall on on their oratory skills instead of their exegetical accuracy.

Having problems memorizing scripture? Do we take the discipline of scripture memorization seriously ?

18 Tricks to Memorize More Scripture | Fallen and Flawed.