As for Yu Darvish, the 21 year old Japanese phenom? The Yanks will not be outbid on him this time around.

This is what the British Parliament is debating today. Should embryos be created in vtiro for the purpose of providing material for siblings who have physical problems? Christianity Today reports:

These include a provision to allow the creation of human-animal embryos, a move to allow so-called “saviour siblings” - creating a sibling through IVF to treat a child with a life-limiting condition - and the removal of the requirement for doctors to consider “the need for a father” when offering fertility treatment.

So not only are they considering these ’savior siblings’, but they are contemplating the validity of merging human and animal genes to create these manimal embryos. Regardless of this measure in Parliament, these experiments will continue to take place. Human hubris knows no bounds and the Tower of Babel, which perhaps many believed was a one time event, continues to be repeated throughout history. When David says this in Psalm 14:1: “The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds, there is none who does good,” he says this simply because there will always be fools who believe there is no God. There will always be attempts to displace God as God so long as there are sinners. And until Christ returns, sin will continue to plaguethe human condition where no one is righteous, no not one. (Rom 3:9)

The time will come when manimals will at least be attempted, if not created. The time will come when embryos and eventually children will be born for the purpose of harvesting organs for the sake of those people who truly have rights (against these harvested creatures who are nothing more than fingernails). The time will come. The time will come because human beings will always act upon their pride before anything else. But oh what the world will be like at such a time, and what judgment will come upon all at such a time.

(HT: JT)

Our fourth value reads as follows:

We value the primacy of the LOCAL CHURCH to sustain the believer’s continuance in the Gospel.

It might surprise you but the word “church” has never been more ambiguous than it is today and it has never been more attacked than it is today. More and more churches are abandoning the word “church” in their name because some find the word culturally irrelevant, some find it obsolete, and others find it offensive. Some churches are now attempting to reinvent themselves to be anything but a church. An emergent blog proposed this idea for a church:

So, church=
->lots of newspapers, muffins, coffee, cafe tables
->open for about 2 hours on a Sunday am
->a number of stations set up that relate to sections of the newspaper. As people read a section, then they have the opportunity to go to the relevant station, where various responses - confession, intercession, praise - are offered.
->a regular liturgy of coffee, in which God is thanked for her gifts
->followed by a 20 minute interview with 2 people, in which the weeks events are reflected on from a Kingdom perspective. So various articulate, witty people get to help all us poor newspaper readers make sense of the news. They would have to be both well read, yet quick on their feet, because the newspaper is setting the agenda.
->a small, regular, set liturgy ends this.

The comments on the blog read: “What a wonderful idea for an everyday church,” and “Interesting, definitely an idea with potential.”

Some churches not only have a disdain for the word ‘church’ but also for hierarchical leadership. One church called, ‘The Church of the Common Table’ (a church that meets at the Jammin’ Java in Vienna, VA) encourages everyone to take turns leading the services. When I was in Africa, I met some people from Connecticut who recently formed small groups which had split from a church after the church closed down. He explained that the people in the church did not want any leadership structure but community power-sharing. But of course, in a fallen world, there really is no such thing is unobtrusive power-sharing.

The problems in defining ‘church’ does not merely rest with the churches themselves, nor the men and women who run them, but with the people as well. Josh Harris calls such people “church-daters.” These are people who believe the church is about me than it is about God or His people. Such people tend to be critical since no church could ever live up to the standards of the Almighty me. He then tells the story of his friend Nathan who attends two churches, one because he likes the music and the other because he likes the preaching.(Josh Harris, Stop Dating the Church!, 17-18) We’ll talk about this phenomenon a bit later. But you can see that the church is at a crossroads. People are not merely leaving the church, but they are changing the church to be something quite different. What are we to make of all of this?

I’d like to explore why we value not only the universal church, but perhaps even more importantly, the local church. It’s not that the universal church is not important. It is. But most Christians wholeheartedly support the importance of the universal church while some deny the relevance of the local church. So first, I’d like to address what the local church is not, and then what the church is according to the Bible.

The Local Church Is Not

First, the local church is not a store in the mall. As Josh Harris’ friend Nathan viewed the church, so too do many others. There are some who will attend three to four churches much like visiting different stores in a mall. A person will go to one church for the music, another church for the preaching, another church for its happening small group, and another church because they have a great Bible Doctrine class after worship. But to treat the local church as a mall is self-defeating. It undermines the very purpose this person has in taking this approach to the church, a desire to grow in Christ. It also negatively affects each one of those churches in a unique way. Imagine a man dating three different women simultaneously. The first woman he dates because of her physical beauty. The second woman he dates because he loves the conversation they have together. And the third woman he dates because she has the qualities that he believes would be perfect as the mother of his children. In his mind, he believes that he is receiving optimal benefit because each woman provides their strength to his joy and satisfaction. But what he doesn’t realize is that marriage is not about each component part growing separate from the other. No person can predict exactly what he needs for his greatest joy. Sometimes, trials and pains lead to a far greater ultimate joy than a lack of trials and pains. Also, the commitment and longevity of remaining with one person leads to a far greater joy than multiple partners could ever bring. The mall mentality is self-defeating in the end because it never truly satisfies, much like dating multiple women will never truly satisfy one’s soul.

Also, this person not only negatively harms himself but each church that he attends. You might think this is a bit far-reaching, but if we take Paul at his word in 1 Cor 12:26: “If one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together,” we must believe that a person’s half-hearted commitment to a local church will be felt by the church body. For example, if this person were to share with others in the church that he attends another church for the music, of course, the first question that he will be asked is, “Why?” And the answer will probably be something along the lines of, “Well, the music at the other church is better,” which conversely means the music in this church is not as good. This can lead to divisions, criticisms, etc. The sad truth is, the mall mentality benefits no one, not the individual and not the various churches he attends. If any of you have such a mentality, I want to urge you to attend one local church. If this church is not the church you believe is your local church you wish to commit to, then please do not use this church as one store in your church mall. It will not benefit this church or any of the churches you attend, and it will not benefit you.

Second, the church is not an arcade. I loved going to arcades as a kid. The sound of the guns firing, the bells ringing, the lights flashing, made me bounce around with giddiness. It was wild entertainment and it was thrilling. But now when I enter an arcade, it’s not as thrilling. The carpet smells musty. The kids seem hypnotized by the sights and sounds. The games seem boring. What happened to all of the excitement I once had? The entertainment was no longer entertaining. Watch some of the old TV shows you grew up with when you were a kid, shows like Gilligan’s Island and Happy Days and you find them to be corny and boring. That’s the problem with entertainment. It gets old and it can even get silly.

The church is not an arcade and not a TV Show. But sad to say that in the past couple of decades, there has been a move to make the church a place of entertainment. Tod Ford, who is an architect that designs churches, explains why this move has taken place. He says a big reason for the gradual change is that churches now have to compete with other aspects of entertainment in order to reach young people. ‘The thrust now is becoming the celebration of the assembly and not so much the written word.’” Youth Groups are notorious for the arcade mentality. Far too often, pastors, churches, and youth pastors have assumed kids need to be entertained or they simply won’t be interested. Youth Pastor Ken Moser calls such thinking a lie. He writes for Youth Specialties, saying, “Most groups have bought the lie that, to be an effective youth group, you must put on a night of entertainment so that the local young people will come, have a truckload of fun, hear a short message from the Bible, and then maybe come back next week for more. For many people, the local youth group is nothing more than a glorified coffee shop—a place to hang around, have a fun time, come back next week, and start all over. That is, until you move on to better, more fulfilling entertainment.” And there will always be better entertainment than what the church can offer. If the church continues to believe that entertainment will capture the hearts and souls of people, it will lose all hope of reaching people with the Gospel of Christ. This simply is not the church. No, the church is Jesus’ beloved Bride whom He gave His life for. There is gladness in the church always. But there is a weight to our gladness. Our lives according to 1 Cor 7:23 were purchased with our Savior’s blood. That’s not entertaining, but it is oh so joyously freeing.

Third, the church is also not a building. This past week I was speaking with a friend who is a youth pastor at a church. During a congregational meeting he attended, the elders began a screaming contest, accusing each other and the pastor of undermining the church. The reason for all of this anger? The purchase of a building. Buildings can be a wonderful blessing that God can certainly use for His glory. But buildings never equate biblical faithfulness and a God-glorifying church. We must never believe that our church MUST be in a particular type of building, MUST own a building, MUST remain in this building. To think in such a way is to dismiss the biblical idea that the local church is not a building, but as we will see later, the people of God.

Fourth, the church is not a therapy center. You might have heard the analogy that the church is a hospital, a place where sick people come. That analogy is accurate, to a point. Far too often people believe the church should be the place where felt needs are met. People want to feel good about themselves but at the same time want their consciences messaged. They want to come to a place where there is healing so long as there is no personal accountability. The want to see transformation but do not want to be told there is a such thing as sin. David Powlison comments on what he calls the therapeutic Gospel:

In this new gospel, the great “evils” to be redressed do not call for any fundamental change of direction in the human heart. Instead, the problem lies in my sense of rejection from others; in my corrosive experience of life’s vanity; in my nervous sense of self-condemnation and diffidence; in the imminent threat of boredom if my music is turned off; in my fussy complaints when a long, hard road lies ahead. These are today’s significant felt needs that the gospel is bent to serve. Jesus and the church exist to make you feel loved, significant, validated, entertained, and charged up. This gospel ameliorates distressing symptoms. It makes you feel better. The logic of this therapeutic gospel is a Jesus-for-Me who meets individual desires and assuages psychic aches.

This might not so bad if it actually brought true healing and full transformation. But without any understanding of personal responsibility or a look into the deepest recesses of the human heart which reveals the reality of sin, there is no Gospel at all. But when the church caters to this person, when you merely come here to feel good about yourself, and we do nothing more than try to make you feel good, we are no better than the Yoga studio, the Mormon church in Oakland, or the self-help books section at Borders. Paul describes this phenomenon in his letter to Timothy: “For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, 4 and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths.” (2 Tim 4:3-4)

Fifth, the church is not a political headquarters. If you were to ask me who I was going to vote for this election, I would be willing to tell you. If you were to ask me why I was planning to vote for this person, I would give you some reasons. But I will not endorse a politician in the pulpit. Why not? Because while I believe that according to Romans 13, the church is called to pray for our political leaders, I also believe that this country will not ultimately change because of politicians and laws. I am not advocating that the church completely disengage for all political processes. There is a time when we must be willing to march to oppose abortion and I can preach that from the pulpit. But what drives the message is not a political affiliation, but rather, a biblical outworking of the Gospel. The church is a prophetic voice to the world about the glorious Gospel, not a stopover for a political candidate or party to trumpet its views.

Sixth, the church is not a small group. Now, I need to define what I mean by this. I am not talking about the size of a church. The church can in actuality be a very small group of people meeting together. But the church is not a small group of people gathering together to talk about politics, or to play poker, or to go bowling, or to even do book studies who happen to be Christian. There are far too many people today who have relegated the church to consist of any gathering of Christians with some purpose. Such a perspective completely ignores the biblical ideas of a church.

Seventh, the church is not an action. The local church is not feeding the poor. The local church is not evangelizing on campuses. The local church is not “saving the world.”

Finally, the local church is not the parachurch. It is not the local chapter of InterVarsity or Campus Crusade. It is not the home office of World Vision. It is not BSF or MOPS. It is not Hands at Work, Africa. While these ministries have its place within the universal church, to assume that attending an InterVarsity meeting weekly is the local church, is to disregard what the Bible teaches about the local church.

So now that we know what the local church is not, what exactly is the local church? (more…)

Educational choices have always been a matter of parental responsibility, not of some extra-biblical standard. Every householder should make an informed decision before God. All should research their local schools, public and private and become fully convinced in the way in which he (or she) decides to use his God-given liberty under the Lordship of Christ to bear the best and most abundant fruit he can for the glory of God.

The only moral issue at stake is whether we are willing to walk in the obedience of our faith in God and His will as we understand it from the Scriptures. Though wisdom and foolishness are called into play, there is no moral superiority to be found in any one educational option. Though dilligence is required of all three options, only our labor in Christ will not be in vain. Then, as the relative fruit of each option is put on display in time, may we all be humble enough to change our ways as needed in order to bear even better fruit for God.

Not all options seem to be equally fruitful thus far. But as a long-time home-schooling father and Christian home-schooling advocate I can honestly say that every option, including home schooling has its problems (as you well know). So, pick your problems, and by the grace of God deal with those problems as they arise.

(The new Bible is on the left )

This is one thing that the visually challenged have been asking for for a while, a readable Bible that’s compact.  I know that many have shied away from the compact ESV’s because you needed to have a magnifying glass handy as you read.  Well, you’re wait is over.

D. A. Carson
John Piper
C. J. Mahaney
Mike Bullmore
Mark Dever
Ligon Duncan
Tim Keller

(HT: JT)

In the Sovereign Grace podcast, Jeff Purswell discusses what it feels like when he wakes up in the morning to worship God:

Well, mine sound very similar to what C.J. has just described, especially those opening moments. I never cease to be amazed at how cold my heart is in the morning. And I used to think, “No, if I am really saved then I wouldn’t feel this way in the morning.”

It encouraged me one time to hear Dr. Piper say, “I feel like I have to get saved every morning. I wake up and the devil is sitting on my face.” I can relate to that.

So now I am no longer surprised. I can be discouraged at times, but the coldness that I feel just reminds me how badly I need God. Because apart from him I can do nothing. And apart from getting food for my soul this morning, I will be starving.…

So I’m very pragmatic in my devotions. I don’t feel obligated to continue along a track that is not bearing fruit. Because of how cold I am in the morning I am desperate in the morning. Obviously, I think that is a gift of grace. But I just have this feeling because I am so cold I must meet with God, I must connect with him, I must be addressed by him. I must reach a point of faith for that day, knowing I have indeed encountered his presence, that the flames of affection for God in my heart have been stirred, that I have brought myself under his sway, and under the control of the Holy Spirit.

During this past Together for the Gospel Conference, my friend, co-worker, partner-in-crime Tim Kurtz was my roommate.  And he has a gift that I sure wish I had, the gift of automatically waking up early.  He would arise at 4 or 5 am without a bit of struggle.  The devil was far from his face.  I think he was far from his face because he was busy putting me into a headlock as I slept.  I hate sleep, but I love sleep.  I hate that it takes away from my time with the Lord.  I hate that it reminds me of just how weak and feeble I am before the Lord.  But it also reminds me of how desperately I need Christ and how grateful I am that I am not held guilty on the basis of my discipline.  And for this reality alone, I desire to wake up early, push the devil off my face, go downstairs and read God’s Word.

But it’s never easy.

In a later personal conversation I had with him, I asked him about the doctrinal convictions he once held (he had graduated from a conservative seminary). He explained to me that while those were important, what was more important was caring about the lost, and so those doctrinal convictions would take a lesser priority. Today, he leads a ‘successful’ church where their perspective on worship and culture has truly merged together in various ways. Many people attend for all sorts of reasons. When I talk with different members of his church, one couple noted that though their worship does not suit their taste (they’re not as hip as the church is), they go because of the children’s ministry. They are not involved in anything at the church. Another family I know that goes to that church continually languishes over the church’s lack of doctrinal concern, and yet they stay because it’s close to their home and convenient.

It strikes me that though the church and its community strive to be cool, hip, and culturally relevant, so many people who attend the church still have the same hang-ups as those who go to more ‘stodgy’, stiff, and culturally irrelevant churches.

These thoughts come time mind as I read Kevin DeYoung and Ted Kluck’s book Why I Am Not Emergent. In referring to emergent speaker/thinker Tony Jones, Kluck says:

Tony Jones doesn’t look as ‘emergent-y’ as I might have expected, if what I might have expected might have been frosted tips, hipster glasses, and torn Levis. He has a good deal of charisma, once he gets going, and I counted one reference to Saturday Night Live, one reference to Desperate Housewives, the obligatory Matrix shout-out, two references to 24, and several references to Moby during the first hour of the class. (p. 226)

His description of Tony Jones seemed strangely familiar. But it was this phrase that had a haunting ring to it:

And he even apologizes for the next statement before he makes it, admitting the fact that what he is about to say could come off as a little cliché: ‘Truth is not a destination,’ he says, ‘Truth is actually a journey.’…Jones adds: “I find most theology boring. I want to do my own theology…I don’t want to be an acolyte for somebody else’s theology. I’m interested in reading French sociology, postmodern deconstruction, things like that. And then have a theology that bubbles out of that.” (p. 227)

A theology that bubbles out of French sociology and postmodern deconstructionism? I wonder what theology that leads to? This is what the church is facing today. How will the church respond to? Will we respond with bubble theology?