Countdown to My Holiday . . .

July 26, 2006 By Adrian Warnock

The last three days have been the first since the onset of my shingles that I have attempted to sit up at a computer desk for a full day’s work. (I have worked other days, but mostly from my bed – half-lying down puts less strain on the affected nerve!). Unfortunately the nerve pain has reminded me that it is still very much there and ready to punish me for foolishly thinking I should not spend my life lying in bed!

I am fortunate, though, that over the course of the last few weeks the pain has been slowly improving. Some people suffer the severe – literally excruciating – pain for months or even years. It seems that if my current progress to date is anything to go by, I will not be one of those. For that, I praise God, and thank you all for your prayers.

This enforced inactivity has made me more grateful for the times I am able to get out of bed. It has also made me glad for the job I have that allows me to work from home, and – at least after the first ten days or so after the pain eased – from bed.

All this has also made me very thankful for the wonderful wife I have who works so hard for me and the family. I intend to treat our family holiday this year with the respect it deserves. There will be no Internet cafe trips. No email access. No blog posts. In short, I will be en famille for a little over a week. I will, of course, read, but I am eager, as much as my pain allows me, to get off my bed and make sure that my darling Andrée gets a break this next week.

Having shingles has also made me realise how glad I should be of the strength to do practical things. So, as I continue to improve, I am hoping to get out and do stuff a whole lot more – doing mundane things like loading a dishwasher actually makes me feel so glad these days to be healthy enough to do them!

Right now, I wish I could be out of this bed and up and helping my wife who is busying herself getting our stuff ready for the holiday. Once I am physically able, I plan to make sure Andrée gets a whole lot more help from me than she sometimes has had.

But, don’t go away quite yet – I still have one more post for you tomorrow which will contain a fantastic special offer for you, my blog readers – which will also give you loads of stuff to read while I am away.

In fact, you don’t need to go away at all – now that I have the “Warnie Headlines,” you can find some of the best Christian bloggers’ latest work by coming right here!

I will leave you with a list of my favorite posts, just in case you are one of the very few people in the world who are as addicted to reading this stuff as I am to writing it! If this isn’t enough for you, book reviews and interviews can be found in the sidebars!

MY PERSONAL FAVORITE POSTS

A New Perspective on Paul
Apostles are Meant for Today
Blogging Principles
Churches that Change the World
Del.icio.us Fun for Bloggers
Disagreeing with the Jollyblogger
Don’t Listen to Me – What Do I Know?
Free From the Yoke of Legalism!
How to be a Successful Blogger
It’s All About You, Jesus – Calvinism and Worship
Loving Even Our Blogging Enemies
My Favorite Living Preachers
My Story
On Pastoring and Christian Counseling
Preaching to the Unconverted?
Preaching with Passion and Imagination
Sex Survey Results
Sufficient and Efficient Grace – Spurgeon, Tongues, and the Toronto Blessing
Teamwork that will Change the World
The Simple Gospel Explained
The Toronto Blessing
Together for the Gospel Conference 2006 – My Round-Up Post
Together On a Mission – the newfrontiers Conference Summary Post
What Does True Preaching Look Like?
What is a Neo-Liberal?
What is a Reformed Charismatic?
What is Love?
Year in Review – 2005

2000 posts and a big thank you to The Doctor

March 13, 2006 By Adrian Warnock

This is the 2000th post on this blog, which means that I have been posting on average just short of two posts a day for almost three years. That’s a whole lot of words one relatively recent reader has set out on a quest to go back and read ’em all. I am not sure that too many will want to join him!

As I drew near to this post, I wondered how best to use it. I briefly considered a review post like I did at the end of 2005 and 2004. I also thought about doing a post on what blogging has meant to me, but realised that like so many other things, David Wayne had already said it better. I could have written about my mistakes and the lessons I had learnt, but my posts here, here and here have already covered that ground.

So I decided that a tribute post was clearly the answer returning thanks to others is always a good thing to do at moments like this so that is what I decided to do.

There are so many people that I want to thank, but I have decided to focus in on one of them. Before I get to that, however, there are a number of people I want to thank briefly. I would like to thank:

My God for creating me, saving me, empowering me, and sovereignly determining that he would use me the way he does and place me where he has.

My wife for being such a gracious blog widow I still can hardly believe that God was so gracious as to give me you who I have done nothing to deserve.

My family for keeping me sane you kids are the best gift God has ever given your mum and me!

My parents for raising me as a Christian.

My dear friend and Pastor, Tope Koleoso, who incidentally preached his heart out yesterday morning. All too often preaching just explains some facts or doctrines to us and leaves us to figure out for ourselves how to apply it. I was never very good at figuring out how to live in the good of what I had learnt thank you Tope for preaching in such a way that we are left in no doubt about what we need to do differently on Monday morning as a result of your message. If you have not heard one of Tope’s sermons yet, go listen right now to yesterdays message on “Discipline”. It is the perfect introduction to his preaching.

My previous pastors and those men of God who have discipled and mentored me Colin Potter, Mike Hewitt, Robin Hawkins, David Nunn, Terry Brewer, Eric Hutchinson, David Coak, Henry Tyler, and others.

My favorite living preachers who have given me so much despite in most cases never having met me.

Those who, although they are dead, still speak and have inspired me more than they will ever know until I get to heaven and seek them out to thank them for it these men include of course Spurgeon , Wesley, Whitfield . . .the list goes on and on . . . .

The bloggers who have inspired me, welcomed me, interacted with me, and linked to me. There are too many to mention everyone but some that stand out in my memory are of course the Warnies, The Reformed Charismatic bloggers, and I ought to thank every blogger in the Blogdom of God as together we make up a formidable group who largely (despite our differences) interact with remarkable grace. But specific thank you’s must go to Josh Claybourn and Hugh Hewitt who were the first “big time” bloggers to link to me, correspond with me . . . so you can blame them for inflicting this blog on such a wide audience. Of course, no list of thank you’s would be complete without a mention of David Wayne who, as I say in my sidebar, taught me everything I know about gracious blogging.

But the person I want to focus on in this post is the one writer I would like you to get to know more than any other Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones. Lloyd-Jones combines in one man my passionate desires for increased intimacy with God and for reformed theology. I have already claimed him as a father of the charismatic movement elsewhere. Although he would not have called himself this, he almost single-handedly inspired the breed called Reformed Charismatics. The cries of his entire ministry, and particularly his closing years echo resoundingly today.

I will share some more quotes in this post on his views on the

on-baptism-of.htm”>Baptism with the Holy Spirit. You will see from them why I like this man, and want to publicly confess my debt to him and his ministry. I am of course in good company in declaring such a debt. Although he is not spoken about much these days, he is in danger of becoming evangelicalism’s best kept secret it is time 25 years after the death of the 20th century’s finest English-speaking preacher to revive his memory and learn from his wisdom!

He has many books, and a number of them can be bought at Amazon. Of course, many have heard of his series on Romans, but there is much more to the Doctor than that. I recently was directed to an article at Banner of Truth which gives guidance as to where to start with his many books I would largely concur, but would also emphasise Joy Unspeakable and Prove all Things as being books you simply cannot miss reading.

The best article on Lloyd-Jones on the web comes perhaps unsurprisingly from one of our modern heroes John Piper. The quotes in the rest of this post all come from that article.
Piper acknowledges his own debt to Lloyd-Jones and credits reading his sermons as setting the course for his own life. Piper remarks in his post on the way that God providentially organises the smallest details of our lives. He is eager to retell the story of how Lloyd-Jones was prevented from taking a role in Wales he had set his heart on. Amazingly, it was a missed train by a supporter which set in motion the events that led to him accepting the call to Westminster:

“His main supporter on the board of the college had missed the train and couldn’t support his call to the presidency. And so he accepted Westminster’s call and stayed there 29 years until his retirement in 1968.

I can’t help but pause and give thanks for the disappointments and reversals and setbacks in our lives that God uses to put us just where he wants us. How different modern Evangelicalism in Britain would have been had Martyn Lloyd-Jones not preached in London for 30 years. How different my own life may have been had I not read his sermons in the summer of 1968! Praise God for missed trains and other so-called accidents!”

Piper goes on to explain what it was about Lloyd-Jones that is so unique and what has clearly inspired him and so many of us so much:

“From the beginning to the end the life of Martyn Lloyd-Jones was a cry for depth in two areas depth in Biblical doctrine and depth in vital spiritual experience. Light and heat. Logic and fire. Word and Spirit. Again and again he would be fighting on two fronts: on the one hand against dead, formal, institutional intellectualism, and on the other hand against superficial, glib, entertainment-oriented, man-centered emotionalism. He saw the world in a desperate condition without Christ and without hope; and a church with no power to change it. One wing of the church was straining out intellectual gnats and the other was swallowing the camels of evangelical compromise or careless charismatic teaching. For Lloyd-Jones the only hope was historic, God-centered revival . . . .

Lloyd-Jones has done more than any other man in this century, I think, to restore the historic meaning of the word revival.

[Lloyd-Jones said] A revival is a miracle … something that can only be explained as the direct … intervention of God … Men can produce evangelistic campaigns, but they cannot and never have produced a revival (Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Revival, Westchester, IL: Crossway Books, 1987, pp. 111-112.)

But for Lloyd-Jones it was a great tragedy that the whole deeper understanding of revival, as a sovereign outpouring of the Holy Spirit, had been lost by the time he took up the subject in 1959 at the 100th anniversary of the Welsh Revival. “During the last seventy, to eighty years,” he said, “this whole notion of a visitation, a baptism of God’s Spirit upon the Church, has gone.” (Iain H. Murray, David Martyn Lloyd-Jones: The Fight of Faith 1939-1981, p. 385).

The Doctor clearly linked historical revivalism with the baptism with the Holy Spirit as the following quotes demonstrate:

“The difference between the baptism of the Holy Spirit and a revival is simply one of the number of people affected. I would define a revival as a large number, a group of people, being baptized by the Holy Spirit at the same time; or the Holy Spirit falling upon, coming upon a number of people assembled together. It can happen in a district, it can happen in a country.” (Joy Unspeakable, Harold Shaw Publishers, Wheaton, 1984, p. 51.)

“What is needed is some mighty demonstration of the power of God, some enactment of the Almighty, that will compel people to pay attention, and to look, and to listen. And the history of all the revivals of the past indicates so clearly that that is invariably the effect of revival, without any exception at all. That is why I am calling attention to revival. That is why I am urging you to pray for this. When God acts, he can do more in a minute that man with his organizing can do in fifty years ” (Revival, pp. 121-122.)

“The purpose, the main function of the baptism with the Holy Spirit, is … to enable God’s people to witness in such a manner that it becomes a phenomenon and people are arrested and are attracted. (Joy Unspeakable, p. 84.)

Lloyd-Jones was remarkably dismissive of cessationism:

“[Before Pentecost the apostles] were not yet fit to be witnesses … [They] had been with the Lord during the three years of his ministry. They had heard his sermons, they had seen his miracles, they had seen him crucified on the cross, they had seen him dead and buried, and they had seen him after he had risen literally in the body from the grave. These were men who had been with him in the upper room at Jerusalem after his resurrection and to whom he had expounded the Scriptures, and yet it is to these men he says that they must tarry at Jerusalem until they are endued with power from on high. The special purpose, the specific purpose of the baptism with the Holy Spirit is to enable us to witness, to bear testimony, and one of the ways in which that happens is through the giving of spiritual gifts.” (Martyn Lloyd-Jones, The Sovereign Spirit, Harold Shaw Publishers, Wheaton, 1985, p. 120.)

“If the apostles were incapable of being true witnesses without unusual power, who are we to claim that we can be witnesses without such power?” (The Sovereign Spirit, p. 46.)

“I think it is quite without scriptural warrant to say that all these gifts ended with the apostles or the Apostolic Era. I believe there have been undoubted miracles since then” (Martyn Lloyd-Jones: The Fight of Faith 1939-1981, p. 786.)

“The Scriptures never anywhere say that these things were only temporary never! There is no such statement anywhere.” (The Sovereign Spirit, p. 31-32.)

“There is no question but that God’s people can look for and expect “leadings”, “guidance”, indications of what they are meant to do … Men have been told by the Holy Spirit to do something; they knew it was the Holy Spirit speaking to them; and it transpired that it obviously was his leading. It seems clear to me that if we deny such a possibility we are again guilty of quenching the Spirit. (The Sovereign Spirit, pp. 89-90.)

Piper explains He deals with the cessationist arguments and concludes that they are based on conjectures and arguments from silence in order to justify a particular prejudice “To hold such a view,” he says, “is simply to quench the Spirit.

Lloyd-Jones admitted that he did not feel he completely lived in the good of his understanding of the Spirit, but there was no doubt that some remarkable experiences surrounded him as one observer, Stacy Woods, puts it:

“In an extraordinary way, the presence of God was in that Church. I personally felt as if a hand were pushing me through the pew. At the end of the sermon for some reason or the other the organ did not play, the Doctor went off into the vestry and everyone sat completely still without moving. It must have been almost ten minutes before people seemed to find the strength to get up and, without speaking to one another, quietly leave the Church. Never have I witnessed or experienced such preaching with such fantastic reaction on the part of the congregation”

I will leave this 2000th post with some fantastic words from the Doctor himself, which I couldn’t have said better myself:

“Those people who say that [baptism with the Holy Spirit] happens to everybody at regeneration seem to me not only to be denying the New Testament but to be definitely quenching the Spirit” (Joy Unspeakable, p. 141.)

“It is not that God withdrew, it is that the church in her “wisdom” and cleverness became institutionalized, quenched the Spirit, and made the manifestations of the power of the Spirit well-nigh impossible” (The Sovereign Spirit, p. 50.)

There is more information and links on The Doctor at www.misterrichardson.com/mlj.html and his audio sermons can be downloaded at mlj.org.uk

Adrian interviews Tim Challies

February 2, 2006 By Adrian Warnock

Adrian
It is my great privilege and delight to welcome to the blog today Tim Challies. Tim is one of the most prominent of all God bloggers and though he wont tell you his traffic, I can tell you he gets more readers than I do just from looking at his comment section! Or perhaps his readers just like commenting more than mine. Welcome, Tim. As we start can you just tell us a bit about yourself?

Tim
Sure. In fifty words or less? I live in the Toronto area, just far enough outside the city to avoid the pollution. I was born and raised in this area and have lived here for my whole life other than a year I spent in Edinburgh, Scotland. I have post-secondary training in two fields- history and network administration. Despite that, I currently work from my home as a web designer – a job that requires none of the training I received in school.

Adrian
Why do you blog?

Tim
I blog as part of my spiritual disciplines. If I stop walking closely with God I very quickly run out of things to say. And so I blog to ensure that I continue to read the Bible, I continue to seek after God and continue to read good books. If I become lax in these activities my blog suffers. It really is a thermometer that measures my spiritual temperature. If that sounds selfish, so be it!
Of course I also blog because I love to challenge other people and to interact with them. I love people and love to spend time with them, even if only in an non personal setting like the Internet.
Adrian
You are dead right. You know why I started blogging? I figured it would be a good place for me to store clippings of stories and quotes and ideas that might find there way into one of my sermons!

Adrian
How did you get into this blogging thing? And how did your blog come to be so popular? Did you have any particular strategy that you were following in the early days?

Tim
I really just fell into this blogging thing. I began challies.com as a web site to provide family updates for my parents who had moved to Atlanta, Georgia. Every now and then I would put a little article on the site just to share it with them. At some point Google picked up these pages and people began to read them. A few years ago I decided to make the site into more of a blog, even though I hadn’t ever heard the word “blog.”

So to be honest I had no strategy. I don’t know that I’ve ever really done much to publicize the site. At the beginning I suppose I would try to find well-trafficked sites and post comments, but that didn’t seem to work. So I just dedicated myself to writing what I felt was quality content.
There were a couple of topics that I feel drove quite a few people to the site. I wrote an in-depth study of “The Purpose Driven Life” and several articles about “The Passion of the Christ.” These seemed to resonate with conservative Christians. So I suppose these were topics that helped make the site popular

Adrian
So just for the record, do you think that Warnie I gave you helped any? What about being on aggregators or being linked to by any other prominent bloggers? Or were you just in the right place at the right time?

Tim
I certainly appreciated the Warnie award. If you want my honest opinion about whether it helped any, I’d have to answer “not that I know of.” But I also don’t know how people discover my site, so perhaps it did. Regardless, I was honored to receive it and consider it an honor.

Adrian
You mentioned quality content earlier. I couldnt agree more about your content being great, but what do you think makes good content? How can we recognise it? To me it feels like some blogs become popular without much great content – perhaps mine is a case in point(!) A lot of bloggers like you and I dont have any real qualifications, or right to be listened to more than anyone else- no theological degrees or anything – we are just pyjama theologians you and I arent we. Why on earth does anyone listen to us?

Tim
Those are good questions. I sometimes ask the same questions about authors of books. How is it that one author, who really has little to say, gets book deals while another person does not? It does not seem to make much sense, yet that is the way it works at times. Again, I feel the author himself (or herself) is an important factor. I think Amy of Amy’s Humble Musings is an excellent example of a writer whose audience identifies with her (and no, I am not passing judgment on her content!).

As for what makes blogs popular, I suppose there has to be a combination of a topic that is of interest to people and a writer with whom people can feel some type of affinity. In my experience I know that I feel more comfortable reading blogs where I can identify with the author. Obviously the most popular topics among blog readers are politics and gadgets. Almost all of the most popular blogs are dedicated to these topics.

Adrian
Having some affinity with the author, now theres a point. I know for me that there are some blogs I love because I can see traits in the author that I share- sometimes to a lesser degree- but I share them nonetheless. I do love your passion for books for example. When I was young I know I read a lot more books than now but your obsession with reading in the real world definitely helps me want to listen to what you have to say…and there are all kinds of other ways why I have felt that I have some kind of connection to you.

Adrian
Blogging seems to do that to you. People often feel strangely connected to other bloggers they discover, and can begin to think that they agree with them on everything, and almost see them as somehow an extension of themselves. That kind of relationship can look weird to those watching

Tim
Exactly. Blogging is a form of communication that is very personal in nature. It is far more so than books, for example. A person can interact with the blogger and his audience through the comments section. He can almost always email the blogger to communicate his appreciation or criticism.

Adrian
That sense of identification can really take a hold cant it? I remember a time when a number of people actually thought jollyblogger and I were the same person! Did you ever see that?

Tim
I believe I may have been partly responsible for spreading that rumor, even though I knew you were actually two people!

Adrian
You rascal! What was it about us that made people feel that way?

Tim
I think it was based on the “in partnership” messages on your respective sites. I’m not sure that anyone really believed it. Your styles and subject matter are sufficiently different that it would be difficult to believe you were one and the same.

Adrian
I guess the really interesting thing is what happens when people who have made that connection suddenly discover that they DONT agree on everything. Like the day that I dropped a bombshell (for some people!) that I was a charismatic despite being known up to that point as a reforemd bloggger.

Tim
…or the day I admitted to being a closet Catholic! (Just kidding, of course).

Adrian
When it came to jollyblogger and I, we seemed to find it hard to really disagree on things. Our first crack at the so-called charismatic-cessationist debate makes hilarious reading in some ways. We both bent over backwards to try and understand each other, and seemed reluctant to say “I think you are wrong”

Tim
And yet one of you must be.

Adrian
I felt like I begun to understand the moderate cessationist viewpoint so much better that I actually wondered if we DID agree, but simply used different words to describe the same experience. I guess, that kind of convergance (HT Sam Storms!) is defin

itely one possible outcome of blogging for people. Do you agree?

Tim
I do agree. I think blogging gives us all opportunities to meet people who are like us in many ways, but also to meet people who are unlike us in other ways. It helps us all appreciate the diversity within the body of Christ.

Adrian
I mean, realizing that David was basically a cessationist was shocking, but not as shocking as when I realised after months that as he was a presbyterian he must be a paedobaptist! I mean a charismatic talking to a paedobaptist!

Tim
Presbyterians tend to be that way, don’t they?

Adrian
I know, I know, but I never made the connection!

Adrian
I guess we were agreeing so much on other matters that I could hardly bear to think of myself disagreeing with him.

Tim
Fair enough. As long as the disagreement is handled in agreement with Scripture’s exhortations to kindness and understanding, I don’t know that disagreements are a bad thing.

Adrian
No I think you are right (joke!)

Seriously though, I guess its fine to disagree, but great to do so from a point of being reluctant to get into a big argument, and fearful that you might be understood. I suppose valuing the relationship and what we agree on more than being right and the things we differ over. So I suppose what I am saying is, its fine to disagree, but do it remembering we are brothers and that brothers shouldn’t fight!

Tim
Absolutely. We need to separate the primary from secondary issues. When we agree on the major doctrines we can respectfully discuss the secondary doctrines, even if we do so more from a desire to understand and appreciate than from a desire for conviction.

Adrian
And, disagree with people like we respect them and love them! I know for me, its always easy to imagine my “opponent” in a theological debate obviously hates God and the church and is clearly inspired by the devil or else he wouldn’t be thinking what he thinks

Tim
It is easier that way, isn’t it?

Adrian
Blogging has been good for me because I have been exposed to godly men like you and David and others who disagree with me but are NOT actually my enemies!

Tim
That is what I find so difficult in discussing issues with others. I have come to see not only the value of not only loving the same thing, but also hating the same thing. Yes, we both love Jesus, but do we both hate it when people formulate doctrines that reject His free gift? I find it particularly difficult to disagree with those I admire. The more I admire a person, the more difficult it is to disagree.

Adrian
I cant help but wonder whether that was part of the reason for Pyromaniacs reluctance to really interact over the cessationist issue. Maybe I am being overly analytical but it seemed to me that he had got to know a few charismatics well over the blogosphere, and I guess also he must have heard CJ when he came to preach. Could it be that even the pyromaniac who definitely has “bulldog” tendencies at times felt he couldn’t really bring himself to dispute with reformed charismatics the way he would say with the emergent crowd….

Tim
That is possible. There are certain bloggers who have more to lose than others. A guy like Phil Johnson, as the elder of a prominent church, as the right-hand man to John MacArthur, has to exercise great caution and discernment in what he says and does. His reputation, his church’s reputation, and his pastor’s reputation could all be adversely affected by what he says.

Adrian
Yeh, you and I didnt have a reputation to loose before we started all this did we!

Adrian
I was surprised by his sudden change to a group blog though

I got the feeling reading his reasons that being “out there” and exposed to the hoardes of comments (and he used to get more than you or I) became a bit much due to all his other work.

Or maybe he was just busy over Christmas

Tim
I was saddened to see Phil move to a group blog format, and I say that with all due respect to the people he invited to participate in it with him. I would have preferred to see him go to a once-per week format or similar.

Adrian
Yeah, what is it with some people that they seem to think a blog HAS to be every day for it to be any use?

Tim
I can’t imagine feeling that way!

Adrian
O yeah? I seem to remember a comment about me and David Wayne being delinquent bloggers because we are how shall we say not as regular as you are? Sorry, that makes it sound like we are constipated! Bloggers block perhaps?

Tim
That I have committed to blogging every day has raised a few eyebrows and brought some gentle chastisement. But I feel my motives are pure. I know my personality and know that once I allow myself to become lax in an area, I tend to become very lax. And so I try to blog every day. Blogging is so closely connected to my personal spiritual disciplines that I fear I have a lot to lose if I stop blogging!

Adrian
Just so long as you dont expect all of us to be quite so disciplined! Going back to group blogs, some people think that they are the future of the blogosphere- I guess by the fact that neither you nor I have thrown in the towel we might have different views, right? I think that actually, a group blog can often loose that very intensity of personal reaction that I love about a blog like yours. I come to your blog to read YOUR views, not those of somebody else

Tim
I have also heard that group blogs are the future of blogging. I would tend to disagree. I do think there are some group blogs that are successful, but these seem to be among the minority of blogs. Again we return to the personal connection between the reader and writer. That is easier to form and maintain when there is only one author. Blogging is a perfect postmodern activity. It is a subjective pursuit. A person can blog as he sees fit and still be considered a blogger.

Adrian
What are good conservatives like us doing using such a postmodern activity? I can think of some exceptionally good group blogs though, and the ones I like are ones where the writers have a genuine connection between themselves.

Tim
Precisely. The Together for the Gospel blog is a great example. Anyone who cares to can eavesdrop on the relationship of four men many of us much admire. They have a strong bond already and have chosen to take that relationship to a blogging setting. I think they will do well.

Adrian
Yeah, I couldn’t agree more. That blog DESERVES to do well. I am already in awe of the guys, and then to hear of their reading habits, well it makes your book obsession seem lightweight!

Tim
I’m not a big fan of the word “deserves” and I suspect C.J. would agree with me!

Adrian
Very good! OK. let me rephrase that, I think people will benefit more from reading that blog than many others, my own included and yes yours too!

Tim
Fair enough!

Adrian
Do you think that blogging is a good medium to get the message out?

Tim
I’d say that depends on the message. I do think blogging is a good medium for many messages. The difficulty may be that people do not take blogging as seriously as other forms of communication. A book still trumps a blog when it comes to communicating something serious. Of course with the ability of people to self-publish books this may soon change! But generally I think that people do not take messages communicated by blogs as seriously as they might.

Adrian
Why do you think that is?

Tim
I suppose because i
n many applications it just isn’t that serious of a medium.

Adrian
I actually think that blogging is better than books for putting across the general cut and thrust of a series of arguments for and against a position. Books can be so one sided

Tim
They can be. And yet they’ve done well for us for the past several thousand years!

Adrian
I think blogging is a good forum for generating a kind of community theology for example or at least for superficially understanding differing positions. I guess what blogging does is reinvent the “pamphlet”

I think that Wesley and Whitefield for example would have had their arguments over calvinism on blogs if they were alive today. And it is possible that they may have gone down the reflective, lets try and understand and interact with each other honestly rather than the polemic “this is what I think so there!”

Tim
Community theology can be both good and bad. Blogs make experts of people who have no right to be understood as experts.

Adrian
Too right people like you and me for example!

Tim
But I understand that a polemic “this is what I think so there” position in a book shows that a person has thoroughly researched and reflected upon a topic.

Adrian
Well it can do, but it doesnt always…..

Tim
When it comes to theology I find that blogging is a good medium to begin discussions that will lead back to Scripture and more thorough study in books.

Adrian
Of course, I do agree with what you said earlier, a blog is a very bad medium for developing an argument more thoroughly. But a book can often get away with portraying people who think differently in a very unfair light. In contrast, I can come onto say a cessationist blog and say something like “but charismatics DONT think that prophecy is on an equal with scripture and authoritative”. I cant do that with a book!

Tim
I would suggest that is more the function of a writer than a medium.

Adrian
Thats true to an extent, but there is nothing inherently interactive in a book format, indeed any kind of interaction has to be imported into it

Tim
I guess what I’m saying is that interactivity may not be what people are looking for. I would rather read a thorough explanation of a particular viewpoint and then read an opposing viewpoint rather than read both in a blog format.

Adrian
I guess, what I mean is that people are forced to interact with what other people are REALLY saying rather than the straw men we all are so guilty of erecting. To be quite honest, before I discovered otherwise through blogging I honestly thought that most if not all cessationists didn’t really believe in any sense of an experiential relationship with God for example. Bloggers from “the other side” have put me straight on that and many other points! Gosh. I am sounding like a blog evangelist arent I
Tim
You are! And I don’t think that is necessarily a bad thing.
Adrian
I am interested in the conversation aspect of blogging, but also the fact that its not entirely a free-for-all conversation
Adrian
For me it is somewhere between the spoken word and the written word, would you agree?
Tim
It combines aspects of both of those, yes. It has the interactivity of spoken conversation but is premised on arguments that are, hopefully, well-formulated and well-written.
Adrian
Weirdly, I often think of my blog posts as mini sermons, where I am declaring a point, but unlike sermons there is the opportunity for almost instant feedback. I think that there is something powerful in proclaiming, followed by an opportunity for discussion.
Tim
Feedback is not only an opportunity but an expectation with blogging.
Adrian
There is something very biblical about that
Tim
And yes, it can certainly be powerful.
Adrian
I think that we are in real danger in the modern church if we conclude that discussion between equals is the best and only way for truth to be explored, however
Tim
I think that you’ve touched on the greatest appeal of blogs. The beauty of blogs, and also the curse, is that any person can have a voice. That means that the reader must exercise great discernment, but it also means that the average person in the average congregation can have a voice within the church. I think it is a beautiful thing. But I also think there are issues that we must wrestle with, particularly in regards to teaching, the biblical qualifications of teachers, and so on.
Adrian
I certainly dont think blogging will ever replace preaching. I believe the task of the preacher is to declare the truth with great conviction (obviously moderating that conviction depending on the subject under discussion). The “thus says the Lord” aspect is crucial to preaching, it can never resound with quite the same strength on a blog. Preaching should only be done by those with a recognised call
Tim
Absolutely. I think there needs to be some discussion about the place of blogging along those lines. Some people have, for example, raised questions about the propriety of men reading theological blogs written by women.
Adrian
There is definitely a kind of blogging that is quite dangerous for just “anyone” to do. I think that the main issue surrounds the declaration of something as “Gods truth” If a blog is raising something as a discussion point that is one thing, but I for one am careful not to get my preaching form a blog! But I do like reading blogs written by preachers
Tim
Absolutely, and I assume most people would agree. As Mark Dever warned a week or so ago, blogging (writing to some extent and reading to a greater extent) needs to be supplementary to reading good books, studying Scripture, spending time in fellowship and so on.
Adrian
What do you feel are the other dangers of blogging?
Tim
As with any pursuit there is the danger of pride. Joe Carter wrote an article several months ago about being controlled by statistics and desiring influence and I think that resonated with many people. It is easy to become prideful. And of course there is the danger of teaching what is false. Anyone who blogs is, to some extent, a teacher and ought to read through the Scripture’s warnings to those who teach!
Adrian
Yeh, I know I have been there at points in the past when numbers got the better of me! These days weirdly the stats when I look at them have the opposite effect on me. I worry instead that I might be leading so many people astray……I think “Who am I that people read this drivell?” Do you ever feel like that?
Tim
I have never publicized my statistics. I do that primarily so people will not judge my site based on the traffic, whether they feel the actual number is a lot or a little.
Adrian
But I am sure you have looked at the numbers…..do you ever feel “O boy, what have I got myself into?”
Tim
When I stop to ponder the numbers I feel nothing. But when I understand that each number is a person, made in God’s image who is reading words I have written, I am humbled and sometimes terrified. Less so, of course, when I have written about social conventions regarding inviting oneself to another person’s house, but more so when I have written about matters of theology.
I often marvel that people read my site, but I suspect that is true of most bloggers and true even of many authors. It is very humbling to me that anyone would choose to take time from his busy life to share in my life through my site. But that is part of the attraction to a blog, isn’t it? It is a glimpse into another person’s life. It is much like peering through the window of a person’s house.
Adrian
Yeh
, and I guess we are back to where we were before. I know I sure love looking though your window Tim as do many! What do you think about the future of God blogs?
Tim
I don’t think we’ll see the number of God blogs fall off anytime soon. Blogging continues to increase dramatically and, almost by definition, Christians have a lot to say. So I would expect to see more and more Christians begin blogging. I also expect to see many higher profile Christians begin blogging. Just in the past few weeks we’ve seen Tim Keller, Mark Driscoll, C.J. Mahaney, and Mark Dever join the blogosphere. And I know that some people are pushing John MacArthur to begin a blog, though apparently he has enough trouble with email that he is unlikely to start blogging!
Adrian
I wonder if there will still be room for “nobodies” like you and me, or if we will retreat into the relative obscurity which we probably rightfully deserve?
Tim
Sure, I think there will be room for nobodies. The trouble with being a “somebody” is that the blog either tends to devolve into a circus of comments (imagine if Driscoll allowed comments) or the blog will not allow comments at all. There will always be an attraction to the “true” blogs that allow the interactivity that helps make blogging what it is.
I suppose the real question is what influence blogging will have on the church in the years to come. And I am not entirely sure of that. I suspect we will see Christian leaders arise from the ranks of the bloggers – people who had a blog before they pastored a large church or wrote their first book.
Adrian
Thats an interesting thought I guess. I wonder if we already know any of them? Theres a meme “God blogger most likely to “make it” in the real world?” Should I ask you for predictions? Perhaps not….
Tim
I don’t do memes! But I do think you will see people get their start in blogging. I would imagine they will have to turn to books and conferences and pulpits to really gain credibility. A question I have is whether or not these people will soon outrun their qualifications in terms of education and preparation. At this time I have no predictions, no.
Adrian
One of the things I have thought a lot about is the way that blogging tends to be a good way of sorting thousands of blogs into some kind of order
Adrian
The ranking system of the Blogdom of God is one example
Adrian
The blogs that tend to rise to the top (present company excepted) do seem by enlarge to have some degree of merit. But I also know that there are loads of great blogs that never seem to rise through the ranks. Do you believe in the notion of “the wisdom of crowds” some bloggers speak about?
Tim
I agree. There are some wonderful blogs that seem to “languish.” But we could as easily say the same of various Christians and their finances. If we understand that God is the true force behind the blogosphere we realize that there will not be and should not be parity. The responsibility of bloggers is to be faithful stewards of what God gives them, which in this case is people!
Adrian
yeah, that’s where it really gets scary for the blogs near the top of the pile. We are hear because God has put us here, and therefore will hold us accountable for what we do with our popularity. This is why I tend to want to use whatever popularity I have to give prominence to OTHER blogs or writers- eg in interviewing them.
Tim But, going back to what you just said, I am not sure what you mean by “the wisdom of crowds”?
Adrian
The wisdom of crowds is the notion that the decisions of a great number of people aggregated, especially if those decisions are in part determined by the decisions already made by others will often cause good decisions to be made. According to this model, instapundit is king because it is only right that he should be so
Tim
Then no, I would not believe in the wisdom of the crowds. I don’t know that the majority vote necessarily has a lot of relevance to the Christian life! Humans are far too predictable and fickle!
Adrian
I think that you are right there. Crowds can get it very right sometimes, but they can also get it very wrong!
Tim
I seem to recall what crowds did to Jesus!
Adrian
Yes, and perhaps we would be well to remember that the crowds that currently shower their links and visits on our blogs could quickly turn and crucify us!
Tim
I suppose they could. But I can honestly say that, as long as I was convicted by Scripture (and perhaps a few trusted friends) that I was correct, I would be fine with that. I have prayed that if I am ever in a position where I cannot give God all of the glory for anything that happens to or through my site, that either He take it from me or that I have the strength and wisdom to let it go.
Adrian
You are wise to pray like that. Actually the way that the god blogosphere can sometimes go in for almost public crucifixion of certain bloggers bothers me a great deal does it you?
Tim
The blogosphere is really just a group of sinful people, so sure, they can do great harm in singling out and smiting particular people or blogs. I would hope that people act on the basis of conviction and not just to follow a crowd.
Adrian
I think we must learn to follow both our conviction AND a heart of love that seeks to be winsome, would you agree? What we really need to do is learn to blog the truth in love!
Tim
I can’t disagree with that statement!
Adrian
Thats probably a good place to end. I really enjoyed this chat, lets do it again sometime!
Tim
Sounds good to me. It has been fun!

Tags:

The year in review

December 30, 2005 By Adrian Warnock

Its that time of the year when we look back, get all misty eyed and think about the year that was. This will probably be a long post, in it I will first reflect on the ridiculously flattering but also rather humbling level of readership that has come this way in 2005, then I will review the highlights of the blogging year for me. Its my chance to think about what I have liked about blogging this year- who knows you might find even some interesting posts you would like to go back and read. Flicking through the archives of someones blog can be very interesting, especially if the pages list only the titles (not the full posts) so you can quickly decide which ones if any seem of interest to you.

Running this blog has been an amazing experience for me this year for which I am very very grateful. I remain convinced that there are many Christian blogs you should be reading rather than this one, but a growing and to me ridiculously high number of you keep coming back. Thank you all so much for all your kindness to me.

Unlike Challies, thanks to the merciful kindness of a friend who hosts this site for free I dont have any concerns about the bandwidth implications of all this traffic, but I do have concerns about the implications for me and this blog as it is a fearsome thing to be potentially leading so many of you astray each month! I dont take a single reader for granted, and pray that each of you may be blessed by what you find here (or at least by what I link to!)

So what have the highlights of the year been for me on this blog? I did a similar post towards the middle of December last year, which highlighted some of my Calvinistic posts of 2004 it was entitled “It’s all about you Jesus“.

January

Who will forget the aftermath of the Tsunami washing around the Blogosphere- I asked “Why did science allow the tsunami?“. The Jerry Springer Opera fiasco was the first real forray of blogs into UK political matters – I subesquently claimed that the BBC had been “blogged”. I suspect that UK institutions will learn to fear the blog as much as their US counterparts soon and possibly even in 2006.

I was involved in my first major theological skirmish of the year concerning my coining of the term “neo-liberalism” to define those who consciously desire to change the Christian Church and its message to fit in with postmodernism. Meanwhile I did not do my attempt to prove that David Wayne and I were different people by carrying out an entire theological discussion with him in my own post “disagreeing with the Jollyblogger“. I also had the pleasure of discovering Nancy Pearcey and it really was a pleasure.

February

Much of this month was spent on the amazing storm that was generated from my wifes “simple gospel” post. It was suddenly obvious to me that many of the “God bloggers” were actually not sharing the same understanding I had of many of the fundementals of the faith, to the point that for some I was not evern sure they were Christians. This made me realise that contending for the faith online even if read largely by people claiming to be Christians was actually a form of evangelism. I should get my darling Andrée to blog more often……

March

I think the main lesson I learnt for me was that you simply cannot allow yourself to get fully sucked into every controversy you see online. I only posted a handful of breif posts on the Terry Shiavio situation. Meanwhile, I announced that my church was moving to a cinema, and it was a relatively quiet month.

April
I posted on what I believe true preaching is like, and a helpful discussion ensued between those who believe Sundays should largely be for believers and those who want to see preaching address both unbelievers and believers. This post was for me critical, and is something that helped me crystalise my own thinking on preaching. I loved the critiques and questions that this issue threw up. I also began blogging about the ESV and started to develop a social styles questionnaire.

May

The preaching debate culminated in a link to a blogotional post that detailed the extent of our preaching debate. I marked the 11-year anniversary of the Toronto phenomena by publishing for the first time an old article of mine on my blog that cateloges the history of the movement and precedents in church history.

The first major interview opportunity of the blog- with the ESV translators was also announced in May. For a while I would become a biblioblogger.

I also started what will no doubt be the longest running and most extensive series on this blog for a long time – “Churches that will change the world“. I am currently in a haitus on that one, but fully intend to come back to it – if not sooner the next time I get bloggers block! The series flowed out of a sermon which expresses my belief in what church is capable of.

I also did a series of posts on becoming a succesful blogger which was I think something of a turning point for me, as it was the point where I finally started to realise that this blog was actually remarkably more successful than it probably deserved to be, and that I really had to step up my efforts to help other blogs share some of the limelight which has surprisingly come my way.

June

The ESV interview did somewhat dominate this month, but more was forthcoming on social styles and the church and a handful of other posts got thrown in – one of which tackled the New Perspective on Paul.

I was somewhat carried on a wave of the amazing grace of the ESV people and the new readers I gained through that process. That kind of use of a blog for christian promotional activity is actually something I enjoy, provided I remain in the driving seat – so any marketing people out there drop me a line and I will see what we can do to help….

July

I dared to attenpt to engage the pyromaniac in a debate, and discovered what has since been something of a repeating pattern- he was strangely reticent to pick up the challenge. This puzzled me as it seemed

somewhat out of character for Phil Johnson. I also had the pleasure of meeting him for the first time after a decade of online correspondence. He was every bit as engaging and fun to be with as I imagined. I spent a few too many hours with a tool that shows how google “sees” the net. Who will forget the 7th July the day the UK was hit with homegrown sucide bombers?

August

Tamasin showed a great way with words which inspired first a blog post then a sermon on “what is love?” I tried guest bloggers whilst I was away on holiday and despite the wonderful efforts of some great bloggers, decided that this was goign to be a strictly Warnock-only zone from now on except for the comments section (at least for now!). And once more, the blogosphere plugged some of the gaps left by the mainstream media as the New Orleans disaster unfolded- what a year we had.

September

I blogged about my growing frustration with the inaccuracy of the mainstream media. I cant help but wonder whether blogs really will start to take their place even in the UK. I was thrilled to be able to report that Terry Virgo had preached at a UCCF conference and hint at all that represented. The God or Not carnival was launched to significantly less enthusiasm than I expected, and world mags theologica was also born.

October

The highlight of the whole month for me was landing an interview with one of my greatest heroes of the faith: CJ Mahaney. Meanwhile I was ganging up with his daughters to stir up a mini blogstorm on courtship (actually they were eager to dissipate said storm as quickly as possible)

November

The month started fittingly enough as it turned out with a slightly provocative little post entitled “Why not have a noisy time?“, much of the rest of the year’s blogging would revolve around the charismatic debate which this post prefigured. My posts on preaching with passion and continuing my story also skirted around the subject of the role of the Holy Spirit.

But it was two posts, one by Challies which I responded to in “Convergence or divergence over spirtual gifts and cessationism?” and one from pyromaniac to which I replied “Rubber prophecies prove nothing except some peoples gullibility” that rattled my cage and it seems many others to cause the charismatic/cessationist debate to ignite. There are so many posts on that subject you will really have to flick through the archive page to get a flavour of the debate from my side at least.

December

The charismatic debate continued right up to Christmas, but a couple of interludes during the month included a resurgance of the subject of Bible Translation , two interviews and a reposting of links to some old articles on counselling. All in all its been a great fun year!

One of the ongoing highlights of blogging this year has been the opportunity through Tim Challies to review some great Christian books – if anyone is a book marketeer out there and wants to send me a book to consider mentioning on my blog just drop me an email or approach Tim if you want a few of us to all blog a review.

I have also developed something of a taste for the “Blog interview” usually conducted via email so let me know who you think I should interview next!

Thank you once again. I pray that 2006 will be a great year for you my readers and that together we can continue to explore this still largely uncharted land called blogging.

Tags: article adrianw

Del.icio.us fun for bloggers

December 22, 2005 By Adrian Warnock

I am writing this post with the aid of some blogging technology which is new to me. I can see it is going to cause me lots of fun in the future, and you will see the effects around this blog a whole lot more. (HT: Jollyblogger who linked to The Best Web 2.0 software)

The exciting technology is Del.icio.us which has made its mark on my sidebar already, and I suspect may eventually take over all my blogroll requirements. It replaces the Blogrolling.com function, but does oh so much more than blogrolling can ever dream of doing!

The possibility is definitely there for it to run the various category based blogrolls that I have on my site -like the list of reformed charismatics for example. I am just looking at the best way to share the production of such lists with others. For now, if you want me to take a look at your blog and possibly include it in one of my lists of blogs why not join Delicious, add your site to it and in the category tag section put FOR:apwarnock as well as whatever other tags you think should apply. Its one sure way to get a busy bloggers attention!

Then there are some neat extensions to the Delicious concept which make it even more useful- The first is the Firefox extension which makes it possible to tag any webpage you are visiting – Think “Blogroll This” with steroids. This feature can be almost duplicated in Internet Explorer with the “buttons“

Then, for blogger users is the fantastic Blogger categorising and publishing script which requires firefox and greasemonkey to be installed on your computer but enables you to “tag” your posts for use in delicious and also technorati as you create them using blogger. The idea of greasemonkey is to change the behaviour of webpages you are visiting and it sure seems to work wonders!

Trust me, if you are a blogger and dont automate your blogroll you want to check this site out right away! It is very user-friendly and I look forward to the Christian Blogging community embracing this technology – it will help us find each other much more easily I am sure.

UPDATE
Try also video blogging for more information about blog automation and The several habits of Delicious users for a general introduciton

Tags:

Settling some old scores the old fashioned way

December 3, 2005 By Adrian Warnock

Many thanks to Jacob Hantla for a link to “Google Fight”. Its time to settle a few scores the old fashioned way. Step outside gentleman. Square up. Prepare to fight. Keep it clean boys…….

The fixtures

1. Reformed Charismatic vs Reformed Cessationist
2. Phil Johnson vs Michael Spencer
3. Jollyblogger vs Blogotional
4. Joe Carter vs Hugh Hewitt
5. ESV vs NIV
6. Adrian Warnock vs Tim Challies

Who will be the winners……?

——————————————————

Stop reading now if you want to avoid the spoilers

——————————————

The post match analysis

1. Reformed Charismatic vs Reformed Cessationist

Total domination by the charismatics – the poor old cessationists didnt stand a chance. Of course in some circles the fact that cessationism seems now to be a minority position at least online actually stands in its favour!

2. Phil Johnson vs Michael Spencer

Two heavyweight bloggers fought so furiously it seemed like one of them would knock the other out. Phil only just scraped through…..

3. Jollyblogger vs blogotional

Blogotional never really stood a chance in this match but he put up a surprisingly good fight

4. Joe Carter vs Hugh Hewitt

Well all I can say is poor Joe never stood a chance……

5. ESV vs NIV

There clearly is life in the old dog yet. I always liked to back the underdog

6. Adrian Warnock vs Tim Challies

Modesty forbids me to gloat or in any way comment on this result…….

Fallible Prophecy?

November 16, 2005 By Adrian Warnock

24 Comments

JOLLYBLOGGER has a helpful contribution to our debate on the charismatic view of prophecy. He explains Grudem’s view of NT prophecy and why he doesnt quite believe it. He concludes:

“When we call something ‘prophecy’ that is really my own interpretation of some spontaneous impression we are giving a greater weight to that impression/interpretation than it can carry. The same applies when we use phrases like ‘God told me.’ Calling my own spontaneous (and subjective by the way) impressions prophecy escalates them in certainty and authority. There is a world of difference in the statements ‘I think God may be leading me,’ and ‘God told me.’ There is a world of difference in saying ‘I have an impression that I ought to do so and so,’ and ‘I have received a word of prophecy.’ In both of those examples, the first statement identifies me as the speaker and the latter identifies God is the speaker. If I use the first kinds of statements there is no authority to them, they are not binding, it is up to me whether or not I act upon them, and there is no harm no foul if it turns out my impression was wrong (unless I act on it unwisely). If I use the second kind of statement there is a binding authority to them which I must act upon.

And so I won’t begrudge my charismatic friends their spontaneous impressions. I have met people who tell me of spontaneous impressions they have received and acted upon to great benefit, and I praise God for that. I have met others who regularly have spontaneous impressions that are completely off base and sometimes ludicrous, yet they believe them with all their heart because they are sure they are words from God, words of prophecy. But when you have your spontaneous impression, please just call it a spontaneous impression, not a word from God or a prophecy. “

I can certainly see his point to a degree. I do feel that us charismatics need to be careful not to rely too heavily on our prophetic impressions. But, I am not quite convinced he has debunked the notion I have put forward that NT prophets are not always 100% infallible. It is of note that the scriptures urge us to judge individual prophecies not the prophet. Thus, it is possible to have a mistaken prophecy which is either totally wrong or at least wrong in most if not all of the details. That does not a false prophet make in my humble opinion.

If we ever get onto speaking about Apostles, then I suspect we will have a similar discussion. Should we speak of apostles today who carry out the non-scripture-writing function of the apostles in the new testament? I would say we should. No doubt many would say, there are people who do similar work to the appostles but instead lets call them something else.

Its funny how many of my cessationist brothers are happy to call someone an apostle or prophet after they have died, just not while they are a live. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Spurgeon, Whitefield, Wesley etc are often described as Apostles or prophets of their times…….

The cessationist who concerns me is the one who does not believe that there is any sense in which we have a relational experience of God today. I beleive the bible promises a gift of the holy spirit which has not been rescinded and which causes us to know Gods work in our lives experientially. If any of my cessationist friends wish to dispute that, it concerns me a whole lot more than what we want to call our fallible impressions.

Meanwhile elsewhere, Shawn seems to hold to the jollyblogger line – accepting of impressions but reluctant to call them prophecy since he believes prophecy to be infallible.

Blogotional has a great post which will get almost the last word of this post :

Why are most of us reformed types so afraid of the Holy Spirit……..I more than anyone know the dangers of charismatic thought run amuck — I have seen it result in literal death, to people I love dearly…..What upsets me so about this issue is that the best way to fix the problem is not in picking sides but in fusing them. Sound doctrine is the best way to keep charismatic experience in check and charismatic experience is the best way to keep the reformed from becoming lifeless, or worse legalist……..A fully cessasionist viewpoint simply denies reality — there is too much experiential evidence to the contrary, but experience alone is a dangerous thing. Denial of the experience is; however, equally dangerous.

It is not purely coincidental that virtually everthing that is wrong in the reformed/evangelical movement is not wrong in the charismatic movement and vice-versa. Such tells me that the truth and a genuine faith lies in the middle, not in picking one or the other, or in failing to pick.

People like me who cry out for convergence in our time, with each of us seeking to learn the best from one another will rejoice to read a post like that.

Convergence or divergence over spirtual gifts and cessationism?

November 5, 2005 By Adrian Warnock

Challies nails his colours to the mast on the charisma debate, making it clear where he stands in a review of a book by Sam Storms which advocates a convergence of Reformed people and Charismatics. As one who has already converged I think I would find this book interesting. Here’s what Tim said:

“While I admire much of Storms’ ministry and have benefited greatly from reading some of his previous writings, and this book was useful in helping me understand how charismatic teachings are blended with Reformed soteriology, it that did little to challenge me or to convince me to set aside my cessationist beliefs. I suppose it is a bit ironic that Storms seems to fall back into the greatest criticism Calvinists have towards charismatic teachings: very few people offer substantial scriptural proof for them and rely instead on experience as the final arbiter of truth. Many arguments in this book seem to boil down to, ‘you will just know when you experience it’ or ‘disbelief is usually the case with such events until they happen to you.’ I am thankful to see Calvinists and charismatics who agree on the foundational doctrines of the faith coming ‘Together for the Gospel,’ but see no biblical foundation to support the type of convergence Storms suggests.”

Two thoughts spring to mind. Firstly I had no idea before today that Tim was definitely a cessationist although I supose if I had thought much about it I would have guessed as much. Why is it that whilst blogging some of these issues seem to matter a whole lot less than they do in the real world – at least until a debate is struck.

Secondly, it fascinates me that Tim feels the main argument charismatics use is from experience. Bizarrely I have always felt that experience, or rather the lack of it is the main argument used by cessationists. I still havent seen a single expositonal point that I feel has any real weight from the other side. O, for sure we can all be guilty of using bad experiences or good experiences as the arbiter, but I honestly believe that if I had never experienced any of the so called charismata I would still have been convinced that they were available today from scripture and would have spend my life following Pauls command to earnestly desire them.

It seems that a debate is brewing. Pyromaniac and Challies in one corner, me in the other (maybe someone else will spring to my defence I hope!) . I hope Jollyblogger will act as referee. I hope that Pyro and Challie will be able to get a chance to interact with some of my old material on this subject (from a debate with jollyblogger) which I linked to in my reaction to pyromaniacs charismatic baiting– it could all make for some interesting blogging. I only hope it doesnt lead to a divergence in the Christian Blogosphere!

Rubber prophecies prove nothing except some peoples gullibility

November 4, 2005 By Adrian Warnock

PyroManiac has been at the game of charismatic-bating. Citing examples of clearly erroneous prophecy he implies but then denies arguing that the charismatic gifts have ceased – although one gets the feeling that is coming up next! The comments were not as voluminous as I thought they would be, but one of them tickled me pink:

“If I remember correctly, Martin Lloyd Jones believed in the gifts for today. C.J. Mahaney, Adrian Warnock, John Piper, highly respected men believe in the gifts for today. I don’t see any of these guys going off on strange tangents with weird words of prophecy.”

To see my name in a list of such greats as the rest of these men made my year! It is absolutely fearsome the way that blogging can take an obscure preacher from London and, at least in the mind of one commentator, place him in a list like that! Perhaps I should stop blogging now before I lead someone seriously astray!

Anyway, on the subject of prophecy, I have little to add to what I already said in my cessationism debate with Jollyblogger, in which he totally capitulated whilst listing all our previous posts in the following manner (I think his tongue was somewhat in his cheek at the time!).

If you read Adrian’s post you see that he references a prophecy that was given in reference to C. H. Spurgeon. In a private IM conversation with Adrian I told him that I give up, he wins. After all, in theological debate a Spurgeon quote settles any issue. A Spurgeon quote is like four aces in poker, its like sinking a sixty foot putt for eagle on the 18th at Augusta (or St. Andrews) to win the Masters (British Open), its Michael Jordan’s buzzer beater that defeats the Jazz in the NBA finals – in short, a Spurgeon quote settles any theological argument.

Actually David did go on to make some interesting points, and the conclusion we came to was that just as there are indeed extreme charismatics (the loonies?) there are also moderate cessationists who at least recognize that God is real and active today and it is possible to experience him in some way. I will be interested to find out if pyromaniac is what I call an extreme cessationist or not.

I fear for some today that they might find themselves directly opposing the teaching of the bible which in the ESV says: So, my brothers, earnestly desire to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. (1 Corinthians 14:39 ) and speaks of those “having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power” (2 Tim 3:5)

Full assurance of salvation, Holy Spirit Baptism, Heb 6 and 1 John

June 3, 2005 By Adrian Warnock

1 Comment

This is the kind of blogging I like best- me bouncing off David Wayne. Right now he’s posting about the security of our salvation and how that relates to Heb 6. Interesting that like me he went through a quiet spell recently and has now decided to serialise some sermon material (see my “what kind of church changes the world” series)

I linked the other day to an introduction to the introduction, one of the many similarities between David and I is that we both like to creep up on you slowly……

He has now posted his introduction to Heb 6 and leaps straight in with the following:

“When the original writer put this passage in the letter of Hebrews he wanted his readers to be sweating, not wiping the sweat away from their brows and saying whew, glad that doesn’t apply to me.

One of the things we don’t talk about as much as we should is the fact that there are many false professions of faith, there are many counterfeit Christians.

It is true that, if you are truly saved, you cannot lose your salvation, but it is equally true that there are many who think they are saved and who aren’t. This writer, whoever he was, was genuinely concerned about the spiritual condition of those to whom he was writing. He feared that this may have been a church full of counterfeit Christians who professed faith but did not possess faith……..

This is a warning passage of Scripture. Warning passages are there for the purpose of calling you to stop and re-examine yourself, not just to skip over lightly assuming it doesn’t apply to you. “

This is all good stuff, but I worry that although there are indeed those who like David seems to be addressing need to wake up and realise that they are not christians there are also those who need to quit worrying already. My understanding (correct me if I am wrong) is that some great puritans went to their death bed concerned that they may not have made a genuine profession of faith. Whatever our understanding of these warning passages, they must not undermine true assurance of salvation.

David does quote in his second part many of the eternal security passages and concludes “The fact that you have believed in Jesus is not a cause of your salvation, it is an evidence of your salvation. You believe because God has chosen you, God doesn’t choose to save you because you have believed.” But, the question remains, how can I KNOW that I am one of the chosen ones? David states “Yes, we can have assurance of salvation, but this assurance is not based upon looking to some past experience.” I would argue that our assurance is largely based on the current experience of being IN Christ that the Spirit grants us, and that those who do not know the infilling of the Spirit consciously will always struggle with this question.

A muslim blogger has picked up on the apparent undermining of any sense of finality about salvation in Davids first posts. As a result Davids third post focusses on assurance but sadly is entirely devoid of any notion of experience, focusing instead on some outward signs of the inward reality. As important as these are, it is the inward reality that is more crucial. I like David’s summary of 1 John as a book to distinguish true Christians from false, but he seems to have missed some of the clearly experiential concepts which litter the book, let me list them:

“so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ. And we are writing these things so that our joy may be complete” 1 John 1:3-4
“…If we say we have fellowship with him….” 1 John 1:6
“..we have come to know him…” 1 John 2:3
“…whoever says he abides in him…” 1 John 2:6
“I write to you, fathers, because you know him who is from the beginning” 1 John 2:14
“But you have been anointed by the Holy One, and you all have knowledge” 1 John 2:20
“But the anointing that you received from him abides in you, and you have no need that anyone should teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about everything and is true and is no lie, just as it has taught you abide in him. And now, little children, abide in him, so that when he appears we may have confidence and not shrink from him in shame at his coming” 1 John 2:27-28
“And by this we know that he abides in us, by the Spirit whom he has given us” 1 John 3:24
“By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God” 1 John 4:2-3
“By this we know that we abide in him and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit.” 1 John 4:13
“And the Spirit is the one who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth” 1 John 5:6
“…so that we may know him who is true; and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ” 1 John 5:20

Notice, that on many occasions the relational language is immediately qualified with a statement which kind of says “You better show me outward evidence that what you say is happening inwardly really is” so I am not saying that David was wrong in his assessment of assurance, merely incomplete.

Before Christmas I was planning on posting a series on this very subject, but kind of got distracted with all the fuss about the simple gospel posts. I argued that the certainty of our salvation could be found in our relationship with christ and what he has done for us. I argued that the five points of calvinism all point us to Jesus, and because of my charismatic slant I focussed also on the experiential side which is in my view often missing from good calvinists, and appears to be a biblical mark of the genuiness of our salvation.

I believe that the experience of receiving the baptism of the Holy Spirt can settle the question of whether we are saved or not once and for all, as we receive the deposit that guarantees our inheritance and the love of God is poured out in our hearts.

“In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.” (Eph 1:13-4)

“hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us” Romans 5:5