David Westerfield

Gospel. Culture. Technology. Music.


Progressive Secularists Know in their Heart that God Exists

Progressive secularists know in their heart that God exists (Rom 1:21). Every time they moralize about racism, slavery, torture and corporate corruption they presuppose His existence. For if there is no ultimate justice then all of their moralizing would unintelligible because they have no point of reference… no objective standard to which they can appeal to in order to reveal how they know their morality has any basis. If they were consistent, it would mean that genocide was no different than a day with the family at Disneyland. We must gracefully but repeatedly take the time to ask them how they KNOW their view is true and what basis they have for declaring Christianity perverted and immoral.

– John Hendryx, Founder, Monergism.com

One verse that nails down Limited Atonement

As I was reading Hebrews 10 last night, I came across a verse I’ve read many times, but thought I’d comment on. The verse is verse 14, which states, “For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.” In other words, by the single offering, blood atoning, propitiatory sacrifice of Christ, He has perfected (past tense, i.e. it happened in history) for all time the very people who are being (present tense) sanctified (made holy). His sacrifice was not a potential sacrifice. His sacrifice accomplished something objectively, for certain people, namely those who are being sanctified now, i.e. believers. This work is something that has happened to them, not by their initiation per se, but by His own perfect, infinite power and work on the cross in particular, as stated here. His work accomplished the very perfecting necessary to bring people into heaven. However, not everyone is perfected. Therefore His sacrifice was made for particular persons, namely the remnant, chosen by His grace (Ephesians 1 expands upon this).

Young Moving to the City Centers for the Foreseeable Future? Think Again

For years I’ve heard the constant theme that my and younger generations will be city dwellers for the foreseeable future. However, tonight I came across an interesting podcast by Albert Mohler who spoke with a guy named Joel Kotkin, recognized for his trends forecasting. In the discussion they had, Kotkin indicated that this trend isn’t going to continue for very long. Why? Young people get married, get settled, and start having kids. City-centers aren’t conducive to raising family’s but the suburbs are. And this is where young people are already beginning to move. Check out the podcast (hover over link and click play): http://albertmohler.com/media/audio/totl/Podcast/Thinking_In_Public_Joel_Kotkin.mp3

Also, check out an article recently written by Kotkin: http://www.joelkotkin.com/content/00444-why-america%E2%80%99s-young-and-restless-will-abandon-cities-suburbs

Things You Must Believe if You’re a Premillennialist

If you are a Premillennialist (whether Dispensationalist or not), there are several things you must necessarily believe:

  • You must necessarily believe that physical death will continue to exist beyond the time of Christ’s second coming.
  • You must necessarily believe that the natural creation will continue, beyond the time of Christ’s second coming, to be subjected to the curse imposed by the fall of man.
  • You must necessarily believe that the New Heavens and New Earth will not be introduced until 1,000 years subsequent to the return of Christ.
  • You must necessarily believe that unbelieving men and women will still have the opportunity to come to saving faith in Christ for at least 1,000 years subsequent to his return.
  • You must necessarily believe that unbelievers will not be finally resurrected until at least 1,000 years subsequent to the return of Christ.
  • You must necessarily believe that unbelievers will not be finally judged and cast into eternal punishment until at least 1,000 years subsequent to the return of Christ.

Amillennialists don’t see these beliefs being taught in Scripture.

Sam Storms

From Monergism.com’s eschatology page on Premillennialism: http://www.monergism.com/directory/link_category/Eschatology/Millennial-Views/Dispensational-Premillennialism/

Finally Found a Term to Describe What America is Unfortunately Becoming

Kleptocracy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kleptocracy

From Wikipedia: “Kleptocracy is a term applied to a government subject to control fraud that takes advantage of governmental corruption to extend the personal wealth and political power of government officials and the ruling class (collectively, kleptocrats), via the embezzlement of state funds at the expense of the wider population, sometimes without even the pretense of honest service. The term means “rule by thieves”. Not an official form of government such as a democracy, republic, monarchy, or theocracy; a kleptocracy is rather a pejorative for a government perceived to have a particularly severe and systemic problem with the selfish misappropriation of public funds by those in power.”

Max Keiser describes it quite well in his usual over-the-top rhetoric in this edition of the Keiser Report. Hilarious … and not, all at the same time.

The Breakdown Draws Near – Chris Martenson

Missional-ism: What is the Mission of the Church?

(C) by http://www.martin-liebermann.de

(Resources at the bottom of the page pertaining to this topic)

Over the past several years, the missional movement has picked up steam and has become a common modus operandi for ministry in mainstream evangelicalism, even within aspects of my own church. The term ‘missional’ has taken on many different definitions depending on the point of view. Tim Keller uses it one way, Dan Kimball, Dallas Willard and others [Doug Pagitt, McLaren] use it quite another.

[CORRECTION and update: apparently I’m wrong about Kimball and Keller having different views on missional-ism. Oddly enough, after just writing this, Keller and Kimball are on the same page it seems after releasing a joint manifesto along with some others such as Ed Stetzer and J.D. Greear: http://www.missionalmanifesto.net/ … so I retract that one part and added a couple of other names to show the contrast in views. In the manifesto, they make this statement: “It is first necessary to be clear about what missional does not mean. Missional is not synonymous with movements attempting to culturally contextualize Christianity, implement church growth, or engage in social action. The word missional can encompass all of the above, but it is not limited to any one of these.” And I’m glad they have said this. There is still the concern though about “mission creep” in this movement, that it can inadvertently become those things. I digress.]

Regardless, at the heart of the drive behind missional ecclesiology is a legitimate concern that the Western world at large needs to be re-evangelized, that believers need to go out as missionaries, as it were, and that we need to be reaching out more to the lost in both word and deed. I certainly share those concerns.

Five Solas, Each Described in One Sentence

Taken from the St. Andrew’s Chapel website (R.C. Sproul’s church).

Sola Scriptura
Bible is the sole written divine revelation and alone can bind the conscience of believers absolutely.

Sola Fide
Justification is by faith alone. The merit of Christ imputed to us by faith is the sole ground of our acceptance by God, by which our sins are remitted.

Solus Christus
Christ is the only mediator through whose work we are redeemed.

Sola Gratia
Our salvation rests solely on the work of God’s grace for us and in us.

Soli Deo Gloria
To God alone belongs the glory.

The Gospel-Centeredness of John Calvin – The Gospel as the Foundation Unto Progressing in Holiness

Excerpted from the Institutes of the Christian  Religion, Book III, Chapter XV, Section 5, Christ as the Sole Foundation, As Beginner and Perfecter.

The below section from Calvin’s Institutes is an excellent summary of the foundation of Gospel-centered sanctification (progressing and maturing in holiness). Any other application of teaching apart from this foundation is basing our progression in the faith, at some level, upon our own working and toiling to “be good” (which is an oxymoron in light of Scripture), as opposed to submitting ourselves to His sovereign working in us of what is already true of us by the declaration of our justification before God’s throne. Living in light of what is already true of us in Christ is itself the motivation unto holiness. As Albert Mohler pointed out in his talk from the Together for the Gospel conference in 2010, “The Reformation was all about the recovery of The Gospel; the means of reforming the church was The Gospel.” This excerpt from Calvin is a perfect summary of what this means.

Only by a constant orientation to the Gospel, in particular that Christ is our righteousness (having none of our own with which to offer God in exchange for the eternal life of our souls), are we going to progress in holiness. Any other teaching is using law as a means unto progression in holiness which results in burnout, deadness, legalism, and oddly enough, legalism itself actually winds up resulting in the worst forms of license. The law was given by God to expose how far we fall short, not an instrument to motivate us unto holiness. It is an instrument whose design is to bring us low, to bring us into humility before God, so that we see how great the love of Christ is in the Gospel, that He Himself fulfilled the law in our place, died our death in our place, and rose again to seal, give life, and confirm all He has accomplished in our place. He is righteousness. Calvin shows us just how great this Gospel is and how it is the only true motivator unto holiness.

“…Christ, when we acknowledge Him, is given us to be our righteousness [1 Cor. 1:30]. He alone is well founded in Christ who has perfect righteousness in himself: since the apostle [Paul] does not say that He was sent to help us attain righteousness but Himself to be our righteousness [1 Cor. 1:30]. Indeed, he states that “He has chosen us in Him” from eternity “before the foundation of the world,” through no merit of our own “but according to the purpose of divine good pleasure” [Eph. 1:4-5, cf. Vg.]; that by His death we are redeemed from condemnation of death and freed from ruin [cf. Col. 1:14, 20]; that we have been adopted unto Him as sons and heirs by our Heavenly Father [cf. Rom. 8:17; Gal. 4:5-7]; that we have been reconciled through His blood [Rom. 5:9-10]; that, given into His protection, we are released from the danger of perishing and falling [John 10:28]; that thus ingrafted into Him [cf. Rom. 11:19] we are already, in a manner, partakers of eternal life, having entered in the Kingdom of God through hope. Yet more: we experience such participation in Him that, although we are still foolish in ourselves, He is our wisdom before God; while we are sinners, He is our righteousness; while we are unclean, He is our purity; while we are weak, while we are unarmed and exposed to Satan, yet ours is that power which has been given Him in heaven and on earth [Matt. 28:18], by which to crush Satan for us and shatter the gates of hell; while we still bear about with us the body of death, He is yet our life. In brief, because all His things are ours and we have all things in Him, in us there is nothing. Upon this foundation, I say, we must be built if we would grow into a holy temple to the Lord [cf. Eph. 2:21].”

Question From a Friend on Hell and What Christ Underwent at the Cross

Hey David! I have a theological question for you that has sprung from a few discussions I’ve had with a friend if you have some time. The question is whether or not Jesus went to hell when he suffered and died on the cross. My understanding is that He experienced hell in the spiritual sense- meaning complete separation from God – (“My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?”). If this is correct, does heaven and hell, in the physical sense, exist right now or not until the final judgment?

Another Verse in a Really Long Song – How Deep Postmodernism Has Made Inroads

“Brian McLaren and his ilk of the emerging church [i.e. Rob Bell] … all it is is 19th, 20th century liberalism in a postmodern dress. There isn’t anything new in it at all. And the only reason they can get away with it is because people are so a-historical and ignorant of theologies of the past.” – David Robertson, Emergent Calvinism (MP3). One of the biggest surprises with this Rob Bell universalism/inclusivism controversy isn’t that Bell is affirming universalism. The response of evangelicals, particularly younger generations, including mine, and their response has been the most surprising aspect.

However, I shouldn’t be that surprised. It’s what happened to J. Gresham Machen in the 1920’s and 30’s in which he received the most push back from the moderates of theological liberalism who were willing to tolerate individuals who wholesale rejected anything resembling Biblical Christianity. We are now back at one of those points.

Page 28 of 118

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén