The state of the IMB

Have you ever heard the story of William Carey, who some consider the father of modern missions? He was a missionary to India in the late 18^th and early 19^th centuries. He accomplished many things by the time he died including translating the entire Bible into Bengali and portions of the Bible into more than 40 different languages.

Or what about a missionary by the name of David Brainerd? In the mid-1700’s he was a missionary to the American Indians. Brainerd was a close friend of Jonathan Edwards during the time now known as the Great Awakening. In 1746, Brainerd was part of an “awakening” among the natives. In less than a year the congregation of his native church had grown to over 130 Christian Indians.

What do these two missionaries have to do with the state of the IMB? They both would have been rejected! William Carey’s wife Dorothy did not feel called to minister in India. In fact, Carey was prepared to leave her in England. It was only due to a delay in his departure that Carey was able to plead with his wife and convince her to go with him. According to IMB rules, the husband and the wife must feel the calling into missions.

David Brainerd on the other hand would have been rejected for a couple of other reasons. First, he was expelled from Yale for criticizing a faculty member and second, he had Tuberculosis. I’m not sure if getting expelled from college will result in rejection from the IMB, but I do know that having a life threatening illness will. By the way, Brainerd finally died from TB in the home of Jonathan Edwards at the age of 29.

These are two examples of great men of God who would have been rejected by the IMB. What does that tell us? Have we allowed it to become too influenced by secular business practices? Are we too worried about protecting our assets? Do we have as much faith as the Christians who have come before us?

My point is not so much to bash the IMB as to ask tough questions that will help us reevaluate the process of appointing missionaries. What do you think?

MMA for the glory of God????

Last week I had a wonderful opportunity to go see my cousin fight in a MMA competition. I say wonderful because my cousin lives in West Palm Beach and it is very rare that I get to see him. Also, I am a big fan of unusual competitive sports, especially ones that have a greater risk of injury (e.g. Rodeo, and MMA). After watching my cousin win in the third round by tap-out due to a brutal arm-bar (he broke the guys arm). I was pumped to say the least. However, I do have a theological question that came out of this experience. I will just post the question with the hope that maybe some readers will make an attempt to answer the question or at least start some dialog. Should a Christian take part in a sport where the goal is to cause as much injury to your opponent as possible? {I am thinking specifically about the image of God.} Is it possible for a Christian to compete in this sport for the glory of God? I would like to throw something else out there, my buddy that graduated from RTS in Orlando told me there was a preaching professor there that fights in competitions much like this one.
What do you think?

Would you please not talk.

I am sure if you are honest you have been in a Seminary class where there is always one or two people who feel as if their calling in life is to ask as many questions, or make as many comments as possible. Currently I have two classes where a "bubba" can be found. "Bubba" is a term coined by a professor here at NOBTS to describe these type of people (props to one of my fellow students for teaching me this term). Seminary is a place to learn and students should ask question as part of the learning process. However, a single student should not be allowed to take up a majority of the time dedicated to the learning process. For example, just the other day in a class that meets for 110 minutes one person took 1/10 of the time talking about absolutely nothing. I have a general rule, no more than 3-5 questions or comments per semester. I would give anything if the "Bubbas" of the Seminary world would adopt such a rule. Thinking about this has prompted me to post this diagram of a chart that will help in evaluating if one should ask a question or make a comment in class. I am not sure where this chart came from. If anyone know the origin of it please let me know. If you have one of these people in your class feel free to make a copy and personally hand it to them. It will make you feel much better. Just be sure to do it out of love for the person and the education process.

Sabbath Rest????

Friday night I attended a Reformed Jewish service as part of a requirement for a class at NOBTS. The experience was quite unique and interesting. If one ever finds free time on a Friday night I would suggest attending.
Let me try to set the scene:
Imagine opening your Hebrew Bible and trying to sing through a couple of Psalms. Yeah, just what I though, I must be crazy. Well that is just what happened. Of course they have a transliteration for you to use, as if that makes things eaiser. Well needless to say I stuck out like a sore thumb. The singing went on for at least 30 minutes, along with some candle lighting and a couple of congregational prayers. The Rabbi gave a little talk about being religious, then more singing and prayers. The service ceased as abruptly as it had started.
The theme, if you will, of the service was a welcome of Sabbath rest. As I followed along in the worship book they provided I noticed that each segment of prayers and song revolved around the people thanking YHWH for a certain period of rest in their history. Here is the order: Creation, Exodus, possession of Canaan, Davidic Kingdom, and future rest. My initial thoughts were on the uniqueness and respect they had for their history. Although, I did read in a footnote in the book that they (Reformed Jews) had, because of theological reasons, replaced the idea of a personal Messiah with that of a mere idea of Messiah. Honestly, this broke my heart.
Later in the evening when I was writing an assessment of the service for class, I was struck by another thought, that not only broke my heart by crushed it beyond belief. So here is my theological/biblical insight.
There are few books of the Bible that I am overly familiar with. Two of these are Hebrews and Romans. Hebrew chapter four was what led to a devastation of my heart. In this chapter the writer (according to Dr. Patterson, that would be Luke) is warning Christians not miss the rest promised by God (Heb. 4.1). If you follow the chapter you will find that this warning is accomplished by the author mentioning a period in the history of Israel when they thought they had rest, but then quoting an OT text showing they really didn't have true rest. A key verse would be 4.6, "Since therefore it remains for some to enter it, and those who formerly received the good news failed to enter because of disobedience." All I can say is WOW! Here were these Jewish people practicing their cold dead ritualism, thinking their people had rest, and that they will likewise have rest in the future. For class I was suppose to make note of how they could improve, in this case their ritualism. My answer, they can't. Not until they see and embrace Jesus Christ as their Messiah.
Just in case we are too quick to point a finger of shame at them, remember Romans 11.7,11,18,20 "What then? Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking... So I ask, did they stumble in order that they might fall? By no means! Rather through their trespass salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel jealous... Do not be arrogant toward the branches. If you are, remember it is not you who support the root, but the root that supports you. They were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand fast through faith... So do not become proud, but stand in awe."
Please, brothers pray for these people and thousands like them. May God call some of us to go to them, not as arrogant Gentiles, but rather as passionate believers in the fact that God desires the children of Abraham to know their Messiah.

New Testament Theology

I just finished reading the introduction and chapter 9 in Tom Schreiner's forthcoming New Testament Theology: Magnifying God in Christ
It can be pre-ordered from Amazon. Anyone familiar with Schreiner knows he is an A-class scholar and Southern Baptist should be proud to call him one of their own.
It seems that Schreiner has engaged a range of scholarship in his research and production of this book. Among the many options available for writing a New Testament Theology he has taken a thematic approach. His defense and reasons for taking this approach are both insightful as well as rooted in the need for developing a biblical theology. I totally agree with him, that biblical theology is important and in particular need in the age in which we live. It is important to put forth and teach the metanarrative of the Bible.
I am sure when the book is released in May it will become an instant hit with pastors, laity, scholars, and students of the Bible.
Suggestion: be sure to get a first printing.

Its Voting Season!

In a recent conversation some one told me, “God votes for you, the Devil votes against you and you cast the deciding vote.” I’ve heard this statement before, but I never really thought about it all that much. Maybe because it is smack dab in the middle of the presidential primaries or maybe because of conversations I’ve had at seminary. At any rate, I’ve been pondering the validity of the voting analogy. I decided in order to make sense of my thoughts; I would type them out and submit them to public scrutiny.

So here’s what we’re saying, the Devil’s vote = 33%, your vote = 33% and God’s vote = 33%. Put your theological leanings aside and let’s take a look at what the implications of this old saying are.

The Devil’s vote – Can the Devil’s vote be counted as the Devil’s vote? According to the Biblical narrative of Job, the Devil had to ask for permission in order to wreck Job’s life. More specifically, God gave him power over everything except Job’s life, including wealth, health and family. Would I be going out on a hermeneutical limb by saying that the Devil can’t do anything apart from what God gives him permission to do? If this is true, ‘ole Satan must have permission in order to vote against you. If this is the case, is his vote valid? Does this essentially cancel out his vote?

What about your vote? If we go along with the argument that the Satan really doesn’t have a vote, that brings the total percentage to God’s vote = 66% and your vote = 33%. That seems like a landslide no matter how you look at it. Looking at it from another angle, do we really want to say that God’s vote is equal to my vote? Let’s see, God is the omniscient, omnibenevolent, omnipresent creator of the universe, and then there’s me, who is a created being who’s very existence is dependant on God. No matter how we look at this it seems that the weight of God’s vote is increasing and every one else’s is decreasing.

I’m sure that the Electoral College figures into this somehow but I just can’t put my finger on it.

Dricoll's Greatest Sin

Against my better judgment I must link this:
The real problem with Mark Driscoll.