Ohio: Truly the Heart of It All!

While some people think that I am weird for my new attention to inciting Ohio state pride (not Ohio State pride—I’m actually a Michigan fan), I believe that I have good reason. Many other states have pride about their state (some more than others, some weirder than others). Some are proud that their state was one of the original 13 and that their state helped gain America’s independence (i.e. South Carolina). Others are proud because they can fly their state flag as high as the US flag and could form their own nation if they wanted to (yea Texas, I’m talking about you). There are many reasons given for being proud of one’s state, but I think that if we logically weighed the facts (that is, without allowing attachment issues and overboard emotions weigh in our decision), Ohio, that great state that is round on the outside and ‘hi’ in the middle, is indeed the greatest state—“The Heart of It All!”

Let me first start by mentioning the fact that Ohio is well named as being the “heart,” since it is somewhat heart shaped.

But let’s really get into it (this is going to be off of the top of my head, so it won’t be very exhaustive).

Ohio has at least 6 major (decently) cities (the three “C’s”, Cleveland, Columbus, and Cincinnati, Akron, Toledo, and Dayton). Ohio has every type of major sports team (2 baseball, 2 football, 1 basketball, 1 hockey, 1 soccer, etc). It also has one large lake and one of the major US rivers (Erie and the Ohio). It also has everything from foothills to extremely flat plains.

I must also mention that Ohio has at least 3 international airports within its borders. It also has 4 zoos, at least 3 major amusement parks (Cedar Point—the world’s greatest, Geauga Lake, and Paramount’s King’s Island (which has the world’s 2 largest wooden roller coasters—nobody else would dare try to put its customers through such pain).

Ohio is either first or second when it comes to the number of US Presidents to come from a state (I’ve heard VA has had more, but Ohio wasn’t one of the original 13, so that’s pretty good!). We have also had Neil Armstrong, John Glenn, Drew Carey (had to slip him in somewhere), the Wright brothers, Thomas Edison, and a host of other extremely important persons. We also have the Pro Football Hall of Fame, the Rock N’ Roll Hall of Fame, a really nice art museum in Cleveland, the world’s 1^st and 3^rd largest vacuums, our own islands, 2 Cosi (Cosis?), and what I’m pretty sure is America’s largest university (OSU is at least very close). And the U of Akron is known for its Polymer Science and Akron used to be huge in tires (and blimps). There is also the fact that Ohioans (for the most part—though we too have been affected by the fall—cf. Southern Ohio or parts of Northern Ohio) speak correct American English and without any accent (Illinois, Indiana, and Michigan however can make this same claim). And, Ohio is a ‘swing state.’ In other words, crucial elections are often decided by Ohio (Ohio had a huge part in the last two).

Ohio also has one of the top 5 symphony orchestras in the hemisphere, the Cleveland Orchestra. Plus, the Cleveland Institute of Music and the Oberlin Conservatory are world famous music schools. Akron is also home to one of the two largest TubaChristmas concerts, averaging about 600 each year.

What other state can claim to have both Ernest Angsley (sp?) and Rod Parsley? We have the world’s second largest Jesus statue (the Solid Rock Church). Mormonism took off in Ohio, and we have the Way International (okay, so all of this isn’t something to be too proud about, but at least we can claim it).

There’s actually more about Ohio than I either have the time to write about or that you would be interested in reading. But I think that that is enough for now.

Yes, Ohio truly is the heart of it all! But there is one more thing about Ohio that I must mention.

There is no other state that is truly able to claim that they experience all four seasons…in one day.

Read more »

A Happy Birthday Post to Leslie Follmar

Happy Birthday Leslie! I just thought everyone should know so that they could post comments on your weblog and send you all sorts of pictures of you with famous theologians. I hope that you have a great birthday and that you enlighten us all on how your birthday/birthday weekend go.

Read more »

A Birthday Shout out to McAndrews!

Yes folks, it's that day of the year again...the time when Andy, in his Irish rage and Southern Ohio disposition celebrates his birthday (if you know Andy, you understand what I mean).

Here is a short, and definitely not exhaustive list of what Andy will be doing/has done today:

1) Lay around all day...for reasons I will not mention due to how they would demean Andy.

2) Open gifts which include a tooth brush (seriously, "tooth" not "teeth"), locks from his cousin's mullet, and some of that "Special Brew" he always drinks (I'm referring to either Vanilla Coke or Coffee)

3) Do the Waverly ("A-hult")

4) Enter the domain of the two headed tortoise

5) Receive all sorts of demeaning comments and obnoxious phone calls from Dave.

Happy birthday St. McAndrews! I love you brother.

Read more »

Discipline, or the Lack Thereof, and the Detriment Done to the Body of Christ

Despite the Puritan-style title, this article will be concise, but hopefully potent. Articles on this issue require potency in a period in the life of the Church in which churches (I specifically have evangelical churches in mind here) tend to minimize church discipline for many reasons. All of these reasons are selfish, arrogant, and audacious. It is not my concern here to highlight reasons for the lack of church discipline, but rather to show that church discipline now, as in every age, is crucial to purity, reconciliation, and the ministry of the Church.

When a church fails to discipline its members (this includes leaders), the entirety of God’s people feel the results. That’s correct; when those in sin are not disciplined by the church for their sinfulness the whole body suffers. Paul in 1 Corinthians 12:26, in telling us of the importance of all members of the body of Christ, gives us a universal truth: “If one member suffers, all the members suffer with it.” Consider it, if your little toe hurts, your whole body is in agony with it.

Not only this, but the sinfulness of one member of the church can lead to the corruption of the whole. As Paul warns the Corinthians in 1 Corinthians 5, the church is not to seek to discipline the sinful world (for they continue to live in the sinful age, and are not partakers in the kingdom of God and of the Spirit), but to pass judgment upon those within the body. “For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church? But those who are outside, God judges. Remove the wicked man from among yourselves” (vv. 12-13). We are not even to associate with them—for their benefit and our own (v. 11). “A little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough” (v. 6), and so corruption will breed corruption—sin will snowball.

Matthew 18:15-20 tells us how we are to practice church discipline and its effects (21-35 tells us of how often and how many times we are to forgive those who fall into sin and seek repentance and reconciliation). Church discipline is to be practiced so that not even one of the “hundred sheep” should be lost, even if any one should stray (vv. 12-14).

We must not let fellow Christians continue in sin. As James tells us, “My brethren, if any among you strays from the truth and one turns him back, let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins” (James 5:19-20). Sin must be taken seriously and dealt with in the utmost solemnity—for a brother who continues in sin could lose his soul to death. It is the duty of those who see a brother in sin to seek for that brother’s repentance and reconciliation (cf. Galatians 6:1-3). To not follow this command is a sin—“to one who knows the right thing to do and does not do it, to him it is sin” (James 4:17). And as John tells us, “If anyone sees his brother committing a sin not leading to death, he shall ask and God will for him give life to those who commit sin not leading to death. There is a sin leading to death; I do not say that he should make request for this. All unrighteousness is sin, and there is a sin not leading to death” (1 John 5:16-17). In the context of 1 John, the sin that leads to death seems to be apostasy. Lesser sins could easily escalate into this “sin that leads to death,” as a person could reject the Lord through continual sin and prove him/herself to be unregenerate (cf. 1 John 2:3-6). And even if this does not occur, it is still the obligation of the brother who sees a brother in sin not leading to death to pray for and confront the one who is in sin.

Now for a practical example of how this is true. I will use an example and look at it from multiple levels of what could occur. Let’s say that a brother in Christ is interested in a young Christian lady. Now let’s say that this young man has an “accountability partner.” This young man who is dating the young lady starts to lust after this girl and begins going beyond safe boundaries—boundaries that have been set between he and his accountability partner. Let’s unpack every instance of what could occur.

1) The accountability partner talks to the young man and finds out that he has been sinning—in this case, physically/sexually going beyond set boundaries. The accountability partner, in passivity, decides not to confront the other brother at all in his sin, but rather allows him to continue in his actions—even as the physical boundaries are crossed further and further. Maybe the accountability partner even tells the brother that he doesn’t think that he should be doing what he is doing, but yet does nothing more. The brother in the relationship in this case continues into sexual sin further and further until finally he goes all the way (yes, sexual intercourse—or even oral sex—it doesn’t really matter, sin here is sin). Now, for the example, let us also say that he later breaks up with the girl (even if he doesn’t, the sinful act has been committed and harm has been done—sin against the girl (and she has sinned against him), against the Body, against their parents, against God, etc).

What’s the detriment? Who is hurt? Well, first, the brother and the sister are both hurt. They have sinned against one another—this could have quite possibly been avoided had the accountability partner taken some sort of action. The accountability partner is also harmed in this—the brother has sinned against him and their relationship. Obviously the Lord is an injured party in this—as sin is always against God (cf. Psalm 51:4). The witness of these two young people is also injured if not compromised—the world can now indict them for their sin. The local church is injured, since sin in the body causes hurt to all the members individually and to the body as a whole (cf. 1 Corinthians 12:26). Even those who are not within the immediate picture will be hurt by this sin. The woman’s future husband (and the man’s future wife) are hurt by this—they will no longer be marrying virgins—yes, this does cause pain to the human soul to know this. This may affect the brother and the sister’s performance at work, in school, or in many other areas of life, affecting those around them. If you disagree with this assessment, you are blind to the fact that “a little leaven leavens the whole lump” (1 Corinthians 5:6).

2) Let’s take the same scenario, except let’s say that the accountability partner practices the first step of church discipline and confronts his brother who is in sin. He tells him that what he is doing is wrong and seeks to help the brother to do what is right. One of two things could happen at the sin in this germ-state. Either the brother could repent of his actions and the sin is “nipped in the bud,” bringing about quick and quite painless reconciliation, or else the brother continues in sin.

But let’s say now that the accountability partner does not move on to step two of church discipline, and he does not bring another close and trusted brother to confront the brother in sin. Thus, despite the fact that initial discipline was taken for the purpose of reconciliation, the discipline practice of Matthew 18 was not followed through, and thus the brother continues in sin until all the results of the scenario mentioned above are realized and the pain again snowballs and so does the sin.

3) Let’s take this same scenario from point two and say that the accountability partner once again practices the first step of discipline. However, let’s say that this time he brings a second person to confront the brother when he does not initially repent. The same two outcomes could occur—either the brother is reconciled in a quite painless manner (only two other people know), or else the brother continues to sin. But let us now say that the accountability partner and the second witness do not bring the sinning brother before the local church. Thus the brother continues in sin which eventually snowballs and thus the trail of hurt again brings lasting and widespread pain.

4) Now let’s say that the two brothers do bring the matter before the local church. In doing this, the local church confronts the brother in sin and tells him of his need to repent and be reconciled. Again, the brother could either repent and face what is still a minimal amount of pain in reconciliation (it might be embarrassing for the moment, but the church must be quick to accept reconciliation of the brother and not bring the matter to the foreground ever again), or the brother could continue in sin. If the brother continues in sin and the church does not take the final step in church discipline—complete excommunication from the body—the same pains occur.

5) Finally, let’s say that the church does excommunicate the brother from fellowship for his continuation in sin. The church has done what is in its power—it has concurred that the brother in sin is unrepentant and so thus, not a brother in Christ at all, but a sinner just as any other heathen (Matthew 18:17), and so in need of evangelization—not receiving the fellowship of the local body of believers, period (cf. 1 Corinthians 5).

By giving this brother over to Satan, so to speak, this man (no longer to be considered a brother, though hopefully he will repent and so will show himself to be a true brother) will hopefully fall under the conviction of the Holy Spirit and see his sinfulness—as he faces this lost and lonely world alone. Hopefully this will also cause the sister whom he is dating to see his sinful estate and to leave him (I have not addressed her side of the story, for brevity), as that is the best and kindest thing that she could possibly do for him—if she continues with him, she encourages his sinfulness. This is the farthest that the body of Christ can go—displacing an illegitimate member from its ranks—loosing on earth what has been loosed in heaven (Matthew 16:19; 18:18-20). This is not cruel—rather, it is the utmost in kindness and in obedience.

Thus, it is evident that to not practice church discipline is both sinful and cruel. When discipline is not practiced, sin and pain snowball out of control and affect far reaching corners of the globe. The Kingdom of God for the exaltation of Jesus Christ in all things, to the glory of God the Father, demands that local church discipline be practiced. To love one’s brother demands that you practice discipline—as does loving one’s God. To not practice church discipline is the same as telling God that His method and Word are erroneous—nothing could be more arrogant or audacious!

Read more »

The Theological Implications of Bananas in the Parking Lot

After Uche (he's back in Louisville) and I dropped off Joy at her apartment (Joy used to be our boss = banquet capitan), we saw a bunch of bananas (like, 7 or so bananas in a bunch) sitting on the ground in Joy's parking lot. The bananas looked fine and quite tasty. It was quite random to see bananas just sitting in a parking lot. My presumption is that somebody accidentally left them while taking their groceries into their apartment.

So what does this have to do with theology? This is quite a good question. I can honestly say that I have no idea about this one. All that I can say is that God is sovereign and so He ordained that the bananas be there. I also know that somehow the precise placement of these bananas at that very time in some way edifies the church and causes us to be more like Christ (cf. Romans 8:28-30). Praise be to God for puzzling events such as this.

Read more »

Constantine: Bad Theology Then and Now

I recently viewed the movie Constantine with Keanu Reeves (I got it free from Blockbuster because it was guaranteed to be there, and it wasn't there--this is a great way to get movies) and was not greatly surprised. The movie lived up to the reputation of its namesake--it misunderstood the Christian conception of the universe and had awful theology. The understanding of God and the universe presented in this movie was clearly based upon some sort of medieval Roman Catholic views (taken to a great Hollywood extreme).

In the movie, John Constantine, played by Reeves, hunts and kills demons with holy water and dragons breath--sending them back to hell. The demons possess people, kill people, and try to break through into the human realm of reality--which is against the balance.

While all of this makes for an entertaining movie, it is way off from the Biblical perspective (and yes, there is one unique Biblical perspective that we can understand). There are many misconceptions in the movie--such as the existence of separate realms of existence for God (or maybe I should say, "god") and angels, humans, and demons. In this conception, God (I'm going to start referring to this movie's conception of God as "god" from now on) and the devil (who looks like he just came out of the movie "Saturday Night Fever") have made a wager. In this wager, god and Satan are supposed to be powerless to act to coerce humans to join their sides, but they can try to persuade people (quite a different conception of reality from Jeremiah 31:31-34). And of course, people are fundamentally neutral agents who can choose to be good or evil (a far cry from Romans 1-7).

In the movie, the devil has a son (since god had a son--they don't detail how that happend, nor do they detail how the devil has a son either--the movie might assume some kind of either sexual or asexual reproduction--but it certainly is not understanding God the Son as being eternally begotten/generating from the Father), who is probably meant to be the antiChrist or something (if they said something about this, I totally missed it--which is possible because I was reading while I watched the movie). Also, angels such as Gabriel, are conceived as some kind of human/angel hybrid--and so angels of this sort can interact with humans in this realm of existence. However, unlike the Biblical universe, demons are not powers in this world who can interact in this world (cf. Ephesians 2:2, 6:11-12), but they dwell in hell--and apparently they are some sort of agents of hell, rather than part of those who receive hell's horrors and torrements). Hell in the movie seemed to lack God completely, rather than be the place where the rebellious receive God's hatred and wrath and are completely cut off from His love and kindness.

There is also the clear conception in this movie that those who commit suicide go straight to Hell (medieval Roman Catholic doctrine, no where to be found in the Bible). The god in this movie is small, weak, and unimpressive. He cannot save--in other words, Jesus' death does not effectually save people. Rather, salvation is based upon belief and self-sacrifice (in the Biblical understanding, salvation is based not upon subjective faith, but rather upon the object in which that faith is placed--faith brings salvation because it takes hold of Christ, the One who saves). Also, regeneration and repentance are clearly not necessary in this movie--this is clear because as John rises to heaven, he gives the devil (who belongs in a disco hall, not hell) 'the bird,' in a way that makes it seem like god does not see him do it.

So, if you are looking for a movie with bad theology, a misrepresentation of the Christian worldview, but with suspense and action (there was also no sexual content), then my full recommendation goes out for you to watch this movie. However, if you are not the discerning type, and you are not secure in your understanding of the Christian faith, do not watch this movie.

Read more »

Sucking the Blood out of Evolution

I was watching a program on television Saturday night (I don't know what the name of the program was, what time it was, or what station it was on--though it was a local Louisville station), and I found out some of the coolest things. The show was hosted by some Australian guy who was looking for animals that live off blood. The animal that I found must interesting that he studied was the leech. Now, I'm hardly a leech expert, and I'm sure that there are different kinds of leeches, but I'll tell you about the kind he studied.

The leeches that were shown in the program were the kind with three saw-like jaws that are used to gently saw through the skin. The key to the survival of the leech is that it has to be undetected, otherwise most animals would take the leech off of themselves. So the leech has something in its saliva that is a painkiller. Rather than having intense pain when the leech makes a wound, all the one feels is a slight tingle (which would probably be unnoticable if you were not expecting it).

The saliva of the leech also has an antibiotic in it that keeps the victim from getting infected (I'm not really certain of the benefits of this for the leech, though I'd imagine it probably keeps the leech from getting any diseases that are in the blood of its host). There is also a substance in the saliva which keeps the blood from coagulating (clotting). This keeps the blood flowing so that the leech can fill to ten times its size with blood. As the leech gets full of blood, it releases much of the fluid in the blood so that it can hold as many red blood cells as possible (other animals do this as well, such as vampire bats).

Now, I'm no scientist, and I'm not sure of what kind of explanations can be concocted to explain how the leech developed from a single celled organism into what it now is, but there are a few things that strike me as, at the least, quite unlikely to have possibly been chance mutations. For one, how would saliva go from not containing a substance that stops clotting to containing one? Do some just start to mutate this way? If so, why don't some humans have this trait? Other animals do (such as vampire bats). Now, sure this doesn't help humans to survive, but chance mutations are just that--by chance--and so why would they just happen to occur in little blood sucking worms (and I mean leeches, not your little brother)? Second, why would they develop an antibiotic? We don't see people running around with antiseptic spit--though if we did, Listerine would go out of business pretty quickly. Maybe 3 million years ago leeches mated with rubbing alcohol and so we ended up with hybrid leeches. Third, how about that painkilling saliva? Vampire bats (according to the show) don't even possess that neat little trick.

Now, I'm sure that people can develop some kind of theories about this, but serious logic should seek what is a much simpler answer: God created leeches that way in the beginning. The reason why most evolutionary scientists (and almost anybody who really desires to hold to evolution) will not accept this is because this stifles their naturalistic worldview. Naturalism must and will jump through every imaginary hoop to find a way to get around God--even if it defies logic. Naturalism is not a possibly consistent and coherent worldview (I don't have to worry about offending anyone with this statement because the consistent naturalist cannot read this, as padded rooms in mental hospitals do not come complete with internet hook-up). For a good discussion of worldviews and to see why naturalism does not work, check out Life's Ultimate Questions by Dr. Ronald Nash.

Read more »

A Thought For Guys

This post is specifically for guys, but that doesn't mean that women can't read it.

I recently read an "away message" that said, "When a guy opens a car door for a woman, it is either a new car, or a new woman." I'm afraid that there is probably far too much truth in this statement--thought hopefully not for every guy who reads this.

The key to happiness is being content and delighting in the Lord and in that which He has given us. Remember that you are a sinner, and so even every breath you take is of grace. With that in mind, remember that every moment you have with your girl friend/wife is by God's grace. The fact that you have companionship with her is by God's grace. Be joyful, and treat her with surprising love.

The problem with the truth of the above statement is that it is the reverse of how it should be. Men, as you get to spend more time with your wife (or girl friend), as you experience her companionship, her patience with you, her selfless sacrifices for you (and for your children), her prayers for you, the joyful times you have together, etc, you should rejoice more and more and desire to serve her more and more. Now, you aren't going to open the car door for her everysingle time throughout your life together, that is quite unrealistic (I think you should do it quite regularly, but if you have to hurry to get somewhere, you may have to forgo that for one time--I hope she is reasonable enough to understand that you aren't forgetting her, but that the circumstances demand different). However, you should be showing her more love, respect, patience, kindnesses (it seems to me that women like it when you do little things for them--like bring home flowers, call on lunch, take out the garbage, take her to the restaurant she's been raving about, etc), and every duty, I mean, delightful actions to show love as you grow closer to her.

Remember, she is an extraordinary gift from God--treat her in that way. She is worth far more than your car, your house, your job, or watching your favorite sports team win the championship. If you don't think that, then take some time to meditate on how much she has done for you and how much joy she brings you. Meditate on Scripture and see how you ought to love her and how much God has blessed you with her. Think about the fact that she was willing to say "I do" (or, "I'd be willing to get to know you better") and join in covenant with you so that you wouldn't have to live alone and so that you would have an intimate friend.

If you have any questions, I wrote a post back in May that you can check out.

Men, let's not be the passive cultural norm of laziness. Rather, let's be the leading, pursuing, loving men of God whom we are called to be. Then, when the other women are complaining about their husbands, your wife will be able to say, "He's not perfect, but I've never met a more godly gentlemen than the one I married." Follow the example of Christ. Soli Deo Gloria

Read more »

B A Ware, Open Theism! A Few Comments

So, I drafted this in May sometime. I don't think I was finished with what I wanted to say, but I can't remember what else I wanted to say, so here is what I wrote back then.

I have just finished reading Bruce A. Ware's God's Lesser Glory: The Dimished God of Open Theism. Dr. Ware has done an excellent job of describing the Open Theist view, showing this view's inadequecies, and refuting the tenets of Open Theism (I'd say 'OT' but that would get mixed up with Old Testament).

In chapter 4 Ware converses with some of the most prominent Open Theist proof texts. Two of these proof texts include Jonah and the healing of Hezekiah (2 Kings 20). Ware does a great job of showing that the Open Theist understandings of these two narratives are unwarranted, fallicious, and just plain ridiculous.

Ware speaks about how Jonah's warning was God's means of giving Ninevah a chance to repent, and He did this knowing they would repent and God would forgive them.
With Hezekiah, Ware shows that God gave him the sickness and the opportunity as the means of giving Hezekiah 15 more years of life.
In neither case was God caught by surprise or did something occur that God had not planned.

Ware shows this very clearly, but something he did not get into was why God did these things.

Jonah prophesied 45 years before the destruction of the Northern Kingdom of Israel (767 BC and 722 BC). Yet before Jonah even came on the scene, God promised to destroy the Northern Kingdom through Hosea, Amos, and Joel. In Joel 2:20, the Lord makes clear that those who will come against Israel are "the northern army." In Hosea God makes reference to His bringing of Assyria to capture and rule of Israel (cf. 9:3 (where Egypt probably means captivity, as that is what Egypt was synonymous with in the Israelites minds), 10:6, 11:5 ("They will not return to the land of Egypt; But Assyria--he will be their king because they refused to return to Me"), 11:11). God could not accomplish this if Assyria were not in existence and powerful (the destruction of Ninevah, the Assyrian capital, surely would have made them incapable of attacking Israel).
So God sent Jonah to tell the Ninevites of their coming destruction so that they would repent. This was surely a slap in the face to the reluctant prophet and Israel, when the Ninevites repented. Perhaps Jonah was even familiar with the prophecies of Hosea, and so knew that his warning of Ninevah would end in the destruction of his own people, the Israelites (we cannot be sure). What is clear, however, is that Jonah hated the Ninevites (if nothing else they were a threat to Israel). Jonah knew that His warning was giving the Ninevites an opportunity to repent, and that God does not always give opportunities to repent (consider Edom, the Ninevites and Babylonians later on, etc). Jonah knew something was up (Jonah 4:1-4).

In the case of Hezekiah, in keeping him alive for 15 more years, Hezekiah ends up showing the Babylonians his treasure house (2 Kings 20:12-15). If Hezekiah had not lived, this would not have occurred. He showed the Babylonians everything, and for this Isaiah confronts the king and declares to him this: "Hear the word of the LORD. 'Behold, the days are coming when all that is in your house, and all that your fathers have laid up in store to this day will be carried to Babylon; nothing shall be left,' says the LORD." So Hezekiah was used in bringing the Babylonians against Judah.

God's plans were established and carried out using the "free wills" of men. God knew this was all to happen, for it needed to occur to fulfill His plans. I guess that after such clear and precise planning by the Lord to carry out future plans, open theism doesn't seem like a very viable option.

Read more »