One More Time--Islam Is No Religion of Peace

Lets cut to the chase.  Your next door Muslim neighbor is probably a meek and kindly person.  So are the Muslims I encounter here in Orange County.

But when a noted Islamic academic in the UK contends that it is perfectly just to die for what you believe--even if you do so with a bomb with nails and ball-bearings strapped to your chest in a marketplace full of innocent civilians--then should be clear to all, Islam is a religion of conquest and violence. 

So, suicide bombing is a legitimate method of engaging in Jihad?  That's the view of Dr. Azzamm Tamimi, who reminded his audience of 8000 that they were not European Muslims, but Muslims who happen to live in Europe.  No such thing as Muslims being assimilated by local culture.  Click here: Firebrand Islamic academic: 'dying for your beliefs is just' | the Daily Mail.

Such brutality is thick in Islam's history and its current practice.  If Islam is truly a religion of peace and Jihad is only the personal struggle of the faithful Muslim--as we keep hearing--why don't peaceful Muslims denounce the rabid comments of such men as Dr. Tamimi?  Their silence is deafening and telling.

Tamimi is right about one thing.  The war on terror is a war on radical Islam.  It is a war (on a national level) that we had better be prepared to fight and win.  It is war which will last a generation or more.  If not, what will the consequences be?  Oceans don't protect us from such a threat.

As for the churches of the Reformation, we had all better be learning about Islam, as well as ways to effectively preach the gospel to and engage in apologetic dialogue with our Muslim neighbors.  Who would have ever thought that foreign missions meant sharing the gospel with your Muslim neighbor in your own hometown?  The Mosque down the street from Christ Reformed has more people in attendance on Fridays than we do on Sundays. 

The irony is that twenty years ago this threat was not even on the radar.  Who would have thought that American evangelicalism would become so doctrinally wimpy as to be helpless against Islamic growth and ideology?  Seeker-centered worship and vapid felt-need oriented preaching are quickly exposed for what they are in the face of a threat like Islamic expansion.  Islam is growing and expanding in most communities in the United States, probably yours.  And what are you doing about it?

There is much work to do.  It starts with trusting in the power of God to convert the most fanatical Muslim through the means of the preached gospel.  But surely it doesn't end there.

Update on Thursday, August 24, 2006 at 09:34AM by Kim Riddlebarger

Someone asked me a great question in regards to my post.  What do Muslims want?  Here, in part, is the answer.

Who Said That?

"There are in the Bible several clear examples of believers (about whose relationship with God there can be no question) who were, nevertheless, not completely or continually committed to the Lord. . . . Now if Christ must be Lord of the life in order for one to be saved, then we are forced to conclude that either Peter or Baranbas [who had lapses from a fully dedicated life] were never saved or that they lost their salvation when they rejected the Lordship of Christ."

OK, who said this?  No cheating (google searches or otherwise).  Leave your answer in the comments section!

Update on Wednesday, August 30, 2006 at 03:05PM by Kim Riddlebarger

This quote comes from Charles Ryrie, as some of you guessed.

It can be found on pages 170-171 of Balancing the Christian Life (Moody Press, 1969).

About as Tacky as It Gets

Dave Hunt sent this to me (not that Dave Hunt, but the Reformed guy named David Hunt who lives in Texas and reads this blog).  He saw this in the local mall and took this picture with his cellphone. 

No, this was not a Christian bookstore, but it might as well have been (or it will be by next the CBA).

Don't even start me on this one . . . (ugh)

You Know You Are Not Reformed If . . .

 
You know you are not Reformed if

. . . you think the Apostles Creed is the guy who fought Rocky in Rocky I.

. . . you think the Canons of Dort are like the Guns of Navarrone.

. . . you think Ursinus is a nasal condition.

. . . you think Arminians are the people who run convenience stores.

. . . you think the Belgic Confession was from WWII war crimes trials.

. . . you think “popery” in the church makes it smell flowery.

. . . you think the psalter goes with the pepper shaker.

. . . you think unconditional election is a practice of communist dictatorships.

. . . the only “kirk” you know is from Star Trek.

. . . you think the Three Forms of Unity are health, wealth, and happiness.

. . . you think “catechism” and “dogma” relate to pets.

. . . you think Post Tenebras Lux is a breakfast cereal (it’s actually the motto of post-Reformation Geneva).

(h.t. Pat Yamada)

Can you think of more? 

Who Said That?

OK, who said this?

"Both the Old and the New Testament speak of a future conversion of Israel, Zech. 12:10; 13:1; II Cor. 3:15,16, and Rom. 11:25-29 seems to connect this with the end of time. Premillennialists have exploited this Scriptural teaching for their particular purpose. They maintain that there will be a national restoration and conversion of Israel, that the Jewish nation will be re-established in the Holy Land, and that this will take place immediately preceding or during the millennial reign of Jesus Christ. It is very doubtful, however, whether Scripture warrants the expectation that Israel will finally be re-established as a nation, and will as a nation turn to the Lord."

As usual, no google searches or cheating!  Leave your guesses in the comments section below!

Update on Saturday, August 5, 2006 at 02:11PM by Kim Riddlebarger

This statement comes from none other than Louis Berkhof (Systematic Theology, 698 ff).  But Herman Bavinck said almost the same thing in Last Things (Grand Rapids:  Baker, 1996), 107.

In light of Berhkof's wrong conclusion, I think it behooves all of us to follow the sage advice of Geerhardus Vos, who reminds us that history/fulfillment is sometimes the best interpreter of certain prophecies, and that eschatology requires a particular kind of interpretive patience (Pauline Eschatology, 133).

Who Said That?

Who Said That?

"In conformity, therefore, both to the doctrine of St. John, and the whole tenor of the New Testament, we fix this conclusion:  A Christian is so far perfect as not to commit sin. 

This is the glorious privilege of every Christian . . . though he be a babe in Christ.  But it is of only grown Christians it can be affirmed they are in such a sense perfect, as, secondly, to be freed from evil thoughts and evil tempers."

Please, no google searches or other forms of cheating.  You must guess who said this!  Leave your answers in the comments section.  I'll let you know who this is in a couple of days.

Update on Monday, July 31, 2006 at 07:15PM by Kim Riddlebarger

As many of you correctly guessed, this is John Wesley, from A Plain Account of Christian Perfection (London:  The Epworth Press, 1976), 42.

What's a Thousand Years Among Friends?

What's a Thousand Years Among Friends?

Why amillennialism makes a whole lot more sense than premillennialism

(A lecture given at Grace Evangelical Church, URCNA, in Torrance, CA, July 19, 2006--Click here: Grace Evangelical Church:  A Member of the United Reformed Churches in North America)

___________________________

Without a doubt, most American evangelicals are firmly committed to premillennialism–the belief that an earthly millennial age of one thousand year’s duration will begin immediately after our Lord Jesus Christ’s Second Advent. Since premillennialism is so dominant in American church circles, many who encounter Reformed theology for the first time are quite surprised when they discover that all of the Protestant Reformers, as well as virtually the entire Reformed and Lutheran traditions (along with their confessions), with a few notable exceptions, are amillennial. Amillennialism is that understanding of eschatology which sees the millennium as the present course of history between the first and second Advents of our Lord (the age of the church militant), and not as a future golden age upon the earth as is taught in premillennialism and postmillennialism. In the case of both "pre" and "post" millennialism, the millennium is thought to be the age of the church triumphant, not the age of the church militant.

I am convinced that the reason why so many people reject amillennialism is simply that they do not understand the basic end-times scenario taught throughout the New Testament. Part of the problem is that dispensational premillennial writers have completely dominated Christian media and publishing for the last fifty years. There are literally hundreds of books, churches, and parachurch ministries, all devoted to taking premillennialism, dispensationalism, and the so-called "pre-tribulation" rapture idea to the masses. Many of these teachers and ministries are very effective and compelling in their presentations. Look at the sales of Hal Lindsey’s Late Great Planet Earth, which was the best-selling book in the USA in the 1980's. And then there is the Left Behind series of novels, and the accompanying videos, journals, games, and whatever else LaHaye and Jenkins have cranked out, which have cumulatively sold well over 50 million units.

I can only lament the fact that my own tradition has done so little to produce popular books introducing and defending amillennialism. It is my guess that a number of you have never heard the case for the classical position held by Reformed Christians regarding the return of Christ and the millennial age.

To read the rest of this lecture, click here

What Is It About the White Horse Inn?

What is it about the White Horse Inn that causes people to put our pictures on airplanes (Click here: Riddleblog - The Latest Post - Rod Air -- Come Fly With Me) or on mountains (Click here: Riddleblog - The Latest Post - The Romans Revolution Continues)?

The latest witty creation is courtesy of White Horse Inn listener, Brian Ring (http://myfakeposters.blogspot.com/).

Any thoughts?

I think Rod would make a great Johnny Depp type character!  He really shouldn't be stuck on a woman's body!

Rod Air -- Come Fly With Me

My dear friend and White Horse Inn compatriot, Rod Rosenbladt, has been acting a little funny lately.  You know, like he's got something going on that he can't tell you about. 

Well, his secret is out.  There's a reason why he's no longer flying on Alaska. 

Rod Air . . .  Get in.  Sit down.  Shut up!  Hang on!

(thanks to Mark Vander Pol)

Who Said That?

Who Said That?

"Those who find their own experience written in the seventh chapter of Romans [i.e. Romans 7:13-25] are not converted persons.  If that is their habitual character, they are not regenerated, they are under conviction, but not Christians . . . . You see, from this subject, the true position of a vast number of church members.  They are all the time struggling under the law.  They approve of the law, both in its precept and its penalty, they feel condemned, and desire relief.  But still they are unhappy.  They have no Spirit of prayer, no communion with God, no evidence of adoption.  They only refer to the 7th [chapter] of Romans as their evidence.  Such a one will say, `There is my experience.'  Let me tell you, that if this is your experience, you are yet in the gall of bitterness and the bonds of iniquity. . . .  You are yet carnal, sold under sin, and unless you embrace the gospel you will be damned."

____________________________________ 

This is awful.  Who is bearer of such glad tidings?

Update on Thursday, July 6, 2006 at 02:09PM by Kim Riddlebarger

I am going to call this one early.  As Phil (who either cheated and google searched, or who was at Keith Green's compound in Texas) pointed out, these horrible words come from Charles Grandison Finney, the patron saint of American evangelicalism.

For those of you who are "disappointed" that I hold the traditional Reformed view (I know it is a shock that a Reformed pastor and theologian would actually hold to the view taught in his confessions, even after reading the arguments on the other side), I'll make my case in my forthcoming blog publication on Romans.  We'll debate the matter then.

FYI--I also discussed this on KFUO today (Thursday, July 6).  Go to KFUO.org.  My discussion with Todd Wilken about Romans 7:14-25 will be archived.