Living in Light of Two Ages
____________________________
Sunday, June 30, 2013 at 05:33PM 
Rev. Andrew Compton is preaching through the Joseph Narrative (Genesis 37-50) this summer (while I am on sabbatical). Here's the first in his series: Click Here
Sunday, June 30, 2013 at 04:50PM 
Contending for the Faith
How did the apostles contend for the faith throughout the book of Acts? Did they share their testimonies or inner experiences? Did they encourage blind faith? On this special live edition of White Horse Inn, the hosts discuss the sermons in Acts in order to discover how to “contend for the faith once delivered to the saints.” (originally aired May 2, 2010).
Thursday, June 27, 2013 at 03:12PM I always tell people "unless your smart phone plays the actual tune to the `Song of Moses' from Exodus 15, turn it off during church." This is even better.
(h.t. Shane Rosenthal)
Tuesday, June 25, 2013 at 10:14AM 
I've been thinking about tackling this subject for some time. But it was an article in Monday's Orange County Register (Click Here) which prompted me to begin this brief series. In an article in the new "faith & values" section of the Register religion writer Jim Hinch observes . . .
The future of religious America lives in a two-story beige office building in downtown Fullerton, where homeless people and college graduates attend church together. The future also lives at a mosque in Mission Viejo. At an organic farm started by a megachurch. In downtown Santa Ana, where kids of many faiths feed the homeless. And in an Orange County church for hipsters where women, once excluded from ministry, now are pastors.
Hinch goes on to describe the biggest change of all to the Orange County religious landscape--Robert Schuller's Crystal Cathedral is soon to become "Christ Cathedral," home to Rome's OC diocese. Anyone who has been to the OC, knows that the Crystal Cathedral stands tall and is directly across the 5 freeway from the Honda Center (where the Ducks play hockey) and Anaheim Stadium (where the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim play baseball). Christ Reformed is also nearby, but almost invisible until you are on top of it.
Hinch is right. The change in ownership of the Cathedral is simply the latest and surely the most visible sign that much has changed. The loud buzz long associated with the various Protestant, evangelical, Pentecostal, and charismatic megachurches of the OC, has, by and large, given way to the kind of low-key religious pluralism described above by Hinch.
With all of the changes afoot in OC's religious climate, my question is simply this, "what happened to the OC of the 70s, 80s and 90s?" An era in which a distinctly Christian "buzz" was everywhere, and a time when many of the religious trends and fads which drove American evangelicalism began in my own backyard. Locals joked that based upon church attendance and Harvest Crusade responses, the population of the OC had been saved twice over. You don't hear that quip anymore.
I saw much of it, and participated in some of it. I am now the pastor of a church in the OC where many of us (including me) came to faith in Christ (or to a new or deeper understanding of our faith in Christ) because of that "buzz." My guess is that about 75% of the members of Christ Reformed were, at one time, actively involved in some aspect of OC's Christian buzz. So, if all of that is true, why is it that the OC is now so different? Why is the buzz gone? Why is this a good thing?
I'm not intending this series to be a scientific study of current religious trends (I'm not equipped to evaluate these trends in that manner, nor am I interested in such things). Nor will this series be a nostalgic look back at a better time--granted, it had its moments. I am doing nothing more than offering my observations on a time now gone, and looking for any lessons which might be learned.
My take is that this era was more of like a super nova of a dying star, than it was the establishment of any sustained evangelical movement. We know that to be true, based upon the observations of Hinch and others about the decline of the megachurches and the rise of a generic religious pluralism which has taken their place. Granted, the megachurches are still here, but the buzz they generated is gone (or greatly diminished), as is the influence they exerted upon the religious life and the culture of the OC.
There are several reasons why OC Christianity has changed so drastically. The most obvious is that the OC itself has changed--drastically. Thirty years ago, the OC was mostly white middle-class and Republican. OC had the highest percentage of Republican voter registration in the country. Most of those folks moved here after World War Two, attracted by good jobs and the great weather. There were some Asians, and more Hispanics, but the county was predominantly WASP. The economy was robust and virtually recession-proof, driven largely by aerospace (Hughes, Rockwell, Boeing, and others were here), hi-tech industries (i.e., Bechman Instruments, Fluor), and entertainment (Knott's Berry Farm and Disneyland).
Little of this is true anymore. The local economy is not near as robust. Aerospace and the hi-tech industry are leaving the state because of California's oppressive business climate--high paying jobs are going away and not coming back. Immigrants now dominate many of the county's neighborhoods--including my own. "Little Arabia" is two miles away from me, and Garden Grove has a substantial Vietnamese neighborhood ("Little Saigon"). The barrio of Santa Ana now extends into North Orange County (and is within a block of my home). Right-winger Bob Dornan's old congressional seat is now held by the very progressive Linda Sanchez.
As the county has changed, OC religion has become as diverse as the people who now live here. Hardly a surprise. But one thing which has come with the change is the virtual silencing of the Christian buzz which was quite loud and lasted some three decades.
The Christian buzz was a cacophony arising from the churches and ministries which were located here. During this time, the OC was home to TBN and the nightly follies of Paul and Jan Crouch. The Hour of Power was based here (the TV ministry of Robert Schuller), as well as Insight for Living (Chuck Swindoll's radio broadcast). Chuck Smith's Calvary Chapel and John Wimber's Vineyard reached out to the Jesus people in the late 60's and seemed to get the whole "youth culture" thing rolling. Maranatha music and "praise songs," anyone? There were always concerts, and bible studies in these churches were usually packed to the rafters. Meanwhile, Walter Martin fought back the "cults"--Walter's Saturday night live call-in radio broadcast of the "Bible Answer Man" always generated buzz at church on Sunday. Walter gave many of us our first exposure to Christian theology (weak as it was). There were a host of Word-Faith "ministries" here (like Gary Greenwald and the "Eagles Nest"). Meanwhile, good ole Rich Buhler comforted the neurotic, and KYMS (the local Christian radio station which now broadcasts in Vietnamese) had huge ratings. Then Rick Warren showed up, along with Benny Hinn (for a time) . . . I am sure I am missing many others. There was a lot going on here in the OC. And it generated a distinct Christian "buzz."
We'll talk about all of this and more in this series. Bear with me as we go, I'm doing this from memory, and I didn't think to take notes at the time! A lot of water has gone under the bridge. Thankfully, I have now so successfully isolated myself in the theological sanity and comfort of Reformed theology and church life, if there were still such a Christian buzz, I probably wouldn't hear it.
We'll start next time with an attempt at a definition of a "burned over" district, and develop in a bit more detail what I mean by a Christian "buzz." I'll also recount my own very small role in the OC religion. Part One -- "The Buzz"
To whet your whistle a bit, did you know that both R.C. Sproul and Mike Horton were on TBN? Stay tuned.
Tuesday, June 25, 2013 at 09:55AM 
The Twenty-Fifth in a Series of Sermons on 1 Corinthians
What the Bible says about love, and the way most Americans think about love, are often two different things. Our culture thinks of love as essentially an emotional feeling, most often associated with romance. Pop culture images of the hearts and cupids of Valentine’s Day are ingrained in us from an early age. For those of us who grew up in the sixties and seventies, love is tied to a utopian dream when people experience a powerful sense of brotherhood and unity. Sadly, these images are far from the biblical meaning of love–an emotion which issues forth in action, and which arises not from romantic or sentimental images, but from the Good News that the blood of Jesus, shed on a Roman cross, redeems sinners–people like us who are anything but worthy of the love God showers upon us in Christ’s work of redemption.
We have now come to chapter 13 in our series in 1 Corinthians, one of the most familiar passages in all the Bible. As one writer states about this chapter, “this is one of the most beloved passages in the New Testament, and for good reason. It is one of Paul’s finest moments: indeed, let the interpreter beware lest too much analysis detract from its sheer beauty and power.” Well said, and very true. This is a beloved passage for a reason. It is both beautiful and powerful.
Throughout our study of 1 Corinthians, we have seen that the church in Corinth was plagued by division and factions. This church was composed of new Christians, who were struggling to leave their pagan ways of thinking and doing behind. When they asked Paul about the role and purpose of speaking in tongues–something which apparently was a source of on-going division within the church–Paul answers their question in chapters 12-14. In the opening verses of chapter 12, Paul makes an important distinction between spiritual things (pneumotikon), and spiritual gifts (charismata), of which tongue-speaking was the least. According to Paul, you cannot properly understand spiritual gifts unless you first understand spiritual things. And you cannot understand spiritual things unless you confess that Jesus is Lord–Jesus is the only Savior from sin, the creator of all things, and whose death upon the cross takes away the wrath of God toward sinners. The cross is the picture of that love of which Paul now speaks.
To make his case that all Christians are members of the spiritual body of Christ (the church) and are given gifts of the Spirit for the common good, Paul uses the metaphor of the human body. Each one of us is a member of Christ’s body (the church) through faith in Jesus. Although not all members of Christ’s body serve the same function (just as eyes are not toes), each member of that body is essential to the health and well-being of the whole. This is why Paul ties various gifts of the Spirit to the offices of the church, before exhorting Christians to earnestly desire the higher gifts, so that the Corinthians will be stronger and better able to resist the temptations of their pagan past, as well as the sinful tendency to put our own interests ahead of others. At the end of chapter twelve Paul had written, “but earnestly desire the higher gifts. And I will show you a still more excellent way.”
That more excellent way is the way of love. To read the rest of this sermon, Click Here
Monday, June 24, 2013 at 10:54AM 
Summer has come, and I'm now on my annual vacation/sabbatical.
Rev. Andrew Compton (above) will be preaching through the Joseph story in Genesis 37-50 this summer. Andrew is a first-rate OT scholar, and we will be privileged to sit under his preaching while I'm on break.
As for me, after a week off or so, I'll take up several writing projects. I'm doing a review of Sam Storm's new book, Kingdom Come: The Amillennial Alternative for Modern Reformation.
I'm updating my Riddlebarger family history in light of my DNA test--now that the reality has set in that I'm no longer German, and am related to Ben Roethlisberger (he's a distant cousin), as we both are descendants from the Rotlisperger family of the Canton of Bern.
I hope to make good progress on my two kingdoms book--its been on the shelf because of deadlines for my revised A Case for Amillennialism (which should be out in July) and my recent commentary on 1 Corinthians.
Lord willing, I'll get to spend some time in the Eastern Sierras with church friends and family--always the highlight of my year. One of the first books I'm going to tackle is Allen Guelzo's new book on Gettysburg.
A year ago at this time, I was still recovering from major surgery (colon cancer), and as I enter into summer a year later everything looks good and I feel fine--back to my old sinful self. The Lord has been very kind and gracious to me! Your prayers for healing were answered and I am very thankful for them!
I'll be around, and will post as I can.
Sunday, June 23, 2013 at 04:43PM 
Here's the audio from this morning's sermon: Click Here
Sunday, June 23, 2013 at 04:26PM 
Is Christianity the Only True Religion?
Is it true that all the religions of the world are simply different paths to God, or is Jesus the only way? If Christianity is the only true religion, does this mean that other religions are completely false? What about those who have never heard about Jesus? Joining us to discuss some of these questions is Dr. John Stackhouse, Professor of Theology and Culture at Regent College in Vancouver, BC. (originally aired June 21, 2009).
Wednesday, June 19, 2013 at 02:14PM 
In his best selling 1977 book, The Light and the Glory: Did God have a plan for America?, Peter Marshall writes:
That a drought could be broken, or an Indian attack averted, by corporate repentance is an idea that sounds alien to many Christians today. Yet it was central to the faith which built this country, and is one of the most prominent, recurring themes in the Bible. One of the most familiar examples is, "If my people who are called by my name humble themselves, and pray and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forigve their sin and heal their land" (2 Chronicles 7:14).
Accepting Marshall's untenable hermeneutic (he ignores the fact that God's "national" covenant was made with Israel only), it is quite common to hear well-intended Christians claim that America is a “Christian nation” and in doing so appeal to biblical passages such as that just cited by Marshall. Because our Lord’s promise of divine protection is given to the church (Matthew 16:18), the temptation is ever-present for Christians to mistakenly assume that our Lord’s promise of protection extends beyond the church they attend to the national interests and policies of the nation in which they live. God's plan for our nation properly falls under the category of "providence" not "covenant."
The claim that “God is on our side” often comes to fruition when politically active American evangelicals see themselves in a “culture war”–contending with secular-progressives for the soul of the nation. In the heat of battle, Christians invoke covenant promises made by God to Israel, thinking these promises apply to the United States because they mistakenly believe that the United States has some sort of covenant relationship with YHWH as did Israel. This tendency is one of the key indicators of the popular but erroneous assumption that American is a Christian nation because it was founded on “biblical principles” and therefore possesses a unique relationship to God, just as Israel did under the Old Covenant. 
But America has no national covenant with God, as did Israel under the covenant God made with his chosen people at Mount Sinai. This fact presents a serious problem for those who assume that the promises God made to ancient Israel somehow apply to the United States. Covenant promises of blessing and curse which were given to Israel in a particular biblical context cannot be applied to contemporary political issues given the role such covenant blessings and curses played in Israel’s unique history.
One such example of applying these covenant promises to modern America can be found on the website for the National Day of Prayer, where we read the following (echoing the previous words of Peter Marshall):
Our goal is to see communities transformed across America. That happens one family at a time. We know lives are being changed. We see the reports and statistics everyday (read Answered Prayer). We pray in expectation knowing that God can and will make a difference if we seek Him, turn from our ways and repent (II Chronicles 7:14).
The stated desire of the national day of prayer is the transformation of communities and individuals. Biblical support is taken from 2 Chronicles 7:14. sadly, this passage is cited apart from any consideration of the redemptive-historical context in which the verse originally appears–the dedication of Solomon’s temple (2 Chronicles 6-7), specifically God’s private revelation to Solomon after the public manifestation of fire in the previous verses (2 Chronicles 7:1-3).
If America's founding fathers could repent and seek the face of God, as instructed by the Chronicler, so as to avoid drought or Indian attack, why shouldn't we? Marshall's plea has been heard by many. Those who see themselves in the midst of a culture war, or who are seeking a national revival, often affirm that if only God’s people living in America would act upon the covenant promises God made to Israel in 2 Chronicles 7:14, then God would spare our nation from some impending calamity–usually the election of some disagreeable political figure, or the passage of some worrisome piece of legislation, or a high court decision which is perceived to undermine Judeo-Christian values. If God made this promise to Israel during the days of Solomon, then he is still making this promise to Christians who live in America today. Right?
The invocation of 2 Chronicles 7:14, closely parallels warnings made by certain dispensationalists, who see the end-times centering around God’s program for national Israel. Biblical passages which speak of covenant blessings and curses coming upon Israel’s enemies (i.e., Genesis 12:3), are interpreted to mean that unless the United States support the modern nation of Israel (specifically in terms of the land promise given to the physical descendants of Abraham), America risks coming under God’s judgment. As one prominent evangelical in Congress contends,
I am convinced in my heart and in my mind that if the United States fails to stand with Israel, that is the end of the United States . . . [W]e have to show that we are inextricably entwined, that as a nation we have been blessed because of our relationship with Israel, and if we reject Israel, then there is a curse that comes into play. . . . We believe very strongly the verse from Genesis [Genesis 12:3], we believe very strongly that nations also receive blessings as they bless Israel. It is a strong and beautiful principle [From a speech given by Congresswoman Michele Bachman in February 2010 to the Republican Jewish Coalition].
Although it is believed that God’s promise to those who protect Israel applies primarily to matters of the on-going Israeli-Palestinian conundrum, biblical passages referring to Israel (or to Abraham) under the Old Covenant are applied to contemporary events without the slightest hesitation. In light of Israel’s quite unique role in redemptive history, this kind of application should give us great pause.
If by “Christian nation” we mean that America has some sort of theological charter or covenant with God as set forth in a biblical passage such as 2 Chronicles 7:14, we are sadly mistaken. 2 Chronicles 7:14 applied to Israel in the days of Solomon when God’s glory filled the temple he had just dedicated to YHWH. Passages such as this one are invoked the way they are because of a serious theological misunderstanding–the confusion of promises made regarding the kingdom of God with God’s providential purposes for the civil kingdom. Unless we are willing to rip the passage from its context, it cannot be invoked as a promise applying to modern America. In terms of our national relationship to God, America is every bit as “secular” as is Saudi Arabia, Iran, China, or even Israel, for that matter. America is not a divinely-ordained theocracy with either national promises or threatened curses as was true of Israel.
The reality is that the promise found in 2 Chronicles 7:14 has nothing whatsoever to do with a national revival or the current fortunes of the United States. It has everything to do with the dedication of Solomon’s temple nearly 3000 years ago.
Tuesday, June 18, 2013 at 10:29AM 
Monergism.com is now publishing books. One of their first is Daniel McManigal's Encountering Christ in the Covenants. Rev. McManigal is a graduate of Westminster Seminary California, and is a minister in the URCNA.
Here's the publisher's description:
Encountering Christ in the Covenants has been written for people who are new to covenant theology and want to better understand how the great covenants in Scripture reveal Christ. Readers will be helped by the many references to the Reformed confessions and catechisms which are interspersed throughout the pages of this book. The study questions which follow each chapter are designed so that the book can be used in small group study.
Here are the endorsements:
“Sometimes we make basic concepts more difficult. ‘Covenant’ is not only a recurring topic in Scripture, but the way in which the biblical plot is structured. Often it helps when those explaining it have discovered a doctrine rather than inherited it. That is certainly evident in this book. I hope it enjoys a wide readership!”
-MICHAEL HORTON, J. Gresham Machen Professor of Systematic Theology and Apologetics, Westminster Seminary California.
“The revival of interest in the doctrine of the biblical covenants is bearing the fruit of some excellent books on the subject over the past several decades. McManigal has provided a rich coverage of this central doctrine by winsomely presenting his material from a pastoral perspective. The narrative style follows the unfolding biblical story in ten thorough chapters culminating in the new covenant with a surprise ending dealing with the sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Finally, its christological focus makes it a standout book. I highly recommend this book as a primer in covenant theology for instruction in the local church, but it will also serve well as an apologia to give to those who are unfamiliar with, or perhaps even disagree with, covenant theology.”-DR. GREGORY EDWARD REYNOLDS is the pastor of Amoskeag Presbyterian Church in Manchester, New Hampshire; author of The Word Is Worth a Thousand Pictures: Preaching in the Electronic Age (2001); and editor of Ordained Servant: A Journal for Church Officers.
“Pastor Dan McManigal’s Encountering Christ in the Covenants introduces the covenantal structure of the whole Bible’s story of redemptive history, showing how each advance in God’s covenant bond with his people leads closer and closer to Jesus Christ, the mediator of the new covenant and the focus and fulfillment of all the covenants. Encountering Christ combines clear explanation with theological richness, providing spiritual nurture for mind and soul.”-DENNIS E. JOHNSON, Ph.D. Professor of Practical Theology, Westminster Seminary California.
“Dan McManigal has provided the Church with a much-needed book. The book is a rare balance between solid biblical truth and a writing style that is a delight to read. His chapters flow effortlessly and if the reader wants to ignore the footnotes, he or she may--although I strongly advise you to read them, for they are filled with essential works. The reader will also be greatly aided by the fact that the writing is always in conversation with Scripture. In short, this work offers a valuable tool that explains a key to open and understand the warp and woof of the Word of God”
-DR. RON GLEASON, Ph.D. is the pastor of Grace Presbyterian Church in Yorba Linda, California and author of Herman Bavinck: Pastor, Churchman, Statesman, and Theologian (2010).
You can order it directly from monergism.com or through Amazon: Encountering Christ in the Covenants
