Latest Artiles at ARPTalk: Not for the Weak of Stomach

If you want to read something that can potentially make you sick, I point you to the latest articles posted at ARPTalk. The first, reporting on the latest actions of First Presbytery in regard to the issue of whether or not to try Parker Young for suing the church, can be found here. It gives much more detail than the story from The Aquila Report from a few days ago.

The second, which reports on the actions (or lack thereof) of Second Presbytery in regard to bringing charges against Jay Hering, who attempted to sue the ARP, can be read here. I warn you though, this piece could make those a weak constitution a bit quesy. The logic behind the actions of Second Presbytery are quite disgusting. I also note the involvement of Randy Ruble and Neely Gaston in the actions of Second Presbytery. Nothing like your former bosses (who would have been directly affected by a new Board of Erskine, which Hering's non-suit was attempting stop from coming into power) covering for you, right?

Quick Thoughts on TE Carpenter

It has now been several weeks since the Siouxlands Presbytery of the PCA handed down their terrible decision to find a strong presumption of guilt against TE Brian Carpenter on the charge of violating the ninth commandment. I have typed several blog posts related to this, but then not posted them (usually, I wait a bit, go back and read what I've written and decide to rewrite completely). I'm going to post this one, and it's going to be short and to the point. TE Carpenter has not broken the ninth commandment in regards to calling out proponents of the Federal Vision within the PCA. If he is telling the truth, he is, by definition NOT violating the ninth commandment (yes, I am aware that "speaking the truth unseasonably" is a violation of the ninth commandment, that is categorically NOT what happened with TE Carpenter). I've read the report of the committee investigating him. It's a joke. Assertions do not a case make. There must be evidence. There is none. Hurting people's feelings does not make a case. Having third parties take what you have said and run with it does not make a case. Yet, this is all there is to the case against TE Carpenter. There is no proof that he himself has violated the ninth commandment.

I will continue to pray for TE Carpenter, that he will be vindicated, and I will continue to pray for the Siouxlands Presbytery, that they will see through these charges for what they really are: unsubstantiated accusations that must be dismissed.

Just a Reminder

Just a reminder that there are only two days left to leave a comment on The First Ever Ruling Elder Blog Contest!, to be entered to win. Watch the video that is embedded in the post and leave a comment on the post critiquing the "talk". Comments must be posted no later than Wednesday, October 6, 2010. The best critique will win!

The First Ever Ruling Elder Blog Contest!

I have decided to have a contest.

Here's how it works: below, I have posted a video clip of a portion of a "talk" (I won't call it a sermon) that I watched today. To participate in the contest, you must watch the video (the clip is only about 10 minutes long), and leave a comment on this blog post with a critique of the talk. The best critique (as chosen by me, and me alone) will win and I will send the winner a book of some sort (I'm not sure what just yet, but most likely something by a Puritan). My advice to all who enter is to be precise and concise. No need to write a dissertation on this!

Contest will end in 1 week (no comments posted after Wednesday, October 6 will be accepted for consideration), at which time I'll announce a winner. All who wish to participate may do so.

Here is the video. Watch, comment, and may the best critique win!

Office Hours Interview with Pastor Terry Johnson

R. Scott Clark, professor at Westminster Seminary California has posted a wonderful interview with Terry Johnson, pastor of Independent Presbyterian Church of Savannah, Georgia. Pastor Johnson makes some great points in his critique of the modern evangelical approach to worship, and he also has some valid warnings for the Reformed church, as well.

I encourage you to listen to the interview, here.

Acts 1: Appointing a Replacement for Judas

This past Monday night, the Bible study I lead finished the first chapter of Acts. In that section of Scripture, the disciples choose two potential replacements for Judas, and God picks Matthias. It is interesting to me to read what different commentators have written about that event. Here is a sampling:

Matthew Poole simply asserts:

He was numbered with the eleven. The rest of the apostles, and the whole church, agreeing with that Divine choice which was made.

In other words, the apostles acted correctly and Matthias was in deed chosen by God.

Matthew Henry writes:

Matthias was not ordained by the imposition of hands, as presbyters were, for he was chosen by lot, which was the act of God; and therefore, as he must be baptized, so he must be ordained, by the Holy Ghost, as they all were not many days after. Thus the number of the apostles was made up, as afterwards, when James, another of the twelve, was martyred, Paul was made an apostle.

Henry postulates that just as Matthias was the replacement for Judas, so Paul was the replacement for James.

Charles Hodge had a perspective I didn't find elsewhere:

“And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven Apostles.” And that was the end. We never hear of Matthias afterward. It is very doubtful whether this appointment of Matthias had any validity. What is here recorded (Acts i. 15-26), took place before the Apostles had been endued with power from on high (Acts i. 8), and, therefore, before they had any authority to act in the premises. Christ in his own time and way completed the number of his witnesses by calling Paul to be an Apostle.

I post these only for thought and reflection. I, personally, believe Hodge was incorrect in stating that the Apostles did not have the authority to do what they did.

Quote of the Day

"Remember my dear madam, that it was not anger simply which the Prince of Peace himself condemned, but being 'angry with a brother without a cause'. To be angry where there is a cause is inevitable nature. He, therefore, who affects to be above anger, makes me suspect that his virtue is not supernatural, but hypocritical."

R. L. Dabney in Life & Letters of Robert Lewis Dabney, pg 547.
HT: Bret McAtee