Dead Theologians' Society

noreply@blogger.com (RevMack) — Mon, 23 Sep 2013 23:53:00 +0000

So, what to do when (1) a communicator finds himself with communications that need communicating, and (2) a grammar curmudgeon finds barnacles growing in out-of-the-way places of his brain that used to house perfectly good vocabulary? Fire up the blog and get to writing. Join me for ranting, rambling, mining of stimulating quotes, and (I hope) thought-provoking essays. And, while you're here, let's link arms in this linguistic Thermopylae, where songs are sung in hushed and reverent tones, to fallen heroes with names like Buckley, Safire, and Lehrer.

In the immortal words of Samuel T. Cogley, attorney at law, "... And more than that, gentlemen - in the name of a humanity fading in the shadow of the machine - I demand it. I demand it!"

How Free is Free?

noreply@blogger.com (RevMack) — Sat, 12 Jun 2010 17:21:00 +0000

John Piper did an excellent (or, if you disagree, at least thought-provoking) job of articulating what is really at stake in this discussion: advocates of the "free will" of man are really out to establish the absolute autonomy of the creature.

Listen to E.M. Bounds' bio for free

noreply@blogger.com (RevMack) — Mon, 17 May 2010 18:00:00 +0000

This month's free download from Christianaudio is the biography of E.M. Bounds. Take a minute to pick one up ad give it a listen! A number of other biographies are on sale as well.

He cannot love you more!

noreply@blogger.com (RevMack) — Mon, 03 May 2010 14:21:00 +0000

Here is an excerpt from this morning's Grace Gems devotional:

The Lord cares for His children!

He knows our needs--and has promised to supply them.
He knows our foes--and will deliver us from them.
He knows our fears--and will make us ashamed of them.

All creatures and things are in His hand, and at His disposal; all circumstances are under His absolute control. He . . .
directs the angel,
feeds the sparrow,
curbs the devil, and
manages the tempest!

He is your Father--and His love to you is infinite. You are His delight--His dear child. Will He neglect you? Impossible! Cast then your cares upon Him. Tell out all your desires, fears, and troubles to Him; let Him know everything; keep nothing back. And then in the confidence of faith, expect Him to fulfill His Word, and act a Parent's part.

Bless Him for all He has given, for all He has promised. Plead with Him for all you may need. But never for one moment, or under any circumstances, distrust Him! He cannot love you more! He is your ever present help. He will rejoice over you to do you good, with His whole heart, and with His whole soul.

- James Smith, "The Pastor's Morning Visit"

I'm Sorry, Mom

noreply@blogger.com (RevMack) — Sun, 02 May 2010 14:21:00 +0000

Eternity

noreply@blogger.com (RevMack) — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 13:03:00 +0000

From this morning's Grace Gems Puritan devotional:

"It is this eternality and perpetuity, which completes the happiness of the inhabitants of heaven; the least suspicion of an end--would intermingle itself with all their enjoyments, and embitter them; for the greater the happiness, the greater the anxiety at the expectation of losing it. But oh, how transporting for the saints on high, to look forward through the succession of eternal ages, with an assurance that they shall be happy through them all, and that they shall feel no change--but from glory unto glory!

"On the other hand, this is the bitterest ingredient in the 'cup of divine displeasure' in the future state--that the misery is eternal! Oh, with what horror does that despairing cry, "Forever! Forever! Forever!" echo through the vaults of hell!

"And now, need I offer anything further to convince you of the superior importance of invisible and eternal things--to visible and temporary things? Can you need any arguments to convince you that an eternity of the most perfect happiness--is rather to be chosen than a few years of sordid, unsatisfying sinful pleasures?"
- Samuel Davies

Come Thou Fount

noreply@blogger.com (RevMack) — Sat, 03 Apr 2010 18:16:00 +0000

We don't often hear the entire hymn, and it is powerful:

Come, Thou Fount of every blessing,
Tune my heart to sing Thy grace;
Streams of mercy, never ceasing,
Call for songs of loudest praise.
Teach me some melodious sonnet,
Sung by flaming tongues above.
Praise the mount! I’m fixed upon it,
Mount of Thy redeeming love.

Sorrowing I shall be in spirit,
Till released from flesh and sin,
Yet from what I do inherit,
Here Thy praises I’ll begin;
Here I raise my Ebenezer;
Here by Thy great help I’ve come;
And I hope, by Thy good pleasure,
Safely to arrive at home.

Jesus sought me when a stranger,
Wandering from the fold of God;
He, to rescue me from danger,
Interposed His precious blood;
How His kindness yet pursues me
Mortal tongue can never tell,
Clothed in flesh, till death shall loose me
I cannot proclaim it well.

O to grace how great a debtor
Daily I’m constrained to be!
Let Thy goodness, like a fetter,
Bind my wandering heart to Thee.
Prone to wander, Lord, I feel it,
Prone to leave the God I love;
Here’s my heart, O take and seal it,
Seal it for Thy courts above.

O that day when freed from sinning,
I shall see Thy lovely face;
Clothed then in blood washed linen
How I’ll sing Thy sovereign grace;
Come, my Lord, no longer tarry,
Take my ransomed soul away;
Send thine angels now to carry
Me to realms of endless day.

Practice Your Division

noreply@blogger.com (RevMack) — Mon, 22 Mar 2010 13:44:00 +0000

A father recently visited his daughter's second-grade class at school, and saw something that troubled him deeply. The teacher was quizzing the students on their addition facts. When the teacher asked the class, "What is two plus two?" Some of the students responded "four," others "three," and still others had no idea.

The father was incensed! But . . .

He wasn't angry that many in the class didn't know the correct answer. He was angry - furious - that the teacher would present material that divided the class. How dare that teacher create a divisive spirit among those innocent children!

He spoke to the school administrators, addressed the PTA, started petitions and awareness campaigns, and finally gained the attention of the DOE, where he found an attentive audience. Through his hard work and passion, the father succeeded in having math class banned from schools.

Now . . . remove the word "math" from my clumsy little parable, and substitute "doctrine".

People are incensed at the presentation of doctrine. Pastors are shamed into silence or at best ambiguity. Why? Because doctrine divides.

Yes, doctrine divides. But . . . it is supposed to (e.g., Titus 1:9). It is supposed to divide the true from the false. And that is not a Pauline novelty -- that is a core of Jesus' teaching in the Gospels. In fact, the ultimate division is coming (think: wheat from tares, sheep from goats).

While we need to take great pains that our delivery is not off-putting, insofar as we can, we must nevertheless pursue the highest possible standards of quality, veracity, and effectiveness in our preaching of doctrine. We must "speak the truth in love," but we must never forget that we must speak the truth.

Science bids farewell to Fred Flintstone

noreply@blogger.com (RevMack) — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 16:09:00 +0000

Just read this transcript from Today's Creation Moment. One of the most pernicious evolutionary infiltrates in the church would have to be the notion of "prehistoric people". When we read the Old Testament we tend to picture primeval caravans of near-savages (Christopher Hitchens certainly clings to this sort of prejudice!) But science tells a far different story:

"Cavemen. The very word conjures images of bear skin clothing, wooden clubs and perhaps some simple stone tools. We think of the cavemen themselves as part ape and certainly less than modern humans. All of these images help make human evolution look more plausible.

However, in China there are some 20 million people living in caves. The caves there are easily carved in the silty soil of the Western regions of the Yellow River. The caves are generally 10 to 13 feet wide and can extend as far as 25 feet back into the hillside. Sometimes the caves are connected to one another, creating a larger place to live. Many of the people who live in these caves would not think of moving out of them. Caves are warm in the winter, cool in the summer, and they are fireproof. These caves include flues for venting the exhaust from cooking fires. But these caves are not primitive dwellings by any stretch of the imagination. They feature plumbing, electrical wiring and even cable television! Except for windows, some of these cave homes are as modern as anything you’ll see in the rest of the developing world.

Throughout the ages, people have taken shelter in caves and even set up housekeeping in them. The fact that they lived in caves does not make them primitive at all."

Abstinence Ed Works

noreply@blogger.com (RevMack) — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 00:03:00 +0000

In a recent issue of TIME (Feb 15, 2010, p. 15) , #9 of the "10 Essential Stories" reports:

"According to a study published in the Archives of Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine, abstinence-only sex-education programs proved more effective in encouraging teens to delay having sex than more comprehensive school programs that include information about safe sex and contraceptive options."

Well, duh.

God is Always Good.

noreply@blogger.com (RevMack) — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 15:34:00 +0000

One year ago our daughter was dying. We didn't know it. For weeks she grew more and more lethargic, while other symptoms which we recognize only in hindsight began to present themselves. We took her to the doctor for testing, and he called us a few hours later: her blood sugar was well over 600 (normal is around 100). We needed to get her to the emergency room at Children's Medical in Salt Lake City immediately.

Twenty-four hours later she had been hooked up to IVs, pumped full of medications, and finally she was stabilized and on the road to recovery. And she was a Type I diabetic. Our little 2-year-old would be getting 5-6 injections of insulin, or more, every day for the rest of her life.

And here is where theology kicks in. As I reflect on that time, I recognize that God was not standing by, helplessly wringing His hands as He watched her pancreas shut down. God's Providence was clear through the entire process. God's Providence was clear in the way my wife's heart was unsettled, and perceived danger in ambiguous symptoms. It was clear in the speedy, decisive test results and diagnosis. His watch-care was glorious, dazzling, in the way our daughter's body responded to treatment. His grace has been so clear in watching our 2 (now 3)-year-old enduring the constant needles.

AND . . . this is so very important . . . His Providence, His glorious will, was active and real and decisive when that little malfunction in Alison's body triggered the reaction that put her in the hospital. God gave her a perceptive mother. God gave her a caring, experienced doctor. AND God gave her diabetes (Isaiah 46:9-10, Psalm 33:8-11). That is not an accusation. It is worship.

God is sovereign. Period. Whether Alison's medical condition stems from God's permission or His intervention, this is part of the Potter's grand design for her life and ours. And He is no less loving, no less merciful, and no less good, after the diagnosis than He was before. He is God. He is glorious. And the difficult and distressing times are no less His tools because we finite human beings struggle to understand them.

"But now, O Lord, You are our Father.

We are the clay, and you our Potter;

And all of us are the work of your hand."

Isaiah 64:8

Thank you, Lord, for Alison. And thank you, Lord, for Alison's diabetes.

Back in the Saddle

noreply@blogger.com (RevMack) — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 15:25:00 +0000

Some time ago I felt it best to shut down the blog. Today I HAD to pry open the door, pull the dustcloths off the furniture, and let the sun in . . . at least for a little while. I'll be back in a minute to do some splaining.

The Emperor Goes Soul-Winning

noreply@blogger.com (RevMack) — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 20:22:00 +0000

or, "Why in the world is this guy bragging about THAT?"

Here is a quote from a prominent church's website, touting their pastor's career stats as his bona fides:

"Before becoming the pastor of the [church name], [pastor] served as the youth pastor. Under his leadership, the [church] teenagers have been used by the Lord to see over 260,000 people won to Christ, with over 30,000 of those following the Lord in baptism."

In other words, just over 1 in 10 of these supposed converts actually demonstrated obedience to God. Why in the world is this guy touting this statistic? All it proves is that either (a) God is really bad at follow-up, or (b) this pastor has no CLUE about the Gospel.

Hilarious

noreply@blogger.com (RevMack) — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 17:25:00 +0000

Check out the funniest guys since Victor Borge:

Why "Wronger" Should Be a Word

noreply@blogger.com (RevMack) — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 14:56:00 +0000

Reading Charles Ryrie's Basic Theology in preparation for a Sunday school lesson, and came across a phrase that was so wrong that it begs a new, more intensive word: there's wrong, but then there is wronger. Now, I'm not knocking Ryrie or his book, as a whole. But this particular claim was pretty far off the beam:

"Historically, this consideration has been labeled the ordo salutis, or way of salvation, and it attempts to arrange in logical order (not temporal order) these activities involved in applying salvation to the individual. But like the question of the order of the decrees in lapsarianism, the ordo salutis in reality contributes little of substance."
- Charles Caldwell Ryrie, Basic Theology : A Popular Systemic Guide to Understanding Biblical Truth (Chicago, Ill.: Moody Press, 1999), 374.

Au contraire, mon ami. There is a universe of difference between a soteriology that begins with faith, and one that begins with regeneration. One is synergistic; one monergistic -- and that is two totally different gospels at the core. In fact, I would argue that the ordo salutis is one of the watershed issues of the whole debate!

True Courage

noreply@blogger.com (RevMack) — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 15:56:00 +0000

Studying for Sunday's sermon, from Ruth 1. Alexander MacLaren captures Ruth's character beautifully:

Put the sweet figure of the Moabitess beside the heroes of the Book of Judges , and we feel the contrast. But is there anything in its pages more truly heroic than her deed, as she turned her back on the blue hills of Moab, and chose the joyless lot of the widowed companion of a widow aged and poor, in a land of strangers, the enemies of her country and its gods? It is easier far to rush on the spears of the foe, amid the whirl and excitement of battle, than to choose with open eyes so dreary a lifelong path. The gentleness of a true woman covers a courage of the patient, silent sort, which, in its meek steadfastness, is nobler than the contempt of personal danger, which is vulgarly called bravery. It is harder to endure than to strike. The supreme type of heroic, as of all, virtue is Jesus Christ, whose gentleness was the velvet glove on the iron hand of an inflexible will. Of that best kind of heroes there are few brighter examples, even in the annals of the Church which numbers its virgin martyrs by the score, than this sweet figure of Ruth, as the eager vow comes from her young lips, which had already tasted sorrow, and were ready to drink its bitterest cup at the call of duty. She may well teach us to rectify our judgments, and to recognise the quiet heroism of many a modest life of uncomplaining suffering. Her example has a special message to women, and exhorts them to see to it that, in the cultivation of the so-called womanly excellence of gentleness, they do not let it run into weakness, nor, on the other hand, aim at strength, to the loss of meekness. The yielding birch-tree, the ‘lady of the woods,’ bends in all its elastic branches and tossing ringlets of foliage to the wind; but it stands upright after storms that level oaks and pines. God’s strength is gentle strength, and ours is likest His when it is meek and lowly, like that of the ‘strong Son of God.’

- Alexander Maclaren, Expositions of the Holy Scripture (DEUTERONOMY, JOSHUA, JUDGES, RUTH, 1 SAMUEL, 2 SAMUEL, 1 KINGS, AND 2 KINGS Chapters I to VII), 130.

Stealth Mysticism

noreply@blogger.com (RevMack) — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 14:48:00 +0000

There is a widely-accepted rule in hermeneutics called the Law of (or the Principle of) First Mention. I remember hearing about it in church when I was growing up, indeed hearing entire sermons based on a "truth" derived by the First-Mention Principle. I don't remember hearing it taught in the first Bible college I attended because they, somewhat tellingly, did not even OFFER hermeneutics (the last thing a hireling needs is someone being taught shepherding skills!). I was, however, taught this principle in a hermeneutics class in the second Bible college I attended.

But the more I reflected on it, this Principle of First Mention is a serious fallacy. Think about it: if the key to interpreting any person, place, thing, or idea in Scripture is to be found in its first appearance, this is the opposite of progressive revelation. The key to understanding redemption, for example, is not Genesis 3:15; it is the full exposition in Paul's writings. If the key to understanding lions is the first mention of a lion in the Bible, what exactly are we to learn from Genesis 49:9

“Judah is a lion’s whelp;
From the prey, my son, you have gone up.
He couches, he lies down as a lion,
And as a lion, who dares rouse him up?"

Are we to, upon later learning that Christ is the lion of Judah, teach that He had made sin and death His prey, and, let's see . . . He crouches, He lies down, so that refers to His resting after completing His work . . .

Oh, the sermons we could write. Oh, the ears we could tickle. The only problem is that NONE of that is in the Text! And the Principle is shown to be a quiet, stealthy infiltration, an unguarded back-door through which allegorizing and spiritualizing creeps in.

I'd be interested to learn the provenance of this First-Mention Principle. Who came up with this idea? Were they prone to spiritualizing the Text in other ways?

And are there other fallacies lurking in the methods we employ to prepare the weekly meal for His flock?

Who Cares?

noreply@blogger.com (RevMack) — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:22:00 +0000

Came across a new religious phenomenon today. From Wikipedia:

"Apatheism (a portmanteau of apathy and theism/atheism), also known as pragmatic or critically as practical atheism, is acting with apathy, disregard, or lack of interest towards belief, or lack of belief in a deity. Apatheism describes the manner of acting towards a belief or lack of a belief in a deity; so applies to both theism and atheism. An apatheist is also someone who is not interested in accepting or denying any claims that gods exist or do not exist. In other words, an apatheist is someone who considers the question of the existence of gods as neither meaningful nor relevant to his or her life."

And from apatheist.tribe.net:

"Every religion has dogma, and insists that their particular version answers the question of whether one or more gods exist. Apatheists insist that the question itself is irrelavent.

"If you get frustrated trying to decide if you're really an Atheist or an Agnostic, or a member of any other religion, and also realize that, in your day to day existence, it doesn't really MATTER which religion you belong to, then you might be an Apatheist!"

More commentary later.

More Texts to Avoid

noreply@blogger.com (RevMack) — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 18:59:00 +0000

Haven't done one of these for a very long time, so I thought I'd bring this text back to your attention. Here is a text you definitely want to avoid, if you want to remain comfortably Arminian:

1 Corinthians 1:22-31
22 For indeed Jews ask for signs and Greeks search for wisdom;
23 but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness,
24 but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.
25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
26 For consider your calling, brethren, that there were not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble;
27 but God has chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to shame the things which are strong,
28 and the base things of the world and the despised God has chosen, the things that are not, so that He may nullify the things that are,
29 so that no man may boast before God.
30 But by His doing you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption,
31 so that, just as it is written, “Let him who boasts, boast in the Lord.”

Hear, Hear!

noreply@blogger.com (RevMack) — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 16:25:00 +0000

I know it's old news, but it still stirs me.

The Ultimate Counseling Technique

noreply@blogger.com (RevMack) — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 15:23:00 +0000

Theology Matters, Indeed!

noreply@blogger.com (RevMack) — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 17:20:00 +0000

As James White is fond of pointing out, "theology matters". Our theology, particularly our soteriology, will drive the way we evangelize. It will dictate the form our apologetics will take. From Spurgon:

"Other forces, more mighty, but not so visible, have been employed to promote the sway of Jesus. Never has he invoked the secular arm, he has left that to Antichrist, and the seed thereof. No demand has been made by him upon human governments to patronize or enforce Christianity. On the contrary, wherever governments have patronized Christianity at all, they have either killed it, or else the infinite mercy of God alone has preserved it from extinction. Jesus would not have the unbeliever fined, or imprisoned, or cut off from the rights of citizenship; he would not allow any one of his disciples to lift a finger to harm the vilest blasphemer, or touch one hair of an atheist’s head. He would have men won to himself by no sword but that of the Spirit, and bound to him by no bands but those of love. Never, never, in the church of God has a true conversion been wrought by the use of carnal means, the Lord will not so far approve of the power of the flesh. You do not find the Lord calling in the pomp and prestige of worldly men to promote his kingdom, or see him arguing with philosophers that they might sanction his teaching. I know that Christian ministers do this, and I am sorry they do. I see them talking their places in the Hall of Science to debate with the men of boastful wisdom; they claim to have achieved great mental victories there, and I will not question their claim, but spiritual triumphs I fear they will never win in this way. They have answered one set of arguments, and another set have been invented the next day; the task is endless; to answer the allegations of infidelity is as fruitless as to reason with the waves of the sea, so far as soul-saving is concerned. This is not the way of quickening, converting, and sanctifying the souls of men. Not as a book of science wilt thou triumph, O Bible, though thine every word is wisdom’s self! Not as a
great philosopher wilt thou conquer, O Man of Nazareth, though thou art indeed the possessor of all knowledge; but as the Savior of men and the Son of God shall thy kingdom come!"

Context - Context - Context

noreply@blogger.com (RevMack) — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 16:20:00 +0000

"The Bible ought to be treated in the reading of it as any other book is treated, only with much more of reverential regard. Suppose that Milton’s “Paradise Lost “were used as a text-book, and that its general mode of usage were to take separate lines disconnected from the rest of the great poem, and consider them as positive statements, and suitable topics of meditation; it would he a dangerous experiment, the great poet might well stir in his grave at the proposal.
"Such a mode of study reminds me of the Grecian student, who, when he had a house to sell, carried a brick about the streets to show what kind of a house it was. The Bible ought not to be torn limb from limb, and its joints hung up like meat in the shambles. Beyond all other books it will bear dissection, for it is vital in every sentence and word. Since it is a mosaic of priceless gems, you will be enriched even if you extract a jewel here and there, but to behold its divine beauty you must contemplate the mosaic as a whole. No idea of the magnificent design of the entire Scriptures can enter the human mind by reading it in detached portions, especially if those separated passages are interpreted without reference to the run of the writer’s thoughts. Let Scripture be read according to the rules of common sense, and that will necessitate our reading through a book and following its train of thought. Thus shall we be likely to arrive at the mind of the Holy Spirit."
- C. H. Spurgeon
"The Gentleness of Jesus"

Classic

noreply@blogger.com (RevMack) — Thu, 28 May 2009 21:10:00 +0000

Hilarious, as always.

He Didn't Sweatt the Details

noreply@blogger.com (RevMack) — Thu, 28 May 2009 20:19:00 +0000

I finally got around to seeing what all the kerfuffle was about (and to finding an opportunity to use the word "kerfuffle").

Last month, at a regional FBFI conference, Pastor Dan Sweatt of Berean Baptist Church ranted (one could hardly call it "preaching") about the mass defection of young preachers from the ranks of fundamentalism (read: fundamentalist circles approved by the IFB pantheon) toward conservative evangelicalism as represented by men like MacArthur, Piper, et al.

This message was particularly significant to me, as I was reared in fundmentalist, independent Baptist circles. And I, too, have begun to identify more with the preaching ministries of John MacArthur, Alistair Begg, and others. I made the move because fundamentalism absolutely refuses to police itself. Fundamentalism, as a movement, has no problem with shepherds who have mutton on their breath. At the same time, in MacArthur, James Kennedy, et al I sensed a love and compassion for people and a commitment to careful expository preaching -- something else sadly lacking in those hailed as heroes of fundamentalism. So, it sounded like Sweatt was going to tell my story.

And he did, though not, I would guess, in the way he intended to. His talk (I refuse to call it a sermon) consisted of a heterogeneous blend of personal anecdotes (of which he was the hero, or into which he somehow inserted himself regardless of the point of the story), quick head-bobs at prooftexts, fawning devotion to men that he SHOULD identify as hirelings but instead venerates, and red-faced invectives against other Christian leaders.

And, of course, he manages to work in some Calvin-bashing as well. Good times.

Here's a news flash for ya, Dan-o -- that is EXACTLY why I fled your camp, never EVER to return. You represented, on that platform, everything that is wrong with fundamentalism, everything that drives thinking people away. Everything from your mistreatment of Scripture, to your gross misrepresentation of Calvinism, to your internally inconsistent critiques of anyone who falls outside your self-erected boundaries of orthopraxy -- all of this drives us away. In a nutshell, we're leaving fundamentalism because the guys being allowed to drive fundamentalism are jerks.

I'm not going to bother with an item-by-item reply to the nonsense that was belched out at that conference. Others have devoted time to that task. For a detailed (and much more level-headed) rebuttal of Sweatt's offal, see this article from Central Seminary's Kevin Bauder (HT: John Piper).

But the bottom line, for me, is this: until fundamentalism does a better job of repudiating this sort of behavior, my prayer is that more and more young preachers leave. I am GLAD to hear of empires crumbling, of indoctrination centers closing. It's a GOOD sign. Until fundamentalism discovers a love for real expository preaching and a hatred of eisogetic spleen-venting, until fundamentalism discovers a love for people and a hatred for numbers-oriented pragmatism, until fundamentalism discovers that holiness is defined by Christ-likeness, not activity . . . then the best thing for the body of Christ would be for fundamentalism to continue to shrink into irrelevance.

And, if you're going to interact with any theological discussion, Danny Boy, you need to stop playing for cheap amens and Sweatt the details before you speak.