This is rather interesting. Jon Stogsdill, thy wife posted this on Facebook, so I assume you'll read it, one way or the other. You made the blog again! WOO! I bet you're wondering why I said, "thy." Because it sounds awesome, that's why. I digress.
There's no accounting for taste, really, but my favorite Jesus music by a landslide if we're talking pop is Rich Mullins. And this essay tells us why. He was unflinchingly real. I hope he made it to the Big Show, because he seems like my kind of guy. I promise you, if you didn't know he was a Jesus freak, the music will not give it away by itself, like this guy says. And when you sing to me, I have to believe you. If I don't, who cares what it's about? This is your official Digression Warning.
I have been on a Kenny Loggins kick for a week now. Leap Of Faith. Remember when I said I'd listen to it multiple times? Yeah, about that...I'm obsessed. I am on a quest to figure out why. This is the best I can do: whatever that hippie is singing about, I believe him. He could be singing about the glories of pineapple chunks, and I'd be like, "Darn right, Kenny! I love pineapples!"
Derek Webb, by contrast? I could care less. Why? Because he's preachy, in that prideful, possibly secretly guilty of something sort of way. Theological Rant Warning.
"I am a whore I do confess/I put you on just like a wedding dress and I/Run down the aisle..." Remember that? In fairness, let's say, he doesn't view this as a good thing. But frankly, this is imputed righteousness in a nutshell. As soon as you desire to actually be holy, because something inside of you knows you should, (even if this is already affirmed in your theology) you're on the road to Rome. The only consistent thing to do in Reformed theology is to ignore your sinfulness. If you are declared righteous for the sake of Christ, God can't even see your sinfulness, much less require you to change it, under penalty of damnation. The whole section in Chapter XV of the WCF is a waste of breath, if imputed righteousness is true. But if the subjective experience of sin actually points to a real conflict with the holiness of God that demands satisfaction, then Chapter XI is false. And that'll lead you right out of the Reformation, I'm telling you. Because either your feelings are lying to you (Satan accusing you falsely, in which case, ignore them) or not, in which case, TE Johnny-Bob was wrong to go on and on about the "finished work of Christ" yadda yadda. Historical Continuity Bonus: What if the original people who came up with the idea of justification by faith alone were not actually the Church? No, really. Try not to die. In terms of that deposit with which someone has been entrusted, would the doctrinal content itself change, depending on the holiness or lack thereof of the one who proposed it? [No, but it makes it harder to accept.--ed.] Amen, I hear you. So here's the upshot, though: corrupt authorities have nothing whatsoever to do with the truth value of doctrine x. It either came from Christ, or it did not. A moral protest of lament over sin does not become a doctrinal revolution unless someone is pulling a fast one, or the Church's doctrine had always been false. In which case, Christ has failed us. (Let's piously rule that last one out, shall we?) What is the Church? Where is it? Are you sure you're in it? How do you know?
There's no accounting for taste, really, but my favorite Jesus music by a landslide if we're talking pop is Rich Mullins. And this essay tells us why. He was unflinchingly real. I hope he made it to the Big Show, because he seems like my kind of guy. I promise you, if you didn't know he was a Jesus freak, the music will not give it away by itself, like this guy says. And when you sing to me, I have to believe you. If I don't, who cares what it's about? This is your official Digression Warning.
I have been on a Kenny Loggins kick for a week now. Leap Of Faith. Remember when I said I'd listen to it multiple times? Yeah, about that...I'm obsessed. I am on a quest to figure out why. This is the best I can do: whatever that hippie is singing about, I believe him. He could be singing about the glories of pineapple chunks, and I'd be like, "Darn right, Kenny! I love pineapples!"
Derek Webb, by contrast? I could care less. Why? Because he's preachy, in that prideful, possibly secretly guilty of something sort of way. Theological Rant Warning.
"I am a whore I do confess/I put you on just like a wedding dress and I/Run down the aisle..." Remember that? In fairness, let's say, he doesn't view this as a good thing. But frankly, this is imputed righteousness in a nutshell. As soon as you desire to actually be holy, because something inside of you knows you should, (even if this is already affirmed in your theology) you're on the road to Rome. The only consistent thing to do in Reformed theology is to ignore your sinfulness. If you are declared righteous for the sake of Christ, God can't even see your sinfulness, much less require you to change it, under penalty of damnation. The whole section in Chapter XV of the WCF is a waste of breath, if imputed righteousness is true. But if the subjective experience of sin actually points to a real conflict with the holiness of God that demands satisfaction, then Chapter XI is false. And that'll lead you right out of the Reformation, I'm telling you. Because either your feelings are lying to you (Satan accusing you falsely, in which case, ignore them) or not, in which case, TE Johnny-Bob was wrong to go on and on about the "finished work of Christ" yadda yadda. Historical Continuity Bonus: What if the original people who came up with the idea of justification by faith alone were not actually the Church? No, really. Try not to die. In terms of that deposit with which someone has been entrusted, would the doctrinal content itself change, depending on the holiness or lack thereof of the one who proposed it? [No, but it makes it harder to accept.--ed.] Amen, I hear you. So here's the upshot, though: corrupt authorities have nothing whatsoever to do with the truth value of doctrine x. It either came from Christ, or it did not. A moral protest of lament over sin does not become a doctrinal revolution unless someone is pulling a fast one, or the Church's doctrine had always been false. In which case, Christ has failed us. (Let's piously rule that last one out, shall we?) What is the Church? Where is it? Are you sure you're in it? How do you know?
Comments