Help us to admit that we cannot truly love our neighbor as ourselves and then scheme to get his money by enticing him with vain hope. May they not lead this state to share profits from an industry that preys on greed or desperation.

Help us to foster salaries and not slot machines, to build cars and enable jobs—not license casinos and seduce the simple into losing what they have. May their greatest concern not be that we get our share of the family’s losses, but that we foster a sense of hope and justice that creates opportunity and leads to success.

Bully for York for offering a courageous prayer in the face of such pressure. In doing so, he is standing in a long line of preachers and prophets who had the opportunity and courage to cry out against the iniquity of the day. Like Nathan the prophet rebuking King David, or John Knox shaking his finger in the face of the Queen, York besought God publicly for politicians to put righteousness ahead of expediency. Sadly, his prayer fell on the governor’s deaf ears, as the video linked above demonstrates: Beshear followed York’s invocation by continuing to angle for legalized gaming.

The other man worthy of commendation, also a Southern Baptist, is Voddie Baucham, Pastor of Preaching at the Grace Family Baptist Church of Spring, Texas. Baucham was invited to fill the spot vacated by Mark Dever in James MacDonald’s Elephant Room 2. Dever bowed out when he learned that MacDonald had also invited Bishop T. D. Jakes of the Potter’s House; Jakes is a Oneness Pentecostal who preaches a prosperity gospel. With Dever gone, MacDonald invited Baucham to stand in. Baucham considered the venue and the invitation of Jakes and declined the invitation.

However, Baucham had already been scheduled to preach at a Harvest-sponsored Men’s Conference that followed shortly after the Elephant Room 2 conversation. Enough has been written on the lack of clarity with which Jakes answered the questions on his view of the Trinity and the shallowness of the nature of some of those questions. However, Baucham had to field questions from his own constituency about the Elephant Room conversation because of the following Men’s Conference.

Because of the lack of clarity on the Trinity and the failure of the ER2 participants to address Jakes’s prosperity gospel, Baucham responded publicly to the issue via his Facebook page knowing full well that he was to preach for MacDonald soon thereafter. Baucham showed up at Harvest and, after a brief conversation with MacDonald, was disinvited from speaking at the Men’s Conference. Baucham’s rationale for speaking out against the ER2 interview with Jakes may be found here.

Whether or not one agrees with these men over their association with the Southern Baptist Convention, we can certainly appreciate their forthright stand for righteousness in the face of a clear challenge to truth. York could have privately admonished the governor against the gambling issue and Baucham could have chosen remain silent after the ER2 meeting, but both men felt that silence on their part implied some form of tacit agreement. Both men are to be commended for the stand. They serve as models of gracious opposition.

I get the fact that many Christians can use help in these areas. But is a “what wrong with _____” chapter or a “bed-in” really the solution? Do we need to add a class for our students counseling the sexually dysfunctional? Do pastors need to become sexperts?

How is it a nationally recognized speaker can excoriate a photographer in front of perhaps 500 witnesses for taking pictures during his public presentation, but that same voice can not withdraw his approval publicly from this kind of Christian voyuerism? I guess the gospel covers a multitude of sins! How is that we can get together for the gospel, but we cannot lift our voices together before a reprobate world that enough is enough! How about a conference on true spirituality? Where is Isaiah when we need him? Is there anyone who will throw the money changers out of the temple?

Maybe this is the real elephant in the evangelical room. We have no real voice in the darkening world, just a cacophony of confusion. Ichabod!

The popular definition of rhetoric includes, at minimum, the elements of bombast and verbal trickery. This understanding has led to a kind of pseudo-sophisticated distrust of rhetoric. A speaker’s or writer’s ideas can often be dismissed simply by declaring, “That’s not an argument, that’s just rhetoric.”

This mistaken understanding is unfortunate. Rhetoric, together with grammar and logic, is a basic tool of thought, a fundamental component of the life of the mind. The failure to master rhetoric cripples careful thinking by leaving people illiterate. Those who cannot critique rhetoric thoughtfully are typically the first to follow demagogues and propagandists.

Some displays of rhetoric are clearly unethical. These occur, for example, when a speaker uses flourishes to make himself seem impressive or half-truths to manipulate his listeners. At its worst, rhetoric can become mere propaganda. These uses are probably what the apostle Paul has in mind when he denounces “excellency of speech” and “enticing words” in 1 Corinthians 1 (a chapter in which Paul shows himself to be a master of rhetoric).

Nevertheless, these are the abuses and not the uses of rhetoric. Rhetoric has a vital role in both speaking and writing. It involves the skill of ordering ideas so that people are able to follow a sequence of thought. It includes the removal of obstacles that would impede legitimate persuasion. An effective rhetor is able to lead his listeners or readers to observe the world from a new and different point of view so that they can intelligently consider its legitimacy.

In other words, rhetoric has an ethic. Richard Weaver is a rhetor. He understands the use and abuse of rhetoric. As the title implies, in The Ethics of Rhetoric he inquires into the nature of ethical rhetoric, contrasting it with the unethical.

Weaver proceeds by way of analyzing historical examples. He begins with a discussion of Plato’s Phaedrus, employing the Socratic dialogue as an analogy for the right use of rhetoric. He contrasts the rhetoric of Bryan and Darrow at the Scopes trial. He critiques Edmund Burke’s argument from circumstances, and he offers a lucid glimpse into the thinking and speechmaking of Abraham Lincoln.

Having led his reader to distinguish ethical from unethical rhetoric, Weaver turns to his contemporary situation (1950s America). He discovers plenty of unethical rhetoric in both press and politics. He notes the tendency to vest secondary terms with ultimate importance, then to load these terms to “great advantage to a nation bent upon organizing its power to be able to stigmatize some neighbor” by employing “the term’s capacity for irrational assumption.”

This is the kind of thing that makes Weaver worth reading. He is another of those authors who deserves an entire shelf in your library—whatever he writes merits pondering. Here is one of his concluding observations.

An ethics of rhetoric requires that ultimate terms be ultimate in some rational sense. The only way to achieve that objective is through an ordering of our own minds and our own passions. Every one of psychological sophistication knows that there is a pleasure in willed perversity, and the setting up of perverse shibboleths is a fairly common source of that pleasure. War cries, school slogans, coterie passwords, and all similar expressions are examples of such creation. There may be areas of play in which these are nothing more than a diversion; but there are other areas in which such expressions lure us down the roads of hatred and tragedy. That is the tendency of all words of false or “engineered” charisma. They often sound like the very gospel of one’s society, but in fact they betray us; they get us to do what the adversary of human being wants us to do. It is worth considering whether the real civil disobedience must not begin with our language.

Steve and I were born but one year apart. I turn 55 next month, so Steve’s passing hits a little closer to home. It reminds me (as it should remind us all) that life is fleeting and we are mortal. Lord, teach us to number our days and apply our hearts to wisdom! What shall a man give in exchange for his own life?

As the world of Apple mourns the loss of their captain and commander (Steve formally stepped down as Apple’s CEO in late August), let us all remember that life is a gift from God and our days are in His hands. Let us live them for His glory and remember that it is appointed for a man once to die, and after this the judgment. Steve had everything that money could buy, but money cannot buy life itself. That is completely in God’s hands.

I left the meeting, however, working through the emotions of listening to Jim and Susie Goodew talk about the loss of their 21 year old son Titus in February of this year. Everyone present was touched by the pain of their loss as the Goodews opened their hearts in a transparency seldom seen. Titus’s life and suicide have touched many lives. Jim and Susie expressed with unusual clarity the depth of their personal sense of loss, and also the ways in which their own healing process has helped numbers of people. The support of their church, encouragement from other brothers and sisters in Christ (over 600 cards), and the prayers of many helped them through a healing process that is still ongoing.

I am reminded to continue to pray for the Goodews and “to weep with those who weep.” Their recovery continues and so should our prayers.

We will meet in Room 241 (the room where we have chapel). We want to see what is working and what we need to improve, and we will exchange mentoring ideas that have proven beneficial. Additionally, I want to encourage the pastors to find ways to help our students’ wives in the mentoring process.

Our Mentoring Partnership is designed to enlist the help of area churches in training men for the ministry. This partnership is founded on the seminary’s commitment to the local church and is designed to strengthen the relationship between its students and area pastors. The design is to meet the needs of students to learn the ministry from first-hand practitioners in the church while simultaneously learning skills in the classroom.

Please review the mentoring section of our website and come with suggestions. Contact me if you have any questions. I look forward to seeing you on Pastors’ Day after lunch.

Typically, when we receive a donated book, we check first to see if it is needed in our own library, either to add to our collection or to replace a book that has been heavily used. Then we check our collection in Romania. If the book is in both collections, we offer it for sale to area pastors and our students at our annual book sale. These books are all reasonably priced: from $.50 for some paperbacks to $1, $2, $5 or $10. Only rarely will any book be priced over $5, and there are several sets that are being sold for less than $1 per volume.

Not all of these books are older and less useful books. Many are still being used in discussions of church history, systematic theology, and biblical exegesis. So make your plans accordingly! The annual seminary library book sale promises some real bargains for the avid Christian bibliophile!

Dates: Monday and Tuesday, October 10–11

A Review.

In general, the Contours of Christian Theology series (ed. Gerald Bray) is thoughtful and well-done. The volumes in this series form a rather complete systematic theology. Sinclair Ferguson’s book on the Holy Spirit is one of the better contributions.

The tendency of systematic theologies is to look and feel like catalogs of ideas. Ferguson’s treatment is structured as a systematic theology of the Spirit, and he moves through the traditional loci. The “catalog of ideas” phenomenon is definitely present in the book.

The work is unified more by author’s overall theological perspective than by any other factor (except, of course, the topic of pneumatology). Ferguson’s perspective is definitely Reformed, but without being uncharitable. At one point he even recommends the work of Leon Wood, who was a rather traditional dispensationalist.

Ferguson handles the traditional topics well. For example, in his discussion of procession, he notes that contemporary Protestantism “tends to be impatient” with the subtle distinctions that the discussion requires, not to mention suspicious of the exegesis that has led to Western conclusions. His unpacking of the topic, however, is both competent and informative, even if brief (as the series format doubtless dictates). Not surprisingly, Ferguson ends up defending filioque.

If the economic relations of the Trinity illumine the ontological relationships within the Trinity (which is the case throughout the New Testament), then, since the Spirit proceeds on his mission from both Father and Son, it is appropriate to think of him as proceeding personally within the Godhead (ontologically in this sense) from both Father and Son. (77)

On the question of miraculous gifts, Ferguson lands firmly among the cessationists. He ties these gifts to the presence of apostles, making the classic argument that with the apostles off the scene, the miraculous gifts cease. He argues that the tongues of Acts and the tongues of Corinth were the same gift, that of speaking in unlearned, foreign languages. Surprisingly, he is one of the few who still finds a cessationist text in 1 Corinthians 13:8-12. He also discusses and rejects Wayne Grudem’s theory of prophecy.

Dispensationalists of the more traditional variety will be unhappy with a few aspects of Ferguson’s treatment. For example, since he affirms an inaugurated eschatology, he naturally ties certain ministries of the Spirit to eschatological fulfillments. If one is aware of Ferguson’s commitment to Reformed thought, however, such matters can be taken in stride.

This book would make a decent textbook for a seminary course on pneumatology, particularly if it were supplemented with other materials. It is (or should be) well within the competence of an ordinary pastor. By its nature it is not a page-turner, but it does repay the effort spent in grasping its thought.

Gary T. Meadors, ed. Moving Beyond the Bible to Theology. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2009. 369 pp. with indices.

The task of doing theology requires us to move beyond the bare statements of Scripture. At minimum, we must take account of different scriptures that address the same topic, and we must try to understand how supplementary and sometimes seemingly-contradictory statements are related to one another. We are also required to find answers to questions that the Bible does not address directly. Occasionally we need to consider why the requirements of some biblical texts seem different and even opposed to our moral commitments today.

In short, no one develops an understanding of Christian faith and life that stops with the bare statements of the biblical text. The question is not whether we should move beyond the Bible to theology—we all do. The question is how we can move beyond the Bible while remaining faithful to it and continuing to recognize it as our sole authority for faith and practice.

That is the question that Gary Meadors is trying to answer in Moving Beyond the Bible to Theology. The book is part of Zondervan’s Counterpoints series, and Meadors has brought together four authors who articulate four answers to this question. These include Walter J. Kaiser Jr., who advocates a “principlizing” model, Daniel M. Doriani, who argues for a “redemptive-historical” model, Kevin J. Vanhoozer, who articulates a “drama-of-redemption” model, and William J. Webb, the principal salesman of the “redemptive-movement” model.

Unlike some of the Counterpoints books, this volume does not necessarily pit views against each other. The four models often turn out to be supplementary rather than contradictory. Each of the authors recognizes considerable value in the approaches of the other authors.

Not unexpectedly, the most controversial model is Webb’s. While it may be possible to see some sort of redemptive movement within the text of Scripture, the question is whether Webb’s applications of this movement actually go beyond the implications of the text. At this point I register personal reservations. It seems to me that Webb has not found any effective way of regulating his method. In the wrong hands (which may be Webb’s), the redemptive movement hermeneutic could be used to justify applications that are actually contrary to the conclusions of Scripture itself.

At any rate, the interaction within the volume makes for a very interesting read. Moving from biblical text to doctrinal or ethical formulation is one of the key problems of theological method. While I find myself in complete agreement with none of the four authors, each of them contributes something useful to the discussion.

–E. M. Bounds (d. 1913), The Essentials of Prayer