The Reformation hits the Los Angeles Review of Books

Over at Marginalia, a channel of the Los Angeles Review of Books, my old pal Bruce Gordon of Yale Divinity School has put together a panel of scholars to offer reflections on the Reformation.  Bruce’s Introduction and Joseph Koerner’s Art in a State of Siege are already available.  My contribution, on the vexed question of whether Luther is more a figure of the Middle Ages or a harbinger of modernity, will be up at some point in the next few weeks.

The NFL, President Trump, and Conservative Consistency

By Todd Pruitt













I am a conservative law and order sort of guy. I like the idea of giving police officers the benefit of the doubt. I like it when NFL players stand for the National Anthem.


But I also believe that conservatives like myself ought to be intellectually consistent. And I am seeing a lot of inconsistency. I am seeing people who warn about government control and champion free speech applying their principles in ways that seem to be contradictory.


The article by Jonathan Last in The Weekly Standard entitled It’s Trump vs. the NFL, And We’re All Losers is well worth your careful consideration.


The Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals is member supported and operates only by your faithful support. Thank you.

Mortification of Spin is a casual conversation of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals. It is supported only by its readers and gracious Christians like you. Please prayerfully consider supporting Mortification of Spin and the mission of the Alliance.

TerKeurst’s Uninvited vs. Brownback’s Finding God in My Loneliness

By Aimee Byrd

This is a guest post from my friend, Dana Tuttle. She has recently read Lysa TerKeurst’s Uninvited and Lydia Brownback’s Finding God in My Loneliness side by side. As we were discussing the differences, I asked her to write a review for Housewife Theologian comparing the two.
For most of my experience as a Christian, I have sat in church alone as a single woman, as a married woman, and even as a mother. I do not feel lonely as I go about my daily routine in any of these seasons in my life until that moment when I join my fellow believers in church. Don’t get me wrong, I have been actively involved in several ministries and enjoy being apart of the weekly services, but the prick of loneliness is there, nonetheless. 
I look around and see several families sharing in the experience of worship together. I thought that would change when I got married, but it did not. I realize when I am there that I struggle with loneliness and that I long to share this with my own family. I see and talk to other women who share my same struggle and I know that I am not alone in my spiritual loneliness at church.
I asked Aimee Byrd if anyone has written about loneliness and if she could direct me to a book that would be helpful on this topic. She immediately recommended Finding God in Your Loneliness, by Lydia Brownback. However, during our talk, which also consisted of coffee, laugher, interruptions, and eclectic topics, I quickly forgot her recommendation.
Around the same time, my church was starting a book club, and they had chosen Uninvited, by Lysa TerKeurst to read. At first, I thought it was the book that Aimee had recommended since the book was about loneliness. I spoke with her again to refresh my memory on what she had recommended and Uninvited was not it. I didn’t want to pass up an opportunity to get to know the ladies in my church, so I decided to read both at the same time and compare the two. 
I generally like to read several books on the same topic and was excited to take on the task of reading both books at the same time. TerKeurst is a popular female Christian author and president of Proverbs 31 ministries. As a New York Times #1 Bestseller, her book was easy to find, standing out on the bestseller shelf even at Target. Brownback is also a female Christian author and speaker, however her book was a little more difficult to find. With both books in my hand, I was eager to see what these two ladies had to say about the topic. For me, I was specifically looking for guidance with spiritual loneliness within my marriage and as I attend weekly church services. 
I don’t feel uninvited, unloved, less than, or even left out, but I do feel lonely when it comes to attending church without my family. Going into TerKeurst’s book, I was hopeful that it would touch on the situation I was facing. Within the 250 pages, I thought that there would be at least a chapter for me to glean from. 
The chapter titles were confusing as I searched for a straightforward statement that mentioned loneliness in marriage or church. Instead, I found chapters about “the lady at the gym who hates me” (the title of Chapter 3). TerKeurst points out that  “there are misalignments embedded in our soul” (3) and that we have a “broken identity” (12). I know enough basic doctrine to know that we are more than just misaligned and our identities aren’t the only thing that is broken. I felt as though she was not treating her reading audience as mature thinking, Christian women. This concern was solidified on page 120 where she calls us “Jesus girls.” Yes, she does get around to using the word sin, but she never gets around to discussing the deep issues in which people may feel lonely. TerKeurst keeps it safe and stays on the surface talking about the lady who ignored her or the lady who is thinner than she is. These were really the examples she was giving in every chapter. She shared an over emphasis on her poor body image and never mentions the body of Christ—the church, his bride. Instead, I was directed several times to her issue with cellulite. In Chapter 9, she discusses rejection and compares her experience to Hannah’s barrenness. Only TerKeurst’s struggle was about the lady who got the writing job instead of her, calling her “thigh gap girl.”    
TerKeurst’s chapters and stories were cluttered and I had a difficult time navigating through her book. She has some false teaching as well when she encourages us to “be prepared to hear new things from the Lord” (112) and to “seek your own divine revelation” through prayer and journaling  (177). Just when I was about to give up hope she did share the gospel, point me to Christ and encouraged me to read God’s word. For that I am thankful. I wish she would have invited her readers to believe the gospel and that sin plays a large part in why they are feeling “less than, left out and lonely.”
In contrast, Brownback’s book was clear and organized. Each chapter was important and led into the next one. Brownback starts right off with a true definition of why we are lonely in the introduction. “Loneliness is an indicator that something is missing, and that something is found only in Jesus Christ.” Just 14 pages in and I have hope! I was able to go straight to the chapter titled “The Loneliness of Marriage,” where she had great advice and application. She reminds us, “to view  [your husband] as a surrogate savior is to intensify our loneliness” (130). Instead, she encourages us to “lean into our heavenly Bridegroom” and “we will find what no earthly husband could ever give us” (131). 
In her carefully thought out chapters, Brownback addressed real issues that cause loneliness like relocating, singleness, and grief from a death or a divorce. I felt like she was writing to an audience of mature thinking Christians and I felt respected. Her book contained enriching vocabulary and intelligent thoughts. I was convicted and encouraged to repent as she touched on the sins that we may lean toward to fill in the gap of loneliness. I was pointed to Christ in every single chapter. Right from the beginning of the book, I was given hope and a remedy for my loneliness. She didn’t wait until the final chapter to fill us up with the good news. Brownback used many examples of people in scripture as examples of those who struggled with loneliness, while spurring me on towards my heavenly Groom and his kingdom!  
I am not sure if Lydia Brownback has cellulite or a thigh gap, but I do know that Christ is the answer to her loneliness and being in the body of believers, even though it may feel lonely at times, is the remedy.
You can listen to an MoS interview with Lydia Brownback on her book here: Is One the Loneliest Number?
Dana Tuttle is a housewife theologian who is obsessed with headless queens. She is a wife and the mother of 11-year-old twin boys. She daydreams about owning a pub, but is happy with her role as the crazy theme mom and scrapbooking fool. Dana is an over-achiever in Book Review Club, and can often be found hiding in her closet reading books written by dead theologians while eating the latest leftover holiday candy.

The Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals is member supported and operates only by your faithful support. Thank you.

Mortification of Spin is a casual conversation of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals. It is supported only by its readers and gracious Christians like you. Please prayerfully consider supporting Mortification of Spin and the mission of the Alliance.

Four Reasons Why Every Christian Should Study Psalm 110

By Aimee Byrd

Every Christian should be well acquainted with Psalm 110. I could give you way more than four reasons. As a matter of fact, Psalm 110 will help us in perseverance. Hebrews 10:23 exhorts us to persevere in the Christian faith telling us this: “Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for he who promised is faithful.” Doesn’t it seem strange that holding fast to a confession is key to perseverance? Building up to this verse, the writer to the Hebrews packs in a lot of theology. When studying this verse within its context of Hebrews for my book Theological Fitness, I discovered that new scholarship suggests Hebrews is a sermon letter based off of Psalm 110. I found that fascinating. Psalm 110 gives us the confession of our hope. It may be my favorite piece of Scripture. I want you to love it as much as I do, so here are some reasons why every Christian should study it.
Study Psalm 110…
If you want to hear God speak
The Christian bestsellers list shows us how badly we want to hear God speak. Isn’t that the success of Jesus Calling? We want to hear from God—today. And so Christian bookstores are full of bestselling books telling us about special words from our Lord to the authors, and how we can hear him too (or at least through them). This is what many well-intentioned believers think they need to persevere in the Christian life. But what we really need is to hold fast to our confession of hope.
Why don’t we let God tell us our confession of hope? This is not a mere message for one person today, but something that applies to every single one of us in every single situation. Psalm 110 begins with an amazing revelation, “The LORD said…” Here is our special word from the Lord. In his commentary on Psalm 110, Puritan Edward Reynolds elaborates, 
The “word of God” in Scriptures signifies his blessing, power, pleasure, ordination. “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God,” Matt. iv. 4. That is, by that command which the creatures have received from God to nourish by, that benediction and sanctification which maketh every creature of God good unto us, 1 Tim. iv.5. God’s saying is ever doing something; his words are operative, and carry an unction and authority along with them. (An Explication of the Hundred and Tenth Psalm, 5.)
And so we see this blessing and ordination again in Scripture in Matt. 3:17,  “and behold, a voice from heaven said, ‘This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.’” None of us can speak with that kind of authority. Study Psalm 110 to hear what the Lord says.
If you want to know God’s will
What do you cling to when your faith is challenged? Your friends, your church attendance, your family, your quiet time, your emotions or psychological health? A prayer that you prayed? These are times in our lives when we really want to know God’s will. Psalm 110 delivers again. Here we see the covenant of redemption, God’s eternal plan, and the appointment of Christ to his office. In these poetic words we see Christ’s Kingdom, his church, his enemies, his humiliation, his exaltation, and triumph.  
And we see this seemingly insignificant word that is like an X-marks-the-spot on the map for us: Until→ You are here. 
We see where Christ is now and what he’s doing. That until can be hard to bear sometimes but in Psalm 110 we have the comfort of knowing, “He shall gather a church, and he shall confound his enemies, because for that end he hath finished and broken through all the sufferings with he was to drink of, and has lifted up his head again” (Explication, 4.).
If you want to know what all the NT writers were talking about
Psalm 110 is the most quoted Psalm in the New Testament. We have direct quotes in Matt. 22:44, Mk. 12:36, Luke 20: 42-43, Acts 2: 33-34, and Heb. 1:13. We have indirect references to it, saying “It is written,” in Matt. 26:64; Luke 22:69; 1 Cor. 15:25; and Heb. 5:6, 7:17, 21. Compare. Mark 14:62; 16:19; Ephesians 1:20; Colossians 3:1; Hebrews 1:3; 5:6; 8:1; 10:12, 13; 12:2; 1 Peter 3:22 to Psalm 110 and you will see how heavily the writers in Scripture relied on God’s words there and how he built upon them. And heck, maybe Hebrews really is a sermon-letter based on the text of Psalm 110.
Why? Don’t you think this must be an important Psalm worth our study?
If you want a creed as solid as David’s
“For this psalm is one of the clearest and most compendious prophesies of the prophecies and person and offices of Christ in the whole Old Testament, and so full of fundamental truth, that I shall not shun to call it David’s creed.” (Explication, 2.) 
There you have it. In seven verses, we have David’s creed, David’s confession of hope—one that we too can hold fast to. As a matter of fact, Reynolds pulls 14 confessions out of these 7 verses: the doctrine of the Trinity, the incarnation of Christ, the sufferings of Christ, Christ’s completed work and resurrection, ascension and intercession, a holy catholic church and communion of the saints, the last judgment and day of his wrath, the remission of sins, resurrection of the body, and life everlasting.
I was honored to teach a Sunday school class on those 14 confessions from David’s creed. You may ask, why would the writer to the Hebrews exhort us to persevere in the Christian life of faith and obedience by holding onto a confession? Christianity is a historical faith that has content. There are certain elements to our confession that would devastate our faith if they were not true. As Paul demonstrates in 1 Cor. 15, “If the dead are not raised, ‘Let us eat and drink for tomorrow we die’” (33). Hope is not the same as wishful thinking; it is built on truth. Jesus is Lord in his person and in his work. That is something that we can hold fast to. And he indeed holds fast to us as our anchor, interceding on our behalf as he is seated at the right hand of the Father.
Psalm 110:
The LORD says to my Lord:
“Sit at my right hand, 
until I make your enemies your footstool.”
The LORD sends forth from Zion
your mighty scepter.
Rule in the midst of your enemies!
Your people will offer themselves freely
on the day of your power, 
in holy garments;
from the womb of the morning,
the dew of your youth will be yours.
The LORD has sworn
and will not change his mind
“You are a priest forever
in the order of Melchizedek.”
The LORD is at your right hand;
he will shatter kings on the day of his wrath.
He will execute judgment among the nations,
filling them with corpses;
he will shatter chiefs
over the wide earth.
He will drink from the brook by the way;
therefore he will lift up his head.

The Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals is member supported and operates only by your faithful support. Thank you.

Mortification of Spin is a casual conversation of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals. It is supported only by its readers and gracious Christians like you. Please prayerfully consider supporting Mortification of Spin and the mission of the Alliance.

The Joy of Paglian Sex

By Carl Trueman

Lesbian feminists with a penchant for Nietzsche, Freud, and DeSade are not typically my type.  Nevertheless, I fell in love with one in 1993 and have never quite recovered. I was then (as now) a happily married man and nothing untoward actually happened.  But when I purchased a copy of Camille Paglia’s Sex, Art, and American Culture, a collection of her journalism, I knew that this was to be more than a passing infatuation.  Here was my ideal woman: Tough, thoughtful, well-read, and clearly somebody who could handle herself in a bar-room brawl.  Feisty is surely too small a word.


In the years since I have learned much from the delectable Ms. P.  She modeled for me both a scholarship and a journalism which engaged high culture and pop culture, moving seamlessly from Aeschylus and Freud to the Rolling Stones and Madonna.   She showed me that learning and writing could be fun and iconoclastic and constructive all at the same time.  Her rejection of the histrionics of victim-feminism, her refusal to follow the orthodoxy on date rape, and her demand that individuals take responsibility for themselves forced me to think.  Her contempt for the tone police, those self-righteous enforcers of the status quo, was evident on every page.


Of all her writings, though, the one I love the most – and the one I return to most frequently — is the essay ‘The Joy of Presbyterian Sex,’ originally published in The New Republic but reprinted in Sex, Art and American Culture.   The article does not, as I had hoped when I first glimpsed the title, offer some technical tips for romantically inept Calvinists; Rather it is a devastating critique of the Presbyterian Church of the U.S.A.’s 1991 report on human sexuality. Nothing I have read since has ever done such a successful job of demolishing the pious pabulum which vitiates so much Christian discourse on sex and which has (as Paglia predicted) eviscerated the faith of its distinctive vitality. If ever there was an essay which cut through sentimental bombast that surrounds liberal Christian pieties and cuts straight to the real heart of the matter, it is this.   And in an era marked by a tedious and increasingly intense combination of political correctness and squeamishness about clear communication, it is still a breath of fresh air.


The key paragraph – vintage Paglia — is this: 


The [PCUSA’s} committee’s prescription for an enlightened Christianity is “learning from the marginalized.” This new liberal cliché is repeated so often that I began to misread it as “margarinized.” We are told that “those of us with varying degrees of social power and status must now move away from the center, so that other, more marginalized voices . . . may be heard.” But the report picks and chooses its marginalized outcasts as snobbishly as Proust’s Duchesse de Guermantes. We can move tender, safe, clean, hand-holding gays and lesbians to the center—but not, of course, pederasts, prostitutes, strippers, pornographers, or sadomasochists. And if we’re e going to learn from the marginalized, what about drug dealers   moonshiners, Elvis impersonators, string  collectors, Mafiosi  foot fetishists serial murderers, cannibals, Satanists, and the Ku Klu Klan?  I’m sure they’ll all have a lot to say. The committee gets real prudish real fast when it has to deal with sexuality outside its feminist frame of reference: “Incest is abhorrent and abhorred,” it flatly declares. I wrote in the margin, “No lobbyists, I guess!”


This is admittedly a little dated, at least in its lists of the marginalized.  Sadomasochism, pornography, and prostitution are being mainstreamed, and it seems quite possible that pederasty and incest will not be far behind.   String collectors, foot fetishists, Elvis impersonators, and Imperial Wizards may perhaps have to wait a little longer.  But even so Paglia’s basic point stands and liberal Christians will no doubt join the sadomasochism and pederasty bandwagons if ever they become part of the Mainstream Margarinized.  Why would they not?  Their ethics are merely the tastes of the world around in the imperative voice.  And that means their moral standards are ultimately formed not by the Bible or Christian tradition but by powerful interest groups in the popular media, by clichéd post-structuralist pieties, and by legislators on Capitol Hill whose political culture is little more than a function of the public relations industry


Yet there is another aspect to the essay, and that is Paglia’s barely concealed contempt for the attempts of liberal Christianity and of the gay lobby itself to make homosexuality respectable. For Paglia, sex is powerful and deviant sex reflects that power precisely because it is transgressive, because it breaks the rules.  For her, sex is an erotic, Dionysian force that threatens to shatter civilization as we know it.  Drawing on the later Freud, with distinct tones of Nietzsche, she understands the destructive power of sex and rejoices in it.  To tame it, to domesticate it, to make it respectable, to turn it into merely one more form of pleasurable recreation is to destroy both its substance and significance.


Her basic thesis is that liberal Christianity cannot cope with sex as it really is.  Instead it has to make into something anodyne and inoffensive as defined by the aesthetics of the wider world.   Cultural tastes trump biblical teaching and historic Christian ethics.  This is the problem of liberal Christianity in microcosm.  Make Christian doctrine merely an expression of religious psychology and, as sophisticated as that might seem, it leads in only one direction: the assimilation of Christianity to the world.   


Ironically, Paglia here is more Christian than the liberal Protestants she lambasts so mercilessly.  Traditional Christianity, with it various sexual taboos, its physical discipline of celibacy for those who are not married, its view of marriage as lifelong and sexually monogamous, and its refusal to make sexuality and sexual behavior a matter of bland personal preference, acknowledges sex as precisely the dangerous, atavistic force that she too sees it to be.   Paglia and orthodox Christianity are two sides of the same sexual coin.


But here is where Paglia differs with the sexual attitudes of the permissive society.  When (almost) everything is permitted and when all social and legal prohibitions and restraints on sexual behavior have been stripped away, society has made sex safe. Too safe. In enfranchising the deviant, it eliminates deviation.  And when nothing is forbidden, sex actually loses its meaning and becomes just one more bland form of entertainment, pleasant but of no social significance, rather like consuming a vanilla ice cream. 


So why do Christians capitulate to such nonsense so easily?   Here Paglia and I are on the same page: Because the Christian church is too often not satisfied with being the Christian church, with all of its austere dogma and demands, but prefers to be merely an insipid and derivative mouthpiece for modern emotivism.  Liberal churches do what they always do: In an effort to remain credible they dutifully turn up to baptize whatever sentimental mush the world wants to promote on the trendy topic of the moment.  Of course, it always does this a day or two late, but that’s what happens when your ethics are simply a response to norms which the world has already embraced.   No longer is it ‘Thus saith the Lord!’ so much as ‘Now, now, poor dear, you just do what feels right for you.  Oh, and please, whatever you do, don’t feel guilty about it.’


Given her polemic against the therapeutic drivel and middle class mores of modern sexual liberalism, could it be that Camille Paglia has a better grasp of Christian teaching than the pope? Even as it has sought to make sex the central component of human identity, sexual liberalism has evacuated it of any real significance through its ruthless destruction of taboos.  In Paglia-speak, liberals, secular and religious, have turned Eros and Dionysius from volcanic deities into quiet suburbanites with a mini-van, a mortgage, and a bottle of hand sanitizer on every surface.   In traditional Christian language, they have turned sex from the mysterious, powerful, terrifying and procreative source of life into just one more pleasurable hobby, like stamp collecting but with more orgasms.


Liberal Christians seem to have a compulsive need to overthrow the traditional teachings of Christianity, and sexuality and human identity now provide the present battleground for this Oedipal struggle. Tendencies that Paglia observed in 1991 are much, much worse today, but such continue to perplex those of us – believers and atheists — who have no problem with historic Christianity being historic Christianity.  As Paglia declares towards the end of the essay:


As a lapsed Catholic of wavering sexual orientation, I have never understood the pressure for ordination of gay clergy or even the creation of gay Catholic groups. They seem to me to indicate a need for parental approval, an inability to take personal responsibility for one’s own identity. The institutional religions, Catholic and Protestant, carry with them the majesty of history. Their theology is impressive and coherent. Efforts to revise or dilute that theology for present convenience seem to me misguided.


It is a shame that more Christians do not think that way.   We do not need to listen to the panjandrums of the wider world.  We need that Paglian attitude: Christian sex should be transgressive and thumb its nose at respectable pieties.  You know – exclusively heterosexual, within the bonds of marriage, with single people remaining celibate.  That breaks all the modern taboos and threatens the comfy orthodoxies that now dominate sexual mores.  Sex is simply too important to leave it to the lobby groups of sexual liberation. Plus, as Paglia knows, breaking the rules makes it more fun too.


And, as I write this and reflect upon the delectable Ms. P, I think that I might be falling in love all over again.

The Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals is member supported and operates only by your faithful support. Thank you.

Mortification of Spin is a casual conversation of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals. It is supported only by its readers and gracious Christians like you. Please prayerfully consider supporting Mortification of Spin and the mission of the Alliance.

Luther: The Idea That Changed the World

By Carl Trueman

My inbox has been full of positive reactions to the PBS docudrama which aired last night.  It is now available online here.

The Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals is member supported and operates only by your faithful support. Thank you.

Mortification of Spin is a casual conversation of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals. It is supported only by its readers and gracious Christians like you. Please prayerfully consider supporting Mortification of Spin and the mission of the Alliance.

One more thought on Nashville

I respect many of those who chose to sign the Nashville Statement. Some of them are friends. And, as I have stated before, I am in agreement with the substance of the document.

However, any suggestion that those who drafted and/or signed the Nashville Statement are like John the Baptist is, to quote a friend, revolting. The fact is, it would cost me absolutely nothing to sign the Nashville Statement. It costs me nothing in my church or denomination to state publicly (as I do repeatedly) that I uphold biblical sexual ethics and reject any attempt to revise God’s design of male and female as the only two available genders. Heck, I’m even on the conservative wing of this whole thing in rejecting the legitimacy of the term “gay (but celebate) Christian.” I am troubled by the spiritual friendship movement. I believe we ought to reject the term “sexual orientation” in favor of the more biblical “homosexual desire.” And stating all of that will cost me nothing.

And this is true for most, if not all, of those who signed the Nashville statement. That is not a criticism. Not everything we do should lead to persecution. But please spare us the self-congratulatory comparisons to actual martyrs. Such comparisons are a mockery of those who actually suffer for their faith in Christ and commitment to God’s Word. Honestly, some of these men need to get over themselves and stop boasting as though it is especially courageous to be a conservative pastor or seminary prof in a conservative institution. I am thankful that it will not cost me my job to uphold God’s Word regarding human gender and sexuality. But the same cannot be said about some of the men and women I serve as pastor. Pastors like me would do well to give thanks for the covering from which we benefit and go about serving those who will indeed pay a price.

On Not Signing the Nashville Statement

Just as we predicted on the podcast, signing the Nashville Statement has become a measure of one’s commitment to biblical sexual ethics and gender distinctions. These sorts of things are inevitable. One group drafts a statement and opens it up to signatures with all the right people and influencers signing gladly. Suddenly those who do not sign are immediately suspected of going all squishy on the truth. And almost like a reflex action the very thing has happened on social media regarding the Nashville Statement.

The whole thing reminds me of a scene from Seinfeld:

[embedded content]

I suppose I understand why many Baptists believe in the necessity of such statements since they have taken vows to uphold an historic confession of faith (excepting our Reformed Baptist friends). But Presbyterians should know better. We are supposed to take seriously the admonition against binding another’s conscience. Presbyterians also ought to understand why a fellow Presbyterian would not feel comfortable signing a non-ecclesiastical document such as the Nashville Statement. Bottom line: there are a whole host of reasons why someone who affirms the substance of the Nashville Statement would choose not to sign. And to call into question someone’s commitment to the truth because they did not sign is rather detestable.

There are three primary reasons why I am not comfortable adding my signature to the Nashville Statement:

1. It is a product of CBMW.

Why would I sign a document produced by an organization which has embraced Trinitarian error (the eternal subordination of the Son)?

2. It is not particularly useful.

I agree with the theses of the Nashville Statement. But because it is devoid of any substantive development of those theses wherein they are grounded in the biblical doctrines of creation and humanity I don’t see how it can be useful except for those who already believe. In other words, I could not give that statement to any of the university students in my community and expect it to actually assist them if they are skeptics. For the purposes of actually instructing, a document like that produced by the RPCNA is much more useful.

3. It is not necessary.

My views on biblical sexual ethics and gender are quite clear. I have a long paper trail and my sermons and podcasts are easily accessed online. Plus I have taken sacred vows to believe and teach according to the Westminster Standards. Given my first two issues the third naturally follows.

TGC and the 2nd Commandment

I had a few spare minutes so I thought I’d ask…

Are the Presbyterian members of The Gospel Coalition Board bothered at all by the fact that TGC’s website employs images of Christ? As Presbyterians they have taken sacred vows to uphold and teach according to the Westminster Standards. If you are not Presbyterian, the Westminster Standards are quite clear that the 2nd Commandment ought to be honored along with all of God’s moral law. So I would be curious to know if they feel conflicted at all to serve on the board of a ministry which holds very different convictions concerning the 2nd Commandment.

I’m not trying to be a pest. I understand that there are some differing opinions among the Reformed which allow, under certain circumstances, for the use of images of Christ for strictly pedagogical purposes. But if any of TGC’s Presbyterian members hold the more restrictive view I wonder how they navigate the ministry’s use of images.

Just wondering.