Passing the Torch to the New "Person of the Year"

In the spirit of Hank Aaron, I want to pass the proverbial torch and congratulate President Vladimir Putin as this year's ambassador for Time Magazine's Person of the Year.

I have to confess that being named Time's 2006 "Person of the Year" came as a surprise to me. Sure, I managed a good GPA and made decent use of time as a research assistant. But I never once thought that anything I had done was earth-shattering or particularly meaningful to the world. However, as Wylie Burp told Fievel, sometimes the real hero is the last one to know about it. So, it is with such a humble spirit that I acknowledge the wisdom of naming me a recipient of this award last year. After all "it is a great accomplishment, which requires skill, longevity, and determination," as Hammerin' Hank might say. Being a student and part-time research assistant who tries to find the time to watch the occasional YouTube video is tough work, though I dare say Putin's 2007 has even surpassed the greatness of my 2006. I move over now and offer my best wishes to President Putin with the hope that his accomplishment will inspire others to chase their own dreams, whether it be watching streaming video on YouTube or leading entire nations.

President Putin, I suspect, will discover as I have that living with the burden of representing Time for a whole year will lead to immense bouts of self-doubting and anxiety. Once people associate you with "Person of the Year," it becomes difficult to meet their expectations. Yet, in spite of the tribulation, I do not regret the journey. Like an Olympian, I pass this prestigious torch. Though my light may fade from the public scene, we can only hope and pray that Putin's lantern has only begun to show us the way for a better 2008.

Revisited: What if LifeWay Christian Stores Sold . . . ?

Seeing how the Christmas season is nearly upon us, I expect many students will be making out their Lifeway Christmas list. But have you ever wished Lifeway could push the envelop as to the quality of their stock? This idea originated years ago during late night brainstorming sessions with my friend, Jesse Florida. I was further inspired to do this as a result of a related post by Tom Ascol.

So without further delay...

Rick Warren, The Prayer of the Purpose Driven Reformed Pastor to Desire God (Banner of Truth Trust, 2007) $12.99

Rick Warren's new appreciation of Richard Baxter is the first in a series of "Purpose Driven Paperbacks" by The Banner of Truth Trust. Warren offers a unique contemporary perspective that is sure to intrigue seasoned scholars and entice a new generation of believers to the wisdom of the Puritans. How would Baxter have balanced traditional and contemporary worship styles? What would he have thought of the 40 Days of Purpose? Warren tackles all these issues and more in a groundbreaking work that is sure to become an instant classic.

Warren: "My developing friendship with John Piper has resulted in my own greater appreciation of the Puritans. No one defines what a pastor should be better than Baxter. I am so grateful to Iain Murray and the Banner of Truth Trust for teaming up with Saddleback to produce the bold, new "Purpose Driven Paperbacks" series. These works will stand alongside the more traditional "Puritan Paperbacks" as a secondary source from a contemporary Christian worship and church growth perspective."

Bruce Wilkinson, Tim LaHaye, and Jerry B. Jenkins, The Purpose Driven Letter That Jabez Left Behind: Ancient Inspirations for Those Living in the End Times, 2 CD set. Narrated by Larry King (Tyndale Audio Series, 2007) $29.97

The best-selling book is now available on audio CD! Bruce Wilkinson takes us on an end times adventure through the eyes of the beloved Jabez. What would Jabez have told the tribulation saints? Did he know about the Rapture and the Millennium? These questions and more are explored through the masterful prose of Wilkinson, who has teamed up with Tim LaHaye's dispensationalism and Jerry B. Jenkins' storytelling to create an extraordinary work of fiction that will encourage any Christian who is suffering under the anxiety of our postmodern age.

Wilkinson: "Working with Tim and Jerry has really been a dream come true. I am living proof that God expands the territory of His children when we claim the promises He has offered us. What began as one small book on an obscure but powerful passage of Scripture has grown into a franchise far bigger than I could have ever imagined. Left Behind was the perfect fit for the next Jabez study because of its popularity and excellent marketing potential. And, of course, Larry King provides an excellent narration and the name recognition that will appeal to people outside the Church."

Larry King: "I admit I was surprised when Tyndale asked me to record this product. I don't have any particular connection with Christianity, but I do consider myself an agnostic seeker. I guess that why this project appealed to me... Because it is about seeking answers to things nobody really knows for certain. When it comes down to it, you just have to take some things on faith."


And finally, a new tool for teaching theology to youth!

3-in-1-D Glasses™, by the Garland-Earl Corporation®, $7.99

Early Praise for 3-in-1-D Glasses:*

R. Albert Mohler, Jr.: "I must admit that I was skeptical about this being another cheesy gimmick. But after I put on those snazzy shades and sat down in my recliner with my storybook in hand, I was hooked! I can't remember when I've had so much fun reading a book, and I read a lot of books, trust me. I'm sure every Christian parent will want to buy a set for their kids. This is exactly the sort of ambitious product that churches should invest in for children and youth ministry."

Billy Graham: "These glasses really are amazing. Not only are they a perfect object lesson for teaching children about God, but they double as an efficient pair of sunglasses when I have to go outdoors. And they look great too."

J. I. Packer: "I wish somebody had thought of this when I was a boy. It would have given me a great head start on my theological studies. I don't give out product endorsements easily, but 3-in-1-D Glasses are deserving of my full support."

*Endorsements may or may not represent the exact views of the parties represented. Quotes were obtained through fourth and fifth degree removed sources.

All in good fun, right?

Merry Christmas! I'll see you in thirty.

You Might Be a Creepy Seminary Guy If...

I hadn't heard of this label until I arrived here at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. When I was in college at Union University, most young women figured they would get their Mrs. Degree before graduation. For many students, marriage was their 4-year goal. But in seminary, it is often expected that the student will already be married before enrollment. In my experience, the peer pressure put upon single students to marry is exceedingly beyond anything I knew at college. I suppose it is this high stakes game of "keeping up with the Joneses" that has given birth to the concept of "The Creepy Seminary Guy," that creature which no man desires to be as perceived as. But what does this term mean and what kind of fellow meets the criteria? I propose to offer some suggestions:

You might be a Creepy Seminary Guy if...

1. If you go to a Boyce College [SBTS's undergraduate Bible school] social event to scout out "the prospects"...

2. If your Facebook "friends" are mostly young ladies you haven't met face-to-face...

3. If you refer to your Facebook friend accumulations as "research and development"...

4. If you plan your course schedule based upon which girls are signed up for which classes...

*BONUS*: If you feel God has called you to a church with a large single ladies' ministry...

5. If you've ever called a girl in response to an unspecified "Roomate Wanted" flyer and proposed matrimony right over the phone...

6. If your "little black book" consists of the campus student directory (minus the Seminary Wives section, of course)...

*BONUS* If that "little black book" does indeed include the Seminary Wives section, then you are without a doubt a creepy seminary guy who should re-evaluate your calling.

7. If you can't remember the chapel sermons because you spent the whole time staring at a pretty face in the choir...

8. If the first thing you look for in a woman is whether she has a ring on her left hand...

9. If you memorize a girl's class schedule to increase your chances of running into her...

10. If you are single... and in seminary...

Then you might be a Creepy Seminary Guy!

In Jest and Joviality,
I am,
On the Shoulders of Giants

"Strict Communion Less Exclusive than Paedobaptists?" or "Should the Water Divide Us?"

The Open Communion VS. Strict Communion debate has once again enticed a generation of Baptists holding to competing views. The question is an old one, "should our churches invite all Christians to partake of the Lord's Supper or just those who have been baptized?"

The open communicant answers, "All Christians should be invited to partake of the Lord's Supper."

In contrast, the strict communicant (under which I include both "close" and "closed," though I disagree with the latter) answers, "Only those Christians who have obeyed Christ and have been properly baptized (baptism meaning "immersed as a believer upon profession of faith") may be invited to take the Lord's Supper." This sort of answer immediately brands persons of this persuasion as exclusive, divisive, and more committed to ecclesiasticism than Christian love.

For the sake of putting my cards on the table, I confess I lean closer to the strict communion tradition.

This nuanced debate is unique to Baptists, as far as I can tell. Baptists are concerned about how to treat a Christian of another denomination if he should attend a Baptist worship service in which the Lord's Supper is being served. Is excluding him from the Lord's Table equivalent to an insult against his godliness?

The best argument I have heard on the subject is quite simple. I encountered it in John Quincy Adams' (not the U.S. president of the same name) Baptists: The Only Thorough Religious Reformers (1876).

To paraphrase Adams' argument:
1. In the New Testament churches, all who were baptized and members of the church were admitted to the Lord's table.

2. One considered a proper subject of baptism would never be excluded from the communion.

3. Baptists receive all proper subjects of baptism (i.e. believers who have been immersed upon their profession of faith).

4. Paedobaptists consider infants who are sprinkled to be legitimately baptized and members of the visible church.

5. According to this logic (of #4), all baptized infants should be admitted to the Lord's Table.

6. Yet, these infants are excluded, and thus the "paedobaptists are most inveterate closed communionists."

7. Paedobaptists have no argument against strict communion Baptists, who "refuse to receive persons whom we consider unbaptized, when they will not receive their own baptized members."

John Quincy Adams, Baptist thorough Reformers (1876), Reprinted: Rochester, NY: Backus Book Publishers, 1982, 160-161.

Solid paedobaptists and the like all believe that no one should be admitted to the Lord's table without being properly baptized. I find it ironic that on this particular point, strict communion Baptists agree with them 100%. The disagreement is on what constitutes a proper baptism. At the risk of sounding cliche, I suppose it all depends on what your definition of "is" means.

Speaking of the Dead (in Christ)

Speaking of the dead... I'm finally getting around to updating my blog!

The title of this entry carries a double meaning.
There are a number of reasons I have cut my blogging back to a minimum these days. One is that I have a very slow computer that always eats away more time than I can spare on little exercises like blogging. Another is that my brain is low on creative impulses. But the biggest reason is that I am trying hard to bridle my tongue so that I won't write something I might regret later. I believe blogging is a good thing, but I'm trying to mortify a few areas of my life that need more discipline.

One important reminder in this struggle occurred a few months back when I forgot the important fact that what one writes on the internet doesn't always communicate as well as a face to face conversation.

I left a mildly sarcastic comment on a blog in response to something another commenter had written. I'll spare the names of all parties involved, but the gist of the exchange was:
Commentator: "Was [said theologian] fat? I like fat theologians!"
Me: "Yes, and skinny theologians everywhere are offended. :-)"

At the time, I did not think my comment was rude or disrespectful.
A few weeks later, however, a respected mentor of mine came across the same blog and noticed my comment. He confronted me about the matter, and ,while not expressing any explicit signs of anger, challenged me to consider whether such a comment displayed appropriate respect to the legacy of this particular glorified saint. As a result of this conversation, I realized that my statement was careless if not intentionally disrespectful.

I was challenged with the concept of speaking of the dead in Christ as if they are still alive. In a very real sense, of course, they are. As Hebrews 12:1 reminds us, "Therefore, having so great a cloud of witnesses around us . . . let us run with endurance the race that is set before us."

I want to be careful not to suggest anything akin to saint worship, but the Bible reveals that God's glorified people, faithful in life, faithful at death, now serve as historical testimonies to the grace of God. Their lives and ideas are not above criticism and godly evaluation, but they are all certainly worthy of our respect, no matter how prominent or how obscure.

So, as I continue to meditate upon the application of this truth, I conclude this entry with a deep appreciation for those who have tilled the soil in which I now labor.

I am,
On the Shoulders of Giants