As American Christians we frequently see debates about whether Christianity is being persecuted in the United States. Strictly speaking, we aren’t being arrested for being Christians, churches are not being seized by the government, and so on. To compare what we in the United States face with what a Christian in some other country, say Saudi Arabia, faces is a stretch.

But the real issue is not whether we as Christians are being persecuted. The issue is we are definitely being marginalized, and that marginalization is what happens before explicit forms of persecution. So I don’t think we are being badly persecuted now, but given how we are being marginalized I think persecution is going to happen at some point down the road.

Continue reading…

In October of 2013 John MacArthur hosted the Strange Fire Conference (followed quickly with the publication of a book by the same name). This re-ignited a serious debate among biblical Christians, one that split people within certain denominations and theological traditions while also uniting people of diverse denominations and theological traditions with one another.

The nature of the Strange Fire conference and book evoked a certain degree of outrage within Pentecostal and Charismatic circles. Having a great gift for remaining uncontroversial, I wrote a blog post titled “A Pentecostal in (General) Support of the Strange Fire Conference.” This blog, much to my surprise, drew a lot of attention. John MacArthur himself positively quoted it in an interview he did with Tim Challies. My guiding conviction in that post was that, while I believe the gifts have continued, they need to be exercised and practiced biblically. Far too often continuationism has provided cover for every kind of abuse, absurdity, and at times even heresy.

Continue reading…

Allow me to get the shameless appeal portion of this post out of the way immediately:  I have recently put together a book, The Budget Record Book, and it is now available for purchase here.

This book, unlike the vast majority of my writing, is not explicitly theological. I do not discuss the doctrine of the Incarnation, I do not attack Pelagianism, and I do not explain how Open Theism is inconsistent with the doctrine of Biblical Inspiration. This book is meant to help people budget, and friends and family familiar with my theological work are looking at this book and saying “What gives?”

Continue reading…

Dear Pentecostals and Charismatics,

If you know me, you know I am one of you. I am an associate pastor at a Pentecostal church. I volunteer with Chi Alpha, the Assemblies of God college ministry. A Pentecostal church was founded in my paternal grandmother’s home. At times I have even undertaken to defend our doctrines from cessationist critics.

Yet I’m an awkward Pentecostal. I don’t really fit in very well. I stand between two families of Christians, Pentecostals and charismatics on one hand, and my more reformed Baptist and Presbyterian brothers and sisters on the other hand. This is not a normal place to be. My reformed friends find my belief in the gifts a curiosity, an enigma, an outlier and anomaly. My Pentecostal and charismatic friends find my Calvinism to be strange, if not antithetical to Pentecostalism itself. This despite the fact that the Pentecostal and charismatic movements have always been highly ecumenical, spanning denominational boundaries and finding homes in a vast array of theological contexts.

Continue reading here.

There has been something of a kerfuffle regarding certain contributors over at The Gospel Coalition lately.  Tullian Tchividjian was planning on leaving TGC in August, but his departure is being hastened.  I am in no position to speak about individuals or ministries involved.  I simply do not know enough about what is happening or why, and I’d rather not wildly speculate at this point.  However, Tchividjian has made some comments that are worth reflecting on.

Continue Reading…

The following is an updated version of a Facebook note I wrote in September of 2012.  As this issue is once again hitting the media, I thought it important to republish this:

As I got online today, a trend on Facebook caught my attention:  It was a story of an ancient papyrus known as “The Gospel of Jesus’ Wife.”  I mentally sighed as I thought about having to deal with a new round of Dan Brown style conspiracy theories.  I read the article, knowing I would soon be asked about this find.

Continue reading…

“It is not possible to be intellectually honest and believe in gods.
And it is not possible to believe in gods and be a true scientist.”
-Professor Peter Atkins

The above quote reflects what is the assumption of Western culture:  There is a deep and necessary conflict between science and religion.  To adopt a religious perspective is to cease to be scientific, to be scientific is to abandon religion.  Faith and science, it is assumed, are antonyms.  Like many assumptions of our popular society, this one is widely accepted, often repeated, has an aura of intellectual respectability, and is entirely wrong.

Continue reading…

The question of what the Bible teaches regarding homosexuality is one of tremendous importance and heated dispute in the current era. An increasing number of professing Christians are questioning traditional teaching on this topic, and the culture at large has strongly rejected traditional Christian teaching on it. Nonetheless, it is my contention that this questioning is not based on the biblical text, but is based on cultural predispositions to reject any form of sexual constraint. Among professing Christians the key question must always be “What does the Bible teach?” We are not permitted to disregard Scripture on a cultural whim.

Continue reading here.

A good theological library is something no Christian minister or leader should be without. In fact, I believe all Christians should have some form of theological library, though not all Christians will need a library to rival that of a seminary professor or scholar.

Even so, unless you are wealthy and can purchase books at will, you’re going to need to think seriously about what books you buy, and how you buy them. These are my tips for building a good theological library on a budget.

Continue reading here.

One of the most vexing questions people ask me is “What is your argument against abortion?” This is vexing not because I don’t have an argument, but because I have several arguments against abortion. I don’t think we’re limited to just one here.

But one argument I’ve thought about is based on Kant’s categorical imperative, namely the formulation of it that states we should only act in a way that we could universally will to become a standard for all other people. That is, if we can’t will that others act in the same way we do in every single case, we should not act this way.

So consider this argument:
1. If we will for one woman to get an abortion, we should will for all women to get abortions.
2. If all women get abortions, we will go extinct.
3. We should not will for our own extinction.
4. Thus, we should not will for all women to get abortions.
5. Thus, we should not will for any woman to get an abortion.

This is really just an extended edition of modus tollens, and we could break the argument into two arguments:
1. If we will all women to get abortions, we will our own extinction.
2. We should not will for our own extinction.
3. Therefore, we should not will for all women to get abortions.

And argument two:
1. No person should be exempted from universal moral laws.
2. It is a universal moral law that abortion is wrong (see the argument above).
3. Therefore, no individual woman should be permitted to get an abortion.

Now some people might object and say “Perhaps abortion is only permissible under Circumstance X, Y, or Z; and we could universally will that any individual under those circumstances get an abortion.” Kant had little room for this type of reasoning, he did not tend to allow exceptions to moral laws based on circumstance.

I am not quite as intense as Kant in that regard. But that’s not the point. Suppose there are circumstances under which abortion should be permitted, there is a vast difference between permitting something and willing it. I may permit my football team to kick a field goal, but I will for them to score touchdowns. It is only in non-ideal circumstances that abortion should even be considered permissible (and I would argue these are relatively few in number). But I still don’t will it, and given any other choice I would likely opt for that.

In the United States, most abortions are not out performed out of medical necessity, and so the arguments presented here would at least eliminate vast numbers of abortions. Additionally, I’m not aware of too many people that want to argue for the extinction of the human race. Hence, they’ll have to attack Kant’s categorical imperative, and it’s a surprisingly defensible rule of thumb.

God bless,

Joey