Interview with Philip Ryken on Preaching

1. Can you provide us with a definition of biblical preaching?
Expository preaching means making God’s Word plain. In an expository sermon the preacher simply tries to explain what the Bible teaches. The main points of his sermon are the points made by a particular text in the Bible. The minister not only begins with Scripture, but also allows the Scripture to establish the context and content for his entire sermon. The way he decides what to say is by studying what the Bible has to say, so that the Scripture itself sets the agenda for his interpretation and application.
This kind of preaching is most helpfully done when a minister follows the logic of the Scriptures, systematically preaching chapter by chapter and verse by verse through entire books of the Bible. This helps ensure that a congregation hears what God wants them to hear, and not simply what their minister thinks they ought to hear.
But expository preaching is not so much a method as it is a mindset. A minister who sees himself as an expositor knows that he is not the master of the Word, but its servant. He has no other ambition than to preach what the Scriptures actually teach. His aim is to be faithful to God’s Word so that his people can hear God’s voice. He himself is only God’s mouthpiece, speaking God’s message into the ears of God’s people, and thus into their minds and hearts. To that end, he carefully works his way through the Scriptures, reading, explaining, and applying them to his congregation. On occasion he may find it necessary to address some pastoral concerns in a topical fashion, but even then his sermons come from his exposition of particular passages of Scripture. Rather than focusing on his own spiritual experience, or on current events, or on what he perceives as his congregation’s needs and interests, the minister gives his fullest attention to teaching what the Bible actually says.
2. In a few paragraphs, how did you discover your gifts in preaching?
By the grace of God, even as a small boy my heart was drawn to using my talents to the very best of my ability, and in a way that would bring glory to God. Pastoral ministry always seemed to be one way to be a faithful steward of whatever gifts the Lord had given me. I generally paid close attention to what various ministers were doing in the pulpit, and would sometimes imagine what it would be like to preach the gospel. As I envisioned it, this would be in a church where people were eager to listen and taking notes.
I can remember going out with my father for ice cream when I was in the eighth grade and talking about what I would do with my life. Pastoral ministry was one calling that we discussed, and I went in to speak with our pastor about what it was like to be a pastor, what books I ought to read, what was hard about the pastoral ministry, and so forth. It was not until college, though, that I became clear in my inward call. When Lisa and I began dating our freshman year it was already apparent to her that I was heading in that direction. In general, there was a growing sense that this and this only is what I was born to do: preach the Word.
3. Who has modeled biblical preaching for you?
The pastor in my home church growing up—Bob Harvey at Bethel Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Wheaton, Illinois—had an exceptional gift for connecting the Old Testament to the New Testament by way of Christ-centered biblical theology. At various times in my life I have had the privilege to sit under the regular preaching of R. Kent Hughes (College Church, Wheaton), William Still (Gilcomston South Church, Aberdeen), Dick Lucas (St. Helen’s Bishopgate), and James Boice (Tenth Presbyterian Church, Philadelphia). Each of these men had his own distinctive style, but they all had a passionate commitment to expository preaching, with a genuine enthusiasm for what God has said in his Word.
4. Do you have any thoughts on the current concern over ‘redemptive-historical’ preaching? How does preaching Christ from all the Scriptures govern the shape of your sermons?
I have been strongly influenced by Geerhardus Vos, Sidney Greidanus, Edmund Clowney, and other advocates of redemptive-historical preaching. What I take to be the main point of this emphasis is exactly right: that we are to preach Christ from all the Scriptures, as Jesus himself did (see Luke 24:25-27). This is especially important to remember in preaching from the Old Testament. Every sermon is a presentation of the gospel of the crucified and risen Christ. I have a concern, though, that what sometimes passes for redemptive-historical preaching today is less than fully biblical in that it downplays the need for practical application. Here we need to follow the example of the New Testament, which uses the Old Testament both to preach Christ and to make practical application from the Scriptures to daily Christian living. “Now these things took place as examples for us,” Paul writes, “that we might not desire evil as they did” (1 Cor. 10:6).
I’m not sure how preaching Christ from all the Scriptures governs the shape of my sermons, per se, but in all of my preaching—from whatever text in the Bible—I want the gospel content outlined in 1 Corinthians 15:1-5 to be made clear.
5. What books on preaching have you found most influential in your own preaching?
I find Bryan Chapell’s book on Christ-Centered Preaching to be the best how-to manual for beginning to learn how to preach. For capturing the flavor of what preaching is all about my favorite book is John Piper’s The Supremacy of God in Preaching.
6. What has been your practice in preaching as regards consecutive expository, textual or topical preaching?
My general practice is to preach expository sermons from consecutive passages in whole books of the Bible. On occasion I have preached a more topical series, but I have generally done this in expositional format. That is to say, I have preached expository sermons on a variety of passages that all related to a unified topic. For example, I preached a series of sermons on “The Message of Salvation” (now published by IVP in a book of the same name) from a wide variety of passages in the Old and New Testaments. Following the example of John Newton, I have preached through many of the texts in Messiah. Or to give yet another example, I have preached through the attributes of God listed in the first question of the Westminster Shorter Catechism by choosing a biblical narrative that illustrates each of these divine attributes (now published as Discovering God in Stories from the Bible).
7. Is there a sermon that you have heard, or a series of sermons, that continues to impress you?
I have had the rare privilege of hearing many wonderful sermons. Two individual sermons that stand out for me are the sermon that Eric Alexander preached at the memorial service for James Boice and the sermon Sinclair Ferguson preached on Romans 8:32 at the 2005 General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in America. I was deeply moved by the latter sermon – for me, it was the best sermon I have ever heard. I have also been helped greatly by the preaching that two of my predecessors (Donald Grey Barnhouse and James Montgomery Boice) did through the Book of Romans.
8. What concessions, if any, does the modern preacher have to make in order to speak to postmodernity?
I’m not sure that any preacher ever has to make any concessions to anything except the Word of God, to which he submits as his only ultimate authority. Of course it is true that any preacher needs to know the context in which he is preaching. What questions do people have in our culture? What aspects of the prevailing worldview most need to be confronted by biblical truth? What is hard for people to understand about God and his gospel because of their surrounding culture? These are important issues in communication and application. But we should recognize that the proclamation of the Gospel in spoken form is God’s permanent plan for the advance of his Kingdom.
9. What is the average length of your sermons? Has this changed over the years?
I try to tell myself that I am preaching for 30 minutes, but usually it is more like 35. The average length of my sermons has not changed. However, I find that I have to work harder to keep things to 30-35 minutes, which I believe to be about the right length for our congregation. Typically I edit out about 20% of my material, and the sermon is usually better for it.
10. Would you briefly describe the main elements of how you go about preparing a sermon?
I generally spend my mornings in study, prayer, writing, and preparation to preach. I try to do all of my main exegetical and commentary work on Mondays, with the goal of having an 8 to 10 page outline by the end of Monday morning, complete with main ideas, thoughts for an introduction and conclusion, lines of application, illustrations, etc. Then I take two hours or so every morning to write at least one section of the sermon, working from beginning to end. Typically I will go back through the entire sermon for one major revision on Saturday or else early Sunday morning.

Hearts Weighed

Proverbs 21:2Every way of a man is right in his own eyes,but the Lord weighs the heart.

Note two insights in this proverb in relation to a Christian. First, a Christian will defend his behavior either through using scripture for justification or by appealing to conscience. I've listened to a husband defend being critical of his wife by appealing to Ephesians 5:25-27 which refers to Christ has sanctifying the church.

Likewise, Christians have defended rude behavior as being bold for Christ and zealous for truth. In every case, the person believes he is doing what is right. In his own eyes, he is being faithful to God.Second, the Lord weighs the heart. He weighs the heart, not the action. He weighs the true motive of the Christian, not what the Christian thinks is his motive. The mistake of the Christian is to believe that he looks within his own heart with clear sight.

That is precisely what we are weakest at doing. We cannot weigh our own heart. Only God can do so.What is the practical input of this reality - that we see a favorably distorted view of ourselves and only the Lord weighs with accuracy the heart? It should make us humble. It should make us slow to make judgment of others, especially to make unfavorable judgments of others in relation to ourselves.

We should be zealous to study God's Word so that it shines a light on our hearts. We should never be quick to defend our hearts, knowing that we may very well be wrong. Even when we may be accurate about what we do see in ourselves, we never do know the full picture. Again, only the Lord weighs truly the heart.Finally, it should lead us to rely wholly on the mercy of God.

If God were to measure out justice according to what he weighs in our hearts, we would all perish. God weighs and then he measures out to us according to his mercy. Have you thanked him today for such mercy?

Wolves

Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature . . . . Colossians 3:5

Elizabeth Berg in the novel The Year of Pleasure tells about a Navajo grandfather who says to his grandson: “Two wolves live inside me. One is the bad wolf, full of greed and laziness, full of anger and jealousy and regret. The other is the good wolf, full of joy and compassion and willingness and a great love for the world. All the time these wolves are fighting inside me.”
“But grandfather,” the boy said, “which wolf will win?”
The grandfather answered, “The one I feed.”
It’s a good story. There are times in all of our lives when it’s most helpful to ask, “Do I really want to feed this anger? Or this lust? Or this envy? Paul appears to say something similar in our passage when he tells us to get rid of—to starve—sinful practices.
Yet the story, as good as it is, is incomplete. It assumes that the self who chooses whether to feed the good wolf or the bad wolf is untainted in its judgments. But, of course, it isn’t. The ways of the good and bad wolves infect the very core of our being. We rationalize and justify our sins all the time; we’re masters at putting a good face on the evil we do.
Paul tells us not only to starve our sinful practices but also to drown our old self in the waters of baptism so that we may put on the new self, Christ.

PRAYER
Lord Jesus, we want you on the throne of our lives to guide us in all our decisions, all we think, say, and do. Be the Lord of our lives, we pray. In your name, Amen.

Evangelizing your kids???????? PART 2 OF 2.....

1. Setting a Consistent Example of Godliness
Evangelizing children consists not simply of verbalizing the gospel with one’s mouth, but also of exemplifying it in one’s life. As parents explain the truths of God’s Word, children have the unique opportunity to observe their lives up close and to see whether they seriously believe what they are teaching. When parents are faithful not only to proclaim, but also to live out the gospel, the impact is profound.
Because marriage is a picture of Christ’s relationship with the church (Eph. 5:22–33), the relationship between the parents as husband and wife is particularly significant. In fact, aside from the parents’ fundamental commitment to Christ, the single most important foundation for successful parenting is a healthy, Christ-centered marriage. Setting a consistent example of godliness is indispensable.
2. Proclaiming the Complete Gospel of Christ
The heart of evangelism is the gospel, “for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes” (Rom. 1:16). If a child is to repent and believe in Christ, then, it will be through the proclamation of the message of the cross (1 Cor. 1:18–25; 2 Tim. 3:15; James 1:18; 1 Peter 1:23–25). Children will not be saved apart from the gospel.
For this reason, parents need to teach their children the law of God, teach them the gospel of divine grace, show them their need for a Savior, and point them to Jesus Christ as the only One who can save them. It is best to start from the beginning—God, creation, the fall, sin, salvation, and Christ in His life, death, and resurrection.
As they teach their children, parents must resist the temptation to downplay or soften the demands of the gospel and must proclaim the message in its fullness. The need to surrender to the lordship of Christ, for example, is not too difficult for children to understand. Any child who is old enough to understand the basic gospel is also able by God’s grace to trust Him completely and respond with the purest, most sincere kind of repentance.
The key is to be clear and thorough. Parents more than anyone have ample time and opportunity to explain and illustrate gospel truths, to correct misunderstandings, and to clarify and review the most difficult aspects of the message. The wise parent will be faithful, patient, and persistent, being careful to look at every moment of the child’s life as a teaching opportunity (Deut. 6:6–7).
One such teaching opportunity is found in the parents’ responsibility to discipline and correct their children when they are disobedient (Eph. 6:4). Rather than seeking simply to modify behavior, the wise parent will look at discipline as an opportunity to help his children become aware of their failure and inability to obey, and subsequently, their need for forgiveness in Christ. In this way, discipline and correction are used to bring children to a sober assessment of themselves as sinners and to lead to the cross of Christ where sinners can be forgiven.
As parents explain the gospel and exhort their children to respond to the gospel, it is best to avoid an emphasis on external actions, such as praying “the sinner’s prayer.” There is an urgency inherent in the gospel message itself—and it is right for parents to impress that urgency on the child’s heart—but the focus should be kept on the internal response Scripture calls for from sinners: repentance from sin and faith in Christ. As parents diligently teach the gospel and take opportunities each day to instruct their children in the truth of God’s Word, they can begin to look for signs that their children have indeed repented and believed.
3. Understanding the Biblical Evidences of Salvation
The evidence that someone has genuinely repented of his sin and believed in Christ is the same in a child as it is in an adult—spiritual transformation. According to Scripture, true believers follow Christ (John 10:27), confess their sins (1 John 1:9), love their brothers (1 John 3:14), obey God’s commandments (1 John 2:3; John 15:14), do the will of God (Matt. 12:50), abide in God’s Word (John 8:31), keep God’s Word (John 17:6), and do good works (Eph. 2:10).
Parents should look for an increasing measure of this kind of fruit in their children’s lives as they continue to instruct them in the truths of the gospel. In addition, parents should be fervent in their efforts to teach their children about Christ and their need for salvation, but they should also recognize that an essential part of that work is to guard them from thinking they are saved when they are not.
Understanding the biblical evidences of salvation—and explaining them to one’s children—is foundational to this work of protection.
4. Encouraging Possible Signs of Conversion
Because of the immaturity and fickleness of children, it is tempting for some parents to write off childlike expressions of faith as trivial, or even meaningless. In contrast, parents should encourage every sign of faith in their children and use the opportunity to teach them even more about Christ and the gospel. When a child expresses a desire to learn about Jesus, parents should feed that desire and encourage the child when they see possible signs of conversion.
Even if parents conclude it’s too early to regard their child’s interest in Christ as mature faith, they must not deride a profession of faith as false, for it may be the seed from which mature faith will later emerge. Instead, the parent should continue to point that child toward Christ, teaching the truth of God’s Word with patience and diligence, and always looking to the One who is able to open hearts to respond to the gospel.
5. Trusting the Absolute Sovereignty of God
The greatest need of children is to be born again. Regeneration, however, is not something that parents can do for them. Parents may pressure their children into a false profession, but genuine faith and repentance can only be granted by God who regenerates the heart. Put simply, the new birth is the work of the Holy Spirit and Him alone (John 3:8).
The salvation of children, then, cannot be produced by the faithfulness or diligence of parents, but only by the sovereign work of God Himself. Such a realization should bring comfort to parents. In addition, it should motivate them to bathe their evangelistic efforts in prayer to the One who does His work where they cannot—in the child’s heart.

Faith

We always thank God . . . because we have heard of your faith in Christ Jesus. . . . Colossians 1:3-4


Faith looks both to Christ for salvation and with Christ to live faithfully.
Faith looks to Christ for the assurance that our sins are forgiven and that we are forever right with God.
Pastor Jim Van Tholen, fighting cancer at the age of 33, confessed to his congregation that he’d been scared of meeting God. In the book This Incomplete One he said, “I assumed I still had about forty years left. Forty years to unlearn my bad habits. Forty years to let my sins thin down. . . . Forty years to be good. . . . But that’s not how it’s going to go. Now I have months, not years. . . . I have to meet God not later, but sooner.”

Of course, as Jim knew, it’s not really about time; it’s about where we look. Young or old, we must all look to Christ for our salvation.
But we must also look with Christ to live faithfully. Faith sees with Christ’s eyes. Faith embraces Christ’s view of God and life, and it lives accordingly.
Once when Jesus and his disciples were on a boat and caught in a terrible storm, the disciples were panic-stricken. Jesus said to them, “Why are you afraid? Do you still have no faith?” (Mark 4:40). Jesus knew and trusted the Father, and he was calm. He saw that they were all in God’s care. Faith sees what Christ sees. It looks with his eyes on all things.

PRAYER
Holy Spirit, open our eyes to see Jesus, our Savior, and give us his eyes to see our neighbor so that in all things we may imitate him. In his name we pray. Amen.

John Calvin as John Piper - An Easter Thought Dr. Ligon Duncan

While making final preparations for Sunday morning's message, I met up with an old friend. A Calvin quote on the purpose of 1 Peter that I think I first read about five years ago. It struck me (reading it this afternoon) how much it sounds like our friend John Piper - if I may speak anachronistically.
"the main object of [1 Peter] is to raise us above the world, in order that we may be prepared and encouraged to sustain the spiritual contests of our warfare. For this end, the knowledge of God’s benefits avails much; for, when their value appears to us, all other things will be deemed worthless, especially when we consider what Christ and his blessings are; for everything without him is but dross. For this reason he highly extols the wonderful grace of God in Christ, that is, that we may not deem it much to give up the world in order that we may enjoy the invaluable treasure of a future life; and also that we may not be broken down by present troubles, but patiently endure them, being satisfied with eternal happiness. Further, when he gives thanks to God, he invites the faithful to spiritual joy, which can swallow up all the opposite feelings of the flesh." (John Calvin, Commentary on 1 Peter)How is this an Easter truth? Well, you'll have to read 1 Peter 1:4 to find out!

An Un-Easter Un-Present Dr Phil Ryken

When Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad released 15 (illegally held, by all objective accounts) British prisoners this week, he claimed that he was doing so "on the occasion of the birthday of the great prophet [Muhammad] . . . and for the occasion of the passing of Christ." Further, on behalf of the Islamic Republic government and the Iranian people Ahmadinejad "forgave those 15." Both the rhetoric and the release are (unwittingly) ironic.
Consider that the 15 prisoners were innocent to begin with, and that therefore they were unjustly imprisoned. Further, having committed no crime in need of forgiveness, they were unnecessarily pardoned. How strange, then, to say that their release is an appropriate recognition of the death of Jesus Christ. For the message of Good Friday and Easter is that the truly guilty go free, fully forgiven, and that this comes at the price of an innocent sacrifice -- exactly the opposite of what happened this week, in other words.

Growling

“Go, tell his disciples and Peter, ‘He is going ahead of you into Galilee.’” Mark 16:7

Many of us went to church yesterday with great anticipation. This, after all, was the big one.
Yet no matter how wonderful the worship was, the miracle of Easter needs more tending and deeper reflection.

Like the first disciples, we must leave the service and go to Galilee, where we live out our lives and where Jesus has gone ahead of us—and we go to live with him year-round.

Eugene Peterson observes in Eat This Book that he saw his dog chewing on a bone. The dog gnawed the bone, turned it over, licked it, and sometimes made a low rumble or growl, similar to a cat’s purring. Later Peterson noticed that the prophet Isaiah said the same thing about a lion: “As a lion growls . . . over his prey . . .” (Isaiah 31:4).

What makes this remarkable is that the Hebrew word that is translated as growl is usually translated as meditate.

For example, in Psalm 1, a blessed person is described as one who meditates (growls) on God’s law day and night.

We need to growl over Easter. As a dog buries its bone to return to it later, we must bury the Easter event in our hearts to return to it on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday . . . every day, to growl over it, for such is its inexhaustible goodness.

PRAYER
Lord Jesus, may your glorious resurrection satisfy us completely. Help us to reflect on it thoughtfully, making it a part of our everyday living for your sake. Amen.

Evangelizing your kids????????

For many believers, fulfilling Christ’s command to make disciples of all nations begins at home—with their children. In fact, few experiences bring greater joy to Christian parents than seeing their children come to faith in Christ.
The process of evangelizing one’s children, however, can be a daunting task. For many parents, the questions are as practical as they are disconcerting: How should I present the gospel to my children? What’s the best approach to take? How do I know if I’m doing it right?
Pitfalls, both real and imagined, intimidate virtually every parent who contemplates this responsibility. On one hand, there’s the danger of leading children to think they are saved when they are not. On the other, there’s the risk of discouraging children who express a genuine desire to follow Christ.
How, then, should we evangelize our children?
The answer to this question is not an easy one, but it begins with recognizing and avoiding some of the common pitfalls in child evangelism.
Common Pitfalls in Evangelizing Children
1. Oversimplifying the Gospel of Christ
Because a child’s comprehension is less developed than an adult’s, the temptation for many parents is to oversimplify the message of the gospel when they evangelize their children. Sometimes this stems from canned or programmed approaches to child evangelism, which often abbreviate the gospel, downplay the demands of the gospel, or leave out key aspects of the gospel altogether.
Like adults, children must be able to understand the gospel clearly before they can be saved. This involves grasping concepts such as good and evil, sin and punishment, repentance and faith, God’s holiness and wrath against sin, the deity of Christ and His atonement for sin, and the resurrection and lordship of Christ. Certainly parents need to use terminology children can comprehend and be clear in communicating the message, but when Scripture talks about teaching children spiritual truth, the emphasis is on thoroughness (Deuteronomy 6:6–7).
Oversimplification is a greater danger than giving too much detail. It is the truth—found in God’s Word—that saves, but that truth must be understood.
2. Coercing a Profession of Faith
Whether parents present the gospel in an oversimplified or thorough manner, many solicit some kind of active response to that message. It could be a show of hands in a group setting, a rote repetition of “the sinner’s prayer,” or almost anything that may be counted as a positive response. Children will almost always respond in whatever way parents ask—not at all guaranteeing real acts of faith in Christ.
Rather than getting their children to pray “the sinner’s prayer” or enticing them into a superficial response, parents must faithfully, patiently, and thoroughly teach them the gospel and diligently pray for their salvation, always bearing in mind that God is the One who saves. There is no need to pressure or coerce a confession from the mouth of a child, for genuine repentance will bring forth its own confession as the Lord opens the heart in response to the gospel. And as time goes by, it is never right to reinforce to the child that a childhood prayer is evidence of salvation (see #4 below).
3. Assuming the Reality of Regeneration
The next pitfall is assuming with certainty that a child’s positive response to the gospel is full-fledged saving faith. The temptation here is to regard regeneration as a settled matter because of an outward indication that the child has believed. One cannot assume, however, that every profession of faith reflects a genuine work of God in the heart (Matt. 7:21–23), and this is particularly true of children.
Children often respond positively to the gospel for a host of reasons, many of which are unrelated to any awareness of sin or real understanding of spiritual truth. Many children, for example, profess faith because of peer pressure at church or a desire to please their parents.
In addition, Scripture indicates that children tend to be immature (1 Cor. 13:11; 14:20), naive (Prov. 1:4), foolish (Prov. 22:15), capricious (Isaiah 3:4), inconsistent and fickle (Matt. 11:16–17), and unstable and easily deceived (Eph. 4:14). Children often think they have understood the ramifications of a given commitment when they have not. Their judgment is shallow and their ability to see the implications of their decisions is very weak. Despite the best of intentions, they seldom have the ability to think far beyond today, nor do they perceive the extent to which their choices will affect tomorrow. This makes children more vulnerable to self-deception, and it makes it more difficult for a parent to discern God’s saving work in their hearts.
For this reason, only when a child’s stated convictions and beliefs are tested by circumstances in life as he matures do parents begin to learn more conclusively his spiritual direction. While many people do make a genuine commitment to Christ when young, many others—perhaps most—don’t come to an adequate understanding of the gospel until their teenage years. Others who profess Christ in childhood turn away. It is only appropriate, then, that parents move cautiously in affirming a child’s profession of faith and not be quick to take any show of commitment as decisive proof of conversion.
4. Assuring the Child of Salvation
After becoming convinced their child is saved, many parents seek to give that child verbal assurance of his salvation. As a consequence, the church is filled with teenagers and adults whose hearts are devoid of real love for Christ, but who think they are genuine Christians because of something they did as children.
It is the role of the Holy Spirit—not the parent—to give assurance of salvation (Rom. 8:15–16). Too many people whose hearts are utterly cold to the things of the Lord believe they are going to heaven simply because they responded positively as children to an evangelistic invitation. Having “asked Jesus to come into their hearts,” they were then given a false assurance and taught never to examine themselves and never to entertain any doubt about their salvation. Parents should commend and rejoice in the evidence of real salvation in the lives of their children only when they know the child understands the gospel, believes it, and manifests the genuine evidence of true salvation—devotion to Christ, obedience to the Word, and love for others.

Be Not Afraid

“Do not be afraid . . . . He is not here; he has risen, just as he said.” Matthew 28:5-6

Don’t be afraid. This is the most common command in the Bible. Don’t be afraid, not even in graveyards.
I heard of a doctor who bought the words Be Not Afraid cut out of steel. He wanted to hang the phrase in the children’s ward of a hospital. The thought of those words in a place full of sick children and anxious parents cuts to the quick. Be not afraid! But isn’t this world frightfully threatening even to our little ones? Yes it is, but there is God, and he is stronger even than death.
In his book Our Greatest Gift, Henri Nouwen tells of a conversation he had with a trapeze artist. Nouwen asked the flyer, “What is it like?” The flyer answered, “The public thinks I am the star, but the real star is Joe, my catcher. I must completely trust my catcher. The worst thing a flyer can do is to try and catch the catcher. The flyer does nothing but trust with outstretched arms, that the catcher will be there for him.”
Nouwen writes, “The words of Jesus flashed through my mind. ‘Father, into your hands I commend my spirit.’” (See Luke 23:46.) Dying well involves trusting in the catcher, and Easter vindicates that trust.

Don’t be afraid. Remember whose you are. He’ll be there in your living and in your dying. Don’t try to grab him; he will grab you. “Just stretch out your arms and trust, trust, trust” (Nouwen).

PRAYER
Gracious God, as you raised Jesus Christ, raise us also in him and give us a great confidence in your victory through him, our Lord and Savior. In his name, Amen.

IF CHRIST HAS NOT BEEN RAISED By Nathan Williams

Easter is tomorrow. What will make this Easter different than every other Easter Sunday for you? Try imagining Christianity without the resurrection. What would be the result?
When Christians are asked to give a brief synopsis of the gospel, they often leave out two important elements, repentance and the resurrection. Repentance is the heart of the gospel presentation. How can a man be saved unless he turns from his sin and to Christ? Yet, this important element gets lost in the shuffle of words and some even deny its place when discussing salvation.
The other component that vanishes in most gospel presentations is equally important and cannot be left out. This element is the resurrection. We are so eager to discuss the death of Christ and his atonement for our sins that we often skip over the fact that God raised Him from the dead and that ultimately, it is this resurrection that secures our salvation. I would like to walk you through a key passage in 1 Corinthians 15 and remind you of the importance of the resurrection by showing you the consequences if Christ has not been raised from the dead.
In 1 Corinthians 15:12-19 Paul responds to doctrine being taught at Corinth that there was no resurrection of the dead. At the beginning of verse 12 Paul explains that the resurrection was being clearly preached at Corinth as it had been preached to all in the early church. This first conditional statement begins a series of conditional statements throughout this passage which Paul uses to make his argument. If this was the consistent message being taught by the early church, Paul expresses astonishment that some among the people were preaching that there is no resurrection of the dead. Paul moves on in verse 13 to show the disastrous consequences of teaching that there is no resurrection of the dead.
“But if there is no resurrection of the dead, not even Christ has been raised.”
This is a crucial premise in Paul’s argument and it is used as an exercise in logical reasoning. If you deny resurrections in general, you must also deny Christ’s resurrection specifically. Having carefully developed his logic, Paul now explains the first area which is affected if there is no resurrection.
1. If Christ is not raised, the veracity of the Apostles witness is shattered (v. 14-15).
If Christ was not raised from the dead, Paul acknowledges that the preaching of the Apostles had been in vain. The preaching Paul is referring to looks back to verse 11 and means the message they have preached. It includes the content of the gospel. This word “vain” means empty, without substance, or void. The gospel has no basis in objective truth if Christ is not raised. Not only is the gospel message tarnished, but the faith which rests on that message is vain. This is the same word Paul used to describe His preaching. Their faith is devoid of any spiritual value. Not only would their preaching and faith be in vain, but the Apostles themselves would be false witnesses.
In verse 15 Paul explains further that the Apostles were clearly giving false testimony if they had said that Christ was raised from the dead and he was not. The words Paul uses give the picture of a courtroom and present the image of Paul providing perjured testimony. There is no worse type of testimony than one who testifies falsely concerning God. All of this would be true if Christ had not been raised from the dead. Paul repeats his original statement from verse 13 in verse 16 and then moves on to his second affected area.
2. If Christ is not raised, Christian salvation is nothing (v. 17-19).
Not only are the consequences of denying Christ’s resurrection directed at the Apostles, they are directed at every Christian. Paul starts this section by stating that if Christ has not been raised, the faith of Christians is worthless. The Greek word for “worthless” is a different word than is used in verse 14. “Vain” in verse 14 focuses on lacking in reality while this word focuses on the result of their faith being fruitless. Not only is faith worthless in its result, but Christians are still dead in their sins. This phrase relates specifically to a legal, objective sense. Without the resurrection, the death of Christ has no atoning, redemptive, or liberating effect in relation to human sin.
This is the reason it is so important to preach the resurrection and stress the resurrection. Without it, Paul says that believers are still dead in their sins and Christ’s death essentially is meaningless. Even beyond this consequence, in verse 18 Paul says that those Christians who have already died have perished. By “perished” he means that they have died under the condemnation of God and are still in their sins. In Scripture perishing has the sense of being separated forever from God and eternal loss of holiness and happiness. Finally, in verse 19 Paul states that Christians should be considered the most pitiable of all men if they have hoped in Christ alone and Christ has not been raised.
This has been a very quick look at a passage that gives us some of the consequences of denying the resurrection of Christ. I hope on this Easter Sunday we will see the disastrous results of taking the resurrection out of the gospel. Salvation is tarnished, our preaching is vain, our faith is worthless, and our lives are destined for a Christ-less eternity without the resurrection.

Careless

What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? Romans 6:1

Does grace lead to moral laxity? Is it a bit like telling students at the beginning of the year that they will all pass with a straight-A? I’ve always sympathized with what Flannery O’Connor said about one of her characters in the novel A Good Man Is Hard to Find: “The old woman would have been a good woman if only someone had held a gun to her head every day of her life.” Take away the threat, and we grow careless.

Knowing that grace trumps every sin (see Romans 5:20-21), would any of us deny that sometimes we’ve taken advantage of grace, sinned with the thought of repenting of it afterward, because there is always grace? Yet Paul’s response to this possibility is indignant, almost horrified: “By no means!” What a ghastly thought!
Why is Paul so indignant? Because grace initiates a “relocation program.” In receiving grace, we receive a new identity, become citizens of another kingdom, are placed in a new family. We are saved to live a new life.

“Can . . . Christians live as though they were still in their sins?” asks commentator John Stott. “Well, yes, I suppose they could,” he says, “at least for a little while. . . . But let them remember who they are. Let them recall . . . [the meaning] of their new life of union in Christ.”
Grace has given us a new identity. How can we do anything other than live accordingly?

PRAYER
Dear Lord, may we die daily to sin and be alive to you. Help us not to take your grace for granted, but to remember who we are—and how much you’ve given for us. Amen.

Easter Forever! By Dr. Phil Ryken

I find it hard not to envy the disciples a little. They were there for the first Easter. Therefore, they were the first to hear the good news of the resurrection and the first to see the risen Christ. Don’t you wish that you could see what they saw and rejoice the way that they must have rejoiced?
Happily, I have been studying and preaching the resurrection narratives in Luke for the last month or so -- an excellent preparation for Good Friday and Easter. What has impressed me most is the way that Jesus presented the gospel to Cleopas and his companion on the road to Emmaus. One might have expected Jesus to point first of all to the physical reality of his resurrection body as the proof of the cross and the empty tomb. Certainly that would have been appropriate, not to mention effective, and Jesus did it on other occasions (see Luke 24:38ff., for example). But what Jesus did instead is more precious to us: He proved the cross and the empty tomb from the Scriptures. Luke tells us that "beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself" (Luke 24:27). Furthermore, Jesus made it clear that these Scriptures should have been enough for Cleopas and his companion to understand the gospel (see Luke 24:25).I say this is precious to us because we have the same Scriptures they had, and more (see Matthew through Revelation!). Luke is therefore showing us (among other things) that we are not at any disadvantage for experiencing the life-changing joy of Good Friday and Easter. We have the Scriptures that Jesus had, and they should be enough for us -- enough for believing the gospel and also enough for preaching the gospel. Easter forever!

The Cross of Good Friday........

God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement. . . . to demonstrate his justice . . . . Romans 3:25

God forgives our sins. This is such common knowledge that we are often not amazed. Yet we ought to be.

After all, bred into our bones is the conviction that evil must be punished. We rightly feel outraged when someone gets away with murder, or when torturers live out their days in secluded luxury. Should God forgive the wicked? Is that fair? What about the victims of their wickedness?

The Bible itself repeatedly tells judges to condemn the guilty (see Deuteronomy 25:1). Proverbs 17:15 adds, “Acquitting the guilty and condemning the innocent—the Lord detests them both.” God is holy. He cannot turn a blind eye to sin or give it free rein in his creation. God has been most forbearing toward us.


Here is a question to consider carefully: How can a holy God declare sinners righteous without either condoning sin or compromising his holiness?

God’s answer is the cross. Here is a forgiveness that shows God is irreconcilable to evil. James Denney writes, “Nothing else in the world demonstrates how real is God’s love to the sinful, and how real the sin of the world is to God.”

There are those who despise the gospel because of the cross, saying there’s too much blood in it. On this day we say that the blood is the reason we embrace the gospel.


PRAYER
Lord Jesus, we thank you for becoming one with us and taking on the punishment we deserved. Thank you, Lord God, for forgiving us through Jesus’ gift of his life for ours. Amen

The Goodness of Good Friday An unhappy celebration—isn't that an oxymoron? Rev. Charles J. Paul

What a supreme paradox. We now call the day Jesus was crucified, Good.
Many believe this name simply evolved—as language does. They point to the earlier designation, "God's Friday," as its root. (This seems a reasonable conjecture, given that "goodbye" evolved from "God be with you.")

Whatever its origin, the current name of this holy day offers a fitting lesson to those of us who assume (as is easy to do) that "good" must mean "happy." We find it hard to imagine a day marked by sadness as a good day.

Of course, the church has always understood that the day commemorated on Good Friday was anything but happy. Sadness, mourning, fasting, and prayer have been its focus since the early centuries of the church. A fourth-century church manual, the Apostolic Constitutions, called Good Friday a "day of mourning, not a day of festive Joy." Ambrose, the fourth-century archbishop who befriended the notorious sinner Augustine of Hippo before his conversion, called it the "day of bitterness on which we fast."


Many Christians have historically kept their churches unlit or draped in dark cloths. Processions of penitents have walked in black robes or carried black-robed statues of Christ and the Virgin Mary. And worshippers have walked the "Stations of the Cross," praying and singing their way past 14 images representing Jesus' steps along the Via Dolorosa to Golgotha.
Yet, despite—indeed because of—its sadness, Good Friday is truly good. Its sorrow is a godly sorrow. It is like the sadness of the Corinthians who wept over the sharp letter from their dear teacher, Paul, convicted of the sin in their midst. Hearing of their distress, Paul said, "My joy was greater than ever." Why? Because such godly sorrow "brings repentance that leads to salvation and leaves no regret" (2 Cor. 7:10).

I like to think the linguistic accident that made "God's Friday" into "Good Friday" was no accident at all. It was God's own doing—a sharp, prophetic jab at a time and a culture obsessed by happiness. In the midst of consumerism's Western playground, Good Friday calls to a jarring halt the sacred "pursuit of happiness." The cross reveals this pursuit for what it is: a secondary thing.
This commemoration of Christ's death reminds us of the human sin that caused this death. And we see again that salvation comes only through godly sorrow—both God's and, in repentance, ours. To pursue happiness, we must first experience sorrow. He who goes forth sowing tears returns in joy.

At the same time, of course, Good Friday recalls for us the greatness and wonder of God's love—that He should submit to death for us.

No wonder, in parts of Europe, the day is called not "Good," but "Great" or "Holy" Friday.
Today, Christian liturgies reflect the gravity of Christ's act. Services linger on the details of Christ's death and the extent of His sacrifice. Often the Stabat Mater is performed—a thirteenth-century devotional poem remembering Mary's vigil by the cross. The poem begins "Stabat Mater Dolorosa"—that is, "a grief-stricken mother was standing."
To commemorate the Lord's hours on the cross, many Protestants hold their Good Friday services between noon and 3. They reflect, in a series of readings and songs, on Christ's seven last words. (1: "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do." 2: "Today shalt thou be with me in paradise." 3: "Woman, behold thy son!" 4: "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" 5: "I thirst." 6: "It is finished." 7: "Father, into Thy hands I commend my spirit.") This form originated with seventeenth-century Peruvian Jesuits, one of many cases in which modern Protestants have picked up Catholic devotional practices.
In the Roman Catholic Good Friday Mass, the altar is stripped of all adornments, and worshipers venerate the cross by kissing a crucifix. In the "Ceremony of the Winding Sheet," Greek Catholics carry a cloth depicting Jesus' dead body in procession to a shrine, where the priest places it in a symbolic tomb.

Some Western churches still celebrate a medieval liturgy called the Tenebrae, or Service of Darkness, in which candles and lights are gradually extinguished until the congregation sits in complete darkness—a representation of the darkness that covered the earth at the death of Jesus (Mark 15:33). Scripture readings and hymns lead the worshipers in a communal repentance for the sins that made the Crucifixion necessary.

The Tenebrae service ends with the strepitus, a loud, harsh noise such as the slamming of a book or crashing of a cymbal. This echoes several scriptural sounds: the final cries of Jesus, the earthquake at his death (Matt. 27:46-53), the shutting of His tomb, and the second earthquake at His rising (Matt. 28:2).


We do not need to be as notorious in our sinning as Oscar Wilde (1854–1900) to remember our own darkness, as he did, on Good Friday. Wilde's 1881 poem "E Tenebris," titled after the Tenebrae, reflects his own long, conflicted entrance into Christianity that would culminate in a deathbed conversion. In the poem, he appeals for mercy:


Come down, O Christ, and help me! reach thy hand,For I am drowning in a stormier seaThan Simon on thy lake of Galilee:The wine of life is spilt upon the sand,My heart is as some famine-murdered landWhence all good things have perished utterly,And well I know my soul in Hell must lieIf I this night before God's throne should stand.'He sleeps perchance, or rideth to the chase,Like Baal, when his prophets howled that nameFrom morn to noon on Carmel's smitten height.'Nay, peace, I shall behold, before the night,The feet of brass, the robe more white than flame,The wounded hands, the weary human face.

Good Friday has always challenged merely human goodness. Its sad commemoration reminds us that in the face of sin, our goodness avails nothing. Only One is good enough to save us. That He did so is cause indeed for celebration.

Mere Breath

from Brahms' RequiemIII.

Baritone & ChorusO Lord, make me know my endand what is the measure of my days;let me know how fleeting I am!Behold, you have made my days a few handbreadths,and my lifetime is as nothing before you.Surely all mankind stands as a mere breath!Surely a man goes about as a shadow!Surely for nothing they are in turmoil;a man heaps up wealth and does not knowwho will gather!And now, O Lord, for what do I wait?My hope is in you - Psalm 39:4-7IV. ChorusHow lovely is your dwelling place,O Lord of hosts!My soul longs, yes, faints for the courts of the Lord;my heart and flesh sing for joyto the living God.Blessed are those who dwell in your house,ever singing your praise! - Psalm 84:1-2, 4The brevity of life sobers us, pressing upon us our frailty. But it is not merely the length of time that shakes us, but how that time is spent. Psalm 39 is a psalm seeking God's mercy to withdraw the punishment of the psalmist's sins. "Deliver me from all my transgressions," is the cry of the psalmist in verse 8. As he says later in verse 11 of the Lord, "When you discipline a man with rebukes for sin, you consume like a moth what is dear to him; surely all mankind is a mere breath!"It is the sorrow of life which we bring upon ourselves through our sins that makes us see clearly and despondently the brevity of life. What hope do we have? Our hope is in the one who disciplines us; for he brings consequences to bear on our sins not to destroy us, but to turn us to himself that we might find life. Our hope is in the Lord to deliver us from the consequences and guilt of our sin. But he not only delivers us from our troubles; he delivers us to happiness found in him. He brings us to his dwelling place where we find joy in the worship of our God.For now, we are spiritually by faith taken to that dwelling place. The day will come when our Lord, who has gone before us, will return and bring us into the presence of God where forever we will joyfully sing his praise.

Facing Reality

Sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all . . . . Romans 5:12

In his book Tortured Wonders Rodney Clapp tells the story of an impeccably dressed young woman who comes to church on Ash Wednesday to receive ashes on her forehead and to hear the solemn words “Dust you are and to dust you will return” (Genesis 3:19). As she kneels and the priest leans forward to trace an ashen cross on her forehead, she whispers, “Father, I am a model. I know I only have a few years; then I will be too old for this work. My body is aging, and I can hardly admit it to myself. I do it once a year at this service. So rub the ashes on. Rub them hard.”
During the season of Lent we’ve admitted, again and again, that sin is in our hearts and death is in our bones. We make our home in the valley of the shadow of death. We are dying. Like the Israelites in exile, we lament: “Our bones are dried up and our hope is gone; we are cut off” (Ezekiel 37:11). We have no future.

Jesus Christ, the one greater than Adam, has entered the “valley of dry bones” to get us out of the mess Adam got us into, to undo what Adam did, to succeed where Adam failed.
During these final days of holy week, as the battle grows fierce, may we “fix our eyes on Jesus . . . who for the joy set before him [the joy of bringing us to glory], endured the cross” (Hebrews 12:2). Let us be astonished!

PRAYER
Lord Jesus, you are our only hope. You alone can rescue us from death and bring us into eternal life. Thank you for setting this joy before us. In your name we pray. Amen.

God at Work

God at Work
Here is a blog posting from Lauren Green of Fox News regarding "God at Work."

The Bible in Public Schools

The Bible in Public Schools
The TIME magazine cover article for the April 2 issue is an endorsement of teaching the Bible in public schools.

The Nature of the Atonement

James K. Beilby & Paul R. EddyReview by Mark Johnston, Minister of Grove Chapel, London, England

There’s nothing like a good debate to stir the juices and make you think! To listen to a bunch of intellectual heavyweights slugging it out verbally is more than just spectator sport, it’s a healthy exercise in personal mind-expansion. The Four Views series published by IVP taps into this discipline of orderly debate as a time-honoured means of presenting an argument and sharpening thought to address some of the big issues that the church has wrestled with over the years. This particular volume takes us into the realm of the Atonement.
Four contributors – Gregory Boyd, Joel Green, Bruce Reichenbach and Thomas Schreiner – lock horns on paper within the constraints of the rules of engagement. Each in turn presents his case and his colleagues each have an opportunity to offer a concise critical response. It proves to be a healthy way of testing each argument and, as we listen to the critiques, have a further chance to test the strength of the views that differ.
Although historically the views, or ‘theories’ of the atonement (it always sounds more than a little arrogant to hear the doctrine of the atonement described in terms of a ‘theory’), have been many and varied, these contributors home in on four. Boyd presents the argument for the Christus Victor interpretation, Green a kaleidoscope view, Reichenbach the Healing paradigm and Schreiner the belief that Penal Substitution is the key to understanding Atonement. Together they cover most of the topography of theological debate on this issue through church history.
Boyd kicks off with the first presentation on Christus Victor, arguing for this view not merely because it was the dominant interpretation of Atonement theology for the first millennium of the church’s history, but because he believes it to be the most comprehensive approach in terms of doing justice to the biblical data on this theme. His co-contributors rightly and graciously acknowledge that there is much to commend in his argument; but Schreiner incisively points out that he manages to overlook the weight that Scripture gives to the seriousness of personal sin and the need for a particular solution to it in the scheme of divine justice.
The contribution from Schreiner on Penal Substitution is both classic and yet fresh as he addresses this issue in the context of the intensified criticism of this view in recent scholarship. He argues cogently, pointing – as already hinted – to the axiomatic significance of human sin in the face of divine holiness as necessitating a view of the atonement that puts penal substitution at its centre. The three responses to his argument reveal just a little bit more of where his friends are coming from give us a foretaste of what is yet to come from Reichenbach and Green.
Mr. Reichenbach delivers his understanding of atonement in terms of its healing efficacy being the key element to it. As his respondents indicate in their comments, healing (in an eschatological sense) is indeed a key element in what Calvary achieved, but rightly question its being the key element.
Joel Green’s contention in his kaleidoscope approach is that all the many perspectives on atonement in Scripture carry equal weight. Strange, therefore, that elsewhere in Recovering the Scandal of the Cross he seems to have a major problem with the substitutionary view. To put a twist on Orwell’s comment: ‘All pigs are equal, but some are less equal than others.’ That aside, for Green, ‘the cross became the chief icon by which to rally a robust Christian identity and to ground a Christian ethic.’
There is no doubting the importance of this debate within the evangelical family; but there are some pretty major questions which emerge, not merely from within that debate, but also from the way it is approached.
There is just a sneaking suspicion that the gentlemanly approach in a ‘Four Views…’ line (or however many you care to sandwich between two covers) smacks just a little of the smorgasbord approach to life in general and theology in particular that is so popular today. Some of the most vigorous debates in the New Testament Church took place between brothers within the church family and they were over much less central issues than the cross and what it accomplished. In our desire to be nice to each other we can perhaps shy away from the ‘withstanding to the face’ approach favoured by Paul when he challenged his dear brother Peter.
There is also a real concern over the way the church so often seems to eschew a systematic approach to doctrine these days. Biblical Studies guys are good at offering surveys of what the Bible teaches; but they’re not always good at gauging the weight of particular doctrines. Paul could tick most of the boxes on what these authors say is covered in the biblical corpus on atonement teaching; but he would very quickly argue to three of these contributors, ‘But you’ve missed the “of first importance” strand that runs through them!’
Given the climate change that’s taking place in evangelical theology today with a whole new view on justification, it’s inevitable that there needs to be a major reworking of the historic view of atonement that has occupied the centre-ground of Reformed and Evangelical theology: namely penal substitution. The fact that imputation doesn’t fit with new-look justification means that substitution must be at least relegated, if not obliterated, in our view of Calvary. One can’t help but wonder how much of that is coming out in these pages consciously or otherwise.
A good debate is not merely about making a case; it’s about marshalling the evidence and winning the argument. If that is so, then Thomas Schreiner wins hands down in this one.

Be Patient

from Brahms RequiemII. Chorus
All flesh is like grassand all its glory like the flower of grass.The grass withers,and the flower falls - 1 Peter 1:24Be patient, therefore, brothers, until the coming of the Lord.See how the farmer waits for the precious fruit of the earth,being patient about it, until it receives the early and the late rains. You also, be patient - James 5:7-8What an interesting juxtaposition of verses. They seem to work against each other. How can we be told to be patient when we are like the grass that withers and falls quickly? It is because our lives are short that we are impatient. There is so much to accomplish and so little time.But take these verses as being spoken by the Lord to you (which he is).

He is saying, "I know how you feel. I know how fragile life is and the pain and worries that you feel. But be patient. I will return at the time appointed. Nothing is being forgotten or left undone. My Father's plans are being carried out as intended, and those plans are for your good."The 1 Peter passage ends with these words: "'But the word of the Lord remains forever.' And this word is the good news that was preached to you." The James passage concludes, "Establish your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is at hand."

Do you see then what matters? It is to remain steadfast in your faith, to remain faithful to your God, believing that his word will remain true forever. It is believing through the trials of life that he will keep his promise and someday return to bring suffering and death to an end. It is believing that someday your flesh will be not as the grass of the fields but as the stars of the sky shining with glory.

Volunteers Needed

Volunteers are still needed for this year's PCRT on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday, April 26-28 (days and evenings). Those who serve for at least three hours will receive free overflow registration and complimentary CDs from the plenary sessions. If you are able to help with registration, book sales, hospitality, and/or child care, please contact Anne Davies at adavies@tenth.org

PARENTING IN AN ANTI- SPANKING CULTURE By John MacArthur

With new legislation being proposed in California which would criminalize some forms of spanking, we will post several articles this week on the topic of parental discipline and corporal punishment.
The subject of spanking is baffling to many parents. Part of the problem is the confusion of the times in which we live. It has been popular for more than half a century to decry corporal punishment as inherently inappropriate, counterproductive, and detrimental to the child. Psychologist, mother, and well-known anti-spanking activist Penelope Leach distills the typical humanist perspective on corporal punishment: “I believe that spanking—or tapping, or slapping, or cuffing, or shaking, or beating, or whipping—children is actually wrong. I also believe . . . that far from producing better disciplined people, spanking makes it much more difficult to teach children how to behave” (Online Source). Notice how she equates spanking with slapping, cuffing, shaking, beating, whipping, and “tapping.” But those are not all the same thing, and they should not be likened to the rod of discipline administered in love.
Opponents of corporal punishment will often cite surveys and statistics that seem to support their findings, but precisely because they begin by equating brutal acts of violence against children with properly administered corporal discipline, their results are skewed. Of course cruel punishment and brute violence against children is wrong, counterproductive, and unbiblical.
But, Scripture does nonetheless prescribe the rod of discipline as a necessary aspect of parenting. In fact, Scripture flatly contradicts modern opponents of corporal punishment: “He who spares his rod hates his son, but he who loves him disciplines him promptly” (Proverbs 13:24). “Foolishness is bound up in the heart of a child; the rod of correction will drive it far from him” (22:15). “You shall beat him with a rod, and deliver his soul from hell” (23:14; see also 10:13; 19:18).
Moreover, according to a 1998 article in U.S. News and World Report, “parenting experts” have based all their findings against corporal punishment “on a body of research that is at best inconclusive and at worst badly flawed” (Online Source). According to the article, some recent studies indicate that spanking, when used appropriately, does indeed make children “less likely to fight with others and more likely to obey their parents.” In fact, in one very thorough study, Psychologist Robert E. Larzelere, director of residential research at Boys Town in Nebraska, found that no other discipline technique, including timeout and withdrawal of privileges, had more beneficial results for children under thirteen than non-abusive spanking, in terms of getting children to comply with their parents’ wishes.
Many who oppose corporal punishment simply are not willing to look at the facts and statistics rationally. One critic of spanking bluntly states that as far as he is concerned, “Hitting children is not a subject to which rational debate applies. It is another manifestation of American’s unique exploitation of children as models for absolutist behavior standards and austere punishments that grown adults would not impose on themselves” (Mike A. Males, The Scapegoat Generation, 116).
Christian parents should not be duped by such “experts.” Scripture itself prescribes corporal discipline and cautions parents not to abandon the use of the rod. In the end, the facts will be found to agree with the Word of God. And in that vein, the U.S. News article actually offers some tidbits of very sound advice: “One lesson of the spanking controversy is that whether parents spank or not matters less than how they spank. . . . A single disapproving word can bring a sensitive child to tears, while a more spirited youngster might need stronger measures. Finally, spankings should be done in private to spare children humiliation and without anger” (Online Source).
It might be worthwhile to reiterate the fact that parental discipline should never injure the child. It is never necessary to bruise your children in order to spank them hard enough to make your point. Spanking should always be administered with love and never when the parent is in a fit of rage. That sort of discipline is indeed abusive, wrong, and detrimental to the child, because it shatters the environment of loving nurture and instruction Ephesians 6:4 describes.
Furthermore, spanking is by no means the only kind of discipline parents should administer. There are many other viable forms of punishing children that, on occasion, can be used in addition to the rod. If the child responds immediately to a verbal rebuke in a given situation, a spanking is probably not necessary. Other punishments, such as withdrawing privileges, can also be used as occasional alternatives to spanking if the situation warrants it.
Much of our parental discipline should be totally positive. Parents can and should provide guidance for their children by rewarding them for positive behavior, as well as by punishing them for wrong behavior. Both sides of the equation are important. Positive motivation is entirely legitimate and can often be an effective means of getting children to obey. Notice, in fact, that the promise God Himself attached to the Fifth Commandment is a positive motivation. The commandment was reinforced with a promise, not a threat. It is often appropriate to say to your child, “If you do this, I will reward you in this way.”
Balanced discipline involves both negative and positive reinforcements. In fact, we might sum up all discipline by saying it means giving the appropriate reward for the conduct. When the conduct (including both attitudes and actions) is good, a positive reward is warranted. When the conduct is bad, a negative reward is in order. It’s really that simple.
Yet parents seem incurably confused about these issues. Even many Christian parents I know are practically paralyzed with fear about whether, when, how, and how much to discipline their children. But what Scripture says is straightforward: You have a depraved and foolish child, and if you want him not to be so foolish, spank him (Prov. 22:15). You have a solemn responsibility before God to provide an environment of nurture and instruction where your child will constantly be exposed to God’s truth (Deut. 6:6–7). In short, you need to be careful not to provoke your children to wrath, but bring them up in the training and admonition of the Lord (Eph. 6:4).

This was sent to me by Joe Morrison

Heavenly Father, Help us remember that the jerk who cut us off in traffic last night is a single mother who worked nine hours that day and is rushing home to cook dinner, help with homework, do the laundry and spend a few precious moments with her children.

Help us to remember that the pierced, tattooed, disinterested young man who can't make change correctly is a worried 19-year-old college student, balancing his apprehension over final exams with his fear of not getting his student loans for next semester.

Remind us, Lord, that the scary looking bum, begging for money in the same spot every day (who really ought to get a job!) is a slave to addictions that we can only imagine in our worst nightmares.

Help us to remember that the old couple walking annoyingly slow through the store aisles and blocking our shopping progress are savoring this moment, knowing that, based on the biopsy report she got back last week, this will be the last year that they go shopping together .

Heavenly Father, remind us each day that, of all the gifts you give us, the greatest gift is love . It is not enough to share that love with those we hold dear. Open our hearts not to just those who are close to us, but to all humanity. Let us be slow to judge and quick to forgive, show patience, empathy and love.

Working for God on earth doesn't pay much .....but His retirement plan is out of this world !

Satisfying Justice

Brahams Requiem Text
I. ChorusBlessed are those that mourn:for they shall be comforted. -Matthew 5:4

Those who sow in tearsshall reap with shouts of joy!He who goes out weeping,bearing the seed for sowing,shall come home with shouts of joy,bringing his sheaves with him.

-PSALM 126Let those who sorrow know that it is joy, not mourning, which shall have the last word. This we know because of what the Lord has done. The context of the passage in Psalm 126 is that of rejoicing in the Lord bringing home the Israelites from captivity in Babylon. It begins, "When the Lord restored the fortunes of Zion, we were like those who dream."

Joy might seem like a dream to you, but it will be a dream that does come true."The Lord had done great things for us; we are glad," writes the psalmist in verse 3. It is because of what the Lord had done, that he can bid his people to rejoice even as they may weep. If God has acted before, so he will act again. We, who know the Great Thing that our Lord has done for us on the cross, have much more reason to be glad. Our Lord who died for us laid before us our hope when he said "Blessed are those that mourn for they shall be comforted."

Our comfort is not a mere expression of sympathy. It is a hope, a promise that the pain of death that hits us when a loved one dies and that inflicts us as we contemplate our mortality - that pain will cease. For our Lord will undergo death himself to overcome death for us and bring us to that day when death will die and mourning will be no more.

We who sow in tears shall someday reap with shouts of joy.

Luther (Easter Week, 1529) commenting on Christ's prayer, "Father forgive them..."

"There are two kinds of sinners. The first are the evildoers, who do not believe, and the arrogant saints. The second are those who believe in forgiveness through Christ. We are indeed sinners but under the shadow of Christ's merit and prayer, which he has performed as our High Priest. Consider this word well and do not skip over it, namely, that the prayer spoken over you with tears was prayed by a true High Priest and is heard by God. For this reason no one is excluded from this prayer except those who are unbelievers or arrogant saints. Other preachers make only an example from this prayer as they did with Christ's suffering."

WHAT MESSAGE ARE YOU SENDING??? Rev. Charles J. Paul

1 John 2:15 tells us, Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.

The Word of God also tells us not to conform to this world any longer.


My sole purpose in writing this article is to set the record straight. After doing some research I have found that there are well over 30 churches and Christian groups in the Philadelphia and Bucks county area that are having the children come to their churches and having their pictures taken with the Easter Bunny, one church is even going to have the Easter bunny teach children's church on Sunday. In some very sad cases the church has become so much like the world that you can not tell them apart. They will do anything they can to bring people into their buildings, even going as far as letting a rabbit, games and prizes being the reason to come to church. This has broken my heart, and if it has broken my heart, what do you think it has done to the heart of God.

My appeal today is to the Pastors, and to the countless believers who sit in the pews, to you I say stand up for the truth of the Gospel and stop compromising with the world. Yesterday we celebrated the triumphal entry of Jesus into Jerusalem, this Friday we will reflect on what our Lord did for us on the cross, and Sunday we will rejoice at the fact that He rose from the grave. It is because He lives that we also who believe in Him will live. As you can see this is not a game, and most of all nothing to be played with.

What we must teach to our children is the message of the cross, not just in words but also by our actions; too many adults today tell their kids not to smoke while smoking in front of them. Sadly the motto today is do what I say not what I do. The Word of God teaches us that there will be a complete transformation, a renewing of the mind of the believer, we will no longer do the things we used to do.

What we must do is pray for the lost, and let them see us worshiping our Lord and savior Jesus Christ, let them be exposed to our new life. But sadly in too many cases we show the them that they can have Jesus and the world.

Remember the Lord will add to the numbers, what people are won by, is what they will have to be kept by.

If they are won to the church by entertainment and prizes, and yes even a person dressed as the Easter bunny, then to keep them you will always have to give them more of the same and better each week.

But if they are Drawn in by the sprit of the Lord and their hearts of stone are changed to flesh, then the scales will fall from their eyes and for the first time they will see that they are a sinner and Jesus is their eternal Savior, then nothing will be needed to keep them but the Word that drew them.

Hear are some facts to consider………..
Eggs, Egg Hunts and Easter
Eggs have always been associated with the Easter celebration. Nearly every culture in the modern world has a long tradition of coloring eggs in beautiful and different ways. I once examined a traveling display of many kinds of beautifully decorated egg designs that represented the styles and traditions of virtually every country of modern Europe.

Notice the following: “The origin of the Easter egg is based on the fertility lore of the Indo-European races…The egg to them was a symbol of spring…In Christian times the egg had bestowed upon it a religious interpretation, becoming a symbol of the rock tomb out of which Christ emerged to the new life of His resurrection” (Francis X. Weiser, Handbook of Christian Feasts and Customs, p. 233). This is a direct example of exactly how pagan symbols and customs are “Christianized,” i.e., Christian-sounding names are superimposed over pagan customs. This is done to deceive—as well as make people feel better about why they are following a custom that is not in the Bible.

Notice: “Around the Christian observance of Easter…folk customs have collected, many of which have been handed down from the ancient ceremonial…symbolism of European and Middle Eastern pagan spring festivals…for example, eggs…have been very prominent as symbols of new life and resurrection” (Encyclopedia Britannica, 1991 ed., Vol. 4, p. 333).

Finally, the following comes from Egyptian Belief and Modern Thought, James Bonwick, pp. 211-212: “Eggs were hung up in the Egyptian temples. Bunsen calls attention to the mundane egg, the emblem of generative life, proceeding from the mouth of the great god of Egypt. The mystic egg of Babylon, hatching the Venus Ishtar, fell from heaven to the Euphrates. Dyed eggs were sacred Easter offerings in Egypt, as they are still in China and Europe. Easter, or spring, was the season of birth, terrestrial and celestial.”

What could be more plain in showing the true origin of the “Easter egg”? An “Easter” egg is just an egg that pertains to Easter. God never authorized Passover eggs or Days of Unleavened Bread eggs, but there have been Easter eggs for thousands of years!

It naturally progressed that the egg, representing spring and fertility, would be merged into an already pagan springtime festival. Connecting this symbol to Christ’s Resurrection in the spring required much creativity and human reasoning. However, even highly creative human reasoning has never been able to successfully connect the next Easter symbol to anything Christian, because there is not a single word about it anywhere in the New Testament!

The Easter Bunny
Here are two additional quotes from Francis Weiser about the origin of the “Easter bunny”: “In Germany and Austria little nests containing eggs, pastry and candy are placed in hidden spots, and the children believe that the Easter bunny, so popular in this country, too, had laid the eggs and brought the candy” (p. 235) and “The Easter bunny had its origin in pre-Christian fertility lore…The Easter bunny has never had religious symbolism bestowed on its festive usage…However, the bunny has acquired a cherished role in the celebration of Easter as the legendary producer of Easter eggs for children in many countries” (p. 236).

Here is further proof of the origin of Easter eggs and rabbits. It demonstrates how no one has ever been able to connect the Easter bunny to anything Christian, let alone to the Bible: “The Easter bunny is not a true Christian symbol” (John Bradner, Symbols of Church Seasons and Days, p. 52), and “Although adopted in a number of Christian cultures, the Easter bunny has never received any specific Christian interpretation” (Mirsea Eliade, The Encyclopedia of Religion, p. 558).

None of this will stop scores of millions of professing Christians from decorating their lawns and houses with Easter bunnies each spring.

Consider this last quote: “The hare, the symbol of fertility in ancient Egypt, a symbol that was kept later in Europe…Its place has been taken by the Easter rabbit” (Encyclopedia Britannica, 1991 ed., Vol. 4, p. 333).

Even in modern times, rabbits have remained common symbols of fertility. While their rapid rate of reproduction is well known, another problem arises with rabbits—they do not lay eggs! While both are clearly fertility symbols, there is no logical way to connect them. In a world filled with pagan tradition, truth and logic can be lost. Merging these symbols with Christianity makes an already idolatrous practice worse.

There is nothing Christian about any of these symbols. The true history of these fertility symbols, rabbits and eggs, is completely unknown to all the unsuspecting children who have been led by adults to think them so special.

The entire concept that these are Christian is a lie foisted on innocent children who will believe that “the moon is made of cheese” just because someone tells them so. While these are shocking facts, they are true nonetheless.

Fellow believers let's be true not only to our children but also to the world, let us celebrate this weekend, the resurrection of our King, without the influence of the world telling us how we should do it. To the churches and organizations planning to do these events, I say to you boldly do not depart from the Truth of God's Word that saved you. And tell the Rabbit to stay home.

May God bless you as you grow in His truth.

Another King

“I tell you,” he replied, “if they keep quiet, the stones will cry out.” Luke 19:40


The Pharisees want Jesus to tell the “crowd of disciples” to stop their loud praise. They fear that Pilate and his soldiers might hear the shouting: “Blessed is the king who comes in the name of the Lord!”—and they know that Rome shows little mercy to people who claim a king other than Caesar.
But the Pharisees’ demand comes not only from fear. They think it’s simply outrageous, even blasphemous, that these disciples would declare Jesus to be their long-awaited Messiah-King.

The Pharisees and other religious leaders do not see Jesus’ glory or believe that Jesus has come from the Father. So this praise must stop—at this instant!

But Jesus does not yield to their demand—for two reasons.

First, Jesus knows it is time to go public. He intentionally enacts the prophecy of Zechariah 9:9. It’s time to roll and meet the Prince of Darkness head-on.

Second, the people’s praise is right and fitting. He is the Messiah-King, worthy of all adoration. Jesus will go as our King from this parade to the cross, “from the cross to the grave,” and “from the grave to the sky,” as a song puts it.

Jesus’ person and mission are so magnificent that if there is no praise coming from human lips, the stones will cry out, shaming us for our blindness and hardness of heart.

LETS PRAY
“Lord, [we] lift your name on high,” praising you for fulfilling your mission as Savior. Father in heaven, we praise you for sending your Son to set us free. In Jesus name, Amen.

R. C. Sproul reviews N. T. Wright

Review by R.C. Sproul, Chairman of Ligonier Ministries and Senior Minister of St. Andrews Chapel, Orlando, FL

Perhaps it is merely a question of monomania, like Captain Ahab’s singular pursuit of the albino whale. Bishop N. T. Wright seems to have an incurable proclivity for all things new. His new perspective on Paul was greeted largely with disdain by orthodox Christians for his unusual treatment of the doctrine of justification, in that he declared a pox on both houses of Roman Catholicism and of Reformation thought. At the same time, Bishop Wright has received great acclaim from the orthodox Christian community for his marvelous defense of the reality of Christ’s resurrection. Now, however, he offers us a new perspective on evil. He treats the doctrine or the problem of evil as a necessary exercise for his own preparation to explore more deeply the doctrine of the atonement of Christ. In this investigation, he eschews various treatments of the problem of evil that are rooted in abstract philosophy and theology. He is particularly critical of the myth of progress that emerged particularly in the 19th century as a result of the influence of Hegel’s dialectical idealism. The idea that evil will be redeemed through some natural historical process of selection or cosmic movement to some omega point is an idea that Wright finds completely unbiblical and untenable, and rightly so. He views as a watershed moment for modern understandings of evil the Lisbon earthquake that occurred in 1775. That catastrophic event created a new investigation into the nature and cause of evil both from a philosophical and literary viewpoint. The tragedy that befell the Portuguese in the earthquake prompted Leibniz’s famous theodicy in which he distinguished among three types of evil, metaphysical, physical, and moral. According to Leibniz all evil has its origin in the inescapable privation and lack of metaphysical evil, that is to say, even God cannot create another god, for that second god would be finite and dependent upon the original God for its own existence and would be by definition a creation with all the limitations belonging to creatureliness. So if God is going to create, he must create entities, cosmos and creatures, that are less than metaphysically perfect. In this scenario, moral evil is explained as a necessary consequence of finitude, a view which is on a collision course with the Biblical understanding of the entrance of evil into the world. This type of thinking provoked the satirical writings of Voltaire when he made fun of Dr. Pangloss for his naïve understanding that we live in the best of all possible worlds. That is to say, what Wright sees in this watershed moment is the need for Western thinkers to take the question of evil out of the abstract and into the realm of the concrete existential pain and suffering that we experience in this world.
Of course, there’s nothing new about having to deal with evil in the context of concrete suffering and tragedy. It is not as if the first time people had to wrestle with the question was after enormous devastation wrought by an earthquake in Portugal. The world, since its inception, has been exposed to violence, catastrophic upheavals, and the invasion of blood and death where we live. We think of the Barbarian onslaught against Rome that quickened Christian thinkers’ investigation to the problem of evil. Or later on, the ravaging onslaught of the Turks raised the same provocative questions, not to mention the horrendous decimation of the European population by the bubonic plague. No, putting evil in the context of real pain is nothing new. When we go to the Old Testament, as in many cases Bishop Wright so marvelously does in this book, we see not only Job crying is despair while sitting on the dung heap, but we also look at Habakkuk who rises to his watchtower complaining about the inconsistency of a holy God beholding and apparently tolerating evil. And we also look to the author of Ecclesiastes, whose setting for inquiry into the problem of evil certainly includes the flesh and blood aspects of it. But what Wright is speaking of is the culture in which we live today that is so heavily influenced by postmodern thought. He’s happy that on the one hand postmodernism has deconstructed the myth of progress, which was the legacy of 19th century evolutionary philosophy, but at the same time exposes the face of postmodernity for its untenable approach to evil. The new problem of evil in this cultural circumstance manifests itself in three characteristics that Wright elucidates. The first is that as postmodern people we tend to ignore evil when it doesn’t hit us in the face. As long as we escape the reach of Katrina or even the Twin Towers of 9/11, we manage to keep it a distance from us. However, when it does fall like a bombshell on the serenity of our disassociation, we are shocked. Then, as a result of this shock, the tendency is to react in immature and dangerous ways. This is the summary of the process and response to evil that Bishop Wright notes in the postmodern culture, and in many ways he has astute insights to this sophomoric behavior towards evil that so characterizes our age. We indeed all but eliminate the term evil and treat it as an archaism until we feel its painful slap in the face, and then we have the tendency to react to evil as if it is merely the problem that comes to us from without rather than from in. We dig our trenches, draw our lines in the sand, and make the lines of demarcation between us and them. We never stop to consider that perhaps we are part of the axis of evil and may even be building an evil empire of our own. Bishop Wright works from the front backwards in the Old Testament to see how the Old Testament comes to grips with evil. The call of Abraham to be the father of the faithful and to implement God’s agenda of redemption in the world cannot be understood without first looking at the chaos of the building of the Tower of Babel, and even before that, the influence of the serpent in the Garden. What Wright so astutely demonstrates in the reconnaissance of the Old Testament history is that even with Abraham and his descendants, evil has not been eliminated. The saints of the Old Testament repeatedly seek to build their own towers of Babel and continually find themselves easy prey for the serpent’s temptations. What the Old Testament does reveal, however, is a plan. It is the plan of God to conquer and triumph and redeem evil. That plan reaches its culmination in the cross of Christ. At this point, we see why Wright must first wrestle with the problem of evil before coming to his treatment of the atonement. Though he’s aware that the New Testament offers several images or metaphors of atonement, he finds the one he favors the most, though does not accept in its entirety, the Christus Victor motif set forth in the 20th century so ably by Gustaf Aulén. In this motif, the central drama is found in Christ’s victory over the powers of evil, that indeed are not mere abstractions but real destructive forces and power. He acknowledges that the Gospels give us little theology of atonement, rather merely the narrative of it, with the exception of a few hints here and there, which hints are then dealt with more extensively in the Epistles. Wright doesn’t speak much in this volume about other aspects of the atonement. The Biblical view of the atonement is not monochromatic. It is a tapestry with several threads woven together to form the final product. We have the thread of victory, the thread of ransom, the thread of penal judgment, the thread of the motif of the curse, the reoccurring thread of substitution, and we also have the cord of satisfaction, which unfortunately is all but ignored in Bishop Wright’s preference. Now, as he expounds on the motif of God’s victory in Christ, he makes no obvious adoption of the gross heresy of open theism. However, he does go to the edge of this theological abyss and perhaps gazes at it a bit too long. What I found most disturbing in this book were some of the comments that Bishop Wright makes with respect to the nature of God. He speaks on more than one occasion as the plan of God’s treatment of evil as a daring and risky plan. Elsewhere, he uses the term “ambiguous” with the qualifier “risky.” As I read that phrase that was reoccurring in his work, I was jolted in my theological sensibilities and wondered if perhaps this was just a slip of the Bishop’s pen, where in his customarily lyrical prose, he nodded for a moment with respect to his doctrine of God. I cannot escape abstract theology altogether anymore than N. T. Wright can, but I had to ask myself how is it possible for a self-existent, eternal Being, who is omniscient, omnipotent, holy, and sovereign to undertake a plan that includes within it any real risk? What would the risk be? Would God be risking that His plan would fail? Would God be risking that His plan would be thwarted by the decision of mortal agents in this world, such as we find argued in open theism? What is so daring about a sovereign God’s determination to triumph over evil? We may encounter risks as we wrestle with the problem, but how can be transpose those risks to God Himself. I have to conclude at this point that this represented a little nap along the way of Wright’s exploration of the problem of evil. Another aspect for which I’m grateful in his work is his insistence upon the active power of evil. We remember that the classical theologians described the nature of evil in terms of privatio and/or negatio, and Bishop Wright understood those dimensions. However, the magisterial Reformers of the 16th century did not deny the elements of negation and privation in evil but added a term to it to make sure that we didn’t get lost in a sea of abstraction. Their preferred term for the nature of evil was privatio actuosa. Here they stressed that evil was not a mere empty hole in the road. It was more than the privation of pavement on the highway. It would be not enough to explain evil simply as a pothole that represents a threat to the well-being of our car’s suspension. Rather evil is active. It is a force that cannot be seen as a mere lack of the good or negation of the good. It is an active negation, an active privation, and it has a supernatural and personal dimension to it. Though Wright stops short of referring to Satan in personal categories, I would ask him to guess again, as the Scriptures attribute the chief attribute of personality to Satan, namely intentionality. Satan is an actor, and the evil he purveys is an evil that is actuosa.
Finally, Wright takes us from the cross and points to the future consummation of the Kingdom of God as it is seen in the graphic description of the new heaven and the new earth. He beautifully captures the mood of that eschatological hope that is indicated by the absence of the sea and the chaos that threatens the world from the sea in Hebrew poetic categories. The sea is banished from the new heaven and the new earth, and with it all forms of evil, pain, suffering, and especially death are sent into exile. He describes his view of the future as “inaugurated eschatology.” What does he mean by that? It is clear that Bishop Wright is not a futurist, where he sees no present power and reality of the intrusion of the Kingdom of God in this world. We live on the other side of the cross, of the resurrection, and of Pentecost, where the power of the Kingdom has been set loose with manifold force. Nor do we find Bishop Wright embracing the kind of realized eschatology that was set forth by C. H. Dodd and others in the 20th century. Rather, his view of eschatology is closer to that of Herman Ridderbos and to Oscar Culmann, who saw the Christian pilgrimage of the present day to be worked out in what was called the “already” and the “not yet.” There is indeed the presence of the Kingdom in our midst, which indicates the “already,” and there has been a tremendous victory over the powers of evil already, yet the final battle has not yet been fought. We remember Culmann’s famous analogy of his “already” and “not yet” schema, which was the analogy of D-day in World War II. On D-day, the war was not over, but it spelled the turning point for the certain victory of the allies. I think that Wright goes beyond that with his inaugurated eschatology. What has happened on the cross, in the resurrection, and in Pentecost is more than D-day. It is more powerful than D-day was and leaves us with an even greater certainty than D-day did to a troubled world during the great war. And what it does for us, as we look to the past and then look to the future promise of the complete triumph of God over evil, is that it enables us now to have a real, present, and vital spirit of reconciliation and forgiveness to those whose evil has brought pain upon us. This is perhaps the most beautiful insight that the Bishop offers where he moves his theological analysis certainly from the abstract to the level of pastoral care. Despite the concerns that his doctrine of God raises in some of the passages I’ve mentioned, I find in the main that N. T. Wright has made a valuable contribution to our understanding of the problem of evil.