Bob’s Blog Finds: Tiger Woods, the Manhattan Declaration, Blogging Arrogance & More

In my blog finds I highlight some of the best articles I’ve found online recently. You can see all my blog finds in my sidebar, under the Bob’s Blog Finds & Bob’s on Twitter sections.

Tiger Woods Controversy

I don’t relish the media’s obsession with all the gory details of things like this. Thankfully, I’ve missed most of such coverage. I did come across a couple really good treatments of the issue from a Christian perspective and wanted to share them here for your benefit.

  • Albert Mohler: “The force of public outrage directed at Tiger Woods’s admission of marital infidelity indicates that the American public conscience remains more deeply rooted in its biblical origins than many secular observers would expect or appreciate…. For Christians, there is an even deeper concern. The current travail of Tiger Woods points far beyond his need for marital recovery, career consultation, or brand management. Tiger Woods needs a Savior. I am praying that this devastating experience, caused so classically by his own sin, will lead Tiger Woods to understand that he is not so self-sufficient as he thinks…. In the end, all this must remind Christians of the universal need for the Gospel. We must remember our own sin and our utter dependence upon the grace and mercy of God made ours in Jesus Christ. Without question, this is the most important lesson drawn from the travail of Tiger Woods.”
  • Curt Harding: “The truth is he’s no better or worse than you and me. You can talk yourself into believing you’re superior, but you’re not. There’s no leader board for sin and Tiger’s not at the top of it…. The good news for Tiger is that this can be done. Peace can be his again. God wants to put us all back together.”

The Manhattan Declaration

I’ve already blogged a little about this. But R.C. Sproul recently explained why he is not signing the declaration. I thought his post was really good and worth the read.

However, true reformation and revival within the church and the winning of our culture to Christ will come only through the power of the Holy Spirit and our clear, bold proclamation of the biblical gospel, not through joint ecumenical statements that equivocate on the most precious truths given to us. There is no other gospel than that which has already been given (Gal. 1:6–8).

The Manhattan Declaration puts evangelical Christians in a tight spot. I have dear friends in the ministry who have signed this document, and my soul plummeted when I saw their names. I think my friends were misled and that they made a mistake, and I want to carefully assert that I have spoken with some of them personally about their error and have expressed my hope that they will remove their signatures from this document. Nevertheless, I remain in fellowship with them at this time and believe they are men of integrity who affirm the biblical gospel and the biblical doctrines articulated in the Protestant Reformation.

Blogging Arrogance

Carl Trueman has some important words for those of us who engage in social media and blogging:

Let’s stop there a minute. This is madness. Is this where we have come to, with our Christian use of the web? Men who make careers in part out of bashing the complacency and arrogance of those with whose theology they disagree, yet who applaud themselves on blogs and twitters they have built solely for their own deification? Young men who are so humbled by flattering references that they just have to spread the word of their contribution all over the web like some dodgy rash they picked up in the tropics? And established writers who are so insecure that they feel the need to direct others to places where they are puffed and pushed as the next big thing? I repeat: this is madness, stark staring, conceited, smug, self-glorifying madness of the most pike-staffingly obvious and shameful variety.

Bob's Blog Finds: The Apostolic Hermeneutic

In my blog finds I highlight some of the best articles I’ve found online recently. You can see all my blog finds (courtesy of Google Reader) in the sidebar.

It’s been a long while since I posted a Bobspotted Blogroll post. With Google Reader, it’s easier to share my posts one by one. Rather then abandon the blogspot idea altogether, I plan on posting Blog Finds posts where I share articles or links one at a time. This will allow more interaction from you, my readers, and I hope it will serve my blog readers well.

Proponents of Biblical Theology, particularly those who hold to redemptive historical hermeneutics, often speak of the apostolic hermeneutic. We see how the Apostle’s interpreted the OT Bible and draw lessons for how we should interpret it as well.

Now this approach is often misunderstood or even maligned by other Bible scholars, particularly dispensationalists. R. Scott Clark addresses this issue in an excellent post (actually a re-post) at his Heidelblog. I’ll provide some excerpts and encourage you to read the excellent post for yourself. He provides book recommendations for where to pursue this hermeneutical approach further, too.

It’s isn’t that complicated. Pay close attention here:  The Apostolic hermeneutic is to see Christ at the center of all of Scripture. We’re not reading him  into Scripture. We’re refusing to read him out of it. There, I said it. That’s what it is. Perhaps the reason our dispensational friends cannot see it is because they are blinded by their rationalism. They know  a priori what the organizing principle of Scripture  must be and it isn’t God the Son, it’s national Israel….

Yes, Reformed folk (and others) have been reading the bible like this for a very long time. The earliest post-apostolic Christians, in contrast to the Jewish critics of the Christian faith, read the Bible to teach a unity of salvation organized around Jesus Christ. The entire medieval church read the Bible this way as did the Reformation and post-Reformation churches….

What method do we use? It’s grammatical and historical! It reads the Old in the light of the new. It doesn’t set up arbitrary  a priori‘s about what can and can’t be. We don’t begin with an unstated premise, “All reasonable people know p.” We don’t think that any uninspired hermeneutic (system of interpretation) is superior to Paul’s or James’ or Peter’s.

One need not be inspired to read the Bible the way the apostles did. I’m not even sure it’s proper to say that their hermeneutic was inspired. We confess that Scripture is inspired, but was their way of reading Scripture inspired? I doubt it. As John Frame used to ask in class, were the apostolic grocery lists inspired? No. Can we observe  how they read Scripture and imitate it? Yes….

Read the rest of the post for yourself. And let me know what you think of it.