My Journal

Lately, about the last 3 years I suppose, I've heard from the American Fundamentalists bringing up somethings that I believe I've learned from Stephen Tong but I'm sure were quite popularly known at the time already:

1. Love the Sinners, hate the sin. A phrase attributed to Mahatma Gandhi. However, the fundamentalists, even R.C. Sproul, attacked this by saying something like "God doesn't send sin to hell, but sinners to hell." So this is beyond the boundary of language. Should we not love the sinners whom we preach the Gospel to? Tong said, if one does not love the sinners, one has no right preaching the Gospel to them. While it is true that God sends sinners and not sin to hell, this fact is a mere understatement, and off topic: maybe used against post modernists but even so, there are better weapons against such.
2. God will not give you more than you can handle. This is mainly from 1 Corinthians 10:13. Nevertheless, the fundamentalists took it the wrong way, calling the Corinthians quote as referring to "temptation" and nothing to do with what you are ABLE. They would cross that out, saying that it is NOT US, not about our Ability, but God. They point to the verses in 2 Corinthians 1:8-9. They erred in one major stand a basic reformed Christian shouldn't: that ALL is of God, ALL is of God's grace. Thus, the harmonization of 1st & 2nd Corinthians, as if they need harmonizing but thanks to the lacking of these, we must clarify in terms of harmonization for their sakes, is that it is grace upon grace. John 1:16. What they thought we have ABILITY in (1 Corinthians 10:13), is but God's grace as they called it in 2 Corinthians 1:8-9. What I call grace in 2 Corinthians, is the new grace that is upon the already given grace. And thus the infinite increasing of grace.

I must label a new extension entry to this one as private because there is new names mentioned with children involved.

As always, the Sunday School is my favorite part of the pastor's ministry. We are doing Chapter 26 and Chapter 17 of WCF. I realize I really need, since I have the proof verse, to re-study these closely, deeper, more thoroughly with the verses. Meditate on them. Not just go through what they were discussing.

The pastor ended the service today in prayer with the phrase "Lord, quickly come", which prompted me to look up the verses. I have criticized Janet Mefferd on something similar before: "I can't wait." I do believe there's nothing wrong with praying Lord come quickly, for we do long to be with God, surely, as Christians. But here are the verses: Psalms 70:2, 5, Psalms 141:1, From Jesus' own words: Revelation 2:16, 3:11, 22:7, 12, 20. I believe the right attitude is only to want to be with God, not a disdain in creaturely things of God or a lack of love to neighbors. Though may not be this pastor, I do not know, but may have used the phrase in a negative way as I have mentioned.

Interestingly, the service today brought in quite a few new faces. At least 3 families, with 2-4 children each. Two of the families are related to members of the church and have been here long ago, so I am not going to focus on that. The third one, found us on google, I asked what keyword he uses, he said: conservative, reformed. I will be adding his email to our coming Saturday hike, hopefully they can join. Though this church is far for them, about 40 mins drive, people like myself, and CCCNY members drive similar distance if not further. For some of them, is loyalty, for me it has to do with a good faithful church starting from doctrine, then working up to church ministries.

So I'll be composing an email for this week's informal hiking for church family. I figure, if it works well, they can put it as an official thing in the future, or not. I believe the pastor really appreciate it. May God grant us grace in this fellowship.

Sunday School led by Rodney Duttweiler, missionary to Africa. The usual American style. I don't agree with where he repeated a few times (since dinner) that he followed the African proverb: "A log that floats do not become a crocodile", meaning that he will never become a Senegalese in spite of how long he's been with them. There are tons of Inland Missionaries who identified themselves with Chinese, despite their Caucasian looks. Culture and everything else. That should be the heart of a missionary, hence I alluded him to David Livingstone, whom he quite certainly knew, whose heart was not permitted to leave Africa posthumously.

Sermon: Colossians 3:16-17

I thought I heard the pastor said "Music is not part of God's grace"? or is it. Since the video has not been uploaded yet, I cannot rewatch this to confirm. I think his point was trying to keep people away from worshipping music. If so, that I agree, but I would disagree that music is mere subjective, which I think the pastor may allude to. There is a qualitative value to music, good music, bad music. Sure, there is at certain level a subjectivity to music appreciation, but it is mostly due to cultural differences, not emotional. One needs a deep study in music for such discernment.

After service, I learned a couple of things about the church in the Annual meeting:

1. given a list of Grace Community Church Missionaries Supported ministries. (Scanned into my archive)
2. That the church is still under mortgage, and has about 7 years to finish from now.

单身神学理想：上帝有叫有些人单身吗？有 （Matthew 19:12). 但那是什么样的人？什么叫为天国的缘故？一定不是那些认为自以为自己可以独立的人，若是要论自立而单身，肯定不是在上帝理想旨意里行的，最多只是在祂怜悯的许可下，不然的话，肯定会在婚姻问题上，离婚率比一般人还要多。这样看来，真正在上帝恩典上赐下做单身为天国的缘故的人，与那些最多在祂怜悯的许可下而单身，像是为天国其实是为己的人，是不难辨别的。

If we assume wrongly, we are sinning. Falling in the category of fools, liars, etc.

This is different from honest inquiry.

Received in the post mail invitation to service from Garden State Baptist Church. Emphasis on "multi-ethnic". Curious. Sundays 10:45AM & 5PM. 17 mins South of us. I'll just mark it on the map. I do wonder, if this is the best way American Christians do evangelism these days. Kind of sad. But it's better than not doing anything.

On Christ being of Mary's substance: This site lists a few good quotes from great men (See comments for copy).
Came across a section of Louis Berkhof's Systematic Theology, and I was reminded of a debate I had on FB a week ago, with Mike Hollomon, touching on the subject of female pastor, who claimed to be a Baptist (fundamentalist) preacher of 48+ years and appeared to love Berkhof's. Yet everything he said opposes this part of Berkhof, be it intentional or not:

Berkhof's Systematic Theology: The States of Christ - The State of Humiliation:

d. The incarnation constituted Christ one of the human race.
In opposition to the teachings of the Anabaptists, our Confession affirms that Christ assumed His human nature from the substance of His mother. The prevailing opinion among the Anabaptists was that the Lord brought His human nature from heaven, and that Mary was merely the conduit or channel through which it passed. On this view His human nature was really a new creation, similar to ours, but not organically connected with it. The importance of opposing this view will be readily seen. If the human nature of Christ was not derived from the same stock as ours but merely resembled it, there exists no such relation between us and Him as is necessary to render His mediation available for our good.

So it seems that this is a thing with Anabaptists, that Jesus' human nature is not organically linked with ours, though they may not view His human nature as non-created, at least not according to Berkhof, but the actual fact I am not sure. Although, it is not surprising that the Anabaptist influence today has resulted in a uncreated/uncreaturely human nature of Jesus view. Not just among Chinese Christians as Alex once proposed.

And Bavinck's take on this is just gold:

Herman Bavinck (1854-1921) explains the motivation of these Anabaptists: “That [Christ’s] human nature did not exist beforehand. It was not brought down with Christ from heaven and borne into Mary from the outside and, so to speak, conducted through her body. The Anabaptists teach this in order to hold to the sinlessness of the human nature in Christ. But in taking this stand, they are following in the example of the ancient gnosticism, and proceed from the idea that flesh and matter are in themselves sinful. But in the incarnation, also, Scripture holds to the goodness of creation and to the Divine origin of matter. Christ took His human nature from Mary (Mt 1.20, Lu 2.7, Gal 4.4). So far as the flesh is concerned, He is from David and the fathers (Acts 2.30, Rom 1.3, 9.5). Therefore this nature in Him is a true and perfect human nature, like ours in all things, sin excepted (Heb 2.14, 17, 4:15). Nothing human was strange to Christ. The denial of the coming of Christ in the flesh is the beginning of the antichrist (1 John 2:22).”[11] The Divine and Human Nature of Christ by Herman Bavinck

The FB Debate pasted below in comment.

This contrast can also be seen in the Baptist's ("reformed" or not) 1689 London Confession Chapter 8.2 versus the WCF 8.2, where in of Christ the Mediator, the Baptists struck down the phrase "of her substance" after ...being conceived by the Holy Spirit in the womb of the Virgin Mary, of her substance. Thus, it is no surprise any "reformed" Baptist would hold to a Christ's human nature in error the way the Anabaptists do.