Common wisdom allows for us to become desensitized. Once we’ve felt the weight of an experience twice previously, it is understandable if the event bears less impact the third time through and few would blame us if we remained unmoved.

But the commonplace is no home of miracles. Miracles demand your attention, they are out of the ordinary, that’s what makes them miracles, they are beyond explanation and require that we be content without explanation, without the ability to bring it down to the commonplace. Three times now I’ve been given the golden ticket to witness a miracle and it is no less powerful each time.

Rhett has teased in the past that I am”extremely Reformed,” which I am. Experiencing the miracle of birth only solidifies for me a Reformed soteriology (a Calvinistic understanding of salvation).

We do not choose our birth. We cannot conciously hinder or aid it, we are helpless throughout the process, completely dependent upon others, even to the point that we must be prompted to take our first breath. Birth is truly a miracle and I’m convinced that salvation is no less a miracle.

It is common to hear people gloss over the imagery of Scripture in favor of a particular doctrinal argument. John 3 is most often referenced only in terms of John 3:16 and that verse is typically used to argue against Reformed soteriology. The common argument goes something like: “See, Jesus says that God loved the world so much that anyone is able to come to Him if only they were convinced of it.” While this is an attractive interpretation, that’s simply not what the text says, particularly understood within the larger context of the whole chapter.

Many readers don’t allow Scripture the same allowances in language that they allow themselves. They gloss right over certain imagery because they don’t like the implications. In John 3, Jesus uses very specific and very powerful imagery to describe the process of salvation, but of course He didn’t mean what His imagery implies, we know better, don’t we?

Speaking with Nicodemus, Jesus says that “unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God” (John 3:3). We must not be so proud that we refuse the implications of Jesus’ words. Jesus repeatedly proves to be a master of words and always chose His words wisely and for very particular reasons. We must allow Him the benefit of the doubt as to the straight-ahead meaning. Here, He compares salvation to birth.

We readily admit that birth is a miracle. But, we are somehow uncomfortable with the idea that the New Birth is purely supernatural. In our pride, we want a part in it, we want credit. Yes, we must repent, but the faith that allows us to repent is itself a gift from God “lest no man should boast” (Ephesians 2:8-9). If you still maintain that you repented in salvation, Scripture reminds us that repentance itself must be granted by God (Acts 11:18, 2 Timothy 2:25, etc.).

Jesus forces Nicodemus to recognize the miraculous nature of salvation and chooses His imagery appropriately, pointing to the birth process. Witnessing birth leaves one completely in awe, no words of explanation may be offered, no credit to the baby may be given. Praise is the appropriate response. Why then do we lessen the miraculous nature of salvation and feel that we must take credit from God and give it to man? Salvation is no less a miracle. The new birth, like the first is truly a miracle and our appropriate response ought to be that of Job 37:14: “Stop and consider God’s wonders.”

Last Thursday’s post examined the deadly relationship between marketing and the decreased discernment among the greater Christian community. In another post, I’ve openly struggled with those well-intentioned believers who say that they will only listen to “Christian” music while using discernment to filter all other forms of popuar art intake. Elsewhere, I’ve discussed the lamentable state of much of the artistic quality of the popular arts within the Christian sub-culture and that for many, the popular arts have simply become an outlet for progaganda, the quality of which no longer matters, as long as the message is heard.

Marketers have succeeded in convincing many that it is the label on the music that matters more than the actual content. As such, the level of creativity and/or artistic integrity of many of these “artists” is never questioned because people are no longer interested in art but the message. They fit the label, so they sell records; not because they are truly pushing creative boundaries, not because they actually make you think or evoke any emotions, but because they fit the marketing M.O. As Derek Webb sings on his new album Mockingbird for many, the typical approach to purchasing music is: “Don’t teach me about truth and beauty, just label my music.”

As the labels pertaining to music become more rigid and the quality of much “Christian” music decreases, many artists openly expressing their faith are put into difficult circumstances.

In recent years we’ve been faced with a category of artists who say things like “we’re Christians but we’re not a ‘Christian’ band.” Sometimes what they mean is that their faith will never make an explicit appearance in their art. But increasingly, what they mean is that they recognize that the label “Christian band” is understood by many to mean second rate limited content, less creative, out-of-touch and they want no part of the sanitized reproduction of popular culture.

The decreased discernment of many Christians has led them to believe that the only acceptable art is either praise and worship or an explicitly presention of the Gospel. Actually putting the Gospel to bear on real-life situations and emotions isn’t good enough because you have to think about the connections being drawn. If it isn’t explicit, then it’s no good. The reality is that we are then faced with people who already claim to believe the Gospel being reassured of their claim rather than ever being challenged to grow deeper in thought and commitment.

I recently read an article in which the band Mute Math openly wrestles with many of these issues. Mute Math is a band that recognizes all of this and more. Having come from more “explicitly Christian” musical backgrounds, the band came together seeking to explore more dynamics of their faith wider than the stilting CCM format allows for. In other words, they were “Christians, but not a ‘Christian band.’” But, something odd happened on their way to artistic expression. Singer Paul Meany states:

“All of the sudden, we began to see ourselves getting pigeonholed into this particular world that we weren’t necessarily proud to be associated with, because we aren’t really fans of the music or fans of the cause of the music.”

Mute Math and artists with similar visions, if not similar music (Sufjan Stevens, Pedro the Lion, etc.) are facing great difficulties trying to break free from the cloud that hangs over many “Christian art.” These artists openly announce their faith while arguing that their faith has more to say than simply get saved, or praise God you’re already saved and many shun them for not fitting the stereotype. Meany laments:

“We’ve always conditioned our show universally, and (we’re) just trying to speak to human beings; (we’re) not really conditioning it down to Christians, and that’s what the Christian music industry does. It’s for a certain sect of people. I don’t have anything against that–I’m one of them–but I don’t want to taper it just for that.”

In other words, the Gospel is actually bigger than most Christian musicians or music fans make it out to be, and music truly ought to be artistic expression. Cutting to the core of the issue, Meany argues,

“You know, you don’t want to be ashamed of your faith and your beliefs, but you don’t want to be marketed by that, either. It’s like, ‘Can we just market this as music?’ We’re a normal band here; we’re not trying to be the Christian version of a real band.”

The blurring of the boundaries between faith and marketing have disintegrated discernment and for many, helped destroy any sense of true artistic expression or appreciation. Rather than stifle those who see that the mold needs to be cracked, we ought to encourage them to remind us all just how big the Gospel can be and just how beautiful expressing its hold over everything, even music, should be.

• Visit Mute Math’s official website.
• Read the original article.
• Visit Derek Webb’s official website.
• Visit Sufjan Stevens’ official website.
• Visit Pedro the Lion’s official website.

Helping to shine the bright light of truth on your path through the wicked web of the web, here’s some of what caught my eye and my mouse this week:

Read Russ Moore’s thoughts on “The Spiritual Danger of Blogging.”

Read “What Were They Thinking? The Controversy Ove The End of the Spear” by Al Mohler.

Browse the initial list of confirmed bands for Cornerstone 2006.

Read Nine Marks Ministries‘ review of Donald Millers Blue Like Jazz. Read my posts on the book: Something Witty About the Color of Jazz and More on the Color of Jazz.

Re-Browse the Best of 2005 post as some late submissions have come in.

Read Christianity Today’s review of the new album by Charlie Hall.

Browse Allmusic’s picks for the Best of 2005.

Read Phil Johnson’s announcement regarding changes over at Pyromaniac and visit the new group blog effort.
Re-read the post about my new son Carson!

Read Al Mohler’s Thoughts On Reading Books over at the Together For the Gospel blog.

Read Reformation 21’s review of Rob Bell’s Velvet Elvis and re-read my post concerning the “relevant” trend Bell and others represent.

Read Marc Heinrich’s suggestion You Probably Shouldn’t Lead Worship Anymore If…

Visit Keith and Alicia’s Adoption Journal to see the photo of Ruth Ann!

• Browse Town Crier (8).
• Browse Town Crier (7).
• Browse Town Crier (6).
• Browse Town Crier (5).
• Browse Town Crier (4).

Some time ago I wrote a piece entitled Who Says What’s Christian Music? in which I briefly examined the sad fact that the actual content of music has little to nothing to do with what is actually classified as “Christian” and “secular” music. Artists like Sufjan Stevens openly express their faith with artistic excellence but won’t be purchased in your local Christian bookstore because they don’t play the marketing game. Meanwhile, Phillips, Craig and Dean, who openly deny the orthodox view of the Trinity are in every “Christian” bookstore because they do play the marketing game. Marketing rather than content determines what you can buy and where you can buy it.

Yet, even while marketing is the determining factor, many often implement Misplaced Boundaries, arguing that they will not listen to anything that is not “Christian.” More often than not, they mean that they bought it in a “Christian” bookstore, not the actual content of the material. The place of purchase determines the purchase rather than the content. The label tagged to the product becomes their discernment rather than applied Scripture.

The result is tremendous confusion. On one hand, we have “Christian” businesses determining what will and will not be sold in bookstores based on pure marketing rather than content. On the other hand, these stores are filled consumer who implicitly trust the fact that they purchased the item in a “Christian” store and they are determined to listen to nothing other than “Christian” music. The problem is larger than anyone seems to notice.

There is a tremendous disconnect in which a segment of population has lost all discernment, trusting marketers who don’t care about discernment, much less orthodoxy. As the marketers chase the dollar, their boundaries widen. As those boundaries expand, the consumer’s Scriptural discernment by necessity lowers because they are trusting people who care more about money than Scriptural fidelity.

The creation of a “Christian” sub-market has been devastating to the Church in America. Surrounded by a market-driven economy, we’ve never stopped to consider its devastating effects on the typical Christian life. By necessity, marketing appeals to the lowest common denominator. Marketers don’t want to alienate their consumers by making them feel dumb, so the bar is drastically lowered to a level where everyone can get it. Products are not longer actually comparing themselves, they are simply trying to evoke better emotions in advertising.

But what are the effects of such a culture on a segment of the marketing in which the content of a product is actually a matter of life and death (eternally)? What if the wrong content could actually lead people to hell rather than heaven, or vice versa? We might hope that in such a scenario, the marketers would be the most Scripturally discerning gate-keepers of us all, realizing their role in eternal perspectives, trying to protect their customers rather than milk them, striving for Scriptural integrity lest they should be found guilty. We might hope that, but that is certainly not what we find.

By creating a Christian sub-culture, marketers have positioned themselves exactly as the sort of gate-keepers just pictured. But the reality is that they simply ask for the magic marketing password rather than anything remotely Scriptural. They don’t care what you bring through the gate as long as you use some of the right words and line their pockets.

All the while, they have convinced many otherwise well-intentioned people into believing that since a book or an album was purchased in one of these stores that it must be safe. As the gate-keepers allow more and more travelers through, the consumers have lost sight of the fact that there is actually a difference between orthodoxy and heresy. While Benny Hinn and John MacArthur may be purchased in the same store, there is little else that would otherwise unite the two. But we’re increasingly finding consumers who not only don’t know the doctrinal differences between the two, they’re being told that those differences don’t matter; the two authors are just writing to different demographics.

While we certainly cannot blame the poor state of most of the American church on “Christian” marketers, most are certainly not helping the situation. Many are caught in the vicious circle of attending dead churches and being taken advantage of by money-hungry marketers. The marketers suck the discernment out of them and the churches do nothing to counter the attack, and everyone drifts farther from the Gospel, floating along on the dollar.

Those Christians who still care must take a stand. Churches must reclaim the Gospel, we must equip our people to spot error. Marketers sell tripe exactly because it sells and it sells because many don’t know the Bible well enough to refute it. At least many are having their ears tickled while the piper leads them to their doom.

I would like to interrupt this regularly scheduled blog for an important announcement. On Monday, January 23, 2006 at 8:06pm, Carson Benjamin Thomas made our new favorite television series My Three Sons. Weighing in at 6lbs., 14oz., and 20 inches, he was smaller than either of his brothers but no less loved. Mother and baby are both doing well.

We were not prepared for Carson’s two-week early arrival. He was not due until February 04 and we didn’t even expect him to arrive by then. Neither of his brothers were early, in fact both had to be induced, so this was quite a shock to be told that Kristi’s water had broken on its own! Kristi wasn’t sure what had happened, so she called the Dr. who made her come in and they kept her! I didn’t quite believer her at first! Everything went smoothly and everyone is doing well, but needless to say, posting will probably be slim to none while I adjust to life as the father of three!

Steve McCoy has apparently ruffled quite a few feathers recently with his “Open Letter To Southern Baptist Seminary Students.” In it, McCoy argues that “the greatest poison in our convention, fundamentalism/legalism.” McCoy argues that the recent “IMB policy issues and the continued push for alcohol abstinence by SBTS leadership and Jack Graham (to name two) are symptoms of a convention concerned with power, control, and extra-biblical rules and righteousness.”

I have not “peed next to Danny Akin,” as has McCoy, but I have heard him carelessly instruct an entire chapel audience to gather “your Calvinist posse” and come debate, because, he’s “your huckleberry,” but that’s another issue altogether. I won’t argue McCoy’s basic concept that legalism is indeed a “poison,” and that it is rampant particularly in the SBC.As a pastor I encounter various forms of legalism in daily life. It typically takes either the positive or negative approach, either “you must do this” or “you can’t do this,” that much is obvious. However, the more I compare the legalist mindset to Scripture, I’m becoming convinced that legalism is a symptom of deeper issues.

The real question ought to concern the cause of legalism; from what does it flow? How does this mindset manifest itself that artificial lists of do’s and don’ts become the gauge of holiness rather than the actual process of sanctification and our Christ-likeness?

The more I look at it, I think that the roots of legalism are actually two-fold. First, it stems from a (possibly subconscious) denial of the sufficiency of Scripture. While this seems shocking at first, think about it. Any time we add to the requirements put forth by Scripture, we’ve in essence said that God didn’t say enough. In truth, we’re arguing that we know better than God what is holy, what is acceptable and what is not. Though Scripture argues that we must not be drunk, we seem to think that if we take it a step farther and call for complete abstinence that we’ll receive bonus points in heaven. Yet if God wanted total abstinence, He would have called for total abstinence.Legalism is a denial that Scripture says what Scripture mean and actually means what it says. Though it might be subconscience, it is the conviction that Scripture does not actually go far enough, and that we in our wisdom know what it really should have said.

This denial of the sufficiency of Scripture is actually a byproduct of pride working its deceit in the human heart. It is striking that in the face of so many televangelists preaching the gospel of self-help that we never find, as Stuart Scott points out, “the Scriptures saying, ‘Come on now, you’re thinking too poorly of yourself’ or ‘What you need is to consider yourself more.’”

In his booklet From Pride to Humility, Scott defines a person as prideful “who believes that they, in and of themselves, are or should be the source of what is good, right and worthy of praise.” Legalism looks to its regulations as the measure of holiness, and is therefore looking to the self rather than to God.

The legalist suffers from pride on at least two levels. First, they deny Scripture by arguing that we actually ought to go farther than prescribed, in essence saying that we know what God really meant. No, it might not say that the teetotaller position is the only acceptable position, but it certainly means that. The legalist places his/her own conscience as the judge of Scripture and others. Second, the legalist looks to what they either do or don’t do as a source of holiness, and thus as an accomplishment which only furthers the cycle of pride. They believe that their regulations achieve holiness and they then perpetuate them, all the while patting themselves on the back while condemning anyone not adhering to their specific list, whatever it might contain (we all have different lists, don’t we?). The SBC, as do we all, ultimately suffers from pride.

While I applaud McCoy’s sentiments, they do not go far enough, they don’t get to the heart of the issue. Legalism never occurs in a vaccum. It might create one, but it never occurs in isolation and it is always a symptom of deeper issues. Legalism denies that Scripture goes far enough and it measures holiness by accomplishments (either in the positive or the negative).

The cure for legalism is not liberty but humility. As Scott notes, “humility is so rare because it is unnatural to man.” We must walk in the footsteps of Christ who described Himself as “meek and lowly” (Matthew 11:29), and who did not come to be served but to serve (Mark 10:45). Only once we are truly able to consider others as more important than ourselves (Philippians 2) will the poison of legalism be neutralized.

• Read An Open Letter To SBC Seminary Students by Steve McCoy.
• Read From Pride to Humility by Steve Scott.
• Read Humility: True Greatness by C.J. Mahaney.
• Read A Scandalous Freedom by Steven Brown.

Welcome to my new home on the world wide web! As you know, I’ve moved from Blogger/Blogspot to WordPress and my own domain. The new template is much simplified, but there are a couple of known issues with it. It was designed with Firefox in mind, so it does seem to have some bugs with other browsers, particular Explorer, so if you experience any difficulties, please let me know so that I can continue to work out the bugs.