Theology of the Cross, Salinger Style

Finally, though, I got undressed and got in bed. I felt like praying or something, when I was in bed, but I couldn’t do it. I can’t always pray when I feel like it. In the first place, I’m sort of an atheist. I like Jesus and all, but I don’t care too much for most of the other stuff in the Bible. Take the Disciples, for instance. They annoy the hell out of me, if you want to know the truth. They were all right after Jesus was dead and all, but while He was alive, they were about as much use to Him as a hole in the head. All they did was keep letting Him down. I like almost anybody in the Bible better than the Disciples. If you want to know the truth, the guy I like best in the Bible, next to Jesus, was that lunatic and all, that lived in the tombs and kept cutting himself with stones. I like him ten times as much as the Disciples, that poor bastard.

I used to get in quite a few arguments about it with this boy who lived down the corridor, Arthur Childs. Old Childs was a Quaker and all, and he read the Bible all the time. He was a nice kid, and I liked him, but I could never see eye to eye with him on a lot of stuff in the Bible, especially the Disciples. He kept telling me if I didn’t like the Disciples, then I didn’t like Jesus and all. He said that because Jesus picked the Disciples, you were supposed to like them. I said I knew He picked them, but that He picked them at random. I said He didn’t have time to go around analyzing everybody. I said I wasn’t blaming Jesus or anything. It wasn’t His fault He didn’t have any time.

Anyway, when I was in bed I couldn’t pray worth a damn....

Holden Caulfield in The Catcher in the Rye

RIP, J.D. Salinger

"Three Things I Need You to Know"

First off, a moment of silence in honor of the life and death of Howard Zinn. His magnum opus, A People's History of the United States, is a must-read for anyone at all interested in history and politics (it'll knock you on your, umm, rear, to misquote Will Hunting). I would especially commend it to those who insist that the church must fight for social justice; no church leader, regardless of how emergent, bohemian, or soul-patched, will ever come close to raising Americans' awareness of the plight of the powerless and disenfranchized to the degree that Zinn has done. His love for his neighbor should put us all to shame. Plus, he even puts social justice concerns in the correct kingdom....

Speaking of book recommendations, have you all heard of the Classic Reformed Theology book series? A new volume was just released: Caspar Olevianus's exposition of the Apostles' Creed with an Introduction by R. Scott Clark. Here is Volume One, and here is Volume Two. For those of you pinching pennies, a great deal on both volumes can be found here.

And lastly, I was dismayed to discover after Steve Jobs's unveiling of Apple's iPad that my life was suddenly meaningless because I don't yet have a -- what's it called again? -- oh yeah: an iPad. Then again, it looks like I'd still need to muster the energy to actually use my fingers to type on it, which is a total hassle. I mean, it's 2010 for crying out loud, I can't be expected to endure that kind of physical exertion anymore. Call me when you invent a microchip implant to make all my decisions, or a personal Avatar-body to live my life for me. Reality is too tiring....

Some Tidbits, Three Cheers, and a Curse

As some of you know, I am in CA right now to attend Westminster Seminary's annual conference (the topic is Christ and Culture). Should be good. One thing I am especially looking forward to is purchasing David VanDrunen's new book, Natural Law and the Two Kingdoms (he gets a lot of his material from this blog, you know. Yes, that was a joke).

It was great to attend Westminster's 30th Anniversary Dinner last night (apparently we are R.C. Sproul's favorite seminary in the world). Although there regrettably wasn't a "Class of '04" table to sit at (probably because it would make everyone else jealous of how awesome we are), I was seated with some old friends. Plus, the chicken wasn't nearly as rubbery as I expected. Oh, and Godfrey just hit it out of the park with his address.

.

I am also pleased to announce that our very own Paige Britton has painstakingly pored over the DRD archives and single-handedly tagged every post (until recently only the last year or so was actually categorized). So now everything is nicely labeled and easy to sift through should you so desire. So three cheers for you, Paige, may the wind ever be at your back.

And lastly, I'd like to offer the exact opposite of a cheer and blessing to Pat Robertson. I don't know if people of his ilk are still able to feel shame, but I certainly hope he is brought to understand just how irresponsible his speech has been in the aftermath of the calamity in Haiti. Like Falwell's remarks after 9/11, Robertson's sanctimonious drivel makes me want to distance myself as much as possible from such self-styled representatives of evangelical conservatism. So Pat, if you're reading, may God silence you before you bring any further dishonor to his Name. You don't speak for me, and neither do any of your friends.

It's a Small World After All

Call me sappy and sentimental, but I have watched this about twenty times and can't get enough of it.

Enjoy (and be sure to view it from start to finish).

Some Bits of Tid

Chris Donato of Tabletalk magazine is continuing his "walk-through" of Dual Citizens on his blog. Here is Part One, Two, and Three.

By the way, I have been informed that Ligonier has pre-sold 200+ copies of the book thus far, not to mention the ones that have been pre-ordered from places like Amazon and CBD. The publisher seems pleased, and sees this as being indicative of people's interest in the issues the book addresses.

Switching topics, I read this in Hahn's Kinship By Covenant a few hours ago:

Paul's argument [in Gal. 3:15-17] is also a reductio ad absurdum: he shows that his opponent's position leads to an unacceptable conclusion. The Judaizers argue that obedience to the Mosaic law is necessary for the Abrahamic blessings to reach the Gentiles, that is, for them to become children of God and children of Abraham. In Paul's view, this would be tantamount to placing the Mosaic law as a condition for the fulfillment of God's covenant with Abraham to bless the nations through his "seed" (Gen. 22:16-18). Since, at the Aqedah [the binding of Isaac], God put himself under an unconditional, unilaterally binding oath to fulfill his covenant with Abraham, this would be nonsense. To suppose that God added conditions (the Mosaic law) to the Abrahamic covenant, long after it had been unilaterally sworn by God would imply that God acted illegally, reneging on a commitment in a way not tolerated even in human covenants. This would be an unacceptable conclusion; therefore, the premise that obedience to the Mosaic law had become the condition for Gentile inclusion into the Abrahamic covenant blessings must be rejected.

Sheesh, I guess the student of Meredith Kline doesn't fall far from the Klinean tree....

Lastly, a plea to Lamar Odom: Just sign on the dotted line, son. But either way, we're looking pretty good.