You may also like...

31 Responses

  1. Linnea says:

    I like Wade Burlison’s article and think Piper is choosing to not see the whole counsel of God. Are we not in similar circumstances to Nehemiah 4:17 ?

  2. Pineapple Head says:

    The Driscoll video…ugh.

  3. Bill Kinnon says:

    As one who spent 8 months on staff at a Hillsong-relating church just over a decade ago, the GQ article made me nauseous. This as a result of how the writer appeared to be sucked in, in much the way I had been — though she escaped in the end. I was booted out for asking questions.

  4. victorious says:

    Driscoll and GFA are summed up appropriately in the old KJV phrase, “filthy lucre”.

  5. Michael says:


    Asking questions is always dangerous in big time religion…

  6. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    The article on Mary was good … and short. 🙂

    Lutherans along with the Orthodox have no problem referring to and glorifying Mary as Theotokos, the Mother of God,

  7. Jean says:

    MLD, were you able to open the whole story on Mary? I only got the intro before the request to sign in. The intro was good, I agree.

  8. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    I guess I didn’t pay that much attention – I thought that was the end.

  9. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    I was reading the last article on Post Christmas thoughts on the Incarnation…

    This thought has nothing to do with the article, but I was talking to some folks last week and I tried to make the point — didn’t the incarnation actually occur at the annunciation and not Christmas?

  10. dswoager says:

    On gender fluid Jesus…

    I’m sure that this wasn’t the intent at all, but this verse came to mind.

    “For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.”

  11. Em says:

    #9 – sounds like a question to ask God … not man, who is not even clear as to a zygote’s soul 🙂

  12. Em says:

    gender fluid Jesus – i read that and wondered “why?” … male and female are for a purpose and a time … the soul with all its affections (and affectations) goes on – we have so many traits that are neither male nor female – “sucking” the blood of Jesus is poetry run amuck – like the poem that declares no poem as lovely as the tree, then proves its point as it goes on to picture the poor tree with its mouth latched onto mother nature’s flowing breast and its arms contorted to reach for the sky… poetry can go off the rails IMHO

  13. Em says:

    #12 to be clear i should have mentioned that i love the maleness and the femaleness of creation and mourn how we’ve distorted this lovely complimentary design as we, on one hand try to become gender neutral and on the other try to put every single thing we are under one heading or the other … thank You, Lord for the beauty of creation as You designed

  14. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    Back to Mary. So just think, God himself locked up in the womb of a woman for 9 months. Freaky but true.

  15. Papias says:

    Driscoll soliciting funds doesn’t surprise me as much as him calling himself “Pastor”.

    “You Keep Using That Word, I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means”.

  16. Papias says:

    MLD… The baby John leapt in the womb when Elizabeth heard Mary, right after the annunciation.

    39 In those days Mary arose and went with haste into the hill country, to a town in Judah, 40 and she entered the house of Zechariah and greeted Elizabeth. 41 And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the baby leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit, 42 and she exclaimed with a loud cry, “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! 43 And why is this granted to me that the mother of my Lord should come to me? 44 For behold, when the sound of your greeting came to my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy. 45 And blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfillment of what was spoken to her from the Lord.”
    [Luke 1:39-45 ESV]

    Difference was that the Son took on flesh….

  17. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    I need to check it out, but I don’t think Jesus took on flesh like putting on a flesh coat to go over his God being. I think he became flesh.

  18. Linnea says:

    Papias @15.. LOL! Perhaps he is pastor of the pocket!

  19. Em says:

    flesh is an interesting mystery/ponder … essentially we all put on flesh like a coat and it wears out, but we go on into eternity to wait the next, permanent incorruptible flesh … would Jesus have aged and eventually died a natural death? or, sinless, would he have gone on forever?
    i guess God didn’t think that was relevant…

  20. Em says:

    Linnea, that is funny … “pocket pastors” …?… a new calling and a new definition

  21. Jean says:

    Jesus was fully human and fully God , but without sin. There is no Biblical record of anyone questioning his humanity. Of course he aged. His human nature was mortal.

  22. Em says:

    #21 said quite a bit more than just a comment on God incarnate aging … i will ponder on human nature and the mortal flesh

  23. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    Em – Mormons all over the world applaud your #19 about man putting on flesh as they believe in the pre existence of the soul that later gets a body.

  24. Em says:

    well, MLD – i don’t care much how you got your flesh or how any Mormon thinks he got his

    the point is that it is an earthen vessel, corrupted and temporary – the bigger mystery is indeed the living soul and that is God’s creation also… i happen to think that the God-created soul enters the body at the baby’s first breath, but then i can’t explain John’s leaping for joy in his mother’s womb with that understanding… the how or when God creates and implants a soul is His to know and the rest of us to wonder…

    let me rephrase – God puts the flesh on us after conception … of us 🙂

  25. I know that Jews don’t think you are a person until you take your 1st breath.

    That’s what makes abortion acceptable to them.

  26. Back to Mary – this is fascinating – the notion that Mary was impregnated through her ears. How about that one??? 🙂

    But isn’t that how God creates – by his word. “God said ‘let there be light’ and there was light.”

  27. EricL says:

    MLD, what is your opinion of the Luther video at the end of the Rambling thoughts post? Luther insults Anglican Christmas hymns. 🙂

  28. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    Eric L
    Hans Fiene has this down to an art.

  29. Papias says:

    The point from the Luke passage is that MLD is correct(gasp) – the Annunciation would seem to have been the point at which Jesus is in Mary’s womb.

    Not only does Elizabeth make her proclamation, but John jumps in the womb, which in some strange way shows he knew something about the baby or Mary??

    As far as Jesus “taking on” or “becoming” flesh, there does seem to be a difference in meaning. “Taking on” would seem to indicate that He preexisted and then “put on” humanity like a coat, but one that He will never take off. See also Phil 2:5, 1 Tim 3:16, Gal 4:4.

    J.I. Packer, in Knowing God, chapter 5

    “But in fact the real difficulty, the supreme mystery with which the gospel confronts us, does not lie here at all [he was discussing the atonement, resurrection, and Gospel miracles]. It lies not in the Good Friday message of atonement, nor in the Easter message of the resurrection, but in the Christmas message of Incarnation. The really staggering Christmas claim is that Jesus of Nazareth was God made man–that second person of the Godhead became the “second man” (1 Cor 15:47), determining human destiny, the second representative head of the race, and that he took humanity without loss of deity, so that Jesus of Nazareth was a truly and fully divine as he was human.

    Here are two mysteries for the price of one–the plurality of persons within the unity of God, and the union of Godhead and manhood in the person of Jesus. It is here, in the thing that happened at the first Christmas, that the profoundest and most unfathomable depths of the Christian revelation lie. “The Word became flesh” (Jn 1:14); God became man; the divine Son became a Jew; the Almighty appeared on earth as a helpless human baby, unable to do more than lie and stare and wriggle and make noises, needing to be fed and changed and taught to talk like any other child. And there was no illusion or deception in this: the babyhood of the Son of God was a reality. The more you think about it, the more staggering it gets. Nothing in fiction is so fantastic as is this truth of the Incarnation (Knowing God, IVP, 1973, p53).”

    Taking on or Became? Or both? Or just a mystery?

  30. randall slack says:

    A hireling begging for money… what else is new. Only a fool would trust him after Mars Hill.

  31. Em says:

    the word became flesh doesn’t seem that hard to understand if one thinks of The Word as the revealing of God to man… talk about the ultimate billboard
    when i think on it, how condemning it would have been to watch this Jesus as he lived, as he spoke and interacted with man and then have come to the conclusion that he was a dangerous man and had to be done away with … or just as bad IMV to have concluded that he was just a passing side show

    i appreciated reading the sweet reason of God’s man J.I.Packer tonight – thank you for posting that, Papias

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.