Notable posts on marital abuse, December 25, and a whole lot more

by Dan Phillips

Howdy, gang.

Thabiti Anyabwile unintentionally gives us a sad example of blogging at its best and worst. On the one hand, he provides a letter to an abusive husband that contains a lot of pastoral, masculine, godly wisdom. It's well-written and forthrightly addresses a miserable situation with the Gospel and with truth.

Immediately he's set upon by an angry, stubborn, self-righteous commenter who gives no evidence of having thoughtfully read anything below the title. Thabiti, God bless 'im, tries manfully and with incredible grace to engage the poor soul graciously and patiently and, as we Pyros could have predicted, it goes nowhere, and the meta has to be closed. Metas often bear out the truth of Ecclesiastes 9:18b ("one sinner destroys much good"), and this is a case in point.

So read the post, skip the comments — unless you want to see a Herculean model of grace in Thabiti's attempts to reach out and engage a scoffer. You might be thinking of Prov. 17:12, 27:22, and 29:9... and if that makes you wish you had a solid, in-depth Christian book that would help you read, apply, teach and preach Proverb — well, you know.

And BTW, Thabiti is there experiencing what drove me to the philosophy of strategery with which I blog.

You may know that N. T. Wright has sallied forth to speak down to us benighted bumpkins about what Serious Scholars know to be the truth behind (and contrary to) the words of Paul. Douglas Wilson responds once, yea twice, yea unto three times. Readable and witty, as usual.

In much lighter humor, Kevin DeYoung posted a couple of very cute videos.

This reminds me of one you might enjoy, especially you Joss Whedon fans. It's a literally-told Story Written By a Kid. You'll love it, and you'll never think of SWAT the same.

If textual criticism is your thing, you'll appreciate an article at Triablogue about recently-announced manuscript finds.

At that same blog, Jason Engwer tells us more about the December 25 date for Christmas than we would have thought it possible to know.

Professor Matt Harmon. of Grace Theological Seminary, did me the great favor of proofing my Greek notes and translations for that little green book. You'll want to bookmark his series on the Gospel according to the Minor Prophets.

Sharper Iron ran a really terrific post by Gary Gilley (why do I know that name?; or am I thinking of Garry Graham, who used to beat me up regularly when I was a single-digiter?...but I digress) called Cessationism, Revelation & Prophecy. Gilley reads as if he were a regular Pyro reader conversant with our years of work on the endlessly-vital subject, and his robust and pastoral exposition is a very worthwhile contribution.

Then Gilley follows up with A Case for Cessationism, in which he argues (among other things) that "the position taken by most on prophecy—cautious but open—is untenable." he deals with the "God in a box" dodge and the dithery cowardice of refusing to commit robustly to the implications of really believing in a really sufficient Word.

Do you prefer your Carl Trueman crusty, or non-crusty? The latter? Sorry, all out!

In case you missed it, I offered a jazzy little rendition of a little dittie by a Reformer guy.

Finally, would you like to hear a sermon that discusses the notion of "the call to pastoral ministry," the concept of qualifications and unculpability, and what Titus 1:6 means about the pastor's family life? How about if it contains the words "Not just any idiot can be an elder. It takes a special kind of idiot." Ah, interested now? Then you're in luck.

---

Pyro and me: philosophy of strategery

by Dan Phillips

Candidly, I'm not writing this because I think it can possibly be of any great interest to anyone. It's more of a bookmark, for my own future use and reference — as in "See my explanation here." I may even give it one star myself. (On re-read, I may give it 2 or 3 for the neologisms alone.)

However Phil or Frank saw or sees their role (respectively), I have always viewed my role here as semi-pastoral, in this sense:

1. I have some Biblical essentials to communicate which I think are vitally important.
2. Many of these essentials are communicated too seldom, too unclearly, too timidly, too ineffectively, too zombily, and/or too vaguely.
3. I mean to communicate them as directly, clearly, forcefully, effectively, memorably, mark-leavingly and fruitfully as I can.

Though this will be a "duh" to long-timers, it actually does place me in a different category from many other high-traffic bloggers. You've noticed it: the writers impart some cybergold nuggets — fine men that they are. Then they wander off to do important, big-name-guy things... and allow unmoderated metas to go straight to Hades.

Which I just won't.

My aim has never been to host an open-ended PoMo discussion group, with sofas and tie-dye T's and foo-foo drinks. I view this as more akin to a Bible study, where I am responsible for leading the discussion in a specific direction — and making sure it gets there and stays there. Participation is welcomed, appreciated, and encouraged; but it is also moderated and directed. This isn't a democracy.

Would be-derailers and snipers tend to find that out quickly. Guys who sit at the back of the classroom and make sniggering, snide little derailing snipes for their own smug amusement, not only refusing to learn but doing their best to prevent others from learning, encounter reality in due time.

Remember, too, that I am not postmodern. I don't think that truth is in the eye of the beholder. If I'm making the case that the Bible is sufficient and the Canon is closed, that is what I am earnest that readers take away. I am not timidly raising a flag to see who will salute it; I am not nambipambily floating a trial-balloon with the intent of tremulously taking a poll afterwards. My goal in life is not to be lauded by as "careful" by RBP types. I am teaching, I am aiming to inform and persuade.

Of course, there are exceptions, such as all the brain trust posts, which are of a totally different nature. But seriously, think about it: I've been at this in earnest for well over thirty-nine years. That's longer than many of you have even been alive, let alone saved. Does it mean I'm right? Mercy, don't I wish! But, friend, in earnest: if I haven't come up with something to say with conviction and force in that time... I've been doing it really, really wrong.

So it's with that conviction that I write. And for most of you, that's actually why you come here. If you had wanted to see timid, dainty, precious, raised-pinkie reeds shaken by the wind, there were lots of high-traffic sites you could go to. This is not that.

(If any of this surprises anyone, donde esta frijole? — which is Spanish for "Where you been?")

Pyromaniacs (to my mind) never has been and never will be simply a clearing-house for that great howling wasteland of insanity that gibbers and prances under the loose canopy of "evangelicalism." Pyromaniac wasn't, and Pyromaniacs isn't. I see Pyromaniacs at its best as a beacon and a lighthouse, a haven and a place of instruction and direction. Not a bloggy Bedlam.

Clear enough?

Keeping it that way, with open comment threads, is actually a lot of work. And it places quite an obligation on me, given my self-assigned role. I can't just throw something out and then allow the subsequent conversation to be captivated by what I think are harmful false teachers, who throw out irresponsible and devastating distractions and delusions, beguiling and ultimately damaging the souls of my readers. I feel that responsibility very keenly.

All this has its parallel in the thought of Titus 3:8-11. As he has done many times in the epistle, Paul urges Titus to insist that sound faith must issue in God-honoring actions (v. 8). Those opposed to sound faith will want to come in with endless arguments and debates, hoping to start a discussion that will whirl about in repetitious circles for their own amusement and aggrandizement — but the net outcome of all such exercises is both unprofitable and foolish (v. 9). Therefore, Titus is to take decisive action: confront the divisive ones decisively, and then show them the door, leaving them to the miseries they've chosen for themselves (vv. 10-11).

I feel a responsibility like that for what I'm doing here, for the reasons detailed above. Of course, many who've been shown the door would argue that their perspective was vital and wonderful and needed and all. To that, my politest and (I think) inarguable response would be, "Then that's what your blog is for."

Now, add another pressure to maintaining all this. As you (should) know, this is not my paid job. It isn't what feeds, houses and clothes my family. I love this ministry dearly. I thank God for it. But my priority is God, my family, and my local church pastorate. Any of those things "trump" this ministry.

Frankly, I've found that my pastorate has had more of an impact on blogging than I anticipated. Perhaps that was naive of me, but there we are. I still aim to keep on blogging, and am in fact keeping it up, but it's being more of a challenge than I expected.

So one of the impacts of that reality is in metas. To take two extreme poles, I simply cannot spend hours and hours babysitting a meta that has turned into a ridiculous free-for-all for passing barking-loon drive-bys, OR accepting the role of chief and sole debater in a long ongoing series of barrages that would require one-man research assignments and (again) hours of ongoing participation. Just can't do it.

So that leaves me with several choices, none of them perfectly happy:

1. Stop blogging. (Won't.)
2. Close comments altogether. (Would rather not.)
3. Moderate comments and just don't allow the more de-raily, reading-comp challenged, wheel-reinventing endless-do-loop ones. (Do.)
4. Do my best to allow comments and participate, but close the meta if I am unable to meet what I believe is my responsibility as "discussion-leader," given the accountability I feel for my readers. (Also do.)

So there you go. And if you feel really cheesed off about all this, I'm sorry, but I'd just take this occasion gently to remind you, not for the first time, what your monthly fees are for this service.

---

BoB2012: The Gooey Center

by Frank Turk

For those curious, the audio of the event is still stored at the Southern Seminary archive (click to listen; right-click to download)

The  most interesting thing that happened last week after starting this 3-part series on Band of Bloggers 2012 was not the passive-aggressive tweets which, when called out, got deleted.  It was this tweet stream I received literally yesterday:

OK: STOP a second.  I have been advised that, for the sake of good order, it ought to be noted that the tweets below are utterly false -- that the people mentioned here are not and have never been members of Tim Brister's church.  


That is actually my point in saying these tweets are a "parable" of how comments work on the internet.  If that was not clear, please let it be clear now: in no way were these tweets clipped and posted here to reproach Grace Baptist Church, its members, or its elders for any behavior in their local church.  These comments, as they say in the KJV, stinketh, and ought to be a lesson to the rest of us as to how not to behave on the internet.


As evidence of such a thing, note that these comments are now evaporated -- as is the habit of people who can't engage the "edify" filter before hitting "post".


You know who you are.

Timmy, whom I could not identify in the first two minutes of the audio, was attacked -- according to this person who fled his church.  Mull that over as a monument to how the internet works.

Anyway, I was going to undertake an extended consideration of the reflections on how blog comments work and ought to work according to the young men of Band of Bloggers, but this example and the tweets which got deleted last week will have to be a parable of the whole thing.  I'll lay off for a week and just post my rough outline of BoB for you as a PDF you can download, right here.

Next week, in our final installment, I'll undertake to discuss, in a helpful way, section 3 of that outline.  It's the part you're dying to read anyway, so consider today a breather.

---