What's Wrong with Calvinism?

If you can attribute American patriotism or the Tea Party to Calvinism, you have a term that is almost as much of a wax nose as evangelicalism. This is why the phrase Reformed Protestant is better than Calvinism. Reformed Protestant has a definite meaning that Calvinism doesn’t.

And this is why the so-called New Calvinism thrives (at least in its own promoters’ minds). Take for instance the question of diversity, a factor that lets New Calvinists think they are the mainstream. Here is Matthew Barrett on John Piper:

Some today are surprised by the wide diversity within New Calvinism, including everyone from Lecrae to the Gettys, or R. C. Sproul to Francis Chan. Piper points out that this diversity among Reformed-minded folks has always been present. All one has to do is look back at the long list of Calvinists in church history. Piper suggests comparing Augustine and Adoniram Judson, Francis Turretin and John Bunyan, John Calvin and Chapiper-writingrles Spurgeon, John Knox and J. I. Packer, Cotton Mather and R. C. Sproul, Abraham Kuyper and William Carey, Haynes and Dabney, Theodore Beza and James Boice, Isaac Backus and Martin Lloyd-Jones, etc. “If there is such a diversity in the Old,” Piper argues, “then we really cannot find dividing lines between the Old and the New.”

He goes on to say, “The Old is too diverse and the connections between Old and New too organic to claim things that are new in the New that were not present in any aspects in the Old.” The New is too assorted to claim any “downgrade” or “upgrade” from the Old. History is too complex for “broad brush commendations of one over the other or condemnations of one under the other.” Hence, any “given issue that you try to address you can find periods and persons and movements among the Old that would outshine the New.” Piper concludes, “There is no claim, therefore, in my assessment that the New is better.” From here Piper goes on to give 12 features that define the New Calvinism.

I wonder what Piper or Barrett would say about New Calvinism’s diversity being the product (as Nate commented) of waffling, for instance, on baptism and charismatic gifts, the way that Old Calvinism doesn’t. In other words, diversity is a sign of failure, not an indication of strength.

Plus, if you define Calvinism by the creeds and confessions of the Reformed churches, which is how Calvinism started, you find remarkable coherence. Spurgeon, Judson, and Piper are out. Knox, Kuyper, and Dabney are in.

And this is what Old Calvinists find so alarming about the New Calvinists. They can understand themselves entirely as a categorical abstraction (Piper’s 12 points) without relationship to word, sacrament, or discipline — the marks of the church (as in, Reformed according to the word). In fact, aside from the implicit hubris in the New Calvinists’ understanding of the past, do these guys, as Tim Challies apparently believes, think they are in the mainstream? Can you really be in the mainstream when instead of church you chart your existence by conferences and organizations like Gospel Coalition, Acts 29, and Sovereign Grace? Have I got a book for Tim.

My understanding of earth sciences is spotty, but new bodies of water generally do not become the mainstream within three decades unless you do some serious dirt moving (and that didn’t even spare New Orleans). But cheerleaders always think their team is number one, even when they are losing.

64 thoughts on “What's Wrong with Calvinism?

  1. “Plus, if you define Calvinism by the creeds and confessions of the Reformed churches, which is how Calvinism started, you find remarkable coherence. Spurgeon, Judson, and Piper are out. Knox, Kuyper, and Dabney are in.”

    Ding-ding-ding…

    Like

  2. My understanding of earth sciences is spotty, but new bodies of water generally do not become the mainstream

    Right track here, brother. IMHO, you need not go to the billions of years route I’ve signed on to (though I wouldnt mind). But lets just say Noah may be a step in the wrong direction. You know of what you speak, brother.

    The answer to the question about Driscoll you raise is here. So, again, you know of what you speak. IMHO..

    Yo.

    Like

  3. Driscoll is giving up social media for the rest of 2014, maybe longer, right after he sends a:

    “lengthy letter via Mars Hill’s online network, The City, Driscoll reflects on what he has gotten right and wrong over the past 17 years.”

    Been there, done that, got the tee shirt.

    Like

  4. “Mars Hill confirmed to CT that Driscoll did post a letter to The City ‘as a private family communication,’ but spokesperson Justin Dean said he could not confirm ‘whether each instance of the private letter posted online is accurate or not.’ Dean said Mars Hill has chosen not to publicly release the letter.]”

    Someone needs to introduce this younger generation to the concept of a postage stamp.

    Like

  5. From Driscoll’s letter: “To be clear, these are decisions I have come to with our Senior Pastor Jesus Christ. I believe this is what He is asking of me, and so I want to obey Him.”

    The changes he is talking about making are actually a good idea and will be a test of whether or not a man can truly retreat from “celebrity pastor” status once he has obtained it.

    Like

  6. As I read this stuff “My Dinner With Andre” is on in the background.

    If Marijuana is ever legal here and I try it, It will definitely be done while watching that film.

    Like

  7. dgh—-word, sacrament, or discipline — the marks of the church

    markmc—Some would say that “discipline” as a mark of a true church is something the Magisterial Reformers “appropriated” from the Anabaptists. Some confessional baptists (Mark Dever) would say that for “discipline” to be a meaningful “mark”, we have to think about “a church” instead of “the church”. (Unless it is really true that opc churches associated with Tim Keller can “discipline” Tim Keller.)

    I will make a more modest claim. The definition of what “discipline” is changes once you revise your Confessions so that you stop claiming that every infant born in your parish is under your jurisdiction.

    I don’t know if John Owen counts as “Reformed” but he was certainly still “Constantinian” in his thinking. But consider the following quotation from Owen about “discipline”—-“From this influx, it is not surprising that the doctrines of faith and, most especially, that of the new birth became so rapidly corrupted in the churches. With separation from the world spurned, there is no wonder that the sanctity and glory of the gospel was overshadowed, and superstitious practices flooded in along with the unconverted pagans, until, at length, Christian church discipline was remodeled on the fashion of the pagan secular state. Once hypocrites and other unregenerate people began, as it were, to swamp and overwhelm the believers, there soon emerged leaders who were pleased enough to accommodate spiritual doctrines to the prevailing systems of philosophy. And so it came about that faith was neglected, doctrine no longer studied, regeneration equated to the mechanical performance of the rite of baptism, truth and piety no longer defended by any great efforts in the assemblies and councils, the majorities at best indifferent, at worst bitterly hostile, to the total over-shadowing of these essential things. By that time, most of the world had taken up the Christian profession so, at most, everything that had been instituted by Christ had been basely transmuted into another gospel. Strange to tell, it was done without a protest or major split in the Church.” John Owen, Biblical Theology (Soli Deo Gloria 1994), p 660

    If you start letting “discipline” in as a mark of your church, won’t the puritans and the anabaptists follow?

    Like

  8. For more on congregationalist puritan John Owen, check out p 113 in the hardcover, Calvinism: A History

    the paperback revision—The Reformed Church, Old and New: A History

    Like

  9. IPerhaps we need to think also about what’s wrong with the Reformed church alliance of which Kenneth Stewart is a member.

    In his book Ten Myths About Calvinism: Recovering the Breadth of the Reformed Tradition ,, IVP, 2011 seeks a kind of “catholic discipline” He wants to exclude those he refers to as “thoroughly reformed” (p 15) as extremists. On p 93, Stewart concludes that “TULIP cannot be allowed to function as a creed”.

    I certainly understand that being Reformed is more than the five points, but if we were to examine what’s wrong with the Reformed church, I would suggest that many Reformed congregations not only teach less than the five points, but also teach much that is in antithesis to the five points.

    If those who teach against universal and governmental notions of the atonement are to be dismissed as “non-Reformed” and “strident” (AW Pink, p 280) and “contentious” (Nettleton, p87) and “belligerent” (p85) malcontents, does being “Reformed” mean agreeing that “being Reformed” is only “one form of Christianity”?

    When Stewart writes about the “adequacy and capaciousness” of the atonement to save the non-elect, is that teaching “Reformed” so that any who disagree must be dismissed as “non-Reformed”?

    But if the death of Christ does not save the non-elect, then it was not enough to save them. And since this is true, this is either because God never intended the death of Christ to save the non-elect or because the death itself is not adequate to save anybody. (On this topic of “sufficient/efficient”, I would recommend the book by the Confessional Baptist Tom Nettles, By His Grace and For His Glory)

    Excluding the baptists will not settle what it means to be “Reformed”. Signing the same Confessions will not decide what it means to be “Reformed”. Kenneth Stewart warns those who do not go along with his “sufficient for everybody” Procrustean formula that they will end up in a marginalized “self-imposed ghetto” (p 89). But if this is a self-fulfilling prophesy, why does Stewart worry so about those who want to be Reformed without being “evangelicals”?

    Baptist Calvinist Abraham Booth, Divine Justice Essential to the Divine Character, book 3:60
    “While cheerfully admitting the sufficiency of Immanual’s death to have redeemed all mankind, had all the sins of the whole human species been equally imputed to Him, we cannot perceive any solid reason to conclude that His propitiatory sufferings are sufficient for the expiation of sins which He did not bear, or for the redemption of sinners whom he did not represent. For the substitution of Christ, and the imputation of sin to Him, are essential to the scriptural doctrine of redemption…

    Baptist Calvinist Dagg , Manual of Theology, p 330— “Some have maintained that, if the atonement of Christ is not general, no sinner can be under obligation to believe in Christ, until he is assured that he is one of the elect. This implies that no sinner is bound to believe what God says, unless he knows that God designs to save him…

    Like

  10. mcMark, if assemblies fence who gets to be minister, and if churches fence who receives the supper and baptism from the pastor, discipline is inherent to the ministry of word and sacrament.

    Like

  11. dgh—discipline is inherent to the ministry of word and sacrament.

    mark–i get that, because you could fence Tim Keller even if you did or did not still claim jurisdiction over every infant born in the territory. But is that all you mean by “discipline”? Is that all that Calvin or other Reformed people mean by “discipline”?

    I understand that, if you do not have ‘confessional membership” but only “confessional preachers and adminstrators”, that you can’t discipline members for what they confess or teach. But what about other acts of lawlessness, such as failure to submit their infants for water?

    But I agree with you that it would be a great step of reformation forward if there were fences against elders who teach universal and ineffective atonement.

    Like

  12. George,

    I’m insulted that you think I would watch a movie with Alan Alda in it. I guess he was in “Crimes and Misdemeanors”.

    “My Dinner With Andre” is these two guys, one of whom is played by Wallace Shawn (The Son of the long-time “New Yorker” editor, William Shawn), the other played by Andre Gregory, going to dinner and having a conversation. That’s it. They basically play themselves.

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082783/

    Like

  13. Erik – turns out that Alda apparently mentioned the Louis Malle film during an interview as being one of his favorites. Not sure how my mind jumped to the conclusion that he acted in it (not real sure what my mind’s doing these days period, as far as that goes). But I agree, an Alda film is not one I’d want to watch, either.

    Like

  14. mcMark, discipline is more than this and I’d use our Form of Govt. to begin to express what it is. But I do think it is important to see how closely related discipline is to word and sacraments.

    Like

  15. Don’t forget! If you want to play in an NCAA March Madness Bracket, Oldlife style, click on the link below and when prompted, search for the “Old Life League.”

    So far, it’s me and one other person. At this the group grew 100% since I last checked (from 1 to 2). Yippee! It’s a lot of fun, even if you know nothing of NCAA. This will be the last advertisement for this, it starts on March 20, so sign up today or tomorrow if interested. All are welcome to join. Good luck Providential Blessings 🙂

    http://games.espn.go.com/tournament-challenge-bracket/2014/en/game?invitesource=twitter&inviteuser=NDgyNzczMDM2A&ex_cid=invite-twitter-tcmen

    Like

  16. Darryl:

    I would recommend adding some social media buttons, e.g. FB, Twitter, etc. Facilitates hiking more widely.

    Regards.

    Like

  17. and that one other person (me) thinks the big ten is once again over-rated. Go Providence, beat the stupid coach

    Like

  18. “Jonathan Edwards by George Marsden was published”

    Because when you think of the New Calvinist take on Jonathan Edwards you think “George Marsden”

    Like

  19. mark mcculley
    Posted March 18, 2014 at 1:48 pm | Permalink
    Perhaps we need to think also about what’s wrong with the Reformed church alliance of which Kenneth Stewart is a member.

    In his book Ten Myths About Calvinism: Recovering the Breadth of the Reformed Tradition, IVP, 2011 seeks a kind of “catholic discipline” He wants to exclude those he refers to as “thoroughly reformed” (p 15) as extremists. On p 93, Stewart concludes that “TULIP cannot be allowed to function as a creed”.

    I certainly understand that being Reformed is more than the five points, but if we were to examine what’s wrong with the Reformed church, I would suggest that many Reformed congregations not only teach less than the five points, but also teach much that is in antithesis to the five points.

    Exactly. What if you’re a TULI? Or an ULP? Whose Calvinism is it, anyway? Who says? Why can’t you reform the Reform?

    Like

  20. Tom, Calvinism belongs to Jesus Christ. Aren’t you reading Darryl’s responses? You keep asking, I’m not sure you read what he writes back.

    We are Xtians here.

    Do you have religion? Just curious.

    Peace.

    Like

  21. Q: What’s wrong with Calvinism?

    A: New Calvinism, ha!

    From Driscoll’s letter: “To be clear, these are decisions I have come to with our Senior Pastor Jesus Christ. I believe this is what He is asking of me, and so I want to obey Him.”

    The changes he is talking about making are actually a good idea and will be a test of whether or not a man can truly retreat from “celebrity pastor” status once he has obtained it.”

    Where is the repentance? He used over 200k from offerings and tithes to get on the Best Sellers list. Should he not step down as pastor? Isn’t a pastor supposed to be above reproach?

    Like

  22. AB, Tom occasionally tries his hand at applying the conservative RC wish fulfillment delusion of an epistemologically certain and infallibly principled magisterium to actual prot realities. He thinks he makes a point, because he’s unaware that no RC communion functions in the imagination land of the RC blogosphere, but don’t blame him, he’s not actually aware of what the reality on the ground is in his local RC parish. He conducts his war from his keyboard. Think, WoW or D&D role playing.

    Like

  23. The New Calvinism is personality-driven. Or you could say that it is culturally a subset of broad evangelicalism hence looks to the celebrity. We need to wait and see what happens when the first generation celebrities are gone. There’s a fair chance the followers are more likely to follow similar personalities than they are Calvinist theology. In other words, there’s a fair chance we’re dealing with a blip on the radar screen and nothing more.

    Like

  24. Matt – Where is the repentance? He used over 200k from offerings and tithes to get on the Best Sellers list. Should he not step down as pastor? Isn’t a pastor supposed to be above reproach?

    Erik – I haven’t followed the details. If he was spending church money to promote his books, was the church also getting the income from book sales? If so, how much of an annual salary was he being paid?’

    We need to hire Kent to go in there and poke around.

    Like

  25. “Should he not step down as pastor? Isn’t a pastor supposed to be above reproach?”

    Well, to my understanding he’s self ordained. And now, as the big dude, he’s self-sustaining. He’s the star and the cash cow. I think the business model will predominate over any churchly, orderly, ahem, Presbyterian model. If subordinates get in his face they’re gone. He’s there as long as he wants to be.

    Like

  26. Driscoll’s apology is only the visible surface of a very large iceberg. There is a lot of “save the brand” scrambling going on right now.

    Like

  27. From what I have witnessed personally, and I am sure this is only a generalization with some exceptions; what is problematic among the YRR New Calvinistic ministers is a desire for glory without first putting in the hard work.

    Instead of spending three years at a theological seminary studying the original languages, church history, theology, etc., they feel worthy of a call because, well, they desire to plant a church somewhere, so God must be calling them. Why bother with the pain-staking process of theological training and proper ordination when I have this strong desire to do this now?

    Instead of spending years in struggling churches learning the ropes, they expect God will do “awesome” things in the first church they plant.

    Instead of ministering in obscurity for many years and gaining wisdom and maturity through that difficult process, they want to be immediately recognized, usually through social media, for their pearls of wisdom they have acquired through – two whole years of ministry.

    Instead of taking the time to read and study the works of Calvin, Turretin, John Owen, Warfield, Machen, etc., they want to proclaim themselves New Calvinists without even studying the Old Calvinism to understand what they are rejecting.

    Instead of learning from older ministers who have spent years in ministry, they assume the older ministers are out of touch with today’s world and assure themselves they have more to offer the younger generation because – well, because they are them.

    And even if they decide to put in the years of time, study, struggle, and faithfulness, they fail to realize that there is no glory even after putting in those years. Ministry is not God doing “awesome,” things through us every week that we always have something to tweet about, but it is quietly and faithfully fulfilling one’s calling and leaving the results to God, and living in the reality that our churches and ministries will be just as unimpressive 20 years from now as they are today.

    Like

  28. Tom, then you’re not Reformed. If Methodists don’t recognize 1-point and 2-point Arminians then Reformed may exclude 4-point and 3-point Calvinists. And if you actually read the five points (initiated by the Remonstrants and responded to by the Calvinists), you’ll see that they are internally consistent, so to pick and choose makes no sense on either side. It’s the wonder working powers of modernity that gives us Calminians and Reformed Baptists, not the spirit of the Reformation. Neither Arminius nor Gomarus would know what to do with cafeteria Calvinism or Arminianism. But what makes anyone think he’s discovered a whole number between 4 and 5?

    Like

  29. PS what Tom and I share, sean, is we both like games.

    If even Bryan Cross plays, it’s scores a point in my book. I’m a sucker for anyone who says they’ll golf with me.

    Rememeber to fill out your bracket early. See my 3:19pm, yo.

    Like

  30. The accusation is out there for use of charity funds to pay for his gaming of the bestsellers list

    Your IRS takes a dim view of that, a very very dim view

    Hope it is not true for all involved

    Like

  31. The story so far—

    mark mcculley:

    If we were to examine what’s wrong with the Reformed church, I would suggest that many Reformed congregations not only teach less than the five points, but also teach much that is in antithesis to the five points.

    TVD:

    Exactly. What if you’re a TULI? Or an ULP? Whose Calvinism is it, anyway? Who says? Why can’t you reform the Reform?

    Zrim:

    Tom, then you’re not Reformed. If Methodists don’t recognize 1-point and 2-point Arminians then Reformed may exclude 4-point and 3-point Calvinists. And if you actually read the five points (initiated by the Remonstrants and responded to by the Calvinists), you’ll see that they are internally consistent, so to pick and choose makes no sense on either side. It’s the wonder working powers of modernity that gives us Calminians and Reformed Baptists, not the spirit of the Reformation. Neither Arminius nor Gomarus would know what to do with cafeteria Calvinism or Arminianism. But what makes anyone think he’s discovered a whole number between 4 and 5?

    D. G. Hart:

    Marvin, New Calvinism is inherently exclusive. Why not just say “Calvinism”? Why refer to a variety as New? Think this through.

    Jared Oliphint, summarizing John Piper, says that New Calvinists don’t affirm limited atonement. If you don’t like that, don’ refer to yourself as a New Calvinist.

    TVD:

    TUIPs! No True Scotsman! Call the Calvinist Inquisition!

    DGH:

    As for semper reformanda and moving with the flow, we Old Calvinists actually believe God told us all we need to know in Scripture.

    TVD:

    Why can’t Calvinism [Reformed theology] be reformed? Perhaps the “New” Calvinists have it right. Who says all God’s children will not be spared the fire? [It’s at least mathematically possible.]

    DGH:

    As for where history is moving, that is like your opinion.

    TVD:

    Or perhaps the reformed future of Reformed theology is TUIP? Who are you to say it’s not? A prophet? A pope?

    It’s all a matter of opinion. Unless you’re Jesus. Who knew.

    Andrew Buckingham:

    Tom, Calvinism belongs to Jesus Christ.

    TVD:

    Calvin = Jesus Christ? J. Gresham Machen = Jesus Christ? Darryl Hart? =?

    Jesus Christ. Perhaps it’s not a matter of opinion after all. We’re lousy with authorities and we’re not even into popes yet. Whose Jesus Christ is it, anyway?

    Andrew Buckingham:

    Aren’t you reading Darryl’s responses? You keep asking, I’m not sure you read what he writes back.

    TVD:

    Every word, every jog & tittle, me brother. Especially the ones you don’t write, Darryl, which speak loudest of all.
    _____

    Thanks to all who took part in this discussion. If you feel you were cited out of context, the intention was to state everyone fairly. Apologies in advance if you feel you weren’t, so please do spare your correspondent any abuse in favor of simply stating your case for yourself.

    ;-D

    I love this here theological society, sometimes.

    Like

  32. Andrew Buckingham:

    Tom, Calvinism belongs to Jesus Christ.

    TVD:

    Calvin = Jesus Christ? J. Gresham Machen = Jesus Christ? Darryl Hart? =?

    Tom, Reformed Christianity apparently ranges in the 75 million persons, range. I don’t see why you keep asking, whose calvinism. Whose Catholicism, whose Judaism, whose mormonism, whose Islam, etc etc. If you haven’t noticed, we are duly organized into presbyteries and have national assemblies. In other words, doctrinal matters are dealt with properly in our form of government. I met Darryl in person at General Assembly in the summer last year. So if you want to see who we are, you need to get off your computer, and check us out.

    And who is Darryl? He’s the guy who wrote the book on Calvinism. Literally.

    I honestly don’t understand why you keep asking the same questions, and are not getting it. Does this help you at all? Sometimes it seems you make good points and are being helpful. Lately, it seems like you are just rehashing old things that we’ve been over many times (have you been here doing this a year now, or so?). What’s your end game?

    Take care.

    Like

  33. PS and yes, this time next month or so, will be Tom’s OL Anniversary. We should all watch his Joker’s Wild video together online. I may even upload my Price is Right to youtube, if Erik manages to join the NCAA brackett. No promises though.

    Next..

    Like

  34. Todd,

    Well said.

    Driscoll on New vs. Old Calvinism:

    http://theresurgence.com/2009/03/12/time-magazine-names-new-calvinism-3rd-most-powerful-idea

    FOUR WAYS ‘NEW CALVINISM’ IS SO POWERFUL

    Old Calvinism was fundamental or liberal and separated from or syncretized with culture. New Calvinism is missional and seeks to create and redeem culture.

    Old Calvinism fled from the cities. New Calvinism is flooding into cities.

    Old Calvinism was cessationistic and fearful of the presence and power of the Holy Spirit. New Calvinism is continuationist and joyful in the presence and power of the Holy Spirit.

    Old Calvinism was fearful and suspicious of other Christians and burned bridges. New Calvinism loves all Christians and builds bridges between them.

    Like

  35. Can someone expound on “Old Calvinism was fundamental or liberal and separated from or syncretized with culture. New Calvinism is missional and seeks to create and redeem culture”?

    What is he talking about and how is it any different from what Neocalvinists do?

    What is the difference between being “syncretized with culture” and “redeeming culture”?

    Does Driscoll redeem Mickey Mouse by wearing a Mickey Mouse shirt while preaching?

    Like

  36. Todd, to be fair (me?) guys like Piper and Keller have put in the hard work. Their celebrity is partly the result of many years of labor. It’s guys like Justin Taylor or Tim Challies who are trying to bring the aura of Piper and Keller to a wider set of pastors. In other words, there are the stars, and then there is the marketing of the stars.

    Like

  37. As a lumper, not a splitter, Darryl, I see commonality then between B. Cross and T. Challies.

    In other words, descendents of the “connected age.”

    Creatures spawned by the interweb.

    Thanks, Algore..

    Like

  38. Erik, except that New Calvinism doesn’t build bridges with Old Calvinism. They throw Old Calvinists under the bus but act like they run a good bus service.

    Like

  39. Erik, Old Calvinism was either the PCUSA (liberal) or OPC (fundamentalist). We are above categories. We are millennials (except when we have to get boomer blessings from Piper and Keller and Carson).

    Like

  40. Darryl,

    Right, guys like Piper and Keller who have put in the years would more apply to my last paragraph, that they still hold onto a theology of glory. The rest is what I have seen personally.

    Like

  41. The glaring problem with Piper is that he is a Baptist, is proud of being a Baptist, and gives sermons attacking infant baptism. Instead of calling this “The New Calvinism” just call it being a Reformed Baptist and we can all be friends (but not ecclesiastical allies). Infant baptism takes up a lot of space in the Reformed Confessions.

    Like

  42. I like Rick Phillips, but didn’t enjoy his warm and cozy post on the New Calvinism. To be honest, I rather dislike the “old” and “new” calvinism terms. Why submit to Piper? There are proper categories. Reformed. Old Side. Old School. New Side. New School. Etc.

    Like

  43. Deej, sure, old and new can mislead. But the phenomenon of a Calvinist resurgence was noted by Time mag, etc. We have to call what we are seeing, something. I’m not sure a Challies really fits the other categories you list. Maybe he does, I don’t know, I’m too close to situation to see objectively.

    Like

  44. Deej, dunno. I’m just a golfer. With a Winnie the Pooh brain.

    I came to the OPC for the hot chicks in the youth group. And then msrriend one. She hasnt given up on me yet, thank goodness.

    So don’t ask me. My motives are clear.

    Yo.

    (emoticon)

    Let me know if I missed soemthing, Dj.

    Peace

    Like

  45. Honestly, D, I see categories upon categories made, trying to explain the religiosity of the last 10 years.

    Does anyone care about Time mag anymore?

    Maybe 20 years ago person of the year mattered.

    YRR is a mystery to me, so thanks for linking to a Google books on the other thread.

    Challies emodies YRR to me, and my simple brain.

    As for me, I go to church on Sunday, which is when all these questions stop, and I have to explain the Gospel to 5 year olds in Sunday School.

    And it makes Tom Van Dyke look so silly for all his questions out here.

    I know I’m all over the place.

    It’s just some of your interlocutors seem so immature.

    In other words, this is the place for me. Mr. immature himself, that’s me.

    I’m thinking Ultimate Frisbee may be my next endeavor. Watch out for a new AB avatar. Golf is too pricey. I’m a man on a budget.

    I’ll keep you apprised, of me and my doings. As always.

    Later, amigo. You done good work out here. I be listening to your every word. Don’t let that creep you out.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

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