Stream Immanu El's new album free - 'In Passage'

Here's a few tracks from their second album 'Moen'

World Opinion of Europe Going Down (The Independent)

The Independent has an article on how Europe is losing credibility in the eyes of the world in part because of the crisis.

Here is also an infographic on world perceptions of different countries.

The Giant Marionettes of Royal De Luxe

Based in Nantes, France, the street theatre company Royal de Luxe performs around the world, primarily using gigantic, elaborate marionettes to tell stories that take place over several days and wind through entire cities. Puppeteers maneuver the huge marionettes -- some as tall as 12 meters (40 ft) -- through streets, parks, and waterways, performing their story along the way. Gathered here are images of several recent Royal de Luxe performances, from Belgium, Mexico, Germany, Chile, and England.

If you can see the videos of some of the performances on Youtube they'll give you more of an idea of what the performance must have been like. They look fantastic.

You can see the sequence of photos over At the In Focus photo blog page.

Charismatic Gifts in Church Meetings & sensitivity to unbelievers

Post from Andrew Wilson.

“Charismatic-Missional Tension”

Author. Andrew Wilson | Publication Date. 09/05/2012

I've been thinking quite a bit about the "charismatic-missional tension" recently. Some prefer not to think of it as a tension for theological reasons (since to be truly charismatic and truly missional are, surely, one and the same), and many will object to framing it as one because it makes it sound like a spectrum - highly charismatic and non-missional at one end, highly missional and non-charismatic at the other - that necessarily requires believers, and leaders, to compromise. But that said, I am confident that most readers of this blog will know what I mean when I call it that.

When David Devenish from Newfrontiers speaks of the challenge of becoming more missional while remaining charismatic, as he did recently at Together for the Nation, and when Dave Smith from Kingsgate, Peterborough talks about a shallow end / deep end approach to spiritual gifts in meetings (Sundays are shallow end, prayer meetings are deep end), they are addressing the issue I am talking about when I refer to the charismatic-missional tension, even if they don’t call it that. So I’ll use the phrase for now, because it’s a convenient shorthand, although I happily acknowledge that another way of framing it, like Simon Brading’s picture of an aeroplane with two jet engines on full blast, is probably needed.
 
But here’s what I’ve been wondering about. What, specifically, are the areas of concern, compromise or even conflict when we think of a charismatic-missional tension? What are the trade-offs, if that’s what they are? And what are the practical decisions we have to make about them? Because I’m not persuaded that the superficial analysis - that is, that being charismatic is entirely about encouraging spiritual gifts in meetings, and being missional means banning them - is accurate. I think the issues can be more subtle, and less explicitly biblical, than that. So here are a few areas where, in my experience, some of us can feel a tension between being fully charismatic and being fully missional.
 
Spiritual Gifts in Public Meetings. Having just said that this is not the whole story, it clearly is a sizeable part of the story. At the charismatic end of the spectrum, there are those who believe that encouraging spiritual gifts in public meetings is a core value, based on exhortations like 1 Corinthians 14:1 and summary statements like 14:26, and that a decision to ban them or discourage them in the interests of being “missional” is to sell out, and to directly disobey 14:39. At the missional end, there are those who argue that the Holy Spirit’s intention is always to draw unbelievers to Jesus through the gospel, and that expressions of spiritual gifts in the church are always to be subordinated to this wider purpose, on the basis of 1 Corinthians 14:23; doing this, and administering a meeting in a way that is “fitting and orderly” (14:40), might well (in some cultures) involve restricting spiritual gifts in public meetings for the sake of the outsider.
 
The extremes are relatively easy to see. I’ve been in Sunday meetings which are full of spiritual gifts but virtually incomprehensible to me, let alone to any unbelievers who might be present. I’ve also been in formerly charismatic churches which are so seeker sensitive that spiritual gifts have been all-but-banned in public contexts. But in between those extremes, there are lots of us who think that prohibiting spiritual gifts in a meeting is unbiblical, and that Paul sees prophecy in particular as highly missional, but who also think that everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way, that wackiness doesn’t necessarily glorify God, and that it is important for unbelievers to be able to understand what they see and hear. Navigating that one is not impossible, but it can be challenging.
 
Pursuing Breakthrough in Healing. This might sound odd, because healings in Scripture, as well as today, present such an excellent opportunity to preach the gospel. What could be more missional, some wonder, than seeing a healing happen in front of you? Well, yes. But the point is, it is almost incontestable that pursuing breakthrough in healing as a church - as opposed to, say, being satisfied with the occasional sick person getting well - requires a commitment to stepping out in risk-filled faith, and an openness to failure. The churches today that see the most people healed in response to prayer are, almost without exception, the churches that also see the most people not healed in response to prayer. They take more risks, pursue greater and more dramatic signs and wonders, and frequently find that people don’t get healed. As John Wimber apparently said, I’d rather pray for a thousand people and see one healed, than pray for nobody and see none healed.
 
So how do you handle it when unbelievers are around, and you say that God heals today, and pray for people on that basis, and then nobody gets healed? In practice, I’ve found myself in that situation on several occasions: how do you respond in a way that doesn’t fake it, doesn’t patronise the unbeliever, and doesn’t destroy faith in the church? How, also, do you handle partial, temporary or unimpressive healings: with a potentially faith-diminishing honesty (“OK, you didn’t really get healed, but people often don’t; we’ll carry on praying, though!”), or with a potentially honesty-compromising faith (“that’s amazing that you’re a tiny bit better! Praise God”)? The charismatic guys might decide to pursue and testify to healing come what may, even if unbelievers are led to conclude that they’re deluding themselves; the missional guys might shut the whole thing down, in corporate gatherings at least, for fear of making the church look weird to outsiders. What to do?
 
Corporate “Ministry Times” in Public Meetings. Another area where some will perceive a charismatic-missional tension is in the handling of so-called “ministry times” (I say so-called, not to cast aspersions on them, but just because the phrase itself is not a biblical one, and “ministry” simply means “service”). Fifteen years ago, any charismatic church worth its salt would have had a “ministry time” at the end of their meeting, in which people would respond to the message, pray for each other, lay hands on one another, prophesy over each other, and (often) respond to God in a variety of visible ways including crying, laughing, falling down, shouting out, and so on. These days, any missional church worth its salt would be highly sceptical of things that would appear bizarre to a visitor, and would often regard such “ministry times” as a rather self-indulgent practice that should be reserved for corporate prayer meetings. Again, in the middle, there are many who want the people of God to experience him in a deeper way when they gather together, and who suspect that if something gets bumped from Sundays the saints will instinctively think it doesn’t matter much, but who also don’t want to seem needlessly strange to visitors, and who struggle with how to fit a thirty minute ministry time into a ninety minute meeting alongside a forty minute worship time, a forty minute talk, a few necessary notices, breaking bread, and whatever else.
 
Even when ministry times take place, some leaders will wonder which sorts of responses should be allowed, encouraged or pursued. As anyone who has heard Kim Walker will testify, laughing out loud in the middle of a song can bring a huge sense of joy to the Christians - but then again, it might also seem strange to visitors. An individual crying out as they encounter God’s love often raises the spiritual bar significantly for believers who are present, and it can thereby foster greater openness to the Spirit - but it can also spook people who have no idea what is going on. We could say similar things of falling down, whooping, dancing, and the like. We could also say it of the lengthy silences that often precede people encountering God in power. So even if “ministry times” are unequivocally embraced as a powerful way of engaging with God, it remains the case that leaders, not to mention individuals in the church who have brought guests along, may feel the charismatic-missional tension.
 
Preaching and Teaching on Sundays. Preaching and teaching in such a way that is faithful to the biblical text, teaches doctrine clearly to Christians and communicates the gospel clearly to non-Christians is hard work. It’s not impossible, but it’s hard work. If you then add into the mix the need to encourage, exhort and equip Christians regularly to pursue spiritual experience, ideally by modelling it yourself, things become even more difficult. It is probably no coincidence, then, that virtually every gifted preacher or teacher I can think of excels at one or two of these (doctrine and mission, mission and Spirit, Spirit and doctrine), but not all three. It’s just an awful lot to achieve in forty minutes.
 
Websites and Social Media. This is a curveball, but: I know of some church websites, and some Facebook friends, that by being charismatic express things in ways that alienate some non-Christians. I know of others that, in the name of being missional, say next to nothing about what God has done or is doing in their lives. The former raise faith amongst Christian friends but risk freaking out others; the latter remain friends with everyone, but miss opportunities to testify to God’s power for the benefit of their fellow believers. Just a thought.
 
So there we have it: the “charismatic-missional tension” boiled down to five issues. There are some other notable examples - the planning vs spontaneity spectrum, the issue of the church’s focus in its efforts and its prayers, etc - but those strike me as the main ones. And I think they need some thoughtful reflection, particularly from those of us called to lead and pastor God’s people. Tomorrow, I’ll try and make some sense of it all.
 
——-
 
Andrew is the author of several books including, most recently, If God, Then What?.

10 Book Recommendations on the End Times & Revelation (Andrew Naselli)

Ten Books Schnabel Recommends on the End Times

Posted by Andy Naselli on May 9, 2012 in eschatology | 3 comments

Eckhard Schnabel, 40 Questions About the End Times (40 Questions; Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2011), 321 (numbering added):

1. Archer, Gleason L., ed. Three Views on the Rapture: Pre-, Mid-, or Post-Tribulation. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996.  [The second edition came out in 2010, and the only repeat author is Doug Moo.]
2. Blomberg, Craig L., and Sung Wook Chung, eds. A Case for Historic Premillennialism: An Alternative to “Left Behind” Eschatology. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2009.  [See A. J. Gibson’s review in Themelios.]
3. Bock, Darrell L., ed. Three Views on the Millennium and Beyond. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1999.
4. Clouse, Robert G., ed. The Meaning of the Millennium: Four Views. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1977.
5. Hays, J. Daniel, J. Scott Duvall, and C. Marvin Pate. Dictionary of Biblical Prophecy and End Times. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007.
6. Mounce, Robert H. The Book of Revelation. Revised edition. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998.
7. Osborne, Grant R. Revelation. BECNT. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002.
8. Walker, Peter W. L., ed. Jerusalem Past and Present in the Purposes of God. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992. [2nd ed., 1994]
9. Walls, Jerry L., ed. The Oxford Handbook of Eschatology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.
10. Witherington, Ben. Jesus, Paul, and the End of the World: A Comparative Study in New Testament Eschatology. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1992.

Heavenly Mindedness by Randy Alcorn

A post by Randy Alcorn, something of a heaven focused writer, on heavenly mindedness.

If you lack a passion for heaven, I can almost guarantee it’s because you have a deficient and distorted theology of heaven (or you’re making choices that conflict with heaven’s agenda). An accurate and biblically energized view of heaven will bring a new spiritual passion to your life.
When you fix your mind on heaven and see the present in light of eternity, even little choices become tremendously important. After death, we will never have another chance to share Christ with one who can be saved from hell, to give a cup of water to the thirsty, to invest money to help the helpless and reach the lost, or to share our homes, clothes, and love with the poor and needy.

Trellis & Vine ebook for $5.99

The Trellis and Vine - Matthias Media has the ebook version of The Trellis and the Vine marked down to $5.99. This is a fantastic book and a must-read for anyone in ministry.

Maurice Sendak (Where the wild things are) Dies - Reflections on darker children's literature (BBC Podcast)

• Maurice Sendak Dies (author of Where the Wild Things Are)

  Tue, 8 May 12
  BBC Podcast - The World Tonight
  
  
  Another Children's author reflects on darker material in children's books. Interesting observations.
  
  The story begins at around 18:00 minutes
  
  
  Fresh Air Podcast - Remembering Maurice Sendak
  
  

Huxley vs Orwell: The difference in their visions of the future

This post comes from Andrew Wilson who in turn got it from Justin Taylor. It looks at how the vision of the future of the two men differs.

In short, Orwell feared that what we hate will ruin us. Huxley feared that what we love will ruin us.

Author. Andrew Wilson | Publication Date. 04/05/2012

Aldous Huxley's Brave New World and George Orwell's 1984 have a lot in common. Both depict a fruitless, empty dystopia in the future, both were written within twenty years (1931 and 1949 respectively) in the first half of the twentieth century, and thus both, in a fictional but nonetheless dark and even savage way, imagine what the world would be like today.

Fundamentally, however, they offer completely different accounts of what will enslave humanity in generations to come. In his Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business, Neil Postman points out some of the differences, and argues that one of them was far closer to the reality that ensued than the other. Thanks to Justin Taylor for the link:

Contrary to common belief even among the educated, Huxley and Orwell did not prophesy the same thing.
 
Orwell warns that we will be overcome by an externally imposed oppression. But in Huxley’s vision, no Big Brother is required to deprive people of their autonomy, maturity and history. As he saw it, people will come to love their oppression, to adore the technologies that undo their capacities to think.
 
What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.
 
Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism.
 
Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance.
 
Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumblepuppy. As Huxley remarked in Brave New World Revisited, the civil libertarians and rationalists who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny “failed to take into account man’s almost infinite appetite for distractions.” In 1984, Huxley added, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure.
 
In short, Orwell feared that what we hate will ruin us. Huxley feared that what we love will ruin us.
 
...Huxley, not Orwell, was right.

What to do when you identify a sin in your life (John Owen)

This extract is from a post in a series of posts on Tim Challies excellent blog on John Owen's Overcoming Sin & Temptation. You can read an updated version of the entire book for free here.

In this series of posts I am sharing some of what John Owen says about putting sin to death, or what he calls mortification. I have been going through his book Overcoming Sin and Temptation and trying to distill each chapter to its essence—to a few choice quotes that capture the flavor of what Owen is trying to communicate.
So far we’ve looked at The Foundation of Mortification, we’ve been encouraged to Daily Put Sin to Death, to understand that It Is the Holy Spirit Who Puts Sin to Death and to acknowledge that Your Spiritual Life Depends Upon Killing Sin. Then we saw What It Is Not to Put Sin to Death and What It Is to Put Sin to Death. He now moves on to the actual directions for how to put sin to death; first he deals with a couple of foundational issues and then with dangerous sin symptoms.

Today he moves to the first of his practical instructions on putting sin to death and the first action you need to take when you identify a sin in your life. It is this: 

(1) You need to ponder 
(a) the guilt, 
(b) the [future] dangers and 
(c) the [present] evil results of that sin 

(2) and let it rest in both your mind and heart. 

Or as he says it, “Get a clear and abiding sense upon your mind and conscience of the guilt, danger, and evil of your sin.” He will discuss each of these three things in turn.

Top 5 Things Introverts Dread about Church

Interesting article on what introverts dread about church, from a blog by a guy who wrote a book on the subject. Looks interesting and I can relate to a few of these!

Saturday, May 5, 2012

Introvert Saturday: The Top 5 Things Introverts Dread About Church

This post comes to you from Chelsey Doring. Chelsey posted a version of this on her blog last week and I asked if I could re-post it. It nicely and humorously captures some of the first issues that introverts have with church culture, especially in an evangelical culture that emphasizes sharing and transparency.

The Top 5 Things Introverts Dread about Church

(written so extroverts may understand)

5. “Welcome! Shake a hand, give a hug, share a name!”

In every church I have attended, this has been a precursor to the beginning of the service. What I want to know is why. There is no way that anyone is going to remember anyone else’s name in the 2.7 uncomfortable seconds it takes to say, “Good morning! My name is so-and-so. God’s peace.”

And has anyone considered what that is like for people who have never stepped foot in that church, or any church at all? I’ve been in church my entire life, and this entire process ties knots in my stomach. I understand the rationale behind it (we want to be a friendly, welcoming community), but isn’t this accomplished in a less forced manner before and after the service, over donuts and coffee?

Awkward encounters are so much easier with caffeine and sugar.

It is for this reason that I really love running slides or doing some other manner of work for the church during the beginning of the service. Can’t shake your sweaty hand if mine are busy doing something else.

4. “Chelsey, what do you think?”

Okay, look. I will tell you what I think once I want to say it. Trust me, I am very opinionated. Just because I am sitting quietly in this group of people, listening to all of them talk about their lives or this Bible passage or this idea, doesn’t mean I have a rock for a brain or that I’m too scared to speak up. Or, even worse: that something is wrong with me.

The worst offenders for this one are small group leaders and youth directors. And I know that for a fact, because I am one. Take it from me: if an introvert isn’t speaking, it isn’t because nothing is going on upstairs. It’s because they’re thinking. And once they feel comfortable enough, they will share. And yeah, that might take a couple minutes. A couple weeks. Maybe even a couple months. Their silence isn’t a reflection on your leadership! Leaders like me need to be secure enough in ourselves so that we can let the silence happen. It's not "awkward" until you make it awkward.

3. “Let’s get into groups and pray aloud and/or tell each other our deepest, darkest struggles.”

At this point, you may be wondering if I actually like people. I like people. I really do.

Introverts tend to have deep relationships and friendships. They are often very few in number. Case in point: when planning our wedding, I told my husband Ted that I wanted three bridesmaids: my sister, my best friend, and his sister. He gave me his best puppy dog face and told me that he wouldn’t be able to go lower than 9 groomsmen. People just love Ted. I get it, obviously. (We ended up having 7 bridesmaids and 7 groomsmen, and I love and cherish every single one of them.)

At the church where I work, we meet weekly to pray over the prayer requests we receive as a staff. We separate into groups of 3 to 5, go to separate corners of the church, and begin to pray over the list. I have a mini-panic attack every single time. I hope I’m adept enough to cover it. I’m probably not.

2. Spontaneous Public Prayer

If you could see into my head while I pray aloud, it would look something like this:

“Dear Jesus: I am completely blanking right now. I know that when we usually talk, the conversation never ebbs, but all these people are looking at me and listening to me and I feel like I’m naked and I’m going to hyperventilate. If you love me – no, I know you love me – please give me something intelligent to say in front of all these people. That I work with every day. Who are expecting me to form a coherent sentence. If it’s fancy and a little theological, too, that would be great. Thanks a million. Amen.”

Recently, one of the pastors at my church gave a devotion about how people pray out loud. He said that if a person asks for things that God has already promised, like his presence or his faithfulness, then it’s foolish and they probably have a pretty weak faith.

Right. As if I wasn’t already self-conscious enough.

On Jon Acuff’s post about introverts, one very well-meaning woman tried to give an introvert some advice about praying out loud:

“Sometimes I have an apprehension of going to the bathroom in public with someone who is the in the stall right next to me. Sometimes it is really hard to avoid. However, I know I have to go, so what I do is close my eyes and just go with the flow. I would say the same to you the next time you are asked to pray out loud in front of others: Just close your eyes and go with the flow. He promises that as we open our mouths he will fill it with his words. I have found this to be true not only in my life, but also in the lives of others I know.”

I'm convinced that "go with the flow" is a distinctly extroverted phrase. Also, I’m not sure I’ll ever be able to use the phrase “go with the flow” again.

1. ”You should be more…”

Talkative. Friendly. Open. Or, my personal favorite: “You should be more like your sister.”

I once had a very influential camp counselor tell me that. My sister and I are very close now, and I would love to be more like her, because she is clearly cooler than I am.

When we were in high school, my sister was a beautiful, blonde, popular, fashionable, outgoing cheerleader. I was a somber, dark-haired band nerd who wore jeans and t-shirts and hated high school. Of COURSE I wanted to be more like her! Who wouldn’t?!

You would think that this sort of thing doesn’t happen to me anymore, but it does, actually. Even at 23, an age in which I am actually secure in my personality, this conversation takes place:

Me: “Yeah, I’m an introvert.”

The other person: “Oh, I’m so sorry.”

-----
God has created us all so beautifully and uniquely. There is no reason to apologize for that.

I am very sure that other introverts out there have had similar experiences. Please feel free to share, because I know that I shouldn’t be so presumptuous as to speak for all introverts everywhere.

But only if you feel comfortable enough.


If you want to read more about introverts and church, check out Adam's book Introverts in the Church. 

The Gift of Being Prophetic (PJ Smyth)

The Gift of Being Prophetic

Written by  PJ Smyth

Definition

In keeping with the ‘motivational’ theme of these gifts, you will have immediately noticed that I am calling this gift ‘being prophetic’. I am not calling it either ‘the gift of prophecy’ like the one in the 1 Corinthians 12 cluster of gifts, nor ‘being a prophet’ like I will in the Ephesians 4 cluster of gifts. However, as you would imagine there is significant overlap between these three distinctions.
Prophetic people (the group that we are looking at here) will usually have the gift of prophecy, and some will mature into full-blown Ephesians 4 prophets. But – and some of you will be relieved to hear this – it is possible to be prophetically motivated but not be much inclined to bring prophetic words. For you, it is the way that you think and speak and act that is prophetic. Let’s have a look and see what I mean…

Characteristics of prophetic people

• They tend to have a very direct way of dealing with things. They tell things ‘the way they are’ and see things as right and wrong. They are outspoken. They need to speak to express what they think. They are direct, frank and don’t waste words. They are verbally motivated. E.g. John the Baptist (Mk 6:18) – he just told Herod straight!
• They are provocative. Prophets provoke us to think about things in a new way.
• They tend to be uncompromising, bold, and forthright, and are concerned about the things of God. They like to motivate people to righteousness, and can therefore make strong leaders.
• They have an intuitive sense about where people are at, and how things really are. They see through facades. “How are you?” “I’m so blessed.” “Rubbish!” They have the capacity to identify, define and hate evil. But it is righteous anger. They get angry because the person is ruining their life! They hate the devil! Sin enrages them.
• They tend to make passionate and fervent pray-ers. They have a heavy concern for the reputation of God and His agenda.
• They like to confront things and to deal with issues then and there. Unless they hear the person say, “Yes, I am wrong, you are right, I will do that,” they are not convinced! They also like to see a visible change in a person.
• This gift often works well with the gift of prophecy, discerning of spirits, and intercession.

Misunderstandings / Weaknesses

• Their frankness may be perceived as harshness, and they usually have to learn how to speak the truth in love and present truth in the most helpful possible way with minimum offense. They can come on too strong. In their passion to ‘fix it’ they sometimes struggle just to listen and express empathy.
• Their focus on right and wrong (no grey areas) may be seen as intolerant.
• They can be rather intense and often need to learn to lighten up a bit.

How can a person like this help you?

So long as you can survive what they say and how they say it, the advice they give you can help you very much indeed because they cut right to the heart of the issue.

Growing my gift

Pray for more of it. Study it. Use it. But stay accountable and work on the “in love” side of things.

Testing Prophecy (PJ Smyth)

Testing Prophecy

Written by  PJ Smyth

Do not put out the spirit’s fire. Do not treat prophecies contempt. Test everything. 1 Thes 5:19

How can we treat prophecy with contempt?

• By not bothering much with prophecy
• By listening to prophecy passively rather than engaging with it and drinking it in
• By not responding to it in faith and action

How do we test or ‘weigh’ prophecy?

Prophecy needs to be tested and weighed because due to the human element:

1. Sometimes with the best of intentions we can miss the mark.
2. Sometimes we can get the word partially correct. For example, the church in Tyre had prophesied to Paul (Acts 21:4) through the Spirit about the suffering he would undergo in Jerusalem and so those prophesying urged him as part of their prophecy not to go. This was a true prediction but a wrong conclusion and application.
3. Sometimes there can be false prophecies and prophets (Jer 29, Mt 24:24, 2 Pet 2:1).

Here are four questions to ask to help test a prophetic word:

1. Is it in line with scripture?

• If it is counter-bible then toss it out. An example would be, “God says that your current state of sin is OK, and that you can remain in adultery because he knows the pressure that you have been under, and he will make an exception for you…”
• If it is in line with Scripture, or if Scripture doesn’t address the issue, then you will move to the next question…

2. Does it settle well with my spirit? Colossians 3:15 speaks of the Holy Spirit in our hearts as an umpire who helps judge what we hear and bring a sense of either peace or unease. If in the minutes, hours and days following a prophecy over you, you get increasingly uneasy about it, then it is usually (not always) a sign that God’s spirit in you is not confirming that the prophecy was from God. Alternatively, if you find yourself getting increasingly excited about it – although you may have no idea how or when it may come to pass – then it is probably God’s spirit in you confirming that the prophecy was from God.
3. Does the counsel of respected others confirm? Don’t run around seeking the advice of many or you will just drown the voice of the Spirit. Go to one or two other mature Christian leaders or friends to ask what they think. God has ordained wisdom and protection through other people. See Gal 2:1-2 where Paul goes to those “who seemed to be leaders” to test his “revelation”. See also Proverbs 14:11.
4. Does circumstance confirm? Because God is in control of all circumstance, then if after prayer and appropriate action, the door refuses to open, then you have to conclude that the prophecy was either off the mark, or ‘not for now’. Either way, don’t despise it but rather simply say, “Well Lord, I am going to just put that prophecy aside for now confident that you will bring it to pass if it is from you”. Acts 16:7 is a great example of this: Paul felt prompted to go to Bithynia but was wrong and God closed the door….only to open a wonderful door into Macedonia.

France & Greece Election Result Analysis: The Future of Europe (BBC Podcast)

• France & Greece Election Result Analysis: The Future of Europe

  Mon, 7 May 12
  Duration:
  38 mins
  
  
  Ritula Shah presents from France, where last night Francois Hollande was elected President. We hear why in Paris, many believe relations with Germany may be key if the new President is to keep his promises of delivering change. Charlotte Ashton in Berlin finds out how much willingness there is in Germany to embrace a new direction; and Paul Moss is in Athens. Also on the programme, a look at Greece's political and economic situation.

Top 10 Most Read Books in the World Infographic (from Justin Taylor's Blog)

Top 10 Most Read Books in the World

by Jared. Browse more data visualizations.

HT: First Things

What is a Local Church (from the IX Marks Blog)

What Is a Local Church?

By Jonathan Leeman | 5.7.2012 Print

A local church is a group of Christians who regularly gather in Christ’s name to officially affirm and oversee one another’s membership in Jesus Christ and his kingdom through gospel preaching and gospel ordinances. That's a bit clunky, I know, but notice the five parts of this definition: 

• a group of Christians; 
• a regular gathering;
• a congregation-wide exercise of affirmation and oversight; 
• the purpose of officially representing Christ and his rule on earth—they gather in his name;
• the use of preaching and ordinances for these purposes.

Just as a pastor’s pronouncement transforms a man and a woman into a married couple, so the latter four bullet points transform an ordinary group of Christians spending time together at the park—presto!—into a local church.

The gathering is important for a number of reasons. One is that it’s where we Christians “go public” to declare our highest allegiance. It’s the outpost or embassy, giving a public face to our future nation. And it’s where we bow before our king, only we call it worship. The Pharaohs of the world may oppose us, but God draws his people out of the nations to worship him. He will form his mighty congregation.

The gathering is also where our king enacts his rule through preaching, the ordinances, and discipline. The gospel sermon explains the “law” of our nation. It declares the name of our king and explains the sacrifice he made to become our king. It teaches us of his ways and confronts us in our disobedience. And it assures us of his imminent return.

Through baptism and the Lord’s Supper, the church waves the flag and dons the army uniform of our nation. It makes us visible. To be baptized is to identify ourselves with the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, as well as to identify our union with Christ’s death and resurrection (Matt. 28:19; Rom. 6:3-5). To receive the Lord’s Supper is to proclaim his death and our membership in his body (1 Cor. 11:26-29; cf. Matt. 26:26-29). God wants his people to be known and marked off. He wants a line between the church and the world.

What is the local church? It’s the institution which Jesus created and authorized to pronounce the gospel of the kingdom, to affirm gospel professors, to oversee their discipleship, and to expose impostors. All this means, we don’t “join” churches like we join clubs. We submit to them.

This article is excerpted from Church Membership: How the World Knows Who Represents Jesus (Crossway).

Recommended Books for Church History and Historical Theology

From Justin Taylor's excellent blog. Historical Theology is a look at how theological doctrines have been understood throughout the ages.

Recommended Books for Church History and Historical Theology

Carl Trueman was once asked if he could recommend a couple of resources for students on church history and historical theology. He responded:

(1) The series being written by a guy named Nicholas Needham. It’s called 2,000 Years of Christ’s Power (Evangelical Press) and is proving to be a very good, comprehensive, but easy-to-read account of church history. It comes in several volumes.
(2) And the other book I recommend to students—the best single-volume on the history of theology —written by a Scandinavian Lutheran named Bengt Hägglund, titled simply, History of Theology (Concordia: 2007). It’s a single volume that takes you from the early church almost down to the present day in terms of the history of theology.
So those would be the two books I would recommend.

Needham’s 2000 Years of Christ’s Power is a projected five-volume history of the church, of which three volumes have already appeared:

• Vol. 1: Age of the Early Church Fathers [sample pages]
• Vol. 2: Middle Ages [sample pages]
• Vol 3: Renaissance and Reformation [sample pages]

A few notes about these books:
(1) They are based on excellent scholarship, but they are quite accessible.
(2) There are virtually no footnotes, except as short explanatory material—including, helpfully, pronunciation guides on ancient places, names, and events that may be unfamiliar.
(3) This is not only a comprehensive overview of historical theology, but it also contains primary source reading at the end of each chapter, so that you are not only reading about, say, the church fathers, but also sampling their actual writings.
(4) These volumes originate in the UK, and as such, they have a different aesthetic feel in terms of cover design, font choice, typsetting, etc. than you would find in the United States.
For a better overview than this, see Tony Reinke’s helpful post.
Reviewing volume 3 for Haddington House, Carl Trueman writes:

This book is the third volume in Dr Needham’s projected comprehensive history of the church from the age of the church fathers to the present day. While Dr Needham is an accomplished scholar in the fields of church history and historical theology, in these volumes he brings his learning to bear in a manner which is easily accessible to the layperson.
In a time where neither history nor the reading of books seem to be a particularly strong part of church culture, we should welcome the fact that there are books such as these which compress so much valuable information into a such a relatively short compass is to be welcomed by all who have a concern for the church’s historic heritage. . . .
In short, this book, indeed, this whole series, is well worth purchasing, reading, and inwardly digesting.