Highlanders

My sister, and a group of home friends that we have known for many years from our home schooling years, are trying to raise funds to go on mission trip to Germany. Here is a link to the website.

Blessings.
Whitney

Instant Rebate.

The Instant rebate from Vision forum ends tomorrow night at midnight so if you are wanting to take advantage of this now is the time.

Vision Forum sale

Fall pics

More Reformation Pics

More Reformation Day pics

Reformation Day pics.

Reformation Faire 2008

Here are the pics from the 2008 Providence Reformation Faire.

It was a great day.

Voddie Baucham on McCain-Palin

This was a well written and articulated article that brother Baucham penned and posted on his blog on August 30th. I don't know how I missed it but anyway I thought it was well worth the read.

Did McCain Make a Pro-Family VP Pick?

Conservatives are all aglow as John McCain pulled off an apparent coup d’état this week by naming Sarah Palin as his choice for Vice President. Bob Unruh, writing for the conservative Christian web magazine, Worldnet Daily may have put it best when he opened his column:

Pro-family advocates and Republicans are saying presumptive GOP nominee for president Sen. John McCain may have checkmated Democrat Sen. Barack Obama with his choice of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his vice-presidential running mate.

Everyone from Liberty Counsel to FRC is raving about the political genius displayed by Mr. McCain. It seems Christian conservatives have received the bone they were hoping McCain would throw their way in order to alleviate doubts about his conservative bona fides.

While I agree that from a political standpoint Mr. McCain made a brilliant political move, I am not so sure his pick can be portrayed as “pro-family.” It is true that Mrs. Palin is ardently pro-life –a distinction bolstered by the fact that she has five children, and chose not to abort a Down Syndrome baby—and she is also a fiscal conservative, a Washington outsider, and she hunts wolves from helicopters! What more could the Neocons ask for?

Unfortunately, Christians appear to be headed toward a hairpin turn at breakneck speed without the slightest clue as to the danger ahead. I don’t see this as a pro-family pick at all! Moreover, I believe the conservative fervor over this pick shows how politicized Christians have become at the expense of maintaining a prophetic voice. I believe that Mr. McCain has proven with his VP pick that he is pro-victory, not pro-family. In fact, I believe this was the anti-family pick. I say that for at least two reasons.

NOT A PRO FAMILY JOB

First, if Mr. McCain was pro-family, he would want to see Mrs. Palin at home taking care of her five children, not headed to Washington to be consumed by the responsibilities of being second in command to the most powerful man in the world (or serving as the Governor of Alaska for that matter). Let me also say that I would have the same reservations about a man with five children at home seeking the VP office. It’s not exactly a pro-family job.

FRC’s piece on Mrs. Palin links to a Wallstreet Journal article outlining her political career. While many Christian conservatives are highlighting Palin’s toughness, integrity and obvious conservative credentials (more conservative than McCain, in fact), they also seem to be ignoring several red flags.

For example, the Journal article, in an effort to highlight Palin’s ‘eco-friendly’ lifestyle, uncovers a disturbing trend that plagues far too many young women with families. The article refers to Palin’s habit of “driving herself to and from work every day from the Anchorage suburb of Wasilla, about 45 miles away.” Does this bother anyone else? Lets say the Governor averages sixty miles per hour on her daily commute (which I seriously doubt). That adds seven and a half hours per week to what one would assume is already a fifty to sixty-hour workweek (at least that if she is as driven as the article implies). This is supposed to be pro-family?

Perhaps the most disturbing revelation in the article is Mrs. Palin’s recent decision to travel for work (against her doctor’s orders) in the final days of her pregnancy. According to the article:

“Gov. Palin's opted to board a jet from Dallas in April while about to deliver a child. Gov. Palin, who was eight months pregnant, says she felt a few contractions shortly before she was to give a keynote speech to an energy summit of governors in Dallas. But she says she went ahead with it after her doctor in Alaska advised her to put her feet up to rest. "I was not going to miss that speech," she says.”

She put her child at risk, not for an official, necessary, or emergency duty as the Governor of Alaska, but because she simply “was not going to miss out on that speech.” A speech! The more I learn about the choices this woman has made, the less inclined I am to see Mr. McCain’s choice as pro-family. She may be the best working mother in America, but the evidence is questionable at best.
class="paragraph_style_2">NOT A PRO FAMILY MESSAGE

Not only do I believe that a pro-family candidate would prefer to see Mrs. Palin at home taking care of her children, I believe a pro-family candidate would also avoid validating and advancing our culture’s desire to completely erase gender roles. Much of the discussion about Mrs. Palin’s candidacy centers around her opportunity to “break through the class ceiling” and be a “role model for young women.” The same was said of Mrs. Clinton’s candidacy in the Democratic primary. But what does this mean?

Are we really saying that we want to completely erase the distinctions between men and women. Do we really believe that it is good for our country to promote the view that women are merely men who happen to be biologically capable of having children (when it does not interfere with career advancement, of course)? I don’t think so. What do we do with the Bible’s admonition in Titus chapter two? Are Christian conservatives saying that Paul’s instructions concerning women’s duty to be “keepers of their homes” has somehow been overturned in light of recent discoveries? Or are we saying that pro-family means one thing when we’re in church, but something else when we’re trying to beat the Democrats?

Let me be clear. I am not arguing that it is always wrong for a woman to be engaged in affairs outside the home. I agree with Albert Barnes who wrote:

This does not mean, of course, that they are never to go abroad, but they are not to neglect their domestic affairs; they are not to be better known abroad than at home; they are not to omit their own duties, and become “busy-bodies” in the concerns of others. (Barnes’ Notes on the Bible)

My point is simple. The job of a wife and mother is to be a wife and mother. Anything in addition to that must also be subservient to it. There is no higher calling. Moreover, I believe Paul’s admonition should lead us to reject any notion of a wife and mother taking on the level of responsibility that Mrs. Palin is seeking.

My heart breaks for her. She has been blessed beyond measure with five incredible children, but she is running hard after what the world says is ‘something more.’ I fear she will regret this some day. In fact, I believe she already does. I can’t imagine her going to sleep at night without a nagging doubt in the back of her mind as she thinks about the time with her children that she will never get back.

My heart breaks for her children. Their mother, by all reports, is an incredible, intelligent, energetic woman with a great deal to offer. Unfortunately, right now she is offering it to the people of Alaska, and the people of the United States of America when her first priority is to offer it to them. God designed them to flourish under the nurturing care of their mother, not some surrogate.

My heart breaks for her husband. Mrs. Palin is not even supposed to be the head of her own household (Eph. 5:22ff; Col. 3:18; Titus 2:5; 1 Peter 3:1-7), let alone the State of Alaska, or the United States Senate (The VP oversees the Senate). He should be shepherding her, but instead she is ruling over him (Rom 13:1-7; 1Pet 2:13-17). How difficult it must be for him to walk the fine line of bowing to the culture that is stealing his bride while still trying to love his wife and lead his family.

My heart breaks for the so-called Christian right. All the usual subjects have been falling all over themselves to praise Mr. McCain and justify their blind allegiance to the Republican Party in an effort to secure more “pro-family” judges. They want to protect marriage from redefinition by the homosexual movement, and they are willing to redefine marriage (and motherhood) to do it.

Ironically, the Neocons are merely using Mrs. Palin as a political pawn. She is beloved because she gives them the coveted “moral high ground” in the upcoming debates. Read recent articles and the goals become clear. We must win on abortion. She makes it hard to argue for it. We must win on the race/gender issue. She gives us a woman to their ethnic minority. We must win on being young and hip. Obama is 47; Palin is 44. We must win the “change” argument. Obama is new to Washington; Palin has never served there. Checkmate!

Unfortunately, this political pawn represents a fatal flaw worldview flaw. In an effort to win the pro-family political argument, we are sacrificing the pro-family biblical argument. In essence, the message being sent to women by conservative Christians backing McCain/Palin is, “It’s ok to sacrifice your family on the altar of your career; just don’t have an abortion.” How pro-family is that?

VB

Also, if you want to watch Voddie discussing this issue on the CNN watch the video below.

pics

Saturday Afternoon Walk By The River 8/2/08 4:52 PM

Babies a Drag On the Economy?

Read this.

pics

Random Baby pictures

New Web Album

John sitting and crawling...

Mini Golf

John and I decided we wanted to do something fun last night so we went out and played mini golf, and had dinner it was a wonderful enjoyable evening, and so we thought you might like to see some pictures. :)

Mini Golf June 25,08

Creath and Peiffer family.

Creath and Peiffer family pictures

New web album.

Random Pics

Fireproof...

If you watched Facing the Giants, or Fly Wheel you need to keep track off this movie. The creators of Facing the Giants are at it again. Oh, even if you haven't seen the previous movies you should check it out.

New web album.

John IV May pics

NEW BABY PICTURES! :)

Another Excerpt From Chilton

Good Morning. I am sitting here on my couch reading some more of David Chilton's extensive work on Revelation and I came across a part that I can't resist posting. It is eloquent and sums up a lot of things that I have been thinking without knowing exactly how to put it into words. This part is Chilton's commentary on Rev. 1:5. So, without any further ado, here it is: (yes, its another sorta long one) :)

The third member of the Godhead (in this liturgical order) is
Jesus Christ, spoken of by St. John under three designations:
the faithful Witness, the Firstborn from the dead, and the Ruler
of the kings of the earth. R. J. Rushdoony has forcefully
pointed out how the term Witness (in Greek, martyr), has ac-
quired connotations foreign to the word’s original meaning: “In
the Bible, the witness is one who works to enforce the law and
assist in its execution, even to the enforcement of the death pen-
alty. ‘Martyr’ has now come to mean the exact reverse, i.e., one
who is executed rather than an executioner, one who is perse-
cuted rather than one who is central to prosecution. The result is
a serious misreading of Scripture. . . . The significance of Jesus
Christ as ‘the faithful and true witness’ is that He not only wit-
nesses against those who are at war against God, but He also ex-
ecutes them. . . . Jesus Christ therefore witnesses against every
man and nation that establishes its life on any other premise
than the sovereign and triune God and His infallible and ab-
solute law-word.”

The theme of Christ as the preeminent Witness is important
in Revelation, as we noted above on v. 2. By way of supplement-
ing Rushdoony’s analysis, we may observe that a central aspect
of Christ’s witness-bearing was His death at the hands of false
witnesses. Those in this book who bear witness in His image will
also do so at the cost of their lives (6:9; 12:11). The modern con-
notation of the word marfyr is thus not so far-fetched and un-
biblical as it might appear at first glance; but it is necessary, as
Rushdoony has shown, to recall the basic meaning of the term.
Jesus is also the Firstborn from the dead. By His resurrec-
tion from the dead, He has attained supremacy, having “first
place in everything” (Col. 1:18). As Peter said on the Day of Pen-
tecost: “This Jesus God raised up again, to which we are all wit-
nesses. Therefore having been exalted to the right hand of God,
and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy
Spirit, He has poured forth this which you both see and hear.
For it was not David who ascended into heaven, but he himself
says: The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at My right hand, until I
make Thine enemies a footstool for Thy feet. Therefore let all
the house of Israel know for certain that God has made Him
both Lord and Christ –this Jesus whom you crucified” (Acts
2:32-36). God fulfilled the promise He had made long before: “I
will make Him My Firstborn, the highest of the kings of the
earth” (Ps. 89:27).

St. John obviously had this passage from the Psalms in
mind, for the next designation he gives to our Lord is the Ruler
of the kings of the earth. Christ’s priority and sovereignty are
above all. He is not “only” the Savior, waiting for a future cata-
clysmic event before He can become King; He is the universal
King now, in this age – sitting at His Father’s right hand while all
His enemies are being put under His feet. This process of taking
dominion over all the earth in terms of His rightful title is going
on at this moment, and has been ever since He rose from the
dead. As Firstborn (and only-begotten!), Christ possesses the
crown rights of all creation: “All authority in heaven and earth
has been given to Me,”He claimed (Matt. 28:18). All nations
have been granted to Him as His inheritance, and the kings of
earth are under court order to submit to Him (Ps. 2:8-12). Com-
menting on Christ’s title Ruler of the kings of the earth, William
Symington wrote: “The persons who are here supposed to be
subject to Christ, are kings, civil rulers, supreme and subordi-
nate, all in civil authority, whether in the legislative, judicial, or
executive branches of government. Of such Jesus Christ is
Prince; – ruler, lord, chief, the first in power, authority,
and dominion.”

This, in fact, is precisely the reason for the persecution of
Christians by the State. Jesus Christ by the Gospel has asserted
His absolute sovereignty and dominion over the rulers and na-
tions of earth. They have a choice: Either submit to His govern-
ment and law, accepting His non-negotiable terms of surrender
and peace, or be smashed to bits by the rod of His anger. Such
an audacious, uncompromising position is an affront to the dig-
nit y of any self-respecting humanist — much more so to rulers
who are accustomed to thinking of themselves as gods walking
on earth. Perhaps this Christ can be allowed a place in the pan-
theon, along with the rest of us gods; but for His followers to
proclaim Him as Lord of all, whose law is binding upon all men,
whose statutes call into judgment the legislation and decrees of
the nations – this is too much; it is inexcusable, and cannot be
allowed.

It would have been much easier on the early Christians, of
course, if they had preached the popular retreatist doctrine that
Jesus is Lord of the “heart,” that He is concerned with “spirit-
ual” (meaning non-earthly) conquests, but isn’t the least bit in-
terested’ in political questions; that He is content to be “Lord” in
the realm of the spirit, while Caesar is Lord everywhere else
(i.e., where we feel it really matters). Such a doctrine would
have been no threat whatsoever to the gods of Rome. In fact,
Caesar couldn’t ask for a more cooperative religion! Toothless,
impotent Christianity is a gold mine for statism: It keeps men’s
attention focused on the clouds while the State picks their pock-
ets and steals their children.

But the early Church was not aware of this escapist teaching.
Instead, it taught the Biblical doctrine of Christ’s Lordship –
that He is Lord of all, “Ruler of the kings of the earth.” It was
this that guaranteed their persecution, torture, and death at the
hands of the State. And it was also this that guaranteed their ul-
timate victory. Because Jesus is universal Lord, all opposition to
His rule is doomed to failure, and will be crushed. Because
Christ is King of kings, Christians are assured of two things:
warfare to the death against all would-be-gods; and the com-
plete triumph of the Christian faith over all its enemies.

For this reason, St. John breaks into a doxology of praise to
Jesus Christ, who loves us and freed us from our sins by the
ransom-price of His blood, and has made us to be a Kingdom
and priests to His God and Father; to Him be the glory and the
dominion forever and ever. Not only have we been redeemed
from our slavery, but we have been constituted as a Kingdom of
priests. The Kingdom has begun: Christians are now ruling with
Christ (Eph. 1:20-22; 2:6; Col. 1:13), and our dominion will in-
crease across the world (Rev. 5:9-10). We are a victorious, con-
quering priesthood, bringing all areas of life under His rule.

Demographic Winter

On Saturday night at a friends house my wife and I watched a documentary that was quite profound. The message that it presented was quite the opposite of that which our expectations dictated (in a good way). When one sits down to listen to a bunch of University of Chicago and other secular "scholarly" professors talk about demographics the first thing that would pop into most minds would be "overpopulation". I expected to hear things like how in X number of years we would have to practice euthanasia to regulate the worlds population, enforce birth control, etc. The first mental image that came to my mind was Ted Turner if that tells you anything.

Demographic Winter says that we (United States, Russia, Europe & others) are going to be looking at third world country status in one to at best two generations because we can't repopulate ourselves. It proposes that the reasons we are actually declining in population and experiencing economic disperity are due to: immature males who are 18-25+ living at their mommas house playing Xbox's (or what ever the current video game console is) instead of working and establishing their own family, fatherless homes, one parent homes, hostility between parents in two parent homes, women working outside the home, higher education, cohabitation, premarital sex, and my personal favorite - faithless societies. THESE ARE THE GOD HATING LIBERALS THAT WE HEAR ATHEISTIC GARBAGE FROM DAY IN AND DAY OUT!!! How they arrive at these conclusions without embracing Christian faith is beyond me, so you can imagine my jaw-dropping reaction when they started citing these faults as causing the demographic problems we face as a society.

Demographic Winner not only gets the problems right but even more astonishing they conclude with the right solution that says it will be families of faith raising up like minded offspring that will save our society and return prosperity to our culture!!! Again, how they arrive at these conclusions is amazing and to some extent leaves a question mark in my brain.

My review of this documentary doesn't do the documentary itself justice though. I would strongly advise families to watch and discuss this film together and find out where your family stands on this issue of demographics and reproduction. This is a wonderful tool to use when instilling in our children a proper worldview as it pertains to multiplying and being fruitful.

This is normally where I would insert any cautions to be on-the-look-out for when you are watching the film I am recommending to you, but I must say I incredulously have no criticism of the film itself. These professors and experts from secular outlets of policy analysis and education get it right in this documentary. The only kind of warning I can think of is that these "experts" only look at and speak about the data they are presenting rather than practicing what they preach. I would admonish you to not follow the idle example these "professionals" live out, but to practice the lessons that they teach in this film and be doers of this warning to our civilization and not hearers only. Anyone can be a back seat driver, a sideline athlete, or an armchair philosopher that only talks about what should be done and never does anything. We as people of God must be the ones to obey God's first charge to man when He told us to be fruitful and multiply and take dominion of the earth.

Click here to order this documentary

Covenant Children

I have been thinking lately on the topic of padeobaptism and covenant children. Now is a good time for me to be thinking of such things, right?, since God has most graciously put into Whitney's and my keeping a precious (and I would say little, but he isn't so little anymore) baby boy. So, here I am on the bed with baby John sleeping right next to me and Whitney and I am thinking such thoughts as, "how do I view this young child that God has given me for my legacy? How does God view this child that he has put in my stead?" Does the way that God views John IV differ from the way He views me? I will admit right here and now that I am not interested in trying to promote myself as a theologian which is why to some degree I have put off writing anything like this until now - but now I find myself looking into the beautiful eyes of my little son and such questions arise that I cannot avoid. 

The other day I was skimming my facebook profile and found a quiz/survey that a friend sent me called, "How Reformed are You?" I laughed out loud when I saw it and then decided to take the test to see how the Reformed crystal ball would label me. The reason I laughed was because I knew that no matter how good the test would be it would somehow in someway force me to choose an answer that I would not entirely espouse. I came to one question that caught my attention - it read something like this: How do you view your children? a) We baptize them so that they become regenerate b) we baptize them because we assume they already are regenerate c) they are vipers in diapers d) we assume they will become regenerate but that they are not now and thus we don't baptize them until they make a profession of faith. A year ago I would have said, "this is an easy one, its d) without a doubt." But now I am pretty sure that I would, given my preference, pick two of the answers - b) and c). Here is why...

First of all, and I do not say this arrogantly, the scriptures are and unending story of God saving His people... ALL of His people. When did He save His people?  He chose His people for His glory before the foundations of the earth that through His calling them into Himself they might exalt Him [Rom 8:28-30]. He justified them by His grace, through faith [Hab. 2, Rom 1, Gal 3].Who were those "people"? If we go back to the Law (the first five books of Scripture. And for me Deuteronomy has been the most helpful on this issue, to me anyway) we see that God made a covenant with His people. This covenant said in so many words this; "I will be your God and you shall be My people if you follow Me." If we go back to implementation of this covenant in the days of Abraham we see that those who kept this covenant with God received a sign that he was set apart and was chosen by God (Deut 7:6, 14:2 & Gen 17 I believe are some examples). This sign was given generationally. Meaning that the covenant extended to all in the lineage of the covenant keepers. The way that this would work in the families of covenanters, the male children would be given the sign on their eighth day of life after entering this world (the only reason for waiting until the eighth day and not performing this sign earlier was due to medical considerations). At eight days old I think we would all agree that they probably were not entreated into the making of this decision. At this point at least there is no age of accountability. Why? Because the parents, in fulfilling one of their covenant obligations, were going to live and breath and impart this covenant to their children ALL the time (Deut: 6). The biggest part of relaying the details of this covenant to the child was ensuring that the child understood that he was a part of this covenant by default of his parents being called of God into this covenant. If he kept his covenant obligations God would keeps His. If he did not keep his covenant obligations and forsook God he would be damned for his foolishness (Ps. 53:1) and he would receive the covenant curses (Ex 34, Deut 4). 

It is important to note here that men were and are saved by the same gift from God that they were given in the Old Testament. Faith alone (Eph 2). Faith in what? That Jesus would be, to those who lived in the Old Testament, and is, to us today, the propitiation for our sins. Salvation has always been through faith (Heb 11). So, our salvation by grace, through faith is not of our own works (because God gives us the faith) lest we should boast, it is the gift of God - this is the same God who is not controlled by time I will add. When did He give us this faith? It has always been there (because with God there are not time limitations. The faith has always existed because it is a part of God). There has never been a time in the regenerate persons life that God gave him regeneration. The regeneration has always been there. Does that mean the regenerate man always has the appearance of regeneration when observed by other men? Of course not. If you, considering yourself regenerate, think that you have always had the appearance of regeneration in your countenance let me tell you delicate creature that you are fooling yourself. I, considering myself to be of God's people, know that I do not always emit a fragrance of regeneration to all I come in contact with. But does God take away His sign on me (baptism and being one of His) when I sin? No. Why? This is where God extends grace to us, His chosen, holy people. This is where when my sin abounds but God's grace does much more abound (Rom. 5). Does this give me license to sin then? God forbid! [Rom 6]. 

So, when God so beautifully and tenderly extends His grace to us by not removing our sign and seal that He has given to us when we sin, why would we as parents suffer our little ones, who are umbrellaed just as rightly under God's covenant as we are, to come unto the Father by sign of baptism and sequentially partaking of communion. Does not God look upon my son, John IV as He does me? Yes he is indeed a sinner as am I. When God called, way up my lineage somewhere, that man or woman out of darkness into His light and He said to him or her that he would be a God to them and their children and to their children's children (which I might add would include me somewhere in there) do we believe that He meant it? When He said that does that mean that we are really His? Yes! Does that mean we receive His promises? Yes! Does that mean we should receive His sign given amongst men? Yes! If salvation is not of ourselves and we do not make a decision to accept Jesus but He accepts us and chooses us then we and our children are given the promise of God being our God. To make the argument that we must wait until our children reach the "age of accountability" (which is nowhere mentioned in scripture I might add) and then they can make a decision to "accept Christ" and then receive baptism and communion and fellowship with the rest of covenant keepers is twisting scripture to the extent where it would not surprise us to see God asking Abraham if he would like to make a covenant with Him and then wait to hear back from Abraham when he was "ready." Do we accept Christ? No. Do we choose God? No. He has already chosen us and our children. Do we, and will our children, proclaim Christ? Yes, because He is their and our God not of our works lest we should boast. 

This is why when Paul writes to the Corinthians in 1 Cor. 7 he talks about a believing wife who is married to an unbelieving husband being the channel for which the promises of God flow through. Paul is reassuring the believers that though they may be married to an unbelieving spouse their children will still be made "holy" (yes, that is the word that is used in vs. 14). Notice that yet again we do not see these extended promises being contingent on whether the child will decide to be a covenant keeper or not. Why? Because it is a covenant. It works both ways whether we like it or not. We cannot dictate whether or what parts of the covenant will be extended to our children because it already is - obligations, curses to covenant-breakers and all. We as parents cannot say, "we'll I would just like the covenant rewards part to be extended, but don't include the covenant curses just in case my child does not embrace the covenant." That is not to be our attitude as parents because number one, we don't get a choice in that and number two because we are to be about diligently teaching this covenant made between God and His people by revealing God's word to them, and yes that includes the parts that talk about the way God views them and how they are a part of His covenant and should be treated as members and heirs of God from conception.  

"...as for me and my HOUSE, we will serve the Lord" Joshua 24:15

"That is all I got to say 'bout that"

Don't forget...

You can click on the Vision Forum banner to the right and order straight from the website.

New Web Album

Just so you know there are new baby pictures in the web album.

Days Of Vengeance Excerpt

Whitney and I have been reading through the book of the Bible, The Revelation of Jesus Christ of recent and have been having a difficult time of trying to understand what is being conveyed. I decided to consult a commentary to aid me in my trying to flesh out some sense of what is being said. David Chilton's, "Days Of Venegence" came highly recommended by several friends of mine from church and work. I just finished all the forewords and prefaces which add up to about 30 to 35 pages (the entire work is 740 pages) and have just gotten into the first several chapters. Chilton starts by addressing what I think is many Christians (myself included) problematic presupposition of Revelation. Here is an excerpt from Chilton's book that I found very helpful in establishing a sound foundation from which to look at this widely overlooked and misunderstood book of the Bible.

The Book of Revelation is part of the Bible. At first glance
this may not seem to be a brilliant insight, but it is a point that is
both crucially important and almost universally neglected in the
actual practice of exposition. For as soon as we recognize that
Revelation is a Biblical document, we are forced to ask a central
question: What sort of book is the Bible? And the answer is
this: The Bible is a book (The Book) about the Covenant. The
Bible is not an Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge. Nor is it a
collection of Moral Tales, or a series of personal-psychology
studies of Great Heroes of Long Ago. The Bible is God’s written
revelation of Himself, the story of His coming to us in the Medi-
ator, the Lord Jesus Christ; and it is the story of the Church’s
relationship to Him through the Covenant He has established
with her.

The Covenant is the meaning of Biblical history (Biblical
history is not primarily adventure stories). The Covenant is the
meaning of Biblical law (the Bible is not primarily a political
treatise about how to set up a Christian Republic). And the
Covenant is the meaning of Biblical prophecy as well (thus,

REVELATION AND THE COVENANT

Biblical prophecy is not “prediction” in the occult sense of Nos-
tradamus, Edgar Cayce, and Jean Dixon). To a man, the proph-
ets were God’s legal emissaries to Israel and the nations, acting
as prosecuting attorneys bringing what has become known
among recent scholars as the “Covenant Lawsuit .“
That Biblical prophecy is not simply “prediction” is indi-
cated, for example, by God’s statement through Jeremiah:
At one moment I might speak concerning a nation or con-
cerning a kingdom to uproot, to pull down, or to destroy it; if
that nation against which I have spoken turns from its evil, I will
relent concerning the calamity I planned to bring on it.
Or at another moment I might speak concerning a nation or
concerning a kingdom to build up or to plant it; if it does evil in
My sight by not obeying My voice, then I will repent of the good
with which 1 had promised to bless it. (Jer. 18:7-10)
The purpose of prophecy is not “prediction,” but evaluation
of man’s ethical response to God’s Word of command and
promise. This is why Jonah’s prophecy about Nineveh did not
“come true”: Nineveh repented of its wickedness, and the
calamity was averted. Like the other Biblical writings, the Book
of Revelation is a prophecy, with a specific covenantal orienta-
tion and reference. When the covenantal context of the proph-
ecy is ignored, the message St. John sought to communicate is
lost, and Revelation becomes nothing more than a vehicle for
advancing the alleged expositor’s eschatological theories.
Let us consider a minor example: Revelation 9:16 tells us of a
great army of horsemen, numbering “myriads of myriads.” In
some Greek texts, this reads two myriads of myriads, and is
sometimes translated 200 million. All sorts of fanciful and con-
trived explanations have been proposed for this. Perhaps the
most well-known theory of recent times is Hal Lindsey’s opinion
that “these 200 million troops are Red Chinese soldiers accom-
panied by other Eastern allies. It’s possible that the industrial
might of Japan will be united with Red China. For the first time
in history there will be a full invasion of the West by the
Orient .“28


28. Hal Lindsey, There’s a New World Coming (Eugene, OR: Harvest
House Publishers, 1973), p. 140.

Such fortunetelling may or may not be accurate regarding a coming Chinese invasion, but it tells us absolutely
nothing about the Bible. To help put Lindsey’s view into histor-
ical perspective, we will compare it to that of J. L. Martin, a
19th-century preacher who, while sharing Lindsey’s basic pre-
suppositions about the nature and purpose of prophecy, reached
the different, and amusing, conclusion that St. John’s “200 mil-
lion” represented “the fighting force of the whole world” of
1870. Note Martin’s shrewdly scientific, Lindsey-like reasoning:
We have a few more than one billion inhabitants on the
earth. . . . But of that billion about five hundred millions (one-
half) are females, leaving an average population of male inhabit-
ants of about five hundred millions; and of that number about
one-half are minors, leaving about two hundred and fifty mil-
lions of adult males on the earth at a time. But of that number of
adult males about one-fifth are superannuated – too old to fight.
These are statistical facts. This leaves exactly John’s two hun-
dred millions of fighting men on earth. And when we prove a
matter mathematically, we think it is pretty well done. 29
But Martin is just hitting his stride. He continues with his ex-
position, taking up the terrifying description of the soldiers in
9:17-19: “The riders had breastplates of fire and of hyacinth and
of brimstone; and the heads of the horses are like the heads of
lions; and out of their mouths proceed fire and smoke and brim-
stone. A third of mankind was killed by these three plagues, by
the fire and the smoke and the brimstone, which proceeded out
of their mouths. For the power of the horses is in their mouths
and in their tails; for their tails are like serpents and have heads;
and with them they do harm.”Whereas modern apocalyptists
view this in terms of lasers and missile launchers, Martin had a
different explanation – one which was in keeping with the state
of military art in his day, when Buffalo Bill was fighting Sioux
Indians as chief of scouts for General Sheridan’s Fifth Cavalry:
John is pointing to the modern mode of fighting on horse-
back, with the rider leaning forward, which, to his sight, and to
the sight of one looking on at a distance, would appear as the

29. J. L. Martin, The Voice of the Seven Thunders: oc Lectures on the Apoc-
alypse (Bedford, IN: James M. Mathes, Publisher, sixth cd., 1873), pp. 149f.

great mane of the lion; the man leaning on his horse’s neck. He
would, in fighting with firearms, have to lean forward to dis-
charge his piece, lest he might shoot down his own horse that he
was riding. In John’s day the posture was very different. . . .
Now, I want to ask my friendly hearers if it is not as literally ful-
filled before our eyes as anything can be? Are not all nations en-
gaged in this mode of warfare? Do they not kill men with fire
and smoke and brimstone? . . . Do you not know that this is
just ignited gunpowder? . . .
Could an uninspired man, in the last of the first century, have
told of this matter? 30
Unless we see the Book of Revelation as a Covenant docu-
ment — i.e., if we insist on reading it primarily as either a predic-
tion of twentieth-century nuclear weapons or a polemic against
first-century Rome – its continuity with the rest of the Bible will
be lost. It becomes an eschatological appendix, a view of “last
things” that ultimately has little to do with the message, pur-
pose, and concerns of the Bible. Once we understand Revela-
tion’s character as a Covenant Lawsuit, however, it ceases to be
a “strange,“ “weird” book; it is no longer incomprehensible, or
decipherable only with the complete New York Times Index. In
its major themes at least, it becomes as accessible to us as Isaiah
and Amos. The Book of Revelation must be seen from the out-
set in its character as Biblical revelation. The grasp of this single
point can mean a “quantum leap” for interpretation; for, as
Geerhardus Vos made clear in his pathbreaking studies of Bib-
lical Theology, “revelation is connected throughout with the fate
of Israel.”31

30. Ibid., pp. 151f.
31. Richard B. Gaffin Jr., ed., Redemptive Histoty and Biblical Interpreta-
tion: The Shorter Writings of Geerhardus Vos (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian
and Reformed Publishing Co., 1980), p. 10.

I like the way Chilton starts off in this section of his book by reminding us that this is in fact a book of the Bible. I believe that many of us have looked at Revelation and shrugged our shoulders and moved on without really considering, meditating, and searching to understand what is being revealed as we would when looking at any other book in scripture. And since we feel insecure in our lack of understanding Revelation we allow people such as J.L. Martin, Hal Lindsey, and of late, Jerry B. Jenkins and Tim LaHaye, and friends and family to form our presuppositions for us. Oh...and about those J.L. Martin and Hal Lindsey quotes that I included in Chilton's excerpt; I didn't include them so as to make light and fun of some of my premillenial friends. I did include them as just two of many (did I mention many?) examples of what happens when we get off track and don't retain Revelation as part of scripture but submit its interpretation to the latest catastrophe reported on CNN and the New York Times and then try to draw parallels between what is happening and what "is to come." This is actually a problem. Why? Because it entices us away from our purpose and calling - to take dominion and further Christ's kingdom here on earth by the spreading and instillment of the gospel to the nations. May that aspiration be in the hearts of all of us.

Hope this provokes you to go and examine your hermeneutics, worldview, eschatology, and perspective on scripture as it has made me. 

"Now go do the right thing."

"That is all I got to say about that"

BTW: From what I have read thus far of Chilton's Days of Venegeance I would recommend reading it.

Okay, Okay More pictures...

I know you all would love to be just as busy, and completely taken in, with John IV as we, and if you were you would all do better about baby pictures to right?

Okay all joking aside. Thought you might like this pictures of John IV on his first day with Papa back at work. I think this past week must have worn him out. :) He really is sleepingl like this right now.

Baby Update... Day 2

This picture is from 8:30AM on day two, the second night went much better than the first with more sleep for all, and much better feeding times for Mom and John IV. But as the pictures show we still all need lots of rest.




Last evening (technically day one) John IV received his first bath. Daddy and Baby both did a great job with that, while Mommy sat on a towel in the bathroom and watched. :) The poor thing was exhausted after his postpartum check-up (heel pricking included) and then the bath.

The postpartum check went great. When the time came for the heel prick, John IV only cried for about 30 seconds. It made all of us grown ups feel a lot better.

Blessings to all, and many thanks for your prayers, and comments.


Ps. 127: 3-5
Lo, children [are] an heritage of the LORD: [and] the fruit of the womb [is his] reward.
As arrows [are] in the hand of a mighty man; so [are] children of the youth.
Happy [is] the man that hath his quiver full of them: they shall not be ashamed, but they shall speak with the enemies in the gate.

The Baby Story

Sat., February 2nd Whitney started having noticable contractions at 4:20 in the afternoon. It was decided that the best thing to do in response to the contractions was to go to Kroger for groceries. 

After getting home we started timing the length of contractions and the time in between. We determined after several hours that thing were starting to progress and contacted our midwife, families, and churches at about 8:00pm. Our gracious neighbors, the Peiffer's, came over to assist and encourage us. Soon after this our good friends the Evans (who live in TN but were up here for a wedding) offered to have Kim come over to help. Seeing Kim was one of the highlights to our already exciting evening and she was such a blessing and servant to us.

At 9:30-9:45pm our midwife, Bernice, decided that is was time for her to start heading our way. 

10:00pm was met with some contractions that started necessitating Whitney's full attention. These contractions continued through the night and into the morning. 

At 11:00-11:30 Bernice arrived and checked both baby and mom.

At 7:31am, on February 3rd., John Winston Creath IV was born to a very excited, and exhausted Whitney and John. John the Fourth weighed 7 pounds and 6 ounces, 20 and 1/4 inches long. Both Whitney and John the Fourth were very blessed of God to not have sustained any injuries. 

At around 9:15 Bryan Evans came by to pick up Kim and and pray over Baby John. 

By 10:13am the midwives and support ladies had left, all three members of the John W. Creath III family enjoyed time together. 

The End

Pictures...

They say a picture is worth a thousand words. The pictures above show you why I have been inside a lot lately. The other pictures show you what I have been doing some of the time to keep myself busy.

Yeah only six more days to go!!! :D

One Year...

Wow, One year since this picture was taken. Time has flown by so quickly. Poor John, he was so nervous this time last year that he was feeling quite ill. This year he is fighting a cold.

We did figure out that I am feeling a lot different, all except for the tired part. (If you have questions on this look at all the baby updates, and pics.)

Happy Betrothal Anniversary. :)

Babysitting...

Being the closest Aunt and Uncle can have it's advantages. John and I babysat for the Peiffer's a few nights ago. Here are some pictures. (Just so you know I did play with the kids, I just couldn't get on the floor and wrestle like Uncle Johnny could.)

Nine Days....

Yay! Nine days and counting. I have had several request for updated pictures so. Here you go.

Whitney.

Thirty Eight Weeks and counting...

We are 38 weeks along today. Still not a whole lot that makes me believe baby will be here soon, but I am still hoping for sooner rather than later. Thanks everyone for your prayers on our behalf.

Baby count down....

We are at 16 days till D (due date) day. Hopefully we will have a baby on, or preferably before, that day.

Baby adjustments...

Right now it is 2:25 AM central time. Most normal people would be asleep. :) I never liked being normal. I believe this is another one of those baby things that we must get used to. I figured I would get up and catch up on a few blogs that I haven't been reading of late. Then I thought I would share with you for no apparent reason that it is 2AM and I am still awake.

21 Days and counting. (Till the due date that is, still hoping for an earlier baby)

Blessing to all you normal people that actually sleep. :)

Nesting... or being a neat freak.

Call it nesting if you will, or just the urge to clean out closets, laundry rooms, and rid ones life of junk.

We are at 23 days and counting, and I have spent most of the afternoon and evening while John was out (work, then men's bible study) cleaning. You would be shocked at the difference. No more clutter on the desk, sewing stuff mostly put away, it's great. :)

Baby Day....

27 Day's and counting till BABY DAY!

Still hoping and praying for a little bit sooner than that!

Waiting for Baby...

Waiting for baby with joyful heart
despite sore ribs and back.

Waiting for baby with hopeful prayers,
and longing arms.

Waiting for baby while days go by,
as I count each one.

Waiting for baby with busy hands,
and lots of baby projects.

Waiting for you sweet little love.



For those of you counting, we are 31 days and counting (that's if the baby is born on it's due date.) Oh, and for the record, we are expecting a very cute little Creath baby.

Pictures from our visit home...

The Creath family visited home for Christmas. Here are just a few pictures.