So I got the results to my greek test…and lo and behold, I passed! Suprisingly, I did well enough that supposedly they put me in the top tier class of NT Exegesis I. Praise the Lord, this means 1 less class to take, at a savings of about $2400!

The temptation is to spend that money on a new MacBook Pro, right? Unfortunately, it can’t really work that way. Since I didn’t really earn anything, I won’t see a check for $2400, and that money that would have otherwise-been-spent will go to pay for sensible things like rent and food and other tuition.

I am, however, considering a MacBook yet again. The specs are good, the battery life good, noise—good, size: perfect. Unfortunately, I’d probably have to get parallels and run XP on it as well so I can use BibleWorks 7. Has anyone out there run XP in Parallels (or VMWare Fusion) on a Macbook (NOT a MacBook Pro) that could give me any word on performance?

Or, better yet, anyone want to buy me a MacBook Pro?

Update: It seems that Accordance Bible Software for OS X is pretty sweet, and comparable in price (at least for what I’ll be using it for) to BibleWorks. Maybe, just maybe, I won’t need windows after all…

I figure that I’ll certainly be behind some of my classmates entering school this fall, since I have no really formal Biblical training. (Unless you count a high school sunday school class and 18 years of listening to sermons)

So I decided that now was as good a time as any to start getting educated, and since I’ve had a few discussions about Calvinism/Arminianism in the past, I decided to start by reading John Piper’s position paper on the issue. If you aren’t familiar with the topic, [click here for a primer].

• Total depravity
• Unconditional Election
• Limited Atonement
• Irresistable grace
• Perseverance of the saints

These five points make up the most notorious bit of Calvinism, and are what people generally assume you to believe these days if you call yourself a Calvinist. This is not the whole entirety of what Calvin taught, but certainly the five points that have caused the biggest controversy, and the five that are in contrast to Arminianism.

Now, I am no expert on Arminianism. In fact, I’ve never read Remonstrances (although I hope to do it soon) and I don’t claim to be an Arminianist, because I’d hate to align myself with something that I don’t even know what it says. That being said, I’ve got some disagreements with Calvinism. I’ll be posting my way through the five points—please feel free to comment, and point out my logical fallacies. Please do not throw lots of scholarly references and high-faluting mumbo-jumbo at me, because I’m a simple guy, and I could care less what Saint whoever said 800 years ago unless it can be simply shown to be scriptural—and if it’s scriptural, just point at it in the Bible, and maybe comment that the idea started with said Saint holy-guy so he doesn’t come out of the grave and sue you for stealing his intellectual property.

I’ve got little respect for scholarship for scholarship’s sake alone: if the idea has merit, it shouldn’t have to stand solely on the reputation of some famous guy.

Such an innocuous title, sounds so easy, right? After all, this is standard content, so most “well-informed” Christians should be able to pass it, no problem-o. (Or so I thought)

The SBCT is something Trinity Evangelical Divinity School does to ensure that incoming Divinity students are up-to-speed enough on the Bible to not flounder their way through their first couple years. The idea: wonderful. The execution: maybe a little sketchy.

In case you’re an incoming Divinity Student at TEDS studying for your SBCT, and want some advice: read the Bible a lot. There’s really no way to cram for this test unless someone gives you all the questions, and I’m not going to do that. The content test focuses not on big, important things, as you might expect, but less-crucial minutiae. For example, you might be expected to know:

What region is [some random city] in?
What is the reationship between [some guy] and [some other guy]?
In what book is [some bible verse] written?
How would you describe [some OT king]?
and, my favorite,
What city/region is [some minor character] from?

Unfortunately, if you’re not good with names, locations, and marginal characters, this test could be a bugger. Thankfully, it’s all multiple-choice, and you get two attempts. While the test is randomly-chosen questions, you do get a bit of overlap, so if you fail the first time, hopefully you’ll know what gaps you have in your Biblical Content Knowledge.

Your studying philosophy should not be “what is crucial to life and doctrine?”, but “where was this guy from? where did this happen? who was he related to? what was his occupation?” I suppose at the end of the day it will certainly weed out anyone who’s not very familiar with the Bible, but unfortunately could weed out a whole lot of people who don’t have a Christian School eduction or a mind for random (often useless) facts.

If you’re going to take this test: good luck! At the worst, you have to end up paying about $600/credit hours for NT and/or OT review courses. $1800 because you didn’t know that one guy was a tentmaker? Yikes!

So last night at about 1 AM, I finished reading the 7th book of the Harry Potter Series. It was good, it was long, and I’m glad it’s over. Why?

JK Rowling is not CS Lewis.

The 7 books were certainly fun to read, and mostly well-written, and had good continuity. They were also quite creative. But at the end of the day, when all is said and done, there’s nothing there. No deeper meaning, no eternal hope, nothing. In contrast, I thought of the end of Narnian time in “The Last Battle”: what a picture of heaven, with perfect sweetness that only gets better as eternity increases. What a hope to be drawn into the fullness of communion with God Almighty!

In contrast: [click here only if you want to have the ending of Harry Potter to be spoiled]

By far, I prefer the example of the woman from Perelandra, who lives out the temptation of the garden of Eden and gets it right, upholding purity, complete obedience to God, and heavenly love as the highest and noblest of desires.

This morning I read an article on MSNBC.com about a girl’s battle to be allowed to wear her virginity ring to a school that has a ban on jewelry. While I commend her commitment to sexual purity, and applaud her desire to stand firm in her convictions, I agree with the court’s decision.

The whole point behind the ban on jewelry, I’m guessing, lies somewhere in having a distraction-free place of education, and keeping people from outwardly flaunting or flashily broadcasting their social, political, and religious views. There are better ways of proclaiming that you’re a christian than wearing a shirt that says “JesUSAaves” (yes, saw one yesterday). The school, as far as I can tell, has not prohibited her from talking to people about her faith or commitments, and to throw a stink about not being granted special privileges to wear this ring is ridiculous.

If the ring was essential to her virginity (ie, if she wasn’t able to remain a virgin without the ring) or if it was dictated by her faith (ie, if her faith demanded that virgins wear a ring), I would consider it necessary that she be allowed to wear the ring—and I’m guessing that the court might be as well.

The bottom line is that no one else is allowed to wear jewelry as a means to express anything about themselves. Why should she?

Another thought on the “True Love Waits” movement.

Welcome to the world of double standards.

Recently in Canton, OH, Bobby Cutts Jr. was arrested for the June 14 murder of his girlfriend. The charges brought against him? Two counts of murder. I agree with the charges–she was 9 months pregnant at the time of the murder, and therefore the crime involved the killing of both Jessie Davis and her unborn child.

The case, however, brings with it a double standard. If a mother decides to abort her “fetus”, it is not murder, and in many cases she can do this with no better reason than person preference, usually up until “viability” (around the 24th week). After that point, abortions become less common, yet are still performed–and not always just to save the life of the mother.

There’s little question about the second murder charge in this case, but what would the outcome have been if the pregnancy was in the second trimester? How about the first? The fact remains that if this woman hadn’t been murdered, she’d be having a baby next week–how far back do we have to go before it stops being a future baby? If we have to arbitrarily draw the line somewhere, does that mean we’re playing God?