Free* Copy of John Calvin: A Heart for Devotion, Doctrine & Doxology

John Calvin is a name that stirs up great emotion from his admirers as well as his detractors. Out of all the leaders of the Reformation, Calvin was the most prolific writer and his works have long survived him, including his famous Institutes of the Chrsitian Religion and his numerous commentaries on different books of the Bible. Even if you are not a fan of John Calvin, you would be hard-pressed to deny This year, 2009, marks the 500th anniversary of his birth. In connection with that fact, there are a number of projects designed to celebrate this anniversary. One of those projects is the book, John Calvin: A Heart for Deveotion, Doctrine & Doxology, which explores the life and legacy of John Calvin. For a page that links to more details about the book, including a sample chapter, you can follow this link. Ligionier Ministries is offering a free copy of this book to Pastors. The offer is only good while supplies last or until 6/12/09. The offer also requires that you pay a $5.00 shipping and handling charge. The offer is also only for Pastors and church leaders. The link for the book is http://calvinforpastors.ligonier.org. Surely, Calvinist and non-Calvinist can agree that this could be a valuable resource into the life of an interesting man. Just my thoughts, Frank

The Sovereign Grace/Getty Music Question

The Sovereign Grace/Getty Music Question. That is the title of this recent post by Scott Aniol of Religious Affections Ministries We have been using his hymn We Gather Together as part of our celebration of The Lord's Table at Fellowship Baptist Church of Salisbury for a few years now. It is a rich text that does a nice job of breaking down the various aspects regarding the Lord's Table (Communion) as presented in 1 Corinthians 11. At Scott's old site, he used to have some free hymns for downloading and using and We Gather Together was one of those hymns. Unfortunately, I cannot locate this feature at his new site. Anyway, I think his article is definitely worth a read to anyone who has struggled with this question. I do have one quibble with the article, however. Perhaps Scott is correct, but I feel as though he raises a little bit of a straw man in regards to the issue of Calvinism and dislike of SG/G. He comments: "But my observation is that for some fundamentalists, the reason they are afraid of SG/G is more because of the associated Calvinism than anything else." and later, "If you do not want to use the songs because you are uncomfortable associating yourself with the Calvinism of these writers, then honestly state your reasons and be consistent. But please show grace to those who embrace Calvinism and choose to use these songs because they reflect their soteriological convictions." Again, there may be creatures out there who exist that fit the trait that Scott puts here, but I have NEVER met such a creature who rejects SG/G because of their associations with Calvinism. I have met plenty who reject SG/G because of their associations with charismatism, but never because of their Calvinism. It seems like to do so would cause some serious problems with some of the most popular hymns of all time. I have yet to see a Fundamentalist that rejects "Amazing Grace" because of John Newton's Calvinism or any of the great hymns of Isaac Watts because of his Calvinism. Methinks that sometimes the strong Calvinists among us tend to think that anyone who is not also a strong Calvinist is an "anti-Calvinist" who is looking for a Calvinist "boogey man" behind every tree. While there are certainly some who seem to fit that description, it seems more like a charicature than reality. UPDATE: My friend, Pastor Chris Anderson indicates that he has heard (albeit second-hand) of well-known music speaker Frank Garlock making the exact charge that Scott aludes to in his post. If this is the case, I am sorry for the straw man comments. If this is the case, I would also say that the group of Fundamentalists I associate with must be a strange group, because this line of argument would never come up in my circles. (Also, if any one has a source of Garlock saying this, I would appreciate it. I would love to see what he said in context.) Just my thoughts, Frank