I’m just starting to dig into William Farley’s Gospel-Powered Parenting, but it looks like a terrific tool to help us bring the gospel to bear in our families. Farley’s point is one that evangelical Christians desperately need to recover: “The goal of Christian parenting is heart transformation” (43). Far too often, our goal is transferring morality. And moralism kills the gospel.

Farley argues that parents can substitute many things for the gospel: techniques, therapy, and even . . . religion (50-51). In their place, he proposes seven ways the gospel affects parents (46-48). The gospel . . .

• Teaches Christian parents to fear God.
• Motivates parents to lead by example.
• Centers families in their male servant leaders.
• Teaches and motivates parents to discipline their children.
• Motivates parents to teach their children.
• Motivates parents to lavish their children with love and affection.
• Is the solution for inadequate parents.

Statistics from Pastor Juan’s sermon on the idolatry of sexual reminder were a chilling reminder to me of how early young people are being confronted with sexual images, messages, and choices.

We plan to offer additional teaching and resources in months to come to help you disciple your kids, but Todd Terry sent me this helpful link to some resources that may come in handy right now.

Christianity Today recently published its annual list of the previous year’s “10 Most Redeeming Films.” I’ve only seen the top 2 of the top 10, and none of “the ones that got away” on page 2. Though I’m not a big animation guy, I liked both of the ones I saw, and I really liked The Blind Side.

But were they redeeming?

Here’s how CT defines redeeming films:

What do we mean by “redeeming”? We mean movies that include stories of redemption—sometimes blatantly, sometimes less so. Several of our films have characters who are redeemers themselves; all of them have characters who experience redemption to some degree—some quite clearly, some more subtly. Some are “feel-good” movies that leave a smile on your face; some are a bit more uncomfortable to watch. But the redemptive element is there in all of these films.

Now, I don’t have a beef with movies that tell stories about people who turn their lives around or people who help others do so. I am concerned that we not misunderstand real, biblical, redemption, and I’m also concerned that CT hasn’t really helped us.

Here’s what I mean. Look at their definition. Do you see any problems with it? The one that leaps out to me is that their definition of “redeeming films” never clearly defines, well, . . . redemption. It assumes we already know, and I’m not sure we do. Frankly, I don’t see evidence that they do. The definition that’s implied certainly isn’t biblical redemption. Instead, it seems simply to refer to people getting their lives turned around.

Like I said, I’ve only seen two of the movies in the whole list, but they were the top two, and neither presented an explicitly biblical picture of redemption. By that I mean, the gospel wasn’t present. Was a form of redemption present? Sure, but ultimately, those movies presented a picture of people’s lives changing for the better wholly apart from the gospel.

I’m not arguing that we should only watch movies that present the gospel—certainly not. I am arguing that we, as consumers of media and art, need to be discerning as to what’s genuinely redemptive and what’s not.

Now, you might push back and point out characters in the Bible who redeem or experience redemption, without an immediate, explicit explanation of the gospel present in the text. And that’s true. But remember, when we talk about those stories and people, we need to be really careful that we not moralize their stories (”be like Moses/Joseph/Daniel”). Instead, we need to teach our families and our friends that these are stories of imperfect redeemers who point us to the only fully-sufficient Redeemer. We need to tell these little stories in the context of the big biblical story—the proclamation of the glory of God in the redemption of Christ.

These stories ultimately point us an over-arching story about God. They’re not a handy set of “how-to make your life better” parables. Recognizing that difference is the crossroads between a gospel that saves and a religion that damns. If we watch “redeeming films,” we need to remember that a person turning his life around is only good news, ultimately, if the gospel accomplishes the change. Otherwise, we’re cheering on an external reformation that only hides the symptoms of our depravity.

Give up on your dream of a kingdom with yourself at the center, that is. See Paul Tripp make the argument for marriage as a means to kill idols here.

On a day when my Ohio State Buckeyes lost out on one of the nation’s top football recruits to UT (and just 100 miles from Columbus, at that), a post like this, written primarily to Texans, might seem like sour grapes. But the truth is, I’m preaching to myself too. I’ve got my OSU national championship banner in my office, my DVR set to record two soccer matches tomorrow (don’t tell my wife!) and I drool every time one of those World Cup 2010 commercials rolls on ESPN.

So here it is: Christianity Today just published online a confrontational article on the culture of sports idolatry that pervades evangelicalism. It’s well worth a read, particularly in light of the idolatry themes in this stage of Pastor Juan’s sermons in 1 Corinthians. Though I’m not affirming all the author’s conclusions, they’re always thought-provoking, often convicting. Here’s a sample:

Big-time sports culture lifts up values in sharp contrast with what Christians for centuries have understood as the embodiment of the gospel. There are simply no easy, straight-faced, intellectually respectable answers for how evangelicals can model the Christian narrative—with its emphases on servanthood, generosity, and self-subordination—while immersed in a culture that thrives on cut-throat competition, partisanship, and Darwinian struggle.

Should Christians read The Shack? Not uncritically, Keller argues.

The Shack effectively deconstructs the holiness and transcendence of God. It is simply not there. In its place is unconditional love, period. The God of The Shack has none of the balance and complexity of the Biblical God. Half a God is not God at all.

Read the whole thing here.

Pastor Juan shared in his sermon Sunday morning several questions we can use to help us diagnose our idols. They’re originally from a sermon by David Clarkson. I thought they were a useful tool for exposing our hearts, and I wanted to reproduce them here:

That’s the theme of John Sailhamer’s new book, The Meaning of the Pentateuch: Revelation, Composition and Interpretation.

Here’s a bit more of his argument in a recent Christianity Today interview:

The old theologians used to speak of “the love for Scripture” as a sign of true faith in Christ. They would say, “We should read the Old Testament as if it were written with the blood of Christ.” For them, the Old Testament and the Pentateuch in particular was a Christian book, a book about Christ. For most evangelical Christians today it is a book about archaeology and ancient history.

Here we have to be careful because, to be sure, the Old Testament is about ancient history. But that is not its meaning. Its meaning is Christ. Saying that also calls for a great deal of caution. In my book, I take the view that the whole of the Pentateuch is about Christ, but that doesn’t mean that Christ is in the whole Pentateuch. Finding Christ in the Pentateuch means learning to see him when he is there rather than trying to see when he is not there. I like to tell my students that we don’t need to spiritualize the Old Testament to find Christ, but we do need to read it with spiritual eyes.

What all this means is that the Pentateuch isn’t primarily a record of Israel’s religion. It’s not primarily about how we should live. It’s not a history of important things that happened before Jesus (though the things it says happened, did). It’s about Jesus.

Now having said all that, I’m not recommending that you go out and buy Sailhamer’s new book. It’s really long and fairly technical. Instead, I’d encourage you to have a look at his NIV Compact Bible Commentary. It’s an excellent, efficient tool to help you pick up on the major themes of Scripture, particularly the narrative passages and the prophets. I like to read it alongside my regular time reading Scripture.

Plus, you can get it dirt cheap used. By the way, if you use the ESV or another translation, don’t be put off by the NIV in the title. In no way is it tied to that translation.