Welcome to the online home of Tim Challies, blogger, author, and book reviewer.

Tim Challies

Challies on FacebookChallies on Twitter

November 2004

November 22, 2004

Banner of Truth features many excellent articles, but one that grabbed my attention recently is entitled simply Apostasy. The author makes a distinction between two terms that I had never stopped to differentiate – apostasy and heresy. Apostasy he defines as a rejection of truth that one once believed. So I would be apostate if I rejected the doctrine of the Trinity, a doctrine I now hold dearly. Heresy is the addition of foreign doctrines, so that I would be heretical if I added the worship of some foreign deity to my beliefs.

The first apostasy, then, was when man rejected God. Having once held that God was perfectly trustworthy, man rejected this and attempted to thrust himself into God’s role. In so doing he dragged himself and the rest of Creation into this state of horrible sin. This first apostasy is the source of all further apostasy.

The author then turns to the Church of Rome to show an example of a church that is both apostate and heretical, for she has both rejected doctrines she once believed and has added unbiblical beliefs to them. He calls Catholicism “wickedness under a form of godliness cunningly managed” and with Dr. Martin Lloyd-Jones and many other eminent Protestant theologians, considers Catholicism Satan’s masterpiece. Catholicism seeks to undermine Christianity not with an obvious frontal assault, but with careful, deliberate and veiled attacks. Francis Turrentin wrote:

“Christ wills that sola Scriptura, inspired by God be received by us as the perfect rule of faith and morals. The Pope denies Scripture alone is an adequate rule of faith, unwritten traditions must be attached. These traditions, together with Scripture, are to be equally adopted and venerated. They are to be held alike as the means of influencing godliness.

“Christ wishes His Word to be believed on its own, because it does not take its authority from man. In our estimation, the Pope wishes the authority of the Word to be derived from his Church. Christ wishes no supreme judge to be acknowledged in ruling on controversies other than God speaking through Scripture. The Pope sacrilegiously claims this prerogative for himself.

“Furthermore, Christ teaches that He alone is the Mediator, appointed by the Father, who alone is the way, the truth and the life, without whom no man can Conic to the Father. Yet the Pope forces innumerable mediators upon us. Mediators who, he says, are to reveal the way to heaven for us. Also, Christ testifies that there is no other sacrifice apart from His own; no other satisfaction by which we may obtain remission of sins and the reward of salvation. But the Pope insists on human punishments and satisfactions, while demanding a new propitiatory sacrifice called the Mass.

“Though Christ established that men are to be saved by grace through faith alone. the Pope includes works as well. Whereas Christ institutes only two sacraments, the Pope decrees seven. Christ ordains that no one but God be the object of cult and adoration, yet the Pope worships creatures as well. Christ declared Himself the sole Head and Groom of the Church, but the Pope grants this to himself as well. Christ subjects Himself to the magistrates, ordering His servants to be likewise subject. Nevertheless, the Pope subjects the magistrates, rulers and emperors to himself.

“Can it truly be said that those who teach such doctrines and defend such dogmas keep the faith of Christ? Or are they not adjudged guilty by the deserts of defection and the fact of apostasy?

Doctrine after important doctrine is discarded in the Roman system, only to be replaced with something that is more appeal to man’s sinful nature. Words are changed, meanings slightly altered, so that it seems so very close to the truth.

All this leads to the author’s assessment of the evangelical churches. “The Protestant Churches, having largely abandoned the biblical doctrines of the Reformation, which were their raison d’être, are capitulating to the leadership of the papacy and to Roman Catholic doctrine. There are, indeed, other ways that men and Churches may apostatize from the faith - into liberalism, for example, or other faiths - but Rome remains the great threat to the Protestant churches, Satan’s great masterpiece, his counterfeit Christianity by which he deceives the nations.”

I have often bemoaned the fact that the contemporary church has so little identity with its Reformation roots. Each year Americans celebrate Thanksgiving and Independence Day, days that hearken back to their roots as a nation. They celebrate Memorial Day and Veterans Day which also look to the great victories of the past. All nations celebrate similar days – here in Canada we celebrate the anniversary of our confederation on Canada Day, remembering each year the events of the past. Yet Christians have little identity with the Reformation, the event which gave birth to the church as we know it. Along with the loss of the historical view has fallen the loss of the historical doctrines. The beliefs that gave birth to Protestantism are rarely articulated or taught to evangelicals. Is it any wonder, then, that many churches have capitulated “to the leadership of the papacy and to Roman Catholic doctrine?” And many who have not capitulated have developed apathy towards, a respect of, or even an envy of Catholic doctrine.

A few paragraphs later, in a discussion of the causes of idolatry (which he identifies as: enmity against God in spiritual matters, spiritual darkness and ignorance), the author writes about the critical difference between dialogue and controversy.

I think this explains the ease with which many in recent years have been able to enter into dialogue with Roman Catholics and even Muslims and Hindus. It demands a certain detachment from the truth to be able to do that. You are obliged to put a question mark over it, otherwise you are not genuinely engaging in dialogue, which means, at least in principle, you are prepared to change and qualify your beliefs. I think we must be very careful to distinguish between dialogue and controversy. Dialogue carries with it implicitly this assumption, that you will be prepared to modify and change your position, in the light of the debate, if it so requires you. But controversy, in which all the Reformers engaged, is quite a different thing. You start from what you know and believe to be the truth, and your object is to expose the error and confusion of the opponent’s position and, if possible, persuade him of the truth. It was dialogue in which Satan engaged Eve in the garden. She would have been safe if she had insisted on controversy. When men have not a fervent love of the truth and no sense of abhorrence of error they are in the anteroom of apostasy. It is said that the apostle John fled from the public baths, where Cerinthus the heretic appeared, lest they should fall on him. Today some evangelicals would be glad to stay and engage in friendly dialogue.

He is correct that dialogue carries with it the assumption that there is a question mark hovering over my beliefs. It is very postmodern, in that I acknowledge that though I believe what I believe quite strongly, it might just be all wrong. Those who dialogue enter into their dialogue with that attitude and it is no wonder that they are often persuaded that they are indeed wrong.

Perhaps the most important part of the article is the author’s wisdom, culled from John Owens, about how we can avoid apostasy. He lays out several important steps:

  • A preeminent concern with God’s glory. Meditating upon God’s glory and the current state of the church may well lead us to mourn.
  • Continual prayer. We are to continually pray for the restoration of the primacy of proper doctrine in the church.
  • Constant testimony. An open and avowed profession of, and contending for the faith and the truth of the Gospel.
  • Keep careful watch over your heart. We must remember that our hearts are deceitful and wicked and will seek to lead us from the inerrant and holy word of God.
  • Beware of the world. We must be careful not to allow the customs and habits of the time to indiscriminately infiltrate the church.

The article, then, provides a brief overview of apostasy and provides the most prevalent example of apostasy in the Roman Catholic Church. But best of all, it instructs us how we can guard ourselves against falling into such error. I recommend the article which you can read for yourself here.

November 22, 2004

I don’t often advertise here, but I’ve found a really good deal I’d like to pass along. The company that hosts my Web site, along with the sites of many of my clients, is offering a deal for this week. They are doubling many of their services, so instead of getting 1 GB of storage space you will get 2 GB. Instead of 40 GB of bandwidth, you’ll get 80. And all this for $7.95 a month. It makes me wish I had waited another couple of months! So if you are looking for hosting for a Web site, drop me a note and I’ll give you the details.

November 21, 2004

Our church has been in existence for three years now and is at the point where it needs to formalize many things, including its incorporation. This morning I, along with many other people at the church, was handed a 37 page document and asked to review it. Generally I flee from such legalese-filled documents but I am actually finding this one quite interesting as it lays out the inner-workings of a church. I am guessing that the New Testament church did not have to concern itself with keeping all sorts of laws designed to govern charitable organizations! The letter accompanying the document says “…I realize this may not be an exciting process (unless, perhaps, it cures your struggle with insomnia), but please recognize its value.” I have no struggle with insomnia, though I’m sure this document could prove to be a cure.

My buddy Brad of Read ‘N Reap fame has opened a new online bookstore and asked me to make mention of it. Apparently he thinks that my Sunday ramblings are little more than public service announcements. Maybe they should be. So here is my shout-out for Brad - please visit his new bookstore and support him. Tell him Tim sent you when you order a book and…well, I don’t think it will do you any good.

Last week I picked up Casting Crowns’ new album (titled, none to originally, Casting Crowns) and am quite enjoying it. It came out months ago but I hadn’t heard any of their songs until recently. It really is a good album with a good mix of fun, louder songs and some good worship-type songs as well. Of course if you don’t have Derek Webb’s new album you need to buy that one first…

And now I’m going to sit down and watch the New York Giants take on the Atlanta Falcons. I, along with most of the rest of the people in the world who care about football (and live outside of New York) are hoping to see Eli Manning get crushed by the Atlanta defense. His preseason arrogance has turned many against him, at least for one game. This may be the first and only time you will find me cheering for a team from Atlanta!

November 20, 2004

God uses the most basic building blocks to construct his kingdom. He primarily extends his Kingdom through the family. Second only to the family is the local church. It is no wonder then, that we see both family and church under constant attack from Satan.

We see all around us the level of success Satan has had in his battle against the family. Nearly half of all marriages now end in divorce, leaving families estranged and devastated. Divorce is even becoming common within Christian churches. At the same time we see him fighting to change the very definition of family through the government, further diluting the ability to extend the Kingdom through the most basic building block. The family metaphor is used so often through the Bible, but we see now a whole generation for whom a father will be a weekend visitor and a family will be a changing group of mothers, fathers and step-siblings. Truly Satan has had phenomenal success in this battle.

Satan also makes constant attacks upon the church. The state of devastation in so many churches and denominations in North America proves that the devil has had extraordinary success in this battle as well. If a local church is strong and growing and doing God’s work we must expect it to come under attack from both within and without. When Satan attacks a church it stands to reason that he should prey upon the leadership. What more effective way could there be to destroy a church than by turning the people on their leaders and making the people doubt the abilities and motivations of those God has placed in positions of authority and leadership within the church? It is a rare church leader indeed who has not come under a concerted attack from the evil one.

We need to realize that our pastors are attacked on our behalf. As ones who provides spiritual leadership, spiritual guidance and as ones who teach how to resist the evil one, we know that they are despised above all. The more they love us, pray for us and hold us up before the throne of God and indeed the more they fulfill their responsibilities and callings as pastors, the more Satan will attack them because of the love and concern they have for us. And still we sit idly by without constantly and fervently praying for their protection.

We, as members of a congregation, have a duty to uphold our pastors before God and to pray for their protection. We know especially that if we are part of a vibrant, growing church the leadership is going to merit special attention from Satan. If one of our pastors falters, it speaks volumes about the congregation. It shows us that we may have failed in our responsibility of praying for our leaders.

Now this is not to excuse the sins committed by our spiritual leaders. They are still responsible for their actions. But as we are only too happy to share the responsibility for the church’s growth and success, so we should be willing to share the responsibility when we have failed in our duties.

We need to be people of prayer! Attacks on our leaders will be inevitable. We all need to pray for those in positions of leadership, that they would be able to resist the attacks of Satan. Let us be a people who stand in the midst of the spiritual battle, surrounding our pastors and leaders, and fighting for their protection. A general is only as strong as his army, so as that army let us gird ourselves with the spiritual armor we will need to fight this battle and to hold the forces of evil at bay. And should the enemy win a victory over one of our pastors, let us look to ourselves first and examine our own hearts. Did we provide our pastors with the spiritual protection they so desperately need? Or were we as a watchman who slept while the enemy snuck and broke through the walls only to awaken and discover that it is too late for us to protect our city?

November 19, 2004

Like many other people, I was a little disturbed by the introduction to this week’s broadcast of Monday Night Football. If you happened to miss it, it featured the Eagle’s always-controversial receiver Terrell Owens and Nicollette Sheridan from the show Desperate Housewives. Sheridan was clad initially in a towel, but in an effort to persuade Owens not to take to the field but to instead spend time with her (hint hint), she soon dropped the towel and leapt into his arms. Owens made some comment about the team having to make do without him and that was that. It was provocative and was clearly lewd. It made many people upset. The NFL issued a statement saying that it was innappropriate for a broadcast and the network ABC has also subsequently apologized.

I was glad that my son wasn’t watching the game at that moment. While it was clearly inappropriate I can’t deny that there are far worse things to be seen on television - it’s just that football is usually family-friendly viewing.

The headlines on ESPN and NFL.com today announced an apology by Owens. In my view it is the perfect postmodern apology:

“I felt like it was clean, the organization felt like it was a clean skit and I think it just really got taken out of context with a lot of people and I apologize for that,” Owens said. “Personally I didn’t think it would have offended anyone and, if it did, I apologize.”

I’ll interpret that.

“In my system of morality I tought it was clean. Other people, in their old-fashioned views which are no more or less correct may have seen it otherwise. If any of those old fashioned people are offended, I apologize to them. But I don’t think it should offend you because it doesn’t offend me. But if it did anyways, I apologize.”

Note to Owens: that is not an apology. That is, at best, an explanation. Heck, it might be a legitimate one - he had no moral qualms with doing the spot and willingly participated. His apology is just silly and it can’t possibly make anyone who was offended feel better. A true apology is premised on true remorse, and clearly Owens has none. And again, that doesn’t bother or surprise me. What bothers me is that he gives us this silly, meaningless apology.

If it wasn’t 5:00 PM on a Friday afternoon I would take the time to make a spiritual connection here, showing that repentance before God indicates both a turning towards (an apology) and a turning away (an admission of guilt). But I smell a roast cooking and I need to make sure my wife doesn’t overcook it.

For those of you who disappear for the weekends, enjoy your days off. For the rest, perhaps I can finish this up tomorrow!

November 19, 2004

The November issue of Christianity Decay Today featured an article entitled The Emergent Mystique which examines the so-called emergent church. The subheading says �The ‘emerging church’ movement has generated a lot of excitement but only a handful of congregations. Is it the wave of the future or a passing fancy?�

The emergent church, knowing elsewhere as the emerging church seems to defy description. I have read long, drawn-out discussions where various members of this movement have tried to put together a working definition. Generally they were unable to agree on one. Andy Crouch, who wrote the article in Christianity Today, says ��the phrase �emerging church� captures several important features of a new generation of churches. They are works in progress, often startlingly improvisational in their approach to everything from worship to leadership to preaching to prayer. Like their own members, they live in the half-future tense of the young, oriented toward their promise rather than their past. But if their own focus is on what they are �emerging� toward, perhaps most surprising are the places they are emerging from.� These churches are emerging from what they consider the dust and ashes of the failure of the modern age of Christianity and are emerging towards a new way of doing church � church for the post-modern generation. Men whose names continually arise in discussions about the emerging church are N.T. Wright and Brian McLaren. The article in Christianity Today focuses on Rob Bell, who was influenced by both of these men, and began Mars Hill Bible Church in Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Bell is a young, trendy type of guy who probably could have made a good living selling cars. But at the age of twenty eight he planted Mars Hill and in just a few years has seen attendance swell to thousands of people every Sunday. He is known for doing just about anything to make a point in a sermon, even bringing live animals onto the stage with him or covering himself with a Jewish prayer shawl. He has tried to rediscover rabbinical preaching, eschewing traditional preaching methods.

In the interview Bell and his wife revealed how they began their journey away from traditional church. They tell how they became increasingly disillusioned with church, even the church they were running. But then the breakthrough came when they �discover[ed] the Bible as a human product,� as Rob puts it, rather than the product of divine fiat. �The Bible is still in the center for us,� Rob says, �but it’s a different kind of center. We want to embrace mystery, rather than conquer it.�� It was only through their discovery that the Bible is a human product and not a book that was sanctioned or decreed by God that they were able to see things clearly. They continue, ��I grew up thinking that we’ve figured out the Bible,� Kristen says, �that we knew what it means. Now I have no idea what most of it means. And yet I feel like life is big again�like life used to be black and white, and now it’s in color.��

The author writes, �An earlier generation of evangelicals, forged in battles with 20th-century liberalism, prided themselves on avoiding theological shades of gray, but their children see black, white, and gray as all equally unlifelike. They are looking for a faith that is colorful enough for their culturally savvy friends, deep enough for mystery, big enough for their own doubts. To get there, they are willing to abandon some long-defended battle lines.�

It would seem from the article that the Bells have given up on trying to discern what the Bible really means; that their view of the human origins of Scripture have made them decide that the Bible is not a book God gave for us to pour over and study and do all we can to understand. Rather, it is a mysterious book that we can never really know. We have to let go of the black and white of past days � the black and white of saying that we know what the Bible means � and instead embrace color � new, trendy ways of doing church. We have to embrace doubt and mystery.

If we cannot know God through His Word, then we have to find him in other ways. It is little wonder, then, that the emergent church is embracing mystical practices of days past. The labyrinth and Catholic mystics find their way into emergent worship. There is renewed emphasis on meditation and new methods of preaching. The Bible is taught as a guidebook, not as an authoritative manual for the Christian life.

I have no issue with worshipping God in new ways, provided those ways are Scriptural. I have no issue with different styles of delivering a message or having a pastor with two-tone hair. But when the emphasis of the church is removed from the Word of God and the focus is placed instead on mystery, on experience and on removing the old simply for the sake of removing it, I have to object.

And here we see that the emergent church is nothing new, for it merely harkens back to the continual cycle of the church. The Bible is rediscovered and soon left behind. The emergent church removes the emphasis from the Word, portraying it as too deep and mysterious to understand, and emphasizing instead mystery and doubt. Does this sound like anything we have seen in history?

Perhaps what is most tragic, or even ironic, about this movement is that many people involved in it believe they are doing something that is original, yet this simply is not the case. As the wisest man once said, �there is nothing new under the sun.� The emergent church proves this axiom to be true.

November 18, 2004

This morning I decided that today I was going to write about man’s sinful condition, or as we says as Calvinists, man’s total depravity. Doing my rounds of other blogs this morning I noticed that Jollyblogger had written about this topic yesterday, so I thought I would take a slightly different approach and write about two types of depravity - depravity in extent and depravity in degree.

When we say that mankind fell in Adam, we affirm that as our federal head, Adam’s sin was passed on to all of us. Adam represented the human race, and when he decided to forsake God, he did so on behalf of all of us. This is similar to a head of state declaring war on another nation - his declaration means that each person within his nation, each person that he represents, is now at war with the foreign country. Job laments “Or how can he be pure who is born of a woman?” (Job 25:4) No one who has been born of man can escape this radically sinful nature. Nature tells us that like begets like; a dog can only give birth to dogs, not to cats or frogs or birds. Similarly a sinful person can only bring forth other sinful people.

Another affirmation we make in the Christian view of the fall is that there is a sense in which the first sin is ours in the same way in which it was Adam’s. While we did not actually take the piece of fruit and eat it, God foreordained our relationship to Adam long before Adam fell so that from the moment of our conception we are sinful. We are not innocent until we commit our first sin, but are condemned, sinful people from the moment our lives begin. Psalm 58:3 tells us that “the wicked are estranged from the womb; They go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies.” Before we are even born we are already sinful, and deliberately go astray as soon as we are able.

And so it is that humans are sinful from the moment life begins. But how sinful are they? We will turn to this now.

Calvinists speak of Total Depravity, a term that has often led people to confuse the issue. R.C. Sproul speaks today of radical corruption and others speak of radical depravity. I believe these issues clarify the matter, for by total depravity we do not mean that people are as depraved as they could possibly be. It is here that it is helpful to differentiate between extent and degree.

When we say humans are totally depraved in extent, we mean that their depravity has reached every part of their being. It extends to every part of them - their mind, body and spirit are all corrupt. When we speak of a total degree of depravity, we indicate that something is exactly as bad as it could possibly be so that there is not even a tiny bit of good left.

Consider the illustration of three glasses of water. The first glass contains clean, pure water and represents Adam in his perfect state before the Fall. Now consider a second glass which contains this same clean, pure water. We can put one drop of deadly poison in that glass and it renders that entire glass poisonous so that if you were to drink it, you would quickly drop dead. That one drop extended to every part of the glass even though the entire vessel is not filled with poison. This represents humans after the Fall. While they are not wholly corrupt, the corruption they do have extends to every part. And finally consider a third glass which is filled entirely with poison. From top to bottom there is nothing but deadly poison. This represents Satan, who the Bible portrays as being absolutely corrupt so there is no good left whatsoever, but this does not represent humans here on earth. Humans are not as depraved as they could possibly be. We must note that sinful men who have been cast into hell will also be in this state where they are wholly depraved.

One might ask, then, why God has allowed men who are corrupt in extent not to be corrupt in degree. The reason we find in Scripture is simply that God is merciful. Had He not intervened every human would indeed be corrupt in extent and degree. If every person in the world were as filled with sin as he could be, the world would be uninhabitable, filled with murderers, thieves and all manner of evil. Thankfully God has allowed even sinful men to avoid being wholly corrupt. There are several means He has given to do this.

Conscience - Every human being has been given a conscience, an inner working which helps restrain the desire to do evil. Paul writes in Romans 2 “…their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them.” (verse 15)

Government - God has put civil authorities in place to restrain men from evil. Furthermore, He has given them the authority to dispense justice and punishment. Romans 13 verses 1 through 5 speak to this. “Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil. Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath but also for conscience’ sake.”

Fear of Death - Humans have a natural fear of death. Every man-made religion emphasizes the necessity of doing good so that we can store up a treasure of good deeds to supposedly sustain us in the life after death. Hebrews 2:14-15 reads “[Jesus] likewise shared in the same, that through death He might destroy him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, and release those who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.” (emphasis mine)

Society - People are also restrained by the desire to appear good before their friends, families and society in general. Doing good is generally valued highly enough that people seek to attain to some degree of goodness.

That is the Christian view on depravity. All humans are corrupt in extent - every part of us testifies to our imperfection, but thanks be to God, not in degree. And before us lies a decision. God tells us that when we die we can anticipate either becoming perfected, so once again we will be like that glass of water that is crystal clear, free from any poison of corruption or being cast out of His presence where we will become like that glass of poison, as corrupt and evil and filled with hate as we could possibly be. Which will you choose?

November 17, 2004

Many people wondered what Derek Webb was thinking when he abandoned his position as co-leader of Caedmon’s Call, a band that was routinely playing before crowds of 2000 people, to strike out on his own. After all, why would he abandon security and a regular paycheck to do his own thing? On this album he gives the answer: Webb sees things upside down. In “What is Not Love” he tells us that “what looks like failure is success and what looks like poverty is riches.” To do what he felt God wanted him to do he had to leave the security of Caedmon’s Call.

Webb’s first album, “She Must And Shall Go Free,” was a necessarily harsh but loving call to the church to return to the purity of the gospel. He pulled no punches in describing the church’s current state and how God must feel about her. The album was well-received by some but disliked by others. Some stores even refused to sell it. Webb followed the album with a series of house shows where he played in intimate settings of 20 to 50 people, sitting in a living room, playing his songs and just teaching others what God had taught him. He released an album called “The House Show” that allowed anyone to experience one of these shows. And now, a year later, he has released his next studio album, “I See Things Upside Down.”

This album is clearly different from his previous ones. The sound is more polished and even includes plenty of synthesized sounds and organ backgrounds. It kicks of with “I Want A Broken Heart,” a haunting song with all sorts of background noise that describes his condition before God. He moves on to the country-inspired ballad “Better Than Wine” which sets The Song of Solomon to music. From there he moves to a bigger sounds in “The Strong, The Tempted & The Weak” and then to the slower “Reputation” and “I Repent” which we first heard on “The House Show.” Other notable songs are “We Come To You,” written by Aaron Tate – a stirring ballad that clocks in at just over 8 minutes, the bulk of which has no lyrics and “Lover Part 2” which is a haunting, beautiful song that picks up where “Lover” left off in the first album.

It is difficult to define the musical style of this album. I suppose “atmospheric rock” would be an appropriate title. It certainly deviates from the pop music of Caedmon’s Call and doesn’t have nearly as much of the folk feel as his previous album. The most obvious instrumental change in this album is the amount of keyboards Webb uses. “She Must And Shall Go Free” was almost entirely guitar-driven where on this album many of the songs were clearly written for the keyboards. According to his web site he will be supporting this album with a full-band tour and that is clearly a necessity with these new songs, many of which simply wouldn’t work with only a guitar.

To conclude, this is an excellent album, both musically and lyrically and I heartily recommend it. As we have come to expect, Webb presents an original and inspiring view of the church. He continues to challenge the church to be more like Christ intended her to be. If you are a fan of his music you will definitely want to add this to your collection. If you have not heard Webb before, this is an excellent opportunity to discover one of the best artists in Christian music. Pick this one up; you won’t regret it.