The Word is Not Chained

What does it mean to be Reformed?

2010-04-30T13:20:00.003-04:00

I am now reappearing after a long hiatus, with the hope that as I prepare to re-engage the ordination process, I can reflect of substantive things along the way.

What does it mean to be Reformed? For many confessionally-Reformed folks (myself included), it means subscription to either the Westminster Standards or Three Forms of Unity. Lest some denigrate this position as mere verbal assent to an extra-biblical authority, these Reformed folks consider the confessions to be faithful summaries of the systems of doctrine espoused in Scripture--not as replacements for Scripture. Subscription to these biblical doctrines is also not an end in itself, but is meant to cultivate the theology, piety, and practice that is provided for in Scripture. In a sense, these confessions are the collective voice of the Reformed Church, declaring "These are the truths of Scripture. Our conscience is bound by them. We can do no other."

But what of the times when we are asked to express the distinctiveness of Reformed theology in a sentence or two? I was recently asked by a non-believing soldier "What is the difference between Presbyterians and Baptists?" To my shame, I was caught off-guard. I spoke of God's sovereignty over all things, including salvation (though my Baptist chaplain friend reads Michael Horton and R.C. Sproul and believes the exact same thing) and also mentioned church polity. Confessional fidelity would make no sense to this soldier as a matter of distinction, nor would it be an effective segue to the Gospel. At the same time, he is not asking why I am a Christian or what it means to be a Christian. Thus the gauntlet is laid down--one which I willingly take up.

On to the Dr. R. Scott Clark's book, Recovering the Reformed Confession.

Looking for Light in the Shadow of Death

2009-12-24T21:50:00.003-05:00

It seems that Christmas is the time when people are at their most hypocritical. They beam smiles back and forth while grief consumes them. For most people, Christmas is anything but merry. It is the time when they remember that their family is not whole, their dead loved ones are but vaporous memories, their love echoed by a thousand betrayals.

More than anything, Christmas is the season of contrasts. Everything that is meant to be celebrated is scorned. I can picture the word irony in tacky little blinking lights.

Even at the heart of Christmas, the manger scene is a study in contrasts: unconquerable life in the midst of death and decay; light piercing darkness; innocence into guilt. Everything beautiful about Christ coming into this world often seems negated by this present darkness. It is especially pronounced on a day of supposed triumph.

Christmas becomes a dividing point between Christians and the rest of the world. For Christians, Christmas imbues pain with purpose; restlessness with resolution; pain with peace; hollow with hope. It points us onward, past a manger, a cross-strewn hill, and an empty tomb to a heavenly city placed upon the earth. For non-Christians, Christmas is littered with disappointment. It is utopia gone ugly--where all the good virtues of man are dashed upon the rocks.

This study is contrasts should provoke its own contrast in the heart of the Christian on Christmas: gratitude and empathy. Thus my day will be innundated with the knowledge of triumphs and travails, and my heart will feed upon my inward tears.

My God is For Me

2009-11-19T15:33:00.005-05:00

Let me count the ways in which I don't love you...

God is an omnipresent reality, but so is sin. In fact, sin is much more real to me in many respects because I am it, in a sense. Although I was created in God's image, my identity since birth has been "sinner." It is impossible to avoid the reality of sin because it pervades the senses, even if the reality of God is elusive because we suppress the knowledge of Him in unrighteousness (Rom. 1). Perhaps that is why sin has always been the perfect platform for the Gospel. If you tell me about God, I'll have to take you at your word. You need not convince me of sin, however. It is all around me in a world wavering on the brink of chaos. It is in me. It is me.

And that is my reality today. I feel mired in sin. I wish I could feel mired in Christ. I don't want to pray or read God's Word; I don't want to feel, think, dwell inwardly. I have remained seemingly content with compartmentalizing the Gospel in my own life as I pretend to manifest it to others. I don't have time to "meditate day and night" on the Word of God and ponder its riches--I must work 9.5 hours, recover for .5 hours, prepare the next Sunday's lecture for 2 hours, and tend to my oft-neglected wife for the remainder. (She is so precious.)

At my wife's behest, I will take a moment to ponder a passage, and I choose Luke 13:34-35 and 19:41-45. Why? Because I will use those passages in an upcoming lecture, which makes meditating upon them pretty darn convenient.

"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not! Behold, you house is forsaken. And I tell you, you will not see me until you say, 'Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.'"

And when he drew near and saw the city, he wept over it, saying, "Would that you, even you, had known on this day the things that make for peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes. For the days will come upon you, when your enemies will set up a barricade around you and surround you and hem you in on every side and tear you down to the ground, you and your children within you. And they will not leave one stone upon another in you, because you did not know the time of your visitation."

Will He weep for me? Will He weep for the one whose tears dried up in the barren wasteland of a savage childhood. He weeps for the lost and perishing, but what about those who remember the pangs of the brokenness and can't shake it? Will He gather me like a hen gathers her chicks, though I feel barricaded by the enemies of my soul? I know "the things that make for peace," but I keep those things from myself. I want war. I want my enemy cast down, but my enemy is me. No one can snatch me from the hand of God, but I can refuse to feel His embrace.

I was often told when I was younger that my sin grieves the Spirit. I always pictured the Spirit as One ashamed and disappointed in me. Perhaps I cast my own fears and my own pitiful self-image upon the mind of the Spirit. But as I force myself back into Scripture (or am drawn?), I think for just a moment that Christ's Spirit is not aggrieved by my sin in the same way as He is over the unrepentant sinner. What if He grieves with me and for me? What if His heart breaks over mine and pours out with grief over the reverberating pangs of death. What if I am not shaming Him, but grieving Him? And what if my grief over sin is not merely a shallow attempt to follow my culture's perpetual self-victimization, but a grief that recognizes that I am simultaneously transgressor and victim?

What if I am the resurrected Lazarus, slowly being stripped of the grave clothes that wrapped my old body of death? What if the tears of Christ for His elect friend are not the acids of retribution, but the cathartic salve of grace? What if God really...really...is for me, not against me? Can I finally live like I am alive?

The Wonder of War

2009-06-06T22:17:00.003-04:00

The wonder of war. The sharp edge of the razor of evil that scrapes and scars the face of the earth.

Words can do no justice to the horrors of war--especially those penned by one who has never entered into those horrors. But I can remark on the wonder. It is in war that we see the very worst of fallen mankind. On occasion, however, the tide of evil is met and rolled back by mankind at its most noble.

Men (like those pictured above) left the safety of these transports in order to wade through water, trudge through sand, and scale cliffs under merciless enemy fire. They willingly offered themselves to certain death--like sheep to the slaughter--in order to subdue a tyrant who wished to subdue the earth.

They are our heroes. What would lead a man to throw himself into death so that others may live free? Pure moral fiber. It is the epitome of courage: Sacrificing oneself for no immediate or certain gain, but for the possibility of a better world for one's posterity.

And I am left in wonder.

Reclusive No More

2009-06-06T00:53:00.000-04:00

Dear Friends--none of whom likely read this blog anymore--I am coming back online. I disappeared for a whirlwind engagement, months of Army training, and a new marriage. My professional writing opportunities may be frustrated for a time, but God gives us alternative outlets. May God bless whoever amongst you happens to stumble upon this forsaken blog once more.

Your Friend,

Stephen

A Boon to Pickens, the Free Market, and American Pride

2008-08-06T13:30:00.000-04:00

Gal Luft, the executive director of the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security, lambasted oil man T. Boone Pickens in the LA Times today. While Luft may have made some valid points in his critique of Pickens' proposal, his disparaging of Pickens, the man, for his pursuit of profit is discouraging. In a recent interview, a reporter asked Pickens about the allegation that he is trying to pursue a profit, to which he essentially answered "Of course!"

Since when has "profit" become anathema to the American mind and a curse word in the American vocabulary? We have a free-market economy, where success in productivity and innovation is rewarded. The American economy is rooted in the idea that there is no greater incentive for individual and corporate success than a potential profit. If a person becomes a mere cog in a nationalized economic machine, that person performs their function and nothing else. Yet if a person is allowed to run her own machine, maintain it as she sees fit, and even create a new machine, then she will strive do do so.

Boeing and Northrop Grumman are competing to build a new tanker for the Air Force. The winner of that competition will earn a government contract, which will provide better equipment for the defense of our country and a good deal of money for a private corporation. While our government squabbles over how best to punish corporations and regulate our way into a more sound energy policy, they should look to people like T. Boone Pickens for inspiration. He represents old-school American ingenuity. In his proposal, Americans are presented with the mentality that made American great--one which seeks to harness the power of the free-market to create and make a profit.

If the Pickens Plan is not one's cup of tea, new proposals should be put forth by the private sector, with the promise of government awards for success. I would love to see the federal government present Pickens with a monetary reward for his work on the issue and persistence in bringing it before the public. The government should offer free-market incentives and avoid regulation and taxation, lest their incompetence erode the foundations of our economy. Let the competition begin! Gal Luft would have a fit, but the economy that is the pride of America and the beacon for the world will breathe a sigh of relief.

Goldberg on the Postmodern Obama

2008-08-05T15:36:00.000-04:00

One on my favorite political writers, Jonah Goldberg of National Review, wrote a column today on "Obama, the Postmodernist." As usual, Goldberg offers helpful philosophical insights into that amorphous concept we call "postmodernism." In addition, he does well in showing that Obama in many ways is postmodernism personified. What isn't as usual for Goldberg is that he fell short in two regards: One, our society as a whole can be generally labeled "postmodern" (perhaps even Goldberg himself). Two, that isn't necessarily a bad thing, especially compared with the worldview that is riding in on its coattails.

As a general point, we imbibe our thought patterns in large part from the philosophical currents of the day. Even in critiquing postmodernism, we are simultaneously immersed and heavily influenced by postmodernism. Postmodernism in is no way an exclusive trait of the Democratic party. Even in rejecting certain implications of postmodernism (i.e. moral relativity), Republicans and other traditionalists do so for reasons influenced by postmodernism. Often, traditionalists embrace and defend moral absolutes for pragmatic reasons, such as maintain social order and good governance. In justifying truth claims for pragmatic reasons instead of philosophical, traditionalists display their part in the postmodern milieu.

Postmodernism is not a clearly definable concept, let alone an inherently evil one. According to scholars like Thomas Oden, postmodernism is best defined as that which is not modern. It is more a reactionary movement than a progressive one and has no cohesive agenda other than to undermine the modern worldview. The work done by postmodernism has actually done much to help conservatives. Twentieth-century modernism attempt to construct an edifice of truth to compete and eventually annihilate a Christian-revelatory truth. It embraced Darwinism as the authoritative scientific paradigm, "progress" as the authoritative social paradigm, and therapeutic-victimization as its psychological paradigm. In all of these ways, it made itself a competitor to Christianity and natural law governance, believing that these worldviews would not be able to survive their competition with "the fittest."

Postmodernism is America was largely precipitated by Vietnam and hippie disillusionment. The secular truth paradigms had largely failed in morally advancing the human race and a vacuum was created that created mass soul-searching. Christianity was not able to fill this void as it had largely capitulated to the modern worldview. In particular, Protestant Christianity had failed in bringing the Christian worldview to bear. "Christian" modernists continued to work in the intellectual realm, but without anything distinctively Christian; Christian fundamentalists had largely retreated from the intellectual realm.

Postmodern philosophy, vacuous in its own right, stepped into the void and began demolishing the secular edifices. Darwinism, "progress," and modern psychology had all failed in their promises for Utopian existence and had largely ignored their own philosophical assumptions along the way. But postmodernism by definition is not able to create anything, let alone an ideology. It has done positive and negative work in its deconstructing of truth paradigms (throwing the Christian baby out with the bathwater) and now leaves its own void.

As Christianity still struggles to regain its voice in America, it has largely left the work of reconstruction to neo-paganism. Instead of banishing God through pride in the intellect (like modernism), neo-paganism instill godlike spirituality into every crevice of this world. This modern pantheism, in its decimation of the transcendence of the Creator over His creation, subsequently blurs all other lines instituted by God (man/woman; human beings/animals/nature; etc.). As Goldberg helpfully notes, it also discards the quest for truth in employing empty rhetoric which is devoid of a telos.

Barack Obama is encapsulates the postmodern vacuum, but more importantly, the neo-pagan reconstruction. For that matter, President Bush displays similar characteristics (belief in human goodness, denial of Christianity exclusivity, etc.). The problem we face now is philosophical, not political. We have a captivating political figure rising on the wings of an ancient philosophy, which is soaring over the heights of all political factions (and even many religious traditions). There is a reason Obama has special appeal to the young, who largely belong to this new worldview. Traditionalists should not target Obama, the postmodern, but Obama, the neo-pagan. In order for Obama's messiahship to be made palatable, people must first come to view their need for this type of new-age messiahship. Let the Christian reconstruction of the postmodern intellect begin with haste before this pagan messiahship is realized and the kingdom of the pagan gods is brought to earth.

Of Mice and the Need for Men

2008-07-30T13:21:00.000-04:00

The mighty men and women of yore have always had to face their inevitable decline. Very few have gone out in a blaze of glory at their peak, like the heroes in most movies. Hitler committed suicide while hunkering in a bunker. He had almost conquered Europe. Saddam Hussein, who only a decade before was running wild over the Middle East, was found in a hole and subsequently hanged. The same anti-climatic demise has held true for many heroic figures. The great missionary/scientist Livingstone died in the African bush. Twentieth-century theologian J. Gresham Machen died of pneumonia in a barren stretch of North Dakota. Ronald Reagan, after one of the most consequential presidencies in American history, was slowly dragged away by Alzheimer's.

Yet many mighty men and women of the present forget history's lessons and desperately cling to legacies which are quickly slipping away. Two such figures are very different in their politics--Dr. James Dobson and the Rev. Jesse Jackson. Both of these men were pivotal in the political landscape for a time, but now are mice in the hands of the movements they created. Dr. Dobson increasingly finds himself out of touch with younger evangelicals, who are becoming more heterodox in their theology and liberal in their ideology. Rev. Jackson has quickly aged beyond his usefulness, representing an era of civil rights pioneering that is lost on an increasingly heterogeneous population.

Both of these men have looked puny when up against the presumed man of the hour--Barack Obama. The presumed heir to the presidency represents and connects with the present generation's moral listlessness and vague platitudes. Along with the younger generations, he disdains those moral causes represented by figures like Dobson and Jackson in the name of a moral unity that merely seeks out the lowest common denominator. Dobson and Jackson both fought for substantive change in eras when change was needed--the family structure was under attack and people were still not treated as equals. The present populace, on the other hand, has embraced a restless contentment instead of guilt and a vacuous call for "change" rather than anything substantial.

Young people--blacks and evangelicals included--are embracing Barack Obama because he speaks in the "parsel tongue" (to borrow a Harry Potterism) that opens the door to modern (or rather, postmodern) affections. His hollow rhetoric and warm smile is exactly what many people want--the ability to feel good about themselves without any sense of responsibility. The time for Dobson and Jackson's demise has come and their adherents must make their peace with that reality. The more scary prospect is the demise of moral causes in America. The War on Terror demands moral resolve, as does a variety of domestic causes during a time of unprecedented prosperity. To relinquish ourselves to Obamian ambiguity at this juncture could prove fatal.

To Know and To Love

2008-07-29T16:52:00.000-04:00

Famed theologian R.C. Sproul wrote in his book, The Intimate Marriage, that the two most important elements to marriage are those of knowing and loving. A person in a marriage cannot do without either of these elements. If your spouse knows you but doesn't love you, then you will constantly feel exposed and ashamed. If he or she loves you but doesn't know you, then you will constantly feel isolated and cut off except on the superficial realm.

In Tess of the D'urbervilles by Thomas Hardy, this axiom reaches poetic expression. Tess, the heroine, takes upon herself the shame of society's scorn for those who are sexually promiscuous. As the hero, Angel, tries to woo her to himself, he must convince her that any knowledge of her would not affect his love for her. After a prolonged resistance, Tess finally gives in to him and entrusts herself to his love. On their wedding night, she confesses to him her past infidelities, to which he grows cold, forsakes his love of her, and travels far away from her. Her worst nightmare--that the love of her betrothed might be forsaken with a more comprehensive knowledge of her--proved nightmarishly true. Thus the hero proves himself to be a demon; his betrayal ultimately ruining her.

Perhaps this axiom explains why movies like Pretty Woman and Moulin Rouge and even Good Will Hunting prove to be so moving for so many. In each of these stories, love proves unconditional with full knowledge and the mettle of that love proves unbreakable, but by death.

This in part is what makes divorce and estrangement so abominable. In marriage, you promise to love through better or worse 'til death do you part. It is a promise that transcends all social relationships--one that promises a lifetime of security and hope. When one's parents or spouse reneges on that promise, all hope for unconditional love seems lost. The next thing you say or do might be the last thing you say or do to/with the person you love.

People have this inherent yearning for an unconditional love based upon full disclosure because it mirrors the same love they need for present joy and eternal hope. Very few people argue over whether God is all-powerful. If He exists, then He knows us. Thus says David:

Psalm 139:1 For the director of music. Of David. A psalm. O LORD, you have searched me and you know me. 2 You know when I sit and when I rise; you perceive my thoughts from afar. 3 You discern my going out and my lying down; you are familiar with all my ways. 4 Before a word is on my tongue you know it completely, O LORD. 5 You hem me in-- behind and before; you have laid your hand upon me. 6 Such knowledge is too wonderful for me, too lofty for me to attain. 7 Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence? 8 If I go up to the heavens, you are there; if I make my bed in the depths, you are there. 9 If I rise on the wings of the dawn, if I settle on the far side of the sea, 10 even there your hand will guide me, your right hand will hold me fast. 11 If I say, "Surely the darkness will hide me and the light become night around me," 12 even the darkness will not be dark to you; the night will shine like the day, for darkness is as light to you. 13 For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb. 14 I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. 15 My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, 16 your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be.

God knows each person better than that person knows him or herself. That knowledge proves terrifying to the ordinary human heart, because knowledge necessarily entails exposure of sin and guilt to judgment. If known by God, then accountable to God; if accountable to God, then in need of love from God.

This is why the Christian may rejoice in the intimate knowledge of God of his or her heart:

Psalm 103:1 Of David. Praise the LORD, O my soul; all my inmost being, praise his holy name. 2 Praise the LORD, O my soul, and forget not all his benefits-- 3 who forgives all your sins and heals all your diseases, 4 who redeems your life from the pit and crowns you with love and compassion, 5 who satisfies your desires with good things so that your youth is renewed like the eagle's. 6 The LORD works righteousness and justice for all the oppressed. 7 He made known his ways to Moses, his deeds to the people of Israel: 8 The LORD is compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in love. 9 He will not always accuse, nor will he harbor his anger forever; 10 he does not treat us as our sins deserve or repay us according to our iniquities. 11 For as high as the heavens are above the earth, so great is his love for those who fear him; 12 as far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from us. 13 As a father has compassion on his children, so the LORD has compassion on those who fear him.

God knows His children and He loves them, promising "never will I leave you nor forsake you." As He loves us in Christ, who paid for our sin and placed His perfect life before God on our behalf, He loves us unconditionally. Never need we fear for the love of our God. And that, to use a borrowed cliche, makes all the difference...especially as it pertains to our confidence, love for others, and intimate, unconditional love for our spouses.

Christ--the Great Liberator

2008-04-29T16:07:00.000-04:00

The mission of Jesus Christ in His coming to earth is often misunderstood. Many people "draft" Christ into their various political or socio-economic missions: social justice, egalitarianism, moral culture, democracy, etc. Such gross anachronisms give weight to argumentation (who wouldn't want Jesus on their side?), but ultimately obscures and perverts His true mission. Each of these various causes betray the belief that Jesus was the best conjured-up expression of an idealized humanity, setting an example for all of the most noble causes. Such beliefs are actually an insult to Christ an His mission. He did not come to epitomize humanity, but to save humanity. He was able to do so, not only because of His perfect righteousness as a human, but also by virtue of His deity.

Man does not progress into a state of godlikeness--there is nothing godlike about man. Man is created in the image of God, but is still pure creation in direct contradistinction from the Creator. Man is universally sinful, regardless of individual sins (i.e. adultery, homosexuality, murder, etc.). All people stand in the same natural state before God: rebels deserving of wrath. The forgiveness of sins does not capture the work of Christ, because human beings are sinners. People need to be forgiven--not simply thoughts, words, or deeds.

Therefore, any attempt to obscure the mission of Christ, the God-man, who lived the life that man couldn't live and died the death man couldn't bare--in order to save those who believed--is an insult to the power of God and callous toward the true needs of man. With regard to the persistent wrath of God against a rebel creation, man does not need a liberator of an economic, social, or political variety--but a Savior from sin. This need sets all sinners on level ground before the foot of the cross.

The Christian realizes (or should) this reality, and thus offers herself to the glory of God in a state of gratitude. This gratitude is not a mere legalism, nor is it a license to sin. It brings about a love in the Christian that reflects the love of God for sinners and seeks the salvation of all, that the world might indirectly be made more just, and ultimately, that God's name would once again fall upon the lips of His fallen creation. Here is one example of such gratitude in the African context from this past summer:

The Second Commandment

2008-04-21T17:52:00.000-04:00

Exodus 20: 4(E) "You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. 5(F) You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the LORD your God am(G) a jealous God,(H) visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me, 6but showing steadfast love to thousands[b] of those who love me and keep my commandments."

I remember once reading a book about the Second Commandment and learning that there was more to it than is commonly understood in modern times. Many people like myself have understood this commandment as simply prohibiting the worshipping idols, as opposed to God. Yet it is not merely foreign idols that are delineated in this commandment, but "carved images" of any sort. This includes images made of the true God. When I read this, I shared this information with fellow Reformed Christians who casually dismissed such an assertion, but as I continue to read--this is the traditional position of Reformed Christians since the Reformation and even existed in earlier centuries when the debate over the use of icons within the Church gained full steam.

In relation to the First Commandment's "who" with regard to worship, the Second Commandment provides the "how." Specifically-speaking, we are not to use any images in our worship of the Lord. Our faith is one belonging to the ear (the preached Word), with two specific sacraments offered for our visual edification (baptism and communion). It is God alone who reveals Himself and to pull Him down in any form not prescribed by Scripture is to "attempt a peek at God in the nude" (Luther). More broadly-speaking then, we are not to worship God on our own terms, but on His terms. This application has taken the form of the Regulative Principle of Worship in the Reformed community, which sets forth that our substantial elements of worship must be specifically prescribed by Scripture.

Of course, this new learning comes to one who watched "The Passion of the Christ" three times in the movie theaters. In our age of do-it-yourself Christianity, such traditional (and biblical) understandings of how we are to worship our God is difficult, but refreshing.

An Executive Traitor

2008-04-15T16:54:00.000-04:00

Former President Jimmy Carter is currently meeting with members of the terrorist organization, Hamas, and will soon be meeting with their leader. Hamas is one of the more prominent terrorist organization, condemned by the vast majority of the international community. They have murdered over twenty Americans, countless Israelis, and doubtless many Muslims who have proven themselves "infidels" in some form or another.

For any American official to consort with these heinous criminals is morally abhorrent; for the former leader of the free world to do so is despicable (even that is an understatement). In a bipartisan plea, 50 members of Congress today called upon Carter to cancel the meetings. The Bush Administration and Israel's government are both infuriated. Not only is such a move immoral, but it is also politically disastrous as it legitimates a heartless, criminal enterprise.

When a young man from California was found amidst al-Qaida troops in Afghanistan a few years ago, he was rounded up with the other prisoners of war, branded a traitor, and taken captive by allied forces. While such an extravagant move cannot properly be employed against a former President, there should currently be a discussion on Capitol Hill concerning whether charges of treachery and aiding and abetting known terrorists should be drawn against Carter, as well as possibly barring Carter from U.S. territory as one who has consulted with enemies of the free world.

There was once a time when former Presidents upheld the dignity of their office by working in a non-partisan way toward good causes, e.g. former Presidents Bush and Clinton joining together to aid the victims of the tsunami in southeast Asia. With Clinton now playing the part of schoolyard political bully for his wife and Carter hobnobbing with Hamas, Americans may duly feel ashamed and disappointed.

The Wise and Perverse

2008-04-12T13:58:00.000-04:00

Biblical wisdom is that ability to rightly discern the created order (and twisting thereof), which logically produces action consistent with that understanding. Romans 1 speaks of the inability of a sinful mankind to comprehend their rebellion against mankind, which in turn produces action consistent with that rebellion--namely, participation in the fallen order and the twisting of creature-to-creature relationships (for example, homosexuality). Thus, homosexuality speaks of the brokenness of this world and the wisdom that desires it rightly ordered.

That said, the perverse may still be instruments of insight. Christopher Isherwood, gay author of The Single Man, portrays that lifestyle as more of a philosophical critique of society than a caving to perverse desires. Such a portrayal demands a nuancing of homosexuality that is quite foreign to many Christians. Even in the foolishness of his rebellion, Isherwood has the ability to step back and view his lifestyle in relation to a quickly-crumbling American society. Having cast off notions of a higher authority, Isherwood saw Americans as unwitting players in a sort of social determinism: studying, graduating, marrying, working, reproducing, dying. Their ignorance concerning their numb, mediocre existence made Isherwood's homosexuality alluring--not merely as a lifestyle choice, but as an act of rebellion against a social structure gone mad.

Thomas Hardy once wrote that "If a way to the better there be, it exacts a full look at the worst." This means not only a clear-minded view of homosexuality and the sadist heterosexuality of a Normal Mailer, but also an understanding of the gravity of their depravity. In other words, those in the muck often see the muck better than the self-righteous, and offer sterling insights that enable those with loyalty to the King to better understand the perversity of the world. Social determinism numbs the heart and mind to true beauty and genius; social Darwinism allows for wicked ideals to ravage true community while the blind remain blind. America, in its advanced state of science of technology, has detached itself from the reflective roots which produced some of the most ingenious documents and societal foresight and given itself over to shallow, unreflective living and entertainment-induced passivity.

And in the knowledge of the vacuous and mundane, a need for a better existence is impressed upon the human heart.

Reformed Theology as Covenantal Theology

2008-04-10T13:56:00.000-04:00

In a past entry, the assertion was made that Reformed theology was at its foundation covenantal theology--that is, the bountiful and beautiful truths offered in Reformed Christianity are rooted in God's covenantal relationship with His people.

There are three covenants revealed in Scripture: the Covenant of Redemption, the Covenant of Works, and the Covenant of Grace. The proper understanding of the latter two covenants is essential for a biblical theology. Within these categories, the majesty of God's character and the gravity of Christ's atoning work is put on display with an unequaled profundity.

A former classmate, Brennan Ellis, now working on his doctorate at St. Andrews in Scotland, produced a helpful summary of these covenants at his website, creedorchaos. Follow this link: http://creedorchaos.wordpress.com/2008/04/10/covenant-theology-is-reformed-theology/

Enjoy!

Honoring MLK

2008-04-04T20:09:00.000-04:00

It is tempting to take those who have slipped the surly bonds of this broken world and make them into other-worldly figures. Myths come to enshroud certain historical figures--perhaps giving them added power of inspiration but denying that inspiration the grounds for moving the average person today. George Washington could not tell a lie about chopping down the cherry tree, yet every person does lie, as evidenced by the propagation of the cherry tree myth. Since when did transcendence become a higher historical value than accessibility?

Martin Luther King Jr. was a plagiarist and known adulterer. History has forgiven him as well it should, but should his shady side be diminished in order to propagate a mythical figure with the power to inspire, yet bereft of the power to move people? His transgressions, when put in the context of his mighty struggle for basic personhood, prove him to be a more mighty person because he was human, through and through. He was a flawed man seeking justice from a flawed society with flawed rules.

Never should children be told myths, for then mere mortals will fail at attempts to change the world because their heroes are lost to transcendence. Let a child say "I want to be like Martin Luther King" without feeling the pangs of being unable to measure up. For MLK certainly envisioned a society where every person has the opportunity to be hero. He demanded that opportunity, and if society is to respect his legacy, it will demand the same by making its heroes accessible to the average person.

Daily News

2008-04-04T02:53:00.000-04:00

So...for the second straight day at Fenway Park (home of the Red Sox), a hawk attacked a visiting tourist. This time, the victim was a young girl. She had to go to a hospital for a scratch on her head. When will we say enough is enough? As long as these hawks roam the land, free from any sane regulations, they will pose a threat to the well-being of average, ordinary Americans. If I was a politician, I would introduce legislation in which every hawk would be assigned a "safety tether" that would prevent them from accidentally implementing their destructive power. This will be for their own good and the safety of your children.
******************************************************************************
President Bush and Russia's Tyrant-in-Chief, Vladimir Putin, will be meeting in the next several days to discuss a wide range of issues. Many believe that these meeting could be "contentious." Really? Vladimir Putin has interfered in the elections of neighboring nations in order to exert Russian influence, has eliminated an impressive number of independent journalists (even those residing in democratic Western countries), and has virtually destroyed independent businesses and media in his country. Meanwhile, President Bush has gotten approval from the NATO allies to install missile defense positions in several former Soviet republics in eastern Europe. Contentious? Perhaps we'll have a repeat of Rocky IV. Stay tuned...
******************************************************************************
Another bout of tornadoes have beset poor Little Rock, Arkansas, which boasts the former political residence of Bill Clinton. Tornadoes in populated areas bring about unsurpassed tragedies, but tornadoes in the boonies where chasers can get kick-butt footage...awesome! In reality, with all due respect to victims of tornadoes, what guy would not want to see a good F-4 or F-5? In a society of incredible wealth and weenie challenges, a tornado is just what a guy needs to realize that typical man activities totally suck.

Spontaneous Observations

2008-04-02T13:12:00.000-04:00

So the other night, two of my housemates--Dan and Buttsis--and I were all going to bed. Dan turned to me and initiated the following exchange:

Dan: Night night. I'll see you in dreamland.

Steve: Umm...Dan...I don't think I care to talk to you anymore.

Dan: I'll see you in 15 minutes.

Steve: Dan, I'm not sure we should put a time frame-

Dan: I'll go get ready.

With exasperation, I went into my room and slammed the door--clearly at a loss for words.
____________________________________________________________________

Today was D-Day +1 in my fight against the larvae in our house food pantry. It has not been pretty. The warfare was preempted by the presumption of said larvae (and consequently, moth-like things) to occupy a place in our pantry and not pay rent. A few moths fluttering around the house is no problem, but when I pay a buttload of money each month, they sure as heck should not be attaching their eggs to my chocolate bars and packets of oatmeal. Imagine if each of these assorted larvae and moth-things paid rent--divided equally (as they assume equal living rights), I'd probably be paying $3 a day in rent!

In any case, like the black ant invasion of aught seven, these insects are not going down without a fight. More and more of them are seeking safe haven in my bedroom, which is so not cool. Unlike the black ants, however, they are little more than a nuisance (unless one finds them in their breakfast). As I tried to wash thousands of ants from my box of granola bars last year, they tried to advance my arm, biting along the way. Thankfully, the ants are defeated and the larvae are being subdued, but the ordeals are still gross-tastic.
___________________________________________________________________

Seminarians are great at answering their own questions in class, without even asking the question in the first place. There should be a ten words or less policy on question-asking. It is remarkable how many times a student will ask "Does X remind you of Y?" with X being the lecture material and Y being an unknown point of comparison that then must be expounded upon in order for the professor to make some sort of intelligible comment. What a scam! If ever a seminary professor in such cases, I will walk over to said student, drop a fresh Abe Lincoln on his desk, thank him for his instruction of the class, and tell him that I will be writing his course evaluation. It reminds me of a recent preaching class where a critic not only made his critique but explained how he would have handled the passage differently.

Said one well-known young professor at a sister-seminary, "It's funny how often seminarians compare the size of their book cases while more normal men will just whip it out." To my fellow seminarians: put the bookcase away--no one cares about the size nor want to peruse the shelves. Go eat a Big Mac, find a girlfriend and take her to a PG-13 movie, and for God's sake get some sun!

A Prison Letter

2008-03-30T20:37:00.000-04:00

At the recent funeral of a beloved saint, a friend of mine at my home church gave me a poem that he wrote in prison many years ago:

"Hope Fulfilled"

If you are down or feeling blue,

Open the word, it was written for you.

The promises of God, they are all there,

Sealed with an oath, which He did swear.

In truth and honor, love flows out,

Speaking to my heart, as loud as a shout.

His word is alive, with feeling I read,

As each promise, speaks to my need.

So with gladness and joy, by faith He said,

To believe on My word, in your heart and head.

All that are called and given to Me,

Not on will be lost, just wait and see!

The day is coming, with a trumpet from above,

When all in Christ will rise, by the power of

His love.

Lonny Beamer

12-3-95

When he handed me this poem, Lonny's eyes were filled with tears as he said farewell (with 700 others!) to a woman of the Lord who had welcomed an ex-convict into the Church with open arms. She was one of the few to whom he had ever personally given this poem (though a Christian group published it for a now-defunct organization).

There is no dark corner of human existence or the human heart that can remain hidden to God when He has elected to lavish His love upon such objects. We who are known by Christ are such objects.

7 Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence?
8 If I go up to the heavens, you are there; if I make my bed in the depths, you are there.
9 If I rise on the wings of the dawn, if I settle on the far side of the sea,
10 even there your hand will guide me, your right hand will hold me fast.

-Psalm 139

Christianity and Communism: Mutually Exclusive?

2008-03-24T12:42:00.000-04:00

In the book of Daniel, chapter 3, King Nebuchadnezzar ordered all people (including the Jewish exiles) in his land to bow down to a 90 foot tall golden statue of himself. Three men refused to bow the knee, provoking the king's anger and wrath. They defended themselves in this way:

16 Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego replied to the king, "O Nebuchadnezzar, we do not need to defend ourselves before you in this matter. 17 If we are thrown into the blazing furnace, the God we serve is able to save us from it, and he will rescue us from your hand, O king. 18 But even if he does not, we want you to know, O king, that we will not serve your gods or worship the image of gold you have set up."

While the Church is never called into the realm of politics, she often finds herself opposed to the State when the State assumes the prerogatives of a spiritual entity and becomes idolatrous. Whenever the State demands that the Christian bend the knee in a way contrary to God's Word, the Christian replies that he/she will not fear death to the point of forsaking the will and worship of God.

Communism, like fascism, has provided a stark example of this principle at work in the past century. Unlike socialism, which requires a more penetrating analysis in order to appreciate its evil as a system, communism demands a simple choice: worship the State as God or perish. Soviet communism knew as much as it coerced churches into becoming state-run institutions or face extinction. China currently employs the same strategy. Either a church registers with the government and becomes beholden to State prerogatives, or it faces persecution and annihilation. Communism cannot tolerate a competitor for individual devotion and allegiance.

In the recent crackdown in Tibet, this principle is again aptly demonstrated. Tibetan Buddhists may not be Christians, but their religion demands a devotion apart from that offered to the State. Like the Falun Gong cult in previous years, their punishment for such double-mindedness is found in persecution and repression.

Communism is a self-idolatrous political cult that by definition (evil and need defined in materialist terms; salvation by government aid) is aligned as a competitor to Christianity. As citizens (though not as Christians) peoples of the free world must vigorously oppose this tyrannical system and the atrocities it afflicts on those who do not bow the knee.

A Foretaste of the Pastorate

2008-03-14T20:24:00.000-04:00

As of Sunday, I will have preached three sermons in five days. The first was for class on Wednesday; the second was for the chapel service this morning; the third will be my normal Sunday morning sermon. The preaching opportunity this morning opened up last-minute (really, last night) and I was called upon to preach in a desperate situation. As a result of these sermons, other important obligations have not been attended to this week.

Tomorrow--my last opportunity for solid academic production before Break--will largely be occupied by a wedding, sadly followed by a memorial service. In one day, I will have the opportunity to welcome a new Christian marriage and to bid farewell to a godly, beloved saint.

This type of week used to overwhelm me. I would look at all I had hoped to accomplish and shake my head in frustration. Alas, this is the life of a pastor. Aside from his essential commitments, the pastor is made subject to a myriad of events and circumstances unbeknownst to all but God. While the elders of a church must guard the pastor--especially his time with his family--the pastor's whole life in essence is a drink offering to be poured out upon the altar of ministering to Christ's Church.

Thus, I sit here reflecting upon a week of "should but couldn't" tasks and lift my chin high. I am at the service of my King, and I better start remembering that while the day is still young.

Two Symptoms; One Disease

2008-03-11T16:38:00.000-04:00

Two very interesting stories have broken in the past two days: 1) Governor Eliot Spitzer (D-NY) was sexually-involved with a prostitute for the better part of a year, and 2) One in four teenage girls (age 14-19) have some form of sexually-transmitted disease. These stories are both interesting and incredibly sad. The image of the squeaky-clean politician has long been forgotten, and even those self-identified as moral crusaders are often exposed as the greatest of hypocrites. In addition, the old picture of "Daddy's little girl" with its connotation of virtue and modesty has been replaced by a quite-disgusting picture of moral license.

Underlying such promiscuity and infidelity lies irresponsibility of the most fundamental sort and a flawed philosophy of humanity. The irresponsibility is exhibited in a lack of personal commitment, parental guidance, self-respect, and a general exploitation by the educational system. Children are not often talk basic values of right and wrong, and even when they are, often lack the desire to put their virtuous upbringing into personal practice. In an educational system where morality lacks any true foundation and is often treated as a matter of self-interest, virtue becomes denigrated even further. In addition, self-respect (and a general adolescent culture of depression) undermines self-respect, which can only become more despised after promiscuous acts.

Beneath these various issues of responsibility lies a flawed philosophy of humanity: ontological dualism. Particularly popular (but not self-consciously identified) in the present culture is the mind/body dualism, in which one's mind and body are treated as two separate entities. This dualism is aptly displayed in the movie "Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves," when the evil Sheriff of Nottingham tried to rape Maid Marion. As he tried to commit his heinous act, she cried out "You might have my body, but it's not me! It's not me!" While good for movie fodder, that line is not true at all. A person is both mind and body. This is evidenced in the total coordination between mind and body in the person, and the division created by such a dualism leads to the labeling of certain types (i.e. the mentally handicapped) as "less than human." If a teenager's body is not made distinctly valuable through a complete view of individual personhood, they are likely to treat it a Platonic "prison house of the soul" rather than something with real value.

Yet the disease underlying the initially-stated symptoms and their contributing factors is the simple matter of sin. Sin affects every part of humanity and the created order and manifests itself in various forms. In the present day, sin is a taboo and its logical implications avoided. Thus, the deeper questions must be asked. Why are teenagers extraordinarily promiscuous? Why do they not take themselves and life more seriously? Why do they not respect their bodies and treat other bodies as means to an end? Why do they avoid asking these deep questions?

To the final question: Perhaps it is because the hardest of questions belie even harder answers.

A Whitewashed Tomb in Rome

2008-03-10T13:26:00.000-04:00

Jesus Christ took pity upon sinners, but also in a certain sense hated the Pharisees and what they stood for. They had turned their religion into legalism; God's Word into a text that needed thousands of additional rules to guard against sin; the Law as a ladder to righteousness; sin as those outward acts that violated the Law or the additional rules. This manipulation of the True, Revealed Religion infuriated Jesus, and He condemned it at every point. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus informed the masses that sin infects the internal man as well as the external deeds. In fact, he who hates is guilty of murder. He who lusts, adultery.

Perhaps Jesus' most pointed words came in Matthew 23:27--"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of dead men's bones and everything unclean." Paul, the last apostle of Jesus, took this zeal for the majesty of God and His law upon his own lips. When the Judaizers followed Paul around from city to city, telling the new Christian babes that they also needed to be circumcised and abide by certain customs as well as following Christ, Paul thundered "As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!" (Gal. 5:12). This language seems shocking to the weak-kneed, teary-eyed Church in the present day, but the Lord and His appointed apostles didn't take the manipulation of the Gospel lightly--and neither should the present Church.

In the present measure of the "Pope" to add to the list of "mortal" sins in order to increase the general awareness of sin and compel more people into confession, one finds another example of Pharisaism at its worst. This man takes upon himself the role of apostle, though that line ended with Paul, and thus feels the liberty to take from or add to God's Holy Word, against the specific prohibition of such treachery against the King in the final chapter of Scripture. This measure will work against this man's aim in this case, as such a hierarchy of sins and surrounding rules serve merely to make the self-righteous more content in their sin and the dregs of society more lethargic in their hopelessness. Is God's law to be used in such a way as to provide a means for salvation and sin-avoidance?

1) It would be futile to argue that the Mosaic Law did not abide by a works principle (Gal. 3:6-12). What was the purpose of this principle though? In Galatians 3:8, Paul makes clear that faith was always required for salvation; in 3:10, he shows that all live by the law live under its curse.

2) That works principle was never meant for salvation (Gal. 3:15-29). The Law given to Moses didn't set aside the gracious Promise already given to Abraham (3:17), but was rather a written tutor, pointing the way to Christ (3:24--the phrase "put in charge" refers to a pedagogue, or teach, in the Greek). It fulfilled this purpose by driving man to his knees. Instead of being a staircase to salvation, it was an unattainable standard. Working in cooperation with the Promise of Christ, it exposed the need for Christ.

3) The Law for the people of old was a basic or elementary principle (4:3) and incomplete apart from Christ. The people of old eventually perverted the pedagogical purpose of the Law and made it into a slave-driver, thus making them slaves to something that was not God (4:8). It would thus seem ridiculous that anyone would return to the Law when it was never meant to lead anywhere but Christ (4:9). The Law apart from its fulfillment becomes mere paganism with its vacuous religion and hollow hopes.

4) Christ took the curse of the Law upon Himself, inheriting the blessing that came through perfect fulfillment for His people (Gal. 4:4-5). Christ was born with full humanity and under the full dominion of the law (v.4) in order to salvage/redeem humans born under the full weight of the law (v.5).

5) As the Law has been fulfilled in Christ, it is impossible to return it as a mode of religion (Gal. 5:3-4). All who seek salvation by the Law becomes its debtor (v.3), and thus demonstrate separation from Christ and grace (v.4). The Law, in a certain sense, has become obsolete (at least as it guides one to salvation) and brings only condemnation apart from Christ. Why would anyone stand before the judgment seat of God without Christ the Mediator? He bore the great hammer-stroke of justice so His people would not have to and be damned.

The man assuming the position of Christ over the Church sits upon a throne of lies. He advocates measures that would beautify an ugly humanity, thus making them more complacent as judgment nears. Not only is this unbiblical, ungodly, and outright heresy--it is an inhumane travesty that must be fought with every bit of sweat and tears that Christians can muster--knowing the beauty of calling men to God, rather than calling men "God."

Dealing with Death

2008-03-06T20:07:00.000-05:00

I walked into my associate pastor's office a while ago to collect my completed internship forms. We spoke warmly of my time at New Life--my real Church home. As that conversation slowly dissipated, I broached a new topic: "Kevin, how do pastors deal with death? I grieve so much over the loss of the church family members, and I don't know how it will ever get easier."

Of course, at the forefront of my thoughts was Sandra Wagner--a woman who virtually has defined the concept of a godly woman for me. Kevin told me that he has not had too much experience with this in his few years of pastoring, but he knew what I had in mind--"This one...it really hurts." Our head pastor, with choked-up voice, led the congregation in prayer this past Sunday, and apparently there was not a dry eye in the house. The people who know Sandra have blinked back tears all week. It hurts so much.

When I first came to New Life in 2005, I quickly fell in love with the Wagner family. Coming from a spiritually-broken family in a culture of spiritually-broken families, I marveled at this family-encapsulated testament to God's covenantal faithfulness. They would sit together--the happily-married (of some 50 years), Dan and Sandra, and their three kids and each of their spouses, and a host of little grandkids. God really blesses the generations of His people.

Sandra also epitomizes the "godly woman" to me. Within the Church, she participated, prayed, and produced. It is those women--those stereotypical prayer warriors--who make the Church whole. Ministries seem incomplete without their labors of love; days seem incomplete without their encouragement. When the individual sinner is unable to lift both feeble hands in prayer to God Almighty, their persistent prayers lift them in a symbolic way.

Contrast the covenantal blessings of our God and the godliness of His servant, Sandra, with the ugly spectre of death. It is no wonder that Jesus wept and raged at the death of Lazarus. Sure, resurrection awaits, but the beauty of God's creation seems utterly wasted under the temporal reign of death. This is NOT the way it is supposed to be. And every person knows how very out of place death is to us. It is expected, but it is not natural. The whole creation groans under the weight of this knowledge--waiting for the eternal relief that comes with Christ. Thus we labor forth in the valley of the shadow of death, knowing that on that distant hill, light breaks.

Romans 8:28-39

2008-03-06T16:26:00.000-05:00

28 And we know that in all things, God works for the good of those who love him--who have been called according to his purpose. 29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his son, that he might be the firstborn of many brothers. 30 And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified. 31 What then shall we say in response to this? If God is for us, who can be against us?

32 He who did not spare his own son, but gave him up for us all--how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things? 33 Who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? It is God who justifies. 34 Who is he that condemns? Christ Jesus, who died--more than that--was raised to life, sits at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us. 35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall trouble or hardship or persecution or famine or nakedness or danger or sword? 36 As it is written, "For your sake we face death all day long. We are considered as sheep to be slaughtered."

37 No! In all these things we are more than conquerers through him who loved us. 38 For I am convinced that neither death nor life, angels nor demons, present nor future, nor any powers, 39 neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation can separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Beautiful in so many ways.

Where, O death, is thy sting?

2008-03-03T12:01:00.000-05:00

Earlier this year, my church was saddened to learn of the loss of Maria Hougesen. This lady was a prayer warrior and constant encouragement. Though wheelchair bound and often in pain, she would always want to offer fellow congregants (like myself) a word of encouragement and remind them that she was praying for them. In her frailty, the brutality of a fallen world was fully exposed and the resurrection of the body became more than an abstract doctrine. She now sings and dances amongst the angels.

And now my church steadies herself for the loss of another mighty woman of prayer. Sandra Wagner, wife of some 50 years to the Westminster librarian, Dan Wagner, is in the last stage of her fight against cancer and race of life. Sandra and Dan are the most admirable of people--married for 50 years and still full of compassion, tenderness, and love to each other and to all others within their reach. Their three children are all married and have children--they go to the same church as Sandra and Dan. Three generations of Wagners sitting in one place always proved emblematic of God's covenantal faithfulness.

Sandra was a regular member of the church choir, and helped to anchor the alto section. In practices, she was always ready with a prayer request for a grandchild or homeless friend. It was a bit shocking one evening to hear her ask for prayer for upcoming tests. The tests came and the cancer was revealed. Chemotherapy started, the handkerchief was donned, and the body started to be sapped of strength. In about a year's time, the suspicion of cancer has evolved into an inevitable demise.

When one looks upon a child, he sees the image of the child's parents--particularly the mother. A responsible child is a product of a mother's loving discipline; a faith-borne child of God is a product of a Christian mother's power of love and nurture. This is said, not to undermine God's sovereignty, but to recognize that His sovereignty in caring for covenantal children is often conducted and displayed through Christian women. Through these women, God builds and blesses his Church. As was true with Maria, Sandra has children who walk with the Lord.

Death is both the great leveler and divider of humanity. On the one hand, as the writer of Ecclesiastes notes, no amount of wisdom, wealth, or work will make anyone less mortal. Death comes and robs all of their earthly possessions. On the other hand, death finds itself robbed of its power for the Christian. Instead of ending whatever vestiges of peace are attained in this world and ushering a person into the hellish confines of an eternity apart from God, death is used by God to usher the Christian into eternal life. Even death is His servant! It is the final sanctifying stage for the person born anew in Christ Jesus, in which the agonies of child birth gives way to the beauty of seeing the heavenly lights for the first time.

The Equalist Paradigm

2008-03-01T18:42:00.000-05:00

The role of human governance seems to be approached from two different angles--one collectivist and the other opportunist. The collectivist approach draws upon utilitarianism, in which the end of the "greater good" justifies whichever means are deemed necessary for implementation of such an end. This approach gained momentum 20th century America and naturally leads to a socialist or communist system of government. In this approach, individual value and freedom are denigrated for the sake of maximizing the greatest good for the greatest number of people.

The opportunist approach, on the other hand, draws upon no greater good than that offered to each individual. Opportunity is exalted above all other values, and naturally follows a sort of social Darwinism in which the stronger rise to the top while the weaker are crushed. This approach was prominent at points in 19th century America, and followed to its logical extreme, produces fascism in the mold of Hitler. In its lesser form, it may be seen in an unrestrained capitalism.

Both biblical and natural principles militate against each approach. The City of Man, as erected in Genesis 4, is given the task of just governance with the limitation of not encroaching upon the prerogatives or rights of Church (in Old Testament seed form), family (of which the city arises), or individual. In Romans 13, the City is given a renewed mandate to bear the sword of justice.

The Declaration of Independence, informed by a plethora of influences, declared certain rights to be inalienable: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Notice that there is no guarantee of liberty in a vacuum, apart from the others; neither is there a guarantee of happiness in itself.

With risk of being foolish for the sake of innovation, I would like to propose the "Equalist Paradigm" as the biblical and natural view of ideal human governance. This paradigm is an expression of the just pursuit of equal opportunity. The individual and institution are each allowed semi-absolute freedom to pursue their desired end, as long as it doesn't encroach upon the rights of other individuals and institutions. The goal is never equality or opportunity in a vacuum. Both are idolatrous virtues of different eras. The sword given the state is for justice, not for benevolence or favoritism; leveling the field or obliterating the weak.

In the collectivist approach, individuals and institutions are given value solely in their relation to the state. The political system of pure socialism highlights the evil in this approach. In the socialist scheme, the state takes upon herself the properties of the Church and ultimately seeks to vanquish the Church as her strategic competitor. Individuals are not viewed as inherently valuable and are not allowed to pursue their own end (say, glorifying God), but are as useful and valuable as needed by the state--then disposable.

In the opportunist approach, strong individuals and institutions are given absolute value, thus relativizing those individuals and institutions that are weaker. This system inevitably leads to social Darwinism and fascism. If the absolute value of the strong is threatened or contradicted, those with relative value are diminished or destroyed. As with the collectivist approach, the power of the sword is abused and manipulated in this system.

All this to say--governmental philosophies, propositions, and policies must be carefully scrutinized. There is no inherent right to equal results--do some policies aim for that? What are the risks of such policies? There is no inherent right to unrestrained opportunity (as it comes to impact others)--do some policies aim for that? What are the risks of such policies? God laid the groundwork for such questions when He implemented the state, and the the Founding Fathers considered such questions as they founded the American state. Are those questions still prevalent today? The answer to that question is likely negative, which is horrifying.

William F. Buckley (1925-2008)

2008-02-28T02:21:00.000-05:00

In the middle of the twentieth century, freedom-lovers in America found their hope on the verge of extinction. The modernist malaise threatened to sweep away the freedom of individuals, families, businesses, and the Church in its murky gray tide. The editors of National Review called this "the inexorable collectivist tide." When William F. Buckley launched the National Review in 1955 at age 29, he said that he hoped to "stand athwart history, yelling 'stop'!" Many had gotten lost in the modern utopian dream without questioning the premises it stood upon or the means with which it was trying to reach its idyllic end.

The conservative political ideology, though claiming the mantle of tradition, is relatively young. Early in the twentieth century, political philosophers like Russell Kirk and Frank Meyer, as well as German economists Ludwig Von Mises and F.A. Hayek, ushered in the intellectual seeds of which the conservative ideology would grow. These men represented the philosophical wave. Later, economist Milton Friedman and William F. Buckley made compelling public cases for the conservative ideology. They were the leaders of the popular wave. Finally, after Barry Goldwater's earlier loss in the race for President, Ronald Reagan swept into office in 1980. This marked the beginning of the successful political wave, also represented in the "Contract with America" in 1994 and the subsequent takeover of Congress by Republicans.

But of all these men, a compelling case could be made for Buckley as the most pivotal figure. He took the theories to the press, and using his incredible intellect and wit, used the press to tailor public opinion and usher in the conservative political age. The evils of socialism and its tyranny over all natural freedoms endowed to man, family, and Church has been delayed from its "inevitable" triumph over the American "experiment". If in the coming decades an overbearing government becomes the caretaker of human hearts and souls, it will do so only because the brilliant Buckley is no longer able to "stand athwart history." If Americans are wise and grateful for their freedoms, they will gladly make his legacy their continuing cause.

Doctrine Divides?

2008-02-27T20:27:00.000-05:00

One of the most delightful of slogans to proclaim as a hip, young Christian is that "doctrine divides." If only individual denominations stopped being so nit-picky on matters of doctrine, then the consequent unity would streamline the power of the Church in the world and enable the Kingdom of God to really start growing!

The power of the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution on the American mind is incredible. It is from these documents that American governance is maintained and a degree of identity is gained. "We hold these truths to be self-evident" initiated the document that brought vitality to this once-subjugated colony. In a treatise describing the perceived nature of humanity and human governance, life was brought to a new nation. Even so, that life lacked governance. Thus, the U.S. Constitution provided the rule by which Americans were to live. They united and continue to unite under its proclamations, and even moderate attempts to amend it are often squashed. The life of America is found in her Declaration of Independence, and her unity and identity is found in her Constitution.

Is there perhaps some indirect correlation between these documents with much more ancient ones? In no way was America ever a Christian nation, but did she draw her inspiration for cohesive documents from the ancient models of Holy Scripture and the creeds and confessions. It is these documents, the former God-breathed and the latter the expression of collective Church wisdom, that Christians find their unity and identity. In the Bible, one finds life in the very Word of God. The Bible, in all of its doctrines, brings to life and animates the people of God is the most fundamental sense. Upon this foundation, the creeds and confessions of the Church emphatically declare their allegiance with one voice, and thus the Church is given a systematized rule of law derived from Scripture.

Drawing this all together, those who seek to undermine the doctrinal core of Christianity are really emptying Christianity of its content and eroding the foundation of the people they hope to unite and equip. They are merely trading one unity--that of a house upon a solid foundation, for another--that of an amorphous blob with no support, identity, or direction. It is from God's Word primarily, and the Church's collected reflection secondarily, that the people of God are truly the people of God. Why do Americans understand this principle so much better than Christians? Perhaps common grace is much more palatable than the grace which offers true hope, even to many Christians.

Black Coffee and Pain

2008-02-24T19:54:00.000-05:00

On most mornings, I like my coffee black. And pain...I like pain. When I drink alcohol, I opt for shots rather than mixed drinks or beer because I'd rather down my poison in one manly gulp than reflect between dainty sips on why masculinity as so often associated with the disgusting and distasteful. I often get mad at men who call fouls when playing a sport, because they seem like weenies to me. If one feels like he got hit too hard on the last play, he'll have the opportunity to dish it out in return sooner or later.

These are not objective observations, hence the first-person narratival format. They do provide a keen insight into my own mind, and perhaps the mind of others as well. I am sick of the mundane; the normal; the mediocre. Yet somehow I am still Reformed. Yes...the same worldview that believes God's primary means of grace to be those "ordinary" elements of the Word and sacraments and somehow attracts an inordinate number of spectacle-clad nerds...that is the worldview of this edgy extremist.

The world often bores me, so I turn it into an adventure. Power and pleasure make for hollow pursuits, and only the understanding of history offered in the Bible is compelling in the least. I must always be the hero in the final throes of life, and my damsel must exhibit distress per the stereotype. "Weird" and "quirky" become my two favorite (though bland) adjectives, as they innately describe those things and people that are set apart in my estimation.

ADD overtakes me at every turn--in the classroom, church, and conversation. Even when the subject matter in these things is compelling, I always simultaneously partake of the experience and scan the horizon for some grand overarching metanarrative that imbues life and individual experiences with greater meaning. My favorite mental term growing up was "suddenly," and I would attach that term to my inner-monologue throughout the day--most days--so as to make that next step more exciting.

And now I have the most wonderful of jobs and the most wonderful of ladies. My job is the ministry of the Word--where I get to speak on God's behalf to His people every Sunday. God divinely opens and closes hearts through my humble messengering, and that thought is invigorating. When a church drop-out dropped-in to my event this past Friday night, I cornered him and told him that I would always be accessible to him, though he was complete stranger. He was at church this morning. I like people who view church as something more than a routine.

My girlfriend--here called "L"--is the most wonderfully-weird person I know. She is additionally wonderful to accept my bizarre adjective with the positive connotations with which it is infused. She is a mystery that the mind cannot fully comprehend--a sillouette in the lighted doorway. She makes conversation an extraordinary experience, for her quirkiness fills out that empty space often residing alongside the normal, dreary activities of life.

The two greatest things I know--the power of God in His Word and the power of love--are such because they fill out the empty space. In each (though the latter is certainly subordinate to the former), words have power and meaning. Abstractions and ideals are personified. Each provides its own backdrop to the primary storyline at the forefront. Both project the human heart beyond the plane of normalcy to that of progressive revelation (to borrow a friend's recent term)--one as a window into the Divine plan and the other as a mirror. They suggest that there is more to life then the bland and boring--and much more than that offered even by black coffee and pain.

The World's Longest (but Helpful) Post

2008-02-23T19:55:00.000-05:00

God and Human Knowledge--Stephen Roberts

An Essay Prepared for Josophat Mwale Theological Institute, Based on a Lecture Given on 20-06-07

Why should we talk about human knowledge in relation to theology? Is not human knowledge more of a philosophical concept? Yes it is, and that is why we must speak of it. In a certain sense, philosophy precedes theology. First of all, when we speak of God, we do not speak as mindless beings who merely create our own reality. We speak as those who are confident in their ability to make a claim about truth. Second, we must know why we believe what we believe. Thus, we are told in 1 Peter 3:15 “Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have.” If we don’t establish why we believe something, no one will really care what it is that we believe.
These initial comments may still seem a bit abstract, so we shall talk about it on a more practical level. Let us examine these three statements:

I think that Jesus Christ is Lord.
I feel that Jesus Christ is Lord.
Jesus Christ is Lord.

Which of these three statements do you find to be the most compelling? In other words, if you were a non-Christian and somebody came to you to share the Gospel, which one of these statements would you find most effective? We would all agree that the final statement is the best, for it demonstrates a certainty in the heart of the person who shares such a statement. It isn’t presented as a matter of opinion, but of truth.
When I was in Malawi last summer, I had the opportunity to share the Gospel with some families in the small village of Dzuwa, north of Lilongwe. At one home, my friend asked a family if they any hope of heaven after death, and the wife immediately responded, “No, because I am a sinner.” By God’s grace, this family all came to a saving faith in Jesus Christ that day. Notice that this woman did not say “I think” or “I feel” with regard to her sin, but “I am a sinner.” It was much easier for us to share a certain hope to one who had a certain conviction of sin. Do you see why it is important to know why you believe what you believe? If you don’t know why—your faith has no foundation or claim to truth.
If the importance of this discussion as not been made clear yet, let me put it in the strongest terms: If you present the Gospel as something that you think to be logical, or feel to meaningful, you may win converts—but not to Christianity. You are only calling them to believe something as logical or meaningful, not something that is true. The problem today is that many people share the hope that they have, but not the reason for that hope as 1 Peter 3:15 calls us to do. What is the reason for our hope, and how are we able to share that reason?
Let us look first at two terms that might seem a bit intimidating, but will quickly become understandable: archetypal and ectypal knowledge. Does that first word bear a resemblance to any words you know? How about the term architect? An architect is one who draws plans for how something is to be created. For every building that you see, you know that there first was a set of blueprints that outlined how the building was supposed to be built. With that in mind, when you think of an archetype, you should think of that original plan—the perfect model that is later copied. An ectype, on the other hand, is the copy of that plan. Likewise, when you speak of archetypal knowledge, you are speaking of the knowledge of the architect of this world: God. When you speak of ectypal knowledge, you are speaking of the knowledge of those created in image: man.
This understanding of knowledge leaves us with several problems that must be resolved. First, the ectypal knowledge given to man in Creation has become corrupted by sin. As a result, the only we can have as human beings is that which condemns us and leaves us without excuse (Rom. 1). Second, if we are left only with this corrupted knowledge, is it possible for us to know anything as true?
These questions have plagued man throughout history, and have evoked various responses from different philosophers. Perhaps the most important philosopher, and the one we shall discuss briefly here, is Plato. Plato believed there to be a ladder extending from the perfect form (God) and the copies (man). As the unity and spirit of this perfect form deteriorates into diversity and matter, it loses its beauty and purity. As you can see, Plato viewed a distinction between the archetype (God) and ectype (man), but he did not view the distinction as absolute. By that I mean that Plato did not believe God and man to be fundamentally different in essence, but only different by degree. The difference between God and man was qualitative, not quantitative.
As Christians, we thoroughly disagree with Plato’s model. Although God created us in His image, we can never be like God. This desire to be like God actually led to the first sin by our parents in the Garden of Eden. It was God who created man out of the dust; It was Satan who told created man that he could be like God. Instead, Christians maintain that there is an absolute distinction between the Creator and the creature. There is no ladder, but only an inseparable gulf.
From the time of Plato until now, most philosophers have used his ladder as the fundamental model for human knowledge. On the one hand, you had those who believed they could climb Plato’s ladder. For example, “realists” believed that human beings could climb Plato’s ladder and know reality absolutely. In later days, two types of realism emerged: rationalism and mysticism. Rationalists believed that the human intellect could conquer all knowledge and know things as God knows them. Mystics believed that through meditation, the human mind could ascend to God and see the truths that normally lay hidden. You are likely familiar with this latter group, as many here who engage in tribal witchcraft believe that they can gain access to the things of God through their substances and rituals.
On the other hand, you had those who believed in Plato’s ladder, but didn’t think it was possible to climb it. Many of these were called “nominalists”, and they believed that it was not possible to know reality beyond the names we give to things. In contrast to the realists, who believed that a human could know exactly what a “tree” is and everything about that tree, the nominalists believed that “tree” is only a name invented by man, and that there is nothing we can know of the reality of a tree. In other words, those who tried to climb Plato’s ladder through human history believed that man could have the same knowledge as God, while those who thought the ladder to be impossible to climb consequently thought that human beings could have no true knowledge.
This type of dilemma still confronts us all over the world in our day. In recent centuries, “modernism” has replaced realism as an attempt to know absolute truth. Modernists believe that truths can be proven without a doubt—for example, 1+1=2. Likewise, “postmodernism” has replaced nominalism as an attempt to destroy any possibility of knowing absolute truth. According to the postmodernist, all things we believe to be reality are simply matters of opinion. You may say the sky is blue, and I may say it is white, and neither of us is able to tell the other that he is wrong.
So where does Christian faith fit amongst these two opposing lines of thought? The modernist will ridicule your faith because he doesn’t believe that your faith can be proven. Of course, his standard for proof is in many ways a matter of opinion as well. The postmodernist will be largely apathetic about your faith. To him, your faith is simply a matter of opinion, and everybody has opinions, and all opinions are equally good, so why pay special attention to yours? In other words, who cares?
Both the modernist and postmodernist follow the thinking of a famous philosopher, Immanuel Kant, when they think about faith. In order to protect faith from the scrutiny of other philosophers, Kant created a special island of insanity where faith could live on its own terms without being subjected to the tests and rigors of science. As a result, the modernists considered their case closed because faith could not be proven, and later, postmodernists simply ignored the island of faith while creating their own islands of opinion.
We of course don’t subscribe to this fundamental distinction between faith and knowledge. Christian belief isn’t a mere matter of opinion, but a knowledge of something to be fact. Thus, when the inspired writers of God’s Word and of the historic creeds of the faith wrote “I believe” or “we believe”, they were not stating an opinion but an assertion of something they knew to be true.
So what exactly can Christians claim to be true? Let us use the Trinity as our example of a proper understanding of Christian knowledge. Are we able to completely explain the Trinity? Not at all! We do not have archetypal knowledge—we cannot explain what God is, or know His thoughts. As Romans 11:34 declares: “Who has known the mind of the Lord?”
In the same way, are we left without any knowledge of the Trinity whatsoever? Again—not at all. We are left merely left with ectypal knowledge; we are still able to make certain statements about the Trinity. Deuteronomy 29:29 tells us that the secret things belong to the Lord, but the revealed things belong to man. So we are left with these “revealed things” to give us knowledge, but what are these things exactly?
Let us give the answer through what Christians would describe as the Doctrine of Analogy. When we talk about an analogy, we are talking about something that is compared to something else in order to communicate a truth. When I tell you that a boy is like a man, I am telling you that a little boy bears some resemblance to a grown man, but is not exactly like that grown man. That should make perfect sense to all of us who have been both little boys at one time and grown men now.
In the same way, the Lord provides analogies to us in Scripture so that we may understand certain things as truth. When God inspired David in Psalm 23 to write “the Lord is my shepherd,” He was giving us an analogy so that we may understand something about Him. David was not saying that God walks around heaven in bare feet with a cane, but that God is like the shepherds we see in the way He cares for us. We are not able to understand how exactly God cares for us, so He tells us that it is like the shepherd we see in the fields (but certainly infinitely better!). In the same way, when the first epistle of John says that “God is love,” we understand that God in some way demonstrates love like we do, but does so perfectly whereas our love is flawed.
In conclusion, Christians can know truth, but not absolutely. Remember that “absolute truth” is not a Christian concept, but a modernist concept. We can never know things as God knows them, because we are not God. We must avoid that devilish temptation to claim that knowledge. At the same time, we are not left with the hopeless despair of those who can know nothing. In the whole of the Holy Bible, God speaks to man analogously so that we can understand something about God, ourselves, and grace. Calvin calls God’s Word “baby talk,” because God must reduce the majesty of His language in order that sinful minds may comprehend His Word. He must speak to us as a father speaks to his baby. Let us praise God for revealing Himself to us in His Word, so that we might know things with certainty—most importantly, the things that bring about our salvation from sin and death.

Helpful Resources:
Systematic Theology by Louis Berkhof
Reformed Dogmatics V.1: Prolegomena by Herman Bavinck
Christianity and Eschatology by Michael Horton
Lord and Servant by Michael Horton
The Gospel in a Pluralist Society by Leslie Newbigin
The Sovereign God by James Montgomery Boice
Institutes of Christian Religion by John Calvin
Westminster Confession of Faith; Heidelberg Catechism

TULIP

2008-02-22T19:29:00.000-05:00

Adding a brief addendum to the previous post--Calvinism is the branch of Christianity which stresses God's sovereignty over all things, man's utter inability, and the ensuing need for the salvation which must necessarily be wholly provided by God. While most definitions of Calvinism are quite insufficient, the Canons of Dordt--a Dutch Confession of Faith--outlined five broad points of Calvinism with the acronym TULIP.

Before diving into the meaning of TULIP, it should be noted that like most points of Christian orthodoxy, TULIP came in response to the heretical views Jacobus Arminius, a Dutch theologian of the late 16th and early 17th century. His followers produced the "Great Remonstrance." (as shown below)

"The Great Remonstrance published in 1610 by the Arminian clergy codified Arminius's beliefs into five major points:
Rejection of the doctrine of election
Rejection of predestination
Rejection of the belief that Christ died for the elect alone
Rejection of the belief in irresistible grace
Assertion of the belief that saints could fall from grace."

(taken from http://www.wsu.edu/~campbelld/amlit/armin.htm)

Thus, the five points of TULIP found in the Canons of Dordt came in direct response to this assault upon the Gospel. The following is a brief introduction to the points of TULIP:

Total Depravity: Humanity is utterly sinful and incapable of anything meritorious in God's sight. Humans are fundamentally broken, and though the Image of God is not totally lost in any person, every part of man and his work is skewed and tainted. Thus, humanity is not only in need of help when it comes to eternal life, but must be revived from the dead.

Unconditional Election: Election refers to God's choosing of a people for Himself, and this is what God does when it comes to salvation. He elects (or predestines) certain people for salvation from the beginning of time. This is great news for Christians, who know the power of sin over an enslaved humanity, because it places salvation entirely in the hands of the only One with the power to bring life.

Limited Atonement: This is often the hardest point to swallow for Christians, though it is true nonetheless. Jesus Christ did not come for all people--He came for His people. He died for those whom God elected from the beginning of time to save (John 3:16--For God so loved the world that He gave His only Son, that whosoever would believe in Him might have eternal life). Is it fair the God would create people without allowing them the opportunity for eternal life? (I used to struggle mightily with that question.) Yet what mercy it took to save some! It also is not like people theoretically lack the opportunity for salvation--the call of Christ is heard round the world. Many will never be given the faith that will overcome their obstinacy and rebellion, however. (For more on this, a coming post will be dedicated to the matter of reprobation.)

Irresistible Grace: While the call of Christ is heard 'round the world, the call is only effectual for some. By effectual, or irresistible, what is meant is that this call for those whom God has chosen is absolutely undeniable. One may resist with all of his or her might, but one cannot fight off the love lavished by God upon His people.

Perseverance of the Saints: When someone truly comes to saving faith in Christ by God's grace, they in no way will ever be able to relinquish that saving faith. As one youth pastor in southern California notes, with today's connotations pertaining to perseverance, preservation would be a better word to use. One is never able to fall away from grace. It is impossible. Christ is the author and perfecter of a Christian's salvation--what He has started, He will finish.

So if God is entirely in control of salvation as with all other things, where does this leave the Christian in his or her impetus to share the Gospel? That question must wait until another post, but until then, remember another product of the Dutch Confessions: guilt-->grace-->gratitude.

What Does it Mean to be "Reformed?"

2008-02-20T20:08:00.000-05:00

George Marsden, a historian of the highest rank, wrote an article entitled "Reformed and American" which sought to define "Reformed" in historical context. In that article, "Reformed" was used to describe three movements (which often overlap): doctrinalistic, pietistic, and culturalistic. While such historical studies can be quite helpful, they fail in two regards: 1) historical trends tend to describe terms much more effectively than they define them, and 2) the implication that a word can only be defined along such lines involves a certain degree of unwarranted cynicism.

The first point can be demonstrated quite easily by applying Marsden's standard to the term "Christianity." This term has meant very different things to different people spanning the globe and two thousand years of church history. The doctrinalist may think Christianity to be nothing more than a sophisticated worldview; the pietist, a moral way of life; the culturalist, a social program. Should any of these groups be considered a part of that unique redemptive religion known as Christianity? In the present day and age, there are many nominal "Christians" who label themselves as such because it is part of their culture. Should they be included in that definition of Christianity because they include themselves in the label?

Absolutely not. Christianity, according to the true Christian, is the one true religion revealed in God's Word which offers the one true hope in the one true Savior who in life and death opened the way of salvation for sinners. This definition would be considered static and objective by the true Christian. The term cannot be effectively applied to a State, culture, or way of life. To do so does violence to the meaning of the term.

The second point can be demonstrated on simple philosophical terms: If, a) a term or fact can have no objective meaning and b) can only be described in different ways by different people of different ages, then c) the way of cynical relativism and baseless skepticism is inevitable. J. Gresham Machen made this point in a different form over and over again against those adherents of Liberalism, who claimed the label of Christian, using the pragmatist argument that doctrine (facts) is merely an expression of each generation's experience. This wrong-headed logic has since extended beyond the bounds of the Church (where it did incredible damage) and spread its sickly cynicism to society-at-large. The appeal to experience is no real appeal at all.

Before this post gets bogged down in negative argumentation, a positive presentation of what Reformed means will be offered. To begin with, Reformed, as it originated in the Reformation, was used to describe the theology derived from Scripture, particularly espoused by John Calvin. This understanding of "Reformed theology" was soon cemented in the Dutch Confessions (Three Forms) and the non-continental Confessions (Westminster). Thus, three "C's" will be proferred in order to provide an accurate understanding of historical Reformed theology.

Calvinism. This primarily refers to the core beliefs of Reformed theology. One of the best expressions of Calvinism was the Reformation "solas" (Latin=only). Sola Scriptura holds that God's Word was the sole authority of the Christian for doctrine and life. Solus Christus holds that Christ is the sole mediator of salvation. Sola Gratia holds that God's grace alone can rescue sinners from death. Sola Fide holds that faith is the sole instrument through which salvation may be attained (as opposed to works in any part). Soli Deo Gloria holds that the glory of God is the sole motive and purpose of human life. These five solas stood opposed at every point to Roman Catholicism and Arminianism, both of which exalted man and denigrated God.

Confessional. Reformed theology is by nature Confessional, as the historic confessions best describe the system of doctrine contained in the Scriptures. It is not merely a belief in predestination or God's sovereignty, but an entire worldview under subjection to God's Word and the confessions that present Its truths systematically.

Covenantal. Finally, Reformed theology is inherently covenantal, in that it considers God's relationship with man to always be conducted through a covenant. Thus, throughout the Scriptures God lovingly binds Himself to His people, declaring "I will be your God and you will be my people." All truth of God is revealed and mediated to man through this covenantal relationship. The eternal binding of this Covenant of Grace is of course found in the perfect life and atoning death of Christ for God's elect.

In addition to all of this, Reformed theology does not claim to be one competitor among many or simply one interpretation of Scripture, but claims to be the proper and faithful understanding of Scripture. In an age in which any claim to exclusive truth is viewed as hostile and arrogant, such a claim comes under frequent attack. Yet, if one is truly gripped by profound truths of the Gospel as they come to light in Calvinism, the confessions, and the covenants, then one is thrusted into incredible awe, wonder, and humility. Out of those truths come the piety and desire to engage the culture that is spoken of by Marsden. As Machen once remarked, Christianity rightly-understood is the "religion of the broken-hearted."

The Delight of (a Certain Type of) Decadence

2008-02-17T19:23:00.000-05:00

You might be considered old-fashioned if you assert that the most sexy clothing worn by the opposite sex is their winter garb. What do mittens, a stocking cap, and a scarf have to do with "sexy?" Old-fashioned fogies like yourself might retort that there is mystery in modesty, and that such mystery unlocks true beauty. How is that possible, especially for the physical beauty that depends so heavily upon sight? Well, a scrooge of clothing etiquette like yourself would reply that mystery opens the way for power, pursuit, and privilege.

In an age that virtually coerces the masses into sheer buttnakedism, an individual shows remarkable power in showing the ability to veil beauty and reveal it as one's discretion. The "right to choose" gains new meaning in this sense. The pursuit of women by men is a static feature of human relationships, but the extent of that pursuit will always be a variable. When a woman's top resembles a double-barreled water balloon launcher, about to be pulled back and let go, she makes the pursuit way too easy. As people guard their hearts and only allow their emotional vulnerability to slowly expand over time, so they must guard their bodies and only allow physical vulnerability to slowly expand over time. In prolonging the typical pursuit, romantic relationships gain a degree of privilege. The male, in his state of delayed gratification, comes to share in the female's respect for her own body and regains his own humanity in learning to care for the heart as well. The female, likewise, comes to appreciate the effort of a male to restrain his physical impulses for her sake. In keeping the proverbial princess in her tower, the male learns how to proceed with valor for the sake of his beloved and the female learns how to wait with patience for the sake of her beloved.

The power of mystery was largely lost in a 20th century modernist culture that devalued the human individual. Evil socialist impulses robbed people of their dignity and made them cogs in the societal machine. Conversely, the reigning capitalist paradigm, applied to human beings, made them as valuable as the social market dictated. Consequently, human beings were worth as much as their weight in butts, boobies, and ding dongs. In addition, the vacuous theories of Darwinism and social utilitarianism turned humans into animals and made them as valuable as the social and sexual "utilities" they offered.

Hence, the following description of certain women by Evelyn Waugh in his book The Loved One (from the 1940's) is incredibly refreshing:

"She was the standard product. A man could leave such a girl in a delicatessen shop in New York, fly three thousand miles and find her again in the cigar stall at San Francisco, just as he would find his favourite comic strip in the local paper; and she would croon the same words to him in moments of endearment and express the same views and preferences in moments of social discourse. She was convenient; but Dennis came of an earlier civilization with sharper needs. He sought the intangible, the veiled face in the fog, the silhouette at the lighted doorway, the secret graces of a body which hid itself under formal velvet. He did not covet the spoils of this rich continent, the sprawling limbs of the swimming-pool, the wide-open painted eyes and mouths under arc-lamps. But the girl who now entered was unique. Not indefinably; the appropriate distinguishing epithet leapt to Dennis's mind the moment he saw her: sole Eve in a bustling hygienic Eden, this girl was a decadent."

Gas-Price Galore

2008-02-16T12:08:00.000-05:00

Perhaps the most ridiculous fiscal complain in American society is that which is leveled at gasoline prices. It is likely that voting habits may even be influenced by such price fluxuations. I am a student who commutes about 300 miles every week, needing to get gas about every week and a half. With my eleven gallon gas tank, I pay an extra dollar and a few cents for every ten cent price hike. Even in times of extraordinary hikes--like that caused by Hurricane Katrina or OPEC ham-fistedness--I might possibly pay an additional $5 every time I refill my tank. Even if those communiting into major cities with gas-guzzling SUV's pay ten times that amount in that time span, they are paying far less than the fine occurred in an ordinary speeding ticket, and they can more than make that cost up with their well-paid city jobs.

Yet people scream and cry about the raising of gas prices. While taxes rob each taxpayer of many thousands of dollars each year and bloaded government programs threaten to make this robbery even more severe, people cry about gas prices! This is the free market at work, people. The world's oil reserves are diminishing (cf. the peak oil debates), while consumption, especially in growing nations like China and India is increasing exponentially. What happens when the supply diminishes and the demand increases? Higher prices. This protects the supply and demands discernment amongst consumers.

The California wildfires provided an apt example in this regard. Several gas station jacked up prices along the major highways out of southern California. People immediately complained about greedy price-gouging by the oil companies in a time of distress (rumors of $9 a gallon at some stations). The only problem with that accusation is that it lacks thought. Hundreds of thousands of people were fleeing their homes, and the last time the do-nothing EPA inspectors checked, gas stations were not connected to a vast underground American oil reserve. The finite supply had to be protected and preserved for those who really needed gas. A dramatically-increased price will accomplish such an intended effect.

The witless witchhunt for rich oil barons will only turn this minor inconvenience into a major debacle. The CEO of Exxon-Mobil makes $13 million a year, while George Clooney makes $25 million. While $13 million is a lot of money, it is nothing in the realm of the rich. Meanwhile Exxon-Mobil is affected by OPEC extortioning and a lack of easily-accessible oil reserves. Money must be poured into research and heavy-cost extraction efforts (for example, in portions of Canada where oil is extracted from sand flats). If the populist politicians demand that these corporations reduced prices, they will create a fiscal crisis and energy shortage.

What this comes down to is simple personal responsibility. Fattened-up Americans need to stop looking for external sources to blame with vague ideals of get-slim-quick schemes, and should actually tighten their own belts. Oil has become America's achilles heal, making the wealthiest country in the world beholden to tyrannical despots. Its use also produces air pollution that people of all political stripes find unpleasant, if not damaging. Instead of punishing the evil, rich men for this problem, why not exercise personal discipline? Why not seize the opportunity afforded by higher gasoline prices to consider the importance of every commute and seek new ways of energy-efficient transportation, such as public busses or hybrid vehicles. In the meantime, the populist politicans can divert their energy from conspiracy-based economic McCarthyism to worthwhile proposals offering economic incentives to those corporations that invest in alternative energy.

Let it Rain!

2008-02-14T14:08:00.000-05:00

The Garden of Eden was a paradise in every way imaginable--untainted by sin, harmony between man and his environment, and a landscape painted in shades of unimaginable beauty. When Adam and Eve sinned, they were banished from the Garden and cast into the wilderness of thorny toil and painful pregnancy. The generations and the work they did would both be encompassed by the shadow of sin. Within that wilderness, man remains to this day.

Yet flowers bloom. Some 2,000 years ago, Jesus Christ walked within the wilderness. Soon after that miraculous baptism of Christ, where God the Father thundered "This is my Son, with whom I am well pleased," and the Spirit hovered, signifying His presence with Christ, the Messiah was cast into the desert for a time of temptation. This desert could be seen as the Garden of Eden A.S. (after Satan). In this barren ruin of Eden, the wild beast again submitted to the rule of man; in this barren ruin, Christ--the second Adam--was tested by Satan, but this time, the Word of God prevailed over the word of the tempter.

God's people for thousands of years previous to that point had attached themselves to the hope of the promise (Gen. 3:15) and waited for the day when relief would come to a parched world with parched hearts. In the day of Christ's ministry, buds began to bloom and a trickle of water seeped from the earth. He walked the worldly wilderness, with the mission to know it and conquer it on behalf of His people. The whole of human history emphatically declared its thirst, to which Christ said "I am the water of life."

The continual rainstorms in southern California right now powerfully evoke this ancient imagery. In a land known for its barrenness, the most vibrant hues of green now abound. What once was scorched by wildfire now blooms anew with life. Amidst such flourishing scenery, how can one not think of Christ?

Through Adam, the first federal representative of humanity, came sin, death, suffering, and pain. Through Christ, the second Adam, the new representative of the redeemed peoples of the earth, came righteousness, life, peace, and hope. Christ, upon His perfect life, death, resurrection, and ascension, made rare buds bloom and issued forth that trickle of watery hope.

There will be a day--that Great Day--when Christ will return on the clouds. The buds will spring forth into a new Garden and the trickle will turn into a mighty torrent, breaking through the impediments of death. On that Day, a new heavens and earth will be created. Heaven and earth will meet in the New Jerusalem, but the new city of God, unlike the original Garden, will allow for no more rebellion. The tree of the knowledge of good and evil will no longer be accesible, but will be replaced by the overgrowth of the tree of life. The leaves of that tree will be for the healing of the nations. There will be no more sin, no more pain, no more tears.

My God, let it rain!

Where is Your Authority?

2008-02-13T14:47:00.000-05:00

In a small book by J.I. Packer, entitled Freedom and Authority, the ancient Roman moralist, Seneca, is quoted as describing the slavery to self as the worst possible slavery. He believed that any other authority structure was preferable to the tyranny imposed by one's own will. John Paul II put out an encyclical not too long ago, putting his own spin on Seneca's sentiments. The belated leader of the Roman-Catholic church wrote that true freedom is exercised in one's ability to escape animalistic impulses in favor or reason and virtue.

Like Seneca and John Paul II, many Christians and pagans throughout world history have sought to establish an accountability to a higher authority. They would engage in this quest because, through deep reflection, they would come to realization that human authority was compromised by the selfish desires of the human heart. To grant absolute human authority was even more unthinkable. As Lord Acton once said, "Absolute power corrupts absolutely."

Although the need for a higher authority was well established amongst the ancients, the source of that higher authority was oft-debated. Ancient Judaism sought its authority in a god of rules--compromising on the Old Testament God of the Law that condemns. In this way, human reason and righteousness could be guarded by self-imposed, Pharisaic rules. Ancient Greeks and Romans worshipped pagan deities, who happened to be quite permissive when it came to those animalistic desires of mankind. Roman Catholicism, arising a few centuries after the early Church, sought to make the Church the guardian of God's words--most notably centralized in the papacy. In all of these various expressions, people cloaked God's rule in human garb, preferring a rule that was made less terrifying through some form of human mediation. None of these systems were willing to fully account for God's holy law and man's wholly depraved character. Even so, the pursuit of a higher authority was generally a given.

The post-Enlightenment Western World tired of such antiquated views and sought to establish a worldview based on the autonomy (independence and authority) of the human mind. Philosophers established rational proofs and naturalistic scientists established a scientific method, both of which gave man absolute, unquestioned authority over the object of his pursuits--an absolute authority that would have made Lord Acton shudder. Human autonomy in this form--where God is ignored in the initiation, process, and end of human enquiry--became an inhumane autonomy. As America's Founding Fathers correctly noted with their system of checks and balances in human governance, human beings are always in need of accountability.

In the Western World of the 20th century, mankind bowed down to the primacy of the human mind--an unchecked mind which set loose unprecedented horrors across the face of the globe. Such human-centered external power is now checked by the power of individual human experience, which looks within for self-guidance. Instead of being guided by optimistic individuals with misguided notions of truth, this truth-from-within conception will ultimately bring a truth-by-consensus mentality by necessity of order, and will bring the same sort of human-centered tyranny unleashed upon the world in the past century.

So where is authority to be found? For the Christian, that authority is found solely within the Word of God. The Bible is the transcendent Word from God, breaking upon human hearts as the immanent source of hope. It is through the Bible that God speaks to mankind, offering the divine plan of redemption in the sphere of human history. When one bows the knee to the God of the Bible, she is acknowledging He who created the world in perfect harmony and even now restrains sin and chaos through His providence. When once bows the knee to anything else, she is prostrating herself to the same forces that initially brought chaos and brokenness.

Christians must resist the tyrannical authority of the papacy, which assumes the throne of Christ with utter disregard for the Lord of Hosts. They must also resist the tyranny of "mini-popes"--those church leaders who deny the need for accountability from a larger denominational structure. In addition, those charismatic groups that claim the power of the Spirit while neglecting the power of the Word must also be considered dangerous. There are many Christians in all of these other bodies, but they are Christians playing with fire.

Instead, the Christian should submit himself to a local church body within a larger denomination which professes the supremacy of the Word of God over all of human life. He should profess allegiance to the historic Confession of that denomination, a confession which unites believers of many ages and many countries under a clear understanding of the Bible. In this way, he will also avoid the pitfalls of interpretational, a la carte Christian relativism. God speaks to His people as they wander this worldly wilderness and has granted that the Church maintain the bonds of unity in these dark days. Why forsake the gifts of the Lord?

A Jacket is Not Enough

2008-02-12T23:05:00.000-05:00

The breeze bit against the young man's body through his jacket.

Normally, warmth is something taken for granted. (Finitude has a remarkable ability of finding someone out.) Though the clouds do not obscure the sun--though a man could still bathe in the warm rains of his world--the clouds still cast a shadow and the proverbial man still finds himself chilled.

God could have cut His creative work short and left it with the definitive remark, "Good." If anyone cuts such corners, it is not God. If anyone remains unsatisfied with simple "good," it is God. The God who demands perfection from sinners according to His righteous character could never settle for anything less than perfection in His own work. Thus, God created His masterpiece--opting to make her of rib instead of the dust of the earth. He veiled her in long hair and gave her the power to sustain the generations of mankind. "Very good."

Wind is by nature a finite force, exacting its will without regard to those within its folds, yet bound to pass as a word spoken and forgotten. It enshrouds man within the walls of its blustery tomb for a moment, leaving a cacophony of silence in its wake. Who fills the silence, but God, the Master-Craftsman?

The young man thought to himself, "A jacket is not enough."

Christian Tyranny

2008-02-10T19:39:00.000-05:00

The Dec. 9th, 2007 issue of the Washington Post Magazine features an article entitled "The Trials and Tribulations of Hashmel Turner." The byline: "An unassuming small-town preacher and his unconventional lawyer are trying to win the right to pray to Jesus at city council meetings." At issue is the alleged right of a city council member to pray in Jesus' name. The case, Hashmel C. Turner Jr. v. The City Council of the City of Fredericksburg, may advance to the Supreme Court where the "right to pray" in city council meetings will either be enshrined into federal law or prohibited.

What is the purpose of the State in this world? Is it to function as a religious organization? Many would like to think so. The Religious Right speaks with wistful nostalgia of the golden age of a Christian America, and many speak of America as the modern day Israel, representing the cause of Christ before a fallen world. Socialists also believe the State to be a religious entity. Sin is defined as social injustice in this scheme, and redemption is found through the power of State to remedy social evils.

The traditional political dichotomy of liberal v. conservative proves itself to be unhelpful when it comes to Church-State tensions. Both ideological groups tend to view Christianity as a means to an end. Liberals have typically viewed the Church and the State as cooperative entities, working together for social justice. Conservatives have typically view the Church and State as competitive entities, in which the Church must harness the power of the State in order to promote and enforce a code of civic virtues.

What is the Christian position? Christ said that His Kingdom was not of this world. Instead of riding into Jerusalem on a mighty military steed and implementing a theocratic state, He rode into Jerusalem on a lowly donkey and bore a Roman cross, instituting the theocracy of the Church in the process. He instructed people to render unto Caesar what belonged to him and to God what belongs to Him. The Kingdom advances on this earth when the Church proclaims the redemptive message of the Gospel.

What results have past intermingling of Church and State borne in history? One needs only look at the Crusades for a clear example of the Church inappropriately wielding the sword of the State. Roman-Catholic tyranny and its usurpation of the throne of Christ with a mere man may likewise be tied to its political interests. In fact, every authoritarian regime in world history has by definition taken upon itself religious properties in order to exact its power.

Was America ever a Christian nation? Never. It was founded upon such religious principles as natural law and an awareness of sin, liberty and the need of the government to preserve the integrity of the family and Church to attend to religious matters. Christian? No. It could best be labeled as a blessed period in which God, in His common grace, imbued the American consciousness with an extraordinary sense of civic righteousness.

Is there such a thing as a Christian nation? There is no such thing. The State is a God-ordained insitution (Gen. 4), which is specifically areligious. Ideally, the State preserves the right of the Church to maintain its redemptive prerogatives. The usurpation of religious functions by the State necessarily comes at the expense of the Church and the family. Likewise, the Church, by aiding and abetting this diabolical usurpation, becomes a tool in the hand of idolatrous man rather than Almighty God.

The Twentieth Century has seen an unwarranted transfer of religious power from the Church to the State. As a result, the Church often finds itself corrupt and spiritually impotent and the State has become a bureaucratic monstrosity that competes with the Christian remnant for the spiritual vitality of human souls.

In the aforementioned article, Turner is described as living "through bad times: segregation, bomb shelters, the Vietnam War. But something was different. 'Before, it seems like things came from somewhere outside. Now it seems like America is eroding from within.'" Within that statement, one finds the modernist quest to put the Church and State in bed together and make pseudo-spiritualized pagan babies. Something was different in the twentieth century: evil had come to be viewed as an exterior force, such as segregation, Hitler's Germany, or Tojo's Japan. In the 21st century, such absurd simplifications are discarded and the the disturbing realities of every human heart are coming to light.

At least Turner's lawyer is consistent--he appeals for the same rights to sectarian prayer for Muslims and Wiccans as he does for Christians. Conservatives are right to stress that the Church-State separation is intended more as a buffer for the Church's right to free expression than as a wall with which to exclude religious voices from public venues (the latter opinion was voiced by the bigot, Thomas Jefferson, years after the Constitution). They are not right, however, in assuming that religious disciplines, such as prayer, are appropriate and beneficial for the State. The battle for public prayer should not be between sectarian and non-sectarian prayer, but between prayer generally and an absence of prayer. The latter should be preferred.

"Teacher's can't control kids anymore because the government took God out of all these places," said one member of Turner's church. Really? Perhaps kids are uncontrollable because the government took upon itself the responsibility of raising children--a responsibility entirely unsuitable for an areligious entity. Two other members of Turner's church said that it didn't matter whether one prayed to God or Allah because "Everyone is praying to the same God." That is what happens when the Church submits her prerogatives to the State. The Enlightenment figures had their goddess of reason; Americans have their goddess of non-sectarian spiritual virtue.

In the West, the Church has largely prostituted herself to the nations, much as Israel did in the Old Testament. Is it any surprise then that the vital centers of the Church are developing in third-world countries? America has not failed--the Church failed by handing the keys of the Kingdom to an entity which knows not the door.

Rebels with a Cause

2008-02-09T13:33:00.001-05:00

The true health of a Church may be measured in its proclamation of the dark side of the Gospel: the power and guilt of sin. It is one's doctrine of sin that provides the landscape for one's doctrine of Christ. Christ came to conquer the power and guilt of sin, so how it is exactly defined also defines the ministry of Christ and His redemptive work.

In that vein, men like the one above (Joel Osteen) may and should be considered heretics. Even a non-confrontational postmodern should be able to make this claim. As Dr. Michael Horton said on 60 Minutes, Osteen preaches a "cotton candy gospel." How dare one make this claim about a nice young man like Pastor Osteen--a man who loves Jesus so much? Because Pastor Osteen loves an emasculated Jesus. Joel Osteen defines the guilt of sin as one's inability to escape their past, and the power of sin as poor self-esteem and self doubt. Consequently, Osteen defines Jesus as the conquerer of the past and the giver of self-esteem. Jesus becomes the little string-drawn puppet attached to the fingers of an autonomous humanity, rather than the God-man who will return on the clouds with awe and terror in His wake.

There is a reason why "sin" and "Christ" are the two hardest words to speak and hear. One exposes the horrible plight of the human heart; the other reveals the exclusive way to escape the penalty of that plight. That is why it is admirable when a young Christian finds herself trying to speak those words of power when many a pastor of God's flock display cowardice of the highest rank in avoiding them.

For those looking for a rubric with which to judge the faithfulness of the preaching and teaching they receive, here is what the Constitution of the Presbyterian Church says about sin: "Sin is want of conformity unto, or transgression of, the law of God" (Shorter Catechism, 14). Sin is not injustice, as the socialist would claim; it is not feelings of guilt, as the psychologist would claim; it is not even bad deeds, as some Christians might think. Sin is the guiltiness of man before the law of God--the law that man definitively rejected and rebelled against in the garden of Eden and which is rejected and rebelled against in every human heart (Rom. 1 and 3:23). Every system and ideology that desires an allegiance as strong as Christianity must redefine sin and salvation in its own terms in order to claim that allegiance.

There is no excuse for ambiguity on the matter of sin by the Church--such ambiguity enshrouds the Savior in shadow. Sure, it is a painful thing to hear (especially for modern and postmodern Americans), but the the Scripture tells that the Gospel is offensive. Even so, there is such love in bringing sin to light: "For God demonstrates His own love for us in this--while we were still sinners, Christ died for us" (Rom. 5:8). The doctrine of God is here: sovereignty (absolute control and rule), revelatory (accessible to His creation), and loving (mercy toward sinners). The doctrine of sin is here: guiltiness and helplessness (in need of some supernatural act to escape God's wrath). The doctrine of Christ is here: the atonement (offering Himself us to pay our penalty, turning away God's wrath).

Lord God, please convict human hearts of their sin and pastors' hearts in their unfaithfulness in preaching and teaching this necessary message. Please teach Your people to come to terms with their disease rather than being distracted with symptoms--exposing our wounds before the salve of Your grace in Christ. We are rebels against the living God, with the cause of thwarting Your purposes. Our lives are individual towers of Babel, seeking to exalt ourselves to the highest place. Yet in our pride, we stumble. You deconstruct our baseless edifices and reveal to us the Roman cross in which the God-man connected You to Your people in one great redemptive act. In light of our need for Your grace and Your fulfillment of our need, we--the people of the broken heart--prostrate ourselves before You in reverence and awe. May You lighten our burden and our path as we walk the road of faith, giving You the glory. Only in Your Son can sinners know the love of God. We know, and we rejoice.

In Jesus' Name, we pray. Amen.

A Snow-Strewn Mist

2008-02-06T12:12:00.000-05:00

The sky, congested with gray, drops millions of little while flurries.

The ground is thick; the trees are bare.

Sight extends no more than fifty yards to the past or the future.

Each torrent of flurries presents another wave of nostalgia.

The wall of white obscures the view while imbuing hope.

The chill forces the heart to beat with greater fury.

Enveloped by a snow-strewn midst, I am lost in wonder.

Where is Home?

2008-02-05T22:44:00.000-05:00

Home is where the heart is. Aside from the bad grammar in that statement, it is really quite profound. What do you think of when you think of home? In Michigan, I lived in a house with six other guys, but not a home. I share a house with five other men in California, but no a home. Whenever we picture "home," we are reminded of the smell of Dad's old suit or Mom's perfume as she got ready to go somewhere. We remember a bed surrounded by posters and the places in the yard where we liked to play. Home is where the heart is.

We inevitably leave the home of our upbringing for another home. Until we find this mythical "other home," we are in a very real sense homeless. We keep our hearts in a small bandana tied to a stick to await the time when the bandana may be untied. Perhaps that is why college and the period right after so often cause an existential crisis--the homeless feeling cannot be assuaged. With a nature that cries for autonomy and in a society that demands personal responsibility, this feeling becomes exacerbated. How can we live in a world that doesn't offer us a home? Can brave and enduring battles be won abroad without a home where we can rest and regain our fervor?

There is a temporal remedy for this homelessness in found within the auspices of marriage. The bandanas finally are untied and the valuable content within is put on display. This is where the existential crisis of the collegiate years finds its resolution. Moving from location to another location does not affect this status, as even a tent shared with the spouse is made a home. The howling winds of the worldly wilderness may whip through a large, but lonely house; they will not whistle within the embrace of those joined in marriage.

Yet, even marriage is but a tent for the home-seeking human being in this world. The tent is a mansion for those who do not know the Lord, for within its confines they find their greatest home. For Christians, this tent is a lookout post--there they find refreshment; there they search the horizon for the coming home; there they offer the water of life to weary travelers; there they know that they abide in a grace afforded for the home-bound until that Day comes.

Hebrews 11:8 By faith Abraham, when called to go to a place he would later receive as his inheritance, obeyed and went, even though he did not know where he was going. 9By faith he made his home in the promised land like a stranger in a foreign country; he lived in tents, as did Isaac and Jacob, who were heirs with him of the same promise. 10For he was looking forward to the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God.

Bob den Dulk: Building Bridges

2008-02-02T13:53:00.000-05:00

Ecumenism is incredibly overrated, as it often assumes that various denominations will diminish key distinctive in order to reach this higher ideal of "unity." This concept of unity is an appealing bowl of stew for the weary Christian, but often comes at the cost of one's confessional birthright. At Calvin College, I saw this tendency at work in a meeting between some CRC leaders and many Mainline leaders. At the time, I didn't realize that the only commonality amongst that group was the belief is some vague notion of Jesus. That seemed enough to build unity amongst those people. My denomination, the EPC, suffers a similar desire for unity. Like the fundamentalists of old, the EPC seeks to unite its church to a small list of "essential" doctrines, while ignoring other key distinctives.

True unity for Christians is found in the historic confessions. All true Christians believe in the Bible as God's authoritative Word, but each denomination has a confession that says is essence "We hold these truths to be self-evident." A sign of denominational decline is found in the sacrifice of any part of a confession for the sake of unity; a sign of its growth is found in gathering people around the deep unity forged upon a confession.

Bob den Dulk, like most Dutch men, was a giant. Also like many of the Dutch, he was gentle giant. He was an ordained elder and administrator in the greatest of Dutch-American denominations, the Christian Reformed Church. From early on in his life, he knew that a non-compromising unity was a blessing, and sought that unity amongst Reformed denominations with similar confessions. As a little boy, he spent time with one of the great leaders of the ecumenical movement: Cornelius VanTil. As the PCUSA succumbed to heresy and apostasy, the CRC quickly sent aid to the beleaguered conservatives under Machen. This mostly came in the form of three professors to Westminster--the foremost being VanTil. While unknown to the public at-large, VanTil in my estimation may have been the greatest theorist of Christian apologetics in the modern era. He was also a symbol of historic Reformed unity.

It was not surprising then that little Bob den Dulk eventually went to a Dutch Reformed school, Calvin College, followed by a Presbyterian seminary, Westminster Seminary in Philadelphia. For years he faithfully labored as an administrator at Westminster until called upon to help plant a Reformed seminary on the West Coast, later known as Westminster Seminary California. Early on, WSC was known as a Presbyterian school, adhering to the Westminster Confession. In Bob den Dulk's five years as President of WSC, he was able to convince the seminary to also adopt the Three Forms of Unity, the Dutch Confessions, as another point of adherence. In doing so, he created a legacy in which students from the URC, CRC, OPC, PCA, and EPC come together as a unified body of Reformed Christians under the two beautiful banners of historic Reformed unity.

Bob den Dulk not only sought out God-honoring ecumenism between people of similar confessions, he demonstrated that warm-hearted love most characteristic of the Dutch brethren. When he met a firey Christian in the Philippines who wanted seminary training, den Dulk helped him through the admissions process at WSC and took him into his home, treating him like a son. This man, now a Christian leader in the Philippines, wept the last time he saw his "American" father. Bob den Dulk also seized opportunities given to him to share the Gospel. One of my elders at New Life Presbyterian Church was a non-Christian when overseeing the construction of the WSC chapel...before he met the Lord through Bob den Dulk. My housemate Zach now has several shelves of his bookcase filled with Calvin's commentaries, given to him by Bob den Dulk this past summer.

Bob den Dulk died in early August, leaving behind a legacy amongst friends, family, Westminster Philadelphia, Westminster California, Covenant College, and a host of Reformed denominations of various backgrounds. Every path he blazed was done with the grace of God. My one memory of this giant of a man was from Board luncheon at WSC where he was explaining to Dr.Kim (one of my professors) that conservative churches might leave the embattled CRC for the PCA if only the PCA let them continue to hold to their Dutch confessions as well as the Westminster Confession. I inwardly wondered, "Why not?" As his death loomed, Bob den Dulk sent out many letters of hope amidst his suffering. Westminster Seminary California demonstrates the best of true ecumenism, united upon the greatest of historic confessions. Much of that spirit can be traced to a giant of a man, whose shadow still lingers over the faithful remnant of Reformed Christians in the United States.

A Man's Heart

2008-01-30T13:33:00.000-05:00

I have just started reading A Grief Observed by C.S. Lewis, a short portrait of his searing pain in the aftermath of the death of his wife. The utter agony he describes reminds me of a trend that friends of mine have pointed out amongst old couples in their churches: when the wife dies first, the husband dies soon after. Even if this trend is largely anecdotal, I think it speaks to a truth that Lewis alludes to as well: A man's life is a heartbeat; his wife is the heart.

The female poet in Song of Songs notes that her love is worth more than "all the wealth in his house" (8:7), for she is not just another woman for the wealthy king, but (in her words) "my vineyard is mine to give" (8:12). She knows that wealth and power may still lack love. As N'Sync once sung, "For the girl who has everything, I give you love." Decades before, the Beatles sang a similar theme, "Money can't buy you love." While this principle applies to both man and woman, I cannot help but think the love of a godly woman is more valuable.

The writer of Proverbs expresses a similar regard for the value of a wife: "A wife of noble character is her husband's crown (12:4). He who finds a wife finds what is good and receives favor from the Lord (18:22). A wife of noble character who can find? She is worth far more than rubies (31:10)." A wife is a husbands crown, a sign of the Lord's favor, and invaluable. More importantly, she is his heart. Unless specifically called to singlehood, a man's heart and love is wasted in this world when not lavished upon a woman. It is the most true and pure expression of Christ's love for His Church.

It is only a woman who can unlock this part of a man. Without her, a man often feels wasted. People often remark that if a man is the head of a marriage, then the woman is the neck. When not used as just a witty line, this can express some valuable truths: even as a man leads his marriage with love and humility, he is dependent upon the support offered by his wife. But what is the neck but the pipeline between the head and heart? If the heart stops beating, everything else becomes useless. A wife offers a love that becomes life for her husband and nurtures life in her children. Without that love, for all intensive purposes, a man is dead or in mourning.

Five Fearless Political Predictions

2008-01-29T15:22:00.000-05:00

One of the best portions of the old Sports Illustrated NFL Preview issues was the "Five Fearless Predictions" given by one of their experts. Extravagant claims were made, exciting the sports fan's imagination. If any of those predictions were fulfilled, the expert would receive due praise. In that light, I am making several predictions for this coming election cycle, just to put myself "on the record," so to speak.

1) African-American voters will become more disillusioned with the Democratic Party than they have in decades as a result of the racially-tinged comments made by the Clintons. As a result, they may become slightly more receptive to Republican overtures if Hillary is the nominee.

2) If Barack Obama takes the Democratic nomination, he will handily win the Presidency, as a historic shift in the "evangelical" vote propels him by a significant margin. The largest Republican voting has been trending toward more liberal positions, theological and political, and will rally behind a charismatic Obama with his profession of faith in Jesus Christ. They may even give him close to 50% of their vote.

3) Hillary Clinton, presuming she will be the Democratic nominee, will do more than ever to alienate male voters, as the vindictive spirit and crocodile tears which make her sympathetic to liberal women will appear to men as emotional manipulation, gender-based hate-mongering, and blatantly sexist. Men can be offended by such a posture--just ask Barack Obama.

4) The nomination of Mike Huckabee, likely as a VP candidate if anything, would help hasten the political demise of the so-called Religious Right. His suave, charismatic, stump-speech persona may play well to religious conservatives, but it will also undermine his credibility amongst more mainstream voters. In addition, his nomination would provide Democrats and Independents the opportunity of a lifetime to mortally wound the Religious Right political movement.

And the most audacious of predictions...(drum roll please)

5) Assuming the Hillary Clinton and John McCain win their parties' respective nominations, the McCain camp will make under-the-table overtures to Barack Obama to run as McCain's VP on a split ticket. McCain is rumored to have made similar overtures to John Kerry in 2004, and Barack Obama may covet the opportunity to become the first African-American VP. If he runs with McCain, that may very well happen, even against the establishment-endorsed campaign of the mighty Hillary.

A Few Essential Christian Books

2008-01-28T16:48:00.000-05:00

Many Christians go in search of books that help them grow holistically deeper in the faith. By holistically deeper, I mean a depth that is measured in more than simple piety. People are realizing perhaps more and more that while books by C.S. Lewis and Rick Warren may nature the Christian mind and heart, respectively, they don't root the Christian in his or her tradition and historic formulations. Enough said on that point...

1) The Bible--This may seem like common sense, but there are better and worse Bibles out there. For one, "The Message" by Eugene Peterson is not a Bible, but a paraphrase, and should never be used as more than a supplement. It is not God-breathed. I would also not suggest the King James Version, as its old-English colloquialisms are becoming more difficult to understand in the modern vernacular. It also doesn't draw directly from the ancient Greek and Hebrew as other contemporary translations do, and thus lacks the valuable proximity to the original autographs. I personally prefer the ESV, but also love the NIV and preach from the latter.

2) The Confessions--The most important works for the Christian after Holy Scripture are the historic confessions. For all Christians, this includes the ancient texts like the Apostles Creed and the Nicene Creed. For those who align themselves with one of the two great branches of the Reformation (outside of Lutheranism)--Dutch Reformed or Presbyterian--that would also include the Three Forms of Unity or Westminster Confession of Faith, respectively. For Reformed Baptists, it would be the London Confession from the mid-nineteenth century, though I am not sure of its title.

3) Systematic Theology by Berkhof--There are three editions of this comprehensive systematic work by deceased Calvin Seminary professor, Louis Berkhof. They are each different sizes, appealing to people of different levels of spiritual maturity. Other great systematic works exist by other past figures, such as Bavinck, and more contemporary theologians, such as Horton.

4) Institutes by John Calvin--Calvin is the father of the Presbyterian/Reformed wing of the Reformation and his Institutes provide a tremendous intellectual grounding to the faith. His commentaries on Scripture are also unparalleled in many respects. Works by other figures of the orthodox past, such as Augustine and Luther, are also very profitable.

5) Christianity and Liberalism (1923) by Machen--Out of the ashes of the modernist-fundamentalist controversy of the 1920's came an enduring classic which pitted Christian orthodoxy against paganistic counterfeits within the Church. In a time in which the line was drawn between "conservative" and "liberal," Machen reminded the Church that there was still a historic line called "confessional," which traced its roots through the Reformation to the Holy Scriptures and early Church Fathers. Through Machen, there still exists this historic, confessional movement in the form of three denominations--OPC, PCA, and EPC, and many seminaries--Westminster Philadelphia, Westminster California, Covenant Seminary, Reformed Theological Seminary. This book has also been life-changing for countless thousands, including yours truly, in reminding us what Christianity is all about.

A League of Sinners

2008-01-28T12:47:00.000-05:00

The Church may be spoken of in two senses: Visible and Invisible. The visible Church is the current collection of people visibly gathered in Christian churches each Sunday, made up of both believers and unbelievers. The invisible Church is the collection of believers worldwide--those whose faith and hope are permanently affixed to Christ. In order to guard the purity and unity of the Church in each of these manifestations, Reformed Christians have often spoken of the "spirituality" of the Church. This refers to exclusively redemptive message of salvation from sin in Christ which belongs to the Church, as opposed to the social and political aims of the State. The last (incredibly long) entry was an attempt to promote the spirituality of the Church in the perpetual age of simultaneous advance and decline in a sinful world.

That said, my good friend at Calvin Seminary was very helpful in his response and I would like to interact with a few of his thoughts. First, I am thankful for his critique. In an age in which potential disagreements are swept under the rug in order to "dialogue," his clear and forthright response is refreshing. Second, all of his points are apropos and many indicate ways in which I could have been more clear in my writing, leaving only a small remainder in which there might actually be some disagreement.

With regard to agreeable points, let me list a few: We have both had friends who struggled with homosexuality, and several of them in college were mutual friends. The conduct of many "conservative" Christians toward people with this struggle has and continues to be morally repugnant. People who struggle with homosexuality are confused and ashamed, likely feeling the same type of disgust and stigmatization that pornography-addicts feel. They needs Christians in their lives who speak clearly and love abundantly. These people are often failed on both counts. The saddest case in recent memory is that of a recent graduate at Calvin College who at one point fought against his temptation, yet later capitulated because, I believe, he lacked people who spoke clearly and loved abundantly. This case still grieves me greatly, and provoked my sharp rebuke of those theological obscurantists in positions of power at Calvin. We should not be fighting for homosexuality or against homosexuals, but should fight with people who struggle in this regard against that which afflicts them.

I also join my good friend in expressing pride in a denomination that takes the time to deal with such an issue. There seems to be two dueling approaches amongst denominations of various stripes: either doctrinal clarity or social methodology. In my circles, doctrinal stances are clearly marked, but possibilities of engagement are often neglected. That is one of the reasons why I visited Mars Hill Church in Seattle, which does well at both. In other circles, particularly Mainline (PCUSA, United Methodist, etc.), engagement is refined into an art while being bereft of standards of truth. In engaging the issue and the people, the CRC is setting a fine precedent for other denominations. This courage and thoughtfulness also marks my friend's blog on the issue. Their ability to ask the tough question about a natural (though fallen) homosexual orientation is one that will require careful consideration in years to come.

Finally, my friend offered a sterling reminder to be careful in my remarks concerning the origin of sin. I incorporated the Romans 1 language of God giving sinners over to the consequences of their sin, but did not clearly remark that God is by no means the author of sin. This "giving over" is explicitly a just punishment and not an arbitrary afflicting--man rebelled against God by worshipping the created order, so God allowed for his sin to be revealed in all its perversity. God is the judge, not the author of sin.

Now by way of contrast and reaffirmation of my original point in this entry, the doctrine of the spirituality of the Church dictates that the Church remember its primary mission of proclaiming redemption from sin (always accompanied by pious acts) and its sole authority for faith and practice: the Holy Bible. That was my critique of certain sectors of the Church in my last entry--that in the most recent age of transitory values and scientific studies, the Church should resist establishing its center in anything but the Word. The abuse of this center has ruined several formerly prestigious denominations in the past century, and threatens to overwhelm many more. This warning is not only aimed at denominations that are perhaps accommodating too much to "progressive" values and norms, but also especially at the larger conservative evangelical movement which often roots its knee-jerk hostility toward people who struggle with homosexuality with an array of their own reports--biological and sociological (just go to the website of Family Research Council).

In my friend's last response, he asks if people may adopt the "homosexual" label as they do the "alcoholic" or "adulterer" label in order to more clearly identify the struggle and resists its many perils. That point has merit and is well-received. I would make what I believe to be a more helpful approach, however: that we all adopt the "sinner" label. Labels often have the power to establish one's inward and outward identity. They also play into the hands of those who love to stigmatize certain sins according to a self-revelatory hierarchy. When we all incorporate the label "sinner," we find ourselves on the same level ground at the foot of the cross.

The Church is a league of sinners--sinners who have been redeemed by the blood of the God-man. When the Church remembers the totality and pervasiveness of sin in all human hearts, she will again function as that subservient beacon of light to a world enshrouded by darkness. In that day, sinners will wince under the power of God's conviction as those who experience the pain of peroxide in a wound, rather than the salt normally administered by self-righteous individuals. In that day, sinners of all stripes will find healing in the wings of Christ's Church.

May God hasten the coming of the new heavens and earth, where the reign of sin and tears is replaced by the Kingdom of Christ. Until that day, may the Church remain faithful to her calling as Christ's body on earth and never forsake the very Word of God given her.

Will the Center Hold?

2008-01-27T20:06:00.000-05:00

Turning and turning in the widening gyre/The falcon cannot hear the falconer/Things fall apart; the center cannot hold/Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world/The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere/The ceremony of innocence is drowned/The best lack all conviction, while the worst/Are full of passionate intensity.--from "The Second Coming" by William Butler Yates (1919)

A common cliche in contemporary political, social, and religious circles is the question: Will the center hold? Although ignorant in the "finer things" of historic literature, I cannot help but hear the echoes of Yates poem in the current conservative-christian cry of impending doom due to the forsaking of our nations "Christian" heritage. In direct contrast to that sentiment one reads from Brian McLaren, the Church's own Dr.Jekyll and Mr.Hyde (civil demeanor/theological monstrosity), the optimistic refrain that "there is some kind of pull back to the center," by which he means a quest for new-found unity amongst the disillusioned. Amongst Christians of various sorts then, one finds both hopeless pessimism and baseless optimism.

This contrast can be seen in Yates' day as well. His poem was a year removed from the Allied victory in WWI--the effect of which was to inflate American pride and optimism to soaring new heights. At the same time, a mind-numbing modernism was settling upon American intelligence and morality. More and more, the answer to the question "What is right?" came in the form of "whatever is most useful to the end of unity and prosperity."

The dualism likewise appeared after WWII. Allied troops had just defeated the most insatiably blood-thirsty regime in the history of mankind, only to find Europe subsequently partitioned by an "Iron Curtain," to borrow Churchill's term. On one side of that curtain, freedom reigned; on the other side, a monster that would soon supplant Hitler as history's great villain as between 40 and 100 million people were wiped out in less than a century. This new division was probably less disturbing for the deeply-reflective types than the knowledge the same naturalistic-materialist philosophy (Darwinism) that gave rise to the evils of Soviet and (later) Chinese communism was shared by the democratic West. Mengele's machines of inhumanity and torture were shut down in Germany, only to be replaced by gulags in the Soviet Union and abortion clinics in the West.

Many thought America to either be on the verge of collapse or salvation in 1967, according to a recent article by former British MP, Jonathan Aikman. In that year, communism was seen to be spreading its evil tentacles across the world and flower power was lifting America's hippies to new drug-induced highs. As in the time of post-WWI optimism and the post-WWII "baby boom," this perceived time of radical alteration was little more than a blip on the historical radar screen. Optimistic dreams were deferred and pessimistic fears were alleviated.

That leads us back to the contrasting outlooks on the present day. Science since the days of Darwin has attempted to maintain an objective neutrality in its analyses, aiming to descriptive rather than prescriptive. Following Kant's contrast between objective "facts" and subjective, non-scientific "values," science has arrogantly but judiciously maintained that line and focused upon its own perceived prerogatives. We now live in a day of the pseudo-sciences of so-called "social science," however. Psychology has blurred the line between the chemical sciences and social sciences, combining description and prescription. The most phony of sciences, sociology and my own political science ("politicology?"), study "people" and "trends" and try to prescribe "innovative" new ideas to accommodate the changes in society.

In his fascinating recent blog on Dumbledore's sexual "declosetization" (my term), my very good future-pastor friend noted his denomination's view of homosexuality. He rightly pointed out that people who struggle with homosexuality have their admirable qualities like everyone else and should be more highly regarded and loved by Christians. Here here! Apparently, some circles in that denomination have officially endorsed a "study" that declares approximately 2-3% of people are born homosexual and another 3% are born bisexual. While I would agree with many of my friend's conclusions, I must emphatically state that the Church must never ground its theology in anything but God's Word. I am not accusing my friend of turning his back on God's Word (he certainly would strive not to), but critiquing the use of such a study by the Church in this manner. Not only is this proper grounding in the Word the biblical and historic precedent of the Church, but also takes into consideration the wonderful critiques of postmodernity pertaining to the strongly-subjective nature of science. General revelation provides the human eye and mind with many things, but when it comes to theology and faith, it only provides enough to condemn (Rom. 1).

Speaking of Romans 1, that passage draws the earlier historical-philosophical discussion together with the preceding paragraph. Romans 1 describes how God gave man over to the consequences of his rebellious idolatry, the prime example of which is homosexuality. It is not grounded in Creation, but in the Fall. The people who struggle with it are entitled to respect as they are part of the created order, but the thorn with which they're afflicted is part of the distortion of that created order. It is not just the sinful action that matters, but also the fundamental distortion of God's created bond between man and wife that occurs when people adopt or succumb to a homosexual "orientation." Such a distortion is Paul's key illustration in Romans 1 concerning how ridiculous mankind is now made to look for his idolatry of the created order.

This example, in turn, provides a key to the philosophy of this age, termed by many as "postmodernism" but drifting toward the recapitulation of ancient Rome that many term "neo-paganism." Whereas modernism was a quest for economic and political unity built on the assumption of human goodness, neo-paganistic-postmodernity is a quest for spiritual unity based on the assumption that "all is one" (otherwise termed "monism"). With such an assumption and such a quest, this new philosophy seeks to obliterate the lines drawn by God in His natural law given to all of man, such as that between man and woman, mankind and animal and nature, and right and wrong.

I am becoming less of the stereotypical Republican by the day, and reject the "Religious Right's" desire to impose Christless "Christian" values on the institution of the State. The State is not the moralistic Christian's means to a theocratic end. Nonetheless, the purity of the Church is at stake when Scriptural foundations are loosened in the name of such scientific studies* (the asterisk denotes my contempt for many such studies and puts them on a level with Barry Bonds' home run record). This is why much of the Mainline denominations are spiritually-hollow civil organizations proclaiming vague notions of "peace" and "tolerance" instead of the Gospel.

Who knows where exactly the "center" is for the United States? Whatever and wherever it is, it has held fast thus far in our nation's history through God's common grace. Only let us not confuse this murky center with the biblical core of the Christian faith. The Church is united around this core, and her historical confessions and creeds speak to it proudly. Our aim should not be the Christianization of America, but the loving defense of the purity and unity of the Church. In pursuing such an aim by God's grace, a true, holy love will be made so manifest that the penchant for demonizing select sins over others will be but a memory.

The Power of Personal Interest Stories

2008-01-26T21:47:00.000-05:00

In an episode of The Simpsons, entitled "Girly Edition," Lisa and Bart host a student-based news program called "Kids Newz." Lisa accidentally calls her brother an idiot while the camera is still live, which prompts her brother to try to one-up her. He does so by learning the art of the "personal interest story." The most memorable line given by his teacher, anchor Kent Brockman, is that the value of such stories is found in their ability "to pull heartstrings and cloud minds." Lisa attempts to expose the thin intellectual veneer to Bart's sappy sentimentality, but is voted town by the TV execs because she lacks Bart's "pizazz."

As always, The Simpsons provides brilliant satire of the contemporary social and political scene. Long ago, the American People discarded the objective news story with limited bias of Kronkite for the more subjective and sentimental reporting of Rather. In the same way, one politician's vague generalities concerning American needs has been necessarily supplanted by another's specific anecdotes of one American's needs. The same holds for Christianity, where "rags-to-riches" testimonies become a more popular medium for communicating the Gospel than actually sharing the Gospel accounts in the Word.

Lisa Simpson makes a piercing critique of such an approach. After doing an interest story on a war veteran, Bart makes a pitch for a day honoring such veterans, to which Lisa responds "That's why we have Veteran's Day!" When Bart responds that one may not be enough, Lisa again rejoins "That's why there's also Memorial Day!" Bart's last line of defense..."Maybe there should be three. That's Kids Newz. Cut!"

In order to buy into the power of the personal interest story, people are often asked to suspend the traditional skepticism that such ploys lack substance. Everybody loves to hear a tear-jerking story of "Mary Stewart", a 27 year old single mother of four beautiful children who sacrifices her evening dinner for her kids' morning breakfast and sells her winter clothing for their school books. To speak into the aftermath of such a story seems almost criminal. Instead, people bask in the angel-like glow of the next political savior. One is not allowed to ask what policies or trends led to poor Mary's downfall, or what policies or trends can be expected to lift her from the ashes and how they will accomplish such a feat. The cynic might also be motivated to ask "If Mary has so touched your heart, why do you not do anything to help her yourself?"

Contemporary society honors celebrities and causes over real philanthropy and substance. A quintessential example of this fact is found in John Edwards. He pleads the case of the poor to sympathetic supporters, while also living in a sprawling mansion with a cadre of servants. The true postmodern hates such hypocrisy. These stories should not be a means to an end, but their alteration should be the end pursued through more substantial means. For news reporting, this means honesty; for politicians, this means wise policies; for Christians, this means doctrinal consistency and pious practice.

The best Christian testimonies are not the dramatic ones, but the ones that focus upon Christ, whose objective work resulted in the subjective changes that come now--most importantly, eternal life. The quest for meaning doesn't result in truth; the knowledge of Truth imbues life with meaning. As Lisa Simpson would say, "Pizazz? What is that?"

Book Project

2008-01-25T19:48:00.000-05:00

Tentative Title: Under the Sun

How does one make sense of the death of a family member in Iraq? This question reigns supreme for the Johnston family, who lost youngest son, Bobby, in the conflict. The pain threatens to tear the family apart, especially Bobby's older brother, Jamie. Only through rejecting the easy answers proferred up by a superficial society and asking the right questions can Jamie hope to find meaning in his brother's death.

The first draft for this book is about 80% completed and is intentionally not a Christian book. It looks at life through the lens of a non-Christian and includes much of the family dysfunction and social perversity that is common in East Coast suburbia.

Musings on "Love"

2008-01-24T12:17:00.000-05:00

What if love is like faith? This is the question I posed to a small group of fellow volunteers with my local youth group. I was explaining to them how ridiculous I thought it was that people felt constrained by social norms in relationships (see past entry--"Oppressed by Social Norms"). How can one trust conventional social wisdom when it speaks through a hundred competing voices and ultimately doesn't affect the likelihood of divorce? Christians share the same statistical averages with secularists of various stripes.

"So what do you guys think of countries like mine that still have arranged marriages?" asked Don, a Japanese-American father of 7. I was astonished that the three younger people (myself included) were not totally averse to the idea in theory. It reminded me of the words of an Prof. Scipione, former professor in Biblical Counseling at Westminster California, who used to tell students to "just find someone and get married." Both Don and Scip were alluding to something more profound than simple, shocking comments: Love may be very different than most every way our society has construed it, even amongst Christians. These allusions provoked my thought at the outset of this posting:

What if love is like faith? According to Hebrews 11:1, "Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see." In the original Greek, "being sure" is drawn from a term that also has an objective sense of the "reality/substance" of what we hope for. In addition, "certain" has the more objective sense of "evidence" of what we do not see. It was by this objective faith, with subjective effects, that the Old Testament saints "received testimony" of Christ (better understanding of "received commendation" in v.2). All of this to show that faith is not simply a subjective sense of trust, but an objective link attaching the Christian to the saving work of Christ by the Holy Spirit. This is why we know that it is impossible to lose faith or salvation--it is not really ours to lose.

In the same way, could love also be understood in this sense? In Genesis, God made Adam and Eve "one flesh," which presupposes the most intimate of bonds. This bond was created prior to the Fall, which means that within that coming together, love should be assumed as well. Throughout the book of Song of Songs, the most beautiful picture of romantic love, there is a continual presentation of the power of love over the heart, but at the climax of the book, there is something much deeper presented:

8:6 Set me as a seal upon your heart, as a seal upon your arm, for love is strong as death, jealousy is fierce as the grave. Its flashes are flashes of fire, the very flame of the LORD. 7 Many waters cannot quench love, neither can floods drown it. If a man offered for love all the wealth of his house, he would be utterly despised.

The Holy Spirit is described as the seal of our salvation, because He gives us the assurance that our salvation is real and fixed. In the same way, the female in Song of Songs wants her love to be pictured as a seal, because it is real and fixed. As death is inescapable, so is love. It is a flame of the Lord, and can never be overwhelmed or extinguished. Love is not a transitory possession, and is thus worth more than all of one's accumulated wealth.

In the book of Hosea, God tells Hosea to continue to pursue his wife, though she prostitutes herself. Why? Because it symbolizes God's unconditional love for His people. This love finds its ultimate expression in the cross, where the God-man offered His righteousness to God on our behalf and took our sin upon himself. That saving work by the Lord then becomes the ground for the commands in Ephesians 5 for wives to submit to their husbands as the Church submits herself to the Lord and for husbands to love their wives as Christ loved the Church.

Just as faith is a saving bond created by the Lord and is unable to be severed, so love is a bond grounded in the love of the Lord and cannot be relinquished. Forget about all of this talk about "falling in love" by sentimental dreamers and "falling out of love" by jaded divorcees. Love is much greater than such notions. Its purposes are several-fold: To offer to man and wife the most profound and godly bond this side of heaven; to point man and wife and the watching world to the great love of Almighty God for His people; to match the sin of a spouse with the overflowing effects of love in Hosea-like fashion.

So as people spend years sorting out whether or not they are "in" love through all sorts of erroneous rubrics, they fall deeper and deeper into self-deception. Taking it with a grain of salt, here is my conclusion: Love is objectively the bond between man and wife and subjectively the realization and commitment to that bond. This by no means destroys the romance or excitement of love, for this definition gives rise to the aforementioned purposes of love, which in turn can change the world.

An Unhealthy Addiction to Government

2008-01-22T18:55:00.000-05:00

The United States and in particular its national government is very different than it was just a century ago. In 1908, the bureaucracy was not nearly as expansive (New Deal in late '20's), the Department of Education was simply a pipe dream for some, Social Security and Medicare were unheard of (LBJ's Great Society in the '60's), and there was not even a federal tax being levied (established in 1913). At that time, the progressive-modernist impulse was just beginning to take root on a national scale, as diversity began being traded for unity, creativity for efficiency, and liberty for power.

In that day, parents would decide when their children would begin to work and what type of education their children would receive. The purpose of government according to many in that day was found in its restraint of those things that would infringe upon the prerogatives of individuals and families. As the modernist impulse began to overrun all competing ideologies, many valid counter-arguments were raised: The government cannot possibly raise children as well as families, nor does it have the prerogative to determine their paths. Unity comes at the cost of individuality and unique potential, as all are driven to the common denominator necessary for such unity. Efficiency brought power, but it made human beings into cogs of the societal machine, treating them only as means to a governmentally-ordained end. This view of human value in functional terms would inevitable cause a devaluation of life and create significant moral dilemmas. In addition, as power was sought above all things, the common good would inevitable be set aside for the "greater good."

As a result, power and wealth came to America as never to any society preceding her. We traded our birthright of liberty for the warm porridge of wealth and initially found ourselves satisfied. But what now? We have our Brave New World, with its entertainment-induced apathy to the reality of the world around us, each fulfilling our societally-imposed function. Some might think such a statement ludicrous as we live in a time of unparalleled opportunity to pursue any career path, but we must think more deeply. We must receive a certain type of education through the 12th grade, either through public schools or governmentally-monitored private/home schooling. The curriculum is always ordered in such a way as to program robots with certain basic facts, without asking questions concerning origin, morality, or purpose. In order to translate this "education" into productive labor as adults, people must commit their lives to given careers that consumes two lives and allows child-rearing by means of entertainment and "education."

Uncle Sam has gone from guardian to godfather as the family lives at the mercy of the almighty State. To criticize is to blaspheme and bite the idolatrous hand that feeds us. In all of this, we have made our choice: a hollow, vacuous wealth and a world of illusions. Is this not your choice? Then why do we each cringe at the thought of losing any of this power in order to regain a fraction of our old liberty? Security and prosperity have become our gods.

A Mountaintop Prophecy

2008-01-21T23:39:00.000-05:00

J. Gresham Machen, a 20th century Reformer if ever there was one, was not only a superb theologian but also an avid environmentalist. In both the realm of theology and the realm of nature, he witnessed the horrible ravages of modernism. While modernism brought unprecedented efficiency and wealth to the West, it also brought the decline of the intellect, moral vacuity, and the loss of purpose. Both Christianity and the environment were laid on the altar of human progress. As Machen in his later years reflected upon the ravaging of Christian orthodoxy and unspoiled environmental beauty, he recalled one of his many trips through the Eastern Alps:

"Then there is something else about that view from the Matterhorn. I felt it partly at least as I stood there, and I wonder whether you can feel it with me. It is this. You are standing there not in any ordinary coutnry, but in the very midst of Europe, looking out from its very center. Germany just beyond where you can see to the northeast, Italy to the south, France beyond those snows of Mont Blanc. There, in that glorious round spread out before you, that land of Europe, humanity has put forth its best. There it has struggled; there it has fallen; there it has looked upward to God. The history of the race seems to pass before you in an instant of time concentrated in that fairest of all the lands of earth. You think of the great men whose memories you love, the men who have struggled there in those countries below you, who have struggled for light and freedom, struggled for beauty, struggled above all for God's Word. And then you think of the present and its decadence and slavery, and you desire to weep. It is a pathetic thing to contemplate the history of mankind." (Hart, Collected Works, 435)

Machen was one of those great men, standing upon the mountainous legacies of the Apostle Paul, Athanasius, Augustine, Luther, and Calvin. He was the man called by God to stand athwart a lethal threat to the Church and cry "Stop!" Try as he did, the heartlands were ravaged by economic progress and the hearts of sinners were ravages by a ruinous belief in human goodness. Yet, through this man, God sustained the Presbyterian Church in the US, now in the small denominations known as the OPC, PCA, and EPC, as well as through numerous seminaries, such as Westminster Philadelphia, Westminster California, Covenant Seminary, and Reformed Theological Seminary. Modernism lies on the trashheap of history, and Christ's Church stands once again upon the ashes of a major world movements, living out the promise that the gates of hell will never prevail against God's Church.

The aforementioned memory of Machen was written in the twilight of his life, 1933. Just a few years later, thugs in Italy began to terrorize the populace and secret forces would shattered windows in Germany. The tanks of Hitler, fueled by a Darwinistic view of a hierarchy of human value and ongoing historical progression, rolled over the illusory hopes of a naive generation. Machen once noted that the ideas of one generation would move armies in the next. He grieved over the looming war that would follow the end of his life, but it took tanks to remind humanity that peace is borne upon the back of human sacrifice and to remind Christians that are hopes are borne upon the back of our Messiah.

A Top-notch Testimony

2008-01-20T13:44:00.000-05:00

1 Timothy 1:15-16--Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the worst. But for that very reason I was shown mercy, so that in me, the worst of sinners, Christ might display his unlimited patience as an example for those who would believe and have eternal life.

I used to engage in the worst type of evangelism--sharing with people a false immediate happiness and doing so in a self-serving manner. I would approach someone with a giant grin, declaring "Hey friend, Christ has changed my life and He can change yours as well." That person would consequently look at my life to verify the Gospel and would come away sorely disappointed. If I was able to maintain the facade, that person would reject the Gospel because they thought it inaccessible by "normal" people. As was most often the case, the facade would fade and I would blatantly sin, thus confirming the horrible stereotype of Christian hypocrisy.

Paul provided Timothy with a wonderful testimony to be held close to Timothy's heart and tongue. The Gospel is not a mere description of the effects of Christ on someone's life--it is the proclamation of the objective work of Christ. Christ came into the world, taking full humanity upon His full deity. That is the fact of His person. The bridge to us comes in His mission: to save sinners. That was the purpose of His coming--not to introduce a higher sense of morality or pattern to live by or to eliminate the injustice of Jewish "racism"--but to free sinners from the reign of death by His atoning work. It is at that point that Paul finally includes himself in the testimony and mention that he is the worst of sinners--the most needy for God's grace. Our story is not that of pain and hardship being redeemed into hope and purpose. We still sin and suffer in this world! The story of Paul is our story--that through Christ's work, sinners are saved from the power of sin and sting of death.

What is the purpose of God's redemption of weak-kneed and feeble-tongued sinners? Through sinners, God's great glory is truly made manifest. When one is bereft of pride in their own accomplishment and abilities, they attest to the great grace of Christ that would make weak instruments the carriers of the greatest news ever known to mankind. It is this type of testimony that woos other sinners as well, because if God can be patient with someone as wicked as I am, then He can surely have that patience for others. Not only is this "display" compelling for sinners, but it also a clear testimony to God's glory.

We always want praise for the work that God does in us, as if we accomplished it ourselves. What a great moment it would be if someone approached me and said "Man, you suck. That God of yours must be pretty great to make a pansy like you something to be used."

Our Sovereign God

2008-01-17T23:05:00.000-05:00

Everybody loves God's love. All other attributes are often ignored so that what is often viewed as the supreme attribute--love--may be used to define God. To boldly proclaim God's love is not a bad thing by any means, for "God is love" (1 John) and embodies love in a way that no human can even imagine. The measure of His love in Christ is a feat that no human could even attempt to replicate. When we imagine love, however, we often self-project our finite view of it onto God. We remake His love in our image, rather than letting God's love speak on its own terms through Christ.

Instead of drawing God down to our level in order to make Him seem closer and more real to us (which He has already done in Christ and continues to do in His Spirit), let us meditate upon another wonderful attribute: His sovereignty. This is not an attribute that can be used to superficially draw God close to us--rather, it does the exact opposite. It places Him far away from us in a role which we can never replicate. By virtue of God's sovereignty (total control over all things), man is proven to be the exact opposite--absolutely helpless and unable to control any part of his life. That does not mean that man is left without responsibility, but even that responsibility is governed by God.

So why talk about sovereignty instead of love? In order to answer that question, let us ask another question: Do we simply want a God who is with us in our daily ordeals and suffering, or a God who is over them? So often, we draw God so close to us in a contrived sort of way that we neuter His character and render Him helpless before the ravages of a world under the temporary dominion of sin. In an age that has firmly rejected the unfathomable optimism of the 20th century and come to terms with the reality of sin and suffering, God's sovereignty offers hope. In the sovereign God who rules through His Word, we find a God who stands over evil; who sent His own Son to bear His just judgment and wrath over evil; who has thus provided a hope that transcends the realms of all that is decaying and dead.

We need a God who stands over the great human problem and offers the quintessential Solution, and that is exactly the God we have. The world will be justly judged and convicted for its sin, but for those who have faith in the Person and work of Christ, the judgment has already been meted out once and for all on a Roman cross. That is not only love, but a sovereign love.

Biblical Preaching?

2008-01-16T20:29:00.000-05:00

A great majority of preaching today is not preaching in the true sense of proclaiming God's Word to His people, but is instead an opportunity to offer inspiring speeches on personal morality or political causes. Even in many conservative pulpits that lift high the Word of God as the Word of God, the great Message of salvation from sin in Christ is neglected in favor of "messages" that use the Bible as a means to a moral end.

Now, I don't want to promote a hyper-critical approach to evaluating sermons, as everybody wrongly fancies themselves as an expert. The Word always stands over its hearers, rather than vice-versa. All the same, there are several basic elements that should be demanded of every sermon:

1) God, the Creator, as One who created all things but is entirely distinct from all created things. He is neither part of the creation nor unknown to it, but has revealed Himself to His creation through His Word. Not every word of this has to be spelled out, but people must know that God is not only Creator, but judge, and that He is in control of all things, including salvation. As a holy God, His standard for salvation is perfection.

2) Man, created in the image of God, but absolutely sinful and unable to meet God's standard for salvation. The law does nothing for salvation, but does condemn man and reveal his total depravity. The only hope for sinful man lies in a gracious historical act by God...

3) Christ, eternally God, became fully man as well when He entered human history and existence. He then lived a life of perfect obedience in fulfillment of God's law (and meeting His standard), and then died on a cross, taking upon Himself our sin and giving to us His perfection. Thus, we are not only forgiven, but counted as righteous.

Too often in contemporary sermons, sin and Christ are both left out of sermons. Both the disease and cure are callously kept from the sinners in the pews, leaving them without hope or purpose. All of these elements can also be found within any passage in Scripture. As Christ told the disciples on the Road to Emmaus, all of the Scriptures point to Him.

Brothers and Sisters, whenever the Gospel of salvation from sin through Christ is missing from the pulpit, a true sermon is missing as well and God's people are being neglected and abused. Using the Bible is not enough, but using it as God intended is what blesses His people and brings glory to His Name.

What Good is a Shell?

2008-01-15T11:57:00.000-05:00

A commercial once asked "How many licks does it take to get to the center of a Tootsie Roll Tootsie Pop?" The cartoon owl would start to count the licks before peremptorily chomping through the remainder of the fruity exterior. Thus, the answer was "The world may never know."

But what would happen if one bought a Tootsie Pop, only to find a hollow center? That is what is happening to the younger generation of Christians. In a recent US News cover story, "A Return to Tradition," the return of many young Jews and Christians to ancient practices is highlighted.

"More substantial than a trend but less organized than a movement, it has to do more with how people practice their religion than with what they believe, though people caught up in this change often find that their beliefs are influenced, if not subtly altered, by the changes in their practice. Put simply, the development is a return to tradition and orthodoxy, to past practices, observances, and customary ways of worshipping. But it is not simply a return to the past--at least in all cases. Even while drawing on deep traditional resources, many participants are creating something new within the old forms." (p. 44)

In the earlier twentieth century, the modernist worldview took hold in the Christian Church, propagating the lie that doctrine is an expression of the Christian life and thus necessarily changes with each passing generation. That view absolutely undermined the Christian Church in the West. People saw Jesus as a moral example instead of a Savior from sin, and developed truth out of their experiences in following this "moral man." The diminishing body of orthodox believers across denominational lines vigorously argued against this theological atrocity, reminding the confused Church that the Christian life has always sprung out of doctrine; practice out of belief.

Thus, the "subtle alteration" of beliefs brought amongst young Christians by a return to traditional practices cannot be considered substantive. As Sean Michael Lucas noted in his introduction to his book "On Being Presbyterian," the lack of a fixed identity in the present, postmodern age leads to a continual shape-shifting of individuals who constantly alter beliefs and practices. The "subtle alteration" is just another example of a temporal fluctuation in belief.

So does this new trend exhibit a "return to tradition and orthodoxy?" To the former, yes; to the latter, no. Those disparate answers spell trouble for this next pseudo-movement. A return to true Christian tradition means a return to orthodoxy: a submission to God's supreme historical revelation in the Scriptures and an alignment with the historic creeds and confessions of the Church. That type of tradition has a core--it is a history of life springing from doctrine. That is not what is currently happening. Postmodernism rejects traditional orthodoxy and its claims over the human mind and heart because of modernist abuses of "truth" and "reason." After generations were wiped out in concentration camps and gulags in the name of "truth" and "reason," the generations that followed became weary and fearful of any such claims.

The present generation craves a generic tradition because it precedes the age of "might makes right" modernism. The symbolism and rituals of previous ages provide a rallying point for community without exploitation, as opposed to the machine of economic efficiency. Quoting Brian McLaren in the article: "Protestantism has been in a centrifugal pattern for so long, with each group spinning away from the others, but now there is some kind of pull back to the center." The fact that the words come McLaren should already be dissuasive, but his explanation is unsatisfactory as well. The centrifugal pattern has resulted from the Church treating Christianity as a means to an end, neglecting its Gospel truth in favor of political power and social influence. It sought to unite itself last century in order to wield the greatest influence, but lost its soul.

A new quest for unity around a false "center" of changing generational expression will simply result in a forthcoming Big Bang of diminishing hopes and bonds. A return to traditional symbolism is meaningless if not accompanied by the symbols' corresponding realities. The taste of grape or orange will be pleasant until the inevitable bite, when the promised tootsie roll is exposed as a hollow nothingness and a new era of despair sets in.

A Revelatory Pig Head

2008-01-11T19:30:00.000-05:00

Those small, semi-classic novels assigned in high school English courses are often more rich in insights concerning the deeper things of life than college textbooks. Aldous Huxley, author of A Brave New World, presents a more thoughtful analysis in the political, social, psychological, and philosophical realms than most of the prominent "experts" in these fields. Perhaps his brilliance came with the realization that these disciplines don't own their fields, but are beholden to them. He also lived in a day in which subjects were not so specialized as to place them in a vacuum.

Another brilliant masterpiece is William Golding's Lord of the Flies. Golding asks the incredibly prodding and difficult question of what human beings, still in the pre-adolescent "age of innocence," would do if stranded on an island and left to their own moral and intellectual reserves. In their adventure, the children are constantly fearful of an unknown monster, but late in the novel, one small boy receives a revelation from a skewered pig's head:

"Fancy thinking the Beast was something you could hunt and kill!" said the head. For a moment or two the forest and all the other dimly appreciated places echoed with the parody of laughter. "You knew, didn't you? I'm part of you? Close, close, close!" (p. 130)

The copyright of this book is 1954, thus placing its writing soon after World War Two. Prior to that war, Europe joined the US in embracing an optimistic view of human nature and potential. With the rise of science, higher education, and greater international connectivity, the West brimmed with optimism at the thought that it could create heaven on earth. World War Two revealed to Europe that such optimism was unfounded and delusional; it took Vietnam to bring that home to the U.S. Thus, Golding was a man of his time, realizing that evil was not an exterior force--something social or political--but infected all things, including the individual human heart.

Christian Unity

2008-01-11T02:28:00.000-05:00

Dr. Robert Godfrey's "Reformed Dream:"
http://www.modernreformation.org/default.php?page=articledisplay&var1=EmailComp&var2=123&var3=authorbio&var4=AutRes&var5=70

Every day provides another opportunity to contrast the Truth of Christianity as God has revealed it in His Word with The Lie, which is the human endeavor to worship the created order instead of its Creator. This opportunity should be constantly seized, as God constantly reveals how His Truth in best understood in contrast to The Lie. All human effort, whether intellectual, emotional, or spiritual, is part of a worldwide rebellion against the King that has persisted since the Fall in the Garden of Eden. Only when the whole person is transformed by the saving knowledge of the Gospel of Christ is one free to ascertain the Truth and abide in its glory.

With each passing day comes another opportunity to contrast True Christianity with Relevant Christianity. True Christianity at minimum embraces God as a Creator who is wholly distinct from His Creation, a fallen mankind that is guilty of Adam's sin and is unable to escape the mire of sinfulness, and Jesus Christ--the God-man who is eternal, yet came into the world, taking upon Himself full humanity--who lived the life that we could not live and died the death that we could not bear so that His elect might be saved. Relevant Christianity compromises on any or all of the aforementioned facts, trading its purity for popularity. Thus, it is always appropriate to criticize a figure like Joel Osteen, who defines human need in terms of unfulfilled potential instead of sin and prescribes Christ as the Savior from failure rather than the Savior from sin.

Purity and fidelity to God demands that Christians take the two stands mentioned above, but there is certainly a place for Christian unity. Such a place is found in mutual adherence to Reformed Confessions. While True Christianity extends beyond Confessional Reformed congregations, significant doctrinal differences renders unity impossible between all true Christian bodies. One of the wonderful attributes of Westminster Seminary California is found in its ability to gather Reformed Christians of all stripes together for the sake of the Gospel. The Church and its seminaries need not compromise on God's Truth in order to be ecumenical. Rather, it should merely issue forth the cry of the Gospel with the utmost clarity, that all who share in the fellowship of the historic Confessions of Reformed Christianity might find new strength in renewed unity.

Strength is not found in numbers, for God's people have often found themselves to be the persecuted minority in the course of redemptive-history. In one of the darkest moments for God's people, the prophet Elijah thought himself to be the only true believer left. God encouraged him with the knowledge that there were still 7,000 who did not bend the knee to the idols of the world. In our day--one in which compromise and capitulation has been more common amongst Christians than courage--we could use the encouragement that amongst the broader Reformed community, we have our 7,000 by God's grace.

A Fun Field of Presidential Candidates

2008-01-09T23:26:00.000-05:00

A cursory examination of the field of presidential candidates for those who desire their own sort of ideological pure-bred can prove quite disappointing. At least on the Republican side, ideological heterodoxy seems to be the greatest common denominator amongst the candidates. National Review made the telling (and humorous) observation that between Rudy Giuliani and Mike Huckabee, one finds one solid conservative--the former representing the fiscal end and the latter the social. Mitt Romney is a rather recent convert to conservatism and John McCain has always prided himself in being a political maverick. The most consistent conservative in the field is Fred Thompson, but he currently has about as much motivation as a high school student when distracted by Playstation 3.

Conservatives bemoan the lack of a new Reagan, but forget that controversy becomes a great refiner of sound principles. By most standards, the Republican Party finds itself in disarray and at times, outright failure. While many theories are set forth to explain the current pheonomenon, a case could be made for apathy caused by the uniformity of the majority being a causative factor. The current plurality of thought amongst Republican contenders may prove to be a godsend for conservative ideologues, as an authentic discussion of the issues must ensue. The Republican field has not been this exciting in years. All that remains lacking in this era of change is a Republican who doesn't fit the rich, old, white stereotype.

Oppressed by Social Norms

2008-01-08T01:17:00.000-05:00

Many people blame the incredible number of divorces on some universal social faux-pas of some sort or another. The religious right ascribes the blame to a declining moral consciousness, neglect of absolute truth, the school taking the place of the family in moral instruction, and the high number of cohabitating couples. For the more traditional and pragmatic, the issue is reduced to foolish and impatient young adults acting impetuously. The more hardened and cynical would claim that people view relationships in too idealistic of a light, thus rendering the reality a pure disappointment and inevitable failure.

There are certainly a plethora of potential pitfalls for the contemporary relationship, but must the given social wisdom dictate how such relationships are to proceed? The plurality of opinions is itself a great argument against accepting such "social wisdom." Not only is social wisdom an eclectic set of diverse opinions masquerading as wisdom, but it is also ill-informed and destructive. Wisdom that speaks simply from the common grace elements of social science ignores the more substantial (and necessary) pool of revealed Truth. It can describe the effects of total depravity as "social disorders" and "disturbing trends," but not diagnose the true disorder: a broken, sinful world.

Nor can it prescribe any real solutions, as it neglects the true problem. Not only is the reality of sin neglected, but so is the pervasiveness of sin understood. Even well-intentioned advice that is not rooted in God's revealed Truth is a mixed-bag of common grace wisdom and sin-infected worldliness. While common wisdom might prove helpful, it can also be destructive. This type of wisdom might commend an order for relational growth (which may be helpful), or it might suggest that couples live together or "test the waters" with other individuals (which are both obviously horrible options).

All of these considerations should be an impetus for rethinking the contemporary bevy of various relational approaches. Sin should be acknowledged, its remedy in Christ sought out, with Spirit-wrought godliness as the grateful response. God's Word and prayer should guide relationships, as well as wisdom from mature, older Christians. Social wisdom should be supplemental and carefully scrutinized. Beyond all else, it is important to be more discerning when it comes to relationships--and it starts with a biblical worldview.

Ho Ho Home?

2007-12-22T18:53:00.000-05:00

In a season marked by festive smiles and equally-bright trees, there exists an underlying darkness and depression. Behind every lit-up facade on a tree is the murky, shadowy expanse of intersecting branches, hidden behind pine needles. Likewise, behind most every smile is the knowledge that there are real problems that are often brushed aside by the Christmas season.

The Christmas season involves not only a brushing aside of those uglier aspects of one's family life and relationships, but also the perpetuation of those uglier aspects. That is why the caseloads of many psychiatrists and pastors goes up drastically during this time of year. Everybody is forced to view the hallmark ideal and present grotesque reality side-by-side and the contrast is pronounced.

While there are obviously many negative trends that have a malevolent impact of the typical family, there is a more subtle problem that must be addressed: unrealistic expectations. People expect the ideal home, but only get the painful counterfeit. Like in all areas of life, the family provides another example of a God-given institution horribly twisted by sin and its effects. This is true of every family, and when this fact is ignored or brushed-aside, the result is a counterfeit beauty--one that seeks to imitate the heavenly home but fails horribly in this effort. This result is natural, considering the reality of sin.

Instead of idealizing the home, we should affix our eyes to the true meaning of Christmas--a Savior who was born in our sinful home, that we might share in His perfect, heavenly world. He was born in the muck and mire of a manger, that we might know a day without tears. Instead of growing depressed over our counterfeit Christmastime beauty, we should yearn for the heavenly home that awaits the sin-stranded orphans of the world who follow Christ by faith.

Seminary Smiles

2007-12-19T02:14:00.000-05:00

I think two things prompt men to pursue the pulpit more than anything else: a passion for God's Word and a passion for God's people. Thus, the absolute height of ecstasy for those called by God to the pulpit is found in the intersection of the passions: preaching. In preaching, God superimposes His messenger and effectively conquers hearts with His Word. Often, He uses the most wretched types for this office, that His glory might receive greater praise.

All this to say that I have finally gotten a consistent opportunity to exercise this most exciting of tasks on a consistent basis. At a meeting with leaders at New Life Korean Presbyterian Church this past Sunday, I was offered the part-time post of preacher and teacher for the remainder of my seminary tenure. Even with all of the added responsibilities, I could not turn down this wonderful offer. Upon my return from Christmas Break, I will have the opportunity to bring God's Word to bear upon His people week after week. May He equip me for the task!

The Prodigal

2007-12-18T02:28:00.000-05:00

To be performed at Fourth Presbyterian Church on the evening of December 30th...
(chords muddled a bit in the copy/paste)

Intro: Final chords from “How Great Thou Art,” descent from Bb

Bb Ab Gb FmàF
I woke up last night in a ditch
Bb Ab Gb FmàF
with a giant lump on the side of my head.
Bb Ab Gb FmàF
And I can't remember a thing—
Bb Ab Gb FmàF
Oh wait! It's all come flooding back...

Eb Gm AbàBb
It was just a normal morning
Eb Gm AbàBb
when I looked down at the sweat on my hands.
Cm Bb
And then I looked straight at You and said
Ab GmàF
'Lord, look what I can do.'
Ab Bb Cm F
That's the day I turned away from You.
Ab Bb Eb
That's the day I turned away from You.

Transition: DàA (x2)

E D
You were born in a lowly manger—
A
a man like me.
E D A E
Yet You retained Your deity.
E D
And they all had such hope in You,
A Bm
but then You went and died.
FbàCb
You died. (x3)

Transition: BmàCbàFb/GbàEb/Fb (x2)

Bm
Were you there?
Cb
Did you hear?
Gb
It's true I swear—
Eb Bm
He has risen from the grave—
Cb Gb
bringing hope to you and me!
Bm
Look He's there—
Cb
He's in the air—
Gb
there's no despair!
Eb Bm
Our King's returning to His throne
Cb Gb
to take with Him His own.

Ab Bb Gb Db
Hallelujah! Hallelujah!
Ab Bb Gb Db
Hallelujah! Hallelujah!

Why Worry Works

2007-12-17T02:28:00.000-05:00

I am coming to terms with a problem facing many my age: future uncertainty. By "coming to terms," I am not implying that I am effectively managing the uncertainty, but recognizing its potency and seeking strength from the Lord in the meantime. Why is it that future uncertainty strikes the heart with an almost unparalleled sense of worry?

Much of it has to do with our fallen nature. In our continual craving to worship the created order (Rom. 1)--or rather, the created things that we pretend to order--we turn our future into an altar to ourselves. We spare no expense or present cost, that our future might be ordered by our hands as we so desire. Yet we continually find that our future, as all other things, seems to take on a shape that we had not intended. As tight as we try to take hold of it, it continually eludes our grasp. We cannot control it.

We not only are unable to take ahold of our future, but we are unable to know our future. This knowledge of our lack of knowledge brings our feeble reason to its knees. No amount of education ascertained or natural intelligence can steady us for our future. As the wise King Solomon continually notes in Ecclesiastes, the realities of the world often negate those efforts we make to control our lives--labor, indulgence, knowledge, etc. Sometimes the dumb and lazy become rulers while the witty and diligent become subjects. Our mind cannot sort this reality out, so we cry with Solomon that life is ultimately meaningless, or vanity.

But we hope. As Christians, we hope. We find that true knowledge is that which accepts our limited knowledge. True control acknowledges that we're not in control. For the nonbeliever, that thought brings terror and worry and the ensuing accumulation of wealth becomes but a buffer between man and reality. For the Christian, however, that thought turns worry into worship. Worry works...into worship. We do not tremble before the unknown, but tremble before the God we know--the God who speaks through His Word.

Thus, we carry in our hearts two truths that give us hope per Hebrews 12:2...

Christ is the Author of our faith...

and the Perfecter.

What He has started, He will finish. If He gave us faith, He will refine us, and in that last day, perfect us.

A Brave Heart Until...

2007-12-02T00:46:00.000-05:00

In the midst of a thousand and one tasks, I have dropped in on a few scenes from the movie, Braveheart, as it has played in our living room. Within a few moments of watching one of those scenes I remembered why I could never buy that movie...when I watched the burial of William Wallace's young bride. It breaks my heart every time I see it. Other movies have the same effect on me. The first time I watched Patch Adams, I turned it off midway through when the lead woman was killed.

These heartrending scenes remind what men are called to with the women they love (or will love--chin up, seminarians :)). We are told in Ephesians 5 that husbands are to love their wives as Christ loves His Church. Men are not to be like Adam, who did not protect his wife from the serpent in the Garden, which thus led to her downfall.

The covenant of marriage is perhaps the greatest living, walking demonstration of the glory of God in a broken world suffering between the first and second coming of Christ. When men and women enter into this covenant and its stipulations (cf. Eph. 5), they are committing themselves to an imperfect living-out of the great love of Christ and His bride, the Church. When men sacrifice themselves for their wives, the world is given a blurry glimpse of our Lord. When women devote themselves to their husbands, the world is given a splintered view of a life devoted to the Lord Jesus Christ. Is it any wonder that in Scripture, non-believing husbands are shown to come to Christ because of devoted, Christian wives?

When God placed Eve alongside Adam in the Garden, the responsibility and privilege was given to man of all ages to care for his female counterpart. This is a responsibility and privilege that man must embrace! All people will suffer in this sin-shadowed world. Men must do their best to shelter women from the effects of evil and will not always succeed at this task. This is inevitable. What is unacceptable, however, is when Christian men become a party to the suffering experienced by the women they love. This is a sin against God's creation mandate and covenant command to reflect Christ.

Men, grow a pair and get out there and be men! Christ suffered a cross for the sin of mankind--the least we can do is go and suffer whatever sword threatens the women in our lives!

The Word is Not Chained

2007-11-28T20:11:00.000-05:00

2 Timothy 2:8-9--"Remember Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, the offspring of David, as preached in my gospel, for while I am suffering, bound with chains as a criminal. But the word of God is not bound!" (ESV)

These two verses might be amongst the most encouraging for a Minister of the Word. When I first arrived in Malawi this past summer, I was placed in a sort of mini-crisis. After spending the better part of a year planning this trip around the primary task of teaching in a theological school, there seemed a fair chance that my team would be rebuffed by the school and would be left to come up with a new primary task in a land that was totally foreign to us. More than any other time in my life, I devoted my days to prayer and Scripture. God poured his Word upon my parched heart--in particular with these two verses.

Not only the preacher, but all Christians should find encouragement in these verses:

1) Consider your predicament--you are weak, sinful, and suffering--either internally or externally. Each time the God puts His Word upon your tongue in any setting, it is done in spite of you. You are shackled in every part by the chains of sin.

2) Consider your hope--God does not need human vessels to carry His Word into this world, but He elects and even delights in doing so. You are given the privilege of taking the very Word of God into a sinful world--piercing darkness with light. If this Word does not share in your shackles, then it means that what it is sent forth to accomplish will not be thwarted. Thus, you need not question your salvation if you are a Christian, because God's Word has given you the content of your hope and promised you that it will never be taken away (cf. Rom. 8:36-39). You need never despair of purpose or meaning in this life, because you know that God will continue to use you to bring Himself glory. His Word will speak beyond your shackles, with the result that people will know that it is God who speaks and moves--not you. Finally, you need not fear suffering or even death. It is not the messenger who matters as much as the Message, which will continue to advance throughout the world through the Church.

Paul knew that his chains revealed the mighty power of God's Word, and we should share in that confidence. When the great Church father, Athanasius died, God raised up the Cappadocian Fathers. When the Calvin and Luther and the other great early Reformers died, God raised the Protestant Scholastics to continue the purification of the Church. When Warfield, Kuyper, and Bavinck died in the early 20th century, God raised up my hero, J. Gresham Machen. When Machen died, God raised up luminaries like VanTil, Murray, and Berkhof. Today, even as the Western Church declines, we have great lights in figures like Horton, Vanhoozer, and Piper. In addition, God is raising up more leading lights from the majority world by the day.

It is amazing to watch God's Word move, unrestrained by the sin and suffering that afflicts the Church. May the Church be a pillar and foundation for this great Word, that it may be lifted high and God's Name be glorified!

Moving Toward McCain; A Great Opportunity

2007-11-26T01:17:00.000-05:00

On the political front, I have recently experienced an inward shift to Sen. John McCain. There are a few issues with which I would take exception to the Senator, but he is generally conservative. On most issues, he stands on the right side (no pun intended). Amongst most of the presidential candidates, there seems to be an air of political opportunism. Not so with McCain--his politics are as sturdy and unwavering as his principles. If he modifies a policy position (such as immigration) he doesn't try to disguise the change, but rather explains why he has changed his approach (i.e. the American people hated his old position and wanted it moderated).
**************************************************************************************
I preached and taught Sunday school at a Korean Presbyterian church today, and it went very well. People responded well to the sermon, and several teenagers were astounded by the Sunday school lesson on "The Gospel According to Genesis 3." If you ever want to talk about the Gospel in Genesis 3, please talk to me. I love talking about it. By God's grace, the pastor of that church has asked me to preach and teach until I leave for Christmas Break. For the next three weeks, I'll be a visiting pastor of sorts (recognizing I'm not yet ordained) at a Korean church. Go figure! I loved the people, as well as the preaching and teaching, so I'm currently psyched!

Revelation: Pictures to Set Our Eyes Upon

2007-11-24T04:11:00.000-05:00

The command in the early verses of Hebrews 12 to "set our eyes upon Jesus, the Author and Perfector of our faith" might seem a bit trite to those agonizing through the ravages of our fallen world and natures. How do we know that the same Jesus who rocked the face off of this world some 2,000 years ago will come in similar fashion to finish the job? It is great to know that we are saved, but what are we saved into? Will we be riding clouds while playing some sweet, state-of-the-art harps?

These are just a few of the questions that should prompt us to read the final chapter of God's Word, which happens to describe the final chapter of human history as well. The book of Revelation is a book about the last days--our days. All of the days between the first and second coming of Christ are the "last days." Thus, Revelation is our handbook to Christian living in this dark and dispiriting time.

It shows us that even as human history seems to descend on a downward trajectory, Christ is on His march to the throne. As we imitate the Lamb who was slain for us, the slain Lamb is showing that death not only has no hold on Him, but is merely a precursor to His eternal reign on the throne. What a great contrast: the One slain for sin is the One who will assume the throne to judge the world!

Another great contrast: the great host of the redeemed will be wearing white robes cleansed by His blood. How does blood make things white? Well, there we have the story of the cross, where Christ took our filthy rags of sin (Is. 64:9) upon Himself and clothed us in His robe of righteousness, that we might be seen as pure in the eyes of God. In fact, He who cleansed us will also be given authority to judge us. Pretty sweet deal, huh?

Finally, we will end up in a new heavens and earth, where there will be no more hunger or tears. The Lord will be our light and the river of life will flow through His eternal city. There are two trees, as in the Garden of Eden, but replacing the old tree of knowledge of good and evil is a second tree of life. There will never again be a possibility of falling away from grace as in the Garden, because Christ has given us that assurance.

Isn't it great to know the end of the story? May we live our lives with the knowledge that what Christ has started as the Author of our salvation, He will complete as the Perfector. His words "It is finished" on the cross were not in vain, but a declaration that what He has started for His people, He will finish. Praise God!

Gratitude in Two Parts

2007-11-23T02:18:00.000-05:00

I figured that I should submit at least one random thought for consideration under the pretence of Thanksgiving. Like Christmas, Thanksgiving can often be one of the most depressing days of the entire year. People utter "thanks" through gritted teeth as they consider all the unwanted gifts they have received in the past year: monotony, lack of appreciation, broken relationships, even death.

The Christian should not become bogged down on days such as this one. Instead, we recognize that gratitude involves two points of reflection: the gift given and the recipient of the gift. We often thank God for His grace in Jesus Christ, but don't ponder why His grace is so great. When we think upon the laundry list of life's sorrows and woes, we see the shadow of our sin as God casts His light upon us. Instead of gritting our teeth and grieving, we give thanks that in spite of our sin and the brokenness of our world, God has lavished His grace upon His children.

"Therefore, I urge you brothers, in view of God's mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God--this is your spiritual act of worship." (Rom. 12:1)

We cannot out-sin God's grace, though we sure try. Grace is God's demerited favor toward rebels, and our gratitude should be informed by that fact. Let us live accordingly.

Mission: Malawi

2007-11-22T02:21:00.000-05:00

I had the privilege of traveling to the small African country of Malawi during each of the past two summers. The focus of the first trip was on preaching and social service; the second was on teaching future pastors. Both trips were great benefit in very different ways. I love Malawi.

That said, Malawi is at a crossroads. There are just as many orthodox Presbyterians in the central part of Malawi as there are in all of America (about a million). Contrary to the popular paradigm, the poor villagers in Malawi would rather see an influx of Gospel teachers and preachers than large sums of money. A year after mass famine, I witnessed firsthand poor, rural congregations giving of their meager resources so that the Word of God might be promoted.

Competing with this strong and vibrant Christian body are threats of both an external and internal nature. Externally, Islam is growing, "Christian" liberalism is diluting the Gospel, and Christianity is often merged with tribal witchcraft. Internally, the impulse to compromise on the Gospel grows stronger by the day because of the money offered by liberal Western denominations. Also, there is an incredible shortage of pastors which means that most of the hungry, young Christians are not getting fed.

This is where my vision for Westminster Seminary California comes into the picture. After my scouting expedition two summers ago, I led the first ever team from WSC to Malawi last summer to spend several weeks teaching at the lone orthodox seminary in Malawi. The school is impoverished and has only three full-time teachers, but it serves as a beacon of hope for the Church nonetheless. The need for orthodox seminary teachers and students from WSC is even more dramatic this year as the largest seminary in the country went bankrupt, which creates a lot more tension for our small orthodox school in central Malawi.

Please pray for Josophat Mwale Theological Institute--that they would continue to stand for Truth, even at the cost of financial aid. Pray that another team would be gathered from WSC this summer, that we would development deep friendships with the school and its students that will carry over into our pulpits in later years.

Republicans in Decline

2007-11-20T16:33:00.000-05:00

Many would describe the low popularity of Republicans to be the inevitable result of pragmatic concerns. The war in Iraq has made Republicans look incompetent and uncritical of their own plans. Reiterating the decades-old offer of lowering taxes has made them captive to the cliche. Even their tough line on immigration seems to reinforce the old stereotype of Republicans as racist and incompassionate.

The pragmatic concerns are too simplistic, however. What we are currently seeing is likely a philosophical backlash against Republicans--not for their conservatism, but for their nursing of the stale beer of modernism. Older voters still desire the meaty steak of principle, while the younger generations are clamboring more and more for the sizzle of rhetoric. The rise of this mysterious philosophical movement called "postmodernism" must be dealt with by the Republican Party. While postmodernism is hard to define, a core characteristic is found in its rebuttal of modernism. It lacks some of the optimism in human ingenuity and it sees truth as a means for power. It also has forsaken the abstract principles for concepts that touch people and imbue their lives with meaning.

Enter: Republicans. The Iraq War is very unpopular, likely because it smacks of an antiquated idealism. Diverting his course from the original realist argumentation, President Bush began to speak of bringing democracy to an evil tyranny. Even supporters don't buy that as a legitimate argument for war in Iraq. We are over there because Saddam Hussein left his WMD program to our imagination, which can run away with itself because of past wars and genocides brought about by the Hussein regime.

Our approach to immigration seems great in principle, as does personal savings accounts for social security, but until we can define these issues in personal terms, we'll continue to lose the battle for hearts and minds. More and more of the electorate is coming to hate abstractions. Insetad, they want people who can relate to them on a personal level, captivating their dreams for a better tomorrow rather than their aspirations for a "higher" principle.

This does not mean compromising on principle, but realizing that politics=principle + people. There are two horizons of understanding: the objective principle and the subjective interpretation. It is integral for the Republican Party to understand that they can't rely simply on knowing their principles, but knowing their people as well so that they can effectively communicate those principles. The times are changing, and unless Republicans learn to deal with that reality very soon, they will learn again what it is like to spend half of a century in the political minority.

Sorrow in Suffering

2007-11-19T12:32:00.000-05:00

<--Michelle Goss (1982-2002), at dinner before our prom night.

Rachelle Goedhart (1983-2005), Calvin student photo.

My oldest cousin, Laura, is grieving right now because her best friend from college was shot to death last week. Two men followed this girl home and shot her execution-style in order to take her laptop and car (to see more on this, go to Laura's sister's site link, which is linked to this page under "WTS Cousin's Blog"). This provides another one of those unending "What the hell?" moments that humanity must constantly suffer through.

It is that vein that I opted to write about suffering and include the photos above. The first is of Chelle--my first prom date and kiss. She was a wonderfully brilliant girl who remained one of my good friends until she died at age 20 of ovarian cancer. The second picture is of my friend, Rachelle--a friend who struggled with depression and self-image until alcohol and sleeping pills killed her at age 22. Both of these gals had incredibly bright futures, and I cannot help but think that all of life will be a bit dimmed by their absence.

There are many horrible responses to those who are suffering. When I grieved over Chelle, some tried to tell me how they knew exactly what I was going through, as if no death is unique in itself. Others scolded me for picking up smoking, because it could kill me. How ironic! The more generous in heart would quote verses like Romans 8:28, as if knowing that God had a purpose for me would negate the fact that my friend no longer had a purpose in this world.

It is amazing how people try to beautify suffering and death. Whenever tragedy strikes, we start pointing fingers, because, heck, if there was an obvious failure on some person's part, then human virtue and ingenuity will prevent such failures in the future. The California wildfires were handled magnificently by communities and public officials alike, but you wouldn't know so from the public finger-pointing.

So what do we do when terrorists level towering buildings and thousands of lives? When cancer or pills take the young? When fires wipes out every hard-earned possession and link to the past?

For one, we avoid easy answers. Humanity cannot eliminate evil with utopian dreams and to minimize the effects of suffering and sin is inhumane. The word of Solomon translated "meaningless" in Ecclesiastes could likely be fairly translated as "f'd up" in the modern vernacular. It connotes frustration and helplessness in the face of a screwed up world. So much that happens makes so little sense to us.

Second, we have some guiding principles that don't explain, but guide us through suffering:

1) The brokenness of the world is humanity's baby. This world is f'd up because humanity f'd it up soon after the beginning of human history. The human nature that we anchor our hopes to for some sort of utopian ideal is the the same human nature that obliterated the beauty of God's Creation in every sense and would ruin this world entirely if not for God's common grace. Our perceived answer is in reality our greatest problem.

2) The God whose ways are not our ways doesn't give our simple minds an easy answer to the problem of suffering, but He does give us an authoritative response: the cross. God's love manifested itself in grace (demerited favor) for sinners and mercy for the suffering. Thus, He sent His Son, fully God and fully man, to live perfectly within our screwed up world, finally paying the price of our rebellion on a Roman cross. For the Christian, this means hope.

So as I and others ponder the unbearable sorrow and endless flow of tears that this world produces, I turn to God. I may occasionally cry out "Where are You in all of this?", but I know the answer even as I ask the question. He was here in the person of the Son, taking sin and suffering upon Himself so that His children by faith would know a day when there would be no more tears.

Carried by Christ

2007-11-19T00:55:00.000-05:00

Courage is an incredibly attractive quality. It took a hobbit named Frodo into the depths of an evil kingdom and it took a wizard named Harry to the precipice of an unnoticed death. C.S. Lewis says that such accounts are memorable because they mirror the greatest of all accounts: the historical work of Christ on the God-forsaken cross. Many of my favorite quotes (displayed on my Facebook site) are those that show a courage drawn from the work of Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit.

One such quote is from the famed Dr. David Livingston--the first missionary throughout much of Africa. People marveled at his exploits and kept telling him to come home before he died in his work. His response: "Cannot the love of Christ carry the missionary where the slave trade carries the trader?" Livingston saw the horrors of the largely unheard of Islamic slave trade of eastern Africa, and sought to combat it with the Gospel. If evil (or even a civic good) could carry a man to a certain length, cannot Christ carry His followers to those same points and even further? Livingston eventually died in his work, fulfilling his words "In this work I truly live; in this work I hope to die."

This sentiment echoes in my ears whenever I consider doing missions work in Malawi or Sudan, or prepare for the Army Reserves Chaplaincy. If people must face death for a cause other than Christ, I will surely face death alongside of them and perhaps even on behalf of them, that they may know Christ--or at least have His name ringing in their ears. This is not reckless bravado. I cannot carry the Gospel anywhere, only recline my sinful heart upon the Gospel, which could carry me anywhere.

That said, I received the following email from the NAE Chaplains Commission tonight:

"It is with great sadness that I must inform you of the death of Chaplain (MAJ) Maury Stout, United States Army. He was buried with full military honors at the Leavenworth Veterans cemetery on Friday, November 16...

Maury was a gifted speaker and teacher. He was given and faithfully completed responsibilities way beyond his rank and the Chaplaincy will be indebted to his contributions for years to come.
Maury leaves behind a wife and 5 dear children. Please remember them in your prayers."

It sucks to read something like that, but encouraging to know that this man is now with our Lord in glory. Being carried by Christ means being carried to suffering and even possibly death. Yet, in these ways, we know that our faith is forever secured, because we are following the footsteps of our Savior and are likewise being hated by the world.

"However, I consider my life worth nothing to me, if only I may finish the race and complete the task the Lord Jesus has given me--the task of testifying to the gospel of God's grace." (Acts 20:24) These were the words given to me by Chaplain Cooper at Calvin College right before leaving for seminary. They were the words of Paul as he left his beloved Ephesian brothers for a likely martyrdom. Martyrdom is not our goal--only God's glory and whatever that entails.

First Round of Corrections

2007-11-18T19:46:00.001-05:00

Seeing that I don't believe in revising previous pieces of writing, I would to make a couple of clarifications pertaining to the previous article (thanks, Mom).

1) I disagreed with those who pit the terms "Reformed" and "Evangelical" against one another. Those who disavow the Reformed label believe it to be inconsistent with evangelism. I argue to the contrary. Those who eschew the Evangelical label do so on the grounds that it contradicts the Confessional basis of Reformed theology. I similarily argue to the contrary. To both of these contentions, I vehemently believe that Confessional, Reformed theology gives birth to the only true, evangelical impulse.

2) Let me clarify my use of "indicative" and "imperative." By indicative, I am simply describing a propositional truth that God sets forth in His Word. God's Word is filled with these truths--all of which are grounded in the grand narrative of redemptive-history and centered upon the hero of the narrative: Jesus Christ. By imperative, I mean those exhortations concerning Christian conduct. These imperatives are rooted in indicatives. For example, we are told in Romans in 12:1 to "offer ourselves as living sacrifices" only after we are first told to do so "in view of God's mercy."

3) Finally, let me clarify my specific description of American culture. Those -isms that describe many movements in American culture may also be used to describe movements in many other cultures (though some are not, such as fundamentalism). In the previous article, I focused exclusively upon American culture because the phenomena I was describing is much more common here than in other countries like Malawi. For example, in Malawi, I would talk more about the problem of syncretism between Christianity and paganism, rather than a false dichotomy between Reformed theology and being evangelical.

Hope those clarifications help!

A Reformed Evangelical?

2007-11-18T03:23:00.000-05:00

In response to my claim to be a Reformed Evangelical, one man once told me that such a pairing was impossible. His not-too-subtle implication was that Reformed theology had absolutely nothing to do with evangelism. This false dichotomy is also sometimes propagated in Reformed circles. Perhaps these folks think that being evangelical is antithetical to being confessional, which is the proper, systematized grounding of Reformed theology.

I would argue to the contrary with regard to each of these points. To be evangelical is to believe in the imperative to go out and make disciples--to engage the world primarily through bringing God's Word to bear upon sinful human hearts. It avoids the fundamentalist temptation to retreat into a "holy huddle," while also avoiding the liberal temptation to transform Christianity into a civil religion built around ethical principles.

Moreover, I would contend that one can only be truly evangelical if they are Reformed in theology. God always roots the imperatives in His Word into a series of indicative truths, including God's sovereignty, man's depravity, and the atoning work of Christ. These truths usher forth gratitude in the heart of the redeemed, which in turn breaks forth in evangelism and the many other fruits of the regenerated heart.

Those free-will Arminians who turn faith into a work and place salvation on the shoulders of sinful men only see true conversions in spite of their beliefs, not because of them. They are also in danger of repeated Rome's heresy of turning God's law into an illusory ladder to heaven, but which is in actuality an escalator to Hell.

Throughout his epistle to the Galatians, Paul condemns the teachings of the Judaizers, who attempt to pervert the law into some sort of supplement to the Gospel. In chapters 3-5, Paul in essence says "You idiots! The law is a standard for salvation, not a tool. It tells you what is required, but doesn't get you there. It sets the bar so far from the grasp of sinful hands that only One could grab it. By Christ's perfect obedience, death, and resurrection--by living perfectly according to the law and paying for our desecration of the law--He has earned grace for His children. We have nothing to do with it." Therefore, be grateful, Christians. You were bought at a price and nothing can separate you from the love of God in Christ (Rom. 8:36-39). That's an indicative, so get off of your butt and offer a sin-tainted hell of an imperative as your worship.

One final note--I will follow in the reasoning of my hero, J. Gresham Machen, and reject evangelicalism as a body of which I'm a part. Christianity is not an -ism, and shouldn't be reduced to any -isms, whether political (i.e. communism, socialism, capitalism) or theological (i.e. liberalism, fundamentalism, evangelicalism). We are the Church--guided objectively by God's Word and subjectively by the Holy Spirit. Our outward point of unity is our Confessions, and our inward point is the love of Christ which has been poured upon the Church. To reduce Christianity to an -ism is to equate Christianity with all of the -isms in American society, beneficial or detrimental. I'm sorry, but Christianity is so much more.