We Are People Who Together Form A Community

Some might say that “confession is good for the soul”.  I think that’s right.  Even better is it to say that self-consciousness is good for the soul.  In the words of that stalwart Highland theologian, Robert Burns: “O wad some Power the giftie gie us, to see oursels as ithers see us!" This forms the context of why I engage in writing this article.  

The calendar has turned on my first year of retirement.  I said to a friend recently that in reflection it appears that I think more as a retired soldier than a retired pastor.  In other words I think my military paradigms were quite active even in pastoral ministry.  Staff at church seemed to see that clearer than I did, especially when they would make sport of my desire for order, precise protocols and decorum.  It also affected the way I viewed the Church and participation within the church (The change in case is intentional.).  When people would float in and out of the local church, even for seemingly logical reasons, it would bother me.  When some abandoned the community in protest (e.g., COVID-19 policies) I was very provoked.  I categorized such fluidity as disloyalty.  Loyalty surfaced as one of my most important ideals.  This conviction became more obvious when I was recently reading, THE PATROL, SEVEN DAYS IN THE LIFE OF A CANADIAN SOLDIER IN AFGHANISTAN by Ryan Flavelle .  He writes, 

 

“At that moment I realized just what an important thing choice is. Not the choice between shopping at Walmart or shopping at Superstore, but the ability to choose whether to participate in things that directly affect your safety. I had given up that right. I was going to get into the back of that LAV, stand air sentry, cross my fingers and toes, and hold on. That was my only choice.

 

The cold, hard reality of military life is that no one makes any effort to treat you as an individual. You are a soldier; that is all. It is refreshing to be reminded that no matter what our third-grade teachers taught us, we are not all unique and delicate flowers; we are people who together form a community . . . In the military we are painfully aware that each one of us is merely a cog in a much larger machine . . . The military doesn’t view us as unique, and it doesn’t need to.”

 

Of course I would err to take Flavelle’s accurate view of military life and apply it directly to Christian communion without some nuancing.  The New Testament certainly acknowledges the individual, individual gifts, individual genders, culture, etc.  But the New Testament also points to community, to oneness, and to one another-ness.  In our culture that emphasizes individuality, freedom, autonomy, etc., we would do well to heed the community aspects to our Christian faith.  Much of the New Testament is written to us in our plurality, not individuality.  The most basic prayer starts, “Our Father . . ..”   

 

Just like it is unique to military life to see the whole as more important than the part, it is also unique to life in the Christian community.  The initiatory act of baptism symbolizes that.  One might wonder if the militant Church on earth wouldn’t be more effective if people would acknowledge that certain individual freedoms are forfeited the moment one becomes part of Christ’s Body. Today we have a weakened Church because everyone wants to be treated as an individual.  Thus they live and make choices mainly on what satisfies their needs and their desires.  It might be a time to make ourselves nothing and see the glorious “larger machine” that we are “merely cogs” within. 

 

I recently overheard a spouse say, “I get to be me!”   Perhaps a better marital ideal is, “I get to be us.”  The same is true for the Church.  So I don’t apologize for my military influence that places loyalty to the Church in such a prominent place.  And if you still float between churches like shopping between Walmart and Superstore, I’m still provoked by your heightened view of your own self-prominence.  

There are good reasons to leave a church.  That discussion is not part this article.  Tim Challies has an excellent Blog on that topic.  Akin to marriage, when we go into a fellowship with the notion that we can remain autonomous and leave when we want to we start at the wrong place.  When we start at the point of “may death do us part” we are on the right path to true Church life.  It is counter-cultural but it is Scriptural: the whole is more important that the sum of its parts.

 

 

Is there a difference between preaching and teaching?

This question stimulates intriguing discussion among pastors and church leaders.  It has been said to me, “I am a teacher, not a preacher.”  Interestingly, no one has ever said the opposite!  Some suggest that there is no difference between the two.  They say the two terms as virtually synonymous.  My position is that there is a distinction, but not a radical division.  It helps to state it this way:

You can be a teacher and not a preacher; but

You cannot be a preacher without being a teacher.

An important text of Scripture that gives rise to this definition is found in 2 Timothy 4:1–2 (ESV):

“⁴ I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingdom: ² preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching.”

Notice this important call to Paul’s protégé, Timothy: “Preach the word . . . with patience and teaching.” The imperative is to “preach”.  The Greek word is translated “herald” or “proclaim” and he is to do it with “teaching” (with doctrine or instruction).  To read on in 2 Timothy we learn of a time when people will not welcome this “sound teaching” v3.  Sound teaching or sound doctrine is the content of the word preached.  Exegetically we can discern that to preach includes the elements of “reproving, rebuking and exhorting.”  I would argue that you can conduct instruction that conveys doctrinal understanding to the hearer. Left in that alone it is defined as teaching.  The preacher though takes the sound teaching and in love and concern for the hearer brings reprimand, conviction of sin, a stern warning, comfort and encouragement.  There is a Spirit endowed authority with true preaching.  This diagram is a facsimile of my position [1]:

This emotion that is implied in Biblical preaching is that blend of compassion and passion.  Martyn Lloyd-Jones defined preaching this way:

“What is preaching? Logic on fire! Preaching is theology coming through a man who is on fire. A true understanding and experience of the Truth must lead to this. I say again that a man who can speak about these things dispassionately has no right whatsoever to be in a pulpit; and should never be allowed to enter one.”[2]

J.I. Packer presses in deeper by stating that the “preacher” conveys the Word of God through His “commands, promises, warnings, and assurances, with a view to winning the hearer or hearers…to a positive response.”[3] My father had a book on his shelf entitled, Preaching to Convince.  There is a sense where the preacher, more so than the teacher, is burning to be persuasive, pressing the urgency of the doctrine onto the hearer and seeking the right response through invitation.

It is no accident that the Greek word for the preacher represents a herald, a town crier.  The herald is a representative of the king and has a message that the subjects need to hear.  Certainly, the herald must represent the king’s message with precision, but he is also endowed with a serious responsibility to ensure that people hear and respond to the message. His job is not to provide facts and information.  His job is to press the facts and information on the minds and wills of the citizens. 

Now what of a person who is preaching (so-called) but is devoid of the essence of teaching?  I have witnessed such things in the name of preaching.  I think of them as nothing but circus clowns parading themselves back and forth across the stage, ranting and railing, throwing out nothing but carefully designed memes, entertaining their audience with their performance.  Preaching without teaching is not preaching.

There is a role for teachers in the church.  “Teaching, on the other hand, if done well, is dialogical [a discussion with students. A conversation.] by nature. The communication of content is driven by the teacher, but questions from the hearers shape the conversation and interchange that happens in the classroom. Good teaching is inherently dialogical.”¹

So, there is a need for sound doctrinal, albeit dialogical teachers in the Church. They provide insight into systematic and Biblical theology.  They instruct the listeners in doctrine.  Their goal is to provide information that equips. Often, they are seen as discipling believers.  But the essential need for the Church is for preachers.  They are transformational in their approach. They warn.  They correct. They bring Gospel comfort and encouragement in the Lord. They have a fire within that cannot be quenched.  As prophets of old they come with a “burden”.   

So yes, there are teachers that are not preachers.  But Biblical preachers — preachers representing the King of kings approach their congregation with a compassion driven passion to conform people to the likeness of Christ in Christian maturity.

“Him we proclaim, warning everyone and teaching everyone with all wisdom, that we may present everyone mature in Christ.” - Colossians 1:28 (ESV)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

---

[1] https://www.logos.com/grow/what-is-the-difference-between-preaching-and-teaching/

[2] Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Preaching and Preachers, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1971), 97.

[3] J. I. Packer, Preaching a Biblical Interpretation in Inerrancy and Common Sense, ed. Roger Nicole and J. Ramsey Michaels, (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1980), 189.

 

What is a woman?

Abegail Dodds, speaking at the Godward Life Conference at Bethlehem College and Seminary, spoke on the topic: She Shall be called Woman.  This is a message full of grace, non-abrasive, Biblically informed, doctrinally sound, and Christ-centered.  It is a breath of fresh air in a culture that is so confused by gender issues.   The YouTube link is here:

https://youtu.be/-cKmPoH6KdE

So, what is a woman?  Only God can define a woman.  This is where we must start.  To start elsewhere leads to disaster.  “We don’t define womanhood because we didn’t make it, God did; but we do embody it either willingly or in rebellion . . ..”

Dodds definition that emerges from Genesis 2 and 1 Corinthians 11.

“A woman is a human made by God in His image from man to be his helper and glory by subduing and filling the Earth with God’s glory, primarily through Godly offspring.”

“That’s what she is. It’s not mainly describing what she does, but who she is.”

So when you are asked, “What is a woman?”, what will your answer be?

The Exaltation of God is the Hope of the Christian

This is an encouraging sermon by David Mathis, pastor of Cities Church in St. Paul, Minnesota, entitled: God Can Handle Your Crisis. The message is an exposition of Psalm 46.

It can be viewed on YouTube here: https://youtu.be/qAD-Z2rq_ss

 

Here are some quotable quotes from Mathis:

 

“If God’s people can be without panic when the ground shifts, and the seas rage, and the nations rage, then we can face any crisis with confidence.”

 

“Whatever trouble comes, Psalm 46 tells us, with its first word, where to turn. Not to a change in circumstances. Not to our best efforts to fix the problem. Not to our anxious strategies to avoid pain and loss. But rather, to God.”

 

“One of the overwhelming effects of Psalm 46 — perhaps the chief effect of the psalm — is that it communicates to our souls: ‘Your God is strong, with infinite strength.’”

 

“He is not only strong, with infinite strength, but he’s present to help in trouble. And not just present, but ‘very present,’ attentively present.”

 

“For every crisis we face in Christ, and all its darkness, God has a dawn designed. He will help when morning dawns. Your dawn will come. God’s help does not mean that his people are kept from crisis, but that he keeps us through crisis. In his perfect timing, when the appointed morning dawns, he rescues his people from their trouble, having preserved them through the long night.”

 

“And he speaks into the chaos, into the raging and tottering, “Be still.” Lay down your weapons. Cease your warring and deconstruction. Cease your rage and disorder. Be still, which is first a rebuke to the raging nations, to our turbulent world . . . However, it is also a word to God’s people, who hear him say it to their foes, and read it in their Bibles. Be still, church.”

 

“For God’s covenant people in Israel back then, and for his covenant people today in Christ, our God’s exaltation is our salvation. His exaltation is our refuge and strength — and very present help in trouble.”

 

 

 

_______________________

David Mathis is executive editor for desiringGod.org and pastor at Cities Church. He is a husband, father of four, and author of Rich Wounds: The Countless Treasures of the Life, Death, and Triumph of Jesus (2022).

 

Guess the date?

 

To what generation was this written?

"There is an amazing ignorance of Scripture among many, and a consequent want of established, solid religion. In no other way can I account for the ease with which people are, like children, “tossed to and fro, and carried about by every wind of doctrine” (Eph. 4:14). There is an Athenian love of novelty abroad, and a morbid distaste for anything old and regular and in the beaten path of our forefathers. Thousands will crowd to hear a new voice and a new doctrine without considering for a moment whether what they hear is true. There is an incessant craving after any teaching which is sensational and exciting and rousing to the feelings. There is an unhealthy appetite for a sort of spasmodic and hysterical Christianity. The religious life of many is little better than spiritual dram–drinking, and the “meek and quiet spirit” which St. Peter commends is clean forgotten (1 Pet. 3:4). Crowds and crying and hot rooms and high–flown singing and an incessant rousing of the emotions are the only things which many care for. Inability to distinguish differences in doctrine is spreading far and wide, and so long as the preacher is “clever” and “earnest,” hundreds seem to think it must be all right, and call you dreadfully “narrow and uncharitable” if you hint that he is unsound! [1]

This book on Holiness was written in 1877.  It could have been written in 2022.

John Charles Ryle (10 May 1816 – 10 June 1900) was an English evangelical Anglican bishop. "Bishop Ryle, as he is still affectionately known even by many who would not share his love of the Church of England, was essentially a lover and teacher of biblical truth. His uncompromising stand for evangelical doctrine and scriptural holiness often made him unpopular with those who favored new ideas and superficial practices." - Dr. Martyn Lloyd Jones.

"And I, when I came to you, brothers, did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God with lofty speech or wisdom. For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. And I was with you in weakness and in fear and much trembling, and my speech and my message were not in plausible words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, so that your faith might not rest in the wisdom of men but in the power of God.” (1 Corinthians 2:1–5, ESV)"

“For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths.” (2 Timothy 4:3–4, ESV)  

______________________________________________________

1. Ryle, J. C. (1999). Holiness: it’s nature, hinderances, difficulties and roots (electronic ed. based on the Evangelical Press reprinting, with new forward, 1995.). Christian Classics Foundation.

The headline read: Elisabeth Hasselbeck returns to 'The View' and debates abortion with Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar. Admittedly I don’t know anything about these ladies.  The name Whoopi Goldberg is familiar, and I have heard about this show called “The View”.  My comments therefore are not grounded in a lot of knowledge or backstory.  The article showed up in my Google news feed and it was the title that grabbed my attention.  I can’t write about anything beyond what is in the article.

Apparently, Elisabeth Hasselbeck, was a previous co-host and returned to the Show and the topic of the Kansas’ debate on whether to keep pro abortion rights in light of the recent dismantling of the Roe vs Wade decision by the US Supreme Court.

If the reporting is accurate, the author, Suzy Byrne, wrote: “Using religion in her response, Goldberg said, "As you know, God doesn't make mistakes. God made us smart enough to know when it wasn't going to work for us. That's the beauty of giving us freedom of choice."”

I have no desire to defame Hasselbeck.  In fact, I admire her courage and I applaud her use of adoption as an alternative to abortion.  My focus is on the phrase, “Using religion in her response.” My point is that although religion could be a response to the abortion debate, it is not the best nor is it the necessary response.  Prolife is not simply a religious conviction.

Scott Klusendorf writes, “The abortion controversy is not a debate between those who are pro-choice and those who are anti-choice. It’s not about privacy. It’s not about trusting women to decide. It’s not about forcing one’s morality. It’s about one question that trumps all others.”[1]

The question is, Is the unborn a human being or not?  That is not a religious question.  At its core that is a scientific question. I don’t think there is any reason to debate the issue with someone who admits the unborn to be human and is willing to take its life.  One would hope that this approach is fundamentally wrong on any level. So the real debate between so-called pro-choice and so-called pro-life is WHAT IS THE UNBORN?

Klussendorf has written a very compelling book entitled The Case for Life.  I think someone seriously committed to do what is morally right ought to read his book. It argues extensively, this point:

“The science of embryology is clear. From the earliest stages of development, the unborn are distinct, living, and whole human beings. Therefore, every “successful” abortion ends the life of a living human being.”[2]

“Leading embryology textbooks affirm this. Keith Moore and T. V. N. Persaud, in The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, a widely used embryology text, write that “human development begins at fertilization when a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoon) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell— a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.”[3]

He goes on to quote T.W. Sdler’s Langman’s Embryology text that affirms that human life begins at fertilization.  He points the reader to a 1981, a U.S. Senate judiciary subcommittee that heard expert testimony on when human life begins. Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth of Harvard University Medical School told the subcommittee, “It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisive. . . . It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception.” Other expert citations are offered by Klussendorf and are important sources for the reader to examine.

“Embryology textbooks uniformly state that new human life comes into existence upon completion of fertilization.” [4] The scientific, embryonic research supports the conclusion that life begins at conception and human beings didn’t come from a fetus but are fetuses. So, the question of enquiry is clear: what is the unborn.  The scientific (not religious) response is that the unborn at every stage are human – not mature, but a complete, whole human being in its essence.   

“From conception onward, the human embryo is fully programmed, and has the active disposition, to develop himself or herself to the next mature stage of a human being,”[5] write Robert George and Patrick Lee.

So, as much as I admire and in principle will agree with Elisabeth Hasselbeck’s argument on The View, the pro-life position is not founded on religion, but on science.  “Pro-lifers don’t look to theology to tell them these things but to the science of embryology.”[6]  Where religion comes into the discussion is what follows when one has properly heard the science.  My question is, by what code of ethics or morality is it right to kill a defenseless human being without justification?  This is where Hasselbeck is correct. “"I believe our Creator assigns value to life, and that those lives have plan and purpose over them as designed by God that are not limited to the circumstances of conception, nor the situations they're born into."

If someone properly answers the question, “What is the unborn”, the morality is clear.  And this is where Hasselbeck’s solution is totally appropriate: adoption is a better pro-choice argument.

 

 

---

[1] Scott Klusendorf. The Case for Life: Equipping Christians to Engage the Culture (Kindle Locations 201-203). Kindle Edition.

[2] Ibid, (Kindle Locations 555-557).

[3] Ibid, (Kindle Locations 565-568).

[4] Ibid,(Kindle Location 863).

[5] Robert P. George and Patrick Lee, “Acorns and Embryos,” The New Atlantis, No. 7, Fall 2004/ Winter 2005, 90-100; http:// www.thenewatlantis.com/ publications/ acorns-and-embryos.

[6] Scott Klusendorf. The Case for Life: Equipping Christians to Engage the Culture (Kindle Locations 856-857). Kindle Edition.

Faking It With, “I’m Fine!”

It was the title that got my attention: No More Faking Fine – Ending the Pretending.  As it turned out the book was the life story of Esther Fleece, an autobiography, and it was a practical guide through the biblical practice of lament.  “Lament is how Christians grieve. It is how to help hurting people. Lament is how we learn important truths about God and our world. My personal and pastoral experience has convinced me that biblical lament is not only a gift but also a neglected dimension of the Christian life for many twenty-first-century Christians.”[1]

Esther begins No More Faking Fine with a story from her childhood—a moment which deeply impacted her. It was the day she began pretending. Over and over through the Bible, we read stories of lament. Stories where God’s people cried out to Him, demanding to know why. From the Israelites in Egypt to Job at Satan’s hands, God’s people lament. Some of the best laments are recorded in the Psalms. And it is these stories and laments that taught Esther to face her own pain and walk through it to help others.

The second and third part of the book, Esther looks at examples of lament prayers and then how lament moves forward to healing, respectively.  Jim Daly from Focus on the Family writes, “For many of us, when someone asks how we’re doing, our automatic response is “fine”—even when we aren’t. Esther Fleece transparently shares her story of “faking fine” until she couldn’t anymore—and how God has brought emotional healing as she learned to stop pretending. This is an encouraging and helpful book.”

Here are my quotations from the book that I think is impressive:

“Without lament, there is no joy.” (p. 15).

“Of course, the last thing I wanted was for anyone to know I felt this way. My busy days were spent performing and producing, keeping up appearances, praising God in public while wondering in private if He even cared.” (p. 18).

“The pressure to keep up is sometimes so significant that we default to everything being fine—even our unhappy lives . . ..”  (p. 31).

“I have learned through the years that God does not want just our happy; He also really wants our sad. Everything is not fine, and God wants to hear about it. He is drawn to us when we’re mourning and blesses us in a special way. God is not up there minimizing our pain and comparing it to others who have it worse than we do. God wants all pain to be surrendered to Him, and He has the capacity to respond to it all with infinite compassion.” (p. 35).

“Think of the people who say everything is “fine” all the time. How many times is “how are you?” asked in our church hallways and coffee times only to be responded with an automatic “good!”—even if it’s not true?” (p. 36).

“Laments don’t need to be carefully crafted prayers. Lament is the language that God has given us to use when we are hurting. It’s a language that sometimes means tears or groans or simply feeling an emotion.” (p. 76).

“Even though the psalmist was feeling despair, he chose to remember God’s goodness and His wonderful deeds. Could I try the same thing? Could I find something to praise God about? The enemy wants us to stay stuck in despair, but God wants our laments to lead into a deeper recognition and understanding of Him.” (p. 95).

“Far from a complaint, this lament is a bold declaration that God is present, hears, and is powerful to act on our behalf. “How long?” is an expression in Scripture of staking one’s hope in the only One who is able to save.” (p. 127).

“I was so used to sucking it up and making it on my own, and it became a gift when God made it clear that He no longer wanted me to live this way. God severs our “faking fine” tactics in order to show us a better way. I just didn’t see it at the time. We rarely do. (p. 178).

“You will know you are coming through a lament when you begin to hear a new song of praise.” (p. 206).

Esther Fleece Allan’s book, No More Faking Fine, Ending the Pretending is available on Amazon.  I’ve listened to several good sermons on Lamenting, both from my own Church and elsewhere.  A great series by the author of Dark Clouds, Deep Mercy Discovering the Grace of Lament, Mark Vroegop has a series online that can be found HERE.  A really helpful and moving book is, Lament for a Son, by Nicholas Wolterstorff. For students, Dr. Bruce Waltke’s, James M. Houston, and Erika Moore wrote a book, The Psalms as Christian Lament A Historical Commentary, which is an excellent commentary on Lament Psalms.    

“For to have a genuine human existence as God intended us to enjoy is to exercise lament before him. This is expressive of his sovereign grace, of our trust in his good purposes, and of our final destiny, to be transformed to the image of his Son.”[2]

 

---

[1] Vroegop, Mark. Dark Clouds, Deep Mercy (p. 21). Crossway. Kindle Edition.

[2] Waltke, Bruce K.; Houston, James M.; Moore, Erika. The Psalms as Christian Lament: A Historical Commentary (p. 10). Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.. Kindle Edition.

 

Christianity IS A Religion!

G.K. Chesterton rightly observed that "A heresy is always a half-truth turned into a whole falsehood" (America, November 9, 1935).  Or elsewhere he wrote that "every heresy is a truth taught out of proportion" (Daily News, June 26, 1909).  I wrote the article below in 2012.  I keep hearing this fallacy from dear Christians over and over again.  They say, "Christianity isn't a religion, it's a relationship." This half-truth is leading the Church to disastrous results.   Here's my former article.  See my conclusions at the end. 

________________________________________________

I have heard (and probably said) on many occasions that Christianity isn't a religion, it's a relationship.  Unfortunately that's only a half-truth.  We better stop bashing religion because we will soon learn that the wound is self-inflicted.  Jefferson Bethke has a blog post and one of his YouTube videos went wild as he bashed religion. The huge problem for us if we decide to run down this road is that Jesus was very religious.   As Kevin DeYoung intuitively writes: 

Jesus was a Jew. He went to services at the synagogue. He observed Jewish holy days. He did not come to abolish the Law or the Prophets, but to fulfill them (Matt. 5:17). He founded the church (Matt. 16:18). He established church discipline (Matt. 18:15-20). He instituted a ritual meal (Matt. 26:26-28). He told his disciples to baptize people and to teach others to obey everything he commanded (Matt. 28:19-20). He insisted that people believe in him and believe certain things about him (John 3:16-18; 8:24). If religion is characterized by doctrine, commands, rituals, and structure, then Jesus is not your go-to guy for hating religion.

Not only was our Lord, Teacher and Savior very religious, His Word commands us to be "religious":  

"If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person’s religion is worthless. Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world." (James 1:26-27, ESV).

The adjective in this quote from James (religious) is the Greek word θρῆσκος [threskos]. It actually has ideas of fearing and trembling before God in worship.  The Scripture is replete with those ideas.  James is pretty clear: a managed tongue; a care for the needy in mercy and compassion; and a pursuit of holiness is God's idea of religion.

So, before we bash religion, let's define our terms.  Yes, Jesus did say hard things to the religious leaders of Judaism; and Paul did condemn self-made, man-made religion.   But Jesus was religious and His Word commands us to be religious.  We better define what we mean when we bash religion.! Religion bashing is not the kind of sport we should engage in readily.  I'm tired of hearing it.  It's simply not intellectually coherent to suggest that a Christian has a relationship with Jesus but no religion. 

___________________________________

We live in a world where Christians are highly individualistic and are driven by consumerism.  WHY?  One of the causes is due to this incredibly erroneous statement that Christianity is simply a relationship with Jesus.  The popular chorus goes like this, "Me and Jesus got a good thing going."   Indeed, you come to Christ on your own.  You repent and you believe.  And yes, when you are saved your new identity is to be in union with Christ. But guess what: you share that union with every other believer. And together you express your newfound relationship through the Church -- the local church.   A scant reading of the New Testament reveals the "corporateness" of the Christian faith.  We don't even pray the Lord's Prayer without saying, "Our Father . . .."  

A Christian will shrivel and die without a connection to the means of grace, the disciplines of the Spirit, all experienced through the local Church.  If it's just "Me and Jesus" you will shipwreck your faith because your Jesus is not the Jesus of the Bible.  Those that are in union with Jesus will soon find that they have an interdependent, accountable, caring relationship with others who are in union with Jesus. And all these relationships are fostered, nourished and built-up in the local church, using the ordinary means of grace. 

By definition a religion is a system of worship and faith.  Christian if you're not religious, you're in trouble.

What is a conservative?

Dr. Alberta Mohler hosted an interview with Yoram Hazony, on Mohler’s YouTube channel, “Thinking in Public”, June 15, 2022.  Yoram Hazony is an Israeli philosopher, Bible scholar, and political theorist. He is president of the Herzl Institute in Jerusalem and serves as the chairman of the Edmund Burke Foundation.  They discussed Hazony’s latest book Conservatism: A Rediscovery. I found the interview stimulating and provocative. From the discussion I gleaned this all-important question:

What is a conservative?

The dictionary defines a conservative as a person that tends or is disposed to maintaining existing views, conditions, or institutions.  They are marked by moderation and caution. So, it makes sense that a conservative is conserving something. Thus, in Canada, it is oxymoronic to call oneself a “progressive conservative.”  The point to be made is that there are permanent laws, traditions and values that dare not be changed because it risks losing what is good and right.

A point that Hazony makes is that one cannot properly call oneself a conservative unless you are a conservative is values and lifestyle.  To take the conversation further we could add that to call oneself a conservative and live a life that is not conservative is hypocritical. So, 2 questions emerge to the reader who claims to be conservative:

1. What are you conserving; and

2. Are you living a conservative lifestyle?

In the interview, Hazony, was very transparent and in fact courageous.  In examining that last decades of western conservatism, the executive word is “abandonment”.  Conservatives have abandoned God, Scripture, marriage, the family, man and woman, the sanctity of life, and so on. When a social or political movement places individual liberty as the end all and be all for all things, that is not conservatism.  It is liberalism.

The questions that face both Canadians and Albertans in the coming months is heavily rooted in the answer to the question, “What is a conservative?”  Secondly, for a political representative to embrace the category of being a conservative, do they live conservatively?  A cursory scan at those who are seeking the leadership of the United Conservative Party in Alberta reveals men and women who have abandoned God, the Bible, the Family and the sanctity of life.  There really are very few conservatives. Many so-called conservative politicians are clothed in liberal clothing.

Perhaps a question that begs an answer from prospective candidates is, “As a conservative what are you conserving?”

 

 

 

 

The People of God

In his book entitled, Between the Cross and the Throne, Matthew Emerson provides a beautiful description of the people of God all taken from the Book of Revelation.   Here’s some quotable quotes:

“John’s description of the Church can be summed up by Revelation 1:4b–5—“To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood and made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father, to him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.””

“The Church is the redeemed people of God from all tribes, languages, and nations (Rev 7:9). The entire people of God is possibly indicated by the “twenty four elders” in Revelation 4:4; 11:16; and 19:4. This number is made up of two groups of twelve—one representing the tribes of Israel, and one representing the apostles. This is also exemplified in John’s numbering of the “sealed from every tribe of the sons of Israel” at 144,000 (Rev 7:4, 9; 14:1).”

“The people of God are clothed with white robes, which, according to Revelation 7:13–17, means that they are the “ones coming out of the great tribulation,” who have “washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb” (Rev 7:14). In other words, the white robes indicate that their wearers are believers in Christ, those who have repented of their sins, who have trusted Christ for forgiveness, and who have been made new by his Spirit (Rev 4:4; 6:11; 7:13–17; 19:8; 22:14).”

“John also refers to believers as those who have been sealed on their foreheads with the name of God (Rev 7:4; 9:4; 13:8; 14:1; 22:4) and who have had their names written in the book of life before the foundation of the world (Rev 13:8). Both of these images assure believers that their salvation, accomplished by Christ and applied by the Spirit, is secure because of God’s great power.”

“Believers are also those who follow the commands of Jesus, keeping themselves pure and blameless (Rev 14:4–5). This includes not only in their individual morality, but also their corporate holiness in the face of economic and political corruption (see the description of the Harlot in Rev 17–18).”

“ John also combines this last image of the Bride with the new Jerusalem, the holy city coming down from heaven (Rev 21:2).”

“John also describes the Church in Revelation 4:5b–5 as reigning with Christ. As with the first description of the Church as redeemed, John uses a number of different images throughout the book to convey this point. He starts and ends the body of his vision by picturing 24 elders (representative of the whole people of God) with crowns on their heads and sitting on thrones (Rev 4:4; 20:4, 6).”

[Emphasis Mine]

Is Mental Health a Biblical Concept?

Is Mental Health a Biblical Concept? [1]

By: Garrett Higbee

Selected Quotations:

“I think it is important to note that our epistemology, anthropology, and etiology differ from our secular counterparts, who are measuring secular well-being. We see personal sin at the root of mental dysfunction and sin’s effects on this world causing tremendous suffering. We are not ignorant of human weakness and, in effect, mental illness as a result of the fall (Gen. 3), but we measure and treat it differently. Our truth as Christians is not simply based on objective and empirical evidence but also on the unseen (Eph. 6:10-12) and the authority of Scripture (2 Tim. 3:16-17).”

“Secular scientists, while often well-meaning in their pursuit of mental health, are searching in vain without understanding the power of the Cross to redeem relationship and peace with our Creator. Thus, if we pursue mental health through means of addressing symptoms and focusing on self-esteem, self-help, and self-sufficiency, we too will reap misery in the end (Matt. 10:39).”

“I believe we must continue to develop ways to reframe issues and guide our people to a biblical worldview of mental illness (Col. 2:8). While causality may vary, based on Scripture, we believe that every “mental illness” has a spiritual origin (Jer. 17:9; Rom. 1:20-24). Having a holistic and biblical perspective of man, we cannot let mental health assessment, standards, and care be abdicated to the secular therapeutic community as it has for over a century.”

“God left us the key to true mental health in His Word, the gospel. The standard for wellness is a heart redeemed by and satisfied in Christ (Ezek. 11:19). A life where we are growing a Christ-like character, mindset, and demeanor is a believer’s “new normal” (2 Cor. 5:17; Gal. 2:20, Phil. 2:1-5) and the baseline for mental health in a biblical worldview. There is a paradigm shift from being conformed to a set of criteria that the world calls functional to being transformed through progressive sanctification (Rom. 12:1-2). But how? First, by abiding in Christ in deep dependency (John 15), second, by being mindful of Christ in all that we do (2 Cor. 3:18), and third, by being renewed in our thinking primarily through His Word (Eph. 4:22-24). Scripture does not mention mental health but does use words like shalom, joy, soul rest, contentment, and blessed to describe a person at peace in Christ (Ps. 4:8; 119:165; Prov. 3:17; Isa. 26:3; 32:17; John 20:21; Acts 10:36).

[Emphasis mine}

_____________________________________

1. https://www.biblicalcounselingcoalition.org/2022/04/25/is-mental-health-a-biblical-concept/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=is-mental-health-a-biblical-concept

The Unity of the Transcendentals

What a mindful! The unity of the transcendentals! It sounds like a notion developed by someone with too much time on their hands.  I hadn’t ever recalled hearing of such a concept.  The unity of the transcendentals. This is what  Dr. Albert Mohler entitled his lecture in the series Truth and Consequences, produced by Ligonier Ministries and shown in the Elk Point Baptist Adult Sunday School class on Sunday, May 1st.

So what is it, or are they?  The transcendentals are those universal virtues of the good, the beautiful, the true and the real.  They have been understood in the history of Western thought to be indispensable categories for understanding the world.  Mohler points out that the unity of the transcendentals is a foundational theological belief for the Christian because it points to the One who is good, beautiful, true, and real. The concept of unity suggests that they are indivisible.  You can’t have something good, if it’s not true or real.  Scripturally they are seen clearly in Paul’s letter to Philippi:

Philippians 4:8 (ESV): “Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things.”

Our culture craves beauty but has no clue what beauty is because it denies basic truth about God and the world as He created it.  Instead we fabricate fake beauty; we manufacture our own truth; we consider it our right to create our own reality; and so on.  All this due to a denial of God and His Word.  Dr Mohler gave an example.  He said that from the Christian worldview, a Down-syndrome child is more beautiful than a exorbitantly made-up fashion model. The former carries the Imago Deo, the latter is a fake.  Yet the former is aborted (killed) in thousands by our culture.  

Another important thing that Dr. Mohler said was that truth is never bad news.  In relation to the gospel, telling someone about the truth of their sin is necessary to point someone to Christ. The fact that Christ is presented as the solution to the problem of sin makes the bad news of sin, while a harsh reality, good news in actuality. He illustrated that point by showing that a physician’s news that one has a malignant tumour is “hard” news but if there is a remedy it is not bad news.  It is never unloving to give hard news (the Truth) if you have a solution.  So-called “bad” news becomes good because it is true.  And if it is true then it is beautiful and real.

The transcendental realities of the good, the beautiful, the true, and the real are not just philosophical mambo jumbo, they are deeply theological, because they speak of the character of God.  This Christian worldview is the only worldview that can hold together in a logical, cohesive, comprehensive package because it is based on the reality of a God who is the good, the beautiful, the true, and the real. Other worldviews cannot claim the same ability, therefore they are fractured, inconsistent, confusing and lack all logical integrity.

What Is Saving Faith?

Recently Matt Tully from Crossway Books interviewed John Piper on his new book, What Is Saving Faith?, from Crossway in a podcast entitled Can Affectionless Faith Be Genuine?  Here are some quotable quotes from the interview.

“A lot of people think that the people who have been born again out of the most horrific lives of sinning have the clearest idea of what depravity means and what salvation means. I think that’s wrong because I don’t think experience can come close to teaching us about the nature of our depravity that we find in Scripture . . . We have to see in the Bible what our condition was before we were saved, what our condition is after we are saved, and we get from the Bible that line in between, which is what we want to talk about—What is the saving thing that happened in our hearts?”

“What I’ve come to see is that I think the church, especially in certain parts of it, has many unbelievers who think they’re saved. It’s why the church is weak, it’s why the church is ineffective in so many ways, it’s why worship is so flat—because there are a lot of unregenerate, non-born-again people in the church who have been taught that they are to make a decision, so they decide to believe some doctrines, to believe that they are going to heaven, and nothing has changed in their heart.”

“The will, when it inclines vigorously with all of its force, we call affection. I prefer my wife over all other women. That’s not a small preference. I prefer life over death. In other words, the will can act without affection, and the will can act vigorously with affection.”

“America is a free will driven culture, meaning I have ultimate control over my destiny. I’m the captain of my fate! That’s all heresy. We don’t have ultimate control over our fate; God does.”

“Faith is affectional, and so it does rest on knowing and believing that I have a treasuring of Christ that ranks him above mother and father, because Jesus said, If you don’t love me more than your mother and father you don’t belong to me. I can’t get away from that. That’s real. I have to fight for that. I have to treasure him more than I treasure my wife and my children and my mother and father. Otherwise, I’m not a Christian. That’s truth from Matthew 10:37.”

“When we believe and do not work for our justification, we glorify the grace of God. We glorify grace by looking away from ourselves to the all-sufficiency of his justification by imputing Christ’s righteousness to us. However, God aims to get more glory than being a sufficient sin-forgiver, or an efficient righteousness-imputer. He means to get glory for being an all-satisfying treasure, so he built that into saving faith as well. Saving faith embraces Christ as my righteousness, embraces Christ as my Lord, embraces Christ as my treasure. In doing that it is satisfied in him, and so we arrive at the basic statement of Christian hedonism: God is most glorified in me when I, in my saving faith, am most satisfied with all that he is for me in Jesus.”

Normalizing Same-sex Marriage

 Herein is a stunning statement by Dr. Albert Mohler, if you’re an evangelical Christian:

“In the end, we will almost surely have to concede that divorce will harm far more lives and cause far more direct damage than same-sex marriage . . . Heterosexuals did a very good job of undermining marriage before the culture forces began advocating for the normalization of same-sex relationships and the legalization of same-sex marriage . . . Today’s movement toward the total acceptance of homosexual behavior and relationships was only made possible because some heterosexuals first did their best to undermine marriage.“ [1]

______________________________

1.  We Cannot Be Silent: Speaking Truth to a Culture Redefining Sex, Marriage, and the Very Meaning of Right and Wrong by R. Albert Mohler Jr.

https://a.co/b3DzsJD

What is “secularization”?

“Secular refers to the absence of any binding divine authority or belief. Secularization is a sociological process whereby societies become less theistic as they become more modern. As societies move into conditions of deeper and more progressive modernity, they move away from a binding force of religious belief, and theistic belief in particular.”

“In his book A Secular Age, Taylor described the pre-modern age as a time when it was impossible not to believe . . . In the modern age, a secular alternative to Christian theism emerged and it became possible not to believe . . . But, as Taylor noted, those days are behind us. In our own postmodern age it is now considered impossible to believe.“

Secularization isn’t the opposite of religion or spirituality.  “Secularization, according to Taylor, is about the rejection of a belief in a personal God, one who holds and exerts authority.” [1]

________________________________________

1.  We Cannot Be Silent: Speaking Truth to a Culture Redefining Sex, Marriage, and the Very Meaning of Right and Wrong by R. Albert Mohler Jr.

https://a.co/7DwHgP6

You don’t just lose someone once

 You don’t just lose someone once.

You lose them when you close your eyes each night.

And as you open them each morning.

You lose them throughout the day.

An unused coffee cup.

An empty chair.

A pair of boots no longer there.

You lose them as the sun sets.

And darkness closes in.

 

You lose them as you wonder why.

Staring at a star lit sky.

You lose them on the big days.

Anniversaries.

Birthdays.

Graduations.

Holidays.

Weddings.

And the regular days too.

You lose them in the ordinary.

Paperwork.

Household chores.

Routines taken for granted.

You lose them in the familiar.

A song they used to sing.

The scent of their cologne.

A slice of their favourite pie.

You lose them in conversations you will never have.

And all the words unsaid.

You lose them in all the places they’ve been.

And all the places they longed to go.

You lose them in what could have been.

And all the dreams you shared.

You lose them as you pick up the broken pieces.

And begin your life anew.

You lose them when you realize.

This is your new reality.

They are never coming back.

No matter how much 

You miss them or

Need them.

No matter how hard you pray.

They are gone.

And you must go on.

Alone.

You lose them as the seasons change.

The snow blows.

The flowers blossom.

The grass grows.

The leaves fall.

You lose them again and again.

Day after day.

Month after month.

Year after year.

Time marches on, carrying them further and further way.

You lose them as your hair whitens and your body bends with age.

Your memory fades.

And the details begin to blur.

Their face stares back at you from a faded photograph.

Someone you used to know.

You think you might have loved them once.

Long ago.

Back then.

When you were whole.

You don’t just lose someone once.

You lose them every day.

Over and over again.

For the rest of your life. 

~ Donna Ashworth

Lament for a Son

 In Lament for a Son[1] Nicholas Wolterstorff writes not as a scholar but as a loving father grieving the loss of his son. The book is in one sense a narrative account of events--from the numbing telephone call on a sunny Sunday afternoon that tells of 25-year-old Eric's death in a mountain-climbing accident, to a graveside visit a year later. Lament for a Son gives expression to a grief that is at once unique and universal--a grief for an individual, irreplaceable person.

Quotable Quotes

“Often, I am asked whether the grief remains as intense as when I wrote. The answer is, No. The wound is no longer raw. But it has not disappeared. That is as it should be. If he was worth loving, he is worth grieving over. Grief is existential testimony to the worth of the one loved. That worth abides.”

“It’s the neverness that is so painful. Never again to be here with us—never to sit with us at table, never to travel with us, never to laugh with us, never to cry with us, never to embrace us.”

“IT’S SO WRONG, SO profoundly wrong, for a child to die before its parents. It’s hard enough to bury our parents. But that we expect. Our parents belong to our past, our children belong to our future. We do not visualize our future without them. How can I bury my son, my future, one of the next in line? He was meant to bury me!”

“His death is things to do not done—never to be done.”

“THERE’S A HOLE in the world now. In the place where he was, there’s now just nothing. A center, like no other, of memory and hope and knowledge and affection which once inhabited this earth is gone. Only a gap remains. A perspective on this world unique in this world which once moved about within this world has been rubbed out. Only a void is left . . .  A person, an irreplaceable person, is gone. Never again will anyone apprehend the world quite the way he did. Never again will anyone inhabit the world the way he did. Questions I have can never now get answers. The world is emptier. My son is gone. Only a hole remains, a void, a gap, never to be filled.”

“I believe in God the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth and resurrecter of Jesus Christ. I also believe that my son’s life was cut off in its prime. I cannot fit these pieces together. I am at a loss. I have read the theodicies produced to justify the ways of God to man. I find them unconvincing. To the most agonized question I have ever asked I do not know the answer. I do not know why God would watch him fall. I do not know why God would watch me wounded. I cannot even guess.”

“WITH THESE HANDS I lifted him from his cradle—tiny then, soft, warm, and squirming with life. Now at the end with these same hands I touched him in his coffin.”

“And at the end, that we now must learn to live as faithfully and authentically with Eric gone as we had tried to do with Eric present.”

“I will indeed remind myself that there’s more to life than pain. I will accept joy. But I will not look away from Eric dead. Its demonic awfulness I will not ignore. I owe that—to him and to God.”

“I cannot fit it together at all. I can only, with Job, endure. I do not know why God did not prevent Eric’s death. To live without the answer is precarious. It’s hard to keep one’s footing.”

“Will the family all be home for Christmas?” . . . “What are your children doing now?” . . .  “How many children do you have?”

“HIS YOUNGER brothers had begun to ask him for advice. To Claire and me he had become an equal, no longer a child to be cared for. Now he’s gone, and the family has to restructure itself. We don’t just each have a gap inside us but together a gap among us. We have to live differently with each other. We have to live around the gap. Pull one out, and everything changes.”

“The mourners are those who have caught a glimpse of God’s new day, who ache with all their being for that day’s coming, and who break out into tears when confronted with its absence.”

“Lament is part of life.”

 

---

[1] Wolterstorff, Nicholas. Lament for a Son. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.. Kindle Edition.