Men should read good fiction. It is often the case that men who do not read good fiction struggle significantly to understand others. They will think mainly propositionally and treat others mechanically, expecting them to engage in a particular way, using a particular school of logic and reading them through encyclopedic lenses.
Good fictional works allow men to see kindness as a virtue, explore the good life, and develop relationships within a paradigm of grace and wonder. Too often, the most demanding men to counsel are those who are theologically well-read but fictionally deficient. They assert themselves over their families with brute dogmatism and fail to embrace the good story of each child or spouse. They point out in a calculated fashion the errors of everyone else without engaging the role they had in altering the story of others.
I am sure you are hearing about sundry celebrities abandoning the faith. Some say it’s the contradictions in the Bible. Others believe the sexual revolution is causing people to choose between family members and traditional Christianity. Still, others argue that the allure of wealth leads people to drink from the mammon chalice rather than the eucharist chalice.
Well, let me address only the first quickly by stating that the supposed contradictions in the Bible have been addressed ad infinitum in the last 2,000 years of Church History. Contradictions only exist if someone denies that God is all-powerful and that the Spirit inspired men to write accounts that preserve their humanity’s integrity and perspectives on events. Presuppositions shape conclusions.
Assume someone says, “Hey, I can’t believe a man would live in the belly of a fish for three days and three nights. That’s just impossible.” In this case, he is denying that God is all-powerful. After all, if God created the world out of nothing, then for a sea creature to swallow a Hebrew prophet is actually a playground miracle in God’s repertoire.
If someone says, “But the Gospel accounts are different from each other.” In this case, they are denying the humanity of the authors. If these authors wrote identical accounts, then we should be skeptical. But they added their individual perspectives to the narratives, which prove indisputably that we are dealing with a reliable source.
I say all these things because when someone leaves the faith due to their perceived notion that Judas’ death in Matthew and Luke contradict each other, therefore bidding adieu to the Holy Trinity, they are actually using such silliness to justify some moral and ethical decision they have made or are eager to implement to their itinerary. The Bible is used as a scapegoat for their validation. I could claim they are all ignorant, but in these cases, it’s clear that they are only unaware of what they know to be true.
Ultimately, they want a way out of obeying God and following Jesus. The road to the cross can be difficult; self-control is hard; repentance is not for the weak. So, why not use the fallibility of God’s word to make a case for your fallible actions, they think.
These thoughts returned to me when thinking about Derek Webb’s forthright defense of his LGBTQ+ community in his chosen attire. How are the mighty fallen! Ironically, he dressed himself in a wedding dress to signal that he, too, was for them, that he wed himself to their cause. I say “ironic” because one of his most well-known songs tells how God rescues hypocrites. He argued in the song that we can put on the image of godliness by metaphorically wearing a beautiful wedding dress when in reality, we are whoring after false gods. Well, Derek, this time, you put on a wedding dress and become the god of your imagination.
I noted that he was one of the few singers who could speak boldly of the Church in the early 2000s and told the Gospel story with remarkable care but was now invested in “perfecting apostasy.” He thought this amusing and re-tweeted my note with a sarcastic retort that “perfect apostasy” would make a great album title. I replied that I would love to talk and even sent him a private note. But I expect nothing will come of it.
This entire departure from the faith is a play for control. Derek and so many others want to control the stories by downplaying the central claims of the faith. Their world will not produce meaning. But if they can tell a different story- one without God- they will dress themselves for the occasion. Then, and only then, will they comfort themselves.
Don’t be sucked into this chaos! Those who leave Jesus are leaving true life. They are walking contradictions. Our story is infinitely better and leads to the harmony of Father, Son, and Spirit.
Logos has long held primacy in the Bible software universe. It offers untold tools to aid the ministers and students in their labors. I applaud the work of Logos and especially its longevity. The market is getting more saturated. BibleWorks couldn’t stay in the fray (I still use BW 10), and Logos continues to take the preeminence with its capacity to provide curated research and facilitate the task of accurate sermon research into languages and background information. This is all good.
However, the singling out of their amplification of African-American, Asian, and Latin resources does not indicate its attempt to add orthodox voices from different cultures but accentuates the idea that textual analysis is shaped by contextual and geographical presuppositions. This is how you gain brownie points in the evangelical community. Diversity of thought is king.
True study, they argue, must fit your cultural ethos, and the more interconnected these worlds are, the more understandable the text will be and the more we will appreciate contributions from all voices ranging from the early church to the local lesbian mother at the Unitarian Church. They will argue that we should expect that an Asian perspective on Luke will yield new details that an Anglo scholar cannot provide and vice-versa. Sermon research must be open to all multicultural perspectives.
The purpose behind this sociological buffet is that all these modern and ancient voices will eventually carry the same gravitas in the interpretation arena. You can read through Genesis 2 and discover a feminist reading of the text next to Augustine’s sermons on Genesis, or search for books on sexuality and find an equal share of LGBTQ-friendly data next to Calvin’s studies on creational norms.
While these kinds of things are expected in significant institutions seeking a monopoly over a product, and while Logos has proven to be useful in many, many ways, we should not overlook the reality that this is an intentional move to make ideas a part of the egalitarian pursuits within evangelical institutions, which will undoubtedly impact hundreds of seminary students and laity seeking greater biblical understanding.
This now-deleted article has received an avalanche of mockery, even hitting the @Not_the_Bee status. TGC has hit the ceiling of self-fabrication. Calvin writes that man is an idol-factory, which can be broadly applied even to Christian institutions.
This attempt at grabbing readership becomes a self-fabricating reality used to connect the Gospel to things and people in a distorted attempt at harmony. It’s a pursuit of cultural relevance that provides no substance and leaves the faith in a place of despair, looking for something substantive to glue itself to in the culture and finding the lowest level of synergy with the lowest level of entertainment.
No one is disputing talent or how Christians should pursue excellence, but TGC is seeking an audience that is already inoculated with the mundane, who largely succumbed to societal pressures during COVID, and who may be ever-so-slightly sympathetic to the REVOICE agenda.
What these articles do is perpetuate the tendency to find common ground in lowly places; to connect the Gospel to the trivial and meaningless for some cultural and artistic brownie points.
While the world derides pastors and specific evangelical ministries target pastors, and while pointing out particular examples of pastoral malpractice alleviate the Church from its blemishes, we should be doubly invested in observing the faithfulness and perseverance of the thousands of pastors who shepherd quietly but steadily; who cherish their sheep without expecting rewards or recognition; who visit hospital beds, who comfort grieving parents, who preach and administer the sacraments, who love their families, and who refuses to lord over their people because of their title or status.
Yes, we must observe the thousands of faithful men who use their training to feed the flock in word and deed, joy and sorrow. They may be in small/medium/large churches, but they are everywhere.
Do not allow the belittling of pastors and their work to take away the honor reserved for those who fight the good fight of faith and awaken each morning with a deep sense of their calling before God and man.
The Bible is a book of stories. Every story whispers his name. True enough. But then again, we should believe that every story shouts his name also. Christ is there in the defeat of fat Eglon when the sword pierces his body, revealing that he is a man of dung. That was no mere whisper. It was there when Jael drove a tent peg through Sisera’s skull. That was no mere whisper.
Examples like these could be multiplied with little ease. This is more than a whisper; it’s a hallelujah ringing loud and clear. Jesus is the defeater of fat and evil kings and drives tent pegs through the skulls of his enemies, fulfilling the promise of Genesis 3:15.
Far from shyness, Christians should rejoice at such raucous occasions through sacred scriptures. Wherever our Lord goes, he produces disciples unto life or disciples unto death. There is no neutrality. There is no whisper but a loud shout of praise for the Lord our God omnipotent reigneth over all his enemies (I Cor. 15:24-26).
The practice of head-covering, belief in the perpetual virginity of Mary, iconography, and veneration of saints is befitting those traditions that claim centuries of adherence to the dogma. They form a liturgical unity of clothing and ritual.
These traditions do not believe in theological maturation but depend on established theological dogma in stated doctrine and practice. It makes sense in a world where history is meant to be the great mother. These practices form the fabric of Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism.
These practices, however, are not befitting Reformed Protestants who affirm theological maturation and growth in biblical theology and practice. While Calvin held to certain ideas which favored the perpetual virginity of Mary, for the Protestant, fidelity to Scripture gains from history but is not bound by it. We can easily claim that Calvin’s theological dispositions were erroneous on this front while praising a large portion of his theological corpus. The Reformed are especially not bound to the praxeology of history; instead, the Reformation builds on historical knowledge to a greater maturity.
We can affirm the dogma of creedal orthodoxy because it reflects the ultimate biblical creed. Nevertheless, we do not believe Church History’s practices or methods are fixed because God is maturing his body according to his Word.
