Category: Abraham kuyper

Posted on

The Church to the World

Closeup Vintage Light bulb Idea

One well-known author wrote recently that the Christian influence could shape society’s conception of a just social order, but we shouldn’t expect policies or laws to be Christian. How is that possible? How can the Church go to the world but not expect the world to come to the Church? If members of the Church go into the political sphere to influence laws and policies, then why not expect those laws and policies to reflect the Church and the Word of God? If the Church’s goal is to go to the world, how can it not shape it? As Abraham Kuyper noted: “All power in the church of Christ must forever be traced back to Christ.” How can the Church go to the world without tracing her message back to the Lord of the Church?

Posted on

Ecclesial Conservatism and Self-Authenticating Orthodoxy

Closeup Vintage Light bulb Idea

To be a faithful pastor in our day while trying to reconcile political movements/ideologies is impossible. One cannot seek the reconciliation of both and be successful. This is one of several reasons I coined the term ecclesial conservatism.

When I speak about ecclesial conservatism, I argue for a political dogma that dictates political coherence at a congregational level. Congregations cannot operate on the eclectic side of the political spectrum. An ecclesial ministry will consistently produce either a liberalized or a conservative ethos. But the two cannot function–in our day–harmoniously. The issues are too substantively contrasted in every sphere of thought, and platforms are well-defined worldviews that lead to distinct conclusions.

We are no longer operating where common assumptions are shared at a broad level. There are defined visions of the world which each party and movement wish to implement. Therefore, as Kuyper would argue, we must function as agents of the antithesis. The Church must navigate with clarity on what it opposes. She is not merely a theological voice affirming the common good but a theological voice challenging the opposing team in matters that threaten the preservation of the Church.

Much of that opposition is not only without but, in many cases, within. While social systems outside the church threaten her culturally, various systems within also threaten her status. Thus, a theology of the antithesis must be clear about what it opposes and create a long-term system of self-authenticating orthodoxy and conservative principles both in church and society.

Posted on

The Church’s Influence

The Church cannot function as an isolated sphere. She has a primary function that necessarily impacts the secondary function. Her liturgical cause is fundamental to her identity. She cannot be home for political partisanship. Her authority comes from on high. She is a heavenly city seeking to colonize earth (Matt. 6:4).

But her worship is not some piece of artifact offered, displayed, and then left alone. Instead, she moves outside by the power of the Spirit, enabled by heaven’s blueprint to put into action heaven’s habits.

As Abraham Kuyper observed, the Church as an organism “elevates public opinion, introduces more solid principles, and so raises the view of life prevailing in state, society, and the family.” She is the ever-fruitful body taking her religion to the poor and widow (James 1:27), extending her mercy to those oppressed by sinful powers, and using her power of mercy to sustain the weak.

The church unfolds the “potentials of creation” by giving life wherever it goes and breathing Epiphany joy into other spheres. She is the alternative city precisely because she shapes earthly cities.

Posted on

John Frame on Theological Definitions

One of the greatest joys of my life was spending four years under Prof. John Frame at Reformed Theological Seminary in Orlando, FL. Those four years also included an independent study with him on Abraham Kuyper. It was that one semester that cemented my affection for the Dutch theologian. Since then, I have not looked back. I started a website named Kuyperian Commentary, wrote articles on Kuyper, lectured on Kuyper, and most recently wrote a new introduction to a reprint of his classic work, “Lectures on Calvinism.”

The impetus for such pursuits always goes back to my old mentor, John Frame. He taught me what it meant to pursue biblical fidelity. As he states in his Systematic Theology, he taught me that theological definitions must measure up to Scripture, not the other way around.” ((Systematic Theology, 4)” Frame sealed my love for the Bible as more than one revelation, or one authority among many, but as the ultimate authority over other legitimate authorities. Further, he instilled the sense that biblical definitions are given as the grammar of heaven. It is not merely sufficient to see the Scripture as a place for safety from heresies but to look to it as the source of safety itself for the Christian.

Frame adds that while some may differ in their definitions from us, it does not necessarily mean that we are at odds but may be approaching things from a different perspective. We may even share distinct ideas on the application, but we may be in harmony regarding the nature of the task. Therefore, we have to seek points of commonality first and foremost before engaging in the task of polemics.

Posted on

The Stone Lectures of Abraham Kuyper: New Edition

The great Dutch theologian, Abraham Kuyper, has shaped the political and religious scene in the Calvinistic world more than anyone since the 16th century. While the grandiosity of such a statement should shock us a bit, the sheer persuasive nature of the Stone Lectures should confirm my bold assertion. Indeed, Kuyper was an unbridled force of nature altering the landscape of discourse from the atomistic way of seeing the world, enhanced and propagated by the Enlightenment, to looking at the world through the distinct lenses of Trinitarian religion.

Here is my latest interview with Canon Press’s podcast with the delightful Jake McAtee.

Posted on

Aimee Byrd and the New Neo-Orthodoxy

We must be honest about the evangelical landscape. We can’t deny the nature of things. Certain trajectories were written in stones, and some of us saw it coming. For instance, if you saw a woman climbing into a pulpit on Sunday morning followed by artsy-fartsy bands playing some silly versifications written by a 22-year high school drop-out, and–hypothetically speaking–this woman was to talk at length about the Songs of Solomon, and–hypothetically-speaking–she were to give a benediction at the end in the tradition of Aaron of old, what would ye say? If it quacks like a duck, if it walks like a duck, is she Aimee Byrd?

Now, I have no animosity towards this woman, but a host of people warned us about those trajectories long ago, and all they received were ugly faces with “how-dare-you” signed letters?! This is where the rubber meets the egalitarian: this is expected in the evangelical scene. We don’t tremble anymore at the ways of prophets. We treat the Apostle Paul like some modernized hipster eager to overthrow his history in favor of new pastures of masculinity and femininity.

The Apostle Paul forbids women to preach (I Tim. 2:12). This has nothing to do with their lack of giftedness. She was not to usurp (authenteo) the authority of a man. An inherent authority was placed upon man because of the order of creation (I Cor. 11). A hierarchy was imposed on humanity. On the other hand, there are all sorts of men who should stay away from, step down, or run from the pulpit. This is not a competition of the sexes; it’s a calling of one qualified and called sex to attend to the needs of shepherding and preaching.

There is a fine market for this kind of thing out there. And everyone who once stood tall on the pulpit of Machen’s religion saw it. But some of these folks have stepped down from such pulpits to do nobler things. Russell Moore knows quite well how to tap into that world. By the way, congratulations to Dr. Moore on becoming editor-in-chief of Christianity Today. CT has become a shining light for leftist politics and Biden supporters; you are the Sojourners of Christian economics, the Jemar Tisby of race relations, the Jen Psaki of round-about explanations, the decaf of theological discourse. Again, congratulations!

And speaking of Psaki, let me circle back to something about that ol’ Dutch Theologian. Abraham Kuyper once wrote about the shibboleth of Anabaptist theology. They escape from cultural responsibilities because it’s just easier than fighting the good fight. These evangelical leaders will not cheer overthrowing Roe v. Wade for the same reason they will not cheer for the pastor who was imprisoned in Canada for standing up against tyranny– however they pronounce that in Canada. They will chew us for being outspoken against the government industrial complex, and all the while, they will claim to be heirs of the Genevan magisterium. They will say they are in coalition with the government authorities cause that’s how things are to be. Behold, Romans 13!

The vast majority of these folks have not repented. I know that because their tattoos still say, “Regert.” That’s not how you spell that word. They don’t think I know a butt load of crap about the gospel. But I dooo. Okay? There is a subtlety to human ingenuity, but I read subtleties for a living. Okay?

When my four-year-old asks me, “Father, what is a Calvinist?” He knows exactly what I am going to say. I say, “Son, a Calvinist is someone who despises sophisticated footnotes and who sees the trajectory of total depravity playing out in 21st century American evangelicalism.” But sometimes, he pushes me further, “Father, tell me more.” And I generally reply, “Son, Calvinism is the thing you get when you drink the Kuyper kool-aid.” And being satisfied, he went away with a glad heart.

But the general consensus is that those who stray from strict mandates will follow the way of the crowds. They will take over the mantle of neo-orthodoxy. And because we remember our history, we should pray for their demotion from the evangelical galas. We should pray that they return to the simplicity of worship in their local OPC churches and follow the way of straight-glory.

Posted on

Abraham Kuyper for Dummies

Have you ever wanted a quick and dirty guide to the old, dead, white guy by the name of Abraham Kuyper? The demand was overwhelming, and I obliged the need of the masses. In this episode, I discuss the five principles that guide a Kuyperian viewpoint, namely,

a) Trinitarianism

b) Great Commission

c) Incarnational Lenses

d) Doxological

e) Church as Didactic

Please leave a comment and spread the wealth.

Posted on

Fauci, Tyranny, and Beth Moore

Watching Australia, Austria, Netherlands, and other sundry places makes me realize that the roots of paganism were deeply embedded before COVID, which means the seeds of tyrannical governments were ready to burst with violent colors. And so they have. Aaron Ginn has been heroic over on Twitter (https://twitter.com/aginnt) pointing these things out since the very beginning. He revealed the COVID-hysteria in the days when it was still not cool to doubt the science. He’s been vindicated a thousand times.

Compulsory vaccination and lockdowns in Germany, police brutality toward the non-vaccinated in Australia, Netherlands’ police officers going out and about on the streets checking vax passports, and other such things are par for the course. On the other hand, Ginn has also revealed drone footage of wide protests all around the globe from people who will not accept such impositions. Good on them! Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit freedom, and stupid are they that let things carry on, for they shall receive the approval of the left.

Kuyper once wrote that when our convictions are challenged, peace has become a sin and battle our calling. And these days, if you are not fighting or at least pushing back, you idolize peace like the people in Jeremiah’s day (Jer. 6:14). Even if you have fallen for the trap of nice Christianity–as Lewis puts it–you have to at least see that something is not right. Right? Because peace is non-sensical if it is predicated on baseless assertions. Because peace is non-sensical if it is predicated on baseless assertions. The option they offer us is, “Find peace or die!” Anyone should be able to see right through this mercenary strategy.

As for me and my house, we unequivocally affirm that the Church can’t be at peace in any way when her vision and mission are dictated by the mandates of the state. If you tell me to sit back and relax and let the state have its piece of the pie, I am going to stop you mid-sentence and walk out. If you tell me to just play it cool when it comes to the centrality of worship, I am going to theonomy even harder on Sundays.

Nah. Peace schmeesh!

It was one thing when the church stood her ground in the early days, but it’s another thing altogether when the church is the one now saying, “Please, what can I do to help the state’s cause?” This Thanksgiving, we are going to be extra cautious and require every family member to be vaccinated in order to be around them. Let’s show some gratitude for mother Newsom in California.

~~

On a similar note, a few of my friends in Brazil sent me a note about a congregation–among many–who was recommending everyone to seek out the unvaccinated and convince them to be vaccinated and furthermore, to determine whether such unvaxxed were worthy to be officers in the church. Now, if you think the qualifications for officers (I Tim. 3) are serious business, wait until the state begins to set their qualifications! Man, that presbytery examination will be brutal!

This kind of thing allows me as an immigrant to say to my fellow Americans that we are exceptional in the sense that what I say makes sense to so many of you, whereas in many other places what I say sounds like fumigating incense from the caves of Mordor. So, thanks for listening and I trust you will approve this message.

~~

What we have before us is an ever-moving goal post that commander Fauci has no interest in ever stopping. I have argued elsewhere that controlling time is the technique of tyrants, and for Fauci, controlling boundaries is his art. When you think you have fenced everything, he adds five more acres to your work. There is no end in sight because boosters x 20 is just fine math for the religion of scientism.

~~~

Let me add a translation for those who are watching this thing unravel in other ways in the Christian community. You may have seen that there is now an attempt to talk about how we can deconstruct the faith to build it back again. Inerrancy and the historical Adam are such things that need to be reconstructed because it has fallen into the hands of fundamentalists like yours truly. But when they come for Adam and Revelation, they necessarily come for Jesus and inspiration.

I am actually one of those who think all these things come together, and I am actually one of those who believe the entire deconstructionist tables need to be overthrown. Why is it that everyone who falls in the affirmations above also falls for the affirmations below? “Correlation for $1000, Alex!”

I firmly believe that not one square inch should be given to Jonathan Merrit, Peter Enns, and Beth Moore. If you stand with me in the first two but hit the pause button on the third name, I can understand your frustration. But I have been around this theological block give or take 20 years, and I can see from my vantage point when certain things lead to Rome, and when certain things lead to Fauci.

There is no going back to normal. But again, the old normal stinketh and needed to be replaced/reformed with God’s normal. Pastors need a healthy dose of courage, parishioners need to encourage their pastors and one another in realizing that power resides in heaven. The Church needs to proclaim that the time for gentility ended when Jesus sat at the right hand of the Father, and our call is absolute dominion. Anything else is accepting the premise of neutrality.

Posted on

On Evangelical Youth Leaving the Church

I would like to add some general conversation starters to the observations that many are making in our day, most notably, Russell Moore, concerning the loss of the evangelical youth.

Moore’s argument is that young evangelicals are “leaving the church because they believe that the church itself does not believe what it teaches.” The argument used by Moore is a bit of a switch from the previous assertions that evangelical support of dogmatic theological positions and the brashness of a Trump presidency have driven the youth away from the tradition of Billy Graham. So, which is it: is it our dogma concerning creational ordinances like “no sex before marriage,” or “prohibition of same/sex union,” or “deep commitment to Nicene Religion”? Or, is it that we don’t believe any of it, after all?

Set aside the ongoing contradiction of prevailing voices in our culture, there are deeper questions to consider beyond the statistical evidence-whatever the ultimate cause may be.

For instance, under what theological framework did these children grow up throughout their lives? Was it a theology of fear or one that pressed the claims of King Jesus? Are we merely seeing the results of faulty theological paradigms coming home to roost like dispensationalism, public education, civic-calendar-driven church life, female-led congregations, invitationism/revivalism/Finneyism?

What I am seeing on the ground is that the youth are leaving because they have been catechized in particular trendy hashtags. They are not leaving because their pastor supported Republican figures explicitly, but because they supported Biden’s policies implicitly.

I would be curious to analyze these youths straying from conservative churches to find out whether they affirm basic Christian doctrines on sexuality and classic economic policies. My suspicion is that when orthodox Christendom is practiced it serves as a marker to determine inclinations, and what we have discovered is that many were headed towards Leftism all along and that the Trump presidency–for instance– was ultimately an easy rationale used to protect what was clearly in their hearts and also the obvious trajectories of their minds.

On the other hand, we do need to analyze carefully from whence these youth are coming. My small denomination has grown these past 18 months, and there are always cases of apostasy, but it is nowhere close to what evangelicalism is experiencing broadly. I suspect other biblically saturated denominations are experiencing similar trends.

The response–as I have argued for a long time–must be grounded in allegiance and rituals. Allegiances to the good and formational rituals keep first things first with the youth. Conservative politics is the result, in my estimation. But it is a consequence of a beautiful life lived and a joyful liturgy practiced. When the youth ground themselves in the Creeds and Classical Theology, there is no reason to pursue leftists ideologies afterward; at least not naturally.

There are always exceptions, but I suspect the real reason for the youth leaving was not Trump, or that churches do not believe their own dogma, but ultimately, history provides big episodes that mark eras, and our era is marked by a trivialization of the holy. We have allowed our causes and hobbies to keep us from growing up into maturity and Christ-likeness. We have given our children a pass from liturgical education and we formulated liturgies of our own divorced from the holy city and added to that, our sense of selectivity when it comes to friends and spouses has derailed us from the covenant vision. We have allowed convenience to challenge our convictions.

I don’t find any joy in the loss of the evangelical youth, but I do find renewed opportunities for the liturgical education: a ritualized worship that draws the child and then the youth, and then the married man and woman into the gates of Jerusalem for generations to come. 

Posted on

A Kuyperian Manifesto

It’s all Kuyper’s fault. I have been pondering his words ever since 2003. Someone gave me a copy of his “Lectures on Calvinism” and it hit me with electrifying power. Now, mind you, I was already versed in Rushdoony, North, Van Til, Bahnsen, and Sproul, but Kuyper was from the past; an ancient past. At least that’s how I viewed him as a novice in Church History. And what is it that brought me to my theological knees when I first read him? It was his claim of the exhaustive Lordship of King Jesus. Here are five propositions that makes him such a superb apologist for the kingdom of Jesus and a needed voice in our day:

a) Kuyper was Trinitarian. In his Pro Rege: Living Under Christ’s Kingship (Volume 1), he notes that

“There can be no separation or contrast between the authority of God and the authority of Christ.”

For Kuyper, the dominion power is not inherent in fallen humanity but comes from the divine power of the Son who creates all things. Kuyper does not separate the power of the Son from the Father, but he harmonizes the Triune work. As the Catechism states, “…and these three are one God, the same in substance, equal in power and glory.” Kuyper operates from beginning to end as a Trinitarian Christian. Dominion can only occur in a Trinitarian universe and the Father and the Son work together to ensure it.

b) Kuyper believed in the fulfillment of the Great Commission. Though Kuyper did not use the theological categories of Postmillennialism in his writings, his vision harmonizes quite well with that of his fellow theologian B.B. Warfield who invited Kuyper for the Princeton lectures in 1898. Kuyper notes in profoundly optimistic categories:

“Christianity [is] being carried forth into the world, coming into contact with the elements and laws of human life and through that contact modifying and changing life entirely.”

Jesus’ Commission was not a mere hope, but the promise that the nations would fall under Christ’s authority. Everything Christianity touches, Kuyper notes, changes for the good.

c) Kuyper viewed the world through incarnational lenses. The reason Kuyper’s view of the world was not detailed in the abstract is that he believed that Jesus’ arrival on earth signaled a transition into a new way of being. Jesus did not come as a ghost, but he embraced humanity. He writes:

“On the contrary, he becomes one of us—a human being just as we are; he organically incorporates all the elect into his mystical body, and he rules over them by ruling in them and making them spiritually free.”

Kuyper affirmed that this world is guided by a flesh and blood King who sits at the right hand of the Father. He is not separated from his creation, but he entered creation so that we might live as new men and women in his kingdom. The incarnation was the turning point of redemptive history when heaven came to earth in human flesh. Thus, Kuyper advocated a Christian life deeply free from the slavery of sin and free to do the service of God on earth as it is in heaven. This freedom is achieved through the God/Man, Jesus Christ.d) Kuyper’s theology was doxological. Again, the catechism famously notes that our chief end is to glorify God and to enjoy him forever. The goal of dominion is not to change people through the use of force but to see lives transformed by the Gospel and free to worship the great and Triune God. As Kuyper observes:

“Our salvation is indeed the goal of Christ’s kingly rule, but its primary goal is the glorification of the Triune God.”

We are not saved to live as we please, but we are saved to live as He pleases. That is true freedom; to use our gifts and callings to serve the God who created us. We are doxological beings.

e) Finally, Kuyper viewed the role of the Church as more than spiritual, but also didactic. He writes:

“The church may not be content simply to bring the gospel to the lost. Instead, its primary calling is to lead those the Lord calls into a deeper understanding of God’s intentions…”

If the Great Commission is going to be fulfilled on earth, it must be a commission rooted in discipling the nations, which includes a sacramental component (baptizing them) and a sanctification component (teaching them all my commandments). The Church’s call is to feed the people of God and send them out to feed the world. First, we are nourished and then we nourish.

The Kuyperian writes and thinks on the basis of these fundamental assertions advocated and taught by the Dutch theologian, Abraham Kuyper. A Kuyperian commentary must be faithful to these principles. Principles, which, are rooted in the very fabric of sacred Scriptures.