Category: Theological Thoughts

My interview with Dr. Alastair Roberts at The Perspectivalist Podcast.

While there is much to critique in American churches–its mainline apostasy, sexual compromises– we still can claim to have the most faithful churches in the world–numerically and qualitatively. These include churches of all sizes, in every tradition, proclaiming Christ as King and faithfully administering the sacraments, and preserving the faith once and for all delivered to the saints. Our critiques should not overlook the immensity of fidelity among churches throughout the United States.

At this stage of history, we are attempting to build on the benediction of a Christian heritage where the language of Christendom is still very much embedded in societal institutions. Therefore, this allows us to strengthen the culture of our churches in the biblical grammar and persuade others that the city of God is superior to alternative cities.

There aren’t one or ten, but thousands upon thousands of persevering bodies who will not bow down to Caesar but to Christ alone. This remarkable reality gives me confidence in the preservation of this country and the continual blessings of God upon our churches and, thus, upon our culture.

Presbyterians and Baptist pastors (the worlds I am most acquainted with) are dealing with Moscow fans in their congregations. I know this because I receive questions from such parishioners regularly. 99% of them do not want to cause friction in their local churches, but they are tired of direct attacks from the pulpit about the CREC or Douglas Wilson or some supposed boogeyman called the Federal Vision. Most of them have read a few things I’ve written (though I am far from the most prolific in our group). Still, lots of them have come across the Canon+ app, Crosspolitic, or the various high-quality publications from Canon Press, and invariably something from Pastor Wilson.

My recommendation is rarely, if ever, to encourage them to leave. In fact, my encouragement is that they find peace within the body and not raise their convictions to issues of first importance. However important their issues may be, there is a greater right than being right. They should speak with the pastor. Build a history of peace-making within the body. And if there should be an opportunity to leave, leave peacefully and quietly without internet noise. We have enough growing pains not to desire additional turmoil, which is why we don’t waste time selling our agendas in private meetings with members from other churches. We invest in our calling as local bodies and shepherd those under our care, and God gives the increase.

The reaction of high-profile pastors to the supposed threat of Moscow/CREC is, first and foremost, pastoral. Kevin DeYoung is genuinely seeking to protect his flock from what he perceives as a danger to the long-term well-being of his congregants. Others speak out from a position of defensiveness and even react aggressively, which exemplifies a lack of confidence in the ministry of the Gospel. These churches/pastors become watchdogs, constantly looking for trouble where there is none, thereby creating congregants suspicious of everything and everyone who does not uphold identical dogmas.

My suggestion to pastors is to draw these questioners close. Engage the topic with concerned parishioners and grant that their interest in healthy families, a strong political backbone, and a high view of worship (things our Communion cherishes) are good things to pursue and that you share these pursuits, though from a different perspective. But don’t act defensively or aggressively. I guarantee you will find much more agreement if you carefully engage rather than overreact.

Do you want to be prepared for the Season of Advent? Subscribe to the Perspectivalist.

We will be adventing in the weeks to come! I hope you will subscribe to the initial articles as we prepare for a rich season of longing.

Preaching is not simply conveying data without thought to rhetoric. Healthy preaching develops a rhetorical framework through which ideas can be appropriately communicated and received by the people. It seeks to understand the ecclesial context before proclaiming the ecclesial word.

Much of this comes with time and trust in the pulpit. Each minister will develop a particular flavor that will communicate more astutely to their listeners. But the problem is that while we may communicate well to our particular people, we may not train them to listen well. It is possible to learn from poor communicators, but it is not ideal to learn from poor communicators.

For this reason, ministers need to train themselves in preaching, considering their style and changing it appropriately. I have written about ten questions to ask before each sermon here: https://kuyperian.com/10-questions-preachers-ask-sunday-morning/…

The danger of poor articulation of ideas is that it leaves parishioners weak to more seductive forms of learning. Preachers are imaginative creatures proclaiming a heavenly revelation that changes the thinking and structures of human understanding.

Paul chastises sophistry (I Cor. 2) but does not chastise proper rhetorical pursuits or persuasion (Acts 19:8). The minister brings the kingdom of God to full display in the preached word. He is not simply conveying data but a biblical dramatizer of the Word. #preaching #pulpit

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.