Posts

Posted on

Why Moscow, ID Keeps Winning

The opposition to Moscow from various corners will likely continue in the days and months ahead. There is a happy momentum that is unhappy with speed limits. The fruitfulness of the worldview touching on every element of life is attractive. Until people see the Kuyperian batteries driving the Moscow train, they will remain dumbfounded about why a little town keeps driving the modern theological and political conversations.

The latest attempt by Baptist pastors to derail the Moscow train reflects a desperate movement to focus on minutiae in order to gain some cheap brownie points. But that case is doomed before it starts.

Christopher Hitchens did not need a sweet Wilson; he needed Gospel serratedness. So, he did get the kindness that should come with your fries, but he also got the rough edges that should come along with your Scotch.

When Jesus came to Jerusalem, one of the first things he did was to destroy all the hallmark cards written in his honor. People expected Jesus to walk in holding a sheep with flowing blond hair, sustaining his rhetorical discourse. But when he came in, he looked like Elijah and Knox. He saw all the revolutionaries gathering inside and outside the temple courts. He brought out his inner Jeremiah and scolded them with rhetorical and physical force. “The temple is for the nations, and you have turned it into a John Hagee fest filled with charts, and worse, you have gathered the thugs of Israel, including maybe even Barrabas, to lead the Bible studies.”

Jesus did not pull out Phil Vischer’s magic vegetables for a presentation. He pulled out his serrated rhetoric and went to town, tearing down idol after idol, table after table, and politician after politician. The religious leaders wanted baby Jesus then, but they got the mature God/Man wrapped in “Hell hath no fury” like a man called by the Father to speak truth to powers. Of course, there is time for kindness and gentleness to rule the day.

And I suspect Jim Hamilton and others would concur that there is time for the happy scolding of thugs. But in this calculated effort, I prefer to be Mark’s Gospel over the Gospel of Russell Moore. I prefer to use rhetoric to call people back to soberness in an age of drunken stupors by our elites, even within the church. And further, I have seen too often that those holding back have also been viciously silent when they should act like maniacal prophets screaming from the rooftops.

Posted on

The Captivity of Evangelical Worship

Evangelicals are allergic to Roman Catholicism for all the wrong reasons. Instead of being concerned with sacerdotal impulses, they are concerned about chanting God’s words. I will never forget a visitor who grew up in an evangelical home and castigated our worship service for singing the Lord’s Prayer. “That is Roman Catholic,” he argued. He then observed that kneeling was not helpful because it kept our eyes looking down instead of up to heaven. I will give him an A for creativity but an F for Bible basics (Ps. 95:6).

There is a general mental paralysis when it comes to the Roman Catholic question. Anything that resembles order becomes catholicized, labeled as “too formal,” or “too-not-what-we-have-always-seen-and-heard-before.” This creates the kinds of problems with modern worship, which produces everything new, and creativity becomes the product of the week.

Roman Catholic dogma has lots of problems. Their current pope is opening the doors to a dismantling of the modern dogma on sexuality, and, likely, something like a Vatican II revolution could disrupt the Roman Catholic order, sending millions to Protestantism.

But their problem is not their kneeling or the recitation of the Lord’s Prayer. Evangelicals need to realize that biblical practices, no matter how similar they may look to your Roman Catholic experience as a child or something you heard from a third-party, are non-negotiable. You do them because they are at the core of Christian expression.

The Reformation fixed these tendencies by ordering the liturgical loves according to the Scriptures instead of long-held traditional practices. Instead of elite choirs singing on behalf of the congregation, Luther returned it to the people: “So that the word of God may be among the people in the form of music.” Instead of viewing the Church as authoritative by itself, Luther writes: “The Church is your mother who gives birth to you and bears you through the Word.” Luther restored music to the people and placed the Church’s authority as a Word-centered authority.

Our evangelical problem is a captivity problem. We are captive by the wrong things and wrong fears. We need to be captive to Jesus Christ, our righteousness. The Reformation takes us back (ad fontes) and places us in the textual practices that strengthen and call us to an unadulterated faith in the Person of Christ as our central liturgist.

Posted on

Men should read good fiction

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.

Posted on

Derek Webb Plays Dress-Up

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.

Posted on

The Wokeness of the LOGOS Bible Software

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.

Posted on

Ten Propositions on Feasting

This has been a weekend of abundance among friends. I have savored so much of it, from homemade pizza to superb soups, meats, flavorful desserts, and a treasury of drinks and the ever-restful pipe tobacco. Add to these assortments the smiles and stories and we have the definition of feasting in its highest expression. Yet many don’t see or cherish this life or even may desire it but fail to see the need to absorb it as a highlight of the Christian experience. They try not; therefore, they feast not.

In what follows, I wish to lay out ten propositions on feasting to guide us through this intense season of expectation and celebration coming in the weeks ahead:

First, we eat without thanksgiving. Gluttony exists because thanksgiving does not. Eating is not a neutral exercise. Christians eat as acts of triumph over the world. God eats us in his love, and we eat the body and blood of our risen Savior by faith and love.

Second, the ritual of eating is undervalued in America. In this country, food is consumption. We eat because we want to or because it is entertainment; therefore, we eat without intentionality. When rites become trite, our experiences become trivial, and the doors for abuse open wider.

Third, corporate eating is devalued because we allow the immature to rule over the table. Parents must re-assert their authority over the table and keep food at the table and not on laps in front of laptops. This should be done at least in one meal a day.

Fourth, feasting suffers when worship looks like a funeral. If every head is bowed and eyes are closed, we cannot see the feast or hear the feasters. Feasting is diminished when worship is feast-less in character. Feasting must be jubilant in worship and overflowing with worshipful acts.

Fifth, feasting is best formalized and appointed. When it is that way, it can be adorned with fancy napkins and plates and silverware and glasses. It allows family members to long for something better. We are gnostics to think that immediacy is best. Christians understand that better feasts mean preparing more to enjoy better.

Sixth, feasts are more meaningful when we incorporate singing. Feasts in the Bible are celebrations of our freedom from bondage. Singing to Yahweh a new song is declaring Pharaoh will never rule over our appetites again.

Seventh, there is no friendship without Christ. There are shared experiences and stories, but friendship is rooted in a shared Christ. Feasts are accentuated when brothers dwell together.

Eighth, relationships change and are re-directed. Someone who was a friend in eighth grade may not be a friend now. God gives us a rotation of friends through life because He knows that our changes will require new people to speak into our particular phases of life. Feasts restore friendships and renew friendships and are the genesis of new friendships.

Ninth, many of us are worse friends than we think, but we have better friends than we deserve. Feasts create the environment for friendship rituals to be exercised in service and communion.

Tenth, all rituals require meaning. All good things require work. Therefore, all feasting is meaningful work. It provides true health for the Christian.

Real health is grounded in a proper relationship with God, and since this relationship is in part sacramental, it involves physical things. The purpose of these physical aspects is not, however, to provide mechanical health to the “human biological machine.” Instead, the goal of these physical aspects is to communicate to us, in a mystery, the grace of God.

Posted on

The Lord’s Supper is Calvinistic and Celebratory

The Lord’s Supper is Christ given for his Church. It’s the way we bless one another (I Cor. 10:16), it’s our New Covenant reality (I Cor. 11:25), it’s the context of unity (Acts 2:42), it’s the sacrament of discernment where we know who is in and who is out (I Cor. 11:21) and it’s the promise of eternity (Rev. 19:9).

As we work through our worship at Providence, I wish to mention two features that characterize our Lord’s Supper:

First, it is Calvinistic. That’s a short way of saying it’s not Roman Catholic or Anabaptist. During the Reformation, our Reformed brothers affirmed that the Lord’s Supper was not the transformed substance of the body of Christ. Jesus did not come down from heaven in a physical body in the priest’s consecration, as the Roman Catholics affirmed.

But neither are we simply partaking of an empty sign, as the Anabaptists affirmed. To eat and drink is not simply a way of speaking of belief. The elements of bread and wine are truly the body of Christ, not because of the priest, but because of the Spirit who takes us to heaven to commune with Jesus. Christ’s human body is locally present in heaven, and we partake of it because the Spirit of God effects communion.

Second, it is Celebratory.

Now, most traditions, ranging from Roman Catholic to the local megachurch, treat the Lord’s Supper through the lens of the death of Jesus. Christ died; therefore, we bow our heads and meditate on his death. But we affirm that the Lord’s Supper is not a summary of our sins but a celebration of our sins forgiven by the blessings of Christ’s resurrection.

In other words, the Lord’s Supper is bread and cup of blessing, not of sorrow. It is full blessing. Total blessing. Exuberant blessing. We partake in it precisely because Christ is no longer dead but risen from the dead and vindicated.

The Supper embraces the joy of the disciples who ate with Jesus after the resurrection. It’s loud, talkative, and festive. It’s a moment of glory for people rooted in the Word of God and who allow the Word to bear fruit in us. Behold, the fruit of the vine is here, offered at this table, Jesus himself. We are fruitful ones eating of the great fruitful Christ, who became the first fruits of all those who trust in him. We eat and drink together not as those who weep but as those who are blessed by the fruitful Word. Rejoice, pass the peace, and trust in the vindicated Word made flesh.

You are welcome to this table if you are baptized in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Come by faith, and the God of all peace will give you himself.

Posted on

The Gospel Coalition’s Pursuit of Artistic Brownie Points

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.

Posted on

Two Categories of People to Avoid in Leadership

male employer gesticulating and explaining idea in light office

The more public a work/ministry becomes, the more careful one has to be with two categories of people:

a) Flatterers: I have often differentiated flattery from praise by stating that flattery is consistent and generic, whereas praise is timely and specific. Something similar to what the poet Anne Bradstreet noted when she wrote, “Sweet words are like honey, a little may refresh, but too much gluts the stomach.” Or some variation of the multiplication of words principle (Prov. 10:19). A leader must learn to despise flatterers by dismissing their comments and giving them little attention.

He needs to see that their intentions may not always be to find some favorability with your role, but it is often to gain something from the association. Flatterers rarely serve, but they are generally charismatic. They watch from afar and come close only when suitable and advantageous for them.

b) Anonymous Naysayers: These will pose on social media as genuine interlocutors, but ultimately, they are only here to cause distractions and function as detractors. They will find a hundred reasons to parse a jot or tittle. They will take issue with virtually everything said, hoping you will interact with their words and give them a spotlight. But they are not seeking genuine interaction. They are pursuing a monological moment where they can speak from angst, hoping you will absorb their frustration and react to their grief.

I recommend avoiding these: blocking them quickly and limiting your online interactions only to those with a disposition toward knowledge.

I have several friends in high-profile positions and often pray that God would give them a spirit of courage, which requires avoiding unnecessary entanglements and pursuing steady work ethic.

Posted on

Providing Rituals for our Young Men

There is a de-ritualization of our Christian young men in our culture. They grow up without rituals and grab onto the first sign of a ritualized culture, whether wokism or socialism. Every system of thought shares common practices and liturgies. Some are distinct, and others lack thought and intentionality, as in the vast evangelical experience.

Our young men are reflecting the de-ritualization of church life. As the Church goes, so goes our young men. Dru Johnson notes in his book “Human Rites,” that we need to know our rites, and to know our rites demand the exercising of meaningful rites in the community. We can belabor the point of raising godly young men but without grounding them in godly traditions, our young men may easily find themselves grounded in their expressive individualism.

The more we understand our rituals, the more meaningful they become. The more our young men remember who they are through these rites, the more they will meditate on their meaning and the more stabilized they will be in their Christian culture.

My oldest son turned 13, and I wanted him to see that turning 13 is a rite of passage, a transition to a world of manhood. But beyond that, I wanted him to know that becoming a mature man is not the task of isolation. It’s a community rite, a shared glory with others. I didn’t want this stage of his life to pass by without marking it.

I invited my Church officers to come to our house and to pray over him. I offered a sobering charge to him in the presence of many witnesses, and we sang hymns about warfare and celebration, and then we did a toast with champagne. I will never forget the evening, and I trust he will never forget that life is not a series of empty symbols but a full and rich aroma of substantive rituals that shape your existence from baptism unto life to baptism unto death.

Rituals comprise our way of being. Rituals are established to orient the kind of people we hope to be. Our children need to be bathed in rites. They must look back and see that older men were there, sharing that moment and cheering them through sacred moments. Rites mark our stages in life, and they should be meaningful enough for our young men to pass on to their boys as well. It should be meaningful enough to keep them from chasing false rites.