Isn’t Communism Biblical?

This is a helpful quote from R. B. Kuiper:

The members of the church at Jerusalem had all material things in common. It hardly needs to be said that this communism was something quite different from the communism for which so may clamor today. It was communism among Christians only. It was local in its scope, there being no evidence in the New Testament that it was practiced in any church other than that at Jerusalem. Even in the Jerusalem church it was a temporary arrangement. There was nothing compulsory about it, for when a member of the church sold a possession and pretended to give the whole price to the church, although actually he gave but part, Peter said to him: “Whiles it remained was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power?” (Acts 5:4). And the spirit behind this communism was radically different from that which often comes to expression in present-day communism. Someone has aptly said: “The Christians at Jerusalem said, ‘All mine is thine’; communists today say, ‘All thine is mine.’”

Kuiper, R. B. The Glorious Body of Christ (Carlisle: The Banner of Truth Trust, 2001), 150-151. Emphasis is mine.

The Greatest Story Ever Told - Shai Linne

I love this! The story of the Bible in 4 minutes and 32 seconds!

Lyrics:

Here are the lyrics:

It’s the greatest story ever told.
A God pursues foes whose hearts turned cold.
The greatest story ever told.
Restoring all that the enemy stole.
The greatest story ever told.
The glory of Christ is the goal, behold.
The greatest story ever told.
It’s the greatest.

Alright check it: let’s go back in time, brethren. Divine lessons always keep your mind guessing. The glory of the Triune God is what I’m stressing. The origin of humankind was fine. Blessings were plenteous. God is amazingly generous. Crazy benefits in a state of innocence. God told the man what he could taste was limited. Not long after came our nemesis in Genesis. He scammed well, man fell, damned to hell. The whole human race—he represented it. Fooled by the serpent, man through his work, woman through birth—even the earth ruled by the curses. But instead of a wake immediately. God said her Seed would be the One to crush the head of the snake. Yo, wait what is this? Whoa, a gracious gift! In Jehovah’s faithfulness He clothed their nakedness. This was so they would know their Savior’s kiss and bliss. But first, many growing pains exist suffering in the worst form, ugly deeds. Eve’s firstborn seed made his brother bleed. Indeed things got progressively worse. Every section of the earth is been affected by the curse. And though God’s judgments against sin were gory, praise the Lord! It’s not the end of the story.

Next scene: man’s sin was extreme. God gets steamed, man gets creamed. The Lord is so Holy that He drowned them in the water. Fire in the valley of slaughter – Sodom and Gomorrah. But at the same time, He’s so gracious and patient that from one man He created a whole nation. Eventually enslaved by the mentally depraved, they cried out to the only One with the strength that He could save. He brought them out with signs and wonders – satisfied their hunger. Then He appeared on Mount Sinai in thunder. Where He laid down the law for God-ruled government. Commonly referred to as the Mosaic covenant. Sin was imputed. So for man to know he’s unrighteous, God instituted animal sacrifices. This was to show our constant need for atonement. And when it came to sin, the Lord would never condone it. And when His people disobeyed and went astray, He raised up prophets and kings to lead them in the way. But they would get foul with their idolatry—wet and wild prophecy—send them into exile. To take their punishment like a grown man. Then with His own hand He placed them back in their homeland. And while in their forefather’s land they dwelt, they awaited the arrival of Emmanuel.

After 400 silent years filled with sighs and tears. In Bethlehem the Messiah appears. God in the flesh—Second Person of the Trinity. At thirty begins His earthly ministry. Baffling cats with accurate, exact facts and back-to-back miraculous acts. A stumbling block to the self righteous. But the humbled—His flock, said “There’s no one else like this.” He came from heaven to awake the numb. Demonstrated His power over nature, son. A foretaste of the Kingdom and the age to come. But the reason He came was to pay the sum for the depths of our wickedness, our wretched sinfulness. Bless His magnificence! He is perfect and innocent. Yet He was wrecked and His death. He predicted it. Next He was stretched, paid a debt that was infinite. He said that He finished it. Resurrected so the elect would be the recipients of its benefits. Through faith and penitence we get to be intimate. His grace is heaven sent, it never diminishes. Now the Holy Spirit indwelling is the evidence for heaven’s future residents who truly represent Jesus, the Author, Producer, Director, and Star of a story that will never, ever end!

(HT: Thabiti & JT)

Healthcare Deja Vu

When the current political climate started to rain "healthcare debate" a few months back I had no clue that when I was watching Aladdin and The Lion King in the theater as a kid that the same arguments and fears were being presented.

Between the ages of 10 and 14 I probably wouldn't have listened or given much attention to the political debate if it was actually mentioned. That being said after sorting through hundreds of newspaper articles at work recently (from the 90's Healthcare Debate) I was able to catch up on what I missed, and I was surprised at how much the current conversation sounds almost identical to what was going down about thirteen years ago. Here are a bunch of cartoons from the 90's that literally and figuratively illustrate the similarities:

The first 9 are from 1994

























It's amazing, you could take almost any of these and publish them in a paper today without any revision and it would be just as relevant to the current debate. Well, I guess the proverb still applies plus ça change, or as Ecclesiastes puts it, "There is nothing new under the sun (Eccl 1:9)."

Truth, Charity, & Tolerance

This morning at theology breakfast we read John Owen’s A Country Essay for The Practice of Church Government There (Volume 8 of his works by...Banner). As Linds and I were headed home we were thinking about how the culture impacts people. We are truly children of our era. We have all thought this before… “How could our ancestors have tolerated slavery?” Well, the answer we often hear is, “Well, they were children of their time.” This did not make it just, but it did not make one hundred percent of their thinking about all things wrong. Many of our ancestors – not all, but many – had a wrong view of slavery. It was wrong, and it was a huge blind spot. This blind spot, however, should not keep us from going back to them for what they had correct. There is still much good that we can learn from their perspective on things.

Well, the truth that we are “children of our time” was hitting home as we considered this essay by a 17th century theologian and pastor. His was a time in which evangelism was a foreign thought (if you were born in England you were baptized into the Anglican “church” and therefore thought to be a Christian). In effect their perspective was one of, “What’s the need for evangelizing when everyone is a Christian?” This was also a time that ecclesiological decisions regarding church discipline were made by the civil magistrate (the government). There was an established religion (Christianity). This is the situation that Owen was writing to in this essay. His thoughts were revolutionary for his time, and they are for us as well as we try to figure out where our country is headed. Here’s an excerpt:

“Ignorance of men’s invincible prejudices, of their convictions, strong persuasions, desires, aims, hopes, fears, inducements, - sensibleness of our own infirmities, failings, misapprehensions, darkness, knowing but in part, - should work in us a charitable opinion of poor erring creatures, that do it perhaps with as upright, sincere hearts and affections as some enjoy truth.” 61

It is interesting that he says their ignorance played out in convictions (etc.) and that it should elicit charity from us in regard to their errors because they do it with upright sincere hearts and affections as some enjoy truth. They are ignorant of the full truth but we should be charitable because they perceive their error as truth. This doesn't mean that what people believe erringly is truth, however. Owen is clearly calling for charity in the midst of strong diverse opinions and convictions. Generally this is the definition of “tolerance”.

In our era many say that tolerance means, despite differences of persuasion, one cannot say another’s conviction or persuasion is wrong or false (and if you do you better have scientific data provable by repeatable experimentation!). At least this is the general theoretical understanding of tolerance folks would articulate in our day. In real life this principle does not work itself out as neatly as they may articulate. Hence, we have two supposedly opposing political parties in our country (which I think is a false dichotomy of sorts), or the fact that we buy one product over another based on how they have pitched a convincing or unconvincing argument for “quality” or usefulness. Regarding the latter you don’t see companies that have decreasing sales figures yelling at other companies, “By you saying your product is superior to ours you are not being tolerant.” We all understand to a certain extent this is a dog eat dog world. Despite a push for strict egalitarianism across all diversity we all understand that that philosophy is a half-truth at best. Regarding the former you do see politicians crying fowl sometimes in regard to “tolerance” but generally we would all agree that they should try to be well educated in their decisions and if their solutions to problems are the best then by all means, persuade us! This isn’t a lack of tolerance. Why then do we point accusingly at people in religious and moral matters accusing them of a lack of tolerance? We need to practice charity as Owen is exhorting. His words of “charity” and of “tolerance” though old are fresh to our time. He doesn’t pose the perfect solution, but he does offer a different perspective that we should listen to which we may not have considered. (I disagree with him, however, that the civil magistrate should handle matters of discipline. I believe this is something given to the responsibility of a local church.)

Owen further speaks to the inclination our age has toward relativity in most if not all things:

“These things turn in a circle: what we are to ourselves, that he is to himself: what he is to us, that we are unto others that may be our judges. But however, you will say, we are in the truth, and therefore ought to go free. Now, truly, this is the same paralogism: who says we are in the truth? others? no, ourselves. Who says erroneous persons (as so supposed) are heretics, or the like? they themselves? no, but we: and those that are to us as we are to them, say no less of us. Let us not suppose that all the world will stoop to us, because we have the truth, as we affirm, but they do not believe. If we make the rule of our proceedings against others to be our conviction that they are erroneous; others will, or may, make theirs of us to be their rule of proceeding against us.” 62-3

He is addressing the fact that the magistrate in carrying out disciplinary actions on behalf of the Anglican “church” to those they believe are heretics, namely burning them alive, chopping heads off, etc. They weren’t barring them from the sacraments or taking their names off of member roles; they were killing people. He is encouraging more charity in church discipline based on the logic of Matthew 7:12 “So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.” Further, he later uses the logic that Gamaliel used in Acts 5:33-42 that if what dissenters in the churches believe and live out the validity of this (whether or not it is actually true) will be established by God: “But if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them. You might even be found opposing God!” (Acts 5:39) May the Lord forbid our exercise of discipline in the form of killing if it only proves that we were in opposition to God. He is calling the church then to exercise charity in discipline. This is revolutionary! John Locke (one of Owen’s students at Oxford) had not come along yet to propose a separation between church and state. Even though Owen was a product of his era, here, in the middle of England's civil war, Owen is proving himself to be ahead of his time.

Toward the end of his essay he leaves us with two cautions:

“(1.) So to carry ourselves in all our censures, every one in his sphere (ecclesiastical discipline being preserved as pure and unmixed from secular power as possible), that it may appear to all that it is the error which men maintain which is so odious unto us, and not the consequent or their dissent from us, whether by subducting themselves from our power or withdrawing from communion. For if this latter be made the cause of our proceeding against any, there must be one law for them all, – all that will not bow, to the fiery furnace! Recusancy is the fault; and that being the same in all, must have the same punishment, – which would be such an unrighteous inequality as is fit for none but Antichrist to own.

(2.) That nothing be done to any, but the bound and farthest end of it be seen at the beginning, and not leave way and room for new persecution upon new pretences. ‘Cedo alteram et alteram,’ – one stripe sometimes makes way for another, and how know I that men will stay at thirty-nine? ‘Principiis obsta.’" 68

The first caution seems to be a warning against a mixture of church and state and that having the same punishment (death) for dissenters as all others who must be disciplined by churches was of the type of inequality the Antichrist would support.

The second caution seems to be a warning of centralization of power in one body, individual or otherwise without some kind of accountability. There should be some kind of limitation of power and of meting out punishments. Otherwise, new reasons will come to the surface that require new punishments (or persecution) and there is no accountability for how much punishment is given out.

"Oliver Cromwell at the Battle of Marston Moor, by an unknown artist. The Parliamentarians under Sir Thomas Fairfax defeated the Royalists at this battle in Long Marston, Yorkshire, on July 2, 1644. Cromwell commanded the Parliamentarian cavalry that defeated the previously invincible Royalist cavalry of Prince Rupert. Marston Moor was a turning point in the English Civil War, as it effectively lost the Royalists the north of England."

I am thankful for the Lord's work in the separation of church and state. May we take advantage of this and seek to share the gospel. Further, we may not always have this freedom...so lets take advantage of it as an opportunity given from the hand of God Himself!

Any thoughts?

Dissed

After having been in DC for a bit now I'm still surprised (somewhat) at how people avoid eye contact and avoid saying hello to each other on the street. Some people are bound and determined not to acknowledge your existence.

Yesterday I experienced the biggest slam on this front yet.

I was walking home from work (9 blocks). I was coming up on a young woman who looked like she was really nice. She seemed happy, was smiling, had a bounce in her step. I thought, "This will be great...I'll say hello and she'll smile and be friendly spreading some of that good cheer."

Well, as you can tell by the title of this post this is not what happened. She wasn't mean; she didn't snap at me. Nope, she completely ignored me. So I was left trying to make eye contact only to be shot down. It's like when you go to give someone a five and they leave you hanging. This wasn't the worst part of the encounter though.

As we passed I noticed that there was a puppy sitting out on the stoop of a house close by. After we passed and she completely ignored me I heard a sound so I turned only to see that she was looking with a smile at the puppy. She was looking at it like, "awe, you are a cute little creature." And guess what she said. "Hello puppy"

What!? What is it about humans that they will ignore the existence of other humans...yet they will look at a puppy and say hello.

That's messed up!

Reaction 3: False Unity Part 2

I can remember a few times when disagreement arose in a church I was a part of, and concern for unity was held up above the pursuit of a transparent honesty and truth (or even a proper venue to give feedback and share concerns or emotions). It seemed like anytime there was a problem that it was quickly swept under a rug lest it cause any disunity in the body. Don’t get me wrong; they did not do this for every circumstance. Also, I am not arguing for a pursuit of disunity, but rather against a pursuit of false unity based in a deceiving outward appearance. This relates to how Jesus told the scribes and Pharisees they were whitewashed tombs because their outward appearance deceived others and themselves to the condition of their inner heart condition (Matt 23:27). I can so easily fall into this mindset of masking what I really am to project that I want others to think that I am, so can leaders of churches.

We are sinners still and our sin keeps throwing kinks in how we organize as a body of believers, but that doesn’t mean we should be secretive about the truth of circumstances (we must be wise about this though). It seems that the response would be, “well, it is a circumstance that the congregation doesn’t need to know about.” This might be true, but if it involves public sin or another kind of public activity with visible members or leaders in the church this will only lead weaker sheep in the congregation to speculation and gossip. It’s right to say, “well, the congregation should not speculate like that…that is ungodly,” but leaders should know that they are leading a body of people that may not be as mature spiritually as they are.

Phillip Jensen has recently written about this kind of thinking in Australian culture, “To be divisive or uncooperative is one of the worst criticisms leveled against anybody. In fact, it bears the most damning label of all: it is ‘un-Australian.’ (By God’s Word: 60 Reflections for Living in God’s World (Sydney: Matthias Media, 2007), 40.)” Later in the same little reflection he wrote that this is usually heralded most by those who are theologically liberal in denominational power and he follows that with three points: (1) the passages in question are regarding congregational unity; (2) based in a common understanding of doctrine and of godliness, not tolerant relativism; and (3) this comes from the same Bible that they spurn as unimportant (50-51). Of these three only the second point is really relevant to the circumstances that I have experienced.

The difficulty with the topic of unity in the church is that on one hand we must seek to maintain it, and on the other hand we must recognize that if there is not an agreement of philosophy of ministry or of a secondary doctrine (secondary to the gospel, e.g. baptism, polity, etc.) then in the sovereignty of God we must trust that we are supposed to go our separate ways for the sake of the gospel and strengthening of churches (Acts 15:36-41). Whether or not Paul was correct to separate from Barnabas on account of John Mark is uncertain, but there seems that there was still an accepted principal in outward separation while having a spiritual unity (if not between Paul and John Mark at least between Paul and Barnabas). In the end Paul came to cooperation with John Mark (Col 4:10; 2 Tim 4:11; Philemon 24; 1 Pet 5:13). At the time of disagreement they agreed to disagree and went their separate ways. Likewise we might disagree with others, but we must recognize that in our separation there is still a spiritual unity if we hold the same gospel. Scripture teaches that we are called sons of God if we repent and believe in the gospel (Rom 8:14, 19; Gal 3:26; 4:6; etc.). If we are believers then we are of the same spiritual family (Mark 3:31-35; all of the following passages use the word adelphoi translated “brothers” referring to siblings in a family (Matt 5:47; Acts 1:14; 1 Cor 1:10; 2 Cor 1:8; Gal 1:2; Phil 1:12; Col 1:2; 1 Thess 1:4; 2 Thess 1:3; 1 Tim 4:6; 2 Tim 4:21; Heb 2:1; Jas 1:2; 2 Pet 2:10; 1 John 3:13; 3 John 1:3; Rev 6:11; etc.).

D. Broughton Knox pointed out that four attitudes preserve Christian unity: (1) forgiveness, (2) humble-mindedness, (3) thankfulness, (4) forbearance (D. Broughton Knox Selected Works Volume II Church and Ministry (Sydney: Matthias Media, 2003), 35.) Expression of unity is found in the context of relationships. Lastly, Knox pointed out that, “unity is a relationship of persons of God and to one another through the Spirit, and it is modeled on the unity within the trinity, and is brought about by deepening our relationship to God and so our relationship to one another (36).” Unity is Trinitarian! So even as the Trinity exists in three separate persons they still maintain a spiritual union. This is not a perfect analogy, because churches are not perfect as the trinity is, but as we live in separate churches with different philosophies of ministry, different convictions, etc. if we hold in common what the Bible teaches the gospel to be we are in unity. As Iain H. Murray recently quoted J. C. Ryle we should, “Keep the walls as low as possible and shake hand over them often.” No doubt there will be times in the local church that we will have to forbear with each other in our disagreement, but it should not be done in a way that is not truthful and transparent.

Unfortunately, when I have seen the model of a type of false unity I responded with a hermeneutic of suspicion rather than with a hermeneutic of trust. I convinced myself that I was humble, thankful, forgiving, and forbearing; however, in the end my bitterness and lack of joy showed that I was quite the opposite. Unity includes disagreement, but there comes a time when for the sake of unity and distinctive convictions paths need to diverge recognizing that a spiritual unity still exists in the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Again, no church is perfect and we must be willing to be open about that as an expression of holiness in repenting from what we once were. We should be open about the disagreement we have for the edification of the body and for a clear witness to the world of what this redeemed people really represents...sinners that are being transformed into the image of Christ. A people trying to live honestly about who they are for the sake of the gospel.

Ephesians 4:1-3 “I therefore, a prisoner for the Lord, urge you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling to which you have been called, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.” (my emphasis)

Reaction 3: False Unity Part 1

Psalm 133:1 “Behold, how good and pleasant it is when brothers dwell in unity.”

Disagreement exists on many levels. No doubt the American experiment is even a strange secular exhibition of this; a sovereign nation with a vaguely, yet firmly, established equilibrium. As individualism and relativism has steeped in the culture difficulty has come about in maintaining balance between antithetical positions in many conversations. Can there be any clarity? Can there be any unity? The answer is, “Yes,” but not necessarily in regard to a political unity in governing structures built by human wisdom.


How should we think of John McLaurin and Ben Tillman’s little exchange on February 22, 1902 in the senate? Or what about Thomas Benton and Henry Foote’s scuffle in April of 1850 on the Senate floor? Despite the “reports” of disunity in the United States the modern context has yet to see her senators pull pistols on each other. Maybe the United States is not as bad as people say? Maybe it is worse? One thing is certain, if one puts too much hope in a human philosophy for the “salvation” of a society one side is bound to be disappointed immediately, and the other will likely be disappointed eventually (by “salvation” I mean secular folk’s perception of what will fix all wrongs in the world, people’s perception of “salvation”).

Be careful whom you trust. Be careful how you trust! Aside from who or what the ideology is, if we hope in something that is temporal in an unhealthy way we will surely be disappointed. If we hope in something that is temporal in a healthy way we will likely still experience disappointment. When this happens what does one do? Everything you have put your hope in has quickly left, and what you thought was a societal “salvation” has left as well. On the other side of the coin..maybe the representative of an ideological position gains the position one believes would give him or her the power to legislate for what many people hold to be the “salvation” of a society (conservation, progress, etc.). We have many examples of this and many unfortunate results: (1) these folks do a lot of good, but many promises go unfulfilled because of a naiveté on the part of both politicians and those they represent regarding exactly what a person in that potential position can actually do; (2) they lied and just wanted the power, “absolute power corrupts absolutely”; (3) their policies were meant to meet a need at a particular time and the means by which the need was met becomes irrelevant or unhelpful; etc. We need to pray for our secular authorities (2 Chron 7:14; 1 Tim 2:1-3).

What does this have to do with unity in the church? Is the Bible just another vague document meant to establish the status quo? Not by any means! Is the church just another victim of natural entropy? Of course not! The Christian church is not meant to preserve a temporal political unity that so many worldly structures pursue. It is meant to be a preserve of a unity based on the foundation of the gospel, a spiritual unity. The unity is already existent. It is also amazing that God has given a polity to organize the visible expression of His church for the purpose of unity grounded in faith and the knowledge of the Son of God:

Ephesians 4:11-14 “And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of the ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes.” (my emphasis)

Christian unity is founded in the gospel. Too many times we carry presuppositions into the church from our secular experiences. D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones’ conclusions from his exposition of John 17 and Ephesians 4 in The Basis of Christian Unity (Carlisle: Banner of Truth, 2004) are relevant:

(1) Unity must never be isolated, or regarded as something in and of itself (70).
(2) The question of unity must never be put first [fellowship follows doctrine; Acts 2:42, etc.] (70).
(3) We must never start with the visible church or with an institution, but rather with the truth [Luke 3:8; John 8:32-34; etc.] (71).
(4) The starting point in considering the question of unity must always be regeneration and belief of the truth (72).

a. People are not in Christian unity if they don’t agree with the following.

i. Submission to revealed truth (73).
ii. The Fall and man’s utter helplessness (73).
iii. The person of Jesus Christ and His substitutionary atonement (73).

(5) An appearance or façade of unity based on anything else, and at the expense of these two criteria, or ignoring them, is clearly a fraud and a lie (72).
(6) To do anything which supports or encourages such an impression or appearance of unity is surely dishonest and sinful [John 17:21] (73).
(7) To regard a church, or a council of churches, as a forum in which fundamental matters can be debated and discussed, or as an opportunity for witness-bearing, is sheer confusion and muddled thinking (74).
(8) Unity must obviously never be thought of primarily in numerical terms, but always in terms of life (75).
(9) The greatest need of the hour is a new baptism and outpouring of the Holy Spirit in renewal and revival (76).

Talkin' in the City

Just a quick vent...

We live on the corner pretty close to a school, a bus stop, etc. in Wash DC. Its really a pretty busy street, but its really surprisingly quiet in our place. We hear police sirens and firetrucks quite a bit. None of that is really distracting or annoying though.

What is distracting is high school kids walking home from school, folks walking home from work, and people walking home late at night from wherever they are coming from. Its not that they are annoying because they are talking, but most of the time they are SHOUTING! Lol...

It always cracks us up to hear some folks walking down the street two to five feet from each other and they are literally shouting, not in anger, in normal conversation. Second to public displays of affection this shouting in normal conversation ranks as one of the more annoying things in a city;)

Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission

Just an update...

I have accepted a position and am working for the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission on Captiol Hill.

Should be a great place to work. Check out their website sometime;)

In Christ,
Noah

Bella

This looks like a good movie.

If you've seen it leave a comment on what you thought.

Reaction 2: Isolation

Proverbs 18:1 “Whoever isolates himself seeks his own desire; he breaks out against all sound judgment.”

There is no such thing as a perfect church before glory, because Christians are not yet perfect (Phil 3:12). This is a representation of the tension between the “already” and the “not yet” of the Christian life. True believers are made perfect in Christ, yet they are being made perfect (Heb 10:14). Even a church that practices a “regenerate church membership” has to recognize that despite their best attempt to maintain a believer’s church some folks will not truly be believers, and those that are have not been fully sanctified. Despite the sin we all commit Christians are called to live in a community with other believers.

One of the other reactions that I have seen to the problems that sin creates in local churches is to isolate from the church. The temptation is to isolate from a visible local community of believers. In order to show the kingdom of God to the world we are to be a city on a hill, a light to the world (Matt 5:14). I know its basic, but a city is composed of people with relationships. Here’s a natural example of what I am trying to point out. One of the problems in our society today is that people try to live in isolation within cities. Many cities simply do not have a concept of community. Christ’s disciples are called to redeem what true community looks like, and they will show Jesus Christ to the world by the way that they love one another publicly (John 13:34-35). It seems that we are somehow to make the relationships that we have among other believers public! It’s a commandment from Christ for us to love fellow Christians (1 John 4:20). If we don’t we simply may not be true Christians. If we want to live obediently to what the Bible teaches we would see that it is really a book about relationships: God within the Trinity, God and man, husband and wife, parent and child, friends, employer and employee, brother and sister (biologically and in Christ). However, relationships are difficult.

Relationships are one of the means by which God sanctifies us (Ecc 4:12). At the same time it is through relationships that God displays his glory to the world. My pastor wrote about a conversation that he had with a friend that worked for a campus Christian ministry years ago:

“He would always slip in right after the hymns, sit there for the sermon, and then leave. I asked him one day why he didn’t come for the whole service. ‘Well,’ he said, ‘I don’t get anything out of the rest of it.’ ‘Have you ever thought about joining the church?’ [Mark] responded. He thought that was just an absurd comment. He said, ‘why would I join the church? If I join them, I think they would just slow me down spiritually.’ [Mark] asked, ‘Have you ever considered that maybe God wants you to link arms with those other people, and that perhaps even though they might slow you down a little, you might help to speed them up - and that that’s part of God’s plan for how we’re supposed to live as Christians together?’” [Dever, Mark, 9 Marks of a Healthy Church (Wheaton: Crossway, 2004), 155-156]

One examples of this reaction of isolation, which I can remember from my own life, was from my English teacher in my freshman year of high school. I remembered praying with our church for his family (when we were members of that church), but I couldn’t ever remember seeing him at the church meetings. I knew that they were members of the church, though. So one day I caught him in the halls at school and asked him if he was still a member of that church and if he still did not attend. He replied, “Yes.” I asked him why he never went and he told me that He did not believe that he needed to go to church to be a Christian. Further, he also said that he felt that he could worship God better by himself in the presence of God’s creation.

At the time I remember thinking, “Good enough.” Now, though, I can see how this view could be detrimental to a Christian walk. Yeah, you don’t have to attend a fellowship of believers to be a Christian, but you must ask yourself if you are truly a disciple of the Lord Jesus Christ if you do not. How can you love God whom you cannot see if you cannot love your brother whom you can see (1 John 4:20)? “God said, ‘It is not good that the man should be alone (Gen 2:18).’” I know that your thinking, “But, that verse is saying that Adam should not be without a wife.” Well, yeah, but this passage is setting up a general biblical principle that humans need help. We need other people to help point us to Scripture, and we need people to help us identify sin in our lives. You cannot do this Christian life alone. Mankind is not meant to live in isolation. I have quoted this before, but it’s worth repeating:

“Separation from the church is the denial of God and Christ. Hence, we must even more avoid so wicked separation. For when with all our might we are attempting to overthrow of God’s truth, we deserve to have him hurl the whole thunderbolt of his wrath to crush us…Therefore, those who more boldly than others incite defection from the church…have for the most part no other reason than by their contempt of all to show they are better than others….For because God willed that the communion of his church be maintained in this outward society, he who out of hatred of the wicked breaks the token of that society treads a path that slopes to fall from the communion of saints.” [Calvin, John, The Institutes of the Christian Religion (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1960), 1024-25 & 1030-31.]

If you are not happy with the music, the relationships, the structure, etc. of your church that doesn’t mean you should live in isolation. This is not a solution to the problems in churches. Join one that most closely reflects your biblical convictions and be a blessing to that congregation. If you do not want to be a part of a fellowship of believers ask yourself why. Then ask yourself how you might go about changing this.

Reaction 1: Nominalism/Unbelief

I'm putting these two descriptions together because in most cases what is understood as "nominal Christianity" is actually "unbelief". So these are the kind of folks that don't believe what the Bible teaches about God, man, history, worldview, etc. and continue to maintain that they are actually Christians.

This reminds me of a conversation I had recently. The young man I was talking with said that he believes in the Lord Jesus Christ and worships Him. As the conversation carried on he explained how he views God as an entity that will just give him whatever he wants.

For example he said that he thinks that if he would pray for a car God would give it to him. I asked him if God ever has given him a car in response to a prayer like that, and he answered, "No." I then told him that this is not how the Bible represents the Lord, and he understood that; however, he said the this is how he is going to continue to approach God, because it makes him feel better.

So as we continued to talk I explained that just because something makes you feel better for a time does not mean that it is based in truth and is good. We can easily deceive ourselves. Our perception often times is different from reality. We also discussed how he likes to think about Jesus. From a lot of what he said it was clear that he was worshipping an idol that he had made Jesus out to be, not who Jesus Christ is in reality (according to the Bible). Also, he is pretty proud of some of the sins that he has committed in his life...because ultimately God used those sins to bring about good. He didn't understand, though, that this did not make the sins a good thing...but in God's common grace He will often use bad things or circumstances for good.

I explained then that if he is worshipping a man-made idea of who Jesus is (in contrast with who Scripture reveals Jesus to be) and he is not willing to repent of his sins...that his life is not consistent with what the Bible teaches a Christian is. He completely understood, and he said, then, that he is not a Christian. But he said that he is going to continue to call himself a Christian because it makes him feel better. I asked him if he were to die that night where he thinks he would go, and he told me that he would be going to hell. I explained who the Bible teaches that Jesus Christ is and described that all he needs to do is to enter into a life of repentance and belief...but he was not willing to do that. Although, he insists on calling himself a Christian because he said it feels good.

The reason I spent so much time writing about this circumstance is because this is a classic case of nominalism or someone who calls themself a Christian, conforms themself to the morality of Christianity, yet they do not believe in what revelation teaches about God or repentance and belief.

I have listed this as a reaction to the problems in the church because folks like this are scattered everywhere in our churches. People who falsely believe that they are Christians. If the gospel is not clearly preached from the pulpit, if the gospel is not clearly displayed and spoken of in the lives of those in the local church then people may be seeking shelter in a church because it makes them "feel better." K. P. Yohannen (founder of Gospel for Asia) has a sobering quote that is very true in this regard, "Feeding a man without sharing the Gospel with him is like giving a sandwich to a man on his way to the electric chair…it is, in essence, simply making him more comfortable on his way to hell."

When churches do not embrace a biblical approach to discipleship of all of it's people (those that covenant with the congregation in membership), and allow non-Christians to shelter as if they were Christians (in membership or even attendance) that is a major problem in the church. So you can see how nominalism and unbelief can be supported by the local church.

The young man in the conversation that I wrote about above is regularly attending a church. In the way that the church functions he has never been confronted with his unbelief or the fact that he is not a Christian. This is a problem...and while the church has not caused his nominalism or unbelief it has not helped him see it, thereby contributing to his continuance in unbelief. Hence, his reaction to that basic problem of discipleship in that specific local church has been to continue in nominalism/unbelief.

Reactions to Problems in Churches

While writing a paper about discipleship the other day I started to think about the different models of how people respond to problems in churches that I have seen throughout my life. I could think of at least six different responses and I'll briefly outline them here.

I should give a disclaimer...I don't have everything figured out. I'm trying to think through these things in a public way...so if you have ideas or suggestions please feel free to post a response here.

Also, when I am talking about what a Christian is I am talking about those who have an understanding of the gospel and believe it! Another word for the gospel is "evangel" which consists of an understanding and wholehearted belief of the following:

(1) There is one true and living God who always was, Uncreated, Eternal, Triune, Holy and Perfect who created all things and made a covenant with mankind. (2) This man, made from the dust, sinned by not keeping the covenant God made with him by doing what he wanted to do and not doing what God wanted him to do...therefore incurring God's right wrath against him. (3) The Lord Jesus Christ...God became man, fully God and fully man (the Son of God, the second person in the Trinity) and died as a substitute for sin. This substitute worked atonement on the cross making it possible for men and women to have a personal relationship with God. He took God's right wrath against us...in our place. (4) Lastly, response...Jesus was a substitute for all the sin of those who will repent of their sin and believe on Jesus Christ. This believing in and on Jesus Christ positively is a belief in who Scripture says that Jesus Christ is...if we believe in who we like to think Jesus is...we could be worshipping an idol. Belief in Jesus as he truly is consists of a stepping into a life of worship of who Scripture teaches that Jesus Christ is in both word and deed. So there is a cost to us, but the good news is that Jesus saved us from God's wrath. God paid the price for our sin if we will repent and believe.

This great gospel or "good news" is the fact that those who are saved are justified before God by faith alone, not by works (Ephesians 2:8-9). Works are indicative of the gift of faith that God gives to us. Our works have no merit...Aquinas was wrong! William Tyndale described the joy of the gospel as follows:

Evangelion (that we call the gospel) is a Greek word; and signifieth good, merry, glad and joyful tidings, that maketh a man's heart glad, and maketh him sing, dance and leap for joy.

So... Here's the list of different reactions I have seen to problems that exist in churches. I'm hoping to blog through each of these and describe a bit how it appears that each of them function.

(1) Nominalism/Unbelief
(2) Isolation
(3) False Unity
(4) Schism based on an attempt to Biblical fidelity.
(5) Reformation based on "cultural contextualization"
(6) Reformation based on Biblical principles and what the church has had biblically correct in the history of Christianity

Radiohead Critique of Christian Individualism?

This is a post that a friend of mine from Iowa posted (Pastor Wayne) on his blog. It’s pretty thought provoking…or much more simple. You be the judge;^)

I've been a fan of Radiohead since the late '90's, but I hadn't seen this video set to the Thom Yorke song, "Rabbit in Your Headlights." I'm tempted to give this video a very Christian spin, even if Yorke et al. have no desire to carry any Christian freight.

The video reminds me of the parable of the Good Samaritan in that we have a man "on the way" - a powerfully biblical metaphor in itself. This man is a babbling schizophrenic, yet he almost appears to be praying - perhaps schizophrenia reveals more about true humanity (homo laudens) than we might be led to believe. On two occasions he seems to shout out the word "Shema!" The Hebrew word for "Hear" or "Listen," as in THE Shema - "Hear, O Israel, the Lord your God, the Lord is one!" (Dt. 6:4) In other words, through his insane babbling, he has a message of prophetic critique. (Echoes of Zarathustra, perhaps?)

But this is a beaten and pitiful man. The juxtaposed phrases "Rabbit in your headlights" and "Christian suburbanites" as he's being pummeled by traffic presents a rather forceful critique of a Christian individualism more concerned with its own self-preservation than demonstrating the self-sacrificial love for another seen in our Lord. 

I also like the redemptive moment of him shedding his old self and his victory over the powers through a renewed cruciform humanity.

Or maybe it's just about rabbits.

[HT: Wayne [http://carrifex.blogspot.com/2007/09/rabbit-in-your-headlightschristian.html]]

Noise

This quote is from Don Whitney in Spiritual Disciplines for the Christian Life:

"Many of us need to realize the addiction we have to noise. It's one thing to listen to the television, tape player, or radio while ironing or doing other chores, but it's another thing habitually to turn one of these on immediately upon entering a room just to have sound. Even worse is to feel that it's necessary to have background noise during Bible intake or prayer. I believe the convenience of sound has contributed to the spiritual shallowness of contemporary western Christianity. The advent of affordable, portable sound systems, for instance, has been a mixed blessing. The negative side is that now we don't have to go anywhere without human voices. As a result we are less frequently alone with our own thoughts and God's voice. Because of this, and because we are the most urban, noise-polluted generation ever, we have an unprecedented need to learn the Disciplines of silence and solitude. [pp. 186-7]"

Have you ever sat in a communion service or a baptism service and thought...turn off the music?

Religious Expression

Imagine a school not allowing a student to wear a ring that expresses a religious belief. More specifically a Christian religious belief. Even more specifically the Christian religious belief that one will be chaste and sexually pure prior to marriage. And then imagine that the principal for the school argues as a defense that ,"It is not a Christian symbol, and is not required to be worn by any branch within Christianity."

Well, yeah...you got me...it actually happened. Let me get this correct. There has to be a "mandate" by some ecclesiastical power in order for a person to do something that expresses their religion? It's a good thing it wasn't a tattoo. With this logic our schools better CRACK DOWN!! There's so much "religious" attire out there...the religion of "self worship" and "culture worship". Check out this article, "British Girl Sues for Right to Wear Chastity Ring".

This just isn't very good logic from a principal, Leon Nettley, at a school in Horsham, south of London. Any thoughts??

Approval Rating

Bush isn't doing so hot according to theGallup Poll approval rating from May 15, 2007. He's at 33%.

But here's something I wasn't aware of. A Gallup Poll regarding congress...

Well check this article out, "Americans' Confidence in Congress at All-Time Low" from June 21, 2007. What is their approval rating?? 14% Wow!

We're not doing so hot.

[HT: Josh Dyvig]

Sam Brownback @ Work Today

Well, today I saw Senator Brownback @ work. I like him... In case you're curious here are the the handouts with some information on him. (just click on the images to enlarge)

What is Iowa State University’s Beef??

ISU’s new football coach wants to hire a chaplain as full time staff. And according to WHO TV’s article, Petition Opposes ISU Football Chaplain, “More than 100 faculty members have signed a petition, opposing the idea.”

What is up with ISU’s “faculty”? Also, notice that, “Private donations have fund [sic.] the position, which Coach Gene Chizik would like to make permanent.” So why do the ISU faculty care? Notice PRIVATE DONATIONS. Besides the football program basically runs off of private donations called "ticket sales" anyhow.

With all the robberies, muggings, assaults, etc. that the football players have committed in the last few years I’d think most would welcome a chaplain. “ISU athletic director Jamie Pollard supports the idea, saying student-athletes under a lot of stress should have access to spiritual guidance if they want it.”

And once again our antagonist is…guess who…just guess…yup, professor of religious studies Hector Avalos. He said, “Are you going to have counseling for Jewish students? Muslim students? There's no such thing as one religion or one version of Christianity." Really?

Also, the ACLU is getting in on the action check this article out if you're interested, ACLU Asks ISU To Reject Chaplain Plan.

I loved what one football player had to say, "I think we need to get Christ back in sports. Chizik was hired to do a job... and that's one thing they're passionate about, as am I."

Any thoughts??

Dissolution

Here’s an interesting poem I came across recently…it’s on the inside of Maria Schneider’s album Allegresse. I think it was written to describe the tune by the same name on the album.

Dissolution
Laurie Frink, June 23, 1998

Flowing Pouring
Sailing Soaring
Searching Learning
Yearning Churning

Melodies Painful
Sounds of Tearing
Souls Tormented
Tortured Baring

Living Fearing
Searing Hearing
Creeping Leaping
Flying Dying

Rhythms Hoping
Harmonies Groping
Building—Built
Compared Despaired

Lives Entwined
Behind Combined
Clutching Touching
Grasping Rasping

Ever Moving
Forward Surging
Stalling Inward
Outward Purging

Shouting Screaming
Demon Dreaming
Wanting Needing
Doubting Conceding

Ginger Peeling
Gentle Healing
Hopeful Posing
Final Closing