Building Your House - Hebrews 3

Hebrews 3:2-6

Moses also was faithful in all God's house. For Jesus has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses—as much more glory as the builder of a house has more honor than the house itself. (For every house is built by someone, but the builder of all things is God.) Now Moses was faithful in all God's house as a servant, to testify to the things that were to be spoken later, but Christ is faithful over God's house as a son. And we are his house, if indeed we hold fast our confidence and our boasting in our hope.


We are all trying to build a house. Increase our income, raise our children, prosper our family, expand our borders.

Interesting that God in Hebrews takes up this metaphor and says Jesus does this faithfully, as God’s Son for His Father (verse 6). And that WE are the house He is building. Husbands all try to live out Christ to their bride, but fail in some way. Jesus doesn’t. Pastors all try to live out Christ as shepherd to their sheep, but fail in some way. Jesus doesn’t. Magistrates fail to build a nation, “a single sword to Thee,” but fail. Our earthly rulers falter. But Jesus doesn’t.

In my circles we put a lot of emphasis on earthly authority of fathers, church elders, and civil magistrates. And rightly so. But they will all fail in some way. Jesus is building the Great House. The houses we’re all trying to build are incomplete, imperfect. But He will establish them by His GRACE. By our faith in Him, and not by our own works.

So as we build our houses, He is building His, with us as His stones (1 Peter 2:5). Remember that when your house falters a bit, God knows how to rebuild, reshape, refashion your stones into his glorious house. Trust Him to do it. Then you won’t get desperate, grasping after particular methods, turning from His power and Spirit to your own paltry efforts. Jesus may do it another way.

Trust Him.

Quick Thoughts from John (3)

John 16:5
none of you asks me, ‘Where are you going?’

I find this verse fascinating. Peter had asked Jesus exactly this just hours before, in John 13:36! 

So what does Jesus mean?

I think He means, you’re focused on your own pain at losing Me, at what God’s people (the Sanhedrin) are about to do to Me (see John 16:6), not on God’s plan, to glorify Himself. Peter asks “Where are you going?” because he doesn’t want bad things to happen. He should have been happy Jesus was going to the Father, but all he/we can think about is our own pain at feeling the absence of His presence when we are mistreated or just wounded (John 14:28). 

That is a hard lesson to learn in affliction, but an important one. Jesus feels distant in our hard times, but He is not.

Quick thoughts from John (2)

John 11:48-50

If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation.” 49 But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, “You know nothing at all. 50 Nor do you understand that it is better for you that one man should die for the people, not that the whole nation should perish.”

This one struck me differently in this election season.

Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin believe that preserving the nation in its present state is absolutely essential, and that they have to get it done.

It’s deep irony: “to preserve God’s people, Jesus must die.”
Deeply true, theologically.
Caiaphas got it completely wrong, politically.
(Can’t resist, but this was Denethor the steward opposing Aragorn the King…)

If you are prone to believe during this election that one candidate must be kept from the highest office to preserve the nation (or that another must be elected), you may want to give this a closer look.

God shakes the nations all the time. Not monthly, or even in our lifetime, but regularly throughout history. If He has the right to reconstitute His chosen people Israel into a church, which He does and did, surely He has the right to let a nation like ours fall due to its continued unbelief and rebellion. We don’t HAVE to make America great again, though we may want and work for that. America is dispensable in God’s plan, as the Sanhedrin also was.

By all means, love your country, and back your preferred candidate (coughcoughnotharriscoughcough), but don’t lose sight of God’s sovereignty. He often brings about a great catastrophe, like the cross, that brings a phoenix out of the fires. Trust and hope in Him alone.

Quick Thoughts from John (1)

John 13:34-36
“A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another. By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.” Simon Peter said to him, “Lord, where are you going…”

One thing usually pointed out here in the upper room is that Jesus will be leaving them soon, and they’ll need one another in the coming days of His absence. But for the first time today, I connected Peter’s response to a deeper possibility. Peter basically ignores this new command to love those around him, and stays focused completely on Jesus. Even though Jesus just told him to focus on the other disciples!

Is it possible that we can get so wrapped up in the grief of losing a close loved one, or the pain of personal trauma, that we can’t remember our call to love others? Absolutely it is. It’s a very natural response, which is why Jesus brings it up. The consequences of sin and heart wounds isolate us and send us within ourselves. We need to work against that and… “love one another.”

Now, this isn’t a heartless demand to them not to feel pain at His departure, or to you not to grieve when it is time. But we should seek to dig out from under our grief and be at least functional again, over time. We may even find that reaching out to others in compassion and service can be a key way we DO overcome our personal hurts and wounds. After all, God “comforts us in all our affliction, so that we may be able to comfort those who are in any affliction, with the comfort with which we ourselves are comforted by God” (2 Cor. 1:4).

The Only Plane in the Sky - a review

The Only Plane in the Sky: An Oral History of 9/11 by Garrett M. Graff
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

A gripping, detailed account of 9/11, from the survivors on the ground.

I never read a book so fast. A real page-turner, because it was real, not some Tom Clancy novel.
The whole thing is only transcripts of interviews of survivors of 9/11.

I was turned off at first by the format. Each paragraph of only 1-4 sentences flipped from one person to another – I got ADD real fast. But I soon realized this was purposeful. It helped the reader get in the mindset on the ground: what’s happening? The lack of knowledge is a key part of the story, and just getting little blips of information is how it happened, and conveys the confusion of the day.

One striking thing is that after the last plane went down in PA, everyone assumed more was coming, even though it was “over.”

Garrett Graff the editor does a masterful job interweaving normal office people in the Pentagon or the World Trade Center with senior leaders like NY Gov. Pataki, VP Dick Cheney in the bunker, President George W. Bush on Air Force One, and senior staff to congressional leaders. He sticks with a cluster of related people for a while then moves to another cluster.

EVERYONE should read this. People under 30 should read it to understand the terror they’ve only heard of second hand, and to grasp the “boomer” politics that ensued. People over 30 should read it to recall and learn anew what all actually happened that day, beyond what they saw on the TV.

It isn’t for the faint of heart. There are a few expletives, and brief descriptions of body parts. But the way it conveys the reality on the ground is unbelievably well done. The fire departments of New York and Arlington are not lauded for merely sentimental reasons – they lost hundreds as they went up into the flames of buildings that were about to collapse, and rescued many. Rudy Giuliani and Don Rumsfeld stuck out to me as quite heroic on the ground, but even more so were the emergency workers and office co-workers who wouldn’t leave without rescuing people from the rubble, often at the cost of their own lives.

Should we be pursuing enemies of the USA beyond our borders as vigorously as we do, when we have so many domestic problems? Don’t answer that question until you read this book.

May God bless America, in His mercy.

View all my reviews

Dance with Dragons - a review

A Dance with Dragons by George R.R. Martin
My rating: 1 of 5 stars

This is a wicked, horrible book. Do not read this series.

I don’t know why I finished it. Can’t resist plots of political intrigue, I suppose.
And I wanted to see what the culture was in such a tizzy about. But looking into this cesspool is indeed nauseating.

The last in his Game of Thrones 5 volume series, yet still unfinished, Martin satisfies only salaciously. He cannot finish a story, or convey meaning with his world building, because his worldview is nihilistic. The only thing that really matters is power. “Words are wind” is a repeated theme, though better minds know that the world was MADE with words.

Soaked with crass vulgarity on nearly every page, Martin seeks to shock, and it’s closer to X than R rated, on the movie scale. This isn’t just sexual innuendo – it’s in your face gratuitous violence and sex, meant to make you think that life is just meat and flesh, and then it’s done. Materialistic despair, run amok, seeking to soothe it with whatever power and pleasure you can get.

Interestingly, Martin is deliberately non-egalitarian. Jaime is a better knight than others. Tyrion has more wits than most around him, and so survives and advances though he is a dwarf. Rulers who are humble like Jon Snow, and less arrogant or cock-sure like Cersei Lannister get on better.

This nausea-inducing series paradoxically gives me hope. I see more clearly now how despairing people are, apart from Christ. They are desperate for hope, though most Martin readers are probably like the dwarves in The Last Battle, who will refuse to believe in the opposite good, true Story, even when it’s shown to them clearly in the face.

At least I know a little better now, how to speak to them the Gospel of hope, the antidote to this nihilism.

View all my reviews

The Bible - a review

 

ESV Study Bible by Anonymous
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

I just finished reading through the Bible, and it hit me that I might do a “review.”
[This isn't a review of the ESV Study Bible, just the text of the Bible itself.]

Of course, you don’t review a book that GOD wrote the same way you do books that humans write.
But still. I thought it would be a helpful exercise.

Made up of 66 books written over centuries by many different human authors, the Spirit inspired each of them to contribute to one grand narrative. The creation, fall, and reclamation of humanity for the glory of God. The Bible makes sense of life, telling us how we should be living, what we were made for, and why things are as miserable as we are because we don’t live up to God’s purpose for us.

A diversity of genres make up the Bible. History in the first third or so, mixed in with statutory laws on how to live and worship. Poetry in the middle, on how to speak and relate to God in various circumstances, as well as practical wisdom in how to live well. Prophecy completes the middle third, which we ought to pair with the history of the kings more than we think to do. The prophets clearly spell out why God’s judgment comes on His people, and on other nations. The Gospels beginning the new testament are a unique genre that narrate the life, ministry, death, and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. The epistles mostly explain the meaning of the person and work of Christ further, and teach the church how to live, believing in Him as their Lord and Savior. The last book shows that God is at work, even when horrible things happen around us and to us.

A key point: God’s purpose is potent. He will bring His people to Himself throughout history, and see His will done, regardless how horrific things are in the present. He means to sanctify us by His Spirit, as He has redeemed us at the cross of Christ. Nothing will stop this.

Take up your Bible, and read. Be encouraged. Reconnect with your Creator. Re-center yourself on the Christ who is the center, and who holds it all together.

The only book that will ever receive 6 out of 5 stars, not that my rating matters…

View all my reviews

Criminalizing Post-Abortive Women Doesn’t Work – Now

A guest post by my daughter, Grace, contra abortion abolitionists.

 

Abortion abolitionists claim that because abortion is murder, the law ought to reflect this by criminalizing post-abortive mothers, and therefore establishing justice for the unborn. Abolitionists are correct in their moral ideology. Elective abortion is murder, not because a law calls it murder, but because the procedure, whether performed medically by pill or surgically, intentionally destroys a human life which is made in the image of God. This should be obvious to any Bible believing Christian. Any society which holds founding principles derived from Christianity should recognize this and implement laws which reflect the murderous nature of abortion.

Abolitionists are wrong to ignore the mechanics of politics and the legislative process. The insistence that abolitionist bills are the only morally acceptable type of bill by which justice can be established against abortion creates a black and white moral framework rarely fits into the mucky grey of politics.

First, the briefest of practical political application: It's not practically obvious that a pregnant mother can be criminalized, depending on the culture of the state in which an abolitionist bill would be proposed. Within supermajority or very strong Republican states where the culture already accepts abortion as murder and post-abortive mothers as murderers, abolition bills would help solidify the Christian mores which that state’s constituency and culture desires. However, federally, and in most states, a legislator (who is elected by a public which does not view post-abortive mothers as infanticidal criminals) who carries an abolitionist bill in the current culture puts a shotgun to their own knee. Depending on how bad the PR fallout is, their constituents will fire them next election and replace them with a legislator more moderate on abortion, causing the prolife or abolitionist legislator to lose their job without effecting change, and causing the prolife or abolitionist lobby to lose an ally by which they could have proposed further bills. In many states, it may very well be bad stewardship of our prolife allies and representatives to strong arm them into carrying an abolitionist bill to committee if the odds of the bill dying are high and the odds of a different prolife bill passing are high. Some wars are won through a blitz. Some wars are won through an island-hopping attrition campaign. Wisdom is knowing what kind of war you are in. The battle in Arkansas is not the same as the battle in New York.

I think, however, that the entire abolition vs. prolife debate misses the point and sounds too much like asking, “Where was Gondor when the Westfold fell?” The debate strikes me as a marked failure of Christians (abolitionist or prolife or otherwise) to understand the pro-abortion strategy. The battle is not being fought at the level of the state laws, it is being fought at the level of the culture and the level of state constitutions. As state after state caves to a popular pro-abortion constitutional amendment, we ought to recognize that without cultural change, even if our legislators passed abolitionist laws in every state, we would still lose this war via popular votes on state constitutions. A primary example is Ohio, a supermajority Republican state with a Republican governor, which still voted popularly for a constitutional right to unlimited abortion up to and including the moment of birth. No abolitionist law could have saved them, and even if one had passed, it would now be considered an unconstitutional law in Ohio and would be struck from the books in short order, likely with great pomp and circumstance by the pro-abortion lobby.

One of the main arguments of the abolitionists is to say that the law is a tutor, and with an abolitionist law, many women would be deterred from procuring abortions. To say that the law is a tutor is true, but it’s an oversimplification.

The culture for the last 100+ years has learned that the emotional and intellectual self is the highest moral authority, and if that selfish moral authority requires the death of unborn children, so be it (see Carl Trueman’s Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self ). An abolitionist law passed and enforced tomorrow will not undo the last 100+ years of cultural self-worship. It will only spit in the eye of a much stronger cultural power, a power which has no problems exerting itself on millions of unborn children. Expect disastrous reprisal. Many abolitionists criticize Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization as a legal prolife victory resulting in sweeping cultural pro-abortion victories worsening the situation in many states. How would an abolitionist law be any different? While we shouldn’t modify our language or message in order to make the leading class of the pro-abortion movement like us (they never will), we would be wise to take some cues from their winning strategy. They didn’t need the law to teach culture, they simply captured the institutions until their cultural power increased to critical mass. By the time Roe v. Wade came before the Supreme Court, it was already too late, the pro-abortion wing had won.

I’ll cite the Comstock Act as a law originally written in 1873, in a more Christian and principled America. The Comstock Act is currently on the books, currently in effect, which legally prevents people from mailing obscene material, including abortion pills. Abolitionists might think that this law is currently acting as a tutor, teaching the culture about the moral wrong of shipping abortion pills from state to state. Unfortunately, the Comstock Act is not enforced because our judicial system and society at large no longer holds the moral principles of 1873. Federally, we lack the moral framework even to desire to enforce the Comstock Act.

Equal protection and justice for the unborn is a good, moral, and righteous idea, if the law is a good, moral, and righteous law, and if the judicial system applies the law in a good, moral, and righteous way by good, moral, and righteous people. Despite the blessing of our judicial system, we should recognize its brokenness, the current brokenness of our culture, and the depravity of any human being, whether they be judge, juror, lawyer, or police officer. If tomorrow you passed an abolitionist law, and the day after you brought a woman to trial for getting an elective abortion with full knowledge of the personhood of the baby and the process of an abortion, not a single person on that jury would find her guilty of first-degree homicide, no matter how strong the evidence. Judeo-Christian morality lacks the cultural strength it held in 1873, and unfortunately, this means that many laws which work within a Christian moral framework, such as the Comstock Act, are culturally rejected, and therefore left unenforced.

That’s a sad state of affairs, but it’s the current state of affairs, and a legal change will have little effect on the culture. The only way the culture will truly change is through the spread of the Gospel. This is where our efforts should be focused. God will grant the cultural change as He sees fit, but let us not be caught slacking in our commission.

  

The Road to Serfdom - a review

The Road to Serfdom by Friedrich A. Hayek
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

A tour de force of conservatism, which I’ve been meaning to read for many years, Hayek does NOT disappoint.

Writing in England near the end of World War II in 1944, Hayek raises the alarm: many Europeans are adopting the same socialism that Germany did in the buildup to Hitler. Collectivism, whether fascist or communist, is the road to serfdom. Western nations must resist it and insist on the first political principle of individual liberty. State bureaucrats should not plan our economy – the free market is the best instrument for this.

The ad Hitlerum argument is overplayed these days, but for Hayek it packed a powerful punch. The carnage he wreaked had become evident. And Hitler was the one who wanted to organize society and industry under the state, subsuming the family, church, and individual. Now the socialists in the west want to do the same! No. Let the market sort out the best allocation of resources.

At many points, Hayek is prescient in seeing the downsides of the United Nations and the European Union, neither yet formed when he wrote.

There was a strange section I think I disagreed with, where Hayek argues that no society has a comprehensive ethical system. Therefore we cannot have central planners dictate rules for everyone, since not everyone agrees to all the moral priorities. There is some truth to this, in realpolitik, especially surveying our divided society today. But he doesn’t address the Judeo-Christian heritage in Scripture, which certainly DOES provide Western nations of Christian heritage with a comprehensive ethical system. Should Hayek’s libertarianism be moderated by some sort of Christian theonomy? This debate rages today.

Be that as it may, Hayek is a master in exposing the good intentions of socialist planners as totalitarians at heart. Even today, especially today, subsidizing various industries in many areas of the economy (green energy comes to mind), these socialists continue today to chip away at freedom, seeking to plan and direct the free economy to their own ends. Even the right has gotten on board lately, with their tariffs and nationalism.

Hayek is a helpful political compass to bring us back to what government is FOR. Not directing a society to the state’s “ethical” ends, but enforcing established rule of law so individuals can plan effectively how to use their resources to the fullest.

Hayek was an academic, and is not very easy to read. His average sentence length is probably double that of popular writing today. But it is well worth the effort. A rare 5 stars!

View all my reviews

Don Juan - a review

Don Juan by Lord Byron
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

This book was a TRIP.
Knowing little about Lord Byron, except he was a Romantic poet (“She walks in beauty like the night…”), and that Don Juan was a profligate womanizer, I wasn’t sure what to expect. Here’s what I learned.

Byron structures and writes his epic like Dante. The chapters are Cantos. He often refers to contemporary figures, criticizing or praising them, while telling a different story with a different point. Following a strict meter and rhyme (mostly), each stanza also has 8 lines. There over 100 stanzas in each of the 16 complete Cantos! The modern reader finds this tiresome, and I did at times. But there is also a freedom to the structure that lets you focus on other things he’s doing.

Unlike Dante, Byron is EXTREMELY self-conscious, referring to his Muse, reputation, giftedness, and humility (!) constantly. He compares himself to all the great epic poets, seeing himself as one of them, or striving to be. Juan is shipwrecked like Odysseus. The book is PACKED with literary references like Dante. You need good footnotes to make sense of much of it. But with Byron you get more the sense that he is showing off his knowledge. He says he is moralizing, but seldom does the way a preacher would (he likes to make fun of moralizing preachers). His long digressions on politics, women, society, religion, etc. are actually the point of the book, I think. Juan’s plot is just a device to hold it together and flip back and forth between.

Juan is set up as Byron’s hero, the paragon of what a virtuous man should be, and it is no Christian vision. Handsome, courtly, facing hardship head on as serenely as pleasure like a good Stoic. He goes from one beautiful woman’s arms to another, and there’s a fair bit of sexual innuendo, especially at the beginning. Byron does not criticize this at all, but comments on (and criticizes) women of high society, assuming it’s fine to pursue them outside of marriage. Juan is a hero for having women desire him. He has a fair number of chauvinistic lines about the capricious changeableness of women. He several times criticizes the institution of marriage outright, as the other Romantics did.

But Byron was a genius writer and not totally wicked. He was an apt social critic, with plenty of clever lines. Here is a sampling of some of his best.

‘Twas for a voyage that the young man was meant,
As if a Spanish ship were Noah’s ark,
To wean him from the wickedness of earth
And send him like a dove of promise forth.
II:8

Our hero (and I trust, kind reader, yours)
Was left upon his way to the chief city
Of the immortal Peter’s polished boors, [Rome]
Who still have shown themselves more brave than witty.
I know its mighty empire now allures
Much flattery, even Voltaire’s, and that’s a pity.
For me, I deem an absolute autocrat
Not a barbarian, but much worse than that.

And I will war at least in words (and should)
My chance so happen – deeds) with all who war
With thought; and of thought’s foes by far most rude,
Tyrants and sycophants have been are are.
I know not who may conquer. If I could
Have such a prescience, it should be no bar
To this my plain, sworn, downright detestation
Of every despotism in every nation.

It is not that I adulate the people.
Without me, there are demagogues enough
And infidels to pull down every steeple
And set up in their stead some proper stuff.
Whether they may sow scepticism to reap hell,
As is the Christian dogma rather rough,
I do not know. I wish men to be free
As much from mobs as kings – from you as me.
IX:23-25

It were much better to be wed or dead
Than wear a heart a woman loves to rend.
XIV:64

But more or less the whole’s a syncope
Or a singultus, emblems of emotion,
The grand antithesis to great ennui,
Wherewith we break our bubbles on the ocean
XV:2
[Here, like a good Romantic, Byron asserts that feeling/emotion is the best antidote to ennui / boredom / nihilism.]


But what’s reality? Who has its clue?
Philosophy? No, she too much rejects.
Religion? Yes, but which of all her sects?

Some millions must be wrong, that’s pretty clear;
Perhaps it may turn out that all were right.
XV:89-90


View all my reviews

Fellowship of the Ring - a review

The Fellowship of the Ring by J.R.R. Tolkien
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

Fellowship of the Ring

5 stars!

The usual critique of this trilogy is that it is too long on landscape. Sitting outside reading it during the late summer / early autumn, I disagree. Part of the point is to awaken a love for the outdoors again, and it worked for me, this time through.

Besides that, I heavily notated all the theologically laden comments Tolkien makes:
- Evil [the ring] can only be used for evil
- We need companions on the journey for good and against evil
- We are tempted to use power for good when that is not in God’s design
- Things are not always as they seem: Strider appears suspicious at first; Boromir seems kindly but seeks to take the ring. Discernment is needed.
- Do not assume those in charge and assumed to have great knowledge (Saruman) are to be trusted.
- Come together for counsel against evil and share your knowledge [Elrond’s council].
- Be aware of evil set against you, when you are at peace and unaware [Frodo before leaving the Shire]
- Understand the bigger picture, and don’t just stay in your little Shire bubble, so you can act properly.

Much more could be said in a preachy way, but the story is compelling in itself.
Tolle lege.


View all my reviews

That Distant Land - a Review

 

That Distant Land: The Collected Stories by Wendell Berry
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

Berry is a gifted writer. He preferences the land, the world, and its value over all else. People are meant to belong to the land. The price of crops means less than value of work. A dying ancestor means more to his community than modern medicine’s care for him.

A collection of 2 dozen short stories, most of which can be read in an evening, I reread this after 15 years or so, and found it valuable.
It’s a good introduction to the Port William world, or a great way to fill in the story after reading Jayber Crow or Hannah Coulter.

Many points brought me to tears out of nostalgia, which critics declaim. Maybe they’re right. Berry longs for a world that has passed away. But the values of that world can reorient our moral compass in very helpful ways.

View all my reviews

Should we give the middle finger to idolatry, Doug?

A breakdown of Doug Wilson's defense of the recent NSA ad with the middle finger to idolatry.

Prologue

I remain a friend of Moscow and all its ventures to build Christian culture and to fight against the rising secular and pagan worldview.  I liked 98% of the NSA ad, and would recommend the school to friends.

However.  

(A critique of each section of Doug's post here.  The ad is here.)

"First, What it Was"

It doesn't help to say it was just a nano-second, and that we'd just be WILLING to go there (use the f-bomb).  If you're willing to go there, and show it, it's as bad as going there.  Showing the picture at all is as good as saying "eff you."

"Where We and Our Critics Disagree"
Doug bifurcates between friends of the college, and those out to get them. Respondents are effeminate wusses, library ladies, and sob sisters; or we are masculine, faithful, fighting friends. Most are in the middle, in neither camp. He is much more sensitive to those out to get them, and I don't discount there are many enemies of his doing that. But there are many like me who don't want to give Nate a pass, and also are not effeminate wusses. This is an ad hominem fallacy on Doug's part. (Any critics are sob sisters.) Also, in this section Doug downplays the gesture: "we didn't actually say the word out loud." This is casuistry. Finally, Doug plays the "who will fight?" card. If you criticize using the f-bomb you aren't willing to fight, in his view. Non sequitur. I've seen this before from him, first hand: if you don't agree with him, you're unwilling to put on your "big boy pants." He quotes Judges 15:11, but Samson and other judges never used the f-bomb, or used the enemy's sinful tactics against them.

"I'll Tell You What's Problematic"
Doug's critique of Strachan falls flat. Just because Strachan positively reviewed a film with several f-bombs in it, doesn't make it inconsistent to critique Christian platforms that PRODUCE it. His reference to "Evangellyfish" also doesn't fly, as Doug didn't use the f-bomb in it. I wouldn't call Doug a grifter, but the ad was definitely made to get attention. To say his critics are out for attention is just to siphon criticism off Moscow onto their critics.

"The Heart of the Difficulty"

This is a decent section, though it depends on inward intent. I believe Doug's intent is sincere and that he is not seeking fame for its own sake. He is seeking attention for a godly purpose. But he assumes his critics are seeking fame in an ungodly manner, which is uncharitable of him. Maybe they actually have a substantial case to consider. Assuming it is not so displays a lack of humility, uncharacteristic of the Doug I know. (I liked his appeal to DeYoung being our next standard bearer.)

Overall, I'd say including the middle finger gesture violates Scripture. We want to renounce idolatry like we saw in the Paris Olympics opening ceremony, but not say "eff you" to it. This tiny portion of the ad was a play to ungodly hatred of wickedness, which we ought to reject.

I urge you: reject both the wickedness itself, and the ungodly, hate-filled response to it.

Judas, Kamala Harris, and God's Providence

 Another great sermon by Doug Wilson, especially the last bit from 40:00 or so, on.

There's also a great passage on what Judas was trying to do, which applies to our political situation today.

https://www.christkirk.com/sermon/acts-of-the-apostles-3/

On the Trinity - Augustine - a review

On the Trinity by Saint Augustine of Hippo by Augustine of Hippo
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

Augustine breaks the rule that no one can talk for more than 15 minutes about the Trinity without committing some heresy. He takes 288 fine print pages to cover every aspect of Father, Son and Holy Spirit, with no major error. It is a stunning theological and philosophical accomplishment.

This book also proves CS Lewis’ rule of thumb right: read an old book between every 1-2 contemporary ones you read. The way Augustine writes is nothing like people today. It isn’t that he uses big words too much. His grammar and syntax, and way of argumentation is very different. But once you’re used to it, you see that his arguments are incisive, Scriptural, and compelling. My edition had a summary of every short chapter which helped my feeble brain a ton. It would be easy to skim, by only reading those chapter headings, and dipping in further where you want.

Part of his argument is to use an expected Scripture text, and then infer logically a truth of the Trinity. It’s a master class in going from interpretation of Scripture to systematic theology.

This is a challenging read, essential for seminary students, and very helpful for pastors to connect with “mother church,” and keep their minds sharp in this important area.

A rare 5 out of 5 stars!

View all my reviews

Scalia Speaks - a review

 

Scalia Speaks: Reflections on Law, Faith, and Life Well Lived by Antonin Scalia
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

This is a stellar book. A collection of Scalia’s speeches on various topics, I learned a TON and laughed along the way.

I’d say the key take away is that the law, and the Supreme Court, cannot be distilled to the binary we all make politically today of liberal/conservative. A GOP appointee isn’t a guaranteed “conservative vote” on the Supreme Court. The law is a different animal than politics, and it was very enlightening to learn more about it.

Scalia did have his own sort of binary, though. He was an originalist back when the word was anathema. But his case is winning today: we should be constrained by what the constitution and the law says, and not seek to make it say what we want it to say, according to our newer and (of course) better values. Those benighted people of the past, our Founders and legal ancestors, didn’t know anything about gender like we enlightened people know today, so why listen to them?

Scalia’s orthodox Catholicism steeled him against that latter claim. How do we know we know any better? Shouldn’t we heed the wisdom of our forebears? Absolutely.

But originalism is not always conservatism. His take on the Church of the Holy Trinity v. U.S. 1892 case shows that. The church hired an English minister as its pastor. A federal law forbade importing foreigners to work in the U.S., with only certain exceptions. Clerical work was NOT one of them! SCOTUS went with the spirit of the law, unanimously allowing the church to hire a pastor, claiming in part that “this is a Christian nation.” Scalia disagreed with the decision, as there was no such exception in the law. He also disagreed with the assertion that the U.S. is Christian. “Legally it was false. But sociologically I have no doubt it was (in 1892) true” (128). Scalia no doubt would NOT be a Christian Nationalist today.

The speech on Lincoln is astoundingly good, showing the depth of discussion going on in Lincoln’s time, and even in Scalia’s, that is sorely lacking today. Scalia shows that Lincoln was no dummy, nor was he only opposed to slavery cynically while in the White House. Lincoln’s and Scalia’s analysis of Dred Scott’s case shows that precedent is not an iron rule, as earthly judges can err.

He gave several commencement addresses, and at one gave this gem of advice:
“It is much less important how committed you are than what you are committed to. If I have to choose, I will undoubtedly take the less dynamic, indeed even the lazy person, who knows what’s right, than the zealot in the cause of error…. It is your responsibility… not just to be zealous in the pursuit of your ideals, but to be sure that your ideals are the right ones…. Good intentions are not enough” (100).

These are only a few highlights. This is highly recommended reading to raise your level of understanding of legal issues.

View all my reviews

Work Is Not a Curse

 David Bahnsen has a good book out, distilled nicely in this article.

https://wng.org/articles/selling-work-short-1722992245

There a short Q&A with him here.
https://wng.org/articles/a-chat-with-david-bahnsen-1723002311

Needed to straighten out our view of work.

The Memory of Old Jack - a review

The Memory of Old Jack by Wendell Berry
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

This was a depressing book, but also with a blessed encouragement near the end.

Jack Beechum’s life was full of disappointments. His marriage. His ambition in work. His children following after him. All were failures in his mind, and objectively. His memory of it all as an old man paralyzed him, literally and physically. Yet he left behind a small group of men who respected him and sought to carry on his legacy.

The title has a double meaning, only revealed at the end. While most of the book is Jack remembering his past life and woes, the last few chapters are Jack’s “adopted sons,” those he has mentored and have adopted his values and way of life, remembering HIM, and carrying on his farm, his way, his harvest, his memory.

Wendell Berry is a compelling author, and I commend anything he writes. (Ironically, he was introduced to me by someone who hurt me much, while Berry’s writings have healed me much.) He values the land, work, and the community of the older faithful, probably in that order, above anything else. Including family and church. So his priorities aren’t exactly aligned with a Christian worldview. You could even call it idolatrous of ancestors and place, tradition and soil. But there’s enough overlap with Biblical truth to make it a very worthwhile read. Much of it is “Christ-haunted,” as Dorothy Sayers might say.

Much of his writing is a lament for a bygone age – nostalgic. But as I look ahead to being the oldest generation alive in a decade or three, I’m starting to see the problem Berry presents: some of those up and coming attain the wisdom needed, yet many do not. Sometimes I’m one of those that misses it.

There is a striking lack of God’s sovereignty in Wendell Berry’s picture – He only appears once or twice in the whole book. It’s more a modern-day Ecclesiastes.

But Berry’s books are drenched with salt-of-the-earth wisdom that will edify you deeply.

View all my reviews

The Cruciform Way II - a book review

The Cruciform Way: A Steady Cadence of Christ for Life by Christopher Ian Thoma
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

A Lutheran pastor local to me writes compellingly of the Christian life.

Tuned to the church year, one 3-6 page chapter per Sunday, this has been a staple of my Sabbath reading for a while.

Thoma’s solid orthodoxy brings him to apply the gospel of forgiveness and the importance of the visible means of grace, to many areas of life.

A few highlights:

“Video-game manufacturers are the modern day mind-altering drug dealers to this generation” (pg 145).

“What good is standing against the wealth-stealing pestilence of big-government socialism when you can’t rightly govern your tithes and offerings to the Lord with the current freedom you possess?” (199).

In worship, “you will hear a single voice – your pastor’s voice – and it will be for you as the Lord’s own voice announcing you need not fear. You need not be uneasy. You need not be afraid. Through repentance and faith in His merciful love, you belong with Him and He will not push you away” (229).

“Abortion is about a radicalized individualism that takes what it wants and gets rid of what it doesn’t. In America it’s only ‘Baby Joy!’ if we want it. It’s a fetus… if we don’t” (244).

HIGHLY recommended reading.

View all my reviews

The Power of a Praying Husband - book review

 

The Power of a Praying Husband Book of Prayers by Stormie Omartian
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

This tiny book comprises about 60 prayers, 4-5 sentences each, that a husband can pray for his wife.
Seems small and trivial, but Omartian packs a lot of relational truth into a small space.
A husband concerned for his wife’s needs will find enlightenment as to what those needs are, and fuel for his prayers here.

I think Omartian is more charismatic than me theologically, but it doesn’t come through in this book hardly at all.

Especially convicting and striking are those times men are called to pray for God to do something for their wives that they cannot do themselves: convict them of sin, bring them joy, etc.

I recommend this book to jump start or deepen your prayer life as a husband for your wife.

View all my reviews

Thirty-Nine Steps review

 

I reread this John Buchan short story, as my wife is staging it as a play.

 

What hit me is how spycraft is mainly about confidence in what you know to be true.  If you don’t trust your view of things, you’ll get played by the other side.  That's a SPIRITUAL lesson, people.

 

It’s a fast-moving flip from one scene to the next.  The main character Hannay changes identities as quickly and deftly.  Written between the world wars, it is instructive in its “out of date-ness.”

 

Recommended reading.

Habitation of Dragons review

Habitation of Dragons by Keith Miller
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

Our lives, our souls, are the habitation of dragons.

Keith Miller wrote over 50 years ago, and I found it compelling. An autobiography, he considers the ways he is tempted to various sins. Pride. Envy. Anger. Ambition.

His format is devotional: 2-3 pages of writing, then a few quotes, and a prayer. Easy to read a chapter in 5-10 minutes, per day.

Some will see it as overly “navel-gazing,” but there is a time for introspection and considering one’s sins and temptations. The HONESTY is what struck me most. Miller has a way of vividly describing the (mostly non-physical) temptations that come upon us all.

“To know that I am not alone with the shameful dragons I fight in my inner life is very encouraging,” he writes in the introduction. And so this book is convicting, but also encouraging.

Miller was a teacher and speaker in the church in full time Christian ministry, so I related to much of what he had to say. Some of his dragons were unique to that world, but many were common to all.

Written in 1970, a few things are dated, but surprisingly little.

I highly recommend this book to any Christian pursuing sanctification, especially against sins of the mind.

View all my reviews

Church History - a Review

Church History by Simonetta Carr
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

This is a GREAT book. Geared as a textbook for roughly 7th-12th graders, Carr does an excellent job simplifying complex issues for students without dumbing things down. I used this as a homeschool text for a semester, and it was marvelous.

Carr is known for her shorter biographies of figures around the reformation, and applies her historical research more broadly, here.

Covering all of church history from 30AD to the present, worldwide, is quite a task, and some selectivity is needed. Here are some weaknesses, and then strengths of the book in this area.

Weaknesses:
The coverage is quite uneven. 30-1517AD is covered in 80 pages. Reformation to the present gets 170 pages. This is expected from a book published by “Reformation Heritage Books,” but still disappointing. Alfred the Great gets 2 sentences. Alcuin gets 3.

So many figures of history are given a little box with 2-3 sentences that I got ADD. It became just random facts, instead of a cohesive story.

The “Think about It” questions are helpful to engage students (and provide homework!), but they are often leading to a specific answer, rather than helping to think critically about a subject.

Strengths:
The visuals and high quality paper and binding are VERY well done. The book is beautiful and appealing, including many original portraits and pictures of historical figures, documents and assemblies.

The coverage of the Reformation through Westminster is thorough and excellent.

The coverage of history from 1900 on is the best I’ve seen anywhere, giving much detail and key figures I’d never heard of, worldwide from South Korea to Nigeria.


I don’t know if this is a strength or weakness, but the book is obviously from a Reformed Presbyterian perspective. It “takes sides” on the Arminius controversy and Dordt. Carr also is obviously keen to show that not only Baptists but Presbyterians sent out many missionaries in the 1800s. This makes her selective in modern history, focusing on Machen, Packer and Sproul, while Mohler’s historic reformation to orthodoxy of a major institution is absent.


Reformed homeschoolers should definitely get this book. Classical schools should consider it for their curriculum. We all need to know our history better, and this book provides a path to dip into history for as much time as you have. Either 5 minutes as a family devotion, or a semester as a high school course, Carr’s accomplishment brings you more understanding and spiritual edification from our Church family history.

View all my reviews

Seismic Shifts - a book review

 

Seismic Shifts: The Little Changes That Make a Big Difference in Your Life by Kevin G. Harney
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

This is a great book to spur you on to growth in the Christian life.

Continuing my streak of practical Christian living reading, Harney covers most of the basics: Scripture reading, prayer, giving, evangelism. But he also throws in some surprises: eating well. Using your tongue to build up instead of burn down. Resting in God’s peace instead of being anxious.

When I got toward the end, I admit I groaned. 3 chapters each on giving and evangelism! But they were good and many Christians today need to hear this perspective again. We need to be generous with our time and money for others, since we are merely stewarding our lives for God’s glory, not building our own empires. We need to see other people not as evangelism projects but as the image of God to value and love for their own sake, not so we can boast in converting them.

The book is 15 years old, and he is more enthusiastic for the Willow Creek model than I am. But it’s definitely worth the read. Especially if you’re sensing a need for change and growth in your walk with the Lord Jesus.


View all my reviews

First Freedoms - a book review

First Freedoms: Drawing Near to God by Cultivating a Wholehearted Prayer Life by Jennifer Barnett
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

What weeds need removing from your life?
How does God mean for you to flourish and reflect His glory better?

In this book, Barnett covers the basics of the Christian life simply, with great illustrations.
The author is a friend of a friend, and this book was a treat to discover.

Sometimes I noticed she’s probably more charismatic than me, but that didn’t intrude overmuch.

Each chapter ended with questions for reflection and prayer, and questions for group discussion.

Having read mostly more theological writings in the last 20 years, I’ve found shifting gears to more spiritual edification like this to be very helpful. I highly recommend this book, especially if you are struggling with your relationship to God or your sanctification.

View all my reviews

Hamlet - a Review

Hamlet by William Shakespeare
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

5 out of 5 stars!

I just read Hamlet again, this glorious print edition we gave to one of my children recently.

Hamlet was a good guy. He wasn’t sure if he should take vengeance for his father’s death, but he did. (Very few are in his situation to do so, as son of the king, though.) He had almost rather died. Thus his “to be or not to be” soliloquy. He stood up as a man, and took cunning, well-reasoned action. All while acting like David, crazy before the Philistines (1 Samuel 21:13). He got the job done, though it cost him his own life.

When you read it, get a good edition with explanatory notes. About ¼ of the lines need explaining! But it is worth it.

Please read Hamlet.

Good quotes:

“Words without thoughts never to heaven go” – Act 3. Scene 3. Line 98
“I must be cruel only to be kind” – 3.4.178
“There’s a divinity that shapes our ends, rough hew them how we will” – 5.2.11
“The readiness is all” – 5.2.194
“I am justly killed with mine own treachery” – 5.2.284


View all my reviews

A Gentleman in Moscow - a Review

 

A Gentleman in Moscow by Amor Towles
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

A rare 5 stars for a contemporary book.

There comes a time in a man’s life, when he sets aside the pursuit of ideologies for the finer things in life. It may be an internal impulse, as he is sickened by the desolate political landscape or the seeming hopelessness of making any progress in that realm. Or outward circumstances may foist it upon him, as they come upon “A Gentleman in Moscow.” When all the world is focused on the “Course of Human Events,” sometimes it is best to focus elsewhere.

As in the French Revolution, shortly after the revolution of 1917 the new Bolshevik party simply and surreptitiously shot most of those standing in their way. But Count Alexander Ilyich Rostov, recipient of the Order of Saint Andrew, instead they confine to one of Moscow’s premier hotels for the rest of his life. Growing up as an aristocrat, he spends the second half of his life (1922-1954) as a Former Person, watched carefully by the KGB.

The beauty of this excellent book is how it conveys the essence of being a gentleman, through some of the most brutal and ideological of times and places: just a few city blocks from the Kremlin in Soviet Russia’s Red Revolution. He remains a gentleman, not becoming calloused, embittered, or partisan. He leads a significant life, investing in people, paying attention to the finer things in life, and serving others with what he has.

I would guess there are about 10 pages out of the 450 total that discuss politics and the revolution directly. Far more ink is spilled on the finer points of cuisine, conversation, and the Count’s heavy drinking. A superficial read would criticize the Count for burying his head in the sand (or the bottle), unwilling in his cowardice to enter the political fray of his day.

But that would miss the whole point. For Sasha, as his sister and closest friends called him, pursued the greater things in life. Not power and politics, but matters of the soul. A well-set table. Music. Setting the right wine with a carefully prepared meal. Crafting a conversation with whomever Providence sets before you. And most of all, cultivating the next generation and learning from it at the same time. It isn’t that he fought a cultural or political battle with these things. He sought them as an end in themselves, regardless of the ebb and flow of cultural tides.

Which makes a political point all on its own.
Seek first the Kingdom of God, and all these things will be added unto you.

Amor Towles’ writing is exquisite, the literary allusions abundant. For the Ronald Reagan fan in me, the Cold War warrior, this was the perfect counterpoint: many Russians are cultured, refined, and virtuous, too. They know their Homer and their Montaigne. They pursue the good, the true, and the beautiful as vigorously as any patriotic American.

A true gentleman serves others first, before himself. He presents himself and does not hide in the shadows of conniving or bureaucratic anonymity. He sets others at ease, and engages them in constructive conversation and activity. He seeks to genuinely understand them, and puts that understanding to their service, rather than using them. All of this, Count Rostov shows us, can be done in the worst political conditions imaginable.

Also, the lessons aren’t just for the male species, here. The three main women in the Count’s life act like noble ladies in their own ways. They each have things to learn, just as the Count has things to learn from each of them. The book holds high the dignity of each individual as something to honor and cherish.

Now, the Count’s overriding pursuit of gentlemanliness makes those 10 pages or so of political critique all the more potent. Embedded in personal memories from before the Revolution, the Count is certainly not neutral in politics, nor resigned to the state of affairs. Towles marvelously depicts the Count’s joy hearing the village bells ringing as they sleigh ride at Christmas during the Tsar’s reign. And then the shock of seeing those bells (and the priest with them) cast down and reforged as cannons for the Revolution. His dear friend is caught up in the revolutionary fervor as a writer. His literary and love pursuits go nowhere, but the Count’s friendship stays constant. One of the funniest moments is when his friend relates in all seriousness the Revolution’s devotion to Japanese haiku. The Count simply responds: I am glad Homer was not born in Japan.

I’ve heard there is a movie made of this book. Do NOT see it. The sexual liaison implied but never explicitly described in the book is likely presented with more raw sensuality on the screen. Read the book. And just to offend everyone: do NOT listen to this book – it will not do it justice. (Listening to a book is not really reading it. But that’s an argument for another day.) Many sentences and passages need rereading for the pure enjoyment of how they are written.

A Gentleman in Moscow will make you think. It will awaken senses in your soul you had forgotten. It will turn your attention to the important things in life. Whatever is happening on the world stage today, you can become a gentleman or a lady, and act like one toward the people around you.

View all my reviews

Entangled in Sin - Doing what's hard - Joy - Worship - Prayer

I've been doing some good reading lately.
Here are random quotes.

Jennifer Barnett, First Freedoms

On entangling vines: "Green vines rapidly grow... we tugged and pulled, and used a chainsaw to rid our beloved trees of those vines... The know was the size of a grocery cart, and the vines extending from it were eighteen feet long.  Let's just say, the vines did not give up easily.  Spiritual entanglements look and feel much the same.  They grab our attention and seem inviting - even life-giving- but before we know it, we are tangled up in them....

No one searches on social media looking for an old high school love in hopes of ruining their marriage.  No one starts drinking socially in hopes of destroying their life with alcoholism....

Yes, we must repent.  Yes, we have to want to get untangled.  But often we get in over our heads and desperately need to be carried by the only One who is head over it all.  We need his hands to untie us, to pick us up, to place us on his shoulders, and to carry us back to the flock.  We cannot do it on our own" (121-123).

"Our flesh works the same way [as pulling weeds].  It requires daily and diligent maintenance to keep it from taking over.... Often the weeds of sin slowly take over, and when we realize this, we attempt to cover them up and hide.  Then we painstakingly try to pull all the weeds out on our own" (132).

Keith Miller, Habitation of Dragons, pg 54-55.
"I have often avoided things I really wanted to do, just because they were difficult....
Joy does not usually come from the trouble-free and effortless periods of life.  Rather, joy seems to be distilled from a strange mixture of challenge, risk, and hope."

Kevin Harney, Seismic Shifts
On worship: "Come rested and refreshed.... don't stay up until 2:00 a.m. on Saturday and then wonder why you can't focus during the sermon.... Come with joyful expectancy... God will be present, the Holy Spirit will be at work.... God does not merely suggest or hope that we praise Him; he calls us to sing songs of worship.  Even if you don't like your voice, you can be sure that God loves it.  He made you, including your vocal chords, and he delights when you sing to him....  [In worship] God performs spiritual surgery to cure us of our myopia, and we see the world through his eyes, not ours" (65-68).

On prayer: "Every follower of Jesus needs to learn how to recognize the way the Holy Spirit speaks, prompts, and directs" (89).

No One Doubts a Belly Laugh - a review

 

No One Doubts a Belly Laugh by Jason Farley
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

A slim but savory collection of poems organized around the 7 Medieval “planets,” Farley dishes some great phrases while often hinting delightfully at biblical truth. Often best read aloud, just a few at a time.

A sample:
Garden of Eden, and Garden of Eve, too.
Grace there to meet through, and strong grace to cleave to.
The birthright of beauty dickered for sweat-filled duty.
The image of God has become serpent-booty.

View all my reviews

Good Poems - a review

 

Good Poems by Garrison Keillor
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

The title is apt. These poems aren’t the great classics for the most part, but lesser known and more homely ones. Often endearing, sometimes disturbing or risqué, I read 2-3 poems a day for about 2 years, for a change of pace from other work and reading.

Examples:
O, my love’s like a red, red rose… (Burns)
Tell all the Truth, but tell it slant… (Emily Dickinson)
Ode to the Medieval Poets – W.H. Auden
Home on the Range – Anonymous – (the whole thing!)

Keillor regularly recited poems on the Prairie Home Companion, and this is a compilation of them.
Many of these poems reflect Keillor's own wandering from orthodox Christianity, so stay alert...

View all my reviews

Thoughts on DEI Training

So this week I went through the dreaded DEI training from HR, at your typical big corporate/public institution.

Here are some takeaways.

1. There was no overt hostility to Christians or conservatives in the program.

2. There was no insistence that you pledge personal allegiance to their dogma, besides giving “right” answers to vague and obvious questions.  (“Should you be okay with a racial insult or should you say something?”)

3. There IS an assumption that underprivileged groups are the only ones discriminated against.  This is a huge blind spot in the DEI/Left community right now.  They simply cannot see that their over-reaction to making sure minorities are not oppressed, winds up oppressing the majority.  Reverse discrimination is not a possibility in their minds, but it is obviously real.  If a black woman accuses a white man falsely, and she is assumed to be truthful because of group identity and history, that IS oppression of the white man.  Justice should be blind and impartial.  But what I was taught was all one-sided.  The majority needs to walk on egg shells to make sure they don’t offend any minority.  Now, of course, everyone should be sensitive to everyone.  But everyone also has a responsibility to strive not to take offense at “micro-aggressions.”

4. One spot was especially egregious – the assertion that a minority person offended does not have to accept an apology or any remedial action from the offender.  The implication was, they have the right to simply stay offended and keep the offender in condemnation and contempt.  Yikes.


Overall, this is a mixed bag.  There are naïve and innocent people trying to keep people being nice to each other, after the racism in our past.  And there are more devious elements sneaking in Marxist assumptions, which divides us according to group and class, undermining social cohesion, right when the former group thinks they are bolstering it.

Christian Nationalism

World Magazine's latest issue has a cover story on Christian Nationalism.
It's quite good, featuring most of the main players and critics.  

It points out how the Left wants to paint the Right all as nationalists, to energize the Left to vote against the Handmaiden's Tale vision in their heads.  

It points out Christian Nationalists aren't aiming for that vision.  

But it does point to problems, especially in Stephen Wolfe's book, the main catalyst of the discussion right now.

Wilsonites and Canon Press won't like being called a "tiny fringe," but they are.  Most Christian conservatives who are politically engaged do not share the "Moscow Mood."  I think Wilson has an important point to contribute (see next paragraph), but Moscow's messaging often hurts them more than it helps.

One thing the article doesn't cover enough is the underpinnings of theology at play.  Cornelius Van Til's rejection of neutrality anywhere, including politics, is a major factor.  It inherently rejects the secular liberal political order, where we think the same "natural law" rules can apply to everyone.  Can they?  No, CN says, we need God's revealed, special-revelation-law to apply to everyone.

World makes it seem like the choice is either secular liberal democracy a la Rawls, or theocracy.  This is a major flaw of the article.  Wolfe's book didn't do very well describing a path between the two.  Maybe Wilson's Mere Christendom does better.

It seems to me we want Christian worldview underpinnings to our law and politics, without the government fining or jailing people for worshiping in a way the state deems idolatrous (an absurdity at this point), taking God's name in vain or having their restaurant open on Sunday.

Most of CN is just Quixotic dreaming: "what would it look like if society actually implemented God's Word?"  They're not going to.  The last sentence of World's article sums it up: "It’s a sucker’s game. … You risk getting distracted from the things that actually matter."

Trump and Christianity

One of our family members gets regular anonymous hate mail from a leftist.

This arrived yesterday, with a Ruth Bader Ginsburg stamp on it:

"Trump has said that he has NEVER asked God for forgiveness.  Please explain to everyone how that is Christian."

1. I believe I remember Trump saying that.  I don't dispute the veracity of it.

2. It is not Christian.  Trump is a misguided or sub-Christian, at best, in his personal spirituality, in my estimation.

3. The writer assumes the Right's nominee needs to be Christian to be a valid candidate, and that conservative Christian voters will only vote for a Christian.  It's true pointing this out may make some Christian voters less motivated to vote for Trump.  But I think that would be a mistake.  Christians can vote for a politician who they don't think is a true Christian.

4. Thanks to the media, the Left now thinks most of the right are Christian Nationalists, who insist Christian doctrine be made law.  They project their own intolerance onto the Right.  The Left today is far less tolerant than the Right.  We just want to restrict people's freedom to kill others, whether that's a mother her baby, an illegal who just arrived, or a gang member in the inner city.  A DA is not free to not prosecute crimes, because he thinks the system is racist.  A president is not free to not enforce border laws, because he wants more votes for his party in the future.  A mother is not free to kill her baby, because she can't envision a good future if she doesn't.

5. Even with Trump's recent abortion statement, pre-born people in utero will be safer in a Trump presidency than they have been with Biden.  Trump will do more to preserve pre-born life than Biden will.  Even if he won't do enough, that's not a good enough reason to stay home and not vote against Biden.

6. On other issues more in the headlines, Trump is obviously better:
a. Better border policy
b. Not pressuring Israel to back off from Hamas.

7. It's pretty clear to me that both Biden and Trump are willing to use religion for their political purposes.  Neither seems very sincere on that front.  Trump is reading the political weather well on the abortion issue.  All the energy is on the pro-choice side, right now, and he's trying to blunt that.  I think he's being smart, politically, but it's disappointing.  We can expect more from our church leaders, but maybe not from our politicians in such a divided landscape.

8. Turnout decides elections in this climate.  Those who are angrier turn out more.  So our thought leaders are tempted to stoke anger in us, on both sides.  Instead decide to vote on principle, not emotion.

The Hammer of God - a Book Review

The Hammer of God by Bo Giertz
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

2 Corinthians 2:16 – “Who is sufficient for these things?”

Have you ever wondered what a pastor thinks and feels, what his relationship with God is like, as he ministers at church or visits you in the hospital?

This unique novel offers three stories of three young ministers, each faced with a spiritual crisis. Each is spiritually zealous and equally misguided. The main message is that pietism has no answers for the basic questions of the real spiritual life. What do you say when an otherwise Christian man raves on his deathbed, speaking profanely of his many sinful experiences? How do you help a woman who prays and seeks for a pure heart, but knows all the time she doesn’t have it?

Without a foundation of God’s grace to us in Christ, the Christian life is a shaky and brittle endeavor. The genius of The Hammer of God is to show us the truth of this in the minister’s own spiritual life, and his public ministry as well. Pursuing revivals and calling people to obedience and purity can be done in a way that focuses everyone on themselves or on the pastor. Such will pass as a wind-driven leaf. But to ground all we think, feel, and do in reliance on God’s grace, not finding our righteousness in our thoughts, emotions, or deeds, looking to Jesus only, brings sturdy, Gospel hope.

I was a pastor for many years, and this book ably gets inside the pastor’s mind and heart, in many ways.

The author is Lutheran, and baptismal regeneration is assumed at various points. But this is not overdone, and the main theme of the book is one every Christian needs to hear.

A strange omission: none of the clergy were married. Marriage as a minister wasn’t even a passing thought. Probably because the perpetual theme was the pietism-fighting pastor.

“If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations— 21 “Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch” 22 (referring to things that all perish as they are used)—according to human precepts and teachings? 23 These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh” – Colossians 2:20-23.

Highly recommended, especially for pastors.

View all my reviews

Last Minute Palm Sunday Thought - Habakkuk 2

Most people and preachers catch the contextual point the Gospels make at Palm Sunday, when Jesus rides a donkey, from Zechariah 9.  It's right there on the surface: Jesus is the King of verse 9.

It's common to say those shouting "Hosanna" were expecting a military Messiah to drive out Rome, and I believe it.  It's an important warning to those who trust in earthly rulers to save, in every time.

But it's very UNcommon to hear an explanation of why they shouldn't expect Jesus to drive out Rome, given Zechariah 9:11-17.  Note all the military victory references, there!  (I think the answer lies in the multiple time-horizons of prophecy - the text doesn't always refer to the same event in the same epoch, even in the same chapter or verse, something the post- and pre-mil positions can't often grasp, and don't deal well with.)

Less obvious than Zechariah 9, but just as important, is Jesus' response to the Pharisees, when they demand He silence His shouting followers: "If these were silent, the very stones would cry out."  Often we think Jesus means all creation will praise Him, even if the Pharisees won't.  This is true, but not the point of the text.

Jesus here alludes to Habakkuk 2:11, "the stone will cry out from the wall," and its context.  "Woe to him who gets evil gain for his house.... Woe to him who builds a town with blood and founds a city on iniquity!"  This is exactly what the temple leaders Jesus confronted were doing.  It's fascinating the context of the chapter includes the famous verse, the just shall live by faith," contrasted with the wicked's greed, indulgence, and oppression.  Instead of indulging themselves by politically allying with the pagan Roman oppressors (the Sadducees), the faithful were called to wait on the Lord and live by faith (Hab. 2:4), not taking up arms.

So Palm Sunday is

 - acclaiming the coming King

 - accepting the right Lamb for your Passover atonement (another post)

Yes.  

But it is also prophetic confrontation of governmental/national sin as a nation.

Jesus unleashes a veritable flood of Scripture, rich in context, at this event (not only King, but Prophet and Priest).

 - My house shall be called a house of prayer - read all of Isaiah 56.

 - A den of robbers! - read all of Jeremiah 7.

 - Hosanna! (Save, please!) - read Psalm 118:19-27.

This Prophetic breakout continues during holy week in Jesus' teachings...

The Moscow Mood - basic differences, and Moscow's take

So Douglas Wilson and Kevin DeYoung are two of my most influential contemporary theological writers.

A few months ago, Kevin critiqued Doug.
Here is Doug Wilson’s response to Kevin.

Some basic disagreements between them seem to be:

What is the right level of political engagement?  
Should we stay a bit distant, focused on more directly spiritual matters (Kevin)?  
Or go full-boar into the fray, since politics IS a spiritual matter (Doug)?

To what extent should we instigate conflict in culture and politics?  
Not much, since it draws attention to the wrong thing (Kevin)?  
As much as possible, since people’s focus needs to be here in this moment (Doug)?

Doug would say, we need to try to set the world right, and not retreat to only our churches and homes.
Kevin would say, to focus less on politics and provocative rhetoric, and more on our churches and homes is not retreat, but a proper biblical focus.

What is the “Moscow Mood”?
Moscow would define it thusly:
You can’t fight a culture without a culture.  The mainstream Reformed Evangelical movement (of which Kevin is coming to be a major leader) does not HAVE a meaningful culture of its own.  Moscow does, and it’s getting attention.  Build Christendom and fight the ungodly culture out there.  We want Christ as Lord over everything.  Not just Sunday morning.  Not just church and family time.

Many think fighting a la Moscow-style means scowling or indulging anger.  It doesn’t.
Fighting well means living a corporate, embodied Christianity with a purpose.

Lots of young people hear what they are supposed to be doing, but know they are not doing it, b/c they aren’t plugged into a community.  Faith is in the upper story only, to use Francis Schaeffer’s categories.  How do we live it out down here, in the lower story?  Or do we only escape to the upper story to live out our godliness and piety?  Christians don’t know how to build a robust Christian life here on earth.  God is bringing the Kingdom of God to earth, not only by the direct work of His Son apart from us, but also through our work here, building families, churches, communities and nations.

The mainstream Reformed Evangelical movement has forsaken this for either a carnal political solution (joining the Trump train, or going Sojourner/liberal mainline).  Or, rejecting that, an escapist pietism that ignores politics as much as possible.

Next time I’ll respond to Kevin’s critiques of this “mood.”
A hint: some of it is off base.  Some of it hits the mark.