"From the modern point of view the difference would have seemed to be very slight. Paul as well as the Judaizers believed that the keeping of the law of God, in its deepest import, is inseparably connected with faith. The difference concerned only the logical - not even perhaps the temporal - order of three steps. Paul said that a man (1) first believes on Christ, (2) then is justified before God, (3) then proceeds immediately to keep God's law. The Judaizers said that a man (1) believes on Christ and (2) keeps the law of God the best he can, and then (3) is justified. The difference would seem to modern "practical" Christians to be a highly subtle and intangible matter.... Surely Paul ought to have made common cause with teachers who were so nearly in agreement with him.... As a matter of fact, however, Paul did nothing of the kind.... the difference between the Judaizers and himself... was the difference between a religion of merit and a religion of grace."
Christianity and Liberalism - Pg 24
9.08.2005
New Orleans and the blame game
Click the title for an interesting dialogue between me and an RCA pastor-friend on New Orleans.
Church members, coming and going
Here are a couple paragraphs from Doug Wilson that touched me personally, as a pastor with a whopping 2 years of experience (me, not him!).
"Every pastor with any experience at all knows what it is like to deal with members or former colleagues who for one reason or another get sideways with the church, and feel like they have to go. As I have pastored this one congregation over the course of almost thirty years, I have seen people come and go in almost every conceivable way. When some people leave, they do so in a gracious and kind manner, maintaining full fellowship with everyone as they do so. When people have sought to do this, I have visited with them, fellowshipped with them, prayed with them, and asked God to bless them richly. I was privileged to do that with some departing members just last week.
"But alas, it is not always thus. Some do not leave because of doctrinal conviction, or differences over liturgy, or because they are moving from the area. Some leave because of a profound disloyalty fueled by bitterness, harshness, legalism, or inability to manipulate the elders. When this happens their stated reasons for leaving are not the real reasons for leaving, and they are soon caught up in need to justify themselves, if only to themselves."
- www.dougwils.com - 9/7/05.
"Every pastor with any experience at all knows what it is like to deal with members or former colleagues who for one reason or another get sideways with the church, and feel like they have to go. As I have pastored this one congregation over the course of almost thirty years, I have seen people come and go in almost every conceivable way. When some people leave, they do so in a gracious and kind manner, maintaining full fellowship with everyone as they do so. When people have sought to do this, I have visited with them, fellowshipped with them, prayed with them, and asked God to bless them richly. I was privileged to do that with some departing members just last week.
"But alas, it is not always thus. Some do not leave because of doctrinal conviction, or differences over liturgy, or because they are moving from the area. Some leave because of a profound disloyalty fueled by bitterness, harshness, legalism, or inability to manipulate the elders. When this happens their stated reasons for leaving are not the real reasons for leaving, and they are soon caught up in need to justify themselves, if only to themselves."
- www.dougwils.com - 9/7/05.
9.03.2005
Psalm 93 and New Orleans
1 The Lord reigns, He is clothed with majesty;
The Lord is clothed,
He has girded Himself with strength.
Surely the world is established, so that it cannot be moved.
2 Your throne is established from of old;
You are from everlasting.
3 The floods have lifted up, O Lord,
The floods have lifted up their voice;
The floods lift up their waves.
4 The Lord on high is mightier
Than the noise of many waters,
Than the mighty waves of the sea.
5 Your testimonies are very sure;
Holiness adorns Your house,
O Lord, forever.
We’re thinking about floods lately, with the infrastructure breakdown in New Orleans.
Two things are true in the middle of all of this. One is that Jesus calls us to clothe the naked, feed the hungry. If you do it to the least of these, you do it to me. Once again, we’ve seen the massive relief efforts begin to obey Jesus.
The second thing to remember is less obvious in the middle of chaos. God is in charge. He didn’t drop the ball here. He knows what He’s doing, even if we don’t. More to the point, God is doing something. He’s not looking away, cringing while Satan has his heyday in this disaster. That never happens, and that should encourage us. “In all things God works for the good of those who love Him,” Romans 8:28 tells us. This is a time to ask if we really believe that, and the rest of Scripture. Nahum 1:3 says that the LORD has His way in the whirlwind and in the storm. Amos 3:6: “When a trumpet sounds in a city, do not the people tremble? When disaster comes to a city, has not the LORD caused it?” Huh. Won’t hear that on CNN. God is in charge. Psalm 29:10 reminds us that the LORD sat enthroned over the flood. That means Noah’s flood, and Katrina’s too. It has astounded me how political this whole thing has become. The left blames the storm on conservative environmental policies. The right blames the government for acting too slowly. WHO was it that’s enthroned over this mess, again? The United States? A mayor? A governor? A president? Who are we looking to to save us? Who does the Bible say is in a position to save us?
God is in charge, and we are so frail, and dependent on Him. We are inadequate to protect ourselves from God’s world. We need God’s good graces to mute the storms to what we can handle. We fall apart morally when our structures are washed away. We need God’s good graces to restrain evil in each human heart. Sometimes God withholds these graces for a time, and we don’t know why, but there is a reason, and it is for our ultimate good. And we also need God’s good graces to coordinate providentially the huge-scale relief efforts happening even now.
Like never before, let us worship our sovereign and grace-filled God today, and ask for His mercy to return to us.
The Lord is clothed,
He has girded Himself with strength.
Surely the world is established, so that it cannot be moved.
2 Your throne is established from of old;
You are from everlasting.
3 The floods have lifted up, O Lord,
The floods have lifted up their voice;
The floods lift up their waves.
4 The Lord on high is mightier
Than the noise of many waters,
Than the mighty waves of the sea.
5 Your testimonies are very sure;
Holiness adorns Your house,
O Lord, forever.
We’re thinking about floods lately, with the infrastructure breakdown in New Orleans.
Two things are true in the middle of all of this. One is that Jesus calls us to clothe the naked, feed the hungry. If you do it to the least of these, you do it to me. Once again, we’ve seen the massive relief efforts begin to obey Jesus.
The second thing to remember is less obvious in the middle of chaos. God is in charge. He didn’t drop the ball here. He knows what He’s doing, even if we don’t. More to the point, God is doing something. He’s not looking away, cringing while Satan has his heyday in this disaster. That never happens, and that should encourage us. “In all things God works for the good of those who love Him,” Romans 8:28 tells us. This is a time to ask if we really believe that, and the rest of Scripture. Nahum 1:3 says that the LORD has His way in the whirlwind and in the storm. Amos 3:6: “When a trumpet sounds in a city, do not the people tremble? When disaster comes to a city, has not the LORD caused it?” Huh. Won’t hear that on CNN. God is in charge. Psalm 29:10 reminds us that the LORD sat enthroned over the flood. That means Noah’s flood, and Katrina’s too. It has astounded me how political this whole thing has become. The left blames the storm on conservative environmental policies. The right blames the government for acting too slowly. WHO was it that’s enthroned over this mess, again? The United States? A mayor? A governor? A president? Who are we looking to to save us? Who does the Bible say is in a position to save us?
God is in charge, and we are so frail, and dependent on Him. We are inadequate to protect ourselves from God’s world. We need God’s good graces to mute the storms to what we can handle. We fall apart morally when our structures are washed away. We need God’s good graces to restrain evil in each human heart. Sometimes God withholds these graces for a time, and we don’t know why, but there is a reason, and it is for our ultimate good. And we also need God’s good graces to coordinate providentially the huge-scale relief efforts happening even now.
Like never before, let us worship our sovereign and grace-filled God today, and ask for His mercy to return to us.
9.02.2005
The Legitimacy of Satire - Steve
Many times when I mention to fellow pastors that I’m a Douglas Wilson reader, the response I get is that he’s got good stuff, but the hard-edged style sends people away, shaking their heads in consternation.
As one who usually has an answer for everything, Wilson wrote a book in defense: “The Serrated Edge: A Defense of Biblical Satire and Trinitarian Skylarking.” In other words, a defense of the magazine, Credenda/Agenda, published by the church he pastors.
This post is a summary and analysis of “The Serrated Edge.”
The first question: is satire or sarcasm inherently sinful? If so, we’re done arguing, and Wilson loses. Satire is a well-known literary genre (Gulliver’s Travels), but that doesn’t make it right. So we find some Biblical satire or mockery in Isaiah 44:9-17 and 1 Kings 18:27, and in Jesus’ harsh words for religious people in Matthew 23 or Mark 7:6-13, and in Paul’s strong criticism in Galatians 5:12.
The second question: isn’t satire just outside the bounds of respectable discussion?
Well, yes it is. Wilson maintains that respectable discussion isn’t the goal – honoring God is. How do you have a reasoned discussion with hard-hearted, obstinate people? You don’t; you taunt them, simply as a way of defining and shoring up the truth against opposition. You jolt them awake from their apathetic self-certainty. Wilson uses the word “nigger” in this book (an interesting and rather poignant modern application of Mark 7:26-29). That’s outside respectable discussion. Yeah, that’s the point. Saying today, “What you believe is wrong” is uncouth, too, but it must be done. Wilson reminds us that satire is one weapon in the realm of polemics, where orthodox truth takes the show on the road, instead of simply defending itself against worldly and liberal attacks. We have Biblical warrant for attacking in Matthew 16:18. Hell’s gates won’t prevail against the Church’s attacks. This leads into the third question…
Third: we aren’t inspired by God as these Biblical authors were to be so strong in our criticism. “Maybe it’s in the Bible, but you aren’t Jesus, pal.” Wilson’s response: the Bible calls on us to imitate Jesus and Paul; how do we choose which attributes to follow, and which to ignore? Why do we try hard to draw sinners with our compassion like Jesus did, but not ream on religious hypocrites like Jesus did? Moreover, Jesus and Paul both call on us to follow their example, precisely in this regard. Jesus with the gates of hell line above, and Paul in Col 4:6, telling us to season our speech with salt. Sometimes you’ve gotta make a point.
The fourth objection: the Bible calls on us to be kind (Eph 4:32) and have gracious speech (Col 4:6!), and not to be contentious or disputing, which contradicts satire or sarcasm. Wilson’s rejoinder is three-fold: (1) it takes wisdom to know how to interact with the world, and different responses are called for in different situations (Prov 26:4-5). (2) There must be a way in which Jesus’ diatribe in Matthew 23 and Paul’s strong language was not contentious or sinfully disrespectful or divisive. (3) Paul tells us to be kind to one another. If a shepherd is kind to wolves, he hurts the sheep. Shepherds must point out wolves for the sheep’s safety. This takes us to a more fundamental objection…
Fifth: we shouldn’t judge people with such certainty. Only God can do that, right? Satire and sarcasm brings to the fore the judgmental character of the undertaking, and Wilson admits it up front, saying this genre assumes a norm to which the satirist holds the object of attack.
I think Wilson is weakest here. For one thing, he is simply going against a strong stream of intellectual current, affecting even the most conservative of evangelical writers: admitting uncertainty in personally knowing the truth. When everyone around you is saying, “Well maybe you’re right. I don’t claim to know everything. As I understand it…” then you just look bad when you start railing on people, assuming they are wrong.
Wilson’s argument at this point is to give us more evidence of the ills of modern evangelicals, his favorite target. He shows they deserve criticism. But he doesn’t like to waste time doing this, it seems. It’s quite obvious to him, so let’s get on with rebuilding a Christian culture. But this doesn’t answer the objection: even if you’re right, shouldn’t we be more kind in how we point out the fault?
Wilson answers indirectly when he brings up sentimentalism. This is the phenomenon of the world, and the church, defining love as being nice and kind. But this leaves no room for other Biblical definitions of love, like saving some with fear, pulling them out of the fire, hating even the garment defiled by the flesh (Jude 23). This is an act of love, but it is distinguished from being compassionate (Jude 22). It is like pushing my daughter out of the way of a Mack truck about to run her over. It wasn’t nice to do; she’ll be shaken up, might have bruises from the fall, but it’s better than the alternative, and it was an act of love. Sometimes nice doesn’t get the job done. We need to awaken the Christian world to the dangerous direction of its current drift, regardless of if it shakes them up a bit.
There are many mainstream, more respectable writers dishing out the same criticism Wilson does. A sermon by RC Sproul on the golden calf, applying it to worship trends today, comes to mind. The criticism is just as hard. The only difference seems to be specificity. Naming names. Calvin College, my alma mater. Zondervan, producing the majority product I sold at a former job. This doesn’t bother me, because I see the truth of the criticisms.
What does bother me is that most Wilson observers, while acknowledging the truth behind the criticism, focus less on the truth and more on the criticism and criticizer: “you can’t say it that way!” I suppose they are simply employing the same principle Wilson does: be hardest on those closest to you. Wilson doesn’t mind dinging everybody including the PCA, CRC, OPC and Christian bookstores, and he does it specifically, in public, in books, so he’s got enemies everywhere. It’s the prophetic dilemma. If you speak the truth to everybody, without restraint, you won’t have many friends. And, as Don Lucchesi says in Godfather III, “even the strongest man needs friends.” This worries me about Wilson and corps, because they are getting isolated and marginalized by the broader Reformed and Evangelical community. He claims otherwise in the book, but my experience paints a different picture. Precisely because they are so right about so much, I do want them to have a hearing. But if it won’t come on their terms, they don’t seem to care.
So Wilson never really answers the second objection he raises in the preface: you’re driving people away from your positions by your style. His short-term, "We're growing" belies a wider response of isolation that I see in the Reformed world. In the end, his only response to this objection seems to be, “Nuh uh.”
As one who usually has an answer for everything, Wilson wrote a book in defense: “The Serrated Edge: A Defense of Biblical Satire and Trinitarian Skylarking.” In other words, a defense of the magazine, Credenda/Agenda, published by the church he pastors.
This post is a summary and analysis of “The Serrated Edge.”
The first question: is satire or sarcasm inherently sinful? If so, we’re done arguing, and Wilson loses. Satire is a well-known literary genre (Gulliver’s Travels), but that doesn’t make it right. So we find some Biblical satire or mockery in Isaiah 44:9-17 and 1 Kings 18:27, and in Jesus’ harsh words for religious people in Matthew 23 or Mark 7:6-13, and in Paul’s strong criticism in Galatians 5:12.
The second question: isn’t satire just outside the bounds of respectable discussion?
Well, yes it is. Wilson maintains that respectable discussion isn’t the goal – honoring God is. How do you have a reasoned discussion with hard-hearted, obstinate people? You don’t; you taunt them, simply as a way of defining and shoring up the truth against opposition. You jolt them awake from their apathetic self-certainty. Wilson uses the word “nigger” in this book (an interesting and rather poignant modern application of Mark 7:26-29). That’s outside respectable discussion. Yeah, that’s the point. Saying today, “What you believe is wrong” is uncouth, too, but it must be done. Wilson reminds us that satire is one weapon in the realm of polemics, where orthodox truth takes the show on the road, instead of simply defending itself against worldly and liberal attacks. We have Biblical warrant for attacking in Matthew 16:18. Hell’s gates won’t prevail against the Church’s attacks. This leads into the third question…
Third: we aren’t inspired by God as these Biblical authors were to be so strong in our criticism. “Maybe it’s in the Bible, but you aren’t Jesus, pal.” Wilson’s response: the Bible calls on us to imitate Jesus and Paul; how do we choose which attributes to follow, and which to ignore? Why do we try hard to draw sinners with our compassion like Jesus did, but not ream on religious hypocrites like Jesus did? Moreover, Jesus and Paul both call on us to follow their example, precisely in this regard. Jesus with the gates of hell line above, and Paul in Col 4:6, telling us to season our speech with salt. Sometimes you’ve gotta make a point.
The fourth objection: the Bible calls on us to be kind (Eph 4:32) and have gracious speech (Col 4:6!), and not to be contentious or disputing, which contradicts satire or sarcasm. Wilson’s rejoinder is three-fold: (1) it takes wisdom to know how to interact with the world, and different responses are called for in different situations (Prov 26:4-5). (2) There must be a way in which Jesus’ diatribe in Matthew 23 and Paul’s strong language was not contentious or sinfully disrespectful or divisive. (3) Paul tells us to be kind to one another. If a shepherd is kind to wolves, he hurts the sheep. Shepherds must point out wolves for the sheep’s safety. This takes us to a more fundamental objection…
Fifth: we shouldn’t judge people with such certainty. Only God can do that, right? Satire and sarcasm brings to the fore the judgmental character of the undertaking, and Wilson admits it up front, saying this genre assumes a norm to which the satirist holds the object of attack.
I think Wilson is weakest here. For one thing, he is simply going against a strong stream of intellectual current, affecting even the most conservative of evangelical writers: admitting uncertainty in personally knowing the truth. When everyone around you is saying, “Well maybe you’re right. I don’t claim to know everything. As I understand it…” then you just look bad when you start railing on people, assuming they are wrong.
Wilson’s argument at this point is to give us more evidence of the ills of modern evangelicals, his favorite target. He shows they deserve criticism. But he doesn’t like to waste time doing this, it seems. It’s quite obvious to him, so let’s get on with rebuilding a Christian culture. But this doesn’t answer the objection: even if you’re right, shouldn’t we be more kind in how we point out the fault?
Wilson answers indirectly when he brings up sentimentalism. This is the phenomenon of the world, and the church, defining love as being nice and kind. But this leaves no room for other Biblical definitions of love, like saving some with fear, pulling them out of the fire, hating even the garment defiled by the flesh (Jude 23). This is an act of love, but it is distinguished from being compassionate (Jude 22). It is like pushing my daughter out of the way of a Mack truck about to run her over. It wasn’t nice to do; she’ll be shaken up, might have bruises from the fall, but it’s better than the alternative, and it was an act of love. Sometimes nice doesn’t get the job done. We need to awaken the Christian world to the dangerous direction of its current drift, regardless of if it shakes them up a bit.
There are many mainstream, more respectable writers dishing out the same criticism Wilson does. A sermon by RC Sproul on the golden calf, applying it to worship trends today, comes to mind. The criticism is just as hard. The only difference seems to be specificity. Naming names. Calvin College, my alma mater. Zondervan, producing the majority product I sold at a former job. This doesn’t bother me, because I see the truth of the criticisms.
What does bother me is that most Wilson observers, while acknowledging the truth behind the criticism, focus less on the truth and more on the criticism and criticizer: “you can’t say it that way!” I suppose they are simply employing the same principle Wilson does: be hardest on those closest to you. Wilson doesn’t mind dinging everybody including the PCA, CRC, OPC and Christian bookstores, and he does it specifically, in public, in books, so he’s got enemies everywhere. It’s the prophetic dilemma. If you speak the truth to everybody, without restraint, you won’t have many friends. And, as Don Lucchesi says in Godfather III, “even the strongest man needs friends.” This worries me about Wilson and corps, because they are getting isolated and marginalized by the broader Reformed and Evangelical community. He claims otherwise in the book, but my experience paints a different picture. Precisely because they are so right about so much, I do want them to have a hearing. But if it won’t come on their terms, they don’t seem to care.
So Wilson never really answers the second objection he raises in the preface: you’re driving people away from your positions by your style. His short-term, "We're growing" belies a wider response of isolation that I see in the Reformed world. In the end, his only response to this objection seems to be, “Nuh uh.”
9.01.2005
Machen on culture
"The real difficulty amounts to this that the thought of the day, as it makes itself most strongly felt in the universities, but from them spreads inevitably to the masses of the people, is profoundly opposed to Christianity, or at least what is nearly as bad it is out of all connection with Christianity. The Church is unable either to combat it or to assimilate it, because the Church simply does not understand it. Under such circumstances, what more pressing duty than for these men to make themselves masters of the thought of the world in order to make it an instrument of truth instead of error? The Church has no right to be so absorbed in helping the individual that she forgets the world."
Taken from "Christianity and culture" essay in The Princeton Theological Review Volume XI, 1913, pp. 1-15.
Taken from "Christianity and culture" essay in The Princeton Theological Review Volume XI, 1913, pp. 1-15.
July 31, 2005 worship service - 1 John 4 sermon and Communion
This one got cut off toward the end, but the whole worship service, including Communion, is here.
Grace - Ephesians 4:32
Here is the "B" verse the kids learned, although I think it's a shortened version...
Isaiah laughing - 15 months old
The city streets will be filled with boys and girls playing - Zechariah 8:5.
Jesus Loves Me
This one includes some of our friends, Caden and Myah (did I spell that right, Amy?) singing along while we were on vacation by Torch Lake up north a few weeks ago.
Family singing the Gloria Patri
We try to after every evening meal, but sometimes Owen cuts in with Jesus loves the little children first!
Happy Birthday Grace!
Here's my first experiment with audio...
The kids are learning a Bible verse for each letter of the alphabet. This is the first one...
The kids are learning a Bible verse for each letter of the alphabet. This is the first one...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)