Signs of the Times

These signs are directly across the street from each other. At the church faith is optional, and the other demonstrates the real pride government employees take in their work.

Belief is optional.

Belief is optional.

IMG_0744

This is what government development looks like.

Though the strains of the virus are different, I diagnose both institutions as afflicted with the same disease.

The bottom line of the church sign says,
“Where you can belong before you believe”

The other says,
Limpopo Provincial Government
Department of Finance and Economic Development

Both are advertising that they have lost their way. And the solution to both problems is gospel repentance.

Posted in Inconsistency, Rewarding mediocrity | Tagged , | 1 Comment

Master the Arts for the Sake of the Church

At very least, Christians have to know music, poetry, rhetoric, and architecture. Music because we’re told to sing; poetry because we’re told to sing hymns, psalms, and spiritual songs; rhetoric because somebody’s got to preach; and architecture because we’ve got to meet somewhere.

David de Bruyn

Where are the master poets and architects in the church today?

Posted in Orthopathy, Pastoral, Quotes | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

From Whence the Baptists?

We believe that the Baptists are the original Christians. We did not commence our existence at the Reformation, we were Reformers before Luther and Calvin were born; we never came out of the Church of Rome, for we were never in it, but we have an unbroken line of succession up to the apostles themselves. We have always existed from the very days of Christ; and our principles, though sometimes veiled and forgotten, like a river which may travel underground for a little season, have always had honest and holy adherents. Persecuted alike by Romanists and Protestants of almost every sect, yet there has never existed a Government holding Baptist principles which has persecuted others; nor, I believe, has any body of Baptists ever held it to be right to put the consciences of others under the control of man. We have ever been ready to suffer, as our martyrologies will prove; but we are not willing, to accept any help from the State, or to prostitute the purity of the Bride of Christ by any alliance with earthly Governments.

C. H. Spurgeon, in a greeting to all the Baptist churches who gathered for the opening of the Metropolitan Tabernacle in 1861 (sermon #376)

Posted in Quotes | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Brief Introductions to Orthopathy

Three contemporary authors have helped me get a grip on right feeling and its applications in the church.

1. One of the 6 authors of A Conservative Christian Declaration is David de Bruyn who also wrote a 130-page book called Building Conservative Churches. In the back of that book is a great bibliography of recommended reading on orthopathy. I’ve got some of the books and hope to read through them slowly over the next few years. Mostly De Bruyn treats the practical side of beauty as it applies to the church. For example, he questions painting nurseries with Noah’s Ark cartoon giraffes when the Flood is a terrible description of judgment—a prefiguring of Hell.

2. Roger Scruton, Anglican philosopher who writes about beauty from a conservative perspective. Solid, but not much Bible. You can start with his excellent and short, Culture Counts. His long books are very heavy (like The Aesthetics of Music), but this one is readable. For example, what is culture? Scruton, “The collective pursuit of true judgment.” He also writes in the brief series, Beauty: A Very Short Introduction.

3. A third book deserves a recommendation, Why Johnny Can’t Sing Hymns by David Gordon. Again, it’s neither long nor heavy, and it nearly earned my book of the year for 2013. He says things like, How can we worship a God whose name is the Ancient of Days when we are frantically trying to chase everything new? Gordon’s website has some interesting articles, and he also writes at Second Nature.

These three books by a Baptist, Anglican, and Presbyterian respectively would be the first three recommendations I would make for someone who wants to grapple with beauty and culture especially as they relate to the forms of worship like music, clothes, architecture, language, and technology.

If you are looking for perspective, these men all stand in contrast to the contemporary view of culture homogenized in the Gospel Coalition and promoted by men like D. A. Carson and Tim Keller.

Since these three books are all short, it’s not a great commitment to work through any of them. De Bruyn (the Baptist) uses the most Bible, Gordon (the Presbyterian) uses history and theology, and Scruton (the Anglican) is mostly philosophy.

If we care about loving God, then we should care about what love is, and these men point us in the right direction.

Posted in Book reviews, Definitions, Multiculturalism, Orthopathy, Pastoral | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Similarity Between Hitler and Roosevelt

We may be sure that the characteristic blindness of the twentieth century–the blindness about which posterity will ask, “But how could they have thought that?”–lies where we have never suspected it, and concerns something about which there is untroubled agreement between Hitler and President Roosevelt or between Mr. H. G. Wells and Karl Barth. None of us can fully escape this blindness, but we shall certainly increase it, and weaken our guard against it, if we read only modern books.

C. S. Lewis

A few blindspots come to mind where Hitler and Roosevelt probably would have agreed:

1. Practice is more important than theory.
2. The new is better than the old.
3. Science has the answers for contemporary man.

Can you improve the list?

Posted in Quotes | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Prosperity Theology Affirmation and Denials

1.     On the definition of Christianity
We affirm that the Biblical gospel may be summarized as the message that Christ died to save us from the wrath of God.

We deny that the Biblical gospel may be summarized as the message that Christ died to save us from poverty.

2.     On the affections
We affirm that the Biblical gospel includes affections for Christ which means a warm heart toward His prophetic ministry whereby He teaches His people to hate their own sin, a devoted faith toward His priestly ministry whereby He atones for the sins of His people, and a submissive joy toward His kingly ministry whereby He rules them with His Word.

We deny that the Biblical gospel creates affections for money, health, or any other earthly comfort. We further deny that loving pleasure is fitting with the first great command to love the Lord our God with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength.

3.     On the Christian status of regions influenced by prosperity theology
We affirm that Christian missionary obedience is desperately needed in those areas of the developing world in Africa as well as in South America, India, and China that are heavily influenced by prosperity theology. We affirm the church’s responsibility to evangelize those holding to prosperity theology as they would any other false religion.

We deny that the prosperity gospel is sufficient Christian witness to raise any people group to the status of “reached” in the context of world missions.

4.     On the five “Sola” doctrines
We affirm that the Biblical gospel assumes and requires the five doctrines commonly known since the Reformation as the Five Solas: Scripture alone, faith alone, grace alone, Christ alone, and to God alone be glory.

We deny that any message that rejects, contradicts, or stands independent of the Five Solas is the Biblical gospel.

5.     On charismaticism
We affirm that the Biblical gospel may be held by brothers and sisters in Christ who also practice speaking in tongues, miracles, and prophecy so long as they love humility, repentance, Christ, and the Bible more than any earthly comfort.

We deny that the Biblical gospel may be held by the charismatic who uses miracles, tongues, and prophecy as a foundation on which to promote the doctrine of deification (the teaching that men are little gods) and its counterpart positive confession (the teaching that men can create reality with their words).

6.     On wealth creation
We affirm that the Biblical gospel creates wealth as the truth is believed and practiced for generations and so long as it is undisturbed by the sins of others including encroaching governments. We further affirm that God’s usual means for creating wealth is according to the ordinary means of providence and not according to miracles.

We deny that the Biblical gospel creates wealth miraculously or immediately or in such a way as to draw men’s hearts away from the glory of Heaven, the atonement of Christ, and the horror of their own sin.

7.     On preaching
We affirm that the glory of preaching is clearly explaining the Word of God such that men understand what God is saying and are prepared to leave their sin, draw near to Christ, or change their worldly thinking to conform to the mind of God.

We deny that preaching honors God when it is filled with unprepared shouting, religious slogans, or “God talk” styled so as to impress the hearers with the status of the speaker.

8.     On money
We affirm that the Bible speaks about money, that our use of money shows the love and direction of our hearts, and that money is necessary to live in the modern world.

We deny that sermons should repeatedly return to money as a standard motif for reflection on the Lord’s Day.

9.     On television and media
We affirm that the gospel may be communicated through television and media in a way that honors God, Christ, and Scripture. We further affirm, however, that the dominant presence in religious broadcasting is occupied by those who will hear our Lord’s words, “Depart from me, I never knew you.”

We deny that all popular preachers and ministries are men of God or even true Christians simply due to the facts that they are popular and call themselves Christian.

10.  On handling false teachers
We affirm that pastors, preachers, and authors should be held accountable for their faithfulness to the gospel such that if they deny, change, or consistently ignore the gospel they must be named publicly and avoided.

We deny that Christian love will silence the mouths of God’s people regarding the terrible wolves who are trying to devour and make merchandise of the church which he purchased with His blood.

11.  On Christian unity
We affirm that believers in the Lord Jesus Christ are spiritually unified and should be practically unified in purpose and fellowship as much as circumstances permit on the earth.

We deny that believers in the prosperity gospel are believers in the Lord Jesus Christ, nor, therefore, are they unified spiritually with any true believers.

Posted in Lists, Prosperity gospel | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Why Isn’t Homosexuality More Popular in Africa?

The majority of Africans live in the rural areas—about 60% or 700 millions. And in the rural areas, homosexuality is not common. I have never seen it though I lived in an African village for 9 years and still work in the rural areas. The Africans who live in the villages and with whom I have spoken are dogmatically opposed to it whether they are Christian or not. Uganda, a state with 84% rural population, has famously attempted to outlaw homosexuality.

Why is homosexuality so uncommon in the rural areas of Africa? Several answers may be offered, but they all point in the same direction. After the last reason, they will all bond together to form yet another reason to reject the short-sighted decision of the U.S. Supreme Court.

1.     Answer #1: It is uncommon because rural Africans oppose it.

Either this answer is true or false. If it is false, then our question is still unanswered and we can proceed to another option below. But if it is true, it does not help the discussion because we still have to ask, “Why is homosexuality not accepted by the average rural African?” Either way, this answer only pushes the argument elsewhere.

2.     Answer #2: It is uncommon because homosexuality reflects sensibilities from European and Western cultures.

Maybe someone would say, “It’s not part of their culture.” But if homosexuality is a genetic trait, then why would culture influence how consistently it shows up? I would agree that sodomy is not a part of African culture, yet eating, drinking, sleeping, and marriage are parts of African culture because these are natural. If homosexuality is also natural, why isn’t it seen in the villages of Africa?

Perhaps someone may reply that Africa’s primal patterns have been adjusted since the colonists forced Christianity on them. Maybe someone could say that in the past Africa had a significant homosexual presence, but Western Christian norms chased that away like all the game on the African veldt.

Conversations with numerous vakokwana (elderly people) in the villages show that they have never heard of homosexuality in the rural areas. Nor does African traditional religion have written texts that propose ethics of sexuality. More importantly however, fornication, adultery, and polygamy are all still common in the rural areas even after colonization and Christian missionary influence has left its superficial mark. So we can’t argue that Africans have a high moral standard imported by Western, imperial religion.

3.     Answer #3: It is uncommon because African culture does not provide fertile soil for homosexuality.

The poverty of rural Africa has not allowed luxury to the average man. Many live a hand-to-mouth existence where they have not been able to cultivate tastes that are common in Europe and the U.S. When you are focused on surviving, time, energy, or heart for a plush life are in short supply. Many areas of culture will only wilt and die under the life-strangling chill of poverty. The frozen atmosphere of want touches everything from classical music to hard liquor. Though Africans have the resources to play drums and brew a traditional beer, their circumstances could not produce violins, Jack Daniels, abortion, or bikinis. These things all require a level of leisure to invent and cultivate that African societies have traditionally lacked.

Homosexuality fits into this category. Africans in the rural areas have not developed this for the same reason that they have not pioneered child pornography. Though fornication and sexual sins are common, the average villager does not indulge in them to the same degree of comfort that those who live in the richer parts of the world do. Here men purchase prostitutes and pursue their lust in the bush like animals rather than hidden in comfortable hotels. Poverty highlights the depravity; wealth disguises the perversity.

But hidden away, and with expendable income, the cancer of sin can feed on the wealthy societies until their tolerance is so gorged that they will pay any price for new and more edgy experiences. Lusts, like muscles, get stronger after use. In the U.S., a relatively poor man can pamper every desire. Hungry, American? Salt, fat, and sugar are available at amazingly cheap prices. Hot? Electricity is ubiquitous and fans are dirt cheap if you somehow couldn’t afford air conditioning. Tired? Soft beds, clean sheets, and large homes are easier to attain than in rural Africa.

Nearly every physical desire we have can be satisfied as soon as it comes up—including natural urges for physical intimacy. From pictures and videos on phones, the desires are sated and glutted until they have ballooned way out of proportion. To further touch these grotesquely inflated desires some churches have even offered “sex sermons” while the world experiments with ever-new titillations, which of course, are actually as old as wealthy societies. If you struggle with same sex attraction, what role has the dominant culture around you played in expanding your threshold for stimulation? Is popular culture in the developed world known for denying itself any desire? We are responsible both for our decisions as well as for being aware of the spirit of the age in which we live.

Homosexuality is not common in Africa because it generally requires a level of wealth to produce the leisure that allows for sinful desires to press the furthest reaches of reprobation. Therefore, we should expect sinners with access to more wealth in America and the urban areas of Africa to have a higher instance of homosexuality over their rural counterparts in Africa because they can indulge their sinful natures in ways that the poor cannot.

The lack of this particular vice in poor areas of the world is one more echo of God’s law revealing itself in nature against homosexuality. Let all those who support it grapple with these facts of life—homosexuality is a sin only rich societies can afford. But not for long.

See also: Gay Marriage is Wrong Because Christianity is Right.

 

Posted in Inconsistency, Missions, Pastoral | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Has Beauty Lost Her Voice?

A high-domed auditorium with classic wood trim speaks to everyone who enters it even if they don’t realize they have joined the conversation. A 30-piece orchestra sends a message too. In the words of R. C. Sproul, “Every form is an art form, and every art form communicates.” That means wood trim, suits and ties, use of technology, paint colors, plants real or fake, hairstyles, furniture, the level of the floor, the height of the podium, and general cleanliness all have meaning. Every art form casts a vote for the values it is promoting.

Art sends messages, and so too do propositions. While seeing truth in beautiful art forms is satisfying, God has also given us beauty in truthful statements as well. I love speaking, hearing, reading, and writing truth in words. Carefully crafted, logical arguments are vital to Christianity making up large portions of the New Testament. Absolute truth can and must be communicated in words and propositions because God did it in the Bible.

To finish the set, we can predicate beauty and truth of actions as well. When a woman serves her children, that is beautiful. When a man sacrifices for his wife, that speaks the truth about the role of men as well as Christ and His church. Good actions, beautiful art, and truthful statements all work together sending messages.

Nevertheless, we often feel like we need to dignify beauty with propositions as if art can’t say anything without our words. In an effort to enhance the art form however, we subtly detract from it kind of like affirmative action does for minorities, “We love you so much we’ll give you help that you may not need or want.”

Here are some examples in a worship service where words of explanation may potentially undermine the art form.

1. Placing the words of the offertory on a screen, thus distracting people from the message of the music itself.

2. Discussing the quality of a song’s lyrics while in a discussion about musical style, thus implying that the only message of music are the propositions in the words.

3. Filling blank walls with slogans, mottoes, or verses, thus interrupting the silent, deep throat of architecture.

4. Projecting announcements on the screen before the service starts, thus calling people away from any beauty in the largest room of the building.

5. Allowing no quiet time during baptism or the Lord’s Table, thus saying that these rituals can be handled quickly so that we can get back to more propositions.

6. Choosing a Bible translation based only on readability, thus saying that beautiful words and poetry add nothing to worship.

The items on this list are not necessarily bad. They are only bad if we don’t genuinely value the contribution that beautiful art can and should make to worship. If our sensibility defaults to a relativistic view of beauty, or if we secretly don’t know how to interpret and enjoy art in worship in a God-honoring way, or if we are cherishing the ridiculous notion that art doesn’t really matter, then these six and others will show up repeatedly.

Words are not the enemy of beauty, nor do all those bad results come each time we explain some artistic endeavor. But for those raised in a world where post-modernity is in the air, for those who basically fit in with the broader sensibilities of the age, for those who eat more mental sugar in a month than our forebears had in a lifetime, we should expect ourselves to discount the objective role of beauty in worship. If beauty has not lost her voice, then we probably don’t need to speak for her.

Posted in Orthopathy, Pastoral | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

The Connected Web of Liberalism

Since every truth is connected we should expect that receiving the truth at one point leads toward other truths. Truth is a united, flowing river, but so too is error. All truth holds together in a great system, yet the same dynamic is evident regarding any position. Hold firmly to the wrong understanding of economics, for example, and it will necessitate certain views of culture, science, sexuality, and ultimately of God. But if we have a Biblical view of humanity, for example, then that too will inevitably sweep us into certain views of evolution, global warming, overpopulation, multi-culturalism, socialism, and feminism. It all hangs together.

I’ve discovered a classic example in John Reader’s Africa: A Biography of the Continent, which introduces itself as a scholarly work written in a popular style but in reality it is a poorly disguised flying buttress for the weak façade of liberalism’s Top 10 most untenable theories. While writing like a journalist, Reader also squeezes in 50 pages of footnotes and nearly 40 pages of small print bibliography to impress all those who are awed by such literary trappings.

The first line of the book: “The ancestors of all humanity evolved in Africa.” So then, I anticipate that he should like socialism, global warming, and big government. Furthermore, he will look for ways to denigrate the accomplishments of Western culture, or which is to say the same thing, to raise the objectively sub-standard achievements of African culture in a weird effort to prove—again, just as an example—that Bach’s Brandenburg Concertos are only “relatively” beautiful.

And that train-wreck is exactly what unfolds throughout the book. In order to support evolution, he tosses out lines like, “Climatic change undoubtedly has a major effect on the distribution and population size of all living species…” (37, see also, 135) At the point he writes this line, he’s not arguing for climate change, he’s arguing for evolution, but he slips it in so that thoughtful readers would know he’s got a comprehensive view of things.

He writes of the “genocidal behaviour of European settlers…” (117) who “filched” whatever advantages they possessed (99). I have not found a positive reference to white people or Western culture in the book. But, of course, that is to be expected if he is to be consistent with his growing web of doctrines.

Then comes the chapter on the Nile and its effects on Egypt (193-199). Though he references a number of dates ranging from 2450 to 600 BC, he does not reference any Biblical evidences. He cites a stone “tablet making brief mention” of Egypt’s glory, but he couldn’t find anything relevant in Genesis or Exodus or the prophets? Over 700 references to Egypt and the Nile in Scripture, yet he’d rather not cite that ancient document.

Liberalism is like the guy who keeps wiring and blocking sections of his fence to keep the dog from slipping out, yet each morning, somehow it finds another escape route. They will continue to add to their list new ideas that they love in order to fence in the old ideas that they hate. Hierarchy, absolute truth, and the depravity of man imply an entire culture that the world cannot abide.

So their system will become increasingly complex to support the insupportable. They would say the same thing about Biblical Christians. If that’s true, then how do each of us explain the blindness of the other? We say they are blinded by sinful and wicked hearts. They can’t say that about us or else they put a huge whole in their fence by acknowledging the Biblical doctrine of sin. How can liberals explain the existence and tenacity of Biblical Christianity?

They can’t. And that is one more proof that they are trying to stop the unstoppable and ignore the beautiful.

Posted in Book reviews, Inconsistency | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Christian Friendliness

Today just after 5 pm I stood with a 41-year old man and his mother in the parking lot of a playground where my children had been playing with his. What made this particular moment unusual was that we stood hand-in-hand as he prayed for us. And it wasn’t a nice, short prayer.

After overhearing them speaking to each other, I had thought they were discoursing about evangelism. Surprised, I decided to briefly encourage them as I left the park, but they turned the tables on me by kindly sharing Scripture and gracious exhortation with me. As providence willed, in 1998 they had actually been to Malamulele, a village about 1 hour from my house.

Both son and mother were passionate about their Savior, Scripture, and evangelism, and I left with a warm heart thankful to God for fellow pilgrims who love Christ and aren’t afraid to open up a little to a stranger. “Exhort one another daily.”

One weakness of American culture is the unconscious individualism that keeps many of us from simply greeting a stranger with a smile and eye contact. Showing the value of friendship is kind of like proving to someone that a fire is hot—experience will teach them far more quickly than explanation. In the NT, friendliness is like personal responsibility, assumed everywhere even though there aren’t many proof texts.

This kind of initiative is dangerous because if you try it for any length of time you will get ignored, slighted, or tired, yet the payoff in strengthening other believers, discomfiting your selfish flesh, and opening up relationships with unbelievers should help to offset the liabilities.

Some conservative Christians are not friendly meaning they do not readily reach out a hand, a smile, or an interested question. But those who are friendly will be a sweet taste lingering long after they’ve left the presence of those they’ve befriended. Don’t you think Christ had that effect on many people?

Posted in Pastoral, Unusual character | Tagged , | 1 Comment