New Website

I have a new website at singingandslaying.com. All the posts from here have been transferred over to there.

Hard Questions: What is the Normal (Healthy) Christian Life?

This the first in a continuing series of hard questions that I have been asked by members of my congregation, other Christians, and in some cases non-Christians. 

What is the normal Christian life? Or better yet, what is a healthy Christian life? Why is that we know Christians who hold to correct practices and doctrine, yet they seem so unhealthy? They are bitter, angry, joyless, and judgmental. Often as time goes on, they leave the faith or their children leave the faith. Why is that we know Christians who hold to different practices or doctrines than we do and yet they seem healthy and solid. I believe in not sending your kids to public school. Yet I know parents who send their kids to public school who are more godly than some who don't. Why is that? Why can someone be right in doctrine and practice and yet look so little like Jesus and be so unhealthy?

The temptation here is to point to externals. That is good as far as it goes. There are central actions that a Christian will do. These would be worship, prayer, reading the Word, fellowship with the saints, reaching the lost, confession of sins, etc. These are core practices of the Christian faith. But we all know Christians and churches who do these things and yet...something is off.

How to Listen to the Word

What attitude should we bring into to worship as we prepare to listen to God's Word preached? Pastor Danny Hyde gives us five attitudes we should bring to the preaching of God's Word. Everything below is a quote from his book From the Pen of Pastor Paul. 

Expectantly-Lord, I expect you to speak. 
This means we assemble not merely out of ritual or merely out of routine. God is no dead idol, but the living God...Therefore he still speaks. Because of this we must come before him in worship expectantly, clinging to his every Word as heard from the mouth of the minister...This also means that we need to prepare ourselves to hear him speak his Word through his minister.

Hungrily-Lord, I need you to speak. 
We have a hunger not just that God will speak in general, or that he will speak to someone else, but that he would speak to me...Why do I need God to speak to me through the words of a man, which are in reality the Word of God? It is because the Word of God, not merely written but as it is explained, exposited, and expounded is the food for our souls...The Word satisfies the longing soul of the hungry. Like our forefathers in the wilderness had to learn, "man does not live by bread alone," but most importantly, "but man lives by every word that comes from the mouth of the Lord" (Deuteronomy 8:30). What kind of appetite do you bring to worship?

Attentively-Lord, I will listen to you speak.
Sermons seem to be a monologue. In reality, they are to be a dialogue. While the minister is preaching there is communication from God to us and from us to God in our hearts. We are to hear and affirm, hear and be challenged, and hear and grow. This means that every moment of every sermon we must be saying to ourselves in an attentive way, "These are not the words of my pastor, these are the words of God. These are not the words of men, but as they are in truth the Word of God." Since we recognize that God is in our midst speaking, we should be attentive. We should have our eyes open, looking up upon the minister but our ears perked up listening to the Lord.

Faithfully-Lord, I believe you when you speak. 
To hear the Word "faith-fully" is to hear it with a full faith, with a whole-hearted trust, with a giving of ourselves and laying ourselves before God...Because preaching is itself an act of faith and hearing it is also an act of faith, the devil is going to attack...We need to listen to what God says and focus our hearts on that, even though it comes through sinful and fallible men.

Obediently-Lord, I will obey you when you speak. 
John Calvin once described preaching like this, "The preaching of the Gospel has life when men are not merely told what is right, but are pricked by exhortation and summoned to the judgment seat of God, so that they may not sleep in their errors." The Word of God that pastors preach and that the people receive can never be fruitless; it must always abound in fruitfulness...Receive his Word, with the well-prepared soil of your heart that the seed of the Word that is planted may be watered by the Spirit that you may be fruitful. Hear his Word in an obedient way and follow through on what God says in it.

Trump is Our Problem

I am not a political pundit. I rely on friends for much of my political understanding. I read theology often and politics only occasionally. I have not watched any of the debates in their entirety. This post is therefore not a foray into deep political thought. It is more like the rambling thoughts a political novice. When Trump announced his candidacy I never thought he would get as far as he has. He was like a cheap firework; all flash, no substance. But somehow the inevitable did not happen. Now that he is the presumptive Republican nominee it is worth considering why.

The Failure of "Conservatives"
I am sure other people have noted this, but Trump's rise is a backlash against conservatives.  By conservatives, I do not mean true conservatives. That is why the word is in quotes. True conservatives, the hold to the Constitution, small government, less spending, low key foreign policy conservatives, are a very small minority. By conservative, I mean those who affiliate with the Republican party and generally oppose the Democrats. For most Republicans the last couple of decades have not been that great. Our last two conservative presidents were weak and left a trail of wreckage.  Both the nominees against Obama were weak and impotent. Conservative appointees to the Supreme Court have voted liberal over and over again. When conservatives were in power in Congress they too often compromised. Conservative politicians have repeatedly failed the ones who voted them into power. Trump is not Romney or McCain or Jeb Bush. He is not a conservative establishment candidate. Is it any surprise that he is getting the traction? Why vote in another GW or nominate another Romney?

This also why I am not sure all those Republicans opposing Trump are going to make a dent in his appeal. His appeal is that he is not like those guys. Their opposition makes him look more like an outsider, which is one of the reasons he appealing.

The Disdain of the Average American
Remember Duck Dynasty? For years it was one of the highest rated shows on cable television. It was mercilessly mocked not just by the secular media, but also by many Christians, especially the more sophisticated type. They just did not understand how something so low class could be watched by millions. For years the church and the country has despised the average American. The guy who works 50 hours a week in a low paying job, mows his lawn on Saturday, goes to church on Sunday, and watches football in the afternoon. The single mom who cares for her two kids after waiting tables all day. The elderly man barely surviving as a greeter at Wal-Mart. The housewife who greets her children when they get home from school.  Maybe I am wrong here, but these are the folks Trump is appealing to. All politicians talk like they care about this very large group of Americans. But most Americans believe politicians care more about the elite ruling class than the factory worker, the farmer, or the school teacher.

It is odd that a millionaire businessman would get the ear of the American people before Cruz or Rubio. But one reason is that he has convinced conservative Americans that he cares about them. This is what people mean when they say, "He says it like it is." Trump does not listen to the elite. He is not tied to the ruling class of Harvard and Yale grads who give $25,000 a plate dinners to raise support. He does not care what the media thinks of him. He doesn't care what anyone thinks of him. He doesn't care about polls. He is not posturing for his donors. I am not sure Trump does actually care more about the average worker, but America feels like he does. And given our current climate, that is enough. He parallels Obama's candidacy on this point. One reason people voted for Obama is they felt he cared for them.

Ten Quotes: The Mark of a Man by Elisabeth Elliot

Here are ten of my favorite quotes from a book I recently read. Who/what book do you think these quotes came from?

Masculinity and femininity, being elements of the original design, radiate glory. They shine.

If the original distinction is lost-the vital one between men and women-we end up recognizing no distinction in sexual conduct. It is the logical conclusion. If sex has no transcendent meaning, what different does it make who you go to bed with? You can be promiscuous, homosexual, incestuous, bestial, or otherwise perverted. The only lasting sanctions against such behavior are based on the divine man-woman order. 

Four extremely important events [in Genesis 1-2] illuminate where woman stands in relation to man: 1. She was made for man. 2. She was made from man. 3. She was brought to man. 4. She was named by man.  

Clearly such women [Gloria Steinem] are adrift. Yet other women follow them, blindly hoping that what they are offering is freedom and fulfillment. The awful truth is that what they offer is bondage and destruction; for they would strip us all-men and women alike-of all mystery and, indeed, of our very humanity.  

Masculinity means initiation. Femininity means response.

If a husband can look upon his gift of initiation as a privilege, instead of a right; and if the wife can look upon her gift of response in the same way, instead of as an obligation, both might be surprised to find that Jesus' promise actually comes true for them: The yoke proves to be easy, the burden light.

People come with standard equipment. Tongue, eyes, ears, hands, and hearts are usually provided for both men and women. But there is equipment which is radically differentiated: the reproductive system. Its functions are plain enough. Quite unarguably, they are designed for initiation and reception. Is it unreasonable to probe deeper than the temporal function and recognize that these, too, are signs? May we not infer from them, as well as from creation's order, the meaning of masculinity-initiation; and of femininity-response? 

The refusal to accept things which cannot or ought not be changed is neurotic. These matters of what men are and what women are have been beautifully thought out and put in place. The sooner and the more wholeheartedly we settle into the places assigned, the greater will be our peace and the more harmonious our world. Resentment about it leads to neurosis and bondage.

 It is at best a misguided chivalry and at worst irresponsibility that prefers to take a backseat and let women run things. 

The husband is the head of the wife. The Book doesn't say he ought to be or he must work at it and become. It says he is, in the same way that Christ is the Head of the Church. 

And One:

First [in what a man should look for in a woman to marry] she ought to be glad she's a woman....a real woman has accepted the given: her femininity. This is an act of faith. She accepts the place her femininity gives her in God's world. She knows she was made for man, from man, brought to man by God and named by him. She does not covet the not given...a real woman understands that man was created to be the initiator, and she operates on that premise. This is primarily a matter of attitude. I am convinced that the woman who understands and accepts with gladness the difference between masculine and feminine will be, without pretense or self-consciousness, womanly.

Quotes From Other Books
From the Pen of Pastor Paul by Daniel Hyde
Fool's Talk by Os Guinness
The New Pastor's Handbook by Jason Helopoulos
On Being a Pastor by Derek Prime and Alistair Begg
How to Exasperate Your Wife by Douglas Wilson
The Things of Earth by Joe Rigney
A Son for Glory by Toby Sumpter 
Escape from Reason by Francis Schaeffer
Crazy Busy by Kevin DeYoung
Making Gay Okay by Robert Reilly 
Christ Crucified by Donald Macleod
Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God by John Calvin

Washed with the Most Impure

Calvin on the call of Matthew from Matthew 9:4-13. He explains what we should do if we find ourselves not wanting to associate with sinners in the Church.

He whom you detest appears to you to be unworthy of the grace of Christ.  Why then was Christ himself made a sacrifice and a curse, but that he might stretch out his hand to accursed sinners? Now, if we feel disgust at being associated by Baptism and the Lord's Supper with vile men, and regard our connection with them as a sort of stain upon us, we ought immediately to descend into ourselves, and to search without flattery our own evils.  Such an examination will make us willingly allow ourselves to be washed in the same fountain with the most impure, and will hinder us from rejecting the righteousness which he offers indiscriminately to all the ungodly, the life which he offers to the dead and the salvation which he offers to the lost." (Commentary on the Harmony of the Gospels, p. 402-403)

Leave Like Moses

It has been a long time since I was in public school. When I was in school I had many teachers who were Christians. But even in the early nineties their faith was kept under wraps. They could not pray for us or push us towards God. They could not reject a teaching because the Bible rejected it. And I went to public school in a conservative Southern state. It is hard to picture that has changed for the better in the last 20 years. Every story I hear is of schools becoming more and more liberal in their teachings on sexuality, politics, economics, etc. I know there might be exceptions, but my guess they are few and far between.

What would I say to a Christian who is teaching in the public schools? I would say:

Thanks for your work, labor, and love for the students. I know you see your job as a way of honoring God. Despite these things and all the good you have done, I would still encourage you to get out. You will make less money teaching at a private school. You might have to move to get a job. You will lose many of your benefits. Your financial security will be lost. Your reputation might be ruined. But given the current situation, it is the right thing to do.

Wouldn't it be great to work at a place where you can talk about Christ openly? Wouldn't it be great to tell your math students about the God who created this world with order so Algebra works? Wouldn't it be great to pray with your students before class or to show them how history demonstrates man's sinfulness and God's kindness?  Wouldn't it be great to pray with other teachers for a student who is struggling? There is little doubt that at this stage in history it would be a sacrifice to leave the public school system. But the New Testament is clear that those who sacrifice for Christ will have their reward (See Matthew 10:42, 19:27-30, and Colossians 3:24).

In particular I would encourage Christians working in the public school system to meditate on Hebrews 11:23-27, the story of Moses.

By faith Moses, when he was grown up, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter, choosing rather to be mistreated with the people of God than to enjoy the fleeting pleasures of sin. He considered the reproach of Christ greater wealth than the treasures of Egypt, for he was looking to the reward. By faith he left Egypt, not being afraid of the anger of the king, for he endured as seeing him who is invisible.   

Moses left Egypt because he would rather suffer with God's people than enjoy the passing pleasures of sin. He knew it would be painful, but he also knew that Christ was worth more than Egypt and would reward him. I believe this is where many Christian teachers in public schools are at. It would be a tremendous help to your fellow Christians if you left "Egypt" behind. I know you have done some good and I know you would like to do more good. I also know there are many Christian kids in these schools. And I know you love the students that come in each year. But at some point, as Jesus said, you have to let the dead buried the dead. The public schools are more and more hostile to the Christian faith. The constant hammering of the homosexual agenda, failure of a sexual ethic beyond consent, prominence of the evolutionary origins of man, rejection of truth in favor of feelings, revising of history, watering down of standards, lack of respect for authority, necessity of being politically correct, and the postmodern reading of literature all indicate that the public schools are not a place where a Christian teacher can consistently and publicly exercise their love for Christ their Savior and Lord. Therefore I would encourage you to get out and find a place where your faith in Christ, love for his Word, and understanding of His Lordship can be a central part of your teaching.

Unrelenting

In their excellent book, Unchanging Witness, Professors Fortson and Grams spend a chapter recounting the capitulation of the numerous mainline denominations to the homosexual agenda, including the Episcopal Church and Evangelical Lutheran Church. But the account that caught my attention was the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America (PCUSA).

I am not an expert on the history of the PCUSA, but I believe there were serious issues, such as rejection of the authority of Scripture, rejection of the supernatural, and ordination of women, which preceded their acceptance of homosexuality. If true, their capitulation to the homosexuals was not a surprise. A denomination that ordains women is going to have a hard time barring the doors against homosexuals. Here is the timeline how the PCUSA moved to accepting gays, gay ministers, and eventually same sex marriage (Fortson and Grams p. 157-158):

1978-United Presbyterian Church in the USA adopts a policy forbidding the ordination of homosexuals, but allowing gays and lesbians into church membership.

1979-The Presbyterian Church in the US adopts a similar policy.

1983-These two denominations join to create the PCUSA. The policy from 1978 remains in force.

1983-1993 There was constant debate in the denomination about ordaining homosexuals. So much debate that in 1993 a ban was instituted to prevent the issue from being voted on for three years.

1997-Conservatives passed an amendment to the PCUSA constitution requiring candidates for ordination "to live either in fidelity within the covenant of marriage between a man and woman, or chastity in singleness."  Liberals presented a substitute amendment which said, "fidelity and integrity in marriage or singleness." The substitute amendment by the liberals was defeated.

1998-Liberals again pushed for their substitute amendment. Again it was defeated though the votes grew closer. This happened again in 1999 and 2001. Each time the votes for the liberals grew.

2006-A PCUSA task force recommended allowing exceptions to the "fidelity and chastity" clause. This allowed homosexuals to be ordained.

2009-Again the liberals pushed for a vote to change the constitution. Again it was defeated though by the smallest margin yet.

2011-The language from 1997 was finally gotten rid of and openly gay persons could now be ordained to the ministry.

2014-The PCUSA approved a policy allowing pastors to perform same-sex marriages in states where the practice is legal. In that same year an additional vote was made that changed the definition of marriage from one and one woman to two persons. That passed by a 71% majority.

What I find fascinating is how "unrelenting" to use the authors' word, the pro-gay lobby was. They never stopped bringing up the votes. They found ways around official policy, such as the 2006 task force. They kept pushing and kept fighting until they got what they wanted.  I am sure this began long before 1978, but even from 1978-2014 is a pretty long time. It reminds me of what Edwin Friedman said in his excellent book Failure of Nerve. Pathogens do not stop. They will not stop. They must be cut out. Long before sodomy ever became an issue someone within these denominations compromised on basic Christian teaching. It may have been the authority of Scripture. It may have been human sexuality. It may have been the denial of the resurrection of our Lord. But they compromised and here is the key no one disciplined them for it. Maybe they disciplined them the first time and second time and third time, but eventually they stopped, eventually the good guys gave up.

In the previous chapter Fortson and Grams discuss all the denominations that remain faithful to the Scripture's teaching on homosexuality, such as the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA), the Evangelical Presbyterian Church (EPC), and Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (LCMS). I look at those denominations and my own, the Communion of Reformed Evangelicals (CREC), and I pray. I pray that we can hold fast. I pray that we have the stamina and backbone to fight. I pray that we have the courage of our brothers in Africa who stood up to the Anglican bishops who compromised. I pray that we are not afraid of being hated, cast out, and maligned. I pray that we can preach faithfully what the Word says. I pray we have the strength to excommunicate when necessary. I pray that our seminaries fire those who compromise. For we can be assured of this; the homosexuals will not stop. Their goal is not live and let live. Their goal is that churches everywhere accept them as true Christians no matter their sexual practices. For the sake of Christ, his sheep, and the lost we must be as unrelenting as they are. If not we will end up just like the PCUSA and the proverb will be fulfilled:

Like a muddied spring or a polluted fountain is a righteous man who gives way before the wicked. (Proverbs 25:26)

Did the Early Church Approve of Homosexuality?

Revising history has been one of the common ploys in the gay Christian movement. In particular John Boswell and former Jesuit priest John McNeill have written books that revise the history of the church to be more friendly to gays. These books have been used by gay Christians as proof that Christianity from it's earliest times was welcoming of homosexuals. Boswell even argues that same-sex unions were approved by Anselm. Their scholarship, if it can be called that, has been called into serious question time and time. Yet they are cited by gay Christians as proof that sodomy really has not been that big a deal in church history.

To combat this error Donald Fortson and Rollin Grams have written Unchanging Witness: The Consistent Christian Teaching on Homosexuality in Scripture and Tradition.  These authors carefully cite numerous primary sources from the early church into the modern era that show without a doubt that sodomy in all its forms has been condemned by the church. Michael Kruger has a review of the book here. He states:

After reading Fortson’s and Rollin’s book, they may not agree with what Christians have always believed.  But, they would have to admit that Christians have always believed it.

I have only gotten through the chapters on the early church and the Middle ages, but both are valuable and clear. Several points stand out.

First, the church has always taught that the sin of Sodom was homosexuality. Hospitality is sometimes mentioned alongside of homosexuality, but homosexuality is always mentioned. I read nothing that indicated that the primary problem was homosexual rape either. 

Second, sodomy was often grouped with murder and bestiality as the gravest of sins.

Third, the celibate priesthood was a breeding ground for sodomy. Sodomite priests were common enough that specific punishments were put into law for priests who were homosexuals. Despite these laws sodomy continued to be a problem in monasteries.

Fourth, marriage between a man and a woman was always considered the only proper outlet for sexual expression. Sodomy, masturbation, prostitution, bestiality, lesbianism, mistresses, concubines, etc. were all sins of varying degrees with sodomy being at the top of the list.

Finally, there were distinctions made between different types of homosexual behavior, including sex with boys, the dominant male, and the submissive male. But all of these were considered a gross violation of nature. One does not get the impression reading the primary sources that the main concern was sex with boys. The problem was sodomy not the sexual abuse of boys.

Here is the conclusion to their chapter on the church fathers:

This brief survey of the early Christian centuries underscores several assertions that can be made with confidence about Christian attitudes towards homosexual practice. Given the ethnic diversity of Christians and their geographic dispersion throughout the Mediterranean world in the earliest centuries after Christ, the evident consensus on this issue is remarkable...The church fathers were aware of homosexual practices in their culture and consistently condemned such behavior...The Fathers believed homosexual practice was perverse and would lead one down the path to destruction. Same-sex activity was considered a grievous sin against the Creator who designed men and women for each other. In addition to violating divine design, homosexual activity-according to early Christian writers-was an instance of humans abusing and polluting one another. 

Here are some conclusions from their chapter on the Middle Ages:

The cumulative evidence from centuries of medieval sources points to the church's unequivocal condemnation of all forms of homosexual practice. As in the patristic era, despite the geographical separation and diverse cultures of early medieval Christians, they shared a commitment to biblically defined sexual ethics...no extant source includes an example of medieval Christians expressing toleration of homosexual behavior. There was no medieval deviation from patristic teaching concerning the accepted code of Christian sexual morality...all varieties of homosexual practice were condemned by the medieval church...in the late medieval era, when massive collections of earlier Christian writings  emerged, the compilers of canon law provided a comprehensive picture of the church's views of homosexual practice. What one observes is a consistent pattern of both denunciation and pastoral care for persons guilty of homosexuality.  

Here is the final paragraph in the chapter on the Middle Ages:

The medieval material indicates a distinction among persons who engaged in same-sex acts. Younger boys experimenting with homosexual sex were treated far more leniently than adults, adults who habitually engaged in homosexual acts were treated more severely than occasional offenders. The texts reveal a medieval awareness that some people felt sexual desire for persons of the same gender, but this did not legitimate acts against nature. Rather extreme measures were taken to help persons with same-sex attraction avoid eternal damnation, from penance to strict requirements concerning their living arrangements. Homosexuality was not viewed as a psychological disorder: it was sin. While homosexuality may have been characteristic of some persons-an orientation-ethics was not reduced to a psychology of inclinations or orientations; it dealt with actions that proceeded from the wickedness of fallen humanity, a humanity that could be transformed through the work of Christ. 

The authors have done the church a great service by doing the research and writing this book. It will be a great resource for the body of Christ as she ministers to those coming out of the gay culture to Jesus and as she stems the tide of the gay Christian movement which attempts to turn the Bible's teaching on its head and to throw out 2,000 of the church's teaching on sexuality in general and sodomy specifically.

What if Public Schools Were Christian?

Yesterday I posted on how Christian parents are required to give their kids a Christian education. I was addressing the current situation where God has been jettisoned from public education.

But what would happen if government schools were Christian? What if we lived in a community where the curriculum was based on Scripture, the teachers were Christian, subjects were connected to God, and holiness in conduct was as important as a test score? What if there were chapel services and every class began with prayer? Would this change things? The answer is yes, but it still would not justify government schools as they are now. There are a couple of points to remember.

Christian parents have the right to delegate the education of their children, assuming that education is Christian. Christian parents do not have to teach everything. Even those of us who home school do not teach everything. We use videos, co-ops, online classes, etc. Christian parents are overseers of the education of their children. That is why I am not opposed to Christian schools. If the local community school was godly then a Christian parent could send their child there and not violate Scripture. They would be giving their child a Christian education.

But the government does not have the right to force the parents in their community to send their child to the school or to tax parents to support that local school. Why? God did not give the government oversight of a child's education. The parents in Scripture are given primary oversight of a child's education. You can have a community school but support of the school and participation by the parent must be free, not coerced. Parents should be able to opt-out without a penalty.

This is also an extension of Christian freedom and charity. Imagine a community is mostly Christian and the schools are run by Christians, but there are Muslims in the community. Should the Muslims be forced to attend or pay for the local Christian school? The answer is no. As a Christian, if you lived in a Muslim community would you want to be forced to attend their schools or to pay for their schools?

If the community was mainly Christian and they wanted a community school that was also Christian citizens could voluntarily put their money towards that endeavor. In this way, it is in one sense governmental because it is the local, community school and is viewed as such by the citizens. But in another sense it is private because funding comes not from taxes and the citizens are not forced to participate. In essence you have a private school that is voluntarily supported by the majority of the citizens.

Of course, the chances of this occurring in our present situation are non-existent. Therefore the best options for Christians are homeschooling or private Christian schools.

The two key points are: the government should not force participation in its schools nor tax its citizens to support those schools and parents have oversight of a child's education, not the government.

Reality is Not Taught

Introductory Note: I was educated in public school. I have many friends and family who send their kids to public school. This post is not meant to be cruel. But we can look around and see that something needs to change with our country, communities, and churches. Educating our children in the Lord is one the best things our generation can do to turn the tide and more importantly to honor Christ. I know Christians can come through public school with their faith intact. But that is a sign of God's grace and kindness, not a Christian's obedience. Christians who sleep together before marriage can have good marriages. That does not make fornication okay. Just because someone got through "okay" does not make it right. I believe it is wrong for Christians to send their kids to public school. I am in favor of both home schooling and Christian private schools. Feel free to ask questions, raise objections, or comment. 

Here in West Virginia there has been a rather contentious bill that was passed by the our legislature that gave those who home school more freedom. It was spearheaded by many good people, in particular Brian Kurcaba, a state representative from my county who home schools his children. With this law being in the news it is a good time to once again state what the Bible teaches on the matter of education and how Christians should approach education.

I plan on writing a couple blog posts on Christian education and public schooling. The first point I want to make is that Christian parents are required by Scripture to give their kids a Christian education. Public school does not provide a Christian education and therefore Christian parents should not send their children to public school.

What is the purpose of an education? Why do children learn math and science, Spanish and English grammar?  Is education primarily the accumulation of various facts and skills so the student can eventually get a job? Or is there a moral dimension to education? Can it be an education if it does not train hearts and minds in the proper direction? Do we want men like Walter White, good at chemistry, but who use it make meth?

All men would, if pressed, agree that education will and must have a moral dimension. Education cannot be morally neutral. Children, whether they know it or not, are being taught every day what is right and wrong. They are being taught how to think about the world, what the great truths are that govern our lives, what is right, good, and beautiful, what is important, and what is not. Education is the shaping of a heart and mind and not just the passing on of facts.  Therefore Christian parents should not send their kids to be educated by those who do not believe in God or cannot express that belief in God in the classroom. Without God, it is not a true education.

The goal is not to learn math, science, etc. The goal is to bring glory to God and to love my neighbor by doing math and science. If God is eliminated from education we have missed the main point. As I tweeted the other day: To eliminate God's authority from education is to eliminate the primary lesson that is to be learned.

God made this world from nothing. He rules this world. He redeemed it by sending his only Begotten Son.  He gave man dominion over the earth to serve one another and build his kingdom. We are sinners, made in His image, but separated from Him by our sins. This is reality, the world as it is. The Bible is clear that parents must bring their children up to love God with all their heart, mind, soul and to love their neighbor as themselves. This is not an option or suggestion. It is a command. Christian parents cannot afford to put their children in an environment where the essentials about the God, the world He has made, and mankind are blatantly denied or ignored. Here are some Scriptures to back up this point.

"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. And these words that I command you today shall be on your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise. You shall bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes. You shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates (Deuteronomy 6:4-9).

Our children are to be surrounded by the great truths of God's Word day in and day out.

We will not hide them from their children, but tell to the coming generation the glorious deeds of the LORD, and his might, and the wonders that he has done (Psalm 78:4)

"Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me, but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea (Matthew 18:5-6).

Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord (Ephesians 6:4).

These are some of the obvious examples, but there are more. The entire book of Proverbs is built on the assumption that the son is being raised to loved God. It is a covenantal book. Joshua's statement in Joshua 24:15, God's statement about Abraham teaching his children in Genesis 18:19, Psalm 1, Psalm 112, Psalm 128, and passages like Romans 6 and Matthew 22:37 make it clear that our children are to be taught to think God's thoughts after him, to bring him glory, and to serve our neighbor.

Our public school system has denied God. God is neither acknowledged nor taught. He is an afterthought occasionally prayed to before a football game. But he is not Lord. His commands on sexuality, holiness, respect, kindness, and greed are ignored. Darwinian evolution teaches a false view of origins, which influences all disciplines, not just science.  There is no standard for right and wrong other than what works. Pragmatism rules. Children are not taught how to glorify God in their studies or interaction with other students. Reality, the world as it actually is, is not taught. The most important things are ignored for the trivial. Self-fulfillment is the great goal. That is not an education, even if it does help someone get a job. Christian parents should want their children to grow up loving God, loving their neighbor, and loving Jesus. They should want their children to learn math and science in a place where God's glory is the great aim. Public education does not provide this. Therefore, outside of circumstances where there are no other options (for example a single mother) Christian parents should not send their children to public school.

Similar Posts
A Few More Verses Would Have Been Nice.
Failure of Modern Education to Teach Selflessness. 

Andrew Peterson: I Want to Say I'm Sorry

Mercy Shown-Justice Satisfied: Heidelberg Catechism, Lord's Day 4

Q: 9. Does not God then do injustice to man, by requiring from him in his law, that which he cannot perform?

A: Not at all, for God made man capable of performing it; but man, by the instigation of the devil,  and his own willful disobedience, deprived himself and all his posterity of those divine gifts.

Q: 10. Will God suffer such disobedience and rebellion to go unpunished?

A: By no means, but is terribly displeased  with our original as well as actual sins; and will punish them in his just judgment temporally and eternally,  as he has declared, "Cursed is every one that continues not in all things, which are written in the book of the law, to do them."

Q: 11. Is not God then also merciful?

A: God is indeed merciful,  but also just;  therefore his justice requires, that sin which is committed against the most high majesty of God, be also punished with extreme, that is, with everlasting punishment of body and soul.

It is tempting to believe that at the cross mercy triumphed over justice. We all stood condemned. God because he was such a nice God and did not want men to go to Hell, pulled a fast one and sent Jesus to earth so men could be let off the hook. And poof, mercy trumps judgment. Like a magic eraser, God takes away ours sins. But if that occurred, if God allowed the debt of sin to pass unpaid for, then God is not just. He is a trickster, who says sin is really, really bad, but I can just wipe it away without payment being made.

The Heidelberg Catechism Lord's Day 4 gets at a problem that most of us do not consider. What about the justice of God? We often think on God's grace shown to us at the cross. We know we are miserable, wretched sinners separated from God. We also know at the cross that Jesus dealt with our sins.  We focus on the mercy of God. You can see that assumption woven into Question 11. Questions 9 and 10 focus on judgement and wrath and the loss of divine gifts. But we say, "Is not God then also merciful?" In other words, "Doesn't God's mercy do away with all that punishment and wrath?"  Or we could say, "Doesn't mercy triumph over justice?"

The Heidelberg's answer is no. Mercy does not triumph over justice. God does not say, "Well mercy wins. Therefore now your sins are gone." He does not magically remove our sins. As the next question states:

Q: 12. Since then, by the righteous judgment of God, we deserve temporal and eternal punishment, is there no way by which we may escape that punishment, and be again received into favor?

A: God will have his justice satisfied and therefore we must make this full satisfaction, either by ourselves, or by another.

God's justice must be satisfied. At the cross, Jesus fully satisfied the demands of God's justice. Why is it mercy? Because the Innocent stood in for the guilty. It is not mercy because God decided to make our sins magically disappear or decided to overlook how bad we were. They were really and truly paid for.

Why does this matter?

First, it matters for the character of God. This is part of Paul's argument in Romans 3. How can a righteous God allow unrighteous men into his presence and not compromise his righteous? Here is Paul's answer:

But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it—the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus (Romans 3:21-26).

Paul says that God sent Jesus as a propitiation so God might be just (righteous) and the justifier, that is the one who makes men righteous. If God let sin slide with a wink, wink then he is unrighteous and wicked. His holiness demands that sin be paid for. Jesus did that. Therefore God is righteous and can make us righteous.

Second, it clarifies what happened to Christ at the cross. He did not die just as an example to us or to be a pipeline for God's mercy. He did not just die to overcome death. He hung on the cross so our sins might be laid upon him. He took our sins. Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. This is why we love Jesus. He did what we could not. He took God's justice so we might be ushered back into God's presence.

Finally, it matters for our understanding of our salvation. We can be confident that we are saved because our sins are actually paid for by Christ. They are not sitting out there, hidden away somewhere.  They have been actually taken away, actually paid for. Imagine you owed a huge debt, millions of dollars. Someone comes to you and says, "I took care of that." Oh you mean you paid it off. No. I just took care of it. Would that make you comfortable? Would you sleep easier knowing it was "taken care of" but not paid off? My guess is no. What you need to know is that the debt is gone never to be heard from again. That is what Christ did. Jesus our substitute took our sins upon himself and fully satisfied the justice of God. All of our sins are taken away in Christ.

We think often about the mercy of God and the kindness shown to us at the cross.  But the justice of God is just as important. If God is not just then our salvation unravels. How can we trust a God who does not righteously deal with sin? How can we trust that we are truly saved if our sins have not been paid for? The cross is not a place where mercy and justice fought and mercy won. At the cross God showed us mercy by sending his Son to fully to satisfy his justice. Mercy shown. Justice satisfied. Salvation accomplished.

Bavinck on Sola Scriptura

The following paragraphs from Herman Bavinck's Reformed Dogmatics: Volume I come after a discussion of how the theologian must function within his local church and use his confession. Here is a sentence explaining Bavinck's point. "Dogmatics [theology] is possible only for one who lives in the fellowship of the faith with one Christian church or another." He goes on to say that theologians/dogmaticians must stand on the shoulders of previous generations and not just those in their particular line of theology, but other lines as well. Lutherans begin within their own confession, but then move on to study and learn from other branches of the church, such as Presbyterian and Baptist. He also argues that none of us begin without presuppositions. We all have been taught something and from that deposit we then do theology. But there is a logical question that follows: Doesn't this build our theology on the foundation of our confessions and our church instead of God's Word? If we cannot do theology outside of a church and must have human teachers does that make our church and those teachers the source of our theology? If theology must be done in the church does that make the authority of our theology the church and her teaching? Here is Bavinck's answer to that question. Whenever you see dogmatics, etc. just substitute theology or theologian. I have removed a few Latin phrases.

This is not to elevate the history of dogma and the confession of the church to a position of infallible authority. There is a difference between the way in which a dogmatician is shaped and the primary principle from which dogmatics receives its material. In every branch of learning, the practitioner begins by living from the tradition. He always gains his first acquaintance with the field from an authority. He must first absorb the history of his discipline and attain a knowledge of the present state of the field; then he can go to work independently and acquire his own insights into the object of his research. But no one in his right mind will, for that reason, view the tradition, which was pedagogically [it taught him] so important to him, as the source of his discipline. It is no different for the dogmatician. Pedagogically the church is prior to Scripture. But in the logical order Scripture is the sole foundation of church and theology. In case of conflict between them, the possibility of which can never be denied on a Reformational view, church and confession must yield to Scripture.

Not the church but the Scripture is self-authenticating, the judge of controversies, and its own interpreter. Nothing may be put on a level with Scripture. Church, confession, tradition-all must be ordered and adjusted by it and submit themselves to it...The Reformed, though deeming a confession a necessity in this dispensation of the church in order to explain the Word of God, to turn aside heresies, and to maintain the unity of the faith, denied with the utmost emphasis that the confession had any authority apart from Scripture. Scripture alone is the norm and rule of faith and life. 

There Are Things Worse Than Sexual Immorality

Here is the final paragraph from C.S. Lewis's chapter on Sexual Morality in Mere Christianity. Brackets are mine. All else is his.

"Finally, though I have had to speak at some length about sex, I want to make it as clear as I possibly can that the centre of Christian morality is not here. If anyone thinks that Christians regard unchastity [sexual immorality] as the supreme vice, he is quite wrong. The sins of the flesh are bad, but they are the least bad of all sins. All the worst pleasures are purely spiritual: the pleasure of putting people in the wrong, of bossing and patronising and spoiling sport, and backbiting, the pleasures of power, of hatred. For there are two things inside of me, competing with the human self which I must try to become. They are the Animal self [sins of the flesh], and the Diabolical self. The Diabolical self is the worse of the two. That is why a cold, self righteous prig who goes regularly to church may be far nearer to hell than a prostitute. But, of course, it is better to be neither."

Jesus & The Bible

Jesus is not the Bible. We do not bow down to the book on the table, as if it contains Jesus. However, we cannot find Jesus outside of the Bible. For humans, God has given us the Scriptures as the only way we know Jesus. Jesus is in Heaven and we can pray to Him there. But we cannot hear the voice of Christ outside of the Scriptures. We cannot know Christ's character outside of what read in the Scriptures. How do we know the work in our lives is the Spirit of Christ and not the Devil? The Bible.  The Bible is where we find Jesus. There is no Jesus in church tradition unless He is the Jesus of the Bible. There is no Jesus in your heart unless He is the Jesus of the Bible. The preacher is not preaching Jesus unless he is preaching the Jesus of the Bible. When someone believes they can find Jesus outside of the Scriptures they have left the anchor of God's Word for either a church tradition, whether written (Roman Catholic) or spoken (celebrity preacher) or some personal experience where they met or heard Jesus. If we seek to find and follow Christ outside of the Scriptures we have shifted the foundation for our worship of Christ and walk with Christ from the words of God to the words of men.

Getting It

In Dr. Schaumburg's book Undefiled there is an appendix that sums up one of the most glaring errors in modern evangelical culture. I have seen the error he addresses in my own life and my church. I have read it in books, heard it in sermons, and to my shame probably preached it. Dr. Schaumburg is explaining what the difference is between people who "get it" and people who don't. What is the difference between a couple who comes to him for counseling and they see real, life changing fruit and a couple who doesn't? Read carefully what he says here. I have bolded certain sentences and phrases. The ellipsis is mine, as are the brackets. All other punctuation is his.

I usually see one major reason why people come [to counseling] for help with sexual sin, and two types of responses. Generally speaking, everyone who comes has in mind the pressing need to change a behavior, end an affair, and/or save a marriage. Therein lies the basic problem in getting it. We often focus on the external-the behavior and the pain-rather than the internal. What seems like a logical center of attention is filled with flawed thinking and the pervasive false teaching within the evangelical church. This leads many to spend their energy and their entire lives on "living life well." Therefore when an affair, pornography, or some other type of sexual sin is uncovered, it threatens the goal of living an abundant, fulfilling Christian life. It prevents us from having a meaningful marriage and guarantees endless pain. The response is to do whatever must be done to recover the abundant life and get the marriage back on track. It's just common sense-but is it biblical thinking? 

If we are biblically grounded we will start from an entirely different perspective: "Our citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ" (Philippians 3:20; see Ephesians 2:19). The opposite and powerful perspective described above[previous paragraph] comes from "minds set on earthly things" (Philippians 3:19). The biblical understanding of life centers on the essential internal change that leads to life (Philippians 3:21) versus the temporal change that will fail and lead to death. Repentance is not an emotional response to sin. It is much more than behavior management or a matter of being in recovery. It is a genuine heart change that always produces a life of righteousness. God's redemptive grace requires a person's responsive obedience. Repentance is a radical inward change that results in everything else beginning to change. Repentance always bears fruit as the work of God continues and we live out our lives in a manner "worthy of the gospel of Christ" (Philippians 1:27)...repentance is not merely new behavior. Repentance is inward change leading to the fruit of new behavior. It is imperative that we understand that Jesus demands this inward change [Luke 13:3]. 

So why do some people "get it"  while others don't? Most come desperate to change a behavior, possibly save a marriage, and certainly stop the pain, but many never truly repent with an internal change of mind and heart. They leave with a false hope based on mere sorrow for their sin, a commitment to change their behavior, and a new desire to find real intimacy in their marriage. Those singles and couples die, while those who shift their perspective to their desperate need of inward change live. The former leave dependent on their good efforts; the latter leave dependent on the continued work of God. They cling to God in fear and trembling, with a desire to "walk in a manner worthy of the calling to which you have been called." (Ephesians 4:1; see Colossians 1:10, 2:6-7). 

These paragraphs sum up well what a true gospel message does. It begins with the inner man, not outward change. It causes us to see that our greatest need is not to fix our lives, but to fix ourselves. We cannot do this. Therefore we must repent and flee to Christ. As we cling to Christ he gives us grace and power to fight the sin in our hearts, which leads to outward righteous behavior. But if we begin with trying to fix our lives, our marriages, our children, our jobs, our... then we will fail. Unfortunately most evangelicals approach God like his goal is make our lives good and the Bible is there to tell us how to have a successful Christian life. There are blessings that come with obedience. But the goal should be obedience that comes from a change in heart, mind, and will. The goal should not be using God and the Bible to make our lives better.

Justifying Sin

Harry Schaumburg has been counseling people for over thirty years and has spent the last eighteen years focusing on counseling those who struggle with sexual sin, such as adultery, pornography, prostitution, etc. His book Undefiled  is his attempt to put into writing his Biblical Intensive Counseling workshop, which is five straight days of intense counseling.

I struggled with pornography from the age of eleven into my twenties. During this time I went to church, was active with my youth group, eventually attended Bible school, and got married. It took a long time for me to beat the pornography addiction that I had. This book has been a wonderful help for me in working through some of those hidden issues that still hang over from my pornography addiction.

I will be putting more from this book on my blog later, but for now I wanted to post this list of how the heart deceives us when it comes to sin.  How is it that so many Christians know porn is bad, but still do it? The answer is not complicated. We justify it. Schaumberg focuses on sexual sin, but insert your own sin where he puts sexual sin.

• The sexual sinner always acts like he or she is sexually pure.
• The sexual sinner always justifies the sexual sin. 
• The sexual sinner always  declares the sexual sin a need. 
• The sexual sinner always deceives himself or herself into believing that sinning sexually will be a positive benefit. 
• The sexual sinner always makes excuses for his or her sexual sin.
• The sinner who does not sexually sin tells himself or herself that his or her heart is good. 

When we read this our initial reaction is, "No way." But the further you dig the more realize that is exactly what we do with our sin. When we sin we do not see ourselves as filthy, dirty people. We might feel that way momentarily after our sin, but it does not stick and we go back to believing ourselves to be pretty good people. We always justify our sin. I had to do it. There was no way out. What could I do? I needed it. They deserved it. And we do this not just with sexual sin. We do this with gossip, anger, pride, bitterness, laziness, etc. 

The beginning of our fight against sin is realizing that we are not very good people. We sin and make excuses for our sins. We pretend we are holy when we are not. We think because we don't commit the same sins as others we are good. But the truth is we are unclean and defiled without Christ. Once we understand that we can flee to Christ for forgiveness and for the means to fight against our sin. But if we assume that whatever we do is justified and that our sin is not that much of a problem we will never win the battle. 

Ten Quotes: From the Pen of Pastor Paul

Here are ten of my favorite quotes from Daniel Hyde's book, From the Pen of Pastor Paul, which is a series of published sermons on I & II Thessalonians.  

The pastor's heart towards his people leads to the pastor's labors for his people.

God's Word in preaching is not communicated by skits; it is not conveyed through art; it is not taught to us through music; it is not expressed through deeds; but in words.

A preacher must have total confidence, total conviction, and total assurance of his message.

Paul says there is a real presence of God himself in the preaching of the Word.

[Paul] was so motivated by their [the church] need that despite the great risk of persecution and violence, he opened his heart and mouth to give them what they need-the gospel...He was willing to bring this message despite persecution.

When we do not speak as Paul speaks, personally, sincerely, passionately, and even gently, we fail in our duty as pastors.

What does living in light of the Lord's return look like...What does the Christian life look like in this age between Jesus' first and second comings? It looks like a struggle. It looks like a fight. It looks like a battle.

Deep down our theology and life is about having the assurance that we are saved. I don't want you to know what the doctrine of election is, what the doctrine of limited atonement is, what our view of the sacraments are, what our theology of worship is...unless knowing this increases your certainty that you belong to Jesus Christ in body and soul both in life and death. (ellipsis Hyde's)

A false prophet's mission is to shake believers..alarm believers...and deceive believers.

I don't know about you, but my languishing soul needs this [predestination-II Thessalonians 2:13]. I need salvation to be taken out of the whims and wishes of my mind. I need salvation to be taken away from my sin-stained hands. I need salvation to be removed from my stony heart. I need a God who chooses.

And one:

I really enjoyed this short summary of justification and sanctification. Remember this was preached, not written in a scholarly journal with three hundred foot notes. All italics are Hyde's.

Like justification, then sanctification is a part of the complete work of our Lord Jesus Christ as our Mediator and Redeemer. He is a complete Savior and we need to proclaim this whole gospel.  But there are some differences. In justification Christ works for us in his life of obedience and death, while in sanctification in Christ works in us to make us obedient and to die to sin. Justification is outside of us, while sanctification is inside of us. In justification we are passive, while in sanctification we are active. In justification we are recipients of Christ's work, while in sanctification we are participants with Christ's work. In justification Christ works upon dead men, while in sanctification Christ works in and through those who have been made alive.

Quotes From Other Books
Fool's Talk by Os Guinness
The New Pastor's Handbook by Jason Helopoulos
On Being a Pastor by Derek Prime and Alistair Begg
How to Exasperate Your Wife by Douglas Wilson
The Things of Earth by Joe Rigney
A Son for Glory by Toby Sumpter 
Escape from Reason by Francis Schaeffer
Crazy Busy by Kevin DeYoung
Making Gay Okay by Robert Reilly 
Christ Crucified by Donald Macleod
Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God by John Calvin

Book Review: From the Pen of Pastor Paul

From the Pen of Pastor Paul by Daniel R. Hyde
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

A wonderful book by Pastor Danny Hyde. This is not a commentary in the strict sense of the word. You will not find chapters on Pauline authorship or the textual issues in these letters. Also this is not a slow, careful verse by verse examination of the text. These are sermons put to paper. Here are several things I enjoyed about the book.

First, it is warm and pastoral. You feel like you are sitting in the pew listening to a pastor bring you the Word of God chapter after chapter. He speaks with passion and directly to the reader. It reminds me of older commentaries, which were basically extended exhortations based on the text. Pastor Hyde is interested in our souls and it shows. This is not as easy to do as it sounds. I have read many sermons put to paper and they does not always work.

Second, several chapters read like mini-pastoral theologies, especially early in the book. I have never read Thessalonians the way it was presented in this book, as Paul pouring out his pastoral soul to the church there. If you are a pastor and find your love for your people growing cold read this book. While I was reading this book I visited one of the families at church. The book changed the way I approached that visit.

Third, Pastor Hyde is straightforward. His goal is to teach and give his congregation meat. Therefore he is clear. The longer I am in the ministry the more I see the need for this. There is a place for in-depth writing or speaking that gets into all the nuances of the text, the Greek, its connections to Roman world, etc. But that place is not in the pulpit. In the pulpit people need a clear Word from God. They need to know what the text says, what it meant for the people who read it, and what it means for them. If they leave impressed, but unchanged then the pastor has wasted his time. Pastor Hyde's chapters are well organized and clear with exhortations to holiness as well as calls to follow Christ. You read them and find yourself examining your walk with Christ.

Finally, I appreciated all the quotes from other men, including Chrysostom, Aquinas, Calvin, Spurgeon, Stott, Bruce, etc. By doing this he introduces his readers to these great men and also adds depth to the writing.

I had a few complaints here and there. But this book is well worth your time whether you are studying Thessalonians or not, especially if you are a pastor.

I was given this book freely in exchange for an unbiased review.

View all my reviews