Kevin DeYoung's Blog, page 101
July 22, 2013
July 20, 2013
Guest Blogger Next Week
I’m heading down the home stretch of this four-week vacation/study leave. Lord willing, I will be wrapping up a few projects next week and then making the long trip home with my family. It’s been a good time in Colorado, but it will be nice to be back home and back with our church family.
I’m very excited about my guest blogger for next week. Jackie Knapp is a good friend and a really fun person. For the past three years she’s been the Associate Campus Ministry Director at our church. Before that she was a Resident Director at the Master’s College.
Jackie has just left URC and will be heading to Uganda for the short term before moving back to California. We will definitely miss her.
But before we let her go, I asked her to take the reins of my blog for a week. You can look forward to thoughtful posts on college ministry and a couple entries on ministering to “dramatic girls.” Be sure to check out her new blog too.
July 19, 2013
Turn Your Back on Sterile Aberrations
J.I. Packer’s words were needed in 1958, and, oh heavens, they are needed now:
The honest way to commend God’s revealed truth to an unbelieving generation is not to disguise it as a word of man, and to act as if we could never be sure of it, but had to keep censoring and amending it at the behest of the latest scholarship, and dared not believe it further than historical agnosticism gives us leave; but to preach it in a way which shows the world that we believe it wholeheartedly, and to cry to God to accompany our witness with His Spirit, so that we too may preach ‘in demonstration of the Spirit and of power.’
The apologetic strategy that would attract converts by the flattery of accommodating the gospel to the ‘wisdom’ of sinful man was condemned by Paul nineteen centuries ago, and that past hundred years have provided a fresh demonstration of its bankruptcy.
The world may call its compromises ‘progressive’ and ‘enlightened’ (those are its names for all forms of thought that pander to its conceit); those who produce them will doubtless, by a natural piece of wishful thinking, call them ‘bold’ and ‘courageous,’ and perhaps ‘realistic’ and ‘wholesome,’ but the Bible condemns them as sterile aberrations. And the Church cannot hope to recover its power till it resolves to turn its back on them. (Fundamentalism and the Word of God, 168)
July 18, 2013
Book Briefs
[image error]Allen C. Guelzo, Fateful Lightning: A New History of the Civil War and Reconstruction (Oxford, 2012). Guelzo is one of the finest American historians writing today, and maybe the best historian of the Civil War era. Like the other works I’ve read from him, this book combines a mastery of the subject matter with a knack for readable prose. As the Director of Civil War Era Studies at Gettysburg College, some may detect more sympathy for the North than the South in Guelzo’s history, but overall he has no problem critiquing and commending men and women on both sides of the Mason-Dixon. The strength of this book is that it manages to be relatively thorough (at 576 pages) without getting bogged down or sidetracked. Guelzo keeps the story moving at a good pace and tells the story very well.
Nathan A. Finn and Keith Harper, eds., Domestic Slavery Considered as a Scriptural Institution (Mercer University Press, 2008). Finn and Harper are the editors, but the real authors of this volume are Richard Fuller and Francis Wayland. In late 1844 and early 1845, the Christian Reflector ran a series of letters between two Baptist leaders–Dr. Wayland, President of Brown University and Dr. Fuller, a pastor from South Carolina and one of the founders of the Southern Baptist movement. In 1846, their letters–with Wayland giving the anti-slavery argument and Fuller the pro-slavery side–were published as Domestic Slavery Considered as a Scriptural Institution. The exchange was thoughtful and irenic. A fascinating look at not only American history but the history of biblical interpretation.
Robert P. George, Conscience and Its Enemies: Confronting the Dogmas of Liberal Secularism (ISI, 2013). George is a trenchant thinker, crisp writer, and arguably the most influential social conservative in our America. As a Protestant I differ with George’s approach here and there (he is a Catholic), but you’ll not find a better collection of pro-life and pro-marriage essays from a natural law perspective. Those apt to agree with George should read these essays to have your reasoning greatly strengthened. Those opposed must take this Swarthmore/Harvard/Oxford graduate and Princeton professor seriously.
Mary Eberstadt, How the West Really Lost God: A New Theory of Secularization (Templeton Press, 2013). In this fast-moving accessible work, Eberstadt makes the case that secularization in the West is due, at least in part, to the decline of the family. After explaining secularization and dealing with those who deny its existence, Eberstadt looks at the typical explanations for the loss of Christian faith in the West and concludes that one key factor has been missing. She makes a compelling case that the decline of the family has not only paralleled the decline of Christianity in the West, but that it has also been a contributing factor. Her thesis (despite a few egregious swipes at the Reformation along the way) is provocative, timely, and, at least to my amateur ears, convincing.
July 17, 2013
How Jesus Traded Places With a Leper
In Mark 1:40-45, Jesus makes a leper clean, and in a way that may surprise you.
Here’s a man with leprosy, a skin disease, and the Old Testament says that he has to declare himself “Unclean, unclean!” This leper is in exile. He’s an outcast. No wonder he calls upon Jesus: “You can make me clean.” So Jesus makes him clean.
But then something curious happens. Jesus instructs the former leper not to tell anybody about his miraculous healing. Jesus says this sort of thing all throughout the book of Mark. Why? Because Jesus knows that if everyone starts publicizing what he’s doing, the miracles will become a distraction. Worse, they will get the wrong people’s attention at the wrong time. The Jewish leaders will notice him (even more). They will get jealous (even more). Everyone will be confused (even more) about what sort of Messiah Jesus is. And the constellation of all this confusion could lead to Christ’s premature death–before all has been accomplished. That’s why Jesus instructs the leper not to say anything.
Nevertheless, the healed leper, ignoring Jesus’ exhortation, goes out and starts telling his story. And sure enough, the crowds hear about, people start flocking to Jesus, and he can no longer openly enter a town. Just like he thought, the miracle has become distraction, a diversion, and possibly a danger. So the episode ends with Jesus out in desolate places.
Do you see what has happened? The leper, who was an outcast, comes to Jesus so that he might be cleansed. Jesus gives him his cleansing and restores him to community. He has a new life. But after this great miracle where do you find Jesus? He’s alone. He’s out in desolate places. He’s become an outcast. The leper and the Christ have traded places: the outsider is brought in as the Chosen One is cast out.
This is how sinners enter the family of God. Because the Son was forsaken by his Father, we can join the household of God. For us to be made made clean, Christ had to be reckoned unclean for our sakes. Jesus didn’t overlook uncleanness; he conquered it. And he didn’t just conquer it; he traded places with it.
For lepers–of every kind.
July 16, 2013
Race Relations: Four Things You Can Do to Help
I can tell you two subjects on which I’m not an expert: the Trayvon Martin case and racial reconciliation. As to the former, I did not follow the Zimmerman trial carefully and have nothing to add to the many fine pieces that have already been written (see, for example, Trillia Newbell’s post). And as for the latter, I’m a pastor who longs to see the gospel break down old (and high) barriers between people, but other than trying to faithfully preach, pray, and love I’m no authority on this thorniest of issues.
And yet, like many Christians, I want to do something that may, perhaps, by God’s grace, over the long run, in some small way, make a difference for good. To that end, here are four things I’ve learned, am trying to learn, and you should probably learn as well.
1. Don’t bail. Talking about race in America is incredibly difficult. Suspicions run high. Our histories go deep. Our propensity for getting hurt and frustrated is great. Therefore the temptation is strong to give up on ever thinking about this issue, entering into this issue, or talking with those who disagree with you on this issue.
Those in the minority can easily conclude about their conversation partners, “These people just don’t get it and they never will. I’m tired of trying to show them what they refuse to see.”
And those in the majority can easily conclude, “These people can’t get over it and they never will. I’m tired to being the bad guy and always stepping in some mess I never saw.” Don’t give up when you come to that point, especially when you are dealing with your brothers and sisters in Christ. Keep talking. Keep forgiving and being forgiven. Keep praying. Stay at the table.
2. Be quick to listen. This does not mean agreeing with everything or patronizing someone with the nod of your head. It means what it means: listen.
Consider that your experience could be greatly influencing the way you see things. Consider that someone else’s experience has been very different from yours. Try to understand. Try to empathize. Try to give whatever ground you can honestly give.
Have you ever noticed that when you and your spouse get into a fight, the turning point usually comes when one or both of you concede some small point? “You know, honey, I can see why that made you upset.” Listening by itself doesn’t solve problems, but it can help us avoid new ones and help us build a foundation of mutual trust and understanding.
3. Enjoy friendships across racial lines. Notice, I did not say “make friends across racial lines.” That’s not necessarily bad advice, but it makes friendship sound like a project. We don’t need white people looking to fill up their “I have a black friend” quota. We don’t need people of any race or ethnicity making friends so they can understand diversity and embrace multiculturalism. Real, lasting friendship is not based on anthropological investigation or sociological congratulations.
That’s why I used the word “enjoy.” Have people over for dinner. Go out for a movie. Play basketball every Saturday. Do a Bible study together. There’s a hundred things you can do because real friends enjoy being with each other. And when we have friends across racial and ethnic lines, especially ones formed in Christ, we are less likely to stereotype and more likely to sympathize, slower to jump to conclusions and quicker to hear someone out, more eager to build a bridge and less prone to blow one up.
4. Examine your heart. What do you fear? How are you hurt? Why are you angry? Where has bitterness taken root? What lies are you believing? What promises do you need to trust? What about that beam in your eye? Of course, the divisions in our country–and there are similar ones all over the world–won’t be solved by pure hearts alone, but they won’t be get better without them. And since we in the church know the power of indwelling sin to deceive and destroy, we’d be foolish to underestimate its influence in our own hearts. Sin goes deep–that’s at the heart of the problem. The gospel goes deeper–that’s essential for any solution.
July 15, 2013
July 12, 2013
Do Not Lose The Term “Christian”
In Antioch the disciples were first called Christians. They were known as Christ-people. This is not the only term used in the New Testament. In Acts alone we see Christians called saints, disciples, believers, the church, brothers, Nazoreans, and people of the Way. We can rightly be called by many names. But let me put this before you: don’t lose the term “Christian.”
Sometimes you find people who are a little hipper than thou who conspicuously eschew the title “Christian.” They would rather we called a “Jesus follower” or a “disciple of Jesus of Nazareth.” There’s no problem in using this biblical language, unless it is to steadfastly avoid other kinds of biblical language. In our day there is a certain casualness about “following” someone. It’s what you do on Twitter. It’s what you do when you settle on a school of thought. You follow Keynes or you follow Hayek. Following is pretty safe. Being called a “Christian,” however, is a little dicier.
Just like the first century.
Almost certainly, the believers in Antioch were first called “Christians” as a put-down. It was an insulting jab they came to own for themselves, much like the Puritans and the Methodists would later do. There was something about these believers in Antioch–their distinguishing characteristic to the world was that they were of Christ.
This is significant because the word “Christ” says something that merely “Jesus” doesn’t . Jesus was a common name. It’s become sacred to us, but it was like Mike or Jason or Sean in first century Palestine. Just another familiar male name. And so it’s telling that the church in Antioch came to be known as “Christians” rather than simply “Jesus people.” The fact that Luke points this out suggests the term stuck in the early church. The saints at Antioch not only pursued the ethical life of Jesus and revered the wise sayings of Jesus, they had a reputation for believing, teaching, and heralding that this man Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God, the Anointed One, the long awaited Messiah and King. There new name carried with it theological freight.
By all means, let’s be disciples of Jesus, followers of Jesus, lovers of Jesus, and friends with Jesus. But let us never stop there. We are also Christ people–worshipers of our Savior and King, trusting in all that the Messiah fulfilled and accomplished, redeemed by our dying Lord. Don’t lose the term the church in Antioch “earned” by their faithful witness. If you are glad to be a Christian, don’t be ashamed to be called one either.
Do Not Lose This Term “Christian”
In Antioch the disciples were first called Christians. They were known as Christ-people. This is not the only term used in the New Testament. In Acts alone we see Christians called saints, disciples, believers, the church, brothers, Nazoreans, and people of the Way. We can rightly be called by many names. But let me put this before you: don’t lose the term “Christian.”
Sometimes you find people who are a little hipper than thou who conspicuously eschew the title “Christian.” They would rather we called a “Jesus follower” or a “disciple of Jesus of Nazareth.” There’s no problem in using this biblical language, unless it is to steadfastly avoid other kinds of biblical language. In our day there is a certain casualness about “following” someone. It’s what you do on Twitter. It’s what you do when you settle on a school of thought. You follow Keynes or you follow Hayek. Following is pretty safe. Being called a “Christian,” however, is a little dicier.
Just like the first century.
Almost certainly, the believers in Antioch were first called “Christians” as a put-down. It was an insulting jab they came to own for themselves, much like the Puritans and the Methodists would later do. There was something about these believers in Antioch–their distinguishing characteristic to the world was that they were of Christ.
This is significant because the word “Christ” says something that merely “Jesus” doesn’t . Jesus was a common name. It’s become sacred to us, but it was like Mike or Jason or Sean in first century Palestine. Just another familiar male name. And so it’s telling that the church in Antioch came to be known as “Christians” rather than simply “Jesus people.” The fact that Luke points this out suggests the term stuck in the early church. The saints at Antioch not only pursued the ethical life of Jesus and revered the wise sayings of Jesus, they had a reputation for believing, teaching, and heralding that this man Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God, the Anointed One, the long awaited Messiah and King. There new name carried with it theological freight.
By all means, let’s be disciples of Jesus, followers of Jesus, lovers of Jesus, and friends with Jesus. But let us never stop there. We are also Christ people–worshipers of our Savior and King, trusting in all that the Messiah fulfilled and accomplished, redeemed by our dying Lord. Don’t lose the term the church in Antioch “earned” by their faithful witness. If you are glad to be a Christian, don’t be ashamed to be called one either.
July 11, 2013
The Myth of a Grand Bargain on Marriage
In light of the recent Supreme Court decision, these are sobering, almost prescient words from Robert George in his new book Conscience and Its Enemies.
A fundamental error some supporters of conjugal marriage have made is to imagine that a grand bargain could be struck with their opponents: “We will accept the legal redefinition of marriage; you will respect our right to act on our consciences without penalty, discrimination, or civil disabilities of any kind. Same-sex partners will get marriage licenses, but no one will be forced for any reason to recognize those marriages or suffer discrimination or disabilities for declining to recognize them.”
There was never any hope of such a bargain being accepted. Perhaps liberal forces would accept parts of such a bargain temporarily for strategic or tactical reasons, as part of the political project of getting marriage redefined. But guarantees of religious liberty and nondiscrimination for people who cannot in consciences accept same-sex marriage could then be eroded and eventually removed.
There is, in my opinion, no chance–no chance–of persuading champions of sexual liberation (and it should be clear by now that this is the cause they serve) that they should respect, or permit the law to respect, the conscience rights of those with whom they disagree. Look at it from their point of view: Why should we permit “full equality” to be trumped by bigotry? Why should we respect religions and religious institutions that are “incubators of homophobia”? Bigotry, religiously based or not, must be smashed and eradicated. The law should not give it recognition or lend it any standing or dignity.
The lesson for those of us who believe that the conjugal conception of marriage is true and good, and who wish to protect the rights of our faithful and of our institutions to honor that belief in carrying out their vocations and missions, is that there is no alternative to winning the battle in the public square over the legal definition of marriage. The “grand bargain” is an illusion we should dismiss from our minds. (144-45)
Considering that a majority of the Supreme Court considers traditional marriage supporters to be motivated by “animus” in their views, a victory in the public square is looking less and less likely. And yet, considering that losing this debate in the public square will be worse than many Christians fear, we should not be quick to give up our winsome promotion and intelligent defense of what is true and good.
