Kevin DeYoung's Blog, page 137

Take Courage

Wilhelmus À Brakel in The Christian’s Reasonable Service, Volume 3

There is no other way to heaven except by way of courageous warfare. This is the way ordained by God: “And I will put enmity” (Gen. 3:15). You have chosen this way when you entered into the kingdom of Christ and placed yourself under His banner. Or on the other hand: you must either sever yourself from the covenant, as a villain walk from this ensign, and relinquish God, heaven, and everything else; or you must courageously engage in battle in order thus to conquer the devil and his cohorts, the world and all that is in it, as well as sin and all its lusts.

The crown of glory must be worth so much to you; so precious must spiritual life and fellowship with God be to you, and such pleasure must you find in the will of God, that you will be willing to battle valiantly all the days of your life. Do not let this weigh heavily upon your heart, thinking, “Must I be in arms and engage in warfare my entire lifetime? That is indeed a distasteful way and there is no way whereby I will persevere.” Yes, heaven must be that precious to you; or else you must not relinquish it.

Be it known, however, that to battle courageously is not such a heavy task as you allow yourself to believe. To always battle and succumb, or always to be equally matched in force, causing the outcome of the battle to be in doubt, is indeed a heavy task. It is a joyous task, however, to conquer as you are fighting, to proceed while conquering one city after another, and to humiliate the enemy battle after battle. Such will be the case if you but conduct yourself courageously, commensurate with you strength—be it that you battle as a child, a young man, or a man. You are so fearful of the battle because you do not proceed courageously, instead, due to your laxity, carelessness and lack of seriousness you give the enemy the opportunity to get the advantage over you. This makes them more courageous and you become weaker. Therefore, lift yourself up in the ways of the Lord and courageously engage yourself. Resist the devil and he will flee from you. (342-342)

RCA Synod Round Up

Tis the season for denominations to get together and hash out there business. Important work, even if unbearable at times. This year I’ll be a delegate at the Reformed Church in America’s General Synod, June 21-26 at Trinity College in Palos Heights, Illinois. This is an assignment that comes up every five or six years and not one I look forward to. I appreciate your prayers.

There are a number of important issues at this year’s Synod, including:

1. Considering alternative funding models.

2. Moving to a biennial Synod.

3. Several recommendations related to the promotion of social justice.

4. Recommendations and overtures to the remove the “conscience clauses” which were instituted over 30 years ago to maintain peace and diversity on the issue of women’s ordination.

5. Several overtures calling for a renewed commitment to biblical marriage and making clear that those who perform or promote gay marriages open themselves up to church discipline.

As you are able, pray for the various denominations assembling this summer. For those following the RCA, especially the issue of homosexuality, I’ve included many pertinent links from my blog below:

It’s Probably Not the Worship Style

If We Believe All the Same Things, Why Do Our Churches Seem So Different?

The Church and Homosexuality: Ten Commitments

What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality

Five Reasons Christians Should Continue to Oppose Homosexuality

Does the Heidelberg Catechism Have Anything to Say About Homosexuality

An Overture Regarding Homosexuality and the RCA

A Series on Homosexuality and the RCA

Homosexuality and the RCA: A Call for Action, Consistency, and Faithfulness (Part 1)

Homosexuality and the RCA: A Call for Action, Consistency, and Faithfulness (Part 2)

Un-churching of a Church

No, Homosexuality is Not Just an “Ethical Issue”

Death by Dialogue

What Else We Confess

A Status Confessionis Issue

 

Freedom in Christ

Guest Blogger: Jason Helopoulos

One of my favorite chapters in the Bible is Romans 6. I heard Romans 6 explained for the first time in a seminary classroom. The professor walked us through this chapter and as he did a true joy and peace began to occupy my heart and mind. It was one of those moments where I wanted the class to go on forever and also end as soon as possible. When the class did conclude I ran out the door, skipped my next class, and raced home to walk (or more accurately—”run”) my wife through Romans 6. She was gracious and listened as her young seminary student husband seized by zeal and enthusiasm rushed through a teaching of Romans 6. The lesson was probably lost in the moment, but I just had to share this new knowledge with someone.

The truth that was opened to me that day was that I am not only free from the guilt of sin, but also its reign and power. Paul uses “regal” language in Romans 6 (i.e. dominion, reign, under, etc.). In so doing he personifies sin as if it was a king sitting upon the throne. What struck me that day is that where sin once sat on the throne of my heart and life, grace now sits. In Christ, sin is no longer my sovereign. It is no longer my master. I am no longer a slave to sin having to obey its every enticement and command. I have been set free.

Our new found freedom in Christ is one of the most liberating doctrines of the Christian faith. And we need to have a full view and understanding of this freedom. In the Reformed community there has been quite an emphasis of late on the freedom we have in Christ from the guilt of sin. Thank God! That is essential in our Gospel preaching and teaching. But let us with equal force remind one another that we have been set free from the reign and power of sin as well. This is just as essential to our Gospel preaching and teaching.

In Christ I have been set free from the guilt of sin, but not that alone. I have also been set free from its reign and power. When we think about the Gospel, speak of proclaiming the Gospel, and encourage one another in the Gospel, we need to remember that the Gospel proclaims that we are set free from sin in Christ—free from its guilt, its reign, and its power. Let us teach, preach, and encourage one another in the full spectrum of our freedom from sin in Christ. What joy, peace, and godly living emerges from such knowledge.

The One Indispensable Rule for Using Social Media

Whether you are a tween, a teen, a pastor, a politician, a grandma, or a grad student, whether you blog, tweet, post, or pin, here is the one indispensable social media rule you must follow if you want to be wise, edifying, and save yourself a lot of anguish:

Assume that everyone, everywhere will read what you write and see what you post.

No matter your settings or how tight your circle is, you ought to figure that anyone in the world could come across your social media. All it takes is a link or a search or a bunch of friends you don’t know gathered around a phone that belongs to someone you do know. Anyone can see everything. Your pastor, your parishoners, your ex-whatever, your boss, your prospective employer, your spouse, your kids, your in-laws, your I don’t know if people forget  fans, your constituents, your opponents, your enemies, your parole officer, the girl you like, the dude who freaks you out, the feds, the papers–assume everyone can read your rant and see your pics.

I’m not a conspiracy theorists or a worry-wort. I’m not saying the IRS is spying on you at this moment or That Guy is stalking you. But you ought to assume that any of them could if they really wanted to.

It’s amazing what some people post online. Do we forget that a thousand other folks are reading this intimate declaration of marital affection or this lambasting of all that their family holds dear? I wonder if people realize that what we post is who we are to hundreds or thousands of people. So no matter what we think we are like in real life, to most people who know of us, they only know us as that guy obsessed with Ron Paul or that girl obsessed with dieting or the pastor who seems to hate everyone or the cynical college kid or the older checking out strange things through Socialcam.

Remembering this one indispensable rule should remind of us two related guidelines for Christians.

First, you represent Christ in a real way even if it is in the virtual world. Most people will know that you go to church, what church you go to, and that you claim to be a Christian. So let’s all think before we post. If we go by the name of “little Christ” we ought to be careful to show a little more Christ.

Second, if you need to be critical (and my blog is critical at times) write in such a way that you would not be embarrassed to have the object of your criticism read it with his mother nearby. This doesn’t mean we have to be lily-livered or call for the nice police every time a Christians disagrees strongly with some other person or idea. It means we should be humane and remember we are writing about other humans. By God’s grace, it took me only a week in blogging to learn this lesson. One of my first blogs (now deleted) was a snarky post about an author I wasn’t too keen on. Several days later I was speaking at an event when one of the close friends of this author came up and rebuked for my snark. I have to say he was right. Even though I had legitimate criticisms of this author’s views, my post didn’t edify and didn’t take into account that a real person would read what I wrote.

This was a valuable lesson for me as a blogger, one that I still need to recall and one that many authors, bloggers, pundits, and critics never seem to heed. In our internet age even the most famous people can come across what some unfamous person says about them. And just because someone is famous or rich or powerful or will never meet us doesn’t mean our words can be careless and callous. Even though my writing can be polemical I always try to keep in mind: how would I feel to meet this person face to face or have him call me up sand say “I just read what you wrote on your blog.” Rick Warren, John Piper, President Obama, Lebron James–love ‘em or leave ‘em, agree or disagree, commend or criticize, they still deserve to be treated with basic human dignity.

So be careful little fingers what you post. The internet is like God and like the devil. It sees all and forgives nothing. Knowing this, I will still tweet and blog, and I’m sure I’ll make mistakes from time to time. But I hope I wont forget the one indispensable rule. Remember, the web that gives you access to the world allows for worldwide access to you. And if you don’t like that bargain, you can always shut the screen, put down the phone, and stop feeding the beast.

 

RCA Integrity Leadership Conference June 18-19

It’s not too late to sign up for the RCA Integrity Leadership Conference which runs next Monday and Tuesday.

Who can come? Anyone. Most of the attendees are RCA folks, with some good CRC friends sprinkled in to keep us on our toes.

Where? Trinity Evangelical Divinity School in Deerfield, IL.

Who will be speaking? Carl Trueman, Scott Manetsch, and myself.

What is the theme? Church unity.

Does this mean Trueman is now a celebrity pastor? No. This is a very small conference and we will try to treat Carl poorly.

Why the Mission of the Church Discussion Still Matters

When our book What Is the Mission of the Church? came out last fall it generated a fair number of responses, including some heavy (and usually respectful) pushback. We tried to respond to a few of these thoughtful responses. Since then the conversation has quieted down, which is entirely appropriate.

But that doesn’t mean the issue is any less urgent. Few Christians would question that disciplemaking is at the heart of the church’s missionary imperative. No evangelical is against evangelism, reaching unreached peoples, and making disciples. And yet, I believe we are blind to serious dangers if we think we can pay mere lipservice to these things, spotlight everything else, and still expect our missionary heartbeat to keep beating. For many churches and many Christians our mission work and mission aims have become indistinguishable from that of any number of humanitarian organizations.

Last week I was reading through a Christian magazine and saw a page with short blurbs about local church life. The snippets included a story about a church dedicating a wind turbine, a church celebrating clean water for Earth Day, and a worship leader organizing a shoe donation. These were three of the six stories about church life (in fairness, one did mention discipleship).

Similarly, while checking out a church website several months ago I was struck by the goal of their missions program: “to connect people and their resources with opportunities to respond to human need in the name of Jesus.” Of the local missions supported by the church one was a food pantry, another a fair trade coffee shop, and the third an organization that rebuilds homes.

And finally, I noticed recently that a large missions conference, in describing what attendees will experience at the conference, talked about “exposure to global issues and realities” and a special track in “poverty and social justice” but there was no indication in this list that the conference would alert attendees to the plight of the lost or the urgent need to share the gospel and call people to faith and repentance.

In my experience, there is hardly a college Christian in the country who needs to be reminded that God cares about the justice and poverty. Almost every young up-and-comer Christianity Today highlights on their back page is involved in or passionate about some kind of social justice ministry. It’s not like we are sending out a generation of Christians into the world who are so zealous to rescue the eternally perishing that they won’t be bothered to give a cup of cold water or protest injustice. The opposite is much more likely to be true, that scores of mission trips, mission budgets, and missional pursuits are full of good humanitarian deeds with little thought about heaven and hell and the proclamation of the gospel.

I’m not saying that evangelicalism’s better missional thinkers are making this mistake. What I am suggesting is that we are making a mistake if we think no one is.

Consider this sentence:

What would it take to change the world, provide food for the hungry, and water to the thirsty, teach children to read, and keep them healthy, shelter families and train a new generation, give the poor a chance to better themselves, create a worldwide network of peacemakers, and conquer a disease that has killed or crippled millions?

This sentence poses a fine question, one which provokes us to pursue noble goals. It almost sounds like the mission statement for a church, or the introduction to a new conference, or, for some, the summation of the Christian life, but it’s the opening line to the promotional video for Rotary International. I have nothing against Rotarians. Who could? Their motto is “service above self.” That’s a much better way to live—for you and for everyone else—than striving for “self above service.” It is good. It is honorable. It is important. And done with the right motives from the right faith, humanitarian service is profoundly pleasing to God. But is it the mission of the church?

If service broadly defined as bettering nutrition and reducing illiteracy, with or without gospel proclamation and disciplemaking, is Christian mission, then the Rotary Club belongs with Carey, Judson, and Paul in the pantheon of missionary heroes. If not, then we still have some work to do in helping our people see what is the mission of the church. Doing good is great, but only good news saves.

Monday Morning Humor

The church was all abuzz yesterday because this week is. . . . drumroll. . . .family camp! That’s right, this is the week where we let our children reenact Lord of the Flies and parents voluntarily decide to take a vacation that is seventeen times harder than real life. For the first time in eight years providence has frowned upon our family so that we are in town during the church’s camping week. So the DeYoungs have purchased an eight person tent (it has two rooms!) and we’ll be enjoying nature (and bathrooms) with a large portion of our congregation. Were it not for the fellowship (which really will be nice) the prospect of living outside with five children–on purpose–would be even more puzzling. I just hope my books don’t get too sandy.

The Price of a Feel-Good Faith

Thomas E. Bergler in The Juvenilization of American Christianity:

Many larger American churches have remained vibrant by adapting to the preferences of younger generations. Many of those adaptations have enriched the church. In 1950, many people who went to church did so out of a sense of social obligation. While at church, they didn’t expect either to have fun or to be challenged to work for social justice. Just as many people go to church today, but now, by and large, they want to be there be there because their faith is providing them with strong feelings of connection to God, to others, and to a spiritual mission. As a result of juvenilization, they are more likely to have intense experiences of God, participate in a service or mission trip, and engage in Christian political activism. Evangelical youth ministries made religious conservatives less dour and legalistic. Progressive Protestant, Catholic, and African American youth leaders eventually won the battle to get Christians to see social and political concerns as legitimate elements of their faith.

Of course these changes came at some cost. White evangelicals invested heavily in young people and aggressively adapted to their preferences for an informal, entertaining, feel-good faith. They ended up with churches full of Christians who think that the purpose of God and the Christian faith is to help them feel better. Liberal Protestant youth leaders seriously misjudged the cultural tastes of young people and underestimated how much effort it would take to form countercultural social activities. They ended up with aging congregations and declining numbers. Roman Catholics were slow to juvenilize their churches and invested less in the spiritual formation of youth than they had before the crises of the sixties. They ended up with thousands of nominal Catholic adherents with relatively low levels of religious knowledge and commitment. African American churches managed to retain a high level of religious loyalty without much juvenilization, thanks to the close identification between racial and religious identities among African Americans. But there are signs that younger generations of African Americans may now be less automatically connecting with the church, particularly in urban areas outside the South.

Although juvenilization has renewed American Christianity, it has also undermined Christian, it has also undermined Christian maturity. First, the faith has become overly identified with emotional comfort. And it is only a short step from a personalized, emotionally comforting faith to a self-centered one. Second, far too many Christians are inarticulate, indifferent, or confused about their theological beliefs. They view theology as an optional extra to faith, and assume that religious beliefs are a matter of personal preference. Many would be uncomfortable with the idea of believing something just because the Bible, the church, or some other religious authority teaches it. And they are particularly resistant to church teachings that impose behavioral restrictions. If we believe that a mature faith involves more than good feelings, vague beliefs, and living however we want, we must conclude that juvenilization has revitalized American Christianity at the cost of leaving many individual mires in spiritual immaturity. (224-225)

What Christians Do When They Believe and Feel about the Word of God Rightly

The Psalmist believed God’s word was true (Psalm 119: 42, 89, 96, 142, 160). He knew the Scriptures demanded what was right (Psalm 119:75, 86, 128, 137) and provided what was good (Psalm 119:1, 2, 6, 9, 24, 98-100, 105, 130). He delighted in God’s word (Psalm 119: 14, 24, 47, 70, 77, 103, 111, 129, 143, 174). He desired God’s word (Psalm 119:5, 10, 17, 20, 27, 29, 33-35, 40, 131, 135, 169). He depended on God’s word (Psalm 119:31, 50, 52). In other words, the Psalmist believed what we should believe about the word and felt what we should feel about the word.

And notice what happened as a result. When all this underground pressure of believing and feeling explode on to the surface it makes a splash. Our thoughts and our affections concerning the word of God can’t help but burst forth as a geyser of Spirit-led activity.

So what do Christians do when they believe and feel about the word of God rightly?

1. They sing (Psalm 119:172).

2. They speak (Psalm 119:13, 46, 79).

3. They study (Psalm 119:15, 48, 97, 148).

4. They store up (Psalm 119:11, 16, 83, 93, 148).

5. They obey the word (Psalm 119: 8, 44, 57, 129, 145, 146, 167, 168).

6. They praise God (Psalm 119:7, 62, 164, 171).

7. They pray for help (Psalm 119: 36, 58, 121-23, 147, 149-52, 153-60, 175-76).

These seven actions are the best indicator of what you and really believe and feel about God’s word. If you do these things, you probably believe what is right even if you can’t quite explain it; you probably have your affections in order even if they don’t always feel like much. And on the other hand, if there is no geyser bursting forth into these kinds of activities, you probably don’t feel what you should or really believe all that is true.

Sing, speak, study, store up, obey, praise, pray. That’s what Christians do with the word of God.

Two Things to Keep in Mind When Evangelicals Turn Catholic

As you may have heard, a few days ago Jason Stellman, a PCA pastor in Seattle area, announced on his blog that he was leaving the PCA because of questions surrounding sola Scriptura and sola fide.  By all appearances Stellman, a graduate of Westminster Seminary (Escondido) and the author of a 2009 book arguing for a Two Kingdoms theology, is leaving Protestantism for Rome. This move has generated even more interest because Stellman recently pressed charges against Peter Leithart in the Pacific Northwest Presbytery for deviating from the Westminster Standards with the latter’s Federal Vision theology. Not surprisingly, Leithart has weighed in on Stellman’s announcement, with Stellman explaining his actions in the Leithart prosecution here and saying more about his decision to leave the PCA here. If you’re interested, Doug Wilson and Carl Trueman have also had something to say about the whole mess.

What should be said about such an ordeal? I’ll leave it to others to dissect the ins and outs of Leithart’s trial and Stellman’s prosecution. I’m not qualified to do so. I’ll also leave it to others, for the time being at least, to mount a defense of sola Scriptura and sola fide. Without knowing Jason, I’m not going to judge his motives or how he’s handled the process. It looks to me as if Jason kept his ordination vows by making his reservations known to the presbytery and resigning his position. He appears to be a man of honesty and integrity, even with mistaken theological conclusions.

Instead of weighing in on any of that, I simply want to remind of us two points that we can easily forget when a somewhat high profile evangelical converts (or seems about to convert) to Rome.

1. Let’s remember that the traffic across the Tiber is not one way, not by a long shot. Because we live on the Protestant side of the river many people notice when one of our guys becomes Catholic. That’s natural when we may know the person’s books or have heard him at a conference or recognize him from the academy. But when a prominent Catholic becomes Protestant, we are unlikely to know about. How many evangelicals can name one prominent Catholic writer, speaker, or theologian alive and popular at the moment? I bet most evangelicals can’t think of more than two or three, like Scott Hahn and the Pope Benedict XVI, but Scott Hahn we know only because he used to be Protestant and the Pope is rather an unlikely convert. If there are Jason Stellman’s or Christian Smiths making the pilgrimage to Colorado Springs (or Grand Rapids, or Dallas, or Orland), few of us would know anything about it.

More importantly, we should remember that almost any Protestant church of any size in this country will be well populated with ex-Catholics. I know we have many in our congregation. They often come because their Catholicism was an empty tradition or they never knew the gospel or they never really heard the Bible taught. I’m not indicting every Catholic or claiming to explain every Catholic conversion to evangelicalism, I’m simply reminding us that the flow across the Tiber has benefited evangelicals more than it has Catholics.

Chris Castaldo, a former Catholic himself, understands the reality well:

According to the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life’s U.S. Religious Landscape Survey Changes in Americans’ Religious Affiliation there are currently 15 million former Catholics in America attending Protestant Churches, two-thirds of whom do so as evangelicals. Inactive or “lapsed” Catholics are 27.5 million strong in the US according to the Pew Forum. They constitute roughly 10 percent of the U.S. population, making them the second-largest religious demographic in America behind Roman Catholics at 77.7 million and ahead of the Southern Baptist Convention (at 16 million plus).

All that to say, let’s not think the Catholic church is emptying our evangelical churches. Quite the contrary.

2. Let’s be cautious about tracing a straight line of historical determinism which can explain someone’s change of mind. Why steps occurred and what thinking got in place which led Jason Stellman to reject sola Scriptura and sola fide? Only Jason and the Lord know for sure, and maybe only the Lord. Was Two Kingdoms theology the gateway drug? Confessionalism? A high view of sacraments? An appreciation for history and liturgy? It could be all or none of the above. And even it were all of the above that would not necessarily indict anything on that list. Granted, there are some common themes that surface among converts to Rome (e.g., tradition, beauty, authority), but it’s best to stick with the stated reasons for jumping the good ship Protestant and refrain from the temptation to psychoanalyze.

The human head and heart are complex. Even when patterns and missteps are noted in hindsight, we should be wary of creating tidy sequences of first this, then this, then that. As David Powlison points out in his masterful essay “The Ambiguously Cured Soul,” this historical determinism is what mars so much of today’s counseling. We think Judy hates women because her mom was mean, but the same mean mother could have just as likely “produced” a Judy that craves the approval of women, or becomes addicted to bad men, or dedicates her life to making sure women have the affection she never knew. In the same way, it’s tempting to think we know which doctrinal emphases might lead someone to Rome (or worse). But as a general rule such warnings are worth little. Someone might first get attracted to Rome because of a robust view of church tradition, or because he read G.K. Chesterton, or because he saw A Man for All Seasons, or because he loves the music from The Mission, or because he once went on a tour of Italy out of his deep love for lasagna.

If our theology is unbiblical or imbalanced let’s talk about that. But if our theological interests overlap with those typically associated with Catholicism, don’t send out the doctrinal fire trucks just yet. There is no straight line from Wheaton to Rome, no one wrong turn at Orland Park that gets you on the fast track to the Vatican. I’m not sure what else Stellman might have gotten wrong on his way to leaving Protestantism, but I do know that he’s sadly getting sola Scriptura and sola fide wrong. And that’s what should concern evangelicals.