Kevin DeYoung's Blog, page 177
May 24, 2011
My Summer Plans
[image error]Officially, as of yesterday, I am on sabbatical.
In actuality, I have meetings and conferences this week and won't begin to let my proverbial hair down for another seven days. But after that I will be away from my church, away from conferences and meetings, and away from the daily grind of emails and phone calls until the end of August.
It's hard to believe, but I've been the Senior Pastor at University Reformed Church for seven years. The plan from the beginning has been to grant me a sabbatical after seven years of service. So here I am. What a blessing the church is giving me and my family.
The Plan
What will I be doing? I'll be spending more time with my family. We'll travel a little. We'll go to the beach. We'll visit family. I'll have my evenings free. I'll sit with my wife and kids during church. I'll take my boys to a White Sox game. I'll read books (lots of books I hope). I'll pray (lots of prayer I hope). I'll let my wife sleep in and I'll help my older kids finish their Star Wars Lego set. We"ll go see Cars 2 and Kung Fu Panda 2. In August, Lord willing, we'll have baby #5.
That's the royal "we."
Along the way I hope to write a book on personal holiness and the doctrine of union with Christ. The Bible says a lot about both, and yet I fear, for various reasons, we have not been terribly interested in either. Stay tuned.
Da Blog
And what about blogging? How does that fit in on a sabbatical? Do I drop out for three months, keep plugging away as usual, line up guest bloggers, fill the days with reruns, or give my platform over to Brian Regan and Julian Smith for the summer? Here's what I've decided to–it's a slightly slimmed down version of normal.
Monday – I'll keep trying to find clean, funny Monday Morning Humor. I know that's why most of you are here!
Tuesday – A new post
Wednesday – A series of short devotionals (200-250 words) on the kings of Judah
Thursday – A new post
Friday – A series of short devotionals on specific ways we can glorify God
Saturday – Maybe something, maybe not
Sunday – Off
This schedule will allow me to keep posting during the summer, without making a big chunk of my sabbatical about blogging. I hope you all are well served and I can be refreshed.
And get some rest too while you're at it.
The Devil Is Not in the Details
It may have sounded prophetic at one point, but now it's rather prosaic. Everyone knows (or is supposed to know) that individualism is bad. An emphasis on the individual—such a common theme in the West—has been blamed for a myriad of problems, everything from friendlessness to consumerism, from contemporary praise music to gated communities. And no doubt, individualism has its downside. For the church, it's meant an aversion to authority, a reluctance to accept certain elements of covenant theology, and a community life that isn't everything it could be. Problem duly noted.
But let us not forget that the reason for individualism in the West is, among other factors, because Christianity taught the West to prize the individual. After all, God did not start by making a community; he made a man, Adam. And he gave to that man dignity and worth as a creature made in the divine image. The individual matters because each individual matters to God.
There's always a danger in the Christian life of dealing only with generalities. The temptation is to float in the fog of general truths and general promises instead of seeing with laser-sharpness the specificity of God's truth and God's promises. The truth is not just that all men are sinners; therefore we must be sinners too. The truth is I am a sinner and I sin, not general theoretical sins, but actual, condemnable, particular sins. Conversely, the promise of his love is more than a general blanketing of good will toward all people, like the t-shirt that says, "Jesus loves you. Then again, he loves everybody." We need to know that God's love does not rest upon us at the end of a syllogism. He loves us—loves me, loves you—specifically, particularly, uniquely, and individually.
As much as some newer songs abuse references to the self, we should never forget it was the Psalms that first stuffed church singing full of personal pronouns. Our faith is not private, but it is certainly personal. Christianity is much more than "me and Jesus" but it is not less.
If the devil cannot stop the truth from being known, his next strategy is to stop it from being felt. He wants to keep the truths about election, providence, redemption, sin, forgiveness, heaven, and hell neutered with theories, principles, and generalities. The last thing he wants is for the Christian to understand that his sins are his sins and his Christ is his Christ. The devil will gladly allow us a broad knowledge of godly propositions. It's the I-me-my of the gospel details he wants us to avoid.
True faith does more than believe the gospel pronouncement; it believes gospel promises. According to the Heidelberg Catechism, "True faith is not only a knowledge and conviction that everything God reveals in his Word is truth; it is also a deep-rooted assurance, created in me by the Holy Spirit through the gospel, that out of sheer grace earned for us by Christ, not only others, but I too, have had my sins forgiven, have been made forever right with God, and have been granted salvation" (Q/A 21). This is Christian individualism at its best. Faith isn't faith if it merely believes that God exists and God is good. True faith believes that God is and the God who is will be good to me because of Christ.
When you come to the end of your life, what do you want buried in your heart—a general truth that God is gracious and merciful or the particular promises that your sin is forgiven by Christ (1 John 1:7), you have been crucified with Christ (Gal. 2:20), and in death you will gain Christ (Phil. 1:21)? Calvin maintains that the knowledge we want in our last days "is not merely of a general kind, as though believers were merely in a general way persuaded, that the children of God will be in a better condition after death." In other words, we will have no consolation in death unless we find assurance individually. "Everyone must have a knowledge peculiar to himself," Calvin goes on to say, "for this, and this only, can animate me to meet death with cheerfulness–if I am fully persuaded, that I am departing a better life."
There may be no "I" in team, but when it comes to claim the specific truths of Scripture and God's particular promises for the individual believer, there is an "I" in faith.
This article originally appeared in the May issue of Tabletalk.
May 23, 2011
May 21, 2011
Preparing for Your Funeral
J.C. Ryle reflects on death and what makes you a true believer:
When we have carried you to your narrow bed, let us not have to hunt up stray words, and scraps of religion, in order to make out that you were a true believer. Let us not have to say in a hesitating way one to another, "I trust he is happy; he talked so nicely one day; and he seemed so please with a chapter in the Bible on anther occasion; and he liked such a person, who is a good man." Let us be able to speak decidedly as to your condition. Let us have some solid proof of your repentance, your faith, and your holiness, so that none shall be able for a moment to question your state.
Depend on it, without this, those you leave behind can feel no solid comfort about your soul. We may use the form of religion at your burial, and express charitable hopes. We may meet you at the churchyard gate, and say, "Blessed are the dead that die in the Lord." But this will not alter your condition! If you die without conversion to God, without repentance, and without faith–your funeral will only be the funeral of a lost soul; you had better never have been born. (Holiness, 228-229)
May 20, 2011
Not Separate, But Unequal
Every first semester theology student knows the difference between general revelation and special revelation. God reveals himself to us in two ways–by the creation we can see with our eyes and by the words written down for our hearing in Scripture. Or to put things more precisely: general revelation is God's self-disclosure through the created world; special revelation is God's self-disclosure through the spoken word of an apostle or prophet, or their words inscripturated in the Bible. Both means of revelation are important, and both are taught in Scripture
Though I believe everything in the previous paragraph, I confess I get nervous nowadays when Christians start talking about the "Two Books" of God's revelation. It's true that we know God by God's works and God's word. But from this it does not follow that science and the Bible are equal sources of authority. Of course, it's a truism that "all truth is God's truth" so that in the end there is no real conflict between the Bible and science. The same could be said for sociology or economics or horticulture or history. Whatever is true will not be contradicted by the Truth. But nothing is infallibly true like the word of God.
Some Christians are too quick to reinterpret the Bible when it seems to contradict "the clear findings of science." We've misread the Bible before, they will say. To which we might respond, "Yes, and we've misread science too." I'm not trying to weigh in on any particular scientific debate with this post. I sympathize with Christians who struggle to reconcile what they hear from scientists and what they see in the Bible about a particular issue. We should not be quick to dismiss these questions. It is possible to read the Bible wrongly. It is possible for the Church to miss the mark for a long time. But every Christian should agree that if the Bible teaches one thing and scientific consensus teaches something else, we will not ditch the Bible or change the Bible for science. The Two Books are not separate, but they are unequal.
The Belgic Confession provides a standard definition of general and special revelation.
We know him [God] by two means:
First, by the creation, preservation, and government of the universe, since the universe is before our eyes like a beautiful book in which all creatures, great and small, are a letters to make us ponder the invisible things of God; his eternal power and his divinity, as the apostle Paul says in Romans 1:20.
All these things are enough to convict men and to leave them without excuse.
Second, he makes himself known to us more openly by his holy and divine Word, as much as we need in this life, for his glory and for the salvation of his own. (Article 2)
Notice that the difference between general and special revelation. The former gives us a sense of God's power and divine nature so that we are left without excuse. The latter reveals God "more openly" so that we might be saved. The doctrine of general and special revelation was never meant to make the Bible bow to science. The heavens declare the glory of God, but the law of the Lord is perfect and the testimony of the Lord is sure (Psalm 19:1; 7). Jesus can illustrate with the lilies of the field, but "it is written" can conquer the devil.
I am not for a moment arguing for obscurantism when it comes to the hard questions of faith and science. Pastors who haven't had a science class since the tenth grade are often too quick to dismiss the tough issues raised by geology, biology, and genetics. What I am saying is that the Christian must believe everything the Bible teaches no matter who says it can't be so. General revelation can show us there is a God and convict those who don't worship him rightly. But special revelation speaks more clearly, more openly, and more authoritatively. Let's be open to correcting errant interpretations or traditions, but let us never change a jot or tittle of the Good Book because the book of nature seems to suggest we should. Let God be true though every one were a liar (Rom. 3:4).
For more reading on the interplay between faith and science, you may want to check out: Redeeming Science by Vern Poythress and Science and Faith by C. John Collins.
May 19, 2011
Not Another Sacrament
Harold Best on the role of faith and music:
I want to jump ahead a few chapters for a moment and apply this concept to music in corporate worship. (We could use vestments or architecture or sculpture or liturgy to make the same point.) If in making music or listening to it I assume that faith will bring substance and evidence to the music, so as [to] make it more "worshipful," I am getting into real trouble. If I truly love the music–that is, if I have chosen a church that uses "my music" and I am deeply moved by it–I can make the mistake of coupling faith to the musical experience by assuming that the power and effectiveness of music is what brings substance and evidence to my faith. I can then quite easily forge a connection between the power of music and the nearness of the Lord. Once this happens, I may even slip fully into the sin of equating the power of music and the nearness of the Lord. At that point music joins the bread and wine in the creation of a new sacrament or even a new kind of transubstantiation.
Or let's say that I deeply love Jesus but I detest the music–it is not "my music." What am I then to do in the absence if a linkage between having faith and loving the music? Where is God in all of this? If he is in the music, I will never find him, because to me there is no substance or evidence, even though others are seemingly finding him there. Do I wait for the right kind of music so that my faith becomes effectual? Do I look for another church, hoping that my faith will be fed and my felt needs met? Or do I turn from the music to the Lord, knowing that faith remains faith and the music is merely music and not a sacramental substance that mediates between God and me? I hope that the last question becomes the only question. Otherwise, faith needs exterior scaffolding for worship to become authentic worship. (Unceasing Worship, 29-30 )
Other good books on worship include: Worship by the Book, edited by D.A. Carson; Worship Matters by Bob Kauflin; Christ-Centered Worship by Bryan Chapell; Give Praise to God, edited by Philip Ryken et. al.
May 18, 2011
Five Thoughts on Worship
There is no shortage of good books (and bad!) on the theology of worship. The best is David Peterson's Engaging with God: A Biblical Theology of Worship (IVP, 1992). Peterson's book is not a practical how-to on worship planning, but rather an in-depth, exegetical look at the biblical understanding of worship.
Worship, according to Peterson, is first of all a whole life lived to the glory of God.
Throughout the Bible, acceptable worship means approaching or engaging with God on the terms he proposes and in the manner that he makes possible. It involves honouring, serving and respecting him, abandoning any loyalty or devotion that hinders an exclusive relationship with him. Although some of Scripture's terms for worship may refer to specific gestures of homage, rituals of priestly ministrations, worship is more fundamentally faith expressing itself in obedience and adoration. Consequently, in both Testaments it is often shown to be a personal and moral fellowship with God relevant to every sphere of life.
While he argues throughout the book that all of life is worship, Peterson also recognizes that the New Testament speaks of the corporate gathering as a specific kind of all-of-life worship. Peterson makes several helpful points with regards to corporate worship.
First, the starting point for reflection is the conviction "that God fully and finally manifested himself in the person of his Son. Jesus Christ is at the center of New Testament thinking about worship." He is the mediator between God and man. He is the procurer of salvation and blessing for the nations. He is the new temple in which and around which all true believers gather. Christ draws us to himself in worship and through him a new relationship with the Father is made possible.
Second, true worship is gospel-centered. The gospel–Jesus' life, death, and resurrection–is what makes worship possible. The gospel is what we proclaim in worship. The gospel is what we sing in worship. The gospel is what calls a people together in worship, arouses a people to praise in worship, and sends a people out in a life of worship. Some churches ignore the gospel. Others reject the gospel. Many churches only touch the gospel tangentially, focusing on nebulous truths like relationships or connecting with God or acceptance or love. But in the best churches, never does a Sunday go by when God's people don't sing about the cross or glory in our Redeemer or marvel at substitutionary atonement.
Third, "Jesus removes the need for a cultic approach to God in the traditional sense." Cultic doesn't refer to cults, but to the ritualized worship of Israel. Because of the uniqueness and completeness of Christ's work, there is no longer a need for a human priesthood, no need for a sacrificial system, and no sacred buildings and implements. The heavily symbolized, strictly regulated approach to worship in the Old Testament has been abrogated. Hebrews 8 and 9 make clear that the regulations of the first covenant have been fulfilled and superseded in Christ.
So, the pastor matters in the church service, but not as a priest. The architecture matters, but not as sacred space. The Lord's Supper matters, but not as a sacrifice. Christ is our High Priest, our Temple, and our Sacrifice. What matters is that we worship him in spirit and truth (John 4:24). For these reasons, we are probably not quite right when we speak of "entering into worship" or "lingering in his presence." Through Christ, we are already in God's presence. Through Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, we have already come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God and to the heavenly assembly (Heb. 12:22-24).
Fourth, corporate worship is set apart from all-of-life worship in its focus on edification. Because of this focus, there are many activities that are appropriate for the Christian in all of life that aren't appropriate in a worship service. I can change diapers to the glory of God, but changing diapers in front of the gathered congregation would be considerably less appropriate because it does not edify like preaching, praying, and admonishing one another in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs.
Fifth, corporate worship is meant to be an anticipation of the heavenly gathering of God's people. The grand scenes of heavenly worship in Revelation are both present and future, and they are meant to be mirrored on earth. Like the saints and angels in Revelation, we too should direct all our attention to the throne. We too should sing of Christ's work. We too should be earnest and uncompromising in our devotion to God. Our weekly gatherings–sometimes small, sometimes clumsy, sometimes forgettable–are meant to be a sweet foretaste of the heavenly worship we will one day experience for ages unending.
May 17, 2011
It's Probably Not the Worship Style
I was at a denominational meeting not too long ago, sitting at a table with half a dozen other pastors and elders. At one spot in the agenda we were supposed to take 10 minutes to talk about vision and direction of the denomination. This led to a conversation about our churches and why so many RCA congregations keep losing members. An older man at my table lamented that his church continues to shrink. What used to be a rather large church has declined to a shadow of its former glory. He quickly offered an explanation, "People just don't like traditional worship anymore. We have the hymns and the liturgy and the organ. The growing churches have guitars and drums. Our style just doesn't work anymore."
I wasn't sure quite how to respond. There can be a hundred reasons for a church's decline–some of them the fault of the church, some of them not. But I knew a little bit about the church this man was from. It's a church with classic worship and liberal theology. They have hosted pro-gay events before (to cite one example). Knowing this, I asked the man if he thought the gospel was faithfully preached each Sunday. Of course, he said he was certain it was. I suggested that the reasons for their decline were probably more complex than simply their worship style. I didn't get far in the conversation except to add that there are plenty of examples of thriving churches with classic worship and we shouldn't assume our church problems can be fixed by a simple change of instrumentation.
I don't share that story to suggest that liberal churches always shrink and robust gospel-centered churches always grow. But I do wish church leaders would stop assuming that their problems boil down to a certain worship style and can be fixed with another. I run into church leaders fairly often who struggle to make sense of their declining numbers. I feel for these brothers (and sometimes they are sisters in my circles). I don't know all the reasons for church growth or church decline. Growth does not equal faithfulness any more than decline equals failure. Sometimes situations, histories, and circumstances are outside our control. Regenerating human hearts always is. So we should be slow to judge another church's fruitfulness.
And yet, we can ask better questions. I'm not against changing worship styles. There may be good reasons to do so in some circumstances. But I doubt very much that's usually the real problem. Instead of assuming that young people will flock to our churches if we drop the organ and plug in the guitar (and we have both at our church), declining denominations and shrinking churches should ask deeper, harder questions:
Is the gospel faithful preached?
Is the Bible taught with clarity and passion?
Are the sermons manifestly rooted in a text of Scripture?
Do the elders/pastors and deacons meet the qualifications for church office laid out in the New Testament?
Are the sacraments faithfully administered and protected?
Is church discipline practiced?
Do the elders exercise personal care over the flock?
Are there good relationships among the staff and other leaders?
Is the worship service put together thoughtfully and carried out with undistracting excellence (as much as possible).
Do the people in the congregation sing the songs with gusto or are they going through the motions?
Is a high bar set for church membership?
Are the people of the church engaged in personal ministry?
Is the congregation marked by increasing prayer and evangelism?
Do the pastors believe in the complete trustworthiness of all of Scripture?
Do they take adequate time for study and preparation?
Do they truly believe and eagerly rejoice in their church's/denomination's statement of faith, creeds, and confessions?
Are their lives examples of personal holiness?
There are scores of other questions you could ask. These are only a sample. It may be after facing these questions that a church decides to change a few programs or alter a few songs. But until a congregation asks these tough questions, the quick fixes will not fix much of anything. Don't assume the style is the thing. Check your substance first.
May 16, 2011
Monday Morning Humor
Speaking of parenting…
(Sorry, there is one mild expletive a third of the way through, but still a great bit of comedy by a great storyteller.)
