Joshua D. Jones's Blog, page 5

Don't Mark Me 'Israel'

ARE WE, THE CHURCH, the ‘New Israel’? Some think so. The position is variously referred as ‘supersessionism’ or 'replacement theology'. 
What does the Bible say?
The term ‘Israel’ is used 87 times in the New Testament. As far as we can tell, the meaning is rather straightforward. Like in the Hebrew Scriptures it means, well, Israel. Israel in the ethnic and national sense that we tend to think of even to this day. 
[There is one exception. I will mention it at the end.]
Jesus and PaulIn the Gospels, the term is used 31 times and it’s hard to imagine in these contexts Jesus ever meaning it as a spiritual code for ‘the church’. In Matthew 10 Jesus commands his disciples not to go to the Gentiles or the Samaritans, ‘But rather got to he lost sheep of the house of Israel.’ Whenever Jesus talks about Israel, he means Israel―not the church.
What about Paul? Do basic terms take on new meanings after Pentecost?
Paul refers to Israel twenty-five times in his writings and five times in his speeches in Acts. Does Paul refer to us as ‘Israel’?
In his speeches in Acts, Paul still uses it to mean ethnic Israel. In Acts 13 he says, ‘Fellow Israelites and you Gentiles who worship God’. Likewise, his letters reflect similar usage. The most extensive treatment being in Romans 9-11.
It's in this passage that Paul goes into the most detail about the relationship between Israel and believing Gentiles. It is beyond the scope of this short blog to do an exposition of these three chapters, so let me encourage you: read it closely for yourselves. Take a pencil and underline every time Paul uses the term ‘Israel’. Then ask yourself if it is even possible that Paul is referring to the church. ____________ Go to the Bible directly and do your own word search. You'll be amazed at the clarity you find. ___________
But for some people Paul’s prediction of a future, national revival in Israel is too grand. Paul says ‘All Israel will be saved!’ (11.26). Surely, some think, this must be a reference to the church! But though understanding this phrase may fit our theological presuppositions, it doesn’t fit the context if we’re using a straightforward hermeneutic. In verses 11-25 Paul has been continually distinguishing between Israel and believing Gentiles. This is why Dr. Keith A. Mathison (part of the late RC Sproul’s teaching fellowship) comments here,
We have to remember that Paul’s concern in these chapters is for his kinsmen according to the flesh (9:1–5). His prayer in this context is for the salvation of unbelieving Israel (10:1). In Romans 11:26, Paul is revealing that the prayer of 10:1 will be answered once the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.
After telling us many things about God’s purposes for ethnic Israel in chapters 9-11, Paul leaves us with hope that prayers for Israel’s salvation will one day have fulfilment in a massive, spiritual awakening.
What About Galatians Six?Other supersessionists, whose theology is desperate to find at least ONE reference to the church as ‘Israel’, may look to Galatians six. In it, Paul declares in verse sixteen, at the end of his letter, ‘Mercy to the Israel of God!’ They will say that Paul is praying for mercy for the Galatian church―the ones he’s just written to.
But there are problems with this view. Is it right to refer to just one local congregation as ‘the Israel of God’―as opposed to the whole church worldwide? Also, is this interpretation demanded by the context?
No. It’s not demanded. It’s wide open to be seen in at least one of two ways (if not more). In the context Paul is helping the Galatians deal with false teachers from Israel who are telling the Gentile believers that they must also become Jews if the want to be true Christians. Much of the discussion revolves round circumcision. Verses 15 and 16 together read:
15 For both circumcision and uncircumcision mean nothing; what matters instead is a new creation. 16 May peace come to all those who follow this standard, and mercy to the Israel of God! (HSCB)
The first way one could read this is in a parallel fashion. In that way we see ‘Israel’ as a synonymous repeating those ‘who follow this standard’ (the obedient Galatian church). A second equally obvious way would be to see it as a prayer for two separate entities: peace for those following his instruction andmercy for the Israel from which ‘the circumcised’ false teachers are emerging.
Is there anything we can look at to determine which understanding is the most likely? As this is the only time Paul uses the term ‘Israel’ anywhere in Galatians, we must look at how he uses it in his other letters. If we do that, we see that the most obvious understanding is overwhelmingly that we understand ‘the Israel of God’ to mean just that. Israel.

Again, do your own word study on Paul's use of the term. You won't need a postgraduate degree in hermeneutics. 
Circumcision? Some may ask, ‘What about when Paul discusses true circumcision or inward Jewishness?’ Sure. Those are great discussions. But let's not conflate the topics. They're not identical. Paul uses different terms because he addresses different subjects. Having God reach inside of you and circumcise your heart (being a Jew inwardly) is a powerful reference to true, individual devotion. Though it may overlap with the subject of God’s purpose for corporate, ethnic Israel, the issues are not fully synonymous. When using ‘Israel’ the New Testament means Israel.
The One ExceptionAs stated at the beginning of the blog, there is one exception. It's only fair to mention it. There is one place in the New Testament where there is room for a poetic or symbolic license in understanding the term ‘Israel’. It's John’s usage in (unsurprisingly) the book of Revelation. There John refers to ‘the 144,000 taken from out of Israel.’ 
Understanding that passage (if not many throughout the book) is a task of elephantine proportions. Commentators are all over the place in their understanding who exactly these 144,000 are. My simple keyboard has no words to add to the effect of their true identity here.
And Us?It is for the reasons that we've briefly discussed here and more that Dr. Gerald McDermott, Anglican Professor of Divinity at Beeson, points out in his book, Israel Matters, ‘The Bible never suggests that the church is the “New Israel,” or that God’s covenant promises to Israel have been revoked.’
There is a sense in which Jesus Himself is the fulfilment of Israel. But neither He nor Paul ever label us Gentiles as ‘Israel’. We are referred to as 'co-heirs' with Israel in the Messiah. We are grafted in as wild branches into the saving purposes of God. I gladly accept all the descriptions and titles that God in his mercy sees fit to grant me. 
But please don't mark me 'Israel'. That name is already taken._______________ For more, please check out our book Elijah Men Eat Meat: Readings to slaughter your inner Ahab and pursue Revival and Reform 

The Royal Wedding & A Whore's Desolation

'I saw the Holy City come down from Heaven
as a Bride prepared for her Husband.' -JohnHUMAN HISTORY WILL END with a royal wedding. It will be the wedding all other weddings were meant to point us towards. On that day, no one will complain about the wedding sermon; for the Groom will be the only Word that is given. He will be all that is necessary. The Bride was once an outsider to this monarchy. But the Groom has made her worthy with His own blood.
In addition to the breathtaking exaltation of the Bride, we are also amazed at the complete collapse of another woman. While one is made glorious, the other is made desolate.
BabylonSpecial attention is given this femme fatale in the final pages of Scripture. John sees her and his mouth drops open in amazement. He has already introduced us to one Jezebel at the beginning of the book of Revelation. She was a local fake teacher in Thyatira. Now he uses similar language to describe a global city personified as a woman wrapped in colourful clothes that bewitches the whole world and tries to corrupt the people of God with sexual immorality and idolatry. 
Her beauty is a terror. This Jezebel does not desire to merely manipulate a beta-king like Ahab. Rather, this grander Jezebel makes all the Earth’s rulers and mighty men ‘drunk on the wine of her sexual immorality’. She militarises her magnetism. All the seduced gather round. They drool over her breasts and legs, are mesmerised by her dark eyes, and hunger to be lost in her hills and valleys. Like a magnificent black hole, she consumes whatever comes near.          There are two ways to understand this monstrous mistress. One way to view her is as the part of our world that delights in revolution against God. She is the cities of the earth that define themselves by sexual immorality and sophisticated idolatry. She is the dark side of Sodom, Corinth, Ancient Rome, 1930s Berlin, San Francisco, Vegas, Bangkok, Rio, and Amsterdam. She is the sites you visit online before you erase your browsing history. She has manifested herself in big ways throughout history, and will continue in even grander displays before the End. She is the counterpart to the Beast who influences through force and authority. She prefers to pull people into darkness with charm―not threats.           
We may also see her as the phantom that allures God’s people in every age to compromise. The Beast in Revelation persecutes Christ’s Bride from the outside. Jezebel corrupts her from within. Yes, the queen can be terribly totalitarian once fully enthroned. But she gets there craftily―one innocent compromise at a time. Though hell delights to see the holy Bride beaten down, it prefers to see her sell out. That’s why Jezebel pulls us away from the wholehearted worship of Yahweh and his Christ. She takes us from loyalty to the Scriptures and the power of the Spirit towards almost any socio-political cause. She infiltrates souls and congregations alike. She is Fake Church.           But have courage. John’s revelation displays the scene of her destruction. Just as Scripture records King Jehu judging the original Jezebel from his war chariot, so our greater King Jesus ‘judges the great prostitute’ from his battle horse. As dogs ate Jezebel’s body, so two beasts now ‘devour her flesh’. The feminine form once coveted by Kings is chewed by the cruellest of critters. She is judged―and the power of her allure shatters like stemware on stone.
The WeddingAt the eternal Wedding, our souls are no longer soured by sin. Our inner-Ahabs are buried and we are free. We love with liberated embrace, untainted by shadows of impropriety, jealousy, or fear of unrequited affection. We arrive at a sea of true and perfect love. The counterfeit is gone.
The blood that spilt from our bodies in heralding the gospel did not fall silently into earth’s soil. The Universe’s Judge has heard the cry of every innocent drop. Our own hands renounced vengeance because we knew our Avenger would be faithful. We knew because we read the culmination of the Holy Book where time ends and eternity begins.
Now, the New Jerusalem arrives. The voice of the Bridegroom shouts in celebration. God’s people party, for there is no more perversion to protest. Our protesting is done; paradise is here. Once persecuted saints now laugh as they feast on meat, not brought by ravens, but by angels. Battle-scarred prophets raise their glasses in cheer. There is now and forever only a glorious Bride. And the only thing left of the ancient sorceress, who lifted herself to heights of worldly glory, are the turds of banished and burning beasts.
The Whore is nevermore.
___________________
This post is an extract from the book Elijah Men Eat Meat: Readings to slaughter your inner Ahab and pursue Revival and Reform. We'd love for you to check it out. 

How to Give & Receive Hard Words

SINCE the whole episode at Mt. Carmel, Elijah and Elisha have had a measure of freedom in their preaching work. After that mountainous revival hit, Baal’s police-priests were slaughtered and public opinion partially turned against Jezebel’s despotic religious agenda. Spiritual revival is turning into a more permanent expression of reform in some quarters. This is not to say that the nation has successfully repented. But a small bit of light is now shining and a faithful few are on the march. At least 50 preachers, known as ‘the sons of the prophets’, are in Elijah’s tutelage and people are listening to them.
At this time, God calls Elijah to give a hard word to King Ahab. Ahab had ceased government-sponsored persecution of the prophets and had shown an openness―albeit a small one―to Yahweh’s prophetic word since their last encounter. Elijah had at least some reason to be encouraged that his prayers for Ahab were taking effect. But now God has given him a hard word and, as a messenger, he must be obedient to give it whether he wants to or not. Love without truth is mere sentimentalism.          Jezebel has killed a righteous man. The most blasphemous Queen that Israel has ever known had Naboth run through a kangaroo court and executed on fake charges of blasphemy. The irony is dark as are the days. Like many of her spiritual daughters throughout the ages, Jezebel executed her agenda by wrapping it all up in a religious veneer. She called for a time of fasting and asked for the charge to be confirmed by two (fake) witnesses in accordance with Mosaic law. Etiquette is etiquette. Especially in religion. If we are going to murder an innocent, let’s do so properly. Evil can be impressively civilised.
The means of execution was the slow, painful death of stoning. Not only was Naboth killed this way, but Jezebel had all his sons killed so that there would be no one to inherit the land she wanted to give to her husband as a gift. Ahab at least partially knew what happened―though perhaps not all the details. But when God gives you the authority to lead, he doesn’t let you escape responsibility if you turn a blind eye to matters. King David went to great lengths to separate himself from the shedding of innocent blood that was done by those around him. By contrast, Ahab delightfully goes out to inspect his new garden while the dirt is still wet with Naboth’s blood.         The King is strolling about the vineyard―celebrating the most futile of his misadventures to date―when Elijah appears. He sees the prophet and irritably greets him with the title of ‘my enemy’. Enemy? How many of us see the world like this? How often do we feel someone is our enemy because they tell us hard truths? Correction often feels like condemnation when we love our sin. Yet, there was no one else who prayed for Ahab’s redemption like Elijah. Still, Ahab viewed him as an enemy. True friends do not always feel friendly. Our best friends will love us more than the fun of a relationship with us. They will risk our rejection in order to tell us what we need to hear.
Correction Rejected          Let’s flip things around. Stand in Elijah’s sandals a moment. How would you respond if someone labelled you an ‘enemy’ like Ahab did? What if you had been the one who firmly but lovingly spoke hard words to a friend―only to have them treat you like a foe? Most of us would find the experience painful. Our efforts are met with rejection. We get hurt, then angry. We either explode in their face or we quietly let our past concern and love for the person turn to bitterness. Our friend treats us like an enemy when we are trying to be helpful―so we react by treating them like an enemy in return. After lust, the most common character issue men report struggling with is anger.          Elijah doesn’t do this. He doesn’t call Ahab an ‘enemy’ back.  He doesn’t get verbal revenge. He doesn’t yell, ‘Do you know how much I’ve prayed for you?! Can’t you see that I’ve only been trying to help you break free from the influence of that crazy she-demon of a wife that you’re married to?! I’m your true friend―not her―yet you still treat me like rubbish!’ No, Elijah doesn’t lose his temper out of self-pity or feelings of personal injustice.
But he doesn’t back off either. Our culture often talks about the sin of giving offence. But Elijah knows that the sin here is one of taking offence. Elijah knows Ahab finds his words offensive. But he doesn’t say ‘Enemy?! What? Did what I say hurt your feelings? I am soooooo sorry. Tell you what, let’s drop the whole thing and go grab a pint of lite beer.’ No, 
Elijah wouldn’t say that.
Elijah doesn’t drink lite beer.
Elijah is neither personally bitter at the unjust way Ahab has treated him, nor does he cower at Ahab’s indignant reaction. He doesn’t lose his cool. He calmly and faithfully pronounces God’s word to him―words that are hard to say and hard to hear. They are words about sin, judgement, and demise. These are gospel words. They let men know that ‘the wages of sin are death.’ Elijah is a faithful friend―though Ahab does not acknowledge him as such. He is not controlled by Ahab’s rejection. Ahab does not have the power to make Elijah stop caring for him or honouring him as King.
The New CurseThis works for those of us who speak to a wider audience through preaching or writing. In the 1950’s, at the height of McCarthyism, it was the term ‘communist’ that was used to ruin someone’s reputation―even with little or no evidence. Today that word has been replaced. ‘Xenophobe’, ‘racist’, and ‘homophobe’ are the pejoratives they now ejaculate at you in their arrogant hysteria. Those who do not know us well may hurl these verbal grenades because they see us like Ahab saw Elijah: as the enemy. This gives us the opportunity to grow in love by responding with blessing to those who curse us. We don’t respond to haters in kind.
The fact that someone treats us as an enemy does not mean we need to respond to them in either fear or aggression. Someone’s hatred of us does not define us. God’s love does. People might get angry at us, but we know that this is never our goal. We are not those who get a kick out of working people up. Success is not making lost people angry. There are lots of egotistical and rude ways we could do that. Success is making hell angry.

Elijah gives the hard word. Though Ahab was not technically guilty in the modern, legal sense of the murder of Naboth, he was responsible before God. Elijah does not let him hide behind his wife’s guilt as Adam sought to do with Eve. Elijah enunciates the divine sentence without dilution. It is prophecy with testosterone. And it works―at least to a degree. Ahab responds with a measure of humility that we have not seen before, not even at Carmel.
Amazingly, Ahab’s repentance is enough for God to extend mercy and withhold judgement for a generation. Elijah didn’t give up being loving and faithful in his exhortations, prayers, and rebukes towards Ahab and in the end, it bore fruit. This is the challenge for us: refusing to see even the most treacherous flesh and blood as our ultimate enemy, but always as an object of possible redemption.
___________________
This post is an extract from the book Elijah Men Eat Meat: Readings to slaughter your inner Ahab and pursue Revival and Reform 

Throwing the Patriarchs Out with the Bath Water

ELIJAH PRAYS to the God of the three men known throughout Scripture and church history as ‘the Patriarchs’. He cries to the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He publicly addresses Yahweh before the multitude in this fashion to contrast the spirituality and sexuality that he proclaims against that of Jezebel. He calls his generation to choose between two opposing ways of seeing the world. The difference between them affects everything from how we pray, to what we do with our pants, to what marriage means.
Patriarchy is currently a socially charged term and open discussion on the topic is often difficult as is any subject that is to do with gender or gender roles. The ASA here in Britain passed a law this year against the display of women in traditional roles in advertising. Theoretically, this means that a woman cannot be displayed in an advertisement picking up children’s socks in the living room unless she is also displayed marching through the desert carrying a sledgehammer and wrestling an alligator.
Many Feminists take it as their war cry to ‘smash the Patriarchy’. But not only is patriarchy a term that triggers, it is a term filled with ambiguity and confusion. Just what is it exactly that we are talking about? This makes it even more difficult as the term evokes different ideas for different people. There is 19th Century Victorian Patriarchy, Islamic Patriarchy, Greco-Roman Patriarchy, and Biblical Patriarchy. Some believe that we should smash everything even connected with this term regardless of cultural or historical context. Others believe we need to look closer and be more nuanced in what we choose to reject, lest we throw out the father with the bathwater and Western civilisation get's wrecked by the smashing zealots.
Patriarchy has not always been a charged term. It has not always been enunciated as if it were synonymous with Beelzebub. Not long ago in Western culture, patriarchy was generally understood to mean the process that most young men went through in order to become men. For a man to be taken seriously, he had to demonstrate a capacity to work hard and wise enough to be able to support a wife and raise well-adjusted children. 
This understanding has not been completely lost. Even today, there are men who can testify that marriage and children has forced them to lovingly lead and sacrifice in ways that laziness and moodiness in them would not have wanted. Being challenged to do marriage and family in godly ways changes us and pushes us to lead in ways that our passive inner-Ahabs may naturally resist. Yes, some men choose not to marry and employ their talents in other fruitful ways―and we will talk about the gift of celibacy later. But celibacy is the exception, not the rule.
Though historically noble, Patriarchy has developed a new connotation over the last few decades, and it is not a good one. Whereas the understanding of the word used to focus on the responsibility of the maturing young man, it now implies the oppression of women. It has gone from something to be applauded to something to be abhorred. 
Most radical Feminists now want to smash everything under this banner of Patriarchy without taking the time to appreciate the vast differences that exist between the various systems associated with this term. This goes from the most ignorant Neanderthal that thinks that girls should not be able to read and rules his house like a dictator all the way to the soft and tender ‘mild complementarian’ who always wears cardigans and is constantly apologizing to Feminists for how horrible men are. Modern feminists want to smash the whole thing. They want to smash all the various worldly patriarchies as well as Biblical patriarchy.          With Feminists, Christians should agree that there are some things called Patriarchy that should be smashed. We can agree that there is much oppression of women in this world and rightfully denounce it. Some MRA (Male Rights Activist) readers may be quick to add there are also ways that men are treated unfairly. Quite. We will address that later. For now, let us agree that the widow burnings of India, the acid attacks in the Middle East, the wife beating of North Africa, and female genital mutilation are all forms of female oppression that should be resisted by followers of Christ. If such acts are what people have in mind when the term Patriarchy is used then ‘no’, we should not be patriarchs. Give us a hammer, let’s start smashing.          But these things are not what the Bible or Christians have historically meant by the term. Some mix this sort of violent oppression up with other things and soon ideas get muddled and we end up passing around ideological cocktails into the conversation. These cocktails are made by those who have an agenda that they want to sneak through instead of subjugating it to clear and open debate. This is sad. Because under the banner of ‘smashing the patriarchy’, we usually end up not addressing the areas of the world where women are oppressed the most. Instead, many use the expression to promote certain gender heresies here in the West. And the results have been unfortunate.          
In pursuit of revival and reform, the Western church needs to rediscover what the Bible―not culture―means by patriarchy. Culture changes. We would label the Angles and the Saxons of the 5th-10th Century as patriarchal, yet they had much more open ideas about gender roles than the more narrowly defined ideas of the Normans who invaded our islands in 1066. Often those who reject Patriarchy outright have a particular idea in mind and fail to consider the good some forms of Patriarchy have brought the family unit and wider culture over the millennia in cultures around the world. 
Today in the UK we have over 3 million children going to bed each night without a father. They are not fatherless because of too much Patriarchy. They are fatherless because young men are not raised with a vision of manhood that involves marrying a woman and raising healthy, loved children. Instead, thanks to fifty years of social engineering that has been introduced under the banner of liberation, young men are raised to think that manhood involves drinking loads of alcohol and sleeping with as many girls as possible without having to accept responsibility for unwanted children. In the 21st Century, young women are often treated with all the respect of a used car and young men continue to act like boys well into their early 30s―if not longer. This would have met with much social shame 60 years ago. But today, few people care. Could the lack of young men interested in marriage and children be the fruit of indiscriminately ‘smashing the Patriarchy’?
God created sex, marriage, and children to be a one package deal. One man, one woman, one lifetime―that is the context for sex. If a young man wants sex, he needs to demonstrate first that he has what it takes to be a good husband and good father. Sex was not seen as a right. It was seen as a privilege―a privilege for a man who was mature, capable, and ready to take a wife. Separating these things has done far more harm to women in the West than all the individual cases of hyper-patriarchal abuse combined. Sadly, it is often Feminist groups that promote these notions, thus betraying the women they claim to work for.           Yes, there will be some men who will choose to forgo marriage to better serve God. Elijah was one. But most will serve God in marriage and by being fruitful and multiplying. Raising young men with a vision to marry and raise up children flies counter to the laddish culture of today. Our culture does not raise a lot of men. It raises ageing boys.          Some of what is written here may be triggering. And, granted, a word of warning is in order. While we need to affirm the Creational gender binary and celebrate the uniqueness that exists between men and women, we must do so while holding up an obligatory caveat as many Christians tend to swing from one extreme to another. When some speak about rediscovering the godly development of boys into men, traditional ideas are often imported. We need to be careful here. We should not assume that everything done in the past was good, nor that all Feminist achievements are essentially bad. As we’ve said, some things that are called Patriarchy should be smashed. I have several books on my shelf written by women. I have learned a great deal from these ladies. I find the writings of Amy Carmichael and Catherine Booth to be particularly full of fire. ________A barracks is meant to be a place where real soldiers were to be fed and equipped for war, not a place to settle down in or as a comfortable snuggery in which to enjoy ourselves. I hope that if ever they, our soldiers, do settle down God will burn their barracks over their heads!-Catherine BoothSpeaking about her hopes for the future of the Salvation Army which she and her husband William started.________It would be easy to embrace ideas of faux manhood or womanhood from traditional culture instead of from careful exegesis of the Bible. It could also be easy to create legalisms and become gender Pharisees. Culture varies and there is freedom in the methods we might use in the raising of men (so long as our goal is just that: raising men). We are not trying to establish Pride and Prejudice.
Nor do we want the sort of Patriarchy described in the Qur’an. Simply reacting to laddish culture without careful Biblical reflection can create stifling gender roles that oppress instead of ones that direct and cultivate actual maturity. We are called to follow Christ, not the Sultan or Mr Darcy.
Confronting a laddish culture that seeks sex without children is an Elijah ministry. The angel Gabriel declared about John the Baptizer that he would be like Elijah in turning ‘the hearts of the fathers back to the children’. This is what the Bible means when it speaks about Patriarchy: men whose hearts are set on children. Abraham was a Patriarch because of his heart for Isaac and his desire raise up decedents that would serve Yahweh.
Men: if you get married and seek to do this in a God-honoring way, you will suffer. To righteously lead one of God’s daughters and her children will involve the regular sacrifice of your own dreams and desires. It means getting off your phone and playing with your children. It means talking with and listening to your wife when you would prefer a nap. Anyone who thinks Biblical Patriarchy means the bloke gets to do whatever he wants has not done his homework and is still ignorant of what Christ-like leadership means. You are a heretic and not orthodox in your Patriarchy. 
Being a Biblical Patriarch means having a vision of seeing your grandchildren preach the gospel and worship Jesus―and having this vision 25 years before they are even born. A Biblical Patriarch is one who prays for his descendants to honour and obey God, long before he even has any.
A Biblical Patriarch lays down his life for his family. And it is to the ultimate Patriarch who will one day make this ultimate sacrifice that Elijah now prays._______________
For more, please check out our book Elijah Men Eat Meat: Readings to slaughter your inner Ahab and pursue Revival and Reform 

Why did God Create Sex?

THANKS TO STATE SPONSORED sexual education and the internet, our generation knows a lot about various sexual practices. Probably far more than we’ll ever engage in ourselves. But though we may be well versed in the mechanics of sex, we are tragically ignorant about the purpose of sex.
Why Create Sex?Most Christians are rightfully taught that sex should be reserved for marriage. But many of them find it difficult to explain why this is so. Did God randomly decide to do it this way? Did He outlaw fornication on a whim?
Many of us struggle with what the Bible says about sexual sin because we lack a concept of sex’s purpose. In traditional societies, the purposes of sex and marriage were understood to be for reproduction and social stability. This response ultimately fails to communicate God's purposes in sex, but few people reading this article come from such a society. 
Among us 21st Century Westerners, it is different. We err in another way. We assume that sex has whatever purpose our feelings choose to give it. We might say that sex has something to do with being in love, but we would be coy to say it has a universal purpose that applies to all humanity.
One of the difficulties with this modern, post-Freudian view is that, if sex’s purpose is simply found in our feelings, we cannot say there is any right or wrong way to engage in sexual activity. After all, what feels right to you may feel wrong to me. Also, our feelings change. I may say that adultery is wrong early in my life, but if I find myself in a loveless marriage when I get older, perhaps my feelings will tell me that a passionate affair is ok. What I once proclaimed to be a moral turd I may begin to try and polish into a romantic box of chocolates.
This is why sex needs an ultimate purpose that doesn’t depend on our feelings―which are usually predicated on current cultural ideals and our own circumstances. Without real purpose, it’s as if you were riding in a car with a navigator who constantly told you to turn left or right―but never actually told you where you were going.
But God has given us light. We do not have to sit in the shadows with our sexuality being guided by crooked promptings and twisted tales - be they traditional or modern. 
The Sacrament of MarriageFor this reason, a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.” This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. -Ephesians 5 First of all, marriage is a sacrament. Those of us who are Protestant often cringe at the word ‘sacrament’―especially if it’s applied to anything other than communion or baptism. But the term is fitting for human sexuality―if we use it in its proper sense.
By ‘sacrament’ we mean something material that points to something transcendent. The waters of baptism point to the washing work of spiritual regeneration. The bread and the wine at communion point to the body and blood of Jesus. In a similar way, we speak of marriage as a sacrament. It points to something far more meaningful than itself.
When God presents Himself as the husband to His people, He is not spontaneously choosing a metaphor. He did not think, ‘Hmmm, let me see… how can I explain my plans to these humans? I know! Marriage! They really seem to be into that.’
No. Rather, God has a purpose for sex that stretches from Eden's first sunrise to the world's last night. He knew that He was going to redeem a people for Himself. For that reason, He created marriage as a symbol (sacrament) of where He was going to take history. He gave us weddings so that we could look forward to the real, eternal wedding when our faults and sorrows are forgotten, and we forever smile. 
Gender DivideSecond, In His wisdom, God created us male and female. The first chapter of the Bible records:So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. -Genesis 1
The next chapter expounds this division in more detail:The Lord God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man and brought her to him. The man said, “This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh. She shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.” -Genesis 2
Genesis affirms radical similarity between man and woman: ‘She is bone of my bone, flesh of my flesh.’ It also affirms radical difference between the two: ‘She shall be called woman because she was taken out of man.’ 
Our Bodies are Designed for a Purpose Our bodies are created by God and we will give account to God for how we use them. As Christians, our bodies are ‘doubly’ God’s. He has brought us back to himself through the blood of Christ. Our bodies are to be ‘offered up as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God’ (Rom12.1). Our bodies, including our genitalia, have a purpose.
Marriage and SexBoth traditional and modern values such as children, intimacy, social stability, and happiness are all gifts connected with marital sex. But they are not the ultimate purpose. Rather, these gifts flow from sex’s ultimate purpose: to display God’s eternal plans of redemption.
God initiates an enduring covenant with His people just as a man takes a wife in a lifetime commitment. In marriage, the man and the woman cross the mysterious gender divide to become one, just as God and humanity mysteriously become one through Christ.
As the husband enters into the woman to release his seed to bring life, so God sends His Word into humanity so that we can be born again. Those unfamiliar with the Biblical teaching may think such a comparison weird. But it is a key teaching of the New Testament: For you have been born again not of seed (Gk: spora) which is perishable but imperishable, that is, through the living and enduring word of God. -1 Peter 1.23
This why CS Lewis argued that, before God, we are all female. (God is never referred to as the ‘wife’ of His people―or even the ‘spouse’. He is always the ‘husband’. There’s a creational, gender-based reason for that.)Inadequate AnswersThis is why descriptions by popular commentators, like Martin Saunders in Christian Today, where he says that God created sex to ‘bring intimacy between two people exclusively in love with each other’, fall woefully short of the mark. Sex is not simply to help two generic humans who feel ‘in love’ feel closer. If we base our sex on feelings, we are simply marching to the gallows of our own foolishness. 
In sex, the unique gender of each partner is an essential dynamic. In Scripture, there is 'man' and 'woman'. There are no cookie-cutter 'people'. The male-female covenant represents the diversity necessary to point to the even greater union between (the very different pair of) God and humanity at the end of time. Ancient statue unearthed in
the Middle East of the world's
first family. #NotFakeNews
The ability of a man and woman to create new life together is also key. In our age of birth control, it is trendy to divide sex, marriage, and children into separate, airtight containers―like they had nothing to do with each other. But they do. I know that many activists will stop petting their unicorns and pretend to be appalled at this idea. But the fruitfulness of the sexual union was part of God’s design. Had God wanted to separate the joy and intimacy of sex from the ability to reproduce, He could have. But He didn’t.
That sex should happen exclusively in marriage is yet another essential dynamic. Outside of this covenant, we are communicating sexual heresy. We are saying with our bodies I give myself completely to you, but legally, publicly, socially, etc, this is not the case. It is a sacramental lie. It is fake sex.
For the Sacrament of Marriage to communicate what God intended, it demands male-female diversity, the possibility of new life, and a total life commitment.
GraceWhen we are able to articulate the divine purpose and beauty of human sexuality, we will find new strength and grace to overcome the sexual sin in our midst and walk in the integrity the Spirit within us longs for. If we willfully ignore God's plan for sex, then the laughter of hell will be our only reward.
_______________

For more, please check out our book Elijah Men Eat Meat: Readings to slaughter your inner Ahab and pursue Revival and Reform 

Food Porn & The Praise of YHWH

Why do we praise God? Does God have the emotional insecurity of a 13 year old girl, needing to be repeatedly told by us that we love Him? Does His ego need reassuring? If He knows everything, why do we need to tell Him in song that He’s ‘great’ or ‘awesome’? How should He respond? ‘Gee, thanks guys, but I already know I am.’
Food Porn may help us understand. I assume that all you culturally savvy followers of Sanity’s Cove are familiar with this phenomenon. It pops up on social media feeds everywhere, and especially on Instagram. You sit down to an exceptionally delicious looking meal, snap a photo of it, and upload it for all your social media followers to see and drool over covetously.
Why do people do this? Why snap a picture of the food you’re enjoying just to broadcast it?
It’s praise. That’s why. Food Porn does nothing for the actual food itself. It has no ego that needs boosting. Your plate is not going to look up at you and say, ‘Thanks, I put extra effort into my appearance today. Glad you think I’m InstaWorthy!’
We don’t do it for the food. We do it for us. We praise the food because it brings our enjoyment of it to a whole new level.
Hong KongI was at a restaurant in Hong Kong last year when I experienced this to an almost distressing level. Though I spent most of my time in that city with my Asian friends, I found myself alone one evening while they were otherwise occupied. I went to a restaurant to eat dinner―all by my lonesome―and there discovered the best Chinese dumplings on the planet.
I was ‘oooing’ and ‘awwwing’ as I was enjoying this top tier gastronomical experience. I kept talking to myself about how good they were because I had no one else at my table to listen to me. It was an existential crisis! I had to call my wife back in Britain just to tell her about the majesty of what I was eating. The joy this food brought me constrained me to tell others. Being able to praise this food climaxed my celebration of it. The food was truly worthy.
It may have even made it onto my Instagram feed.
We praise God, not because He needs it. He doesn't need our praise anymore than our food needs it. It's us who need to do so. We were designed to give praise. It is the appropriate climax of a heart that is enjoying God. It lifts our celebration and lets those around us know that what we are enjoying is truly worthy.
‘Taste and see that YHWH is good!’ -Psalm 34
And if the term ‘Praise Porn’ goes viral, remember you read it here first. 
_______________



For more, please check out our book Elijah Men Eat Meat: Readings to slaughter your inner Ahab and pursue Revival and Reform 

You Have Gay Blood on Your Hands

Have you come across this line?
‘Gays and lesbians are committing suicide in record numbers and it’s all because of people like you!’
Now the context of such a comment matters immensely as to how one is to respond appropriately. But in recent conversations with other Christians, I’ve realised that many don’t know how to respond at all to this soundbite―and can even feel it’s a blunt form of emotional blackmail.
I’ve asked around and heard a few good responses - depending on the situation you find yourself in when this accusatory grenade gets lobbed your way. The type of response you should give when being shouted down to by a loud activist group should be marked by courage. Alternatively, the type of response you give when talking one-on-one with an individual who vulnerably approaches you should be marked by compassion.
Here are four possibilities that I’ve heard. I share them for your consideration:
The Put-Up or Shut-Up Approach. Ask for evidence. I know that this 'you're guilty' line has been used so much that it’s almost become a social media truism, but how many reputable studies (done by institutions other than Pink News!) back up this claim. Yes, it is true that people in the LGBT community have higher suicide rates than mainstream society. But it is quite a leap to then say that the reason for these suicides is because Christians express alternative views of gender and sexuality to their own. Scholarly studies are quite thin here.
When someone accuses you of having blood on your hands, it is not inappropriate to ask for reliable evidence which is a bit more solid than 'Well I knew this guy...'. Put-up or Shut-up. Justify your claim or don’t say such things.
The Go-Deeper Approach. ‘Respectfully I disagree. But if the reason that you are contemplating suicide is simply that I have different views on the purpose of human sexuality than you do, then I think there are deeper issues that need addressing. Why is your whole sense of security wrapped up in my opinion? Surely there are healthier ways to live.’
The Ju-Jitsu Approach. ‘I disagree with you that marriage can be between two people of the same gender. You disagree with me that Jesus rose from the dead. You choose to base your identity on the first belief, I choose to base my identity on the second. Why is it that you get to express a different point of view on Jesus (even if it risks disturbing my peace) but I don’t get to express my view on marriage (because it risks disturbing yours)?’
The Overlook & Listen Approach. Look past the accusation and ask, ‘Are you contemplating suicide? I’m sorry to hear that. Would you mind telling me more about that over coffee?’ This may be a good response if the person is being genuine with you and is not simply trying to beat you in an argument or guilt trip you into silence. 
Again, each of these may be appropriate depending on the individual(s) you’re speaking with and the context of your relationship with them. As always, pray, and ask the Holy Spirit to give you the words to speak when in such situations.

___________________
For more, please check out our book Elijah Men Eat Meat: Readings to slaughter your inner Ahab and pursue Revival and Reform 

The Case for Hate Speech

Speakers Corner, LondonWhen God created humans, He created them with the capacity to blaspheme. It is a capacity that mankind had made much use of throughout the millennia. Today one does not need to look far at all to find robust examples of God’s character being mocked and his Son being insulted.
Sadly, mankind thinks it knows better than God. When Christianity was a dominant ideology in Europe, blasphemy was a punishable offence. Thinkers like the French critic Voltaire fought against these laws that made the church (primarily the Roman Catholic Church) impervious to criticism. He used his witty and sarcastic prose to mock the moral inconsistencies of powerful church leadership―something that was dangerous and taboo at the time.
I disagree with Voltaire on some issues. I find some of his comments blasphemous, offensive, and needlessly harsh. Yet I dearly want to live in a country where people like Voltaire can articulate their offensive comments without fear of imprisonment. One quote that is often (mis)attributed to Voltaire is worth reflecting on:

‘I disapprove of what you say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.’
If someone hates Christianity, I want them to have the freedom to say so. I would appreciate it if they expressed their disagreements in a way that I find respectful. But we know that all disagreement over things we hold precious may feel uncomfortable at some level. Sometimes to make a strong point people may wield acrimonious language in fierce protest. I would rather them speak hateful words out in the open against Christianity than to only contemplate those ideas quietly out of fear.
Bring hateful ideas into the sunlight of public debate and exposure. Such sunlight usually kills sick ideologies quicker than legal repression. Hate breeds in the dark underground. 
Give me more Hate Speech Let those who hate my faith (or any other system of religious, social, or political belief) say so. Turn the cameras on us. If we can’t defend and debate our beliefs and values against mockers and haters in the free public square, perhaps they’re not that great to begin with. Maybe we need to shop around for some new ones.
If you’re so insecure about your beliefs and values that you need Hate Speech laws to imprison those who would mock them, perhaps your critics aren’t your problem. Maybe your beliefs and values are.
I want people to respect the Christian faith because they come to know Jesus as Lord. Not because I coerce them with legal threats. We should not want people to mock the God we worship. But how we get that verbal respect is important. Do we win hearts and minds through persuasion? Or, do we criminalise criticism?
The liberty to offend is foundational to any free society. Sadly, here in the UK we are letting this liberty, that men and women spent centuries fighting for, slip away. Britain was once a matchless beacon of Free Speech. She was the home of men like JS Mill, that great father of Classical Liberalism. She was the home of the famed Speaker’s Corner in London―once the global epicentre of Free Speech. Will we now let Britain enter into a post-Freedom of Speech era?
Neither the Tories in Westminster nor the Labour Mayor of London, Siddiq Kahn, seem to be exerting much energy to ensure this Freedom.  The only British political party that even has Freedom of Expression as a part of their platform is the ‘Pirate Party’―a modest party with less than 2,000 members.
Increasingly in Britain, more and more groups are getting a special status that protects them from the type of satirical criticism that Voltaire, Martin Luther and many other shapers of Western culture once wielded. To do so now brings one under the condemnation of the ‘Hate Speech Laws’―vaguely written enough to leave it up to the magistrate to determine how and to whom they are applied. These laws are notable because, unlike other crimes here in Britain, intent to commit a crime no longer has to be proved.
As a Christian, I may want people to speak respectfully of what I hold dear. But I should resist any law that would make it criminal if they don’t. One day we will all give an account of every word we’ve ever spoken or tweeted to the One who spoke the Universe into existence. Hateful words and foolish speech will not be allowed to continue forever.
But I am not that Judge. And this is not that Day.
___________________
For more, please check out our book Elijah Men Eat Meat: Readings to slaughter your inner Ahab and pursue Revival and Reform 

The Counter-Revolution

'That's a cute little revolution you have there.
It would be a shame if someone were to
counter it.'Not so long ago, in a galaxy not so far away, there was a revolution. A group of creatures that were a quasi-hybrid of primates and angels rebelled against their Creator and King. These children of dust that carried divine breath began a revolution against the government of Heaven―a revolution that continues to this day.
This revolution has been given various names over the millennia. ‘The Fall’ and ‘Paradise Lost’ are among the more popular in the English language. It could also be labelled the ‘Self Revolution’ or the ‘My Revolution’.
It was this revolution that murdered Jesus. He explained what would happen to himself in a parable, saying, ‘But when the tenants saw the son, they said to each other, “This is the heir. Come, let’s kill him and take his inheritance.”’* We want this world to be ours. Mine.
My own.
My precious.
In our Gollum like insanity, we want to gain wisdom, happiness, love, and power for ourselves apart from the King. We want to self-name, self-justify, and self-identify. We want to call ourselves our own. We want to be our own masters. ‘I am my own!' - and so the revolutionary propaganda rolls over and over again in our head from childhood.
We are all part of this revolution against our Creator. We all wish to set up a government alternative to Heaven. We want the ‘Me Government’. A government where we can do what we want, eat how we want, spend money how we want, have sex how we want, and speak how we want. We want to be able to pronounce for ourselves what is right or wrong. 
The Counter-RevolutionaryJesus came to lead the Counter-Revolution. He came to lead the wayward revolutionaries back to their true King. He came to set them free from all the little gulags they had created in their attempts to build their own kingdoms. This counter-revolution is often called ‘repentance’. It’s when we stop looking at our lives and our world and saying ‘mine’, and we start saying ‘His’.
You can join this Counter-Revolution.  To do so, you must surrender. Wave your white flag. Our leader has paid the price to secure a full pardon for your treachery. But don’t wait to long. The revolution will not be allowed to exist forever. There is a time when the King will say, ‘Those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.’**
*Matthew 21.38    **Luke 19.27___________________
For more on how to live as a counter-revolutionary, please check out our book Elijah Men Eat Meat: Readings to slaughter your inner Ahab and pursue Revival and Reform 

Dear Ofsted

Dear Ofsted,
I am writing to save you a visit. It seems that you are in the process of reviving plans to assume oversight over non-state schools and programs that involve children and youth to ensure that such activities are in line with British values. According to the reports (Here), this will include churches such as ours.
I wish to lay the ethics of your little power grab over the activities of private citizens aside for a moment. Let me simply do you a favour so that you do not make a needless visit up our way. If you’re curious to know if what our church teaches its adults and children is in line with your ever-changing list of British Values, the answer is ‘No’.
At least, not all of them. There may be some on your list that are not wholly unrighteous. But that’s only because we Christians have been around long enough to make a degree of impact.
In some ways, British Values have changed.
In others, not so much.I know, based on your State school curriculum, that history is not your strong point. So please allow me to remind you of something. When Christians first arrived here on these Emerald Isles, they found an illiterate people who were running around naked, painted blue, throwing spears at each other, eating human brains, and worshipping frogs. Those were the British Values of the day.
Christianity did not simply confirm these values. We challenged them. We did so back then and we will continue to do so today. And we will actively teach our children to do the same. 

If you send us a notice for not conforming our teaching to British Values, we will ignore or burn it. If you fine us for ignoring it, we will refuse to pay the fine. If we get sent to jail for refusing to pay it, we'll go on hunger strike.
Please make a note on your records, get some caramel lattes there in the office, and save yourselves a visit.
Have a lovely day,-Rev. Joshua D. JonesLead Minister of Therfield Chapel, EFCC.  
___________________
For more on living with godly courage in an ungodly and intimidating nation, please check out our book Elijah Men Eat Meat: Readings to slaughter your inner Ahab and pursue Revival and Reform