Oh that you would slay the wicked, O God!
O men of blood, depart from me!
20 They speak against you with malicious intent;
your enemies take your name in vain.
21 Do I not hate those who hate you, O Lord?
And do I not loathe those who rise up against you?
22 I hate them with complete hatred;
I count them my enemies.~Ps. 139:19-22
You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same?~Mt. 5:43-46
As you might have heard, Fred Phelps, head of the notorious Westboro cult (to dignify it with the terms "Baptist" or "Church" would smear said terms nearly as much as shying away from them for fear of association with the organization) passed to his "eternal reward" today, a reward which, it must be said, I can only speculate consists of permanent residence in the place with which he was most concerned in life. Just now, my friend Ryan mentioned that it would be the height of hypocrisy to "hate" Fred Phelps for "hating people"; a sentiment with which I can hardly disagree. But to stop there would be an oversimplification, and dare I say, fails to explore the reasons,which I am about to defend as (conditionally) righteous, that Christians are not among those mourning Mr. Phelps (indeed perhaps the only folks who are are certain media personalities, the proverbial false prophets in whose mouths Phelps has long been a lying spirit).
Few passages spring more readily to the lips of Sunday School teachers than the above quotation from Matthew 5. While it is a marvelous example of passages violently excised from meaningful context when monotonously chanted by apostates and cafeteria Catholics, guilt by association is no reason to treat Christ's words here as unimportant or trivial. In proclamation of the standard of righteousness entailed in the Father's law, a standard He came to fulfill on behalf of the totally incapable, Jesus announces that our enemies are our neighbors, that they deserve our prayer and that if we only love those from whom we receive blessing, we are no better than pagans. This line of the Sermon of the Mount, like the rest of it, is a man-slayer. All boasting is stopped in the shadow of the Law's mountain, all proclamation of our righteousness is exposed as menstrual leavings in Christ's demand that we show perfect love for our persecutors. And while each of us fail (in the flesh) to love the way Christ loved his enemies on the cross, it is certainly the heart's desire of every sheep to see hypocrites like Phelps, a man whose flesh would likely burn on contact with the printed words of Matthew 5, called to task for flagrant scorn heaped on the Lord's words here.
Yet, some argue, there can be no joy in the perishing of Phelps so (evidently) far from the true gospel, no sense of vindication in the hearts or minds of Christians, that a pernicious false teacher has passed, for by the measure we measure out we will be judged. Surely, goes this logic, if Phelps is indeed our enemy, Matthew 5 calls for, if not sackcloth and ashes, at least silent sobriety in the face of Phelps' passing? Would it not be Pharisaical to do otherwise? And here is where Ps. 139 rears it's ugly head.
It is hyperdispensational thinking at its worst to sever the writings of David from the teachings of the Son of David. The greatest rabbi who ever lived, the inheritor of the Davidic throne, the Logos incarnate, and the guy who just got done saying he came to fulfill the law in verse 17 knew full well that David actively boasted in song and prose of his "hatred" of the enemies of God. It is easy in the modern age of pagan friends, political correctness and what I will term "voluntary illiteracy" to refuse to square the circle of these two statements, to shrug off the elder as "OT thinking" "law not grace" etc. But to a truth-seeker, that will not do.
Scripture calls to love our neighbors AND to hate evil. Praying for those who persecute us can walk hand in hand with setting our face against false teachers of every stripe. If Paul desired that those troubling the Galatians would castrate themselves, (Gal. 5:12) it is right to feel a measure of vindication at the death of a man who made an art-form of "speaking against God with malicious intent and taking his name in vain". This vindication is not for ourselves, and must not be mingled with self-righteousness. But for the restraining hand of God, we might be as bad as Phelps or worse. But we can know with absolute certainty that the judge of all the earth manifests his justice in the fate of men, and that all the vitriol and blasphemy of men like Fred Phelps cannot prevent their going the way of all flesh.
I believe that the American Church is facing a time of trial for which it is largely unprepared. When persecution increases it will be vital for us to obey the dictates of Matthew 5 and uphold God's standard of righteousness. We must treat all bearers of the Imago Dei as our neighbor, and know that our persecutors have not merited murder, repression, slander or wicked treatment: this is Decalogue 101. But it will similarly be important to know that God is fighting our battles for us, that evil is identifiable, and that the triumph of the divine justice is eternal, inevitable, holy and good. As sheep and goats separate into more distinct camps, we must know that sheep are not the only apropo animal metaphor for the redeemed, and as a certain Picard-Genevan expositor said, "even a dog barks when his master is attacked".
Bark.
~JS
Thursday, March 20, 2014
Thursday, March 13, 2014
A study of Marine Life, or "in which James fulfills the ambitions of his mother"
Once upon a time, my mother said that I should have been a marine biologist. I neither begrudge her statement nor fail to see the logic; at one time I had a great love of the wonder of God in creation, and had it not been for my constant and humbling failure at math and the natural sciences (but for which I'm sure I would have been rendered an insufferable nuisance to mankind), I may very well have embarked on such a career path. And so it is with the greatest of ironies that I explore the times and habits of a little-known specimen of marine life which I have previously referenced in these musings: the evangellyfish. (All apologies to Doug Wilson, from whom I am borrowing the term.)
The evangellyfish is a creature who similarly borrows the term "evangelical" from historical Christianity, evangelical being derived from evangelium, the term for the gospel that at one time separated Solas Christianity from pre-reformed or later Liturgical/Episcopal Christianity. However, the linguistic similarities are the demarcated zone of common ground between said sea life and the beleaguered unit known as "the Reformed". Major differences are as follows:
1) A belief that Church history begins with Billy Graham, or at the best, perhaps John Wesley.
Your average evangellyfish will have no conception of any Christianity predating America's 19th and 20th century revivals; and who can blame them? The history of American Christianity precedes these events by perhaps a generous two centuries, and given the state of Christianity, or perhaps it were better, "post-Christianity" in Europe, there is little to see as redeeming in Christian "historicism". However, the attachment, subconscious in the main, of "traditions of men" to "traditions at all" has rendered entire generations of Christians, the youth especially, impotent in the face of rank heresies such as Modalism in the UPCI, Mormonism, the egregiously humanistic wings of Romanism, the word-faith movement, and Open 'theism'. America stands poised to equip a nation of missionaries, politicians, philosophers and theologians with a deficit of tools, in that said nation will neither recognize the claims of aforementioned movements as old, nor realize that a consistent worldview from Scripture, namely Calvinism, stands in centuries-old armor to combat them. Moreover, said worldview has been paralyzed by the introduction of traditions of post-Weslyanism, unable either to move beyond human autonomy as a primary, or to understand that their views are traditional. As James White said to Dave Hunt, "there is no one more trapped in tradition than those who fail to acknowledge its impact in their lives".
2) A total rejection of God's sovereignty...except when convenient.
A dearth of Church history leads to a failure of Biblical soteriology. Statistically, the evangellyfish you encounter will likely recoil squidlike from any mention of man's deadness in sin, his incapacity to love God as he aught, and God's total freedom to love and save as he will. The questioner in Romans 9, thrusting injustice upon God, could hardly have found a better counterpart than the average American pew-sitter. The rule of faith is human autonomy...unless of course it's in the "big picture" of God. The hardening of Pharoah's heart and the opening of Lydia's, the resurrection of Lazarus and the crucifixion of Christ, the book of Revelation and the opening chapters of Genesis are open to God's utter control. The actions of men in time as moral agents, by and large, are not, Genesis 50 and and Acts 2 to the contrary notwithstanding. Evangellyfish want God to be God when Jesus is dying for them, and themselves to be God when that death is applied. They want God to be God when Ananias is slain, and themselves to be God when they go to the club (or buy shoes, or choose Robert Frost's immortal road). Many thinkers have sought philosophical justification for that road less traveled as a human creation, whether they be Molinist or classical Arminian, and yet they flee utterly from a literal reading of Acts 2 or Romans 9.
3) An eschatology that disavows alternatives.
Whether due to outright laziness on the part of preachers and expositors regarding the Old Testament as a foreshadowing of Christ, or a sincere belief that there is only one position because it is the only one one has heard, dispensational thinking latent or patent has crept into the evangellyfish mind. With it has come a dogmatic assurance that the book of Revelation reveals near-gnosis secrets incomprehensible to the initial readers of that Scripture, and a patient waiting for the end of the universe that similarly bears the gnostic fixation on rejection not only of materialism but of the material world. Political involvement, career ambition and intellectual pursuits fall by the wayside as the worst of the stereotypes of Christianity as a faith of "pie in the sky...by and by" come to fruition.
4) Man-centeredness in worship.
The average American parish consists of a dwindling congregation of the Old Guard, perceived as out of touch with the culture and unable to sustain itself biblically or procreatively, or a church that could perhaps paint the faint outline of a guitar upon its Crucifixion symbols. A game I enjoy playing is to eliminate all songs from a contemporary Christian music station (Spirit 105 is a great example) that contain the words "I" or "me" outside of a context of self-abasement , and see how much of the station is commercials. Or to put it another way, if you made a drinking game out of that, you would die. This quickest way to locate an evangellyfish congregation would be to ask the band to play in the back where no one could see them and omit songs including "I". The thought experiment is however, unlikely to happen. Similarly, an overemphasis on "community building" in Church ordinances, and alteration of parish names to conform to worldly standards are hardly infrequent. (Washingtonians: how many churches are you aware of that were named "x or y baptist" and are now some combination of "grace" "point" "way" "church" "free" "fellowship" etc.?)
This my friends, is why soteriology matters. When the law is not unkeepable by mortal hands, then eschatology and covenant theology suffer (the Jews did so much better than we did!). When the point of salvation is our response rather than God's condescension, worship is about adulation of a band and Church history is about "making a decision for Christ'...regardless of whether that was ever the gospel was presented in aeons past. I do not condemn those in the average mileau of American protestantism, or even world Christianity to perdition, and I don't claim that the modern fate of the American Church is irreversible or irredeemable, but the tentacles of the evangellyfish have wrapped snugly around the body too long to stay silent. Lest you fear the future, know that God has made you a moral actor and agent of eternal reformation. The next time you hear the same empty or infuriating platitudes, the next time you despair of American Christianity, know that there is something you can do. When you meet your local evangellyfish, shake their hand/hug them, buy them a coffee....and tell them that Jesus is bigger than they imagine, and that his gospel has been more than a pamphlet.
In Christ,
~JS
The evangellyfish is a creature who similarly borrows the term "evangelical" from historical Christianity, evangelical being derived from evangelium, the term for the gospel that at one time separated Solas Christianity from pre-reformed or later Liturgical/Episcopal Christianity. However, the linguistic similarities are the demarcated zone of common ground between said sea life and the beleaguered unit known as "the Reformed". Major differences are as follows:
1) A belief that Church history begins with Billy Graham, or at the best, perhaps John Wesley.
Your average evangellyfish will have no conception of any Christianity predating America's 19th and 20th century revivals; and who can blame them? The history of American Christianity precedes these events by perhaps a generous two centuries, and given the state of Christianity, or perhaps it were better, "post-Christianity" in Europe, there is little to see as redeeming in Christian "historicism". However, the attachment, subconscious in the main, of "traditions of men" to "traditions at all" has rendered entire generations of Christians, the youth especially, impotent in the face of rank heresies such as Modalism in the UPCI, Mormonism, the egregiously humanistic wings of Romanism, the word-faith movement, and Open 'theism'. America stands poised to equip a nation of missionaries, politicians, philosophers and theologians with a deficit of tools, in that said nation will neither recognize the claims of aforementioned movements as old, nor realize that a consistent worldview from Scripture, namely Calvinism, stands in centuries-old armor to combat them. Moreover, said worldview has been paralyzed by the introduction of traditions of post-Weslyanism, unable either to move beyond human autonomy as a primary, or to understand that their views are traditional. As James White said to Dave Hunt, "there is no one more trapped in tradition than those who fail to acknowledge its impact in their lives".
2) A total rejection of God's sovereignty...except when convenient.
A dearth of Church history leads to a failure of Biblical soteriology. Statistically, the evangellyfish you encounter will likely recoil squidlike from any mention of man's deadness in sin, his incapacity to love God as he aught, and God's total freedom to love and save as he will. The questioner in Romans 9, thrusting injustice upon God, could hardly have found a better counterpart than the average American pew-sitter. The rule of faith is human autonomy...unless of course it's in the "big picture" of God. The hardening of Pharoah's heart and the opening of Lydia's, the resurrection of Lazarus and the crucifixion of Christ, the book of Revelation and the opening chapters of Genesis are open to God's utter control. The actions of men in time as moral agents, by and large, are not, Genesis 50 and and Acts 2 to the contrary notwithstanding. Evangellyfish want God to be God when Jesus is dying for them, and themselves to be God when that death is applied. They want God to be God when Ananias is slain, and themselves to be God when they go to the club (or buy shoes, or choose Robert Frost's immortal road). Many thinkers have sought philosophical justification for that road less traveled as a human creation, whether they be Molinist or classical Arminian, and yet they flee utterly from a literal reading of Acts 2 or Romans 9.
3) An eschatology that disavows alternatives.
Whether due to outright laziness on the part of preachers and expositors regarding the Old Testament as a foreshadowing of Christ, or a sincere belief that there is only one position because it is the only one one has heard, dispensational thinking latent or patent has crept into the evangellyfish mind. With it has come a dogmatic assurance that the book of Revelation reveals near-gnosis secrets incomprehensible to the initial readers of that Scripture, and a patient waiting for the end of the universe that similarly bears the gnostic fixation on rejection not only of materialism but of the material world. Political involvement, career ambition and intellectual pursuits fall by the wayside as the worst of the stereotypes of Christianity as a faith of "pie in the sky...by and by" come to fruition.
4) Man-centeredness in worship.
The average American parish consists of a dwindling congregation of the Old Guard, perceived as out of touch with the culture and unable to sustain itself biblically or procreatively, or a church that could perhaps paint the faint outline of a guitar upon its Crucifixion symbols. A game I enjoy playing is to eliminate all songs from a contemporary Christian music station (Spirit 105 is a great example) that contain the words "I" or "me" outside of a context of self-abasement , and see how much of the station is commercials. Or to put it another way, if you made a drinking game out of that, you would die. This quickest way to locate an evangellyfish congregation would be to ask the band to play in the back where no one could see them and omit songs including "I". The thought experiment is however, unlikely to happen. Similarly, an overemphasis on "community building" in Church ordinances, and alteration of parish names to conform to worldly standards are hardly infrequent. (Washingtonians: how many churches are you aware of that were named "x or y baptist" and are now some combination of "grace" "point" "way" "church" "free" "fellowship" etc.?)
This my friends, is why soteriology matters. When the law is not unkeepable by mortal hands, then eschatology and covenant theology suffer (the Jews did so much better than we did!). When the point of salvation is our response rather than God's condescension, worship is about adulation of a band and Church history is about "making a decision for Christ'...regardless of whether that was ever the gospel was presented in aeons past. I do not condemn those in the average mileau of American protestantism, or even world Christianity to perdition, and I don't claim that the modern fate of the American Church is irreversible or irredeemable, but the tentacles of the evangellyfish have wrapped snugly around the body too long to stay silent. Lest you fear the future, know that God has made you a moral actor and agent of eternal reformation. The next time you hear the same empty or infuriating platitudes, the next time you despair of American Christianity, know that there is something you can do. When you meet your local evangellyfish, shake their hand/hug them, buy them a coffee....and tell them that Jesus is bigger than they imagine, and that his gospel has been more than a pamphlet.
In Christ,
~JS
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)