Blast from the Past: An Old Bibliotheca Sacra Journal Article from 1951 Chiding Pentecostals for Being a “Small” Denomination

In my research for my thesis, I came across the following from BSac—V108 #429—Jan 51—pps. 46-47

Is the Pentecostal Movement Pentecostal?
Part 1 – Roy L. Aldrich

The first statement to be examined is the assertion that the modern Pentecostal movement is “a second, or fuller, realization and fulfillment of Joel 2:28–29” than was known previously. If the modern movement is any fuller realization of Joel 2:28–29, then it should be at least equal to the original Pentecost in scope. But there was no Pentecostal movement or sect in the early church; the entire church was Pentecostal—in the proper sense! There was no tongues movement in the apostolic church; all of the 120 at Pentecost spoke with tongues, and later the gift of speaking in tongues was at least generally distributed throughout the church. Nevertheless modern Pentecostalists admit that they belong to a sect which is set apart by its own peculiar experience. Here is their admission: “There was one great Christian experience which brought together all the component parts of the Assemblies of God movement—the baptism in the Holy Spirit accompanied by the speaking in tongues as the Holy Spirit gave utterance. This one truth has designated and set apart the Assemblies of God as a distinct religious body, and the Pentecostal experience is the one excuse for its very existence as a religious body separate from other organizations of similar faith.”
First-century Christians would have considered this a heresy. In spite of its rapid growth the tongues movement represents indeed only a small segment of Christianity. If all the Pentecostal groups were combined they would constitute a denomination inferior in numbers to several of the larger denominations. The Assemblies of God reported 253,000 members in 1948. Several of the well-known denominations have memberships in the millions. This is no reflection upon a small denomination. It is only to point out that the modern tongues-movement is not what it asserts itself to be: it is not Pentecostal in scope.

Notice that Aldrich seemingly belittles the Pentecostals for having a tiny constituency in comparison to other “larger” denominations as proof that Pentecostals aren’t what they claim to be, Pentecostal (Universal). You think he would eat his words today as the Pentecostal movement is one of the fastest growing global movements and is larger than many mainline denominations combined?

Catholics Withdrawing Charitable Minsitries Becasue of Equal Protection Laws for Homosexuals

As reported in the NY Times:

Catholic Charities To Withdraw Services Over Same-Sex Marriage

The fight over a proposed same-sex marriage law here heated up this week as the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Washington said that if the law passed, the church would cut its social service programs that help residents with adoption, homelessness and health care. Under the bill, which has the mayor’s support and is expected to pass next month, religious organizations would not be required to perform same-sex weddings or make space available for them. But officials from the archdiocese said they feared the law might require them to extend employee benefits to same-sex married couples. As a result, they said, the archdiocese would have to abandon its contracts with the city if the law passed. The church’s social services arm, known as Catholic Charities, serves 68,000 local residents, including about a third of the city’s homeless people, who go to city-owned shelters managed by the church, city officials said.  The New York Times, 11/12/09

I want to say that this is a sad day and that the repercussions of these “equal protection” laws are going to drive away millions of dollars that flow through these ministries.

Also, as I understand it, if the Senate health care bill doesn’t include the Stupak amendment and president Obama breaks yet another promise of not funding abortion by signing it into law, then Catholic hospitals will be in a tough bind. If they extend services to those under the Gov’t plan, they would be bound to extend abortion services. Hopefully the bill keeps the amendment and a conscious clause is contained within that will allow certain doctors and hospitals to extend care to folks in the Gov’t plan, but refer abortion services to another hospital or doctor that is willing to perform them. We shall see, but the trend is not good.

Gandalf Defacing the Bible? Say it ain’t So

In an interview with”Details” magazine, actor Ian McKellen admitted to ripping pages out of the Bible whenever he gets a chance (link).

Details: Is it true that when you stay at hotels you tear out the Bible page that condemns homosexuality?

Ian McKellen: I do, absolutely. I’m not proudly defacing the book, but it’s a choice between removing that page and throwing away the whole Bible. And I’m not really the first: I got delivered a package of 40 of those pages — Leviticus 18:22 — that had been torn out by a married couple I know. They put them on a bit of string so that I could hang it up in the bathroom.

I would say that Scripture must be piercing his heart if he feels the need to rip out pages from the Bible to feel at ease. It cut him first before he responded in like-manner. He can cut up the Bible all he wants, but it is alive and active and not subdued by such rebellious folly.

United Methodists Trying to Reach Younger Folks, Lower Average Age

The United Methodist Church, having already lost a couple million members over the years and continuing along that trend, have decided that they will make a proactive attempt to lower their average member age from its current median of 57 (link).

They have unleashed several PR initiatives, including their “Open Minds, Open Hearts, Open Doors” campaign and are now also carrying out a “Rethink Church” campaign.

My advice would be not to “rethink” Church, but rather return to the Catholic-Protestant-Anglican-Wesleyan heritage that got them going in the first place. A median age of 57 evidences a lack of families and a lack of children remaining in the Church. Dare I suggest that they actually catechize their kids in the Apostolic faith? They need to stand firm in the once for all faith delivered to the saints. The UM has too long compromised their theology for the sake of relevance and if they continue along that path they will no longer have any substance to offer the world. My two cents.

John Piper: Rejoice over the reach of world Christianity, but don’t be complacent

From his recent sermon, The Legacy of Antioch:

Meet the Global South

Let’s review the situation of the world today in regard to the spread of Christianity, and what this new term Global South means. The Global South refers to the astonishing growth of the Christian church in Africa, Latin America, and Asia while the formerly dominant centers of Christian influence in Europe and America are weakening. For example:

• At the beginning of the twentieth century, about 71 percent of professing Christians in the world lived in Europe. By the end of the twentieth century, that number had shrunk to 28 percent. 43 percent of the Christians now lived in Latin America and Africa.¹
• In 1900, Africa had 10 million Christians, which was about 10 percent of the population. By 2000, the number of Christians was 360 million, about half the population of the continent. This is probably the largest shift in religious affiliation that has ever occurred, anywhere.²
• There are 17 million baptized members of the Anglican church in Nigeria, compared with 2.8 million in the United States.³
• “This past Sunday more Anglicans attended church in each of Kenya, South Africa, Tanzania, and Uganda than did Anglicans in Britain and Canada and Episcopalians in the United States combined.”
• “The number of practicing Christians in China is approaching the number in the United States.”⁴
• “Last Sunday . . . more Christian believers attended church in China than in all of so-called ‘Christian Europe.’”
• Kenya has more people in Christian churches on Sunday than Canada.
• “More believers worship together in Nagaland than in Norway.”
• “More Christian workers from Brazil are active in cross cultural ministry outside their homelands than from Britain or from Canada.” In other words, the churches of the Global South are increasingly sending churches.
• Last Sunday “more Presbyterians were in church in Ghana than in Scotland.”⁵
• “This past week in Great Britain, at least fifteen thousand Christian foreign missionaries were hard at work evangelizing the locals. Most of these missionaries are from Africa and Asia.”⁶

“In a word,” Mark Noll says, “the Christian church has experienced a larger geographical redistribution in the last fifty years than in any comparable period in its history, with the exception of the very earliest years of church history.”⁷

The West Is Not Done in Sending Missionaries

This is a great cause for Christians to rejoice in the sovereign grace of God. But what it does not mean is that the day of sending missionaries from our churches in the West is over. That would be a tragic misunderstanding of the situation. Partnership in mission with the Global South does not mean that all the unreached peoples of the world can be reached by people who are in the Global South. Don’t buy into the idea that we should send our money, not our people. That would sound very much like: “Let them shed their blood, not ours; we’ll just send money.”

The point of the sermon was this: “The Legacy of Antioch is that it was a mission church that became a sending church through the partnership of Barnabas and Saul, who in the end were sent out by the church to which they were sent.”  Piper also highlights the need for Christian instruction after conversion:

In all your evangelism and church planting, don’t neglect to teach the converts and to take them deep into the gospel and build them up so they are stable and strong….

Justin Martyr before the prefect of Rome

Through reading Litfin’s Getting to Know the Church Fathers, I found out that the short narrative of Justin’s martyrdom is online at the Christian Classics Ethereal Library, maintained by Calvin College.  Justin and others were arrested in Rome about AD 165.  The prefect (chief magistrate) of Rome first ordered Justin to sacrifice to the gods and then examined him about his beliefs and the meetings of Christians that followed him (see Chapter I and Chapter II).  The prefect, Rusticus, then asked the others if they were Christians and asked Liberianus if he would worship the gods.  Their responses, recorded in Chapter III give a brief glimpse into what seems to have been a diverse group of Christians in Rome.  Two had been taught the faith by their parents, while another claimed that “Christ is our true father, and faith in Him is our mother; and my earthly parents died.”  This latter man, Hierax, had originally come from “Iconium in Phrygia” and came to Rome after he was driven out, while Euelpistus’ parents were in Cappadocia.  Euelpistus, “a servant of Caesar,” gave my favorite response to the prefect: “I too am a Christian, having been freed by Christ; and by the grace of Christ I partake of the same hope.”  In the face of their commitment, the prefect informed the Christians of the fate that they faced.  I have quoted in full the last two chapters (IV and V) of the story:

The prefect says to Justin, “Hearken, you who are called learned, and think that you know true doctrines; if you are scourged and beheaded, do you believe you will ascend into heaven?” Justin said, “I hope that, if I endure these things, I shall have His gifts.²⁶⁴⁶ [alternate reading: “I shall have what He teaches [us to expect].”] // For I know that, to all who have thus lived, there abides the divine favour until the completion of the whole world.” Rusticus the prefect said, “Do you suppose, then, that you will ascend into heaven to receive some recompense?” Justin said, “I do not suppose it, but I know and am fully persuaded of it.” Rusticus the prefect said, “Let us, then, now come to the matter in hand, and which presses. Having come together, offer sacrifice with one accord to the gods.” Justin said, “No right-thinking person falls away from piety to impiety.” Rusticus the prefect said, “Unless ye obey, ye shall be mercilessly punished.” Justin said, “Through prayer we can be saved on account of our Lord Jesus Christ, even when we have been punished,²⁶⁴⁷ [alternate reading: “It was our chief wish to endure tortures for the sake of our Lord Jesus Christ, and so to be saved.”] // because this shall become to us salvation and confidence at the more fearful and universal judgment-seat of our Lord and Saviour.” Thus also said the other martyrs: “Do what you will, for we are Christians, and do not sacrifice to idols.”

“Emerging adults” and Liberal Theology

Peter Leithart comments on the end of Christian Smith’s Souls in Transition.  Here is his full post:

Near the end of his recent Souls in Transition: The Religious and Spiritual Lives of Emerging Adults, Christian Smith summarizes the argument of a 1995 article by N. Jay Demerath of the University of Massachusetts.  Demerath writes, that the widely reported decline of liberal Protestantism may in fact signal its “wider cultural triumph. . . . Liberal Protestant have lost structurally at the micro level precisely because they won culturally at the macro level.”  Smith adds, “liberal Protestantism’s core values – individualism, pluralism, emancipation, tolerance, free critical inquiry, and the authority of human experience – have come to so permeate broader American culture that its own churches as organizations have difficulty surviving.”  Try, Smith implies, running an organization centered on the values of “emancipation” and “the authority of experience.”

The Image-Bearer’s farewell: The letters of Ignatius of Antioch

Ignatius, bishop of Antich, wrote 7 letters on his way to be martyred in Rome, addressed to his friend Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, and to the churches in Rome, Ephesus, Tralles, Smyrna, Philadelphia, and Magnesia.  He appears to have died as a martyr around AD 110.  In each letter, he refers to himself as “Theophorus,” which translator Michael Holmes renders “Image-bearer” and others have rendered “God-bearer.”  Holmes argues that he is drawing on the image of pagan religious processions.

As Holmes’ introduction states, we don’t know why Ignatius was arrested, but he apparently escorted to Rome by 10 Roman soldiers.  His letters are often used as sources for the history of the Church in the early centuries.  Holmes writes that his three major concerns throughout the letters are the purity of doctrine against Judaism and Gnostic teachings; unity of the Church, especially under the bishops; and his coming martyrdom.

His theological opponents seem to be two-fold: Judaizers and Gnostics (see here for Peter Leithart’s comments on the interpretation that they were actually Jewish Gnostics – from reading the letters I’m not sure that I agree).  To combat false teachings, Ignatius includes over the course of his letters four creedal statements that affirm Christ’s humanity.  Here’s an example from his letter to the Trallians:

Be deaf, therefore, when anyone speaks to you apart from Jesus Christ, who was of the family of David, who was the son of Mary; who really was born, who both ate and drank; who really was persecuted under Pontius Pilate, who really was crucified and died while those in heaven and on earth and under the earth looked on; who, moreover, really was raised from the dead when his Father raised him up.  In the same way his Father will likewise also raise up in Christ Jesus us who believe in him.  Apart from him we have no true life.

But if, as some atheists (that is, unbelievers) say, he suffered in appearance only (while they exist in appearance only!), why am I in chains?  And why do I want to fight with wild beasts?  If that is the case, I die for no reason; what is more, I am telling lies about the Lord (Chapters 9 and 10).

Ignatius of Antioch writes to the Ephesians

I thought that these were some beautiful words from Ignatius to the Ephesians, describing their union to God in Christ and urging them to both pray for those outside the faith and model Christ for them:

But I have learned that certain people from elsewhere have passed your way with evil doctrine, but you did not allow them to sow it among you.  You covered up your ears in order to avoid receiving the things being sown by them, because you are stones of a temple, prepared beforehand for the building of God the Father, hoisted up to the heights by the crane of Jesus Christ, which is the cross, using as a rope the Holy Spirit; your faith is what lifts you up, and love is the way that leads up to God.  So you are all participants together in a shared worship, God-bearers and temple-bearers, Christ-bearers, bearers of holy things, adorned in every respect with the commandments of Jesus Christ.  I too celebrate with you, since I have been judged worthy to speak with you through this letter, and to rejoice with you because you love nothing in human life, only God.

Pray continually for the rest of humankind as well, that they may find God, for there is in them hope for repentance.  Therefore allow them to be instructed by you, at least by your deeds.  In response to their anger, be gentle; in response to their boasts, be humble; in response to their slander, offer prayers; in response to their errors, be steadfast in the faith; in response to their cruelty, be civilized; do not be eager to imitate them.  Let use show by our forbearance that we are their brothers and sisters, and let us be eager to be imitators of the Lord, to see who can be the more wronged, who the more cheated, who the more rejected, in order that no weed of the devil may be found among you., but that with complete purity and self-control you may abide in Christ Jesus physically and spiritually. (Chapters 9 and 10)

Source: Michael Holmes, The Apostolic Fathers in English

James 5:12 Belongs to James 5:7-11

In my sermon preparation for this coming Lord’s Day, I am working on James 5:12 and was seeking where this verse belongs in James literary structure. Some place it with the discourse on prayer that follows, while most place it with the previous unit on patience, speech, and judgment. Some see it as an isolated insertion with little to no connection with the surrounding units. Suffice it to say, i found Motyer’s outline below to be the most convincing argument for it to be connected with James 5:7-11, thus comprising a unit of James 5:7-12 as a whole:

 

 

 

 

7–8 Patience	9 The tongue (mutual recriminations)
10–11 Patience/steadfastness	12 The tongue (using oaths)

We can open up this pattern in further detail:

7–8 The coming Lord The farmer’s patience is related to God’s programme of the seasons and issues in precious fruit. Patience will bear precious fruit for the coming Lord.	… 9 The coming Judge Sins of speech will bring us under condemnation. The Lord who is near (8) is also the Judge who is at the doors (9).
10–11 The coming end	… 12 The coming judgment

^[1]

 

---

^[1] Motyer, J. A. (1985). The message of James : The tests of faith. The Bible speaks today (174). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill., U.S.A.: Inter-Varsity Press.

Gene Robinson Quote

Was listening to NPR today and heard part of an interview with Episcopal Gene Robinson, who happens to be openly gay and in a relationship with another man. He was previously married to a woman and had two children with his former wife. Anyhow, this quote is not exact, but the best my memory can recall.

I’m encouraged that Christians are reading the sacred text in a new way. They are realizing that the text is not saying what it appears to be saying.

When the interviewer asked him what he does with certain Scriptures that clearly prohibit homosexual behavior, Robinson replied that he would be glad to answer such questions privately during the break. What a coward. Should we really be encouraged that people are reading the Bible in a new way where what it seems to be saying is no longer what it is actually saying?

Nidal Hasan and Secular America

I have written in the past about the coexistence of Islam and Secularism; (here and here for example). According to the Washington Post, Islamic murderer Nidal Hasan gave a presentation to the Army about which the Post says:

Under the “Conclusions” page, Hasan wrote that “Fighting to establish an Islamic State to please God, even by force, is condoned by the Islam,” and that “Muslim Soldiers should not serve in any capacity that renders them at risk to hurting/killing believers unjustly — will vary!”

Yes, will vary.

The Ft. Hood massacre exposes once again the fissures in our society. It is patently obvious that Hasan wanted to inflict death on Americas rather than being forced to go overseas and fight against fellow Muslims. But our corporate, government and educational elites have enforced diversity and tolerance from the top-down for decades now and cannot admit that this level of violence is happening. The reactions to the event are tired and predictable. Expect to see religion blamed in the abstract as a problem, or access to guns, or the wars themselves, not Islam.

A plain reading of the Qur’an reveals that Bin Laden and Hasan are living in closer harmony with the will of Allah revealed in the text than are those Muslims who do not resist the infidels. The response of most in the West is to talk about “Islamism” and “radical Islam” as opposed to the “peaceful” Islam that is the majority view. Clinton, Bush and now Obama engaged in this game. [An aside - where is the ACLU screaming for separation of mosque and state when the President of the USA takes it upon himself to decide which version of Islam is orthodox and which is fringe? In making these pronouncements the leaders of the “free world” are choosing between the different sects of Islam and are acting as official interpreters of which sects are orthodox and which aren’t.]

The official policy of state “neutrality” in religion is a thin veneer of lies that masks the official endorsement of Enlightenment secularism as the de facto philosophy of western nations. There can be peace so long as religion makes no ultimate claims upon the Almighty State and so long as people don’t take religion too seriously. Americans are just fine with religion as long as you don’t get overly serious about God. If you do, at that point you become a fundamentalist, Bible-thumper, nut, or some other pejorative term and you are marginalized.

Any Muslim who gets serious about his religion and reads the Qur’an may resort to violence. God sanctions it and indeed favors it. Christians who take their faith seriously would instead follow the example of Paul who was a model citizen to the point of refusing to flee his Roman captors on two occasions when he could have. BUT, Christians also have absolute truth claims and a body of law that informs how a nation, city or county should run. In this respect we are similar to Muslims or any other religion. Secularism will have none of this. All must be equally powerless and silent in the public sphere, keep your religion to yourself, your church building and your home.

The same folks who bring us Tolerance and Diversity also welcome mass immigration. I believe that their underlying assumption is that such immigration will destroy any chance of Christian hegemony and remake the nation in their weird image. If you think that’s a stretch, you should read this. But what they don’t seem to grasp is that a Muslim America would not have gay marriage and queer courses in college, it would demand submission. Perhaps a miscalculation on their part.

But the way in which they want to change this is to do to the Qur’an what German scholars did to the Bible – that is impose higher criticism on it and deconstruct it. What many people would like to see at the end of this is an Islam that is peaceful, works within the framework of secularism that upholds America and has a text that is not trustworthy and does not have to be obeyed.

Time will tell if this approach is successful or not. But Christians should be cautious about cheering these efforts on. The same high-handed approach that wants to neuter Islam also wants to (and has) emasculated Christendom, removing any threat to the State from a modern day Constantine. We have entire schools of thought and churches within Christianity that are FOR the separation of Church and State!

The answer to Muslims who want to kill at the behest of Allah is not more secularism, pornography, drugs and tolerance. The answer for them is to repent and believe on Jesus the Messiah. This is what we should work for and pray for. Hasan’s murders expose the illogical nature of our settled political order and one would hope that people would begin to think seriously about who we are and what we believe as a people. However, we have had plenty of warnings and thus far the elites and their tired ideology show no sign of cracking.

Against Evangelical Hipsters

In the Summer 2009 issue of The City there is a superb piece of writing that diagnoses a creature that I come across quite a bit online and sometimes in the flesh up in D.C. – the evangelical hipster.  John Mark Reynolds wrote the piece, where he diagnoses the persona of these individuals:

Secularists should stop worrying about a theocracy: Anderson finds young Evangelicals to be like young Mark Studdock in the C.S. Lewis novel That Hideous Strength—more spaniel than pit bull in their desire to charm rather than snub those that despise them. In fact, Anderson’s article essentially accuses young Evangelicals of being just like the characters Mark and Jane Studdock. Like Mark, young Evangelicals desire admission to the “inner ring” of the culture more than any other temptation. Like Jane, they are lightly educated, but take their thoughts very seriously. Unlike Mark and Jane, young American Evangelicals are given Blue Like Jazz rather than Taliesin through Logres.

Although I have often seen this, I’ve never quite put my finger on it like Mr. Reynolds does. The admission to the inner ring of the culture is THE temptation for me and many folks who have moved beyond Left Behind and Christian bookstores and think they have it all together. To me, the solution is to take a stand and appear to be a (gasp) fundamentalist on some issues. I realized some years ago that one thing which makes men like Tolkien great is that he had beliefs and he stood for them. We can easily quibble with his obscurantist stands on motor cars, roads and airplanes, but he had reasons for believing and he believed! He was not a perpetually vacillating ninny who never arrived at a position and did not stand up for the Creeds and culture which gave him birth.

Catholic Idolatry

Mark Horne has a helpful post on why he is not a Roman Catholic. An excerpt:

1. Idolatry is a huge sin and praying through icons (whether 3d or 2d) is idolatry.  I cannot possibly engage in such a practice, allow anyone in my guardianship to do so, or excuse such a thing, without falling into rank unbelief.
2. Necromancy is almost as huge a sin and praying to the departed saints is necromancy.  See #1 above.  People raised thinking bigamy is Christian may be true Christians, but people who know better are living in sin and without hope of eternal life unless they repent of such behavior.
3. The way some Roman Catholic constituencies provide ministry opportunities for defectors from Protestantism is, of course, tempting–but it can hardly count as anything more than thirty pieces of silver if #1 and #2 hold.  If one must be marginalized and impoverished in the Protestant world due to sectarian sins, well, God has called many Christians and their families to far worse martyrdoms.
4. Claiming unity can be achieved by everyone else joining one’s own denomination is exactly the sect spirit that is so loathsome in many Protestant groups, and it gains no more attractiveness in Rome.

While Mark’s honesty will offend many who justify idolatry by appealing to John of Damascus, we have an opposite example in the Internet Monk’s interview with Bryan Cross, someone who has made that plunge into idolatry. I don’t know why these issues are never raised in these ecumenical interviews. Many Protestants still seem to assume that justification is the core issue between us and Rome, while in fact idolatry is and always has been one of the central concerns of the Reformation, if one that is often ignored today.

New Calvinism and Holy Hip Hop

I just finished listening to a 9Marks Audio installment where Mark Dever interview Christian hip hop artists shai linne and Voice.  I’ve heard shai linne’s “Atonement Q&A” before; it’s something like a rap catechism that’s part of his album “The Atonement.”  Shai and Voice are both theologically Reformed, and they view their work as a way to build up the church with “lyrical theology.”  If you’re interested in their explanation of the purpose of their work, the best 15 minutes to listen to are from about 40 minutes in through about 55 minutes in.  They see their artistry as God’s redemption of a sinful medium to be used for his glory.  It’s not intended to replace preaching or congregational music, but instead to do what rap does very effectively: communicate a worldview.  Dever has become a fan and actually says that no other form of music matches the “theological density” of shai linne’s music.

In the last 30 years or so, there have been a lot of Christian “knock-offs” of secular music, clothing, etc.  I think that the “holy hip hop” movement is more original and edifying, although I don’t know for sure yet.  For one opinion, check out Thabiti Anyabwile’s short explanation here.

“Emerging Adults” and Religion

Christianity Today’s Katelyn Beaty interviewed sociologist Christian Smith for the current issue.  Smith’s new book, Souls in Transition,  looks at the religious attitudes and practices of 18-29 year-olds.  The idea that this phase of life is now a prelude to married life has come out in several things that I’ve read.  Some good examples are an article about twentysomething “child-men” from the City Journal (warning: some crude descriptions of a crude young male culture), Joel’s post dissecting the attitudes of “Our Mad World,” and Christianity Today’s recent article “The Case for Early Marriage.”  Here is Smith’s explanation of this development:

Much social transformation since the 1960s and ’70s has created it. A higher proportion of American youth are spending more years in higher education. They are waiting a lot longer before they get married and have kids. That’s partly related to wanting to stay in school longer. It’s partly related to wanting to be “free” longer. It’s also associated with things like the availability of artificial contraception.

Book Review: Divided by Faith, by Michael Emerson and Christian Smith

Divided by Faith: Evangelical Religion and the Problem of Race in America is a historical and sociological study of white evangelical attitudes toward white-black relations.  I found it fascinating.  I should also try to read some reviews by trained sociologists who may be able to offer some insight into their research methods.

Emerson and Smith state that America is a racialized society in which “race matters profoundly for differences in life experiences, life opportunities, and social relationships” (7, emphasis in original).  They define racism sociologically, in that it does not have to be intentional; instead, it is an inequality in power that disadvantages one group or another.  One interesting example of this is that more educated whites tend to have fewer prejudices against black people, but at the same time tend to take actions that increase racialization because they are able to pursue higher-quality schools and neighborhoods that tend to be predominantly white.  Thus they are actually more segregated from African Americans.  They also quote another study that argues that racializing practices are becoming more hidden and institutionalized rather than direct and expressed in the language of race (9).

The European Heritage of Zionism

I’ve been episodically reading David Engel’s Zionism in Pearson’s “Short Histories of Big Ideas” series.  It seems like a good, fair, and readable introduction to the topic.

He distinguishes Zionism from “activist messianism.”  The latter, a religious movement,  grew in the 16th and 17th centuries and resulted in migration to Palestine in the 18th and 19th centuries.  A small group of Jews hoped that their efforts would lead God to send the Messiah.

Zionism, on the other hand, is a more secular movement based on trends in Europe, where so many Jews lived.  Many of the Zionists were influenced by European trends of the 19th century:

• Nationalism was the most powerful influence, as Jews began to think of themselves as a national group without a state.  As other ethnic groups began to seek political unity based on a shared culture, influenced by the nationalist and liberal political ideas of the French Revolution, Jews found themselves defined as not part of the “nations” among which they lived.  This happened especially in Eastern Europe in the multinational Austrian and Russian empires, where about 85% of European Jews lived.  Jews were often assimilated into Western European countries, although anti-Semitism could flare there too (the Dreyfus Affair in France and Aryan supremacist thought in Germany are two examples).

Expositional Preaching Crosses Cultural Boundaries

Recently, I posted some reflections on preaching in the African-American church.

Yesterday, I listened to Thabiti Anyabwile’s talk on expositional preaching in non-white contexts (you can find the audio here).  Late in the talk, he broadened non-white to “subcultural.”  He said that there is a conception that expositional preaching (where the preacher focuses on explaining the text) is often thought of as a white or socially elite way to preach, whereas the distinctive emotionalism of preaching in the black church (or the hwyl in the Welsh church that Martin Lloyd-Jones refused to imitate) is thought to preclude expositional preaching.

Anyabwile, an African American who now pastors in the Caribbean, used the example of the reading and explanation of the Law in Nehemiah 8 as proof that expositional preaching is not “white,” for it moved the Jews who had returned from exile to observe their faith.  Instead, he argued, the exposition of the Word of God is part of the culture of the “new humanity,” the community of people from all nations redeemed in Christ.

2 Clement: A Call to Repentance and Holy Living

While it’s traditionally called the “Second Letter of Clement,” Michael Holmes notes that it’s neither by Clement nor a letter.  2 Clement is actually a sermon or some other kind of address, the first complete Christian sermon outside of the New Testament.  The author and date are difficult to establish, although Holmes discusses some interesting theories.

2 Clement seems to be addressing baptized Christians (Holmes also notes another historian’s theory that it is addressed to catechumens), urging them to live in a manner that will please Christ and will ultimately result in a favorable judgment by him.  Here was one of the more striking exhortations:

For if we do the will of Christ, we will find rest; but if we do not – if we disobey his commandments – then nothing will save us from eternal punishment.  And the scripture also says in Ezekiel, “Even if Noah and Job and Daniel should rise up, they will not save their children” in their captivity.  Now if even such righteous men as these are not able, by means of their own righteous deeds, to save their children, what assurance do we have of entering the kingdom of God if we fail to keep our baptism pure and undefiled?  Or who will be our advocate, if we are not found to have holy and righteous works? (2 Clement 6:7-9)

As an evangelical Protestant, I found this kind of language jarring at first.  Ligon Duncan also noted the importance of works in 2 Clement as opposed to the emphasis on the cross in this interview about patristics with Sovereign Grace Radio.

Reaching the Next Generation With Substance, Not Style

Kevin DeYoung, pastor at University Reformed Church in East Lansing, Michigan, did a series this week on his five-part plan for “reaching the next generation” with Christ: “Grab them with passion.  Win them with love.  Hold them with holiness.  Challenge them with truth.  Amaze them with God.”  The focus of the series is this: substance is more important than style, truth and depth and holy living are more important than a cool presentation or appearance, and a challenging, God- and gospel-centered message is more important than being non-threatening.  In fact, DeYoung argues, these meaningful things are often what people want, rather than something watered-down or shallow.  Presentation is important, he says, and there’s nothing wrong with thinking about presentation, but more important is what you’re presenting.

The whole series is good, but I thought that I would pull out a couple of things out.  From the post on love:

The evangelical church has spent far too much time trying to figure out cultural engagement, and far too little time just trying to love.  If we listen to people patiently and give people the gift of our curiosity we will be plenty engaged.  I’m not arguing for purposeful obscurantism.  What I’m arguing for is getting people’s attention with a force more powerful than the right lingo and the right movies.We spend all this time trying to imitate Gen X culture or millennial culture, and to what end?  For starters, there is no universal youth culture.  Young people do not all think alike, dress alike, or feel comfortable in the same environments.  Moreover, even if we could figure out “what the next generation likes” by the time we figured it out they probably wouldn’t like it anymore.  Count on it: when the church discovers cool, it won’t be cool anymore.  I’ve seen well meaning Christians try to introduce new music into the church in an effort to reach the young people, only to find out that the “new” music included “Shine, Jesus, Shine” and “Shout to the Lord.”  There’s nothing worse than a church trying to be fresh and turning out to be a little dated.  Better to stick with the hymns and the organ than do “new” music that isn’t new or do the new music in an embarrassing way.

As the post on holiness makes clear, DeYoung sees these five ideas as important for parents, too:

Remember, the next generation is not just out there.  They are also in here, sitting in our churches week after week.  We often hear about how dangerous college can be for Christian teens, how many of them check out of church ones they reach the university.  But studies have shown that most of the students who check out, do so in high school, not in college.  It’s not liberal professors that are driving our kids away.  It’s their hard hearts and our stale, compromised witness that opens the door for them to leave.

One of our problems is that we have no done a good job of modeling Christian faith in the home and connecting our youth with other mature Christian adults in the church.  One youth leader has commented that how often our young people “attended youth events (including Sunday school and discipleship groups) was not a good predictor of which teens would and which would not grow toward Christian adulthood.”  Instead, “almost without exception, those young people who are growing in their faith as adults were teenagers who fit into one of two categories: either (1) they came from families where Christian growth was modeled in at least one of their parents, or (2) they had developed such significant connections with adults within the church that it had become an extended family for them.”  Likewise, sociologist Christian Smith argues that though most teenagers and parents don’t realize it, “a lot of research in the sociology of religion suggests that the most important social influence in shaping young people’s religious lives is the religious life modeled and taught to them by their parents.”

The take home from all this is pretty straight forward.  The one indispensable requirement for producing godly, mature Christians is godly, mature Christians.  Granted, good parents still have wayward children and faithful mentors don’t always get through to their pupils.  But in the church as a whole, the promise of 2 Peter 1 is as true as ever.  If we are holy, we will be fruitful.  Personal connections with growing Christians is what the next generation needs more than ever.

He closes the series with this observation:

We have an incredible opportunity before us.  Most people live weightless, ephemeral lives.  We can give them substance instead of style.  We can show them a big God to help make sense of their shrinking lives.  We can point them to transcendence instead of triviality.  We can reach them with something more lasting and more powerful than gimmicks, gadgets, and games.  We can reach them with God.

Imagine that.  Reaching the next generation for God by showing them more of God.  That’s just crazy enough to work.

The Man Who Went to Church for Starbucks

A local church plant sent out fliers to each home advertising a free Starbucks gift card to all who would show up. They are also running ads on Facebook with the title “Free Starbucks Gift Card”. If people choose a church because they can receive a free Starbucks gift card, then I would seriously question whether such folks really want to meet with God. I would also question whether the church is seeking to be a purveyor of goods to meet superficial cravings and needs, or if they are preaching Christ as a matter of life or death.

I would like to think that our worship service brings people to God…that is our intent at least. Guests to our Church should be warned that they might encounter the living God who speaks to us through Word and Sacrament, revealing the secrets of their hearts and bringing them to their knees in confession of our desperate need for Him.

There was once a poor man who thought he most needed silver and gold. Peter said that he had nothing of what the man was seeking, but instead offered him Christ and the lame man was healed. The poor man got better than he initially sought.

Well…..there was once a church, desperate for a big crowd, offered willing attenders a free Starbucks card if they would dare visit their new church. Some flocked there, awkwardly inquiring about the card, glad to finally receive it. They sat through the blaring loud music, thinking that the “band” was trying too hard to sound like U2 (but really sucked).

The pastor got up and “shared” with the group, giving 5 “relevant and practical” points on how to be a more gracious person. The attender thought to himself, “I guess I can implement the ‘life points’ this ‘pastor’ just gave me. Seem simple enough”. Deep down, curiosity struck, “Why do I feel empty? Is this the really good news…that I get a Starbucks card and a message on how to be a happier person? Is that what Jesus died for?”.

On the way out the door, a happy smiley person walks up and quips, “Hope you enjoyed your visit and enjoy your Starbucks coffee. While we don’t hand out gift cards to repeat guests, I hope you found the worship to be cool and relevant, the message to be practical and relevant, and the people to be ‘real’ and relevant, and hope to see you next week at our cool, rocking, practical, real, and relevant church”.

The guest gave an awkward smile in return and  endured a patting on the back as if he was now this guy’s best friend.

On the way home, the man felt somewhat guilty for even having come to church for a Starbucks card, “How shallow can I get?”

He realized his need for God and wanted desperately to seek Him out. As he thought for a moment about returning to the church he had just visited, his guilt over receiving a Starbucks card dawned on him, “How shallow can they be?”. He concluded that this wasn’t the type of church that would most satisfy his deepest questions and longings in his life.

Deep down he needed God, but went to church for a Starbucks card. After being told by a church-member how cool, relevant, real, and practical their church was, he concluded that they were anything but.

Starbucks, rocking music, and friendly people they did have, but not the Jesus he so desperately needs.

Why Young Folks Are Turning to Reformed Worship

This is a brief quote from the article, “Young, Restless, and Reformed” (link).

“If there’s an appeal to students, it’s that we’re not playing around,” Hughes said. “We’re not entertaining them. This is life and death. My sense is that’s what they’re interested in, even from an old man.”

I know this article and quote are old, but just came across it in some recent reading and thought it relevant. Unfortunately so many worship services in America exude with triviality and over-casualness. I spoke to some college students that chose to attend our church after visiting some of the local churches and asked them why they settled here. Their response was essentially that the other churches felt too much like a “production”. In an attempt to be relevant, many are becoming overly-relevant and thus not relevant at all.

I would describe our worship service as being semi-liturgical, with a core emphasis on God and approaching Him with reverence. I preach as a dying man to dying men. Their is a gravity to worship and preaching in “Calvinism” which reaches deep down into the soul and meets our greatest need. It is my prayer that more young people will realize they need Jesus before loud, rocking U2 wannabees, a pastor guru who “shares” his thoughts on living for Jesus, and freebies.

I pray that they would hunger for Biblical preaching over a multimedia experience,

that they would hunger for the Lord’s Supper more than lunch following service,

that they would long for fellowship with the elderly and handicapped more than merely their niche peer group.

 

Home Group Sheet for Matthew 5:4 “Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted”

I know this is a bit choppy, but I made it for my personal use and it might not be reader-friendly. This is a condensed commentary on Matthew 5:4 for the homegroup I am leading right now. We are going through the Sermon on the Mount.

Matthew 5:4 “Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted”

-          This beatitude connects to the previous one in that “being poor in spirit” acknowledges one’s poverty and need for help. Important to note that the Sermon on the Mount doesn’t advocate “works righteousness”, nor is “law” for Jews only. It begins with our poverty and need of grace.

-          Being “poor in spirit” will manifest itself in mourning.

• Our faith is a “crying one”:
  • “We need, then, to observe that the Christian life, according to Jesus, is not all joy and laughter. Some Christians seem to imagine that, especially if they are filled with the Spirit, they must wear a perpetual grin on their face and be continuously boisterous and bubbly. How unbiblical can one become? No. In Luke’s version of the Sermon Jesus added to this beatitude a solemn woe: ‘Woe to you that laugh now.’¹ The truth is that there are such things as Christian tears, and too few of us ever weep them.”^[1]

-          “I fear that we evangelical Christians, by making much of grace, sometimes thereby make light of sin. There is not enough sorrow for sin among us. We should experience more ‘godly grief’ of Christian penitence, like that sensitive and Christ-like eighteenth-century missionary to the American Indians David Brainerd, who wrote in his journal on 18 October 1740: ‘In my morning devotions my soul was exceedingly melted, and bitterly mourned over my exceeding sinfulness and vileness.’ Tears like this are the holy water which God is said to store in his bottle. Such mourners, who bewail their own sinfulness, will be comforted by the only comfort which can relieve their distress, namely the free forgiveness of God” (Stott, John).

What is Godly grief?

Appreciating your clergy…

8 ways to encourage your pastor…

have you encouraged him lately?

Too Much Information

It seems like the challenge I face in this world is that I am drowning under waves of information. Twitter feeds, Facebook stream, Google Reader constantly shooting more articles at me. Newspapers arriving at the door, books glaring from the shelf, papers on various subjects. Movies to watch, shows to keep up with, sports talk bombarding me with the soap opera that is the NFL.

All of it crashes in upon my brain every day and I have to try to prune it back, manage it, reduce my inbox, get my unread items to zero. I am tempted to cut the tether binding me to the Empire of Information, but I can’t summon the willpower to do it. What if I miss some amazing trend in theology or come up short when someone mentions the name of a 16th century author whose works have recently been unearthed from a dig in central Saxony? I would like to change, but not today, not today Lord.

My Girls Are Hillarious

Brief post here, but wanted to share a couple funny things that happened with my girls today.

• This morning as I was packing up my book back, Kira (5 year old who is learning to read) saw my commentary on Romans and was asked by mom to read the title. She struggled through the word “epistle”, but continued quite well on the proceeding words “to the”. She paused at the word “Romans” and proceeded to say quite boldly…”Mormons”.  “The Epistle to the Mormons” she says…maybe she is on to something. She knows more of what she knows not what she speaks.
• Later in the afternoon, while watching the news, Lexi perks up at the appearance of President Obama and exclaims “Dada”. She doesn’t talk like a baby but pretends once in awhile. Surprised, we asked here if Obama was her daddy and she nodded yes.
• The girls provide laughter on a daily basis…what a blessing they are!!!

Hugh Hewitt: A Simply Christian, Evangelical, Catholic, Presbyterian (say that 5 times fast)

I finished my Sunday evening by watching C-Spans special on the Supreme Court and then flipped over to C-Span 2 to watch their feature of all-everything Hugh Hewitt (link). I used to listen to him while driving through southern California rush hour and was somewhat fond of him. After hearing him take questions for close to 2 hours, my esteem for him has grown.

He describes himself as simply Christian in the tradition of C.S. Lewis, whom he also lists as his favorite non-fiction author, as an Evangelical Roman Catholic, who is also Presbyterian. He said all with a smile and chuckle and didn’t elaborate on how all that fits together. Anyhow, I just wanted to give some props to him. He also demonstrated a charity towards our president that evidences Christian maturity, but also boldly criticized him on a handful of issues. He also cited with conviction that it seems inconceivable to him how one can be a “Christian” and support abortion. I was surprised a bit by how bold he was in his assertion.

He also pointed out the inconsistency of liberals who care more about fish than humans in the much publicized issue of the Californian farmers whose water has been shut off. He also levied some attacks at liberal policies that prohibited California firefighters from using certain techniques to prevent the spread of the recent wildfires because they had to respect the property of some endangered rat. Lastly, I found rather insightful his comment that the National Parks were Republican ideas which sought the preservation of land for “human” public enjoyment. Teddy Roosevelt promoted “conservationist” policies that have an enduring legacy and Hewitt encourages Republicans wear the “conservationist” banner proudly and revive the issue in matters of what’s best for the public.

Kevin DeYoung on Church Membership

Kevin DeYoung has a good post on the importance of church membership.  It’s worth reading.  Here are his main points:

1. In joining a church you make visible your commitment to Christ and his people.

2. Making a commitment makes a powerful statement in a low-commitment culture.

3. We can be overly independent.

4. Church membership keeps us accountable.

5. Joining the church will help your pastor and elders be more faithful shepherds.

6. Joining the church gives you an opportunity to make promises.

Four Reformed Views of Christ and Culture

Kevin DeYoung links to an article by Ray Pennings about how four different Reformed camps think about the ancient question of Christian engagement in culture.  It’s short but interesting.  I’m a little surprised by the names that Pennings gives to the camps, but it looks like he explains them in a print-edition only article of December 2008 issue of Comment magazine.

Matt Harmon summarizes the views of the camps that Pennings delineates:

(1) neo-calvinism, which focuses on the comprehensive claims of the gospel; (2) two kingdom approach, which stresses the distinctiveness of the church from the culture; (3) neo-puritans, who emphasize the sovereignty of God and the role of the individual in seeking the good of the city; (4) old-calvinism, which contends that cultural engagement inevitably leads to worldliness.

Check out the whole article if this is a topic that interests you.