Kuyperian, Author at Kuyperian Commentary

On October 21, 2014 By Kuyperian In Theology Like

Mental Disorders and Ecclesial Hospitality

Why should churches seek to integrate people with mental disorders into the body-life of the church? To begin with, all of us, in our own ways, are thoroughly disordered. Jesus is the only person post-Fall who has been perfectly ordered in psyche, personality, and affections. So integrating individuals with disorders into the life of the church is not optional, and it begins with our own disordered selves. Secondly, though all of us are cracked, we’re still mirrors, reflecting the God of the universe. As C.S. Lewis points out, a “mere mortal” has never walked in our midst. Even the person on the furthest end of the “cracked spectrum” is still a reflection of God, retaining immeasurable worth and beauty.

In light of this Imago Dei reality, integrating someone with O.C.D. into a small group shouldn’t be viewed as an inconvenience or a bother, but as a privilege, a way to make the group more functional. By incorporating the mentally disordered person into your group, you’re implicitly acknowledging that the person has something to offer. You’re admitting the deficiency of your church, indeed of yourself, and asking the O.C.D. person to bring their portion to the communal feast, that everyone’s meal might be better because of their contribution. Mysteriously, God is in the business of bringing order from disorder and dignity from depravity.

While we may cognitively recognize the necessity of integrating the differently-disordered into the body-life of our church, we often lack the motivation to do so. An evening Bible study with close friends feels much more comfortable than opening our home to a manic-depressive woman who needs space to process. Joining a softball league sounds like more fun than taking meals to the families of those in long-term psychiatric treatment centers. What should be our motivation for putting ourselves in situations so rife with conflict and pain? The answer, in a word, is love.

On the surface, comfort feels more loving than conflict. Yet, the Bible shows us that to avoid conflict is to miss out on love. After they sin, Adam and Eve avoid conflict, they hide. The first pair would have happily stayed in isolation, avoiding the pain of conflict with God, but God was not content to leave them in there hidden, isolated state. Instead, He approaches them. He kills an animal with which he covers there nakedness and shame. He enters into the brokenness of his creatures, pursuing love at the expense of comfort and ease. Independence, isolation, and privacy are all tertiary to love in God’s economy.

Being in a church is a daily decision to sacrifice comfort for love. On Sunday mornings, our alarm goes off and we choose the conflict of the cold wood floors and bright light over the comfort of our blankets and cozy darkness. We then choose the conflict of awkward greetings and conversations over the peace of isolation. We choose the conflict of confessing our sins to one another over the peace of privacy and anonymity.

If we as a church were called to comfort, to toleration, our job would be easy! To tolerate the A.D.H.D. teen in our church consists of giving a friendly smile, wishing him well from a distance, maybe contributing a few bucks for him to go to camp. But to love him involves the conflict of awkward, lengthy conversations in the church lobby when you want to be on our way to lunch. The inconvenience of making sure he has a ride to Sunday school because you genuinely care not only for his social network, but for his spiritual growth and maturity. In other words, we are not a “Babel” people, scattered and left to our own selves and languages. No, we are a “Pentecost” people, given the Spirit of understanding and unity, the Spirit that pushes us toward the uncomfortable, toward the different, toward the other.

Why should we seek to make our church more hospitable to people differently-disordered? We do so because we’re a people shaped by the word which brings order and comfort to the lost and confused. We’re a people fed by the bread and wine meant only for the hungry. We integrate the differently-disordered into our churches because we are followers of the Savior who left the comfort of heaven to endure the conflict of His Father’s wrath, dying as a substitute for His disordered people. We follow Him down the road of the awkward, the uncomfortable, the confrontational, because it is the narrow road of love. Few will take the journey. Each are given a cross to carry. But all who make the hard choice of walking down this uneasy road will find beauty in the brokenness and peace in the pain.

Dustin Messer is a graduate of Boyce College, Covenant Theological Seminary, and is currently pursuing his M.Th. in Historical Theology from University of Glasgow. Dustin and his wife Whitney live in the Dallas area and worship at Christ Church-Carrollton, TX.<>

On October 15, 2014 By Kuyperian In Books 2

Morning Devotions: The Screwtape Letters, Chapter 6

In Chapter 6 of C. S. Lewis’ The Screwtape Letters, Uncle Screwtape exhorts Wormwood to “direct the malice of his patient to his immediate neighbor whom he meets every day and to thrust his benevolence out to the remote circumference, to people he does not know. The malice thus becomes wholly real and the benevolence largely imaginary.” Screwtape references the English people as “creatures of that miserable sort who loudly proclaim that torture is too good for their enemies and then give tea and cigarettes to the first wounded German pilot who turns up at the back door.”

Recalling that this book was written in 1942, the English people would certainly have been loving their enemies by caring for wounded German pilots. These Luftwaffe pilots had fallen from the sky, just two years earlier, while attempting to destroy London during their Blitz—37 consecutive weeks of bombing raids, resulting in the destruction of over one million English homes and deaths of over 40,000 civilians. Screwtape’s Enemy (God) told His people to love their enemies, and the English people were actually doing it.

What are we to learn from this? We have enemies that we need to love, and these enemies will probably fall into at least two distinct categories: the ideological sort—liberal judges, corrupt politicians, misguided mega-church pastors, etc., or of the personal sort –failed friendships, obnoxious neighbors and coworkers, or strained family relationships. Relationships so strained that particular people have become our real enemies, but not the type of enemies sneaking in at night to murder us while we sleep. Our enemies are of a different sort than England’s enemies of the 1940’s.

Lewis’ call to love our enemies, however, is of the same sort. While our hatred of the judges and politicians may be real enough, causing much angst and even the occasional expletive, those people are not in close enough proximity to feel either our hatred or our love. They cannot feel our steely glares through their teleprompter. While they are vying for our vote, not our affection, we are called to love them as we love ourselves. We would want someone to pray for us, not gripe about us behind our backs. We would want someone to think the best of us and our intentions, not demonize every word we say. Thinking the worst of our enemies does nothing but bring us down. Lewis elaborates on this point in Mere Christianity:

“Suppose one reads a story of filthy atrocities in the paper. Then suppose that something turns up suggesting that the story might not be quite true, or not quite so bad as it was made out. Is one’s first feeling, `Thank God, even they aren’t quite so bad as that,’ or is it a feeling of disappointment, and even a determination to cling to the first story for the sheer pleasure of thinking your enemies as bad as possible? If it is the second then it is, I am afraid, the first step in a process which, if followed to the end, will make us into devils. You see, one is beginning to wish that black was a little blacker. If we give that wish its head, later on we shall wish to see grey as black, and then to see white itself as black. Finally, we shall insist on seeing everything – God and our friends and ourselves included – as bad, and not be able to stop doing it: we shall be fixed for ever in a universe of pure hatred.”

Concerning the personal enemies that we see every day, the Samaritan is always in the ditch. These are the ones that Lewis is calling us to love through our actions, for they are ever present. Screwtape would want us to feel good enough about loving our faraway enemies that we would consider our job well done and thereby cease loving the enemies next door. If we view loving our neighbor as a checklist—something we could quantify and complete in a given time period—then we are more susceptible to fall into Screwtape’s trap.

Lewis’ idea of loving those who are far away to the neglect of loving those who are near applies to more than just our enemies. We can send money to help Compassion International kids around the globe to the neglect of loving the poor around us. (I say this as a financial supporter of Compassion, not a foe.) We can love the missionaries who have travelled far to the neglect of supporting local charities or even neglecting to personally testify of the mercy of God to our neighbors.

One final thought is that we can fall prey to loving our virtual neighbors while neglecting to love those neighbors that God has placed within our own household. “Just one more email, darling, and I’ll be done for the evening.” “Hold on, honey, I’ve just got to post this to Facebook and I’ll read to you.” “Junior, play my iPad while I finish this article.” None of this should be taken as some sort of guilt trip about using global technology for the benefit of those that afar off, but are we loving God’s people around the globe to the neglect of those flesh-and-blood heirs of Christ’s Kingdom placed under our direct care? If we are, then both Screwtape and Wormwood are about to get a promotion.<>

On October 12, 2014 By Kuyperian In Scribblings Like

Anti-ethnocentric Ethnocentrism

“Only in the Western nations, i.e., those influenced by Greek philosophy, is there some willingness to doubt the identification of the good with one’s own way. One should conclude from the study of non-Western cultures that not only to prefer one’s own way but to believe it best, superior to all others, is primary and even natural—exactly the opposite of what is intended by requiring students to study these cultures. What we are doing is applying a Western prejudice—which we covertly take to indicate the superiority of our culture—and deforming the evidence of those other cultures to attest to its validity. The scientific study of other cultures is almost exclusively a Western phenomenon, and in its origin was obviously a search for new and better ways, or at least for the validation of the hope that our own culture really is the better way, a validation for which there is no felt need in other cultures. If we are to learn from those cultures, we must wonder whether such scientific study is such a good idea. Consistency would seem to require professors of openness to respect the ethnocentrism or closedness they find everywhere else. However, in attacking ethnocentrism, what they actually do is assert unawares the superiority of their scientific understanding and the inferiority of the other cultures which do not recognize it at the same time they reject all such claims to superiority. They both affirm and deny the goodness of their science.”

–Allan Bloom, The Closing of the American Mind, p.36

Perhaps we could summarize it this way —

Anti-ethnocentric Ethnocentrism: The belief that our way of thinking, which states that no one’s way of thinking is better than anyone else’s, is better than anyone else’s way of thinking, which states that their way of thinking is better than ours.

<>копирайтинг цены

On October 11, 2014 By Kuyperian In Scribblings Like

Van Til on John Dewey

“It becomes increasingly apparent that the teacher in Dewey’s schools must somehow know that these teachings of Christianity cannot be true. They must protect their pupils from the evil influences of such disintegrating and miseducative doctrines. So they must be sure that these doctrines are not true. They must know that it is impossible that they can be true. They must be able to assure the pupils that there cannot be a judgment coming. They must be able to make universal negative assertions about all future experience. And they must make such assertions on the basis of present experience as it is intelligible without reference to anything beyond itself. In other words Dewey’s teachers must first assert that man knows nothing of a transcendent realm. But they must also assert, in effect, that they know all about it. They must assert that nobody knows anything about it. This means that they who claim to know about it must be mistaken. And then they themselves, nonetheless, presume to know all about it. They must be omniscient in order to know that no one can rightfully claim to know anything about God.”

–Cornelius Van Til, Essays on Christian Education, 1979<>

On October 4, 2014 By Kuyperian In Scribblings Like

How to Prepare to Listen to a Sermon?

Calvin once wrote: “When a man has climbed up into the pulpit… it is [so] that God may speak to us by the mouth of a man.”Paul says in I Thessalonians 2:13: “And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers.” (1 Thes 2:13)

The Word of God preached is a necessary part of worship. It is the counsel of God to the people of God. The sermon is a time for teaching, exhorting, and bringing the Word of God to bear upon the life of the people. This is the pastoral duty as he stands before you. The pastor preaches as one following the apostolic train.

But how do you as a parishioner respond to the preached Word? Preparation is key. People need to be trained to take advantage of this profound means of grace. The Word is a two-edged sword. It is God’s divine surgery on the Lord’s Day. It is crucial to realize as God’s servant prepares to deliver God’s word to you that your expectation is not one of a judge or critic, though at times you may have your doubts about a particular interpretation, but that is not your duty when listening to the Word preached. Your duty is to trust the Word preached to mold your very being; to humble your very spirit, and to change your very life. If you are in doubt that this is happening in the preached Word, you may need to consider whether another Church is more faithful to this sacred duty or whether–and this is likely–you have hardened your heart to the ministry of the Gospel. In other words, if everyone around you affirms that God’s word is being delivered faithfully and you are the only one who sees differently, perhaps the problem is not with the ministry of the Word, but with your heart.

But though the preached Word plays a fundamental role in the life of the Church and worship, it’s important to avoid a particular kind of error that sometimes plagues certain Reformed churches. ^aOur intellectual heritage is largely a “Word-oriented” heritage. In light of this, sometimes we think of the sermon as the climax of the service, so that everything before and after do not carry the same weight. We have a tendency to view preaching as the only indispensable part of the service, but we should not think in this manner. The sermon is not meant to be primarily a time for great detailed word studies or to hear the latest controversy, or to hear an exhaustive treatment of a passage. If you want a classroom atmosphere, this is not it! Worship is not an extended classroom time; worship is the word of God from heaven to you! This is the gathering of the army of God. As an army, you will begin the service hearing God’s call, and you will sing God’s word in psalms and hymns, and you will eat at Christ’s table, and you will leave with a benediction from God’s word. All these areas are as important to worship as the sermon. Each has its own level of importance. I want you to look at the sermon as a time for an extended hearing of God’s word, but the Word of God is also present from beginning to middle and from middle to end. If you have been inattentive throughout the whole service waiting simply for the preaching, then you have failed to prepare yourself for the preaching. The whole service of God is the service to God’s people. If only a portion interests you, then you have failed the task of responding properly to the Word of God.

The over-emphasis on preaching has created a type of elite Christianity where the newly converted, divorced mother of three feels inferior because of her inability to keep up with detailed Greek exegesis or lengthy treatments on cerebral subjects. These topics do have a place, but worship is not that place. Fancy terminologies may fulfill the appetite of hungry theologians, but may leave the depressed parishioner–who desperately needs hope– empty.

So, qualifications aside, the sermon, or the preached Word, is a necessary part of worship. It ought not to be the center focus of worship, but the most extended aspect of worship due to its nature. And taking that time seriously is important for those who wish to mature into a fruitful faith. Here are then some ideas for how to make that time more beneficial for you as a Christian.

First, come humbly to hear. We are not trained well in this area. Most of us are more interested in what we have to say on a particular subject. Hearing a sermon will require humility to train your ears to listen.

Second, for all the work a pastor does throughout the week in researching and putting together a manuscript, through every attempt to be precise, still sometimes he will say something that does not connect in your mind. When this happens, write it down and ask the pastor after the service. If you think it is a subject that will require more time, wait until Monday or sometime during the week. After the service, pastors are eager to greet guests or to minister to certain members, or to counsel someone. Pastors always enjoy when people interact with his sermon. Trust me!

Third, prepare yourself for the text. Read it throughout the week. Know the passage before hearing the passage explained to you. In most churches, pastors will give the congregation some idea of what text he is preaching next. If this is not a habit, ask your pastor to let you know, so you can prepare yourself and your family for the sermon. He will be appreciative of that.

Finally, I exhort you to presuppose the authority of the Word. When science speaks with authority, the Word of God is more authoritative. When there is a claim that contradicts the Scriptures, the Scriptures will never fail. The Word shall never be broken. Trust it, embrace it, and live by it and you will be blessed all your days.<>

I refer to Reformed churches because this is the context I have been serving in the last 15 years (back)

On September 29, 2014 By Kuyperian In Theology Like

What’s wrong with being Gospel-Centered?

Guest Post by Rev Dr Steve Jeffery, Minister at Emmanuel Evangelical Church, London, England (Blog, Facebook, Twitter)

Well, come on, what could possibly be wrong with the insistence that all of our thoughts and actions about every aspect of our lives – politics and science and economics and education and childrearing and art and work and sport and everything else – should be determined in relation to the gospel?

Nothing at all. So far, so good. Three cheers, and then some.

But there’s a potential problem lurking in the background. The key question is this: What do you think the gospel is?

Suppose we get the gospel right. Suppose you believe that the gospel is the glorious annnouncement that Israel’s God has at last returned to Zion (Isa 40:9) in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, who has been declared with power to be Israel’s true King and the World’s true Lord and Judge (Rom 1:1-6); that this Man is David’s greater Son, and has now been exalted to sit on David’s throne (1 Tim 2:8); that therefore the creation which was once ruled by a rebellious man of sin and dust and death is now ruled by a perfect Man of righteousness and glory and life (Gen 1-3; Rom 5; 8; 1 Cor 15); and that this Man invites and commands all people and all nations to bow before him and receive from him forgiveness of their sins, adoption into God’s family, empowering by the Holy Spirit, and a renewed vocation to bring every aspects of their lives into conformity with God’s inspired and infallible word, the Bible (I’ll leave you to dig out the remaining couple of hundred biblical references – I’m running out of space).

This being the case, there is no problem with affirming that every aspect of our lives should be determined in relation to the gospel. Three cheers for the Gospel-Centered movement

However, suppose we get the gospel wrong. Or, if not wrong, perhaps a little shrunken. Suppose, for example, we think of the gospel in narrower terms, as the proclamation that we’re sinners before a holy God and a righteous Judge, and that God has provided in the crucified and risen Jesus Christ the salvation we need to be put right with him. This is gloriously true, of course, as far as it goes. This is one aspect of the gospel, one perspective on the gospel – a perspective that highlights the gospel’s implications for the salvation of an individual human being. But we’ll encountered all kinds of problems if we identify this as the gospel in toto, and then start to think about all the other aspects of our lives.

The problem is that it is not at all obvious how this message of individual salvation in itself has much relevance for politics and science and economics and education and childrearing and art and work and sport and everything else. If we think of this as “the gospel,” we’ll be right in what we explicitly affirm but wrong in what we implicitly deny. For by conceiving the gospel too narrowly, this view overlooks the fact that the gospel has any relevance beyond the salvation of individual people, since it mistakenly identifies one (vital and glorious) aspect of the gospel (the promise of salvation for sinners) with the gospel as a whole (the declaration of the Lordship of God in Christ over all creation).

To take one example: if we ask what relevance this restricted vision of the gospel has for secular work, we’ll probably struggle to find any connection beyond the (true and important) insistence that we should try to evangelize our colleagues. We’re unlikely to grasp the rich Reformed and biblical doctrine of the dignity of secular vocation: the wondrous truth that all of our work – whether banking or preaching or childrearing or busdriving or whatever – has dignity in the eyes of God not merely because it is what he gave us to do, but also because it is what He Himself is doing in the world through his redeemed-in-Christ human vicegerents to fill and subdue all creation to his glory (Gen 1; Ps 8; Heb 2; etc).

So there’s nothing wrong with being gospel-centered. We just need to make sure that we get the gospel right.<>

On September 26, 2014 By Kuyperian In Books 5

Christian Pipe-Smoking: An Introduction to Holy Incense by Uri Brito and Joffre Swait

Our first published kindle book from Kuyperian Press is now available for download!

It is but a booklet, some twenty-five pages, but each page will delight the Christian pipe smoker, enlighten his heathen fellow-enthusiast, crush the ambitions of the heathen teetotaler, and soften the heart of the Christian abstainer. All four of these good things are guaranteed to happen if you but promise to go onto your porch tomorrow with your pad or other device, light your pipe, and Tolle Lege.

Christian Pipe-Smoking: An Introduction to Holy Incense [Kindle Edition]

Uri Brito (Author), Joffre Swait (Author)

Be the first to review this item

Kindle Price: $2.99

On September 25, 2014 By Kuyperian In Scribblings Like

What Does Repentance Look Like for the Unfaithful Husband?

Guest Post by Alan Stout

Here is the scenario: You have cheated on your wife. You have been unfaithful and she has asked that you leave the home. Your desire is to repair the relationship, reconcile with your wife, and get back to leading your family in righteousness. What does repentance look like?

1. This is my sin. I have sinned against God and my wife and the consequences of my sin are a broken family, including my headship. I am NOT currently the head of my home, because I broke the covenant vows that I made. As a result…

2. I am not going to plan or lead my wife in sanctification. It will not be my place to lead her in accepting me back into her life. I have, through my own sin, abdicated that role for a time. I have hope though for I know that…

3. The Holy Spirit does not leave my wife without a covering nor has He left her without counselors. I need to trust God and the men that He has placed in our lives to do what I failed to do. So that…

4. I might, in this wilderness of my own making, learn humility, love, and sacrifice for my wife. To that end…

5. I am committed to resting under the hand of a holy God. I will submit myself, my wife and my children to the care of the Church, believing that this will work to the glory of God and benefit of my soul, my life, my family and as a testimony to the truth of the Gospel. All the while…

6. Knowing that this is going to take a long time I will commit myself to prayer and patience, believing that God will give me the strength to bear this weight. Even if my family is never restored I will trust God through it all.** Finally,

7. As God works in me to see and to do His good pleasure I will be made more like Him and I will be the husband I have been called and always wanted to be. Even though I will have difficulty seeing God because of my sin, I know that He still sees me and will not abandon me. Hear the word of God from Job 23:8-10:

8 “Behold, I go forward, but he is not there,

and backward, but I do not perceive him;

9 on the left hand when he is working, I do not behold him;

he turns to the right hand, but I do not see him.

10 But he knows the way that I take;

when he has tried me, I shall come out as gold.

** Part of this confession of sin is realizing that it may be too late to repair what has been broken. Your sin may have gone on too long, the testimony of an unfaithful man has far reaching effects and while your wife should forgive you she does not HAVE to take you back simply because you have seen the error of your ways and repented. This is not your wife’s fault… Trust God to turn even this situation toward your good.

Pastor Stout blogs at http://importantparentingtips.wordpress.com<>mobi game аудит а пример

On September 23, 2014 By Kuyperian In Politics Like

The Image of God Recommends Them To You

Guest post by Mark Nenadov

“When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.” (Leviticus 19:33-34, ESV)

In his 1867 speech in Boston, Frederick Douglass said:

“If we would reach a degree of civilization higher and grander than any yet attained, we should welcome to our ample continent all nations, kindreds, tongues and peoples…The outspread wings of the American eagle are broad enough to shelter all who are likely to come.”

Christians don’t speak with one clear voice on immigration policy. Our exegesis, political theory, experiences, prejudices, vocations, and economic situations seem to guarantee that. And that is OK.

At a bare minimum, though, I believe Christians should share something of Douglass’ optimism. It ought to be grounded not so much in trust of human nature as trust in God’s sovereignty and His graciousness to the nations in Jesus Christ. We North Americans have an “ample continent” which can welcome many “outsiders” and we will have no claim on being “exceptional” if we don’t make our place welcoming. In theologically conservative circles there are sadly few who possess such optimism. The shrill voice of the “nativist alarmist” is raised in every generation. And it is ugly.

I have no desire to tell you how to vote or what concrete policy positions to support. I’m just sharing thoughts which will hopefully help you think “Christianly” in this area. Before proceeding, let me tell you something about myself. It doesn’t make me any less or more of an authority on this matter, but perhaps it will interest you. I’m a first generation Canadian, the son of immigrants from the former Yugoslavia. My dad left his country illegally because it was about to arrest him for his religious principles.

1. Don’t forget your past (or your status)

In my mind, at the root of the problematic thinking on immigration that is so prevalent among theologically conservative Christians is a basic forgetfulness.

First, there is forgetfulness about our indebtedness to (and dependence on) God’s gracious disposition in our direction. That’s when pride and a sour nationalism creeps in.

Second, there is a forgetfulness of the basic dignity which is tied to the fact that humans are made in the image of God.

Third, it is easy for us to forget how tenuous our “nativist” identity is. Even if your family was here “going way back”, you might be surprised to learn how marginal and “outsider” your roots really are. It’s often not hard to find a “break” in a “nativist” pedigree.

Fourth, it is easy to forget how non-mainstream and marginal our religious or cultural affiliation really is. For example, as a Baptist, I must always remember how Baptists were once been regarded as outsiders. In the early 19th century, several states imposed “dissenter” taxes on Baptist ministers. Baptists also couldn’t hold public offices at times. And that’s just the situation in North America. Baptists often did not fare very well in Europe, either. Historical research is a great antidote against ignorant and boastful nativism.

2. Beware of sensationalistic statistics and slogans

I was once researching old newspapers from my town here in Ontario, Canada, and I found a political ad from the 1920s. It said: “Canada is for Canadians…stop the alarming tide of immigration.” With a touch of humour, the competing politician observed that the majority of immigrants were actually from the British Isles. While I am sure some things have gotten worse since the 1920s, I’m glad for progress in this area. Canadian politicians do not feel free to be so overtly xenophobic today. Though, I must say when I survey North American political discourse, I’m still amazed at how free politicians still feel to play the “nativist” card!

Let’s dig into U.S. history a bit. In 1845, the U.S. Nativist Party spoke of a troubling “onslaught” of Irish Catholics — 1.7 million Irish Catholic immigrants who “crowded the shores of the United States.” Similar anecdotes could be shared regarding fears of Jewish, Italian, Japanese, Chinese, Mexican, or German immigrants. Of course, such “concerning” statistics seem laughable today. Especially in light of how many millions upon millions of people have immigrated to North American since then. However, we would do well to recognize the extent to which we are confronted with thinly veiled messages which, while perhaps a bit more sophisticated, convey the same spirit. In each generation, the alarmists know how to dress up statistics and platitudes to spread fear and xenophobia.

Of course, it is not wrong to use immigration statistics. In fact, they can be genuinely alarming in that they call out serious logistical, policy-making, or humanitarian challenges. However, they should never propel us to hatred or “tight-fistedness.” We need to keep up a healthy optimism. God created a glorious world and He is in control. He didn’t create a zero-sum world. The world is full of God’s wondrous works. Don’t let fear-mongers fool you into wasting your time with foolishness which leads to slavish fears.

3. Beware of common but false assumptions

Not everything that is popularly repeated is true. Nor is everything that is intuitive. Nor is everything that aligns with our anecdotal experiences. Here are two common but false assumptions about immigration:

A. “Immigration is bad for the economy”
On the contrary, economists generally believe that immigration leads to increases in productivity and growth for all parties in the economy. For more information on this, review Building a Wall around the Welfare State, Instead of the Country. 60% of the top 25 technology companies have been founded or co-founded by first or second generation immigrants. Who knows what other amazing developments will come at the hands of immigrants in the future!

B. “Muslims are taking over the West and are not assimilating”
This is a pervasive myth, and one with a certain amount of plausibility. However, Doug Sanders’ work has shown that many of these “popular assumptions” are either inaccurate or exaggerated. Though I reject the Islamic religion and its truth claims and hate the “political correctness” that shuns the critique of religious beliefs, I must say that many of the commonly held fears about Muslim immigration are based more upon anecdotal evidence than any sort of trustworthy analysis. Muslim birthrates are rapidly falling. Doug Sanders suggests that even if the immigration rates stay constant, Europe is unlikely to surpass a 10% Muslim population. And while Muslim immigrants often initially have differing views than their host countries, their opinions tend to converge with those of their new neighbours. Generation by generation, they’re assimilating quicker than many assume. Sanders also notes that about 40% of American Muslims have University degrees–about twice as many as the overall national average.

Whatever we might make of Sanders’ findings, I believe Christians ought to have an evangelical optimism about Muslim immigration. Many Muslims who can’t (safely) hear the gospel in their homelands, through immigration, now have an opportunity to hear the gospel. If North American Christians will take it to them, that is. Personally, it is disturbing that some are so consumed by a Muslim “threat” that they seem unable to even rejoice in (let alone participate in) this gospel opportunity. For instance, a PCA minister recently claimed that mass conversion of Muslims is “not Biblically doable” (his article, in Charisma News, has been subsequently taken down).

We would do well to remember the prayer of the RCA minister Samuel Zwemer:

“Father, the hour has come; glorify thy Son in the Muslim world, and fulfill through him the prayer of Abraham thy friend, ‘O, that Ishmael might live before thee.’ For Jesus’ sake. Amen.”

Some final thoughts

Whether or not you agree with everything I’ve said here, I hope that this article will help you think through these issues.

Let us remember that God’s people, in many seasons of history, have been and are pilgrims and strangers, and so our treatment of others should reflect sensitivity to those in the same situation.

We need to do some serious thinking on the immigration issue on a level that is more basic than merely that of a policy discussion. No matter what policies we may wish to support, we Christians must proceed under the Lordship of Christ. Why should we be concerned about the immigrant? As John Calvin said, it is “the image of God, which recommends him to you” (Institutes, 3.7.6).

On September 15, 2014 By Kuyperian In Family and Children Like

The Birds, the Bees, and the Eleven-Year-Old Trip

My children know that when they reach their eleventh birthday, they get to go on an overnight trip with Papa, i.e., me. They get to pick where we go and what we do for that entire day (within reason, of course–in other words, Disney world is not an option.) We have a grand time doing the things that they enjoy, and as a dad, I rejoice in the opportunity to focus on them entirely for the weekend. However, the primary motivation for the special trip centers around getting them alone for several hours in order to begin more detailed discussions about those ‘birds and bees’ that can be so uncomfortable to discuss. The goal is not to talk about it all, all at once, but to invite them to engage in a conversation with their dad. My hope is that this conversation will continue through their teen years and up until they say, “I do,” before God, their minister, and the gathered witnesses, and the chosen, complimentary mate says, “I do,” in response. (more…)