Kuyperian, Author at Kuyperian Commentary

On June 17, 2014 By Kuyperian In Scribblings Like

A few thoughts on the first round of World Cup 2014

Round one finished this evening with a tie between the South Koreans and the Russians. This means that every country has had its debut in the most spectacular soccer tournament in the world. What follows is a brief summary of the 5 best soccer nations in the World in my estimation and then the surprise of this first round:

Since I am Brazilian, and since we are hosting the World Cup for the first time since that disastrous 1950 final at Maracana, it is helpful to start with Brazil. Brazil has now played two games, since they inaugurated Round 2 this afternoon in Fortaleza. Brazil’s chances, in my estimation, of making it past the first three rounds is 90%. Only a solid victory from Cameroon and a combination of results will take Brazil away from making it to the top 16. Led by Brazil’s superstar, Neymar Jr., Brazil carries the hopes of over 200K fanatic Brazilians into this World Cup. The expectations are high and despite a less than impressive start–thanks for the penalty–Brazil’s draw with Mexico today showed a more efficient Brazilian squad. Marcelo and Fred: Wake up!

Germany made Cristiano Ronaldo’s worst nightmares come true. The camera’s love affair with Ronaldo showed a despondent best player in the world. Pepe’s red card–a combination of stupidity and lack of self-control–made Portugal the perfect candidate to experience defeat by the German powerhouse. And what a whipping they received! Led by Thomas Mueller (3 goals), the Germans could have scored at least a couple more. German’s chances of making it to the round of 16 is 100%. After losing the final to Brazil in 2002, the Germans come with revenge in mind, and they got the team to do it.

Let’s be honest: Ángel di María and Lionel Messi are superstars. Something spectacular happens every time these two touch the ball. Argentina’s 2 x 1 victory over Bosnia and Herzegovina was not the show we expected from Messi and company, but speaking of Messi, what a brilliant goal. Argentina now plays Iran and Nigeria. No surprises will come from these matches. Argentina will undoubtedly make it to the round of 16.

Holland (Netherlands) came to the 2014 World Cup with a bitter taste after losing their third chance to win a World Cup in 2010. On that occasion, Iniesta scored the winning goal for Spain. The Spaniards came to Brazil as World Champions. But after re-engaging Van Persie and Robben this past Friday in what to this point is Spain’s greatest soccer humiliation since the 1950 World Cup when they lost to Brazil 6 x 1, Spain’s new slogan is: humility. With an inspired Chilean team, Spain’s chances of making it to the round of 16 is about 40%. As for the Dutch, they will certainly continue to round of 16.

What about the surprise of this first round? You guessed it! Despite Ghana’s overwhelming control of the game, the U.S. revealed what they do best: persevere. With a fascinating header at the end of the game, John Brooks gave hope to Klinsmann’s squad in the hot afternoon in Natal. I think Portugal is still favored to take that second spot, but U.S.’s determination may send Ronaldo’s team back home much earlier than they expected.<>allsocialgames.net

On June 14, 2014 By Kuyperian In Scribblings Like

The Most Entertaining Jerk in Soccer

Slate describes the most entertaining jerk in modern soccer. He is known for scoring goals, biting opponents (plural), racism, using his hands, and diving. According to Slate:

Why he might be a jerk: So many reasons. In the video at the top of the page, we’ve put together a lowlight reel of some of Suarez’s most hilariously egregious offenses. In the 2010 World Cup, he famously earned a red card by punching the ball off the line to prevent fan favorites Ghana from scoring a game-winning goal in their quarterfinal match. After Asamoah Gyan tragically rammed the ensuing penalty off of the crossbar, Suarez—who had been sent off for the violation—could be seen punching his fists in the air like a criminal who was caught robbing a bank and then told he could keep the money.

<>регистрация а на rambler

On June 14, 2014 By Kuyperian In Theology Like

A Brief Introduction to the Athanasian Creed

The Athanasian Creed is known for its very thorough Trinitarian statement. But the Creed also contains a high Christology. “The Athanasian Creed is usually divided into two sections: lines 1–28 addressing the doctrine of the Trinity, and lines 29–44 addressing the doctrine of Christology.” ^a The Creed was early attributed to St. Athanasius, but that attribution has since the 17th century been disputed. It is widely accepted now that Athanasius did not pen the Creed, though the Creed reflects much of Athanasius’ Nicene theology.

The Creed begins with these perilous words:

Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith. Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled; without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.

This harsh expectation for salvation implies, according to Philip Schaff, a precise knowledge of doctrine in order to be saved. Schaff was critical of this language and there have been others who have shared this criticism. For instance, here is a short description from the Creed:

The Father unlimited; the Son unlimited; and the Holy Ghost unlimited. The Father eternal; the Son eternal; and the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet they are not three eternals; but one eternal.

This, according to some historians, would place too great a demand on the laity. Some have seen this to be a strict demand that cannot be met, except for those grounded in historical Christianity. Indeed there is some truth to this skepticism. A modern look at our landscape would conclude that not only do evangelicals speak very little about the Trinity from the pulpit, but have little knowledge that such a Creed even exists.

My own reading of the Athanasian Creed and its history is more in line with Greg Uttinger who stated:

The Creed, of course, does not require every Christian to fully understand the complexities and implications of Trinitarian orthodoxy. Yes, an ignorant believer may speak in, say, Sabellian terms because he has not been taught better. He may in his ignorance compare the Trinity to an egg or a tree. The Creed is not addressing such ignorance; it is addressing outright rejection of the truth by those who have every reason to know better. ^b

As Trinity Sunday approaches, let us not be those who speak in ignorance, but those who confess this Creed and live out this Trinitarian faith.<>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athanasian_Creed (back)
http://chalcedon.edu/research/articles/the-theology-of-the-ancient-creeds-part-4-the-athanasian-creed/ (back)

On June 13, 2014 By Kuyperian In Culture, Family and Children Like

I’ve Stopped Yelling. Can I Stop Scowling?

by Marc Hays

Over a year ago, I stopped yelling at my children. The urge to vent my displeasure became increasingly distasteful until I could hear myself snap at them just before I did it. Whatever the child had done, whatever infraction had occurred, ceased to kindle my ire like the thought of hearing myself lash out at them. Accompanying this conviction, my sin decreased. Go figure. It is encouraging to no end for a man to see that the deeds of his flesh can be mortified as Scripture says they must and for a man, alive in Christ, to experience the Holy Spirit at work, bearing good fruit on formerly dead limbs.

As my desire to shout the fear of God into my children waned, I found an increasing zeal to see my children flourish. Replacing the idle threats about their doom, should they fail to mend their ways, was an increase in instruction concerning righteousness and sin; wisdom and foolishness; repentance and forgiveness. I yell less, if at all, which is good, and instruct more, which is better still, but as with most virtues, too much of a good thing is no longer a good thing.

I’ve found that my new virtue has become my new vice, for at some point a father’s instruction becomes a father’s lecture, which at yet another point becomes a father’s tongue-lashing. I am quick with my mouth and hasty in my heart, therefore my words can in no way be described as “few.” Quick with my mouth—speaking before thinking, and hasty in my heart—not patient enough to raise them over a lifetime, wanting to accomplish it all at once. As I lecture, and lecture, and lecture some more, I can see that they go from being instructed, to being irritated, to being bored—anxious to get back to the life that comes at the end of my soliloquy.

If my verbal instruction merely waxed long, there would be less of a problem than there actually is, because along with this extended scolding comes an explicit scowling. My voice is calmer than it once was; I’ve learned to keep the decibels down, which prevents the veins in my neck from popping out as far, but I know that my face tells the story of a dad who is not remembering his own sin at that moment, a dad who is not treating his children the way he wants to be treated, a dad who is not loving his neighbor as himself.

If Jesus is King over every square inch of creation, which He is, then wouldn’t that include every square inch of my face as well? Can I be serious about sin without scowling about it? Can I handle my children’s sin biblically without acting like they’re the first ones to ever do it? Does it help for me to act like I’m surprised that they don’t do everything right all the time, or that they committed this particular household crime again?

Love is patient. Love is kind. It does not behave itself unseemly. It is not rude.

God is patient. God is kind. He does not behave himself unseemly. He is not rude.

When it comes to raising our children in the fear and admonition of the Lord, are we patient? Are we kind? In disciplining our children, do we behave ourselves in a way that would be embarrassing for anyone else to see? That would be unseemly. Even if we’ve stopped yelling, do we berate them with our words? That would be rude.

Children are to respect and obey their parents; parents are to respect and disciple their children. To put it technically, the economic relationship is different, but the ontological relationship is the same. Parents must correct; parents must instruct. Children must take heed; children must amend their ways. This economic reality is one of complementary difference, but ontologically—in our being—we are exactly the same as our children. We are no more image-bearers of the triune God than they are. We are exactly the same in our being—identical.

It is this identity that makes the whole parenting thing work. Can a wolf raise a Mowgli? Probably. Can a wolf identify with a Mowgli? Barely. Can we identify with our children’s struggles and temptations? Yes, indeed. Can we long for their sanctification as we long for our own? Definitely. Can we stop lecturing long enough to think about how we would like to be treated? Can we remember how it feels to be scolded so that we keep our scolding at a minimum and our patient, kind instruction at a maximum? In Christ, empowered by His Holy Spirit, we can, and we must.

Love is patient. Love is kind. It does not behave itself unseemly. It is not rude.<>

On June 11, 2014 By Kuyperian In Theology Like

Pneumatology in Baptism, Part IV, The Red Sea

Guest Post by Joshua Torrey

Read Part I & II, III

The Exodus Baptism

Fast forward now to the baptism of the Israelite people in the Red Sea. Moses has defeated one Pharaoh by being saved through water (baptism). But the Lord is after His entire people. The story of God conquering Pharaoh and Egypt’s gods are well known but the focus for this section is the time period after Pharaoh’s defeat at the Passover. After this incredible event, the Lord took the people of Israel up against the waters of the Red Sea. This happens to be more than the people of Israel can handle. All these people can tell Pharaoh is on the verge of overtaking them. A return to slavery seems eminent. What will God provide to demonstrate that this won’t happen? A baptism. A baptismal union consisting of water and Spirit,

21 Then Moses stretched out his hand over the sea, and the Lord drove the sea back by a strong east wind all night and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided. 22 And the people of Israel went into the midst of the sea on dry ground, the waters being a wall to them on their right hand and on their left. – Exodus 14:21-22

Once again the Hebrew Scriptures invoke water and the Spirit together. And again the symbol is found most clearly in the Hebrew language, “the Lord drove the seas back by a strong east spirit.” The Holy Spirit is once again about His work parting the waters and providing deliverance from sinful oppression. He is making the dry land appear to make a path for new creation! The Biblical story is not new but certainly perpetually epic.

After a long night of the Spirit’s work, land appears from underneath the waters. God’s new and ransomed people have a deliverance to walk upon. From every possible direction this seems like a water and Spirit baptism. The correlation to creation is evident; the similarity to the Noah’s flood is obvious. The only remaining question is how accurate of correlation is the portrayal of the Holy Spirit.

It is here that the events shortly after the Red Sea are helpful. For the people of Israel their songs can often reveal great theological moments. And after this baptism Moses and the people sing an important song. A song that confirms the interpretation of this text and validates the incredible work of the Holy Spirit,

8 At the blast (literally “spirit”) of your nostrils the waters piled up;
the floods stood up in a heap;
the deeps congealed in the heart of the sea.
9 The enemy said, ‘I will pursue, I will overtake,
I will divide the spoil, my desire shall have its fill of them.
I will draw my sword; my hand shall destroy them.’
10 You blew with your wind (literally “spirit”); the sea covered them;
they sank like lead in the mighty waters. – Exodus 15:8-10

Without question the Spirit of God is responsible for the waters parting in baptism for the people. It is the water of deliverance and salvation (Psa 18:15). Destruction will not overtake the people of Israel and Israel’s enemies are destroyed by the very same baptismal waters. This is because water and the Spirit are administered in baptism. It was the Spirit responsible for the waters closing around the people of Egypt in judgment. It is the Holy Spirit’s necessary involvement that invokes both blessing and curse. And this is true also in Christian baptism. All of this symbolism continues the line of Old Testament thinking. The baptismal waters of Noah brought both salvation and destruction. The waters of death were for salvation with Moses. And they do so again here with the people of Israel and Egypt. It then is no wonder that this event is picked up by Paul in the New Testament as a warning,

1 For I do not want you to be unaware, brothers, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, 2 and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, 3 and all ate the same spiritual food, 4 and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank from the spiritual Rock that followed them, and the Rock was Christ. 5 Nevertheless, with most of them God was not pleased, for they were overthrown in the wilderness. – 1 Corinthians 10:1-5

Blessing and curse. Paul presents both quite clearly in this passage to the church at Corinth. Within the epistle’s context it is clear that this passage is intended as a warning to the church. Baptism is not solely for salvation and this is because of the involvement of the Holy Spirit. For the unfaithful these activities are warnings and judgments. Mere water cannot be responsible for that.

Even more, what is most telling is the language used. The baptism of Moses is a type of Christ’s baptism. In fact Paul uses to the very same language for both of them. In Corinthians Paul speaks of being “baptized into Moses” (1 Cor 10:2). In Romans Paul uses similar language when saying that the church is “baptized into Christ” (Rom 6:3). Baptism into Moses is a type of baptism into Christ. This fits the motif of Moses being baptized before Israel and Jesus Christ being baptized before the church. But baptisms deliver from death. Both bring curse and blessing. And in both cases is a baptism of both water and Spirit. Neither one nor the other explains the fullness of Paul’s teaching. It must be both water and Spirit.<>технологии pr

On June 10, 2014 By Kuyperian In Politics Like

What Racism, Human Trafficking, and Abortion All Have in Common

Guest Post by Michael Graham

Racism, human trafficking, and abortion all share a common source to their evil – the fundamental denial of human dignity – more specifically the creator endowed dignity of being made in the image of God. This is unilaterally accomplished by carving out groups of people (by ethnicity, gender, vulnerability, or age) who are classified as sub-human and therefore not treated as equal human beings.

Racism
Racism denies the image of God in a particular ethnicity, people group, or tribal affiliation. It seeks to make the persons of such groups or affiliations lesser than your group or affiliation. In doing so it assails the inherent worth endowed by God. There are several idols at work in racism – power, control, pride, and ironically likely both self-love and self-hatred.

Human Trafficking
Human trafficking denies the image of God in humanity by treating certain humans as not being human at all, but rather property. All sense of dignity and worth must be deconstructed in order to justify the human as property. There are several idols at work in human trafficking, most notably, greed, power, control, and lust.

Abortion
Abortion denies the image of God in those of a certain size, age, gestation, or relative level of “wantedness.” The human is made to be sub-human because it is small, young, not yet viable, and has not travelled the magical 6″ journey down the birth canal that suddenly and mysteriously imbues it with life, human rights, and legal status. Their are several idols at work here, most notably, lust, selfishness, comfort, and escape.

While perhaps difficult to personally engage heavily on all three fronts, I find it ironic that my own age demographic seem inclined to care about the first 2 of these 3 and not the third. I don’t know if this is for reasons of ignorance, idolatry, apathy, or all of the above. It will be interesting how history plays itself out on this particular issue… but I am willing to wager that our grand children will think of abortion with a similar disdain that our generation holds toward the Holocaust.

The Banality of Evil and Our Cultural Morass

I hope we would see ourselves as being more dignified than to cut up our children for the pursuit of the ideal body, the next ladder rung of the career, or the perfect orgasm. I hope we would see ourselves as being more dignified than to allow persons to be treated as property for sex or for unpaid work for the pursuit of cheaper goods, uncommitted and intimacy-less sex (rape). I hope we would see ourselves as being more dignified than to allow other ethnicities to be treated as less worthwhile, less valuable, and sub-human for the pursuit of feeling good about one’s own tribe at the expense of another tribe.

There is a certain banality to evil that lulls us into going along and getting along. It was the same banality that anesthetized the very bright German people into the wholesale slaughter of persons categorized as sub-human.

What we want is what we worship and what we worship controls us. This is true if we are pagans, atheists, agnostics, or Christians. We are all slaves to our wants. Those wants drive our ideas… And ideas have consequences… Often dire ones.

What the heart loves, the will chooses, the mind justifies – Thomas Cranmer

Michael blogs at Modern Pensées.<>

On June 9, 2014 By Kuyperian In Theology Like

Pneumatology in Baptism, Part III, The Baptism of Moses

by Guest Writer, Joshua Torrey

Read Part I & II

The Baptism of Moses

After addressing the clear union of water and Spirit in the story of Noah and Peter’s teaching, some might conclude that the matter of baptism is settled. But there are more Old Testament references to be incorporated to validate and expand the doctrine of this interpretation. Through the seed of deliverance in Noah came the great Patriarch Abraham and the Scriptures tell us that through Abraham God began to build a people to provide a Savior and Blessing, found in Jesus Christ, for the entire world. The remainder of the Old Testament is filled with “how to recognize Him when He gets here” type of material.

One of these important Old Testament reminders and pointers to Christ comes with the story of Moses. He like Noah is a savior. But this time he saves all of Abraham’s family (seed) from the land of Egypt. The early portions of the book of Exodus set the stage for this salvation of Israel,

8 Now there arose a new king over Egypt, who did not know Joseph. – Exodus 1:8

23 During those many days the king of Egypt died, and the people of Israel groaned because of their slavery and cried out for help. Their cry for rescue from slavery came up to God. 24 And God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob. 25 God saw the people of Israel—and God knew. – Exodus 2:23-25

The contrast between these two passages is important. Pharaoh’s lack of knowledge led to persecution and trials for Abraham’s seed. This Pharaoh ceased to “know” the blessings of God through the faithful deliverance of Joseph (a subject matter all its own). As a result the people of Israel were forced into slavery and their lives were made miserable. Despite Pharaoh’s rejection God chose to bless Israel. Pharaoh responded by taking things to the highest level: He attempts to kill the covenant children of Israel (Exo 1:15-22). The importance of this event and its relationship with children will be fully developed later but this event does cast a looming shadow on the tenth and final plagues sent by God. For now it is against this death of Israelite children that the great arm of the Lord is revealed and He does this through “knowing” His people. As seen with Noah, this means that God is acting in favor and mercy towards His covenant people. And so through the faithfulness of two Levites (Exo 2:1) God brought forth a deliverer. And once again He used an ark (H8293),

2 The woman conceived and bore a son, and when she saw that he was a fine child, she hid him three months. 3 When she could hide him no longer, she took for him a basket made of bulrushes and daubed it with bitumen and pitch. She put the child in it and placed it among the reeds by the river bank. – Exodus 2:3

Before addressing the reintroduction of God’s saving basket/ark, it is interesting to note that Moses upon birth is declared “good” (H2896). This is the reason given in the Scriptures for the saving of Moses and it is an element of the story that gets repeated in the New Testament (Acts 7:20; Heb 11:23). Since good is rarely used in the Hebrew concerning people (Genesis 24:1; 26:7; 1 Sam 9:2; 16:12 among the exceptions) the description surely stands out. In two cases it is associated with women found at wells (Gen 24:1; 26:7) and in two others it is the kings of Israel (1 Sam 9:2; 16:12). In every case the individual is clearly being marked out to bring deliverance (the kings) or new life (the Godly wives of the patriarchs) to God’s promised seed. Moses stands in this tradition and the Scriptures mark him out. And it is this marker that explains the actions of his mother.

The English translation hides the symbolism of the Hebrew word tebah (H8293). Moses’ mother truly built “an ark made of bulrushes” to deliver her son. The parallels to Noah are fairly obvious. Pharaoh has declared that all Hebrews shall be “cast into the Nile” (Exo 1:22) to die by water. Moses too is cast into the waters that are meant for death but the Lord delivers him through an ark. This is done not only for the deliverance of Moses but to bring salvation to the people of Israel. One can speculate if Paul’s concept of being “buried with him [Christ Jesus] by baptism into death” (Rom 6:4) is influenced by this out-of-death typology for baptism.

The very name Moses means “to be drawn out.” It stems from a Hebrew verb used only in David’s baptism/deliverance from Saul (2 Sam 22:16-20; Psa 18:15-19). In Moses’ example, God brings forth “new land” from the waters of death. Moses’ rise up out of the water once again reminds us of the baptism of Jesus Christ (Matt 3:16; Mark 1:9). Through baptism, Moses is now capable of saving His people and providing new life. Even more graphically, the ark carrying Moses is delivered from “the reeds” (Exo 2:3). This is the same Hebrew word to describe the baptism of Israel and the conquest of Pharaoh (Exo 15:4). Moses is lifted up from the very death that consumes the armies of Pharaoh (we’ll see more of this is the next section).

The Holy Spirit has no direct link to this story and the symbolism found in Noah is obvious. Sinfulness and death abounds. God has once again “remembered” His covenant people and had godly people build an ark. God has used this ark to perform a baptism of deliverance and instituted a man to deliver His people. As Moses is tightly linked to Noah so also he is to Jesus Christ. In fact the example of Moses brings into focus the particulars concerning Jesus’ baptism under John. Moses, like Christ, was baptized before His ministry began and both spent a full time (40 years/40 days) in the wilderness. Jesus Himself was saved from the arm of an evil king (Matt 2:13-15). He was even delivered to and from Egypt like Moses.

But how does this apply to the baptism practiced by the church? As already seen, Moses’ baptism prepares him to lead Israel through one large baptism to save all of the people. This story points forward to Jesus Christ and the church. Jesus would participate in a baptism in order to start a ministry that would lead to a baptism for God’s people. He would be baptized in John’s “baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins” (Luke 3:3) and then send His disciples out proclaiming “repentance and forgiveness of sins” (Luke 24:47). We know that Christ’s baptism was water and Spirit. Now it is to be seen how Moses’ baptism in the Red Sea is also a union of water and baptism.<>

On June 6, 2014 By Kuyperian In Culture Like

Calvin Didn’t Flinch

by Marc Hays

During my childhood years, my family lived in a 12’ x 55’ single-wide mobile home. When we bought it in 1980 it was already about 20 years old. The plan was to live in that home while my dad built a house on our property. Given the economic recession of the early 1980’s, we never built that house. As my brother, my sister, and I got older, and consequently larger, my dad closed in a front porch to create another bedroom. He completely remodeled the inside of the home over the 15 years that we lived there: drywall, trim, carpets–the whole nine yards. The exterior would occasionally get painted, the roof tarred, and the underpinning, which had rotted from ground contact, replaced. It was a lovely home, and I do not remember being particularly envious of my friends who had nicer homes than we did. However, that doesn’t mean that I was not aware that they had nicer homes than we did.

I can remember being 9 or 10 years old when I went to spend the night at a friend’s house from school. He lived with his family in a small brick ranch home. It couldn’t have been over 1000-1100 square feet, i.e., relatively small, but I remember being enamored by the fact that the house went all the way to the ground. This wonderful home had no underpinning; it had bricks. Its roof wasn’t flat; it had a gable-ended roof with shingles on it. It seemed so sturdy. So strong. Once again, I was not beset by the fact that our home sat upon concrete blocks 2 feet above the ground with the resulting void between floor and earth being hidden by plywood, but that doesn’t mean that I didn’t plan on living in a site-built home when I grew up.

I am now 40 years old, and I own my own house. It is no Taj Mahal, but it is quite lovely. It has a gabled roof with shingles, and the concrete block foundation, sporting a brick veneer, rests upon a couple dozen cubic yards of concrete. It is sturdy. It is strong. And I am blessed to get to live here with my wife and six children.

The other day, my son Calvin and I were making a delivery to some friends who live in a manufactured home community near our house. (Manufactured home community is the new, friendlier way to say “trailer park.”) As we drove away, Calvin saw some children riding their bikes together in the street and exclaimed how much fun it would be live there.

In that trailer park.

In a mobile home.

He saw kids and playtime, while I saw single-wides and underpinning. Instead of possessions, he saw people and didn’t give a second thought to changing from our lovely home in the middle of a 20-acre field to living in a manufactured home community in order to create more opportunities to be with people.

I think Calvin has one-upped me. I truly believe that I could give up everything I have acquired in my life; move back into a single-wide home; and be really, truly happy. But I honestly think that I would flinch when it happened. However, that day–in that trailer park–Calvin didn’t flinch.<>online mobile оптимизация web ов

On June 4, 2014 By Kuyperian In Culture Like

Not buying what the Vanity Fairians are selling

by Marc Hays

This article was originally published in Every Thought Captive magazine.

As Pilgrim and Faithful passed through the town of Vanity Fair, they created a “hubbub.” Pilgrim and Faithful dressed and spoke differently from the townspeople and refused to purchase the fleeting pleasures being peddled there. Upon being asked, “What will ye buy,” the Christians responded, “We buy the truth.” (Proverbs 23:23) At this answer, the people of Vanity Fair railed against the Christians, beat them, caged them, arraigned and tried them, and eventually murdered Faithful.

Why did the people of Vanity Fair react so violently at Faithful’s response? Why all the hubbub? The answer lies in the fact that the assertion for truth necessarily implies an assertion against falsity. The Deceiver is happy with any deception at all, for all lies point away from the single truth, and it is also true that anyone who speaks the truth necessarily condemns all falsities. Truth and lies are as mutually-exclusive as light and darkness.

John Bunyan points this out through three examples as Pilgrim and Faithful walk through Vanity Fair: their garb, their speech, and their refusal to buy what the Vanity Fairians are selling.

Their garb: Christians are clothed in “white garments” in the eternal, justificational sense, but for the moment let’s look at how this spiritual reality is manifest in the here-and-now. We are not to be like the world, but being in the world, we need to wear clothes, just like the world does. I wear my jeans on the lower half of my body and my shirt on the upper half, just like everyone else on earth, whether Christian or not. As America publicly undresses and Christians continue to cover themselves, no one will think twice about Christians wearing modest apparel unless and until some bold Christian asserts the truth that everyone should cover their nakedness. At that point, the Christian will encounter opposition. The “Truth” will be spoken, and the citizens of Vanity Fair will cry foul. While the world around us exults in their freedom from all constraint, the Christian, who loves their neighbor enough to step into their lives, will find that the particular freedom of speaking the truth in love has been vilified and must be constrained. “We’ll have none of that truth-telling here. Thank you very much,” goes the rule for that crowd that has “no rules.” Jesus said there is freedom in truth. The world wants freedom from truth. I doubt there will ever be a law prohibiting modesty, but there are, and will be, plenty denying the fact that modesty even exists.

Their speech: Many words can, and ought, to be spoken regarding coarse jesting, idle words, slander, gossip, etc., but the battle lines are not drawn on any of these minor skirmishes. The enemy will send out the berserkers when the Christian begins asserting that all of the issues of man’s tongue are judged against God’s single, unchanging standard of Truth. The world truly believes that there is no contradiction in imposing their maxim, “What’s true for you is true for you” on everyone, while also maintaining that it is wrong to insist upon one truth for everyone. Whenever they speak, they are implying that there is a meaning behind their utterances, all the while stating that no inherent meaning lies behind their vehement tongue wagging.

Christians in America speak English; secular humanists in America speak English, too. We do not need a new alphabet, new words, or new syntax to be holy; in fact, the vulgar vernacular is the only tongue that will be any use at all. It will not be different words that get us in trouble; it will be the ordinate use of the ones we have, asserting such a thing as an ordinate use that will cause a fuss.

Their investments: Christian and Faithful would not buy what was for sale in the markets of Vanity Fair. In order to be “relevant,” many American Christians are not only saying that we should buy what they’re selling, but we should slap a fish on it and sell it too. The issue at hand is not about silk-screened t-shirts, trendily-embossed Bible covers, bumper stickers, or WWJD bracelets (or whatever the current trends are); the issue is about where Christians go to find the answer to the question, “How can I best keep the two great commandments: to love God and neighbor?” If we seek to faithfully keep these two commandments before the watching world, we will be cities on hills whose lights cannot be hid, no matter what t-shirt we have on. As the world cries, “be yourself,” what they mean is “be trendy.” As the contemporary church around us cries, “be like them for the sake of the gospel,” we should respond, “no thank you, thank you very much.” We should want to be like Jesus for the sake of the gospel, not be like those who look like they’re all about Jesus. Don’t get me wrong—if you want to wear a “Jesus fish” while loving God and loving your neighbor, then go for it, but it will not be the uniform of a “relevant” Christian that makes you relevant. It will be the steady application of the two great commandments. On these hang ALL the law and the prophets. Christian love, exhibited through the keeping of the two great commandments and all subsequent corollaries, is unmistakable. They will know we are Christians by our love: love of God and love of neighbor.

May God preserve us from being “different” by Christianizing the garb, speech, and baubles of American Vanity Fair; may God gives us grace to speak this truth in love.<>уникальность а

On June 4, 2014 By Kuyperian In Theology Like

Pneumatology in Baptism, Part II, Noah’s Baptism

by Guest Writer, Joshua Torrey

Read Part I

Noah’s Baptism

The story of Noah is well known to us. We know how it starts (sinful man leads to rain drops) and how it ends (wine drops Noah). But lodged in the middle are a few fascinating events that link Noah with the original Adam and the last Adam. These events affirm the typology of baptism in the Old Testament as one that is a union of Spirit and water.

The Narrative

The primary link occurs mid-flood and is the crucial bridge between the original creation and Noah’s “new creation,”

1 But God remembered Noah and all the beasts and all the livestock that were with him in the ark. And God made a wind blow over the earth, and the waters subsided. 2 The fountains of the deep and the windows of the heavens were closed, the rain from the heavens was restrained, 3 and the waters receded from the earth continually. At the end of 150 days the waters had abated, 4 and in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat. 5 And the waters continued to abate until the tenth month; in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, the tops of the mountains were seen. – Genesis 8:1-5

There is a lot here so I’ll start with the Spirit focused part. When this passage is read in Hebrew the inclusion of the Holy Spirit is more evident. Genesis 8:1 reads “God made a spirit blow over the earth.” Translated in English the inclusion of “a” before the word spirit or wind is a misnomer that can confuse readers. Broken down the sentence reads “God (noun) passed over (verb) spirit (direct object) the earth (indirect object).” But the grammatical argument is solely part of the link. The greater argument is the general context surrounding Noah’s deliverance.

Destruction of sinful flesh has occurred through the flood. The world is once again “formless” and once again it is covered in water. Genesis 1:2 is played out once again as God’s Spirit moves across the water and brings to fruition life-bearing land. The waters are brought together once again in the heavens and under the earth and slowly the great mountains of the earth show themselves. And it is on this mountain that the ark rests. The baptism of Jesus Christ has already been connected to new creation and so here too Jesus is the realization of this “new land.” He is represented by the mountain that reveals itself because of the hovering of the Holy Spirit.

New creation has appeared. Noah is a re-casting of Adam and he is bestowed with a new creation. Already this story is highlighting the Holy Spirit and water. Once again both in union point to the creation account and to the work of Jesus Christ. Event surrounding the flood interconnect with the baptism of Jesus. The first is the timing of the parting of the heavens,

11 In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep burst forth, and the windows of the heavens were opened. 12 And rain fell upon the earth forty days and forty nights. 13 On the very same day Noah and his sons, Shem and Ham and Japheth, and Noah’s wife and the three wives of his sons with them entered the ark, 14 they and every beast, according to its kind, and all the livestock according to their kinds, and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth, according to its kind, and every bird, according to its kind, every winged creature. 15 They went into the ark with Noah, two and two of all flesh in which there was the breath of life. – Genesis 7:11-15

The opening of the heavens only occurs once the full number of animals and people are within the ark. It is at the conclusion of their inclusion that the Lord Himself closes the door to the ark (Gen 7:16). So also Luke’s description of Christ’s baptism comes at the inclusion of “all the people” (Luke 3:21). The heavens open up at the baptism of Jesus Christ and the Lord speaks. The Trinitarian involvement does not stop there. The typology of Noah’s sending out of the dove is also a pertinent link to this story’s link to the baptism of Jesus,

8 Then he sent forth a dove from him, to see if the waters had subsided from the face of the ground. 9 But the dove found no place to set her foot, and she returned to him to the ark, for the waters were still on the face of the whole earth. So he put out his hand and took her and brought her into the ark with him. 10 He waited another seven days, and again he sent forth the dove out of the ark. 11 And the dove came back to him in the evening, and behold, in her mouth was a freshly plucked olive leaf. So Noah knew that the waters had subsided from the earth. 12 Then he waited another seven days and sent forth the dove, and she did not return to him anymore. – Genesis 8:8-12

An argument from this passage may border on allegorical for many. But the dove of Christ’s baptism makes sense of the gospel writers’ tie to the Old Testament baptismal stories. This tie could be to the general idea of peace that is associated with doves but I believe the easier link to make is with this story of Noah. For through Christ, new life is granted to His church and to us. The seven days between flights and the total number of three flights are surely symbolic of Christ’s work but they do not build up or diminish the two-fold link found in Noah’s flood to the first Adam and last Adam.

Covenant Framework

Having drawn a relationship between creation, Noah and Christ’s baptism, this section concludes with an application to New Testament hermeneutics. But before that we must address the covenant framework contained in the simple idea “God remembered” (Gen 8:1). From a grammatical perspective, this is a powerful word in the book of Genesis and Exodus. It is used in respect to covenants (Gen 9:15-16; Exo 2:24; 6:5) but it is also used for deliverance from trials (Gen 19:29; 30:22). In the story of Noah both of these concepts are pertinent and permissible understandings of God’s remembrance. The world is being judged and God’s “remembrance” delivers Noah and his family through the work of the Holy Spirit. Outside of the story of Noah, no other place in the Old Testament combines these concepts more clearly than the prelude to the exodus from Egypt,

23 During those many days the king of Egypt died, and the people of Israel groaned because of their slavery and cried out for help. Their cry for rescue from slavery came up to God. 24 And God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob. 25 God saw the people of Israel—and God knew. – Exodus 2:23-25

Everything pertinent to this word “remember” (H2142) is contained here. There is a need for deliverance and there is a remembrance of a covenant. Our God is omniscient and does not actually forget so it should be clear that this word is drawing together a pertinent truth focused on the covenant action of God. These are actions focused toward His covenant people for deliverance. Thus God’s “remembrance” is another way to say that He has decided to save His people.

This concept stands at the start of our important passage with Noah. God has remembered His covenant man with his covenant family. And God has decided to move in His Spirit to save His covenant people through the emergence of new land and new life. All of this is tied together in a way very similar to the exodus. There is salvation through the Holy Spirit and water. There is then salvation in baptism. It is in all of this that we interpret Peter’s link Noah and baptism,

20 because they formerly did not obey, when God’s patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water. 21 Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ – 1 Peter 3:20-21

It is the overriding concepts of salvation from trials contained in this epistle that drives Peter to this story of deliverance found in Noah. Baptism, which was portrayed in the flood and realized in Christ, points to the type deliverance and new creation Peter is using to assure those who are suffering. Through this typology his audience would be aware of the faithful being saved from the filth of the world. Even with the original story of Noah is embedded the Jewish concept of 40 days for purification. This is Peter’s conclusion that water from God washes away the sinfulness of the world. But Peter has to make sure that the church doesn’t fall into the mistake of presuming its only water. As the story of Noah has shown it was the deliverance found of in the union Spirit water. The story of Noah was water and Holy Spirit moving to revealing new creation (Gen 8:1) and so it is with Peter. Baptism saves but not as just water. Baptism truly saves because of its inherent relationship to the Holy Spirit in applying to us the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Peter cannot be read to make a separation of water and Spirit. The water was necessary for the flooding of the world. It’s the entire basis for the typology to the narrative of Noah. But the Spirit was necessary for the deliverance of ark.

Water and Spirit remain distinct from each other but they are not separated from each other. Baptism is Spirit and water.<>mobile online game