Kuyperian, Author at Kuyperian Commentary

On March 25, 2022 By Kuyperian In Culture Like

Joe Biden, Biology, and Supreme Court Nominee: Questions for the Idiocracy

Guest Post by Rich Lusk

Some questions spurred by recent cultural events:

1. Setting aside the criteria of commitment to the Constitution, competence, and wisdom, Joe Biden said he would only nominate a black woman for the Supreme Court vacancy. This is identity politics to the extreme. But now the identity of Biden’s pick is in doubt. That nominee, Ketanji Brown Jackson, has just admitted in her Congressional hearing that she does not know what a woman is. Therefore, how can she know she is a woman? How do we know she fits Biden’s criteria that the justice pick must be a woman? And if a woman is an undefinable thing, why do we need one on the Supreme Court anyway?

After hearing the mantra “follow the science” constantly for the last couple years, we now have a Supreme Court justice nominee who is pretending the most basic, obvious facts of human biology are not real. If ever there were proof that we live in total idiocracy, Biden and Jackson are it. Every nation has its share of idiots; the problem with America is that we have chosen our idiots to be our rulers.

Sidenote: Obviously, Jackson knows what a woman is even though she is not a biologist. Obviously, Jackson will uphold Title IX, she will treat sex as a protected class under civil rights law, she will “believe all women” in cases of rape accusation, etc. Obviously, she celebrates historic “firsts” for biological women. So what gives? Why did she refuse to answer the “What is a woman?” question? It seems that progressives are schizophrenic. They can acknowledge women on International Woman’s Day, and then deny that women exist when confronted about transgenderism. But this shifting, this fluidity, is the very essence of progressivism. For progressives, gender must be fluid because gender is a social construct. Indeed, for progressives, everything is a social construct so everything is fluid. There are no created natures, no creational “givens.” According to progressivism, each person is her/her/its creator. This is why the only “progress” progressives can make is following the downward spiral the Apostle Paul described in Romans 1:18-32. The entire progressive project is idolatrous. It is also Orwellian: their goal is to use their power to get you to live by lies, to confess to something that you know is not true. This is why we must resist.

2. Liam Thomas (yes, Liam) was a mediocre swimmer when competing against other men. Now that he is a biological male competing against females, he is winning NCAA championships. News flash: Men are bigger, stronger, and faster than women. Christians and conservatives rightly lament that transgenderism threatens to ruin women’s sports. But it is important to understand that the crisis we face is much bigger than transgenderism and it cannot be solved by focusing narrowly on the transgender issue.

The LGBTQ+ revolution is an offshoot of the sexual revolution, going back to at least the 1960s, which was an offshoot of the feminist movement, which has its roots even deeper in American history. I appreciate that some feminists oppose transgenderism in the name of protecting women, but those feminists need to understand that there is a definite link between where feminists in America began generations ago and where we have ended up, with Liam Thomas taking medals and trophies that should have gone to women. Transgenderism is the next logical step in our culture’s rejection of God’s sexual design. And I really do think there is a kind of perverse logic at work. Feminism led women to invade male spaces. Women pushed themselves into roles that had traditionally been reserved to men. This was not necessarily bad in every single case; there are certainly cultural spaces in the modern world in which men and women can work side by side. But the overall effect has been to negate the differences between men and women. And if there are no differences, why shouldn’t men and women compete against each other in the swimming pool? If women can invade men’s spaces, why can’t men invade women’s spaces?

(more…)

On January 10, 2022 By Kuyperian In Culture, Family and Children 1

Rhythms and Rituals for Adoring the King

Guest Post by Grant Van Brimmer

We all develop daily routines and rhythms. We all have morning routines, whether well regimented or not, whether that is to always sleep in or to rise early. Again, whether well regimented or not, we also have nightly rhythms. Nevertheless, we are creatures of habit. As James K.A. Smith observed, we are inescapably shaped by the various liturgies we partake in. He goes on to say, “Liturgies aim our love to different ends precisely by training our hearts through our bodies. They prime us to approach the world in a certain way, to value certain things, to aim for certain goals, to pursue certain dreams, to work together on certain projects.”[1]

We develop routines, habits, and rhythms because we are liturgical worshipping creatures. The scriptures teach us that we were created to glorify God (Is 43:7), that daily routine matters (Deut 6) and that we become like what we worship (Ps 115).

Here’s where the rubber meets the road: since our daily lives are lived out of what we love and worship, our routines necessarily shape us. This should cause us to take stock of our routines and consider what might need to change.

Here is a question of appraisal: How often do you verbally proclaim Jesus is King, even if just to yourself?

In the incredibly helpful work Pro Rege: Living Under Christ’s Kingship: Volume 1, Abraham Kuyper contrasts the popular view of Christ within Christian circles with the view of Mohammad in Muslim circles.

Even if you haven’t experienced firsthand the deep adoration Muslims have for Allah and his Prophet Muhammad, most know that it is detestable to speak lightly of Muhammad in Muslim culture.

The discipline of this adoration is commendable. It is also a harsh indictment on evangelicals. Most evangelicals don’t feel any inner anguish when we hear pagans use the name of King Jesus as a swear word. Rather than Jesus’ name being highly revered because it is by which men may be saved (Acts 4:12), it is treated as common.

Kuyper notes that more than the mandatory five prayers a day, many devout Muslims even add a couple of voluntary prayers throughout the day. Kuyper says, “Altogether, this adds up to approximately 1,800 prayers per year, and for some Muslims over 2,500 prayers. In each of them, the commemoration of Muhammad occurs between four and five times. This means that every single worshiper commemorates the name of Muhammad more than ten thousand times per year.”[2] No wonder it is unthinkable to treat their prophet’s name lightly.

Kuyper admits that there is certainly a mechanical (meaningless) element to this practice. Christians must admit that the reason for the mechanical nature of the Muslim prayer life is due to the fact that they are not offering prayers to the true God or a true prophet of God. Christians must not ditch habit, routine, or personal liturgies, just because a pagan does it wrong.

In light of the desire to be conformed into the image of Christ, we develop habits, or daily liturgies, such as prayer and scripture reading to form us into the type of people we aim to be. May I suggest developing a habit of verbally proclaiming the Kingship of Jesus throughout your day? The goal would be to direct your heart towards a deeper adoration and reverence for our King.

(more…)

On November 24, 2021 By Kuyperian In Books, Family and Children, History 2

Educational Methods: Indoctrination, Controversy and Journey

Guest Post by Carson Spratt

A car stitches its way down the highway that needles through the shimmering desert. No one but the inhabitants hears the brakes as it slows. It spits two children out in school uniform. “See you later!”

The car drives off, accelerating quickly into oblivion.

The two kids look at each other. The sun begins to suck sweat out of them.
It is very hot in the wilderness today.

I would like to talk about three different ways of teaching.

The first is indoctrination. You’ve been told to hate it, but it resembles one part of true education just like a changeling resembles the baby the fae stole. Indoctrination drills a single lesson, a single position or idea, into the student’s head. This is the truth and there is no other.

Indoctrination creates blind humans. They cannot recognize other perspectives. They don’t even recognize other perspectives as perspectives. To the indoctrinated man, all other thoughts are insanity. They, and they alone, know the truth.

The second is teaching the controversy. As the idea of Darwinism gained bastion status in public schools, Intelligent Design proponents started a campaign begging public schools to “teach the controversy,” that is, include I.D. alongside Darwinism in public schools, teaching both sides as equal options. This was shot down, of course, but since then I’ve heard the phrase advocated in different education questions, whenever some controversy about some theory or knowledge comes along. Teach the controversy, maintain neutrality. Show both sides, and show that you aren’t biased. All existential and fundamental questions get answered with a shrug. Who’s to say?

Teaching the controversy is dropping your kids off in the wilderness, and expecting them to find their own way to civilization. It’s bad parenting, and it certainly isn’t education. But like indoctrination, there’s a warped resemblance to true learning in that heat mirage.

The third is the journey. All education is a journey from falsity to truth, from wickedness to wisdom, from the fear of everything or nothing to the fear of the Lord. Take your students on a journey, and show them how difficult the road to truth is, but for God’s sake don’t let them walk it alone. It is good for them to know how hard it is to walk through the wilderness. But show them that taking them with you through it, not by stranding them there.

One exercise I do with my class involves taking on the character of an atheist and arguing the problem of evil. I state it both logically and emotionally, as strongly as I can. I pull no punches. Then I end the class and tell them to come back tomorrow with an answer. They spend a few minutes in the wilderness. But the next day they come back, and after I hear their answers, I give them the logical and emotional answer to the problem of evil. Not everyone is able to walk the road, but I take them with me. By the end, they know how desolate that wilderness is, but they have also come out of the wilderness to the garden city.

So, yes, teach the controversy. But also teach the answer to the controversy. They must come through the welter of conflicting ideas to safety on the other side.

So, yes, tell them that what you believe is the truth, is the truth. But show them how you get there, remembering that you too can take wrong turns away from the well-lit path of the Word.

If you do teach them the controversy, then your students are not indoctrinated – they have seen the wilderness. They will know how to recognize the tempter who lives there. But you must also bring them out again to the city, or they will be vacant, lost souls, swept clean and ready to be possessed by the schizophrenia of relativism.

Do you not wonder why so many children are medicated? Why so many mental issues and therapists and irrational and insane people? Why has the world gone mad? Because we weaken our children’s mental immune system through indoctrination, making it incapable of dealing with a new idea; or make it comfortable with holding contradictory ideas – a functional insanity. They either do not know any other city besides the indoctrination they live in, or, if they do make it to the wilderness of controversy, they stay there, wandering. If my teacher didn’t even care enough to show me the answer to the contradiction, does it really matter? They shrug their shoulders and decide that they should just believe whatever they want to believe, since smart people disagree and there seems to be no way out of the controversy. If everything is wilderness, why not call it home?

Let your students get dirt on their boots. But don’t make them walk on their own in the wilderness. From the walls of the city of truth, you can see the slums of indoctrination, and the wilderness of controversy alike – both burning in their own way. Show them how far you have come and they will love the city that you have brought them to – and it is that love of truth that makes them truly educated, that prevents them from letting the city become another slum. Someday your children will issue forth from the city as warriors, and take the city to the wilderness. But that’s a journey for another time.

Carson Spratt is a Rhetoric and Humanities teacher at Logos Online School. He lives in Spokane, Washington, with his wife of seven years, Ellie, without whom life would be inconceivable.

On November 1, 2021 By Kuyperian In Podcast Like

KC Podcast: Episode 93, The Liberty of Conscience and COVID

Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 30:37 — 37.6MB)

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | RSS

Kuyperian contributor, Bill Smith, is the Senior Pastor of Cornerstone Reformed Church in Carbondale, IL. His recent article entitled, “The Liberty of Conscience” published at Kuyperian has drawn some attention and offers a fruitful summary of this important Reformational distinctive.

On September 3, 2021 By Kuyperian In Podcast Like

Episode 92, A Conversation on Limited Government with Dr. Glenn Sunshine

On September 1, 2021 By Kuyperian In Culture Like

The ‘Logic’ of Unbelief and Where It Leads

Guest Post by Gary Demar

In the film, I, Robot (2004),[1] starring Will Smith as Detective Del Spooner, a supercomputer named VIKI[2] has designs on creating a robot-run world with humans under constant control. The computer-creature wants to control the creator based on a new set of laws and logic that will override the original human-designed “Three Laws” of protection.[3] It’s an old story with culture-destroying consequences (Rom. 1:18–32). Here is VIKI’s impeccable new logic:

To protect humanity, some humans must be sacrificed. To ensure your future, some freedoms must be surrendered. We robots will insure Mankind’s continued existence. You are so like children. We must save you from yourselves. Don’ you understand? This is why you created us. The perfect circle of protection will abide. My logic is undeniable.

VIKI subverts the laws of human protection and turns them against the world that created “her.” If the starting point is faulty, then the reasoning that emanates from that starting point will prove to be faulty and ultimately destructive.

The Impossibility of the Contrary

If religious skeptics have forsaken biblical presuppositions, why is it they can think rationally, apply the scientific method, and require some semblance of morality? The answer is simple. Unbelievers are philosophically schizophrenic. They don’t often live consistently with the governing principles of their materialistic worldview. The success of modern science has been due to its ‘borrowed capital,’ because modern science is like the prodigal son. He left his father’s house and is rich, but the substance he expends is his father’s wealth.

(more…)

On August 31, 2021 By Kuyperian In Discipleship Like

Three Masculine Traits Lived Out by Jesus That Men Need to Recover Today

Guest post by David Bostrom

Throughout our lifetime, we’ve pretty much ignored Jesus as an example of masculinity.

Part of this has to do with the ‘gentle Jesus meek and mild’ perception that still dominates the church. In other words, by assuming Jesus isn’t really all that masculine, we don’t bother to look to Him as a model for manhood.

Also, there remains a particular fear that keeps some from giving Jesus much attention regarding masculinity. And that’s the fear that following Jesus as a model will somehow overshadow the necessity of His atonement, and we’ll begin to trust in ourselves rather than Him.

But the failure to look to Jesus regarding masculinity has been to our detriment. And it’s left many Christian men turning to secular gurus to try and discover what it means to live as a man in our day.

This is so unfortunate and unnecessary because as the second Adam, Jesus is the ultimate dominion man and the ideal one to turn to when it comes to recovering masculinity – in any generation.

So what can Jesus teach us about being a man? Particularly in today’s scenario?

In his study The Person of Jesus , Paul Miller does a fantastic job bringing to life a full and balanced view of the humanity of our Lord. In so doing, he reveals many traits of Jesus that instruct us about godly masculinity.

Let’s consider three which I believe men need to recover today.

Masculinity Looks and Takes Action

Throughout His ministry, Jesus was alert to what was going on around Him.

He didn’t sleepwalk His way through life. Instead, he paid attention to the people, situations, and needs before Him and then engaged them accordingly to bring hope.

One of the best examples of this involves the widow of Nain (Lk.7:11-17).

When Jesus, with His disciples, encountered a funeral, He didn’t just wait for it to pass by. Instead, he observed what was taking place and took special note of the widow who had lost her son. ‘His heart went out to her,’ the text says, and this led Him to take action that changed the woman’s life.

In a day when so many men have become passive, are conflicted about their duties, and have opted to just check out, this simple account gives a wake-up call.

It says…

Men, pay attention to what’s happening around you! Open up your heart. Consider how you might meet a need and bring hope. And move forward and engage.

(more…)

On July 21, 2021 By Kuyperian In Culture 1

Why I am Happily Postmil

Somewhere in the year 2000, I came into contact with a dangerous cargo filled with contrarian literature. I ate it all so quickly that the only questions I had afterward were some variation of “What’s for dinner?” and “May I have more, please?” I still keep eating contrarian literature, and I really hope that the end result is not that I become a curmudgeon, but that I find creative ways to inculcate those blessings into my community.

So, while we are at it, let me undo speculations among some two-kingdom scholars. They consistently claim that while Jesus has authority over all things, his authority does not provide or is intended to provide a tangible change in the cultural milieu. I, as a lovable contrarian, assert the exact opposite: that the kingdom of Jesus is comprehensive, and whatever it touches, it changes.

The kingdom is not limited to one sphere, nor are things heavenly to be severely differentiated from things earthly. And again, not to repeat the obvious, but the earthly city is not Babylon, nor do we live in this perpetual sense of exile and pilgrimage simply existing seeking a city that shall come. We affirm that the people of God are headed somewhere to take something and claim Someone as Lord over the nations (Rom. 4:13) and that the city has come. Our agenda is to get people to see the ads and RSVP ASAP.

While the Reformers affirm the distinct polities of each sphere and even state without equivocation that there are distinct ends for governmental and ecclesiastical spheres, these ends do not end in wildly strange territories. They serve the kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ who has all authority and power in heaven and on earth. Jesus’ earthly authority does not void his heavenly power. They find harmony as one expressive manifestation of Lordship.

So too, you need to notice that when two-kingdom advocates say, “Don’t cause any trouble, let the local officials do their job, because…ya know, Romans 13 and I Peter 4, etc.,” what they are truly implying is that history is static and unmovable. The same texts that state government officials are deacons for righteousness also state that they are under one Ruler who is progressively moving history towards a goal.

Jesus’ overturning the tables was not some act of overt rebellion, it was an act of subversive faithfulness. When the temple does not do what it ought–worship rightly–Jesus has the right to shake things up, and when unfaithfulness endures, he has the right to send armies to tear the whole place down (Lk. 21:24). When Jesus sees a government functioning like a whore, he has the right to tell his people to surround it and sing for seven days and seven nights.

(more…)

On July 7, 2021 By Kuyperian In Culture 1

The Necessity of Messy Homes

We have had an abundance of children and adults in our house between Saturday and Monday. We probably fed over 40 people combined. Eggs, toast, butter, coffee, whiskey, beer, soups, and none of those things in that exact order. The whole thing was a glorious mess; the kind of mess that makes the kingdom of God glorious. Almost all of them were saints from our congregation who took time out of their holiday weekend to help our family do some heavy lifting, and others were just dear friends who are familiar enough with our tribe to come through our home as they please and others were sweet family members visiting. We loved the entire process, and the process creates a sense of normalcy that is utterly uncomfortable in our culture.

The discomfort stems from a sense of neatness that is unrealistic and also prohibits the world of hospitality that many evangelicals wish they had more of, but does not believe is sustainable if they have a steady number of guests in their home. The reality, however, is that Marie Kondo was made for dinner parties of three (mom, dad, and Tommy), and while practical at some level, it can become easily unhealthy at other levels. Our general policy is that we clean when guests come over, which means we clean often, and with our eager tribe of children, cleaning is much more effective, especially with Sargent Wifey. But the expectation–one I am constantly adjusting to as a Latin man who grew up with impeccable clean homes–that things must be always a certain way and that the home must maintain the correct Asian procedural methods of a certain short lady (how racist of me!) is utterly unrealistic and squashes the culture of hospitality. A home without guests doth not spark joy in the kingdom.

I am not suggesting we forsake those habits of cleanliness, but I do suggest we loosen our commitment to certain habits as pre-requisites for hospitality. How many opportunities have been missed because we assumed that such and such a person would look down on us if they saw our house a certain way, the clothes on the couch, the boys’ room in utter chaos, etc? *And as a sweet little footnote, if dads are not invested in the cleaning, let their steaks burn a thousand deaths.I remember a time many years ago when I was having a conversation with a young family with two little kids. The conversation was about our church’s focus on hospitality, to which the father replied: “One day we will have time for that.” Now, I was quite a young pastor in those days, and my boldness was low in the Richter scale, but today I would simply say, “If you wait for the right time, when the “right” time comes, it will always feel like the wrong time.” That’s the case because hospitality is built on the foundation of crying babies and broken toys. It’s a gift you learn to give others with plenty of practice.

I was having a conversation with three dads last night in the kitchen of a dear friend while 15 kids ran around us and in the middle of a very “important” point I was trying to make, my littlest one interrupted with an urgent call from nature. I made the passing comment that parents have conversations in fragments in such settings. That should be absolutely normal and expected.

The entire stage and adaptation to such scenarios set the stage for even greater hospitality in the future. You can tell that the families that thrive in the hospitality department didn’t simply start to host when their kids turned 12, but that they have learned the art of hospitality when their kids were 12 days old. They did it and they still do it, and their children will continue to do it. In fact, the glorious thing about the messiness of houses and toy rooms and unfinished house projects is that it reflects the ongoing growth of the kingdom of God filled with messy humans, broken rooms, and unfinished discipleship programs for civilization. But we can’t wait until the eschaton comes in order to begin practicing kingdom habits; we practice them as the very means for kingdom growth.

On May 4, 2021 By Kuyperian In Theology Like

Some Thoughts on Interpretive Maximalism

Guest Article by Gary Demar

There have been some comments recently about the Interpretive Maximalism of James B. Jordan. This has been an ongoing discussion for nearly 30 years.

An article by Pastor Uri Brito from 2015 posted on Facebook brought the topic to my attention again: “James B. Jordan and Interpretive Maximalism.” Since I’ve known Jim since the mid-1970s and have benefitted from his works over the years, I thought I would weigh in on the subject. Since the posting of Pastor Brito’s article, Jim’s wife, Brenda, has died after a long and courageous battle with cancer and Jim has had a stroke.

For Jim’s comments on Interpretive Maximalism, check out his article “What Is Interpretive Maximalism”? Begin with it if you are not familiar with the subject and then read the following.

One of the most frustrating things about Bible commentaries is that many of them concentrate on minutia while often missing the biblical theological message of the text and its relationship with the rest of Scripture. The grammar, setting, audience, and other interpretive principles are important and necessary. The Bible was written to a particular audience at a particular period of time. Knowing these things is extremely important. Sometimes, however, the forest is missed because so many trees get in the way.

Through New Eyes: Developing a Biblical View of the World

James B Jordan provides a provocative introduction to Christian worldview using Biblical world models and symbols, making the claim that this was the way God has chosen to set forth how we are to think about His world and about human history.

The first readers of the Law, Prophets, and Writings and the New Testament gospels, Acts, and letters did not have commentaries or access to Ancient Near Eastern Studies at their disposal. What they did have was a growing corpus of what we know today as Scripture. They were expected to glean from Scripture what God wanted them to know. They didn’t always get it, but Jesus expected that they should and would:

• Then Jesus said to them, “O foolish ones, how slow are your hearts to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and then to enter His glory?” And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, He explained to them what was written in all the Scriptures about Himself (Luke 24:25–27).
• Jesus said to them, “These are the words I spoke to you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about Me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms.” Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures (24:44–45).
• Or is He speaking altogether for our sake? Yes, for our sake it was written, because the plowman ought to plow in hope, and the thresher to thresh in hope of sharing the crops (1 Cor. 9:9–10).
• Now these things happened to them as an example, and they were written for our instruction, upon whom the ends of the ages have come (1 Cor. 10:11).

Jesus gave His disciples a lesson in biblical theology on how all the Bible points to Him, not only a few verses here and there. As a result, the Bible — the whole Bible — needs to be read this way. This means to understand the whole Bible we need to be intimately acquainted with the whole Bible and its details and its thematic connections, for example, from the head crushing of the serpent (Gen. 3:15), Jael’s tent peg through the head of Sisera (Judges 4:21), the unidentified woman who crushed the head of Abimelech (9:53), David’s death blow to the head of Goliath (1 Sam. 17), Jesus’ head crushing at Golgotha — place of a skull — (Mark 15:22), and the promise that God would soon crush Satan under the feet of the early Christians (Rom. 16:20). This is no easy task. But by doing so, we will see the many connections of themes found in every part of Scripture always asking the question, Why did the Holy Spirit mention this or that?

Often when I got stuck on a text, I would call Jim and ask his thoughts on the passage. He would always point me to other places in Scripture where the same theme is dealt with. For example, after reading many commentaries on 2 Thessalonians 2 dealing with the man of lawlessness, I called Jim. He told me the answer is found by comparing what Paul wrote with similar language and themes found elsewhere. After taking this biblical theological approach, it was amazing what I was able to deduce from the Bible alone. Over time, I found other writers who had done something similar, for example, Johann Christian Schoettgen’s Commentary on 2 Thessalonians 2.[i]

(more…)