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.
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.
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…)
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…)
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…)
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.
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.
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…)Wonderful to join Grant Van Brimmer at RRN. Check out their previous episodes and support their Patreon page!
Guest Post by Rich Lusk
“The old alliances are dead.”
– Theoden
“The world is changed…
I feel it in the water…
I feel it in the Earth…
I smell it in the air….Much that once was is lost. For none now live who remember it.”
— Galadriel
“Our list of allies grows thin.”
— Elrond
“All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us.”
— Gandalf
“The West has failed.”
— Denethor
Now that the Trump era is over, at least as far as his Presidency is concerned, it’s worth taking a look back at what happened in the 4+ years that he dominated the political and cultural landscape. I am convinced that Trump himself is nowhere near the most important thing that has happened. Rather, Trump exposed and accelerated trends that were already in motion. The Trump era brought to the surface and revealed many things that had been hidden from view. This has been an apocalyptic moment in American history.
I am most interested in what has happened to the evangelical and Reformed church context in which I am a pastor, but that cannot be considered apart from the political trends that have generated so much discussion and division.
Obviously, and understandably, Trump was a very divisive figure. His foibles, real and imaginary, are well known because we have been bombarded with them 24/7 for years now. There is no question he is something of an egomaniac, and could often be his own worst enemy. Policy-wise, he was generally conservative and should be applauded for many things he did (e.g., building a strong economy until COVID hit, gaining energy independence, removing the nation from entangling alliances, taking seriously the China threat, brokering Middle East peace deals, etc.) as well as things he did not do (e.g., no new wars, respecting states rights in regard to COVID responses, etc.). But I do not think Trump himself is the most important barometer of the church’s health at this point — indeed, far from it. While it is virtually impossible for me to reconcile any kind of support for Biden/Harris with Christian faith, I can certainly understand why many Christians have been reluctant to throw their support behind Trump. Frankly, I can sympathize with many of the criticisms of Trump that came from the “never Trump” camp….until I consider what the alternatives to Trump were. Making a Christian case that Trump has serious issues is not that hard to do. Making a Christian case that he is somehow worse than the alternatives that were available to us is virtually impossible — and “never Trumpers” never seemed to grasp that. Making a case against Trump is not the same as making a case for the Democrat options (or any other available options), which is what “never Trumpers” needed to do. “Never Trumpers” failed to develop any kind of alternative vision to Trump, even at a theoretical level. Nevertheless, they continued to cast aspersions on Christian and conservative Trump supporters. But this was an entirely unhelpful strategy. Caring about the political realm and expressing patriotic convictions are not necessarily signs of idolatry and voting for Trump in ’16 or ’20 does not necessarily mean one has sold his soul to the devil; indeed one can argue it was the best and most prudent course of action. But, again, how Christians feel about Trump is NOT the best litmus test for where we are anyway. So what is?
(more…)
Guest Post by John Unger
Everywhere and in almost every conversation that one might hear these days, whether in public discourse or on social media, the F- word appears. A generation ago, this curse was rarely employed, and when used publicly, would not only astonish and appall the hearers but also bring shame and dishonor on the speaker for his brazen vulgarity. In the passing decades, the employment of this curse became more common and in vogue, its use coming to be called “dropping an F-bomb”, which startles the hearers with its bold force and brashness.
In the last several years however, the F-word has become more commonplace, permeating daily life and discourse. Rather than a “shock and awe” megaton shell falling from the sky, it has morphed into constant, random, rapid gunfire, read and heard in social media interaction, public television, and casual discourse. On streets, in stores, restaurants, buses, malls, etc., it matters not the age, sex, region, race, sexual orientation, education, status, title, ad infinitum: the F-word truly is an equal-opportunity curse word. In print, the oft-attempted replacement of letters in the word – #### – fails to mask our cultural comfort level with this once-shunned curse word, and its near-ubiquitous use at present. Even our President in a recent speech employed the F-word, in an overtly macho attempt to communicate the high stakes involved in attacking America.
Historically (in the Christian West at least), the cursing of someone or something usually contained a reference to God and the eternal realm, as in “God damn ***!”, or “Damn ***!”, or someone might pronounce, “Go to hell!” upon another, or simply invoke the name “Jesus Christ!” in expressing their anger at a situation, thing, or person. The employment of “hell”, “God” or “Jesus” in cursing demonstrates that even in our folly and anger, we intuitively know and have sense enough to call upon a heavenly God and Jesus Christ as the Sovereign Lord and Creator, Who owns and judges all men and all things. Even in suppressing our knowledge of God (Rom. 1:18), we invoke Him to vindicate our personal cause and make things right for us – however twisted and wicked our desires might be, in our moments of anger and pride.
(more…)
Kuyperian Commentary Podcast
