Wheat and Chaff

I have moved over to Wordpress.

Dr. Stephen Baskerville makes the case that the current push for gay marriage is really just the result of a long push against families that started in the past, especially with no-fault divorce, as that fundamentally altered and degraded the role of fathers in society, and expanded the power of the state as a result.

G. K. Chesterton once suggested that the family was the main check on state power and that weakening it would destroy freedom. Chesterton was writing about divorce, and here another critical difference emerges between today’s debates and the way the issue was framed by Dawson and Zimmerman and theorists they cite. While homosexuality, abortion, pornography, and other cultural issues on today’s family-values agenda do appear in their writings, they are not central. The recurring issue throughout Western history that seems to be the most direct cause of marriage and family breakdown is divorce.

...

 Given that 80 percent of divorces are unilateral, divorce today seldom involves two people simply parting ways.[10] Under “no-fault” rules divorce often becomes a power grab by one spouse, assisted by people who profit from the ensuing litigation: judges, lawyers, psychotherapists, counselors, mediators, and social workers.

The most serious consequences involve children. The first action in a divorce is typically to separate the children from one parent, usually the father. Even if he is innocent of any legal wrongdoing and did not agree to the divorce, the state seizes his children with no burden of proof to justify its action. The burden of proof (and the financial burden) to demonstrate that they should be returned falls on him.

The reason for this is that intact families, and especially fathers that are present in the lives of the children, are one of the greatest checks on the power of the state.

From Henry Dampier who has additional thoughts.

The Communists invented liberation theology, according to an ex-Soviet spy.

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/former-soviet-spy-we-created-liberation-theology-83634/

Genesis 1:27 says, "male and female created He them."  The male-female dichotomy is part of the creative order from the beginning, and that dichotomy was there by God in the initial plan and intention for humanity.  Humankind was to glorify God and represent God's likeness and image, and humankind does this as "male and female".

That refutes any possible normalization of homosexuality, polygamy, or transgenderism.  It refutes the contempt, oppression, and abuse that men have so often directed toward women throughout history, but also refutes the rejection of gender distinctions and roles that is such a feature of our current age.

God made women to be female, to be distinct from men.  You cannot claim to be pro-woman if you are not pro-femininity.  This fact remains true both more men who hold women in contempt and women who hold their own femaleness, as God created it, in contempt.

More here, from Sunday's sermon.

The Bolshevik Revolution was all about creating a just and perfect society in Russia.  When they tried to implement this society, contrary to the reality of God's law and without the benefit of Christ's redemption, they inevitably failed.  When they failed, rather than admit their error and change course, they blamed scapegoats, doubled down, and tried even harder to impose their vision on reality.  Result- tens of millions dead.

Question: "Why did God make you and all things?"  Answer: "For His own glory."

It struck me today, though not for the first time, that this is a truly profound and crucial theological statement.  It's from our little Children's Catechism, and kids have been learning this truth for centuries.  But I think if we really knew that truth, really knew it down in our bones, we would avoid a lot of errors.  There is more that needs to be known, for sure- it is not sufficient.  But it is necessary- without this piece of information, you'll misunderstand and misconstrue everything.  That statement right there cures the Arminian error, I believe.  That's just one example.

How many times in the Bible do you see God saying something like, "So that you will know that I am God" or "for My holy name's sake" or something similar?  These are all statements about God's self-revelation and how fundamental it is to the whole existence of the universe.  This is why everything exists.

Good theology is the reason we don't have slavery anymore, and is the reason why you have cell phones and cars and democracy.  That's not to say of course that the company that built your cell phone is Christian, but it is to say that we as a culture and civilization are still reaping from the long trail of benefits from the building of our civilization in northern and western Europe by people who were Christians.  They believed that God had made all people in His own image and that God made the universe orderly and understandable, and made man to understand it.  These ideas led to the scientific revolution, the concept of human rights and all the rest.  That's not to say they were all perfectly worked out instantly.  Some might cite slavery in the US or Europe as a counterexample.  But the remarkable thing wasn't that slavery existed.  Slavery has existed everywhere for all of history.  The remarkable thing, the thing that requires explaining, is the push to end slavery, which happened entirely in places with a long Christian heritage. 

Because they knew God.  And they knew that God had created the very universe to reveal Himself.  They wanted to know Him better, and they paid attention.

In a society rapidly rejecting Christianity and the civilization which sprang from it, I expect we'll be finding out soon whether this thesis is correct, whether a liberal, free, scientific society can long exist without the theological framework which gave rise to that society.

I love reading the Bible.  No end of profit there, of course.

I like reading godly theologians writing about the Bible.  That is very helpful too, as those wiser than me help me understand the Bible.

I find some interest in reading people who are writing about the theologians who write about the Bible.  This is interesting from a historiographical perspective and helps me see the outline of the great debates we've engaged in over the centuries.

When we start arguing about the theologians, whether they did or did not in fact teach this or that doctrine, I find myself rapidly losing interest.  What are we interested in, here?  We want to know what the Bible says.  That's ultimately what matters.  The further we get in our discussions from that, the less value those discussions truly have.

My new book is available!  It's on the subject of worship, from a Reformed perspective.  I'll post the description from the book page:

Worship matters. We were created to be in relationship with God, in fellowship with Him, and to do so together with His people. The basic, bedrock promise of the Bible story from beginning to end is, "I will be your God, and you will be My people, and I will dwell in your midst." Corporate worship at its best is the closest experience of that eternal reality we will experience in this life. Over time the most accurate insight into a church's theology is their worship- what they do, what they sing, what they say, and the heart with which they do it. When you believe you are going to meet with God, you show everyone most accurately what you think about Him.  

God being God, and we being creatures, and especially creatures in a sinful and fallen state, it must be the case that God will define how that relationship looks. Therefore we look to Scriptures to define worship for us, and not our own imaginations or the opinions of men. A child does not define his relationship with his father; much less can we tell our Creator how we will relate to HIm! But He has graciously and lovingly instructed us in His Scriptures in the principles that should drive our worship.  

God is glorious, and good, and beautiful! And He has done marvelous things for us. Worshiping Him is an honor, a joy and a privilege, and carries great benefits for us as well. Interfacing directly with God through Biblical worship reveals our own nature, since we are in His image, and what we learn and experience in worship will shape our very hearts, to be more like Him in every way. And that is the purpose of our existence.  

This book is a series of essays on the subject of worship. Why do we worship? What principles drive and inform our worship? What are the different elements of a worship service and why do we do them? Throughout, we intend to go beyond going through the motions to see the heart of why we do what we do in worship. The theology of the Reformed branch of the Protestant Reformation informs us throughout.

It will be available on Amazon.com shortly as well.

I got a new board game a couple days ago- Stone Age.  I've played it twice with the kids and it's great.  It's a resource management and worker placement game, and I really enjoy it.

I love playing games with the kids.  I think it's really valuable.  There's all sorts of things to learn and benefit from in a good game.  In Stone Age, you have to roll dice and divide by different numbers depending on what resource you're collecting.  So it works math skills, strategic thinking and planning ahead.  But besides that, most games I play with the kids give opportunities for lots of character building.  How to win and lose gracefully, how to follow rules, how to control temper and pride- I think these are all really valuable lessons.  I can observe my kids and see areas of their character where they need some growth.  And we just get to spend time together and have fun as a family.

What if you never got bored of things?  What if the same sunset that delighted you one day delighted you just as much the next day?  Or even more?  What if one particular piece of music just never got old?  What if you could pick a well-balanced meal that you loved and eat it and only it for a hundred years and never get tired of it?

Would that not significantly change the way one perceives the prospect of eternal life?  Perhaps the very existence of boredom, of the thirst for novelty, is a product of man's fall into sin.  I don't know.  I can't think of any Scriptures to support this one way or another.  It's just a thought.

If you are not learning to get along with other Christians, then you are not learning to be a Christian at all.

The Atlantic has published a really valuable article for understanding ISIS.

One thing that makes Protestantism superior to Catholicism is the burning of heretics.  Now of course the Protestants burned heretics along with the Catholics, but a Protestant can denounce the action, while a Catholic can't.  Heretics were burned by order of popes and councils, for example the Council of Constance which burned John Huss to death.  And in Roman Catholic theology, councils of the church are infallible.  I can say that the Genevan church was wrong to burn Servetus.  But the Roman Catholic can say no such thing about the Council of Constance.

Muslims have a similar problem.  No matter how modern and moderate a Muslim becomes, he cannot escape the example of Allah's true prophet, who held slaves, who married a nine year old, who practiced all sorts of barbarities.  The Islamic State says that anyone who rejects crucifixions and slavery rejects Islam, because it is to reject the practice of Muhammad and the teachings of the Koran, and they have a point.  As Christians, however, we can never go wrong by returning to the example of our founder, Jesus, whose values and teachings have shaped the modern world, values by which the members of that modern world judge people like ISIS even if they do not acknowledge the source of those values.

The Christian church at its very best attempts to emulates the true principles and practices of its founder.  Muslims at their best ignore the values of Islam's founder and adopt the values of the founder of Christianity instead.

The purpose of the Sabbath Day was never intended to teach people to rest in God one day of the week and to trust their own hard work the other six.  That day was a token, a sign teaching them to trust God every day.  It is to me so sad to see that just like the Pharisees of Jesus' day, some of the most careful and scrupulous observers of Sabbath days today think that by their effort to scrupulously keep the Sabbath they are earning God's blessings, and their legalistic attitudes are seen the rest of the week in their frantic activity trying to do everything perfectly.

The New Testament Sabbath is the reality of which the Old Testament Sabbath was just a sign.  The New Testament Sabbath is the resting in Christ and His salvation every day, and doing it whether one is at church, at work, at play, or wherever.  It is not the observance of a day- those ceremonies passed away with Christ.  It is the observance of a mindset, one of faith and trust with God, every day.

Most of what people spend their lives doing is trying to overcome the effects of the curse without ever actually dealing with the curse itself.  The reason we are separated from one another, why people are hateful and envious of one another, why people are at war with themselves, engage in destructive behaviors of substance abuse, drunkenness, promiscuity and the like, why nations go to war, why people wreck the planet, wreck their families, wreck their own bodies- all of it is because they are alienated with God.  The rest of that is God's curse on us for rebelling against Him.  So it is absolutely futile to try to solve any of those other problems without solving the one big problem.  We're not stronger than God, and we will never defy His curse against us.  So people work hard, or chase pleasure, or get educations, or lose themselves in entertainment,  all to try to feel peace and happiness in their lives, or at least avoid pain.  But they will fail, because God is God and He will execute His judgment.  If we accept reconciliation with God through Jesus Christ, though, the rest of it will all fall in line.

The great thing about political correctness is, that as long as your social experimentation continues to produce bad results and therefore produces people who sensibly point out the failures of your social experimentation, you can continue to blame the failures of your social experimentation on the bigotry of the people with the temerity to point it out.