I Like Democracy.

20 years ago, on June 4th, thousands of Chinese died in Tiananmen Square in protest of Communism's suppression of freedom of speech, and in promotion of Democracy.

In a BBC article, a man named Steve Chan is quoted: "June 4 was a time when a group of people sacrificed their lives for democracy. We need to remember their efforts."

We should be so very thankful about our very free lives. God has given us a political system that allows us much more peace and tranquility than so many have on this earth.

On the other hand - democracy will not transform the world. Democracy will not stop the spread of evil. Democracy cannot stop death. Democracy cannot forgive our sins. Democracy cannot satisfy our souls.

Democracy for now is probably as good as it gets, and let's thank God for it. But let's thank God more that it will be replaced by a Kingdom which already exists - as Jesus reigns in our hearts through the Holy Spirit.

President-Bashing: The Biggest Problem in the Church?

I recently was pointed to an editorial which pointed out how our treatment of President Bush must make us look in the eyes of other nations. Here.

I wonder how many of us who call Jesus 'King' are also guilty of President-bashing? The root of the problem runs deeper than mere dislike of our current President, however.

It's a problem of authority. And it runs deep...
Who has authority?

Parents or children?

Pastors or church-members?

Governmental officials or citizens?

Men or their wives?

The Scriptures or my thoughts?

The Scriptures or my feelings?

The Scriptures or my experiences?

And ultimately... God... or me?

Election Day Re-Post: How You Should Vote

A quick addendum to this before the repost.

God cares about social justice.

He cares about social justice because humans are in his image - and so a lack of compassion for hurting people is a lack of compassion for beings who exist to represent God.

So you are required to love social justice. So why don't you go and move to be with people who need you - and give freely of your own money? I mean, you could vote so the government gives handouts from mostly other peoples' money. But, I think you should probably just take responsibility before God for such things.

Also - what do you think God cares more about - making sure poor western people (who by the world's standards are NOT poor) have slightly more - or making sure his image is not destroyed while in the womb?

One more note: God doesn't really care about your portfolio. He cares about your holiness.

So stop and think. God loves justice - but that's because he loves himself. So vote to the glory of God.

So here are some principles from the Bible about God and government:

1) God created governments
2) God created governments to execute righteousness on earth
3) God’s righteousness is evinced in the Law – the OT Law
4) Other nations are held responsible for disobedience to God’s Law in the prophets
5) There is no normative ‘moral Law’ outside the OT Law – every time conscience/natural law is mentioned it’s negative and subjective
6) So the purpose of government is to uphold God’s Law
7) That includes everything in it – including just war, capital punishment, wisely taking care of the poor to an extent, and even the worship of God. – some things more important than others.
8) That will never actually happen until Jesus returns
9) But we have some authority in our government – and thus responsibility to make sure our government conforms to God’s Laws.
10) We also have the responsibility to be honest with our presuppositions – we don’t start from the position of pragmatism – we start with a belief that God owns us, and that his Law is an expression of love to bring us to Jesus.
11) We also have to start with the presupposition that international or national law (Geneva convention; Constitution) aren’t ultimate. We have to submit to law given, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t seek to change them.

DA Carson on Deeds of Mercy and The Gospel

Presbyterian post tomorrow, God willing, I'm tired.

But for now - DA Carson, NT professor of awesome, notes two things in answer to this question:

"Granted that we ought to be engaged in acts of mercy, what safeguards can be set in place so as to minimize the risk that the deeds of mercy will finally swamp the proclamation of the gospel and the passionate desire to see men and women reconciled to God by faith in Christ Jesus and his atoning death and resurrection?"

The two are...

"First, it is helpful to distinguish between the responsibilities of the church qua church and the responsibilities of Christians. Some writers flip back and forth between references to "Christians" and references to "church" as if there is no difference whatsoever. But many Christian thinkers, from Kuyperians to Baptists, have argued that if the church qua church is responsible for some of these substantial works of mercy, such works of mercy ought to come under the leaders of the church. It is very difficult to find any warrant for that step in the New Testament. Even before there were pastors/elders/overseers, the apostles themselves, according to Acts, recognized that they should not be diverted from the ministry of the Word and prayer, even by the inequities of food distribution among the faithful, so they saw to it that others were appointed to tackle the problem. Ministers of the gospel ought so to be teaching the Bible in all its comprehensiveness that they will be raising up believers with many different avenues of service, but they themselves must not become so embroiled in such multiplying ministries that their ministries of evangelism, Bible teaching, making disciples, instructing, baptizing, and the like, somehow get squeezed to the periphery and take on a purely formal veneer.

Second, one pastor astutely urged, "Preach hell." Two things follow from this. (1) By adopting this priority we remind ourselves that as Christians we desire to relieve all suffering, from the temporal to the eternal. If we do not maintain such a panoramic vision, the relief of immediate suffering, as important as it is, may so command our focus that we fail to remind ourselves of Jesus' rhetorical question, "What good will it be for you to gain the whole world yet forfeit your soul?" Read the closing lines of Revelation 14 and Revelation 20 when your vision becomes myopic. (2) As long as you are prepared to plead with men and women to be reconciled to God and to flee the coming wrath, you are preserving something that is central in the Bible, something that is intimately and irrefragably tied to the gospel itself—and those who want to shunt such themes aside and focus only on the relief of present suffering will not want to have much to do with you. Thus you will be free to preach and teach the whole counsel of God and to relieve all suffering, temporal and eternal, without being drawn into endless alliances in which people never focus on anything beyond threescore years and ten."

More Shack-alicious and First Impressions of Blue Like Yazz...

I've taken it on myself to start reading pop-Christian literature. I usually don't because, well, there's a lot of really good Bible teaching stuff out there.

Take that as you will.

Anyway, I watched Driscoll on "The Shack" last night, and was pleasantly encouraged to see his analysis was very similar to my own. One verse he drew on that I forgot about was this:

God has said in Romans 1:22-23, "Claiming to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things."

Whoops.

Whoops seems a light word when that 'mistake' results in the wrath of God, actually (from 1:18 and 2:1-11).

So I've started reading Blue Like Jazz. First impressions:
1) Miller has an amazing ability to write conversationally.
2) These conversations, so far, have done a great job pointing out the sin of man. He's done an excellent job showing how universal it is. He's done a great job showing how it's rooted in the self - in self-pleasure. He's done a great job showing that infects even the good things we do. He's done a great job in showing that everyone is sinful. Awesome.
3) He does a lot of needless ripping on nameless, descriptionless 'fundamentalists.' I'm not sure that's edifying or loving to certain people in the Church.
4) He makes a big deal out of being a political liberal. Eh, frustrating. I'd never say that being a Christian means you have to vote Republican (at least without some argument from Scripture), but at the same time, I don't like it. I think ALL Christians should have some sort of biblical political ethic - a biblical basis for what they think government should be and how we should interact with it - before engaging in such speech. Both Republicans and Democrats. Let's elevate God's words, not our unfounded opinions. Again, that goes for you all on both sides. Knock it off.

Social justice is just alright.

There's been a lot of talk about social justice recently within Evangelical Christian circles. Notably, a lot of this talk has come from people who are - or lean - to being Reformed, theologically speaking.

I think that's in large part a good thing. If we just look at the commands of our Lord, we see an intensity in his commands regarding taking care of peoples' physical needs. And these folks - the ones who are often touting the need for social action on the behalf of Christians - are often talking about it in the context of seeing people hear about and submit to Jesus.

That's good.

Here's the bad - social justice is often talked about as if it is part of how the Kingdom of God is expanding. It's not. The Kingdom is in no way physical now. Look here.

The Kingdom is the reign of Jesus as sovereign Lord of the universe. And he reigns in souls. That reign affects the outside world - but homeless shelters will be destroyed when Jesus comes back. So will soup kitchens. So will houses you've built for the poor.

Those things are good. And they are some effects of the Kingdom. But they are not the Kingdom.

Now... is this just semantic, theological nit-picking? No. Here's why. The poor, oppressed people that you help do not enter the Kingdom without hearing and believing the Gospel. They get judged by it. The don't enter the Kingdom of Heaven; they enter hell.

Taking care of the poor is good. It's the effects of the Kingdom. Or in normal language, it's merely obeying the King's laws. But the Kingdom is only expanded by Jesus' actions, through the Holy Spirit's activity in the preaching of the gospel, in the unseen souls of people.

And one day that faith will be SIGHT! And those of us in Christ will have what we wait for.

Look here.

How You Should Vote

The following text is the outline for the video which appears above.

1) God created governments
2) God created governments to execute righteousness on earth
3) God’s righteousness is evinced in the Law – the OT Law
4) Other nations are held responsible for disobedience to God’s Law in the prophets
5) There is no normative ‘moral Law’ outside the OT Law – every time conscience/natural law is mentioned it’s negative and subjective
6) So the purpose of government is to uphold God’s Law
7) That includes everything in it – including just war, capital punishment, wisely taking care of the poor to an extent, and even the worship of God. – some things more important than others.
8) That will never actually happen until Jesus returns
9) But we have some authority in our government – and thus responsibility to make sure our government conforms to God’s Laws.
10) We also have the responsibility to be honest with our presuppositions – we don’t start from the position of pragmatism – we start with a belief that God owns us, and that his Law is an expression of love to bring us to Jesus.
11) We also have to start with the presupposition that international or national law (Geneva convention; Constitution) aren’t ultimate. We have to submit to law given, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t seek to change them.
12) Practically, I typically vote republican. Morally, I believe they are closer to God’s Law. Economically, no one is advocating we stop taking care of the poor. And quite frankly, someone whining about poverty in our country, I believe, is myopic – and probably has never been out of the Western world.

Jeremiah Wright and the Pope

What do they have in common? Apparently, according to many 'Evangelicals,' they're my brothers in Christ.

I feel rebuked. I mean, yes, Jeremiah Wright, professional racist, says 'Jesus' a lot. Click here for that story.

Oh, and the Pope, professional dress and stupid hat wearer, is anti-abortion. Click here for that one.

So I guess being my brother in Christ has nothing to do with the Gospel. Or in Greek, the 'evangelion' - where we get the word 'Evangelical.' Good thing, too! Because, man - if I broke fellowship with those guys I might end up being called a racist. Or a heretic.

For Dr. James White's commentary on Wright, click here.
And to read about how the Roman Catholic Church condemns the Gospel, click here.

I'm so very glad we don't live in a democracy... and re: the new Christian left

You know why I'm glad the US isn't a democracy? Because then we'd have a bunch of ignorant, armchair wannabe politicians running a show they know nothing about. I'm glad I have the power to elect a set of values to do the hard work of research and decision-making.

That said, that's not the point of this post.

When I was a kid, if you were a Christian, you were a Rush Limbaugh listening, James Dobson loving, pro-life, party line Republican.

Or at least close to it.

Now days, it seems it's the opposite, especially with young people. Young Christians seem bent on political liberalism. And at least part of the reason for that is that they're rebelling against the excesses of older Christians who often subjugated Scripture to political agenda - often speaking without love for the opposing side.

News flash: those of you in this 'movement' - you're doing the same thing. And stop pretending you're the little minority doing the right thing in complaining against this big majority of old mean Christians who hate poor people. Seriously. Get over yourselves. You're a result of reactionary groupthink.

When I was in seminary, I had a crisis. Should I be against 'gay marriage?' (I mean in a legal sense. Of course if anyone in the church did that we'd discipline them and excommunicate them if necessary.)

But what about the laws of the land? Should they prevent 'gay marriage?'

This resulted in a search of what the Scriptures said about governments and how we as God's people are to interact with such institutions.

Now, you might, and rightly, say, that there was no representative government in those days! Well, that's sort of true. But so what? Do we believe the Scripture is sufficient for every good work or not? That means it will provide us a framework through which to think about how we interact with government - about how we vote and who we vote for even.

And quite frankly, I think it's quite stupid to assume one knows what that framework is unless one has studied it.

And a greater weight of responsibility lies on the pastors in God's Church to make sure his sheep know what that framework is.

And as a closing thought - it makes me sick to see how Christians are swayed by smooth talking, content lacking, emotion-grabbing politicians. But hey, the same is true of a lot of pastors that are popular today. Guess it shouldn't be that surprising.