American Idols

We are made in God’s image. The sheer fact that we could spend the rest of our lives contemplating what it means to be made in God’s image, without beginning to scratch the surface, reminds us that we are God’s image, not gods. We are, in some ways, to God, as our mirror image is to us. There is a resemblance, a connection, but the difference is one of ontology, dimension. Thus, God creates, and we create. But when we look at creation more closely we find that He speaks things into reality, while we merely rearrange what He has already created. I’m stringing words together; He spoke language into being. Adam named the animals, but God formed them.

God also, we remember, named Adam. Naming, whether from God or man, is the exercise of dominion. It is rule and authority. Naming has the capacity to shape not the thing in itself, but our perception of the thing. This is why we find the conjugation of adjectives so amusing — I am thrifty; you are cheap, and he is miserly. Each adjective lives in the same neighborhood, and could, in some sense, be used to describe the same behavior. But the choice of the name effects the perception of the reality.
This is the game that the Devil plays with us. He, because he is merely a creature, hasn’t the power to create. Instead, he has only the power of naming, without the authority. We are seduced by him when we think his thoughts after him, when our perceptions are his perceptions. His very first assault was undermining the very words of God: “Hath God indeed said …?” That’s his game.

We are told, for instance, that we live in a “secular” society. To be sure there are a few religious holdouts, most of them living in what is derisively named (there it is again) “fly-over” country. But the “real” world, the world that counts, exists on two coasts. On the east coast, in what we have named the “power corridor” of Washington D.C., Philadelphia, Boston, and New York, we have titans of industry and governance. On the west coast we have the professional namers, the visual mavens who form our culture through entertainment. Where it counts we are supposed to be secular, that is, beyond worship. This, supposedly, is where culture is formed, and thus we have a secular culture.
This too, however, is but the Devil’s sleight of hand. Renaming isn’t the same as remaking. And one thing man will never be is secular. When someone claims, “I’m not a very religious person” translate it to the more accurate, “I’m not a very truthful person.” We are all religious people. That we name our worship something else doesn’t change its true nature. We are still worshiping. The trouble is that the things we don’t call gods, but treat as gods, are merely his image bearers. We worship the creation rather than the Creator, and none more frequently than that two dimensional copy of God, man.

Here I am not referring to philosophical humanism, though such would fit. My point isn’t that those who will not have God in their thinking will instead worship man in the abstract. Rather, we worship men in the flesh. What is Beverly Hills but our own Mount Olympus? We watch television news magazines that tell us what the magazines are saying about what our gods on television are doing. We stand and gawk while they walk sundry red carpets. We build shrines to them on the Hollywood Walk of Fame.
We even have established religion in this country. Local and state politicians live or die by whether or not they are willing to gather the funding to build temples to the gods of this age. Yankee Stadium is less a copy of the Roman Coliseum than it is the Athenium. It is where we gather together for worship, where we hoot and holler for the home team, as if our souls depended on it. These gods never fade away; instead, they simply retire to their respective halls of fame.

To note that we treat our celebrities like gods isn’t merely saying that we treat them better than we ought. Rather, it gets to the heart of the issue, the heart that Calvin rightly called a fabricum idolarum, an idol factory. Calling it cheering, calling it appreciation for the art of filmmaking, doesn’t change what it is — worship.

The bad news of the world out there is that these gods cannot save. They are deaf and mute. The bad news for us in the church is that we too are idolaters. We gleefully blend together our worship of these gods with the worship of the living God and praise ourselves for our cultural relevance. There is, however, only one thing relevant to nationwide idolatry, the call to put away these gods, to repent and believe the gospel of Jesus Christ. We worry that God might judge us because of our national failure to keep the second table of the law. With abortion we murder nearly a million babies a year. With tax-and-spend policies we live by stealing. With our eyes we commit adultery, even as we worship the gods of Hollywood. And we fuel it all with the envy of consumption. But we are fools if we think the first amendment trumps the first commandment. Our only hope is that we would worship the living and true God, and bring no other gods before Him.

Posted in 10 Commandments, abortion, apologetics, Biblical Doctrines, church, creation, Devil's Arsenal, kingdom, Kingdom Notes, RC Sproul JR, repentance | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on American Idols

Lead Us Not into Temptation

Posted in apologetics, Bible Study, Biblical Doctrines, church, Devil's Arsenal, Facebook Live, prayer, RC Sproul JR | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Lead Us Not into Temptation

Comtism; Conquering the World

Today’s Jesus Changes Everything Podcast

Posted in 10 Commandments, apologetics, Biblical Doctrines, church, creation, ism, Jesus Changes Everything, kingdom, philosophy, RC Sproul JR, sovereignty | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Comtism; Conquering the World

Should we follow the science?

Which science? Science, at its worst, is filled with hubris, insisting that it and it alone is the arbiter of truth. At its best science understands that it is seeking to think God’s thoughts after Him, and will ever be doomed to come short. In an earlier piece I made the argument that in this COVID era we have scientists galore who indignantly demand that we follow the science while they’ve left it far behind and have taken up philosophy. I noted then, “If we don’t all get the vaccine, 50% of us will die” is science. Not true mind you, but testable. “We must all get the vaccine because if we don’t, 50% of us will die” is no longer science even if it were so that 50% of us would die if we don’t all get vaccinated. “Must” is a moral demand, not a scientific conclusion. There are no ethical demands in a microscope.

Today, however, I’d like to remember that even when science stays within its own dominion it is clearly on shaky ground. Why? Because while right and wrong are grounded in the eternal and immutable God, our understanding of His creation is tossed about by the wind we’ll never grasp. Imagine Dr. Fauci as a pilgrim, complete with a buckle on his black hat. Imagine a grave illness running through Plymouth colony. Here comes the doctor who pulls out of his medicine kit a great jar full of leeches. Would he not, were we reluctant to attach said leeches to our bodies, insist that we are fools for failing to follow the science? “Leeching cures disease” is science. It is old, discredited science to be sure, but it was once brand spanking new and was still wrong.

Science is quick to, when faced with its own failures, speak through the egg on its face, conceding that science is always progressing. It’s their ready excuse when they get it wrong. The problem is that they forget the principle as soon as they’ve embraced the new science. We, however, unsophisticated rubes that we are, don’t conveniently forget not only that they’ve been wrong before, but that being wrong is seen by science as a feature, not a bug. Science is Hans and Franz pumping us up with gas, telling us, “Listen to us now and stop believing us later.” Because later the new science will slap a label of “quackery” on the old science.

When science says to us, “Yes, yes, yes, of course we’ve been wrong in the past. How stupid we were to believe so fervently in what we used to believe. It was all hornswoggle and hogwash. But now, now we have the truth. Now we really know. This,” they tell us, “is ESTABLISHED science. We know this is true because all the scientists agree.” When we ask about the scientists who don’t agree they tell us, “They’re not real scientists. We can tell, because they don’t agree with the ESTABLISHED science.”

Do not fall for the bluster. Believe what you wish about COVID, Omicron, vaccines. You’ll get no argument from me wherever you fall. Just don’t fall for the bluster that insists that only the wise can see the emperor’s new clothes. Science can best be served with a nation of children snickering at its nakedness.

Posted in abortion, apologetics, Ask RC, covid-19, creation, Devil's Arsenal, kingdom, politics, RC Sproul JR | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments

Roe v. Wade Redux

Today’s Special Jesus Changes Everything Podcast

Posted in 10 Commandments, abortion, apologetics, Biblical Doctrines, church, Devil's Arsenal, ethics, Jesus Changes Everything, kingdom, politics, prayer, RC Sproul JR, repentance, sexual confusion, special edition | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Roe v. Wade Redux

He Ain’t Heavy

Have you ever been embarrassed by a friend? Have you ever watched, cringing while they say or do something totally inappropriate? Have you ever found yourself looking for the door, looking to escape being associated with your friend? Do you suppose you’ve ever been that friend? You have. But your greatest friend is the one who not only doesn’t run away but totally owns your failure as His own.

I know there are plenty of people who are understandably embarrassed by me. I’m one of them. The shameful thing is that I find myself embarrassed by others. That brother in the MAGA hat, and support hose that is forever forwarding the latest youtube video exposing the lizard people in Buckingham Palace is one of them. That brother with the scarf and knit beanie hiding a man bun that is forever telling us how Jesus wants us to save the planet through socialism is another. The first looks to the world like an uncouth, unthinking blithering idiot. The second looks to the world like an obsequious lick-spittle that used to give away his toys to make friends.

I on the other hand, have some of both in me. On my best days, however, I haven’t a care in the world how I look to the world. Because I know to my Father in heaven that I look just like Jesus. Because Jesus took on every shameful, humiliating embarrassment of mine and made it His own. He has even washed in His precious blood my shame over those whom He loved enough to wash in His precious blood.

We do not, in the end, love our brothers more deeply so that the world might believe the gospel. Rather we believe the gospel more that we might learn to love our brothers. It is not mere gratitude, because our Redeemer commands it of us, but it is fitting, poetic. We love our brothers in their flaws because our Brother loved us in ours.

Whether unedumacated or tutored by the wisdom of this world, the body of Christ is made up of every find of failure, every cringe-inducing, prejudiced bumpkin, every metrosexual hipster that rests in Him. From the Arminian that thinks he’s an Armenian to the Calvinist who thinks he’s Calvin, we’re all in this together, all because Jesus isn’t too cool to not just hang with us, but hang for us. When we sing, “Amazing Grace, how sweet the sound, that saved a wretch like me” we need to likewise sing, “that saved a wretch like thee.”

Brothers disagree from time to time. What they don’t do is deny the bond that makes them one, nor the One that binds them.

Posted in apologetics, beauty, Biblical Doctrines, church, communion, Devil's Arsenal, evangelism, friends, friendship, grace, kingdom, Kingdom Notes, RC Sproul JR, scandal | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on He Ain’t Heavy

Forever Friend, Rick Lessing; Plus, Who is God?

Today’s Jesus Changes Everything Podcast

Posted in 10 Commandments, apologetics, Biblical Doctrines, friends, friendship, Jesus Changes Everything, RC Sproul JR, theology, wonder | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Forever Friend, Rick Lessing; Plus, Who is God?

Happily Ever After

“And to forsake all others, till death do us part.” One would think, that with the decades-old trend in the broader culture of “personal marriage vows,” wherein husband and wife fill in the blanks and speak their own words, that the above would be the first to be ditched. It’s not so much the language as the sentiment that is archaic. Competing mathematical theories, combined with actual divorces tell us that between one third and one half of all marriages end in divorce. Strangely enough, most couples still triumphantly march away from the altar having vowed life-long fidelity. It seems even the most coarsened consciences still so long for happily ever after that, while they can actually live without the fidelity, they can’t live without the illusion. No one dresses up and hires a photographer when they decide to move in together.

That illusion is so powerful, however, that in the face of the statistics, it might better be called a delusion. The sad truth is that whatever is the true number, the divorce rate among professing evangelical Christians is virtually identical to the world around us. We pledge our undying love, only to have the pledge die. Which may explain why we have such a hard time understanding the perseverance of the saints. I have heard it said that the proclamation of the glory of the Father won’t carry a great deal of evangelistic freight in many inner-city neighborhoods. When we present God as our father, too many assume that this means that He is irresponsible, that He is absent, that He cannot be counted on. While I think avoiding biblical truths because of cultural sins is folly, I understand the sentiment. How are we to understand Christ as our Bridegroom, in a world where nearly half of all bridegrooms, just like inner-city fathers, step out or skip town when convenient?

The answer within the church is simple enough. Our culture has changed. We are now those of whom Peter wrote, “But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for His own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light. Once you were not a people, but now you are God’s people; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy” (1 Peter 2: 9–10). Our standards for understanding the relationship between a man and a wife come not from the world around us, but from the Word beneath us, the very Word that upholds and sustains us. We are the bride of Christ. And rather than having our vision of our Bridegroom besmirched by adulterous brigands, we ought instead to have our own vision of our calling as husbands be transformed by the image of the faithfulness of Christ. We don’t change Him; we don’t change our language. No, we change our behavior.

Once we grasp that we are His bride and that He will never let us go, we begin to loosen our grip on that cultural picture of perseverance, a white knuckled grip. That is, the perseverance of the saints isn’t ultimately about our tenacious clinging to the Gospel as much as it is the sovereign clinging of the Gospel to us. I will persevere not because of me, but because of Him, not because I am a faithful bride, but because He is a faithful Husband. Perseverance isn’t about bootstrap effort; it’s about cross-bearing effort, which means it’s not about our effort now, but His effort then.

We do not have then merely a handsome groom dressed up for the crowd. The tears shed by our Husband are not simply for the moment of the ceremony, but are for all our lives. When I struggle with the ugliness of my sin, when I grow impatient with the slow process of my sanctification, I like to remind myself of this sound biblical truth — God loves me today as much as He ever will. I am not part way in, laboring to get all the way in. I am in. As comforting as this is now, however, how much more comforting is it forever? That is, not only does God love me now as He will forever, but He will love me forever as He does now.

Let us never forget either that it is love. When we translate biblical truth into formulae, something is always lost in the translation. It is good and proper that we should affirm with all conviction the doctrine of perseverance of the saints. It is good likewise to suggest in turn that preservation might be the better term, as it is what God does for us, not what we do for Him. But such can make the whole process sound, well, like a process. We tend to turn the ordo salutis, the order of salvation, into a kind of production line. We who are Reformed rightly defend this doctrine in terms of His sovereignty. Nothing, the Bible tells us, can take us from His hand. But what drives God isn’t simply the hope of a perfect record. It isn’t merely a display of power. The promise is that He will sanctify His bride, that He will remove every blot and blemish. Perseverance is a love story beginning and ending in the marriage of power and beauty, as our strong Groom finishes the work He has begun in us, beautifying us, precisely because He is faithful and true.

His obedience shows forth our wickedness. We in turn, turn from our wickedness, to embrace His obedience. And then He holds onto us into eternity. This is not just good news now, but good news forever. For this is the one story that rightly ends … “and they lived happily ever after.” Cue music.

Posted in assurance, Biblical Doctrines, church, communion, Doctrines of Grace, grace, kingdom, Kingdom Notes, RC Sproul JR, sovereignty, theology | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Happily Ever After

Bible in 5, II Peter; Is celebrating Christmas a sin?

Today’s Jesus Changes Everything Podcast

Posted in Advent, Ask RC, Biblical Doctrines, Jesus Changes Everything, kingdom, RC Sproul JR, Roman Catholicism | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Bible in 5, II Peter; Is celebrating Christmas a sin?

Does the Bible allow the use of deadly force in protecting of our homes and families?

Indeed it does. It is to some a rather surprising admonition of our Lord, as He sent out His disciples, that they be certain to bring along a sword with them, that a sword was even more needful than a cloak (Luke 22: 36). One of the most frequent “arguments” we hear in favor of pacifism is this emotive nugget, “I just don’t see Jesus wielding an AK-47 and blowing someone away.” Here Jesus calls on His disciples to arm themselves, and that with the most deadly weapon available at the time, even as they are sent out. I don’t “see Jesus wielding an AK-47” either, anymore than I see Him using a smartphone. I can see Him using a sword, and writing in the dirt.

Moving from the lesser to the greater, it would seem on the surface that we ought also to have the liberty to defend ourselves in our own homes. That is, if Jesus suggests we may defend ourselves when out in public, how much more ought we to be free to defend our families while in the security of our own homes? At the very least this warning from Jesus in Luke’s gospel dispels the common myth that pacifism is, prima facie the right choice for the believer.

We are not left, however, with only an inference, no matter how sound such might be. The Bible, in fact, speaks to the issue of home defense. In Exodus 22, just two chapters after we are told “Thou shalt not kill,” thus demonstrating that we cannot either use the sixth commandment to defend pacifism, we read, “If the thief is found breaking in, and he is struck so that he dies, there shall be no guilt for his bloodshed” (verse 2). Notice a few things about this text. First, the conclusion isn’t merely that the guilt of the homeowner is mitigated by the intent of the intruder, but that there is no guilt at all. Second, note that the thief is struck. This isn’t an argument against tort liability, suggesting that we cannot be sued if an intruder slips in our home. Third, note that it is a thief who has broken in.

I have been in conversations with conservative, Bible believing Christians who have argued with my conviction here, suggesting incredulously, “You would kill a man just to protect your stereo, or your wife’s jewelry?” The truth of the matter is that when a man breaks into your house he does not do so carrying a neon sign saying, “I’m just here for your stuff. Your wife and children are of no interest to me.” We don’t know what the man breaking in is after. But even if we did know what he was after, even if we knew he was only a thief, as we do in this hypothetical given to us in the very law of God, we are free from guilt if we should defend our home.

The Bible is abundantly clear. Men are called to protect their wives and children. The police exist to apprehend and bring criminals to justice, not to catch them in the act. That is what responsible husbands and fathers are for. We ought not take a sadistic joy in this calling, but neither should we have a weak-kneed fear of it. We serve a King who goes forth with a sword, and who sent forth His disciples with a sword. We serve a King who loves and protects us- His bride, and His children. Surely we can see that we who are the heads of our own homes, are called to do the same.

Posted in 10 Commandments, apologetics, Ask RC, Biblical Doctrines, ethics, kingdom, RC Sproul JR | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Does the Bible allow the use of deadly force in protecting of our homes and families?