Are hidden cameras a legitimate tool for exposing evildoers?

Thinking through the current controversy at Project Veritas, the battle between the founder, James O’Keefe and the board of directors, has led me to a prior question- is the practice of using hidden cameras, inviting others into conversation then publishing those conversations something Christians are allowed to do? Before I try to tackle that question, a few points of prolegomena. First, I have enjoyed the work of Project Veritas in the past. That is, those they expose are people I’m glad to see exposed. The causes the organization is fighting for are causes I care about. Second, my concern is moral, not legal. I know enough law to know some states require anyone recording anyone else to let them know. Other states do not have that requirement. I will be looking at the question while assuming the practice is legal. Third, I am not of a mind to believe that in all circumstances lying is sinful. I know there are many Christians who hold that view. My view is that we owe the truth to whom the truth is due. Unpacking to whom the truth is due is no easy task.

Is the truth due to Planned Parenthood, Phizer, the Hillary Clinton campaign? If one takes the view that Rahab’s lie in the book of Joshua, protecting the spies in Jericho, was just, or the Hebrew midwives lie in Exodus was just, one would do so on the basis of the reality of an ongoing war. You can lie to the enemy in war, just as the allies did in sending fake messages to be intercepted by the Nazis giving a false landing point for D-Day. The trouble is, while we are engaged in a culture war, war in this context is more of a metaphor. When one starts stretching the context of “war” to include every kind of disagreement, one opens the floodgates to lying virtually all the time.

I am likewise pulled toward suggesting these tactics are not legitimate by CS Lewis. There is a memorable scene in The Voyage of the Dawn Treader where Lucy comes across a book of spells and avails herself of the opportunity of listening in to a conversation of a friend. That friend displayed little loyalty toward Lucy, hurting her feelings. Aslan gently corrected her and let her know we ought not listen in to conversations we’re not invited to.

At the end of the day I’m coming down with my favorite answer- I don’t know. There are, however, two things I do know. First, this is a question that needs to be asked. Just because something is doable doesn’t mean it ought to be done. Second, sauce, goose, gander. That is, if we’re going to argue that this type of activity is a good thing when lefties are exposed, we’d better be prepared to accept the consequences when our allies end up exposed by the same tactics. In turn, I wonder how such tactics mesh with our call to do unto others. “Harmful to our enemies” is not a sufficient standard to earn the appellation, “A good thing to do.”
.

Posted in 10 Commandments, abortion, Ask RC, ethics, politics, RC Sproul JR, scandal | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Are hidden cameras a legitimate tool for exposing evildoers?

Something New Under the Sun

Imagine, if you would, that you are the most powerful person in the world. Now imagine that you are also the richest person in the world. Would your life be fundamentally different? Would everything that is now ordinary about your life become extraordinary? Not according to the wisest man in the world. King Solomon reigned in Israel at the peak of its power. Israel was at that time a world power, her borders swelling. Solomon likewise enjoyed the wealth of Croesus. No one on the planet was as wealthy as Solomon. Better than all this, however, he was gifted by the God of heaven and earth with wisdom. In that wisdom, and in light of experiencing every pleasure, every distraction that the world had to offer, he spoke this heavy nugget: “There is nothing new under the sun” (Eccl. 1:9).

The brave new world, under the flashing lights and tinkling bells, is the same world it has always been. Such does not mean, of course, that we ought not be on our guard amidst swirling cultural change. We are called, after all, to discern the times. That, however, is precisely the point. We can only grasp the winds of change when we are tied to the mast of the permanent things. To walk steady in the midst of shifting sands we do not seek to better understand the sand. Instead we long to have our feet set upon the Rock. Then, and only then, will we sing a new song.

That the brave new world is the timid old world does mean, therefore, that we must hold on to the old truths. No matter how swiftly technology may be changing, it will not change these realities — that we, in ourselves, are sinners at war with God Himself. No matter how slippery the culture’s conception of truth, the truth is He sent His only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have eternal life. No matter how dizzying the world becomes, He still has the whole world in His hands. And no matter how overtly the culture rebels against its rightful king, we are to be of good cheer, remembering that He has already overcome the world.

His victory, however, is not merely the cause of our good cheer; it also rightly informs our strategy. If the wheels really were coming off the world, if these dazzling changes really were something new under the sun, then we could understand the temptation to change course, to adapt, to contextualize, to go with the flow. If, however, Jesus reigns now, if He sends His Spirit in power across the globe, if He wields His Word as a two-edged sword, then we can stay with the program. We can continue, for all authority has been given to Him in heaven and on earth. By this authority He has ordered us to go and make disciples of the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that He has commanded us. We can live in faith, remembering that He is with us even as we walk through Vanity Fair — even to the end of the age.

C.S. Lewis was not only a lay theologian but was also a scholar of English literature. During the height of the Second World War, he penned an essay in which he asked why, in the midst of such a titanic struggle between good and evil, anyone would “waste” time studying literature. He then explained that those who refused to think on matters of culture will not end up with no culture but with bad culture. Culture is inevitable, both in war and in peace. No one can set it aside for a time to deal with the important stuff. In like manner, if we believe that the broader culture is so much background noise, we will not steer clear of it but will buy into it. Those who ignore culture are doomed to repeat it.

If we don’t, for the sake of the gospel, adjust for the culture, and we don’t, for the sake of the gospel, ignore the culture, what do we do? We seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness. We build a culture around and upon the lordship of Christ over all things. We live our lives, as much as is possible, in peace and quietness with all men, which is, at one and the same time, the very power of His assault on the gates of hell. As we refuse to get frantic and adopt the pace of the broader culture but instead live simple, gospel-infused lives; as we raise our children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord; as we hunger and thirst after righteousness; as we meditate day and night on His law and rejoice day and night over His grace; suddenly the world slows down. Our hearts are calmed. We are still, and we know that He is God.

There is nothing new under the sun. But every day, more and new things are being brought under the Son. The mustard seed is growing. The leaven is working through the lump. That Rock, unhewn by human hands, is expanding across the globe, and the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ is covering the earth as water covers the sea.

Posted in 10 Commandments, abortion, apologetics, Biblical Doctrines, church, creation, eschatology, kingdom, Kingdom Notes, philosophy, politics, RC Sproul JR, sovereignty, wonder | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Queer Is As Queer Does

It is a tiresome truth that those of the world, both inside and outside the church, grumble that some of us inside the church make a big deal over other people’s private lives. The Bible is a big book, chock full of all sorts of things we’re not supposed to do that we do and things we’re supposed to do that we don’t. “Why,” these folks argue, “are you Christians always squawking about drag queens, gay ‘marriage’ and trannies? Why don’t you get your noses out of joint over greed, adultery or gluttony?” While a case could be made that some of these sins are more destructive than others, the key reason is that there are not great bands of the broader culture out marching and boasting about their adultery, insisting that some are just born greedy or hosting Aol You Can Eat Buffet Nights for kids at the public library.

The sexually confused find themselves caught on the horns of a great dilemma. First, they desperately want to be accepted. Second, they desperately want to offend. They want to be seen as mainstream, and they want to shock. The better the first goal is met the worse the second is met; the better the second the worse the first. The first goal is easy to understand, because it’s perfectly normal. We all want to be accepted, to be approved of. This is why the key tool of acceptance of choice for the sexually confused is to shame those of us who know they are confused. We are condemned as homophobes and bigots, as hopelessly out of touch, as close kin of Nazis.

The second goal, however, should not surprise us. The very heart of sexual confusion is the drive to act against that which is natural. It is to shake one’s fist at the very order of God and the very God of order, at the design of the Creator’s creation. Perversion, for the sexually confused, isn’t a bug of the lifestyle, but a feature.

As is so often the case with sin, there are those who struggle against it and those who give in to it. The former group are due our compassion, encouragement and prayer. The latter group are due our compassion, discouragement and prayer. The second group, by virtue of embracing their sin are not only calling evil good but demanding that we do the same. To do so is not only evil, but unkind. Homosexual behavior is not simply sin because God is a kill-joy. It is an intentional spitting in His face.

Why then the compassion and prayer? Because such once were we. It is one thing to recognize that sexual perversity is disgusting. It is another thing to act as though, apart from God’s grace, we are beyond such sin. Compassion is the acknowledgment of “there but for the grace of God go I.” Prayer is the response. Those parading down our streets claiming to be proud, though they hate this truth, are made in God’s image. And they are not beyond His grace.

Posted in 10 Commandments, apologetics, church, creation, Devil's Arsenal, ethics, grace, Holy Spirit, kingdom, Kingdom Notes, persecution, politics, RC Sproul JR, scandal, sexual confusion | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Queer Is As Queer Does

Proverbs 31; World War III; The Noah Covenant and More

This week’s Jesus Changes Everything Podcast

Posted in Biblical Doctrines, Biblical theology, In the Beginning, Jesus Changes Everything, Lisa Sproul, Nostalgia, politics, RC Sproul JR, Sacred Marriage, sport, That 70s Kid | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Proverbs 31; World War III; The Noah Covenant and More

A Higher Power

It is not a difficult thing to discern the nature of someone else’s god. Some people carry their religion on their sleeve, advertising their spiritual commitments on bumper stickers or t-shirts. You can tell the Amish by their clothing, even as you can Hasidic Jews or even Hare Krishnas. When a man throws down a mat, faces Mecca and begins to pray, one need not guess to whom he is praying. On the other hand, the world is full of hypocrites. Self-reports about one’s religious commitments may not be wholly accurate. Sometimes we fool ourselves, and sometimes we are fooled by others. A better test than what we wear, or even what we say may well be this- who is our law-giver? The “Christian” who argues that God wants him to be happy, and therefore sanctions his adultery may say he worships God. Instead he worships himself, for he is a law unto himself.

Of course in our day the most widely held and passionately affirmed creed is this- there is no true and false, no right and wrong. Everyone decides these things for themselves. And so one could argue, rightly so, that the god of this culture is this mythical creature I call “God-to-me.” Relativism means we can each define God for ourselves. We can make up our own religion because in the end we are our own god. As soon as we speak this strange god’s name, God-to-me, we are affirming not that we are God’s creatures, but god’s maker. It matters not what follows in our actual description. (Interesting to note, however, everyone’s personal god is rather similar to everyone else’s. The name usually is followed with these kinds of attributes- “God-to-me is gracious, kind, forgiving, wants us to be happy…” How come no one ever says, “God-to-me is a consuming fire, filled to the brim with His just wrath at every sin and sinner”?)

I’m afraid, however, that we are only beginning to scratch the surface of our culture’s sundry forms of idolatry. For when we begin to challenge the clear, obvious foolishness of relativism, especially as it applies to our theology, we find there is another god ready to step up in God-to-me’s defense. If we challenge this nonsense, “Well, God-to-me says your god is silly, foolish and false, and if you don’t bow down to him you will perish forever” what do we hear next? We are reminded at this point that we are in America, and in America we have freedom of religion. We have the first amendment. The truth is that here in America the first amendment trumps the first commandment.

The broader culture has come to understand the First Amendment to mean not that any and all religions are equally legal in this country but that all religions are equally valid in this country. And that is where our deeper idolatry is made known. We seem to think that the state can not only determine what is legal, but in making this determination, can determine what is right or wrong. Legality is morality. In the absence of any true transcendent source of law or revelation, we will usually find the state filling that vacuum. Because men disagree, man cannot determine right and wrong, true and false. Instead that is determined by the closest we can come to collective man- the state.

The First Amendment, so understood then, creates here in America the same situation that ruled in Rome. The Roman empire, like the American empire, did not particularly care what religion those within its borders practiced. This is why they could get along with the Jewish authorities during the life of Jesus. You could worship Yahweh. You could worship Juno. You could worship your own dog for all Rome cared. They had only one ultimate requirement- that you swear absolute loyalty to Rome. You could indeed have other gods before, in the sense of being in its presence, the god of the Roman state. You just could not have any god before, in the sense of having a higher loyalty, the god of the Roman state. The Christians who went to their deaths under the Caesars went not because they didn’t have the right theology, but because they refused to confess the one great creed of that culture, Caesar is Lord.

In our day the state is not quite so easily identified with its leader. No one, so far, is required to bow before the President. Increasingly, however, we are being told that our highest loyalty must be to the state. We may not fly any flag, including the Christian flag, higher than the federal flag. We may not publicly pray to the Lord Jesus in the government’s schools.

The broader culture hates uncompromised Christians for this very reason. We are condemned as radicals, fundamentalists, extremists precisely because at the end of the day our loyalty is to the Lord of heaven and earth, because we will allow no gods before Him. We are a dangerous breed, not because we don’t share their convictions, but because we don’t share their loyalties. For us the First Commandment trumps the First Amendment. For them it is just the opposite. Two competing Gods are seeking our attention, our devotion, our worship. And the Word of God, through Joshua, and through Elijah calls us to no longer waver between two opinions, to choose this day whom we will serve.

Posted in 10 Commandments, abortion, apologetics, Biblical Doctrines, church, ethics, kingdom, Kingdom Notes, persecution, politics, post-modernism, RC Sproul JR | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

No Romans Study tonight.

Sorry folks. We hope to be back next week with our Romans study.

Posted in announcements | Comments Off on No Romans Study tonight.

Last Week’s Study on Romans 1

Posted in 10 Commandments, apologetics, Bible Study, Biblical Doctrines, creation, RC Sproul JR, theology | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Last Week’s Study on Romans 1

Revival?

Sometimes questions assume premises that have not yet been established. Everyone is debating whether or not what is taking place at Asbury University is genuine revival or not. Precious few, if any, have given a compelling definition of revival to begin with. One of the greatest writers of our time, Ian Murray, tackled that question in his book Revival and Revivalism. I confess to having not read that particular work to my shame. While the Bible talks both about individual and corporate revival, usually we tend to try to define the term by historical events in our own time frames.

Which brings us back to Asbury. Is it a revival? I have no idea. Is God’s Spirit at work there? Of course He is. He’s also at work at Western Kentucky University. He’s at work at the Outback Steakhouse in Louisville. He is at work everywhere, convicting the world of sin, bringing life from death, strengthening the body. Revival, if it means anything, must mean an unusual outpouring of the Holy Spirit. The trouble is, how do we know how much is unusual?

It is possible that those who are skeptical of Asbury are absolutely correct. Maybe the whole thing is a ginned up emotive explosion of spiritual cotton candy. It might be a dangerous decoy, feeding the warped prejudices of the student body. And the Holy Spirit might still be at work. I know a guy who had an abominable view of the church. He was Arminian to the core and was known to publicly dispute against Reformed theology. Worst still the stench of Pelagianism clung to him as he maintained that it was possible for a believer to live on this earth sin free. He also led what virtually all revival skeptics happily call the First Great Awakening. His name is John Wesley.

To be sure the sounder of the Methodists was George Whitefield. The greatest mind among the titans of that awakening belonged to Jonathan Edwards. Each of them, however, like John Wesley, were crooked sticks that God saw fit to use. This is not to excuse any errors permeating whatever is going on at Asbury. Nor is it to excuse Wesley, Whitefield or Edwards. Rather it is to remind us that if God would use men to bring revival, He would use men with bad theology, and sin.

The more important question at Asbury isn’t “Is this a genuine revival?” The question is, “Has this person been brought by the Spirit from life to death?” And, “Has that person been led to walk more closely in the footsteps of the Redeemer?” Suddenly it’s not one tribe trying to take credit for a revival and the other tribe straining to cast doubt. No one has or will enter into the kingdom because they were at a revival, nor enter into the fire that never dies because they were at a false revival. Rather, we enter the kingdom because we have been revived, and by His grace confessed that we are false.

Is it revival? I haven’t a clue. This much I know- the Spirit is at work, today and always.

Posted in Ask RC, Biblical Doctrines, church, evangelism, grace, Holy Spirit, kingdom, prayer, preaching, RC Sproul JR, repentance, worship | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

The Second World War

It is natural, though altogether wrong, to think that somehow when we turn the pages that separate the Old and New Testaments that we are entering into more gentle times, that God in the interim somehow became kinder and gentler. We do not see in the New Testament, as we do in the Old, flaming mountains with flashing lightning and earth-shaking thunder. We do not see all the first born of a given nation wiped out in a single night, nor the earth’s whole population, save one family, suffer death by drowning. We do not see Uzzah struck dead for touching God’s ark, nor do we see the prophets of Baal struck down by God’s own prophets. Instead, we meet Jesus. Jesus, we are told, will not break a bruised reed, nor quench a smoldering wick (Matt. 12:20). He is gentle and mild, and utterly determined to bring all His enemies under subjection, to silence every pretender to His throne.

It was when Jesus interpreted law on the mount, at His sermon there, that He first commanded us that we should seek first His kingdom and His righteousness. But it was in Psalm 2 where we are told that Jesus will be given the nations for an inheritance, the ends of the earth for a possession, and where we are told that He will break the rebellious princes and potentates with a rod of iron.
These two perspectives are not at odds with each other. Indeed, they meet together in the book of Acts. Jesus is conquering the world, but the weapons of His warfare are not carnal. If you step back a bit from the book of Acts, you can discern a curious pattern. Just as the book of Joshua tells the story of God’s people conquering the land after a great deliverance, so too does the book of Acts.

In both instances, the great leader, after directing the people out of slavery, has gone on to his reward. Moses is taken to heaven, and Jesus ascends to His throne. In both instances there is trouble from those outside the camp. The Canaanites fight against Joshua even as both Rome and the Jews fight the apostles. With Joshua, the walls come tumbling down. In Acts, angels rescue the apostles from the prison walls that keep them in. In Joshua, there is sin in the camp as Achan seizes the plunder of Jericho and is killed. In Acts, Ananias and Sapphira lie to the Holy Spirit and die.

Both books are stories of conquest. In both instances it is Jesus Himself, the Captain of the Lord’s Host, who goes before His people in conquest. The difference is here — Joshua, at God’s command, fights with a literal sword. The apostles, at God’s command, fight with the Word of the Lord. Because we are worldly, we find the Joshua story more dramatic, the new covenant context a toning down of the war. The reality is far different. The warfare is intensifying rather than waning, the stakes growing more deadly. Now it is clear that it is not a question of dead bodies but of dead souls.

For all the parallels between the books of Joshua and Acts, there is this difference as well. Joshua finished his conquest. The land was subdued under his leadership. In the book of Acts, the war begins in Jerusalem, spreads to Judea, and from there to Samaria and the outermost parts of the world. Never, however, has this battle ended. Indeed, it will not end until the end. Jesus is bringing every enemy under subjection. He is conquering the whole of the promised land (the earth), not a narrow strip of land in the Middle East.

It is because the battle continues that we must continue to hear the battle call of our Lord. From that first mount He commanded all that were there that they would set aside all their worldly worries and set their hearts on the battle. He commands of us the same. He has drafted us into His army not as the war is cooling down but as it is heating up. And He has equipped us not with sword and spear but with that spirit of liberty that is ready to die. He has not called us to go out and kill the enemy but to die for the enemy that they might be won. He has called us to follow His supreme example.

The “bloodthirsty” God of the Old Testament, we would be wise to remember, wisely, rightly, executed the guilty. He never practiced an uncontrolled fury. He never punished the innocent with the guilty, for in the Old Testament there were no innocent. The next time we are tempted to fall for that folly that sees God getting soft in the New Testament, we need to remember this: Only once did God kill an innocent man. And that was in the New Testament.

In the new covenant, it is we who are called to be bloodthirsty. We do not subdue His enemies with carnal weapons but with spiritual. Joshua’s soldiers were sustained by the bread from heaven. So are we. Their thirsts were sated by the rock that was struck. Our thirsts too. We must hunger for His body and we must thirst for His blood. We must, if we would conquer in His name, conquer in His way — by dying to ourselves, by picking up our cross.

Posted in 10 Commandments, abortion, apologetics, Biblical Doctrines, Biblical theology, church, eschatology, kingdom, Kingdom Notes, psalms, RC Sproul JR, sovereignty | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Lie Upon Lie

It is my habit, when teaching my ethics students at the local community college to ask them this straightforward question- is it every ethical to tell a lie? The great majority of students affirm that there are circumstances where such is warranted. Rather, however, than giving examples like misleading the enemy in time of war, they tend to excuse “little white lies.” Rather than reserving lies for saving lives they use them for saving feelings. “If my friend asks me if I like her new dress, and I didn’t, it would be wrong to tell her.”

The exercise, however, isn’t so much about truth telling as it is about unintended consequences. “What if,” I ask the students, “your casual lies make your friends doubt you when you truly want to encourage them? You may be evading hurt feelings today but you may be helping to create worse feelings tomorrow.” This is the lesson we’re to learn from the boy who cried wolf.

What, though, if the issue isn’t two friends discussing sartorial choices, but a government speaking on matters of life and death? The cesspool of misinformation that was the federal government’s response to COVID 19 includes catastrophic financial and human costs from the shutdown, lives lost through destructive protocols and the yet to be toll wrought by the potentially fatal vaccines. It also includes, however, the utter inability of the government to find trust among the governed.

We are likely never going to know the truth about the sundry objects we recently shot out of the sky. We are likely never going to know the truth about the chemicals released into the Ohio sky. We are likely never going to know the truth about Epstein’s clients and the deadly destruction their perpetrations brought to pass. Because even if the truth does come out, we won’t be able to recognize it as the truth.

Conspiracies are born when evil men plot in secret to obtain extraordinary power. Conspiracy theories are born when ordinary men lie to maintain ordinary power. Because they both are born of lies it is difficult to tell them apart.

The Bible, however, isn’t built lie upon lie but line upon line (Isaiah 28). It is not shifting sands but the solid rock. It is true, for its author can tell no lie, and cannot increase His power. It is all already His, and always has been. His Word, His truth command us:

“Do not say, ‘A conspiracy,’
Concerning all that this people call a conspiracy,
Nor be afraid of their threats, nor be troubled.
The Lord of hosts, Him you shall hallow;
Let Him be your fear,
And let Him be your dread (Isaiah 8:12, 13).

Neither lies nor conspiracies have the capacity to undermine the One who is the truth. And He calls us to rest in Him, to fear Him, to be at peace, to hallow Him. That is something we not only can believe in, but must believe in.

Posted in 10 Commandments, abortion, apologetics, covid-19, Devil's Arsenal, ethics, kingdom, Kingdom Notes, politics, post-modernism, RC Sproul JR | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments