Theology

Should a Christian ever be discontent?

She sat across from me, sipping coffee, her forehead wrinkled with unhappiness. She’d struggled for two years in a job that clearly made her miserable, and which everyone else thought she should quit. But she couldn’t quite agree, wondering if there was a reason God had blessed her with the position. “I’m trying so hard to be grateful,” she said. “I just want to be satisfied with what I have.”

****

My friend’s words hit me right in my chest. I didn’t know what to say, because I’ve struggled with the exact same issues. When is it okay to give up on the path you’re currently traveling on? When is it okay to quit and change what you’re doing? We know God has a reason for everything He brings into our lives, so doesn’t it just make sense that we should figure out that reason – figure out how to glorify Him in this situation – before we think of moving on to something else?

But like so many other situations in life, we often don’t understand the invisible plans of God, or know what His goal is for us in our current season of life. And so we can be left unsure if it is okay to move on to something else, or if God means for us to learn contentment where we are.

Often, when we find ourselves feeling like I or my friend felt in that moment – recognizing the strain of dissatisfaction running through our lives – we respond with guilt. We might think this discontent points to a lack in our spiritual lives. But is discontent always wrong?

Dissatisfaction certainly can be caused by a spiritual lack. We humans never are satisfied with what we have. We never have enough. If we had the power to change everything in our lives, we still would not feel fulfilled.

But this does not mean we should never take our discontentment seriously. Discontent might be the motivation to change something in our lives that needs changing.

The value of discontent

When we look at other people’s lives, it’s easy to recognize what’s causing them unhappiness, and it’s easy to say they should change these things. In fact, we often wonder why they don’t. This person is still young, so why don’t they try a new career? Or this person has the freedom to move, so why don’t they try living in another city?

But when it comes to ourselves, we see how hard it is to justify our choices to make changes. Is “unhappiness” really a good enough reason, when we know we’re called to be content? To get here we've struggled, we've prayed, we've relied on God to achieve things – and by the grace of God we have achieved them. We know, because our strength was so weak and we needed God's strength so much to get where we are today, that our current situation is straight from the hand of God. What we need to know is if we can be grateful for God’s gifts while still choosing for change.

No wonder people hesitate to make a change!

One way forward is to consider when feelings of discontent have value. This is not to say discontentment should be embraced, but that the feeling can point us to areas of our lives we do actually have power over. So let’s look at discontentment a bit more closely.

We shouldn’t be content with just this world

First, there are some obvious things God intends for us to be discontent about. We are not supposed to be content with the fallen state of the world. We are supposed to be content that all things are in the hands of God, but we are not supposed to look at injustice be pleased about it. Some of our dissatisfaction points us to the new creation we are looking forward to. When we recognize that we never feel fully fulfilled, we also recognize that we are waiting for eternal fulfillment. We live with “eternity in our hearts” – we have a vision of an ideal kingdom this world cannot live up to.

This also means that life’s frustrations, dead ends, and futility were never meant to be part of God’s good creation. No wonder we react so strongly to them. And yet, while we understand this, we also understand God is still holding all the threads of our lives in His hands. We cling to His promise that in him everything that seems meaningless has meaning.

We shouldn’t be satisfied burying our talent

There’s another aspect of discontentment to consider. Contentment ought to be separated from passivity. A wrong emphasis on contentment can make us believe we’re not allowed to change anything in our lives. But contentment and passivity are not the same thing. Perhaps discontentment may be a challenge to us.

We may hide behind “contentment” because we’re afraid to take the risk of change, because we might fail if we try something new. But our dissatisfaction could hint that we are not reaching for goals that we could try to reach. We are not risking the bumps and falls that might develop our skills. Discontentment might tell us we are meant to challenge ourselves. And if we are taking the easier path without really thinking it through, our emotions may be a sign something is wrong. We should consider whether we need to choose a more challenging goal.

If we do not separate contentment and passivity, it can result in a fatalistic determinism. We might conclude that wherever we happen to be, that is where God placed us so it must be where He wants us to be, and therefore we should be content. But this cuts off the possibility that God also blesses us with opportunities. Determinism leads us to say—You’re still single? God must not want you to be married. You’re poor? God must not want you to be rich. Don’t try to achieve anything. Just wait peacefully. Don’t try to change. Everything you’re meant to have will just happen if it’s meant to be.

But clearly this is an unbiblical message.

Learning contentment from Paul

Contentment is still a good thing, and it is a virtue to be pursued in our lives. After much struggle, I’ve realized that while there may be something behind the vague sense of discontent that so often crops up in our lives, and that these reasons can be addressed, contentment is still the goal, not discontent.

How, then, should we pursue contentment while avoiding utter passivity? There are a few things to keep in mind.

Content even as we strive

First, contentment is about where you are in the present moment. It is not a denial of any change in the future. When Paul talks of being content in all circumstances, he was working towards a goal, and the circumstances occurred while he was attempting to achieve it. Having a goal does imply you expect to cause change in the future. So perhaps it is not the goal you’re supposed to avoid having, but the discontent over the difficulties that spring up on the way to the goal. It may in fact turn out to be that the goal is not one you’re meant to achieve, but contentment in all circumstances includes contentment during the deep disappointment that hits when you don’t achieve your goal. In other words – strive! Keep striving! But be ready to be content with what the Lord brings you.

Content in suffering

Another caveat is that contentment in Scripture, including the contentment passage in Philippians 4 (“I have learned in whatever situation I am to be content”), is mentioned in relation to suffering. It is an approach to situations that are not in Christians’ control. When life is hard, especially when life is hard as a result of being Christians, Christians are to be content. So the intent is not to say, “don’t change your life path,” but rather, “I know you’re suffering, and this is where you can find comfort.” These passages also emphasize that no circumstances of life ever prevent us from being saved by God – whether in chains or free, whether rich or poor – no one needs to be discontent because their circumstances prevent them from truly being Christians. If such circumstances did exist they would surely be reason for despair—but thanks be to God there are none!

We can be content because our circumstances do not prevent our salvation.

Content when we have choices and when we don’t

We all suffer in some way, but in comparison to many Christians in the Bible we are faced with an endless array of choices – we can choose a career, we can choose a spouse, we can choose where we want to live, we can choose to travel, we can choose our level of education. It’s not a surprise the Bible doesn’t predict that we in the future would be faced with this array of choice, and advise us on how to wrap our minds around the dizzying display. And therefore it is not a surprise when we try to apply biblical principles to our choices instead of our sufferings, and end up at the conclusion that we should never desire anything, and never try to achieve anything.

But rather than arriving at this conclusion and automatically accepting it, we should think about whether this is really correct. We are to be content in situations we can’t change, including those which are really, really hard. But our contentment in the present moment doesn’t prevent us moving from one choice to another in the future.

Second, we often think contentment means being stationary unless we’re sure God means for us to move. But Paul did not always sit and wait until absolutely sure that God was sending him somewhere else. If he was called by the Spirit he followed, but he continued to work and preach in all places while waiting for the Spirit’s call. He often made plans to go to different places, or to start new missions. When the Spirit of God prevented him from preaching throughout Asia Minor, he continued trying in place after place until he reached the sea – only then did he realized he was being called to Macedonia. In other words, sometimes we are not sure what we should do, but we do not necessarily have to wait for a firm confirmation from God before every action.

Content in the day-to-day faithfulness

Lastly, we are often discontent with our lives not because of the goals but because of the mundane tasks and the drudgery. Our actions seem so little, and so dull. We cry, like me and my friend did when we were having coffee, “I just want to work in God’s kingdom!” But perhaps the cathedral builders did the same, as they painstakingly placed stone on stone for hundreds of years, unable to see the buildings we’d gasp at in wonder today. Perhaps our grandparents did the same as they struggled to get their children to listen to a Bible story, not knowing if the generations who’d follow would do the same.

When we ask God to use our lives according to His plans, we sometimes suppress a fear that God doesn’t want us to go anywhere, or do anything. This is our fear when we walk into the office and face a mountain of paperwork that needs to be done but hardly seems worthwhile – am I really contributing to God’s kingdom, we wonder? But our God is not a God of waste. If we are to be ordinary, it will be worthwhile.

Our call to contentment brings us to a new understanding, where ordinary labour is not undervalued. We are not pressured to all conform to the mould of world-changer. We can put our hand to the task in front of us without fear our efforts will be washed from the earth, because we know they’re seen by the eyes of God.

Conclusion

What, then, is contentment?

First, it is a focus on the kingdom of God, not the kingdom of the world. It shifts our focus from yearning for the things of this world, such as money, fame, or power. We can trust there are eternal things that we are building, and contentment means that we can rest.

Second, it is not a struggle with God over what can’t change. While we are not called to passivity, in our lives we will sometimes be told “no.” This is where we are most often tempted to fight, not necessarily with our actions, but with a rebellious spirit that insists on despising the situation forced on us. Only by looking to God in His Word and in prayer will we find the strength to turn back to contentment again.

When my friend and I left the cafe, our lives were still the same as when we had come in. Yet somehow Christian company and very good coffee gave us new capacity to rest in the goodness of God.

Harma-Mae Smit blogs at HarmaMaeSmit.com.
This article was first published in July 2018.

Theology

Proverbs: a different sort of devotional

“Do you have a devotional that you would recommend?” I get asked this question in various forms from time to time, and I think my answer someti...

Christian education - Sports, Theology

God and the 2014-15 Seattle Seahawks

All about God’s sovereignty, Man’s free will, and American football ***** When the editor suggested I write a piece about American Football, I w...

Theology

#3 - The unknown Commandment

“You shall not take the Name of the LORD your God in vain, for the LORD will not hold him guiltless who takes His Name in vain.” – Exodus 20:7 ...

Book excerpts, Book Reviews, Theology

A passage from "The Hiding Place" I can't manage to read out loud...

Theology

When God goes to war: holiness, judgment and hope

“Will not the Judge of all the earth do what is just?” – Gen. 18:25 We don’t deny God’s wrath. We just don’t talk about it. In Reformed churches, we still hear faithful preaching and clear teaching about sin. But if we listen closely, we might notice something missing: the weight of divine judgment. Grace is front and center – as it should be. But grace without judgment turns sentimental. If we never tremble before God’s justice, how can we truly stand in awe of His mercy? Even in Reformed worship services, one can notice unease – or even embarrassment – when the congregation is asked to focus on the flood in the days of Noah, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, the plagues on Egypt, or the conquest of Canaan. At Bible studies, it’s common to steer around the “hard parts” of the Old Testament and gravitate instead toward the Gospels. And even there, we prefer the tenderness of Jesus – His compassion, His welcome, His healing – while downplaying His rebukes and His holy severity. The Jesus who weeps is familiar. The Jesus who judges is quietly set aside. This discomfort isn’t new. But it is deepening. We live in a culture at ease with sin and increasingly hostile to judgment. And when the world forgets God’s wrath, the Church often grows shy about declaring it. In some circles, it’s simply assumed that most people already feel guilty and only need comfort. But what if that’s not true? What if the deeper need is not reassurance, but repentance? Few topics unsettle modern readers – especially younger believers and those exploring the faith – like the violence found in the Old Testament. Why did God command Israel to destroy entire cities like Jericho? Was this true justice – or religious brutality? We must approach these questions with care. Scripture never portrays God as the one on trial – we are. The Judge of all the earth is holy, just, and astonishingly patient. He does not owe us an explanation. Yet in His Word, He reveals enough of His character and purposes that we may speak of Him with reverence, and defend His ways with confidence – even when we cannot fully comprehend them. Before we begin to talk about God's judgments in history, it is wise to bow our heads in worship. The story that troubles many Nothing in the Old Testament provokes modern objections like Israel’s conquest of Canaan. The books of Deuteronomy and Joshua tell of entire cities “devoted to destruction,” of swords raised not only against warriors but against entire populations. Jericho, Ai, Hazor – the battles pile up – and so does the bloodshed. To many ears today, it sounds merciless. Unjust. Even barbaric. But we must not read these accounts in isolation. They are not about ethnic hatred or military conquest. Nor were they Israel’s idea. The command came from the LORD – the covenant God who had rescued His people from Egypt and was now bringing them to the land He had long promised. The conquest was part of God’s own design – not just to give Israel a homeland, but to cleanse a land steeped in corruption. If we want to make sense of these difficult texts, we must begin where the Bible itself begins – not at Jericho, but in the promises and warnings spoken hundreds of years earlier. Only then can we understand the justice, the gravity, and the long patience of God. A long patience before judgment The story begins in Genesis 15. God tells Abram that his descendants will live as strangers in a land not their own for four hundred years. Why such a delay? “Because the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet complete” (Gen. 15:16). God does not rush to judgment. He gives time – generations of time – for repentance. Yet while He waits, sin accumulates. The wickedness of Canaan grows darker, not lighter. Leviticus 18 lays bare the moral degradation that had taken root in the land: incest, adultery, homosexual acts, child sacrifice, and even bestiality. God declares, “By all these the nations I am driving out before you have become unclean” (Lev. 18:24). These were not minor cultural quirks. They were systematic, institutionalized violations of God’s created order – acts of defilement practiced and celebrated on a societal scale. Deuteronomy 12:31 adds, “They even burn their sons and their daughters in the fire to their gods.” The cult of Molech demanded child sacrifice. The shrines of Baal and Asherah were built on ritual prostitution and sexual exploitation (Deut. 23:17–18). Deuteronomy 18:9–12 catalogs even more: sorcery, divination, necromancy, and attempts to summon the dead. This was not an innocent land. God’s judgment was not arbitrary or reactive. It was measured, deliberate, and just. And still, He waited. Four centuries passed while the sin of the Amorites ripened. When judgment finally fell, it was not a sudden outburst of wrath – but a long-deferred reckoning from the God who is “slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love” (Ex. 34:6), yet who “will by no means clear the guilty” (Ex. 34:7). Judgment that anticipates the end The reckoning that fell on Canaan was never only about Canaan. It was not merely the clearing of one territory for one nation. It was a signpost – a concentrated preview of something far larger. Jericho, Hazor, and Ai were early eruptions of the judgment that will one day encompass the whole world. In those historical events, God allowed the final verdict to break backward into history. What normally waits for the last day – when every nation will stand before His throne – was, for a time, enacted on the ground. This was not genocide, nor personal vengeance; it was holiness revealed, justice enforced, and a warning sounded to every generation, as we read in Nahum 1:3: “The LORD is slow to anger and great in power; the LORD will by no means leave the guilty unpunished.” “Even in Reformed worship services, one can notice unease – or even embarrassment – when the congregation is asked to focus on the flood in the days of Noah, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, the plagues on Egypt, or the conquest of Canaan…” Reformed theologians Meredith Kline and Michael Horton call episodes like this “intrusion ethics.” At rare points the future Day of the Lord intrudes into the present: the flood (Gen. 6–9), the fire on Sodom (Gen. 19), the plagues on Egypt (Ex. 7–12), and the fall of Jericho all follow this pattern. Each is real judgment in history, and each foreshadows the greater judgment still to come. These events are sobering. They are meant to wake us up. God does not always wait until the end; sometimes He judges now so that the world will tremble – and perhaps repent – before it is too late. Yet even in judgment, mercy shines. Rahab proves it. As her city braced for destruction, she placed her hope not in walls or weapons but in the God of Israel: “I know that the LORD has given you the land” (Josh. 2:9–11). She tied a scarlet cord in her window, and when Jericho fell, she and her family were spared. Scripture later honors her in Christ’s genealogy (Matt. 1:5) and lists her among the heroes of faith (Heb. 11:31). Her story reminds us that the door of mercy is never shut to those who call on the Lord. The conquest, then, points in two directions: forward to the final judgment and forward to the gospel. Judgment and salvation stand side by side. The God who brings down walls also opens the way of life – and that way is still open today. God judges His people by the same standard The judgment that fell on Canaan was not an isolated case – it was a warning. And that warning echoed forward into Israel’s own future. From the outset, God made it unmistakably clear: if His own people defiled the land with the same evils, they would face the same fate. “You shall keep My statutes and My rules and do none of these abominations… lest the land vomit you out when you make it unclean, as it vomited out the nation that was before you.” – Lev. 18:26,28 This was no metaphor. The land was holy because the Lord Himself dwelled there (Lev. 25:23). It had been entrusted to Israel not as a birthright, but as a gift of grace – a sacred space conditioned on covenant faithfulness. But holiness cannot coexist with moral rot. The very sins that condemned the Canaanites – sexual immorality, idolatry, child sacrifice, and occult practices – were explicitly condemned in Israel. Leviticus 20 drives the point home with even more urgency, spelling out specific punishments and warnings. Belonging to the covenant did not exempt Israel from judgment. On the contrary, it intensified the call to holiness. As Amos would later declare, “You only have I known of all the families of the earth; therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities” (Amos 3:2). Being God’s chosen people does not mean immunity. It means accountability. And so God waited again. Just as He had waited for the sin of the Amorites to reach its fullness, He waited while Israel wandered. But He would not wait forever. When corruption set in, the land responded just as it had before: it “vomited out” the unfaithful – this time not Canaanites, but the covenant people themselves. The prophets echo the covenant curses The warning in Leviticus 18 is no isolated threat. It belongs to an entire covenant framework spelled out in Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28–32. These chapters list blessings for obedience and curses for rebellion: prosperity if Israel walks with God; famine, disease, invasion, and finally exile if they do not. “If you will not listen … I will set my face against you … lay the land desolate … and scatter you among the nations.” Lev. 26:14,17,32-33 “If you do not obey the voice of the LORD your God … you shall be plucked off the land … and the LORD will scatter you among all peoples.” Deut. 28:15,63-64 The prophets did not invent fresh threats; they applied these covenant curses to their own generation. When Hosea, Jeremiah, Isaiah, and Ezekiel announce judgment, they are activating the very sanctions Moses described. Listen to their words: Hosea 8:1 – “Sound the trumpet! An eagle hovers over the house of the LORD, for they have broken my covenant.” Jeremiah 11:8,11 – “They would not listen … therefore I am bringing upon them all the words of this covenant.” Isaiah 24:5-6 – “The earth is defiled by its people; they have violated the laws … therefore a curse consumes the earth.” Ezekiel 5:5-8 – “This is Jerusalem … she has rebelled more than the nations … I will execute judgments in her sight.” These are not poetic exaggerations; they are covenant enforcement. The same holiness that expelled the Canaanites now rises against Israel – on identical grounds. The land that once “vomited out” its former inhabitants is about to do so again. The lesson is unmistakable: God shows no partiality (Rom. 2:11). His covenant is never a license to sin; it raises the bar. “You only have I known of all the families of the earth; therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities” (Amos 3:2). Exile: a reverse conquest The conquest began with walls falling and cities burning; the land changed hands under God’s command. Yet, generations later, the story ran in reverse. Israel – the nation that once expelled the Canaanites – was itself driven out. The sword that had cleared the land now turned against the covenant people, exactly as the Lord had warned: “Just as the LORD once rejoiced to make you prosper, so He will now rejoice to ruin and destroy you. You will be plucked off the land you are entering to possess.” – Deut. 28:63 That warning came true. 722 BC: Assyria erased the northern kingdom. 586 BC: Babylon leveled Jerusalem and burned the temple. The exile was no tragic mishap; it was the covenant curses in motion. Israel had filled the land with idolatry, bloodshed, and injustice. God’s patience, as in the days of the Amorites, finally reached its limit. The biblical record is blunt: 2 Kings 17:7-8, 18 – Israel adopted “the customs of the nations… therefore the LORD removed them from His sight.” 2 Chronicles 36:14-17 – They mocked God’s messengers “until there was no remedy.” Lamentations 1:8 – “Jerusalem sinned grievously; therefore she became filthy.” Ezekiel 36:17-19 – “They defiled the land… so I poured out My wrath upon them.” Israel had become indistinguishable from the nations it replaced, and the land “vomited them out” just as Leviticus had warned. In that sense, exile is a mirror image of conquest. What Jericho tasted, Jerusalem tasted. The covenant verdict had been on the books for centuries; the sentence was finally executed. God’s holiness shows no favoritism: what was true for Canaan was true for Israel – and what was true for Israel is true for every nation on earth today. The nations are not exempt One of the most striking features of the Old Testament prophets is how much attention they give to the fate of foreign nations. These are not passing mentions or political footnotes. They are extended oracles – whole chapters – declaring that the God of Israel is also the Judge of every nation. Babylon, Tyre, Egypt, Edom – the prophetic message is clear: no kingdom is above God’s moral law. This was revolutionary in its own time. In a world that believed in tribal gods and local deities, Israel’s prophets proclaimed something astonishing: Yahweh reigns over all. His authority is universal. His holiness is not a private code for His covenant people – it is the moral fabric of creation. Every people, every government, every culture is accountable to Him. The scope and weight of these oracles is remarkable: Amos 1-2 opens with judgment not on Israel but on six surrounding nations – Damascus, Gaza, Tyre, Edom, Ammon, and Moab – condemned for brutality, betrayal, and injustice. Isaiah 13-23 includes a sweeping sequence of prophecies against Babylon, Assyria, Philistia, Moab, Damascus, Egypt, Cush, Arabia, and Tyre. Jeremiah 46-51 announces God's sentence on Egypt, Philistia, Moab, Ammon, Edom, Damascus, Kedar, Elam, and Babylon. Ezekiel 25-32 warns Ammon, Moab, Edom, Philistia, Tyre, Sidon, and Egypt in vivid, terrifying detail. Obadiah, Nahum, and Jonah are wholly focused on foreign nations: Edom, Nineveh, and Assyria. What sins are condemned? Not ceremonial infractions – but moral evils: violence, greed, pride, idolatry, cruelty, exploitation, and the shedding of innocent blood. These are not violations of Israel’s covenant – they are violations of God’s image in humanity. As Paul later affirms in Romans 2:14-15, even those without the written law are accountable to the law written on the conscience. In other words, God’s justice is not narrow. It is global. His concern is not confined to His covenant people – it extends to all peoples. When the strong crush the weak, when kings exalt themselves as gods, when nations corrupt His good creation, He sees, He warns and He judges. This truth helps us understand not only the judgment on Canaan but every judgment throughout redemptive history. It is not about divine favoritism. It is about divine holiness. And when we read of God’s acts of judgment in Scripture, we should respond not with suspicion or defiance – but with reverence and awe. As we read in Isaiah 33:5 & 22: “The LORD is exalted, for he dwells on high; he will fill Zion with justice and righteousness… For the LORD is our judge; the LORD is our lawgiver; the LORD is our king; he will save us.” He is the Holy One of Israel. And the Holy One of all the earth. Judgment fell on Him The covenant story does not end in ruin. Judgment is never God’s final word. The exile to Babylon, devastating though it was, pointed beyond itself. Like the conquest, it foreshadowed something greater. The curse of the covenant would not only fall on a rebellious people – it would one day fall on the faithful Son. Jesus Christ did not come to avoid the curse but to bear it. He, too, was “cut off from the land of the living” (Is. 53:8). He suffered “outside the camp” (Heb. 13:12). He was handed over to the Gentiles and condemned under Roman power. In Him, the fire of Jericho and the desolation of Jerusalem converged. The judgment that Israel had earned and that all humanity deserves, fell on the sinless one. And yet death could not hold the Holy One. His resurrection was the true return from exile – the beginning of a new covenant, a new creation, and a new land. “He has caused us to be born again to a living hope… to an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading” (1 Pet. 1:3-4). All who belong to Christ are welcomed back from exile and secured in a kingdom that cannot be shaken. But the warning remains. God’s holiness has not changed. His judgment is not a thing of the past. To the church in Ephesus, Jesus says, “If you do not repent, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place” (Rev. 2:5). The lesson is as urgent now as it was then: God is patient – but He is not indifferent. And judgment still begins at His house....

Theology

Genesis: theology and history!

A common objection to understanding Genesis 1 as history is that we should instead take it as theology. We’re told that God wants us to learn about Himself, and not history here. But it doesn’t have to be one or the other. In 1 Corinthians 10, the Apostle Paul says something very important about the relationship between the “text” of Scripture and the “history” recorded in Scripture. We need to keep this connection between God's work in history and the message of the words of Scripture in mind, so we can rightly understand the importance of the events recorded in Scripture. Paul is speaking in this passage about the events of the Exodus and the wilderness wanderings, and the importance of these events for his readers: Now these things took place as examples for us, that we might not desire evil as they did. Do not be idolaters as some of them were; as it is written, “The people sat down to eat and drink and rose up to play.” We must not indulge in sexual immorality as some of them did, and twenty-three thousand fell in a single day. We must not put Christ to the test, as some of them did and were destroyed by serpents, nor grumble, as some of them did and were destroyed by the Destroyer. Now these things happened to them as an example, but they were written down for our instruction, on whom the end of the ages has come. – 1 Corinthians 10:6-11, (ESV) Note carefully the words Paul uses in this passage. “These things occurred.” “These things happened.” These were actual events in history, and that is important. To say that they were recorded in Scripture to make a theological point, a theological point that should have a great impact on all of God's people, is absolutely true. They were “written down for our instruction.” But not only were these stories written down as warnings, “these things happened to them as an example”! There is no dichotomy here between theology and history; the two are so tightly linked that they cannot be torn apart. It's not “either-or.” It's “both-and”! Did God use a recognizable pattern in his work of creation? Yes, he did, and that pattern was meant to teach us many very important things. But to say that his work is recorded in a pattern that is meant to teach must not be used as a reason to deny that what is recorded is a true and accurate account of actual events. Our God is the God of history, not merely the God of ideas. This first appeared in the June 2015 issue....

Theology

What does fleeing sin look like?

Despite endless attempts to do so, fleeing sin can’t be done halfheartedly – that only sets the stage for failure. A tepid turning away is like a drunk who doesn’t buy beer anymore but still goes to all the same parties and hangs out with the same drunken crew. He’s pushed off his sin, but only a short distance. So what does fleeing sin look like? It’s radical. It involves complete commitment. In Genesis 39 we find an example of this radical commitment. When Potiphar’s wife propositions Joseph first he refuses her, and, when that isn’t enough and she grabs hold of his garment, Joseph takes off running. Now, grown men don’t run away, do they? It’s undignified. And they certainly don’t shed clothes to get away. But that’s what Joseph did. She was holding his cloak, so he let her keep it. We don’t know exactly what state of undress this left Joseph – was he naked, or did he just lose his outer layer? – but we do know this was no calm and cool departure. This was a man desperate to do what God wanted, even if it left him clothed only in righteousness. This is complete commitment. Matthew 5:29 outlines another radical response to sin: “If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell.” This passage is most often explained as a figure of speech, not to be taken literally. And that’s true enough – Jesus’ point here is to highlight just how important it is to flee sin but He isn’t prescribing the specific means of doing so. However, we shouldn’t “explain away” the radical nature of what’s being said. God can’t stand sin and we need to do whatever it takes to fight our entrapping, entangling sins. The reason that we don’t go plucking out eyeballs is because there are other means – more effective and less harmful – of fleeing sin. But these other means can be painful too, and we may be tempted to dismiss them as too radical. But if that leaves us trapped in our sin, then we need to hear what Christ says next: better a one-eyed man in Heaven than a two-eyed man in Hell. This is about our salvation! If your smartphone causes you to sin… Computers and smartphones are a part of our daily lives – most jobs involve them, and almost everyone has one. But they are also portals to pornography. If that’s a problem for you, then in Matt. 5:29 Christ prescribes a radical, and vital, solution: “if your computer/smartphone causes you to sin, pluck it out.” But how can we manage without a computer? How can we keep in touch with our friends without a smartphone? Is it even possible today to do without these devices? Well, plucking in this case might not mean doing completely without. They can be managed via various technological and practical means. A person can: install accountability software like Covenant Eyes on their computers that monitors where they go on the Internet and then shares it with an accountability partner get filtering software that will block most (but not all – nothing is 100% effective) of the harmful content on the Internet use software or hardware means to limit the time your computer is hooked up to the Internet place their computer in a public area in the home, where other can see what you are up to when you are online install monitoring software on their smartphone swap their smartphone for a simple cellphone (some still allow you to text friends, but not surf the Internet). What if none of this is sufficient? Then, Christ tells us to remember, better computer-less and on your way to Heaven, than a social media king on your way to Hell. If your friends tempt you to sin... Temptation comes in all sorts of forms, and some of us will find it harder than others to resist peer pressure. If your good buddies are into all the wrong things, and you find yourself pulled in again and again, then you need to give up on this group of friends (Prov. 13:20, 1 Cor. 15:33). It doesn’t matter if you’ve known them since elementary; don’t place your friends above God. If your job tempts you to sin... Some jobs involve travel, leaving you alone in your hotel room with the porn channels, or maybe it’s simple risqué R-rated films, readily available. Maybe all that time alone on the road causes temptation. Or maybe you work in an office where there is a growing pressure to conform to their politically correct culture (and in doing so deny your Lord). Or you work with coarse colleagues who have nude pics on the walls. Or you have dishonest colleagues who pressure you to fudge figures. There’s any number of ways your job can be a source of temptation. There is also any number of ways of managing this. It could involve creativity, and a willingness to make strange requests. I heard of one man who required that any hotel room he stays at have the TV removed from his room. Maybe it means speaking to colleagues and asking them to take down their girlie pictures. It could be embarrassing. But that’s the level of commitment God calls us to. If a workaround isn’t possible, and temptation at your job is unavoidable and causing you to sin, then don’t think it too radical to quit…even if you don’t have another job lined up (this is what deacons are for). If your “me time” is causing you to sin... We are called to flee from more than just sexual temptation and drunkenness – Matthew 5:29 applies to all of life. So, for example, God also wants us to control our anger…even if you are a parent running on very little sleep. Tiredness can leave anyone short-tempered, and some of us have to watch out for this even more than others. Maybe it’s been a long day, the kids are finally in bed, and now we just want a little “me time” before we head to bed – just an hour of TV, or a couple chapters. We just want to unwind. Except, that we’re exhausted. And that exhaustion has meant that instead of being a loving disciplinarian, we’ve been a ticked off grump every time our kids have been kids. So it might only be nine o-clock, but if your “me time” is causing you to sin, you need to pack it in early. Flee to Now there is more to fleeing than simply fleeing from. Running from can give us only the temporary sort of victory that Jesus speaks of in Matthew 12:43-45. Here He describes a man who has a demon leave him. Success? Well, no, because after the demon leaves, the man doesn't replace it. When the demon comes back he finds his former abode "unoccupied" and so brings seven other demons to come join him, and "the last state of that man becomes worse then the first." This is what comes of fighting sin on our own. Our fleeing can't simply be an aimless fleeing from but must be deliberate fleeing to our Saviour. He can help us not only put off our old sinful ways, but renew us, so we can put on a new self (Ephesians 4:22-24) "which in the likeness of God has been created in righteousness and holiness of the truth." Conclusion When we are entangled in sin it may feel like there is no way out. It can feel like we are caught in such a complicated situation we are unable to get free. It’s important then to understand that fleeing sin isn’t complicated…but it is radical. And while fleeing sin isn’t complicated, that doesn’t mean it’s easy. Proverbs 22:6 says that if we train up a child in the way he should go, when he is old “he will not depart from it.” That works both ways, for good or evil. If you’ve been partaking in the same sin again and again, you’ve “trained” yourself – you’ve carved some deep ruts that will be hard to get out of, and easy to fall back into. That means fleeing from sin may be hard to do. But it isn’t hard to figure out what to do. It is a matter of placing God as first and throwing off everything that hinders (Hebrews 12:1). The reason we fall into sin, then, is because we count everything as too high a cost. Now anyone who has been entangled in sin knows they can’t get free on their own; that’s why in setting out the radical nature of what fleeing from sin involves, it’s vital we not forget the radical nature of what has already been done for us. Those entangling sins? Jesus has paid for them, so He can loose us from them. We need to flee from sin, yes, but more importantly, we need to run to the God who loved us so much He died for us to set us free. So what does fleeing sin look like? It means running from temptation and putting off every sin and weight that hinders us. It means turning and sprinting full out – arms flailing, legs churning, spittle flying, maybe even cloak leaving – towards our Father and his secure embrace. For more, see John Piper on Hebrews 12:1 and running. This article was first published in August 2017....

Theology

I won't go with you: abandonment as an act of love

“You’re kicking someone out of your church?” It can be hard bringing friends into our churches – our music is slower, our benches are harder and our sermons are longer – but it gets harder still when a friend is brought the same Sunday an excommunication notice is read out. Excommunication is almost impossible to explain, because almost no other churches do it. It is a completely new thing to most people outside our Reformed churches, and on the surface it seems so harsh and uncaring. It seems mean. The biblical basis is clear enough, Matthew 18:15-18 speaks of excluding an unrepentant sinner, from the communion of the Church: “Let him be to you as a heathen and a tax collector.” 2 Thessalonians 3:14 even gives a clear reason for this exclusion: “do not keep company with him, that he may be ashamed.” But the biblical explanation isn’t very satisfying. Yes, that’s what it says, but can that be what it really means? It doesn’t seem to make sense. Wouldn’t it be better if this sinning brother kept coming to church, and kept hanging out with his Christian friends? How can God’s word act on his soul if we prevent him from even hearing it? This is the sort of thinking that has eliminated excommunication in most churches, and delayed and lengthened the process in many of our own churches. There is always the hope that as long as the sinning brother keeps attending, something might change. This hope for change seems to disappear once they have been excommunicated, and so the process is dragged out as long as possible. The pro-life explanation I never fully understood the rationale behind excommunication until a Lutheran, in my university pro-life group, explained it to me. She didn’t talk about excommunication though. Instead she talked about abandonment as an act of love. Our group was discussing what one of our members had gone through when her friend asked her to go with her to an abortion clinic. “What could I do? She’s my best friend, and she was going crazy. She needed me so I went with her.” “Did she know you were pro-life?” “I told her.” “She knew you were pro-life and she still asked you to help her get an abortion? Does she know what being pro-life means? Does she know you think abortion is murder?” “She needed me so she asked me. We’re best friends!” “Your friend asked you to help her murder her baby. Do you think she really understood what she was asking you to do? If she had really understood, do you think she would have asked you?” “But she did ask…what else could I do?” “You could have said no. You could have said, ‘You know I love you, you know we are best friends, but what you are doing is wrong, and I cannot help you do it. You know I would do anything for you, but I will not do this. If you are going to do this, you will have to do it alone.’ That would have given your friend – the friend who knows you love her dearly – something to think about. If you go with her, she’ll never understand how serious abortion is. After all, her pro-life friend went with her. But if you refuse to help her, if her best friend abandons her, then she might just be shocked into realizing just how serious this is. Abandoning her gives her more to think about than accompanying her ever could." Shock and shame An unrepentant sinner is often an ignorant sinner. He doesn’t see the need to repent and doesn’t think his particular sin is a big deal. That thought is confirmed when the church refuses to discipline him. There is no sharp break to snap the sinning brother back to his senses. Instead he’ll probably start attending less and less frequently, and start making more and more friends outside the church. Finally discipline becomes impossible because the man no longer has any friends left in the church. Excommunication at this point is incapable of shaming him, because he doesn’t care what the people in the church think. But if we act while the church is still the focal point in his life, then the unrepentant brother will see the people he loves, and the people who love him, telling him they will not walk down the wide path with him. Then the brother will be left alone with his thoughts, left alone to evaluate his path. And Lord willing he will then be forced to see the error of his ways. Excommunication does make sense, and we should thank God for it. First published in the November 2000 Reformed Perspective....

Theology

Practicing the Sabbath: on living out the 4th Commandment

Theology

The Lifelong Battle

I hate it. I love it. I’m held in its grip. Its power’s alarming. I feel myself slip. It draws me with offers Of quiet and rest, Of freedo...

Theology

Celebrating the Sabbath

“Many people see the Sabbath or the Lord’s Day, as an infringement of their personal liberty – a day that God has taken from them, instead of a ...

Theology

Will animals go to Heaven?

What happens when animals die? The question of whether animals exist in heaven has been debated for centuries. Do people share the same spirit and aft...

Theology

A serious problem 

God’s people should be confidently playful ***** As a mental health therapist, I once attended a workshop on developing and maintaining healthy attachments between parents and their children. The presenter’s information was given in a PowerPoint, and I found that I could put a Bible text to every one of his slides. At one point the speaker went as far as saying “if you want to read a great example of a healthy attachment, then read the book of Job.” Because of this workshop I came to the realization that the more a therapeutic modality is in line with biblical teaching, the more accurate and effective the therapy is. As I developed more in this field, I noticed how important play is as it relates to one’s mental health. That then got me toying with how play must connect with what the Bible teaches us about ourselves. And sure enough, when I started looking, I began seeing evidence of play and humor in the Bible, as well as in the character of God Himself. This further affirmed my initial thoughts on play and mental health and how playfulness is beneficial to Christians. Play defined But what do we mean when we talk about “play”? It’s volleyball games and soccer, but more than that too. It’s an attitude too – we can be playful in how we talk, move, and think. Play can be serious and intense – you can play hard! But it’s always about fun – getting to and not having to – and creativity, and just being in the moment. This last point is a big one: play is about the means more than the end. We play hockey for the joy of playing, and winning is awesome, but secondary. Or it isn’t really play anymore. Play in the Bible “Seriousness is not a virtue. It would be a heresy, but a much more sensible heresy, to say that seriousness is a vice. It is really a natural trend or lapse into taking one's self gravely, because it is the easiest thing to do. It is much easier to write a good Times leading article than a good joke in Punch. For solemnity flows out of men naturally; but laughter is a leap. It is easy to be heavy: hard to be light. Satan fell by the force of gravity.” – G.K. Chesterton I chose the title for this article because it is a play on words. It could be interpreted that there is a problem that needs to be taken seriously, and in our current times there are many things we are told are serious problems. After all, we are only a few years away from climate change killing everything on the planet, or, at least, if World War III doesn’t do us in first. Or might four more years of the Trump presidency be worse than both these scenarios combined? Another way of understanding this title is that there is a problem with being too serious. This understanding would suggest that even if the three threats to humanity just listed all somehow simultaneously occurred, that this still wouldn’t be too serious a situation to joke about. (I just knew an epic string of disasters like this would happen if I took some time off work!) In truth many a problem isn’t so serious, but rather being serious is the problem. Word plays like this are found throughout the original language of the Bible. One website suggests that in the Old Testament alone there are over 500 plays on words. The problem is that most of them are literally lost in translation. One example found in the New Testament is when Jesus tells Peter that “on this rock I will build my church” but even there the parenthetic adage that the name Peter means rock is required for it to make sense to us… otherwise it could be used to justify the concept of a Pope. It could also be argued that the Feast of Tents is mandated play. Every family was told to build a shelter out of sticks and branches to live in for 5 days. For me this sounds like so much fun. I can see kids counting down the days until this celebration, dads competing for the biggest or best designed tent, their children scavenging for branches and sticks and that perfect piece to make a door out of. It reminds me of making a mattress fort for my children (if there are any fathers looking to outdo me, my longest mattress fort was 38 feet long). The creation of music and lyrics is a form of play – that’s why when someone strums a guitar, we say they are playing the guitar. It’s the same with any instrument: we play them all. And when we look at the largest book in the Bible, we find it is dedicated to playing instruments. Also music-related, David was commended for playing when he danced as the ark was brought into Jerusalem and his wife punished for taking it too seriously (2 Sam. 6:14-23). The best evidence of God and play in the Bible is, in my opinion, seen in the way Jesus often responded to questions from the Pharisees. They would come to him with a very pointed question and, instead of getting a somber concise response that was backed with biblical texts, they got a story. It is also worth noting that when Jesus said, “Unless you repent from your sins and become like one of these you will never enter the Kingdom of Heaven” (Matt. 18:3), He was talking about humble, playful children and not the stoic, serious Pharisees. God and play “The true object of all human life is play. Earth is a task garden; heaven is a playground.” – G.K. Chesterton Being created in God’s image means that we reflect the emotions and characteristics of our Creator, but because of our fall into sin we have corrupted these features. So, for example, God’s jealousy is holy and righteous (Ex. 20:5), whereas it is hard for us to think of a time or scenario where our feelings of jealousy were not sinful. But we can think of times in which we have played in delight and been the better reflection of God for doings so. Now if we, as the image-bearers of God, show our better nature when we are playful, then isn’t it reasonable to conclude that play may be in the Being of God too? To compound the point, play is found not just in humans but is also witnessed in the animal kingdom, and might that be because God reveals Himself in nature too? Not only is play seen throughout creation, the act of creating is, in itself, a form of play. Our hobbies often involve creating something or piecing something back together. Woodworking, drawing, painting, knitting, puzzling, writing, quilting . . . all start with a blank canvas and raw material. When what is being created is done for its own sake, and isn’t created for profit or by necessity, that creation is a form of play. If enjoyment is the primary reason for the activity and the secondary reason is profit or necessity it is still play. Since we are created in God’s image it seems fair to suggest that the feelings we have in creating things reflects Him and His pleasure. This can also be seen in Revelation 4:11: “For You created all things, and they exist because You created what You pleased.” Humor “Humor is the great thing, the saving thing after all. The minute it crops up, all our hardnesses yield, all our irritations, and resentments flit away, and a sunny spirit takes their place.” – Mark Twain Another form of play – humor – goes hand in hand with truth. In 1 Kings 18:20-40 we read about how Elijah knew who the living and true God is. He was certain that the altar made to Baal would not catch on fire and he was equally certain that the one made to honor God would. And because he knew these things to be true, he could make fun of the Baal prophets and priests. The religious leaders of Baal were holding on to a lie and seriously thought that if they cut themselves and did every other act of worship that their lie would become true. We also have the truth with us. If the point of view you are defending crumbles at a joke, then it is not true. Those that believe a lie often take their point of view extremely seriously. They talk over people, attack their character, call them names and do anything they can to silence their opposition. We see this in the Bible when the Lord’s prophets were killed, and when Jesus was crucified. The Bible tells us that “male and female, He created them” (Gen. 1:27). The many who believe otherwise can’t defend their point of view, so they try to shut down debate with name-calling, labeling as transphobic any who challenge them. When the satiric website Babylon Bee jokingly gave their “Man of the Year” award to the guy-in-a dress Joe Biden appointed as Assistant Secretary for Health, Twitter kicked the Bee off of their platform – they couldn’t deal with the joke. But like Elijah, Christians can embrace the truth and can in confidence make fun of the lies. The importance of play “Common sense and a sense of humor are the same thing, moving at different speeds. A sense of humor is just common sense, dancing.” – Clive James “Humor can get in under the door while seriousness is still fumbling at the handle.” – G.K. Chesterton One great benefit of play is how it can relieve anxiety, by pulling us fully into the present. So, it probably shouldn’t surprise us, there are a number of Bible texts that encourage us to be fully in the moment: “Be still and know that I am God.” Ps. 46:10 “So don’t worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will bring its own worries. Today’s trouble is enough for today.” Matt. 6:34 “Do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink, or your body, what you will wear.” Matt. 6:24 “Give us each day the food we need.” Luke 11:3 There are many activities that we can do and be fully in the moment, but most of them also allow for focus on the past or future. Grief is an example of this – you can grieve the loss of a loved one while being fully in the moment; but you can also grieve that loss while thinking about things you could have done while they were still alive, or while thinking about how this loss will impact your family in the future. (It is not wrong to have these thoughts while grieving; I am just pointing out how grieving can be done while thinking of the past or future). Psalm 137 illustrates this in verses 1 and 2 where it says: “Beside the rivers of Babylon, we sat and wept as we thought of Jerusalem. We put away our harps, hanging them on the branches of poplar trees.” This focus on the past prevented them from playing the harp. The reason anxiety focuses on the past, and on the future, is our desire for control. We want to look back, to supposedly ensure we don’t make any of our alleged mistakes again. Our focus on the future is to consider all possible outcomes of an upcoming event so we can better prepare for it. But with anxiety, this line of thinking never ends with “and we lived happily ever after” – it ends with the worrier thinking they have cancer, or may become homeless.* In contrast, play is the only activity I know of that cannot be done while worrying about the past or future. This is because play is everything anxiety is not. Anxiety is neat and tidy. It partners with perfectionism to create a standard that is rarely achieved and never celebrated. Anxiety is regimented and time oriented, bound by rules, and it takes everything serious. But play is fluid, and not bound by time. Its rules act more like guidelines and there are exceptions to them. And perfecting a skill is a joyful journey, because play allows things to be “good enough.” In therapy I often will tell my anxious clients about this concept. Often, I will ask them, when was the last time they felt playful? I’ll then ask them, when was the last time that they could recall not being anxious? For most people it will be the same answer to both questions. The reason is, you cannot be anxious and playful at the same time. You will never see an anxious playful person. Hormones associated with stress are the same ones that trigger the fight, flight, or freeze response. In high levels of stress, blood flow is directed away from a part of the brain known as the prefrontal cortex. This is the part of the brain where most of our conscious thoughts are. This is also where most of our decision-making is done. This is a contributing factor to why anxious people have difficulties making a decision – the more anxious someone is the harder it becomes for them to think outside of the box. In contrast, there is a strong association between play and creativity. Einstein acknowledged this connection when he said creativity is just intelligence having fun. His theory of relativity was a result of Einstein playing with the thought of chasing a beam of light around a room. Some other known benefits of play are improvements in: problem-solving skills health, resiliency, and feelings of self-worth the ability to develop and maintain friendships the ability to overcome emotional wounds caused by trauma Serious people often have serious problems “A person without a sense of humor is like a wagon without springs. It's jolted by every pebble on the road.” – Henry Ward Beecher One final point to consider is how, in the Bible we can find serious people whose piety is just a façade. Think of the Pharisees and Sadducees – they prayed long and loud in the synagogue and tithed ten percent of their herb garden (Luke 11: 42), but it was all show and no heart. Pride and covetousness blinded them from being genuinely godly. In their zealous “piety” they dared accuse the Son of God of blasphemy, and then murdered Him. Today we also have very serious people whose piety turns out to be a façade. I view their façade in the same way I do a transgender person’s over-the-top dress, makeup, and mannerisms. In both cases we have an outrageous exaggeration of the real thing. Conclusion God created a magnificent world with changing landscapes and terrain, and with vast bodies of water and rivers, which He filled with millions of different creatures. He then gave us playful hearts to explore His creation and to, with childlike wonderment, give Him praise and glory. God also created us in His image, and as image-bearers, there’s good reason to expect our playfulness is a reflection of a playful God. Is it any wonder then, that the best thing we can do for our spiritual, physical and mental health is play? So, for your and everyone’s sake, go out and play, seriously! ***** Endnote *I’lI note I do not subscribe to the belief that all anxiety is sin – there are several different reasons why people are anxious. See my letter to the editor in the Sept/Oct 2023 issue for my thoughts on this....

Theology

Is the State of Israel a fulfillment of biblical prophecy?

The nation of Israel has a special place in the hearts of many Christians. For one thing, the Savior once walked through the land that this nation now occupies. Furthermore, after the destruction of the Jewish state in the year 70 by the Romans, the reestablishment of the State of Israel on the same land after almost two thousand years can be considered to be nothing short of a miracle. So is the resurgence of Israel as a national entity a fulfillment of biblical prophecy? Many affirm this to be the case. In view of the ongoing conflict in the Middle East, it is good to reflect on these issues. The longing for a return Through the centuries, Jews have cherished the hope that some day they could return to the land of their forefathers. After the very last remnants of Jewish political power were crushed with the defeat of the second Jewish revolt under Bar Kokhba (A.D. 132-135), the dream of a return was never forgotten. Synagogue prayers, no matter where in the world they were offered, were made in the direction of Jerusalem. A strong emotional connection with that city was maintained. Through the centuries, the poetry and literature of the Jews spoke of Zion and Israel. Each year the Passover festival would end with the words, “Next year in Jerusalem!” However, and this is striking, for well over a thousand years, no attempt was made to return to the old Jewish homeland to transform the dream into reality. The pious hoped for a miracle and insisted that it would be blasphemous to force the hand of God by trying to get a homeland on their own. Even in times of tremendous persecution, in which the Jews suffered innumerable atrocities, there was no mass movement to the old homeland. There were some minor exceptions with relatively small groups going to Palestine, but that was all. Far more Jews went to other places for refuge. In spite of the emotional connection to Palestine, it was not coupled with action, even though those few who went apparently had no problems apart from enduring poverty. But that was surely a small price to pay compared to the difficulties they faced with oppression and persecution. What made the 19th and 20th centuries the time for the emotional ties and dream to be translated into action for a new reality? Why was it that even areas outside Palestine were considered as a possible new homeland for the Jews? The explanation is often sought in the anti-Semitism of the 19th century. This was undoubtedly an important immediate factor. But anti-Semitism had been around for centuries. Determinative were the new notions of nationalism and self-determination of which the French Revolution was a dramatic manifestation. People started to think that a nation is made up of individuals who determine their own destiny. A nation is no longer defined by a king or ruler, but by the people who determine what laws are to be passed and how to be a nation. The rise of nationalism positively impacted Jewish thinking about striving for their own homeland. Zionism The development of nationalism meant that Jews scattered all over the world began to think of themselves as needing to determine their own destiny as a people, and so the soil was prepared for modern political Zionism. Jews in the 19th and 20th centuries did what their forefathers had not done. They sought to determine their own future. Zionism was a nationalist movement in which a people sought their own self-determination and future as a nation. It was therefore not of ultimate importance to two fathers of modern Zionism, Leo Pinsker (Russian) and Theodor Herzl (Hungarian), exactly where the nation of Israel was to be established. Both had independently come to see the need for a national homeland and that was the important thing. When Pinkster published his Auto-Emancipation in 1882, he pleaded for self-emancipation, preferably in Palestine, but, if that wasn’t possible, elsewhere would do. Herzl and others had the same view, as indicated by the seriousness with which they considered a proposal from the British government to establish a Jewish homeland in what was then Uganda. Zionism was a political movement and not a religious one. The religious overtones were certainly there and that helped clinch Palestine as the place where the new state should be established. The basis for the state was, however, to be secular, although Judaism was privileged. Nationalist fervor demanded the restoration of the language of the nation – Hebrew. This return to an ancient language is unique in history, but Hebrew would bind Jews from Russia, France, Italy and other countries into the one people that they are. It is interesting to note that before the rise of modern Zionism, Reform Jews had eliminated all references to Zion from their prayer book, insisting that Judaism had outgrown Palestine and that it was now the mission of Israel to be a light to the nations. They therefore opposed Zionism. Orthodox Judaism was also against Zionism because they considered it forcing the hand of God. Their God would miraculously restore them to their homeland, for that is what He had promised, in their view. They must therefore wait for Him. The establishment of Israel was motivated by secular considerations and had little to do with obedience to God. But could it not nevertheless be possible that the reestablishment of Israel as a state was a fulfillment of biblical prophecy? Does Israel have a biblical right to the land? We need to look briefly at some of the prophecies that deal with the land and the promised return of Israel to the land that is now Israel. The land God promised Abraham, “To your offspring I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates” (Genesis 15:18; cf. 17:8). Dispensationalists, who make a sharp distinction between Israel and the Church, consider this promise to have been unfulfilled prior to the establishment of Israel in 1948. After that date, the prophecies about the land were being realized and so Israel will eventually get all the land from the river of Egypt to the Euphrates (which would include most of Syria). The New Scofield Reference Bible in its note on Deuteronomy 30:3 states that it is important to understand that the nation has never been in possession of the whole land that was promised to them. However, is this true? The answer according to the Bible must be “no.” God’s promise to Abraham was fulfilled in Old Testament times. This was most dramatically seen with Solomon’s kingdom. It extended from the river Euphrates to the land of the Philistines and to the border of Egypt (1 Kings 4:21; 2 Chron. 9:26). We can therefore say that the promise of the land given to Abraham has been fulfilled. God has no further obligations here, so to speak. The present nation of Israel has no special biblical claim to the land on the basis of God’s promise to Abraham. The return But what about the prophecies concerning the return? Many people regard the present situation of Israel in the Middle East as a partial fulfillment of the return to the land of which the Old Testament speaks. As a sample of what is usually quoted to support this idea, let us briefly consider promises made through the prophets Jeremiah and Isaiah. In Jeremiah 23:3, the LORD promised: “I will gather the remnant of my flock out of all the countries where I have driven them, and I will bring them back to their fold.” Important here for Dispensationalists is the reference to “out of all the countries.” This must refer, according to The New Scofield Reference Bible note on this text, to a restoration other than the restoration from Babylon which is just one country. This prophecy still awaits fulfillment. However, that is not so. Why then does Jeremiah speak of a return “out of all the countries”? Because it was a customary practice to sell captives taken in war to other nations as slaves (see Joel 3:7, Amos 1:6,9). In this way Israelites could become scattered all over the known world (cf. Ezekiel 27:13). Representatives from both the northern and southern tribes returned. When for instance a sin-offering was brought at the dedication of the temple in the time of Darius, then it was “a sin-offering for all Israel, 12 male goats, according to the number of the tribes of Israel” (Ezra 6:17, also Ezra 8:35). The prophetess Anna belonged to Asher, one of the northern tribes (Luke 2:36). The New Testament also considers Israel as twelve tribes, whether literally or symbolically (Acts 26:7, Matthew 19:28). In view of the above, there is no need to take Jeremiah 23:3 and see the return mentioned there as referring to what is happening today. For further support to the notion that prophecy is now being fulfilled, Dispensationalists quote Isaiah 11:11-12: “The Lord will extend his hand yet a second time to recover the remnant that remains of his people … and gather the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.” Dispensationalists consider the reference to this return being “the second time” as conclusive evidence that the Lord here refers to what is happening today, the first return having been from Babylon. But the first return was not from Babylon, but from Egypt. That was the first release from bondage for Israel. The Old Testament is full of that and even Isaiah 11:16 specifically speaks of it and connects it with the Babylonian return, which is clearly then the second return. Furthermore, Isaiah 11:14 goes on to say that the returned exiles “shall swoop down on the shoulder of the Philistines in the west, and together they shall plunder the people of the east. They shall put out their hand against Edom and Moab, and the Ammonites shall obey them.” The late William Hendriksen aptly noted that these predictions were fulfilled, as is clear from the First Book of the Maccabees. In addition, “those who believe that now, in the twentieth century A.D., these Philistines, Edomites, Moabites and Ammonites must still be destroyed or plundered or subjected will have a hard time even finding them!”1 Israel was restored after the Babylonian captivity. The prophecy of the return was fulfilled. The New Israel There is one other factor that needs to be mentioned before we leave the issue of the promise of the land. Dispensationalism makes a very strong distinction between Israel and the Church. However, according to Scripture the Church is now “the Israel of God” (Gal. 6:16). The apostle Paul wrote to the Romans, “it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise” (Rom. 9:8). All those who have believed God’s promises belong to His children, “the Israel of God.” This identity of the Church has consequences for the promise of the land. The fifth commandment as given to God’s people at Mount Sinai stated: “Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long in the land that the LORD your God is giving you” (Ex. 20:12). However, when this command is referred to in the New Testament, the reference is to living long “on the earth” (Eph. 6:2-3). God’s children as the new Israel will inherit the whole world! That is also the point of Romans 4:13 which states that the promise to Abraham and his offspring was that “he would be heir of the world”! The promise of the land for the new Israel is far more than some real estate in the eastern Mediterranean. In this final age, God’s people have been promised the world! What makes Israel special and why should we care? Most Christians have traditionally held a soft spot for the Jewish people. After all, they were God’s special people and they have preserved for us the Old Testament Scripture. “The Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God” (Romans 3:2) which have come down to us because the Jewish people so faithfully transmitted the Word from one generation to the next so that we have the complete Old Testament. We owe them much gratitude that God used them to give us so much of His Word. However, as we have seen, the State of Israel today has no special biblical claim to Palestine. Like Abraham, Israel must look forward “to the city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God” (Hebrews 11:10). Nowhere does the New Testament give a prophecy of restoration to the land of Canaan for Israel. The State of Israel is not the solution for the ultimate well-being and salvation of Jews. The New Testament clearly shows this to be the case because thinking that a national political restoration is the solution for Israel is an old heresy. When the Lord Jesus walked on earth, many in Israel were looking for a political messiah. But Jesus said that His kingdom was not of this world and He disavowed notions of a political restoration for Israel. Instead he prophesied the destruction of the temple. We do Israel no favor by appealing to the Bible to justify their existence as an independent nation in the Middle East. Their existence is legally and politically legitimate but not founded on the basis of biblical prophecy. If we want to help the Jews, and we should, we can begin by praying more for them. Part of the Reformed heritage are the beautiful prayers, found in books like the Canadian Reformed Book of Praise. Among these prayers is “A Prayer for All the Needs of Christendom” which includes this petition: “we pray for the mission among Jews, Muslims, and heathens, who live without hope and without you in the world.” Note the order. We can and should pray this prayer because Christ came so that also Jews may inhabit the land of the LORD, that is, the new world that is coming. And not only Jews, but also Arabs who according to the flesh are counted as sons of Abraham. One day in the Promised Land, the true Canaan, there will be peace and joy. All the elect, including Jews and Palestinian Arabs, will be there in perfect peace and harmony. The Jewish people may sometimes be off our radar, but not God’s. They remain a special people in God’s sight. A question sometimes asked is: but have the Jews not been rejected? Have they not shown they want nothing to do with the crucified Christ? Has God rejected the Jews? God has not rejected the Jews. Although the apostles turned from preaching to the Jews because of their unwillingness to listen and went to the Gentiles, yet, the apostle Paul said of the Jews: “Brothers, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for them is that they may be saved” (Rom. 10:1). Scripture teaches that the conversion of the Gentiles will stir Israel to jealousy so that as Gentiles are saved, God will also gather Jews to Himself, until “all Israel” will be saved (Rom. 11:1-11, 25-26). This “all Israel” can be Jews plus Gentiles as comprising the “Israel of God” (Gal. 6:16) or “all Israel” can refer to all the elect from Israel, all the believing Jews. In any case, the Bible gives no basis for the belief that there will be a mass conversion of Israel as a nation, but it does state that the total number of the Jewish elect will be saved (Rom. 11:26-27).2 We must never think that mission to the Jews does not concern us. In a sense we owe so much to them and they were God’s chosen instruments to prepare and to be part of the coming of our Savior to this world. The Jews remain a special people for the Lord and therefore also for us. The ongoing conflict in the Middle East reminds us of a sober truth. There is no abiding peace or political salvation here on this side of eternity. But there is hope and true salvation if eyes are lifted up on high and the God of Abraham is supplicated through our Lord Jesus Christ. Conclusion There is only one ultimate solution. It is found in the gospel and in embracing the glad tidings. The Lord Jesus gathers His Church, also in Israel, in the West Bank, and in Gaza. Messianic Jews in Israel are believers in Jesus Christ. In the West Bank and Gaza are also Christians who love and confess Christ under very difficult circumstances. They are a minority in a Muslim society. How God’s people would rejoice if the evil forces that function in nationalism and Islamism could be conquered by the Spirit-fed force of a joint Jewish-Arab Christian testimony in the Middle East. With such a testimony the importance of who gets Jerusalem or which piece of territory is relativized because of the overarching promise of a new Jerusalem which comes down from heaven to give the ultimate peace. There Jew and Arab can truly dwell in peace together. End notes William Hendriksen, Israel in Prophecy (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1968), 21 (emphasis is Hendriksen’s). See Romans 11 and the clear explanation in Hendriksen, Israel in Prophecy, 32-52....

Theology

The sovereignty of God

Despite it being proclaimed as “back” by no less than Time magazine, Calvinism is not well-regarded by most Western Christians and particularly Americans. Calvinism does not, after all, fit the America mantra of “choice, choice and more choices.” Even to us, we can see that the much better theological fit for this type of thinking is certainly Arminianism. Of course we shouldn’t be so very concerned about what type of theology best fits with our culture's thinking, but should instead be seeking out what sort of theology best fits God’s revealed Word – we’re concerned with what is True, not what is popular. So what is true then, Calvinism or Arminianism? Well, both the core, and the most controversial element of Calvinism is the belief in God’s absolute sovereignty – He rules over all, including us, and the choices we make. In Arminianism the limits of salvation are based fundamentally on human responses – God invites us, and we decide whether we want to “let Jesus into our hearts.” Arminians hold that all people are sufficiently enabled to accept the gospel, if they’ll just decide to do so. Consequently, Arminianism tends to overestimate human ability. This debate is therefore basically about the relationship between divine action on the one hand, and human responsibility on the other, in salvation and history. Arminian critique of Calvinism Arminians are extremely critical of the Calvinist view of salvation. Some claim that, to be consistent, a Calvinist needs to be a thoroughgoing determinist – a fatalist even. They caricature Calvinists as believing, “God will do what He will do, and has already decided who He will save, so it doesn’t matter what we do.” We Calvinists, therefore, are hard-pressed to give an account for sin and evil in a way that is morally plausible. If God determines everything that happens, then it is hard to see why there is so much sin and evil in this world and why God is not responsible for it. If God determined all things, including our choices, surely He would not determine the sort of evil and atrocities that we have witnessed in history? Arminians charge that Calvinists can't make coherent sense of our claim that God makes a bona fide offer of salvation when he tells us to “repent and believe!” Furthermore, Arminians consider God's sovereignty over human affairs is a threat to human freedom and responsibility. They claim that the doctrine of election casts God in the role of an arbitrary despot who is indifferent to human choice. Arminians also claim that Calvinism offers the false hope of “once chosen, always chosen.” They caricature God’s predestination of the elect as a warrant to sin, since if you are elect, you will always remain elect, no matter what you do. Calvinism is said to lack the clear warrant to speak the most liberating word of encouragement available for persons struggling with their faith and doubt. How can anyone have assurance of salvation if you don't know whether or not you belong to the elect? Limiting the sovereignty of God It’s clear then that the dispute between Calvinism and Arminianism represents starkly opposing theological views, at the heart of which are profoundly different views of God. Though an emphasis on the sovereignty of God is frequently associated solely with Calvinism, it’s not unusual to hear Arminians also speaking about God’s supreme power and authority, and how He controls all things. That’s because Arminian pastors preach from the very same Bible we have, and there is no avoiding the conspicuous theme running through the Scriptures that God rules over all. Thus the Arminian’s objection to the doctrine of sovereignty arises not from the Bible, but rather from man’s basic dislike for this disturbing and humbling aspect of God's character. If God is in charge, we aren’t, and we don’t like that. An evangelical theologian claims that the kingly model for understanding God's authority is out-of-date. In our democratic times, he argues, it is more understandable and easier to comprehend God as Parent or as Friend, or even as Judge. We may call God Stronghold, Shield and Savior, but not King. I suggest that the wide variety of contemporary formulations of God to redefine His sovereignty are the direct result of denying a knowledge of God through His self-revelation in the Scriptures. So in evangelical sermons we seldom hear of God's demand for total submission to the authority of His appointed king, Christ Jesus. Another practical result of refusing to recognize God as the sovereign Lord over all is to carefully exclude Him from the decision-making institutions of our national life. If He is sovereign over all, then it’s clear there is no excluding Him from anything we do. But if we won’t acknowledge that, then we can pretend it is possible to exclude Him from certain parts of our life – we can kick Him out of our schools and workplace, and separate not just church from state, but God from government. Our limited minds So is God's sovereignty limited? Absolutely not! The Bible everywhere declares that God is sovereign. All creation, from the falling of the smallest raindrop to the fate of the nations is in His hands and has a place in His plan. As someone puts it, "Scripture contains no hint that God has limited his sovereignty in any degree. God is Lord, from Genesis 1 to Revelation 22. He is always completely sovereign." Can we logically explain this doctrine? As James Montgomery Boice notes, "We may not understand that doctrine. We may still wonder why God tolerates sin. But still we won't doubt the doctrine nor retreat from its consequences." This doctrine gives meaning and substance to all other doctrines. "It is," as Arthur Pink observes, "the foundation of Christian theology." But God's sovereignty also means we must acknowledge Christ as King over every sphere of human activity, over the entire domain of human life, whether in education, politics, or business. And if God is not sovereign, how can we then believe in the fulfillment of prophecy? God is fully sovereign. He is active in all events and He always accomplishes His will. He assures us that the world in which we live is not chaotic, without a future. Instead it is under His fatherly control. He rules history and guides it to its goal. He restores and renews all things. He is the God who will one day consummate earthly judgment and redemption through the returning risen and ascended Savior. Sovereignty of God in salvation In Reformed theology God's sovereignty is the ground of predestination and election, and God's glory the chief goal of His decrees. The doctrine of election permeates and controls the whole Bible. From the beginning of the Bible to its end we are presented with the story of a universal purpose carried out through a continuous series of particular choices. For example, Abraham is chosen to be the pioneer of faith and so to receive the blessing through which all the nations will be blessed. The ground of election is not in those who are chosen, but in God Himself. The Bible states explicitly that God chose the redeemed "according to the good pleasure of His will" (Eph. 1:5). While not coercing the will, God irresistibly and effectively draws the elect to faith. Without God reaching out to us, we would never become members of God's family. On our own, we would not even think about the need for salvation. We are sinful by nature. Sin is the wrong orientation of all human existence since Adam's fall, an orientation from which no one can free himself. The sinful inclination inherited from Adam pervasively impacts every area of our lives and bends every faculty toward the self and away from God. As C.H. Spurgeon notes: "There is hardly any doctrine more humbling than that of human depravity or original sin...The evil nature of man brings with it the fact that his will is altogether perverted." God's gracious election, however, does not take away the need for individual repentance and faith in Christ. God's sovereignty is a reality, and man's responsibility is a reality too. God surely demands accountability for our actions (e.g. Acts 2:23). In other words, when a sinner is saved, all the glory belongs to God; when a sinner is lost, the sinner must take all the blame. The blessings of sovereignty The Bible presents the doctrine of God's sovereignty as a source of great comfort and blessing to the saints. The evil in our life is real evil; our suffering is real suffering. But God is still in control and has a good purpose in all of it, even though we probably cannot see it now. Knowing that God is sovereign provides a deep sense of security. Christians will persevere in faith until the very end, when Jesus returns in glory or when they die. God perseveres with them (l Pet. 5:10). The assurance that we will reach our eternal home gives us courage to keep walking with the Lord. Rev. Johan Tangelder (1936-2009) wrote for Reformed Perspective for 13 years and many of his writing has been collected at ReformedReflections.org....

Theology

Does 1 Corinthians 6 mean Christians can never appeal to the courts?

When Charter rights appear to be violated, what can a Christian do? ***** Does being submissive to the ruling authorities mean that a Christian cannot seek their day in court? Would going toe-to-toe with the government in a court of law be a form of insubordination, or show a lack of respect and submission to the civil government? Or can Christians take the government to court? Does the Bible give us any guidance on this question? Some Canadian constitutional context Court action, in a constitutional democracy, is a legitimate form of government interaction. Within the modern constitutional state, there are three branches that hold each other in check: the legislature (makers of the law), the executive (those who carry out the law) and the judiciary (those who review the application of the law). This separation within the civil government is described in our constitution as “the separation of powers.” No one man is lawmaker, police officer, judge, jury, and executioner. We divide power, and for good reason: power tends to corrupt fallen man. All of the civil government in Canada is limited, by law, and is under the law, particularly under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Does the Charter govern you as a citizen? No, it doesn’t. It is the highest law in Canada, but it only limits the power of the civil government. So, judges, lawmakers, and police officers, together with the Charter, are a package deal, and together make up “the civil government.” The Charter of Rights and Freedoms was added to our constitution in 1982. It owes some – though not all – of its language to the Christian legacy of limited state power. (If you want to read more of the legacy, I shamelessly recommend chapters 2 and 4 of A Christian Citizenship Guide, 2nd Edition, which explains it in detail.) The preamble to the Charter states that: “Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the Supremacy of God and the Rule of Law.” This “Supremacy of God” clause is supposed to be a reminder to our lawmakers that they are under the ultimate Lawgiver. (Even if they don’t believe in God, they should at least be able to recognize that they aren’t God!) But note as well the reference in the Charter’s preamble to the rule of law. That echoes the Belgic Confession, article 36, which in turn echoes Deuteronomy 16 and 17 – we are to be governed not by the whims of kings and tyrants, or bureaucrats for that matter, but by laws and statutes. And everyone is under the law, including the king, the prime minister, the premier, the police, the bylaw officer, and any other government employee. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is, in some ways, a product of Christianity’s influence on law in the West. So, what are some things the Charter guarantees? In Canada, according to the Charter, everyone enjoys fundamental freedoms like freedom of religion, conscience, expression, and association, certain democratic rights and mobility rights, certain legal rights and more. These are not absolute rights; the civil government can restrict them in certain, limited circumstances. But, when the civil government imposes on Charter rights like freedom of peaceful assembly, the burden in law is on the civil government – not citizens – to demonstrate that the restrictions are justifiable in a free and democratic society. But what good does this do us in light of everything we know from Scripture about submission to the governing authorities? So what if we have legal rights – aren’t we called to just submit to the government? What does 1 Corinthians 6 teach? Our tendency as Christians is to be suspicious of using the judicial branch due to the misapplication of 1 Corinthians 6, where Paul seems to be telling Christians not to go to the secular courts. "If any of you has a dispute with another, do you dare to take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the Lord’s people? Or do you not know that the Lord’s people will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life! Therefore, if you have disputes about such matters, do you ask for a ruling from those whose way of life is scorned in the church? I say this to shame you. Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers? But instead, one brother takes another to court – and this in front of unbelievers!" However, this passage applies to two private individuals, particularly, two members of the church, and the passage urges settling the matter before going to an “ungodly court.” In the case we are considering here, the “ungodly court” and the other entity in the legal dispute are of the same nature – both government bodies. What we are doing is much more akin to Paul’s own appeal to Caesar in Acts 25 than to Paul’s urging to avoid court. Further, the 1 Corinthians 6 passage must be seen in the context of internal church strife: in the church the wisdom of fellow-members or church leaders should prevail over the need to go to court, assuming that these “wise men” dealing with the matter will deal with it in a just, calm, and wise manner. The brothers challenging each other on a judicial matter should be humble and spiritual enough to accept the wise counsel of fellow believers rather than sue each other. A court challenge of the government’s allegedly unjust actions or laws is not within the scope of what Paul is talking about in 1 Corinthians 6. In Canada, then, a judge is allowed, or even duty bound, to curb the injustice of a higher civil power for the protection of the people under his oversight. In our current context, the Canadian civil government is split into three arms (the "separation of powers"), as explained earlier. Thus when a Christian challenges government action in court (or defends himself against government action in court) it should not be seen as a lawsuit in the sense that we hear about from time to time – a vengeful opportunity to get rich over against an equal opponent. Rather, we are simply approaching one of the three branches of the government and asking the magistrate to do its God-given duty to call the other branch to account, and to remind it of what exactly its obligations are under the Constitution and what its obligations are with regards to justice and righteousness. But what about Romans 13? But what about Romans 13:1-7 and 1 Peter 2:13-17? Don’t these passages demand submission to the governing authorities? Yes, the general rule of Scripture is that Christians are subject to the governing authorities. But in order to make a proper application of this rule, we have to understand how our civil authorities govern. How citizens interact with governing authorities looks different in a constitutional democracy (where the constitution is supreme even over judges and premiers) than in an ancient absolute monarchy. In a participatory democracy, it isn’t only the premier who gets to decide what the law requires. In fact, lawyers and judges, and police officers and citizens should all know what their rights and responsibilities are in law. We are all equally under law and ruled by law. This legal reality is a blessing of Christendom. The Magna Carta, which enshrined this concept over 800 years ago in English law, is rooted in Christian culture. Ambiguities, over-reach, constitutional violations, inequal application of the law, all of this needs to be winsomely exposed, and Christians ought not to shy away from this. It is good and right to point these injustices out. Furthermore, the judiciary is also part of the civil government. When a citizen appeals to a judge to clarify whether or not the actions of the government are constitutional (i.e. legal), then this shows respect for the government and her institutions and uses the law to our advantage. Paul – who wrote Romans 13 – does this multiple times, when he uses his Roman citizenship status to avoid being flogged (Acts 22:22-29), then again when he demands that the local magistrate personally escort him and Silas out of jail after their rights had been violated (Acts 16:37-40), and again when he appeals to Caesar (Acts 25:10-11). Daniel’s example Consider also Daniel’s example. It’s a striking story: King Darius signs a law that says, for 30 days, if men are going to pray, they can only pray to Darius and no other. Daniel 6:10 says, “When Daniel knew that the document had been signed, he went to his house where he had windows in his upper chamber open toward Jerusalem. He got down on his knees three times a day and prayed and gave thanks before his God, as he had done previously.” Daniel acts immediately and decisively. And what is the charge against him? “Daniel pays no attention to you, O king, or the injunction you have signed.” In other words, “Daniel is violating Romans 13, O king! He’s a lawless man, O king. Throw him to the lions!” But what is the first thing Daniel says to King Darius, after miraculously surviving a night with the lions? “O king, I have committed no crime against you” (Dan. 6:22). (If there were any lawyers in the room, they would have interjected, “Oh yes you did! You broke the clear meaning of the law. You prayed to your God, and your God is not the king, and the law says explicitly and clearly that you can’t do that, and we have witnesses and …!”) But Daniel says, rightly, that by disobeying this silly law, this law which does not align with God’s law, he commits no crime against the king. In other words, obeying the law of God, even if it clearly breaks the law of man, is no crime. More than that, when citizens obey the law of God, they will be no threat to a ruler, Christian or not. John Calvin on legal action In Calvin's Institutes, in the chapter on the Civil Government, Calvin outlines several factors in favor of pursuing litigation: He writes: “Judicial proceedings are lawful to him who makes right use of them; and the right use… is… without bitterness, urge what he can in his defence, but only with the desire of justly maintaining his right; and…demand what is just and good.” Later, in the same subsection, Calvin writes, “When we hear that the assistance of the magistrate is a sacred gift from God, we ought the more carefully to beware of polluting it by our fault.” This then, speaks of a specifically Christian approach to litigation: that we “feel as kindly towards opponent… as if the matter in dispute were amicably transacted and arranged.” Later, Calvin also rejects the idea that Paul absolutely or universally prohibits litigation in 1 Cor. 6; rather, an interpretation of that text is to apply to brothers inside the church. Even so, Calvin speaks very highly of the Christian duty, as private individuals, to respect the civil government. Nevertheless, he does discuss briefly the role of other parts of government, which is very applicable to the question of whether Christians in a constitutional democracy can also challenge government action or laws in court. He writes (quoting from a modern translation): “there may be magistrates appointed as protectors of the people in order to curb the excessive greed and licentiousness of kings… I would not forbid those who occupy such an office to oppose and withstand, as is their duty, the intemperance and cruelty of kings. Indeed, if they pretended not to see when kings lawlessly torment their wretched people, such pretence in my view should be condemned as perjury, since by it they wickedly betray the people’s liberty of which, as they ought to know, God has made them defenders.” Asserting legal rights is not (necessarily) insubordination Asserting Charter rights is not insubordination. As a Canadian citizen, you bear Charter freedoms. Making your case in court, as the law entitles you to do, is a lawful exercise of your office of citizenship. So there may be situations where both the civil government and the Christian citizen must justify their actions, the former in a courthouse and the latter before God. What should make Christians distinct from their neighbors is not whether we speak up about our freedoms but how. Our tone of respect, our posture of prayer, and our spirit of submission sets us apart. And not only our tone, but also our philosophy of freedom and submission will shape a distinctly Christian approach to speaking up. Will we advocate for outright defiance, or make our case calmly and reasonably, according to law? I reject the passivism of being totally and silently subservient to the State. This is not biblical (Ex. 1:15-21; Dan. 3:8-23; Dan. 6:5-10; Mark 12:15-17; John 19:11; Acts 4:18-20; Acts 5:17-42; Acts 16:37; 2 Cor. 11:32-33). But I also reject the revolutionary spirit of obstinate civil disobedience. Two examples Let’s consider two examples. Pro-life billboards First, a couple years ago, one of the Ontario ARPA chapters raised a few thousand dollars to put an ad on London city buses that simply said “Canada has no abortion laws.” About a month or so into the contract, due to mild pushback, the city pulled the ads down, without explanation, without notice or opportunity to reply, and without compensating the local ARPA group for the remaining two months of the contract. We wrote to the city, explaining that what they had done was unconstitutional, and asked them to reinstate the ads. They refused. So, together with ARPA Oxford, we took legal action. And we won! It cost time and money, but the city apologized for what they had done and ran the ads again. A few years later, the City of Hamilton refused to run an ad from another local ARPA chapter, this one simply stating, “We stand for women’s rights. Hers, hers, and hers too” – with the final “her” referring to an ultrasound image of a baby. Again, we are taking the City of Hamilton to court, because their silencing of citizens’ participation in an ongoing political and moral debate is repugnant. Standing up for freedom through the courts shows respect for our laws, and for political or legal institutions. This is not about freedom of expression to say whatever we want to say, whenever and however we want to say it. It is the freedom to communicate a message that ought to be shared, without censorship. Dining but not the Lord’s Supper A second example: during the first summer of Covid, a Reformed church presented a re-opening safety plan to a government bureaucrat working within the local health authority. The document indicated that the church planned to recommence with the sacrament of holy supper. By this time restaurants were open again, and churches were gathering at 30% capacity. What was the reply of the local government employee? Without any sense of irony, he told the church that sacraments were “off the table.” Could the bureaucrat point to any law, order, or regulation that prohibited the sacrament? No. It was merely his opinion that allowing the church to celebrate the sacrament was too risky. That is unjust on its face, and a church would do well to challenge such a decision. A church that decided to celebrate communion anyway would not be the one acting illegally. The one acting illegally is that particular bureaucrat. Conclusion Like Paul, Christians ought not to shy away from appealing to the courts of law for redress. It is good and right to contend with injustice. May God preserve the rule of law in Canada for the sake of the gospel witness of the church. André Schutten is ARPA Canada’s Director of Law and Public Policy and General Legal Counsel (ARPACanada.ca)....

Theology

The problem with "pan-millennialism"

“I’m not amillennial, postmillennial, or premillennial. I’m pan-millennial.” “Huh?” “Yep, I’m pan-millennial—I believe it will...

Christian education, Theology

Why biblical poetry matters

Skim through any modern Bible and you will notice something peculiar: many pages are laid out as poetry, with appropriate spacing and indents. But hav...

Theology

What is Grace?

Through sheer repetition, some Christian words seem to blend into each other and we forget their distinct meanings. That's why the word grace is some...

Theology

What a cross-continent trek taught one pioneer about Sunday rest

Documentary, Movie Reviews, Theology

American Gospel: Christ Crucified

Documentary 2019 / 176 minutes Rating: 9/10 In the early 1600’s, our forefathers assembled at Dordrecht to clearly correct the errors of the Remonstrants, publishing the Canons of Dort in a confession that has proved of great value to the Lord’s people ever since. Today Satan still loves to mislead and harass the Church so can we correct current errors effectively through our more modern means of podcasts, websites, and films? Transition Studios is trying to do so by producing a series of documentaries. American Gospel: Christ Crucified is their second installment, and focuses on postmodern and progressive theologians and teachers who have led millions astray. This three-hour episode features long interviews with Bart Campolo (son of evangelist Tony Campolo), and Tony Jones (author of A Better Atonement), and briefer quotes from The Shack author William Paul Young and Todd White, among others. These men all use human logic to attack doctrines they find troubling, such as the atoning work of Christ. Campolo in particular lashes out at the idea of a wrathful God whose justice requires the punishment of sin: “I'm not interested in serving a God like that. That's not a God worthy of my worship. I'm just not interested." Another traditional view that these teachers believe needs to be changed is that homosexuality is a sin. Speaking of gay marriage, Tony Jones states that “the Bible's wrong about this one. The message of the church has evolved." Even the resurrection of Jesus from the dead is cast into doubt as the false teachers go further and further astray from the Gospel. To combat these progressive teachers and their errors, producer Brandon Kimber interviews an impressive assemblage of teachers and ministers from the Reformed and Presbyterian traditions, including Voddie Baucham, Alistair Begg, Kevin DeYoung, Michael Horton, John MacArthur, and John Piper, as well as other teachers from the broader Christian community. These theologians lean on the Bible, patiently explaining what could be complex doctrine using simple terms. Time after time, they quote God’s Word to correct the logic of men railing against clear and simple teaching. Ultimately, these false teachers do not want to believe what the Bible clearly teaches. Bart Campolo in the end reveals that he is now an atheist: he just could not believe that the God of the Bible is real. What starts as a questioning of some parts of God’s Word, and an attempt to harmonize with modern views and human logic, inevitably leads to doubt about all of Scripture. The question remains: what is the most effective way to combat heresy? Can movies and podcasts proclaiming truth be as effective as written creeds and confessions? Alistair Begg wisely summarizes one possible answer: “The Bible is so helpful to us. If we would just read it!” In the 21st century, all of us have access to the Word of God right at our fingertips at all times. We would do well to lean on it for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness. In addition to the Bible, we in the Reformed churches have our precious confessions that have dealt with almost all of these issues before! We can easily recognize the lie when we are confident of and familiar with the truth. I consider this film another encouragement for Christians to read our Bibles regularly, and to not neglect the great gift we have been given in our trustworthy confessions. American Gospel: Christ Crucified is available on various streaming services, and directly from Transition Studios at AmericanGospel.com where you can also download a free 100+ pages study guide. You can watch a 17-minute clip from the film below. Highly recommended! ...

Documentary, Movie Reviews, Theology, Watch for free

Free film: The God Who Speaks

Documentary 2018 / 92 minutes Rating: 9/10 All of us at times have wondered what it would be like if God spoke to us directly, as He did to Abraham, Moses, and the prophets. In The God Who Speaks, dozens of theologians and pastors make the compelling case that God has indeed spoken to us through the Scriptures, and that the Word of God has ample compelling evidence to its validity and historicity. The contributors to the 90-minute documentary include well known apologists and ministers such as Alistair Begg, R.C. Sproul, Albert Mohler, Frank Turek, Kevin DeYoung, and Norman Geisler. These learned theologians make the point that God has revealed Himself through His creative power in the wonder of the natural world, but has given a more clear narrative of who He is and His plan for us through the inspired Scriptures. Frank Turek states: “You need God specifically in propositional language telling us certain facts about Himself. You can get some of those facts from nature, but you can’t get all of them: you can’t get that God is triune, you can’t get the plan of salvation from the stars. You can only get it from special revelation. So if we’re going to be saved and sanctified, we need the Bible.” The movie starts with an overview of what the Bible is – a collection of 66 books written by more than 40 authors, all inspired by God to be a cohesive message pointing to the central turning point of history – the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Christians will enjoy this movie: it gives a powerful testimony about God’s Word, and equips us with talking points that make us ready to defend the validity of the Bible with compelling evidence. The target audience seems to be people with at least some understanding of theological terms and familiarity with the Bible as a whole. This makes it less of an ideal tool for evangelism, as viewers without this familiarity may not follow the line of argument as comfortably. The God Who Speaks was produced by American Family Studios, and you can watch it for free, below. ...

News, Theology

A secular defense of the Sabbath, and how it falls short

Fast Company is a secular business magazine, as likely to pass on presentation tips from industry leaders as it is to pass on marketing tips from drag queens so this isn't the first place you'd look to find a defense of Sabbath rest. But there it was in a Sept. 14, 2018 piece titled: "Let's bring back the Sabbath as a radical act against the always-on economy." The author, William Black does overlook the core of Sabbath rest – there's nothing in this article about taking our rest in the Lord, and coming together to worship Him. But because God's Law is written on our hearts (Romans 2:14-15), even unbelievers can recognize that Law's validity, at least in part. A practical case for the Sabbath Black began his article by pointing to the religious roots of the commandment, but he certainly wasn't making a religiously-based appeal for it. Implicit in his argument was that, despite how "the commandment smacks of obsolete puritanism," there was still something radical and vital about it. "When taken seriously, the Sabbath has the power to restructure not only the calendar but also the entire political economy. In place of an economy built upon the profit motive – the ever-present need for more, in fact the need for there to never be enough – the Sabbath puts forward an economy built upon the belief that there is enough." In a materialistic world, whose gods include "career advancement" and "more take-home pay" there's no end of the work that can be done to earn the gods' favor. Enough is never enough, because extra work can help you advance further and faster, and help you earn more. In that kind of world, the idea of taking one day off every week is not only radical, but downright blasphemous – such a break can only be enjoyed by those who recognize the materialistic gods are not worth giving our full devotion. Black continues by sharing how Sabbath rest was a benefit for the whole community: "The fourth commandment presents a od who, rather than demanding ever more work, insists on rest. The weekly Sabbath placed a hard limit on how much work could be done and suggested that this was perfectly all right; enough work was done on the other six days. And whereas the pharaoh relaxed while his people toiled, Yahweh insisted that the people rest as Yahweh rested: 'For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but rested the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and consecrated it.' "The Sabbath, as described in Exodus and other passages in the Torah, had a democratizing effect. Yahweh’s example – not forcing others to labor while Yahweh rested – was one anybody in power was to imitate. It was not enough for you to rest; your children, slaves, livestock, and even the 'aliens' in your towns were to rest as well. The Sabbath wasn’t just a time for personal reflection and rejuvenation. It wasn’t self-care. It was for everyone." While Black repeatedly mentions the Jewish origins of Sabbath rest, his is still a secular case for the command. He's touting the practical benefits, and not that this is God's authoritative command. Black may or may not be a Christian himself, but his approach – praising God's Law, without praising the Lawmaker – is one Christians commonly take. Whether it's abortion, sex-ed curriculums, or refusing to bake cakes for same-sex marriages, Christians regularly argue for the godly position while avoiding any mention of our God. Without God the argument fails We do that for tactical reasons – the world's not interested in God, so they'll just ignore us if we start any argument with His Name, right? But the problem is, all of God's Law – every position we're arguing for – stands on Him. So when we try to defend His Law without any mention of Him, it will, ultimately, fail. To put it another way, this not only robs God of the glory that He is due – God's people refusing to mention our Lord's Name does rob Him of His due – it isn't even an effective tactic. Take abortion as an example. Christians will argue that abortion is wrong because killing babies is wrong. And because God's Law is written on everyone's hearts, that's an argument the other side will concede. But they'll dispute that the unborn are babies and question how something so small and immature can really be of the same worth as much larger, already-born human beings. So the real argument is not, "Is killing wrong?" but "Where does our worth come from?" Only God provides a satisfactory answer to that question: our worth comes not from any abilities we have, but is intrinsic in being made in His Image (Gen. 1:26-27, Gen. 9:6). That's why an unborn baby has value, no matter how small, and doesn't gain worth as it gains in abilities. This intrinsic value is also why a disabled adult isn't of lesser worth even though he can do less, and why an elderly adult doesn't lose their worth as they lose some of their abilities. Our worth comes not from what we can do, but from in Whose Image we are made. Even as the world rejects this explanation, they can offer no viable alternative. Why do they believe we – at least those of us who have already been born – are of equal worth? Where does the basis for equality come from? Some are bigger, or smarter, or faster, or more inventive, or more artistic, and some are less so – in every which way, no two human beings are exactly alike, so on what basis would we ever talk about equality? There is no worldly justification for it. The world holds to equality, but can't offer an explanation for it. But we can. Only God makes sense of the world Isn't that something we should be pointing out? That's God makes the world make sense? It's no different with Sabbath rest – any argument for it needs to be built on God, and if it isn't, the argument will fall short. In his article Black speaks of an economy that embraces Sabbath rest as being one "driven, not by anxiety, but by...enoughness." And he contrasts that with our current 24-7 "anxious striving for more." Black wants our society to make the switch; he wants us to leave the "always-on economy" and start trusting in "enoughness." But what Black can't explain is on what basis his secular audience can confidently make that leap. Is there always going to be enough? Can we really depend on that? His readers will know that in some spots on our planet there isn't enough right now. They'll also know that if our economy takes a downward turn, there might not be enough here too. That's why the secular soul always has a reason to strive for more – so they can build a better cushion against whatever difficulties the future might bring. In short, as much sense as Sabbath rest makes – as great as the practical benefits are for mental, physical, emotional, and even relational, health – it doesn't make near the same sense without the Sabbath Lord. The world always has reason to fear the future, so they always have reason to continue striving anxiously. It is only the Christian, trusting in the Lord, who can not only take a break each week from the constant demands of work, but who can take rest where it can truly be found: "Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For My yoke is easy and My burden is light” (Matthew 11:28-30). That the secular argument for the Sabbath doesn't stand up on its own isn't a reason to give up on the practical arguments for obeying God's law. But it is a reason to start with God – to start with Him as our cornerstone – and build up from there....

Theology

The Bible on angels

Who are those mysterious angelic heavenly beings who live in the presence of the eternal, omnipotent Creator of the universe? Can we know more about them? Yes, certainly! When we carefully collect the Scriptural data, we receive a marvelous insight into the world of angels – we can learn a good deal about these wonderful beings. Yet angelology has been frequently dismissed as futile speculation with no practical relevance for the Christian life and mission. And those who write about it at any length are said to divert believers from the weightier matters of the Christian faith. Let's be clear: this is no indulgence into New Age escapist fascination with spiritual beings. Rather, it is to see how God is at work in His world. The task of angels is to direct us beyond them to God. That said, it is true that undue concentration upon the angelic world does distracts us from Him. In this context, John Calvin's rule of modesty for his treatment of angels is worth noting: Let us remember here, as in all religious doctrine, that we ought to hold to one rule of modesty and sobriety: not to speak, or guess, or even seek to know, concerning obscure matters anything except what has been imparted to us by God's Word. Furthermore, we ought ceaselessly to endeavor to seek out and meditate upon those things which make for edification. Created by God We know that the angelic world is real, not because we have verified it in experience but because God has said it. The heavenly realms in Scripture are not planets, dead stars, moon rocks or planetary rings, they are personal beings populating the universe. They are unseen spirits having different ranks, attributes and tasks. The physical as well as the spiritual world owes its origin to the Triune God. Through His Son God made the universe (Heb. 1:2). "Through him all things were made," writes the apostle John (1:3). The apostle Paul declares the same truth, "all things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible...were created by him (Jesus Christ) and for him" (Col. 1:16). The most extended passage on angels, Hebrews 1:5-2:9, makes a special point of establishing that our Lord is superior to them. Because they were created through Him and for Him, they belong to Him. He is their head and the center of their world. Little is said about the origin of angels in the Bible. All that it says about the creation of angels is that "God commanded and they were created" (Ps. 148:2,5). The angelic world then is an enormous gathering of solitary, heavenly beings. They are neither male nor female. They neither marry nor are given in marriage (Mark 12:25). They don't have offspring. Their number is complete (Matt.22:30). They are not eternal as they have a beginning. And they are not omnipresent as God alone is everywhere present. Theologians have speculated when the angels were created, but not one has arrived at a definitive answer. We just don't know. Louis Berkhof argues that no creative work preceded the creation of heaven and earth. And he states that the only safe statement seems to be that the angels were created before the seventh day. But I believe it is not too bold to argue that heaven with its inhabitants were complete at the very beginning of creation. Even before the creation of the material universe there was a vast world of angels and they still exist today. They sang praises unto God when they saw the wonder of God's handiwork. As God said to Job, "Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation?...On what were its footings set, or who laid its cornerstone - while the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy?"(Job 38:4-7) Angels then existed prior to man. But Man is the crown of creation (cf. Ps. 8). The Number of Angels Do we really need to know the exact number of angels? No, the very existence of angels testifies already to the greatness of our God. But we can consider some of the popular notions. The Pharisees, for example, seem to have an exaggerated view of their numbers. It was said among them, "that a man, if he threw a stone over his shoulder or cast away a broken piece of pottery, asked pardon of any spirit that he might possibly have hit it so doing." Some medieval theologians claimed to know the exact number: one said 266,613,336, after the 133,306,668 followed Lucifer and fell; another said that there was an angel behind every blade of grass. But the Bible does not give us definite figures. We are told that there is an enormous company of heavenly beings. Daniel 7:10 says 10,000 times 10,000 stood before the throne of God, which would amount to 100,000,000, but the point here is to speak of the vast array, rather than the particular amount. Hebrews 12:22 speaks of the city of the living God and an innumerable company of angels. We also know a great company of heavenly hosts appeared to the shepherds, praising God for the birth of the Savior (Luke 2:13). After His arrest in Gethsemane Jesus told Peter that His heavenly Father could put twelve legions of angels at His disposal. (Matt. 26:53). Again, this does not mean that Jesus said that there were literally 120,000 angels. Jesus used the number to tell Peter that He had myriads of angels who were ready to come to His aid. Fallen Angels So innumerable hosts of perfect angels follow their Creator. But not all angels remained faithful to Him. Satan, the mightiest of the angels, became proud. He led a revolt in heaven and was cast out and innumerable fallen angels entered the service of the wicked Deceiver (Matt.25:41; 2 Cor. 12:7; Rev. 9:11; 12:7-10). Their punishment? The apostle Peter said that God did not spare His angels when they sinned "but sent them to hell" (2 Pet.2:4). Jude notes that the rebel angels "did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their own home – these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day" (vs. 6). When we consider fallen angels, we can also take comfort in the presence of perfect angels. Because they were in the presence of Satan before his fall, they know the powers of the demonic better than any human being. They understand their wicked ways. Shakespeare, the astute observer of human nature, was well aware of Satan's pride and tempting powers. "Cromwell, I charge thee, fling away ambition; By that sin fell angels; how can man then, the image of his Maker, hope to win by it?...How wretched is that poor man that hangs on princes' favors!... When he falls, he falls like Lucifer, never to hope again" (Henry VIII). The evil spirits and their leader are constantly opposing the advance of the Kingdom of God. One of the greatest missionaries of all times, Ludwig Nommensen (1834-1918), settled among the Toba Bataks, in Northern Sumatra. Central to his belief was that by faith in the living Lord, Christians share in Christ's victory over sin, death, and Satan. Nommensen was very sensitive to the reality of the spirit world. He taught fellow missionaries, "After one has come to understand the people and to be understood by them, one has to begin with the preaching of the Gospel in having a twofold work, namely to pull down the bulwark of Satan and to build up the house of truth." The Nature of Angels Although there are abundant references to angels in the Bible, they are not meant to inform us about their dazzling nature. When they are mentioned, it is always in order to inform us further about God, His actions, and how He works out the plan of salvation. What then can we say about them? They are not omnipresent. They are not restricted by time or space. Angels are without bodies and hence invisible. And although they are pure spirits, they can take on human form. We see this happening when two angels came to Lot in the form of men to tell them to get out of Sodom (Gen.19). Also, on the day of the resurrection, the women who went to the tomb saw two men "in clothes that gleamed like lightning" (Luke 24:4). Matthew records that an angel rolled back the stone and sat on it. His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow (Matt.28:2). Angels are endowed with great intelligence (2 Sam. 14:20). Since they are in the presence of God they have a far clearer view of and deeper insight into the meaning of all that happens in this world than we do. Our knowledge is always limited, even in our age of computers, Internet and other amazing technological advances. But angels do not act on their own; they function and intervene in the world only as God commands. Their amazing knowledge and power, like that of all other creatures, are dependent on and derived from Him. They are capable of great feats of strength, whether it is in slaying more than 180,000 in one evening, or setting an apostle free from prison (2 Kings 19:35; Acts 12). When the Bible speaks about heaven and earth, it often links angels and human beings. Our Lord taught us to pray, "Our Father in heaven... your will be done on earth as it is in heaven"(Matt.6: 9f). The presence of angels encourages Christians to obey God. As the angels carry out God's will in heaven so should we do the same on earth. The third request in the Lord's Prayer means, says the Heidelberg Catechism, "Help everyone carry out (his or her work)... as willingly and faithfully as the angels in heaven"(Q&A 124). The angels do more than sing; they also speak. Paul said to the Corinthians, "If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal" (1 Cor. 13:1). But we must not spend time in speculating about the nature of the language which angels use in communicating with one another – this is an exercise in futility. The question is, are we ready to listen when an angel addresses us? God sent an angel to prepare for Israel the way to the promised land. He told His people, "Pay attention to him and listen to what he says. Do not rebel against him"(Ex. 23:21). When an angel spoke to Zechariah the priest, and foretold the birth of John the Baptist, Zechariah did not trust his message. He said, "How can I be sure of this? I am an old man and my wife is well along in years"(Luke 1:18). There is always the tragic possibility that the voice of an angel will come to us but we refuse to listen. Conclusion With joy the angels obey the will of God (Ps. 103:21). Our loving God sends His angels to support His people on their often arduous journey to the heavenly city. From the throne room in heaven He commands His angels. They do His bidding. After his miraculous rescue from prison, Peter said, "Now I know without a doubt that the Lord sent his angel and rescued me from Herod's clutches" (Acts 12:11). The angels before whom Zechariah, the virgin Mary, and the shepherd fell to the ground in fear and awe are actually our unseen helpers. As we mature in our faith, we will increasingly see the beauty and wonder of our Lord's mighty work on our behalf, and gain in our understanding of the role of His ministering angels in our lives. Rev. Johan Tangelder (1936-2009) wrote for Reformed Perspective for 13 years and many of his articles have been collected at Reformed Reflections....

1 2 3 4

Life's busy, read it when you're ready!

Create a free account to save articles for later, keep track of past articles you’ve read, and receive exclusive access to all RP resources.

Search thousands of RP articles

Helping you think, speak, and act in Christ.

Get Articles Delivered!

Helping you think, speak, and act in Christ. delivered direct to your Inbox!

Kids

Magazine

Articles

Book Reviews

Movie Reviews

Daily devotional

More of Reformed Perspective!

Newsletter

Real Talk

Manna

About Us

Advertise

Contact Us

Shop our merch!

Magazine

Book Reviews

Movie Reviews

Articles

Kids

All Contests

Bucket List Book Club

Theology

Should a Christian ever be discontent?

The value of discontent

Learning contentment from Paul

Conclusion

Theology

Proverbs: a different sort of devotional

Christian education - Sports, Theology

God and the 2014-15 Seattle Seahawks

Theology

#3 - The unknown Commandment

Book excerpts, Book Reviews, Theology

A passage from "The Hiding Place" I can't manage to read out loud...

Theology

When God goes to war: holiness, judgment and hope

Theology

Genesis: theology and history!

Theology

What does fleeing sin look like?

Theology

I won't go with you: abandonment as an act of love

Theology

Practicing the Sabbath: on living out the 4th Commandment

Theology

The Lifelong Battle

Theology

Celebrating the Sabbath

Theology

Will animals go to Heaven?

Theology

A serious problem

Theology

Is the State of Israel a fulfillment of biblical prophecy?

Theology

The sovereignty of God

Theology

Does 1 Corinthians 6 mean Christians can never appeal to the courts?

Theology

The problem with "pan-millennialism"

Christian education, Theology

Why biblical poetry matters

Theology

What is Grace?

Theology

What a cross-continent trek taught one pioneer about Sunday rest

Documentary, Movie Reviews, Theology

American Gospel: Christ Crucified

Documentary, Movie Reviews, Theology, Watch for free

Free film: The God Who Speaks

News, Theology

A secular defense of the Sabbath, and how it falls short

Theology

The Bible on angels

A serious problem 