Coming home, my mind swirled with a thousand and one questions. Questions about politics and Christianity. Evolution and science. God's will. Prayer in school.
I spent that night--as I had many a night for years--with my family. Focusing my thoughts like a laser-beam, I asked my parents one or two choice questions. We discussed them. We opened the Bible and examined it. Talked about it. And resolved the questions.
Of course, Friday night was not talk-about-life night because it was game night. Although my Dad was the least interested in the family, in love he consented on most Friday's to engage in a little fun. It did help that we had no TV.
When possible, as a family, we would walk with our lovable doberman (they are actually faithful family dogs). I dressed conservatively. I never dated. I never listened to rock 'n roll.
My sister did once. Some song longing for peace: "People are people, so why should it be that you and I get along so awfully." Reading the lyrics out loud, she laughed: "People don't get along because they are sinners!" I snickered.
With my father the local ecclesiastical black-sheep, I quickly learned some critical thinking. We attended Sunday worship: morning, evening and mid-week. I listened to radio preachers. Together we listened to Dobson at night.
We talked. And discussed. Or more precisely, my father fulfilled Deuteronomy 6 by taking impromptu opportunities to discuss life and God.
Yet our weak spot was action flicks. We saw them at the dollar theater. We never once used the concession stand. It cost way too much. I never knew it then, but I was poor. Not dirt poor just poor. And that poverty meant that we could not attend the new local Christian school. Or any private school for that matter.
Instead, I attended public school. My entire childhood.
And yet I was homeschooled.
In an interview with the online book service, Christianbook, a well-known homeschooling advocate notes that while he went to private and government schools growing up, "life was a constant homeschool program."
Just so: my life as a teenager was a "constant homeschool program".
It is just such an understanding of the Biblical mandate to train children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord that should unite Christians. In an age when America's foundations are crumbling around us, Christians--especially the Reformed--ought to focus on what is important and not spend large amounts of money, energy and rhetoric defending one specific educational method against others.
History and Christian liberty ought to instruct us otherwise. Among other things parental involvement, attitude and especially a Gospel-centered faith transforms a house into a home. This integrates the family from mere physical closeness to spiritual unity. This type of nurture will have our future children telling their children, "I was homeschooled--and you will be too."
Monday, June 29, 2009
Friday, June 26, 2009
Never Never Land
Michael Jackson was a gifted entertainer.
Gifted by God his Creator.
He entertained millions, sold records by the tens of millions, and generated billions of dollars. Money, talent and time dedicated to the entertainment of man. And that is what he'll be remembered as--an entertainer--until time erases our culture's puerile fascination with fun.
The Puritans of yesteryear are castigated by many Americans as unloving, dour and no fun at all. None of which are true. Yet there is a certain truth to the claims: in comparison with today's near-obsession with merrymaking and amusements the Puritans are no fun at all.
But then six-year-olds think adults are no fun at all either.
Michael Jackson was in many ways the symbol of too many American's fascination with play. And this symbol was epitomized by Jackson's Never Land. Named after the ever-youthful Peter Pan fairytale, the amusement park is the embodiment of play run amok. Or what used to be call tomfoolery. Much of Hollywood is but tomfoolery, packed with adults who never grew up.
But from whence comes the American emphasis on childish distractions? Romans 1:18-21 describes the unregenerate man as one in rebellion against God, suppressing the truth in unrighteousness. He is in rebellion against his knowledge of God, for all those outside of Christ know God the Judge and their rightful condemnation to hell. From verses 23 and following Paul explains that the unbeliever suppresses this truth through false gods and false worship. To the extent that fun, play and amusement become gods to that extent they are creations of man's imagination, distracting him from his own guilt-ridden conscience.
Note how the media interviews and one-hour specials laud Jackson as a man who "touched millions" and whose music epitomized the soul man--language decidedly religious and spiritual. The mobs of fans showering flowers to their idol demonstrate their loyalty to not just a man but what he represented: a lifestyle free from responsibility, a way of life never to be touched by God's Law.
It certainly does not help that too much entertainment has penetrated the churches: from overt amusement-centered worship services to more subtle cult-of-personalities many professing Christians are more and more a product of their society. Mature reflection, somberness and thoughtful deliberation are less sought after while Americans and Christians alike seek easier and less disciplined avenues in life, like entertainment.
At this rate we will witness the growth of childishness and the regression of adulthood. Unless the Lord showers blessing upon our country she will never, never become a land of mature righteousness.
Gifted by God his Creator.
He entertained millions, sold records by the tens of millions, and generated billions of dollars. Money, talent and time dedicated to the entertainment of man. And that is what he'll be remembered as--an entertainer--until time erases our culture's puerile fascination with fun.
The Puritans of yesteryear are castigated by many Americans as unloving, dour and no fun at all. None of which are true. Yet there is a certain truth to the claims: in comparison with today's near-obsession with merrymaking and amusements the Puritans are no fun at all.
But then six-year-olds think adults are no fun at all either.
Michael Jackson was in many ways the symbol of too many American's fascination with play. And this symbol was epitomized by Jackson's Never Land. Named after the ever-youthful Peter Pan fairytale, the amusement park is the embodiment of play run amok. Or what used to be call tomfoolery. Much of Hollywood is but tomfoolery, packed with adults who never grew up.
But from whence comes the American emphasis on childish distractions? Romans 1:18-21 describes the unregenerate man as one in rebellion against God, suppressing the truth in unrighteousness. He is in rebellion against his knowledge of God, for all those outside of Christ know God the Judge and their rightful condemnation to hell. From verses 23 and following Paul explains that the unbeliever suppresses this truth through false gods and false worship. To the extent that fun, play and amusement become gods to that extent they are creations of man's imagination, distracting him from his own guilt-ridden conscience.
Note how the media interviews and one-hour specials laud Jackson as a man who "touched millions" and whose music epitomized the soul man--language decidedly religious and spiritual. The mobs of fans showering flowers to their idol demonstrate their loyalty to not just a man but what he represented: a lifestyle free from responsibility, a way of life never to be touched by God's Law.
It certainly does not help that too much entertainment has penetrated the churches: from overt amusement-centered worship services to more subtle cult-of-personalities many professing Christians are more and more a product of their society. Mature reflection, somberness and thoughtful deliberation are less sought after while Americans and Christians alike seek easier and less disciplined avenues in life, like entertainment.
At this rate we will witness the growth of childishness and the regression of adulthood. Unless the Lord showers blessing upon our country she will never, never become a land of mature righteousness.
Monday, June 22, 2009
Controversy & Revival
"Again, men say that instead of engaging in controversy in the Church, we ought to pray to God for a revival; instead of polemics, we ought to have evangelism. Well, what kind of revival do you think that will be? What sort of evangelism is it that is indifferent to the question what evangel is it that is to be preached? Not a revival in the New Testament sense, not the evangelism that Paul meant when he said, 'Woe is be unto me, if I preach not the gospel.' No, my friends, there can be no true evangelism which makes common cause with the enemies of the Cross of Christ. Souls will hardly be saved unless the evangelists can say with Paul: "If we or an angel from heaven preach any other gospel than that which we preached unto you, let him be accursed!"
Every true revival is born in controversy, and leads to more controversy. That has been true ever since our Lord said that He came not to bring peace upon the earth but a sword. And do you know what I think will happen when God sends a new Reformation upon the Church? We cannot tell when that blessed day will come. But when the blessed day does come, I think we can say at least one result that it will bring. We shall hear nothing on that day about the evils of controversy in the Church. All that will be swept away as with a mighty flood. A man who is on fire with a message never talks in that wretched, feeble way, but proclaims the truth joyously and fearlessly, in the presence of every high thing that is lifted up against the gospel of Christ."
J. Gresham Machen, The Importance of Christian Scholarship, p.10, pdf.
Every true revival is born in controversy, and leads to more controversy. That has been true ever since our Lord said that He came not to bring peace upon the earth but a sword. And do you know what I think will happen when God sends a new Reformation upon the Church? We cannot tell when that blessed day will come. But when the blessed day does come, I think we can say at least one result that it will bring. We shall hear nothing on that day about the evils of controversy in the Church. All that will be swept away as with a mighty flood. A man who is on fire with a message never talks in that wretched, feeble way, but proclaims the truth joyously and fearlessly, in the presence of every high thing that is lifted up against the gospel of Christ."
J. Gresham Machen, The Importance of Christian Scholarship, p.10, pdf.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Year of Calvinism: America's First Judge
"Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest, of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers."
These wise words were uttered by the co-author of the Federalist Papers and first Chief US Supreme Court Justice, John Jay. Presiding over the American-British peace-treaty, he was also a New York governor, US ambassador and president of the Continental Congress. He was respected by all the founding Fathers.
He was a godly man. Born in a family descended from the Huguenots, he was reared in an Anglican home with "Calvinistic severity" (Stahr). But how much of the Anglican theological tradition rubbed off on him? Was he a Calvinist?
Consider first his theological state of mind, expressed in a letter to Professor Miller of Princeton:
"In forming and settling my belief relative to the doctrines of Christianity, I adopted no articles from creeds, but such only as, on careful examination, I found to be confirmed by the Bible." (Pellew)
As a low-church Anglican in good standing, then, it can only be surmised with great assurance that Chief Justice Jay was a Calvinist (Jay, 463). After the war, necessarily, the Anglican parishes in America were cut off from their bishop in London. Accordingly, the American Anglicans became the Protestant Episcopal Church in America. And like their mother church in England, they adopted a Book of Common Prayer, which included a confession:
"Art. X. Of Free-will. The condition of man, after the fall of A Jam, is such, that he cannot turn and prepare himself, by his own natural strength and good works, to faith, and calling upon God..."
"Art. XVII. Of Predestination and Election. Predestination to life is the everlasting purpose of God, whereby (before the foundations of the world were laid) he hath constantly decreed, by his counsel, secret to us, to deliver from curse and damnation, those whom he hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, and to bring them by Christ to everlasting salvation, as vessels made to honour..." (p.378ff., 1808 edition)
What Evangelical today would confess with our First Chief Justice such sublime doctrine?
His own letters are rife with allusions to Providence and God's control over all things. His biographer, Pellew, noted:
"...Jay found both inspiration and great comfort and happiness in religion. It was one of his favorite remarks, that if men would never forget that the world was under the guidance of a Providence which never erred, it would save much useless anxiety, and prevent a great many mistakes." (p.316)
Speaking to the Bible Society about the increase in knowledge and desire for more bibles: "there is reason to conclude that they have been produced by Him in whose hands are the hearts of all men." (p.506)
But it is his God-centered prayer of a self-conscious sinner that truly strikes a cord with devout Christians everywhere:
"Most merciful Father! who desirest not the death of a sinner, but will have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth, give me grace so to draw nigh unto thee as that thou wilt condescend to draw nigh unto me; and enable me to offer unto thee, through thy beloved Son, supplications and thanksgivings acceptably.
I thank thee for thy mercy to our fallen race, as declared in thy holy gospel by thy beloved Son...Enable me, merciful Father to understand thy holy gospel aright, and to distinguish the doctrines thereof from erroneous expositions of them...Let thy Holy Spirit purify and unite me to my Saviour for ever, and enable me to cleave unto him as unto my very life...Wean me from undue and unseasonable attachments and attentions to the things of this transitory world...
Protect me from becoming a prey to temptations to evil...Give me grace to love and obey and be thankful unto thee, with all my heart, with all my soul, with all my mind, and with all my strength...Be pleased also to impress my heart and mind with a deep and unceasing sense and recollection of the evil of sin...Give me grace, I humbly and earnestly beseech thee, to repent of my sins...
I thank thee, the great Sovereign of the universe, for thy long-continued goodness to these countries, notwithstanding our ingratitude and disobedience to thee, our merciful deliverer and benefactor. Give us grace to turn unto thee with true repentance, and implore thy forgiveness.
Condescend, merciful Father! to grant as far as proper these imperfect petitions, to accept these inadequate thanksgivings, and to pardon whatever of sin hath mingled in them, for the sake of Jesus Christ, our blessed Lord and Saviour; unto whom, with thee, and the blessed Spirit, ever one God, be rendered all honour and glory, now and for ever."
AMEN.
These wise words were uttered by the co-author of the Federalist Papers and first Chief US Supreme Court Justice, John Jay. Presiding over the American-British peace-treaty, he was also a New York governor, US ambassador and president of the Continental Congress. He was respected by all the founding Fathers.
He was a godly man. Born in a family descended from the Huguenots, he was reared in an Anglican home with "Calvinistic severity" (Stahr). But how much of the Anglican theological tradition rubbed off on him? Was he a Calvinist?
Consider first his theological state of mind, expressed in a letter to Professor Miller of Princeton:
"In forming and settling my belief relative to the doctrines of Christianity, I adopted no articles from creeds, but such only as, on careful examination, I found to be confirmed by the Bible." (Pellew)
As a low-church Anglican in good standing, then, it can only be surmised with great assurance that Chief Justice Jay was a Calvinist (Jay, 463). After the war, necessarily, the Anglican parishes in America were cut off from their bishop in London. Accordingly, the American Anglicans became the Protestant Episcopal Church in America. And like their mother church in England, they adopted a Book of Common Prayer, which included a confession:
"Art. X. Of Free-will. The condition of man, after the fall of A Jam, is such, that he cannot turn and prepare himself, by his own natural strength and good works, to faith, and calling upon God..."
"Art. XVII. Of Predestination and Election. Predestination to life is the everlasting purpose of God, whereby (before the foundations of the world were laid) he hath constantly decreed, by his counsel, secret to us, to deliver from curse and damnation, those whom he hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, and to bring them by Christ to everlasting salvation, as vessels made to honour..." (p.378ff., 1808 edition)
What Evangelical today would confess with our First Chief Justice such sublime doctrine?
His own letters are rife with allusions to Providence and God's control over all things. His biographer, Pellew, noted:
"...Jay found both inspiration and great comfort and happiness in religion. It was one of his favorite remarks, that if men would never forget that the world was under the guidance of a Providence which never erred, it would save much useless anxiety, and prevent a great many mistakes." (p.316)
Speaking to the Bible Society about the increase in knowledge and desire for more bibles: "there is reason to conclude that they have been produced by Him in whose hands are the hearts of all men." (p.506)
But it is his God-centered prayer of a self-conscious sinner that truly strikes a cord with devout Christians everywhere:
"Most merciful Father! who desirest not the death of a sinner, but will have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth, give me grace so to draw nigh unto thee as that thou wilt condescend to draw nigh unto me; and enable me to offer unto thee, through thy beloved Son, supplications and thanksgivings acceptably.
I thank thee for thy mercy to our fallen race, as declared in thy holy gospel by thy beloved Son...Enable me, merciful Father to understand thy holy gospel aright, and to distinguish the doctrines thereof from erroneous expositions of them...Let thy Holy Spirit purify and unite me to my Saviour for ever, and enable me to cleave unto him as unto my very life...Wean me from undue and unseasonable attachments and attentions to the things of this transitory world...
Protect me from becoming a prey to temptations to evil...Give me grace to love and obey and be thankful unto thee, with all my heart, with all my soul, with all my mind, and with all my strength...Be pleased also to impress my heart and mind with a deep and unceasing sense and recollection of the evil of sin...Give me grace, I humbly and earnestly beseech thee, to repent of my sins...
I thank thee, the great Sovereign of the universe, for thy long-continued goodness to these countries, notwithstanding our ingratitude and disobedience to thee, our merciful deliverer and benefactor. Give us grace to turn unto thee with true repentance, and implore thy forgiveness.
Condescend, merciful Father! to grant as far as proper these imperfect petitions, to accept these inadequate thanksgivings, and to pardon whatever of sin hath mingled in them, for the sake of Jesus Christ, our blessed Lord and Saviour; unto whom, with thee, and the blessed Spirit, ever one God, be rendered all honour and glory, now and for ever."
AMEN.
Monday, June 15, 2009
Revival of Rousseau
"But when mothers deign to nurse their own children, then morals will reform themselves, natural feeling will revive in every heart, the state will be repopulated"
"It is only in our father's home that we learn to love our own, and a woman whose mother did not educate her herself will not be willing to educate her own children."
"There is no more charming picture than that of family life..."
What do homeschooling and Rousseau have in common?
Much in may ways.
Rousseau endorsed homeschooling as the ideal system of education.
Read that line again.
The quotes above are from Rousseau himself--the infamous whipping boy of the Religious Right. Yet how could such statements flow from the pen of Rousseau? While we have been rightfully castigating him as the grandfather of socialism and like ills, we never slowed down to actually examine his entire system of thought--a system that has been revived again.
His worldview is based on the inborn (natural) innocence and free-will of man. It is nurture not nature that enslaves man's will and corrupts his innocence. And it is the institutions of man (especially the rich) that hold natural man back. He said as much in his little-known book on education, Emile.
In this idealistic work, the fictitious young boy, Emile, is trained at home in the countryside, far away from the evil influences of the mass of men. The mother is to nurse the child and the father is supposed to teach the son. But Rousseau allows, in this instance, for a tutor-father to replace the stereotypical father who laments his lack of ability and time.
Now, it is certain that many scholars connect Rousseau with Statism, but Rousseau was not always considered consistent with his own thought. If society is the problem and all men are born in society, then what? Either embrace (control) all of society or flee (escape) society. In fact, in a letter to a friend, he admits that Emile is "a philosophical work on this principle advanced by the author in other writings that man is naturally good." (M.h.siddiqui, 83). Emile is an ideal.
The contrast of nature and nurture arises yet again--of good nature and bad nurture. And therein lies the contemporary revival of Rousseau. Both the Left and the Right embrace elements of Rousseau. The left either through monopolistic public education or idealistic anarchy and unschooling and the Right...What of the Right? Although it is certainly the case that many Christian homeschoolers do not buy whole-hog the thinking of Rousseau, it may well be they embrace more of him than they realize.
Consider parents who fearfully isolate their children from society (and publicly state as much). Many are but echoing Rousseau:
"Watch over him from the moment he comes into the world. As soon as he is born take possession of him and do not leave him till he is a man; you will never succeed otherwise. Just as the real nurse is the mother, the real teacher is the father...He will be better educated by a sensible though limited father than by the cleverest teacher in the world" [book 1, paragraph 71].
Or consider Rousseau again:
"A young man is led astray in the first place neither by temperament nor by the senses, but by popular opinion..it is not nature that corrupts them but example...[so] I am dealing only with home training. Take a young man carefully educated in his father's country house, and examine him when he reaches Paris and makes his entrance into society; you will find him thinking clearly about honest matters, and you will find his will as wholesome as his reason. You will find scorn of vice and disgust for debauchery" (Emile, 242, emphasis added).
The educational claims trumpeted in some circles sound eerily Rousseauian. However, the most disturbing is the religious overlap of Rousseau and some Christians: both believe in original innocence and free will. That is, in Rousseau's language, "man is naturally good."
Here is the real culprit. It is not the similarity of methods as such but the fundamental beliefs that support the methods. As much as the public schools are scorned by many conservative Christians, such a system was once inundated with God-talk, prayer and Bible. Once those were taken out, many Christians fled. It was not schooling as such that was the culprit but that the method was shifted into a context of unbelief.
Many Christians--even Christian homeschoolers--in my experience endorse the innocence of babies and the free-will of man. Ask yourself: when a child dies in infancy why should he or she enter heaven? Many answer, "because they are innocent" but they answer wrongly. By birth--by nature--man is a sinner (Ps. 51:5; Eph. 2:2). Ask yourself: can man exercise his free-will and seek after God? Many answer, "yes!" but they answer wrongly. Man's will is bound in sin and iniquity and none seek after God (Rom. 3:11, 12).
Original sin is thrown out while free-will is retained.
In such a world, the Holy Spirit is not needed to regenerate man's mind and free his will. What is needed is a new environment, either of the home or of society. What is needed is a new method, for the churches or for the families.
That is the American religion. That is the revival of Rousseau.
"It is only in our father's home that we learn to love our own, and a woman whose mother did not educate her herself will not be willing to educate her own children."
"There is no more charming picture than that of family life..."
What do homeschooling and Rousseau have in common?
Much in may ways.
Rousseau endorsed homeschooling as the ideal system of education.
Read that line again.
The quotes above are from Rousseau himself--the infamous whipping boy of the Religious Right. Yet how could such statements flow from the pen of Rousseau? While we have been rightfully castigating him as the grandfather of socialism and like ills, we never slowed down to actually examine his entire system of thought--a system that has been revived again.
His worldview is based on the inborn (natural) innocence and free-will of man. It is nurture not nature that enslaves man's will and corrupts his innocence. And it is the institutions of man (especially the rich) that hold natural man back. He said as much in his little-known book on education, Emile.
In this idealistic work, the fictitious young boy, Emile, is trained at home in the countryside, far away from the evil influences of the mass of men. The mother is to nurse the child and the father is supposed to teach the son. But Rousseau allows, in this instance, for a tutor-father to replace the stereotypical father who laments his lack of ability and time.
Now, it is certain that many scholars connect Rousseau with Statism, but Rousseau was not always considered consistent with his own thought. If society is the problem and all men are born in society, then what? Either embrace (control) all of society or flee (escape) society. In fact, in a letter to a friend, he admits that Emile is "a philosophical work on this principle advanced by the author in other writings that man is naturally good." (M.h.siddiqui, 83). Emile is an ideal.
The contrast of nature and nurture arises yet again--of good nature and bad nurture. And therein lies the contemporary revival of Rousseau. Both the Left and the Right embrace elements of Rousseau. The left either through monopolistic public education or idealistic anarchy and unschooling and the Right...What of the Right? Although it is certainly the case that many Christian homeschoolers do not buy whole-hog the thinking of Rousseau, it may well be they embrace more of him than they realize.
Consider parents who fearfully isolate their children from society (and publicly state as much). Many are but echoing Rousseau:
"Watch over him from the moment he comes into the world. As soon as he is born take possession of him and do not leave him till he is a man; you will never succeed otherwise. Just as the real nurse is the mother, the real teacher is the father...He will be better educated by a sensible though limited father than by the cleverest teacher in the world" [book 1, paragraph 71].
Or consider Rousseau again:
"A young man is led astray in the first place neither by temperament nor by the senses, but by popular opinion..it is not nature that corrupts them but example...[so] I am dealing only with home training. Take a young man carefully educated in his father's country house, and examine him when he reaches Paris and makes his entrance into society; you will find him thinking clearly about honest matters, and you will find his will as wholesome as his reason. You will find scorn of vice and disgust for debauchery" (Emile, 242, emphasis added).
The educational claims trumpeted in some circles sound eerily Rousseauian. However, the most disturbing is the religious overlap of Rousseau and some Christians: both believe in original innocence and free will. That is, in Rousseau's language, "man is naturally good."
Here is the real culprit. It is not the similarity of methods as such but the fundamental beliefs that support the methods. As much as the public schools are scorned by many conservative Christians, such a system was once inundated with God-talk, prayer and Bible. Once those were taken out, many Christians fled. It was not schooling as such that was the culprit but that the method was shifted into a context of unbelief.
Many Christians--even Christian homeschoolers--in my experience endorse the innocence of babies and the free-will of man. Ask yourself: when a child dies in infancy why should he or she enter heaven? Many answer, "because they are innocent" but they answer wrongly. By birth--by nature--man is a sinner (Ps. 51:5; Eph. 2:2). Ask yourself: can man exercise his free-will and seek after God? Many answer, "yes!" but they answer wrongly. Man's will is bound in sin and iniquity and none seek after God (Rom. 3:11, 12).
Original sin is thrown out while free-will is retained.
In such a world, the Holy Spirit is not needed to regenerate man's mind and free his will. What is needed is a new environment, either of the home or of society. What is needed is a new method, for the churches or for the families.
That is the American religion. That is the revival of Rousseau.
Monday, June 08, 2009
Year of Calvinism: Antithesis
Calvinism is a worldview.
A worldview is a network of inter-dependent presuppositions about the most basic and fundamental components of life: reality (metaphysics), knowledge (epistemology) and ethics (axiology). What is real? How can we know truth? What is right?
And Calvinism as a worldview is antithetical to all other approaches to life.
This Antithesis is not primarily external or through the overt actions of Calvinists--many non-Calvinist act and practice the same Ten Commandments. The Antithesis is not primarily expressed in a different art form or science (both which by God's common grace many unbelievers can be successful in).
No. The Antithesis is primarily spiritual or in principal. What Calvinists believe and confess stands them out from the crowd. Especially their view of salvation.
In fact, the Calvinistic worldview is rooted in its view of salvation as expounded in the Bible alone: justification by grace alone through faith alone on account of Christ alone. A salvation consistent in both Testaments. This worldview is more than a question of salvation, yet it is rooted in such truths about salvation.
Why? Because wherever man is the question of his individual standing before the Judge of the universe is forefront. How can I be saved? is the perennial question of the ages. Is salvation through law--mine, God's, the state's--or through faith? If the former, then wherever I am in life I turn that work or thought into an idol to save me. If the latter, then wherever I am in life I turn over to the Lord.
Or to look at it another way: if we have all of God's law (worldview) to cover all our questions but trust in our own self-effort what have we gained? That is why the cornerstone of the Calvinistic Worldview is the Gospel. A Gospel antithetical to all other 'gospels'.
Man is dead in trespasses and sins. Dead. He does not seek God. And he is more than dead, he is the living dead, actively suppressing the truth in unrighteousness. Born speaking lies, he invariably matures in his wickedness until God restrains or transforms his soul (Eph. 1:1-3; Rom. 1:18; Ps. 58:3).
But God in His great love wherein He loves His own, sent Christ to become man, to identify with His people, to obey for His people, to die for His people. For the people He chose to save before the foundations of the world.
It is both the absolute sovereignty and over-ruling dominion of God Almighty and the utter and total depravity of man--in thought, word and deed--that makes Calvinism stand out. And ties its worldview together.
Without a sovereign God who has predestined all things there can be no intelligibility in any endeavor of life--all would be meaningless gibberish--worse, there would be no existence of anything. The Trinity is the precondition--the necessary universal Reality--for creation. Neither logic, science, politics or family life can exist in any coherent manner without the Father, Son and Holy Spirit and their all-encompassing plan for our lives.
And if Christians admit to God's sovereignty in everything but in man's salvation--if they deny that God elects whom He will--then all is lost. If God is not sovereign in your salvation then He is not sovereign anywhere. And if not sovereign anywhere, then all is lost.
The Antithesis is lost. And Humanism has swallowed whole the life of the Christian. In principle. So it should be clear that the great Antithesis is not really between generic Christianity and Darwinism, but Calvinism and Arminianism and any other -ism.
The dangerous worldview of Humanism, Evolutionism and the like is so appealing to American families and churches because they already believe in a key-component. To assert 'free-will' as defined today is to already believe in Humanism. The enemy is not ultimately "out there" against the churches, but "in here" amongst ourselves.
The Antithesis of Calvinism is most clearly portrayed in this perennial question of God's unconditional election of sinners unto salvation and man's bound will. And America--and especially the American churches--will not witness revival or reformation until such truths penetrates their calcifying hearts.
A worldview is a network of inter-dependent presuppositions about the most basic and fundamental components of life: reality (metaphysics), knowledge (epistemology) and ethics (axiology). What is real? How can we know truth? What is right?
And Calvinism as a worldview is antithetical to all other approaches to life.
This Antithesis is not primarily external or through the overt actions of Calvinists--many non-Calvinist act and practice the same Ten Commandments. The Antithesis is not primarily expressed in a different art form or science (both which by God's common grace many unbelievers can be successful in).
No. The Antithesis is primarily spiritual or in principal. What Calvinists believe and confess stands them out from the crowd. Especially their view of salvation.
In fact, the Calvinistic worldview is rooted in its view of salvation as expounded in the Bible alone: justification by grace alone through faith alone on account of Christ alone. A salvation consistent in both Testaments. This worldview is more than a question of salvation, yet it is rooted in such truths about salvation.
Why? Because wherever man is the question of his individual standing before the Judge of the universe is forefront. How can I be saved? is the perennial question of the ages. Is salvation through law--mine, God's, the state's--or through faith? If the former, then wherever I am in life I turn that work or thought into an idol to save me. If the latter, then wherever I am in life I turn over to the Lord.
Or to look at it another way: if we have all of God's law (worldview) to cover all our questions but trust in our own self-effort what have we gained? That is why the cornerstone of the Calvinistic Worldview is the Gospel. A Gospel antithetical to all other 'gospels'.
Man is dead in trespasses and sins. Dead. He does not seek God. And he is more than dead, he is the living dead, actively suppressing the truth in unrighteousness. Born speaking lies, he invariably matures in his wickedness until God restrains or transforms his soul (Eph. 1:1-3; Rom. 1:18; Ps. 58:3).
But God in His great love wherein He loves His own, sent Christ to become man, to identify with His people, to obey for His people, to die for His people. For the people He chose to save before the foundations of the world.
It is both the absolute sovereignty and over-ruling dominion of God Almighty and the utter and total depravity of man--in thought, word and deed--that makes Calvinism stand out. And ties its worldview together.
Without a sovereign God who has predestined all things there can be no intelligibility in any endeavor of life--all would be meaningless gibberish--worse, there would be no existence of anything. The Trinity is the precondition--the necessary universal Reality--for creation. Neither logic, science, politics or family life can exist in any coherent manner without the Father, Son and Holy Spirit and their all-encompassing plan for our lives.
And if Christians admit to God's sovereignty in everything but in man's salvation--if they deny that God elects whom He will--then all is lost. If God is not sovereign in your salvation then He is not sovereign anywhere. And if not sovereign anywhere, then all is lost.
The Antithesis is lost. And Humanism has swallowed whole the life of the Christian. In principle. So it should be clear that the great Antithesis is not really between generic Christianity and Darwinism, but Calvinism and Arminianism and any other -ism.
The dangerous worldview of Humanism, Evolutionism and the like is so appealing to American families and churches because they already believe in a key-component. To assert 'free-will' as defined today is to already believe in Humanism. The enemy is not ultimately "out there" against the churches, but "in here" amongst ourselves.
The Antithesis of Calvinism is most clearly portrayed in this perennial question of God's unconditional election of sinners unto salvation and man's bound will. And America--and especially the American churches--will not witness revival or reformation until such truths penetrates their calcifying hearts.
Thursday, June 04, 2009
Year of Calvinism: Worldview
Calvinism has been maligned and misunderstood since it was first clearly formulated five-hundred years ago. It has been maligned because those who know it and hate it wish it to disappear. It has been misunderstood because many simply do not know what it is all about.
There are a number of ways to describe it. It is normally identified with the TULIP acronym: Total depravity, Unconditional election, Limited atonement, Irresistible grace, and Perseverance of the saints.
And that is fine as far as the important question of salvation goes. And it goes far.
Yet, Calvinist leaders and laymen, from John Calvin to Jonathan Edwards, did not base their whole theology upon TULIP—it was rather a result and consequence of a deeper, fundamental principle: the glory of God.
The first question in John Calvin’s Geneva Catechism—a series of questions and answers for biblical instruction—set the tone for his approach to the Christian life:
Master. — What is the chief end of human life?
Scholar. — To know God by whom men were created.
Master.—What reason have you for saying so?
Scholar.—Because he created us and placed us in this world to be glorified in us. And it is indeed right that our life, of which himself is the beginning, should be devoted to his glory.
The glory of God was the chief goal of Calvin and the Calvinists. Over one-hundred years later, an august assembly of learned and godly men gathered in England at Westminster Abby to summarize a common confession of belief. They began the Westminster Shorter Catechism with the same premise as Calvin:
Question 1. What is the chief end of man?
Answer 1. Man's chief end is to glorify God, and to enjoy him forever.
The question references 1 Corinthians 10:31: “Therefore, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.” This has ever been the hallmark of Calvinism in all its ecclesiastical forms. The exaltation, adoration and praise of the glorious Trinity have ever been our song. To glorify God Almighty is to give Him the preeminence in all things.
But how does a Calvinist move from God’s glory to the infamous TULIP? They start with the Bible alone—and the whole Bible. The Old Testament emphasizes God’s majesty and holiness:
“[Israel said] ‘Surely the LORD our God has shown us His glory and His greatness, and we have heard His voice from the midst of the fire. We have seen this day that God speaks with man; yet he still lives.’” (Deut. 5:24)
As the church of old stood in awe of Yahweh’s absolute moral purity, enormous might and majestic otherliness, so we fall before our covenant Lord. The sense—both intellectual and emotional—of God’s fearsome presence is believed by all orthodox Christians, but Calvinism in particular has a theology that best comports with such beliefs. Like Isaiah of old, we cry: "Woe is me, for I am undone! Because I am a man of unclean lips, And I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; For my eyes have seen the King, The LORD of hosts." The penalty for not glorifying God is death (Acts 12:23). We sin by not glorifying God. We deserve death.
In general, many would agree with the description so far. The difference comes in the details of sin and salvation. The doctrine of original sin (Rom. 5:12ff.)—that even infants are by nature children of wrath (Ps. 51; Eph. 1:2)—is repellent to many Evangelicals these days. The outworking of that fact is described by Paul: “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” Sin is the act and condition of falling short of God’s moral perfection; therefore, it falls short of glorifying the Creator God. This sin is so much a part of fallen man’s nature that Paul contends, “There is none righteous, no, not one; there is none who understands; there is none who seeks after God” (Rom. 3:10-11).
If man is born a sinner; if he sins only and continually; if man does not even seek after God, then where is hope? Who then can be saved?
Only those whom the Savior redeems can be saved. God must first seek men. This leads either to the salvation of all or the salvation of some. All orthodox Christians deny the former but many quibble over the latter. Calvinists embrace the latter most heartily because it is Biblical and fully sets forth God’s glory. God is the Alpha and Omega, the Author and Finisher of our faith.
God seeks and finds men in a three-fold way: by appointing, accomplishing and applying. The Father elects those whom He fore-loved (Rom. 9:14ff.); the Son finished redemption for His sheep by His perfect life and vicarious death, justifying through imputed righteousness (Rom. 5:12ff. Phil. 3:9); the Spirit applies the Son’s work, breathing new life and applying the gift of faith alone to the elect, sanctifying their hearts (John 3:8; Eph. 2:8). Salvation is God-centered.
If Christ’s death is truly a substitutionary death, then those whom He saved will be saved and cannot but be saved. They are saved unto good works, persevering therein by the Spirit’s preservation of their new mind, will and desire (Eph. 2:10). TULIP flows from the glory of God.
The worldview of Calvinism begins and ends with the preeminence of God Almighty, Maker of Heaven and Earth. And since all of creation was made by God and for God, the worldview of Calvinism embraces all of creation, in all its complexity. The upcoming series will illustrate the power of that worldview—the power and glory of God in history and through His church.
“Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and His ways past finding out! For who has known the mind of the LORD? Or who has become His counselor? Or who has first given to Him and it shall be repaid to him? For of Him and through Him and to Him are all things, to whom be glory forever. Amen.”
(Romans 11:33-36)
There are a number of ways to describe it. It is normally identified with the TULIP acronym: Total depravity, Unconditional election, Limited atonement, Irresistible grace, and Perseverance of the saints.
And that is fine as far as the important question of salvation goes. And it goes far.
Yet, Calvinist leaders and laymen, from John Calvin to Jonathan Edwards, did not base their whole theology upon TULIP—it was rather a result and consequence of a deeper, fundamental principle: the glory of God.
The first question in John Calvin’s Geneva Catechism—a series of questions and answers for biblical instruction—set the tone for his approach to the Christian life:
Master. — What is the chief end of human life?
Scholar. — To know God by whom men were created.
Master.—What reason have you for saying so?
Scholar.—Because he created us and placed us in this world to be glorified in us. And it is indeed right that our life, of which himself is the beginning, should be devoted to his glory.
The glory of God was the chief goal of Calvin and the Calvinists. Over one-hundred years later, an august assembly of learned and godly men gathered in England at Westminster Abby to summarize a common confession of belief. They began the Westminster Shorter Catechism with the same premise as Calvin:
Question 1. What is the chief end of man?
Answer 1. Man's chief end is to glorify God, and to enjoy him forever.
The question references 1 Corinthians 10:31: “Therefore, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.” This has ever been the hallmark of Calvinism in all its ecclesiastical forms. The exaltation, adoration and praise of the glorious Trinity have ever been our song. To glorify God Almighty is to give Him the preeminence in all things.
But how does a Calvinist move from God’s glory to the infamous TULIP? They start with the Bible alone—and the whole Bible. The Old Testament emphasizes God’s majesty and holiness:
“[Israel said] ‘Surely the LORD our God has shown us His glory and His greatness, and we have heard His voice from the midst of the fire. We have seen this day that God speaks with man; yet he still lives.’” (Deut. 5:24)
As the church of old stood in awe of Yahweh’s absolute moral purity, enormous might and majestic otherliness, so we fall before our covenant Lord. The sense—both intellectual and emotional—of God’s fearsome presence is believed by all orthodox Christians, but Calvinism in particular has a theology that best comports with such beliefs. Like Isaiah of old, we cry: "Woe is me, for I am undone! Because I am a man of unclean lips, And I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; For my eyes have seen the King, The LORD of hosts." The penalty for not glorifying God is death (Acts 12:23). We sin by not glorifying God. We deserve death.
In general, many would agree with the description so far. The difference comes in the details of sin and salvation. The doctrine of original sin (Rom. 5:12ff.)—that even infants are by nature children of wrath (Ps. 51; Eph. 1:2)—is repellent to many Evangelicals these days. The outworking of that fact is described by Paul: “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” Sin is the act and condition of falling short of God’s moral perfection; therefore, it falls short of glorifying the Creator God. This sin is so much a part of fallen man’s nature that Paul contends, “There is none righteous, no, not one; there is none who understands; there is none who seeks after God” (Rom. 3:10-11).
If man is born a sinner; if he sins only and continually; if man does not even seek after God, then where is hope? Who then can be saved?
Only those whom the Savior redeems can be saved. God must first seek men. This leads either to the salvation of all or the salvation of some. All orthodox Christians deny the former but many quibble over the latter. Calvinists embrace the latter most heartily because it is Biblical and fully sets forth God’s glory. God is the Alpha and Omega, the Author and Finisher of our faith.
God seeks and finds men in a three-fold way: by appointing, accomplishing and applying. The Father elects those whom He fore-loved (Rom. 9:14ff.); the Son finished redemption for His sheep by His perfect life and vicarious death, justifying through imputed righteousness (Rom. 5:12ff. Phil. 3:9); the Spirit applies the Son’s work, breathing new life and applying the gift of faith alone to the elect, sanctifying their hearts (John 3:8; Eph. 2:8). Salvation is God-centered.
If Christ’s death is truly a substitutionary death, then those whom He saved will be saved and cannot but be saved. They are saved unto good works, persevering therein by the Spirit’s preservation of their new mind, will and desire (Eph. 2:10). TULIP flows from the glory of God.
The worldview of Calvinism begins and ends with the preeminence of God Almighty, Maker of Heaven and Earth. And since all of creation was made by God and for God, the worldview of Calvinism embraces all of creation, in all its complexity. The upcoming series will illustrate the power of that worldview—the power and glory of God in history and through His church.
“Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and His ways past finding out! For who has known the mind of the LORD? Or who has become His counselor? Or who has first given to Him and it shall be repaid to him? For of Him and through Him and to Him are all things, to whom be glory forever. Amen.”
(Romans 11:33-36)
Monday, June 01, 2009
Calvinism, History & Homeschooling
Many homeschoolers--like many conservative Evangelicals--imbibe on the glories of yesteryear: when Christianity dominated early America. In fact, it is not uncommon that homeschoolers pride themselves as a continuation of that past generation.
But what if what you know about that past generation was wrong? Would that make you think twice about cause and effect--that the cause of what we deem a successful Christian past was anchored in a specific form of Christianity and not some generic, vague and amorphous Deism that many Americans believe today?
Consider:
And not only were the general contours of America life Calvinistic, many of the little known and well-known leaders were or were raised Calvinists: Patrick Henry, John Jay, John Witherspoon, Roger Sherman and Noah Webster.
Yes, that dictionary found in every homeschooling house was written by a Calvinist.
Even the political resistance theory was greatly influenced by Calvinism. John Adams bluntly acknowledges the wide-spread influences of both the French-Calvinist’s work Vindicus Contra Tyrannus and the English Calvinist work of Ponet (A Shorte Treatise of Politike Power), both which defended the right of the people to rise against tyrants.
Much of our political, social and economic freedoms hail from Calvinism.
But why? Is there something deeper to Calvinism than a system of thought that spawned the early Modern Era?
Yes. It is the Gospel.
Ask yourself, Is it coincidence that Luther, Calvin, Tyndale & the Puritans all believed in the Five Points of Calvinism? In TULIP--Total depravity, Unconditional election, Limited atonement, Irresistible grace and Perseverance of the saints?
God the Spirit raised up Luther and Calvin and a hundred other pastors who taught that creeds and deeds must be rooted in the Five Solas--that the Bible alone teaches justification through faith alone by grace alone on account of Christ alone to the glory of God alone. And those Solas were carried to the four corners of Europe by the original Protestants of old and their public creeds: Presbyterian Westminster Confession of Faith, Anglican 39 Articles, Dutch, Swiss, Irish, Polish, Hungarian, French Huguenots, Congregational and Baptist--all with a Calvinistic creed in their origins.
What about those American revivals? Started among the Calvinists first. Whitefield and Edwards--Calvinists. Wesley came a bit later. The Second Great Awakening was started among the Calvinist--Congregationalist, Baptists and Presbyterians. Later on it was hijacked (25 year later!) by Finney and his free-will salvation.
Dear homeschooler: consider well this summary of historical facts. Do you want something greater for your family, your children and their children? for this nation?
You want to bring it back to the good old days don't you? I know I do.
Then learn the lesson of one of the most popular and well-respected Calvinists of the 1800s:
"I have my own opinion that there is no such thing as preaching Christ and Him crucified, unless we preach what nowadays is called Calvinism. It is a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else. I do not believe we can preach the gospel if we do not preach justification by faith without works; nor unless we preach the sovereignty of God in His dispensation of grace; nor unless we exalt the electing unchangeable eternal, immutable, conquering love of Jehovah; nor do I think we can preach the gospel unless we base it upon the special and particular redemption of His elect and chosen people which Christ wrought out upon the cross."
Charles Spurgeon
Sermons, p.88, 1858.
AMEN.
[Hungry for more truth? here for more detailed info or post. Hungry for what the Gospel really is, email me: pastor mathis at gmail dot com]
But what if what you know about that past generation was wrong? Would that make you think twice about cause and effect--that the cause of what we deem a successful Christian past was anchored in a specific form of Christianity and not some generic, vague and amorphous Deism that many Americans believe today?
Consider:
- The founders of the three main settlements, Jamestown, Plymouth and Massachusetts, were creedal Calvinists.
- The Huguenot settlers in the South, the German Reformed of the middle colonies and the Dutch of New York were all Calvinists.
- In 1787, the number of Calvinist churches (of one stripe or another) in America ranged from 60-80% (Religion and the American Experiment, Witte, 120)
- The most popular school book for 100 years, The New England Primer, was Calvinistic!
- Many state legislatures (and the national body) called for days of fasting and prayer in the Calvinistic language of Providence:
And not only were the general contours of America life Calvinistic, many of the little known and well-known leaders were or were raised Calvinists: Patrick Henry, John Jay, John Witherspoon, Roger Sherman and Noah Webster.
Yes, that dictionary found in every homeschooling house was written by a Calvinist.
Even the political resistance theory was greatly influenced by Calvinism. John Adams bluntly acknowledges the wide-spread influences of both the French-Calvinist’s work Vindicus Contra Tyrannus and the English Calvinist work of Ponet (A Shorte Treatise of Politike Power), both which defended the right of the people to rise against tyrants.
Much of our political, social and economic freedoms hail from Calvinism.
But why? Is there something deeper to Calvinism than a system of thought that spawned the early Modern Era?
Yes. It is the Gospel.
Ask yourself, Is it coincidence that Luther, Calvin, Tyndale & the Puritans all believed in the Five Points of Calvinism? In TULIP--Total depravity, Unconditional election, Limited atonement, Irresistible grace and Perseverance of the saints?
God the Spirit raised up Luther and Calvin and a hundred other pastors who taught that creeds and deeds must be rooted in the Five Solas--that the Bible alone teaches justification through faith alone by grace alone on account of Christ alone to the glory of God alone. And those Solas were carried to the four corners of Europe by the original Protestants of old and their public creeds: Presbyterian Westminster Confession of Faith, Anglican 39 Articles, Dutch, Swiss, Irish, Polish, Hungarian, French Huguenots, Congregational and Baptist--all with a Calvinistic creed in their origins.
What about those American revivals? Started among the Calvinists first. Whitefield and Edwards--Calvinists. Wesley came a bit later. The Second Great Awakening was started among the Calvinist--Congregationalist, Baptists and Presbyterians. Later on it was hijacked (25 year later!) by Finney and his free-will salvation.
Dear homeschooler: consider well this summary of historical facts. Do you want something greater for your family, your children and their children? for this nation?
You want to bring it back to the good old days don't you? I know I do.
Then learn the lesson of one of the most popular and well-respected Calvinists of the 1800s:
"I have my own opinion that there is no such thing as preaching Christ and Him crucified, unless we preach what nowadays is called Calvinism. It is a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else. I do not believe we can preach the gospel if we do not preach justification by faith without works; nor unless we preach the sovereignty of God in His dispensation of grace; nor unless we exalt the electing unchangeable eternal, immutable, conquering love of Jehovah; nor do I think we can preach the gospel unless we base it upon the special and particular redemption of His elect and chosen people which Christ wrought out upon the cross."
Charles Spurgeon
Sermons, p.88, 1858.
AMEN.
[Hungry for more truth? here for more detailed info or post. Hungry for what the Gospel really is, email me: pastor mathis at gmail dot com]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)