A Short Review 10: Ten Points of Calvinism

Are Five Points Enough? the Ten Points of Calvinism,
Dr. Coppes

There seem to be a multitude of books and pamphlets on Calvinism. However, even though many of these treatments are useful and convincing, they do not reach the level of integration between simplicity and depth that characterizes this book.

Calvinism is not an isolated debate over how one is saved, but is part and parcel of a larger understanding—a worldview—of the Bible and God’s creation. Our understanding of the Church, worship, evangelism, the Law and all other aspects of the Christian life are integrated in the Reformed community. Put into this context, the reader is invited to explore this fresh introduction to the Reformed faith.

Recommended by Loraine Boettner and Professor George Knight (of Greenville Seminary), this book is highly praised by respected men of the Reformed world. The book contends that Calvinism, properly understood, involves all of life. Creating ten chapters (each a summary treatment of the major themes of Calvinism), the author ends each section with review questions and a list of helpful readings and advance study books. It is eminently readable, while challenging the reader to interact with the copious assortment of Bible verses and Biblical thought.

These characteristics of the book alone make it a valuable addition to those wanting to learn the Reformed faith or for those wishing to refresh their understanding.

A New "Green Day"

There is much talk about "mother earth," being "green," and preserving our environment.

Use better light bulbs. Turn off the lights early. Turn off the TV. Turn off the computer. Drive less.

Going out to eat means using more resources (which already exist at home), especially fast food restaurants with disposable products. Entertainment means more driving and more electricity usage.

In fact, working around the house every day--yard work, car work, basement repair--all use energy.

What if we, as a nation, decided to take a day off from all this energy consumption and disposable waste. An entire day could be "green" and make everybody feel better (both from the liberal guilt and from work in general).

If it got popular enough, it could be a weekly "green" day.
One day in seven.
Hmmmm....

How about the Christian Sabbath--Sunday?

Although not the central point of the day, it turns out those ornery Puritans had something right after all.

SDG

GO JAYHAWKS

WHAT A GAME!!

I LOVE CLOSE GAMES!!

Martin Luther King's Plagiarism

This is actually old news. But old news is quickly forgotten.
And truth is easily forgotten when inconvenient.

This truth is very inconvenient. King plagiarized portions of his dissertation and other works while at Boston University. Their own investigation discovered this in 1990. And the plagiarism was not inconsequential: it was "enough to indicate a serious violation of academic principles." (NY Times).

Naturally, if my M. Div. paper had such problems, it would be rejected out of hand and my credibility would be lost. What I said and wrote would be suspect: am I real? am I fake? am I an opportunist?

But then, I'm not famous.

[Full article below:]

Boston U. Panel Finds Plagiarism by Dr. King

"A committee of scholars appointed by Boston University concluded today that the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. plagiarized passages in his dissertation for a doctoral degree at the university 36 years ago.

"There is no question," the committee said in a report to the university's provost, "but that Dr. King plagiarized in the dissertation by appropriating material from sources not explicitly credited in notes, or mistakenly credited, or credited generally and at some distance in the text from a close paraphrase or verbatim quotation."

Despite its finding, the committee said that "no thought should be given to the revocation of Dr. King's doctoral degree," an action that the panel said would serve no purpose.

But the committee did recommend that a letter stating its finding be placed with the official copy of Dr. King's dissertation in the university's library.

The four-member committee was appointed by the university a year ago to determine whether plagiarism charges against Dr. King that had recently surfaced were in fact true. Today the university's provost, Jon Westling, accepted the committee's recommendations and said its members had "conducted the investigation with scholarly thoroughness, scrupulous attention to detail and a determination not to be influenced by non-scholarly consideration."

The dissertation at issue is "A Comparison of the Conceptions of God in the Thinking of Paul Tillich and Henry Nelson Wieman." Dr. King wrote it in 1955 as part of his requirements for a doctor of philosophy degree, which he subsequently received from the university's Division of Religious and Theological Studies.

One member of the investigating committee, John Cartwright, the university's Martin Luther King Professor of Social Ethics, said the panel had refrained from speculating about the reasons why Dr. King had not properly attributed material, which came from a variety of other interpreters of the works of Tillich and Wieman."

Willing to Write...After Three Years

March 10, 2005 was the first time I ever posted on a blog.
It was the birth of Aspiring PolyMathis.

Now, after three years have I accomplished my goal?

"I hope to bring a plethora of articles on various topics to the forefront..."

That is for you to decide. As of the last installment of Mel's Misplaced Passion I have 250 posts. That averages out to 6.9 postings a month--almost two a week. I'd call that a plethora (but compared to the likes of, say, White Noise, it is a mere pittance) .

Various topics from the current issues in Christianity, cultural news and even local evangelism, to the Iraqi constitution and the science of global warming have been covered--hopefully with tact and wit. More importantly, I hope, these were written with a Christ-perspective (even about action figures!).

Thank you Lord for keeping me on the straight and narrow.

Here's for another three years of glorifying God and enjoying Him for ever.

Soli Deo Gloria (SDG)

Chinese Conspiracy?

That's what could easily be thought after the '07 scares of lead-based paint in toys, questionable toothpaste and food.

Now, there are reports of built-in viruses in Chinese software products!

Go here.

Mel's Misplaced Passion (3 of 3)

They Said That?

• “It changed my perception of what it meant to follow Christ.”
• “…[it] is so wonderfully biblically congruent, I would encourage folks to not stumble over parts [that are disagreeable]…”
• “[it] showed the depth of Christ’s love.”

Wow. That must have been a powerful sermon for these pastors to respond so strongly! These are the responses that we should have more of when faithful preaching occurs! But there was no preaching there. These are the responses by respected pastors, such as Chuck Smith, Jr. of California, after they reviewed the Passion.

I am sure some of you saw that coming. But is it not true what this article has been arguing for: the dangers of images readily supplanting the Word. In light of the centrality of the Word as found in the Bible consider these alarming quotes:

• “This film is equal to ‘a lifetime of sermons’” (Billy Graham, People, March 8, 2004).
• “The best outreach opportunity in 2000 years” (People).
• “In the church we’ve tried for a long time with words to bring into consciousness the reality of what Jesus went through. We have waxed eloquent in our sermons, but this film brings that reality to us in one sitting.” (Chuck Smith, Jr., “Pastor’s Panel”, www.worshipleader.com).

Yes, I am picking on this film. Why not? If the Reformed faith is to be relevant in today’s society, it needs to interact with fellow Christians and to address modern trends. Again, movies and television shows are not inherently evil as a medium of communication, but they can become sinful through wrong means and goals. Just as we avoid certain movies because of their excessive themes (nudity, language, etc.), so, too, movies that violate the second commandment should be avoided. This can be very controversial, but rather than rehash what was written earlier, hopefully, these quotes from Christianity Today, which recommends the movie even after admitting its clear and pronounced Roman Catholic motif, will be eye-opening:

• He [Gibson] also recounted a series of divine coincidences that led him to read the works of Anne Catherin Emmerich, a late-18^th…Westphalian nun who had visions of the events of the Passion. Many of the details needed to fill out the Gospel accounts he drew from her book, Dolorous Passion of Our Lord…
• One reason for Gibson's personal sense of salvation is the way this project rescued him from himself…
• These [medieval] practices [projecting oneself into the event] became the foundation for such widely practiced traditions as meditating on the Five Sorrowful Mysteries when saying the Rosary. The structure of Gibson's film conforms exactly to the list of the Five Sorrowful Mysteries: The Agony of Jesus in the Garden, the Scourging of Jesus at the Pillar, the Crowning with Thorns, the Carrying the Cross, and the Crucifixion and Death of Jesus. And it reveals the way that this film is for Gibson a kind of prayer…
• In the foreword to The Passion, he [Gibson] writes that the film "is not meant as a historical documentary. … I think of it as contemplative in the sense that one is compelled to remember … in a spiritual way, which cannot be articulated, only experienced."
• [Gibson]"I've been actually amazed at the way I would say the evangelical audience has—hands down—responded to this film more than any other Christian group." [What makes it so amazing, he says, is that] "the film is so Marian."

All quotes from www.christianitytoday.com/movies/special/passionofthechrist.html)

Gibson considers himself an old-fashioned pre-Vatican II Roman Catholic. Gibson calls Mary "a tremendous co-redemptrix and mediatrix [meaning she contributed to redemption through her suffering]." Thus, the movie has more about Mary than the Bible, as shown in an article by Romanus Cessario, a Dominican who teaches at St. John's Seminary:

We see Mary's maternal mediation enacted on film. Gibson portrays Mary placing "herself between her Son and mankind [remember the times that Mary looks directly at us!] in the reality of their wants, needs and sufferings [remember Peter at her feet]. She puts herself 'in the middle,' that is to say she acts as a mediatrix not as an outsider, but in her position as mother." The words are from Pope John Paul II. Mel Gibson captures what the Pope writes in "Mother of the Redeemer" in a way that alone merits the film the title "Catholic."

If we recognize that the Passion is related to the Church, then we also recognize that it is related to the reality of the Eucharistic conversion. There is a sense in which the whole film is about the Eucharist. The Bread of Life. (Bracketed comments also by Cessario; www.catholic.org, “Mel Gibson and Thomas Aquinas: How the Passion Works”)

The Roman Catholic has always depended heavily on images; some of the older living generation can still remember the mass being delivered in Latin! In contrast, the Protestant Church has traditionally relied upon Christ and His Word as the source of spiritual vitality in the Church and in the family. When many Evangelical leaders laud this film to the detriment of the preached Word, we can see clearly the sad state of the Protestant Church. There is no passion for the Word.

What It All Means

Coming full-circle, we as Reformed believers in the twenty-first century need to embrace Christ through the Word. The Second Commandment forbids images of the Godhead and man-made worship; it also demands a proper integration of the Word into our lives. The modern pressures upon the Churches and families are immense: all the books and conferences try to evangelize others and grow spiritually through every means—save one. We need to believe God when He says that preachers are a gift from Christ (Eph. 4:8-12). We need to believe God that His Word is sufficient for our spiritual growth. We need to consume the Bible through reading, listening and memorizing. These truths should not only be taught to our children but also enacted in our lives such that they see the Word impacting our living, reading and watching—our very lifestyle. This does not mean that the TV should be thrown out (or it might for some of us), but it does mean we should seriously pray and consider its impact on our family.

Emphasis on reading and writing, listening and learning through words and especially the Word of God will help guard our eye-gates and strengthen our resolve. For it is by faith in Christ by His Word that we have life (Jn. 6:63).

“For, All flesh is as grass, And all the glory thereof as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower falleth: But the word of the Lord abideth for ever. And this is the word of good tidings which was preached unto you” (1 Peter 1:24). Amen.

Mel's Misplaced Passion (2 of 3)

There’s Always a Negative Side!

“You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God” (Ex. 20:4, 5, NKJV)

This commandment, as all commandments (see Larger Catechism Q99), suggests more than a mere surface reading would indicate. Just as the sixth commandment demands not merely avoidance of murder but also the preservation of life, so, too, this ordinance of God demands more than avoidance of idols. There is both a negative and positive side of this law.

The first and most conclusive point is that this commandment forbids any likeness of God—that is of God Triune (God is one), and of God in His several persons, Father, Son and Holy Ghost. Each is God and none may be depicted with man-made images. Even pictures of Jesus are only a “half-Christ” since it only shows His humanity and incorrectly at that (did He really have blond hair and blue eyes?). Also, Turretin correctly points out that this law is two-fold: no images and no worshipping of them. It is not simply a prohibition against images if they are worshipped: neither idols nor false worship is accepted. Exodus 32:4ff. states that Israel made the golden calf to represent Yahweh—yet as Aaron said after the image was made, “Tomorrow is a feast to the Lord.” It was not worshipping false gods, but worshipping the True God falsely! God reminds them later that they saw no “form” of the Lord when He spoke at Mt. Sinai, spending several sentences emphatically denouncing any form, likeness or image of God (Deut. 4:15ff.), and this without any reference to worship. The simple making of an image of Yahweh was, and still is, wrong.

Thus our spiritual forefathers clearly wrote the Confessions against images for worship or teaching (Heidelberg Catechism, 96-98; WLC 109):

“Q98: But may not pictures be tolerated in churches as books for the people?

A98: No, for we should not be wiser than God, who will not have His people taught by dumb idols, but by the lively preaching of His Word.”

The nature of worship also argues against the making of images to supplant the Word (written, preached or taught). Worship is to give proper and due homage to God in thought, word and deed. Worship has two dimensions. The first occurs in weekly public worship; the second occurs in the life of a believer. The Bible, the Word of God, regulates both. This commandment is the foundation for both. Many in the Evangelical circles know this because they will not allow a statue of Christ to enter their houses for family worship. Why? Because they instinctively know that worship is not merely bowing before an idol (who does that in our “enlightened” age?), but also involves the heart.

Worship is to have a high, proper, holy and correct view of our Lord. Yet, cannot these images (pictures, movies, etc.) be used to stir up “pious feelings” or help us to have better, holy thoughts of God? The Roman Catholic Thomas Aquinas and the Lutherans argued such. In contrast, Turretin incisively argues that these uses are still worship indirectly considered because “the sight of them [help] conceive of holy thoughts concerning God and Christ (which cannot but belong to the worship of God, so that thus they really worship God…).” That is, maintaining that these images stir religious feelings is to admit that they stir up worship in our hearts; thus, directly relating their argument to the second commandment. Images clearly impact our thoughts of God and our worship at church and at home.

Let’s Look At The Bright Side

The second and no less significant side of the second commandment is the primacy of the Word. One of the main motifs of Scripture is the Word uttered and written—“Oh, how I love Your Word.” This, then, means that there is a more powerful motive for avoiding images of God: the promises of His Gospel. And these promises are not presented to the covenant community through pictures or images, but through the living Word read and preached.

It is not as though the Reformed faith is comprised of sour-faced, unloving and negative old men. On the contrary, it is and should be a vibrant faith that expresses its trust in God through loving obedience. And that obedience is expressed every Sunday. It is expressed by listening to the preached Word.

“And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Rom. 10:14-17).

This is the promise of God’s Gospel: He will not leave us ignorant of His salvation but will present it to us through the preached Word. Yes, even the Word read daily is a source of strength (Psalm 119). Since the center of our lives is Christ and His Word (for can we really know of Christ apart from the Spirit and the Bible?), should this not emanate through the rest of our lives? Does the heart pump blood only for itself or does it send life throughout the rest of the body? That is how Christ through the Bible is the center of our lives.

The positive side of the second commandment is further illustrated by the history of redemption. God spoke creation into existence; God spoke judgment and salvation to Adam and Eve; God spoke and Noah believed; God spoke and Abraham followed; God spoke His will to Moses, as the great prophet of the Old Testament, and spoke it to all subsequent prophets. Miracles did occur; visual surprises did arise; but these symbols were never suspended in the air, they were explained by the Word. But there is more. The spoken Word, however powerful, was still not enough: God inscripturated His spoken Word. The Old Testament was as a child under age (Gal. 4:1ff.), but we have been privileged to live even beyond that age when the Bible was still incomplete. As even children today first learn through pictures and concrete items and then grow into adulthood—words and abstract thoughts—so the Israelites of old were given many visual signs. But in the New Age these have been vastly reduced to two: baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Since God is merciful and knows our frailties, He has given us these visible signs and seals for our infirmities and weakness. Yet, these sacraments are useless without the preached Word. There must still be a passion for the Word. 1 Cor. 1:21 summarizes this truth:

“For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe.” Amen.

Hopefully, it has been established that the Bible presents a definite view in favor of words in general and the Word in particular. But how does this apply to the here and now? There are obvious applications: both positive and negative. We should be ever conscious of the moral ramifications of what we watch.

The Word of God at home and at Church should be renewing us day by day…

(Concluding Part 3)

Mel's Misplaced Passion (1 of 3)

My wife fought an addiction after we were married. She struggled for months while I encouraged her and distracted her from this obsession. She would catch herself longing for this distraction, but slowly she learned to substitute this longing with reading—yes, she was having withdrawals from television. She hardly read growing up, and it was a shock to her system when in 1995 she married a 23-year-old man whose last memory of television was The World’s Greatest American Hero!

Visual Saturation

We live in a society saturated with images; from still photos and billboards to magazines and television to movies and Internet, Christians are bombarded with demands upon their time, energy and attention. Quiet (or even passionate) discourse and reflective thinking is not the excitement of the day: if there are no raging, emotional debates, then C-SPAN 2 is ignored for the easier-to-digest shallow one-minute sound-bytes on CBS. The visual medium lends itself readily to the exciting and exhilarating—as far as our eyes are concerned.

Adult Americans spend almost 4.5 hours a day watching television—this does not even count Internet or videos! Children watch even more television, not to mention video games. We are a society inundated with the visual. It can be very alluring. These mediums (TV, movie, art, etc.) are not evil per se, but they can be entrapments (and every age has its weaknesses) to a generation reared on the visual medium of stunning images and one-hour “documentaries.” It is not simply that society teaches us to follow temptation with our eyes; we ourselves know the allurement of images and the difficulty of reading words. It is hard to concentrate on a book. Images are more “real” to us than the abstract words on a page.

Indeed, these images are so real that people are more excited when they find themselves on TV than with the simple fact that they actually participated in the televised event. These images become an existential moment—a personal encounter that rises above (below?) rational discourse. It is so real and personal that words are lost. When watching a movie we tend to suspend reality to such an extent that we are moved to tears, rage or joy. That is the power of the image.

Even after being raised without a television from the age of ten, I could still feel the pull of the tube while in the military day room. Am I simply picking on this medium? Cannot the visual mediums be enjoyable? Yes, they can. Cannot these mediums be artistic? Yes, they can. Cannot these mediums be used for teaching? Yes…within limits. As a matter of fact, any of these legitimate goals can be corrupted when they supplant Christ and His Word. Even a book can be an idol.

The images of this world can be extremely alluring. I John 2:16 warns us against the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes and the pride of life. Thus, this is a serious issue that needs to be addressed in our day and age. We must recall our Biblical roots. From the temptation of the fruit in Eden that was attractive to the eyes to the temptation of Christ with a vision of the world’s kingdoms, we know from the Bible the dangers of the eye-gate. On the flip side, there is a positive presentation of what should be done to combat this weakness in our flesh: the Word of God stresses the written or spoken, not the visual. Consider:

• “In the beginning was the Word….”
• The Bible gives little to no physically pictorial information about its heroes and villains, let alone about Christ.
• The Second Commandment emphasizes the dangers of images.
• From God’s stern reproach in the Garden to the audible chiding by Christ on the Damascus Road, God’s revelation of salvation is predominately through words.
• God chose the foolishness of preaching to raise the dead, Ezek. 37:1ff.
• The Bible itself is written—it is not a picture book for children.

“Them Fight’n Words”

One of the battles fought by the Reformers against the Roman Catholic Church was over the use of idols and images. Rome contended, “Images are the laymen’s books.” They also argued that these images would help stimulate “holy feelings.” The Reformers countered, “It is the read and preached Word of God that should inform our minds, stir our souls and motivate our wills to do His holy will.” This is the Reformed root of modern Evangelicals. But it appears that many in today’s Christian world would agree more with Calvin’s opponents than with Calvin himself.

In one sense these are ‘fight’n words’—but we seriously need to wake up from our long couch-potato slumber and fight the temptation to think less and watch more. Our children are becoming more illiterate, recognizing the name of Ben Affleck but staring blank-eyed over why preaching is important, “but it’s so boring….” That is the catchword. We crave entertainment. We are passionate for images. We wish to be sung softly to sleep by the siren calls of American Idol but are rudely turned-off (note how our own language has changed) when the pastor preaches and the congregation sings. There is little passion for the Word. This is one more fight against our flesh. This is one more battle that must be given to the Lord.

Now, the idea of image used here is not to be confused with symbol. Symbols represent people or ideas, usually in the abstract; images represent people or things through physical, visual correspondence. The triangle and three circles may symbolize the Trinity, but it does not claim to visually equate what they physically look like (for who can draw a spirit—God is a Spirit). The difference between these two is readily seen in the difference between the alphabet-words and pictographs. The word ‘house’ does not physically look like a house whereas the pictographs (such as hieroglyphics) seek to draw a house. Historically, the rise of the alphabet has advanced civilization through means of more readily communicating abstract thought.

Raising this issue of Word and image does not intend to undermine the legitimate use of our senses (especially our eyes, obviously we have to use them to read the Word!), but seeks to reaffirm a proper role of the Word for the ordained Church of Christ as a tool of teaching and worshiping. Which is the biblical method to evangelize and teach? Which is the biblical way to worship and appreciate Christ’s work? Thus, this issue affects every individual Christian: what is the role of Word and image in my life?

These questions will be explored through a short presentation of the prohibitions of Scripture followed by a positive evaluation of the role of the word in general and the Bible in particular. Hopefully, this presentation will motive us toward a passion for the Word.

How then should we live? What should dominate our thinking and living: Word or Image? Instinctively, many Christians already know the answer. But sometimes we need to be reminded of the biblical roots of the supremacy of the Word.

Part 2

Pizza with the Atheist Club

In typical college fashion, the pizzeria was crammed with people, food and loud music. I wormed my way to the back wall toward a booth with three young students. Surveying the young men arrayed in the small booth—one with his nose in a textbook, the other with a lopsided grin and the third with stereotypical long hair—I greeted each with a firm handshake.

Placing my pizza on the table, I started the meeting with proper appreciation: “I am glad you agreed to meet with me.”

“No prob man. We don’t do this with just anyone ya’ know,” drawled the grinner. “Our club v.p. here told us you were someone worth talking with---intelligent.”

“Well, I don’t claim mastery of logic or philosophy, but I have enough of a background that I was able to challenge your vice president here.” I grinned in reply.

Instead of reaching for the philosophical jugular, I decided to ask some personal questions: was he raised Christian? Did he have anything personal against Christianity? In short, he was raised a nominal Roman Catholic, yet had no related personal problems. He actually thanked me for asking him, as it was common for cross-examiners to assume the worse.

I then asked about their philosophical views: they were typical atheists (materialistic empiricists disagreeing over morals). However, they had one twist: they were mostly atheists—they were not willing to absolutely rule out the existence of God (as the older atheists would, ala Bertrand Russell).

Ignoring this idiosyncrasy, I spoke with the long-haired student for the next twenty-five minutes about his empiricist approach to morality. As with most empiricist, he was gung-ho for the morality bell-curve; that behavior in the curve was normal. Pointing out that using the bell-curve for the last fifty years on a global scale would lean “normal” morality toward totalitarianism, he replied that being an American he could not accept that. “Then you’ve changed the bell-curve referent,” I reminded him. He was silent. Then I noted that he did not have a large enough sample-size for human behavior over the last 10,000 years. This he conceded. After asking why the extremes of the curve should be ignored (like megalomaniac dictators), he partly conceded. Feeling the pressure he quietly replied: “Even if we cannot establish morality objectively, we can still live it intuitively as we all have human nature.”

“Do we?” I asked. “Materialism cannot speak of a human nature other than observable behavior—the bell-curve. Why does a dictator have to follow a hypothetical curve? What you have is pure subjectivism: every man doing what is right in his own eyes.”

He thoughtfully chewed on his pizza. He was none too happy.

But the day was not over yet.

SDG

Christian Black History Month: Lemuel Haynes

Lemuel Haynes:
(1753-1833)

1) First black pastor ordained by a mainstream American Protestant church.
2) First black pastor for a white church.
3) First in this series of politically incorrect black heroes.

He was born in Connecticut of a "a white woman of respectable ancestry" and an African father; he was abandoned by them. He grew up indentured until the age of 21. Although of limited education, he read voraciously, especially the Bible and theology books.

He became a Minuteman for the Revolutionary War. Then he was ordained amongst the Congregationalists (1780), serving three congregations until his death at the age of 80. He married. He wrote against slavery. And he was a vocal defender of the ancient ways: Republicanism and the Reformation.

Later when the newer class of anti-slavery ministers arose, they would try to use his legacy but gave up since his theology would not dovetail with their liberal theology. He publicly preached against the new (now old) theology of universal salvation.

Ironically, his anti-slavery position was one of racial integration instead of the then popular view (amongst even white anti-slavery proponents) of sending them to Africa (supposedly a land of freedom). The introduction of the new biography sums up the entire matter better than I:

“Like a number of other eighteenth-century black authors...Haynes accepted a Calvinist form of Christianity. Indeed, Calvinism seems to have corroborated the deepest structuring elements of the experience of such men and women as they matured from children living in slavery or servitude into adults desiring freedom, literacy, and membership in a fair society. From Calvinism, this generation of black authors drew a vision of God at work providentially in the lives of black people, directing their suffering yet promising the faithful among them a restoration to his favor and his presence. Not until around 1815 would African American authors, such as John Jea, explicitly declare themselves against Calvinism and for free-will religion. By the standard of many in the twenty-first century, this Calvinist vision may seem tainted, since it presented God’s hand in evil as well as in good. Moreover, this black Calvinism scorned Islam …Acknowledging the divine providence both of evil and of good, these black Calvinists insisted upon the human obligation to shun sin…and to further God’s benevolent design. More than any of his peers, black or white, Haynes found in Calvinism a tradition of exegesis that could be leveled against the slave trade and slavery...By 1830, a new abolitionist exegesis was undoing the ideal of interracial unity that Haynes and his peers had seen in the Bible.” (Sallant, 4, 6)

If we are to have politically correct history months, let us at least pick our own heroes!



[More details:
Online biography: Sketches of... Rev. Lemuel Haynes.
Saillant, John. Black Puritan, Black Republican: The life and thought of Lemuel Haynes]


Black History Month Series:
1. Lemuel Haynes
2. Jupiter Hammon 
3. Phillis Wheately

Elmo's Death Threats

I always suspected something was wrong with Elmo...MSN has the scoop.

Osteen a Heretic?

Here is part two of two-parts of a Sixty-Minutes piece on Joel Osteen.

Two things of note:

1. The interviewer had some astute observations (for an unbeliever).

2. The interviewer's questions and observations were more astute than some Christians.

This last point is sad. Sometimes unbelievers have more discernment than Christians--or at least so-called Christians.

Also, ask yourself this: how many professor of theology today would call a man a heretic?

It's a good interview: watch it, you will not regret it.

SDG.

The Culture of Life

Culture is religion externalized. It is the sum total of not only the institutions normally associated with the idea of society (family, church and state), but includes all the relational interplay of those institutions and the people that make up them. It is a less than tangible idea that integrates the little things in life with the issues of life: from how we greet one another to how weddings and funerals are administered.

Taking this simple premise, one can work backwards, as it were, from the elements of culture to the religion that lies behind them. Take for instance, the popular game of Life. As many of us played the game in childhood, we recall the relatively rigid path that always leads to
a counting of money: he who retires with the most money wins. In the last few years, the game morphed into a hydra-path spanning normal family life goals, living a single's life or trying to tour the world. Money is no longer the objective, or rather, money is only one legitimate path of life along side play, entertainment, family and anything else.

Most readers can quickly perceive how the original and the contemporary versions of Life reflect differing concepts of life and its goal. In fact, they reflect differing concepts of the Gospel. For games are a part of the larger culture that spawned them. Certainly games do not always and only directly reflect that culture, but certain games stand out more clearly than others. So, the original 50s game reflected the "he who dies with the most money wins" mentality; the newer version reflects the "he who dies with the most __ [fill in] wins" mentality. For in this multicultural universe every path is legitimate and every goal is valid.

Historically, the original game of life was not geared toward money but long and fruitful lives. Milton Bradley of the 1800s made the original, original game of life, but it had too much virtue to suit the 1950s company. In turn, Milton received his idea from another popular game in the early 1800s: The Mansion of Happiness. In this game, with sixty spaces spiraling toward the center of the board, the object is good works. Land on a spot of virtue and advance; land on a space of vice and move back. Break the Sabbath day and retreat six spaces.

Yes, the Sabbath day. One can perceive immediately how different was the culture of the early 1800s in contrast with today's culture--even with today's Christian culture. A Christian game I played as a child was Bible trivia pursuit. What analysis can one make of that? It is easy to read the questions in the game and see a Christianity that revels in ignoring the big issues of life that separate churches: baptism, predestination, free-will, the Sabbath. Not one doctrinal question of significant debate between honest Christians existed in that early game. The same can be said of many sermons these days as well.

The culture that many Christians wish to enjoin upon their fellow man is blasé and bleak. And the Gospel proclaimed is benign as well, challenging little and thinking only of man. The churches need to go back to yesteryear and proclaim the big issues of life instead of reveling in the trivial. Only then will there be a culture of life for the dead.

SDG

Books.google.com--The What & How

A good friend of mine has written a useful and well thought out series on GOOGLE BOOKS.
Google books is a must for all ministers and laymen researchers:

Part 1:
One of the most amazing resources on the web is books.google.com. Google is trying to get all of the books in the public domain on the web both downloadable and searchable. A few weeks ago, I went to the eye doctor and was amazed at some of the ways that technology is changing optometry. The woman asked, "How does technology affect your field as a pastor?"

I answered, "I don't know." But, then, I though about it, and I realized that it is changing the pastorate quite a bit. First, there are cell phones, which make a pastor easier to get a hold of. Second, there is the computer and all its usefulness for searching and studying the Scriptures. Now, there is google books. Basically, what google books does for us is to give the rural pastor or western pastors the ability to have as much access to pre-20th century books as anyone near Harvard or any of the best eastern libraries. In many ways, though, it is even better because we can download this material and print it off or search it.

I have told many people about this resource, and yet, I find that many people are not making the use of it that they should. Of course, old habits die hard. On the other hand, I think there is a bit of a learning curve. In these few posts, I want to try and break the learning curve and give some examples of how this resource can be used in the pastorate.

Part 2: Breaking the Learning Curve
Part 3: Latin Works
Part 4: Commentaries
Part 5: Presbyterian Polity
Part 6: Conclusion

Morality and Housing

A recent U.S. News and World Report is illuminating about the basics of economics (Dec. 24, 2007).

"We should have walked away sooner and quit selling to some of them," one president of a large home building company admitted.

And what an admission that is!

There is concern about the housing industry (especially out West here). And there are many answers to the question "why?"

Of course, it is easy to read the above quote and say, "hey, there is the answer: greedy builders!" But the builders' greed can only make an impact if the buyers are greedy.

The article notes: "Approved for 100 percent financing by Richmond American's mortgage arm, the 27-year-old didn't even have a job at the time." Why did she apply if she had no ability to pay?

All within one article, the relation of morality (greed) to economics (low house prices) is complete. Hopefully, this article will be read by more Americans and their education will then be complete.

SDG

A Short Review 11: The Duties of Parents

The Duties of Parents, J. C. Ryle

Do not let the size of this pamphlet fool you. Although it may be small of stature, it is weighty in the things of the Lord. The godly and copious writings of J. C. Ryle have encouraged and strengthened believers for years, and this work is no exception.

There is no stone left unturned, no ally-way of thought left unexplored, while Ryle examines, exhorts and entreats parents to follow the will of the Lord. Covering twenty-seven topics, the author reminds parents to train up the child in the way he should go (Prov. 22:6). This means, amongst other things, the educational, spiritual and disciplinary training of the child. However, it is not merely another mainstream “how-to” book that divorces Christ from doctrine and life by creating a 1-2-3 step program after the fashion of Oprah Winphrey, but an earnest plea to apply the truths of the Word—man’s inborn depravity, Christ’s atonement, and God’s mean’s of grace—to the life of one’s child.

Even as doctrine and life are woven into the fiber of the book, and the dangers of negligence and over-indulgence are forcibly presented through Puritan-like illustration, Ryle lovingly reminds parents of the promise of God (Prov. 22:6). The Proverbial promise, he reminds us, is through the means established by God, even as the dispensing of God’s gifts are within His holy sovereignty.

Powerfully arguing for old-fashioned discipline and training based upon the Word and the Love of Christ, The Duties of Parents is a must for young and old parents alike.

SDG

Top Ten For This Year, & Last Year, &...

People like top ten lists. I like top ten lists. I've read a few over the years ranging from the top Christian music and sermons to more ambitious top best things happening in Christiandom.
This list will be in the latter category. But with a twist...

Top Ten Christian People & Organizations

Big Names:

1) Banner of Truth: The work of this organization has not been praised enough. They brought me to the Reformed faith through their book, The Forgotten Spurgeon. Their magazine and books are found wherever there are thoughtful Christians seeking Reformation of their doctrine and lives.

2) Founders Ministry: Although I am not intimately knowledgeable of this organization, I do know they are trying to infuse the gospel of free grace back into the Southern Baptist Convention--that is inestimable.

3) White Horse Inn: Another group that helped me along my path to Reformation. They have dialogue with a Reformed baptist and a Lutheran, but always in the context of self-conscience confessionalism, while not downplaying their differences. A must in this day of public compromise. The Gospel of free justification is already transforming the lives of general Evangelicals.

4) Ligonier Ministries: Although mostly associated with R. C. Sproul, Sr., this ministry should last beyond him. His winsome style and uncompromising public stand for the Reformed faith in all its offensive glory has influenced many souls toward a revival of doctrine and manners.

5) Reformed Worldview Thinking: The Reformed denominations, OPC, RCUS, etc., are officially dedicated to thinking God's thoughts after Him. These sister denominations, even with their differences, are a small but strong witness in the face of the withering Protestant branch known as Evangelicalism. Their churches are small but their hearts are big. Determined to stand for the truth in love, I pray the Lord to use them in a mighty Second Reformation.

Little Names:

6) Reformed Presence: Both locally and internationally, through the radio and internet, in publishing and lectures, schools and seminaries, the Reformed doctrine and practice is surely spreading. It includes not simply the big names but, in many ways more importantly, the little names. We easily forget, that although Luther was the straw that broke the Roman Catholic back, he was not alone.

7) Faithful People: The leaders of faithful churches depend upon the prayers and support of faithful members. No man is an island and no pastor is an island. The people need to faithfully attend the means of grace, seeking God's will in the Commandments. It is in the pews, amongst the laymen, that the Gospel of our Sovereign Lord is propagated among the masses through private luncheons, email debates, neighborhood picnics and everyday witnessing.

8) Everyday Pastors: It is easy to hitch the wagon of revival to the big, noticeable names because they draw the crowds. But in reality God's revivals of yesteryear spread simultaneously amongst faithful preaching of the Good News. Such pastors stand unswervingly upon the Truths of the Reformation, in public and private. They counseled with one another, admonished one another, and reinforced each other's ministries. Oh, that the Lord of the Harvest would bring unity amongst the leaders to preach and teach all of God's counsel, especially against the reigning heresies of this day.

9) Faithful Churches: It is not enough to have individual piety, or church piety, there must be collective sanctification as well. When the churches work in harmony (both publicly and privately), casting out hate and suspicion in their hearts by the power of the Spirit, there God is working mightily. Corporate prayer and church cooperation is imperative: God is not pleased with a divided Church any more than with the divided Israel of old.

10) Faithful Understanding of Reformation: This last point is about the sum total of what Reformation entails--it is the organizational and organic, individual and collective, doctrinal and moral revival on a larger scale. It is returning to the Word without shame and a clear trumpet call. It is preaching, teaching, writing and admonishing, through all mediums possible, the truth of man's total depravity and God's total sovereignty. It is radically returning the church to her roots in the free righteousness of Christ. The church in America today does not need more "does" and "don'ts"--it just needs the Ten Commandments as a means of convicting them of their sins and need of a Savior. The church needs the Gospel crystal clear.

Reformation is not reformulating old truths, refocusing on doing, or revamping the family. Judgment begins in the house of the Lord, so reformation will begin in the house of the Lord. As Elijah the prophet was to bring the hearts of the family together, so the preachers of today must preach Christ and Him crucified to bring the heart of the church together.

SDG

The Other Side of Christmas

Even the pagans know a little about the Incarnation. Songs are sung about it this time of year. Christmas cartoons and musicals allude to it. The nativity, showing Mary, Joseph and the Baby Jesus, implies such a condescending act by God.

But even if unbelievers can mechanically explain the Incarnation, the proper understanding of it and the implications thereof completely elude them. Like watching a play without a background and underlying plot, many unbelievers observe the nativity with a vague sense of something missing. "What's the big deal?" they ask.


Unfortunately, this question is asked because the message of Christmas is disappearing--not only due to the obvious chaos of narcissistic materialism, but also because of the increasing silence of the Church herself. To the extent that the proper background of the Incarnation is poorly explained, grasped or believed by the American Evangelical church, to that extent she is silent and unhelpful. She becomes a mime, acting out a story without a context.


And what is that context? Sin.


Not only was the Coming of the God-man a marvelous act of a Sovereign King dwelling among infinitely lesser beings, it was more. It was the merciful and forgiving act of a maligned Judge. A Judge and Ruler who was given no grounds for mercy. A Judge, Ruler and Avenger who did,
would and will cast the final sentence against unbelieving rebellion: eternal damnation.


This is not a popular message. Unbelief would rather watch the miming of the church than hear the thundering of the Law. It would embrace the psuedo-gospel of "God-loves-everyone-hoping-to-send-them-all-to- heaven" instead of hearing that God actually intends on sending insurgents to their rightful
place.


Yet, this other side of Christmas is crucial. And it makes sense. Human judges will dispense justice according to the rule of law. How much more will the Great All-Seeing Judge of the Universe dispense justice? And so, Adam was judged, as were all mankind, you and me included. But that is not what unbelievers want to hear during this season of joy.


However, it is exactly what they need to hear. And it is what we need to hear as well. The Incarnation is intelligible only in a Christian framework that takes sin seriously and rebellion as deserving of death. There was nothing in mankind to bring amnesty from God the judge. There was everything in mankind to repel Him. This is the reason why the coming of the Son of God is amazing: we deserved eternal damnation instead of life.


With the truth of the other side of Christmas, the Church can stop miming and start singing aloud with joy the clear message of why the Messiah became a man. And then the world will know what the "big deal" is all about.

The Gospel of Action-Figures

I grew up with action figures. I spent many an afternoon imagining great military battles and ingenious military tactics with my action figures, vehicles and equipment. And although I did join the military, I never experienced a “blood lust” because of these toys.

These toys simply represented a relaxation time in which my imagination could be utilized for things other than short story essays in my fifth-grade class. Yet, it also represented a value-system that accepted military might and lauded military prowess. It capitalized on such moral virtues as bravery, shrewdness, and perseverance. Within a pagan culture, these virtues are ends in themselves, without reference to God or His Law. Thus, they are the roots of militarism and a military state.

Within a Christian context these virtues are not ends in themselves but attributes defined by the Law of God. Within this context, these toys, specifically, the virtues they highlighted, were used for God’s glory because they reinforced God’s Word. The Bible lauds such character traits as bravery, shrewdness and perseverance—remember Christ exhorted the disciples to be as cunning as serpents. However, God does not smile upon the use of stupid bravery, sinful cunning, and prideful perseverance. So, already, one sees how a toy reflects a culture behind it and thus a gospel. For cultures are religions externalized.

Now, what can one make of the new Jesus Christ action figure? (Yes, you read that correctly!)

For starters, is one even allowed to make action figures of Christ? At least, that is the first question our Puritan forefathers would have asked. Remember those men we easily laud as great founders of America—we’d like to have their moral superiority but not their morals. And one of their morals was the Second Commandment: not to make any image of God. Christ is God. Therefore, no image of Christ is allowed.

Secondly, one could write a plethora of pages on the obvious religious-cultural implication involved in a Jesus “action-figure” (I hate even writing that word). We create gods in our own image…need I say more!?

This so-called god of modern commercialism readily fits into the Humanistic god of Americana: he is pliable to the whims of his creator. As the child manipulates the figurine into “action poses” (like dying on the cross?), he merely mimics the theology of his nurturing: a passive god who tries to appease the desires of mankind. Whether this obvious critique maps to the Christmas demigod, Santa, or to the god of the average Christian in America, it does not matter. The metaphor is powerful and ripe, ready to for any energetic pastor to pick and throw at the nearest lackadaisical Christian’s heart.

My toys imbibed on action and heroism. This toy imbibes on pure paganism: man’s sovereignty over God. Instead of imbibing this refuse, try giving your children something more uplifting, like a G.I. Joe or a Book…with Exodus 20:4 earmarked.

SDG

Providence Points e-Newsletter

Verbal Vomit & Golden Apples

After, providentially, finding a blog through Christianity Today, I nearly dropped my computer. The posting outlined an amazing event at a church in Denver--Scum of the Earth. The pastor was in a bit of a quandary: you see, the church celebrated Christmas through a service that included poetry readings. And the woman they asked to compose a poem included the f-word—not once or twice, but multiple times. At the end of the day, after much consulting, it was decided to let her read a modified version for the Christmas Eve service—including “only four expletives” and those as quotes from another character in the poem.

How thoughtful.

Naturally, there were strong reactions from the audience.

Such verbal vomit reflects more than a desire of a pastor to “connect” with a sub-culture. It displays a basic misapprehension of what the third commandment entails. Although clearly sinful, it is a barometer of the level of rebellion found in churches today. A wandering mass of vagabonds seeking any means to stretch the limits of credulity, some in the wasteland of American Christianity (whether in the mainline churches or not) have no sense of shame.

At first blush readers may condemn my language as harsh. Please bear with me: I acknowledge that churches have a zeal for evangelism—but more often than not, it is not according to knowledge.

I have not the time to elucidate the breadth and depth of this commandment; nor explain the differences between false swearing, oath taking and cursing; nor expound how using God’s handiworks—creation—in a flippant and coarse manner demeans God Himself; nor explicate the psychology of how sinful men verbally vomit on others as a form of emotional expiation for their anger, guilt, self-righteousness and the like.

Language is neither private (God is everywhere) nor unlimited and infinitely pliable (only God is unlimited). Thus, individuals or even a group of individuals do not have the right to do anything with language. In other words, language, although conventional, still expresses cultural values—and since all cultures are rooted in religion, that language expresses one’s religion. And all religions have standards of right and wrong, which, again are reflected in language. So, when a sub-culture wishes to express its rebellion against the larger cultural mores it turns toward those things that are taboo, obscene or shocking. Shame is the first thing to go.

Besides the obvious fact that we should offend people with the Gospel (Christ preached more about sin and hell than grace) and not our speech, it is patently clear that Christians should avoid coarse, filthy speech (Col. 4:6, Eph. 4:29). “Filth” in the Greek means “foul speaking, low and obscene speech” [Thayer]—the Greek background points not to blasphemy per se (language against God) but coarse or crass words.

Followers of Christ do not need to act out their old ways to bring shock to their audience. Imagine: instead of reading a poem about sinful acts, one acted it out instead—that by voyeuristic proxy the reader of the play gestured as well as cursed?

One cannot have speech be a free-for-all without denying absolute truth. If this were so, what words would express rebellion, dissatisfaction or dishonor? One could say anything with moral impunity.

Although most of this posting is related directly to abuse of language, the third commandment involves false doctrine as well as false speech. So, even though many Christians would be offended at verbally transforming the marriage bed into a crass cursing, they should be more offended at doctrinally filthy mouths. Besides the obvious pragmatism of the situation, with its disregard for the third commandment and apparent therapeutic usage of filthy words, the last installment on the blog made a passing remark that was shocking in its simplicity and amazing in the fact that no one commented on it:

“Most non-Christians I know do not hate God; they think that God and the church hate them because they are considered vile. We want to reverse that deception…” ---Mike Sares

Really!? Romans one through three clearly declares that man is self-deceived, loving sin and hating God: to love the world is to hate God (John 15:18ff.). Thus says the Lord:

The world cannot hate you, but it hates Me because I testify of it that its works are evil. –John 7:7

Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. –Romans 8:7

And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting;
being filled with all unrighteousness…backbiters, haters of God—Romans 1

Since this false doctrinal stance is maintained, false speech is allowed. It is that simple. The sub-culture under question is not assumed to be in rebellion against God through its language; thus, it is acceptable to use such language to communicate to them. Since they "do not hate God" then the language they use does not express hate; therefore such language is proper to use.

It is too bad the entire situation is setup as an either/or fallacy in which that church is supposedly taking a stand for people perceived as “vile”—I do not perceive them that way and my church welcomes them. The real fact is that many of them do not want our churches because we make them uncomfortable (or should!) with the Law and the Gospel.

James reminds us that our tongue is a powerful member: we must choose—through His power—between breathing sweet truth or vomiting lies. Between ingesting golden apples or digesting garbage.

A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in settings of silver. Proverbs
25:11

SDG

Regeneration "Christmas" Style

TV shows can be easy blog fodder. But why?

The simple reason resides in the fact that many shows manifest the cultural icons and beliefs of the populace at large--the religion of society.

This truth especially struck me with the 1970 stop motion TV special, Santa Claus is Comin' to Town. I passed by it surfing. Stopped. And I watched the regeneration sequence--the one when the Winter Warlock's heart melted. After being born-again from the reception of a toy, the Warlock asked Kris Kringle how he could continue being born-again. Or more precisely, he lamented to Kris that his heart was so bad that he did not know how to be good.

"It's easy," Kris replied. Then he (as with all musicals) broke out in spontaneous song:

Put one foot in front of the other
And soon you'll be walkin' 'cross the flo-o-or
Put one foot in front of the other
And soon you'll be walkin' out the door.
...If I want to change the reflection
I see in the mirror each morn
Oh, you do?!
You mean that it's just my election
Just that!
To vote for a chance to be reborn.

I don't think I need to exegete this. This song is about self-regeneration. The American religion. And what is worse, it is--with many--the Evangelical American Religion.

Try telling your Christian co-worker, neighbor or friend that he did not "vote for a chance to be reborn" but that God chose him first (Rom. 9:18). That Biblical rebirth comes from above, from the Spirit who moves as He wishes. Or if you want to be subtler, ask him his opinion about the song.

This song is just one part of the larger piece of Americana. If the churches cannot differentiate themselves from the religion of this song, there is no hope for America. If the church members cannot differentiate themselves from this song, there is little hope for American churches.

But God has promised to work His will through us (Phil. 2:13). And that begins with teaching and living the truth of God's sovereign grace.

Then one day, Lord willing, there will be new songs and new TV specials that reflect Holy Spirit regeneration instead of self-regeneration.

SDG

Best Blogs and Best Bloggers

I started blogging because it was an opportunity to hone my writing skills.

I think it has. I hope it will. Of course, it is hard to tell since feedback is minimal, especially on the Internet (I write a weekly e-newsletter that receives feedback on Sunday..."you wrote that??" :-)

Be that as it may (or will be), being the holiday season it is time to use old postings. (Don't I get a vacation too?)

So, if you have any postings you liked tell me and I'll post 'em. (Note: in English 'you' can be singular or plural; I use the singular). Or I'll just pick 'em.

Enjoy your vacation time, dear reader, and above all, enjoy your salvation in Christ Jesus the Lord.

SDG

Calvin & Michael Jackson

I always thought some modern songs dovetailed with Calvinism so well...like here!

Humble Leadership A Rarity

Recently, I was again reminded of the necessity of a humble church leadership.

In this age of American independence, it is quite common for men to assign themselves as leaders, especially in the church. Men, by force of arrogance, arrogate to themselves the office of minister. In turn, these erstwhile pastors start new congregations on the power of their personality, preaching or popularity.

But it does not stop there. Some pastors (even legitimate ones) take accolades upon themselves, asserting an air of authority in some specialized field before anyone has legitimately recognized them as experts. They readily assume supposed leadership upon the supposition that popularity implies authority (a common American error). To be a leader amongst leaders is always a temptation.

Yet, what if one were popular? What if accolades and leadership and the public limelight were offered? How should it be approached?

Again, history (within a biblical framework) yields fruitful advice. In this case, a very similar scenario arose in the early 1800s at the then famous St. Andrews college. Thomas Chalmers (a Scottish Presbyterian) was making great spiritual progress within that area. He quietly started a children's Sabbath-school, which in turned quickly grew in popularity amongst the families (Christian and non-Christian alike). This in turn, spawned more such schools and increased his popularity.

He was popular enough (through his engaging teaching and preaching ministry) that Christian societies wanted his face on their boards:

"Soon after he came to St. Andrews Dr. Chalmers was invited to become President of a Missionary Society, composed of Christians of difierent denominations."

Surely, he prayed; surely he sought advise. Yet, he did more:

"He would not accept this office till it had been offered to and declined by others whose [senior] official position entitled them to that mark of respect." [Memoirs, 198]

How many pastors today would take such an approach? Such self-effacement is rare today. Such high respect for those with more experience is refreshing.

The senior professors turned down the job and Chalmers' humility was rewarded. He greatly influenced the cause of missions through the legacy of his students, the St. Andrews Seven.

The rest is history.

SDG

A National Christian Thanksgiving to GOD

Each year from 1777 to 1783 inclusive, we find Congress appointing days for national thanksgiving and prayer, which were duly observed. On motion of John Randolph, in 1781, October 24th, it was " Resolved, That Congress will, at 2 P. M., this day, go in procession to the Dutch Lutheran church, and return thanks to Almighty God, for"—&c.

In the proclamation for a day of thanksgiving, we find sentiments of piety expressed in the following and similar language:

That all the people assemble on that day to offer fervent supplications to the God of all grace, that he would incline our hearts, for the future, to keep all his laws, and that he would cause the knowledge of Christianity to spread all over the earth" —"above all, to praise him that he hath continued to us the light of the blessed gospel, and to supplicate him, that he would cause pure religion and virtue to flourish."

It would seem that the wise and patriotic men of those times believed that the "blessed gospel," not the Koran, nor the Shaster, but the Christian system, was better adapted to the wants of men than any other system; and their conduct shows that they did not entertain views congenial to the feelings of infidels and deists of our day. Had both lived at the same time, they would have been antipodes in sentiment and action. We see no lack of proof that the framers of our Constitution, and the men who first administered it, were not anti-christian, as our objectors would have us believe. It is perfectly evident that these men were not ashamed to own their accountability to God, and their dependence on him: nor were they ashamed or afraid to recognize the Christian religion, in their national capacity. They had discernment, fidelity, piety, and patriotism enough to prompt them to make a wise choice, when they laid down the Christian religion as the foundation of this government, instead of the Jewish, Mohammedan, pagan, infidel, or deistical religion. God be praised for the noble deed.

But it appears that many of the members of Congress, for the last twelve or fifteen years, have been ashamed to acknowledge God; and infidels have united with them to prove that we have no Sabbath, and that this nation knows no religion. She may, in her riches and pride, have forgotten her religion; but she once had a religion, and that was the Christian. She ought to
have it still.

Infidels would have us believe that the Jew, the Mohammedan, and the pagan, have as much claim to legislation in favor of their religion, as Christians have a right to expect that Congress will not legislate against theirs. But these pleas are all false—a mere subterfuge to rid themselves of all accountability to the laws of God and man.

When was this succinct and potent piece written?...................1968?


No, rather.....1841 AD

[p.105, The Sabbath: A Brief History of Laws, Harmon Kingsbury]

The Other Side of the History of Jamestown

Here is a nice summary of one side of Jamestown.

It is filled with much detail, tracing the crucial years of its establishment in 1607 until, by God's all-encompassing providence, it reached critical mass, destined to be a part of America's great religious past.

Well, more precisely America's Protestant religious past. They certainly were not Roman Catholics.

In fact they were Anglicans. The Anglican church's 39 Articles (in the Book of Common Prayer) describe a theology foreign to most Christians.

The Articles affirm the bondage of the will:

X. Of Free-Will.
The condition of Man after the fall of Adam is such, that he cannot turn and prepare himself, by his own natural strength and good works, to faith; and calling upon God. Wherefore we have no power to do good works pleasant and acceptable to God, without the grace of God by Christ preventing us, that we may have a good will, and working with us, when we have that good will.

They affirm predestination:

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.

Lastly, the Articles teach baptism of infants:

XXVII. Of Baptism.
The Baptism of young Children is in any wise to be retained in the Church, as most agreeable with the institution of Christ.

They honored the Christian Sabbath: morning and evening worship with catechism time as well. They even catechized.

Furthermore, these colonists used the Geneva Bible, which included Calvinistic notes.

Dear reader, this is not written to be as offensive as possible. I write this because it is true. In fact, I was reminded of this problem while studying the history of homeschooling. The leading homeschoolers remind their detractors that the schools are using outdated history books that not only lie through commission (making stuff up) but, more insidiously, the books lie through omission. Think about how much the public schools teach about the Christian origins of America? the Founders? the Constitution? Exactly. You get the point.

So, we ought not omit these important truths of the pre-Revolutionary American culture. There were theological difference, yet from Jamestown to Boston, from English Anglicans to French Huguenots, from laymen to clergy, the culture was substantially Reformed.

That is what is missing in many Christians' history lessons.
That is the other side of Jamestown.

SDG

Why Do I Harp On Calvin, Covenant & The Constitution?

Because modern scholarship is doing the same thing.

My interest in the theological and ideological roots of the American Constitution stem from a college paper a decade ago. I wrote a short ten-page thesis on Christianity and the formation of the Constitution...only to change my thesis half-way through my research: it was not just generic Christianity that substantially influenced America, but Calvinism.

In the last two years (with no college schedule to drive my time), I have had more opportunity to discover more non-Christian scholarly work on this subject. Now, I can write five times as much on this topic using secular sources alone.

Well, enough about me; here is a review of a relevant book I would gladly like for Christmas...it's only 98$ :-)

What is fascinating about the review is the critique: the lack of contemporaneousness of the book. It's about twenty years old (it took a while to get the essays published). Yet, from a non-post-modern viewpoint this is not a problem at all: if truth has historical manifestations amongst large aggregates of mankind (think nations), then the truth of Calvinism and Covenantalism for the continual maintenance of this American Republic is quite contemporary.

Can't get more relevant than finding the roots of our freedoms and returning to them! Of course, if mere "covenant" is recaptured without the Covenant of Grace in the hearts of Americans, then we are simply back (and are already there in many ways) to the Covenant of Works.

My prayer, especially for contemporary American Christianity is that she would return to her Calvinistic-Covenantal roots.

And that first begins with acknowledging the truths of history.

SDG

Really, It's True: Calvinism Created America

As a Presbyterian minister, if I claimed that Calvinism, and Presbyterianism in particular, was key to the creation of America, people would laugh at me. But what if I nonchalantly
quoted some secular source stating the same fact? People might actually listen....

"He that will not honor the memory, and respect the influence of Calvin, knows but little of the origin of American liberty"

The above sentiment appears arrogant. When the public schools ardently claim that generic "Christian" Deists and unbelieving Enlightenment thinkers founded America, Christians decry this farce, pointing to historical facts that our founders were specifically conservative Christians (cp. Eidsmoe, Christianity and the Constitution). Yet, how many conservative Christians know that it was not a generic conservative Christianity that substantially created America but rather Calvinism? Lutheran minister Eidsmoe acknowledges it (p.19). Hopefully, more people will.

In a letter dated Oct, 31, 1776, Rev. Inglis, rector of Trinity Church, New York, wrote to fellow Anglican leaders:

"I have it from good authority that the Presbyterian ministers, at a synod where most of them in the middle colonies were collected, passed a resolve to support the continental congress in all their measures. This and this only can account for the uniformity of their conduct;for I do not know one of them, nor have I been able, after strict inquiry, to hear of any, who did not, by preaching and every effort in their power, promote all the measures of the congress, however extravagant."

American historian and founder of Annapolis, Bancroft, asserts:

"The fanatic for Calvinism was a fanatic for liberty; and, in the moral war fare for freedom, his creed was his most faithful counselor and his never-failing support. The Puritans... planted... the undying principles of democratic liberty. [He further claimed]:...Calvin infused enduring elements into the institutions of Geneva, and made it for the modern world, the impregnable fortress of popular liberty, the fertile seed-plot of democracy. We boast of our common schools; Calvin was the father of popular education, the inventor of the system of free schools. We are proud of the free States that fringe the Atlantic. The pilgrims of Plymouth were Calvinists; the best influence in South Carolina came from the Calvinists of France. William Penn was the disciple of the Huguenots; the ships from Holland that first brought colonists to Manhattan were filled with Calvinists. He that will not honor the memory, and respect the influence of Calvin, knows but little of the origin of American liberty." [A History of the United States, p.464; Literary and Historical Miscellanies, p.405]

Yale history professor, George Fisher, who thought the similarities between Roman Catholics and Protestants greater than their differences, wrote:

"How is it, then, that Calvinism is acknowledged, even by foes, to have promoted powerfully the cause of civil liberty? The reason lies in the boundary line which it drew between church and State. Calvinism would not surrender the peculiar notions of the Church to the civil authority. Whether the church, or the Government, should regulate the administration the Sacrament, and admit or reject the communicants, was the question which Calvin fought out with the authorities at Geneva, in this feature, Calvinism differed from the relation of the civil leaders to the Church, as established under the auspices of Zwingli, well as of Luther, and from the Anglican system which originated under Henry VIII....A second reason why Calvinism has been
favorable to civil liberty is found in the republican character of its church organization. Laymen shared power with ministers... Men who were accustomed to rule themselves in the Church would claim the same privilege in the commonwealth ...Another source of the influence of Calvinism, in advancing the cause of civil liberty, has been derived from its theology. The sense of the exaltation of the Almighty Ruler, and of his intimate connection with the minutest incidents and obligations of human life, which is fostered by this theology, dwarfs all earthly potentates. An intense spirituality, a consciousness that this life is but an infinitesimal fraction of human existence, dissipates the feeling of personal homage for men, however high their station, and dulls the luster of all earthly grandeur. Calvinism and Romanism are the antipodes of each other." [The Reformation, p. 07]

A modern Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics summarizes thusly:

"In general it may be claimed for Calvinism that its influence has been an elevating and invigorating one. Abasing man before God, but exalting him again in the consciousness of a newborn liberty in Christ, teaching him his slavery through sin, yet restoring his freedom to him through grace, and leading him to regard all things in the light of eternity, it contributed to form a grave but very noble and elevated type of character, and reared a race not afraid to lift up the head before kings." [Hastings, 153]

Von Kuehnelt-Leddihn, an Austrian Roman Catholic aristocrat intellectual and National Review contributor asserts:

"If we call the American statesmen of the late eighteenth century the Founding Fathers of the United States, then the Pilgrims and Puritans were the grandfathers and Calvin the great-grandfather...the prevailing spirit of Americans before and after the War of Independence was essentially Calvinistic in both its brighter and uglier aspects." ["The Western Dilemma: Calvin or Rousseau?" Modern Age, 1971, 5]

Historian James G. Leyburn, of Washington & Lee University, wrote a book on the Scotch-Irish and summarized it in an essay in the American Heritage Magazine:

...Scottish Presbyterianism was unique in its intensity, even in those religious days...A Hessian captain wrote in 1778, 'Call this war by whatever name you may, only call it not an American rebellion; it is nothing more or less than a Scotch Irish Presbyterian rebellion.' King George was reported to have characterized the Revolution as 'a Presbyterian war,' and Horace Walpole told Parliament that 'there is no use crying about it. Cousin America has run off with a Presbyterian parson, and that is the end of it.'...Such testimony to enthusiasm for the American cause was not given to any other group of immigrants." ["Scotch-Irish: The Melting Pot" online]

On May 20, 1775, the Presbyterian Synod was the first religious body to send a public letter to the churches encouraging general submission to the deceived Crown and specific submission to the Continental Congress and to prepare their lives and souls for war.

Daniel Elazer, a member of presidential committees and of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, eloquently summarizes:

"A majority of the delegates to the Convention were affiliated with covenant-based churches...The Presbyterians, however, were already moving toward full-scale federalism. As Arthur Schlesinger, Sr., noted: "More than either [the Congregationalists or Anglicans] the Presbyterians in their reliance on federalist and representative institutions anticipated the political makeup of the future United States." Indeed, as the first government came into office under the U.S. Constitution in 1789, the Presbyterians held their first nationwide General Assembly. In the Presbyterian system, congregations in a local area formed a presbytery; several presbyteries in a region formed a synod; and then came the General Assembly. As a result, the system of federal democracy established by the U.S. Constitution has often been referred to as Presbyterianism writ large for civil society..." [The Covenant Tradition in Politics, pt.3, p.77]

More can be written. But this should be enough to challenge the modern stereotypes and misconceptions. If we want Reformation again, we have to go to the roots.

SDG