This then is the true logic of religion, that is, when we are persuaded that God is reconcilable and easily pacified, because he is by nature inclined to mercy, and also, when we thus apply this doctrine to ourselves, or to our own peculiar benefit, — As God is by nature merciful, I shall therefore know and find him to be so. Until then we be thus persuaded, let us know that we have made but little progress in the school of God. And hence it appears very clear from this passage, that the Papacy is a horrible abyss; for no one under that system can have a firm footing, so as to be fully persuaded that God will be merciful to him; for all that they have are mere conjectures. But we see that the Prophet reasons very differently, God loves mercy; he will therefore have mercy on us: and then he adds, He will return; [202] and this is said lest the temporary wrath or severity of God should disquiet us. Though God then may not immediately shine on us with his favor, but, on the contrary, treat us sharply and roughly, yet the Prophet teaches us that we are to entertain good hope. — How so? He will return, or, as he said shortly before, He will not retain perpetually his wrath: for it is for a moment that he is angry with his Church; and he soon remembers mercy.

The Prophet now specifies what sort of mercy God shows to the faithful, For he will tread down our iniquities; he had said before that he passes by the wickedness of his elect people. He will then tread down our iniquities; and he will cast [203] into the depth of the sea all their sins; that is our sins shall not come in remembrance before him. We hence learn what I have said before — that God cannot be worshipped sincerely and from the heart until this conviction be fixed and deeply rooted in our hearts, that God is merciful, not in general, but toward us, because we have been once adopted by him and are his heritage. And then were the greater part to fall away, we should not fail in our faith; for God preserves the remnant in a wonderful manner. And lastly, let us know, that whenever we flee to God for mercy, pardon is ever ready for us, not that we may indulge in sin, or take liberty to commit it, but that we may confess our faults and that our guilt may appear before our eyes: let us know, that the door is open to us; for God of his own good will presents himself to us as one ready to be reconciled.

It is also said, He will cast our sins into the depth of the sea. We hence learn that there is a full remission of sins, not half as the Papists imagine, for God, they say, remits the sin, but retains the punishment. How frivolous this is, the thing itself clearly proves. The language of the Prophet does however import this, that our sins are then remitted when the records of them are blotted out before God.

— John Calvin, Commentary on Micah 7

#quotes #Reformed #theology

I've always been enthralled by 20th century dystopia fiction: Orwell's 1984, Huxley's Brave New World, Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451, and McCarthy's The Road. What intrigues me most about these particular works, except the last one, is their pointed critique of society's trajectory and their eerily prophetic gaze into a future (for them) that has in many ways become, quite frighteningly, the reality in which we presently live.

Today, I'm thinking about a word made infamous in Orwell's 1984, “Doublethink.” The American Heritage Dictionary defines it as “thought marked by the acceptance of gross contradictions and falsehoods, especially when used as a technique of self-indoctrination.”

Specifically, given the hostilities between Israel and Iran over the past few days, the notion of doublethink is on my mind. For instance, think about the following ideas we are supposed to hold simultaneously regardless of how contradictory they might seem:

• Israel's pre-emptive attack on Iran is 'self-defense,' but Iran's response to being attacked is 'aggression' or 'terrorism' (see Footnote)

• Israel claims the right to develop/maintain nuclear weapons for itself, but Israel rejects Iran's right to develop/maintain the same type of weapon

• Iran and the U.S. intelligence community claim that Iran is not capable (or nearly capable) of fielding nuclear weapons, but Israel's intelligence claims otherwise, in spite of the fact that U.S. intelligence rejects Israel's 'evidence'

Before jumping to conclusions and name-calling, I am NOT suggesting Iran is morally right or morally superior to Israel or the U.S. I am not. At the same time, however, I am not going to be so hypocritical or arrogant as to suggest that the U.S. or any other nation has the right to decree what technology other nations might develop and possess. The decisions made by nations, like all choices, come with their own benefits and consequences.

Let us not pretend that any nation in history has consistently acted as a disinterested, benign actor seeking the best interest of the world at large. That is delusional. Let's at least be honest and realize that every nation acts only in its own self-interest, and that creates friction, conflict, atrocities, suffering, and war. This will not change until Christ comes to set all things right, so our prayer must always be 'Maranatha. Come, Lord Jesus.”

#politics #theology

(Footnote): Interestingly, the idea of pre-emptive self-defense is consistently and historically rejected by the Christian Just War tradition. George W. Bush articulated the idea that a nation (specifically the U.S.) has the right to take military action against perceived threats before actual attacks...an idea that has taken root in the U.S. but has been consistently rejected through history as incompatible with the Just War tradition. I continue to be on the side of tradition and reject pre-emptive self-defense as an oxymoron.

The little book of Amos is one of my favorites among the Old Testament prophets. Though written over 2,700 years ago, many of the themes Amos takes up and many of the warnings he levies against Israel are just as pertinent to the Church today. It is an amazing book, worthy of our prayerful, detailed study. When studying Amos, it is easy to see how the first six chapters are perpetually-relevant (Who can fail to find application to those famous words, “Let justice roll down like water”?), but then we come to the last three chapter and sometimes wonder what to do with them…especially the final chapter.

Having proclaimed very clearly that Israel would be carted off into captivity by the Assyrians (Amos 9.4) and destroyed from the face of the earth (Amos 9.8), God then promises, “Yet I will not utterly destroy the house of Jacob.” As is always true of the prophets, God’s threat (promise) of judgment is accompanied by his promise of restoration. The book ends with the following, grace-filled proclamation:

On that day I will raise up The tabernacle of David, which has fallen down, And repair its damages; I will raise up its ruins, And rebuild it as in the days of old; That they may possess the remnant of Edom, And all the Gentiles who are called by My name,” Says the LORD who does this thing.

“Behold, the days are coming,” says the LORD, “When the plowman shall overtake the reaper, And the treader of grapes him who sows seed; The mountains shall drip with sweet wine, And all the hills shall flow with it. I will bring back the captives of My people Israel; They shall build the waste cities and inhabit them; They shall plant vineyards and drink wine from them; They shall also make gardens and eat fruit from them. I will plant them in their land, And no longer shall they be pulled up From the land I have given them,” Says the LORD your God.

– Amos 9.11-15 (NKJV)

In the last hundred years, many people have seen this promise fulfilled, at least in part, in the 1917 Balfour Declaration or the 1948 Arab-Israeli war. Here, they say, God is making good on his promise to ‘bring back the captives’ of Israel in their rightful territory.

What should we make of this interpretation? Does it rightly understand this prophecy and properly interpret God’s promises?

In a word, no. In stronger words, absolutely not!

There are some areas of the Old Testament that are difficult to interpret and some that have consistently been interpreted in multiple ways through the millennia, but this is NOT one of them. This passage is plainly interpreted and explained in the New Testament book of Acts, and where Scripture interprets itself, there should be no confusion.

Looking at Acts 15, after Barnabas and Paul describe God’s work through them among the Gentiles, the Apostle James takes advantage of the stunned silence, likely as these Jewish Christians realize God has made a great turning point in his salvific work by including Gentiles. James speaks to the Jerusalem Council about Peter’s missionary work. He quotes Amos 9.11-12 about rebuilding the tabernacle of David and points out that God has fulfilled this promise.

In other words, David’s tabernacle has been rebuilt, past tense. God has fulfilled this promise, says Peter under inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

How? David’s dynasty was restored in Jesus Christ, at which point Gentiles started in earnest to seek the Lord, as evidenced by the reports from Barnabas, Paul, and Peter.

We need not look for some future work of God to rebuilt the temple in Jerusalem. Such an idea has no place in redemptive history, according to the plain testimony of Scripture. Why not? Because it has already been accomplished in the life and work of Jesus Christ, through whose grace Jews and Gentiles are ‘saved in the same manner’ (Acts 15.11).

Thanks be to God!

#theology

There is no neutrality between gratitude and ingratitude. Those who are not grateful soon begin to complain of everything.

— Thomas Merton, Thoughts on Solitude

#quotes #culture #theology

On the Destructive Nature of the Left and the Proper Response of the Right

I read an article today that described the fundamental nature of the Left as 'negative,' i.e. opposed to things, typically the historic status quo. I think I would go further than that and say that the Left is fundamentally destructive / de-constructive and characterized by the desire to create disorder (more quickly than entropy disorders things in a fallen world). Over time, the immediate causes will change and adjust, according to the soft spots or easy gains that present themselves to this philosophy. This explains why the cause of the day has shifted from sexual and reproductive 'freedom' to political correctness to LGBTQ-alphabet soup to wokeness to antisemitism to...whatever will come next.

This is very negative, I admit; however, I am not especially charitable about my understanding of the Right as it is currently understood and exemplified.

The Right, it seems to me, is also characteristically 'negative' but in a different way. Instead of being focused on the destruction of the current state of things, the Right generally defines itself by being against the Left. It seems very rare to me, indeed, that anyone on the Right actually puts forth a genuinely positive position that is not a reaction to something the Left has already tried to destroy (e.g. being 'pro-life').

Understood this way, it is clear that the general, 'big picture,' macro drift of a society will NEVER be anything but to the Left. It will always drift leftward over time if the Right is not genuinely FOR ideas but reacts only against the destruction attempted by the Left. The Right, in this paradigm, is also fundamentally negative. Both sides work together to move a society, at greater or lesser speeds over time, toward self-destruction and societal suicide.

This is Satanic and demonic, full stop. If you don't believe me, think back on the just the last two hundred years of world history.

That this view is correct is self-evident if we pause and reflect on the positions currently held by the Right in the United States that are FAR left of positions held by the Left even less than a century ago. Contrast the views of Donald Trump on abortion or same sex marriage with Bill Clinton—who is more to the Left? Compare the theological views of 'conservative' churches today on female clergy or premarital sex with mainline churches of 50 years ago—who is more to the Left?

The Right, as it operates today, is a retardant to leftward motion rather than a genuinely creative or positive agent acting in society. To recover a truly positive influence, the Right must define itself by what it supports and not by what it is against, AND it must stop repeatedly conceding ground and drifting left itself.

Said positively, the Right (i.e. “Conservatives”) must stop trying to conserve things and start trying to recreate and restore them according to the Word of God and His intention for individuals and society.

Instead of the Right being 'conservative' it must be 'restorational.'

We ought not be trying to simply slow down society's movement to the left but restoring God's intended order, beliefs, and practice.

Who is up for such a monumental task? Certainly none of the political class or academia. It must come from God's people individually, who themselves are recreated and restored, and corporately, as the Body of Christ.

It will not come from anywhere else. Indeed, it cannot.

#culture #politics #theology

While I was in seminary, a new Calvinism was flourishing among Evangelicals in the United States. Well, to be honest, a partial Calvinism was flourishing. The Calvinism then (and still) popular among American Evangelicals like John MacArthur, John Piper, Albert Mohler, Mark Dever, and others was a Calvinism that was limited to following Calvin on the “doctrines of grace” when it came to salvation. Men like these, all baptists, have very little room for Calvin when it comes to his teaching on the sacraments.

Here is an excerpt I ran across recently from John Calvin's commentary on John 20. Here, he takes a very Augustinian view on the power of the sacraments as coming from the joining of the sacramental act with the word or promises of Christ:

But let the reader observe, that with the visible and outward sign the word is also joined; for this is the source from which the sacraments derive their efficacy; not that the efficacy of the Holy Spirit is contained in the word which sounds in our ears, but because the effect of all those things which believers receive from the sacraments depends on the testimony of the word. Christ breathes on the Apostles: they receive not only the breathing, but also the Spirit. And why, but because Christ promises to them?

In like manner, in baptism we put on Christ, (Galatians 3:27,) we are washed by his blood, (Revelation 1:5,) our old man is crucified, (Romans 6:6,) in order that the righteousness of God may reign in us. In the Holy Supper we are spiritually fed with the flesh and blood of Christ. Whence do they derive so great efficacy but from the promise of Christ, who does and accomplishes by his Holy Spirit what he declares by his word? Let us therefore learn, that all the sacraments which men have contrived are nothing else than absolute mockeries or frivolous amusements, because the signs can have no truth unless they be accompanied by the word of the Lord. Now, since we never sport in this manner with sacred things, without wickedly pouring contempt on God and ruining souls, we ought to be most carefully on our guard against those stratagems of Satan.

Here Calvin sounds almost like Luther. Indeed, there is very little for this Lutheran to quibble with here. If only Calvin's contemporary followers read and taught more of what Calvin actually taught!

#theology #sacraments #Reformed #Lutheran #Evangelicalism

Psalm 107 begins with a wonderful call to worship, “Oh, give thanks for the LORD, for He is good! For His mercy endures forever.” This summons to praise God certainly calls to us from the beginning to the end of Scripture; however, what jumps out at me in this Psalm is the use of cycles of events as the proof or rationale for our worship...answering the unasked question, 'Why should we worship the LORD?'

Over and over, the psalmist recites a cycle of hardship or suffering followed by a desperate cry to God for help, which results each time in God coming to the aid of the faithful who cry out to him. This cycle ends each time with the line, “Oh, that men would give thanks to the Lord for His goodness, and for His wonderful works to the children of men!”

After three cycles in the past tense, the psalmist switches to the present tense to describe a storm on the sea and the desperate situation that results. Here, in the present tense, the terrified sailors cry out to God who delivers them again and gives them peace, rest, and a safe port at the end of their journey. This present tense deliverance is yet another reason to implore us to worship. “Oh, that men would give thanks to the Lord for his goodness, and for His wonderful works to the children of men!”

Finally, the psalmist reflects on the great goodness and sovereignty of God over creation, over politics, and over the lives of the righteous—again, all present tense. The Psalm concludes with this reflection, “Whoever is wise will observe these things, and they will understand the lovingkindness of the LORD.”

Though written more than two thousand years ago, Psalm 107 considers the realities of God's covenant faithfulness to his people (past, present, and—by implication—future) and our sinful failure to rightly worship God for his watchful care. More than this, we should find here great hope both in God's past acts and in the gift of prayer, through which God answers the cries of his people, fulfills their every need, and protects them from harm.

#devotional #psalms #theology

There is a clear and present danger that the devil may take away from us the pure doctrine of faith and may substitute for it the doctrines of works and of human traditions. It is very necessary, therefore, that this doctrine of faith be continually read and heard in public. No matter how well known it may be or how carefully learned, the devil, our adversary, who prowls around and seeks to devour us (1 Peter 5:8), is not dead. Our flesh also goes on living. Besides, temptations of every sort attack and oppress us on every side. Therefore this doctrine can never be discussed and taught enough. If it is lost and perishes, the whole knowledge of truth, life, and salvation is lost and perishes at the same time. But if it flourishes, everything good flourishes—religion, true worship, the glory of God, and the right knowledge of all things and of all social conditions.

— Martin Luther, Luther’s Works, Vol. 26: Lectures on Galatians, 1535

(Note: There are very few commentaries that I would ever recommend a Christian take up and read cover to cover just for edification; however Luther's great Galatians commentary is one that every believer should purchase and read slowly, from beginning to end. It is a devotional work of such depth and richness that you will not be disappointed. I promise.)

#Luther #quotes #theology

Miracles are a retelling in small letters of the very same story which is written across the whole world in letters too large for some of us to see.

– C.S. Lewis, God in the Dock

#quotes #Lewis #theology

On this Good Friday, you could do no better than to listen to one of J.S. Bach's most wonderful works, “St. Matthew's Passion.” This is an incredible way to spend the next three hours of your life. You won't be disappointed. I promise.

#theology #hymnody