[first published in the monthly congregational Notes, for November, 2018.]
“Our wisdom, in so far as it ought to be deemed true and solid Wisdom, consists almost entirely of two parts: the knowledge of God and of ourselves. But as these are connected together by many ties, it is not easy to determine which of the two precedes and gives birth to the other.” So begins an English translation of what ranks among the most influential Christian writing of the last 500 years, and one of the best single pieces of work to come from the Swiss Reformation. The words are from the beginning of John Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion, which he first wrote in 1536 in order to demonstrate to the King of France that what was being called a new religion was not new at all but simply a clearer, Bible-based expression of what had always been Christian belief. Since that first small volume was published, it was expanded re-ordered into what is today still one of the best presentations of Christian doctrine and the lifestyle that should flow from that doctrine.
Calvin’s concern to systematise Christian doctrine was never purely academic but always to enhance and enrich true piety, which for him was expressed in Christian daily life. He wrote for the ordinary man, not the scholar. He wrote clearly, logically and Biblically. “For until men recognize that they owe everything to God, that they are nourished by His Fatherly care, that He is the author of their every good, that they should seek nothing beyond Him, they will never yield Him willing service.” In other words, a true, structured knowledge of God is the first requirement for establishing a structured knowledge of man and how to live in community.
So why does Calvin tie together theology and anthropology, especially as nowadays almost all our universities would reject the connection? Simply because that is what the Bible does. (In fact, if they are interested in theology at all, most universities would reduce to simply a minor sub-branch of anthropology; an example of primitive man’s desire for security in a vast, impersonal evolutionary universe.) But, Calvin said, where people are honest, it is impossible for them to consider the wonder of what it is to be human without thinking of God, “because it is perfectly obvious that the endowments which we possess cannot possibly be from ourselves; nay, that our very being is nothing else than subsistence in God alone.” And, to complete the circle, understanding the attributes and character of God will help lift mankind up to its proper dignity and save from the folly of self-confidence. “So long as we do not look beyond the earth, we are quite pleased with our own righteousness, wisdom, and virtue; we address ourselves in the most flattering terms, and seem only less than demigods,” and “[S]ince we are all naturally prone to hypocrisy, any empty semblance of righteousness is quite enough to satisfy us instead of righteousness itself.”
It is not surprising then that where Calvin’s Institutes were read and understood, society took on a distinctively Christian ethos quite different from that furthered by Medieval Catholicism. There was a balance between liberty and authority which preserved from the poles of tyranny and anarchy and which encouraged individual liberty and social responsibility. Those were “Protestant” lands. They are also the lands which have been responsible for so much of the social stability and prosperity of “the West” for the last 300 years. As the West now rapidly and foolishly turns away from its Biblical and Calvinist heritage, it will lose that which has made it distinctive, and the world will lose something very special. Instead of real blessing we will be left with the illusion of wisdom and a “semblance of righteousness” where anyone who stands for God will likely be considered a trouble-maker and a nuisance.
Blessings come from God and when He withdraws them no amount of human activity can make up for what is lost. When we eventually realize this, the only solution, as the Prodigal Son in the parable discovered, is to confess our sin and return to our Heavenly Father. If we do that, we shall find, as did the prodigal son in the parable, open arms and great rejoicing. And what is more, we will find what the Prodigal did not, a Welcoming Older Brother, Jesus Christ.
[First published in the monthly congregational Notes for October, 2018]
Anyone watching Australia over the past few months would doubtless conclude that we are a nation in crisis, and not only politically! It is not hard to find many examples where things are far worse than they once were, and the older we are the easier it is to find them!! So, what do we do about it? One common response is to look to the government, to push for new laws which (we are promised!!) will surely correct the situation. But new laws can only be a lasting solution if the problem was bad law to begin with. Another response is to call for changed school curricula to better educate our young, as if the problems are just of ignorance and a lack of resources. But knowledge on its own is no guarantee that it will be used properly. “Well then let us pass a law making it so,” and around we go again. It seems clear to us that the problem lies far deeper than political inaction or poor budgetary priorities. Ultimately it is one of conscience: no law constrains the will unless the will wills to be constrained!
Conscience is an integral part of our being human that flows from being made in the image of God. It is a tool for life, a God-given inner testimony to the fact that we all have a sense of right and wrong which is independent of oneself. A true conscience reminds us that we are not the makers of our own law or the crafters of our own ethic but are created to love and serve a righteous, holy God. It will warn us not to pursue wrong and when we have done wrong, will by evoking a sense of guilt, remind us of justice and the need for forgiveness and reconciliation And so the New Testament declares that a functioning conscience serves as a reminder of what we already know deep down, even if we cannot always express it (Rom 1:19-32; 2:14-15)! So to have a conscience is to have a very great blessing but as with all God’s blessings (as with all tools) there comes an accountability for its proper stewardship. We are to keep it from becoming weak (1 Cor 8:7ff) and to make sure that its witness to us is good and clean (1 Tim 1:5; 3:9) and properly directed towards God (1 Pet 2:19).
It should not surprise us that one of the marks of our sinful condition is a perverse desire to re-calibrate the conscience according to an alternate set of right and wrong so that our guilt goes away—or at least becomes explainable without acknowledging God! Such a conscience is like a deliberately falsified compass: completely useless as a guide to anything. Instead of serving to restrain from sin, a perverted conscience will happily justify us in our wrong (1 Tim 4:2; Titus 1:15) and give false comfort that humanity by its own efforts can improve (Heb 9:14; 10:22). A perverted conscience is a serious thing because once that happens it can never improve itself but must rely on the gracious intervention of the Holy Spirit in light of Jesus Christ (Rom 9:1).
All this means that when a nation’s collective conscience has been persuaded away from God’s Moral Law, no amount of laws or education alone will turn it around. In fact, apart from either some gracious God-given restraint exercised through His general providence, or some great national repentance these “remedies” will only make things worse in the long run because they come from the same perverted spring.
It also means that the Christian who lives and acts according to a Christ-restored conscience, will stick out like the proverbial sore thumb! It cannot be otherwise, for one of the fruits of the Spirit is Self-Control in which the conscience plays an integral part. Our challenge is to show that only when hearts are submitted to Jesus Christ and His Law, will our society return to what we had, and make it even better. For this we must certainly pray, and for this we must certainly live.
[first published in the monthly congregational Notes, for September, 2018.]
It is surprising, but still encouraging, that in this age of apparent gender confusion we still had Fathers’ Day as a special event this year. Perhaps it is only a matter of time before it is re-named “Partners’ Day” or “Special Person’s Day” or some such neutral term. We are told that this will enable those without fathers to be included and there have been calls to remove or re-name Mothers’ Day for similar reasons. As everyone knows, the plain truth is that no-one exists without either a mother or a father, so the call to re-name or remove these days is really about the nature of family and whether people are free to define family in their own way, without even the constraints found in the natural world. Someone will say, “We overcome the constraints of nature every time we take an aeroplane or turn on a light at night or a heater in winter.” But unless someone wishes to deny a special uniqueness to humankind (and those who believe in evolution ultimately have no reason to assume humans are special) there is a vast difference between overcoming the physical world and altering the design of some-thing which is so fundamental to ordered human existence: the family.
Families are basic to any stable society because they define secure relationships. They sanction some behaviours and rightly proscribe others, and they train their members to uphold these freedoms and limits for the good of others and the future, not just for “personal fulfilment.” (Which in its modern expression is often an excuse for selfish-ness.) This is the deep truth which underlies the 5th Commandment with its promise, “Honour your father and your mother, that your days may be long in the land that the Lord your God is giving you” (Exod 20:12). It’s also why the Devil hates families!
It is all the more important, then, that Christians resolve to build strong families and because this will often mean living in opposition to the world’s values, we should take careful note whenever the Bible gives us instruction. The two Psalms 127 & 128 do just that, where godly family relationships provide the proper context for work and its blessings, marriage, the blessedness of children, stability in the home and real hope for stability in the state for generations. Strong families build strong character, and strong national character is usually the fruit of more than one lifetime.
The imagery is rich and not too hard for us to grasp even though the language may be ancient. A man labours, sometimes painfully but so that he and his family may have sufficient around the table and to enjoy before God. Work that becomes an end in itself and takes away from family life is never truly fulfilling (127:2 & 128:2). In marriage, a wife builds together with her husband with her normal first focus as flourishing and facilitating the home (128:3a), and if for some reason this cannot be the case, it will surely require special prayer and wisdom. Children are not a nuisance or an interruption but a blessing and stewardship for a godly future. They therefore ought to be prayerfully sought and not selfishly delayed, and parents will give an account to God for how they were trained. Do they know how to fly “straight and true” like a good arrow and hold the faith in discussions? Do they themselves hope to build good families as a means of blessing to the whole nation(127:3-5; 128:3,6)?
It is true that in a fallen world, both our natural sinfulness and our social structures will make it hard to pursue godliness in family life but we should not give in to the values of the age; that will pass away! So if as Gospel people we understand that we live for eternity, we will not see godliness as a cost but an investment in our grand-children’s future and beyond. Peace be upon the “Israel of God!” (128:6 & Gal 6:16).
[first published in the monthly congregational “Notes” for August 2018]
Hardly a week goes by without the news bringing us reports of new attempts to push political correctness into everyday speech and actions, not least in the area of gender and its perceived separation from issues of human sexuality. The latest push is for the use of gender-neutral pronouns—now called gender-inclusive to make them more acceptable (because ‘inclusion’ is a good thing). So the State government, building on a 2016 directive for public servants to avoid the use of terms such as ‘husband’ and ‘wife’, now prefers the general plural ‘they’ in all cases where previously ‘he’ or ‘she’ would have been used. From overseas we read of threats to penalize students who do not submit to this new linguistic fashion and university staff suspended or dismissed for not conforming. So now there is a whole range of suggested new pronouns that could be used such as ‘ze’, ’ey’,’ae,’ each with their own set of paradigms.
The stated rationale for such ‘New-speak’ is that we do not want to risk offending anyone by mis-identifying them or denying the reality of their self-perception. Here is the real issue: one of identity. “Who am I, really?” “Am I who others say I am, or who I say I am, or perhaps and more likely, or who I feel I am?” “Can anyone tell me who I am? “Today’s world cannot equip someone to answer those questions accurately and from a Christian & Biblical perspective we are not surprised at this inability, but merely changing one’s language will not make the problem go away. It will in the long run make it worse.
Biblically speaking, God created male and female because it was not good that Adam exist only in his maleness. Nor was it sufficient for Adam to reflect fully the Image of God that he should simply be given another male for company. And so God created Eve, and God (and Adam!!) declared this to be ‘very good’. Now, certainly this ‘good’ has suffered its own unique form of disruption because of the fall into sin, but our response must never be to declare that disruption to be good, normal or something to be encouraged, even as we would never declare any other post-fall disruption (e.g. death, disease, famine, sorrow, lies, power abuses etc.) good and something to be encouraged, especially as God has provided his own, sufficient, unique response to all sinfulness and its disrupting consequences: the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
It seems to us that the real issue with the present insistence on this contrived gender-neutral language is that it deliberately rejects maleness and femaleness as the created standard for human existence. It therefore deliberately rejects God as Creator and is just one more illustration of Romans 1:28-32. It is unarguable that since creation there are only X and Y chromosomes which combine to produce maleness or femaleness but this ‘revelation’ from nature is unhelpful to those who wish it were not so. And herein lies the issue: for one reason or another, people wish it were not so, just as in many other areas, people wish that God’s law did not apply to them. But it does.
Our response must be Gospel focused and clear, showing a love which is never proud, uncompassionate or smug. We may well encounter people who in their confusion have found passing comfort in the world’s assurance that it is ‘good’ that they are neither male nor female. We understand a desire to find acceptance and meaning. but we know that merely inventing new words will never answer the question, “Who am I?” That can only ever be answered by coming face to face with the transforming love of God in Jesus Christ. The only truly fulfilling answer to that question is given when someone can say, “Who am I? I am Someone for whom Christ lovingly died that I might be restored to Him in wholeness for eternity.” So, “Who are you?”
[first published in the monthly congregational Notes, for July, 2018.]
In Parts 1 & 2, we covered our relationship to God in Jesus Christ, how we should live, and our relationships with others. When we understand and embrace these truths, our preparation is essentially done—now go on and live to the glory of God, at peace and without fear! However there are things that will happen after our death which will involve others, and some forethought now may help them when the time comes.
Although wills are read after one dies, they are written beforehand. Having one implies that there is property to be distributed and because “the love of money is a root of all evil,” (1 Tim 6:10) they can be a source of great division and argument. Marriage being what it is, it seems to us that unless there are some special circumstances the great bulk of an estate will naturally go to the surviving spouse. If both should die, then the Bible has some counsel for us in Proverbs: “A good man leaves an inheritance to children’s children” (Prov. 3:22a). In other words, what we cannot take with us we should pass on but try to keep within the family. But just as we tithe in life, we could do so also in death. This is especially so if we have no near family to inherit. Is there a legacy or a bequest that we can give to further the cause of Christ? There are many secular agencies who do good things and clamour for the dollars of the dead but it seems to us that Christians could in good conscience limit themselves to organizations soundly based on the Bible, and that could also include one’s local congregation. Take professional advice, think carefully and provide prayerfully.
At some point it may be helpful to provide guidance to those who have to arrange or conduct the funeral and although some things will be cultural, the Christian should always want their funeral to be noticeably different from that for one of another faith or even no faith at all. This does not mean having to leave out elements that others expect but it does mean determining in advance that all that goes into a funeral will not undermine the Christian message and the assurance that it brings. So eulogies still can be spoken (or put in print) and the modern penchant for audio-visual tributes can be accommodated, but in a way that does not obscure or confuse the grace of God. A Christian will want Jesus set forth more than themselves and their faith rejoiced in far more than their works. The easiest way to set eulogies in their proper context is to contain them within a service which is clearly designed to be a time of worship first and remembrance second, and the easiest way to do that is to have the major portion of the service at one’s home church building. So, give thought to possible hymns of faith and comforting Bible passages but leave liberty for the living to find comfort in their own favourites too. After all, funerals are for the living not the dead.
These days, cremation is very much the social norm, perhaps because it is generally cheaper, or perhaps because people just don’t care. It was not always so. While we will be without the body for a time, there will be one in the resurrection. Certainly a cremated body will be no problem for God on that Day but if the option is available, the Christian may want to ponder how burial more powerfully picks up the Bible’s affirmation of the value of the body and the rich ‘sleep’ metaphor which is used to picture the death of the body pending the resurrection (eg John 11:11-13; 1Thess 4:14).
R.C. Sproul once wrote that he had no intention of dying; he simply planned to have a change of address!! On that, the world is full of superstition and wishful thinking; the Christian has an assurance grounded in the eternal faithfulness of God. Let that hope be seen in your life today and at the time of your death—whenever it may be.