Daveed’s Stud Pose

First off, let me mention that I’m very proud of my friend, Daveed. When I first met him, he was a Muslim and well on his way to being a radical one. Since then, by the power of the resurrected Christ, he’s become a Christian. Praise God! This whole process has given him something of a unique perspective on radical Islam, both domestic and international. You can read all about his experience in My Year Inside Radical Islam. A couple of years ago he also authored a book about how America is not winning the war on terrorism called Bin Laden’s Legacy.

Alright, enough pluggin’ his written work. How about Daveed’s recent work on CNN ? Dig this:

A discussion worth watching

As it comes to the content of that discussion, I admit that I know virtually nothing. Even so, one thing stood out to me that seems quite helpful. Daveed distinguished between “radicalization” and the willingness to engage in violence. These two things are most certainly distinct and need to be understood as such.

Let me illustrate how important this distinction is. I would be (and probably should be) viewed as a radical Christian. I think that Jesus Christ has aims to bring this whole world into submission to himself. Christians are called to take every thought captive to the obedience of Jesus and to tear down worldly strongholds that war against Christ. I submit that anyone who takes that seriously will be viewed as a radical. Fine and good. Here’s the rub: I do not think that the Bible tells us to take up offensive arms against the infidel. Christ’s weapons for world domination are not swords and guns, not jet airplanes and IEDs. Jesus will take over this world by Word and Sacrament, by worship, preaching and prayer, by the humble obedience of his Church. These are Christian weapons of warfare.

I am a radical, but I’m not violent. If we lose that clear distinction (relative to Christians, Muslims, or anyone else), then we will inevitably undercut our efforts at stopping violence. In fact, in the name of quelling violence, we’ll likely end up perpetrating violence (physical, economic, political, etc.) against radical but non-violent people. This, of course, will generate MORE violent radicalism not less.

It seems to me that Daveed is knowledgeable and wise. Hopefully his voice will be heard, and that more and more.

As I try this out, WordPress doesn’t seem to want to let me link to the exact spot in the YouTube video but is just starting from the beginning. The song mentioned above is the last song and starts at 1:12:50. Sorry.

From the Easter-day Mahalani party, we went home to an egg hunt.

My rating: 3 of 5 stars

I think I like Chesterton’s non-fiction more than his fiction. This is (if I recall) the second book of fiction that I’ve read from the great GKC. I have read more of his non-fictional work, and I like it more.

This book, like many mysteries, was a confusing ride. GKC’s word crafting is gorgeous – at points, simply startling. He was a man who knew how to use language. He had a purdy mouth.

The story is full of murder, political intrigue, and interpersonal difficulties. The author worked in some scathing criticism of “Capitalism,” as he saw it in his day. You know, the book was fun, but not super fun. Truth be told, when it comes to someone like GKC, if it ain’t really, really good, it just don’t match up with my expectations. I guess I just expect a great deal from GKC, and this book was, therefore, a slight disappointment.

View all my reviews

If asked in that way, I think a significant portion of the answer is immediately apparent. Can one have a good marriage without knowledge of how to have one? No. That knowledge can be attained from experience (as opposed to reading). What’s more, a person might have that knowledge from experience and not be able to formulate and articulate it. Even so, knowledge about having a good marriage is necessary to having a good marriage, but it is not sufficient to have a good marriage. Clearly, the knowledge must be applied.

Similarly, spiritual maturity is a divine grace that is never bereft of knowledge. In order to grow in Christ one must, to borrow from Calvin, increase knowledge of God and of oneself. Without this, one cannot become mature spiritually. See how knowledge and teaching factor into the Apostle Paul’s call for the Ephesians to grow into spiritual maturity.

And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes. Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love. Eph. 4:11-16

Note the pastors/teachers, the knowledge of the Son of God, winds of doctrine, and speaking the truth. All of these, one way or another, have to do with theological and biblical knowledge (or a lack of it). Growing in knowledge is one necessary component for spiritual maturity.

Theological and biblical knowledge, however, is not sufficient for spiritual maturity. As in the case of a good marriage, until the knowledge is applied, it will not generate a good marriage. What’s more, with spiritual maturity, it’s not just the “application” of knowledge but more of a subjection to Christ that is key. We must come to know more about Jesus, but even more we need to be overcome by Jesus. We need to be slaves of Jesus. It’s one thing to know and another thing to become. Both the knowledge and the applied reality of subjection to Jesus are of grace. May God continue to grant these to both the writer and the readers of this article.

Here’s a short video from Paul Tripp about the danger of mistaking theological knowledge for spiritual maturity. Enjoy!

A Super-Cute Newborn

I know that life situations can be very hard, sexual problems can be intensely difficult, unplanned/unwanted pregnancies will often change lives drastically, and that many people seeking abortions are hurting in big ways; they need help. I have committed my life to the service of Jesus Christ and, therefore, to the service of other people. I am quite interested in helping people, but not all “help” helps. Because I follow Jesus and try to live according to his Word, the Bible, I firmly maintain that abortion IS murder and should be illegal, punished just like any other murder. The modern/current discussions surrounding abortion are, like a freshly brewed mug of coffee, almost always too hot to hold for very long. I am not interested in the heat, but I am interested in reasoned, substantive and honest discussion. Mostly, I’m interested in ministering to and helping people in a moral, Christ-honoring (and therefore helpful) way.

Okay, let’s get into it. Any casual observer of pro-abortion polemics would think that rape and incest are two major factors leading to a goodly number abortions. In fact, if we add those two reasons to the big mama, the life/health of the mother, we have the three-legged foundation of a “reasonable” approach to keeping abortion “safe and legal.” The number of folks who want abortion as birth control, I assume to be somewhat slim. The number of those folks who will present that notion publicly as a basis for maintaining legal abortion is slimmer than Jared after his Subway diet. Thus, the great triumvirate: rape, incest, and the health of the mother are often seen to be the legitimate factors that militate to keep abortion legal.

Leaving off consideration of the “health” and “life” of the mother (which will not bear much scrutiny), I want to focus briefly on the other two: rape and incest.

I recall, back in those heady university days, where I learned many things, but especially that the most “liberal” and “open” folks were actually the most illiberal and closed, numerous discussions about abortion. When I’d mention that I was opposed to abortion, the response would be to ask me about cases of rape and incest. When I mentioned that murdering the “innocent” third party was neither right nor reasonable, I would get looks and words harder than Tammy Faye Baker’s makeup. No one (including me) ever seemed to wonder what percentage of abortions were actually attributed to rape and incest.

Turns out that, according to this New York Times article by Tamar Lewin, that just 1% of all abortions in the United States are traced to rape and incest. ONE PERCENT. One stinking percent. Now, I’m aware that information regarding abortion isn’t the easiest to come by, and even more so with rape and incest. I’m also (see above) sensitive to rape and incest, so I don’t want to be misunderstood as making light of these horrific situations. I do, however, want to be understood as pointing out that the pro-abortion PR folks have been lying to us. I suppose that should not be a shocker.

Since rape and incest account for such a minuscule part of range of reasons people are murdering the unborn, what’s going on? Why are rape and incest still touted as such significant reasons? Other than ignorance, I can see two reasons. The first is that rape and incest are emotionally powerful topics and are, therefore, effective tools in the hands of the pro-abortion PR folks. Secondly, and closely related to the first, is that rape and incest function to keep the door open for abortion in America. Numerically, rape and incest don’t amount to much, but emotionally, polemically and therefore politically, rape and incest are indispensable.

Rape and incest are a herrings redder than the untold amount of blood spilled by abortion clinics.

My rating: 3 of 5 stars

I was given this book by a non-Christian neighbor. I traded him reads. I gave him Raymond Chandler’s The Big Sleep, and he gave me this.

I have to give Mr. Duncan a hand on an energetic, well-written book. From a literary standpoint, it was a pleasure to read. It had me laughing out loud enough to irritate my wife. The characters came across as, for the most part, honest and believable. Sometimes I thought that the brothers’ star qualities seemed a little over the top, but it still read well.

The title obviously alludes to Dostoevsky’s famous book, a book that I’ve read but once, but that I loved. This tale of divergent brothers takes places within a home where the mother is a committed Adventist and the father is a committed baseball player. These varied influences bear exceedingly varied fruit in the lives of the children (four sons and younger twin girls). They all go off in different directions and mostly reap the whirlwind (similar, in this respect, to Dostoevsky’s book).

Another similarity to the older D’s book (I just notices that both Dostoevsky and Duncan start with “D”!) is the very critical tone toward a religious establishment. Actually, both authors are quite cynical toward the church. The main difference here is that the younger D seems quite jaded toward Jesus himself and toward the Bible. One of the tough parts of reading this book is the blasphemous tone the brothers take (and certainly the author, too) toward Jesus.

On the positive side, this book reminded me of what it can be like as a child sitting through church functions and worship that simply are not interesting or engaging, or are (far worse) hypocritical. It was a call to me to engage our children sincerely and honestly about the things of the Lord. So, that’s a good take-away.

View all my reviews

Augustine and Calvin

This post is mostly a personal recollection about how I came to know “the doctrines of grace” or “Calvinism.” There have been a couple of instances recently that have prompted me to think about how it was that I became a Calvinist. Before I delve into some personal reflection, however, I should like to tidy up things on a terminological level. What’s meant by the terms “Calvinism,” “the doctrines of grace,” “sovereign grace,” and the like?

Typically, people use all of those words/phrases to point to John Calvin’s emphasis on the sovereignty of God in salvation. Calvin, however, was no innovator. The set of teachings that bears his name has very little to do with him specifically. Calvin articulated the sovereignty of God in his generation, but many of Christianity’s great teachers had taught the same sorts of things before him. They taught that humans are helpless to save themselves or even move toward God. They insisted that salvation was a matter of sheer grace. They gloried in the fact that salvation is of the Lord. The “five points” of Calvinism are simply a response to five specific attacks which came about after Calvin’s lifetime. These “five points” are, therefore, necessarily limited in scope. Even so, Dortian Calvinism, that is, the five points fully articulated, is true to the heart of Calvin’s theology and to the catholic, Augustinian tradition more generally, which is the back bone of Christianity.

So, how did I happen into this theological tradition? I was brought up in it. My parents took pains to teach me, among other important things, my Calvinism. They made it a point to be members of Bible-believing, Bible-preaching Reformed and Presbyterian churches. To some degree or other, they taught me the catechisms of the church. They shelled out for a Christian education, which was rooted in historic Calvinism. All this goodness was simply given to me by my parents. Praise God for them and for that gift!

As I went off to college, I found that most other Christians had not given any thought to the “doctrines of grace” or Calvinism. What’s more, those that had given thought to these issues roundly rejected “Calvinism.” I put that in quotes because they were usually rejecting a grotesque caricature of Calvinism, not that grand historic, catholic, Augustinianism in which I was reared, and which Calvin joyfully taught. This opposition made me study the Scripture more diligently to see if these things, these doctrines of grace, were true. I’ve been studying since. I’d like to think that I’ve broadened out into that grand catholic tradition since those days. Even so, the breadth of that tradition doesn’t militate against the narrower, five-point conception of Calvinism, it just supplements and helps it.

Let children hear the mighty deeds
Which God performed of old;
Which in our younger years we saw,
And which our fathers told.

He bids us make His glories known,
His works of power and grace;
And we’ll convey His wonders down
Through every rising race.

Our lips shall tell them to our sons,
And they again to theirs;
That generations yet unborn
May teach them to their heirs.

Thus shall they learn in God alone
Their hope securely stands,
That they may ne’er forget His works,
But practice His commands.

Amen and amen. A thousand times: AMEN!

Pondering deep Christian thoughts, to be sure…

Maile and I currently have four kids. Calvin is coming up on 8, Anuhea 6, Anselm 4, and Ambrose 2. Needless to say, I’m interested in education. Being a Christian, I’m interested in Christian education. Being a Christian, I’m also interested in excellence. Put it together and I’m interested in excellent Christian education. So far, so good.

We’ve been homeschooling, of course, from the beginning. However, when it came down to moving beyond simple reading and arithmetic, we found it challenging to make sure that things were getting covered. By contrast, one thing a good school has going for it is that all areas of importance have been brought together and the scope and sequence of each have been planned out. It was the whole making-sure-everything’s-covered-and-covered-well thing that seemed to Maile and me to be a bit of a bugger.

There are various ways for homeschool parents to address this issue. The way we have found has been glorious. Classical Conversations is group that is engineered to empower and help homeschool parents by forming local communities committed to classical and Christian education. Calvin and Sissy took advantage of their stellar Foundations program this past academic year. Next year, we’ll add Anselm into the mix. That ought to be interesting: yeah, he’s pretty loud.

‘Round these parts, in Columbia County, Oregon, we have a wonderful little (and growing!), committed community. Please take a look at it. It you’re interested in talking about this wonderful aid to your homeschool labors (even if you’re just curious), please contact me. The CC website is quite informative, so be sure to check it out.

CC’s been a great blessing to us this year. We’d like to see it grow, thrive and become a greater blessing to more families. Come join us.

Dig in!!

One doesn’t have to read very far in the Gospels to run across the central theme of the Kingdom of God. Not only is the Kingdom front and center, but it is also directly linked with the message and preaching of the Gospel itself. Mark documents the inception of Jesus’ ministry with these provocative words: “Now after John was arrested, Jesus came into Galilee, proclaiming the gospel of God, and saying, ‘The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel’” (Mk 1:14-5). Recognizing that this post is a little on the long side, I want to discuss three aspects of “coming” or presence of the Kingdom: 1) the distant, consummate Kingdom, 2) the then-present Kingdom, and 3) the then-immediately-anticipated Kingdom.  Clear as mud? Good. Let’s make some mud pie. First, and by far the most popular, would be the distant, consummate Kingdom. One aspect of the Kingdom was that it was a distant reality, distant from the Apostles, from their time. (Turns out that this aspect is the same for us today, just not quite so far off.) This distant aspect of the Kingdom is, I think, prayed for by Jesus: “Thy Kingdom come.”  It is also revealed in the two-age structure of NT eschatology:

 ”And Jesus said to them, ‘The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage, but those who are considered worthy to attain to that age and to the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage, for they cannot die anymore, because they are equal to angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection’” (Lk 20:34-6). The terminology of “this age” contrasted with “that age” or “the age to come” is common in the NT. Jesus calls the age to come “the Regeneration.” The Regeneration is when rewards for service rendered in this life are given along with the inheriting of eternal life (Mt 19:28-9). While we now share in the power of the Regeneration or the age to come (Heb 6:5), the fullness of that age to come is… well, to come. It is not here yet. It is the distant Kingdom, the age of the fullness and consummation of the Kingdom.  As I say, this aspect of the Kingdom is well-known, so I won’t spend more time on it.

Less well-known would be the then-present aspect of the Kingdom. This aspect of the Kingdom can be clearly identified in Mark’s account of the beginning of Jesus’ ministry. Jesus said that the time was fulfilled and that the Kingdom of God was at hand. More specifically, Jesus taught that the Kingdom was then currently present: “If it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the Kingdom of God has come upon you” (Mt 12:28). The tense of the verbs looks like this: “If I am [presently] casting out demons… then the Kingdom of God came [aorist - simple past] upon you.” The point is that if Jesus was presently exorcising demons by the power of the Spirit, then the Kingdom was already a present reality. What I’m calling the “then-present” aspect of the Kingdom should be understood  as in and around (in, with and under?!) the person of Jesus himself, as the emphatic first person pronoun in Mt 12:28 would seem to indicate. This is why Jesus can say that the Kingdom of God was “in your midst” (Lk 17:21). The Kingdom is securely tied to the King; where he is the Kingdom is. Thus, in his earthly ministry, the Kingdom was present among those around him, who witnessed the Man and his ministry. This aspect I am calling the then-present aspect of the Kingdom, which is clearly distinct from the distant, consummate aspect discussed above. There is, however, at least one more aspect of the Kingdom that needs to be considered. This third aspect is very little noticed, partially because it tends to wreak havoc with certain schools of eschatological thought. Not naming names or pointing fingers, I shall, protecting the innocent, move right along.

This third aspect of the Kingdom I am call the “then-immediately-anticipated Kingdom,” or TIAK for short. The TIAK aspect is quite distinct from the first two aspects, for it is neither too far distant nor then-present. Rather, it was immediately anticipated (hence the catchy TIAK). This immediate anticipation is found throughout the NT, but let’s start our consideration of it with one simple saying from Jesus. Here it is from they Synoptics:

• Mt 16:28 – “Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”
• Mk 9:1 – “Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God after it has come with power.”
• Lk 9:27 – “But I tell you truly, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God.”

Allow me to test the reader’s patience by reminding him that what Jesus is speaking of here cannot be the then-present aspect, for it is anticipated. Neither can it be the distant, consummate aspect of the Kingdom, for everyone standing there have been pushing up daisies for many moons now, and that aspect of the Kingdom has not yet occurred.

So, what is Jesus talking about, here? Some will answer that Jesus is referring to his Transfiguration, which immediately followed. While I agree that the Transfiguration was a foretaste of the consummate glory of redeemed humanity, I cannot agree that the Transfiguration is the Son of Man coming in his Kingdom shortly to be anticipated. Why? Because the Transfiguration occurred less than a week after Jesus spoke those words. If we are to do justice to Jesus’ words: “some standing here will not taste death,” we have to look for their fulfillment within the general lifetime of those men, but not that very same week.

What would, then, qualify as seeing the Son of Man coming in his Kingdom and with power? Certainly Jesus’ death would not qualify, as that is rightly seen as part of his “humiliation.” How about his resurrection, would that qualify? His ascension? His heavenly enthronement at the right hand of the Father? The pouring our of his Spirit and gifts upon his church? The destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in AD 70? Without arguing my case, I would merely assert that ALL of these things are in view. It is this complex of events that signify the exaltation of the Son of Man, a significant new phase in the development of (and one of numerous “comings” of) the Kingdom. I would also hasten to add that this TIAK understanding makes sense of all the imminent talk and the “this generation” terminology in the NT, which has been such a difficulty to so many well-meaning Christians, even as it has provided a field day for Christ-hating atheists.

This post, unfortunately long though it is, is by no means the final word, even on these three aspects of the coming of the Kingdom. It should, however, at least provide a beginning that is faithful to what the Scripture says about the Kingdom.