Letters During Noahic Covenant Awareness Month

I like some of Gustave Dore’s paintings. Do you think it would be a violation of the 2nd Commandment to display the painting “The Triumph Of Christianity Over Paganism”? The figure of Jesus in the painting is sort of blurry and in the distance. It seems different than the typical Roman Catholic iconic pictures of Jesus where he has facial features and such. Do you think there is a difference?
Thanks,

Jacob

Amidst the discussion on abortion, we Christians claim that unborn children have the image of God and therefore a right to protection. Moreover, to steal that right to life justifies the state in prosecuting that person in one way or another.
So far, all agreed.
This got me thinking about the other side of this equation and I am not sure what to do with it. If the perpetrator is guilty of blood, the just punishment can include (though does not necessarily require) the death penalty. Wouldn’t the same logic apply about protecting their life? I affirm the just-ness of capital punishment based on the Law of Moses, but how do we get around the image of God logic?
My working hypothesis is that humans can lose or disqualify or forfeit (not sure which word is correct) that image of God and therefore lose that protection. Am I close? Or out to lunch?

BJ

I am sure you have covered this in detail elsewhere, and any direction you can share would be great. My question is, as a pastor, what is your specific approach to counseling someone through, what I’ll call, “acute suffering”? For example, a person whose child was abused (in severe terms) . . . what is your pastoral approach to counseling someone through that, or any other such example (especially when they know that you, like me, believe in God’s exhaustive sovereignty)? I know how to approach it theologically. But I also know (as I learned from your dad, in his book “Wisdom Not Knowledge”) that theological/doctrinal exposition isn’t always the approach in a situation like that—yet, we have to remain tethered to the truth. Thank you for your help.

Ben

I have labored in this field for years, and appreciate the abolitionists as individuals and brothers in the Lord. But I am glad whenever their legislative proposals are challenged.
I have done several debates with them as well on this topic, and use the analogy of 9/11. When the WTC were hit, should we have tried to save as many people as possible (the ones below where the planes crashed) or should we give up because we can’t get to the floors that we destroyed and those above? And furthermore. should we charge those who couldn’t save everyone with complicity or compromise? Abortion is a five-alarm atrocity and we should save as many as we lawfully can.
The Berlin meme in your article aptly demonstrates the second fallacy that smashmouth incrementalists face, that we have the power to end abortion and we don’t. Apparently we don’t “trust God” enough or words to that effect. And as you all pointed out, by that standard, Wilberforce didn’t trust God either, and for that matter, neither did Jesus in re: divorce. Great job. God bless you all.

Scott

I recently watched your conversation with Jared about the journey you took for your doctrinal convictions and have had a similar trajectory though not as in depth as yours. Quick background is I grew up in charismatic church went to a Baptist university and earned a degree in Biblical Studies. Pretty much a dispensational and then becoming Calvinistic in my senior year of college. That was the “slippery slope” of really digging into Reformed theology. Skip ahead and I became convinced of covenant theology and a Presbyterian in my mid 30s. We baptized my 2 oldest children in a Presbyterian church but then 2020 happened and the COVID craziness and CRT dumpster caught on fire at the church so we ended up leaving. We have had 2 more children since then and not baptized them yet. They are 5 and 2. We unfortunately don’t have a solid Reformed church locally so that has influenced a decision to not baptize them because we are not at a church that holds to those convictions but are a solid Bible believing congregation.
That leads me to my question as a husband and father, how can I hold to my paedo-baptist conviction and practice it? I have delayed too long in figuring out the appropriate way to handle but it’s begun to bother me more deeply. Should I still baptize my 2 children that have not been baptized? If so, what’s a Biblical way to do so since we are not part of a Reformed church?

Jeremy

Sir, others may have already pointed it out, but just in case, I was able to find the following webpage that apparently has the Credenda Agenda article that was requested in last week’s letters (The Pastor’s Kids, Again):

Daniel

In your capacity as a pastor, you often teach the Word to the gathered church. Such would be a Lord’s Day gathering or any other teaching done when the church body comes together.
What is your philosophy when it comes to your other teaching projects (your blog, books, videos through Canon Press, etc.)? More specifically, 1) is your primary audience in your mind still the members in your local church? and, 2) what is the biblically appropriate way for a pastor to inform his flock about extra teaching material he is producing? The ditch this second question is trying to navigate is how a pastor can avoid slipping into using his flock to build his personal brand, while at the same time recognizing that if my pastor had a biblically sound blog, I as a member would want to know about it that I might profit from addition faithful teaching.
Many thanks,

Will

What are ways or questions to ask to determine the nature of a thing? I want to be a better thinker. In many instances, I can look at something and give a general answer about its nature but I’m not sure of the unspoken questions behind those answers. For instance, nature of men and women seems to be picked up from natural observation but also plenty of passages in the Bible to help in the truth of their natures. Some higher degree of difficulty when not as many references biblically to the “thing” in question. And if you have some reformed fathers writings you can point me to, would love to check them out.
Thank You,

Dillon

A man came to me recently and confessed sin to me and a mutual friend.
He has been married for about five years and has children. In that time, he’s gained worldly success (before her, he struggled to hold down a job, he has now achieved material prosperity) and a good reputation within the church. But he confessed that before marriage, he had been deep in a porn addiction. When he started dating his wife, he realized that his desire for her was muted and that the addiction had caused dysfunction. I may have unwisely asked some follow-up questions, and what he had been viewing was very perverse—whatever you think of when you imagine “perverted,” that and worse. So the dysfunction made sense.
He said that upon the realization he felt emasculated and emotionally broken, he says he gravitated toward the first woman who gave him feminine attention. They were sexually immoral before marriage and rushed into marriage within a few months, thinking marriage would prevent their sin with a questionable interpretation of 1 Corinthians 7.
Here’s where he asked for prayer and where I gave counsel: he feels as though his marriage is the Lord’s discipline—that he married the “wrong” woman because of his sin.
That set off alarm bells in my head, so I asked if he was tempted toward divorce or adultery. He said no.I asked if marital problems had arisen. Not really. As he described it, his wife is submissive, industrious, godly, good with the children, managing the home, and with a good reputation at the church. She has some issues with complaining and such but nothing beyond what you might find in any otherwise good marriage. I asked if he still struggled with porn. He said no. The shock of what porn had done to him, and the reality of a real sexual relationship, had helped him kill the habit. He said it no longer even tempts him.
So I asked why he felt this marriage was discipline? It sounds like textbook mercy. All he could say was that he felt there were more “compatible” women for him in the church, and if he hadn’t been such an emotional wreck he would have chosen differently. He says he didn’t marry out of love for his wife but out of a desire to fix his situation. He even mentioned another woman he had in mind back then, one he now thinks he would have pursued successfully if things had been different.
I agreed with him that the marriage began in sin. But it seems the sin is long repented of, and what he feels now is simply the natural consequence. I gave an example of a woman who has an abortion—she may be forgiven, but the consequence is real: the child is gone and she must live with that. He listened, we prayed, and that was that.
I now think it was a bad analogy. A better one might be a woman who had a child out of wedlock—not aborting, but still grieving that the child was born in sin. It’s one thing for a woman to have a child out of wedlock and later regret having aggrieved the Holy Spirit by not waiting for marriage. It’s another for a man to impregnate a woman outside of marriage, then marry her, have the child, and years later—when that child turns 15 and starts acting out—for the mother to say, “The only reason I have you and not some other child is because I had sex when I shouldn’t have.”
And I began to think: the Lord’s discipline, if we can call it that, in this case seems extraordinarily light. One could say the Lord used even his sin to bless him—delivered him from a depraved habit and gave him a family. Yes, he acted foolishly. Had he confessed during premarital counseling, the church would almost certainly have told them to pause and separate and put them under discipline had they not immediately repented. Likewise had he confessed his porn addiction the woman doubtless would have been counseled that this man was not ready for marriage. Perhaps acting more righteous would have brought them both better marriages with different people.
I thought to myself two things. First, we might all be much happier had we never sinned, and any particular sin can likely be tied to much of our own misery. Recognizing this might be a legitimate part of mourning over our sin.
Second, the Lord responds to sin in different ways. Sometimes He punishes it, and sometimes He shows mercy—not just in the eternal sense, but even in this life. Perhaps it is our duty to respond to those two responses differently: to accept the pain when it is given, and to rejoice in the mercy when it is given.
It seems this man who confessed is confused. That he is trying to put himself inside the mind of God and say, “If this had happened, then that would have followed. And I would be in a better place had I acted in obedience to the clear commands of scripture.” Certainly, God would have preferred that he act righteously. But the man doesn’t really know that he would have been happier had he acted differently, and such a question seems designed to kill the happiness he could have.
Should I tell him that he is sinning now by indulging in self-pity? Or is the realization that he might indeed have found a better wife had he acted more wisely a legitimate one? Is it always impious to ask, “What would have happened?” considering that nothing occurs outside the counsel of God.
Certainly, to us, it often feels like our ruin or our blessing can be traced back to decisions we clearly remember making. I find this case difficult, and I worry for him. “I married the wrong woman” is a thought that has led many a man to the Devil and to broken families.

Anon

Thank you so much for providing guidance to God’s people, I credit any virtue I may have developed to your ministry.
I have a rather random question, but I think it’s important to be sorted out.
If a girl happens to be raped, can she immediately go to the pharmacy and take any measures? Like a “morning after” pill? Would that be abortion? Like the egg got fertilized (does it even happen immediately?) and now it gets removed—so I guess yes?
But what if she goes and gets aspirin (prevents the whole thing or something, North Koreans use it as contraception) or stevia (makes you temporarily infertile)—then is that okay?
Are any measures like that okay at all? “Be ye shrewd as serpents and innocent as doves”

Mary

I hope you are doing well. Recently, my family and I were discussing a topic that required us to refer to Deuteronomy 21:1-9. This section of Scripture deals with the legal and ritual procedure to address the issue of murder when the victim’s murderer is unknown. While we are not bound, in the New Covenant, to ritual/ceremonial law in the same way those in the Old Covenant were, what might be the general equity of applying this procedure to laws in our day and age? That is, if there is a need/way to apply this?
Thank you very much!

O.N.

I read the POLITICO piece. First, it was quite the lengthy treatise. Second, IMO Ian Ward, the author, did a very fair job. Didn’t come at the article from a ‘hit piece’ perspective. If you have any contact with him, he should be commended for his balance. Of course there are things to take issue with. But for a mainstream publication, you couldn’t ask for much better. Third, I’ve been following you since before Collision. I’m frankly shocked at the levels to which the Moscow Mood has grown. Is it all surprising to you as well or was this always the plan and you’re right on schedule? Are there any lessons to glean seeking to grow organizations in a similar vein?

Roger

Have you given any thought to the idea of “idols of the heart” as it’s presented in Biblical Counseling? If you have, what are your thoughts on that idea of how they interpret idolatry and if it is a biblical interpretation and if it is helpful to think of people pleasing as an idol in one’s heart?

Chris

I listened to your FV chat with Jared. You mentioned the distinction between one covenant and two covenants and I am confused on the importance of the first command to Adam needing to be considered a covenant. It seems like it is missing the blood pact that we see in God’s covenant with Abraham. It also trips me up in regard to God’s sovereign plan to save a fallen people by the death and resurrection of the Son that He had planned prior to the creation the world. It seems like a little thing to view it all as being the one covenant with humanity that they failed and He fulfilled.

Stephen

“Say that someone shows you a prospectus that promises an endless supply of energy by means of extracting sunbeams out of cucumbers.”
That’s an excellent summary of most pitches I have heard for anything climate change related—particularly EVs and ‘sustainable’ energy like wind and solar.

Jeff

In the last letters section, you posted my response to you about Titus 1:12, where I pointed out that, grammatically, Paul is saying that one of these false teachers is saying, “Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.” Paul is not favorably quoting it.
You followed up with: “David, so what do you do with the fact that Epimenides, a Cretan prophet, said those very words? And he was the one who prevailed on the citizens of Athens to build an altar to ‘an unknown god’?”
My short answer is: If what you say it true, it must mean that one of these false teachers was quoting Epimenides against the uncircumcised believers in the churches on Crete. Paul does not want them saying things like that against the Cretan believers, calling unclean what God has made clean through baptism. It is because these false teachers are pushing such fables (as you say, created by Epimenides originally) that that their mouths must be stopped.

David

Interesting, our pastor has “met with” Secretary Hegseth as well, and I know there were at least 2 Jews quietly present. The plan is becoming clear to me now.

Preston

The question is what I should do with them were I to be in possession of them. So say that Philip’s daughters had a file cabinet full of their prophecies, and then their house burned down. The Lord is God, and can do what he wants. But what would we make of an heir to the estate, believing the prophecies to be genuine, nevertheless taking them all to the landfill?
You raise an interesting question, but one that for us by God’s grace has been moot from the time of the recognition of the canon. Of course, I’d like to think that if I was alive in 50 AD and had transcripts of Phillip’s daughters’ prophecies, I’d keep them. They’d probably be a great testimony of exhortation, encouragement, and consolation, in addition to a record of surprisingly accurate “words of knowledge” that could not have been known apart from a direct download from Heaven (of course, the interpretation or application could on occasion get messy). Let’s suppose, however, that in addition to those transcripts, I also have the following: an autographed copy of Paul’s “other” letter to the Corinthians; an anonymous letter which is an unparalleled exploration of the excellencies of Jesus Christ drawn directly from the Hebrew scriptures; and copies of letters from James and Jude. Oh yeah, I also have a letter from a guy named Apollos who teaches the way of God very accurately. The first letter is written by a man who claims to be an apostle but was not a member of the Twelve (but has Peter’s endorsement elsewhere), the second I love but can’t identify, and the next letters are written by Jesus’ little brothers (who weren’t His followers at the time Jesus chose the Twelve), and the last one is a great letter written by a great guy. I’m also hearing that Luke the Physician is compiling eyewitness testimony for a two-part account of Jesus’ life and the early church (I hear Phillip and his daughters will make an appearance in his narrative).
What I can’t see with certainty in 50 AD is:
(1) Which of these documents is (and will be recognized in the next few centuries to be) Scripture; and
(2) How exactly God in His sovereignty and goodness will cause those documents which are Scripture to be preserved and recognized, and how those which are not Scripture will be lost (housefire? accidentally taken to the landfill?) or recognized not to be Scripture.
For you and I in 2025, can’t we be thankful that we have a closed canon, and one that both commands and equips us with all we need to weigh any purported prophecy, even to include the contents of Phillip’s daughters’ file cabinet, if discovered?

Jeffrey

I follow your blog (and others) using a feed-reader that collects posts as they’re published. Now and then, I see an oddly short post and click through to the website, expecting to find the rest of it, and instead find that it’s missing. For instance, my feed-reader shows me a short post that it says you made yesterday, called ‘Which Compromise?’ about ‘anti-abortion responses and tactics’, but the post doesn’t seem to be on your blog. Was this an unfinished draft that was accidentally published and then retracted? A spam post generated vaguely in your writing-style? A hallucination from my feed-reader? I suppose in the end it doesn’t matter whether you wrote it, but I would rather like to know.

EMG

I am a young woman in Texas. I am a Christian and I come from a family of non-believers. As I am entering a phase of my life where I am getting to know a young man, I have been wrestling with the fact that I do not have a godly father who plays the protector role. I don’t have a man in my life who would stand in the way between this young man and me. A godly father who would ask him the important questions and would evaluate him before giving me the “all clear” if he were to ask me on a date. How do I go about finding an older gentleman to play this role? Any other thoughts on the situation?
I look forward to hearing back from you!

Ashlyn

I recently ran across Isaiah 3:12 in my Bible, and I would like to know what your interpretation of it is. Is it saying that female and/or young leaders are a sign of a declining society?
A daily reader,

Samuel

Just read about the pastor’s 14-year-old daughter who wears “booty shorts” to prayer meetings. WHAT!?
I had to google up “booty shorts” to be sure what that looks like. Yikes!
This sure makes the Mennonite approach to women’s apparel look logical.

Jack

I was disappointed with your assertion that orthodox, Bible-believing Christians have more in common with Papists than with Liberal Protestants. To say we can have a “robust debate” about what is undeniably blasphemous (the re-sacrifice of Christ in the Eucharist, Mariology), atrocious sin (Necromancy) and blatant explicit idolatry (not simply making something too important as we find in secularism) and a dozen other explicit false worship practices is odd. Social issues matter, but if there is a chief sin (which we should not assume there must be), then Pride is not the most likely candidate; false worship is. Traditional Catholics are as much, if not more deeply, into this sin than their liberal counterparts. I simply cannot see how anyone who seeks to follow and worship God according to what He revealed of Himself can see Roman Catholicism as somehow less bad than the UCC simply because they support some of the right social issues.
How much can people intentionally, willfully, and indefensibly, and in how many ways, not simply ignore but outright blaspheme against God, but they are still not outsiders because, no matter how many awful things they affirm, if they also affirm the Nicene creed and oppose gay marriage? When did sexual sin, as awful as it is, become worse than explicit blasphemy, worshiping others alongside God, downright distortion of his revelation, and idolatry?
We do not always have to pick which is worse . . . asked if I would rather work with traditional paganism or progressive secularism, I’d say I’d fight with either against the other any chance I get. False Christianity is not “true Christianity lite.”

Luke

Here’s the setup for my question: I know you’re very familiar with Rushdoony & Van Til. I’m reading Rushdoony’s, “‘By What Standard’ An Analysis of the Philosophy of Cornelius Van Til.” One of the big ideas of this book is that only Christianity, with it’s doctrine of the Trinity as ultimate reality, can provide a basis for both unity and diversity. And therefore it’s the only philosophy that escapes the alternate pits of ultimate reality being either absolute oneness (without meaning or personhood) or absolute many-ness (without ability to know anything).
Okay, that’s the setup. Here’s my question. I’ve heard you sometimes say that we have a choice between Christ and chaos. I love that statement and find it enlightening. But Rushdoony’s analysis of Van Til has me thinking that the statement isn’t quite complete. “Christ or Chaos” addresses the pit of ultimate disunity but not the pit of ultimate oneness. I’m not finding fault with your statement. I’m just drawing a connection between your point and Rushdoony/Van Til’s thoughts. Here’s my question. Is it fair to say that Christ saves us not just from the chaos of radical plurality, but also from the sterility of absolute unity—and that both ultimately lead to meaninglessness apart from the Trinity? Or perhaps, as a complement to your statement “Christ or Chaos,” we might also say “Trinity or Tyranny”?

Michael