Exactly So
Reading your article about the commotion over Gilder’s book I was reminded of Greg Krehbiel’s book “Eggs are Expensive, Sperm is Cheap.” It is a fun read, and it might help some to understand those basic biological realities . . . I believe you’ve recommended it already, but a second dose might help.
Thiago
Thiago, yes. I thought of that book when I was writing that response, but then forgot to link to it. I am remedying that now.
Infusion and Imputation
Would you care to explain how this comment is in line with WLC 77? Q. 77. Wherein do justification and sanctification differ?
A. Although sanctification be inseparably joined with justification, yet they differ, in that God in justification imputeth the righteousness of Christ; in sanctification his Spirit infuseth grace, and enableth to the exercise thereof; in the former, sin is pardoned; in the other, it is subdued; the one doth equally free all believers from the revenging wrath of God, and that perfectly in this life, that they never fall into condemnation; the other is neither equal in all, nor in this life perfect in any, but growing up to perfection.
I recently heard you take an orthodox view in a sermon from Philippians via the app Canon Plus, in which you clearly state that the instrument of our justification is faith alone. The two statements contradict each other, do they not? Thanks for your time.
Nate
Nate, the quotation you are referring to was this:
“What is regeneration? That is an existential and experimental reality. God takes away a heart of stone and replaces it with a heart of flesh. Now, when does regeneration occur? According to the traditional ordo . . . regeneration is first, then repentance, then faith, then justification. Imputation arrives with justification. What is the righteousness that this new heart has, both experientially and practically? It is an infused righteousness. Regeneration is not imputed, right? Regeneration is a change of heart, from an unrighteous heart that hates God to a righteous (but still imperfect) heart that loves Him, repents of sin, and believes in Him . . . At the end of the day, this means . . . infused righteousness as the instrument of imputed righteousness.”
This was an excerpt from a larger article in which I was pointing out the tension between the classic ordo and the orthodox view of justification as imputation. On the one hand, when the ordo is taken in a chronological way, as though an angel was timing it with a stopwatch, this causes problems. In that ordo, regeneration is first, then repentance, then faith, and then justification. In this order, regeneration (an internal work) is upstream from justification (an external juridical declaration). This is not a position I am urging, but rather it is a problem I am identifying. And I think that Gaffin sees the problem and handles it nicely, working from a “union with Christ” model.
Women Deacons
I am a member of a SBC church of the 9Marks variety. We are, as the pastors say, “reformed-leaning”.
The elders are proposing a change to the church constitution and by-laws that would permit women deacons. Do you have any words of advice for how I can fight hard but clean?
Jay
Jay, I would advise you to fight this by asking basic questions. In other words, ask for the reasoning behind the assumption that women deacons hold the same office that the male deacons do. I have a detailed argument for the view that they were different offices here.
One Man Can’t Do It All
I love the project that’s going on in Moscow. However, I confess that as I dig into the banquet provided by Canon Press I continue cycling from excitement to exhaustion and dread.
I think it amounts to being like the wicked servant, so afraid of his master’s hard expectations that he buried the talent for fear he’d lose it. It’s not that I think I must fulfill the Great Commission myself. One talent alone is more than I feel like I can handle. I don’t pray or read my Bible as much as I could. I’m not “on fire” for evangelism. I fail to help everyone around me who needs it. Truthfully, I just want to build a house, plant a garden, and seek the good of the city I’m exiled in.
I don’t want to recreate the “carnal Christian” category. I want to keep the Ten Commandments. However, I feel like I’m not being obedient to a call if I’m not making use of every resource that’s now available to me. To whom much is given much will be required. There’s always more to do. I want to keep up, but after a while I just get exhausted and feel so bad that I can’t do more. I feel like I’m disappointing my Father.
I don’t want to be a useless servant, but I don’t know where to find the energy and motivation to do what I need to do. The times I think I’m most depending upon God for progress are the times I seem to be doing the least. I don’t feel dread of Him then, but then I go back to working myself into fits for being so inadequate to the tasks at hand.
Is the answer to accept that I just can’t do it all, even if the “all” is just within my little sphere? Am I failing to understand justification by faith alone? Am I actually just failing, and I need to try harder? How do I examine myself rightly, to know whether I am reaching too far or not reaching far enough?
Thank you for reading such a long letter and for any response you may give.
John
John, the one thing I can say confidently that you should not do is “try harder.” What I would encourage you to do is to stop comparing what you did to what you assume you ought to have done, and instead compare what you did to what you did this time last week.
Two Eschatological Qs
I have two eschatological questions related to two chapters.
(1) Joel 3 – What is the battle being described here? The context of Joel 2 sets it in the time of the first century (Acts 2), but Joel 3:1 talks about “restoring the fortunes of Judah and Jerusalem” which sounds like the opposite of AD 70. So when did this happen?
(2) Zechariah 14 – This also seems to be about Jerusalem’s destruction in AD 70 (v1-2), but what about v3? In what way did God “fight against” the nations that destroyed Jerusalem (e.g. Rome)?
Thanks for your help.
Jost
A Swing and a Miss
I regularly enjoy your posts, including this one. However, I think you got a key fact wrong in this one. As far as I can find, Dave Rubin has never worked for Daily Wire. He is on Blaze TV.
Regards,
Jay
Jay, thanks. I do stand corrected. In my defense, I was left unsupervised.
Funerals Don’t Change Anything Really
What would you advise in the below situation:
Someone wants to have a “woman pastor” involved in their relative’s funeral (pray or “say a few words”) at a church that does not recognize women pastors.
Should it be allowed because of the occasion? What are the options here and what would be the wisest?
Thank you for your ministry.
Shimar
Shimar, I don’t believe that a “woman pastor” should be allowed to do anything pastoral.
The Lord’s Day Sabbath
In regards to the “11 Theses on the Glory of the Lord’s Day”—I greatly appreciate you broaching the question of Sabbath. I am a believer in my 20’s who comes from a Jewish family and as such have wrestled greatly with understanding the Christian perspective on the Law, and more specifically the Sabbath.
After reading your blog I have found myself most perplexed by the first thesis on which (at least it seems to me) all the others stand. While the references that we have to “the first day of the week” in the New Testament seem sufficient to constitute a new practice it does not seem entirely apparent to me that it would replace the Sabbath. From my admittedly elementary understanding of Church history, it seems as though the early church thought of the Lord’s Day as distinct from the Sabbath. For instance, in Canon 49 of the Council of Laodicea it is stated: “During Lent the Bread must not be offered except on the Sabbath Day and on the Lord’s Day only” and in the Epistle to the Magnesians by Ignatius we find: “And after the observance of the Sabbath, let every friend of Christ keep the Lord’s Day as a festival.”
Further, given that the command of the Sabbath is to rest (Exodus 20:10) and not teach, gather, and give offerings, it appears plausible to me that they could both exist independent of one another. Paul seems to live this out by continuing to teach (Acts 13:14) and pray (Acts 16:13) on the Sabbath while also commanding the offerings to be taken up on Sunday. The lack of “noticeable controversy” that you note seems more likely to me to be accounted for by a lack of belief that there was a “cosmological shift” in the Sabbath. If such a shift did take place it seems much more likely that it would have been an issue of great debate and one that would be addressed directly by the Apostles or Jesus.
I look forward to hearing your thoughts! Thank you for hearing out my (likely hamfisted) musings.
In Christ,
David
David, not ham-fisted at all. But I think you have misunderstood the point Ignatius was making. Just before that he says, “Let us therefore no longer keep the Sabbath after the Jewish manner,” meaning that we should feel free to work on that day, and that we should keep sabbath spiritually, in our hearts. This, in effect, makes it no longer a sabbath.
Helping Boys Standing Up Straight
Any tips on helping boys carry themselves confidently in the world? My son plays sports and is regularly unsure how to stand up for his friends or himself when picked on. The way he would phrase it is, “I need help with my comebacks.” How do I teach my son to have a serrated edge like Christ?
Joel
Joel, I would sit down with him and come up with three or four situations where he gets “picked on.” As in, what sorts of things does he get teased about? Girls? Grades? Athletic performance? Then have him prepare a comeback or two for each kind of situation. That way he can have a loaded pistol in his boot, ready for the occasion. He will discover that the real potency has to do with actually saying something, and not because his timing was exquisite.
Paul and Tom Mixing It Up
I frequently read your stuff to my husband on short car trips. Recently I started out with reading the title “Why the Apostle Paul Punched [W]Right.”
Like Winnie the Pooh, “his mind ran on.” My husband immediately assumed it was going to have something to do with the Apostle’s likely reaction to “New Perspectives on Paul.”
We laughed and laughed.
Carole
Carole, I can’t believe the two of you could possibly think that I would countenance fisticuffs between two Anglican clergymen.
Here’s Why I Think It Does Work
I’m not a full-preterist, but I don’t think the 2 Tim. 2:17 (Hymenaeus and Philetus) argument works. Wouldn’t the full-preterist just say, “yeah, the resurrection didn’t happen yet then, so Paul was right to issue the warning. But it did happen later.” What am I missing?
Steven
Steven, because Paul was writing in the sixties, such a take would mean that he was treating Hymeanaeus as a reprobate because he was a few months off in his calculations.
Resurrection of the Lost
Since all people are to be resurrected at the final judgment, does that mean that all people (including the wicked) will receive incorruptible bodies as described in 1 Corinthians 15? And if so, would this imply that those who experience the Second Death will find that their punishments are somehow increased or enhanced due to their resurrected bodies?
Mike
Mike, we are given very little information about the resurrection of the damned, other than the fact that it will occur. But given that fact, I think something like what you say is inescapable.
Tipping Point?
Thank you for all of your content. I’m a Canon+ subscriber with a truly grateful heart for all that I have learned about theology and Christian living. My marriage is better, my parenting is better, and I am understanding the Word far better than ever. That being said, I have something I’m pondering over regarding reality and one of your fiction works. From what I can see, there is a strange convergence between Ride,Sally Ride and the reality of our soon to be televised kangaroo court hearing of Trump. I’ll admit that he is no Ace Hartwick, but the circumstances feel similar in spirit, even if this is no Phineas moment with a sex bot. With the televised kangaroo hearing, half the nation in outrage, and corruption abounding over an unresolved cocaine case in the White House with an obvious suspect, do you think the anger will spark something like your novel, or will we all just sit back drinking our Bud Lite in rebellion to the leftist schemes? I’m curious what your prediction on something like that would be without the brave governor from Wyoming like the novel? Would this spark a quick war, or would it likely spark angry letters from the GOP? I always enjoy your take on this stuff because it has that same air to it as Asahel’s worldview thinking that turns out to be pretty accurate. Thanks for all of your hard work.
Sincerely,
Erick
Erick, I think we are still in the slow build-up phase of all of this. But we are certainly getting closer and closer.
Jew Malice
This is regarding your post on punching right. I have no issue with the overall premise. However, I’m not sure #3 on your list of errors should be there. Definitely Jew-malice is unacceptable, but I see antisemitism (is that the same thing?) far more often, and overtly, from the left. See Ilhan Omar, “the squad,” Trayon White, Keith Ellison, etc. If you made a post on punching left, I think Jew-malice would go on that list.
Joel
Joel, I don’t disagree with you about the antisemitism of the Left. It is really bad. In fact, that is one of the things I find so distressing about the emergence of the Jew thing on the right. I have no idea why we would want to imitate those guys in something like this.
Silent Bells Are Still Silent
I was wondering if there will ever be an option to purchase the Silent Bells in a book format?
Best,
Lucas
Lucas, yes. The plan is to get it out between two covers before the Eschaton. Apologies for the delays.
Har Har
Re. Why the Apostle Paul Punched Right-
I’ll admit I had never heard of chelation therapy and so had to look it up. This from Wikipedia:
“Chelation is a type of bonding of ions and molecules to metal ions. It involves the formation or presence of two or more separate coordinate bonds between a polydentate (multiple bonded) ligand and a single central metal atom.[1][2] These ligands are called chelants, chelators, chelating agents, or sequestering agents. They are usually organic compounds, but this is not a necessity, as in the case of zinc and its use as a maintenance therapy to prevent the absorption of copper in people with Wilson’s disease.[3]”
Well, huh. While you have been a tremendous blessing to me and mine for so many years, come to find out all we needed along was zinc.
John
John, zinc is how I keep the symptoms at bay.
“Nails It” Is Right
First off, this young man nails it.
Second off, I’d be willing to bet, based on his speech, that he was raised in a Classical Christian school, reads Uncle Doug, and took some cues from Jeff Durbin and Stickergate. Maybe the CrossPolitic dudes can have him on and confirm my suspicions! As Bane once said, “The fire rises”. And it is exciting to watch it spread!
RK
RK, yes, he certainly did a fine job there.
Unteachable?
I have a man in my congregation with left-leaning sympathies who thinks abortion is allowable as long as it’s prior to the development of the baby’s brain. He has no Scripture to back this up. He keeps repeating that the Bible says an unborn baby is a life, and the Bible never says that life specifically begins at conception. Do you have any advice for how to reach someone like this?
Also, at what point is debating with someone futile? When does a Pastor say “I love this sheep, but my efforts are better spent elsewhere right now”? I’m thinking I might be close to that point, but I’m not sure if it’s true futility or if it’s just the laziness of my flesh.
Bryan
Bryan, it would depend on whether you are a fellow parishioner, or his pastor. If you are responsible for him, I think you should look for any kind of movement at all. If so, keep shepherding him. If he won’t be budged, I would move on. But I would also tell him that he is not permitted to circulate that view within the church, and that if he does, he would be disciplined for it.
Mom and Dad as Civilizational Verities
Also, after reading this on your blog today,
“The dual ordinance—the institution of marriage, and birth from a mother—is therefore the foundation on which antirevolutionary politics stands first.” — Abraham Kuyper
I came across this gem from Chesterton.
“The triangle of truisms, of father, mother and child, cannot be destroyed; it can only destroy those civilizations which disregard it.” — G.K. Chesterton
Todd
Todd, thanks. GKC saw things from quite a distance.
Here’s An Idea
Free idea: Get Canon Press to 100K on YouTube stat so you can blow up the little plaque they send you for NQN. You’re welcome.
Andrew
Andrew, thanks for sharing. Anyone else?
Last Tuesday you responded to a man who felt he couldn’t do it all. You said: “John, the one thing I can say confidently that you should not do is “try harder.” What I would encourage you to do is to stop comparing what you did to what you assume you ought to have done, and instead compare what you did to what you did this time last week.” My wife and I frequently talk about this issue and I sense it from A LOT of Christians. Kevin DeYoung recently wrote a book on it (Impossible Christianity) which I have just started.… Read more »
I know it’s bit of a hornet’s nest, but I really cannot subscribe to the hang up about women deacons and the woman speaking at a funeral. I believe 1 Tim 2 is universal and permanent, and once you have got women not teaching or having authority over men in place you can allow pretty well everything else on an equal basis according to gifts and inclinations. Pray and prophesy in the Corinthian church! Providing you separate deacons from elders – something baptists this side of the pond used to do but now tend to have one pastor and deacons… Read more »
Indeed, Ken B — what would be the problem with letting the camel sniff around inside the tent?
Ask Aimee Byrd. She was once a supposedly, solid, “confessional,” conservative woman who pushed the boundaries more and more until she started preaching.
Birds of a Feather – Women as “Pastors” – YouTube
1 Tim 2 is not only universal, it’s more kuyperian than modern conservatives let on. Paul doesn’t mention the church there, but ties it to creation. That means public authority over mixed crowds is masculine, _anywhere_. Our own American society understood this in the 1800s. An amazing woman mathematician wouldn’t be allowed to address a public crowd, that was reserved for men. Also, only men could vote. You may say, “thank God for feminism in 1890 coming along and getting us out of that rut”! — but I’d caution moving Chesterton’s fence. To honor the command, you have to of… Read more »
The issue with your argument is what happens when the woman makes a
great scientific discovery? If she can’t report it, then it doesn’t help anyone. I think that you are taking your point, farther than Scripture permits. Can a female witness testify to a mixed jury?
@ fp – You see a slippery slope from women contributing in church to the abandonment of 1 Tim 2, whereas I would suggest the opposite. If 1 Tim 2 is misused by extending it beyond what the text says, this may well cause those who do not think women are second-class citizens in the kingdom of God to reject it altogether, or at least limit it to Ephesus. @Cherrera – I’ve read some of Aimee Byrd’s output. She has clearly suffered abuse at the hands of complementarians and men protecting authority structures. I long since stopped pretending this doesn’t… Read more »
Kenny Bee: @ fp – “You see a slippery slope from women contributing in church to the abandonment of 1 Tim 2…”
Nope. Try again. And this time, rather than trying to excite an exothermic reaction with the strawman in your head, start with the phrase “woman pastor”, which is an oxymoron.
1 Tim 2 deals with the concept of ‘woman pastor’. What about the rest of the time? Phillip the evangelist had four unmarried daughters who prophesied. Just imagine that! Imagine too if he came to First Baptist to lead a ‘revival’. That would be fine – provided he left out praying for the sick and deliverance ministry. When it comes to his daughters though would they be told to join the ranks of ‘silent women’? Single too – they didn’t even have husbands to keep them in order! Paul explicitly allows women to pray and prophesy, and the latter gift… Read more »
Funny how “the rest of the time” is all you want to talk about. You certainly are hung up on flogging your pet issues.
You know the answer to my question. And you know the real issue being discussed is uncompromising obedience to the Word.
The church in the West isn’t in danger of becoming The Handmaid’s Tale, your fear-laced rantings notwithstanding; it’s in danger of having its lampstand removed from its place. “Women pastors” is the gateway; the alphabet cult of homosexuality and transgenderism usually follow.
Yeah, of course you side with a woman who blatantly violates Scripture because she plays the victim. Never mind the good men who got into trouble for warning about her teachings and trajectory. Gotta believe all women, #metoo and all that. I’ve come to expect that from you. The cognitive dissonance must be tough, though, as you try to maintain a super strict position on divorce and justify draconian lockdowns and mandatory vaccines under an absurd/hollow take on Rom. 13…all the while giving all kinds of leeway and loopholes for those women who want so badly to teach, argue with… Read more »
Have you ever considered Byrd might actually be a victim? I think our host has got it right in this connection. When abuse is claimed neither simply ‘believe all women’ nor fail to take the accusation seriously. The church, including those so hot on men having to have authority, has decades of an abysmal record of dealing with abuse. Actively covering it up. Not exposing the works of darkness even while giving expository sermons on what all the Greek words for exposing darkness mean. The answer to authoritarian complementarianism is not egalitarianism, but to get rid of the authoritarianism. I’m… Read more »
I followed the Byrd situation from afar and no, she wasn’t the victim. She played the role of an edgy, “how far can I push the boundaries” girl boss. She’s even wearing a shirt that says “I came, I saw, I made it awkward” on her site–not the gentle and quiet spirit she’s called to be (1 Peter 3:4). This article talks about some of her bad takes when she was in the OPC:God Calls Masculinity ‘Very Good.’ Stop Caricaturing It. | G. Shane Morris (patheos.com) She wanted to be one of the boys (teach theology, correct men, very poorly… Read more »
We can all only watch Byrd at a distance. When she wrote Recovering from Biblical Manhood and Womanhood she still believed pastors should be men. I skim read several reviews of it, and gained the impression that she is objecting to the excesses of complementarianism. The abuse of the doctrine of the trinity to justify marriage roles was a big negative. That too much complementarian doctrine is actually rooted in 1950’s American culture. My own view is that the base is sound, but complementarians have built a superstructure on it that scripture does not support. A long time ago I… Read more »
As far as the narrow application to this funeral, it sounds like she is meant to be there *as a pastor*. And that, given Doug’s and Shimar’s (correct) views about women pastors makes it a problem, where the daughter of the deceased simply getting up to speak about her father might not be. It’s not just about the clothing, it’s about who she is understood to be in the community and what role she is fulfilling in the service.
What Jew-Malice is needs to be clarified. At face value, it may conjure up images of someone who hopes that someone seven times as ruthless as Hitler and Torquemada combined will rise up and have all the Jews in the world, including the converts to Christianity, catapulted into an active volcano. That sort of thing should be condemned, but I’m not sure if there are any right-wingers with any clout among the marginally mainstream of America and Europe who think that way. Others may see someone who wants to tear down synagogues and banish most religious Jews from his land,… Read more »
I meant to say, I also have concern about arguing against anti-Semitism by saying most American anti-Semites, in the recent past, have been very liberal. Just because we find common ground with some people to the left of Bernie Sanders on something doesn’t mean it’s wrong. Hitler opposed transgenderism, that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t too. THe Soviet Union raised the literacy rate, that doesn’t mean that we should abandon education. Just because some bad people supported or opposed something doesn’t mean we should do the opposite.
Doug has and will continue for the remainder of his life to refuse to address these nuances, instead horseshoe theorizing about envy or whatever. Part of the reason for this is age, for sure (not just being a “boomer,” but just the fact that as you get older your fighter instinct wanes), but you also have to remember that Doug specifically has a real problem with the feds, some of which is due to his own carelessness. He’s smart enough to understand that he is being watched by them, and moreover, that white extremism is being explicitly treated as the… Read more »
Whether or not you are correct about Doug “refusing to address these issues”, (and you aren’t) what you are saying about him is nigh on slanderous. “Due to his age” What are you talking about? Doug has only gotten more of a “fighter instinct” if anything as the years go by. “Being wary of the Feds” Doug has never cared, and never will, if he is on watchlists of the government (and he certainly is already on their high-danger ones anyway). “Due to his own carelessness” In what way? Doug is anything but careless when it comes to these things.… Read more »
While Armin should probably not have said some of those things about Doug, I think he was referring to the time he quoted Mencken on burning down public schools (which I’m sure Doug doesn’t want to do), when he accused him of being careless. “God don’t make no junk”–He made the Jews, all right, but he didn’t make their religion, as it stands today. Jews are more of a religion than a race, there are black Jews and white Jews and even a few Oriental and Mexican and South Asian Jews, just as there are Christians and Muslims and Buddhists… Read more »
Horseshoe theory is for 110 IQ people who think they’re 140 IQ. Doug is most certainly not 110 IQ which is why I have no choice but to conclude that he’s afraid and/or doesn’t want the fight. And because this is a conscious decision on his part, not due to being some mid-wit retard, I have to assume that he has good reason in his own mind to go that route. And just imagine you had the Feds watching you with the sword hanging over your head. I’m not going to pretend I wouldn’t be pretty nervous and watching what I… Read more »
As a rule and a standard in honoring the Lord: Women ….I had gone to a church that was solid reformed yet was very very small and they did have a woman deaconess she was a lawyer and a theologian so to speak and had been gifted however it wasnt the norm….there were not enough people in the church. She served temporarily. However I think there is room for creative adjustments for a time to allow under abnormal circumstances in the church?
John–look at our Lord Jesus Christ. He finished the work the Father assigned him (John 17). But he did not evangelize China, or even much of Egypt or Syria (as far as we know.) He did his job. (And I suppose treated the Sabbath rest properly–wish I knew what that was.)