Judges For You

This Sunday we will begin our corporate meditations on the wonderful book of Judges. Please join us as we study this important portion of God's Word and consider its application to our time and place. 

Evolutionary Hymn

Lead us, Evolution, lead us
Up the future's endless stair;
Chop us, change us, prod us, weed us.
For stagnation is despair:
Groping, guessing, yet progressing,
Lead us nobody knows where.

Wrong or justice, joy or sorrow,
In the present what are they
while there's always jam-tomorrow,
While we tread the onward way?
Never knowing where we're going,
We can never go astray.

To whatever variation
Our posterity may turn
Hairy, squashy, or crustacean,
Bulbous-eyed or square of stern,
Tusked or toothless, mild or ruthless,
Towards that unknown god we yearn.

Ask not if it's god or devil,
Brethren, lest your words imply
Static norms of good and evil
(As in Plato) throned on high;
Such scholastic, inelastic,
Abstract yardsticks we deny.

Far too long have sages vainly
Glossed great Nature's simple text;
He who runs can read it plainly,
'Goodness = what comes next.'
By evolving, Life is solving
All the questions we perplexed.

On then! Value means survival-
Value. If our progeny
Spreads and spawns and licks each rival,
That will prove its deity
(Far from pleasant, by our present,
Standards, though it may well be). 

C.S. Lewis

Eight Problems of Theistic Evolution

Listed below are eight problems Wayne Grudem finds with theistic evolution. He may not be an authority on these matters, but in typical fashion he distills the main points nicely and explain succinctly what unbiblical conclusions we must reach for theistic evolution to be true.

1) Adam and Eve were not the first human beings, but they were just two Neolithic farmers among about ten million other human beings on earth at that time, and God just chose to reveal himself to them in a personal way.

2) Those other human beings had already been seeking to worship and serve God or gods in their own ways.

3) Adam was not specially formed by God of ‘dust from the ground’ (Gen. 2:7) but had two human parents.

4) Eve was not directly made by God of a ‘rib that the Lord God had taken from the man’ (Gen. 2:22), but she also had two human parents.

5) Many human beings both then and now are not descended from Adam and Eve.

6) Adam and Eve’s sin was not the first sin.

7) Human physical death had occurred for thousands of years before Adam and Eve’s sin – it was part of the way living things had always existed.

8) God did not impose any alteration in the natural world when he cursed the ground because of Adam’s sin.

Additionally, here are a few questions theistic evolution raises for the Bible believing Christian: How can we uphold the special dignity and majesty the Bible accords human beings when we are only qualitatively different from other life forms and continuous with the rest of the animal world? How can God impute sin and guilt to all humans along the lines of federal headship when some of us have no physical connection with Adam? Likewise, if we are not all descended literally from one pair, how can we all have an ontological connection with Christ who only assumed the flesh of Adam’s race?

(From Justin Taylor's "Between Two Worlds")

Lunatic, Liar or Lord

“I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God. That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.” 

― C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity

Forgive Us These Faults, Tim Keller

For decades Kathy and I  have profited immensely from the pastoral wisdom of the converted slave trader John Newton. As an 18th-century Anglican minister, Newton was a good preacher, but it was as a pastor, counselor, and adviser that he excelled. His pastoral letters are a treasure chest. In one of his letters (entitled "Some Blemishes on Christian Character") Newton points out that while most Christians succeed in avoiding more gross sins, many do not actually experience much in the way of actual spiritual growth.

Newton lays out a convicting and specific example of the kinds of Christian people who coast on their strengths but do nothing about their weaknesses and so rob themselves and others of joy and God of his glory. These blemishes are often seen by their bearers as mere "foibles." Newton says they "may not seem to violate any express command of Scripture" and yet, they are "properly sinful" because they are the opposite of the fruit of the Spirit that believers are supposed to exhibit. 

These "small faults" mean that large swaths of the Christian population have little influence on others for Christ. While our faults always seem small to us due to the natural self-justification of the heart, you can be sure they don't look so small to others. 

Over the years I've gone back again and again to this list in the manner he directs to use in my personal self-examination (not as a way to find fault with others). As a result I've seen things in myself that I've sought to stamp out with God's grace. And as I've worked through the list I've expanded it—often breaking some of his larger categories into smaller ones in order to be more incisive.  

Here I'll share my expanded list—based heavily on his Newton's original one. Since Newton gave each case study a slightly humorous Latin name, I've done the same.

Austerus is a solid and disciplined Christian but abrasive, critical, and ungenerous in dealing with people, temperamental, seldom giving compliments and praise, and almost never gentle.

Infitialis is a person of careful and deliberate character but habitually cynical, negative, and pessimistic, always discouraging ("that will never work"), unsupportive, and vaguely unhappy. 

Pulsus is passionate, yes, but also impulsive and impatient, not thinking things out, speaking too soon, always quick to complain and lodge a protest, often needs to apologize for rash statements.

Querulus is a person of strong convictions, but known to be opinionated, a poor listener, argumentative, not very teachable, and slow to admit wrong. 

Subjectio is a resourceful and ambitious person, but also someone who often shades the truth, puts a lot of spin on things (close to misrepresentation), is very partisan, self-promoting, and turf-conscious. 

Potestas gets things done but needs to control every situation, has trouble sharing power, has a need to do everything him or herself, and is very suspicious and mistrustful of others.

Fragilis is friendly and seeks friends, but constantly gets feelings hurt, easily feels slighted and put down, is often offended and upset by real and imagined criticism by others. 

Curiosus is sociable but enjoys knowing negative things about people, finds ways of passing the news on, may divulge confidences, and enjoys confronting too much.

Volatilis is kind-hearted and eager to help, but simply not reliable—isn't punctual, doesn't follow through on promises, always over-extended, and as a result may do shoddy work. 

Look at these and ask which one or two most describe you. Have the courage to ask someone else you know, too. In future articles we'll look both at why so many of us seem to be stuck in these character flaws instead of growing and changing to be of more godly character.

This article originally appeared in Redeemer Presbyterian Church's monthly Redeemer Report.

Weakness is the Way

HT: Jim Saemenes

Falling Plates

HT: Dale Callahan