The Resistance – Repentance – Part 1B

Continued from yesterday…

Acknowledge Corporate Sin

In our churches, we need leaders who will help us see the big corporate sins of our age. We’ve often softened our congregations up on the easy topics that leave us feeling justified. It’s easy to rail against greed – especially when we think it is something that only rich people have. And rich people are people who earn at least $25,000 more than me. It’s easy to turn our applications into calls for more people to give up time in their ‘secular’ callings to spend more time helping out in the church institution. These soft and convenient applications have become staple.

Read More

Different Bodies Mean Something

Hate speech alert. God’s design for marriage is a man and a woman. The Bible makes this clear, but sometimes we don’t think too hard about this. Why do we need a man and a woman? Is it just because two are better than one? Are we essentially to function in the same way? Are we like dual hard drives in a desktop computer – just in case one fails, we have another exactly the same that can carry on functioning? Sure, we admit we have different bodies. We understand the birds and the bees. But do we realise that our different bodies mean something?

Modern Christians don’t seem to consider the significance of our bodies. This is probably why we have failed to be effective in so many areas. We seem to do pretty much the same things as the pagans around us. We don’t often consider that we are designed and that our differences are deliberate, and that they, therefore, have meaning and purpose.

Consider the modern evangelical Christian couple. They marry – usually later in life than in previous generations. Why? Like most pagans, they consider getting their careers on track is more important than sexual purity and creating a successful family. We don’t tend to question the relatively recent narrative that university education for all is the path to fulfilment and success, because we have accepted individualistic materialism and its focus on personal fulfilment. Then, like most secular couples, at some point, our evangelical couple decides they want to add children to their lives. And note, children are an optional accoutrement. They are not integral to the purpose of marriage. They are not core to the purpose of a man and a woman. No, career is much closer to this.

So what happens next? The wife takes a short amount of time off to have the baby. She takes maternity leave of perhaps a year if the baby is lucky, and then she is back into her career. Childcare is then outsourced to others while the couple continues with the main purpose in their lives – personal fulfilment and the pursuit of materialistic success and wealth. This of course leaves the couple, and particularly the wife feeling guilt as she tries and fails to ace her career, care for her husband and be a wonderful mother.

Is this the way it is supposed to be? Should Christians follow this narrative? Of course not! As Christians, we need to rethink the cultural narrative around us. Our bodies are designed by God and tell us about our purpose. Unfortunately, the story that a woman’s body tells has been placed on the book-burning list. Instead of raising our young Christian woman to see the glory of the domestic sphere – being a supportive wife and mother, as Paul notes (see Titus 2:4, I Timothy 2:15, ) we have taught them like the culture around us to glory in career. We have taught our girls to be men.

Now in Christian circles, highlighting the importance of motherhood and children for our girls is often critiqued. When young Christian women make decisions about further education (for instance choosing not to go to university) that express their desire not to rack up years of study and debt which might make being a full-time wife and mother from an early age more difficult, there are Christians who frown on this. Sometimes we are told, ‘What if she does not get married?’ Now there is an element of truth in this. Not all young women who desire marriage do in fact marry. Yet this does not negate a few important truths. First, marriage is normative, and this means that for most Christian women, the way they will fulfil their Christian kingdom work is in the context of being a wife and mother. Preparing for this is therefore of primary importance. Secondly, the argument can be flipped the other way. Most intelligent and capable young women are exhorted to aim for careers that are not conducive to fulfilling wifely and motherly duties. My question is, ‘What if they get married?’ This is the far more likely eventuality. And yet we ignore it. We end up putting both financial hurdles and temptations in the way that are likely to be a stumbling block to their primary role. Finally, we must recognise the cultural blinders that make us assume that more time at university is the path to success. Maybe a young girl won’t marry and have children. But does that mean working as a nurse is less important than working as a surgeon?

A woman in marriage is designed primarily to help her husband in his dominion task by carrying and nurturing children and creating a wonderfully supportive domestic realm. She is not designed to provide for herself. We should not be ashamed of these truths. The world and culture around us have neglected these truths, to the detriment of men, children and women. The Christian way is beautiful and provides an arena for us to flourish in the bodies and roles God has given us. So let’s encourage our girls that it is legitimate to long for children and desire to support a husband. Let’s innoculate them against the secular lie of our age that a woman’s greatest happiness can be found in a career or pursuing the masculine calling of dominion. Too many miserable and stressed women testify against this. Let’s teach our girls of the supremely important role they have in Christ’s kingdom. Let’s excite them with the impact that strong marriages and families have for the kingdom of God.

We should not give god-like powers to the State

In Defending Marriage, Anthony Esolen lays out 12 arguments defending marriage. The final argument is that we should not give god-like powers to the State. A great quote from this chapter follows.

‘What the State essentially does, when it requires us to be parties to the lie that a man can marry a man, is to deny the anterior reality of marriage itself. It says, “Marriage is what we say it shall be,” and that implies, “Families are what we say they are,” and that implies, “There are no zones of natural authority outside the supervision and regulation and management of the State.” We’ve given up on the foolish notion of the Divine Right of Kings, dreamed up by totalizing monarchs of the late Renaissance. Now we have the Divine Right of Bureaucratic States. The old kings used to make common cause with smaller zones of authority, guilds and towns, for example, in order to check the ambitions of the noblemen. The new kings have obliterated those smaller zones of authority in principle, and seek to do so in reality also. That is in large part what public schools are now for; the education of children against the authority and direction of their own parents.’

Frivolous Divorce

‘Most divorces are secured for what people before our time would have considered scandalously frivolous reasons – not physical cruelty, not adultery, but willfulness, irritability, and boredom. Then we set such people free – and divorces are more often than not sought by the party most to blame; the greener-grass seeker, the golddigger, the unreliable, even the adulterous. They then may go on, like carcinogenic free radicals in the body politic, to corrupt yet another household, rather than to have their self-will cordoned off in one household and, possibly, healed by the long-suffering and kindness of the spouse, or by simple maturation. At the worst they would be able to say, “I kept my promise, and our children and our children’s children visit us together, and if we could not be excellent spouses to one another, at least we did not make them suffer the pain of divorce.” And now, if those children marry, they will have an example of perseverance to guide them through the straits they will meet in turn.’ 

Defending Marriage – Anthony Esolen

Advice for 20-Year-Olds

Men like Jordan Peterson have a huge following of young people, often young men. In church circles, we can sometimes think that young people are all godless hedonists who are uninterested in the bigger questions of reality. The Peterson phenomenon suggests otherwise. What are they doing that we aren’t? I’m sure sharper minds than mine have considered this question, but I suspect one reason is that they are offering practical strategies for living a virtuous life. Consider the following short clip.

What strikes me firstly is his willingness to challenge young men without resorting to demeaning and haranguing them as if they are failures. In the church our young men can often be looked down on as ‘hopeless’ and needing to get their act together. Here is a man who is like a loving father encouraging a son to man-up in a winning way. He is giving excellent advice that comports with a biblical view of masculinity and the dominion mandate.

Secondly, he’s not afraid to challenge cultural norms. He rightly points out that marriage is more fulfilling than a career. He says, “You’re not going to find something more valuable in your life than a committed relationship with someone that you love that sustains itself across time and that in all likelihood produces children. That’s life. And there may be people for whom avoiding that is the better route, but those people are very rare, and you need a real reason to assume that you are one of those people.” In the church we have more or less taken on the cultural norm of elevating career above marriage by the way we assume that our children should not consider marriage until after they have completed studying and got career sorted.

Obviously, there is more to be said here. We would disagree that familial relationships are the most important thing in life. Christ is our all in all. Yet getting on with getting married is in general a helpful truth provided this is conducted with wisdom and maturity. The truth is that the pattern of marrying and being given in marriage and raising families is normative in the Christian age. While the celibate life is a valid and God-honouring calling for some, we may be in danger of denigrating the normal pattern for growing the church through a godly offspring as well as the normal pattern for avoiding sexual immorality, and the normal pattern God uses for strengthening society and culture and preventing societal decay. Yes work and vocation is important, but family is more important.

God’s Big Design

God’s big design is an excellent introduction to Genesis 1-2. At the outset, Roberts points out that Genesis is not setting out to answer the questions of modern science, and the book really avoids commenting on this issue much at all. Rather, there are five chapters, each dealing with important doctrines introduced in the first two chapters of Genesis.

In the first chapter we are introduced to the divine Creator. Genesis teaches that God alone is eternal, and thus philosophical materialism is wrong. In addition, accidentalism, the view that there is no guiding hand but chance alone is also wrong. Finally, Genesis presents God alone as sovereign, thus humanism with its lofty claims about mankind is also wrong. Flowing from these truths are implications for meaning, morality and worship. There is meaning to the universe, and we find that in living for God’s glory. There is fixed morality that derives from God’s eternal character, and the only right response to God the creator is worship.

The second chapter deals with God’s design for humanity. Here Roberts contrasts differing views that people have about humanity. Some see humanity as divine, others as worthless. Genesis shows that neither view is accurate. It teaches that we are created, physical and sexual beings. The implications are that God cares about our bodies as well as our spirits and that the gender God gives us is fundamental to our God-given identity. This matters more than how we view ourselves psychologically. In addition to teaching that human beings are created beings, Genesis teaches that we are made in the image of God. This sets us apart from the animals. What this actually means, is not spelled out in Genesis. But according to Roberts, “This is surely one of the reasons why he [God] has forbidden us from making images of him. God has already created an image of himself: human beings.” He then suggests some of the ways we reflect God. We reflect God in our rationality, our ability to make moral choices and our creativity among other things. We also represent God. In the context of being made in the image of God, Genesis has mankind ruling over God’s creation as his representatives on earth. Finally, we are designed to relate to God in a way that animals are not. The implications of this doctrine are far-reaching. Being made in the image of God, we have great dignity, and thus murder which includes abortion is a terrible sin. He concludes the chapter by reminding us that despite the fall, the image of God remains in us, and through Christ it is being remade.

Chapter 3 brings a fairly balanced approach to God’s design for the earth. Genesis teaches that the earth was created by God. It is not an accident which would give it no intrinsic value, nor is it divine. Rather it is distinct from God, lower than him, but has great value. Furthermore, in stark contrast to many philosophies and religions, Scripture teaches that creation is good. It is ordered, beautiful and is designed to bring glory to God. Genesis also teaches that it is unfinished. Yes it was made perfect, but God gave orders to people to carry on the work he had begun with creation by asking them to work the garden, to fill the earth and have dominion over it. The second major point of the chapter is that earth was entrusted to people. We are designed to rule over the world under God. This is not to be in a destructive way, after all, God has spent Genesis 1 declaring what he made to be good, so why would he give human being permission to destroy it in the same chapter? The two tasks humans are given are to work the earth and take care of it. In other words, to develop the resources God has placed in the world, but to do this in a responsible manner. Roberts helpfully points out the dangers of two common extremes – development without conservation and conservation without development. These both ignore the twin aspects of God’s mandate to humans. He concludes the chapter by reminding the reader that the earth will be redeemed by Christ. Redemption is not only spiritual, but physical, involving the putting right of all of creation.

God’s design for sex and marriage is the subject of the fourth chapter. Roberts begins by talking about some of the impacts of the sexual revolution. One interesting statistic he mentioned was the cost of family breakdown in the United Kingdom which is estimated to be £10 billion or 1% of GDP. Genesis teaches that God is for sex. Contrary to the stereotype that Christianity is against sex, the first two chapters of Genesis teach that God created sex as part of his good creation. In Genesis we see two principles in sex. First is complementarity. God made male and female, both in the image of God, yet different. Men and women complement each other so that, in God’s creation design, when we come together we are a perfect fit. But sex was created as the means of reproduction. God’s first command is basically, “Have sex! Propagate!” In addition, sex is for marriage alone. Marriage is a life-long God-given institution and the only proper context for sex. It is exclusive, and forms a deep unity. Ultimately it is a picture of the relationship between Christ and the church.

In the final chapter, Roberts addresses what Genesis 1-2 teaches on the subject of work. Rather than being a corruption of God’s original design, work is a good part of God’s creation. Unfortunately work has been viewed as unspiritual, which is a hangover from a Greek view of the world. Some Christians took this view and decided there were two tiers of Christians. The first was described as the ‘perfect life’ where a priest, monk or nun dedicated their life to contemplation and spiritual things. The second tier was the ‘permitted life’, which was seen as secular. This was the realm of work, governing, farming, trading and raising a family. But this is not the Christian view. Roberts includes a brilliant quote from Mark Greene’s ‘Thank God it’s Monday’. “Work is not an intermission from the main action, something we do so we can then do other things: it is an integral part of the main action, an intrinsic part of our walk with God.” Genesis teaches us God is a worker and people were created to be his co-workers. God created Eden, but gave man the task of cultivating it. Thus work is itself spiritual. This, I think, is an important truth we of the laity need to grasp. We can serve God in day to day life. As a lawyer, or a factory worker, we do not need to feel ashamed that our job is not sufficiently Christian. We can serve God in whatever work we do! Nevertheless, work is not the goal of life. God rests from his work, and he wants us to enjoy his rest too. There is a little bit of discussion on whether the fourth commandment applies to us, and in the concluding section of the chapter, we are reminded of the tension between creation work and new creation work, and the importance of witness.

In summary, this is a very readable, clear and helpful unpacking of some of the core doctrines that spring from Genesis 1-2.