America, I Weep for You: A Reflection on the Heroic Act of Kim Davis

My beloved nation, what has become of you?

Blessed nation, you now persecute Kim Davis and place her in jail. Why? Was it theft or murder? No. Was it fraud or extortion? No. Has she been jailed for attacking or slandering those who are forcing false marriage on our land (through judicial rape, it would seem), or those who turn from the natural male/female love that perpetuates our peaceful and productive existence and continually reorganizes us into biologically balanced families? No. She has caused no harm to them at all. Rather, she is jailed for refusing to deny the self-evident reality of God-created and God-defined marriage, as supported by 99.999% of all human society and all human history (regardless of race, religion, class, ethnicity or politics). She is jailed for acting according to her sincerely held beliefs when faced with new circumstances she did not expect or invite. She is unconscionably incarcerated for choosing to act according to her Christian conscience, because that conscience will not bow to a novel and immoral "law" that seeks to bind her against her will.

America, who freed the slaves, now attempts to enslave the conscience of a free people!

Kim Davis is no saint. However, imperfect as she is, Kim Davis is a modern day hero of American liberty. All freedom-loving Americans should praise her courage and imitate her steadfastness in the face of injustice. She suffers loss for the sake of freedom. Our freedom.

Like the students murdered in Tienanmen square, she has dared to defy an oppressive and overreaching government. America once praised such acts. Now it shamefully prosecutes those who are brave enough to oppose tyranny. America's founding fathers (and mothers!) would stand with Kim Davis in defiance of government coercion and oppression, were they alive today. Is their spirit alive in America today?

We hear much about "law." We hear little about genuine personal liberty.

God will judge the government of America for its defiance of His majesty. Let us pray that this nation repents and turns from its idolatry, blasphemy and stubborn refusal to accept reality as He created it.

America, I weep for you. Will you return from your insanity, or continue to pour moral acid upon yourself and your people, corroding what little remains of your decayed moral foundations?

America, I weep for you. Do you care?

Nonetheless (and all the more), I weep for you.

Faith and Regeneration: Which Comes First?

INTRODUCTION

This is basically a theological version of the "chicken and egg" conundrum. Occasionally it amuses me that Calvinists and Arminians (and others) are so apt to come to blows with regard to this question (I am referring to the theological one, not the chicken/egg question). As far as chickens and eggs are concerned, the answer is quite obvious from this text:

Genesis 1:20-23 And God said, “Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the heavens.” So God created the great sea creatures and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarm, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. And God blessed them, saying, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth.” And there was evening and there was morning, the fifth day.

God created "birds," not eggs, on the 5th day. "Eggs" are the intended method by which they will be fruitful and multiply. I hope you can appreciate what a great mystery has just been solved here. 

Unfortunately, the ordering of faith and regeneration does not have such an easy solution. Let's examine all of the texts related to the topic of "regeneration" to see whether they answer this question.

INVESTIGATING THE TEXT

1. The Greek noun παλιγγενεσία (PALIGGENESIA) appears twice in the New Testament:

Matthew 19:28 Jesus said to them, “Truly, I say to you, in the new world, when the Son of Man will sit on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel."

This text is clearly not referring to individual, salvific regeneration, so it has no bearing on the discussion.

Titus 3:4-8 But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by his grace we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life. The saying is trustworthy, and I want you to insist on these things, so that those who have believed in God may be careful to devote themselves to good works. These things are excellent and profitable for people.

This text, which clearly refers to individual, salvific regeneration, and even mentions faith in close proximity, does not give any hint of which came first.

2. The Greek verb ἀποκυέω (APOKYEO) is used once in the context of spiritual birth:

James 1:16-18 Do not be deceived, my beloved brothers. Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change. Of his own will he brought us forth by the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.

There is no mention of the ordering of faith and regeneration here. What is undeniable is that God alone regenerates, and that it is "of His own will" that He has regenerated His people.

3. The Greek verb ἀναγεννάω (ANAGENNAO)  appears twice in the New Testament, both times in I Peter:

I Peter 1:3-5 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! According to his great mercy, he has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you, who by God’s power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.

This text, while not explicitly addressing our question, only speaks of the role of faith as a protection for believers after regeneration has occurred. Rather than mentioning our faith as the cause of regeneration, Peter speaks only of God's mercy as the cause.

I Peter 1:22-25 Having purified your souls by your obedience to the truth for a sincere brotherly love, love one another earnestly from a pure heart, since you have been born again, not of perishable seed but of imperishable, through the living and abiding word of God; for

“All flesh is like grass and all its glory like the flower of grass.

The grass withers, and the flower falls, but the word of the Lord remains forever.” 

And this word is the good news that was preached to you.

This text, while mentioning regeneration and the preached Word of the Gospel, offers us no indication of the ordering of faith in the equation. If anything, we might refer back to verses 20 and 21, which tell us plainly that "through Him [we] are believers in God." This gives all of the credit for the origination of our faith to Christ, and not to our own act of will in exercising faith. The true sight and knowledge of Him (as proclaimed in the Gospel) produces faith, as surely as the sight of a raging hurricane produces awe and dread.

4. The Greek verb γεννάω (GENNAO) is sometimes used in the context of spiritual birth, or regeneration:

John 1:9-13 The true light, which gives light to everyone, was coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

On the surface, this passage might seem to place faith ahead of regeneration. However, the text does not specify at which point regeneration occurred. Rather, it shows that the "right" of sonship was given to those who believed. Thus, the right of sonship follows upon faith. This right is given to those who are born of God and have believed.

John 3:1-8 Now there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews. This man came to Jesus by night and said to him, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God, for no one can do these signs that you do unless God is with him.” Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” Nicodemus said to him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?” Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.”

This text says much about the new birth, but gives us no indication of the ordering of faith and regeneration. It simply tells us that regeneration is necessary to salvation. Although faith figures prominently in the remainder of the chapter and the book of John, there is no conclusive evidence of ordering here. 

There are several passages in I John that mention spiritual birth:

I John 2:29 If you know that he is righteous, you may be sure that everyone who practices righteousness has been born of him.

There is no evidence of the ordering of faith and regeneration here, unless we take "practicing righteousness" to include initial belief in Christ.

I John 3:9 No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God's seed abides in him, and he cannot keep on sinning because he has been born of God.

No evidence of the ordering of faith and regeneration here.

I John 4:7 Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God, and whoever loves has been born of God and knows God.

No evidence of the ordering of faith and regeneration here.

I John 5:1 Everyone who believes (Present Active Participle) that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God, (Perfect Passive Indicative), and everyone who loves the Father loves whoever has been born of him (Perfect Passive Participle).

On the surface, this verse might seem to teach that regeneration occurs before faith. However, it could be interpreted the other way. Thus, there is ultimately no conclusive proof of the ordering of faith and regeneration here. If anything, the verb tenses might point toward regeneration preceding faith.

I John 5:4 For everyone who has been born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has overcome the world—our faith.

Although faith and regeneration are both mentioned, there is no evidence of the ordering here.

I John 5:18 We know that everyone who has been born of God does not keep on sinning, but he who was born of God protects him, and the evil one does not touch him.

No evidence of the ordering of faith and regeneration here.

CONCLUSION

So, if all of the New Testament passages dealing with regeneration are ultimately silent (or at least inconclusive) on this issue, what was the point of this exercise? We arrive at three conclusions:

1. The subject is not definitively settled by the Biblical text itself (perhaps God has not deemed this to be an area in which we need to have a settled certainty).
2. Any position that insists on a particular ordering must be driven by something other than the text (such as soteriology, systematic theology or philosophical considerations).
3. Upon thorough consideration of these texts, three possibilities remain: 
• Faith precedes regeneration
• Regeneration precedes faith
• Both occur simultaneously

I would favor the third option and recommend it for consideration by all. As a Calvinist, the second option would seem to be the next best. Based on the Biblical text, there can be no doubt that regeneration, faith, repentance, justification, reconciliation, sanctification and all other good gifts are given to us by God, and are not from ourselves. That is GREAT NEWS, regardless of your stance with regard to the order.

A Discussion of the Ordo Salutis

In case anyone is interested, I am having an interesting conversation with some Arminian brothers here:

http://arminianperspectives.wordpress.com/2015/05/29/interesting-comments-from-john-macarthur-on-the-nature-of-preveninet-grace-the-ordo-salutis/

Pretty interesting stuff.

Here is my attempt to describe a Biblical Ordo Salutis:

http://theoparadox.blogspot.com/2012/09/a-biblical-ordo-salutis-for-biblical.html

A Response to Leighton Flowers: What is the "Dead" State of Fallen Man?

Perhaps, dear reader, you are aware of the criticisms of Calvinism recently put forth by Leighton Flowers, a Southern Baptist preacher, professor and Youth Evangelism Director for the Texas Baptists. Flowers is a prolific podcaster and blogger who presents a distinctively Baptist approach to non-Calvinism. I have listened to nearly every podcast he has released, and have briefly interacted with him on the "About" page of his blog site, Soteriology101.com. In what would seem to be an amazingly courageous move, Flowers has also debated the formidable High Calvinist heavyweight, James White. Unfortunately, this was an epic exercise in missing the point, and I found both of their debate presentations and post-debate follow up responses equally disappointing.

This photo was Leighton's humorous take on
his recent debate with James WhiteSee the debate here: https://youtu.be/lzoZjSTysIs

A BRIEF CRITIQUE

There are a lot of good things to say about Leighton Flowers, so let's start there:

• He is respectful in his manner of dialogue with opponents
• He conducts himself with humility
• He generally speaks positively of Calvinists and accepts them as brothers
• He articulates a clear theology of salvation from a "traditionalist" (i.e., non-Calvinistic) Baptist perspective
• He serves as a ministry leader, and is not just a "talking head" with opinions
• He has a sense of humor (a characteristic that is woefully lacking in so many Calvinist/Arminian dialogues on the internet)

There are some notes of concern as well, and at least one of them is genuinely alarming:

• He doesn't always have his facts straight (as an example, in one of his podcasts he mentions D.A. Carson as an example of a non-Calvinist scholar - Huh???)
• He frequently overstates the persuading power of his views, which have not actually proven persuasive to thoughtful, Biblically grounded Calvinists
• He often presses illustrations to logical extremes that amount to "straw man" arguments
• He sometimes ignores critical distinctions that are consistently drawn by mainstream Calvinists
• In contradiction to his typically respectful comments about Calvinists, he has actually said more than once that he believes this passage might refer to them:
• And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. (2 Peter 3:15-16)

We can only assume that Flowers has not thought through the implications of that last point, which are quite inflammatory. Viewed charitably, the statement is a bit out of character, though nonetheless troubling. All in all, Leighton is far friendlier toward Calvinists than many others who engage in this type of debate.

A SIMPLE REFUTATION: IS FALLEN HUMANITY TRULY "DEAD" TOWARD GOD?

Let's take a brief look at an issue Leighton Flowers has often mentioned in his polemic against Calvinism. According to Flowers, Calvinists routinely compare man's "dead" state to that of Lazarus in the tomb, while he prefers to relate it to the state of the prodigal son in Luke 15. The prodigal son was only figuratively dead, right? He still had the natural ability to return to his father, right? So, perhaps fallen man is just "mostly dead":



Leighton's view ignores both the context and the content of Ephesians 2:1-3, which states:

And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience— among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.

Agreeing with Leighton, the clear implication of this text is not that fallen man is incapable of doing anything. However, it is actually much worse than that. According to this text, fallen man is incapable of doing anything that is not sinful. Humanity's "dead" acts are trespasses against God's law and are worldly, demonic, disobedient, fleshly and lust-driven. Believing in Christ for salvation does not seem to fit with this set of "dead" capabilities that remain in fallen human beings.

Much more telling, and far more detrimental to Leighton's position, is the obvious context of Ephesians 2. See Ephesians 1:19-20, which comes just a few verses prior:

... and what is the immeasurable greatness of his power toward us who believe, according to the working of his great might that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places ...

Without question, the flow of the text shows us that Paul is linking the believers' dead state prior to salvation with Jesus' dead state prior to his resurrection. Was Jesus "mostly dead" in the tomb, or was He "all the way dead"? Does Jesus' death and burial more closely resemble that of Lazarus, or that of the prodigal son?

This context-based exegesis stands like a sumo wrestler in opposition to a weak speculation that draws all of its force from the misapplication of an unrelated passage.

Reminding us of the three most important rules for proper Biblical interpretation: context, context, and context.

The whole Bible, taken in context, will always lead us inexorably to something along the lines of Calvinism. An army of critics will never change this, though they may push back with all their might.

Lessons from Blues Legend B.B. King

Today I read an interesting article about B.B. King's church background and Gospel music roots, which he later abondoned to pursue his Blues career. It seems that there are at least two key observations to be made about the sad turn of events which led to his departure from Christianity:

1. B.B. left the church because his religious interests were more about the music and entertainment factors than Jesus Christ Himself. It is not too surprising that one who was never a disciple would seek to liberate himself from the seemingly constricting requirements of real devotion to the Lord. Hip sounding music easily won out when placed next to the way of the cross.

2. B.B. left a church environment that was (at least in his perception) legalistic and hypocritical. Did he even hear the Gospel in the Southern-cultured, Americanized "evangelical" Baptist and Pentecostal churches he attended? One wonders. Churchy folk certainly did not hide their condemnation of the "blues" musical style, nor of the beer drinking and dancing that often accompanied it. However, King said many church members secretly loved the music!

In short, we are reminded that there is nothing more detrimental to the reputation and health of the local church than unconverted, legalistic, religious hypocrites on the one hand, and the failure to aim for genuine conversion and disciple-making through faithful Gospel witness on the other.

And we might imagine that Reformed believers would have embraced the beer and the music (and perhaps even the dancing--all in tasteful moderation, of course), recognizing these as God's good gifts to be enjoyed, while at the same time holding forth the potent light of the Gospel and calling sinners to repentance and true discipleship.

May our great and gracious God help us not to repeat the errors of a church culture gone wrong in the Deep South of long ago. And today. 

We can thank God for Mr. King's amazing talents, and hope in earnest that he did not die unconverted.

Kyrie Eleison.

The Things Children Say . . .

So I've been sitting here watching a series of YouTube videos showing a panel discussion by some leading open theists, in which they respond to their critics and attempt to explain their theology. I have to say I found their reasoning rather unimpressive. After about fifteen minutes of loopy arguments and obvious fallacies, my 10-year old son looked over at me and said, "Instead of watching 'Dude Dumb,' let's watch some 'Dude Perfect!'"

So, here is my alternative to open theism:



Feel free to read into this whatever connections and analogies you might want to make.

True Calvinist Confessions: "I am a Casual Determinist."

As a committed Calvinist, I unashamedly advocate Casual Determinism. I would venture to say that every sincere Calvinist who holds to Biblical truth should be (and probably is) a Casual Determinist.

Please note that I am not talking about "Causal Determinism," nor am I advocating that philosophical viewpoint. I am discussing and arguing for a Biblical position of Casual Determinism.

What is Casual Determinism?

First of all, what do we mean by determinism? This can be defined as the belief that all events are pre-determined to occur. There are various kinds of "determinisms," which are variously advocated by philosophers and theologians of different stripes. The opposing position, Libertarianism (also known as a belief in "Libertarian Free Will"), holds that it is wholly impossible that events for which human beings may be held responsible are pre-determined. Even a casual reading of the Bible, much less a sound program of exegetical study, would seem to decisively demolish the "Libertarian" viewpoint.

In general, Calvinists (along with conservative Lutherans and others who hold to a high view of Scripture) are considered to be Determinists because they believe that God pre-determines everything. However, while we hold this conviction with tenacity and deeply conscientious devotion, we reserve the right to be rather casual about the details. Thus, we are Casual Determinists. We seek to affirm what is clear from Scripture, and not to go beyond what is written.

In other words . . .
1. We acknowledge that there is a great deal of mystery regarding God's pre-determination of everything.
2. We recognize a clear distinction between the pre-determination of good and the pre-determination of evil. God delights in good. He hates evil. He pre-determines both, but in different ways. While He may pre-determine evil, He never commits it nor approves of it. As for good, He alone is its source and author. Get it?
3. Along with Augustine, Calvin, Edwards, et al, we affirm God's absolute sovereignty without denying the voluntary choice and moral responsibility of human beings.

What are the Benefits of Casual Determinism?

1. Philosophical and theological arguments against causal determinism are rendered powerless because Casual Determinism may or may not entail Causal Determinism.
2. We do not have to deny human freedom in order to affirm divine determinism. We are quite casual in recognizing the fact that some type of genuine human freedom exists alongside determinism. And we do not need to solve all of the mysteries of the universe in order to affirm what the Bible clearly teaches.
3. We can interpret all events through the lens of God's absolute sovereignty.
4. We can speak of circumstances and human choices in the same ways the Biblical authors spoke of them, without feeling that we are somehow attributing evil to God or somehow denying His sovereignty.

We can be rather casual in our determinism because GOD is GOD, His Word is TRUE, and it is not our job to know everything.

Our role is to study His Word, worship His majesty, trust His wisdom, follow Christ, and proclaim His Truth. Regarding these things, we are anything but casual!

Christ's Conquest of the Self-Life: A Thematic Study of Philippians

Here is a link to a PowerPoint presentation from a message I shared at church some time ago. There are 23 slides, including a few illustrations. It is based on three of the key themes in the book of Philippians. I hope it is a blessing to you!

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1L2AyEnnqLONOfoCIelTL7-LzakwKIZXRDjdTIZEQgIc/edit?usp=sharing

Christ's conquest of the believer's self-life is . . .

1. Conditioned upon God's work in us
2. Concentrated in God-ordained relationships
3. Completed in union with Christ