Tried With Fire

Domestic abuse is one of those problems that is rarely addressed in the church. While we know it exists out there, we prefer to believe it doesn't take place in the Christian home. Why the discomfort? I think one reason is because of this question: What if the marriage ends in divorce? These are three possible camps regarding divorce among Christians that I am aware of: No divorce for any reason whatsoever. Divorce only for adultery and possibly abandonment. Divorce for adultery, abandonment, and abuse. I stand firmly in the third camp. For an in-depth defense of this position from scripture and church history, I would refer you to these lectures by Pastor David Dykstra (ARBCA). They are worth your time, and I would do them a disservice if I tried to duplicate his seven talks in one blog post. Rather, I am going to offer two hypothetical scenarios with the hope that you will consider how your position on divorce determines how you respond. Scenario 1. A man in your co...

Careful handling of the Bible will enable us to "hear" it a little better. It is all too easy to read the traditional interpretations we have received from others into the text of Scripture. Then we may unwittingly transfer the authority of Scripture to our traditional interpretations and invest them with a false, even an idolatrous, degree of certainty. Because traditions are reshaped as they are passed on, after a while we may drift far from God's Word while still insisting all our theological opinions are "biblical" and therefore true. If when we are in such a state we study the Bible uncritically, more than likely it will simply reinforce our errors. If the Bible is to accomplish its work of continual reformation of our lives and our doctrine - we must do all we can to listen to it afresh and utilize the best resources at our disposal. Exegetical Fallacies , 2nd edition, D.A. Carson, Baker Book House, 1996, pp. 17-18.

We'll be covering Philippians 4:13 tonight. This is a verse that is yanked out of its context too often - "I can do all things through him who strengthens me." But what are the "all things"? Here's D.A. Carson's take:  This verse is often wrenched out of its context. Paul is not claiming to be a kind of superman because he is a Christian and God is on his side. The "everything"in this verse is certainly not unlimited, as if Paul could be read to mean: "I can raise the dead" or "I can walk on water" or "I can show you how cold fusion is a practical possibility." By the same token, the verse should not be deployed by well-meaning but ill-informed church leaders who are trying to manipulate church members into doing something they really do not think they should do: "But Mrs. Jones, you can't say no to our invitation to teach ten-year-old boys, just because you've never taught a Sunday School class bef...

I would like to buy about three dollars worth of gospel, please. Not too much - just enough to make me happy, but not so much that I get addicted. I don't want so much gospel that I learn to really hate covetousness and lust. I certainly don't want so much that I start to love my enemies, cherish self-denial, and contemplate missionary service in some alien culture. I want ecstasy, not repentance. I want transcendence, not transformation. I would like to be cherished by some nice, forgiving, broad-minded people, but I myself don't want to love those from different races -  especially if they smell. I would like enough gospel to make my family secure and my children well behaved, but not so much that I would find my ambitions redirected or my giving too greatly enlarged. I would like about three dollars worth of gospel, please. Basics for Believers, An Exposition of Philippians , D.A. Carson, Baker Academic, 1996, pp. 12-13.

D. A. Carson: At the same time, I do worry a bit about women's ministry and men's ministry. Now there is something to be said for it, and sometimes you have to target particular groups, but have you noticed how many women's conferences there are that focus on the book of Ruth and the book of Esther? So that the whole conference is about women , and now we are getting men's conferences, men's conventions. I know I speak at them, but they trouble me just the same. These men's conferences where the whole aim is to be a hunk, to be a hunk for Jesus. Unless you really like UFC , you are definitely second class. Greek scholars need not apply....  I understand we are trying to fight the feminization of the church and all of that, but there is something ugly about that too, isn't there? So that at the Gospel Coalition Women's conference we are having next June...  it's not about women . It's a women's conference but it's about the gospel for ...

The role of women and men in the church and home is a can of worms. This topic is so emotionally charged that it's dangerous to step into the debate for fear of being verbally electrocuted. I occasionally lurk on a few egalitarian blogs (mainly for other issues), and it's interesting to get their perspective. At times I'm sympathetic to their position particularly when a complementarian spokesperson has made an insensitive, foot-in-mouth blanket statement regarding divorce or abuse, which are hot-button issues with me. But at the end of the day, these scenarios, as sad as they are, can't determine my stance on this issue.  I need to come back to the Bible. So I've been listening to the talks by D.A. Carson and Bob Yarbrough from the ECFA 2012 Conference:  Understanding the Complementarian Position: Considering Implications and Exploring Practices in the Home and the Local Church .  I'm part way through, but so far it's been very helpful. I appreciate the...

Church sign: D. A Carson: So now God comes to us and says, "I love you"? What does he mean? Does he mean something like this? "You mean everything to me. I can't live without you. Your personality, your witty conversation, our beauty, your smile - everything about you transfixes me.  Heaven would be boring without you. I love you!"  That, after all, is pretty close to what some therapeutic approaches to the love of God spell out. We must be pretty wonderful because God loves us. And dear old God is pretty vulnerable, finding himself in a dreadful state unless we say yes.  Suddenly serious Christians unite and rightly cry, "Bring back impassibility!" When he says he loves us, does not God rather mean something like the following? "Morally speaking, you are the people of the halitosis, the bulbous nose, the greasy hair, the disjointed knees, the abominable personality.  Your sins have made you disgustingly ugly.  But I love you anyway, not becaus...

D.A. Carson gave a special address at The Gospel Coalition's 2011 conference on God: Abounding in Love, Punishing the Guilty .  It's worth your listening time. Pay special attention to how our view of the love of God directly impacts our understanding of the atonement.  The panel discussion is informative as well.

One of the most striking evidences of sinful human nature lies in the universal propensity for downward drift.  In other words, it takes thought, resolve, energy, and effort to bring about reform. In the grace of God, sometimes human beings display such virtues.  But where such virtues are absent, the drift is invariably toward compromise, comfort, indiscipline, sliding disobedience, and decay that advances, sometimes at a crawl and sometimes at a gallop, across generations. People do not drift toward holiness. Apart from grace-driven effort, people to not gravitate toward godliness, prayer, obedience to Scripture, faith, and delight in the Lord. We drift toward compromise and call it tolerance; we drift toward disobedience and call it freedom; we drift toward superstition and call it faith. We cherish the indiscipline of lost self-control and call it relaxation; we slouch toward prayerlessness and delude ourselves into thinking we have escaped legalism; we slide toward godles...

[I]n most of the conflicts in which we find ourselves, not least conflicts about the Gospel and the life and healthy of God's people, we do not know the outcome as we grimly enter the fray.  That knowledge is reserved for God alone.  Yet Christian faith is never to be confused with fatalism; the intervention of Mordecai and Esther demanded soul-searching faith, prayer, and obedience.  In retrospect even their presence in the court and on the fringes of the court was God's preparation, and certainly the outcome was God's doing; but never should our confidence in God's ultimate victory dilute our own passionate involvement, intercession, and insertion into the affairs that touch God's covenant people. From the reading for January 30 on Esther 7 from For the Love of God , Volume 2, D.A. Carson, Crossway. (emphasis mine)

I started the New Year by finishing John Frame's Salvation Belongs to the Lord .  After reading this book and listening to R. C. Sproul's talks on reformed theology last year,  I realize how little I know and how much I need to learn.  In one sense, I will never fully grasp all there is to know about God because He is so great.  But in another sense, He makes Himself known and desires that we know Him.   Lord willing, my goal is to read through the Bible this year using the Robert Murray M'Cheyne reading plan in conjunction with D. A. Carson's For the Love of God: A Daily Companion for Discovering the Riches of God's Word.   Dr. Carson has written daily reflections that aim to edify as well as build a whole biblical theology based on chapters from the M'Cheyne reading.   After too many years of reading my chapter a day for a quick edification fix, my prayer is to read and think .  At first I wasn't going to use a plan, but the plan will help...