Volume 3: Issue 6 | October 2020
Worship God as Servants, Not Consumers
"You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above,
or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
You shall not bow down to them or serve them,
for I the LORD your God am a jealous God,
visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me,
but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments."
-- Exodus 20:4-6
Americans love freedom and celebrate it every July 4. But why be free? The recently retired Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote infamously: “At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life." Those are not Christian words.
God’s purpose for liberating Israel from slavery was to worship him, not turn around and define for itself life’s meaning. In fact, Moses did not say to Pharaoh, “Let my people go.” He said, “Let my people go, that they may serve me in the wilderness.” People who love freedom – and who doesn’t – easily forget God’s purpose for freedom (to serve him!) and turn themselves into little gods who define their “own concept of existence.” But self-definition was not God’s purpose in saving Israel from slavery. It was to serve him. “Serve” does not sound like the word “worship” to us, but it is God’s word.
When Israel hears God’s Second Commandment, they hear it as priests, not slaves. What does a priest ask? “What do I do as a priest? How does God want to be served?” The Second Commandment, in fact, focuses on bowing down and serving.
The First Commandment forbids worshiping any other God than the one who saved Israel from Egypt. God’s Second Commandment forbids serving him in any way he has not told us. Israel wasn’t even to worship God with gold or silver, just animal sacrifices on an altar of uncut stone – not beautiful or exciting. And that’s the point. We come to God to
serve him as worshiping servants, not consumers!
Here’s a common scenario. That friend or family member whom you have been inviting to church finally comes. The people are friendly, the preaching is clear and helpful, but your friend says, “I just couldn’t get into the worship.” They mean the music, of course, since in our day “worship” has become a synonym for “music.” But the answer betrays a
deep misunderstanding about worship. It is about serving God, not about having our ears tickled.
When Israel left Egypt, they changed masters. As God said to them right before he gave them his Ten Commandments, “You yourselves have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles' wings and brought you to myself. Now therefore, if you will indeed obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession
among all peoples, for all the earth is mine; and you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation (Exodus 19:4-6).”
This is how the Apostle John speaks to the churches in Revelation, “To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood and made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father, to him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.” We are set free to serve the true King as his priests, humbly, in the ways he has told us to serve him: listen to his Word, pray to him, offer the sacrifice of praise in songs he gave us, offer ourselves for the rest of the week when we give our tithes, celebrate the signs of his Covenant of Grace, baptism and communion. And we do it together as flesh and blood servants – not isolated, solo priests staring at pixels on a screen. Come to church each week as a priest to serve God, not as a consumer to be entertained, and you will understand and obey the Second Commandment.
-- Hunter Jackson
Do You Celebrate Christmas?
The Likely Origin of the Question and Answers for Today
Following this introduction is what we what we expect will be a five-part exploration of the issue of Christmas. It is a paper originally written for a Doctor of Ministry class at the Reformed Presbyterian Theological Seminary, and as such is longer than our other articles and comes with the usual scholarly footnotes. We hope that it will reward careful study and be of help to those who wish to understand some of the questions around this subject.
-- The Editors
A Paper Submitted by John D. Edgar
DM 08: Biblical Worship
January 11, 2019
In the congregation of my childhood, a Saturday evening in December would be chosen for the church Christmas dinner. The basement hall would be decorated in red and green, and after the dinner little booklets containing Christmas carols would be passed out. Favorite carols would be chosen and sung, accompanied by the piano. Then the booklets would be collected to wait unused for a year, and the piano would gradually go out of tune, untouched
save for children banging on it after church services.
This was the full extent of the church's Christmas celebration. There was no pageant, nor a service on Christmas Eve or Christmas. The caroling was done in the basement, not the sanctuary, for this was a dinner, and there was no piano in the sanctuary. I have heard that Santa Claus appeared at the dinners a generation earlier, but I certainly never met him.
Thus matters continued until the church enjoyed an influx of families who did not celebrate Christmas at all. The church absorbed them contentedly until one woman objected to decorating the fellowship hall in red and green for the dinner in December. At this point feathers began to be ruffled.
The following year the pastor addressed the issue in adult Sunday School. Tell us, he said, how your family celebrates Christmas, if at all. Four positions emerged: those who celebrated in full, those who abstained entirely, at least one family who kept Christmas as religious as possible, and at least one who kept it as secular as possible!
Exposure to such a wide variety in a small congregation made the necessary point: we don't have a church position on such matters, each household will set its own course, and we will have peace in this congregation. The dinners themselves must have continued as before, for my younger brother was recently at the piano preparing to accompany the carols. But one might ask: what should my family do?
I. The Puritan position on Christmas
The Puritans and early Presbyterians had a very clear stance on Christmas: they forbade it. The Directory for the Publick Worship of God contained an appendix which stated, “Festival days, vulgarly called Holy-days, having no warrant in the word of God, are not to be continued.”
The case against Christmas rests in the first place on the regulative principle of worship: whatever God has not commanded in worship is forbidden, Deuteronomy 12:32. God has not commanded us to worship him on Christmas, or on any day besides the Lord's Day, so we are not to worship him on those days. If it be objected that surely it is good to hear preaching on Tuesdays and Thursdays, that would not establish the point, because those worship services could not be made mandatory. Nor could people be commanded to cease from their work on those days, since God commanded, six days you shall labor, and do all your work, but the seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God, in it you shall not do any work. If it be objected that the Bible at times calls for fasts and for celebration, this also can be conceded, but only when special acts of God call for special mourning or celebration. A standardized day, held every year, is clearly of human invention, not a human response to a contemporary event. 1
God commanded certain feast days in the Old Testament, but those days are a part of the ceremonial law that is no longer binding on the church. In the New Testament we read generally of the end of the ceremonial law:
Galatians 6:15: Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but a new creation.
Acts 10:15: What God has called clean, do not call common.
Hebrews 8:13: In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the old covenant obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.
Most frighteningly:
Galatians 5:2 If you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you.
And in reference to feast days in particular, we read the following:
Galatians 4:10-11 You observe days and months and seasons and years! I am afraid I may have labored over you in vain.
Colossians 2:16-17 Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These things are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.
While we read of the end of the ceremonial law, we do not read of the establishment of any new festivals. It would have been easy for God to delineate the new feasts that should be kept, but there is no New Testament equivalent to Leviticus 23 or Deuteronomy 16. By previously establishing festivals, God indicated that festivals are to be established by divine
right; absent any divinely instituted New Testament festival, the church is not to invent one. For it was for freedom that Christ set us free, therefore Christians must stand firm and not become slaves of men (Galatians 5:1). The liberty that Christ purchased must be guarded zealously by clinging to his word and not adding to it or subtracting from it. 2
Therefore, groups like the Brownists and Puritans argued, there is no day holy to God any longer, save the Sabbath. No one could rightly order them to stop working on Christmas, or any other holiday, since God has commanded that we work six days and rest one. Not only could no one require them to offer worship on a holiday, some would have maintained that worship should not be offered at times God had not commanded. But this was not the whole of the argument. Holidays were monuments to idolatry. Many were devoted to various saints, Christmas itself centered on an idolatrous mass (the Christ-mass), 3 and in any case any worship invented by men is by that very fact idolatrous. The obscure origins of Christmas may lie in a connection to the pagan festival of Saturnalia, the sun god, whose rebirth was celebrated on December 25, the winter solstice in the Julian calendar. Idolatry is to be fled, not co-opted.
Thus the Puritans and other early English Protestants maintained a clear ban on holidays generally. In Plymouth Plantation, there was evidently no notice taken of December 25 in 1620. In 1621, a new group told the governor it was against their conscience to work on Christmas Day, so he gave them leave to rest and took the others to the fields to work. But when he returned for lunch and found them playing games in the streets, he took their implements and told them it was against his conscience for them to play while others worked. If Christmas was a matter of devotion for them, let them keep it indoors, not revel in the streets. 4
Look for Part II in our next issue.
Footnotes:
1. For these and additional arguments see George Gillespie, A Dispute Against the English Popish Ceremonies Obtruded on the Church of Scotland, Dallas TX: Naphtali Press, 1642/1993. He argues at length that the ceremonies, which include holidays, are neither necessary, nor expedient, nor lawful, nor indifferent.
2. See Ainsworth & Johnson, An Apologie or Defense of Brownists, Amsterdam: De Capo Press, 1604/1970.
3. But see Penne L Restad for a different etymology: Old English Christes maesse (festival of Christ) entered the language around 1050 with the Norman invasion. See Penne L. Restad, Christmas in America: A History. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995.
4. William Bradford, Of Plymouth Plantation, 1620-1647, edited Morison.
Stories of Evangeline: How Miss Metheny Faced Great Danger
by Rev. Remo I. Robb
Reprint from the Covenanter Witness, March 31, 1948, p. 207
“After my work with the prisoners was stopped, it was laid on my heart to go and live among the villagers in the mountains.”
That’s the way another story begins.
For many years there has been discussion among missionary groups about the best way to spread the influences of the Gospel. Some think it best to go to the heathen countries and build dwellings that will be as nearly like their own homes as possible. The missionaries will then lives as they did in their home countries and show how nice Christian homes can be. The people can then see how greatly Jesus Christ affects the entire lives and surroundings of His people, and, wanting to have better living conditions for themselves, will be receptive to the Gospel.
Other missionaries feel that to live so well among the poverty stricken people of other countries makes them feel that Christianity is too rich for them. They think the missionaries are unwilling to accept the same difficult conditions of living that the poor natives have to endure. So, it is argued, the better way to take Christ to the dark places of the world is to go into those places and live like the people who are there, living in native houses, wearing native clothes, and eating native food. Then the people will see that the missionary is one with them, and that he does not think himself too good for their way of life. They will therefore feel more kindly to the message of the gospel, which he has to give.
Miss Metheny had lived and worked many years from a mission home and at the time of this story she felt she would like to try the other way of meeting the people and telling the Gospel.
She decided upon the mountain village where she wished to go, made some trips to find a suitable place to live, talked to her Bible woman whom she intended to take along for company, and laid in necessary supplies. Plans were made with great expectation. As the day of departure drew nearer, it seemed to her that an entire new field for work was opening up
to her, and that out in the village she would have the happiest days of her missionary career.
Then one afternoon the cook came in from the market looking very sober and fearful.
“Oh, Miss Metheny,” she said, “You are next.”
“I am next! I am next what? What do you mean when you say, ‘I am next’?”
“Oh, you know! Miss Edgar!”
All too well Miss Metheny knew about Miss Edgar. She was Miss Maggie B. Edgar, our own missionary in Latakia, whose chosen work was to minister as a Bible teacher among the poor Mohammedan women of the district. One afternoon she went to visit a woman whose husband had made threats. Miss Edgar never visited the woman when she knew the man was at home. But that day she went into the house, and never was seen again. Nobody ever
learned exactly what happened to her.
This had happened only a little while before Miss Metheny’s cook brought the fearful report, so with quickened pulse she asked:
“Do you mean that the Mohammedans will take me as they did Miss Edgar?”
“Yes, that is it. You are next.”
“What makes you say a thing like that? How do you know? Are you imagining?”
“No, I heard it.”
“You heard it? Where did you ever hear a thing like that?”
“Oh, it is in the air.” (An Arabic expression, like our saying “It is everywhere” or “Everybody says it.”)
“You mean, you heard it while you were out buying food, that it is in the market places, and along the streets?”
“Yes, that is it. You are next!”
Miss Metheny was startled at the report. Could it be true that the Mohammedans had marked her for death? Maybe the cook had merely heard some idle rumor and had jumped at conclusions. But how could she know? If it were true, then surely she should not go to the village in the mountains. There she would be living among the Mohammedans and it would be easy for them to take her if they wanted to.
She thought that possibly she should tell the other missionaries, but she knew that if they heard the report they would be most alarmed and would simply demand that she give up her plans. To her this was a problem, which she would have to work out by herself, facing it squarely, weighing both sides of every question, and proceeding only as she was led by the Lord. Daily she prayed about it, oh, she prayed most earnestly. Outwardly she went about her work as usual. She walked on the streets, she met and talked with the Mohammedan people; when it was necessary she even talked about her coming life in the village, but inwardly she was not at peace, not for a moment.
“Should I go to the village?” she would ask herself. “How can I learn the truth about my being ‘next’? What if I just decide not to go? Nobody will need to know why. I could say that my work here is so heavy that I cannot leave it. But, no, the people would know that my work is no heavier now than it was when I was getting ready to go. My fellow workers would be suspicious, and I would have to tell, and then they would get all alarmed about me, and I wouldn’t like that. I must ask for guidance from my Lord until He shows me His way clearly.”
So back again she would go on her knees before God and beseech Him to show her His will. At length she felt that He was leading her very definitely. More and more she believed she should postpone her plan for village life until all alarms had died down. If she went and anything happened, then of course her work would be finished. If she postponed her going she could live in safety at the school almost indefinitely so far as she could see. Later on, in the years that stretched before her, she could go and live in the villages.
Having reached a decision, she next had to take somebody into her confidence and make it known. Still she did not want to create undue alarm, and she feared that her older comrades would be very much wrought up about any such announcement. She needed a quiet young person in whom to confide.
There was on the mission force, at that time, a young lady with whom she had been most friendly, one who came into and went out of her house almost at will. To her Miss Metheny said one day, “I have made what you may think is a strange decision.”
“And what strange thing have you decided on?”
“I am not going to live in the village!”
The young lady turned quickly to her and grasping her by the arms spoke out, “Oh, Miss Metheny, but you must!”
“You do not know what is being said about me.”
“Oh, but I do. Everybody knows what is being said. They say, ‘You are next’.”
Startled that it was such common knowledge, Miss Metheny continued, “And in spite of all that, your are telling me that I must go? Thank you, my friend, I shall go. Thank you, I knew all along that I ought to. But now please tell me, with all the reports that you have heard, why I must go?”
“It’s because of Jesus our Savior. Why, if you did not go to the village, all the countryside would know why. Everybody knows what has been said. And then the Mohammedans would sneer and say ‘I guess that woman’s Jesus is not so great after all. She tells us to trust Him and that He will get us through every trouble, but when she even hears about trouble, she doesn’t trust Him. If He were so great, He could keep her from being hurt.’ Oh, you must go for His sake.”
With tears Miss Metheny put her arms around her young friend and thanked God aloud for sending her with a message of trust and hope in the Savior who is able to do “exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think.”
After her prayer of thanks, she said again, “Oh, thank you, friend, thank you. Thank you for restoring my trust in Jesus Christ my Savior and Lord. Now please promise me one thing more. Do not tell anybody that I ever decided not to go. If anyone even knew that I had entertained the idea, the Mohammedans would sneer at me and at our Lord. From now on, I shall go forward trusting in Him.”
With peace in her heart again, she had to face the very real threat that was “in the air.” She could not merely go to the village and take no precautions whatever. That would be too much like when the devil tempted our Lord, taking Him to the very topmost stone of the temple, and saying, “Cast thyself down from thence. God will take care of you.” God has
put many helps in the world for our protection from danger, which He will bless and use for our protection, and we ought to seek them out in so far as we can find them. Miss Metheny’s question therefore was “What precautions can I take to make my journeys through the mountains as safe as possible?”
After some thought she determined upon three items – she would never leave her house alone but would always have her Bible woman with her, she would never leave the village except on horseback, and she would never ride through the mountains without a bodyguard. Some time later a cart drew up to her house in Alexandretta and was loaded with selected furniture and supplies. With a good deal of creaking it left the city. Shortly afterward Miss Metheny and her Bible woman mounted two good horses and with two faithful hired men rode after the cart toward the village in the mountains.
The Sexual Revolution, A Devastating Failure
What defiles a person? Three of the thirteen sins that Jesus says defile a person are specifically sexual (Mark 7:21-22). Those outside the New Jerusalem include the sexually immoral (Revelation 22:15). Paul often began his lists of sins with sexual sins. “Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice
homosexuality…will inherit the kingdom of God (I Corinthians 6:9-10).” “Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, … I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God (Galatians 5:19-21).” “For you may be sure of this, that everyone who is sexually immoral or
impure…has no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God (Ephesians 5:5).” “Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry (Colossians 3:5).” In his famous description of the decline of Greco-Roman culture, he progresses immediately from increasingly gross kinds of idolatry to the absurdity of women inflamed sexually for other women and men likewise (Romans 1:26- 27). Then he lists briefly a host of other sins.
Until the 1960s Western civilization gave lip service to the Bible’s sexual morality: sex belongs in marriage. “Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous (Hebrews 13:4).” The brief sex-ed section of my 1961-64 high school health classes had a simple lesson: avoid sex outside of marriage. It will cause you trouble. Then came the Sexual Revolution, making grand but false promises of freedom, self-fulfillment, and happiness.
When I was a 1964 freshman at liberal Swarthmore College, there were men’s and women’s dorms. In a new concession to students, women could visit men in their dorm rooms until 11:00 pm on Saturday nights, doors open and feet on the floor. My dorm’s student resident assistant checked the rooms. Two years later, there were no functioning rules. Some male professors soon preyed on young coeds. College dorms became coed. Contraception and antibiotics were freely available, with no hindrances to unmarried men and women coupling as they chose. The promise from the psychologists: remove sexual “repression” and mental health will improve.
In 1969, California’s legislature passed the nation’s first no fault divorce law. Governor Ronald Reagan signed it. Either husband or wife could file for divorce without needing to give any reason, so whoever wanted out had the upper hand with state backing. Other states quickly followed. What about the children? “They are remarkably resilient,” we were told, and “it is better for them to have divorced parents rather than unhappily married ones.” (No one actually asked children.) “Staying together for the sake of the children” was old-fashioned and unnecessary self-sacrifice. The promise from the lawyers: divorce without acrimony and the fall-out will be minimal.
Four years later in its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, the Supreme Court discovered a hitherto unknown feature of the American Constitution, the right to abortion on demand. The family therapist slogan, already useful in breaking down state laws against easy availability of contraception was, “Every child a wanted child.” The promise? On demand abortion would end child abuse.
The Revolution rolled on. Those who disapproved of “shacking up” were shamed into silence: their disapproval is what causes trouble for unmarried couples. In some places, children born out of wedlock became the norm. Critics who pointed to the abundant evidence that children flourish best with a married father and mother were called bigots who
did not understand new family structures. The term “broken family” was verboten. Gay sex came out of “the closet” with parades, and then another Supreme Court decision nullified laws against sodomy, and yet another Supreme Court decision declared that the Constitution provides that men may marry men and women can marry women. Who knew?
Transgender demands followed immediately on the Gay Marriage ruling. Assert that someone is born a man by reason of his biology and be called ignorant. University scholars explained that “gender identity” is merely a “social construct.” To call a baby a boy or a girl is not recognizing biological reality, it is “assigning a gender.” (Odd for self-proclaimed materialists to insist that XX and XY chromosome pairs have nothing to do with “gender,” but never mind.) Who someone thinks he/she is, is who she/he is! For a suitable price, medical technology can even make a man look like a woman – sort of. The promise? The transgendered can be who they really are and be at peace.
The news media, schools, and college departments promote and cheer each new step of the Sexual Revolution. A few restraints remain, but they are under attack. In the wake of the TV program “Big Love,” Utah will no longer enforce laws against polygamy. A new version of the now gone NAMBLA (North American Man/Boy Love Association) will likely appear soon. Voices will even be raised against remaining legal restraints against incest and bestiality, all in the name of the supremacy of desire and one’s right to define one’s own identity. Everyone will be happy.
After sixty years of the Sexual Revolution it is past time to ask: has the Sexual Revolution made people happy? Surveys indicate women are less happy today than sixty years ago. The psychological damage of using and being used sexually sends countless people off to the psychiatrist for anxiety reducing drugs and antidepressants. Children miss the safety and love of a father and a mother; and resent the missing parent, often bitterly. New mores like the rule of “consent” and the rule of “no unequal power relationship sex,” try to fix the problems caused by the Sexual Revolution, but relationships have become quite complicated and even dangerous.
Do we look like a healthy society? The marriage rate keeps dropping. So does the birthrate. Loneliness grows. Single parent families struggle to raise children and put food on the table. People are unhappy. And in a final irony – and to the consternation of Sexual Revolution cheerleaders – young people today are having less sex than they did thirty years ago, not because they are becoming more moral but because they want love as well as sex (and can’t find love), and because many conclude that pornography is better than a real person. Pixels on a screen make no demands and will depict any fantasy. The wrath of God is revealed against our culture of sexual license in our dead babies, angry children, abandoned spouses, rampant loneliness, and widespread discontent.
When I taught 9th grade Algebra I, I was known as the word problem teacher. Students did not like them, teachers found them frustrating to teach, and I plowed through them all. My students fell into three categories: those who could do them, trying a different approach if the first one failed, those who quickly gave up, and those who stubbornly tried the same failed approach over and over again. Their scratch paper showed it all.
Revolutionaries are like my third group of Algebra I word problem solvers. When they do not get their expected results, they just try harder, often with more state power and social coercion. The Soviet Union did that for decades. Advocates of the Sexual Revolution do it now. They blame the failures and unhappiness that each new step in the Revolution brings on its opponents, whom they call “repressive,” “bigoted,” “hateful,” “afraid of change,” and most ironically of all, “obsessed with sex.” What opponents of the Sexual Revolution are, actually, is sane. As Father Brown said in G.K. Chesterton’s 1926 mystery, The Oracle of the Dog, “It’s the first effect of not believing in God that you lose your common sense.”
The Emperor’s new clothes of the Sexual Revolution have left society naked before its own unbridled desires and the result is unhappiness, loneliness, and death. The Sexual Revolution is a god that has failed just as surely as Communism failed. Time to abandon it and turn to God’s Word before our culture comes to an end. What does God tell us about ourselves? Sex within monogamous marriage and the bearing of children is good. Sexual relations outside of marriage are evil and will bring misery.
What should the Christian Church do?
1. Assert unapologetically the Bible passages with which this essay began, maybe even spelling out what the Greek words mean more clearly than is typically done in English Bible translations.
2. Teach God’s clear, simple, and healthy sexual ethic: marriage with children in view. Oppose divorce.
3. Tell young people to marry and help them do it, without putting barriers in their way besides not marrying an unbeliever. (The only exceptions are those to whom God has given the gift of being single for the sake of his kingdom. They know who they are.)
4. Praise bearing children and raising them in the Lord. Frequently.
5. Pay attention to what the schools and media teach about sex, and then clearly teach in the home and preach from the pulpit how wrong, foolish, and unsuccessful that teaching is.
6. Pursue ways to deal with the terrible evil of pornography, a part of the Sexual Revolution this essay has skipped since it deserves its own essay.
7. Ask again and again: has the Sexual Revolution made people “better adjusted,” “happier,” “safer,” or more “connected” to others? The answer is NO, just the opposite. Ask: are children of unmarried or divorced parents flourishing on the whole? NO. Has child abuse disappeared, now that our society grants the freedom to kill unwanted children before birth? NO. On its own terms, the Sexual Revolution has failed!
But, someone will say, “We can’t go back to the 1950s!” No, of course not. Who proposes that? There are things in the 1950s we should not go back to. We need to go forward towards a world of faithful marriages that welcome children. God judges all varieties of sexual sin, which bring only misery and death.
-- Bill Edgar
Racists I Have Loved:
One white man’s experience
We live in strange, sad times. Whether justified or not, many minority people genuinely fear the police and the Trump administration. In our streets we hear the outcry of Marxists and anarchists, many of them white, looting and burning in the name of “Black Lives.” And the label “racist” has become an overused tool to silence anyone who opposes leftists, whether they be more traditional democrats or violent radicals like “Antifa.”
Often the term racist is left undefined and applied so broadly that it becomes absurd. Conservative thought leaders are attacked in ways that would be comical if the attacks were not serious. Ben Shapiro, who is Jewish, is called a Nazi; Candace Owens, who is black, is called a “white nationalist.” We are told that “racism” is systematic: invisible yet
omnipresent. Dr. Voddie Baucham calls this “ethnic gnosticism:” the idea that some minorities “just know” when white folks are being racist. There is no defense allowed to this special intuition.
As Christians, we know that there is only one race, the human race descended from Adam and Eve. We are all cousins, made of one blood. And we are all “colored,” different shades of brown, really. But I know from personal experience that biases based on differences in outward appearance are quite real. In unguarded moments, when only other “white” people are present, some white people reveal their prejudices. Some of these people are my relatives and friends.
Once, at work, some people were discussing the destructive aspects of the welfare system. I voiced agreement with their points, which were economic and had (I thought) nothing to do with race. Suddenly, one of them stopped the conversation, “Shh! Here comes the Corporal!” I was surprised. Our corporal was black, but I had no reason to believe that he disagreed with our perspectives on the policies under discussion. The unspoken assumption of my white co-workers seemed to be something like only black people are on public assistance, and all black people support the welfare state, so the corporal will be offended if he hears us. In one moment, I was transformed from a participant in a discussion of political ideas to an unwitting co-conspirator in a secret society I wanted no part of.
The cynical French aphorist François de la Rochefoucauld wrote, “Hypocrisy is a tribute vice pays to virtue,” so I guess wimpy prejudice that hides in good company is to be preferred to bold discrimination. If ignorance is always going to be with us, it’s better if it stays underground. I imagine that “whites” are not the only club who may say things when
they are alone that would be unspoken if “others” were present.
As a light-skinned person of European ancestry, I grew up among Yankee Republicans in upstate New York. When I was eight years old, my grandpa died. My cousins were excited when a plain brown envelope came in the mail addressed to him, and they convinced our grandma to let them open it. I was too young at the time to understand their hope that it
contained a “girly magazine.” What they discovered was equally corrupting. It was a newsletter called “The Thunderbolt,” published by the National States Rights Party, unreconstructed Confederates who formed the political wing of the Ku Klux Klan. Its main article was unforgettable. It had a photo of Sonny Bono (recently separated from Cher) and his black girlfriend; it explained that “race-mixing” was a plot of our Soviet enemies to “bring down” white Americans to the level of a “lower race.” The “negritude” of black people, you see, was a powerful quality that would prevail over whiteness. If you had one drop of “black blood,” you were black, plain and simple.
Believe me, dear reader, this hogwash sounded as ridiculous to me in the late 1970s as it must to you today. I thought it must die out soon. But a few years later I saw the “progressive” talk-show host Phil Donahue espouse the identical race theory. His guests were young “bi-racial” people who insisted on identifying themselves as such. They were happy to see themselves as half white and half black, as they honored both of their parents. But Donahue was not satisfied. He chastised them for denying their “blackness”!
Like my grandpa, my stepfather was gentle and inconsistent in his prejudices. I loved them both deeply, but never understood their perspective on race. My Pa would say sweeping generalizations about black people. “All of them are -------.” I will not fill in the blank. Yet one of his best friends was a co-worker named Chago, who was a dark-skinned man with Caribbean roots. Once, when my Pa said something less than nice about all those black people, I asked if it included Chago. “What?” he exclaimed, “Chago isn’t black! He’s Spanish!” I didn’t argue with my father. But I knew that Spanish was Chago’s language; his skin tone was a heritage from Africa, not Spain.
Another time, my Pa told me. “You are welcome to bring any girl home. But the day you bring a black girl here you will find all of your stuff sitting on the front porch.” I was a teenager, and shot back a cheeky reply that surprised me. “Well, okay. If you come home and see all my stuff missing then you’ll know what sort of girl I’ve run off with!” We both knew we were trading silly hypotheticals. It was jovial banter, but it did reveal our actual differences in perspective.
Years later, on a visit home from college, my Pa asked me if I had a serious girlfriend yet. At the time, I was courting a Korean lady. I couldn't resist the opportunity to tease him a bit. “Yes, Dad ... but she’s not white.” “What do you mean? Show me her picture ... She’s white, son. She’s not black, that makes her white.” “No, Dad. She’s from a whole different continent. I suppose she’s yellow if we must label her.” Then I dropped it.
I had two other experiences in college that made me think about race issues. On was an unpleasant interaction with a police officer, and the other a wonderful encounter with some urban minorities. I was walking home one evening after my shift at the Food-Town Supermarket in West Caldwell, New Jersey. I worked in the deli, and was dressed the part;
clearly working class, even a little grimy from the job. As I left the Caldwells and entered Essex Fells, a patrol car slowed down and followed me for a few blocks. Then the officer stopped and called me over to his passenger window. Where are you headed, boy? “I’m walking home from work, sir.” Yeah, right. Where do you live? Essex Fells is an old, upscale
neighborhood with Victorian mansions. I finally convinced the officer that I was a student at the Bible College, and he let me continue on my way. But he left me thinking. Is this how black people feel when they are stopped by the authorities just for looking out of place? On the other hand, do black people mistake classism for racism? After all, I was stopped and interrogated in a way that made me uncomfortable, in spite of my white skin.
The other time, one of my fellow students arranged for me to be on a Christian radio program, broadcast from a black church in Brooklyn. I rode a bus into Manhattan, then hopped the subway to Flatbush. I was to meet some people from the church to pick me up, so I arrived early. As I waited in the underground station, commuters came and went. A few
people were just hanging out. I assumed they were drug dealers and prostitutes, but none of them bothered me. So I sat on a bench and read a book. During my 90 minute wait for a ride, I was repeatedly approached by strangers who seemed concerned about me. They were blacks, Hispanics and Asians. Is everything alright, son? The way they said “son” was friendly, not condescending like the Essex Fells cop. Did you get off at the wrong stop? Eventually, I realized why they were concerned. Less than 3% of Flatbush residents were white, and they weren’t riding the subway that day. I must have looked lost to the locals. Ironically, the more strangers worried about me, the safer I felt.
Most people everywhere are decent and well meaning. John Calvin would have called them civilly righteous. As our society is shaken by protests, unrest and vandalism, we all need to remember this. The vast majority of black people are not criminals. And the vast majority of police officers are not racists. The vast majority of whites are not racists. Using stereotypes as short-cuts is less work than getting to know each other as individuals. But we must put in the effort.
When you take the time to know people, the diversity may surprise you. I have had a black co-worker confide in me that he plans to vote for Trump. But he asked me not to tell anyone. I have met Jamaicans who don’t consider themselves “black,” Mexicans who hate tortillas, and Polish people who love Puerto Rican music. I have talked with “African Israelites” who were certain that I was a white demon. But I have worked with “Black Muslims” who used the same rhetoric, yet treated me with great kindness and respect. One of my supervisors became so comfortable with me that he would openly share how he would use his “black card” to get special consideration on the job. I guess he thought I
shared his view. But I was as embarrassed to be included in his circle as when white people assumed I shared their racism.
We need more discussion and openness; less tribalism and fear. We need to remember that we are all made in God’s image. And we need to think about history and politics from a Christian perspective. The party of slave owners and Jim Crow now accuses the party of Lincoln of being racist. They say there was a “Great Switch,” when the racists swapped
loyalties in the 1960s. Democrats are calling for the destruction of the statues of famous Democrats.
In defense of the GOP, it has always been the party of liberty and self-reliance. If Republicans today don’t support affirmative action and reparations, it is most likely because they see people as capable individuals who don’t need help. Also, it is no small fact that over 600,000 northerners died in the Civil War that ended slavery. No Republican ever owned a slave. [An internet search found that a total of ten prominent early Republicans owned slaves. See https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/07/11/politifact_rates_elder_false_on_democrats_and_slave
ry_but_elder_was_right_140756.html – ed.] Can Yankees be blamed if they think their ancestral debt to our African brothers has been paid?
The Democrats, on the other hand, have been the party of collectivism and control. As many black conservatives lament, the welfare ghetto might be just a new plantation. Abortion clinics target black neighborhoods. Since the days of Margaret Sanger, “Progressives” seem to think: if you can’t enslave them, maybe you can abort them. On the other hand, I personally know some closeted racists in the GOP. If we can’t hold them down, at least don’t give them special treatment. It isn’t implausible that some of these people were once Democrats.
As Covenanters, our loyalty is to King Jesus. We cannot give total allegiance to anyone else. We owe a debt of brotherly love to each of our fellow men and women. Love requires the humility to admit that we may not know what other people have experienced. Love means patience to listen and get to know others as individuals. And love means boldness to share the gospel with all of our neighbors. Melanin is, quite literally, only skin deep. Sin goes to the very core of each of us, and our Savior is the only answer. May he give us peace with God through his cross, and peace in our streets.
-- Scott Rocca
Questions I Have Been Asked Recently: Sin, Salvation, Bible Reading
1. Sometimes when I commit a sin, I confess it to God over and over again, but the guilt feelings don’t go away. What’s wrong?
The heart of God’s forgiveness is not in our confession of sin, but in what Jesus did for us. His Word promises that if we confess our sin, God is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness (I John 1:9). The promise is based on the perfect, finished, and complete birth, life, death, resurrection, and present reign of Christ, that will culminate in his coming for us. God never lies. If he says, “I forgive you,” then he forgives you. He says if you confess your sins, he will forgive you. He will and he does. That is what matters, his forgiveness. When guilt feelings remain, remind yourself that God always tells us the truth, and your feelings will follow the truth. Don’t confess over and over because that says to God, “I don’t really believe that you forgave me the first time.” Confess to God once, and let it go at that. For Christ’s sake, God has forgiven you.
2. I know I am supposed to read the Bible, but sometimes I get so busy that I don’t get to it. Then I fall behind. What should I do? Catching up is such a burden.
Oddly enough, there is no command from God to read the Bible. God tells us to remember it, to think about it, to obey it, but not to read it. It’s a good thing that there is no command to read the Bible because throughout history many of God’s people could not read at all, and even one book of the Bible was very expensive. Even when printing appeared, a Bible was a very large and expensive book, more than most families could afford.
Certainly, it is good to read God’s Word if you can read and have a Bible in your own language. What a blessing! However, if you fall behind in your self-appointed determination to read a certain amount of the Bible every day, don’t worry. You are not breaking a divine command. Just pick up where you left off and go on reading.
3. Sometimes I imagine saying or doing horrible things, and I can’t stop thinking about them. What should I do?
Having thoughts go round and round in your head can be quite disturbing. It is a kind of what psychologists call “obsessive compulsive” behavior, sort of like washing your hands every five minutes or walking on a sidewalk and being deathly afraid of stepping on a crack.
When this happens in your thoughts, talk to yourself. “Do I want to say this thing that I am imagining saying?” If the answer is no, then say to yourself, “So since I do not want to say this thing, the idea of saying it is nothing more than a temptation. I’ll just go on saying 'No' to the idea of saying it.” If you are imagining doing something awful, but don’t want to do it or intend to do it, again: it is a temptation to which you are, in fact, saying no. Unfortunately, in this world of sin and woe, we often face the same temptation more than once. Potiphar’s wife did not take no for an answer from Joseph either the first or the second or the third time (Genesis 39:7-10). It is sometimes the same with our thoughts. But if you imagine saying or doing something wrong and don’t want to do it, remember that being tempted to do or say something wrong is not a sin. Jesus was tempted, but he never sinned. If you do not say or do the awful thing your thoughts imagine, and say no to those thoughts, then you are not sinning and do not really have to worry, even if the tempting thought returns.
4. At the end of the day when I pray and confess my sins, I can’t remember every sin to confess. What should I do about that?
Nothing. No one ever tried harder to confess every sin precisely than the monk Martin Luther. He wore out his confessor at the Augustine Monastery in Wittenberg. He took hours and couldn’t do it. Our memories are not constructed to remember every last word and thought we had each day. Thank goodness. We would soon be drowning in its archives. When should we confess a specific sin? When the Holy Spirit brings it to mind, whether directly or by someone else rebuking us (see John 16:8). Then is the time to confess and repent (see John 16:8, II Samuel 12:7). But since Christ has forgiven us all of our sins, we do not need to fear that if we end the day with some sin we have not confessed to God, he will not forgive us that sin.
5. What is the unforgivable sin that Jesus talks about?
Anyone worried about committing the unforgivable sin has not committed it! Jesus warned the Pharisees who were attributing the work of the Holy Spirit to the devil that they were in danger of committing the unforgivable sin (Matthew 12:22-32). The Pharisees were not worried. They should have been.
6. I am bothered by the question, “Am I really saved? What should I do about that?”
There are many sources for that question. One version is, “Am I really among God’s elect? Did God predestine me to be saved?” God actually forbids you to ask that question. His eternal decrees are among the secret things that belong to him (Deuteronomy 29:29). A second version is, “Have I done enough good works?” “Have I had enough of the right
spiritual experience?” “Do I believe the precisely correct doctrine?” The truthful answer to all three of these questions is always no. These three questions all direct your gaze away from the Savior to yourself. Don’t ask them. A third version is, “Do I really believe?” The problem with this question is in the word “really.” How is one to know that he really believes? Again, this question directs our attention away from the Lord to something in ourselves.
This third question tormented me when I was about sixteen. The answer came as I read Romans 10. It was verse 9. “If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.” I thought, “Yes, I confess that Jesus is Lord, and yes, I believe that God raised him from the dead, so to doubt the rest of that verse means that I am implicitly calling God a liar. If he says I am saved, who am I to doubt his word? I’m saved.” Later, I found that the same idea appears elsewhere in Scripture. I just hadn’t noticed it. For example, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved (Acts 2:21, Romans 10:13). Have you called on the name of the Lord? Then he has saved you, is saving you, and will save you. We should take God at his word like little children. He says if you call on him, he will save you. Period. Hallelujah!
-- Bill Edgar
Songs of Ascents In Time of Quarantine: Salvation: Past
"When the LORD brought back the captivity of Zion, we were like those who dream.
Then our mouth was filled with laughter, and our tongue with singing.
Then they said among the nations, 'The LORD has done great things for them.'
The LORD has done great things for us, and we are glad."
-- Psalm 126: 1-3, NKJV
The psalmist begins his praise be remembering past grace. He brings to mind some great, past deliverance that the Lord accomplished for his people.
“When the LORD brought back the captivity of Zion.”
The LORD acted. He rent the heavens and came down and rescued. And as the psalmist remembers the moment, how does he describe the response of the church? He describes it as a dream-like state of pure, child-like wonder and exuberance. “We were like those who dream. Then our mouth was filled with laughter, and our tongue with singing.” Have you ever turned to someone in a moment of unexpected joy, “Are we dreaming?” The first reaction of the church to the saving grace of their God is a certain measure of incredulity. They are turning to one another, “Are we dreaming? Is this too good to be true?”
But as the truth and reality of God’s deliverance set in, that stunned incredulity turned to joyful laughter. Every now and again it strikes me how much my children laugh, and how easily. They can whip each other into the most wonderful laughing fits over the simplest, silliest things. Everything is still so new for them that newness and joy are always near at
hand, a quality we tend to lose as we grow older. But the surprise of grace makes us children again. Because all of a sudden, everything is new once again, illuminated by the Light of the world. Joy and life are near at hand because God who is Joy and Life has drawn near. The Incarnate Word has become Life-giving Spirit (1 Corinthians 15:45).
In John chapter 6, after the feeding of the five thousand, remember the question that the crowd asked Jesus, “What shall we do, that we may work the works of God (John 6:28)?” This question arose in response to Jesus’ placing his divine finger on their unbelief: “Most assuredly, I say to you, you seek me, not because you saw the signs, but because you ate of
the loaves and were filled. Do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to everlasting life, which the Son of Man will give you, because God the Father has set his seal on him (John 6:26-27).” “This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent (John 6:29).” Jesus tells the crowds how to labor for the food that endures to everlasting life: believe in me, the Son of Man. It’s not works, or experiences, or credentials – it’s faith! Believe in me as the one sent by the Father, the one on whom the Father has set his seal.
How should those crowds have responded to Jesus’ declaration? They should have turned to one another and said, “Are we dreaming?” “Are we dreaming that the gift of everlasting life could be this free, this utterly gracious?” They should have responded with child-like laughter and song. Instead, they hardened their hearts even more, “What sign will you perform then, that we may see it and believe you (John 6:30).” May we never so wickedly harden our hearts!
We live in a society that goes to extraordinary lengths to manufacture joy and gladness, billions upon billions in entertainment and leisure and travel and recreation and pleasure. But every dollar spent is only a temporary fix to our gloom, a temporary salve for the gnawing, inescapable emptiness of a life lived in alienation from God and in rebellion against him.
The joy and the laughter of the saints, however, does not belong to time, but to eternity. We cannot manufacture it, we can only receive it, freely given by God. It is the joy of salvation, the soul’s consciousness of reconciliation with God, the joy of the prodigal son come home.
Remember the prodigal son (Luke 15). What happened when he was in the far country? No one gave him anything. No one cared. Having wasted his inheritance in sinful indulgence, he had become completely jaded. And on his way home to his father, what is the best that he thinks he can hope for? “Father, make me as one of the hired servants.” But then he comes round that last corner and his father sees him. And runs to him. And embraces him and kisses him. And celebrates.
That is our Father. And we are not dreaming. In fact, when we “awake” in death, we will find that the joys of salvation were even more real and true than we had ever experienced in this life.
When the mouth of the church is filled with laughter and singing, the world takes notice. “Then they said among the nations, ‘The LORD has done great things for them (Psalm 126:2b).’” The song and laughter of the church has the aroma of eternal life. It shouts to the world that here—here in Christ—is to be found every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places.
"The LORD has done great things for us, and we are glad" (Psalm 126:3).
"Blessed is every one who fears the LORD, Who walks in His ways" (Psalm 128:1).
-- Alex Tabaka
Broomall, 2020
Abominable Scales
"A false balance is an abomination to the LORD,
but a just weight is his delight."
-- Proverbs 11:1
Where money is at issue, conscience sleeps, repeating the mantra, “Business is business,” or perhaps saying, “Buyer, beware.” Twice, months apart, the same gentlemanly old clerk quoted me a too-high sum for four boxes of meat. Each time I said, “That’s not correct,” and twice, untroubled, he quickly said the right number. I overheard a high school student boasting how he siphoned money from the cash register, concluding, “It’s not wrong if you don’t get caught.” “Men make light of such frauds, and think there is no sin in that which there is money to be got by, and, while it passes undiscovered, they cannot blame themselves for it; a blot is no blot until it is hit, Hos. xii. 7-8. (Matthew Henry).”
In Solomon’s day, merchants used a balance, or scales, to buy and sell. To picture a balance, think of Lady Justice, who appears three places in the U.S. Supreme Court building. She holds a sword in her left hand to make criminals afraid, and a balance in her right hand to show impartiality. Cheaters make their scales partial, by using a scale with a bent crossbow, or putting a thumb on one pan of the scale, or using two sets of weights, in the ancient world flat-bottomed stones carved into figures like ducks, or lions, or turtles. A dishonest merchant could carry two sets of these stones in his pouch, a heavy set for buying, and a light set for selling.
This proverb warns us: in business too, God sees and judges, and he hates a false balance in the worst way. It is an abomination to him. Only fools provoke God by cheating neighbors, employers, employees, or customers, but in our foolish world people from rich to poor do just that. Employees lie about hours worked, and companies sell things they know will harm their customers.
When the wise man does business, however, he knows that God delights in a just weight. That is, weights that are properly calibrated according to his culture's accepted standard (ex: the sanctuary shekel, Exodus 30:13; or today the International Bureau of Weights and Measures). Paul teaches that God will see and reward honesty, telling slaves to serve their masters with a good will, “as to the Lord and not to man, knowing that whatever good anyone does, this he will receive back from the Lord (Ephesians 6:7-8, see Matthew 6:1-16).” But the fool says in his heart, “There is no God,” so he uses false weights without fear that God will see and remember (Psalm 14:1).
The wise man lives by faith, trusting God, not his own chicanery, for daily bread. The just man lives by faith, trusting God to uphold what is right, in the marketplace too. God’s adopted sons and daughters live by faith, knowing that the cattle on a thousand hills belong to their Father in heaven. There is no need, ever, to use a false balance; none at all.
-- Bill Edgar
Would You Like to Support this Effort?
While we don't (yet!) ask for subscriptions, we warmly welcome contributions to help keep us in print and online here. Only our faithful, uncomplaining layout specialist receives any payment for her work. The authors and editors work for the joy of sharing the Good News. If you enjoy our efforts and want to keep us chugging along, please mail your gift to A Little Strength, 901 Cypress Avenue, Elkins Park PA 19027 (checks should be made out to "Elkins Park RP Church" with "A Little Strength" on the memo line), or click donate.
Authors in this Issue
Adam & Lisa Edgar are members of Broomall RPC (Philadelphia). Adam is a new deacon there.
Bill Edgar is a retired pastor of Broomall RPC (Philadelphia) and is currently working on the sequel to his History of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America 1871-1920.
John Edgar is the pastor of Elkins Park RPC (Philadelphia).
Hunter Jackson is a student under care of Atlantic Presbytery and is studying at Westminster Theological Seminary. He is currently serving as pastoral intern at Elkins Park RP Church.
Remo Robb (1899-1957) was born in Canton, China to RP missionaries, became an American RP pastor, and served as Synod's Home Missions Secretary.
Scott Rocca is a member of Hazleton RPC.
Alex Tabaka is the pastor of Broomall RPC (Philadelphia).