Coronavirus and the Worship of America

The Coronavirus pandemic has certainly impacted our national life in many ways. Some of the effects have been more obvious and direct than others. I believe one of the indirect effects has been to show us something about our own national religion. Of course, we don’t have a “national religion,” not officially anyway. Nevertheless, people are worshipping creatures. We were made to worship God, and in sinful rejection of the true God, we turn to false gods and false worship. Idolatry, of one form or another, marks the whole history of mankind since the fall. Every human being either serves and worships the creature or serves and worships the Creator. While there’s much that could be said about idolatry in modern America, this pandemic has exposed, more clearly, a common form of idolatry that fills the land. It is a sort of syncretistic blend of statism and something we might call “scientism”.

Idols, of course, are God-substitutes. One of the fundamental elements in the true worship of God is trust in God. To worship God rightly is to place our ultimate trust and hope in God in all circumstances. We must look to Him, not only as our ultimate good, but as our ultimate and true source of security and peace, of blessedness and hope. God, alone, is worthy of our highest trust and confidence. He, alone, has perfect wisdom and knowledge. He, alone, is sovereign over all things and unlimited in His power to save. When man worships an idol, the trust and hope that belongs only to God is transferred to this God-substitute. The idol – the creature – becomes the illegitimate object of the faith and hope that belongs to God alone. In other words, when there’s a real crisis that threatens what we most cherish, whatever we turn to, trust in and place our ultimate hope in for salvation, that’s an object of our worship. If that object of worship is not God, it’s an idol.

              When the novel Coronavirus came along it presented an ominous threat to our health and our lives. Especially in the early days of this outbreak, we knew very little about the virus and its characteristics. We were suddenly facing an unknown, unseen enemy. How was the virus spread? Was it extremely contagious? How deadly was it? How could we protect ourselves? In such a situation, we tend to feel vulnerable and powerless. We are confronted with the stark reality of our creaturely finiteness. How little we really have control over! How little we really know and manage in God’s vast creation! Yet our national, cultural response, overall, was to turn to the experts and authorities. Surely, they would have answers. Surely, they would know what to do. We turned to science expecting definitive, authoritative answers to our questions and uncertainty. We, likewise, looked to government authorities to “do something.” In essence, we have turned to science as the source of nearly infallible knowledge and wisdom and to the government as the ultimate source of power to use that knowledge for our salvation – that is, for the salvation of our earthly lives and existence.

              Such a response is not out of character for a society that has become increasingly secular and humanistic in outlook. Having rejected God, the Creator, and His revelation, we turn to the finite creature. In the secular worldview that seems to dominate our culture today, human inquiry, in the form of scientific research and theory, is viewed as the ultimate source of knowledge. What we can “know” as “fact” is the knowledge that we can gain from scientific studies and the interpretations of such studies given by those who are deemed to be “the experts.” The essence of wisdom is to “follow the data” – “follow the facts.” On the other hand, the highest level of power and authority to effect change and make positive use of our scientific knowledge is viewed as government authority. In a humanistic worldview that sets aside the truth of God and the Creator-creature distinction, science embodies the ultimate source of knowledge and wisdom. Government embodies the collective power of humanity to effect our own salvation. In essence, we’ve substituted science for God’s omniscience and government for God’s sovereignty and omnipotence.

              This does not mean we should be opposed to either science or government. Both are good and useful within their own sphere of operation, but with limitations. God, Himself, ordained human government as a minister for good, to serve His good and merciful purpose in the world. God has also provided us with a wealth of useful knowledge through the progress of science. By means of common grace, humanity has amassed a wealth of knowledge that has led to lengthened life, greater quality of life and many other beneficial uses. The institution of government provides for a greater degree of justice, peace and order in the world. However, neither are sovereign or absolute in and of themselves. They are limited by human frailty and by God’s ordained purposes. Man’s knowledge is always finite and secondary. The rightful authority of government is just that which God has assigned it. The power of governmental authority is limited to its God-ordained sphere and purpose. It is not a power to save. As the object of man’s hope for salvation, from Coronavirus or a multitude of other tragedies, it will prove a huge disappointment.

              To have a right view and expectation of the power of government or the scientific community or any other human institution, we must confess, readily, our own finiteness and limitation as human beings. We must understand that the work of science and governance take place in a world that is ruled by a sovereign God. He, alone, possesses perfect knowledge. He, alone, is the source of all authority. He, alone, has infinite and supreme power and authority. He, alone, is the source of life and salvation. All human activity is designed to function under the sovereignty of God, and we are ultimately dependent upon God for knowledge, for law and order, for life itself.

              But, in refusal to acknowledge our own weakness and dependence upon God, our secular society has turned to mere human authority, power and wisdom in the hope of being saved from that which appears to be threatening and uncontrollable. So, we’ve experienced a situation in which millions have sacrificed (willingly or unwillingly) personal freedom, livelihoods, interaction with families and friends and more. We are expected to accept, without question or doubt, whatever dictates come from our governing authorities, based on “the latest data,” on the assumption that this is our best, collective hope to avoid catastrophe and save our life as we know it.

              As is always the case with idolatry, however, the gods of the western world have proven themselves weak and pathetic substitutes for the Living God. The advice given by experts (who, no doubt are doing their best) has changed as the available data has changed. Studies provide inconclusive and often conflicting information. Officials have used their authority in ways that have often appeared arbitrary and selective. In some cases, decisions made early on proved to be tragic mistakes. The national economy has been damaged, possibly beyond repair. For all this, we have not really been “saved” from Coronavirus, although, admittedly, some of the effects may have been avoided, at least temporarily.

              In such a time of crisis, when much of the world looks to its idols for salvation and help, there is great opportunity for our testimony to the truth of the gospel. In such a time the antithesis between the Christian worldview and that of the unbelieving world should stand out in stark relief. First of all, we see this antithesis with regard to what is most valued. For the unbeliever, and particularly in today’s secularized culture, life in this world is of ultimate value. To be “saved” is to be preserved from physical death – to have life extended for a longer time. COVID-19 presents such a terrifying threat, because it threatens death.

              The Christian has a different outlook on death. Indeed, death is the great enemy, but not because it is merely the destruction of life in this world. Death is the great threat and enemy because death is the curse and punishment of sin. Sin stands behind the specter of death. Sin is the ultimate evil, the ultimate tragedy and the ultimate threat to life, peace, joy and happiness. For the Christian, with a biblical worldview, life in this earth is not our highest and greatest good. God is our greatest good. Life in the presence of God, with His favor and blessing, is our greatest treasure.

              Salvation, then, for the believer, is salvation from sin. It is not just an extension of life in this world. It is the removal of sin – the disarming of death, in its true power, to separate us from God, who is our ultimate joy and good. This, God, alone, has accomplished in the Lord Jesus Christ. COVID-19, while it should concern us, especially in the interests of our fellow-man, cannot present the ultimate threat for us. Nor can any human effort or institution provide us with real security. After all, everyone who does not contract this Coronavirus will still, some day, die. Our security and hope of salvation is found in Christ, alone.

              As Christians, we can, and should, acknowledge and benefit from the legitimate use of science and medical research. We acknowledge the goodness and usefulness of human government as the ordination of God for His purpose. However, we also recognize both these human institutions, like all of creation, as functioning in a world where God, alone, reigns supreme. We should be ready to face COVID-19 and every other form of danger in this world with a calm, settled and sanctified confidence in the Lord God who, alone, is salvation.

The Comfort of the Shepherd for God’s People

Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me… (Psalm 23:4, ESV)

Psalm 23 is one of the most loved of the Psalms and has long been a source of comfort and encouragement for God’s people in times of sorrow and uncertainty. This Psalm is an expression of confident trust in the Lord as protector and provider in all circumstances. It begins with the confident assertion, “The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want.” The Psalm then unfolds this statement in the imagery that follows. It opens up to an idyllic pastoral scene, with green pastures and still waters. There’s a picture of abundant provision and peaceful security under the sovereign and loving guidance of the Lord as the Shepherd/King of His people.

At verse 4, there is an abrupt change of scene. We go from the peaceful, security of the green pasture and the quiet, still waters to a place of danger and uncertainty. The Psalmist describes walking through the valley of the shadow or death or, “The valley of deep darkness.” Here, in contrast to the seeming carefree experience of the first 3 verses, there is danger about. The valley of deep darkness implies that enemies are near. This is also implied in the mention of the rod and staff, which are a source of comfort, because the shepherd is well-equipped to fend off and defeat any potential attackers in the darkness.

This is surely an apt metaphor for our experiences in life. We have times of relative peace and security when all seems, at least, “normal.” Then, there are the experiences of the dark valley – the shadow of death, when dangers abound, and we are surrounded by uncertainty. There’s suddenly cause for fear, while the darkness seems to close in about us. That’s a fair description of the present time, while our world is engulfed in a pandemic, a new strain of disease that even the top experts don’t fully understand. There’s an atmosphere of unease and uncertainty. There’s a darkness of uncertainty concerning our health and well-being, even as we have heard the stories from places where hospitals have been overrun and medical facilities are lacking. Meanwhile, we hear, daily, the grim new death toll from COVID-19. There’s a dark shroud of uncertainty over the future and our economic security as well. This is surely one of those times when we are found in the dark valley, under the shadow of death.

However, even in the darkest valley, the Psalmist can express confidence – “I will fear no evil,” because of the Lord’s abiding presence – “for you are with me.” The Lord’s presence as the source of all security is really the key theme that runs throughout this Psalm. Indeed, it is the promise of the Lord’s presence that has been a source of comfort and encouragement throughout the experience of God’s people. Repeatedly, the Lord’s Word of assurance came to the patriarchs saying, “I am with you” (Gen. 26:3, 24; 28:15; 31:3). To the frightened and hesitant messenger, Moses, the Lord said, “But I will be with you…” (Exo. 3:12). The promise comes to Moses again, later, on behalf of all Israel, “And he said, “My presence will go with you, and I will give you rest.” (Exodus 33:14, ESV) The promise is passed on to Joshua as well, “As I was with Moses, so I will be with you.” (Joshua 1:5) The same kind of reassurance is given to God’s people through the prophets, even as they must pass through the dark valley of God’s chastening judgment of exile. For example, in Isaiah 43, the Lord sets for this encouragement, “When you through the waters, I will be with you…Fear not for I am with you….” (Isa. 43:3, 5)

The assurance and comfort offered to God’s people throughout the ages has not been that we may avoid the valley of the shadow of death, but, rather, it is the promise and reality of the Lord’s presence even in the valley. When, from a merely human standpoint, there is every reason to fear, God’s people need not fear, for our Shepherd/King is ever present to protect and preserve and to guide. This promise of God’s presence with His people, which runs throughout the Scriptures, culminates in the Lord Jesus Christ, Emmanuel, God with us. What was true for God’s people in the Old Testament is even more clearly set before us, as we live in the light of Christ’s coming, His life, death and resurrection. Christ is ever present as the Great Shepherd of His people. He is the Lord and the Shepherd of His people, pictured in Psalm 23 and elsewhere in the Old Testament (cf. Ezek. 34). As the Good Shepherd, Jesus has laid down His life for His sheep. He has, in fact, traversed the deepest darkness, the darkness of death under the curse and wrath of God on behalf of His people. By His sacrificial death on the cross, Jesus descended into the dark valley of death all alone, so that we, His redeemed people, the sheep of His pasture, will never have to traverse the darkness alone and forsaken.

This means, beloved, that we, as believers in Christ, can have a peace and security in the midst of this darkness and uncertainty that the world does not know. With the Psalmist, we can say, “Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me…” (Psalm 23:4, ESV) Even when we come, as we must, to the experience of death itself, and prepare to cross that dark valley, we need not fear. In the Lord Jesus Christ, God has come near. God is with us and for us. In the deepest darkness, He keeps and protects us from the real harm, the curse of sin. So, whatever may come, from coronavirus or any other earthly “darkness,” rest assured, your Shepherd is with you, and His presence is your security and peace.

A Christian Response to Crisis

Fear is a powerful thing. Since the day that Adam heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden and was afraid, fear has been a common part of the human experience. In the last day, men will, again, cower in abject terror, unable to escape from the presence of God and the wrath of the Lamb. In between, man’s existence is often marked by fear, and it sometimes drives people to do things they wouldn’t think of doing in normal circumstances.

Today, fear fills the air. We’re living in a moment of national crisis. As the coronavirus outbreak progresses, we see our government taking unprecedented steps to try and slow the spread of the disease. Our daily routine has suddenly and unexpectedly ground to a halt. How should Christians respond to such a time of crisis? What should we be thinking and doing in contrast to the rest of the world? I’d like to suggest 4 specific things that ought to characterize our attitudes and responses as Christians to this or any other occasion of crisis and fear.

Faith in place of Fear

Fear is one effect of the fall, a consequence of sin, guilt and alienation from God. Cut off from the true knowledge of God and living fellowship with Him, man’s experience of the world suddenly becomes one of blank uncertainty. The more that man refuses to acknowledge the absolute sovereignty of God over all creation, including himself, the more his view of reality is one of chaos, blind chance and uncertainty. Fear, itself, is part of the judgment of God upon sin, and, as the writer to the Hebrews notes, fallen man is subject to lifelong slavery through the fear of death (Heb. 2:15).

It’s normal, in some sense, that the response of the unbeliever to something like a global pandemic will be fear. The sources of fear and anxiety are several. There’s the general fear of the unknown, as this is a new virus we really don’t know much about. There’s fear of the indirect fallout from the current crisis. What will happen to the economy, our savings, our way of life? But, ultimately, there is the fear of death. Any such dangerous virus represents the reality and certainty of death, and death is a fearsome prospect outside of Christ. The unbeliever inherently knows that there is an accounting – a judgment to follow. The presence of a holy God is a terror in this life, but a terror multiplied a thousand times over in the world to come. Indeed, the unbeliever has every cause to be afraid. But not so the believer in Christ. In fact, one of the most oft repeated commands in the Scriptures, directed toward God’s people, is some form of the command, “Do not fear.” Fear must be replaced by faith in the Sovereignty of God and the promises of His Word directed to those who are reconciled to God by faith in Jesus Christ.

Christians need not live in fear of the unknown, because we know the God who is the Creator and Sovereign over all reality. He has a comprehensive purpose and plan for all creation. We know that nothing takes place that falls outside this purpose. What is unknown to us is perfectly known to Him, for He planned it and order it according to His perfect will. The course of the world is not directed by blind chance but by the Sovereign and eternal God. All things, including viruses, fall within the scope of the plan, which He has decreed from before the foundation of the world.

Neither do we need to fear the threat of death, because the real cause for fear has been removed through the death and resurrection of Christ. The Psalmist writes: “For he will deliver you from the snare of the fowler and from the deadly pestilence… You will not fear the terror of the night, nor the arrow that flies by day, nor the pestilence that stalks in darkness, nor the destruction that wastes at noonday (Psalm 91:3, 5-6, ESV). There is no Scripture promise to the effect that Christians are exempt from coronavirus or any other form of suffering and evil in this world. There is no certainty that you won’t get coronavirus or, even, that you may die from it. But the real cause of fear, the fear of death, is rooted in the fact that death is the judgment of God upon sin, and, for the believer in Christ, that judgment has been absorbed and exhausted in the Lord Jesus Christ. The wrath of God has been removed. The curse of the law has been undone and the sting of death has been taken away. So, the Apostle Paul can state with confidence, “’O death, where is your victory? O death, where is your sting?’ The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Corinthians 15:55–57, ESV).

So, first and foremost, the attitude of the Christian in the midst of crisis should be one of faith and not fear – faith in the Sovereignty and purpose of God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ as the source of eternal life and security. Even in the face of death itself, there is every reason to be at peace, knowing that our true life is hidden with Christ in God, that we have an eternal inheritance laid up for us in glory and that death cannot truly harm us. The admonition of Isaiah is quite relevant: “Do not call conspiracy all that this people calls conspiracy, and do not fear what they fear, nor be in dread. But the Lord of hosts, him you shall honor as holy. Let him be your fear, and let him be your dread. (Isaiah 8:12–13, ESV)

Repentance

In one sense, every occasion of natural disaster, disease or other crisis is a call to repentance. When God sends us disaster or pestilence, there is an element of judgment in this. It may be a specific judgment for specific national sins. On the other hand, at the least, the evils of this world, in general, are part of the overall judgment of God upon sinful humanity. We, as Christ’s church in this world, experience these evils and trials along with the world.

Recognizing that we are sinners and deserving of God’s judgment and wrath and that, even as Christians, we continue to commit sins that bring God’s chastening judgment upon us, this is a good time for self-examination. At times like this, we ought to seek the Lord through His Word and prayer. We ought to be considering questions like, “How are we complicit in the sins of the nation that bring judgment? Have we been diligent in our prayers for our nation, for its leader and for those around us who are walking in darkness? Have we trusted too much in man for our security rather than putting our hope in God alone? Have we become enamored with the world and all that it offers?”

When God sent pestilence on Israel in the days of David (1Chronicles 21), it was a result of David’s sin, and it called for repentance and confession. When God sent the people in to exile because of their sins, Daniel turned to God in prayer with confession of the sins of the people and a free acknowledgement that their suffering and exile were the just judgment upon their disobedience and unfaithfulness.

When we experience something like this coronavirus pandemic, something which afflicts the church as well as the world, it’s a reminder of how much greater judgment our sins really deserve, and it should prompt us to repentance and confession of sin, seeking the mercy of God and renewing our faithfulness and devotion to Him.

Renewal in Hope

Disease, suffering and death; that’s what we ought to expect to see in this present, fallen world. Sin has thrown the whole of creation out of order. We are reminded, again, that every kind of sickness and disease, not just coronavirus, is the judgment of God upon sin. It also reminds us that our hope and security are not found in this present world. Indeed, nothing in this world really lasts. “And the world is passing away along with its desires, but whoever does the will of God abides forever” (1 John 2:17, ESV).

Any real “good” that we find in the present is not final and ultimate. Indeed, not to be misunderstood, there is much good in the world, for the believer. The Lord gives good gifts to His children. It is, in fact, only the believer in Christ who can truly “enjoy” the good gifts of God as they were intended – to be used to the glory of God, with thankfulness and submission to Him. However, these good gifts are not ultimate. They are markers, foretastes, that should point us beyond themselves to the giver. They should help to give us a taste for the ultimate joy and fulfillment to be found in the presence of God Himself.

Meanwhile, a crisis such as the coronavirus just serves to heighten our awareness that this present life is transient, as is the creation. Yet, this is not a cause of gloom and despair. Rather, it is an occasion to be renewed in our true hope, the hope of glory to come. As the Apostle Peter wrote, “But according to his promise we are waiting for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells (2 Peter 3:13, ESV). We have an inheritance in Christ and is “imperishable, undefiled and unfading.” This should be the source of our hope for the future. No matter what happens in the here and now, we can know, with certainty, that there is another world coming. There’s a day coming when there will be no more sickness, sorrow and death. The curse will be finally and full rolled back. Most importantly, sin, itself, will be banished from God’s world. Christ’s church will be completed and perfected and we will live and rejoice in the glorious light of His presence forever.

We should be reminded to hold on to things of this world lightly. We should be living and setting our priorities in a way that reflects where our real hope is found, storing up treasure in heaven. The response of the Christian to crisis should be a confident, hope-filled look toward the Lord Jesus Christ who is seated at the right hand of the Father and who will most certainly come again to renew this world and to bring His bride into His own heavenly glory forever.

Love and Service

None of this should be construed as escapism. Too often, the immediate response of Christians to a crisis is to assume it’s a “sign” that Jesus is coming soon (of course, He may come soon) and we’re about to “escape” from this world. One of the problems with this thinking is that it tends toward disengaging from the needs and hurts of the world around us.

While a deadly new virus is a cause for fear and isolation for many, for believers, it presents an opportunity for ministry to others. There are practical needs around us, and people who are hurting and fearful, who need the hope of the gospel. I fear that our default response may be to “look to ourselves” – to close ourselves off and make sure that we and ours are protected. Now, in the current situation, isolation from others may be one of the prudent ways to actually show love, ironically. Yet, where there are opportunities for us to serve others in need and to bring the hope of the gospel to our world, we ought to buy up these opportunities. Our priority should be the glory and service of our King, Jesus Christ, over and above our own personal safety and comfort. In other words, the first question for the believer, in such times of danger and crisis, should not be, “How can I stay safe?” but, rather, “How can I do the will of God and serve the Lord Jesus Christ by serving others in need?” Whatever this looks like in any given situation, the fact is, we needn’t make our person safety our number one priority. That’s because, in Christ, we are already “safe” from real harm. The very purpose of our lives is to serve Jesus. Again, this doesn’t mean we ought to be careless or take unnecessary risks. It really is, I believe, a mindset that we need to adopt – that our highest purpose is the glory and service of Christ at any cost. It’s an attitude reflected in Paul’s admonition to the Philippians, an attitude we ought to have at all times: Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves. Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others. (Philippians 2:3–4, ESV)

The response of the Christian to times of crisis and danger should be characterized by an unshaken faith in God that drives out fear, by an attitude of repentance and confession, by a hopeful outlook and by a desire to serve others, sacrificially, for the glory of the Lord Jesus Christ.

What’s Wrong with the Altar Call?

If you were to visit Hope Presbyterian Church (where I serve as teaching elder) and were very unfamiliar with Presbyterian and reformed practice, you might think something was conspicuously missing from our worship service – the altar call or invitation at the end of the preaching. While perhaps waning somewhat in popularity, for various reasons, the altar call is still a regular practice of many churches, particularly in some Baptist and independent Bible churches. The practice is closely associated with mass evangelism events, like those conducted by Billy Graham and, now his son Franklin and others. In some churches, it features so prominently that a Sunday service without an altar call would be considered incomplete. I was a guest preacher at a southern Baptist church once where, when I failed to perform the desired altar call at the end of the service, a deacon came up to the front of the church to invite folks to come forward to accept Christ. I guess he felt compelled to make up for my unfaithfulness in the ministry to the church! While I respect the motives and sincerity of my brethren who make use of this method, I find it problematic for several reasons. I think the practice, itself, is unbiblical and unhelpful. More importantly, it reflects a deeply flawed understanding of the gospel of grace and how sinners are saved.

The term “altar call” refers, narrowly, to the practice of inviting people to respond to the gospel message by “coming forward” to the front of the church or auditorium to “accept Christ” or to “rededicate your life to the Lord.” More broadly, we could include similar types of responses such as standing in place or raising a hand to indicate one’s decision to accept Christ. While many of us have childhood memories of the altar call as a regular part of our church experience, it is a relatively recent innovation in the practice of the church. It was developed and popularized by Charles Finney in the 1800’s. Finney’s theology was problematic at best. He denied the depravity of man and the substitutionary nature of Christ’s atonement. He believed that salvation was a matter of convincing man to exercise his free will in favor of God. Man could be saved simply as a matter of his own choice, using the means God provided in the gospel. Finney’s theology led him to develop the “new measures” for preaching and bringing sinners to conversion. He felt that whatever means could be effectively used to sway the sinner’s will and convince him or her to choose conversion should be used. This included the idea of the anxious bench, where Finney would invite sinners to come to receive prayer and decide for Christ. This practice was picked up and modified by later evangelists such as D.L. Moody and Billy Sunday. It is the backdrop for the altar call system we see practiced in the church today. This is not to say that everyone who utilizes the altar call/invitation system subscribes to the false doctrines Finney did. However, Finney’s broad influence is still felt in the evangelical church today, and the popularity of the invitation system is an evidence of that influence.

The Regulative Principle

              One question that immediately arises concerning the altar call is simply, “Is it really biblical?” In reformed churches, we seek to apply what we call the regulative principle. In short, this means that God can only be rightly worshiped in the way that He determines and reveals to us. We are not to attempt to worship God in any way not prescribed in the Scriptures. Under the new covenant, worship consists of the reading of Scripture; the preaching and hearing of God’s Word; singing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs; offering up prayers and the administration of the new covenant sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper. We do not find the altar call – a practice of calling sinners to come to the front or some other outward act as a response to the preaching – as an element of worship in Scripture. In fact, we simply don’t find it in the Scriptures or in the practice of the New Testament church at all.

Some have argued that the altar call is something deduced from the fact that New Testament preaching does call for a response. In other words, the gospel preaching of the New Testament included an “invitation” to respond to the message by believing in Christ. Furthermore, those who were responding could be identified in some way. After all, following the powerful sermon at Pentecost, 3,000 souls were added to the church. There must have been some way in which those who responded in faith were identified and added to the church. And, of course, there was. They were baptized. When Peter presented Christ to the crowd and they asked, “What should we do?” his response was not, “Come forward to receive Christ.” Rather, he said, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins.” The essence of the call is for an inward change – to repent and turn to Jesus in faith. In his preaching, Peter held forth Jesus as the Messiah and the all-sufficient Savior for guilty sinners. He called on people to believe that message and, believing, to turn from their sin and rebellion and trust in Christ alone for the forgiveness of their sins.

To the extent that Scripture includes a call for an external, visible act that demonstrates such inward faith, it is two-fold: confess Christ as Lord (Romans 10:9) and be baptized. For Peter’s audience, baptism would signify their cleansing and renewal by the grace of God and their entrance into the true covenant community by union with Christ. Baptism continues to serve the same function in the church today. Those who believe on the Lord Jesus receive baptism as a sign and seal of God’s covenant grace and a sign of entrance into Christ’ church. Scripture knows nothing of a special act of “coming forward” as a means of receiving Christ or formally professing Christ.

This is particularly problematic in the context of the mass evangelism crusade. Baptism is a sacrament committed to the church. In the context of the local church, those who come to faith in Jesus and openly confess Christ are to be baptized, if they have not received the sacrament of baptism already. Every truly Bible-believing church already practices baptism, although we may differ regarding the proper subjects and modes of baptism. There’s no need to “add” another procedure (another “sacrament?”) of coming forward, etc. But the evangelistic crusade event is simply not the church. Those responding to the message at such an event are not responding to the regular preaching of the gospel in the context of a local church, with a minister and elders who will continue to nurture and counsel as well as administer baptism and the Lord’s Supper. This is not necessarily disastrous though, especially as those who come forward will ordinarily be referred to a Bible-believing church for follow-up. However, it does highlight the irregular nature of such events where there is no immediate context for long-term discipleship in the Scriptures or the application of the biblical sacraments. God has committed the ministry of the Word and the sacraments to the church and appointed elders in local churches to oversee the work of ministry. Those who come to faith through the ministry of the organized, local church will naturally be in a place to receive baptism as the sign of entrance into the covenant community.

It is certainly proper and necessary that we call upon sinners to respond to the gospel. We should urge sinners to repent and to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, alone, as Lord and Savior. This does not require, nor does the Bible give us a pattern for, urging people to come forward or stand or raise their hand as some part of coming to Christ. The altar calls system seems to add an unbiblical element to the worship of the church and to the call of the gospel.

Method and Message

              I wish I had a nickel for every time I heard someone say something like, “It’s the message that’s important. The method doesn’t matter.” This rather pragmatic sentiment is often used to justify whatever methods the church might use to promote the gospel message and elicit “decisions” for Christ. There is some truth in this statement, in so far as there are many legitimate means and contexts for reaching people and bringing them within the sphere and influence of gospel witness and preaching. So, for example, an informal small group Bible study, one-on-one witness over a cup of coffee, street preaching and the regular ministry of preaching in the local church are all different “methods” of brining the lost into the hearing of the gospel. I have no argument with that. However, it’s another matter altogether to speak of using different “methods” to bring about salvation or to “get people saved” – to evoke faith and repentance in the sinner. In that sense, both message and method do matter, and when it comes to evangelism, our method reflects on the message we preach.

This is reflected in Paul’s teaching in 1Corinthians 1 and 2. Paul writes to a church that has become enamored with human wisdom and philosophy. This included the practice of impressive and eloquent oratory by the popular philosophers of the day. Paul contrasted such a method of speaking, which appealed to man’s pride, with his method of gospel proclamation. In 1:17, Paul writes, “For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.” (1 Cor. 1:17 ESV) Then, continuing in chapter 2 we read, “And I, when I came to you, brothers, did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God with lofty speech or wisdom. ² For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. ³ And I was with you in weakness and in fear and much trembling, ⁴ and my speech and my message were not in plausible words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, ⁵ so that your faith might not rest in the wisdom of men but in the power of God.” (1 Cor. 2:1-5 ESV)

Throughout this part of his letter to the Corinthians, Paul stressed the seeming “foolishness” of the gospel in two aspects. First, the message itself is foolishness in the sight of sinful man – a message that proclaims power and salvation through the humiliation and shame of the cross. Additionally, however, Paul is saying that the very proclamation of the gospel, preaching itself, was seemingly weak and foolish in the eyes of the world. The simple, straightforward and authoritative preaching of the gospel didn’t have the same attraction or subtly persuasive force that was heard in the lofty speech of the philosophers of the day. Of course, from one standpoint, it might appear like Paul would get more responses if he would use a more attractive tactic in his speaking and incorporate the so-called lofty speech and wisdom of the day to persuade others to become Christians. But Paul was confident in the simplicity of preaching Christ crucified, because he knew that the real power of salvation was not in human persuasion but in the supernatural work of the Holy Spirit. So, the very reason why Paul would not use the “plausible words of wisdom” was because God chooses to demonstrate His power through the preaching of the gospel. It was, “so that your faith might not rest in the wisdom of men but in the power of God.” After all, only the power of God can bring to life one who is dead in trespasses and sins. Salvation must be a work of God’s Spirit and power. It’s not a cooperative effort between God and man, as Paul states in 1:30: “And because of him you are in Christ Jesus…”

For Paul, the message and the method really were inseparable. The gospel of the crucified Christ, the power of God for salvation, requires a method of application that demonstrates the authority of the message and the real power for salvation, which is God alone. God ordained honest and simple preaching or “proclamation” of His Word as the means of working the miracle of regeneration in spiritually dead sinners and effectually calling them to repentance and faith in Christ. No man-devised “gimmick” or fleshly power of persuasion can substitute for the gracious, powerful, regenerating work of the Spirit of God.

With that in mind, the altar call system, with all its variants, is also a method that is inseparable from the message. The method, itself, communicates a part of the message, and despite the good intentions of many who use it, it is inextricably tied to the deeply errant view of the gospel and salvation that led to its development in the time of Finney. Remember that Finney believed that salvation was a matter of man’s decision. He believed that every man had the ability to choose his own salvation and that what was needed to get more people saved were methods that would work on the will and cause people to choose for God and Christ. But the Scriptures teach us that man is totally corrupted by sin, in a state of spiritual death and unable to will obedience, repentance or faith toward God. His will is depraved and in bondage to sin and what is needed is not a persuasive method to push him to make a better decision. What is needed is a supernatural work of God’s Spirit, a resurrection from the dead!

This spiritual resurrection is also called regeneration, effectual calling or new birth. This miraculous, life-giving work of God’s Spirit is necessary in order for a person to obey the call of the gospel by repentance and faith in Christ. However, and owing largely to the lasting legacy of Charles Finney, there is much confusion and error in the modern church of the nature of the new birth and how it’s related to faith. Many believe and teach that the new birth is the result of faith or “a decision for Christ.” An example (just one of many, so not singling out one group here) is found in the statement of faith for the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association where we read, “repentance of sin and faith in Jesus Christ results in regeneration by the Holy Spirit.” (https://billygraham.org/about/what-we-believe/, accessed 3/26/19) Yet, the exact converse is true. Regeneration results in repentance of sin and faith in Jesus Christ.

We do not preach to men and women who have a propensity to sin and disbelieve the gospel but, under the right circumstances, could be persuaded otherwise. We preach the gospel to people who are dead in sin. Like Ezekiel, in the vision recorded in Ezekiel 37, we are told to preach to dead corpses, which can only come to spiritual life if/when the Spirit of God breathes life into them! To paraphrase RC Sproul’s illustration here, in the gospel, God doesn’t throw a life preserver to a man who is drowning. God reaches down to the bottom of the ocean and gives resurrection life to a man who is already dead and could do nothing for himself. Salvation is from the Lord, alone. It is not a cooperative effort, but a work of God’s grace alone.

Contrary to this biblical view of man’s depravity, the altar call system and some of the trappings that are often associated with it assumes man is fundamentally able to decide for himself to respond to God and be saved. However bad and desperate may be the state of the man who’s lost in sin, he must still have the ability to choose, for himself, to be saved or to “make a decision” for Christ. The altar call is designed to create a point of crisis and tension that will serve to facilitate this decision. Often, the invitation is accompanied by emotive music and involves a prolonged and, sometimes, “high-pressure” appeal to come forward to accept Christ. Furthermore, when you add the atmosphere of the crusade event, you have a particularly dynamic speaker along with a massive crowd to further enhance to appeal to respond. All of this is a “method” that not only seeks to bring sinners into the hearing of the gospel but to help bring about salvation by eliciting a decision from the sinner. The underlying theological assumption is that, in the end, salvation really is man’s choice. It depends, finally and ultimately, on a person’s willingness to decide for Christ, a decision that can be manipulated or at least helped along by the right atmosphere and the physical act of “going forward,” which, as we’ve considered already, is an extra-biblical addition to gospel preaching.

One of the concerning, if unintentional, outcomes of this is that many find their Christian assurance tied to a single act they performed at some point in time. Assurance is all based on one’s “decision” to come and accept Christ. This is problematic at a couple of levels. First of all, it tends to place assurance of salvation on a human act rather than on God’s grace. If a person associates salvation with his or her decision to go forward, raise their hand or whatever, then assurance is resting on the wrong foundation! It makes salvation – or at least assurance of salvation – dependent on something you did rather than what Christ has done. Secondly, this can lead to instability in the long run. After all, if my assurance of salvation rests on my response at some point in the past, I may well begin to question whether my response was sufficient. Was I really sincere enough? Did I do it right? Did I pray the right words, etc.? Some folks will likely go away with an unjustified assurance of salvation, thinking they are saved because they followed the right steps (a very man-centered view of salvation). On the other hand, others who have been truly converted are likely to struggle with assurance in the long run, because they’ve learned to rely, to some extent, on themselves for such assurance.

In the teaching of Scripture as well as the practice of Christ and the apostles, assurance is found in looking to Christ, with the help of the Spirit, not by looking at your decision or anything that you have done. Assurance also grows and develops as one continues in the faith, in fellowship with the visible church and under the preaching of the Word. The Spirit gives assurance as He ministers Christ to us and applies Scripture to us. Then, we also gain assurance, over time, as we see the evidences of genuine grace worked out in our lives. These evidences appear as perseverance in the faith, even through trials, and growth in obedience or sanctification.

None of this is meant to imply, in any way, that we ought not to proclaim the gospel passionately and invite sinners, indiscriminately, to come to Christ for salvation. While Paul would not adopt the methods of the philosophers to try and get results out of human wisdom, he did seek to persuade men (2Cor. 5:11). We should preach Christ crucified for sinners and risen from the dead and sincerely plead with sinners to repent from sin place their faith in Christ. Yet, we must also realize that the response is only in the power of God. He must use the preaching of his Word to bring life to sinners and effectually call them to faith in Christ. We cannot bring about genuine conversion by any means of human persuasion or manipulation. It must be the work of God. Also, we should be careful that we are clearly calling people to Christ, not to a decision or an altar. The biblical gospel announces the truly desperate state of man, lost and dead in trespasses and sins. It announces the only hope we have, Christ, who is held out to sinners as an all-sufficient Savior, to be received only by faith.

So, we do not practice the altar call, and I would challenge others to reconsider if this is really a biblical practice and a useful tool. Let us proclaim the gospel simply and clearly. Let us hold up Jesus Christ as He is presented in the Scripture, a crucified and risen Savior for sinners who have no other hope. Let us, then, call sinners to look to Christ, to turn from self and any hope one might find in oneself and look only to Christ for full and complete salvation. Let our method match our message, that salvation is found only and fully in the Lord alone.

Life, Death and Authority

This week, the government in the state of New York passed one of the most vile and heinous pieces of legislation in the history of this nation, if not in the history of mankind. This bill codifies, in the law, a woman’s right to have her unborn baby killed, in some cases, anytime up to the point of birth. It’s a sad state of affairs when a modern and so-called “enlightened” society celebrates the ability to murder its unborn children. Abortion proponents focus on the rights of the woman, using terms like “reproductive rights” or “reproductive health.” We, who oppose abortion, point out how this conveniently neglects and ignores the rights of the unborn child. We would agree that women (and men) have “reproductive rights.” You have the right to remain chaste and not engage in sexual activity (as a single person anyway). You also have the right to purchase and use contraceptives so as to avoid pregnancy altogether. However, reproductive rights do not include the right to kill a child already conceived.

Now, in this midst of discussion about this controversial legislation, I was reminded of an oft used argument from the pro-abortion left regarding consistency. It is often stated that conservatives are hypocritical when they rail against abortion rights and yet support the death penalty. “If you’re really ‘pro-life,’ then you should oppose the killing of anyone, including those convicted of murder,” or so the argument goes. I can’t speak for conservatives in general, but from the standpoint of the Christian worldview, I think it’s pretty easy to demonstrate that there’s no inconsistency in advocating for the life of the unborn while also supporting capital punishment for certain criminal offenders. In fact, I would argue that it’s only on the ground of a Christian worldview that one can find any truly consistent and objective criteria for judging such weighty life and death issues.

On the surface, it seems like it ought to be a pretty straightforward and easy to comprehend distinction. Abortion is the killing of an innocent, unborn child for the sake of convenience or (perhaps in a very rare circumstance) to potentially save the life of the mother. This situation is a world apart from the case of a responsible adult who has willingly taken the life of another human being. The death penalty is an application of justice. In fact, I find the argument of the pro-abortion crowd on this point rather disingenuous. I suspect it’s more of a smoke screen to divert attention from the real nature of the abortion debate.

Yet, at the end of the day, this really comes down to an issue of authority and the very basis on which we might answer, with any sense of real authority, questions about life and death and justice and standards for law and morality in a civil society. For the Christian, the answer is simple and beyond dispute. The Scriptures are the standard of truth and righteousness. That’s because the Scriptures are God’s word. It is God, alone, who is both the Lord and the giver of life. He is Creator. We are mere creatures. It’s God who gives life, God who defines when it begins and under what circumstances, if any, we might be justified to take the life of another human being. We don’t derive our position on abortion, capital punishment or anything else from mere human reason, from centuries of tradition, from the common consensus or any other human source. We turn to the objective and absolute authority of the Scriptures as the Word of God and the revelation of Himself and His will.

The Bible reveals and defines the sacredness of human life. This comes to the fore both in the Scriptures’ teaching on capital punishment and in the passages relevant to the issue of abortion. Human life is sacred, first, because it’s the creation and gift of God. It’s not the result of long ages of random happenstance and unguided chemical processes. Moreover, of all the creatures God made, only man is created in the very image of God Himself. It’s on this basis that God instituted capital punishment back in the days of Noah, following the flood. Gen. 9:6 reads, “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image.” (ESV) Capital punishment, far from devaluing life, affirms the value of life and the seriousness of taking human life. Murder is such a serious crime because it strikes at the very image of God by striking down a fellow human, created in the image of God – a human soul who will exist for eternity either in God’s glorious presence or under eternal punishment. This is so serious that the only way to enact “justice” in the human realm is for the murderer to lose his life.

This foundational principle of law and justice, which was established first in the Noahic covenant, continued through the Old Testament period and was never revoked or rescinded even under the new covenant. Rather, in Romans 13, the apostle Paul affirms the legitimate, God-ordained role of the civil magistrate as one who “does not bear the sword in vain” and “carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer.” A fundamental, though not exclusive, function of the civil government is to carry out the justice of capital punishment for the crime of murder. This is not only “justifiable” but obligatory. It is the responsibility of human government not to allow the shedding of innocent blood to go unpunished and unavenged.

Scripture also speaks, quite clearly, about the beginning of life, that life begins in the womb, at conception. Numerous passages of Scripture speak of the human life having been formed in the womb. The infant still in the womb is viewed as an individual, fully alive. God fashions an individual life in the womb. John the Baptist leaped for joy in his mother’s womb at the greeting of Mary, the mother of Jesus. Jacob and Esau were already “struggling together” while still in the womb of Rebecca. David, in Psalm 51, traces his sinfulness back to the moment of his conception in his mother’s womb. Of particular significance, in Exodus 21:22-23, the Lord gives a law concerning the case in which a pregnant woman is struck with the result that she gives birth prematurely. If the child is okay, there is no further liability, but if her child dies as a result, then there is a fine imposed, even though this was not an intentional act of murder. In other words, the child in the mother’s womb is treated as an individual and not merely as an extraneous piece of tissue, an extension of the mother’s body.

When Scripture is our authority, then there is a perfect consistency between an anti-abortion but pro-capital punishment stance. God is the giver of life. He is the sovereign Creator and Lord. Human life is sacred and only God can justly dispose of human life as He sees fit. God forbids the taking of human life, and according to Scripture, life begins in the womb. There, God miraculously fashions an individual human being in His own likeness and image. Further, God has ordained civil government and given a mandate to the governing authorities to punish the crime of murder by judicially taking the life of the murderer. This is not an act of private vengeance of an act of anger. It is a solemn, judicial responsibility. It’s an act of justice that mirrors, in some sense, the sentence of divine justice. Capital punishment is right, not because life is unimportant or because some lives are more valuable than others but because human life is so sacred and so significant! No other penalty could be justly imposed for premeditated murder.

So, for those of us who are Christians, who acknowledge Jesus Christ as Lord of all and the Word of God as our standard of truth and ultimate authority, we should stand on the Scriptures consistently and firmly.

Savior of Sinners

Matthew begins his account of the birth of Christ with a strikingly simple, matter-of-fact announcement of a momentous, profound and incomprehensible mystery: “When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit.” O, is that all Matthew? A virgin is pregnant…from the power of the Holy Spirit of God. When Joseph finds out about this pregnancy, he’s in a quandary. How to balance justice and mercy, moral integrity and selfless love? He decides on a private divorce from his betrothed, protecting, as much as possible, Mary’s reputation in the community. Then, an angel pays Joseph a visit. He brings a message that explains, yet doesn’t explain, the situation. “That which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit.” That explains the pregnancy. Mary is absolved of any wrong-doing, and the way is now clear for Joseph to take Mary, fully, as his wife. She has not been unfaithful, and Joseph will raise this child as his own, even though he’s not the biological father.  

Yet, the angel’s message, in one sense, raises new questions – deep questions. As a bewildered Mary asked the angel Gabriel, “How will this be?” The Bible teaches the virgin conception of Jesus quite clearly. However, the how is left as a deep mystery, except that it was the work of the Holy Spirit in the womb of Mary. This much we can say with certainty, that God the Holy Spirit formed the humanity of Jesus – a human soul and body – in the womb of Mary so that this child was truly one with her humanity. Yet, at the same time, the Eternal Son of God was united, perfectly, with this humanity, and the second person of the Trinity came down to earth, in union with mankind. He became one of us without ceasing to be fully God. He is, in the fullest sense, as Matthew goes on to explain, Immanuel, God with us.  

The title by which the angel calls Joseph, here, is significant. He calls him “Joseph, son of David.” Matthew has already demonstrated in the first part of chapter 1 that Joseph is descended from the royal line of David. Since Jesus will be considered his son, He has the legal right to David’s throne and kingdom. Indeed, Israel had waited long for salvation to arise from the house and lineage of David. God had promised a descendant of David who would sit upon his throne as the anointed king and would bring peace, blessing and salvation to His people. But a careful reading of the genealogy from Matthew 1:1-17 serves as a reminder that, so far, hopes of a righteous Davidic ruler were disappointed. The history of David’s line was, for the most part, a story of failure. Even the best of the best out of the kings in Judah had had their “moments.” David hit his low point with Bathsheba. Solomon was led astray by many wives. Godly Hezekiah trusted in the strength of Babylon. The line of Davidic kings ended in Babylonian captivity. Jesus, however, was different. He was, legally, David’s descendant and heir, but he did not share David’s sin-nature. The failures and sins that plagued all previous kings would not befall this great son of David. Since He was conceived by the Holy Spirit, He had no sin-nature. In His very person He was (and is) God Himself. He could and would effect the great deliverance and salvation promised by the Lord.  

Indeed, this, too, is a central part of the angel’s message. “You shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.” Salvation is what God’s people needed and what was promised from the very beginning, as far back as the garden of Eden. There, God had promised a seed, from the woman, who would crush the head of the serpent. In other words, the curse and judgment of sin would one day be undone.  

The announcement is rather specific. Whom will He save? His people. What will He save from? Sin. This didn’t align with the expectations of many Israelites at the time. They were looking for a Savior, a son of David, who would save them from the oppressive Gentile power, the Romans. Many were expecting a Messiah who would be a military deliverer – who would lead an uprising against the Roman legions and restore earthly Israel to her former glory, like the days of David and Solomon. They would be disappointed. For that’s not what Jesus came to do. He came to bring spiritual salvation. He came to save His people from an enemy far worse than the Romans or any other foreign power. He came to bring salvation from sin. When He failed to carry out the agenda of many of the Jewish people, they rejected Him and, ultimately, demanded His death by crucifixion. They would choose Barabbas, an insurrectionist, over Jesus, the Son of God.  

We must take care not to make a similar mistake. Jesus will not serve our personal agenda. He came to save people from sin through His atoning death and resurrection life. He didn’t come to save us from discontent or political strife or other worldly problems and issues, apart from salvation from sin. Sin is the real source of all our problems. If we would have Jesus, at all, we must trust Him as the Lord of glory and Savior from our sin. We must face the reality of our sin and guilt, confess it, turn from it and trust in Jesus for forgiveness, righteousness and peace with God. The true people of God, whom Jesus saves from sins, will have deliverance from every other source of suffering, pain and struggle in due time, for the King is making all things new. All that sin has perverted and destroyed will ultimately be set right again in a new world.  

As for those hated Gentiles – the outsiders and foreigners that the Jews were anxious to see the Messiah conquer and destroy – it turns out that many of them, too, were among “His people” whom He came to save. It’s hinted at in the coming of the magi from the east. It’s stated plainly by Jesus in Matthew 8:11-12, “I tell you, many will come from east and west and recline at table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven, while the sons of the kingdom will be thrown into the outer darkness.”  

This is good news for us Gentiles, as Paul writes in Ephesians 2:11-13:  

Therefore remember that at one time you Gentiles in the flesh, called the uncircumcision by what is called the circumcision, which is made in the flesh by hands – remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. (ESV) 

How wonderful! The outsiders are brought in. The “enemies” are made brothers, because God, in Christ Jesus, saves sinners.

Why I’m Thankful for Thanksgiving

Thanksgiving is just about my favorite holiday. I greatly enjoy turkey and stuffing and all the accompaniments. I have fond memories of crisp, fall Thanksgiving mornings spent in the Pennsylvania woods hunting small game and preparing for the start of deer hunting the following Monday morning. I love the time spent with family (although that is true for other holidays as well). Another thing I’ve always appreciated about Thanksgiving is the fact that we have this one major, religiously oriented holiday that is totally unencumbered by arguments about pagan origins, Roman Catholic practices, the application of the regulative principle and, at least until recent years, pretty “uncommercialized.” We just simply have a national tradition of setting aside a special day devoted to giving thanks to God. In my thinking, it’s pretty hard to go wrong with that!

Giving thanks is a one of our most fundamental obligations as God’s creatures. The importance of thanksgiving is emphasized again and again in the scriptures. It is particularly incumbent upon believers in Christ, who have been saved by God’s grace through the redemptive work of Christ, to give thanks continually. True thankfulness is an open acknowledgement that we are completely dependent upon God. We are recognizing that whatever good we have, it comes from God’s hand and it comes freely, since He owes us nothing. We, as creatures, could never place ourselves in a position in which God would be obliged to us. All that we receive, including life itself, flows only from His free goodness and mercy. The practice of thanksgiving directs our hearts away from ourselves and toward God, in praise and humble gratitude. It is the opposite of complaining and discontent. It is impossible to be thankful and grumbling at the same time. It is impossible to be both thankful and covetous at the same time. So, thanksgiving signals a right attitude towards God and, at the same time, helps us to align our hearts, rightly, towards God, the giver of all good things.

Conversely, ingratitude or unthankfulness toward God is one of the fundamental characteristics of unrighteousness. Romans 1:21, standing at the head of a sobering description of man’s sinful depravity, starts with “Although they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks to Him.” These phrases are practically synonymous. To fail to return regular thanks to God is to fail to honor Him as God. Such ingratitude is fundamental to our sin-nature and rebellion against God. It expresses our unwillingness to let God be God and to acknowledge our own creatureliness. According to Paul, it represents the negative counterpart to idolatry. Failing to rightly honor the true God, man turns to false gods, worshiping the creature rather than the Creator. So, the giving of thanks to God is more than just a nice sentiment. It is a fundamental, moral obligation of every moral agent in creation.

The religious and moral landscape of America has changed, drastically, since Washington’s proclamation, in 1789, making Thanksgiving an official national holiday. In some ways, having a national day of Thanksgiving may seem passé – a throw-back to an earlier time when there was a greater level of national piety and public recognition of God in our culture and politics. Today, America is sinking in a morass of moral relativism. A fairly large segment of our society is not only indifferent to the things of God but downright hostile toward the truth of God. We’ve elevated the god of self-fulfillment and set aside standards of Scripture for self-government as well as civil government. We celebrate Thanksgiving, but do we really know and acknowledge, in our daily living, the God to whom all thanks and praise is due? For many, I fear, the idea of thanksgiving is more about a vague sense of gratitude – toward no one in particular and for no particular reason they can explain – rather than a deeply religious act of worship directed to the true and living God.

Yet, it is a blessing that Thanksgiving continues to be a prominent observance among us. I am thankful for such a day that bears testimony, every year, to the fact that our forefathers were convinced of the importance of a national expression of gratitude to God – that we, as a people, acknowledge our dependence on God and humbly give thanks for His blessings. I’m glad that this occasion stands as an annual reminder that we truly ought to be thankful to God, whether we are or not. The very existence of such a holiday – of such a sentiment among us – testifies that there really is someone to be thankful to and that we were created to render worship to this great and gracious God.

The annual observance of a day of Thanksgiving is like a cultural reminder that, no matter how much we might wish to, we cannot escape from the reality of who we really are and who God really is. We are the dependent creatures, bound to love, honor and worship the Creator. God, alone, is sovereign, holy, self-existent and worthy of all praise and thanks; honor and glory. We have, indeed, failed to honor Him as God and give thanks as we ought. We have exalted ourselves, served ourselves and lived without regard to God or His holy law. Yet, God gave His finest, most precious gift by giving His own Son to die for sinners that we might be forgiven and restored. This is cause for thanks and praise indeed. “Thanks be to God for His unspeakable gift.”

Holiness of Heart

Every Christian should care, deeply, about holiness. Hebrews 12:14 says that, without holiness, no one will see the Lord. In 2 Timothy 2:19, Paul writes, “Let everyone who names the name of the Lord depart from iniquity.” Our whole Christian lives should be marked by progress in sanctification, though that progress may be painfully slow and nearly imperceptible at times. The Christian life is an ongoing conflict against the world, the flesh and the devil, and, in this life, we will continue to struggle with sin. The process of sanctification won’t be completed till we are in glory with Jesus. However, to have a complete and careless disregard for obedience to God and growth in practical Christian living is to invalidate one’s profession to true faith in Christ.

Two things are vitally important if we are to pursue real Christian growth: 1. A right view of what holiness really is – what it is we’re striving toward 2. A sound, biblical strategy for making progress. In his letter to the Colossians, Paul addresses both. Of course, Paul and other biblical writers address these things in other New Testament books as well. One thing that is interesting about the context of Colossians, though, is the particular false teaching that is engaged and refuted by Paul. These false teachers were offering the Colossians an alternative model of “holiness” – what it looks like and how it’s achieved. The message of these false teachers centered on keeping man-made rules by a system of strict self-denial along with seeking some sort of higher, extra-biblical experiences. We could sum up the error as a combination of ritualism, mysticism and asceticism. The false teachers would have the Colossians be consumed with keeping Old Testament Jewish ceremonial laws like feast days and dietary restrictions (Col. 2:16), special visionary experiences and insights (Col. 2:18) and disciplining the body by self-denial (Col. 2:21, 23). They were peddling a vision of the Christian life that said, “If you do all these things, then that will make you holy, like us.”

If this religious paradigm sounds familiar from somewhere, perhaps it’s because it is so similar to the practice of the Pharisees and teachers of the law in Jesus’ day. For them the whole idea of holiness revolved around a fairly elaborate system of law-keeping, much of which had no basis in Scripture. In fact, Jesus said that they disregarded and voided the word of God for the sake of their own, man-made traditions. He also accused the Pharisees of practicing a “holiness” that was only skin-deep. “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you clean the outside of the cup and the plate, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. You blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and the plate, that the outside also may be clean. Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within are full of dead people’s bones and all uncleanness. So you also outwardly appear righteous to others, but within you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.” (Matt. 23:25-28 ESV) In other words, righteousness must go deeper than merely outward conformity to a human standard of “righteousness.”

Paul had a similar corrective to the error circulating around Colossae. The problem with this false teaching was two-fold. First, it was focused on externals to the exclusion of real heart change. It revolved around earthly elements that had no real eternal or spiritual significance anymore. The Jewish ceremonial law was of use, before the coming of Christ, only inasmuch as these Mosaic laws pointed to Christ. As Paul says, in 2:17, “These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.” With the coming of Christ, these ceremonial laws regarding thing like foods and festivals ceased to have any meaningful role in the life of God’s people. The regulations being promoted by the false teachers dealt only with material things that had no inherent value to make one holy. In fact, according to Paul, these man-made restrictions not only were of no real use, they had a negative net effect. They ultimately would only serve to foster the sin-nature by encouraging pride and self-righteousness! (cf. 2:23)

Secondly, this false teaching was detached from Christ and the fullness of salvation found in Him. The false teachers undermined, at every point, the sufficiency of Christ for salvation. Their system suggested that, although the Colossian Christians had Christ and were united to Him by faith, that was not enough to make them truly righteous or holy. There must be something more. They must add these religious rules and practices to Christ in order to have real “fullness.” So, with regard to the false teachers, they had the wrong view of what holiness is. They mistakenly identified holiness with outward conformity to man-made rules. They also had a misguided strategy for holiness, namely, adding human works and outward efforts to the sufficiency of Christ, alone.

In contrast to this false teaching, Paul’s prescription for the Colossians’ growth in holiness begins and ends with Christ. It begins with a rich reminder of the fullness of salvation already achieved by Christ and given, freely, by God’s grace. Paul’s strategy for holiness and growth starts with recognizing the fullness or completeness of the salvation that Christians have in Christ. He reminds the Colossians that they have died, with Christ, to sin and the old self. They have been raised up into new life with Christ. They have a new identity, in union with Christ, and their true life is now found in heaven, where it is hidden away with Christ in God. Because of their glorious, covenantal union with Christ, they are already fully forgiven, counted as righteous and accepted in Christ. Paul reminds the Colossians of who they are, in Christ. Then he exhorts them to set their minds and hearts in the heavenly sphere, where Christ is.

Progress in holiness, then, is merely the practical outworking of that new identity. In other words, Paul is saying, “Act consistently with what is already true of you in Christ.” Parallel to his teaching in Ephesians 4, Paul calls on the Colossians to “put off the old” and to “put on the new.” Live according to this new identity in Christ. In doing so, Paul is not merely calling for adherence to “rules.” The holiness Paul commends is one that works from the inside out. It begins with a new outlook – a “renewing of your mind” (Rom. 12:2). It requires that Christians adopt a new, heavenly perspective and a new set of values and priorities. It calls for getting rid of, not only sexual immorality, but also “passion, evil desire, and covetousness.” It calls for getting rid of attitudes like anger, wrath and malice along with putting on virtues like compassion, kindness, humility, meekness, etc. In other words, true holiness starts inwardly. It changes our attitudes, thoughts and desires, not just our actions. The problem with the false teaching in Colossae, with all its stringent rules and regulations, was not that it was too radical and went too far. Rather, it didn’t go nearly far enough! It didn’t begin to touch the heart and work inward change. This kind of radical, inside-out change is only possible by the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit. This power is the current possession of Christians because of Christ and our union with Him.

Christians, today, are still offered alternative paths to holiness. Some of the characteristics of the false teaching in Colossae are echoed, today, in these misguided paradigms of sanctification. The path of “mysticism” is advocated by some who urge Christians to seek special spiritual experiences, above and beyond mere faith in Christ. For them, the idea of holiness is bound up with having this experience – a second work of grace. For others, holiness seems to be defined by adherence to extra-biblical rules and regulations. Christians may be told to avoid a whole litany of “worldly” things, from alcoholic beverages to playing cards. Like the Colossian errorists who forbade certain foods and drinks and said, “Do not handle, do not taste, do not even touch,” these folks advocate rules and self-denial, beyond what Scripture commands. Holiness is reduced to a matter of avoiding certain things and certain places.

In contrast to every alternative, true, biblical holiness is found in Christ. Growth in practical Christian living is not achieved by adding rules or mystical experiences to Christ. It is, rather, a progressive outworking and realization, by faith, of the fullness of salvation Christians already possess in Christ. It is attained by the grace of God and the power of the Holy Spirit, through faith in the risen Christ. True holiness of life goes further and deeper than merely following a man-made, external standard. It begins inwardly, with a renewed mind and heart. If we are united to Christ, we have died, with Him, to our old sinful way of life. We have been raised into new life and a new identity with Him. Growing in true holiness is about living, increasingly, in a way that’s consistent with that new life. We are called to set our desires and thoughts upon Christ, our all-sufficient Savior and Lord.

Merely avoiding things or practicing strict adherence to external, man-made rules won’t make us holy. Christ, by the power of the Holy Spirit, makes us holy. When we truly set our minds and hearts heavenward, on the risen Christ and the life that is ours in Him, then we will desire to live with virtues like self-discipline, self-sacrificing love, sexual purity, etc., not because we have a list of rules, but because we treasure Christ and His glory more than we love sin. The more we are, thus, “heavenly-minded,” the more we will be able to live in the present world and use the things in the world wisely, to the glory of God.

Some Thoughts on Worship Music

What songs should we sing at church?  We recently had a discussion in our Sunday School class about worship and what music is appropriate for the church’s corporate worship. I decided to take the opportunity to write out, briefly, some of the principles that I use in choosing and planning music for worship. Hopefully, it might help us to think carefully and biblically about worship and our corporate singing as an element of worship.

I find the purpose of worship music to be two-fold, according to Scripture. First, it is, simply, worship given to God. Through the medium of song, we give God praise and glorify Him for His greatness, His holiness, His love and mercy. We celebrate His saving works toward His people throughout history. In a way, this is “warm-up” for what we’ll be doing more perfectly in eternity. Secondly, our corporate singing is to edify the church. “Let the word of Christ richly dwell within you, with all wisdom teaching and admonishing one another with psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with thankfulness in your hearts to God.” (Col. 3:16 NASB) Our worship in song is to have a vertical aspect in praise toward God, and a horizontal aspect in that the content of the singing ought to provide mutual instruction and encouragement to one another. Both aspects require certain criteria in our music. It ought to go without saying, but clearly, the content of our worship music must be biblically based and theologically sound. We don’t bring glory to God or sound instruction to the church by singing that which is simply not the truth concerning our Lord. Not only must we sing lyrics that are true, but they need to have a certain depth and breadth of doctrinal content about who God is and what God has done for us in Jesus Christ. Moreover, our singing ought to regularly rehearse and celebrate the central and profound truths of the gospel. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t cover other themes or only sing those songs which explicitly refer to the cross, resurrection, etc. But surely, if our music is soundly biblical, the gospel will be central.

Sound doctrinal content, however, is not the only criteria for worship music. In addition to lyrics, there is the music itself. I would suggest two things that are required for good worship music. First, the music should fit well with the lyrics. The melody, harmony, rhythm and tempo should all complement and accentuate the theme being sung rather than clash with it. Along this line, it is well that there is a variety of music for different aspects of the church’s worship. One style, tempo, rhythm or volume does not cover all the themes and occasions for the church’s singing. For instance, on the one hand, there’s a place for sober, corporate confession of our sin before a holy God. On the other hand, there is a place for songs of exuberant joy for the great mercy of God, for the eternal life we have in Christ and the certain hope of His coming again. I believe the Psalms, themselves, reflect such variety. Psalm 51 is the earnest confession of a broken, penitent sinner who seeks the mercy and forgiveness of God. The whole tone is more somber and reflective. Compare this with Psalm 149:

Let Israel be glad in his Maker;

Let the sons of Zion rejoice in their King.

3 Let them praise His name with dancing;

Let them sing praises to Him with timbrel and lyre.

4 For the Lord takes pleasure in His people;

He will beautify the afflicted ones with salvation. (Ps. 149:2-4, NASB)

Many such Psalms exhort God’s people to bring joyful praises – to praise Him with dancing, to shout with joy, to use varied and loud instruments to give Him praise (see Ps. 150, alone, for at least 6 different instruments including loud “cymbals”, which sounds suspiciously similar to some kind of drums?). The point is that there is a place, even a need, for a variety of music to fit the different themes of worship and different occasions in the life of the church.

Yet one more requirement for good music for worship is simply that it be “singable.” New Testament worship is to be participatory. It’s not meant to be a performance by a few talented musicians, but the active worship of all the congregation together. So, it’s important to sing music that is simple enough for us to sing together. There’s a lot of music that I like to listen to that I would never suggest we sing in church, some of it for this simple reason, that it is not very easy for a congregation to sing together.

Now, the last couple criteria regarding the music itself are, of necessity, rather subjective. Everyone won’t agree, exactly, on what music “fits” the theme or on what is most easy to sing. Those of us who have the responsibility to plan worship services and select the songs to be sung have to make subjective decisions in these areas. Sometimes, everyone won’t agee. In fact, it may be seldom that everyone will agree.

So, all that said, how do we choose what music is “best?” Are there some instruments we should use to worship God and others that are sort of “off limits?” Is there a particular style or form of music that is prescribed for church worship? Scripture gives us only the basic principles outlined above. God has not preserved or prescribed a particular musical style, even in the Psalms. I would suggest that there is a good reason for this. It allows for the abiding truths of God’s Word to be set to the music of many different times and cultures in a way that displays the universality of the gospel and the saving work of Christ among the nations. I think this is captured, somewhat, in a contemporary song by the Newsboys. By the way, it’s one of those songs I like to listen to, but I don’t recommend for church worship.

It’s the song of the redeemed

Rising from the African plain

It’s the song of the forgiven

Drowning out the Amazon rain

The song of Asian believers

Filled with God’s holy fire

It’s every tribe, every tongue, every nation

A love song born of a grateful choir

It’s all God’s children singing

Glory, glory, hallelujah

He reigns, He reigns

Read more: Newsboys – He Reigns Lyrics | MetroLyrics

So, there is a place for a variety of music, within the parameters of doctrinal integrity, cohesion between the music and the lyrical theme and congregational “singability.” There is also a precedent in Scripture for the use of a wide variety of instruments in giving praises to God. How does this apply, practically, in our local church setting? More particularly, how does this apply to the selection of “old hymns” versus more contemporary songs? While some churches sing exclusively traditional hymns and other churches sing mostly all contemporary music, I’d like to make the case for the careful use of both.

Many traditional hymns have a long history of use in the church. They express profound theological truths in ways that have blessed and encouraged believers across centuries. Singing these songs connects us with the church across ages of time. They also help us preserve and perpetuate the teaching of sound doctrines. We ought not to jettison the great and enduring hymns of our forefathers in favor of that which is simply “novel.” It would surely be an arrogant stance to argue that the only “good” music is what is written in our own generation. Moreover, at least some hymnals, like the Trinity Hymnal, contain many of the inspired Psalms put to music. In Ephesians and Colossians, Paul encourages the singing of Psalms as well as hymns and spiritual songs.

All that said, we must remember that simply having the status of a “traditional hymn” doesn’t make a song either doctrinally helpful or musically superior. There are many great hymns of the faith from across centuries of church history. At the same time, I have to say that some of the most beloved American hymns are doctrinally shallow at best. Some of the “old” hymns that are well known to the older generation today are actually relatively modern (19th to early 20th century). Some of these come out of a theologically shallow tradition stemming from the so-called “second great awakening” and Finney revivalism. In my opinion, one strength of the Trinity Hymnal (and a few others like it) is the fact that the editors took pains to choose hymns that meet the criteria of having doctrinal integrity and that focus on the great biblical truths about God and His saving work in Christ.

So, we ought to retain the greatest hymns of the past in our church worship. However, there is also good reason for us to sing new songs – contemporary psalms, hymns and spiritual songs. Christians of past centuries did not have an exclusive monopoly on good song writing or on theological depth. There is some great music being written by Christians today, in the style and language of the 21st century church, just as older hymns we sing were written with the style and language of their times. I think one of the benefits of more contemporary music is that it is simply easier for many (maybe most) of us to relate to. Now, by “relate to”, I don’t necessarily mean “enjoy” (and I want to address that subject in a moment). What do I mean by “relate to?” Singing music in worship is both corporate and personal. We join our voices in praise, but we each, individually, sing the words of praise, confession, etc. While I don’t believe we should be focused on our individual “experience” of worship, there is certainly a sense in which our worship is subjective. It ought to engage us, consciously, in expressing the truths in the music we’re singing. In other words, it’s a personal expression of praise and thanksgiving to God or of the truths of the gospel we personally embrace, etc. One of the strengths of more contemporary music is that is puts these timeless truths into the language and musical expression of the current generation. I really believe that the archaic language and even the outdated musical style of some of our hymns can become barrier to the meaningful expression of worship. In short, when you’re preoccupied with struggling to understand what you’re singing or following an unfamiliar musical style, it’s hard to make the music a meaningful and personal expression of praise to the Lord. I am, personally, thankful for ministries and songwriters, today, who are taking some of the best of traditional hymnody and updating the wording and the music to a more contemporary style. They are making these great old hymns of the faith more “singable” for this current generation. Others are writing new songs that still communicate the same great truths but in new ways that reflect the musical expressions of our time, in the same way that the “old hymns” reflect the musical and lyrical styles of their times. In fact, the irony is that all the old hymns were, at one time, contemporary songs. This is important to remember for those who feel that new music is a bad thing simply because it’s “new” – it represents change. Hymns from the 16th to 19th centuries would be totally foreign to the Apostle Paul and New Testament Christians, much less the ancient Hebrews. So, if we’re really against changing music to fit with the current culture, then we’d better go back to singing Psalms in the Hebrew language!

So, for example, if a young man today wrote a song about his beloved, he would probably not write something like, “O thou fair maiden, when once mine eyes beheld thee…” or something like that. That’s not how we speak today, nor is it how we write music, today. The man who wrote this to his girlfriend would sound disingenuous, like he just copied something out of Shakespeare instead of writing what he really felt. Sometimes, hymn lyrics are just as far removed from the ordinary language of our time. For instance, “Ashamed of Jesus! sooner far let evening blush to own a star: he sheds the beams of light divine o’er this benighted soul of mine.” That’s great poetry, but it’s just not how we speak and/or write music today. I can imagine many young folks needing a dictionary to look up “benighted”. Or consider the following: “My soul he doth restore again; and me to walk doth make within the paths of righteousness…”

My point is not to say, “These hymns are dumb.” They’re not at all. However, they are written in very poetic and sometimes archaic language that bears little relation to our modern speech and music. And, in some cases, the music, itself, is equally dated. It’s not just that it’s not “modern.” Sometimes it’s just hard to sing, because it’s so foreign, so different from music we’re accustomed to today. There is a benefit, I believe, in putting timeless truths into the language and musical forms of our current generation, just as hymn-writers have done over the centuries. This can make worship more meaningful, especially (but not exclusively) for a younger generation of believers.

Now, I want to address what I do believe is problematic in much of contemporary worship in the church. On the one hand, there is a lot of contemporary music that’s just really lacking in the area of doctrinal integrity or substance. Of course, as I’ve mentioned already, the same can be said of some traditional hymns. The writing of poor worship music is not a new phenomenon. However, the notion of contemporary worship is also associated, often, with an entertainment oriented model of church worship. In other words, it’s not just that the church uses more contemporary music. The music, itself, becomes the attraction, and it is more of a performance than it is true, thoughtful, participatory worship. The band takes the focus away from the Lord. Now this, again, is somewhat subjective. The principle to follow, here, is that our focus in worship should be on the Lord and the great truths of Scripture. Our desire and purpose must always be worship, not entertainment. There’s nothing wrong with having good music in worship. We could hardly expect that God will be more honored by poor music. But, if our real motivation is centered on our enjoyment of the music, for the sake of the music, then we’ve lost the proper focus of worship. I would suggest that we needn’t throw away the baby with the bathwater. The use of good, contemporary hymns and songs in worship doesn’t necessarily mean we’ve turned to “entertainment” rather than worship. On the other hand, the converse is also true. Just because a church avoids contemporary music and only sing from a hymnal, doesn’t mean that the focus is necessarily on the Lord. It can be equally true that folks love the “old hymns” because that’s what they “enjoy” hearing and singing. We can make an idol out of our favorite hymns just as easily as we can make an idol out of our favorite contemporary worship songs!

Let me close with a challenge for the whole church. If you prefer traditional hymns only, let me ask, do you idealize (or maybe idolize) one particular time in the history of the church? Is it really that you find the older songs are more biblical, or is it simply that you like them and enjoy singing them? Do you believe that the younger generation of the church is so inferior that they have nothing to add to the wealth of music at the disposal of the church? If you’re in the younger crowd, and maybe roll your eyes when the worship leader says, “Open your hymnal to #…”, let me ask you, can you not appreciate something of the rich heritage of music that has been passed down from previous generations of believers? Is your heart’s desire to worship the Lord, or is it to hear and sing only the music you like? For everyone, no matter which songs you prefer, let us remember that we are called to worship in unity and to be forbearing of one another. Our attitude, in worship music, as in all things, should reflect the exhortation of Paul in Phil. 2: “Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind regard one another as more important than yourselves; 4 do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others.” (Phil. 2:3-4 NASB) Remember that the music that is most familiar to you may seem foreign and difficult to someone else. That song that you think is hard to sing, may be the song that most ministers to others in the body. Let us use the best of the old and the best of the new to bring praise and honor to our Lord and to admonish and instruct one another.

Christian Love

A well-known verse from the Bible states, “But now faith, hope, love, abide these three; but the greatest of these is love (1Corinthians 13:13). Love is surely the cardinal Christian virtue – the true mark of a follower of Jesus Christ. The same context of 1Corinthians 13 also describes what real love is like. It is, in summary, a description of the love of God. This should not be surprising, since love derives from God, and God is love (1John 4:7-8). Moreover, the love of God is displayed, supremely, in and through His Son, Jesus Christ. If we want to know what it means to love, we must look to God’s revelation of His love in Scripture and in Christ.

One of the characteristics of love, from 1Corinthians 13, is that it “does not rejoice in unrighteousness but rejoices in the truth.” When Christians speak the truth and refuse to approve of sin, we are sometimes accused of being “unloving”, when, in fact, the opposite is true. True love, having its source in a holy God, does not and cannot find joy in unrighteousness. Hence, true Christian love does not approve whatever God calls “sin.” To do so would be antithetical to love.

This is the more understandable in light of the truth about sin, revealed in the Scriptures. Sin is destructive and deceptive. It promises fulfillment that it cannot deliver. It is dehumanizing, as it perverts the good gifts of God and defaces the image of God in man. Every kind of suffering in this life owes its existence to the curse that came through human sin. Above all, sin is high treason against the God of the universe. It separates us from Him and brings His holy wrath against the sinner. It leads people to eternal misery and destruction. True love does not delight in something so destructive. Rather, Christian love assents to God’s truth about sin. It grieves over sin and the hurtful influence of sin in individuals and in society. Love learns to war against sin and speak the truth about it.

This is consistent with the perfect pattern of love displayed for us by the Lord Jesus Christ. Jesus did not approve of sin or lessen the demands of God’s holy law. He regularly spoke about sin and the root of sin, the human heart (see Mark 7:21–23 for example). He called sinners to repentance and warned of eternal punishment awaiting those who refuse to repent. In love, He came to save us from our sins, not to leave us in those sins. His cross speaks volumes about the seriousness of sin and our need of a Savior. At the cross, God’s wrath against sin fell on His Son. He died in place of sinners, so that they might be saved. If love were a blanket approval of all human choices, the cross of Jesus would have been wholly unnecessary. Jesus’ ministry would have been merely to inform us that we are all accepted by God already.

Christians recognize the reality of sin, most keenly the sin that remains in us. We know ourselves to be guilty, sinful and justified only by faith in Christ. However, we cannot simply make peace with sin and call evil good or good evil. To approve of sin in the name of tolerance or peace is not love. It is a form of self-love that wants to avoid conflict more than it wants to help others. Popular or not, true Christians will refuse to rejoice in unrighteousness. Love demands it.