ResponsiveReiding

Modern discourse, both in and outside the Church, seems to be fraught with suspicion and accordant condemnation of others, because we think we fully know other’s motives. Especially if they are people we disagree with theologically or politically. If they do not see things completely as we do, then there MUST be some nefarious reason. And in our pretended omniscience, we are certain we can dive deep into their souls and divine the dark coal of their wicked purposes. Whether those purposes are actually there or not.

‌And it is sin.

‌Joshua chapter 22 shows us how even the very best of men can fall prey to this tendency. And, it shows us just how disastrous such a practice can be. Why we need to ask questions and ascertain a full blown set of truths, before we begin accusing. Or, as in this case, before we nearly start a civil war. A war very narrowly averted.

‌The book of Joshua catalogs the events and battles of Israel’s conquest of Canaan. Key victories and even some key defeats are displayed before us. There are acts of bravery, heroics, bad choices, miracles, sad compromises and throughout – God’s faithfulness to His promises. It is a rollicking account.

‌By the time we come to chapter 22, all of the major conquests are done. There are pockets of enemies still to be dealt with, but the basic landmass has been secured and parceled out among the tribes. And if you recall, the tribes of Reuben, Gad and 1/2 of Manasseh had petitioned to receive their inherited lands east of the Jordan. That petition had been granted on condition of those tribes still aiding the remaining tribes in their conquering of the land west of the Jordan. Which they did.‌

Now, it is time for Reuben, Gad and half of Manasseh to return to their allotment. Upon doing so, they stop at the Jordan – the traditional eastern border of Israel – and build what vs. 10 calls “an altar of imposing size.” Once news of this got out – we read: Josh. 22:12 “And when the people of Israel heard of it, the whole assembly of the people of Israel gathered at Shiloh to make war against them.”

‌Civil war.

‌God had made it abundantly clear over and over again, that there was to be but one place in Israel for sacrifice and worship – and that was to be where the Ark of the Covenant was – and where the Levitical Priesthood would officiate. For all intents and purposes, this signaled a breach of the worst kind – rebellious idolatry.

‌War seemed inevitable.

‌Israel gets its army together and marches up against Reuben, Gad and 1/2 of Manasseh and calls them out.

Josh. 22:16-17 ““Thus says the whole congregation of the Lord, ‘What is this breach of faith that you have committed against the God of Israel in turning away this day from following the Lord by building yourselves an altar this day in rebellion against the Lord? Have we not had enough of the sin at Peor from which even yet we have not cleansed ourselves, and for which there came a plague upon the congregation of the Lord,”.

‌Serious stuff indeed.

‌Until.

‌The “rebels” respond. In essence they say – “if we’re actually doing what you think we’re doing – you should wipe us out. But we’re not doing that. Since we are separated from you by the Jordan, we feared that in time you might not consider us still part of Israel, and might eventually say “You have no portion in the Lord.” So we built this, not for sacrifices or worship – but merely to serve as a reminder that we are still all one nation serving the same God.”’”

‌Here’s the problem.

‌Reuben, Gad and half-Manasseh thought they could guess the future motives of Israel about something that hadn’t even happened yet. And Israel thought they could guess the current motives behind something they didn’t fully understand. And because both groups were steeped in their mutual suspicion, they nearly entered into a civil war that potentially could have cost many thousands of lives. All because suspicious minds were certain they knew why other people were doing things they didn’t understand or like. And because no one thought to talk about it to the other party to find out what was really going on.

‌Maybe, just maybe, our homes, our Churches and our political discourse could learn something here.

‌For the Body of Christ’s sake – I pray so.

Joshua chapters 13-19 might at first glance be a bit of a yawner, but “there’s gold in them-there hills.”

‌These chapters are comprised of the tribal allotments to Israel. The various landmasses assigned to each are detailed. And as you know, 2 tribes (Reuben and Gad) along with 1/2 the tribe of Manasseh, received their portion on the east side of the Jordan – all the rest on the west side. The tribe of Levi however was given no real estate of their own, but merely cities to dwell in within each of the tribal regions. The Lord was to be their inheritance.

‌And it is at this point we begin to look at the Providence of God in His assignments to them, and also to you and me. For each of us, under His sovereign hand, have a certain lot in life. A place and a time where each of us were born and raised. And circumstances – most well beyond our control, and some within where we could make alterations, improvements, and even mishaps.

‌In all the divisions which are recorded here – a specific area for each tribe, I am reminded of God’s apportioning the parameters of each of our lives as He sees fit. And I wonder, as you and me, did the tribes find reason to wish they had what some other tribe had instead of what was assigned them? More water? Fewer hills? Better grazing land? Better farming land? etc., etc.?

‌No doubt some did.

‌And as we read later, some thought their lot too hard and sought for other. West Manasseh complained that they didn’t have enough land. Joshua reminded them they were simply unwilling to do the hard work of clearing out some particularly tough inhabitants to get all of what had been allotted to them. They wanted an easier road.

‌Or consider Simeon. As it turns out, their assignment was actually a territory not completely their own, but within the territory of Judah.

‌Some had coastland, others none. Some were completely landlocked between two or more other tribes. Some had good grazing, others better farmland. There were mountainous regions, and flatlands; arid and lush. Each had their own conditions both to wrestle with, and take advantage of.

‌But our God knew what was wisest and best in each case. What challenges were best for each group. What pluses and minuses would keep them looking to Him for what was beyond their own strength, ability and preferences.

‌And so it is with you and me beloved.

‌In His providence, He knows better how to bless His people than we know how to be blessed. No doubt, you might prefer your circumstance to be what mine are, and I might prefer someone else’s. But here, we must rest in the perfect love and wisdom of our glorious Christ and King in all things. Father really does know best.

‌The Father knows what sins you need to wrestle with. What comforts will not spoil you, and what difficulties will not crush you. He knows how to best arrange those places that will help you grow in grace, look only to Him and prepare you best for Heaven. He knows how hard some of what you face is. And He knows how to provide for you in those places. He is never oblivious to your cares and concerns. As Paul preached on Mars Hill: “he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, that they should seek God, and perhaps feel their way toward him and find him. Yet he is actually not far from each one of us, for “ ‘In him we live and move and have our being’; as even some of your own poets have said, “ ‘For we are indeed his offspring.’ (Ac 17:26–28).

‌Now this is not to make us fatalists. It is not a place to throw up our hands and “whatever will be, will be.” This is not grin and bear it time, resignation to all things. As Paul wrote in 1 Cor. 7:21, “were you a bondservant when called? Do not be concerned about it. (But if you can gain your freedom, avail yourself of the opportunity.) And Joseph when in prison, sought consideration from the King’s Cupbearer to change his lot. It is rather to get our eyes upon His providential appointments, and seek out how it is He intends to bless us by them, what provision He has made for us in them, and how we are to respond righteously to them as we seek to improve, change, and be changed by them. In pain, we seek right remedies. In bounty, we seek avenues to bless others. In challenges, we seek to meet them in Christ’s character by The Spirit. In sorrow we seek Him as our comfort. In joy, we lift our hands to Him. In weakness, we look for His strength. In vigor, we look for opportunities to serve. In confusion we trust His providence. In clarity, we declare His truth to others.

‌But in all things: Father really does “know best.”

The verse cited above, and its companion 1 Chron. 16:22 serve well to help us make a very important distinction in Bible study and application.

“Touch not my anointed ones, do my prophets no harm” is a darling passage within the ranks of Charismatic and Pentecostal communities, especially by their leadership – to fend off criticisms and scrutiny. Unfortunately for them, they commit (among others) the critical error of using a passage stripped not only of its immediate context, but of the larger context of the whole of Scripture.

Let’s start with the immediate context of both Psalm 105:15 and 1 Chron. 16:22.

In both cases (for one is a repeat of the other) the immediate context frames what is being talked about. And it is NOT, about individual, self-proclaimed prophets, miracle workers, preachers, teachers or anything of the like. This is how the pericope reads:

"When you were few in number, of little account, and sojourners in it, wandering from nation to nation, from one kingdom to another people, he allowed no one to oppress them; he rebuked kings on their account, “Touch not my anointed ones, do my prophets no harm!”  1 Chron. 16:19-22

So the first thing you need to note is that this is written about the nation of Israel – not any one “prophet.”

2nd, you have to notice that God never actually said this to anyone! It is merely a statement regarding how He had decreed that Israel would remain safe from the attacks from other nations during its 40 years of wandering.

3rd, it has nothing to do with legitimate criticisms of any who are in ministry or some mythical place of prophetic or apostolic leadership.

What is being taught, is that God was faithful to His covenant promises to Israel, even during their wilderness journeys.

Back to the title of this post: yes, the Bible “says” what is often quoted in this verse – but the Bible does not TEACH what so many people try to use this verse to say it does. Instead, the Bible requires God’s people to scrutinize its teachers, to root out false teaching and those whose lives are not commensurate with a godly lifestyle.

So, for instance, the Apostle Paul publicly confronts the Apostle Peter in Antioch when his actions contradict the Gospel. So the Prophet David is rebuked by Nathan due to his sin. So Jesus criticizes the church in Pergamum for not ferreting out those who hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, and the Church in Thyatira for tolerating a woman who called herself a prophetess, but led others into sexual immorality and spiritual compromise. God is in no way saying we ought not to “touch” them, but to rid ourselves of them. And so too – Paul can call the “super-apostles” of Corinth into account, and Deuteronomy 13 can instruct us: 1 “If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives you a sign or a wonder, 2 and the sign or wonder that he tells you comes to pass, and if he says, ‘Let us go after other gods,’ which you have not known, ‘and let us serve them,’ 3 you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams. For the LORD your God is testing you, to know whether you love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 You shall walk after the LORD your God and fear him and keep his commandments and obey his voice, and you shall serve him and hold fast to him.”

The Bible does NOT teach that supposed “anointed” ones or “prophets” are somehow immune from scrutiny, criticism or censure. In fact, it is just the opposite. For when the qualifications for those who would hold leadership positions in the Church are spelled out – they are to be evaluated by the congregation both as to their lifestyle, and their commitment to Biblical truth and competency in communicating and defending it.

Be careful Beloved that you find out what the Bible teaches, and not just what it “says.” It is true that Isa. 5:20 says “call evil good and good evil.” But that isn’t what it teaches. For the entire verse reads: “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!”

Don’t fall for the false-teacher’s tricks. READ THE TEXT – IN CONTEXT.

She trembles

               Smiles

                              Gleefully and feebly claps her hands

He smiles

               Laughs in conversation

                              Wheels her

Every day

               Same place

                              Same time

Simple joy

               Tenderness

                              Love in motion

I weep

               Rejoice

                              Pray for glory

The longer I continue to read and study Proverbs, the more my heart is amazed at the wondrous economy of wisdom the Spirit has packed into phrases like this in Prov. 20:29: “The glory of young men is their strength, but the splendor of old men is their gray hair.”

So, young men, yes, you can do exploits, good for you – but can you endure?

It is one thing to consider “look at what I can do!” It is the pride of the young, both emotionally and spiritually. But it is a far different thing to look back and say, “this is where the Lord took me. This is where He delivered me. This is where He met me, kept me, where He prevented me from following my own path.”

Youth reflects upon itself in the immediate. Age reflects upon the Lord and how that gray hair is a testimony to God’s faithfulness.

This is why Paul argues so vehemently against taking pride in spiritual gifts. It puts the spotlight upon “look what I can do” instead of upon “Look what He has done!”

May we grow wise enough in our youth to turn our eyes toward the glory of the God who made, us, keeps us, empowers us and promises us the unimaginable in Christ. To be more enamored with Him, rather than what He might have decided to gift us with, or do through us.

Not to us, O LORD, not to us, but to your name give glory,
for the sake of your steadfast love and your faithfulness!

The Holy Bible: English Standard Version. Crossway Bibles, 2016, p. Ps 115:1.

Out of sight, out of mind – so the saying goes. And nowhere is that more true than it is in our apprehension of God and His goodness as a constant, living reality to our souls.

So it is in Psalm 103, David needs to remind himself of who and what God is and has done, in order to restore an inward atmosphere of worship.

Note then in the Psalm this catalogue of “His benefits” – or as the 1985 Jewish Publication Society version calls them “His bounties.” But in either case, they are His benefits/bounties toward His own. They are personal. How He loves to bless His own Himself, and not just provide blessings impersonally or as rank and file, generic niceties.

So let these sink in Believer.

(v3) There is no species of sin beyond the power of His forgiveness.

(v3) And He grants forgiveness, not just of individual sins, but of our very sinfulness.

And then, healing from the effects of our sin.

The word for diseases here is only used 5 times in the OT and is always attached to the griefs the Lords lays upon people in punishment for sins. There is no species of suffering brought on by sin, that is beyond His mercy to heal.

(v4) He gives the promise of resurrection.

(v4) And grants the reality of His steadfast – not vacillating – love and mercy.

(v5) There is His desire to give us that which is a true blessing to us, and not decay our souls.

(v6) The privilege of looking forward to a day of complete justice.

(v7) And above all, His self-revelation, located in:

(v8) His imperturbable nature.

(v10) His dealing with us according to grace and mercy because His justice is satisfied in Christ.

(v13) His compassion on our weakness.

(v17) His personal, everlasting love.

(v19) And His divine superintendency over the entirety of our lives.

Remind yourself today of His great benefits.

O’er all the span of endless space
No atom’s hidden from your face
No object lacks your touch of hand
No creature void of your command

A Sovereign true in every way
Your daily work in full display
All Nature, but your own true task
Smile hid ‘neath Providence’s mask

Yet lo how poorly I conceive
How slow my heart to full believe
Such glory, power majesty
In love does condescend to me

The Son in all divinity
Leaves Heaven’s grand felicity
Enrobes Himself in human flesh
To come and die a sinner’s death

In conq’ring grace to overcome
My traitor’s heart in sin undone
To set a wicked captive free
And bind Himself to one like me

This mind so low can’t comprehend
Such love, I cannot apprehend
This Triune grand conspiracy
Unleashed in holy unity

Should Father God, and Christ the Son
Join with the Spirit, three in one
To bring about redemption’s plan
And save the dregs of fallen man

For strength! To know, I humbly cry
To bear such weight of glory high
The length, the width, the depth the height
Unknowable with all my might

Until at last my soul’s consumed
All thoughts and feelings full subsumed
And filled with God’s own fullness. Done
I bear the likeness of The Son

In my younger years, I fantasized about hosting a Talk/Debate TV show. I had determined then that if ever that should come to pass – I would start each discussion with: “Gentlemen, define your terms.” And only after that was done would we proceed. For if parties do not know what each other means by the words they use, very little progress can be made. And nowhere is this more important than when discussing Biblical and theological topics. It is why Paul in his discourse with the august brain trust at the Areopagus begins by defining what he means by using the word “God” before going one step further. Until they knew what he meant when he referred to God, they would import their own meaning(s) into it, and the Gospel would be lost.

Think about this just in terms of the word “Gospel.” Then find out what Roman Catholics mean by it, or Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and scads of others. Each has very different definitions from the other, and for many, very different definitions from how the Bible defines it. Or the term “Christian.” How many today would defer to something like the descriptors Paul uses for the Thessalonians: “how you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God, and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come.” 1 Th 1:9–10. Does that scream “Christian!” to you? It should.

So, “holiness.” The word gets thrown around all the time among Christians, but what we may mean by it might be subject to wide conceptions. For some, it only refers to behavioral conformity to Biblical and perhaps ecclesiastical norms. For others, it has to do with having been set apart for God. Still others may think of it only in terms of God’s own righteousness, and that then imparted or infused or whatever into Believers. But in J. C. Ryle’s book – he strives to use the word as pertains to Believers in one consistent sense: Being conformed to the mind and character of Christ. And he uses it in this sense interchangeably with the word sanctification – which he defines simply as growing in Christ.

As such, this book is not about listing rules which if followed, will make you holy. Nor is it rooted in learning how to keep those rules. It is not about whipping readers into behaviors and performances. Nor is it aimed at helping one achieve some sort of one-time, life transforming experience whereby “ZAP! – Now you’re holy!” It is a book about how we are to “grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ.” (Eph. 4:15) The privilege, call and duty of every true believer in Christ Jesus. Hence the full title of the book: “Holiness: Its Nature, Hindrances, Difficulties and Roots.”

With the skilled and steady hand of a spiritual surgeon, page after page finds Ryle doing what D. A. Carson says should be 2 key elements in every sermon – wounding, and healing. You will seldom read a book which is simultaneously as convicting or as encouraging as Ryle’s Holiness. I truly think it has no true equal in this regard.

Holiness, may be (in my humble opinion) the single most Gospel-centered, Christ-centered book I’ve ever read. And that is not for one moment to downgrade any of the multitude of profound writings of all my Puritan heroes – nor of any of the great “Doctors” of the Church. Christ has seen to it His Body is richly supplied in this way. And has so throughout history. But there is a unique richness and clarity, focus and singleness of purpose in these chapters that sets it apart into a category of its own.

At the risk of being overly reductionistic, let me cite two aspects of this book that make it so profoundly useful.

1. While he presses the need for growth in Christ, he hammers over and over the nature of our once-for-all justification and standing before God in Christ. This is essential in his mind to the Believer having a solid foundation under them while they encounter the very real struggles and failures in pursuing Christ.
2. And he cannot beat this drum enough; but his detailed accounting and stress upon the nature of the Christian life being a perpetual war against the world, and devil, and above all – the influence of indwelling sin – is of the utmost need for genuine growth in Christ. It prevents the Believer from self-condemnation, and from seeking after mythical one-time spiritual experiences that deal with sin once and for all in its inward motions.

On this last point, I cannot say enough myself. How many tender souls in Christ live perpetually suspecting their status before God because they find indwelling sin still so painfully present. And parallel to this is the striving after an imaginary place where I’ll no longer be tempted by X or Y or Z. Forgetting that sin does not die – we die to it. Daily we have to take up that cross. There is no mysterious super-spiritual plane to achieved where we are no longer bothered by such battles. Holiness is a clarion call for the Christian to “gird up your loins,” and to “act like men.”

In Chapter 4, titled “The Fight” a representative and classic portion in Ryle reads thus: “The first thing I have to say is this: “True Christianity is a fight. True Christianity! Let us mind that word “true.” There is a vast quantity of religion current in the world which is not true, genuine Christianity. It passes muster; it satisfies sleepy consciences; but it is not good money. It is not the real thing which was called Christianity eighteen hundred years ago. There are thousands of men and women who go to churches and chapels every Sunday, and call themselves Christians. Their names are in the baptismal register. They are reckoned Christians while they live. They are married with a Christian marriage-service. They mean to be buried as Christians when they die. But you never see any “fight” about their religion! Of spiritual strife, and exertion, and conflict, and self-denial, and watching, and warring, they know literally nothing at all. Such Christianity may satisfy man, and those who say anything against it may be thought very hard and uncharitable; but it certainly is not the Christianity of the Bible. It is not the religion which the Lord Jesus founded, and His Apostles preached. It is not the religion which produces real holiness. True Christianity is “a fight.”

I’m afraid we would be hard pressed to find such words from very many preachers or teachers today. Precious few. And until this truth is firmly in the heart and mind of the Believer – the “fight” will be experienced and processed as something foreign to the “victorious Christian life” rather than an essential feature of it.

I know of no single volume more needed in our day, nor more valuable to the Christian Believer in understanding and living out the Christian life than this one.

It is in my estimation, the finest companion to your Bible in practicality and applied Christian thought and living that you can lay your hands on.

If you read no other book this year, read this one.

There are books which I value greatly, and am edified by. Books that inform and feed the soul. And, there are books I just plain enjoy. I smile when reading them. There is a peculiar delight to be found in them. But rare indeed are those which combine the two as richly and deftly as Austin Brown’s “A Boisterously Reformed Polemic Against Limited Atonement.” It takes a skilled author to write a polemic work which engages in witty “repartee” without crossing over into “rip-apart-thee”, but Brown has done it. To the greater benefit of the Reformed camp of our day in the United States. May it find a wide and receptive audience.

Brown and I share some history. Not personally, I’ve never met the man. But in terms of somewhat shared experience.

Like many in Reformed Protestantism, I was taught that a strict view of Limited Atonement (the L in T.U.L.I.P. and SLA hereafter) was THE Reformed understanding. This view is sometimes labeled the “Owenic” view – after that towering genius of a theologian, John Owen, who for many remains its champion in residence. In truth, I had a very defective understanding of the history of the Church in general, and in the development of some doctrines within Orthodoxy – Limited Atonement in particular. As time and study would prove, many in my circle who would proudly embrace the names, writings and ministries of a John Bunyan, J. C. Ryle, Jonathan Edwards, Charles Davenant (if you restrict yourself to the Banner of Truth edition of his commentary on Colossians which sadly omits his dissertation on the death of Christ), Twisse, Ussher and even John Calvin himself (and a host of other Reformed luminaries) – and tout them as propounders and defenders of SLA – erred. The names above did not embrace SLA. They are misrepresented. And, SLA has never been THE Reformed position. Variations and nuances abound. But we don’t like nuance. We want black and white, concrete absolutism.

The process of moving from a high-Calvinist view of SLA (I differentiate here between High and Hyper Calvinism) to a real and objective atonement for the sins of all – was long, arduous and painful. It came at great cost, especially in terms of pastoral fellowship and relationships. But it has been worth it. Not least because I found that I had been parsing the call of the Gospel in ways which quite frankly, were shameful. In my research, I came upon this from a sermon by Jonathan Edwards: “”Come to Christ and accept salvation. You are invited to come to Christ, heartily to close with Him, and to trust in Him for salvation. If you do so, you shall have the benefit of His glorious contrivance. You shall have the benefit of all, as much as if the whole had been contrived for you alone. God has already contrived everything that is needful for your salvation; and there is nothing wanting but your consent. Since God has taken this matter of the redemption of sinners into His own hand, He has made a thorough work of it. He has not left it for you to finish. Satisfaction is already made; righteousness is already wrought out; death and hell are already conquered. The Redeemer has already taken possession of glory, and keeps it in His hands to bestow on them who come to Him. There were many difficulties in the way, but they are all removed. The Savior has already triumphed over all, and is at the right hand of God to give eternal life to His people. Salvation is already brought to your door; and the Savior stands, knocks, and calls that you would open to Him so that He might bring it to you. There remains nothing but your consent. All the difficulty now remaining is with your own heart. If you perish now, it must be wholly at your door. It must be because you would not come to Christ that you might have life, and because you virtually choose death rather than life.” My heart ached to preach the Gospel like that. But in my circles, some of those expressions would have been looked upon quite dubiously.

But by God’s grace, in time, I was freed. How I wish I had had two helps at the time which are available now: David Allen’s magisterial “The Extent of The Atonement: A Historical and Critical Review.” And Austin Brown’s “boisterously Reformed Polemic.” Dr. Allen’s work thoroughly debunks the myth of SLA being THE Reformed stance. In that regard, it is utterly unassailable. And in Brown’s book, you have a thoughtful dismantling of the logic errors of SLA, along with careful exegesis of the most pertinent passages. The 2 together would have saved me years of personal study. But then again, maybe I needed to read the original sources and work through the exegetical issues on my own. I don’t know.

Now the title itself ought to clue you in that this volume will contain a lot of tongue-in-cheek banter. It does not disappoint. While I found so much of it refreshing and just flat out fun, some of my SLA friends will perhaps be offended. But Brown does not write to wound. He writes in this style to jog and jar the reader out of unquestioned paradigms. It is effective. And don’t let his lightheartedness fool you into thinking his points are not salient and rooted in serious Biblical exposition. It is not theological fluff. But it is intended to point out over and over, the hidden folly behind some of the reasoning and passage twisting which has to go on in defending SLA. And underneath it all, I think I detect an edge which is stained with personal pain. But pain which has yielded sweet fruit. He does not denigrate any person. But he fearlessly attacks ideas. As it should be.

Since I started my journey in this area, I have begun to detect a corrective wave sweeping into our Reformed camp in terms SLA. I fear, lest, like Roger Miller’s old lyric “England swings like a pendulum do”, that some will swing too far in response. In debates like these, both sides are prone to chuck babies and bathwater together. But Brown remains balanced. He rightfully feels the pinch of having been misled (if “lied to” is too strong) about the historical realities of the discussion. I know I feel that way. But it does not lapse into bitterness, even in his discursive “rants.”

When all is said and done, I think there are two target groups this book will help the most. Those like myself a few years ago, who were already recoiling at a Denmarkian odor but were just starting to find out where the smell was coming from. It will save them hours, days, weeks, months and perhaps even years of sorting out tinted exegesis. And those who as new Christians, or at least new to the debate, are confused about where to go with their discomfort. It can spare them a much and not needed theological detour. There is a small 3^rd group. Some of my dear brethren who are still in the SLA camp, but can’t quite put their finger on the uneasiness they feel (but never feel they can safely voice) over SLA. May this serve as a beacon drawing them back away from some rocky shores.

If there is one concept I pray each reader could grasp in it all – it would be this: Yes, there are stark antitheses in Scripture. Sin is not righteousness. Dead is not alive. Christ is either God, or not. But there are both/and dynamics at play in Scripture too. So, is Jesus fully God or fully man? Yes. Is Scripture God breathed, or penned by men? Yes. Is the Godhead three, or one? Yes. Did Jesus die for all, or for the elect? Yes. Requiring yes or no answers from questions which cannot be answered fully or properly that way, makes a hash of the Bible. One of the finer skills in Biblical exegesis is determining whether or not you have a true antithesis before you, or a place where only a both/and dynamic answers more truly. Get that in the SLA discussion, and you will have heard Brown – and understood your Bible better. Brother Brown beats that drum a lot. Necessarily so.

Bottom line?

Buy this book. Better yet – READ IT!  

A Most Important and Timely Book

I don’t know about you, but if you are anything like me, current debates about Black Lives Matter, CRT (Critical Race Theory), Neo-Marxism, etc., while they permeate the public square, suffer from a lack of clarity as to what each actually means – and the import of each. Enter Douglas Groothuis’ profound and much needed book – “FIRE IN THE STREETS: How You Can Confidently Respond to Incendiary Cultural Topics.”

In 9 short and very readable chapters, Groothuis unpacks the cultural terms slung about by pundits and commentators from all sides clearly and concisely. Especially appealing to their historical origins and popular permutations.

At last! Some clarity. I am most grateful for it.

With endorsements from the likes of Os Guinness, J.P. Moreland and Voddie Baucham, one hardly needs my $.02. But I’ve never let that stop me before and I won’t let it do so now.

If one is to understand the current debates, and respond to them in any meaningful way, we need to grasp the central concepts themselves – so as to avoid straw-man rejoinders, and where they come from originally – so as to rightly discern original trajectories. Ideas do not exist in vacuums. They not only have inevitable consequences, they also have a point of origin which determines the goal(s) the originators or adopters and proponents expect those ideas to achieve when taking effect. This is where Groothuis excels. He get it. Gets them. Gets their original intent. Even if many of the modern adopters themselves do not perceive where the thought systems will (if uninterrupted) inevitably lead. And he exposes the underlying and often hypocritically nefarious and hidden agendas which are really there. And in it all, he continually calls us back to consider the Gospel of Jesus Christ as the true answer to society’s ills.

This is an exceedingly important book for our point in history. It is a must read for informed Christians. And I plan to use it evangelistically due to its saliency and unsparing willingness to grapple with the issues at their base. I can give it without reservation to “Conservatives” for its cogency in addressing the topics with facts and logic, while unflinchingly drawing the reader back to the need for and the role of the Gospel as meeting the need behind the perceived need. And, I can do so for non-Conservatives, in opening a dialog based on facts, and not mere emotional heat.

If there are any weaknesses in the book, it would be in two places.

The section on reparations I found well-reasoned, but failing somewhat in addressing the Biblical response more thoroughly. It failed to be as comprehensive as I would have liked. I agreed with the conclusions but wished he had dealt with some areas which required a deeper and more nuanced understanding of events such as David’s handling of Saul’s sin against the Gibeonites in 2 Sam. 21, and how in the minor prophets, God often calls nations into account for historical sins committed generations before. I think that would have added weight to his argument in the face of what I imagine will be the criticisms of some.

The 2nd place was in the handling of the George Floyd killing. While at a distance, we can of course see that Floyd was a man with a troubled and criminal past. But unless we could show that the responding officers were aware of that past at the time, and that such knowledge somehow informed how they dealt with Floyd that day – it should not be used in examining the isolated facts of that event. Much like in jurisprudence where “prior bad acts” are not admissible in prosecution unless they can be shown to demonstrate a relevant pattern – Groothuis’ use of them here could be seen as an attempt to mitigate his treatment by police. Mind you I said could. I don’t believe that’s what Groothuis was trying to do. But I think it could easily be read that way by some. I think it may have been wiser to have left out Floyd’s history in that place, and to have confined his analysis only to the facts at hand at the time.

Those two things considered, they in no wise negate the ultimate conclusions drawn. They in no wise lessen the fundamental power of the book and its vital role in helping all readers, Christians and non-Christians alike, in wrestling through the issues, carefully, soundly, compassionately, Biblically and with an eye to truly seeking to provide a remedy.

I highly commend it to you.