John Barach has an intriguing post on the passage in Mark (3:20-35) which speaks of Jesus’ “own people” wanting to lay hold of him because they believed Him to be “out of His mind.” John points out that this story is interrupted by a second story, Jesus’ confrontation with the scribes from Jerusalem who claim that he casts out demons by the ruler of the demons (3:22-30). Then, in verse 31, the original story picks up again with the identification of those referred to as “His own people” (v. 21) with His mother and brothers (v. 31).

There is an interesting play on words here as well. The word translated “out of His mind” is related etymologically to the word which means “standing outside.” John writes, “So Jesus’ ‘own people’ think Jesus is the one ’standing outside’ (= crazy). But Jesus’ family members turn out to be the ones literally ’standing outside,’ while Jesus identifies those who are sitting inside as his true family, those who, in obedience to God’s will, are ’sitting around him’ (3:32, 34). To be his true family — his true mother and brothers — his natural mother and brothers ought to come inside instead of calling him out.”

Jesus goes on (3:24-25) to declare that divided households cannot stand. If His own family (Mary and His brothers) oppose Him, then they will be “outsiders” and not members of His “true family” — those who sit around Him and receive His word. Barach observes, “If Jesus’ family thinks Jesus is ’standing outside’ in the sense of being insane, then their household won’t ’stand.’” As Jesus says (v. 35), His true family consists of those who do “the will of God.” If Mary and His brothers desire to be acknowledged as His “own people” they must trust in Him and obey just like the rest of the Family.

Thus, we see that Mary joined with Jesus’ brothers (who at this time were yet unbelieving) against Jesus Himself. All of them repented of opposing Jesus later of course. But here we have more evidence of the reality regarding Mary. Rather than being the unfailingly faithful woman who never wavered in doubt or unbelief, we see that Mary too, like the rest of us, had moments of weakness and failures of faith. She was a sinner and had to experience the forgiveness of her Son just like the rest of us.

And, that’s no insult nor is it a derogatory judgment. It’s the truth that Mary herself acknowledged from the moment we first see her in the gospels. The angel declares that Mary had “found grace” with God. Mary was delivered from the consequences of her father Adam’s sin in the same way the rest of us are — not by an immaculate conception, but by the grace of God which forgives us and delivers us from all sin.

Our family went to see The Blind Side during Thanksgiving week and enjoyed it immensely. I had read Michael Lewis’ book a couple of years ago and enjoyed that a great deal as well. If you haven’t yet seen the movie or read the book, the story is about Michael Oher — a huge young man who grew up in the projects in Memphis and ended up being adopted by a Christian family (Sean and Leigh Ann Touhy) who provide, love, and care for Michael as he struggles through high school and develops into a scholarship football player (eventually signing with Ole Miss after being recruited by nearly every major Division 1 school in the country).

It’s a great story about the power of Christian compassion and love. Is it sappy? Youbetcha! But not in an unreal, manipulative way. This really happened and there are witnesses to confirm it. I liked the movie and would encourage you to see it.

But I’ve heard that some of our “black leaders” (along with some black followers) have found the movie offensive and paternalistic. “So, Michael could never have made it if these rich white people hadn’t taken him in. Well, praise the Lawd, chile! Bless Gawd for all these nice, sensitive white people, savin our chillin from the ghetto and all those terrible influences in the black community.”

Ok. I get it. And yes, I do see how this could be used to make ignorant and uncaring white people feel good about their skin color while ignoring the real story.

But here’s the truth: Michael Oher was deserted by his father and mother. He had no place to go. If it hadn’t been for a Christian woman in Michael’s neighborhood who had compassion for him, and insisted that her son find a place for Michael in a Christian school, he would likely not have survived. And if it hadn’t been for the Touhys, Michael wouldn’t have survived in the Christian school.

Leigh Ann Touhy could have sought out “government assistance” and gotten Michael under the care of “Social Services” if all she had desired was good feelings. She could have written a check. She didn’t have to take Michael into her home or feed him or clothe him or really care about him. But she did. And so did Sean and so did their children. And Michael survived and grew and became fruitful, flourishing under their love, and today is thankful to God for giving him a real father and mother — even though they are rich, white Southerners.

If you want to call this sappy sentimentalism, have at it. If you want to view it as an effort to glorify Southern racist culture, knock yourself out. But if you do, know that you’re missing the point of the story.

The story is about the calling God has given His people. This is what we are called to do: care for the broken, the oppressed, the unloved — and by God’s grace be instruments in their healing, protection, and restoration. That’s what The Blind Side is all about. And when you think about it, it’s not really all that unusual after all. God’s people have been doing this sort of thing for over 2,000 years now.

This is who we are. This is what we do. Sean and Leigh Ann had the privilege of doing this for a young man who has become a very gifted professional athlete. The rest of us have the privilege of doing it for those who may remain quite unknown and undistinguished. But the glory is the same — this is how the world is changed.

Reverend Bill DeJong has done us all a great favor by giving a careful examination of the URCNA FV Study Committee Report which has been touted for its wonderful exposition and critique of “Federal Vision” theology. Rev. DeJong has taken the time to go through the report (in 17 brief posts which you can read on his blog) and has pointed out the numerous shortcomings of it. The sad thing is, this report is probably better than the OPC AND PCA reports.

But if you want to know why many of us have been frustrated to the point of almost being unwilling to discuss any these issues at all, read what Rev. DeJong says (and, trust me, he’s only hitting the high points, much more could be said). If the men who served on the various FV committees of the NAPARC denominations really care about truth, it would be nice to see some evidence of that in their reports. But so far, . . . nothing.

But in spite of that, Rev. DeJong deserves our thanks for taking the time to do something the rest of us were too disheartened over to bother with. It is encouraging to find someone who cares enough to examine things carefully.

There’s a great sale going on till midnight tonight over at Athanasius Press. Every book is on sale for at least 50% off!

This is a good time to pick up copies of the Through New Eyes Commentary series as well as some of the other works that you haven’t been able to obtain yet.

In addition AA Media has items on sale (click on “Conference recordings” and “Sermon series” links). It’s a great opportunity to pick up some profitable Christmas gifts for friends and family (and for yourself!). Go over and check it out.

If you have not read Peter Leithart’s Deep Exegesis, what in the world are you thinking????

Please.

Start using your time better!

You need to get this book and read it.

Now.

The video below is the first part of a 50 minute lecture on the truth about the Crusades and Islam. Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and is one of the leading experts on Islam. He is the author of one of my favorite books on Islam: The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades), 2005 and Religion of Peace: Why Christianity is and Islam Isn’t, 2007. This talk was given to the Danish free press society, in Copenhagen. Take a few minutes and listen to all five parts of this lecture, you won’t be sorry.

[HT: Ralph Smith]

So, once again, another one of Allah’s boys has attempted to disprove the fact that Islam is a religion of peace. Now, everyone is falling over themselves trying to find proof that Hasan was an unstable “Islamic extremist,” a “jihadist,” a “fanatical terrorist,” etc., etc. — i.e., anything but what he really is: a faithful, obedient Muslim.

Here’s the problem: As long as we continue to portray Islamic terrorists as “extremists,” “nutcases,” and “whackos” we’re missing the point. The ones who kill are NOT extremists — they’re simply faithful Muslims. All devout Muslims must submit to the Koran which obligates them to kill Christians, Jews, and all other “unbelievers.” Those who refuse to do this are the exceptions. THEY are the abnormal ones — NOT Hasan. He’s just being obedient and following the teachings of Muhammad consistently. In fact, if a Muslim objects to Muhammad’s teachings on this point — he opens himself up to being treated like an infidel as well. It’s only neo-orthodox Muslims and Islamic hypocrites that think murder is a bad thing.

Until we acknowledge this, we’ll continue to put ourselves at risk. We’ll continue to allow devout Muslims into the military. We’ll continue to employ them as baggage handlers at our airports, and allow them to hold positions from which they can cause great harm in a very short time. Someone says, “Wait. You don’t want us to start discriminating against people because of their religion do you?” Let me answer with another question: “Would you think it wrong if I refused to hire a convicted, self-confessed child molester to run my day care center?” And if I did do such a foolish thing and he started molesting the children, would I have grounds to protest that I didn’t realize he was a fanatical child molester?

It’s time to label Islam accurately: It’s a Satanic cult built upon lies, hatred, intimidation, and murder. Until we are willing to acknowledge this truth, we will continue to adopt and follow policies that put the citizens of our country at enormous risk. To presume that most Muslims are hypocrites is folly. The time for being surprised and shocked that there are Muslims who will actually follow Muhammad’s command and kill a bunch of unarmed and defenseless “infidels” for the glory of Allah and the opportunity to have a flesh party with his 72 virgins, is past.

I continue to get inquiries asking if I think we’re living in the “last days” (because of all the shenanigans being pulled by Obama and friends). My answer is very profound and thoughtful. I usually say, “nope.” But Mark Horne has taken the trouble to spell out in a brief space, why I say this. Go here and see for yourself. Short, to the point, clear, excellent. That’s what my “nope” means. Thanks Mark.

A few weeks ago I ordered (online) a copy of the Liberty Fund’s “Portable Library of Liberty.” The Liberty Fund is offering this CD free of charge to anyone who requests a copy (go online here to order). Well, it arrived today and I’ve just spent a half hour or so perusing the contents — and I have to say, it’s amazing.

There are over 900 books (unabridged and searchable) included along with 35 hours of MP3 audio of interviews with some of the leading thinkers of our day. All the books are in three formats (facsimile PDF, HTML, and PDF E-Books). I was astonished at the breadth of titles included (theological, historical, classical, and philosophical). You can browse the CD by title, author, period, schools of thought, subject areas, or topics. All the present Liberty Fund titles are there along with the complete works of Shakespeare, Adam Smith, Thomas Jefferson, Montesquieu, John Stuart Mill, all the poetical works of Milton, and many others (these books would cost you hundreds of $$$ to obtain today — if you could find them).

There are a large selection of works on the American Revolution and Constitution, the English Revolution, and the French Revolution (containing some of the best literature ever written on these epochal events). You can read some of the great writings on Education, Economics, Socialism and the classic Liberal critique, Art, Political theory, and even Theology (some of Calvin’s commentaries along with His Institutes; the complete Summa Theologica; the writings of Wycliffe, Hus, Zwingli, Luther, Bede, Augustine, Luther, John Robinson, and Richard Hooker are included among others).

All in all, this is a wonderful tool and to think that you can get it just for the asking is about as good as it gets. We are indebted to the Liberty Fund for making this available — order yours and, while you’re at it, write them a note of thanks.

So director Roland Emmerich loves to destroy landmarks in his movies (the Empire State building, the White House, the Capital Records building in LA, etc.) and he goes at it with abandon in his latest one, 2012. Nothing is spared: The White House goes down (again), the Sistine chapel, St. Peter’s, Christ the Redeemer in Rio, all are destroyed (along with many other famous places) in the movie — all the prominent landmarks . . . with one exception. Emmerich says he really wanted to depict the destruction of the Kaaba (shown on the left) in Mecca. Why didn’t he, you ask? Here’s why (from the Sci-Fi Wire):

“Well, I wanted to do that, I have to admit,” Emmerich says. “But my co-writer Harald said I will not have a fatwa on my head because of a movie. And he was right. … We have to all … in the Western world … think about this. You can actually … let … Christian symbols fall apart, but if you would do this with [an] Arab symbol, you would have … a fatwa, and that sounds a little bit like what the state of this world is. So it’s just something which I kind of didn’t [think] was [an] important element, anyway, in the film, so I kind of left it out.”

ok. Here’s the state of the world — Christian symbols may be exploded, destroyed, defaced, and treated with reckless abandon and Christians understand that it’s just a movie, it’s no big deal, you’re telling a story and it’s ok. But if you so much as touch the symbols of Islam (which we are told over and over again is a “peaceful” religion), some maniac will think he’s doing God’s will if he can find you and cut off your head.

And that does tell you something. The only reason most people “respect” Islam is because they don’t want to be chased down and killed in the street.

[HT: to Remy]

Today is All Hallows Eve and marks the anniversary of Martin Luther’s nailing of his “95 Theses” against indulgences on the door of the castle church in Wittenberg and so providing the spark that set off the chain of events which we today call the Protestant Reformation. It’s a great and glorious anniversary and it reminds me of some of the things that are available from the Bucer Institute which will give you a better grasp of its significance.

First, are Tim LeCroy’s lectures at our Fall “Special Session” on the Middle Ages which were given last Saturday. These talks will give you a grasp of the period and some invaluable background to give a better understanding of what happened after Luther posted his theses in 1517. They should be available very soon for downloading.

Second, you can also obtain the lectures Steven Wedgeworth and I gave on “Romanism & Orthodoxy” in our first Bucer class of the year. The CDs are available here and the MP3 downloads are available here.

And all this reminds me to tell you that you should register for our 2010 Pastors Conference which will address the topic “The Necessity of the Reformation” — you can do so here.

Happy Reformation Day/All Hallows Eve!

for those of you still undecided about what to wear:

Each year at this time questions arise regarding the celebration of Halloween and if Christians should participate in it. Many Christians view Halloween as an expression of Satan-worship (with all its pagan roots and fruits). I’m sympathetic and certainly agree that not every practice connected with Halloween should be tolerated or imitated. Christians clearly, must be careful and thoughtful here and guard against the spirit of the world which does in fact worship Satan (though often unawares). But that’s only half the work. The other half involves refusing to allow Satan to get credit for things that don’t belong to him.

It is interesting how Satan works. He is not creative. He does not invent things. But he is expert in twisting good things into instruments of evil. He is a genius when it comes to perversion — turning things upside down. He loves to take the things of God and twist them into instruments of ungodliness.

The Church’s job in many ways comes down to turning everything that has been turned upside down by sin and Satan, rightside up again. Reconciliation means upturning those things that have been overturned by sin and twisted into instruments of unrighteousness, so that they bring glory to God again. This is precisely what the Church has done in regard to sensuality and sexuality. Over the years the Church has performed the service of re-instructing the world regarding the truth and proper place of the family, the arts, entertainment, business and labor, and many other fields of human endeavor.

But we must not forget that the Church has had to do this because it has itself been deceived and misled by Satan concerning these things. And such is the case, at least in part, with the celebration of Halloween.

It was no accident that Luther did what he did on “Halloween” — “all saints eve.” The word “Halloween” is of course simply a contraction for “All Hallow’s Eve.” The word “hallow” means “sanctify” or “saint.” It is simply synonym for the word “holy” (thus we pray “hallowed be Thy name” when we desire God to glorify and exalt His name in the earth). The church, following the pattern of beginning the celebration of feasts the evening before the actual feast day, began the celebration of All Saints Day the evening before (All Saints Eve, “Halloween”).

All Saints Day is the celebration of the victory of the all saints who, because of their union with Christ have triumphed over the world, the flesh, and the devil. The observance of various celebrations of All Saints arose in the late 300s, and in the late 700s these various celebrations were united and fixed on November 1.

Contrary to modern legend, the origin of All Saints Day and All Saints Eve in European Christianity had nothing to do with Celtic paganism or the Church’s fight against the pagan Druids (and serious questions are being raised now by scholars about what we have been told regarding the Druids. Many are coming to believe that much of what we have been told is actually a myth concocted in the 19th century by neo-pagans).

In any case, with the coming of Christ and the completion of His work, we no longer fight against flesh and blood, but against principalities and powers, against fallen angels who bind the hearts and minds of men in ignorance and fear. Jesus’ work purchased our victory and made it certain, but the war is not yet over. He stuck the decisive blow and we have the privilege of carrying out the mop-up operation. And we do battle against these evil spirits with the weapons given to us by the Spirit; the weapons of faith, prayer, joyful celebration, and faithful obedience. By these means we will be victorious in Christ. Thus Paul assures us, “The God of peace will crush Satan under your feet shortly.” So, century by century the Christian faith has rolled back the demonic realm of ignorance, fear, and superstition. The feast of All Saints reminds us of this glorious victory of the Church over Satan and his hosts.

The Christian calendar turns the entire year into a drama. Beginning with the Feast of the Incarnation, the world moves progressively from darkness to light. The death of Winter is turned into the resurrection of Spring which corresponds to the Feast of the Resurrection (Easter). Then comes Pentecost and the time of growth and maturity. We do battle with the effects of sin and the curse upon the ground — we fight the weeds and the bugs to protect the seed until the harvest. When the harvest comes in, Satan, seeing the defeat of his efforts to destroy us again, seeks one last time to achieve victory before the year’s end. October 31 came to signify that day. Satan seeks to destroy the saints, but he is banished again by the victory of Christ and the joy and gladness that now has filled the earth through the Church.

The Church vanquishes the demonic realm by its joyful worship of the risen and conquering Savior. Because Jesus has overcome, we are able to laugh and make merry in the face of evil. Indeed, this is the place for holy mockery. Satan’s great sin (and our great sin) is pride. He has been brought down by the Son of God and has endured a spectacular fall. Thus, we read that Jesus make a public spectacle of him by his work on the cross (Col 2:15). Satan has been exposed as a ridiculous pretender and impostor and has been publicly humiliated.

To drive Satan from us, we ridicule him. This is why the custom arose of portraying Satan as being dressed in a red suit with horns and a tail. No one actually thought that he really looked like this (the Bible teaches that he appears as “an angel of light”) but the idea was to make fun of him because he has been defeated by the victorious Son and he no longer has power over us. He is not to be feared any longer but resisted steadfast and mocked.

This was the original purpose of placing gargoyles on the cathedrals. They symbolized the Church ridiculing the enemy. Gargoyles were not demonic symbols but rather they depicted the attitude of the Church toward Satan and his angels (making faces, sticking their tongues out, etc.). The demonic hosts are no longer any threat to us. The church is invincible against the threats and attacks of the evil one. And thus, we who were once slaves of Satan are now able to laugh at and make fun of him.

So, October 31, the eve of All Saints, came to be associated with the defeat of evil and of all demonic powers by Christ and through Christ, by all His people. And it was for this reason, that Martin Luther chose October 31 to post his 95 theses against indulgences and the wicked practices of the Church on the door of the castle church in Wittenberg. He chose this day intentionally, to connect it with the defeat of all things that exalted themselves against Christ and His glorious saving work. And ever since, Halloween has also been the day we mark as the beginning of the Reformation.

And it was for this reason the custom arose of mocking the demonic realm by dressing up children in costumes. The purpose of the costumes was to mock the humiliated Enemy of Jesus. Because the power of Satan has been broken once and for all, even children can mock him. The work of our Savior (who is Love perfected) has banished all fear. Satan has been cast out of his position of authority and rule by the overwhelming, overcoming love of the Son.

Now it is true that the world has lost the original intent of Halloween and they now think of it as a time of mischief and fear of the unknown. But this is not the first time the world has gotten our symbolism wrong is it? Satan still enjoys perverting holy customs and traditions and he has been particularly successful in twisting the meaning of Halloween. So that now this night has in fact become a night of fear and wickedness and debauchery for many as men take advantage of the time to destroy and injure others and carry on perversion. But this only serves as another reason for us to reclaim this day and put it back in its proper place.

Many if not all of the traditions that have arisen had their origins in the gospel and the glorious freedom and life that the gospel brings to us. Children going door to door, collecting candy from neighbors, may not seem like a big deal to us in our society — where candy is a commonplace. But in earlier ages, candy was something rare and precious, simply because bread itself was often a rarity for many in the world. For most people throughout most of history, candy was a special treat that could only be had on very special occasions. For most people in most of the world, children begging in the streets was not a game, but a matter of life and death. Children coming to your door was not viewed as innocent fun, but often viewed as a threat to your own sparse food supply. And usually children doing this were rebuffed in fear and anger.

So what a contrast it is for children to have a night where they can play a begging game and go door to door asking for food and receiving not ordinary food but candy! A night when they would not be chased away in anger, but given special treats that were rare and precious! What can this mean? It means that a new day has come. The old world of death and destruction has been overthrown and now the new world of life and light has come in Christ Jesus.

Reformation Day or Halloween is not a time to look back wistfully at the past. We are not called to pine away for the past or to engage in sentimental dreaming about the “good ole days” (even if they actually were “good ole days”!).

The purpose of commemorative celebrations is to encourage us to move forward — armed not only with the knowledge of the past but with the confidence that history gives us because of what Jesus has done. We do not worship the past, but we do learn from it. One of the great lessons we can learn from the past is that the Church has never surrendered the past to Satan. The church has never retreated from reclaiming the world for King Jesus.

It is certainly understandable that Christians are uneasy and cautious about Halloween (and it seems to me that this is not at all unwise). But our uneasiness and caution must not move us to surrender truth. Originally Halloween was a Christian celebration and that is why we need to celebrate it today. We need to again refocus the world upon the victory of the saints. And thus, All Saints Eve is an important opportunity to demonstrate the victory of Christ over all evil. And it is a victory not just for Protestants, but for the whole world.

This celebration gives us another opportunity to imitate God. The psalmist says that when God observed all the conspiracies and perverse efforts of men to oppose and destroy His purposes, He laughed (Psa. 2). Halloween, All Saints Eve, gives us an opportunity to join in God’s holy laughter and mock the enemies of our Savior — from the least to the greatest. No matter what the world says or does, He is the King, eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God — Lord over all Lords, king over all the kings of the earth. The world may revel in death, but we will celebrate life — life abundant, eternal, and triumphant.

[I'm indebted to a number of articles and essays by various authors for the content here, but especially to James Jordan's article "Concerning Halloween" in the Biblical Horizons newsletter.]

If you’re in the area, you ought to come to our Bucer Institute Fall Special Session with Rev. Tim LeCroy. Tim will be giving four lectures on Medieval Theology. It all begins tomorrow morning at 9:00. Go here for more information. See you there!

If you’ve been wondering what to make of all the neo-Reformed fascination with the Lutheran “law-gospel” hermeneutic and the “two Kingdoms” theology (which has become all the rage among the theo-profs at Westminster West Seminary and other places), John Frame’s review of Michael Horton’s latest book (Christless Christianity: The Alternative Gospel of the American Church) will help you think more clearly about it all.

Professor Frame with his usual clear-headed analysis exposes the confused thinking that supports these positions and the real danger that lies underneath it. Here are a couple of examples:

On the Law-Gospel distinction, Frame writes:

But as a matter of fact, that separation of law and gospel does not have biblical support. One should ask here, is there anything in Scripture that does not reveal God’s saving purposes? Jesus said that all of Scripture testified of him (Luke 24:25-27, John 5:39). And is there anything in the authoritative scriptures that does not impose a requirement upon us, at least the requirement to believe? But if the whole Bible can be considered law, and can also be considered gospel, how can law and gospel be separate?

Further, the gospel as proclaimed by Jesus and the apostles contains a command, the command to repent and believe (Mark 1:14-15, Acts 2:38-40). The law, on the other hand, is often based on divine deliverance, as in the case of the Decalogue (Ex. 20:2). The law itself is a gift of God’s grace, according to Ps. 119:29.The gospel is the proclamation of the coming kingdom (Isa. 52:7, Matt. 4:17, 23) in which God’s will shall be done on earth as in heaven (Matt. 6:10). It is the announcement that God’s law will prevail. So the law is good news, gospel. And the gospel is law.

And in regard to Horton’s application of the “two Kingdoms” perspective:

This discussion is sometimes caught up in eschatological debate: is the Kingdom of God only future or is it in some sense present now? Sometimes it is waylaid by debates about the roles of church and state (as Horton’s exposition of the “two kingdoms” view on 206-217). But apart from these debates, isn’t it obvious that when people come to trust in Christ they seek to bring biblical standards to bear in their workplaces? Paul says, “So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.” (1 Cor. 10:31) Can we possibly exclude from “whatever” our work in politics, the arts, or finance? And can we possibly forbid the church to give us guidance in our attempts to improve society?

What does it mean to be engaged in politics to the glory of God? That is not always easy to define. I would agree with Horton that Christians often exaggerate their expertise on social issues; sometimes nonbelievers can do a better job of gathering the relevant facts. But if I am charged with the work of planning national health care, I certainly must ask how biblical principles apply to that. When a believer produces a sculpture, it may be difficult for him to see how his faith is relevant to each stroke of his tool; but he certainly doesn’t want critics referring to it as a symptom of modern nihilism.

And here’s part of his conclusion:

So Christless Christianity is essentially an evaluation of the American church, not from the standpoint of a generic Protestant theology, but from what I must regard as a narrow, factional, even sectarian perspective. Readers need to understand this.

Read the entire review here.