Deus graciosamente presenteou Sua Igreja com uma variedade de dons úteis e que fortalecem Seu povo. Ao lermos o Novo Testamento, podemos ver que Deus proveu esses dons na forma de líderes que lideram e servos que servem, o que torna cada igreja local forte e vibrante.

Os doze apóstolos ocupam um lugar significativo na história cristã, pois foram escolhidos pelo próprio Jesus Cristo para divulgar a mensagem do reino de Deus. Jesus chamou os doze apóstolos e dotou sua Igreja de dons apostólicos específicos para cumprir Sua missão. Compreender seu trabalho e o papel que desempenharam como um presente para a Igreja primitiva é de vital importância no estudo do cristianismo.

Quem são os doze?

Os doze apóstolos foram escolhidos por Jesus dentre seu grupo maior de discípulos. Jesus escolheu a dedo esses homens específicos para se tornarem seus seguidores e líderes mais próximos. Embora todos os crentes possam ser referidos como discípulos, o termo “apóstolo” foi reservado para este grupo seleto que foi comissionado e enviado em missão especial por Cristo.

Cada apóstolo tinha personalidade e antecedente distinto, o que contribuiu para a diversidade do grupo. Eles eram Simão Pedro, André, Tiago, João, Filipe, Bartolomeu (Natanael), Mateus (Levi), Tomé, Tiago (filho de Alfeu), Simão (o zelote), Judas (filho de Tiago) e Judas Iscariotes (o traidor).

Quando Jesus estava na encosta da montanha, grandes multidões o seguiam. Ele aproveitou a oportunidade para separar doze homens dentre os discípulos gerais e os chamou especificamente de apóstolos. Eles são frequentemente referidos como “os Doze” nas Escrituras, mas o termo apóstolo é de extremama importancia.

Na língua grega, o termo apóstolo (ἀπόστολος) era usado fora das Escrituras para se referir a navios cargueiros que seriam carregados com especiariase depois despachados de um porto para outro através de um canal fluvial onde seria finalmente descarregado e entregue. Quando Jesus emprega o termo para se referir ao seu grupo seleto de pregadores, ele está comunicando algo de significativo. Os apóstolos receberam uma responsabílidade sagrada e foram enviados em missão para transmitir uma grande Mensagem. Eles começaram em Jerusalém e depois espalharam o Evangelho até os confins da Terra.

Os dons Apostólicos

Quando Jesus chamou os doze apóstolos, concedeu-lhes poder e autoridade sobre demônios e a curar enfermos. Os dons apostólicos estavam intimamente ligados à sua missão de pregar as Boas Novas do Reino de Deus. Por intermédio dos sinais miraculosos, a autenticidade de seu apostolado e a mensagem que proclamavam seriam validadas. É importante notar que esses dons eram temporários e especificamente ligados aos apóstolos e associados durante a era da Igreja primitiva.

Deus escolheu usar milagres, maravilhas e sinais para direcionar a atenção para Seu trono Soberano e validar seus líderes escolhidos. No Êxodo, quando Moisés foi acusado de conduzir Israel para longe de faraó, o líder rebelde decidiu desobedecer à ordem de Deus. Foi por meio de uma série de sinais que serviram de pragas que Deus demonstrou a realidade de que Seu Trono e a sua superioridade ao de faraó.

Eu, porém, endurecerei o coração de Faraó, e multiplicarei na terra do Egito os meus sinais e as minhas maravilhas. Exodo 7.3

No Novo Testamento, temos um vislumbre de Jesus realizando milagres, maravilhas e sinais em Seu Ministério terreno. Esses sinais incluíam curar os enfermos, dar vista aos cegos, fazer os coxos andarem, surdos ouvirem, ressuscitar os mortos, expulsar demônios e repreender o vento e as ondas com Autoridade Soberana. Após a morte, sepultamento e ressurreição de Jesus, Pedro pregou no Pentecostes e chamou as pessoas ao arrependimento. Em seu famoso sermão, ele disse o seguinte:

Homens israelitas, escutai estas palavras: A Jesus Nazareno, homem aprovado por Deus entre vós com maravilhas, prodígios e sinais, que Deus por ele fez no meio de vós, como vós mesmos bem sabeis; (Atos 2.22).

Foi durante a era da Igreja primitiva que os apóstolos receberam dons apostólicos. De acordo com Atos 5:12, “Ora, muitos sinais e prodígios eram regularmente feitos entre o povo pelas mãos dos apóstolos”. Muitos sinais e prodígios foram feitos pelas mãos dos apóstolos (Atos 14:3; 15:12). Qual era o propósito? Sempre foi com o propósito de validar e autenticar o Messias, Sua mensagem, Seu povo e Seus apóstolos. Uma vez que Sua mensagem foi completamente registrada no final da era apostólica, os apóstolos morreram, o cânon bíblico da Escritura foi completo e os dons cessaram. Devemos estar cientes de que Satanás tentará imitar o poder de Deus com “falsos sinais e maravilhas” nos últimos dias também quando o “homem da iniqüidade” ou o “homem do pecado” que é o anticristo for levantado para enganar pessoas e direcionar as pessoas para adorá-lo (2 Tessalonicenses 2:9).

As Escrituras são suficientemente completas e servem como a Palavra autoritativa de Deus para o Seu povo. Portanto, não há mais necessidade de revelação especial ou revelação direta vinda de Deus porque Sua Palavra é final e suficiente. Isso não é verdade apenas em termos do dom apóstolico (Registrar a Escritura), mas também dos dons associados a eles (dons apostólicos), como curas, línguas e profecias. Qualquer pessoa que afirme ser um apóstolo hoje deve ser contrariada pois é um ataque direto à suficiência das Escrituras.

O propósito dos milagres, prodígios e sinais pelas mãos dos apóstolos sempre foi a validação e autenticação.

• 1. Validar a Autenticidade do Messias;
• 2. Validar a Autenticidade de Seu Apostolado;
• 3. Validar a Autenticidade do Evangelho;
• 4. Validar a Autenticidade da Igreja de Cristo;
• 5. Completar o Cânon Escriturístico do Novo Testamento;

Na carta de Paulo à igreja em Corinto, ele fala sobre os sinais de um verdadeiro apóstolo. Nos dias de Paulo, a igreja era atormentada por homens que se diziam apóstolos oficiais, quando na verdade eram charlatões. Paulo escreve:

Os sinais do meu apostolado foram manifestados entre vós com toda a paciência, por sinais, prodígios e maravilhas. (2 Coríntios 12.12)

Embora Deus seja soberano e ainda possa realizar milagres como a cura de doenças, Ele o faz com base em Sua vontade soberana, ao invés de dotar homens específicos com o dom de curar enfermos ou expulsar demônios. Essa era acabou, mas Deus permanece Soberano até hoje. Devemos ter cuidado com aqueles que vêm em nome de Jesus reivindicando dons e autoridade apostólica que não são mais dados ao povo de Deus na presente era da história da redenção.

A Missão dos Apóstolos

A principal missão dos apóstolos era pregar o evangelho. Eles eram arautos da Mensagem, encarregados de anunciar a chegada do Rei e chamar as pessoas ao arrependimento. A pregação era fundamental para seu papel apostólico, eles não eram artistas ou celebridades, mas mensageiros designados por Deus. Sua pregação era caracterizada por sua autoridade, clareza e convicção. De acordo com Marcos 3:14, Jesus enviou esses apóstolos para pregar.

A palavra “pregar” (κηρύσσω) significa anunciar ou proclamar uma mensagem a um grupo em nome de uma figura de autoridade. Ele retrata o pregoeiro que saía com um forte toque de trombeta ou com um grande grito e convocava todos para se reunirem onde seria entregue uma mensagem importante. Este anúncio foi feito com autoridade (a própria autoridade do enviado) e deveria ser recebido como se o próprio rei estivesse falando ao povo.

Jesus padronizou esse estilo de pregação, enfatizando consistentemente a necessidade de arrependimento e anunciando que o reino dos céus estava chegando (Mt 3:2; 4:17). Os apóstolos seguiram seus passos, proclamando a mesma mensagem às pessoas que encontraram durante sua missão (Marcos 6:12).

Os doze apóstolos desempenharam um papel fundamental no estabelecimento do cristianismo, pois foram escolhidos e comissionados por Jesus Cristo para pregar o Evangelho de Deus. Sua autoridade e dons apostólicos os separavam como mensageiros de Deus, e sua pregação era caracterizada por sua proclamação autoritativa e chamado ao arrependimento. Compreender o chamado e a missão única dos doze apóstolos fé valioso para entender os primeiros dias do cristianismo e o trabalho fundamental que realizaram.

Embora o ofício dos apóstolos e seus dons tenham cessado com a morte do último apóstolo, seu legado continua a impactar a Igreja hoje. Seu compromisso de pregar e divulgar o Evangelho serve de exemplo para os crentes, enfatizando a importância de proclamar a mensagem do reino de Deus com autoridade, clareza e convicção. Esses homens viraram o mundo de cabeça para baixo e hoje continuamos a seguir seus passos enquanto declaramos a mesma mensagem do Evangelho de Cristo.

Do you ever feel like everything around us is crumbling? You look around and wickedness seems to be everywhere, and you wonder: where is God in all this? And not only that, they’re prospering!

One of the core purposes of the psalms is to help us navigate this kind of reality, which has indeed been a reality for all of human history.

Consider just briefly how some of the early psalms paint this kind of bleak picture.

Psalm 10 opens this way:

¹ Why, O Lord, do you stand far away?
        Why do you hide yourself in times of trouble?
² In arrogance the wicked hotly pursue the poor;
         let them be caught in the schemes
                  that they have devised.

We see that kind of thing over and over again in the Psalms, and we experience it all the time. Look at the next few verses in Psalm 10:

³ For the wicked boasts of the desires of his soul,
         and the one greedy for gain curses
                  and renounces the Lord.
⁴ In the pride of his face the wicked does not seek him;
         all his thoughts are, “There is no God.”
⁵ His ways prosper at all times;
         your judgments are on high, out of his sight;
         as for all his foes, he puffs at them.

What do we make of that? Psalm 1 says that righteous people will prosper, but here the wicked are prospering. Is this not still a reality in our day? The wicked seem to be gaining all the influence, the wicked control the entertainment industry and the media, and the wicked rise to prominence in government.

The wicked are flourishing, God seems to be far away (Psalm 10), and even worse, the righteous people appear to be diminishing: “Save, O Lord, for the godly one is gone; for the faithful have vanished from among the children of man” (Ps 12:1). Does is seem like that today? How does that make you feel? Look at Psalm 13:

¹ How long, O Lord? Will you forget me forever?
         How long will you hide your face from me?

These laments are painting an accurate picture of reality, are they not? It was reality for exiled Hebrews, and it is reality for Christians today. This reality is not only true sometimes; it describes the entire history of humankind after the Fall. And this point is emphasized in Psalm 14:

¹ The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.”
         They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds;
         there is none who does good.
² The Lord looks down from heaven
                  on the children of man,
         to see if there are any who understand,
         who seek after God.
³ They have all turned aside;
                  together they have become corrupt;
         there is none who does good,
         not even one.  

Do you recognize a couple of phrases in this psalm from anywhere in the New Testament? The apostle Paul quotes these very verses in Romans 3 to argue for the fact that this is true of all people. “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Rom 3:23).

This is the reality for humanity in all of human history. How can we praise the Lord when this is the reality?

What Can the Righteous Do?

Well, this is exactly the question Psalm 11 asks. Look at verse 3:

If the foundations are destroyed,
         what can the righteous do?”

Now, what does David mean here by “foundations”? This is a metaphor. Psalms don’t just come out and state things like more prosaic passages of Scripture do, because the purpose of the Psalms is to shape our image of reality—our hearts, and so psalms use imagery to do so. What does this image of “foundations” picture?

This image is often used in the Psalms and throughout Scripture as a metaphor for the order of society, an order that God established at creation under the mediatorial rule of Adam. Even after the fall, God re-established those foundations of order in Genesis 9 to provide a system of righteousness that is the basis for the flourishing and civilized society that will work. Sin will be punished, as God intended, and righteousness will be rewarded, as God intended. Another way to say this is that the “foundations” of which Psalm 11 speaks is the proper image of blessedness under God’s rule mediated through just vice-regents.

This is how God designed things to be: when a society is built on righteousness, it will flourish. “Righteousness and justice are the foundation of your throne,” the psalmist proclaims in Psalm 89:14. Proverbs 14:34 says, “Righteousness exalts a nation.” Proverbs 16:12 says a king’s throne “is established by righteousness.” These are universal principles established by God that apply to all societies. And when societies destroy that foundation, they crumble.

This is exactly what this series of laments is describing. “In arrogance the wicked hotly pursue the poor” (Ps 10:2). “The faithful have vanished from among the children of man” (Ps 12:1). God seems to be absent (Ps 13). “There is none who does good” (Ps 14:1). Or as Psalm 11:2 describes it, “the wicked bend the bow; they have fitted their arrow to the string to shoot in the dark at the upright in heart.”

The foundations are destroyed; what can the righteous do?

God’s people have often lived through times like this, civilization after civilization. David lived through it, and the people of Israel experienced it in their exile. And do we not live in a similar age? At times various nations enjoy systems and laws that are consistent with the way God designed things to work, and as such, this nation has flourished. But the foundations are crumbling, are they not? All around the world, nations are being led by people who set themselves against the Lord and his Anointed. What can the righteous do? And perhaps even worse, like Psalm 12 says, it appears that the faithful have vanished. What can the righteous do?

The Wrong Answer

That’s what this psalm is seeking to address. But before we look at how the psalm answers that question correctly, notice the wrong answer to the question. In the second half of verse 1 through verse 3, David is quoting someone else. In verse 1, David says, “How can you say to my soul . . .” and now the quote begins. And here is the first answer that is given to the question, “What can the righteous do?”: “Flee like a bird to your mountain.” This is the advice being given to David. The foundations are crumbling, the wicked are shooting secretly at the upright in heart, so flee! Escape! Run away! Just get together and sing happy songs and pretend none of it is happening.

This is how God’s people unfortunately often respond to the reality of sin and wickedness around them—they seek escape. There are many ways this kind of escapism manifests itself, but it is no more evident in how many Christians worship today, especially in what we sing. Much of the contemporary worship music in churches today ignores the reality of sin and wickedness, instead presenting a happy-clappy, escapist, feel-good image of our lives. If churches today use psalms at all, they usually use only snippets from the “exciting” psalms rather than all the psalms. Music in worship has become, for most Christians, an enjoyable diversion at best, meant to take our minds off of the hard realities of life. Poetry and music are treated merely as means to excite us about doctrine or make doctrine more interesting. Indeed, lament is all but absent from modern worship.

But that’s the wrong response. And that’s what we see in the Psalms—these songs don’t ignore the reality of crumbling foundations and wicked people; these songs acknowledge that reality but then lead us to respond in proper ways in the midst of that reality.

So what is the proper response, then?

Rebuild the Foundations

David presents three proper responses in Psalm 11 that foreshadow the way the entire Psalter helps us to rebuild the foundations in our own hearts.

Take refuge in the Lord.

The first one is found in the first phrase of the psalm: “In the Lord I take refuge.” When God seems far away, and the foundations of righteousness are crumbling, and the faithful have vanished, and there is none righteous, no not one, the correct response is this: In the Lord I take refuge.

The Lord is in his holy temple.

David gives a second response in verse 4:

The Lord is in his holy temple;
         the Lord’s throne is in heaven;
         his eyes see, his eyelids test the children of man.

When you look around and the foundations of society seem to be crumbling, and you know that this is going to lead toward chaos in the society, the correct response is this: “The Lord is in his holy temple.” The thrones of men may be crumbling, but God is still on his throne.

The Lord has determined the destiny of the wicked and the righteous.

And then look at David’s third response, beginning in verse 5:

⁵ The Lord tests the righteous,
         but his soul hates the wicked
                  and the one who loves violence.
⁶ Let him rain coals on the wicked;
         fire and sulfur and a scorching wind
                  shall be the portion of their cup.
⁷ For the Lord is righteous;
he loves righteous deeds;
         the upright shall behold his face.

When you look around, it often looks like the wicked are always prospering (Ps 10:5). Psalm 12:8 says that “vileness is exalted among the children of man.” Psalm 13 describes the enemies of God exalting over his people. When you look around and there is nothing but corruption around you, the correct response is this: The destiny of the wicked is certain— “fire and sulfur and a scorching wind shall be the portion of their cup.”

And when you look around, it often looks like the righteous are being destroyed, Psalm 10:10 says, “The helpless are crushed, sink down, and fall by his might.” Psalm 12:5 says that the poor are oppressed. Psalm 13 expresses the fact that for the righteous, it seems like God is absent. Consider how Psalm 14:4 describes it: “Evildoers . . . eat up my people as they eat bread.” Do you ever feel that way? The correct response is this: “The Lord is righteous; he loves righteous deeds; the upright shall behold his face” (11:7). The destiny of the righteous is certain.

What we have seen, then, is that David presents three correct responses of God’s people when the foundations of righteousness around them are crumbling:

1. In the Lord I take refuge.
2. The Lord is in his holy temple.
3. The Lord has determined the destiny of the wicked and the righteous.

Now, these are not arbitrary responses that David uniquely expresses in Psalm 11. Rather, they connect to the foundational psalms, Psalms 1 and 2, which establish these principles as key for the whole Psalter.

“In the Lord I put my trust.” Where do you see that in the foundational psalms? The end of Psalm 2:

Blessed are all who take refuge in him.

Psalm 2 predicted that all of human history would be characterized by vain imaginations, by nations raging and setting themselves against the rule of God; so when that happens, why are you surprised? Why would your response be to flee? Take refuge in the Lord, just like the psalm says.

Second response: “The Lord is in his holy temple.” Where do you see that in the foundational psalms? Again, Psalm 2:

⁴ He who sits in the heavens laughs;
         the Lord holds them in derision.
⁵ Then he will speak to them in his wrath,
         and terrify them in his fury, saying,
⁶ “As for me, I have set my King
         on Zion, my holy hill.”

The Lord already set his King on Zion. It’s done. He’s King.

Third response: The Lord has determined the destiny of the wicked and the righteous. Where do you see that in the foundational psalms? Psalm 1:6:

For the Lord knows the way of the righteous,
         but the way of the wicked will perish.

So why are these responses in Psalm 11 the appropriate responses to the reality of crumbling foundations around us? Because in Psalm 11, David is reaffirming the foundations that God set out in Psalms 1 and 2. He’s readjusting his image of reality with God’s image of reality. The foundations look like they’re crumbling, and they may be in the societies of men, but those foundations are still there because God laid those foundations, and they shall never be moved. God’s foundations are the bedrock upon which men build their foundations and construct their societies; man’s foundations may crumble, but the bedrock foundations that God laid are established forever.

This is the foundation of all our hope and all our expectation. God is in the heavens; his rule is untouched by what is taking place on earth. Nothing is altered in heaven where God rules over all things. The end is determined; it was written in stone before the foundations of the earth were laid. And those who take refuge in him can be assured of true, eternal blessedness.

So, if the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous do? The foundations are not actually destroyed. The fundamentals that God has established will never be moved.

And if you shape your image of reality by that foundational reality—if you muse on the music of God’s Word so that your image of true blessedness is shaped by the Word rather than the vain imaginations of the wicked, then you will be blessed, even as the righteous foundations of the society crumble around you.

You will be able to say, “The Lord is king forever and ever; the nations perish from his land” (Ps 10:16). You will be able to say, like Psalm 12:6–7, “The words of the Lord are pure words, like silver refined in a furnace on the ground, purified seven times. You, O Lord, will keep them; you will guard us from this generation forever.” You will be able to say with Psalm 13:5–6, “But I have trusted in your steadfast love; my heart shall rejoice in your salvation. I will sing to the Lord, because he has dealt bountifully with me.” You will be able to say with Psalm 14:5–7, “God is with the generation of the righteous. . . . The Lord is his refuge. . . . When the Lord restores the fortunes of his people, let Jacob rejoice, let Israel be glad.”

This article is excerpted from Musing on God’s Music: Forming Hearts of Praise with the Psalms.

God has graciously gifted his Church with a variety of gifts that serve and strengthen his people. As we read the New Testament, we can see that God has provided these gifts in form of leaders who lead and servants who serve which causes each local church to be strong and vibrant.

The twelve apostles hold a significant place in Christian history, as they were chosen by Jesus Christ himself to spread the message of the kingdom of God. Jesus called the twelve apostles and gifted them to his Church with specific apostolic gifts to accomplish their mission. Understanding their foundational work and the role the occupied as a gift to the early Church is vitally important in the study of Christianity.

Who Are the Twelve?

The twelve apostles were chosen by Jesus from among his larger group of disciples. Jesus handpicked these specific men to become his closest followers and leaders. While all believers can be referred to as disciples, the term “apostle” was reserved for this select group who were commissioned and sent out on a special mission by Christ.

Each apostle had a distinct personality and background, contributing to the diversity of the group. They included Simon Peter, Andrew, James, John, Philip, Bartholomew (Nathanael), Matthew (Levi), Thomas, James (son of Alphaeus), Simon (the Zealot), Judas (son of James), and Judas Iscariot (the traitor).

When Jesus was up on the mountainside, great crowds were following him. He took that opportunity to separate twelve men from the general disciples and specifically called them apostles. They are often referred to as “the Twelve” in Scripture, but the term apostle is critically important.

In the Greek language, the term apostle (ἀπόστολος) was used outside of Scripture to refer to cargo ships that would be loaded down with freight and boxes and then dispatched from one port to another port across a body of water where the cargo would be unpacked and delivered. When Jesus employs the term to refer to his selected band of preachers, he is communicating something of great significance. Apostles were entrusted with sacred cargo and sent out on a mission to deliver that cargo to the nations. They began in Jerusalem and spread the gospel to the ends of the world.

The Apostolic Gifts

When Jesus called the twelve apostles, he granted them power and authority over demons and the ability to heal diseases. These apostolic gifts were closely tied to their mission of preaching the good news of the kingdom of God. Through these miraculous signs, the authenticity of their apostleship and the message they proclaimed were validated. It’s important to note that these gifts were temporary and specifically connected to the apostles and their close associates during the age of the apostles.

God has chosen to use miracles, wonders, and signs to direct attention to his sovereign throne and to validate his chosen leaders. In Exodus when Moses was charged with leading Israel away from Pharoah, the rebellious leader determined to disobey God’s order. It was through a series of signs that served as plagues that God demonstrated the reality that his throne is far superior to Pharaoh’s throne.

Exodus 7:3 – But I will harden Pharaoh’s heart, and though I multiply my signs and wonders in the land of Egypt

In the New Testament, we get a glimpse of Jesus performing miracles, wonders, and signs in his earthly ministry. These signs included healing the sick, giving sight to the blind, causing the lame to walk, making the deaf to hear, raising the dead, casting out demons, and rebuking wind and waves with sovereign authority. After Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection, Peter preached at Pentecost and called people to repentance. In his famous sermon, he said the following:

“Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know.”¹Acts 2:22 ESV

It was during the age of the early Church that the apostles were gifted with apostolic gifts. According to Acts 5:12, “Now many signs and wonders were regularly done among the people by the hands of the apostles.” Many signs and wonders were done at the hands of the apostles (Acts 14:3; 15:12). What was the purpose? It was always for the purpose of validating and authenticating the Messiah, his message, his people, and his apostles. Once his message was completely recorded at the close of the apostolic age, the apostles died, the biblical canon of Scripture was complete, and these gifts ceased. We must be mindful that Satan will seek to mimic the power of God with “false signs and wonders” in the last days as well when the “man of lawlessness” or the “man of sin” who is the antichrist is raised up to deceive people and direct people to worship him (2 Thess 2:9).

The Scriptures are completely sufficient and serve as God’s authoritative Word to his people. Therefore, there is no longer any need for special revelation or direct revelation coming from God because his Word is final and sufficient. This is not only true in terms of the gift of an apostle, but likewise the gifts associated with the apostles (apostolic gifts) such as healing, tongues, and prophecy. Anyone claiming to be an apostle today should be considered a direct assault upon the sufficiency of Scripture.

The purpose of miracles, wonders, and signs at the hands of the apostles was always for the purpose of validation and authentication.

1. Validate the Authenticity of the Messiah
2. Validate the Authenticity of their Apostleship
3. Validate the Authenticity of the Gospel
4. Validate the Authenticity of Jesus’ Church
5. Complete the New Testament Canon of Scripture

In Paul’s letter to the church at Corinth, he speaks about the signs of a true apostle. In Paul’s day the church was plagued by men who claimed to be official apostles when in fact they were charlatans. Paul writes:

The signs of a true apostle were performed among you with utmost patience, with signs and wonders and mighty works.²2 Corinthians 12:12 ESV

While God is sovereign and can still perform miracles such as the healing of disease, he does so based on his sovereign will rather than gifting specific men with the gift to heal the sick or cast out demons. That age has now passed, but God remains sovereign to this very hour. We must beware of those who come in the name of Jesus claiming apostolic giftedness and authority which is no longer given to God’s people in this era of redemptive history.

The Mission of the Apostles

The primary mission of the apostles was to preach the gospel. They were heralds of the message, entrusted with the task of announcing the arrival of the King, and calling people to repentance. Preaching was central to their role, and they were not entertainers or celebrities but messengers appointed by God. Their preaching was characterized by its authority, clarity, and conviction. According to Mark 3:14, Jesus sent these apostles out to preach.

The word “preach” (κηρύσσω) means to herald or announce or proclaim a message to a group of people from a significant authority figure.  It depicts the town crier who would go out and with a loud trumpet blast or with a loud shout and would call everyone to gather where he would deliver an important message. This announcement was done with a measure of authority (the very authority of the one sent) and was to be received as if the king himself was standing there speaking to the people.

Jesus modeled this style of preaching himself, consistently emphasizing the need for repentance and announcing the nearness of the kingdom of heaven (Matt 3:2; 4:17). The apostles followed in his footsteps, proclaiming the same message to the people they encountered during their mission (Mark 6:12).

The twelve apostles played a pivotal role in the establishment of Christianity, as they were chosen and commissioned by Jesus Christ to preach the gospel of God. Their authority and apostolic gifts set them apart as messengers of God, and their preaching was characterized by its authoritative proclamation and call to repentance. Understanding the unique calling and mission of the twelve apostles provides valuable insights into the early days of Christianity and the foundational work they accomplished.

While the office of the apostle and the apostolic gifts ceased with the death of the last apostle, their legacy continues to impact the Church to this day. Their commitment to preaching and spreading the gospel serves as an example for believers today, emphasizing the importance of proclaiming the message of the kingdom of God with authority, clarity, and conviction. These men turned the world upside down and today we continue to walk in their footsteps as we declare the same message of the gospel of Christ.

Shiny Happy People: Duggar Family Secrets is one of the latest shows to gain notoriety recently for its criticisms of Christianity. Though the show carries itself as a documentary meant to shed light on the inner workings of the Duggar family, made famous by the reality TV show 19 Kids and Counting, it is much more than its simple subtitle would suggest. By the end, it comes across more as a carefully constructed hit piece, meant to throw dirt on both Christian and conservative practices alike. The Duggars become almost an afterthought at multiple points, as attention is focused on conflating the cultish activities experienced by some former followers of Bill Gothard, works-based religion, and genuinely biblical Christianity. With a sensationalist bent on storytelling, by the end, the show writers almost seem to accomplish their task of persuading the less knowledgeable and easily persuaded that Christianity itself is bad.

This is not a review of Shiny Happy People. Others can review it far better than I can. This is not another piece written about the Duggars—my knowledge of them is very limited to begin with. This is, instead, an attempt to separate what the documentary has conflated. This is an attempt to examine the beliefs of the Duggars, which is focused almost exclusively upon the teachings of Bill Gothard and the Institute in Basic Life Principles (IBLP). This is an attempt to show that biblical Christianity is still good, true, and beautiful, despite the fact that many have tried to twist and distort it for their own means. 

Is Christianity a Cult of Religious Fundamentalism?

One of the things that the documentary tries to do is introduce multiple voices to comment on things like the Duggars, the IBLP, and men like Bill Gothard. The majority of these interviews come from either Duggar family members or former members of the IBLP.

Now, it must be pointed out that the connection of the Duggar family, and especially its patriarch Jim Bob, to Bill Gothard and the IBLP, is admittedly interesting fodder for a documentary. It makes for compelling drama, which seems to be the sort of thing that documentaries based on a reality show family would be after. Many of the short comings of the IBLP as well as the reported moral failures of some of the leadership, make for a documentary that is able to continually up the stakes as it details horrifying cruelties endured by previous members. And, most importantly, this allows for interviews that have been constructed in such a way to make the viewer believe the faults lie within Christianity itself, rather than the systems that are actually responsible. 

Let’s consider Bill Gothard and the IBLP. The documentary clearly takes a very biased position regarding its teachings and practices, insisting that the IBLP is a representative of all Christianity, and is a backwoods, antiquated, repressive, and misogynistic organization. But, before we deal with the latter claims, let’s first ask the following question: Does Bill Gothard, or the IBLP actually represent all of Christianity?

Of course not! Bill Gothard and the IBLP do not represent historic, biblical Christianity even if some of the teachings may overlap with the real deal. The old saying that a broken clock is right twice a day is appropriate here. Just because Bill Gothard occasionally said or taught things that every Christian would agree with does not mean he or his institution are actually part of the historic Christian tradition. Instead, Gothard and the IBLP are like a fusion of the teachings of the prosperity gospel and moral therapeutic deism. Gothard and the IBLP famously promised God’s blessings over the lives and families of those who put his teachings into practice. Two major problems exist here, though: 1) Not all of his teachings came from the Bible, for he errantly believed that he heard directly from God; and 2) adherence to the moral teachings of man do not bring God’s blessings.

Yet, the documentary continues trying to conflate Gothard’s teachings with the Bible’s teachings. At one point, a former IBLP member is interviewed who was part of a group called the Joshua Generation. This group was evidently concerned primarily with raising up future senators, United States presidents, and Supreme Court justices. Young people were instructed in morality and given the tools to become leaders of the nation. For what its worth, nothing here really seemed all that radical. Shouldn’t all people have the right to try and serve in the public sphere and influence policy? Shouldn’t Christians have the right, like every other group (religious or otherwise), to shape government? Apparently not, according to Shiny Happy People. And while differences surely exist between the two, the documentary again conflates all of the values of the Joshua Generation with biblical Christianity, casting both in the worst possible light, as though Christianity as a whole is a cult machine, pumping out robotic Shiny Happy People all over.

Perhaps the IBLP is run like a religious fundamentalist cult. Maybe Gothard is a wolf in sheep’s clothing, or a very misguided individual. But neither the IBLP nor Gothard represent Christianity. They may fall under the umbrella of Christianity in the same way that Mormons or Jehovah’s Witnesses do, but in the same way that we view these groups as heretical and not true Christianity, so we view Gothard and the IBLP as heterodox at best, and mostly heretical. 

How the Show Tries to Pull the Wool Over Your Eyes

To suggest that Gothard or the IBLP actually represent all of Christian teaching and doctrine is like saying that Starbucks represents every coffee house or cup of coffee you could ever possibly drink, or that Burger King represents every fast food joint you can possibly visit. It simply is not true, and common sense dictates that there will be different flavors and recipes to be found elsewhere.

Nevertheless, the show runners have tried to spin their tale in such a way to suggest that Gothard was a religious fundamentalist (and also hypocritical, according to multiple interviews and reports), and so too are all other Christians. While it is true that Gothard attempted to create an institution in which strict adherence to his teachings would secure good standing amongst others, simultaneously promising God’s blessings, that is not what true, biblical Christianity teaches. 

True biblical Christianity believes and teaches that sinners are always saved through faith in the person and work of Jesus Christ, apart from our own filthy works. True biblical Christianity believes and teaches that because we are saved by God’s grace through faith, our own good works flow out from the salvation we have in Christ. They are not a requirement of salvation. Salvation does not hinge on our doing enough good to merit God’s favor. While we believe God blesses and rewards faithfulness to his Word and Law, we believe faithfulness flows out from God’s grace.

Shiny Happy People ignores all of these distinctions. Instead, it tries to paint the picture that Christianity is a religion of works, wherein one tries to climb a moral ladder to earn their salvation. The documentary often makes appeals to something Gothard taught, shows how the same principle is basically taught in the Bible, and then constructs a narrative through the interviews to create a picture of Christianity as a cult of religious, fundamentalist nutcases.

Take, as an example, Gothard’s teaching on “purity.” The documentary makes a very big deal that both he and the IBLP made much about remaining a virgin until marriage, for sex is to be shared only between a husband and a wife. This, of course, is a good principle to follow, for it is biblical. The documentary, however, proceeds to try and paint this in the most disturbing light possible. Though the following isn’t an exact example, the documentary basically starts to throw as much information at the viewer as possible, without allowing time to process which information comes from the Bible and which comes from Gothard and which was only the unfortunate experience of the ones being interviewed: 

• The IBLP taught that Fathers are to have control over their daughters until they are married, even having a strong say in who they marry.
• Kissing before marriage is frowned upon.
• Bill Gothard never married and may have molested multiple girls.
• Space is to be kept between members of the opposite sex.
• One woman was raped multiple times on her wedding night.
• Once married, the couple should have as many children as possible.
• Sexual abuse was frequent in the IBLP.
• Virginity is a gift that can only be given once.
• To remain pure and undefiled from the world is good.
• Bible verses repress sexuality. 

The examples above, though not exact, act as a picture of what the documentary tries to do. By bombarding the viewer with new bits of information in quick succession, the audience is made to feel as though the problem does not lie with Gothard, the IBLP, or even the ones being interviewed; instead, the implication is that the problem is Christianity. There is no time to discern which information is good and which is bad; the documentary wants the viewer to see all of it as bad. 

But, out of the 10 examples listed above, only a few are actually biblical: Christians ought to remain virgins until they are married, fathers ought to lead their sons and daughters in appropriate ways until they leave the home, and remaining pure is good. Some of those examples aren’t necessarily biblical, but they still make logical sense, even if they come from a broken clock (i.e., kissing can be a serious temptation for some to lead to great sin.). And, some of the examples are things that were peculiar to the experiences of the interviewees. While I am thankful that the interviewees were able to speak out, and while I have no desire to discount their experiences, it must again be noted that their experiences simply do not represent all of Christianity. 

Of course, that doesn’t mean that the showrunners would like Christianity anymore if they understood the differences between the genuine article and the Gothard counterfeit. Clearly, they had an axe to grind and it was easy to use the popularity of the Duggars and their connection to the IBLP to create a hit piece against Christianity as a whole. 

The Enslavement of the Lost to Sin and the Freedom of the Saved to Obey the Law

Shiny Happy People: Duggar Family Secrets is trying to make a statement with its title: Beneath the surface of this evidently happy, Christian family are dark secrets that will change the way viewers think about Christians as a whole. 

Again, it must be reiterated that Bill Gothard does not speak for historical Christianity, nor does the IBLP, nor does the Duggar family. I am genuinely thankful that some of the Duggar family has shed some of the baggage of works-based religion, and that some (like Jinger Vuolo) have spoken about these things in greater detail and biblical clarity. But historic, true, and biblical Christianity is found solely in Scripture, and then taught within the creeds and confessions. So, let’s finally consider what Christians actually believe about God’s Law and why it makes us genuinely happy people, both inside and out. 

The Scriptures are themselves quite clear that the reason sinners hate Christianity and God’s Word is because they are enslaved to their sin. This is why Jesus said in John 8:34, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin.” Yet, those who come to Jesus in faith are set free. In John 8:36, Jesus promises, “So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.”

What Jesus is describing is true, biblical freedom. It is not freedom from God’s Law, but instead freedom from slavery to sin and freedom to obey God’s Law in a way that simply was not possible before. As Galatians 5:1 explains, “For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery.”

True, biblical freedom is, simply put, having the opportunity, desire, and ability to do that which glorifies God and brings the greatest fulfilment to the Christian life. Only Christians possess such freedom, and it is a genuinely joy-filled freedom in Christ to live righteously. 

The Christian is free from sin and empowered by God to live righteously. It is obedience to God and living in righteousness that brings profound joy to the believer in Christ. 

To those who watch Shiny Happy People, I would merely say this: Christianity, as taught in Scripture, is far, far greater and better than anything you can possibly imagine. The IBLP does not represent the whole of Christianity. 

To those who created Shiny Happy People or were involved in its filming, who have either abandoned the Christian faith, or never followed Christ to begin with, I would simply implore them in this way: You must see there are clear distinctions between what the IBLP taught and practiced and what the Bible actually states.

Maybe Bill Gothard and the IBLP manufactured Fake Shiny Happy People with their rules and hypocrisy. Biblical and historical Christianity transforms sinners into saints through grace and, in doing so, creates free people who are genuinely joyful to obey God and his Word.

STANZA 1
A mighty fortress is our God,
a bulwark never failing;
our helper He, amid the flood
of mortal ills prevailing.
For still our ancient foe
does seek to work us woe;
his craft and pow’r are great,
and armed with cruel hate,
on earth is not his equal.

STANZA 2
Did we in our own strength confide,
our striving would be losing,
were not the right Man on our side,
the Man of God’s own choosing.
You ask who that may be?
Christ Jesus, it is He;
LORD Sabaoth His name,
from age to age the same;
and He must win the battle.

STANZA 3
And though this world, with devils filled,
should threaten to undo us,
we will not fear, for God has willed
His truth to triumph through us.
The prince of darkness grim,
we tremble not for him;
his rage we can endure,
for lo! his doom is sure;
one little word shall fell him.

STANZA 4
That Word above all earthly pow’rs
no thanks to them abideth;
the Spirit and the gifts are ours
thro’ Him who with us sideth.
Let goods and kindred go,
this mortal life also;
the body they may kill:
God’s truth abideth still;
His kingdom is forever.

—Martin Luther, 1529
trans. Frederick Hedge, 1852

As I scrolled through social media, I found a comedian joking about how Father’s Day was the worst holiday in the world. “Mother’s Day is the second most celebrated holiday in the world,” he remarked, referring to the amount of money spent on each occasion. He continued, “There’s Christmas and then Mother’s Day. So, after Jesus, you honor your ‘mama.'” 

“Do you know where Father’s Day is ranked?” he inquired. “The number twenty.” As the audience chuckled, a countdown of the holidays that are more important than Father’s Day began.

Curious about the comedian’s accuracy, I checked the numbers. While he took some comedic liberty, he wasn’t far off. The National Retail Federation’s sales report showed that in 2020, Americans spent 773 billion dollars on gifts for Christmas. The second-highest gift-giving holiday was Mother’s Day, with 28.1 billion dollars. In third place was Valentine’s Day, at 27.4 billion dollars. Some would argue that women win that battle with the feminine focus of Valentine’s Day too. Father’s Day would land in fifth place, with 17 billion dollars spent annually.

The best comedy is always forged in truth. So I thought to ask, “Is the amount of money we spend on a holiday a true indication of how we value our fathers?”

What would be a solid criterion for assessing a dad’s value on Father’s Day? 

What Do We Spend When Fathers Are Absent?

When we consider the money spent, gift-giving can be one way to examine the value we give to fathers. Another value proposition could be determining the amount of money necessary to compensate for the absence of a father in the home.

The National Fatherhood Initiative, under the direction of now-former President Roland Warren, released a study in 2006 on annual federal spending to support father-absent homes. This research, which evaluated 13 means-tested anti-poverty programs and child support enforcement, was the first of its kind.

The published report, The One Hundred Billion Dollar Man, demonstrated that the federal government spends $99.8 billion compensating for fatherless homes. The money was spent on programs like Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), child support enforcement, food and nutrition programs, housing programs, Medicaid, and State Children’s Health Insurance Plan (SCHIP). The report also noted that while the cause of fatherlessness can stem from various reasons, the negative implications and statistical outcomes for children are vast and far-reaching. Even so, a father’s value goes beyond just the financial stability he brings to the home.

The Security a Father Provides

When assessing the importance of fathers, security in the form of money is a crucial factor to consider. Security, though, can come in various forms. Sure, having a father at home can lower the likelihood of poverty, but having a father at home can also reduce the level of anger and violence that kids display when their father isn’t there.

Studies indicate that a father’s presence in the home provides structure and discipline that a mother alone cannot account for. Further research indicates that, even in single-parent households where the father is the sole provider for the child’s care, there is no greater increase in violent behavior than with the mother alone.

When violent behavior is present, the outcomes for children are poor. Studies have demonstrated that children of fatherless homes are more likely to commit crimes, go to prison, face neglect and abuse, and demonstrate increased behavioral problems due to a father’s absence. Having a father present in the home benefits the entire family’s security.

My Father’s Story

Unlike the 15 million children living in fatherless homes, I was blessed to have my dad as a regular part of my life. For me, his presence provided stability that, at the time, was difficult to quantify. You see, having him around was normal for me. I never experienced the anger associated with not knowing who he was or the longing to understand why he wasn’t there. His presence enabled me to learn a great deal from my dad.

The first thing my dad taught me was the benefit of hard work. He would say, “I may not be smarter than the next man, but no one will ever work harder than me.” More than just words, this was an instruction on how to live.

My father instilled in me the virtues of self-discipline, a strong work ethic, achieving goals, and never letting others define my worth. I’ll never be able to put a price on having the ability to witness his example in our home.

My dad was not perfect; he would be the first to admit this. However, his value to me is more significant than what I could ever spend financially on him.

If you grew up with your father, I’m confident you feel the same way too.

Scripture is clear that we are to honor our father and mother (Eph 6:2). Father’s Day is set aside to honor fathers. It’s incumbent upon us to see to it that it is the best day for Dad.

Welcome to G3 Weekly—a summary of this week’s top news stories on Christianity and the public square.

This week, attendees of the Southern Baptist Convention voted to disfellowship two churches that ordained females as pastors. Pro-life entities backed a federal resolution that would prohibit the criminalization of abortion. Meanwhile, several thousand congregations have left the United Methodist Church over the last two years over the issue of homosexuality.

Southern Baptists Spar over Women as Pastors

“I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet” (1 Timothy 2:12).

Southern Baptists decided overwhelmingly to remove Saddleback Church, the megachurch in California which recently appointed multiple female pastors under the leadership of Rick Warren, and Fern Creek Baptist Church, a congregation in Kentucky which has a female pastor, from “friendly cooperation” with the denomination.

Attendees representing thousands of churches at the denomination’s annual meeting voted to approve the Southern Baptist Convention Executive Committee’s earlier decisions to disfellowship both churches: some 88% affirmed the decision to remove Saddleback, while some 92% affirmed the decision to remove Fern Creek.

Mike Law, a pastor at Arlington Baptist Church in Arlington, Virginia, proposed an amendment to the Southern Baptist Convention constitution to make clear that churches should appoint “only men as any kind of pastor or elder as qualified by Scripture” to stay in “friendly cooperation” status. On the other hand, attendees voted for a separate motion to create a “task force” to study the process of considering congregations outside of “friendly cooperation.”

The Baptist Faith and Message, the statement to which churches in the denomination broadly adhere, likewise confesses that “while both men and women are gifted for service in the church, the office of pastor is limited to men as qualified by Scripture.” Many pastors noted the importance of enforcing the moves against female ordination since several hundred Southern Baptist churches have nevertheless appointed women into such positions.

Resolution Preventing Abortion Criminalization Proposed in Congress

“Woe to those who decree iniquitous decrees, and the writers who keep writing oppression” (Isaiah 10:1).

Activists in the national pro-life movement backed a resolution in the House of Representatives that would prevent states from criminalizing all parties involved in an abortion.

Representative Doug Lamborn, a Republican from Colorado, introduced a resolution that would affirm that preborn children are “legal and constitutional persons who are entitled to the equal protection of the laws.” The resolution, drafted with the assistance of Live Action and other pro-life organizations, broadly centers on the humanity of preborn children and the need to recognize such realities but says that such equal protection “shall not be construed to permit the prosecution of any woman for the death of her unborn child.”

The Foundation to Abolish Abortion commended the resolution for the “generally excellent” attempt to seek equal protection for the preborn but cautioned that the clause against penalties for women would prevent states from criminalizing abortion for all parties.

“When medical professionals are attempting to save her life and have run out of options to save both patients, no woman should be prosecuted for the unintentional death of her unborn child. And certainly, when forced into an abortion under duress by threats of violence upon her, no woman should be prosecuted for the death of her unborn child,” a statement from the entity said. “Yet this clause contains no such limitations. It merely says, ‘any woman.’ This means that it refers to any woman in any situation whatsoever, no matter how knowing, willful, and malicious her intent or how heinous her conduct.”

The resolution comes as several conservative states move to implement new restrictions on abortion after the overturn of Roe v. Wade. Though some states have rendered surgical abortions illegal, mothers are increasingly using abortion pills to kill their babies.

Thousands of Methodist Churches Leave Denomination

“I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place, unless you repent” (Revelation 2:5).

The United Methodist Church has seen over 5,000 congregations leave the mainline denomination in the past two years.

More than 1,500 churches departed from the denomination last year while more than 3,800 churches departed so far this year, according to data compiled from regional conferences. The United Methodist Church, which is the second-largest Protestant denomination in the nation after the Southern Baptist Convention, has faced internal battles in recent years over increased acceptance of homosexuality and so-called same-sex marriage.

The denomination, which had some 30,000 congregations as of three years ago, recently added a process which permitted churches to disaffiliate because of the “deep conflict” around “issues of human sexuality.” The process allows any disaffiliating churches to keep “real and personal, tangible and intangible property.”

o que é um pastor? é uma pergunta simples, de fato, mas vivemos em uma época em que não podemos mais presumir que perguntas simples sejam abordadas de forma lógica. Ketanji Onyika Brown Jackson é juiza membro da Suprema Corte dos Estados Unidos. Jackson foi indicada para a Suprema Corte pelo presidente Joe Biden em 25 de fevereiro de 2022 e foi ratificada pelo Senado dos Estados Unidos em 7 de abril de 2022. Entretanto, quando estava em seu processo de transição, ela foi sabatinada por uma série de perguntas do Senado publicamente, e foi durante esse período que uma grande controvérsia eclodiu. Ela foi questionada pela senadora Martha Blackburn: “Você pode fornecer uma definição para a palavra ‘mulher’?” Ketanji Onyika Brown Jackson não conseguiu definir a palavra.

Enquanto a controvérsia sobre a incapacidade de responder à simples pergunta fez com que os conservadores questionassem a capacidade de Jackson de atuar na Suprema Corte dos Estados Unidos, os socialistas elogiaram sua resposta e fizeram campanha para que fosse ratificada como membro da mais alta corte do país. Estamos testemunhando uma agenda esquerdista na esfera da política e está sendo pulverisada em todos os âmbitos da sociedade. No entanto, nem todos estão satisfeitos com a agenda desconstrucionista. Visto o enorme sucesso do filme de Matt Walsh, “What Is a Woman? (O que é uma mulher)”

No entanto, essa agenda contínua de justiça social também impactou o evangelicalismo – incluindo a Convenção Batista do Sul.

Desafiando a Definição

Em maio de 2021, Rick Warren e a Saddleback Church viraram notícia ao ordenar três mulheres a função pastoral. Warren elogiou a mudança como uma “noite histórica”. Isso resultou em uma moção para desassociar Saddleback da SBC (Convenção batista) na reunião anual de 2021. O que muitas pessoas não perceberam foi que Rick Warren estava preparando Saddleback para sua saída, o que envolveria uma transição de liderança igualitária. Quando Warren anunciou seus planos de aposentadoria, ele também apresentou os novos co-pastores, um marido e sua mulher, que o substituiria.

Desde então, Saddleback foi desassociado da Convenção Batista do Sul. O Comitê Executivo da SBC recomendou ao Comitê de Credenciais da SBC em 21 de fevereiro de 2023 para considerar a Igreja Saddleback como uma igreja que “não anda em cooperação amigável com a Convenção Batista do Sul”. Isso tocou no brio de Rick Warren, onde ele se comprometeu a retornar à reunião anual da SBC para defender a reintegração de Saddleback. Antes da reunião anual em junho, Warren tem feito tempetade em como d’agua no Twitter para que seu caso gere comoção e ele consiga desafiar a definição de pastor.

Embora Warren afirme que não foi influenciado pela cultura e que chegou à sua nova posição igualitária com base no estudo das Escrituras, devemos ver sua nova posição à luz da revolução cultural. Em 2017, o Barna Research Group (Grupo de Pesquisas) apontou que houve um aumento significativo de mulheres servindo na função pastoral. De acordo com o estudo, “um em cada 11 pastores protestantes é uma mulher – o triplo de 25 anos atrás”. De acordo com o relatório estatístico intitulado “State of Clergywomen in the U.S.: A Statistical Update” (Nível do clero nos EUA: Uma atualização estatística), os números indicam que dentro da “maioria das denominações principais, a porcentagem de clérigas dobrou ou triplicou desde 1994”.

Definições importam: O que é uma mulher?

Embora devamos contestar a alegação de Warren de que ele não foi influenciado pela cultura porque isso é bastante suspeito, devemos contestar também sua exegese e interpretação das Escrituras. Em vez de nos perguntar como Rick Warren define o ofício de pastor, devemos nos perguntar como Deus define o ofício de pastor.

No Novo Testamento, temos vários termos diferentes para o ofício pastoral que indicam seus diferentes papéis e responsabilidades. Por exemplo, em 1 Pedro 5:1-4, Pedro usa esses diferentes termos para descrever a função do ofício pastoral. Pedro encarrega os anciãos (presbúteros) de pastorear (poimaínō) o rebanho de Deus e exercer o episcopado adequando (episkopḗ). Essas palavras não são referências a diferentes ofícios na igreja, mas a um ofício com uma variedade de responsabilidades diferentes.

Em 1 Timóteo 3 e Tito 1, Paulo forneceu instruções bíblicas para o ofício do pastor. Deve-se notar que todos os homens devem aspirar a serem santos e fiéis no caráter, conforme descrito nessas passagens. Deus levanta alguns homens da igreja para servir como bispos a fim de pastorear fielmente a igreja. Sem qualquer ginástica hermenêutica, o papel do pastor é claramente reservado aos homens. Devemos lembrar o que Paulo comunica antes de chegar a 1 Timóteo 3. Uma chave para a interpretação bíblica é que sempre interpretamos o texto dentro de seu contexto apropriado.

Em 1 Timóteo 2:12, Paulo articula uma proibição clara relacionada às mulheres na igreja local. Ele diz: “Não permito que a mulher ensine ou exerça autoridade sobre o homem; ao contrário, ela deve permanecer quieta”. Há uma distinção entre o ensino e o exercício da autoridade que deve ser considerada. Paulo foi revolucionário em sua época, já que muitas vezes não era permitido às mulheres aprender, mas Paulo as encoraja a serem aprendizes – estudando a fé e obtendo maior conhecimento de Deus (1 Timóteo 2:11).

Embora o Espírito Santo tenha levado Paulo a estender os limites das mulheres em uma área cultural, ele revisitou os limites históricos na área de ensino que Deus havia estabelecido no Jardim. As mulheres, como Paulo afirmou, não deviam ensinar aos homens. Isso é uma inversão de papéis. Paulo estava disposto a estender os limites da antiga Éfeso, mas não estava disposto a estender os limites de Deus que estavam enraizados e fundamentados na criação.

Desde o início, Deus estabeleceu uma ordem específica. Esse projeto, enraizado e fundamentado na criação de Deus, estabeleceu o comando e liderança masculina em todas as três esferas da vida: a sociedade, o lar e a igreja. Embora você não veja edifícios de tijolos e campanários brancos no Jardim do Éden, você tem Paulo apontando para o mandato da criação em 1 Timóteo 2 para estabelecer a ordenação de Deus na liderança masculina.

Liderança envolve autoridade. Por exemplo, em Hebreus 13:17 o texto afirma claramente que a igreja deve “submeter-se” aos seus líderes que estão sempre ligados ao ensino e pregação da Palavra de Deus. A palavra ensinar, “διδάσκω,” de acordo com Thomas Schreiner, significa o ensino público e envolve a transmissão autorizada da tradição sobre Cristo e as Escrituras (1 Cor. 12:28-29; Efésios 4:11; 1 Tim. 2 :7, 2 Tim. 3:16, Tiago 3:1).3 Nunca foi plano de Deus que os homens se submetessem ao ensino das mulheres na igreja. Você não pode forçar a Bíblia para tal interpretação. Na verdade, para chegar a essa posição, você teria que distorcer as Escrituras além da ordem e dos limites estabelecidos por Deus. John MacArthur observa:

As mulheres podem ser professoras e líderes altamente talentosas, mas esses dons não devem ser exercidos sobre os homens no contexto da igreja. Isso é verdade não porque as mulheres são espiritualmente inferiores aos homens, mas porque a Lei de Deus assim ordena. Ele ordenou ordem em Sua criação – uma ordem que reflete Sua própria natureza e, portanto, deve ser refletida em Sua igreja. Qualquer pessoa que ignore ou rejeite a ordem de Deus, então, enfraquece a igreja e O desonra.

Os homens foram chamados por Deus para serem líderes, protetores e provedores. É por isso que vemos o padrão de Deus de levantar homens como maridos, pais, guerreiros, reis, profetas, apóstolos e pastores. Este tem sido o padrão consistente de Deus desde o Jardim do Éden até o presente momento. Este não era o projeto original para as mulheres. Isso não diminui o valor ou o dom das mulheres, mas Deus não criou as mulheres para as mesmas tarefas que os homens. Existem diferentes funções e responsabilidades para os homens que são distintas e únicas das funções e responsabilidades que Deus designou para as mulheres. Em seu excelente livro intitulado Biblical Eldership (ancionato Bíblico), Alexander Strauch descreve a função e a responsabilidade dos pastores, que são mais comumente referidos como presbíteros no Novo Testamento:

Os presbíteros lideram a igreja [1 Tm 5:17; Tito 1:7; 1 Pedro 5:1-2], ensinam e pregam a Palavra [1 Timóteo 3:2; 2 Timóteo 4:2; Tito 1:9], protegem a igreja dos falsos mestres [Atos 20:17, 28-31], exortam e admoestam os santos na sã doutrina [1 Timóteo 4:13; 2 Timóteo 3:13-17; Tito 1:9], visitam os enfermos e oram [Tiago 5:14; Atos 20:35] e julgam questões doutrinárias [Atos 15:16]. Na terminologia bíblica, presbíteros pastoreiam, supervisionam, lideram e cuidam da igreja local

O que é um pastor? Um pastor serve como líder, provedor e protetor da igreja de Deus. Essas tarefas são realizadas por meio da pregação e ensino das Escrituras como parte dos meios ordinários da graça de Deus estabelecidos para o bem-estar e nutrição de sua igreja. Essa responsabilidade deve ser levada a sério e nunca deve ser redesenhada para se adequar à estrutura de uma cultura progressista. Devemos sempre lembrar que a sociedade como um todo não tem uma ancoragem firme nas Escrituras. A sociedade progressista tem uma vela em vez de uma âncora. Esta vela é usada para apanhar os ventos culturais que resultam em constante mudança e progressão. No entanto, esse progresso efetivamente a leva para longe de Deus.

Historicamente, encontramos repulsa para com a Lei e atitudes nefastas em nossa cultura – muitas vezes expressas em campanhas de marketing estratégicas que apelam para a natureza pecaminosa da humanidade. Por exemplo, David Wells explica:

Os primeiros pioneiros foram o “Just Do It!” (apenas faça) da Nike. (em outras palavras, não pense nisso e não deixe que nada o impeça de fazer qualquer coisa) e “Às vezes, você precisa quebrar as regras” do Burger King. E muitos seguiram seu exemplo. O rum Bacardi Black, que se anuncia como “o sabor da noite”, afirma: “Algumas pessoas abraçam a noite porque as regras do dia não se aplicam”; Os sapatos Easy Spirit ainda se apegaram a esse tema, prometendo um sapato que “se adapta ao seu pé para que você não precise se adaptar a nada”; O Safari de Ralph Lauren celebra “viver sem limites”; o conhecido e confiável Merrill Lynch declara que “Seu mundo não deve conhecer fronteiras”; e a Nieman Marcus incentiva seus clientes a relaxar porque, diz, “não há regras aqui”.

Podemos esperar que a América e os indicados pelos progressistas para a Suprema Corte desafiem os limites de Deus, mas a igreja deve permanecer comprometida com as Escrituras, mesmo que isso não seja visto como aceitável dentro da cultura socialista de nossa sociedade pagã. Não devemos cometer o erro do antigo Israel, que fazia o que era certo aos seus próprios olhos (Juízes 17:6). Temos um Rei, e ele está sentado em seu trono Soberano. Ele nos deu um Livro e devemos obedecer. Qualquer movimento para feminilizar o púlpito é um afastamento de Deus e de sua Palavra que é suficiente.

Os cristãos que permanecem firmes na Palavra de Deus serão caluniados e escarnecidos. Cristãos fiéis que apontam para a Palavra de Deus como padrão serão chamados de fundamentalistas (como Rick Warren fez em seu tweet), mas a palavra “F” não será empregada no estilo de J. Gresham Machen. Em vez disso, será usado como m termo pejorativo para zombar de tais cristãos como estando fora de moda com a sociedade e até serem taxados de legalista em sua interpretação. Eu abordei essa tática em meu artigo intitulado “Fundamentalismo não é Palavrão”.

Não se engane, há uma batalha pelo dicionário hoje. Definições importam. Deus definiu o ofício de pastor em sua Palavra. Nunca devemos ter vergonha de permanecer firmes na definição de Deus. Se Deus é por nós, quem será contra nós (Rm 8:31)? A SBC deve enviar uma mensagem clara a Rick Warren de que um púlpito rosa não é a resposta para o declínio moderno ou para os anseios da cultura. Quando os políticos, o mundo corporativo e todas as outras esferas da nossa sociedade parecem estar de cabeça para baixo devemos nos firmar corajosamente na suficiência e autoridade da inerrante Palavra de Deus.

It should be obvious to anyone who observes the modern charismatic movement that the gifts of healing, prophecy, and speaking in tongues practiced by today’s Pentecostals are nothing like the apostolic gifts described in Acts and 1 Corinthians. Furthermore, the peculiar manifestations that have dominated that movement in recent decades (holy laughter, drunkenness in the Spirit, spiritual birthing, fire tunnels, animal noises, people being slain in the spirit, and other peculiar charismatic practices) bear no resemblance whatsoever to the work of the Holy Spirit as described in the New Testament. (See, for example, John 15:26; 16:13-15; Galatians 5:22-23).

The apostolic office and the miraculous gifts that constitute “signs of an apostle” (2 Corinthians 12:12) have ceased. That is self-evident. No one anywhere today can credibly claim to have a healing gift comparable to Peter’s (Acts 5:12-16) or Paul’s (19:11-12). The glossolalia charismatics today call “speaking in tongues” are not identifiable languages. Charismatic prophecies are notoriously fallible and often dangerously false. The brands of miracles routinely claimed by the charismatic movement do not come close to meeting the standard of undeniable reality that characterized the authentic signs and wonders described in Scripture.

It is a simple fact of history that the true signs of an apostle diminished and faded from use before the canon of Scripture was even complete. Nothing is said about miraculous gifts in any of the later epistles of Paul. Nor does he bring up the subject in any of his pastoral epistles. Given their proven potential for serious abuse, if these gifts were permanently crucial to the church’s mission, the New Testament writers surely would have dealt with the miracle gifts throughout their epistles. Instead, one of the last things Paul ever wrote was that he had left Trophimus “sick at Miletus” (2 Timothy 4:20). If it were still in Paul’s power to heal, why would he leave a ministry partner in a state of illness that kept him from traveling?

But Paul deals with miraculous gifts only in 1 Corinthians, where his main purpose is to correct some paleo-charismatics in that church who were abusing their spiritual gifts for self-aggrandizing purposes, and disrupting order in the church in a way that actually foreshadowed modern charismatic chaos.

Until the start of the twentieth century, biblically-minded Protestants universally affirmed that miracle gifts, revelatory gifts, signs, wonders, and the apostolic office had all ceased by the time the canon of Scripture was complete. The Westminster Confession of Faith, for example, explicitly affirms that view—known as cessationism. The Confession states plainly in its very first paragraph that “those former ways of God’s revealing his will unto his people [have] ceased.”

Cessationism has fallen on hard times in the past half-century. It seems the belief that now dominates most of the evangelical movement (including many Protestants who consider themselves confessionally Reformed) is a weak strain of continuationism. Those who hold this view insist that the gifts never ceased but have been operational throughout church history.

Historical evidence (beginning with the biblical record of the apostolic era) argues strongly against that view, but a devoted continuationist will embrace and affirm practically any claim about Spirit-wrought signs and wonders. Gold glitter in the church’s air-conditioning ducts is enough to convince many that a heavenly miracle is occurring before their very eyes. The fact that so many prophecies and charismatic urban legends turn out to be false doesn’t seem much of a deterrent to a devoted continuationist.

Apostolic-quality miracles are not being done in the church today, and a few of the more sane and cautious charismatic leaders have admitted this. Still, they insist that they are not cessationists and cannot embrace cessationism because they cannot find the doctrine anywhere in Scripture.

That assertion has become the focus of debate between cessationists and continuationists: Does the Bible support cessationism?

Tom Pennington says yes, it does, and he meticulously builds a careful, thoughtful, biblically sound case for cessationism, showing how both Scripture and history utterly rule out the continuationist claim.

A book like this has long been needed. The tentacles of charismatic beliefs and practices have penetrated into every corner of Protestant Christianity over the past seventy years or so, and the result has been confusion, disillusionment, and disorder. But publishers and theologians alike have generally tried to tiptoe around this debate for decades because of the volatility of the issue and the perceived threat it poses to church unity.

But real unity is rooted and grounded in truth, and if cessationism is the correct understanding of what Scripture teaches—and Tom Pennington argues persuasively that it is—then this is the pathway to real unity. It’s time to shine the light of truth on the central question that divides cessationists and continuationists.

I’m grateful for the courage, clarity, and conviction with which Tom writes. This book had its inception at the “Strange Fire” Conference sponsored by Grace to You almost a decade ago. Tom spoke on this subject, and his message (still available on YouTube) has been instrumental in leading countless people out of doctrinal confusion and discouragement. The book expands and amplifies what Tom taught in that conference session. My prayer is that it will spark a widespread, candid discussion, and that it will provoke an awakening that is long overdue.

Muito tem sido dito a respeito de se concentrar na Missão da Igreja. Isso é algo bom – recebemos uma missão de Jesus para fazer discípulos de todas as nações (Mateus 28:19) e, portanto, devemos nos comprometer continuamente com essa missão e encontrar maneiras de nos unirmos para cumprir essa missão juntos.

Entretanto, o assunto que desejo abordar é a importância da missão na perspectiva de Rick Warren. À luz de sua posição em relação a mulheres pastoras e a igreja de Saddleback que ordenou mulheres ao ministério pastoral e foi desassociada pela SBC (Convenção Batista que pertencia), Warren está em uma missão própria para convencer a SBC a não causar divisão sobre algo tão “secundário” para a missão como mulheres pregadoras. Como ele afirmou em seu infame discurso no plenário da SBC no ano passado: “Vamos continuar brigando sobre questões secundárias ou vamos manter o principal como principal? Precisamos fazer a obra, e isso fará Deus sorrir.”

“Desde o início”, Warren argumentou em uma carta aberta recente, “nossa unidade sempre se baseou em uma missão comum, não em uma confissão comum”.

Então, devemos nos concentrar em nossa missão ao invés de “brigar” sobre uma questão secundária como pastoras.

Primeiro, devemos definir alguns termos. Muitas vezes, ao discutir diferentes níveis de doutrina bíblica, as pessoas usam os termos “doutrina de primeira ordem” e “doutrina de segunda ordem”. Uma doutrina de primeira ordem é aquela em que, se você mudar ou remover a doutrina, você perde o cristianismo completamente. Doutrinas como a trindade, a divindade de Cristo, a expiação substitutiva e a ressurreição corpórea de Cristo incorporam essa categoria. As doutrinas de segunda ordem são importantes, mas não são essenciais para o Cristianismo.

Ao usar tais categorias, eu não teria problemas em afirmar que o presbiterado exclusivamente masculino não é uma doutrina de primeira ordem – não muda fundamentalmente a natureza do cristianismo.

Entretanto, é importante reconhecer que só porque algo é uma doutrina de segunda ordem não significa que não seja importante; nem significa que divergências sobre a doutrina não devam delimitar a cooperação em nossa missão.

O próprio Jesus deixou isso claro quando orou ao Pai pela unidade entre seus seguidores “para que o mundo creia que tu me enviaste” (Jo 17,21). A unidade dos cristãos nos auxiliar a cumprir a missão.

Ademais, existe algo claro na oração de Jesus, Warren o está ignorando, é que essa unidade não é ilimitada. O próprio Jesus diz que a unidade dos seus seguidores será santificada pela verdade da Sua Palavra (Jo 17,17). A unidade cristã não é, como muitos praticam hoje, uma minimização da doutrina para que todos possamos se dar bem e alcançar o mundo. Pelo contrário, a unidade que alcançará o mundo se baseia em na distinção do mundo e se separar pela verdade da Palavra.

O que isso significa, então, é que há um limite em torno da unidade cristã. Não pode haver unidade com aqueles que não crêem no Evangelho. A comunhão cristã é impossível com aqueles que negam os fundamentos do Evangelho, incluindo a inerrância das Escrituras, o nascimento virginal, a divindade de Cristo, a expiação substitutiva e a justificação somente pela Graça por meio da fé em Cristo. João enfatizou isso em sua segunda epístola, quando escreveu: “Se alguém vier a vocês e não trouxer este ensinamento, não o recebam em sua casa, nem o saúdem, pois quem o saúda participa de suas más obras. ” (2 Jo 1:10). O evangelho é o limite da unidade cristã.

Nos últimos quinze anos, os evangélicos conservadores ensinaram muito sobre o Evangelho ser o centro da unidade cristã – somos unidos nessa verdade. Todas as outras questões doutrinárias devem ser deixadas de lado, muitos dizem, para que possamos nos unir em torno do que é realmente importante — o Evangelho.

Mas esse raciocinio, na verdade, está invertido. Ao contrário desses movimentos evangélicos populares, o Evangelho não é o centro da unidade cristã; o evangelho é o limite da unidade cristã. O Evangelho unifica os crentes, mas o faz porque nos separa daqueles que não crêem no evangelho.

O centro da unidade cristã é a Verdade da Palavra de Deus — toda. O evangelho é o limite da unidade cristã, mas o centro da unidade cristã é todo o conselho de Deus, toda a verdade contida em Sua Palavra inspirada, inerrante, autoritativa e suficiente.

Toda a verdade de Deus importa, toda a verdade de Deus afeta a unidade cristã em um determinado grau. A fé cristã é mais do que apenas o Evangelho – é todo o conselho de Deus. Assuntos doutrinários além dos fundamentos do Evangelho, como batismo, eclesiologia, hermenêutica, escatologia e outros, são secundários ao evangelho — eles não são o limite —, mas são importantes e afetam o grau em que podemos nos unir e cooperar com outros cristãos.

Em outras palavras, a unidade cristã necessariamente tem dois níveis: unidade dentro dos limites do Evangelho e unidade centrada em doutrinas importantes e práticas bíblicas. Quanto mais acordo eu tiver com alguém nesses assuntos, mais unidade devo ter com ele. Por outro lado, só porque posso afirmar que alguém é um cristão genuíno e que está dentro dos limites do evangelho, não significa que possa me unir a ele em todos os níveis. Desentendimentos sobre outras doutrinas “secundárias” necessariamente afetam os níveis de unidade e cooperação cristã, especialmente em relação a plantação de igrejas e membresia de igrejas.

Portanto, uma vez que o centro da unidade cristã é todo o conselho de Deus, toda doutrina importa e afeta os níveis de cooperação em determinado grau.

Existe mais um detalhe: Erros de segunda ordem também comprometem o Evangelho.

Eu defino da seginte maneira: É uma “mat´ria contra o Evangelho”. Em outras palavras, uma matéria que tem erros que ameaçam o Evangelho.

Pastoras ameaçam o Evangelho?

A pergunta lógica subsequente seria: Essa questão de segunda ordem a respeito de qualificação pastoral ameaça o Evangelho?

Novamente, o episopado exclusivamente masculino não é o Evangelho, como também não é essencial para a natureza do cristianismo. Uma mulher que afirma ser pastora pode ser cristã, e é possível que verdadeiros cristãos frequentem igrejas com mulheres nesse papel.

O pastorado feminino, no entanto, ameaça o Evangelho pelas seguintes razões:

O pastorado feminino reduz a autoridade e a clareza da Escritura.

Uma leitura clara e sincera de I Timóteo 2.12 é abundantemente clara:

Não permito, porém, que a mulher ensine, nem use de autoridade sobre o marido, mas que esteja em silêncio.

É impossível ler esse texto e chegar à conclusão de que as mulheres podem ensinar e exercer autoridade sobre os homens, isso requer um nível de malabarismo exegético, histórico e lógico que reduz a clareza e a autoridade das Escrituras. Algumas passagens das Escrituras são difíceis de interpretar – definitivamente não é o caso.

Se há alguma questão de difícil interpretação neste versículo, é se ele proíbe as mulheres de ensinar os homens em qualquer caso (o que alguns acreditam) ou apenas o ensino pastoral (o que outros acreditam). Entretanto, em qualquer uma das duas linhas de interpretação citadas, o ensino pastoral é proibido.

Eu sou um batista clássico, mas eu devo dizer que este texto que proíbe as mulheres de exercer ensino pastoral é mais explicitamente claro do que textos que versem a respeito do batismo de crentes adultos.

Se não podemos confiar na simples leitura de um versículo da Bíblia, podemos confiar em qualquer outro? Podemos confiar na afirmação de que Jesus nasceu de uma virgem? Talvez a palavra significasse apenas “jovem moça”. Podemos confiar na afirmação de que Jesus morreu em nosso lugar e ressuscitou vitorioso sobre o pecado? Podemos confiar que aqueles que colocam sua fé em Cristo serão perdoados? Talvez haja uma interpretação mais acadêmicamente aceitável desses textos.

Esse é o exato ponto de I Timóteo 2:13-14

Porque primeiro foi formado Adão, depois Eva.
E Adão não foi enganado, mas a mulher, sendo enganada, caiu em transgressão.

O versículo acima não é uma acusação ou depreciação contra as mulheres – na verdade, é uma acusação contra o fracasso de Adão em liderar como Deus determinou.

Deus decidiu que os homens deveriam liderar. Ele criou Adão primeiro e depois criou Eva a partir de Adão para ser uma ajudante adequada para ele. Adão foi cúmplice da transgressão de Eva porque não cumpriu sua responsabilidade ordenada por Deus de liderar, ao permitir que a serpente tentasse Eva, ele deixou de agir como seu protetor.

Quando as mulheres assumem a liderança na igreja, por definição, os homens não estão cumprindo sua responsabilidade ordenada por Deus, e o ambiente para a transgressão original ressurge.

Quando os homens não se posicionam e lideram – quando eles se omitem e fogem de seu papel determinado por Deus como líder, defensor, protetor, pastor e mestre, os ataques contra o Evangelho permanecem ferrenhos, a igreja fica indefesa e a serpente vence novamente.

3. O Pastorado Femino subemte a Igreja ao Espírito desse Século.

Embora seja verdade que pastoras apareceram de vez em quando ao longo da história da igreja, nunca houve aceitação generalizada da prática até depois do surgimento do feminismo secular. “Hoje somos mais iluminados”, alguém poderia afirmar. “Paulo era um misógino, e estamos simplesmente contextualizando aos anseios modernos.”

Mas supor que o pensamento feminista em relação aos papéis de gênero é mais sensato é contraditório. É submeter os ensinamentos das Escrituras ao espírito da época — o que o Mundo considera ser um pensamento correto.

Em outras palavras, não há nada no texto das Escrituras – ou mesmo, para fins de argumentação, no contexto histórico e cultural da época de Paulo – que naturalmente levaria a qualquer conclusão diferente de que Deus, por meio de Paulo, proibiu as mulheres de servir no ofício do ensino pastoral, e que isso se aplicaria hoje com tanta autoridade quanto quando ele o escreveu. Requer impor ao texto pressuposições igualitárias derivadas da filosofia secular feminista para interpretar o texto de maneira diferente.

Se estamos dispostos a sujeitar o texto da Escritura a pressuposições seculares, onde iremos parar? O que nos impede de sujeitar o evangelho a ideologias que irão comprometê-lo?

Afirmar que existam pastoras reduz a confiança nas Escrituras, enfraquece a liderança masculina ordenada por Deus e enaltece o espírito desse século.

Consequentemente, isso prejudica a nossa missão.

“But it greatly displeased Jonah and he became angry” (Jonah 4:1). What displeased Jonah? “When God saw their deeds, that they turned from their wicked way, then God relented concerning the calamity which He had declared He would bring upon them. And He did not do it” (Jonah 3:10). I have to be honest, I am still stumped at the reaction of Jonah.

The facts are, Jonah didn’t want them to repent. He wanted judgment, and we cannot escape this truth. Not only did this displease Jonah, “he became angry” (Jonah 4:1). Angry that the people of Nineveh repented or angry that God granted it? His prayer tells us where his heart was, “Please Lord, was not this what I said while I was still in my own country? Therefore in order to forestall this I fled to Tarshish” (Jonah 4:2a). We now have his admittance to why he left. He knew God would be gracious. “For I knew that You are a gracious and compassionate God, slow to anger and abundant in lovingkindness, and one who relents concerning calamity” (Jonah 4:2b). 

Jonah didn’t want to preach the message from God. He knew God would be merciful, kind, and gracious. He knew God was abundant in mercy. He knew all the attributes of God. As a Christian today we know these attributes as well. We look at our own lives and see the abundance of mercy, lovingkindness, slow to anger, and compassion God has shown on us. But we are, at times, no different than Jonah. Forgetting His mercy on us and wanting judgment instead of grace to befall our enemies. 

Jonah was so displeased at God’s mercy to them, he simply wanted to die rather than live. Not exactly a missionary’s vision. I do not have a concrete answer as to Jonah’s attitude. He’s been reduced from certain death and now seems ungrateful that God has saved a nation. 

What is beyond my grasp in human terms is God’s continued compassion on Jonah. He asked him, “Do you have good reason to be angry?” (Jonah 4:4). It appears that was a question that Jonah couldn’t answer. Jonah simply left the conversation, as he did before, and “went out from the city and sat east of it” (Jonah 4:5). 

We know this isn’t the first time he fled. When God told him to go in chapter one, he left as well. This is a good time to bring up the uncomfortable truths we come face to face with. What do we do? Flee? Avoid answering? Simply ignore what God has said in His Word?

Jonah fled to camp out to see what would become of the city: “There he made a shelter for himself and sat under it in the shade until he could see what would happen in the city” (Jonah 4:5). Maybe God would destroy the city and give them what they deserve? In Jonah 4:6–7, God appointed both a shade of relief and a worm. Even in Jonah’s pouty attitude, God is merciful and provided shade. Ever been there—a little ungrateful, and yet God was still gracious?

God also appointed a worm, “But God appointed a worm when dawn came the next day and it attacked the plant and it withered” (Jonah 4:7). God is sovereign in both the grace and the trial. He has made them both. God ordained a hot east wind to make Jonah sweat a little. In this last question, God asked Jonah if he had good reason to be angry at the plant? (Jonah 4:9). His response was quick and short, “I have good reason to be angry, even to death” (Jonah 4:9). But why? What was his good reason? Was his knowledge of God the reason, because he knew God was merciful? Is that what has made Jonah angry? Angry because the plant didn’t do as he wished, just as God didn’t do as he wished? 

I don’t know the answer, and the book just ends. I read it over and over again hoping I will find the sequel. But I have found the ending is good enough, God closes with a mammoth statement of grace. He told Jonah in verse 10, “You had compassion on the plant for which you did not work and which you did not cause to grow, which came up overnight and perished overnight.” In other words, you did nothing. 

How much more valuable are 120,000 people than a plant? You have more compassion for a plant than for souls that would be judged and sentenced to hell. God lays the rhetorical question, “Should I not have compassion on Nineveh?” (Jonah 4:11). The depth of their depravity was they didn’t know the difference between the right and left hand. Is God’s grace and mercy that has been shown to you available for the other vile and wicked? Yes or no? Do you wish for certain enemies to perish? I’ll just end it there, like the book of Jonah ends. 

G. K. Beale famously wrote a book titled You are What You Worship. In this work, he makes reference to the book of Isaiah:

“And he said, ‘Go, and say to this people: ‘Keep on hearing, but do not understand; keep on seeing, but do not perceive.’ Make the heart of this people dull, and their ears heavy, and blind their eyes; les they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed” (Isa 6:9–10). 

The idolaters became like the objects they worshiped. God was leaving them to their destructive ways. In the same way, the idols of our hearts shape our lives today. Think about it: those who listen to Heavy Metal deck their bedrooms in band posters, wear t-shirts, and often grow their hair similarly to their favorite stars. Likewise, when people idolize fashion, they spend exquisite amounts of money to look like the latest fashion designs are “in.”

It is as Calvin famously said: “The human mind is, so to speak, a perpetual forge of idols. . . . And daily experience shows that the flesh is always restless until it has obtained some figment like itself, with which it may vainly solace itself as a representation of God.”¹Calvin. J. Institutes of the Christian Religion. Tr. Beveridge. H. James Clarke & Co., Limited. London: England. (1962). 97 This was true five-hundred years ago, and it is true now. The only difference is that it is more clearly visible while more heavily denied. Our hearts crave idols and when we give into those cravings, we, step by step, become more and more like those idols.

Knowing this, we must be careful. Every step of life presents risks. Every expression of appreciation and every thought of something we like puts us at risk of falling into idolatry. If we fall once, it is easier to fall again. Eventually, the idol twists our lives into an ugly representation of itself.

There is an alternative though. If we are committed to something else—someone who is worthy of worship—then the story can be different. If we really become more like what we worship, then worshiping a person would surely make us more like that person. School pupils do everything they can to get the attention of the person they want to date, changing their ways and clothes in order to be noticed by the one whom they want.

If we, as Christians, are committed to worshiping our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, then we can become more and more like Him. We know that should be our desire, but does it really take place through worship?

Conformity to Christ

In the middle of his heavy-weight theological epistle to the Romans, the Apostle Paul wrote, “For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers” (Rom 8:29). As Christians, we are predestined to be conformed to Christ. That is an unchangeable reality. If you are in Christ, you have partaken in the fruit of this predestined grace.

Does that mean we enter a state of perfection as soon as we are converted? Not at all. What it means is that we have Christ’s righteousness, secured by His cleansing blood (Heb 9:14). He has taken our sin, paid the price, and transferred His righteousness to our accounts (2 Cor 5:21). We are no longer condemned, because we wear His robes of righteousness. There is still, however, indwelling sin within us. As we live out the Christian life, we are expected to deal with that sin. As the Lord shines more light on our hearts, we are to kill off that sin.

How does His light help us deal with that sin? It begins in our conversion and flows into eternity. Conversion is the pathway to worship. Knowing all He has done for us, all we can do is bow down in reverential worship (Heb 12:28–29). We know we did nothing to earn our salvation and that He is the One who obtained it for us (Rom 5:1). Knowing this, we cannot praise ourselves. We can only come to Christ’s throne, bow down and worship Him for His merciful grace, displayed on the cross. Who/what else is more worthy of our worship? We will soon see how this connects to our sanctification.

Sanctification

How do we know that this righteousness is irremovable from our souls? Paul further tells us, “And I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ” (Phil 1:6). God will complete in us that which He has begun. Our path to conversion is complete, but that is not the end of the journey. After conversion, we embark on the path to glorification—our final destination. This is sanctification: the process by which we become more holy—more like Christ.

Of course, killing off sin and replacing it with good works is a part of sanctification, but how does that tie into Christocentric worship? The answer is found in how we defeat sin. The idea is quite simple. We cannot simply say no to temptation and leave it at that. Doing so leaves us bound to fall into temptation once again. Instead, we need to rewire our hearts’ desires.

What better way to do that than worshiping Jesus? Knowing all He has done to secure and persevere us by His grace, what more can we do than spill forth praise to His glorious name? If we train ourselves to worship Him in those times of temptation, we will do a lot better at mortifying our sin.

Paul gives us this principle as he calls us to put off evil and put on good (Eph 4:22–24). Do you struggle with lustful thoughts, tempting you to view pornography? Have you wondered how to slay this beast? Do you find yourself pridefully thinking about how wonderful you are, thinking about all the conversations other people must be having about you? Do you find yourself greedily thinking about how you can do things for your own benefit while others go without?

How can we deal with all this sin? The answer is simple, yet profound. We put on Christ. We remember His sacrifice for our sin in these moments and replace those thoughts and feelings by worshiping Him according to those truths. This is the pathway that brings us through sanctification and draws us closer to Him. Worshiping Jesus is exceedingly beneficial for our souls and of great practical value.

As we worship Him more and more, we will find ourselves able to put off more and more sin as we grow in holiness. There will be less room for sin and more room for growth. As we worship Him we become more like Him.

Glorification

The end of our road is glorification. When death looms and swallows us in its embrace, we will finally meet our Savior face to face. There we will no longer be tempted and never sin against Him again. Why? Because His glory will be before us. We will want nothing else. Even if that were not enough, the very memory of everything we suffered in this life because of sin will be enough to remind us of why we should not rebel again.

The fact is, we will have tasted enough of Him in this life that we want nothing more with the world. He will have proven Himself to be the delight of our souls. We will do everything we can to please Him for His unconditional love, unbreakable through the bonds of our heavenly espousal (Rev 19:6–10). He will forever be the object of our desires and we will live to give Him honor and praise. Worthy is He to receive such esteem.

At the moment of glorification we will be as much like Him as possible. Everything He is in His human nature will be shared by us. We will never sin, we will only worship. Truly, we will have finally become like the One we worship.

Our goals in this life are to be like Christ and to worship Him. Those two things are inseparable. To want to be like Him is to worship Him and to worship Him is to want to be like Him. This gorgeously woven tapestry should influence us to do both with all the more vigor. Do we want to beat sin? Let us worship Him. Do we want to grow in Sanctification? Let us worship Him. Do we want to please Him? Let us worship Him with all the holy passion and might He has enabled us to muster. If we worship Him, then we will become like what we worship.

What is a pastor? It’s a simple question really, but we live in a time where we can no longer assume that simple questions are approached logically. Ketanji Onyika Brown Jackson is an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Jackson was nominated to the Supreme Court by President Joe Biden on February 25, 2022, and was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on April 7, 2022. However, during the nominee status prior to being confirmed, she was asked a series of questions by the Senate publicly, and it was during this time period that massive controversy erupted. She was asked by Sen. Martha Blackburn, “Can you provide a definition for the word ‘woman’?” Ketanji Onyika Brown Jackson was unable to define the word.

While the controversy over the inability to answer the simple question caused conservatives to question Jackson’s ability to serve on the Supreme Court of the United States, the liberals praised her answer and pushed her to confirmation as a member of the highest court in our nation. We are witnessing a leftist agenda play out in the sphere of politics and it’s interwoven through the fabric of our entire society. However, not everyone is pleased with the deconstructionist agenda. That has been clearly seen with the success of Matt Walsh’s film project, “What Is a Woman?”

Yet, this ongoing social justice driven agenda has likewise impacted evangelicalism—including the Southern Baptist Convention.

Challenging the Definition

In May of 2021, Rick Warren and Saddleback Church made news by ordanining three women to the office of pastor. Warren praised the move as a “historic night.” This resulted in a motion to disfellowship Saddleback from the SBC at the 2021 annual meeting. What many people didn’t realize was that Rick Warren was setting up Saddleback for his departure which would involve an egalitarian leadership transition. When Warren announced his retirement plans, he likewise introduced the new co-pastor husband and wife team that would be replacing him.

Since then, Saddleback has been disfellowshipped from the Southern Baptist Convention. The SBC Executive Committee affirmed a recommendation from the SBC Credentials Committee on February 21st, 2023 to deem Saddleback Church as “not in friendly cooperation with the Southern Baptist Convention.” ¹Baptist Press: Saddleback Church deemed ‘not in friendly cooperation’ with SBC This sparked a passionate response from Rick Warren where he committed himself to return to the SBC annual meeting to make his case to reinstate Saddleback. Leading up to the annual meeting this June, Warren has been stirring the pot through his large following on Twitter to press his case and to challenge the definition of a pastor.

Although Warren states that he has not been influenced by the culture and that he has been come to his new egalitarian position based on the study of Scripture, we must view his new position in light of the cultural revolution. In 2017 Barna Research Group pointed out that there was a distinct rise in women serving in the office of pastor. According to their study, “One of every 11 Protestant pastors is a woman—triple as many as 25 years ago.” According to the statistical report titled, “State of Clergywomen in the U.S.: A Statistical Update” the numbers indicate that within “most Mainline denominations, the percentage of clergywomen has doubled or tripled since 1994.” 

What must be made clear is that any challenge of God’s Word and God’s original design aligns oneself with Satan rather than God. We see this in the Garden of Eden when Satan asked Eve a simple question: “Did God actually say, ‘You shall not eat of any tree in the garden’?”²Genesis 3:1 It was this engagement of Eve by Satan that not only twisted God’s Word, but it also led to the very first role reversal where Eve took leadership over Adam. We must remember the warning of Scripture about Satan that comes just before the record of Satan’s question to Eve. He is indeed “more crafty than any other beast of the field that the LORD God had made” (Gen. 3:1a).

Definitions Matter: What Is a Pastor?

While we can challenge Warren’s claim that he wasn’t influenced by the culture and that it’s rather suspicious, we must challenge his exegesis and interpretation of Scripture. Rather than asking ourselves how Rick Warren defines the office of pastor, we must ask ourselves how God defines the office of pastor.

In the New Testament, we have various different terms for the office of pastor that indicate the different roles and responsibilities of the office. For instance, in 1 Peter 5:1-4, Peter employs these different terms to describe the function of the pastoral office. Peter charges the elders (presbúteros) to shepherd (poimaínō) the flock of God and to exercise proper oversight (episkopḗ). These words are not references to differing offices among the church, but one office with a variety of differing responsibilities.

In 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1, Paul provides two accounts of the biblical qualifications for the office of pastor. It should be noted that all men are to aspire to be holy and faithful in character as described in these passages, God raises up some men within the church to serve as overseers in order to faithfully shepherd the church. Without any hermeneutical gymnastics, the office of pastor is clearly reserved for men. We must remember what Paul communicates prior to arriving in 1 Timothy 3. A key to biblical interpretation is that we always interpret the text within it’s proper context.

In 1 Timothy 2:12, Paul articulates a clear prohibition related to women in the local church. He says, ” I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.” There is a distinction between the teaching and exercise of authority that should be acknowledged. Paul was a bit of a revolutionary in his day, since women were often not permitted to learn, but Paul encourages them to be learners—studying out the faith and gaining greater knowledge of their God (1 Tim. 2:11).

Although the Holy Spirit led Paul to stretch the boundaries of women in one cultural area, he revisited historic boundaries in the area of teaching that God had put into place back in the Garden. Women, as Paul stated, were not to teach men. This is a reversal of roles. Paul was willing to stretch the boundaries of ancient Ephesus, but he wasn’t willing to stretch God’s boundaries that were rooted and grounded in creation.

From the very beginning, God established a specific order. That blueprint, rooted and grounded in God’s creation, established male headship and leadership in all three spheres of life: the society, the home, and the church. While you don’t see brick buildings and white steeples in the Garden of Eden, you do have Paul pointing back to the creation mandate in 1 Timothy 2 to establish God’s ordination of male headship.

Leadership involves authority. For instance, in Hebrews 13:17 the text clearly states that the church is to “submit” to their leaders which is always connected to the teaching and preaching of God’s Word. The word teach, “διδάσκω,” according to Thomas Schreiner, has in mind the public teaching and involves authoritative transmission of tradition about Christ and the Scriptures (1 Cor. 12:28-29; Eph. 4:11; 1 Tim. 2:7; 2 Tim. 3:16; James 3:1).³ Andreas J. Köstenberger and Thomas R. Schreiner, Women in the Church (Third Edition): An Interpretation and Application of 1 Timothy 2:9-15, (Wheaton: Crossway, 2016), 190. It has never been God’s plan for men to submit to the teaching of women within the church. You cannot make a biblical case for such interpretation. In fact, in order to reach this position, you would have to twist the Scriptures beyond God’s established order and boundary. John MacArthur observes:

Women may be highly gifted teachers and leaders, but those gifts are not to be exercised over men in the context of the church. That is true not because women are spiritually inferior to men but because God’s law commands it. He has ordained order in His creation—an order that reflects His own nature and therefore should be reflected in His church. Anyone ignoring or rejecting God’s order, then, weakens the church and dishonors Him.⁴John MacArthur, “Can Women Exercise Authority in the Church?” [accessed 4-17-18]

Men have been called by God to be leaders, protectors, and providers. That’s why we see God’s pattern of raising up men as husbands, fathers, warriors, Kings, prophets, Apostles, and pastors. This has been God’s consistent pattern from the Garden of Eden to this present hour. This was not the original design for women. That’s not to diminish the value or giftedness of women, but God simply didn’t design women for the same tasks as men. There are different roles and responsibilities for men that are distinct and unique from the roles and responsibilities that God has designed for women. In his excellent book titled Biblical Eldership, Alexander Strauch describes the function and responsiblitiy of pastors, who are most commonly refered to as elders in the New Testament:

Elders lead the church [1 Tim 5:17; Titus 1:7; 1 Peter 5:1-2], teach and preach the Word [1 Timothy 3:2; 2 Timothy 4:2; Titus 1:9], protect the church from false teachers [Acts 20:17, 28-31], exhort and admonish the saints in sound doctrine [1 Timothy 4:13; 2 Timothy 3:13-17; Titus 1:9], visit the sick and pray [James 5:14; Acts 20:35], and judge doctrinal issues [Acts 15:16]. In biblical terminology, elders shepherd, oversee, lead, and care for the local church.⁵Alexander Strauch, Biblical Eldership, (Colorado Springs, CO: Lewis and Roth Publishers, 2003), 16.

What is a pastor? A pastor serves as a leader, provider, and protector of God’s church. These tasks are accomplished through the preaching and teaching of Scripture as part of God’s ordinary means of grace established for the wellbeing and nourishment of his church. This responsibility is to be taken seriously and should never be redesigned to fit the framework of a progressive culture. We must always remember that the society as a whole has no anchor firmly grounded in Scripture. The progressive society has a sail rather than an anchor. This sail is used to catch the cultural winds which results in constant change and progression. However, this progress most certainly leads away from God.

Historically we find progressive non-compliance and rogue attitudes in our culture—expressed often in clever marketing campaigns that appeal to the fallen sinful nature of humanity. For instance, David Wells explains:

The early pioneers were Nike’s “Just Do It!” (in other words, don’t think about it and don’t let anything stand in the way to your doing it) and Burger King’s “Sometimes, you gotta break the rules.” And the imitator’s have been numerous. Bacardi Black rum, which advertises itself as “the taste of the night,” goes on to say, “Some people embrace the night because rules of the day do not apply”; Easy Spirit shoes even latched onto this theme promising a shoe that “conforms to your foot so you don’t have to conform to anything”; Ralph Lauren’s Safari celebrates “living without boundaries”; even stayed and reliable Merrill Lynch declares that “Your world should know no boundaries”; and Nieman Marcus encourages its customers to relax because, it says, there are “No rules here.”⁶David Wells, “Our Dying Culture,” in The Formal Papers of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals Summit (April 17-20, 1996), 13.

We can expect corporate America and progressive nominees for the Supreme Court to challenge God’s boundaries, but the church must remain committed to Scripture even if that is not viewed as acceptable within the progressive culture of our pagan society. We must not make the mistake of ancient Israel who did what was right in their own eyes (Judges 17:6). We have a King, and he is seated upon his sovereign throne. He has given us a Book, and we must obey. Any move to feminize the pulpit is a move away from God and his sufficient Word.

Christians who stand firm upon God’s Word will be maligned and mocked. Faithful Christians who point back to God’s Word as the standard will be called fundamentalists (as Rick Warren did in his tweet), but the “F” word will not be employed in the vein of J. Gresham Machen. Instead, it will be used as a pejorative to mock such Christians as being out of touch with society and even legalistic in their interpretation. I’ve addressed that tactic in my article titled, “The ‘F’ Word: The Revival of Fundamentalism.”

Make no mistake about it, there is a battle for the dictionary today. Definitions matter. God has defined the office of pastor in his Word. We must never be ashamed to stand firmly upon God’s definition. If God is for us, who can be against us (Rom 8:31)? The SBC should send a clear message to Rick Warren that a pink pulpit is not the answer to modern decline or to the cravings of culture. When politicians, the corporate world, and every other sphere of our society seems to have their feet planted in mid-air, we must stand unashamedly upon the sufficiency and authority of God’s inerrant Word.

Recently there has been a lot of talk about the importance of focusing on the church’s mission. That’s good as far as it goes—we’ve been given a mission by Jesus to make disciples of all nations (Matt 28:19), and so we ought to continually commit to that mission and find ways to join with others as we seek to fulfill that mission together.

However, the specific talk about the importance of mission I’m referring to comes from Rick Warren. In light of his personal change of view regarding women pastors and Saddleback church ordaining women to pastoral ministry and being disfellowshiped by the SBC, Warren is on his own mission to convince the SBC not to divide over something so “secondary” to the mission as women preachers. As he stated in his now infamous speech on the floor of the SBC last year, “Are we going to keep bickering about secondary issues, or are we going to keep the main thing the main thing? We need to finish the task, and that will make God smile.”

“From the start,” Warren argued in a recent open letter, “our unity has always been based on a common mission, not a common confession.”

So should we focus on our mission instead of “bickering” over a secondary issue like women pastors?

Secondary Issues

First, let’s define some terms. Often when discussing different levels of biblical doctrine, people will use the terms “first order doctrine” and “second order doctrine.” A first order doctrine is one in which, if you change or remove the doctrine, you lose Christianity altogether. Doctrines like the trinity, the deity of Christ, substitutionary atonement, and Christ’s bodily resurrection would fall into that category. Second order doctrines are important, but are not essential to Christianity itself.

When using such categories, I would quickly affirm that male-only eldership is not a first order doctrine—it does not fundamentally change the nature of Christianity.

However, it is important to recognize that just because something is a second order doctrine does not mean it is unimportant; nor does it mean that disagreements over the doctrine shouldn’t limit cooperation in our mission.

Jesus himself made this clear when he prayed to his Father for unity among his followers “so that the world may believe that you have sent me” (Jn 17:21). The unity of Christians does help us to accomplish our mission.

However, what is also clear from Jesus’s prayer, and what Warren is ignoring, is that this unity is not without boundaries. Jesus himself says that the unity of his followers will be sanctified by the truth of his Word (Jn 17:17). Christian unity is not, as many practice today, a minimization of doctrine so that we can all get along and reach the world. On the contrary, our unity that will reach the world is based on being distinct from the world and set apart by the truth of the Word.

What this means, then, is that there is a boundary around Christian unity. There can be no unity with those who do not believe the gospel; Christian fellowship is impossible with those who deny the fundamentals of the gospel, including the inerrancy of Scripture, the virgin birth, the deity of Christ, substitutionary atonement, and justification by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. This is what John emphasized in his second epistle, when he wrote, “If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works” (2 Jn 1:10). The gospel is the boundary of Christian unity.

Over the last fifteen years or so, conservative evangelicals have talked a lot about the gospel as the center of Christian unity—it is what brings us together; it is what we unite around. All other doctrinal issues should be set aside, they say, in order for us to be unified around what is really important—the gospel.

But this thinking actually has it backward. Contrary to these popular evangelical movements, the gospel is not the center of Christian unity; the gospel is the boundary of Christian unity. The gospel does unify believers, but it does so in that it separates us from those who do not believe the gospel.

The center of Christian unity is the truth of God’s Word—all of it. The gospel is the boundary of Christian unity, but the center of Christian unity is the whole counsel of God, all of the truth contained in his inspired, inerrant, authoritative, and sufficient Word.

All of God’s truth matters; all of God’s truth affects Christian unity to one degree or another. The Christian faith is more than just the gospel—it is the whole council of God. Doctrinal matters beyond the fundamentals of the gospel like baptism, ecclesiology, hermeneutics, eschatology, and so much more are secondary to the gospel—they’re not the boundary—but they are important and affect the degree to which we can unify and cooperate with other Christians.

In other words, Christian unity necessarily has two levels: unity within the boundary of the gospel, and unity centered on other important biblical doctrines and practices. The more agreement I have with someone in these other matters, the more unity I can have with him. Conversely, just because I might affirm that someone is a Christian who is inside the boundary of the gospel does not mean that I will be able to unify with him on every level. Disagreements over other “secondary” doctrines necessarily affect levels of Christian unity and cooperation, especially church planting and church membership.

Levels of Christian Unity

True Christian unity can be achieved only by the truth of God’s Word, within the boundaries of gospel essentials, and centered in the whole council of God. Minimization of any of God’s truth inevitably leads to the erosion of doctrine and the ultimate dissolution of true Christian unity.

Therefore, since the center of Christian unity is the whole counsel of God, all doctrine matters and affects levels of cooperation to one degree or another.

But this leads to another point: even errors in second order doctrines can harm the gospel.

This is how I would define a “gospel issue.” In other words, a gospel issue is one in which errors in such issues could threaten the gospel.

Do Women Pastors Threaten the Gospel?

This leads, then, to the next logical question: Does error in the second order doctrine of pastoral qualifications threaten the gospel?

Again, male eldership is not the gospel, and male eldership is not essential to the nature of Christianity. A woman claiming to be a pastor can be a Christian, and it is possible for true Christians to attend churches with women in that role.

But female eldership threatens the gospel for the following reasons:

1. Female eldership undermines the authority and clarity of Scripture.

A plain, straightforward reading of 1 Timothy 2:12 is abundantly clear:

I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.

To take that text and somehow come to the conclusion that women can teach and exercise authority over men requires a level of exegetical, historical, and logical gymnastics that undermines the clarity and authority of Scripture. Some passages of Scripture are difficult to interpret—this is not one of them.

If there is any interpretive question from this verse, it is whether it prohibits women from teaching men in any case (which some believe) or only pastoral teaching (which others believe). Yet anywhere on that interpretive spectrum one might fall, pastoral teaching is forbidden.

I am as strong a Baptist as they come, but I’d say that this text prohibiting women from pastoral teaching is more explicitly clear than any single text that supports believer baptism.

If we can’t trust the plain reading of one Bible verse, can we trust any of it? Can we trust the claim that Jesus was born of a virgin? Maybe the word just meant “young woman.” Can we trust the claim that Jesus died in our place and rose victorious over sin? Can we trust that those who put their faith in Christ will be forgiven? Maybe there’s a more scholarly interpretation of those texts.

2. Female eldership undermines the created order.

This, I believe, is the point of 1 Timothy 2:13–14:

For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor.

This verse is not an indictment or belittlement of women—it is actually an indictment on Adam’s failure to lead as God intended.

God intended for men to lead. He created Adam first, and then he created Eve out of Adam to be a helper suitable for him. Adam was complicit in Eve’s transgression because he did not fulfill his God-ordained responsibility to lead, allowing the serpent to tempt Eve rather than stepping in as her protector.

When women take leadership in the church, by definition men are not fulfilling their God-ordained responsibility, and the conditions for the original transgression are repeated.

And when men don’t stand and lead—when they sit by the sideline and shirk their God-given role as leader, defender, protector, pastor, and teacher, attacks against the gospel remain undefended, the church weakens, and the serpent wins again.

3. Female eldership submits the church to the spirit of the age.

While it is true that female pastors have appeared now and then through the course of church history, there has never been widespread acceptance of the practice until after the rise of secular feminism. “We are more enlightened today,” someone might claim. “Paul was a misogynist, and we’re simply updating for modern sensibilities.”

But to assume that post-feminist thinking regarding gender roles is more enlightened is begging the question. It is submitting Scripture’s teachings to the spirit of the age—what the world considers enlightened thinking.

In other words, there is nothing in the text of Scripture—or even, for sake of argument, in the historical/cultural context of Paul’s day—that would naturally lead to any conclusion other than that God through Paul forbade women from serving in the pastoral teaching office, and that this applies today with just as much authority as it did when he wrote it. It requires imposing upon the text egalitarian presuppositions derived from post-feminist secular philosophy to interpret the text any differently.

If we are willing to subject the text of Scripture to secular presuppositions, then where will we stop? What’s to stop us from subjecting the gospel to ideologies that will harm it?

Bickering about Secondary Issues?

To affirm women pastors undermines confidence in Scripture, weakens God-ordained male leadership, and bows to the spirit of the age.

And that harms our mission.

STANZA 1
Rejoice! the Lord is King!
Your Lord and King adore.
Rejoice, give thanks and sing
and triumph evermore:
lift up your heart! Lift up your voice;
rejoice, again I say, rejoice!

STANZA 2
Jesus, the Savior reigns,
the God of truth and love;
when He had purged our stains,
He took His seat above: 
lift up your heart! Lift up your voice;
rejoice, again I say, rejoice!

STANZA 3
His Kingdom cannot fail,
He rules o’er earth and heav’n;
the keys of death and hell
are to our Jesus giv’n:
lift up your heart! Lift up your voice;
rejoice, again I say, rejoice!

STANZA 4
Rejoice in glorious hope,
for Christ the Judge shall come
to gather all His saints
to their eternal home:
lift up your heart! Lift up your voice;
rejoice, again I say, rejoice!

—Charles Wesley, 1746 alt.

Welcome to G3 Weekly—a summary of this week’s top news stories on Christianity and the public square.

This week, a street preacher in Pennsylvania was arrested at a “pride month” event, and charges against him were later dropped. Girl Scouts are now able to earn an LGBT patch by attending “pride” parades or creating rainbow-themed decorations. Meanwhile, the Christian and Missionary Alliance voted to permit the classification of women as ordained ministers.

Street Preacher Arrested at “Pride” Event in Pennsylvania

“We must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29).

Damon Atkins, a street preacher in Reading, Pennsylvania, was arrested last weekend at a “pride month” event after less than sixty seconds of quoting the Bible on a public sidewalk.

Video of the event posted by Matthew Wear, another street preacher, depicted Atkins noting to a police officer that he is legally permitted to speak on public property. The officer in turn told Atkins to “let them have their event” and “respect them.”

Atkins responded that people who “are in hell” were “cheering” for the street preachers as they proclaimed the gospel, a reference to the account of the rich man and Lazarus, the preacher said in an interview with the Lancaster Patriot. He attempted to continue preaching, after which the officer arrested him and the “pride month” celebrants appeared to applaud.

The office of the Berks County District Attorney said in a statement days after the incident that charges of disorderly conduct initially filed against Atkins had been dropped.

Girl Scouts Allowed to Earn LGBT Patches

“When pride comes, then comes disgrace, but with the humble is wisdom” (Proverbs 11:2).

Girl Scouts were encouraged to earn “pride month” patches, according to a document published by the youth organization.

Girl Scouts, which is open for participants between kindergarten and twelfth grade, released the document to troop leaders and parents, contending that a celebration of “pride month” would help students acknowledge “the diversity, heritage, and contributions of our multicultural communities.” Volunteers were told to create an “atmosphere of acceptance and inclusion” for students regardless of “sexual orientation,” as well as ethnicity, religion, or political beliefs.

The document, which cited a number of LGBTQ entities which support so-called gender transition surgeries for minors, informed volunteers that Girl Scouts could earn a “pride month” patch by completing activities such as making a rainbow flag, attending a “pride” parade with their family or troop, reading a book by a homosexual or transgender author, or creating artwork about how “families come in all shapes, sizes, and kinds.”

Christian and Missionary Alliance Votes to Ordain Females

“I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet” (1 Timothy 2:12).

The Christian and Missionary Alliance, an evangelical denomination with some 2,000 churches across the United States, voted at a general council meeting to allow the ordination of females.

Attendees voted to approve changes to the denomination’s statement of faith such that both males and females can receive the designations “consecrated and ordained” or carry the titles “pastor” and “reverend.” Eldership in churches, however, continues to be limited to lead pastors, elected lay elders, and other male members of the licensed ministry staff.

The controversial move occurs days before the Southern Baptist Convention, the largest association of Protestant churches in the United States, likewise prepares to debate the issue of female ordination. Some prominent ministers, such as Rick Warren of Saddleback Church in California, have ordained women to various pastoral roles.

Mike Law, a pastor at Arlington Baptist Church in Virginia, will submit an amendment clarifying that a congregation with a female pastor of any type cannot be deemed in “friendly cooperation” with the denomination in accordance with the Baptist Faith and Message doctrinal statement.

o Salmo 1 começa ensinando que um homem verdadeiramente bendito não permitirá que sua visão sobre uma vida feliz seja influenciada pela imagem maligna de uma vida maldita. O Salmo 2 nos mostra o que é essa imagem maligna. O conselho dos ímpios – A filosofia de vida deles.

Por que se amotinam as nações e os povos tramam em vão? Salmo 2:1

Este é um conclusão lógica dos dois salmos introdutórios. Notavelmente, a palavra hebraica para “tramam” no Salmo 2:1 é exatamente o mesmo termo da palavra “meditar” no Salmo 1:2, essa ideia de refletir sobre algo que forma e molda sua imaginação. A ACF traduziu esta frase, “os povos imaginam em vão”. Felizmente, existem versões na língua inglesa que traduziram como: “meditam” (não existem versões em português que traduziram como ‘meditam’ a palavra ‘imaginam’). A pessoa justa medita na Lei de Deus dia e noite…. “Por que se amotinam as nações e os povos meditam em coisas vãs?” Esta é uma imagem da imaginação perversa de uma vida feliz. A imaginação de uma pessoa justa refletirá a Torá, mas a imaginação de uma pessoa ímpia refletirá uma imagem vã.

E o que é essa imagem? Observe o que as nações ímpias dizem sobre o governo do Senhor nos versículos 2–3. Uma pessoa justa imagina que o governo de Deus é aquele que permite a bem-aventurança; como uma pessoa perversa imagina a vida debaixo do governo de Deus?

Os reis da terra se levantam e os governos consultam juntamente contra o Senhor e contra o seu ungido, dizendo: Rompamos as suas ataduras, e sacudamos de nós as suas cordas. Salmo 2:2-3

É assim que os ímpios imaginam que Deus é; não diz respeito a sua teologia, mas ao que eles pensam intelectualmente em seus corações. Não é que eles neguem necessariamente o poder e o governo de Deus. Eles reconhecem seu poderio, mas não tem a mesma visão dos justos. Pessoas más pensam em outras categorias. Quando consideram o governo de Deus, eles o concebem como laços que devem ser rompidos, como cordas que devem ser desatadas para que haja liberdade verdadeira. A imagem ímpia de uma vida feliz é uma vida de prosperidade divorciada de Deus, uma rejeição explícita ao seu governo, porque eles acham que esse governo é opressor.

Os Salmos 1 e 2 expressam duas imagens diferentes da vida governada por Deus – como uma árvore frutífera ou como escravidão. A imagem que você concebe determina seu caminho e seu destino.

E é assim que os ímpios percebiam o governo de Deus ao longo da história. Pense no conselho da serpente a Eva: Deus realmente ordenou que você não comesse da árvore? Isso é horrível! Ele apenas sabe que você se tornará como Ele. Quebre essa algema e coma o fruto.

Pense na Torre de Babel. Deus ordena a Noé e seus filhos que “sejam férteis e multipliquem-se, multipliquem-se grandemente na terra e multipliquem-se sobre ela” (Gn 9:7). Mas seus descendentes migraram juntos para o leste e disseram: Isso é horrível! Liberte-se dessa jaula: “Vinde, edifiquemos para nós uma cidade e uma torre cujo cume toque nos céus, e tornemos célebre o nosso nome, para que não sejamos espalhados por toda a terra” (Gn 11:4). O que Deus ordenou para ser uma bênção para eles, eles interpretaram como uma maldição.

Pense nos israelitas. Deus lhes deu a lei de Moisés, e disse: “E se fielmente ouvirdes a voz do Senhor vosso Deus, tendo o cuidado de cumprir todos os seus mandamentos que hoje vos ordeno, o Senhor vosso Deus te exaltará sobre todas as nações da terra. E todas estas bênçãos virão sobre ti e te alcançarão, se ouvires a voz do Senhor teu Deus” (Deuteronômio 28:1–2). E os hebreus disseram: Isso é horrível! Se quisermos paz na terra, precisamos nos casar com os cananeus, contrariando a Lei de Deus. Se quisermos grandes colheitas , precisamos adorar Baal, o deus da chuva. Se quisermos ter filhos, precisamos adorar Astarte, deusa da fertilidade. Vamos romper essas algemas e escapar dos grilhões. Eles queriam uma vida feliz, mas tinham a imagem errada do governo de Deus – era a conhecida imaginação vã- ela os levou a se livrar do que eles viam como amarras e restrições, quando na verdade os mandamentos que Deus lhes deu eram o caminho para a verdadeira felicidade e benção.

Eu poderia continuar eternamente- essa é a história da humanidade. Em nenhum desses exemplos os ímpios tinham um conhecimento deficiente do fato de que Deus é o Criador e Governador de todos — Romanos 1 nos diz que todas as pessoas conhecem o poder Eterno e a natureza de Deus; sua deficiência – o que formou seu caminho – é como eles imaginavam que Deus fosse. É exatamente o objetivo do Salmo 2: Esses salmos introdutórios apresentam a estrutura de todo o Saltério, o que deve moldar nossa imaginação da realidade do mundo e nos conduzir à bem-aventurança (felicidade) e ao louvor, mesmo quando estamos cercados por pessoas perversas, essa é uma imagem totalmente diferente.

De fato, foi exatamente assim que os apóstolos de Jesus interpretaram o Salmo 2. Em Atos 4, Pedro e João experimentaram a primeira perseguição dos judeus e, depois de libertados, citaram o Salmo 2, reconhecendo esse Salmo paradigmático como uma lente fundamental para interpretar toda a história humana como um conflito entre as imagens da vida feliz, (1) uma vida debaixo do governo de Deus contra uma (2) vida que foge do governo de Deus. Consequentemente, eles também reconheceram que sua pequena participação no desdobramento da estrutura do Salmo 2 não era nem de longe o exemplo mais significativo. Esse tipo de conflito aconteceu no jardim, aconteceu em Babel, aconteceu com os filhos de Israel e estava acontecendo com os apóstolos; mas os apóstolos sabiam que o exemplo final do Salmo 2 era a crucificação do Filho de Deus. Não foi difícil para eles interpretar o Salmo 2 dessa maneira – pois é exatamente isso que o Salmo 2:2 diz:

Os reis da terra se levantam e os governos consultam juntamente contra o Senhor e contra o seu ungido, dizendo:

Os apóstolos identificaram corretamente o Ungido — o Messias — como Jesus. Em outras palavras, o Salmo 2 explica como as verdades fundamentais do Salmo 1 se desenrolam na história do Mundo e, como veremos no próximo capítulo, o Messias está no centro de tudo. Os apóstolos sabiam disso; eles meditaram na música de Deus – os Salmos formaram sua imaginação. É assim eles interpretaram o conflito que estavam vivendo, à luz desse Salmo e essa convicção os manteve no caminho certo para a verdadeira felicidade.

A imagem bíblica de Deus

O Salmo 2 também retrata uma imagem bíblica de Deus e sua resposta à imaginação dos ímpios. Novamente, isso está estabelecendo um conjunto paradigmático de imagens que são desenvolvidas na totalidade do Saltério e que formam uma imaginação inspirada por Deus da realidade debaixo de Seu governo.

Considere a imagem que o Salmo 2:4 pinta de Deus: Diz: “Aquele que se assenta nos céus”. Agora, essa palavra “assenta” é um pouco enganadora. A palavra hebraica é, na verdade, muito mais metafórica do que simplesmente “assenta”. Mais uma vez, os Salmos usam a poesia para ajudar a formar nossa imagem consciente da realidade, e é isso que o Salmo 2 continua a fazer. Em outras porções do Saltério, os tradutores muitas vezes capturam uma imagem mais completa do que este termo hebraico significa ao utilizar a palavra portuguesa “entronizado”:

O Senhor preside ao dilúvio, o Senhor trona como rei para sempre. (Salmo 29:10)

Esse é o sentido desta palavra. Como observa Ross, o termo “significa que ele se senta entronizado ou reina”. Essa é a imagem de Deus que o Salmo 2 está começando a pintar, e isso fica claro quando o Salmo 2:6 se refere a ele como Rei. Os Salmos usam diversas imagens de Deus para moldar nossa concepção dEle, mas a imagem predominantemente é a de Deus como Rei. Você o encontrará chamado de Rei ao longo dos salmos, encontrará referências ao seu trono no céu como vemos aqui em 2:4 e encontrará outras imagens como: cetro, reino, domínio, reinado e poderío. Da mesma forma, no antigo Oriente Próximo, um título como de juiz conotava a ideia de um governante, como no Livro dos Juízes, onde os juízes eram governantes guerreiros e campeões do povo.

Do começo ao fim do Saltério, essas canções nos levam a meditar sobre Deus como Rei. Essas imagens concretas se formam em nossa imaginação, o que Alison Searle chama de “olhos do coração”, uma imagem de uma vida feliz debaixo do governo de Deus.

A resposta de Deus

E como esse Rei responde à fúria das nações? Como Ele responde à vã imaginação de uma vida feliz longe de seu governo? Como Ele responde quando os reis da Terra se colocam contra Ele e Seu Ungido, rompendo os laços de seu governo e se libertam das correntes de Seu reinado?

Ele zomba.

Entretanto Sua risada não é nada engraçada. Ela á uma rizada escarnecedora. (vs 4) “Aquele, porém, que mora nos céus, se ri, o Senhor os reduz ao ridículo”, (vs 5) “Dirigindo-se a eles em cólera, ele os aterra com o seu furor: (vs 9) “Tu as governarás com cetro de ferro, tu as pulverizarás como um vaso de argila”. Vocês se colocam contra o meu Ungido? Vocês o rejeitam, prendem, acusam falsamente, despojam, espancam e zombam de Seu governo com uma coroa de espinhos? Vocês pregam meu Ungido em uma cruz vergonhosa? (vs 6) Eu, porém, ungi o meu Rei sobre o meu santo monte de Sião.

A certeza de destruição para aqueles que vivem segundo uma vã imaginação de uma vida feliz é anunciada ao longo do Saltério, e particularmente na progressão da organização do Saltério. Se você traçar a aparência do ímpio ao longo dos Salmos, especialmente as imagens da prosperidade do ímpio, notará que há uma intensificação do contraste entre o ímpio e o justo nos primeiros quarenta salmos que começa a se diluir e desvanecer à medida que o livro progride para os últimos cinquenta salmos, que se concentram no louvor. Há um movimento no livro do conflito à bênção, do lamento ao louvor. Quando você chega ao último salmo do livro, o Salmo 150, não há absolutamente nenhuma menção aos ímpios. Eles foram destruídos.

O Salmo primeiro profetiza exatamente isso. Eles são como a moinha que o vento espalha (vs 4). Eles são vigorosos por quarenta salmos e continuam na maioria dos salmos, mas começam a diminuir e, no Salmo 150, eles se foram. O fato é : a presença de pessoas perversas é uma realidade inevitável, mas também é uma realidade inevitável que: “os ímpios não subsistirão no juízo, nem os pecadores na congregação dos justos”. Eles estão aqui e lutarão contra nós, e muitas vezes parece que estão prosperando em nosso lugar. Mas no final, no dia do julgamento, eles serão levados como palha.

É assim que temos esperança em meio a um Mundo sombrio e cada vez mais cheio de caminhos ímpiedosos e imaginações perversas. Não temos esperança de escapar da realidade malígna ao nosso redor ou sequer conseguimos ignorar essa realidade. A esperança é formada em nossos corações em meio a tudo isso ao meditar na Torá de David, ao viajar por esse caminho que os editores de salmos criaram para nós andarmos em meio a escuridão, através da adversidade, até a verdadeira felicidade. Cantamos nosso caminho através dos Salmos, de canções de lamento a canções de louvor.

O Conselho da Torá

Os Salmos 1 e 2 retratam duas imagens conflitantes dos modelos de ‘vida feliz’ que competem ao longo da história do mundo: a imagem de uma árvore que frutifíca debaixo do governo de Deus e a imagem do governo de Deus como opressivo e tirânico. O conselho dos ímpios é que a única maneira de prosperar é rompendo os laços do governo de Deus e abandonar suas amarras. Qual é o conselho do justo? O Salmo 2:10–12 nos diz:

Agora, pois, ó reis, sede prudentes; deixai-vos instruir, juízes da terra.
Servi ao Senhor com temor, e alegrai-vos com tremor.
Beijai o Filho, para que se não ire, e pereçais no caminho, quando em breve se acender a sua ira; bem-aventurados todos aqueles que nele confiam.

O conselho da Torá. Esta é uma imagem assertiva de como será se você resistir ao governo de Deus como Rei. A última linha do Salmo 1 promete: “o caminho dos ímpios perecerá”, e assim a Torá aconselha: “Beije o Filho, para que Ele não se zangue, e você pereça no caminho”. Reconheça-o como Rei, aceite essa imagem, ou você será julgado por Deus.

Se você imagina que deve se rebelar e rejeita o Governo Divino porque ele é horrível, então essa é a imagem que realmente terá. Se você resistir ao domínio dEle tendo-o como algo opressor, experimentará verdadeira opressão. Você quebrou as amarras dele? Ele vai quebrar você. Sua imagem da vida abençoada e sua relação com o governo de Deus determinará como você vive e determinará seu destino final.

Mas se você beijar o Filho – se você o servir com tremor porque sabe que seus mandamentos não são pesados; você não percebe Deus como um déspota tirano, você o imagina como um Pastor-Rei, como seu Redentor — se essa é a sua imagem, então você será abençoado.

Feliz o homem, nos diz o Salmo 1, cuja imaginação é moldada pelo deleite na Torá, em vez do conselho ímpio. E a frase final do Salmo 2 é colocada lá intencionalmente pelos editores do Saltério para formar um suporte de livro com o Salmo 1:1: “Bem-aventurados todos os que nele se refugiam”. Se você perceber Deus corretamente, um pensamento formado por Suas canções inspiradas, então você voará para Ele em busca de refúgio; você o verá como a fonte da verdadeira bem-aventurança e como aquele que fornecerá segurança, conforto e proteção em meio a um Mundo perverso.

Este artigo é um trecho de: ‘Meditando sobre a Música de Deus: Formando Corações de Louvor com os Salmos’. (Musing on God’s Music: Forming Hearts of Praise with the Psalms) de Scott Aniol. Logo estará disponível em português.

Editor’s note: Dan posted a letter he had sent his church on the Pyromaniacs blog; however, Blogger removed the post as “hate speech.” We have reposted the letter here with permission from the author.

We all wish we could shelter our children from the harmful and corrupt elements of our God-hating culture. Apart from living under a rock, this is becoming increasingly impossible. The homosexual-and-much-more agenda has increasingly intruded itself into every area of American life, from the media to sports to department stores to fast food restaurants and coffee shops.

I am writing to try to help you talk to your children. I’ll write it as one side of a conversation. Use any part that helps you address matters that arise in your children’s world.

You asked me what “gay” and “homosexual” and “trans” means, and why you suddenly see the word “Pride” everywhere. I’m glad you asked me! Let me try to explain it to you.

We’ve read Genesis together. You know that God created the world as a perfect, wondrous place. And you know in Genesis 1 He created Adam and Eve without sin, or any of the awful things sin does when it gets inside someone. Adam and Eve loved God and were happy with themselves, with each other, and with their world.

But then Satan came along in Genesis 3, and he got them to be dissatisfied with what God gave them. He tried to make God look like He didn’t care, and like He didn’t really want what was best for Adam and Eve. Satan tried to convince them that they knew better than God what was right and good, and what was best for them. Now you know, that is pride. Pride blows us up like balloons — all big and impressive looking, but with nothing but air inside. So in their pride, Adam and Eve rebelled against God.

When they did, they died inside. The happiness and wholeness they had were gone. They weren’t happy with themselves, or each other, or their world — or God. So they had to find ways to try to make themselves feel happy, and to hide the guilt they had inside. They felt guilty, because they were guilty. They had sinned against God, their Maker.

All those words you asked me about come out of this. They are all about people dead and broken by sin, still trying to find happiness by defiantly shaking their fist in God’s face and pretending they’re smarter than God.

You remember that God made Adam and Eve, a man and a woman. That’s what sex means — it means being a man, or being a woman. People say “gender” today, but gender is really a grammar-term, about words, not people. “Sex” is the better word here. How many sexes did God make? That’s right: two. And when God saw it wasn’t good for the man Adam to be alone, what did God make for him, in Genesis 2? That’s right, a woman, named Eve. So God invented marriage, when a man wants to be with a woman in a special way, and a woman wants to be with a man — only the two of them, with each other.

But all of us children of Adam are sinners, and sin ruins all our good desires and feelings that God gave us. Sin makes us want what we shouldn’t want, and it makes us not want what we should want.

So some poor sad men don’t want to have a woman as their wife. They want another man. And some poor sad women don’t want a man, they want another woman. They are ashamed to want these things, they feel guilty. When we feel guilty, we can only do one of two things. We can go to God, confessing our sins and finding His forgiveness and help. Or we can pretend that we’re okay, and just keep holding to our sin. When people want to pretend these broken, wrong desires are okay, they call it being “gay,” pretending to be truly happy. But they don’t have peace with God, and they won’t be happy when God’s patience comes to an end and He judges them.

And then there are other people so broken by sin that they aren’t willing to be what God made them. God made them a man or a woman — remember, He only made two sexes — but they want to pretend to be something else. Men want to pretend to be women, and women want to pretend to be men. Of course, we are what God made us, and no one can really become the opposite sex. They may try very hard, and even hurt themselves, but it just can’t be done. Still, sometimes we keep pretending, even though it really harms and shames us to do so. And when men or women pretend to be the opposite sex, they call it being “trans.”

So they took the whole month of June to pretend together that all these wrong and harmful things are good, and they call June “Pride” month. Like the Bible says, their “glory is in their shame” (Philippians 3:19).

But things are what God calls them, aren’t they? Not what we call them. So men are always just men, women are always just women, and we can only really marry someone of the opposite sex from us. A man marries a woman, a woman marries a man. Anything else can never really be marriage.

Isn’t it sad to think about people so badly wanting things that are bad for them? Isn’t it awful that what people think will be good for them is really bad for them? But that’s what sin does. It does that to all of us! It’s why children want to disobey their parents. It’s why parents sometimes fight each other, or don’t do such a great job being parents. Sin is behind everything bad that we do or feel.

But remember, God so loved sinful men and women that He sent Jesus to save sinners. Jesus can save any sinner! There is no sin too big for Jesus. He shed His blood so that His people could be forgiven and freed from every last sin of every size! When we turn from our sin and believe in Jesus, we can know that all our sins are forgiven. Isn’t that just the most wonderful news there is?

Even more, Jesus died so that His people could be given new hearts, and so that God’s Holy Spirit could live in our hearts. So God removes our old heart that wanted awful and bad things and hated God, and He gives us a new heart. That new heart wants to love God, and believe Him, and walk in His ways. So all of us, whatever our sins were, can be made new people, children of God, learning to love what God loves and hate what God hates.

So we don’t hate people who want bad things. We would be exactly the same if it weren’t for Jesus. We love people who don’t know Jesus, we pray for them, we want to help them, we want to tell them about Jesus. And when they believe, we accept them and love them and help them to learn to walk with Jesus, just like we’re doing.

Postscript: I followed this up with a sermon titled “Pride Month“?

There is nothing more potent, captivating, or essential than God’s Word. There is nothing as true, pure, or necessary as God’s Word. It is the only source of absolute truth for all things about which it speaks, and God’s Word is fundamental to the Christian and the Christian faith.

Without God’s Word, we would have no guide for the Christian life. We would have no source of absolute truth. We would have no sure knowledge of God’s nature and character. We would be left to pure speculation as to the condition of man, left to trust only in our own fickle feelings and vain imaginings.

Without God’s Word, we would have no true knowledge of Christ, no way to know the truth of who Christ is and what He has done, no sure way to redemption, and no knowledge of the gospel, which is the power unto salvation.

Even faith, we are told in Romans 10:17, “comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.” There is nothing more necessary for the Christian than God’s Word. And there is nothing more revealing about Christians than what they believe about God’s Word. This is why the doctrine of the Word of God, or “Bibliology,” is a vital doctrine for the Christian to understand. 

It is all too common today to hear someone profess to be Christian and yet reject the Bible as God’s authoritative, infallible, inerrant, all-sufficient Word. Inevitably such individuals are weak in faith, if they are even truly in the faith, and find themselves struggling, suffering, hopeless, helpless, and anemic in their faith. This is the future for Christians who have a low view of God’s Word.

Contrarily, the Christian who is full of life and vigor, walking circumspectly, fully assured by the truths of Scripture, and constantly pointing others to the same, will be the Christian who holds the highest view of God’s Word. The healthy Christian will be the one who has a sound theology of the doctrine of the Bible and lives his life in light of that knowledge.

It is necessary when considering the doctrine of the Bible, to answer the question: what do you mean by “God’s Word?” The phrase is used in more than one way in Scripture. First, we understand that the phrase is used of Jesus Himself. In John 1:1–4, we read, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.” 

Looking down to verse 14, we read, “And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.” So here, we understand that the Word is referring to Jesus. Then, in Revelation 19:3, Jesus is again called “The Word of God.” So, sometimes the Word of God refers to Jesus. This is important to us because it means that Jesus is the primary person of the Trinity who conveys to us the will of God. He is the living Word of God.

We understand “the Word of God” in other places in Scripture to be when God the Father speaks, such as in Genesis 1 where God spoke light into existence and He created, by His Words, the world. We also see other forms of God’s Word, such as when God has spoken directly to people (e.g., Adam and Eve, Moses, et al.).

Then there is God’s Word that comes through His servants. These are God’s very Words communicated by human lips. God told Moses in Exodus 4 that He would give Moses the words to say to Pharaoh. Therefore, when Moses spoke to Pharaoh, it was God speaking through Moses. When the Apostles spoke in the name of the Lord, they did so inspired by God and therefore were speaking the Word of God.

Lastly, we have God’s Word in written form—the Bible. The Bible is the combination of all of the other forms of God’s Word put together. This makes it a book unlike any other. The Bible isn’t merely a book; it is the Book. It is the very Word of God. The Old Testament alone attests to the fact that this is the Word of God over 2500 times. In the New Testament, we find the phrase “the Word of God” over 40 times.

Peter preached the Word of God. The record in Acts 11:1 says, “Now the apostles and the brothers who were throughout Judea heard that the Gentiles also had received the Word of God.” The Apostle Paul defends his teaching as the very Word of God in 2 Corinthians 2:17, which says, “For we are not like many, peddling the Word of God, but as from sincerity, but as from God, in the sight of God, we speak in Christ.”

In 1 Thessalonians 2:13, Paul again refers to his teaching as the Word of God, “And for this reason, we also thank God without ceasing that when you received the Word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but for what it really is, the Word of God, which also is at work in you who believe.” Of course, everyone is familiar with the 10 commandments, which were first written with the finger of God in Exodus 31:18; then, as Moses neared the end of his life, we see that he wrote God’s Word: “So Moses wrote this law and gave it to the priests, the sons of Levi who carried the ark of the covenant of the Lord, and to all the elders of Israel” (Deut 31:9).

In Isaiah 30:8, God tells Isaiah, “Now go, write it on a tablet before them and inscribe it on a scroll, That it may serve in the time to come As a witness forever.” Of course, all that Jesus preached was the Word of God and so, too, is all the Words of the Apostles recorded in Scripture.

By now, you can see why this is so vital for us to understand because when we think of the Bible rightly, as the very Word of God, it should change how we view the Bible. For many believers, the Bible is many things—a good book, a book that contains some of God’s Word, a book that is about Jesus, or about God’s Word, or perhaps they even refer to the Bible as God’s Word, but they’ve never really thought through the implications of that.

This means that when you are reading the Bible, you are hearing from Almighty God. The reason the congregation traditionally stands at the plain reading of the Word is because God’s Word is to be elevated above all others. There should always be a sense of awe and fear in those who hear the Word of God because God’s Word is not like man’s word. It is holy, righteous, and powerful. 

When you open your Bible, you are hearing from the same God that spoke to Moses on the mountain, the same God that spoke from Heaven at Christ’s transfiguration. You are hearing from God Himself, in written form. This is the God that created the world and all that is in it, the omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent sovereign of all creation.

Theology should never be merely a mental exercise, so how does this brief understanding of God’s Word affect us? How does this change the way you view the Bible? This should change everything about how we handle the Bible. When you read the Bible, you are reading God’s very Word; when you interpret Scripture, you do so carefully, prayerfully, and obediently because you are handling God’s Word.

For the one who really gets this, the Bible comes alive as that which it truly is, not merely a book about God’s Word but actually God’s Word. This theology of the Bible should impact your life because when you open your Bible, understanding that it is the very Word of God, you are deeply impacted by verses like Hebrews 4:12, which says, “For the Word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart.”

This is such a fundamental truth of the Christian faith because if you get this doctrine wrong you are left to mere speculation, human imaginings, and deceptive experiences and are left to wander aimlessly through this life without fixed truth. But the one who comes to grasp the true nature of Scripture will see God, hear God, and be filled with the joy, hope, encouragement, and training that God grants through the knowledge and obedience to His Word.

Christian, the Bible is the Word of God, every page, every book, from beginning to end, and the one who embraces it, obeys it, and lives in it will see Christ and live. As Justin Peters often says, “If you want to hear God, read your Bible and if you want to hear God audibly, read it out loud.” 

A Escritura contém muitas passagens que são difíceis de interpretar – Pedro diz isso em (2 Pedro 3:16). O que seria o “batismo pelos mortos” em 1 Coríntios 15? Quem eram os Nefilins de Gênesis 6? O que Pedro quis dizer quando afirmou que Jesus “foi e pregou aos espíritos em prisão” (1 Pedro 3:19)? O que a Bíblia quer dizer quando diz que Deus se arrepende de fazer algo (1 Sm 15:11)?

Algumas dessas passagens difíceis dizem respeito à questão das mulheres no contexto dos cultos na igreja. 1 Coríntios 11 exige que as mulheres usem véu na cabeça na adoração corporativa? 1 Coríntios 14:34 significa que as mulheres não podem falar nas reuniões da igreja? O que Paulo quer dizer quando diz que as mulheres devem “ficar quietas” (1 Tm 2:12)?

Sempre que encontrarmos passagens difíceis, devemos seguir um princípio importante: interpretar passagens escuras nas Escrituras à luz de passagens claras. Ademais existe um princípio importante: Nunca devemos basear uma doutrina central em uma ou duas passagens escuras.

Quando se trata da questão de se as mulheres podem ou não pregar ou ocupar o cargo de pastora, tornou-se comum argumentar em favor de mulheres pregadoras ou pastoras com base em textos escuros Escrituras.

Entretanto, vários textos sobre a natureza do ministério pastoral são claros, e é meu objetivo resumir brevemente esses textos-chave e o que eles concluem sobre as mulheres e o ministério pastoral.

O Dom e o Ofício pastoral são equivalentes

Tornou-se cada vez mais comum argumentar que, embora uma mulher não possa ocupar o oficio de pastora na igreja, ela pode ter recebido esse dom e, portanto, pode exerce-lo dentro da igreja, mesmo com homens presentes no local.

Efésios 4:11 sempre é citado para argumentar que pastor-mestre é um dom dado sem qualificação tanto para homens quanto para mulheres dentro da igreja, que é diferente do ofício pastoral.

E ele designou alguns para apóstolos, outros para profetas, outros para evangelistas, e outros para pastores e mestres,com o fim de preparar os santos para a obra do ministério, para que o corpo de Cristo seja edificado, (Efésios 4:11-12)

O principal problema com esta linha de raciocínio é que a passagem não descreve habilidades dadas a indivíduos, mas sim ofícios dados a igrejas. Em outras palavras, Paulo não está descrevendo dons que Deus concede a indivíduos particulares; ao contrário, os dons que Deus dá são ofícios particulares dentro da igreja.

Paulo não diz que Deus deu aos indivíduos a capacidade de ser um apóstolo, a capacidade de profetizar, a capacidade de evangelizar ou a capacidade de pastorear e ensinar. Não, Paulo diz que Deus deu os apóstolos, os profetas, os evangelistas, os pastores e mestres à igreja com o propósito de equipar os santos para a obra do ministério, para a edificação do corpo de Cristo. O argumento de Paulo é que Deus deu indivíduos à igreja, não habilidades a indivíduos.

Agora, é claro, Deus deu a esses indivíduos a quem Ele dotou à igreja as habilidades necessárias para seus ofícios, mas esse não é o ponto principal do texto. Efésios 4:11–12 descreve ofícios dentro da igreja, não dons de indivíduos.

Portanto, “pastor-mestre” é um ofício que Deus deu como um presente ou dom à Igreja.

À luz desse entendimento do que Paulo está dizendo em Efésios 4, a próxima pergunta deve ser, portanto, quem está qualificado para o ofício pastoral (poimēn)?

As escrituras são claras em afirmar que apenas homens podem servir no cargo de bispo, observe que uma das qualificações para o episcopado (episkopos) em 1 Timóteo 3:1–7 é que ele deve ser “marido de uma só mulher. ”

Igualmente, em Tito 1, Paulo dá como qualificação para os presbíteros (presbyteros) que eles devem ser: “marido de uma só mulher”.

Novamente, seria impossível argumentar com base nessas duas passagens-chave que mulheres poderiam preencher essas qualificações.

Por outro lado, Efésios 4 não diz que bispos ou presbíteros foram dados como dons às igrejas, diz que pastores foram dados às igrejas. Portanto, alguns podem argumentar que, embora as mulheres claramente não possam servir como bispas ou anciãs, não há passagens bíblicas que afirmem claramente que apenas os homens podem servir como pastores.

Entretanto, aqui está outra verdade que é inequivocamente clara nas Escrituras: pastor, bispo e presbítero referem-se ao mesmo ofício.

Permita-me mostrar esse fato. Primeiro, em Tito 1:5–7, Paulo se refere claramente ao ofício de presbítero e ao ofício episcopal de forma intercambiável:

A razão de tê-lo deixado em Creta foi para que você pusesse em ordem o que ainda faltava e constituísse presbíteros em cada cidade, como eu o instruí. É preciso que o presbítero seja irrepreensível, marido de uma só mulher, e tenha filhos crentes que não sejam acusados de libertinagem ou de insubmissão. Por ser encarregado da obra de Deus, é necessário que o bispo seja irrepreensível: não orgulhoso, não briguento, não apegado ao vinho, não violento, nem ávido por lucro desonesto. (Tito 1:5-7)

Paulo descreve claramente um ofício usando tanto o termo presbítero (presbyteros) quanto bispo (episkopos).

Igualmente, depois que Paulo lista as qualificações para o bispo (episkopos) em 1 Timóteo 3, ele usa o termo “presbítero” (presbyteros) no mesmo contexto em 1 Timóteo 5:17. Claramente, Paulo considera o “bispo” e “presbítero” como dois termos que descrevem o mesmo ofício.

E quanto ao ministério pastoral (poimēn)? Três textos adicionais claramente identificam esse termo com os outros dois citados.

O primeiro texto é 1 Pedro 5:1–2, Pedro admoesta os presbíteros a “pastorear o rebanho de Deus que está entre vós, exercendo a supervisão ou episcopado”. Ao se dirigir aos presbíteros, Pedro usa formas verbais dos termos para pastor (poinaino) ) e bispo (episkopeo). Ele está descrevendo um ofício da igreja usando três termos: presbítero, pastor e bispo.

Em segundo lugar, em 1 Pedro 2:25, Pedro usa os termos pastor (poimēn) e bispo (episkopos) de forma intercambiável com relação a Jesus.

Terceiro, em Atos 20:17-38, Paulo reúne os “anciãos” (plural de presbyteros) da igreja em Éfeso, referindo-se a eles como “bispos” (plural de episkopos) e os exorta a “pastorear” (forma verbal de poimēn) o “rebanho” (poimnion) (v 28).

Algo claro nesses textos conjuntos é que os termos bispo (episkopos), ancião (presbyteros) e pastor (poimēn) se referem a um ofício singular, um dom que foi dado às igrejas por Deus para seu benefício espiritual.

Consequentemente, se a Escritura é pontual que apenas homens podem servir no ofício de bispo/presbítero, então também segue o termo intercambiável “pastor” mencionado em Efésios 4:11. Este é o claro ensino das Escrituras contra o qual todas as outras passagens escuras devem ser interpretadas.

Mulheres não podem ensinar homens

Existe ainda outra questão. Alguém pode concordar que uma mulher não pode servir no cargo de bispa/anciã/pastora, mas ela pode ser dotada de ensino e pregação e, portanto, pode ser autorizada a pregar no contexto da igreja, desde que os pastores da igreja permitam que ela o faça.

Entretanto, existe um texto claro da Bíblia que as proíbem de ensinar:

Não permito que a mulher ensine, nem que tenha autoridade sobre o homem. Esteja, porém, em silêncio. (1 Tm 2:12)

Novamente temos um texto muito claro. Uma simples leitura deste versículo proíbe uma mulher de ensinar as Escrituras (ou seja, pregar) ou de exercer qualquer outra forma de autoridade sobre homens.

Alguns podem argumentar que a passagem apenas proíbe o “ensino autoritativo” e, portanto, a pregação debaixo da autoridade de seus pastores é permitida. Mas esse argumento é fraco gramatico e logicamente. Gramaticalmente, o “ou” neste versículo indica que essas são duas diferentes que são proibidas. E logicamente, a pregação da Palavra de Deus é sempre, por definição, autoritativa.

Além disso, essa mesma proibição nos leva ao capítulo 3, onde Paulo qualifica um bispo, conectando inextricavelmente a atividade de pregação ao ofício de bispo/presbítero/pastor.

A Escritura é clara: mulheres não podem servir no ofício pastoral, que engloba tanto a atividade de pastoreio quanto a de pregação.

Um último ponto precisa ser abordado. É comum argumentarem que as mulheres podem pregar ou servir em uma função pastoral porque têm capacidade de compartilhar o evangelho ou ensinar mulheres e crianças. Mas não é disso que estamos falando.

A Escritura é clara, primeiro, todos os cristãos são chamados para cumprir a Grande Comissão, não apenas os pastores. As mulheres cristãs devem de fato compartilhar o evangelho com outras pessoas; isso não é o mesmo que pregar ou pastorear.

Ademais, a Escritura também é clara em afirmar que as mulheres podem ensinar outras mulheres e também crianças.

Semelhantemente, ensine as mulheres mais velhas a serem reverentes na sua maneira de viver, a não serem caluniadoras nem escravizadas a muito vinho, mas a serem capazes de ensinar o que é bom.
Assim, poderão orientar as mulheres mais jovens a amarem seus maridos e seus filhos, (Tito 2:3-4)

Deus certamente concede às mulheres cristãs maturidade espiritual, sabedoria, discernimento e habilidades de ensino para que ensinem outras mulheres e crianças a conhecer e amar a Deus.

Louvado seja Deus por dotar Seu povo e Suas igrejas, e podemos confiar em como Ele sabiamente escolheu fazê-lo.

A Call to Strong Manhood

“When David’s time to die drew near, he commanded Solomon his son, saying, “I am about to go the way of all the earth. Be strong, and show yourself a man.” (1 Kgs 2:1–2)

As David nears death, he has one last opportunity to pass on wisdom to his son who will reign in his place. The first words out of David’s mouth are a call for Solomon to “be strong and show [himself] a man.” David knows what Solomon is going to be up against as the king, but before he advises Solomon on how to be a faithful king, he reminds Solomon that he is to be a faithful man of God. 

In this stage of David’s life, he is at his weakest. He knows his time to die is drawing near. However, he wanted to leave his son with the wisdom he needed to be the man God has called him to, that he might be the king that he was destined to be. 

David’s dying words should be a sobering reminder to all of us that the most important thing men can teach their sons is to be men of God. We can be encouraged by the life of king David because we know that he was an imperfect man and king. David had seasons in his life where he committed great sins. We also know that David was a man after God’s own heart who recognized his sinful ways and cried out to God in genuine repentance and faith. 

David knew the grievous impact of his sin not only on himself, but on the people of God. He also knew his sin was most importantly against God. That is why as it comes to this final charge from David to Solomon, men of God should be comforted and challenged to make sure that we are being strong and showing ourselves to be men not only to our sons and daughters, but to the sons and daughters of God in his church. 

David doesn’t leave his son in the dark when it comes to how he is to “be strong and show himself a man.” The dying king teaches his son the means to being a strong man.

The Means to Strong Manhood

David continues, “and keep the charge of the Lord your God, walking in his ways and keeping his statutes, his commandments, his rules, and his testimonies, as it is written in the Law of Moses, that you may prosper in all that you do and wherever you turn” (1 Kgs 2:3).

David tells his son on his deathbed the way to be strong and show yourself a man is ultimately to live according to the Scriptures. First, David calls Solomon to “keep the charge of the LORD your God.” David knows that for his son to show himself a man he must follow the Lord’s commands. David knows he and his sons are imperfect kings, under the authority of the true King pointing to the coming King. Therefore, their number one priority is to submit to the rule and reign of the LORD their God.

Second, Solomon is to continue “walking in his ways.” The ways of the LORD are laid down in His Word, as we will see in his Law. Solomon then is to make sure that all of his conduct is in alignment with the Word of God. 

Third, David wants Solomon to know that if he is to show himself a man, it will be by him “keeping his statutes, his commandments, his rules, and his testimonies, as it is written in the Law of Moses.” There is only one way to be strong and to show yourself a man. This was true for Solomon, and it is true for men today. The means to manhood is knowledge of, trust in, and submission to the statutes, commandments, rules, and testimonies of God, which He has breathed out in His Word.

Here is where the problem lies. We know the rest of the story. We know that Solomon—like David—would fall short in this perfect obedience needed to show himself the strong man of God he was called to be. Solomon ultimately would be drawn away from God by fame, fortune, and females. Solomon the wisest king that ever lived, needed another Man to come and fulfill the Law of Moses, which he failed to keep. This is where we find ourselves. We know as men, as fathers, and as sons we all have sinned and fallen short of this perfect obedience that marks strong biblical manhood. What, then, are we to do? 

We are to look to the God-man who was strong and showed himself to be the perfect man.

The Model of Strong Manhood

There is hope for all men. We know that David’s call to be strong men of God is true and right. We know that because we see similar calls throughout the New Testament. But we also know as men we fall short in teaching young men the scriptural standard for manhood. We also fall short in keeping this standard as well. 

This is why Christ is our only hope. In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus says, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them” (Matt 5:17).

In short, Jesus carried out this call to manhood for us. He fulfilled this call to perfect obedience that all of God’s men might repent of their disobedience and trust in the perfect obedience of Christ. It is in Christ and Him alone that we can fulfill this call to “be strong and show yourself a man.” 

Paul makes this crystal clear in Ephesians 6:10: “Finally, be strong in the Lord and in the strength of his might.”

As men of God, we ought to take David’s charge to Solomon to heart. We do this, first, by repenting of our sin and trusting in the perfect Man, our King Christ Jesus. As we seek to live lives of faithful obedience in Him, we are to look to His Word, learn His ways, and live according to His commands. In doing so, we are to turn to the next generation of men and call them to “be strong and show themselves to be men” according to the Word of God, not the ways of the world. 

Scripture contains many passages that are difficult to interpret—even Peter said so (2 Pet 3:16). What is “baptism for the dead” in 1 Corinthians 15? Who were the Nephilim of Genesis 6? What did Peter mean when he said that Jesus “went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison” (1 Pet 3:19)? What does the Bible mean when it says that God regrets doing something (1 Sam 15:11)?

Some of those difficult passages concern the matter of women in the context of church gatherings. Does 1 Corinthians 11 require women to wear head coverings in corporate worship? Does 1 Corinthians 14:34 mean that women cannot speak at all in church gatherings? What does Paul mean when he says that women should “remain quiet” (1 Tim 2:12)?

Whenever we encounter difficult passages like these, we ought to follow an important principle: interpret unclear passages of Scripture in light of more clear passages. And a corollary principle is this: we ought never to base a core doctrine off of one or two unclear passages.

When it comes to the issue of whether or not women may preach and/or hold the office of pastor, it has become common to argue in favor of women preachers or women pastors on the basis of unclear texts of Scripture.

However, several texts regarding the nature of pastoral ministry are clear, and it is my goal in this post to briefly summarize these key texts and what they conclude regarding women and pastoral ministry.

The Gift and Office of Pastor Are the Same

It has become increasingly common for some to argue that though a woman may not hold the office of elder within the church, she may have been given the gift of pastor-teacher, and therefore she may exercise that gift within the church, even with men present.

Often Ephesians 4:11 will be quoted to argue that pastor-teacher is a gift given without qualification to both men and women within the church, which is different from the office of elder.

And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ.

Eph 4:11–12

The key problem with this line of thinking is that this passage does not describe abilities given to individuals but rather offices given to churches. In other words, Paul is not describing certain giftedness that God gives to particular individuals; rather the gifts that God gives are particular offices within the church.

Paul does not say that God gave individuals the ability to be an apostle, the ability to prophesy, the ability to evangelize, or the ability to shepherd and teach. No, Paul says that God gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers to the church for the purpose of equipping saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ. Paul’s argument is that God gave individuals to the church, not abilities to individuals.

Now, of course, God did give these individuals whom he gifted to the church abilities requisite with their offices, but that is not the primary point of the text. Ephesians 4:11–12 describes offices within the church, not giftedness of individuals.

Therefore, “pastor-teacher” is an office gifted to the church.

In light of this clear understanding of what Paul is saying in Ephesians 4, the next question must therefore be, who qualifies for the office of pastor (poimēn)?

Only Men May Serve as Overseers/Elders

Scripture is clear that only men may serve in the office of overseer, if for no other reason than one of the qualifications for overseer (episkopos) given in 1 Timothy 3:1–7 is that he must be “the husband of one wife.”

Likewise, in Titus 1, Paul gives as a qualification for elder (presbyteros) that he must be “the husband of one wife.”

Once again, it would be impossible to argue from these two key passages regarding qualifications for overseers and elders that these can be held by women.

Pastor, Overseer, and Elder Refer to the Same Office

On the other hand, Ephesians 4 does not say that overseers or elders have been given as gifts to churches, it says that pastors have been given to churches. So some may argue that while women clearly may not serve as overseers or elders, there are no biblical passages that clearly argue that only men may serve as pastors.

However, here is another truth that is unmistakably clear in Scripture: pastor, overseer, and elder refer to the same office.

Let me show you why this is unmistakably clear. First, in Titus 1:5–7, Paul clearly refers to the office of elder and the office of overseer interchangeably:

This is why I left you in Crete, so that you might put what remained into order, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you— ⁶ if anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination. ⁷ For an overseer, as God’s steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain.

Paul clearly describes one office using both the term elder (presbyteros) and overseer (episkopos).

Similarly, after Paul lists qualifications for an overseer (episkopos) in 1 Timothy 3, he uses the term “elder” (presbyteros) in the same context in 1 Timothy 5:17. Clearly, Paul considers “overseer” and “elder” to be two terms that describe the same office.

So what about “pastor” (poimēn)? Three additional texts clearly identify this term with the other two.

First, in 1 Peter 5:1–2, Peter admonishes elders to “shepherd the flock of God that is among you, exercising oversight.” In addressing elders, Peter uses verb forms of the terms for pastor (“shepherd”; poinaino) and overseer (episkopeo). He is describing one office of the church using three terms: elder, pastor, and overseer.

Second, earlier in 1 Peter 2:25, Peter uses the terms shepherd (poimēn) and overseer (episkopos) interchangeably with reference to Jesus.

Third, in Acts 20:17–38, Paul assembles the “elders” (plural of presbyteros) of the church at Ephesus, refers to them as “overseers” (plural of episkopos), and exhorts them to “shepherd” (verb form of poimēn) their “flock” (poimnion) (v 28).

What is clear from these texts taken together is that the terms overseer (episkopos), elder (presbyteros), and pastor (poimēn) refer to one singular office, a gift that has been given to churches by God for their spiritual benefit.

And, consequently, if Scripture is clear that only men may serve in the office of overseer/elder, then it follows also for the interchangeable term “pastor” mentioned in Ephesians 4:11. This is the clear teaching of Scripture against which all other less clear passages must be interpreted.

Women Are Not Permitted to Teach Men

One other matter must be addressed, however. Someone might agree that a woman may not serve in the office of overseer/elder/pastor, but she may be gifted in teaching and preaching and may therefore be permitted to preach in a church context as long as a church’s pastors permit her to do so.

On the contrary, another very clear biblical text prohibits such:

I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.

1 Tim 2:12

Here again is a very clear text. A plain reading of this verse prohibits a woman from teaching Scripture (i.e., preaching) or in any other way exercising authority over men.

Some may argue that the passage only prohibits “authoritative teaching,” and therefore preaching under the authority of her pastors is permissible. But this argument fails both grammatically and logically. Grammatically, the “or” in this verse indicates that these are two separate activities that are prohibited. And logically, the preaching of God’s Word is always, by definition, authoritative.

Further, this very prohibition leads into chapter 3 where Paul gives the qualifications for an overseer, inextricably connecting the activity of preaching to the office of overseer/elder/pastor.

Scripture is clear: women may not serve in the office of pastor, which embodies both the activities of pastoring and preaching.

Women Sharing the Gospel or Teaching Women and Children Is Not the Same as Preaching

One final point needs to be addressed. It is common for those who argue that women may either preach or serve in a pastoral function that to deny this is to deny a woman’s ability to share the gospel or teach other women or children. But this is simply not the case.

Scripture is clear, first, that all Christians are called to fulfill the Great Commission, not just pastors. Christian women should indeed share the gospel with others; this is not at all the same as preaching or pastoring.

Further, Scripture is also clear that women may and should teach Scripture to other women and children:

Older women likewise are to be reverent in behavior, not slanderers or slaves to much wine. They are to teach what is good, ⁴ and so train the young women to love their husbands and children.

Titus 2:3–4

God certainly gifts Christian women with spiritual maturity, wisdom, insight, and teaching abilities so that they can teach other women and children to know and love God.

Praise God for how he gifts his people and his churches, and may we trust in how God has wisely chosen to do so.

The Covid era was certainly a challenge for many reasons. Particularly during the first couple of weeks after the virus broke out across the world, most people understandably were very cautious. Because of how the virus appeared to be worse for certain demographics, “fifteen days to slow the spread” and allow hospitals to prepare seemed reasonable to many of us.

However, as fifteen days grew to thirty and more, and as governments began to allow some industries to re-open while insisting churches remain closed, many of us began to smell something fishy. Indeed, despite the fact that most of us moved on years ago, the World Health Organization just recently announced that COVID-19 is no longer a “public health emergency of international concern.” You think?

The fact is that though the first couple of months were understandably confusing, many pastors made some very unwise decisions to keep their churches closed for months and even over a year after lockdowns began. Even many non-Christians are beginning to admit that many of the precautions were either unnecessary or ineffective, and some Christians are following suit.

For example, in a recent article at Christianity Today, Paul Miller acknowledged,

We got things wrong. Masks were not terribly useful unless you used an N95 and wore it just right. Some public schools stayed closed far longer than necessary. Social distancing was unnecessary outdoors. A lot of disinfection in public places was just hygiene theater.

However, Miller goes on to argue that we ought to simply declare a “pandemic amnesty” for pastors who closed their churches for an extended period of time since they found themselves unavoidably caught between choosing whether to obey Romans 13 or Hebrews 10:

Churches faced a difficult decision about whether and how long to remain closed. Should they obey the government, or insist on their right to stay open? Should they close for the sake of elderly or infirm congregants most at risk from the virus? Or should they open for the sake of everyone else? Obey Romans 13, or Hebrews 10?

This is a false dilemma that reveals a poor political theology, which, if not corrected, will continue to create problems when the government inevitably pushes again against the right of churches to gather.

The fact is that the commands given in Romans 13 and Hebrews 10 never conflict, because God has not given government jurisdiction over matters regarding our relationship with God. Therefore, we never have to choose to obey one or the other.

Do Not Forsake the Assembly

Hebrews 10:24–25 is clear:

And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near.

Central to who we are as churches is gathering to stir up one another to love and good works. The author of Hebrews draws an inseparable connection between the command to stir up one another and gathering together—we cannot obey the former without the latter.

One might argue that stirring up one another can take place virtually, and to one degree it can, but certainly not to the fullest extend assumed in Hebrews 10. Broadening out from Hebrews 10, all of the New Testament’s admonitions regarding what we are to be doing as the church necessitate gathering together.

This is only highlighted when we consider the fact that corporate worship is not simply a lecture and some prayers, things that could conceivably be done over Zoom—corporate worship is gathering around a Table for a meal. You can’t share a meal virtually. The Table uniquely pictures and nurtures the communion that we as the Body of Christ enjoy with Christ as a result of the Lord’s death on behalf of those who believe.

Paul clearly states this in 1 Corinthians 10:16:

The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?

The word translated “participation” there is the term koinonia—“communion.” Because of Christ’s death—because of his broken body and shed blood for the forgiveness of sins—those who believe are united to Christ and thus experience true communion with him.

But not only that, believers who are united to Christ enjoy communion with each other as the Body of Christ as well, and this too is uniquely communicated in the observance of the Table. Paul says so in verse 17:

Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.

Partaking of the one bread is an essential part of the picture of communion shared by the Body, and this is possible only with physical presence. This is exactly why when Paul returns to discussing the Lord’s Supper in 1 Corinthians 11, he repeatedly refers to “when you come together.” Notice the frequent occurrence of that phrase in the context of giving instructions regarding the Table:

• v. 17: “when you come together”
• v. 18: “when you come together as a church”
• v. 20: “when you come together”
• v. 33: “when you come together to eat”
• v. 34: “when you come together”

This physical togetherness is fundamentally essential to the drama of the meal—corporate worship pictures communion of the body exactly through the physical, embodied acts done around the Table, especially partaking of the one bread. These embodied acts—the very essence of the observance—are impossible without coming together physically. And thus the corporate gatherings of the church are fundamentally different realities from other times when the church is not gathered physically.

In fact, in this context, Paul explicitly contrasts eating the Lord’s Supper when we come together as the church with eating in private homes (v. 22)—they are not the same thing, because when we eat privately in our homes, we are not gathered as the church.

The bottom line is this: Scripture commands us to gather together. Churches certainly have flexibility regarding what time, how long, or even how often to gather on the Lord’s Day, but the command and necessity to gather is not optional.

Government Jurisdiction

So what happens when government commands us not to gather? After all, doesn’t Romans 13:1 command, “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities”? Romans 13 even tells us that governmental authority comes from God himself, and therefore a governor is “God’s servant for [our] good” (v4).

What if this servant of God commands us not to gather for our good?

Paul Miller would have us to believe that this is exactly where the commands of Hebrews 10 and Romans 13 came into conflict. Hebrews 10 commands us to gather, but God’s servant for our good commands us not to gather. Pastors were forced to choose between obeying Hebrews 10 or Romans 13, Miller argues; some chose to obey Hebrews 10 and remain open, while others chose to obey Romans 13 and obey the government. So let’s just give them a break—they had to make a choice.

But on the contrary, there are two essential biblical reasons pastors did not have to choose between gathering or obeying government.

First, even if the two were in conflict, Scripture is clear: when the commands of man and God conflict, we obey God.

The apostles faced this choice when religious leaders commanded them to stop preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ. They replied, “We must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:19).

So if God commands us to gather, and men command us to close our church doors, the answer is clear: we must obey God rather than men. We must, in fact, disobey human government if that government commands us to do anything that conflicts with the commands of God.

But this leads to the second reason that Romans 13 and Hebrews 10 actually never conflict: God has not given human government jurisdiction over matters related to our relationship with God.

Again, Romans 13 is clear: “There is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.” Human government has authority only because God has given it that authority.

But God has not given human government unlimited authority. And thus submission to government is not unqualified submission.

God gave government authority over a very specific and limited jurisdiction. In Genesis 9 when God first instituted government, he outline its role clearly:

Whoever sheds the blood of man,
by man shall his blood be shed,
for God made man in his own image.

Gen 9:6

Likewise, Paul’s command that we be subject to governing authorities involves a similar jurisdiction, namely, the punishing of those who murder and other crimes that have been committed between two or more individuals like theft.

However, government does not have jurisdiction to mandate or prohibit particular activities because they deem them to be physically harmful. It may only legislate and punish actual harm.

And even more importantly, government does not have jurisdiction to mandate or prohibit particular activities related to spiritual benefit or harm. Spiritual assessment is simply outside of God-appointed government jurisdiction. This is one of the beauties of the First Amendment: civil government is not qualified to regulate spiritual matters.

Spiritual assessment belongs exclusively to the jurisdiction of family (for an individual family) and church (for an individual church), and explicitly under the prescriptive jurisdiction of Scripture. And since Scripture explicitly commands churches to gather because this is what is best for them spiritually, churches must gather.

Sphere Sovereignty

On this basis, then, we must subject ourselves to governing authorities on two conditions:

1. what they command of us does not contradict a command of God, and
2. what they command of us falls under their appointed jurisdiction.

If either or both of these conditions is not met, we are not required by God to obey government. In fact, we must not. We obey God rather than men.

I am so thankful that I lived in Texas in 2020. Governor Abbott took exactly the right approach during those early lockdown months—he urged churches not to gather, but he explicitly exempted church from his lockdown orders because he didn’t believe it was within his jurisdiction to do so.

So yes, those early months were complicated, and it was certainly understandable for churches to choose caution until more information could be gathered.

But no, Christians were never forced to choose between obeying Hebrews 10 or Romans 13, because there was never a conflict between the two.

STANZA 1
Guide me, O Thou great Jehovah,
pilgrim through this barren land.
I am weak, but Thou are mighty;
hold me with Thy pow’rful hand.
Bread of heaven, 
Bread of heaven,
feed me till I want no more;
feed me till I want no more.

STANZA 2
Open now the crystal fountain,
whence the healing stream doth flow.
Let the fire and cloudy pillar
lead me all my journey through.
Strong Deliv’rer, 
strong Deliv’rer,
be Thou still my Strength and Shield;
be Thou still my Strength and Shield.

STANZA 3
When I tread the verge of Jordan,
bid my anxious fears subside.
Death of death, and hell’s destruction,
land me safe on Canaan’s side.
Songs of praises, 
songs of praises,
I will ever give to Thee;
I will ever give to Thee. 

—William Williams, 1745
st. 1 trans. Peter Williams, 1771

Welcome to G3 Weekly—a summary of this week’s top news stories on Christianity and the public square.

This week, government agencies lauded the advent of “pride month.” Two elderly pro-life advocates were assaulted outside of a Planned Parenthood in Baltimore. Meanwhile, the former head of the Anglican Communion endorsed access to assisted suicide in the United Kingdom. 

United States Government Agencies Endorse “Pride Month“

“Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall” (Proverbs 16:18).

Several entities of the federal government praised the advent of “pride month” despite controversy surrounding the annual celebration.

President Joe Biden, who has supported so-called sex change operations for minors and other tenets of the LGBTQ movement, released an official proclamation declaring the month of June as “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, and Intersex Pride Month,” calling on citizens to “recognize the achievements of the LGBTQI+ community, to celebrate the great diversity of the American people, and to wave their flags of pride high.” The commander-in-chief also denounced efforts to deprive “transgender youth” of sex change procedures.

An official social media account for the United States Navy garnered backlash after posting a cover photo with a battleship, aircraft carrier, and fighter jet surrounded by rainbows. The United States Embassy to the Holy See, the seat of the Roman Catholic Church, hung a rainbow flag with elements meant to represent transgenderism and racial diversity. The FBI published a statement endorsing “pride month” and reportedly flew the same rainbow flag in front of the law enforcement agency’s headquarters.

The latest advent of “pride month” and widespread public endorsement comes as views on homosexuality become considerably more liberal: the share of Americans saying the practice should be accepted has increased 18% over the past decade, according to data from Gallup.

Pro-Lifers Assaulted Outside Abortion Clinic in Baltimore

“Their feet run to evil and they make haste to shed blood” (Proverbs 1:16).

A man attacked two elderly pro-life activists who were praying outside of an abortion clinic in Baltimore, Maryland.

Mark Crosby and Dick Schaefer, who are seventy-three years old and eighty years old respectively, were outside of a Planned Parenthood location in Baltimore when they were assaulted by an aggravated passerby, according to reports from local news outlets. The assailant, who is believed to be in his late twenties, entered into an exchange about abortion with the two men and did not “like their opinion or what was being said,” according to a witness.

Schaefer was knocked unconscious and currently has neck, shoulder, head, and back injuries. Crosby, who was punched in the face and stomped on, was taken to shock trauma for serious injuries to his eye and face.

Planned Parenthood CEO Karen Nelson claimed in a statement that the conglomerate “does not condone any violence” and saw the incident as “unfortunate.” She lamented that “folks who are trying to receive health care have to put up with remarks and comments.”

Former Archbishop of Canterbury Calls for More Assisted Suicide Access

“He himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything” (Acts 17:25).

George Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, advised political leaders in the United Kingdom to increase access to assisted suicide. 

The retired minister, who served in the communion’s senior role from 1991 to 2002, remarked in a statement to Parliament that increasing access to the practice is “profoundly Christian.” 

“Some people believe they will find meaning in their own suffering in their final months and weeks of life. I respect that, but it cannot be justified to expect others to share that belief,” Carey said. “We were all aware that the Bible contributes nothing directly to this debate. There is nothing in Holy Writ, or in the two thousand years of Christian teaching, that bore directly on this modern problem, largely created by the success of modern science and improved health care.”

The remarks come as other Western nations, such as Canada and the Netherlands, expand legal allowances for assisted suicide to children and those with mental illnesses. Critics have noted that governments with socialized health systems have incentives to encourage euthanasia instead of promoting more expensive palliative care options.

Tiago foi um líder extraordinário, ele não era apenas humilde, mas um homem que andava nas pegadas de Cristo com sinceridade. Ele era conhecido como Tiago, o Justo ou Tiago, o de caráter reto. Ele era o meio-irmão de nosso Senhor Jesus Cristo e serviu como líder da igreja em Jerusalém após a ressurreição de Jesus.

Conforme os relatos históricos de Tiago, ele era conhecido por ter joelhos de camelo devido à sua constante vida de oração. Ele era ousado e disposto a sofrer por causa de Cristo. Tiago foi jogado do topo do Templo (cerca de 30 metros), e não morreu. Então, de acordo com a tradição da igreja, a multidão enfurecida o arrastou para fora do portão da cidade, onde o espancaram até a morte com pedaços de pau.

Esse foi um homem que entendeu verdadeiramente o que significa ser um cristão. Eu quero aprende com homens como Tiago. Em sua epístola pequena, mas com grandes verdades, ele escreve:

Meus amados irmãos, tenham isto em mente: Sejam todos prontos para ouvir, tardios para falar e tardios para irar-se, (Tiago 1.19)

Considere a linguagem deste poderoso versículo. Organizado com paralelismo, Tiago esmurra com sua declaração proverbial. Obviamente, ele está escrevendo para os cristãos, conforme observado pelo uso da palavra “irmão” seguida pela próxima frase, “que cada pessoa” indica que ele não está apenas se referindo aos líderes da igreja. O exposto é para cada cristão da igreja de Jesus Cristo e deve ser examinado cuidadosamente. É fácil dizer que você é discípulo de Jesus, difícil é andar como Ele.

Seja pronto a ouvir: Desenvolva a arte da escuta

A escuta é uma arte. Muitas pessoas parecem estar ouvindo quando, na verdade, estão simplesmente pensando no que dirão quando for sua vez. Isso é ouvir descuidadamente. A escuta adequada envolve processar a informação que está sendo falada com o desejo de considerar cuidadosamente e respeitar o indivíduo que está falando.

Existe a necessidade de recuperar a arte de ouvir corretamente dentro da igreja hoje. Isso vale para conversas informais e para o culto como um todo. Ouvir um sermão e ouvir o canto (as palavras ao Rei) é essencial para uma igreja saudável. No entanto, no que diz respeito a conversas entre amigos, reuniões e confrontos, ouvir é essencial para a busca manter a paz verdadeira e a unidade no corpo de Cristo.

Devido à velocidade das informações que chegam às mídias sociais, nos tornamos péssimos ouvintes. A dopamina (hormônio cerebral) nos afeta com a funcionalidade específica de recompensa e motivação. A mídia social foi projetada para nos fornecer felicidade instantânea em um curto período de tempo por meio de informações superficiais, curtidas, tuites e seguidores. As empresas de telefonia celular criam sons e avisos de notificação que criam explosões de euforia que se comunicam com o cérebro e incentivam mais o uso para a busca da felicidade e do prazer. Resumindo, é como uma droga e como todas as outras drogas – se não for usado corretamente, pode afetar terrivelmente a função cerebral de uma pessoa. Nesse caso, dificulta a capacidade de uma pessoa de se concentrar em coisas que não produzirão ansiedade.

Queremos informação rápida e não gostamos de esperar que as pessoas terminem de falar. Fomos condicionados a ouvir descuidadamente. Nossos períodos de atenção tornaram-se terrivelmente curtos, o que dificulta nossa capacidade de ouvir pacientemente e respeitosamente. Observe como Tiago expressa essa ordem: “seja pronto para ouvir”. Todos sabemos como é estar perto de alguém que fala rápido, tuita rápido, responde rápido as palavras, mas o que Tiago ordena aqui é o oposto. O cristão deve ser rápido em ouvir, isso envolve emprestar sua atenção ao outro. A Igreja deve recuperar a arte de ouvir.

A grande tentação é ser rápido no falar. Tiago entendeu esse fenômeno porque mais tarde em sua carta ele forneceu uma séria advertência sobre o poder da língua desenfreada (Tiago 3:5-6). Na introdução de sua carta, ao articular sobre a pura religião, instrui os irmãos e irmãs em Cristo a serem tardios em falar.

Lembro-me de meu pai me ensinando a dirigir. Ele foi bombeiro e paramédico por 36 anos em nossa comunidade. Seu conselho foi para eu dirigir mais devagar e nunca mais rápido. Uma vez, ele disse: “Filho, lembre-se sempre desta lição simples. Um acidente em baixa velocidade é sempre melhor do que um em alta velocidade.” Como bombeiro e paramédico, ele havia tirado muitas pessoas de automóveis destruídos. Ele compreendia os resultados devastadores de uma batida em alta velocidade. É mais provável que uma pessoa escape de um acidente em baixa velocidade do que um em alta velocidade.

Quando se trata de falar, o mesmo princípio se aplica. Uma língua que se move em alta velocidade acabará sendo destruída e os resultados não serão bons. Uma língua afiada e um discurso desenfreado são característicos de um tolo. É por isso que Tiago aponta os cristãos a direção oposta. Ele entendeu o que Jesus disse sobre a língua:

Mas eu lhes digo que, no dia do juízo, os homens haverão de dar conta de toda palavra inútil que tiverem falado. Pois por suas palavras você será absolvido, e por suas palavras será condenado”. Mateus 12.36-37

Tenha isso em mente, precisamos abordar conversas, reuniões, mídias sociais e casos de disciplina na igreja com uma reflexão cuidadosa antes de abrirmos a boca. Prestaremos contas de como usamos nossas línguas – para o bem ou para o mal. Tiago construiu seu ensino com base nas sábias palavras de Salomão, que ofereceu a seguinte exortação:

Até o insensato passará por sábio, se ficar quieto, e, se contiver a língua, parecerá que tem discernimento. (Provérbios 17.28)

Quando um tolo abre a boca, ele revela sua tolice a todos. No entanto, é muito mais respeitável ficar calado do que abrir a boca e revelar sua ignorância com um discurso desenfreado que prejudica os outros e cria divisão. Cuidado com a pessoa que está sempre incendiando com a língua – a fé dessa pessoa deve ser seriamente questionada.

A raiva não é pecaminosa se usada corretamente. Uma desafeição emocionada pelas atitudes que Deus odeia não é errado, mas não conter sua raiva é pecaminoso (Ef 4:26-27). Quando consideramos o fato de que nosso Senhor Jesus Cristo estava com raiva, mas não pecou – isso prova que a raiva não é pecaminosa (Mt 21:12-13). No entanto, devemos também lembrar que nenhum de nós dentro de nossa igreja local é Jesus. Devemos ser muito cautelosos em nossas demonstrações de raiva por causa do poder, paixão e destruição que a raiva pode causar se não for controlada.

Tiago pede moderação. Ele diz: “seja tardio em se irar”. Mais uma vez, devemos colocar ordem na casa. Um temperamento explosivo e explosões de paixão desenfreada podem ser destrutivos. Cuidado com a pessoa que se recusa a controlar seu temperamento. É um indivíduo perigoso que deve ser evitado. Jesus nos dá um sério alerta em seu sermão de Mateus:

Mas eu lhes digo que qualquer que se irar contra seu irmão estará sujeito a julgamento. Também, qualquer que disser a seu irmão: ‘Racá’, será levado ao tribunal. E qualquer que disser: ‘Louco! ’, corre o risco de ir para o fogo do inferno. (Mateus 5.22)

Certamente Tiago estava construindo sobre os fundamentos de Provérbios que ensinam o mesmo princípio. Encontramos estas palavras em Provérbios 14:29 “O que é tardio em irar-se é grande em entendimento, mas o precipitado exalta a insensatez.” Todos sabemos como é estar perto de uma pessoa de temperamento explosivo. Às vezes, as pessoas se desculpam dizendo que isso é herança de família. O fato é que todos nós herdamos o pecado de Adão, mas isso não é licença para viver em pecado. Devemos nos despojar do velho homem não santificado e nos revestir da nova pessoa em Cristo (Cl 3:9; Ef 4:22-24).

A comunicação é a chave para todos os relacionamentos na vida. Envolve ouvir, falar e se emocionar. Imagine como nossas igrejas locais seriam frutíferas e saudáveis ​​se todos buscássemos a santidade e uma vida de autodisciplina que resultasse em sermos prontos para ouvir, tardios para falar e tardios para se irar. ‘Sempre reformanda’ envolve mais do que manter doutrina reformada. Significa que devemos estar sempre reformando a doutrina e a vida para a glória de Deus. As celebridades de Hollywood e os influenciadores de mídias sociais enaltecem uma língua desenfreada e um temperamento explosivo, mas a igreja precisa ouvir a sabedoria de Tiago – um homem que realmente seguiu os passos de nosso Senhor Jesus Cristo.

Christians affirm that the Bible was written by both human authors and a divine Author simultaneously. One of the most interesting consequences of this simultaneous authorship is that the human authors were conscious of the fact that they were writing Scripture. This consciousness shows up in several ways. It is evident among the Old Testament prophets when they claimed that they wrote when the “word of the Lord” came to them and spoke (Jer 1:4, 11, 13; 13:3, 8; 24:4; 32:6; Ezek 3:16; 6:1; 11:14; 12:21; 13:1; 14:2; 15:1; 16:1; 17:1, 11; 18:1; 20:45; 21:1, 8, 18; 22:1, 17, 23; 24:1, 15, 20; 26:1; 28:11; 29:1, 17; 30:20; 31:1; 32:1, 17; 33:1, 23: 34:1; 35:1; 36:16; 38:1; Zech 4:8; 6:9). It is also evident in the Old Testament authors’ awareness that the Holy Spirit was controlling them as they wrote (Ezek 3:24–27; 2 Sam 23:1–3). The Old Testament writers knew that God was using them.

The apostle Peter is reflecting the dual authorship of Scripture when he insists that the Holy Spirit spoke about Judas “through the mouth of David” (Acts 1:16, citing Psalm 69:25; 109:8). Furthermore, Peter denies that the Old Testament prophecies were written by any human initiative, instead affirming that the prophets spoke as they were “borne along” by the Holy Spirit (2 Pet 1:21). Similarly, the writer to the Hebrews attributes Old Testament Scriptures to the Holy Spirit (Heb 3:7, cf Psalm 95:7; Heb 10:15, cf Jer 31:33–34).

The apostle Paul does not assign the authorship of Scripture to the Holy Spirit in particular, but he does speak about the Old Testament as if it comes from God. In the introduction to Romans he states that God promised the gospel ahead of time by His prophets in the holy Scriptures (Rom 1:2). Paul also tells the Galatians that the Scripture foresaw that God would justify the heathen through faith and so preached the gospel to Abraham (Gal 3:8). This statement treats what Scripture sees as identical with what God sees. Furthermore, Paul introduces Old Testament texts with an interesting parallel construction, stating that God spoke to Moses and that Scripture spoke to Pharaoh (Rom 9:15, 17). For Paul, Scripture saying something is identical to God saying it.

Paul’s high view of the Old Testament led him to consider it as profitable for teaching, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness (2 Tim 3:16–17). He believed that it was written for “our sakes,” i.e., for Church saints (1 Cor 9:10). He understood it to provide examples (patterns or analogies—the word is types) for us (1 Cor 10:11). Even though the Old Testament was not written to Church saints, they benefit from it by looking for analogies to their own situation.

Remarkably, the apostle Paul does not limit his endorsement to the Old Testament Scriptures. In 1 Timothy 5:17–18 he makes the argument that preachers ought to be paid. He bases his argument partly on two citations of Scripture. He first quotes Deuteronomy 25:4, which forbids muzzling an ox while it is threshing. Obviously, that is an Old Testament reference. But Paul immediately follows it with the saying that the laborer is worthy of his hire. While the principle behind this saying can be found in the Old Testament, the saying itself is from the teachings of Jesus as found in Luke 10:7. Paul cites both texts side by side, and he makes it clear that they are both Scripture. Paul used Luke’s Gospel with the same level of authority as the books of Moses.

This kind of attribution is not unique. Peter does something similar when he is constructing an argument about God’s longsuffering. For evidence he cites Paul’s authority (2 Pet 3:15–16). Peter notes that Paul’s writings are sometimes hard to understand. He further observes that false teachers (who are unlearned and unstable) attempt to twist Paul’s writings. Then he adds these words: “as they do also the other Scriptures.” In other words, Peter classifies at least some of Paul’s epistles as Scripture, right alongside the Old Testament Scriptures.

If Paul is any indication, the New Testament writers saw their own writings as genuinely authoritative. For example, 2 Corinthians sustains an ongoing, threatening undertone about a projected visit from Paul. He makes it clear that he intends to hold the congregation accountable for obeying his words in the epistle (see especially 2 Cor 10:8–11). In an earlier letter, he had already warned them not to go beyond the things that were written (1 Cor 4:6, though the KJV obscures the translation of this verse).

Given this abundant evidence, the inescapable conclusion is that the writers of Scripture knew what they were doing. They were conscious that their words were more than simply human instruction. They understood that the Holy Spirit was using them to author Scripture and that what they wrote was genuinely authoritative. They held a high view both of each other’s writings and of their own writings. Their understanding of their own written documents is fully consistent with a doctrine of verbal, plenary inspiration and robust view of New Testament authority.

This essay was originally published here and is used by permission.

“Now the word of the Lord came to Jonah the second time” (John 3:1). I can honestly say I am grateful that God is merciful and patient. I cannot count the times in my life where I knew God wanted me to do a certain “thing” and I didn’t do it. Yet, he pursued me again to do so. There is a big downside to being disobedient. You often do what you should do, but only after some discomfort in your life. For Jonah, his discomfort was in the belly of a fish, and it seems that made him a little more apt to hear. 

We learn too often by disobedience. One would think we would get it after a time or two. God’s message to Jonah had not changed or been altered to fit what he desired: “Arise, go to Nineveh the great city and proclaim to it the proclamation which I am going to tell you” (Jonah 3:2). 

“So Jonah arose and went” (Jonah 3:3). It seems he heard and obeyed this time. Being in the belly of a fish might do that to a man. The question arises for us today, will you obey now or later? What will it take for you to be obedient to the Lord’s commands? You will not escape God’s will for your life. You can run, but you can’t hide.

What Was His Message?

Obviously, God had given Jonah specific instructions to carry out. He spoke of judgment. In Matthew, John the Baptist came preaching “repent for the kingdom of God is at hand” (Matt 3:2). John didn’t alter the message. Jonah didn’t alter the message either but proclaimed what God had said. This raises the question for us today, why don’t we proclaim what the Scriptures say? Why do some feel a need to culturally alter the words of Scripture? 

It’s important today to not deviate from the message of Scripture. Too many are doing this in the pulpit. Jonah’s second opportunity to do what God commanded, demonstrated his obedience to tell exactly what God had said: “Then Jonah began to go through the city one day’s walk; and he cried out and said, Yet forty days and Nineveh will be overthrown” (Jonah 3:4).

His message wasn’t weak; it was the declaration of judgement. God was going to judge this city. Today, why do men think compromising the message of Scripture is beneficial? Whatever the reason, there is no excuse to change what God has clearly stated in the text to make it more acceptable to a culture that doesn’t know God. An altered message won’t present a true gospel message. It will lead people to a false sense of salvation that’s based upon something they have done or will do. What happened when Jonah proclaimed God’s message?

What Was The Response?

“Then the people of Nineveh believed in God” (Jonah 3:5). The conjunction “then” signifies they believed after they heard the truth from God’s Word. The king would proclaim for men to repent. What a wonderful story of conversion. The fear of judgement struck the hearts of the entire city, “and let men call on God earnestly that each may turn from his wicked way and from the violence which is in his hands” (Jonah 3:8). 

When the Word of the Lord is proclaimed, it will produce true repentance. Although Jonah’s message was short and somewhat out of “have to” than “want to,” God’s Word didn’t return void. It seems to me that if men will preach what God says, he will do the work. It is only God who can turn a man’s heart to repentance. It is the preaching of his Word that brings about a turning, as in the case of the people of Nineveh. 

Our case for proclaiming the gospel is clear, preach what God says. In the case of Jonah, he did just that. What’s comforting to me is that God’s Word will be powerful no matter how I speak it. If I stumble in my voice or I am short in my message, he still uses it.

Um dos últimos contos que C. S. Lewis escreveu foi a revisão de uma de suas primeiras histórias. Era um conto que ele chamava de “Luz”. Nele, um homem chamado Robin, que nasceu cego, teve sua visão restaurada por meio de uma cirurgia. Entretanto Robin fica muito desapontado com sua nova visão, porque ele realmente quer ver o que chamam de “luz” sobre a qual tanto ouviu falar, e ainda assim, enquanto sua esposa e outros insistem que a luz está ao seu redor, ele não consegue ver a luz. Após semanas conseguindo ver, mas sem poder ver a luz, Robin ficou desesperado e, por fim, morreu. Claro, o problema de Robin, e também o problema de sua esposa e outros que não conseguiram ajudá-lo, era porque a luz não é algo que vemos; a luz é algo pelo qual vemos.

O conto de Lewis é, em última análise, sobre a natureza do conhecimento humano, mas também ilustra bem, penso eu, como muitas vezes falamos sobre beleza. Em nossa era pós-iluminista, a beleza é algo para o qual olhamos; é um tema sobre o qual falamos; é, talvez, algo que devemos aprender a apreciar e desfrutar.

Como ocorre nessa estória, a beleza não é apenas algo para se refletir, olhar e simplesmente reconhecer ou até mesmo se deliciar, mas a beleza é o que faz com que se conheça a Deus e Seu mundo. Resumindo, a beleza não é simplesmente uma categoria que está ao lado da verdade e da bondade; pelo contrário, a beleza é o meio pelo qual chegamos a realmente conhecer o que é verdadeiro e bom.

Beleza Transcendente

Um dos princípios fundamentais mais importantes de uma filosofia cristã robusta é a afirmação da verdade absoluta, bondade e beleza, bem como compreender o papel principal de que cada um desses elementos desempenha em conhecer verdadeiramente a Deus e Seu mundo.

A crença em princípios transcendentes está enraizada na convicção de que Deus é a fonte, o sustentador e o fim de todas as coisas. A Bíblia proclama claramente que Deus é autoexistente e autossustentável, e todas as coisas vêm dEle (Romanos 11:36). Tudo o que é verdadeiro o é porque Deus é Verdade. Tudo que é bom é assim porque Deus é Bom. E tudo o que é belo o é porque Deus é Beleza. Não existem fatos separados de Deus; são fatos porque Deus é verdadeiro. Não existe um padrão moral que seja concebido democraticamente à parte de Deus; tudo é moral ou imoral porque Deus determina. E da mesma forma, a beleza não está nos olhos de quem vê; algo é belo quando reflete o Deus que é pura Beleza.

Tendo isso em mente, os cristãos, como portadores da imagem de Deus, devem estar comprometidos a refletir os pensamentos de Deus em conformidade com Ele, a se comportar de maneira a se conformar à vontade moral de Deus e a amar o que quer que Ele ame. A vida cristã está, portanto, preocupada com a ortodoxia — crença correta, ortopraxia — comportamento correto e ortopatia — amores corretos.

A estética da Escritura

A razão fundamental pela qual devemos reconhecer o significado da beleza como um elo central do qual nossos amores são moldados e como conhecemos a Deus e Seu mundo é porque a própria Bíblia é a verdade de Deus comunicada de forma bela. A Palavra de Deus é mais do que “dados divinos”. Ademais, a revelação da verdade e da bondade de Deus chega até nós de várias formas estéticas, como “narrativas, provérbios, poemas, hinos e oratória cujas ferramentas artísticas incluem alegoria, metáfora, simbolismo, sátira e ironia”.

Essas formas estéticas são essenciais para a própria verdade, visto que a Palavra inspirada de Deus é exatamente a forma pela qual a verdade é apresentada. Clyde S. Kilby observa: “A Bíblia chega até nós de uma forma artística sublime, ao invés de ser apenas um documento de prosa prática e expositiva, rígida no esboço como um livro didático”. Ele afirma que essas formas estéticas não são meramente decorativas, mas partem da apresentação essencial da verdade da Bíblia: “Não temos verdade e beleza, ou verdade decorada com beleza, ou verdade ilustrada pela bela frase, ou verdade em um ‘belo contexto’ verdade e beleza estão nas Escrituras, como de fato devem sempre estar, uma unidade inseparável.

Em outras palavras, verdade, bondade e beleza são três fios de um único cordão que não podem ser separadas se desejamos conhecer verdadeiramente a Deus e o Seu mundo.

Eu temo que a maioria dos cristãos não reconheça isso, visto pelo fato de que muitos cristãos têm medo de afirmar e defender a beleza absoluta da mesma forma que fazemos com a verdade absoluta e a moralidade. Adquirimos a ideia modernista de que a beleza está nos olhos de quem vê, e a agenda multicultural pós-moderna que argumenta que a arte advém apenas de uma contextualização cultural de uma determinada civilização. Ainda vemos a beleza e as artes como meios para tornar a verdade interessante, em vez de fins em si mesmos. Vemos a beleza como algo para ver, em vez de algo pelo qual vemos.

Digo isso especificamente porque, novamente, quando consideramos a estética, ela se torna algo sobre o qual falamos e pensamos. Falar, pensar e olhar para a beleza são coisas boas até certo ponto, mas o que estou chamando de ferramentas do amor – que molda nossos amores e cultiva a virtude em nós – não é algo para se olhar, mas sim um meio para se olhar.

Por estética, refiro-me à ideia geral que encontra suas raízes na palavra grega aisthanomai, que significa “eu percebo, sinto, tenho a sensação”. A estética envolve tudo o que afeta a percepção. Envolve como as ideias são expressas e comunicadas. Certamente inclui uma consideração sobre a beleza e a arte, mas é muito mais que isso. A forma que aprendemos e encontramos a verdade molda esteticamente a forma como percebemos a verdade. Mesmo o que poderíamos considerar como elementos menos artísticos do aprendizado tem aspectos estéticos. Uma palestra didática direta tem uma certa estética que molda a percepção tanto quanto um poema. A forma estética é o conteúdo no qual percebemos a verdade, e a verdade assume a forma do conteúdo de modo que a percepção da verdade é formatada por ele.

Portanto, a estética são as poderosas lentes que moldam a forma pela qual se enxerga a verdade para conhecer e amar a Deus e Seu mundo.

Seu amor deve ser transbordante

O apóstolo Paulo ora por esse mesmo tipo de perspectiva em Filipenses 1:9-11, quando diz:

E peço isto: que o vosso amor cresça mais e mais em ciência e em todo o conhecimento, para que aproveis as coisas excelentes, para que sejais sinceros, e sem escândalo algum até ao dia de Cristo; Cheios dos frutos de justiça, que são por Jesus Cristo, para glória e louvor de Deus.

Paulo sabe que o cristão é verdadeiramente caracterizado pelo amor, o que ele descreve no versículo anterior como “afeto de Cristo Jesus”. O próprio Jesus ensinou que o maior mandamento é amar o Senhor, seu Deus, de todo o coração, de toda a alma, de todo o entendimento e de todas as forças.

Mas esse amor não é o sentimentalismo romantizado tão característico de nossos dias. Observe em particular como Paulo caracteriza esse amor – “amar com ciência e conhecimento”. Aqui, talvez, esteja uma descrição adequada do objetivo da santificação cristã – que seu amor seja cada vez mais transbordante, em toda ciência e conhecimento, para que você prove o que é excelente e, assim, ser puro e irrepreensível no dia de Cristo, cheio do fruto da justiça que vem por meio de Jesus Cristo, para a glória e o louvor de Deus.

Paulo ora por um amor caracterizado por “todo conhecimento”, conhecimento de Deus e de Seu mundo, entendimento de suas obras através da História, bem como a ciência de Sua Palavra.

O amor cristão não é caracterizado apenas pelo conhecimento, igualmente o objetivo da santificação cristã não é meramente o conhecimento. Paulo diz: “E minha oração é que seu amor cresça mais e mais, com conhecimento e todo o discernimento.”

Existe um aspecto objetivo do amor cristão, relacionado a santificação que deve ser o seu objetivo ao longo da vida.

Essa é a virtude bíblica da sabedoria, que Kevin Vanhoozer define como “a capacidade de ver o que é correto e apropriado em uma situação particular, dada a nossa compreensão do contexto maior que fazemos parte”. “A sabedoria é a virtude que organiza todas as outras virtudes”, é a capacidade de pegar todo o conhecimento que você adquiriu sobre Deus e Seu mundo e discernir como os elementos se encaixam no todo, sejam estilos de vida, experiências pessoais, eventos que acontecem ao nosso redor— a sabedoria é a capacidade de discernir o que se encaixa no desígnio de Deus para o mundo e o que não se encaixa.

Minha ilustração favorita sobre a diferença entre conhecimento e sabedoria é que conhecimento é saber que um tomate é uma fruta, mas sabedoria é discernir que um tomate não combina com uma salada de frutas.

O cultivo do conhecimento e do discernimento é o objetivo da santificação cristã, porque preparam você para uma vida que se encaixe adequadamente em todas as informações particulares que você encontrará ao seu redor no contexto maior, conforme a intenção de Deus. Existem muitas pessoas que acumularam muito conhecimento, mas relativamente poucas que realmente sabem o que fazer com esse conhecimento, que têm a capacidade de perceber como esse conhecimento se encaixa adequadamente. Como Paulo continua a dizer em Filipenses 1, “para que você possa aprovar o que é excelente”. Isso é sabedoria e discernimento.

Existe algo fascinante sobre esta palavrinha chamada: “discernimento” em Filipenses 1:9. “Discernimento” é uma tradução da palavra grega aisthanomai – da qual obtemos a palavra em português: “estética”.

Isso revela o propósito importante por trás da beleza na santificação cristã. Os elementos estéticos de nossa santificação não são meramente um valor agregado; eles não são incluídos apenas para tornar a aquisição de conhecimento mais envolvente ou interessante. Os elementos estéticos de nossa santificação são fundamentalmente morais porque ajudam a formar o discernimento dentro de nós – eles ajudam a formar a sabedoria. Este é o poder transformador da beleza.

Como exatamente a beleza forma a sabedoria? Através da imaginação. Se a sabedoria é a virtude que nos permite perceber o que é correto, a imaginação é a faculdade humana por meio da qual o fazemos. Como observa Vanhoozer, a imaginação é a “faculdade de fazer ou descobrir conexões e formas significativas”, é “a capacidade de criar ou perceber totalidades significativas e formas coerentes”. Ela cultiva a virtude da sabedoria.

Eu gostaria de destacar duas maneiras pelas quais isso deve acontecer na vida de um cristão.

Em primeiro lugar, as belas obras da imaginação formam a capacidade de perceber adequadamente a ordem no mundo. A beleza é coerentee, portanto, quando mergulhamos na beleza – em obras de arte e elementos estéticos que manifestam uma profunda ordem no mundo criado, como Deus pretendia que fosse, nossa imaginação moral é moldada quanto ao que é correto na ordem criada.

Uma das minhas pinturas favoritas em exibição na galeria nacional em Washington D.C. é uma obra chamada “Fanny/Fingerpainting” de Chuck Close. Se você virasse a esquina da galeria e se deparasse com a pintura de perto, tudo o que veria seria uma confusão de impressões digitais. Aleatoriedade aparente e desordem. Mas, ao se afastar da pintura, você verá um retrato incrivelmente detalhado de uma anciã fotorrealista. O que parecia ser uma desordem aleatória quando visto de perto, na verdade se encaixa em um belo contexto muito maior.

Esse tipo de fenômeno caracteriza toda bela arte em um grau ou outro em uma variedade quase infinita de formas. Um momento de dissonância musical no ar parece ruim e sem propósito, mas quando concebido como apenas um momento em uma peça musical maior, começamos a entender como as partes se encaixam em um belissimo todo. Um gesto do corpo por si só pode parecer estranho, mas junto com outros gestos complementares, cria uma dança lindamente graciosa.

Ao estudar e apresentar, especialmente, executar obras de arte verdadeiramente belas, estamos desenvolvendo a sabedoria, uma capacidade de perceber uma parte – um momento dissonante no ar – e discernir como ela se encaixa no todo da onipotência e sabedoria de Deus e Seu belo plano de Mundo.

Igualmente, em segundo lugar, a beleza na adoração ensina o que é adequado em nosso relacionamento com Deus e Seu mundo. Como observa Vanhoozer, “Tanto a bela aarte quanto a adoração despertam nossos sentidos e imaginação para os contornos da ordem criada. No entanto, ao contrário da arte, a adoração nos enxerta no drama da redenção, naquele desígnio trinitário para a vida em que a beleza é um consentimento amoroso para com o outro.” a redenção, capacitando-nos com olhos iluminados a perceber a obra de Deus no mundo para Sua glória e a de Seu povo. Bela liturgia e música ordenam nossas afeições no que Lewis chamou de “sentimentos estáveis”. A adoração que comunica liturgicamente a verdadeira adoração do céu nos realinha com essa realidade.

Nem preciso dizer a você que nosso mundo está cheio de feiúra, desordem, caos e dor. Consideradas como momentos dissonantes no ar, tais realidades podem nos levar ao desespero se não conseguirmos perceber como esses momentos de feiúra se encaixam em um plano ordenado do Deus Soberano. Mas tendo os olhos de nossos corações iluminados, adquirido por meio da bela arte “a capacidade de compreender padrões significativos ou conceber contextos unificados a partir de elementos aparentemente não relacionados”, somos mais capazes de “’ver’ Deus e o reino de Deus em ação no Mundo.”

A beleza é parte essencial da vossa santificação, pois é ela que forma em nós o verdadeiro amor com conhecimento e todo o discernimento.

‌Ao continuar a buscar a santidade e a semelhança com Cristo, não se esforce apenas para adquirir conhecimento teológico, mas deixe seu amor transbordar cada vez mais, com conhecimento e discernimento, para que você possa aprovar o que é excelente e, assim, ser puro e irrepreensível no dia de Cristo, cheio do fruto da justiça que vem por meio de Jesus Cristo, para glória e louvor de Deus.

Psalm 1 began by saying that a truly blessed person will not allow his image of the good life to be shaped by the wicked image of blessedness; Psalm 2 shows us what that wicked image is. It shows us the counsel of the ungodly—their image of the good life.

Why do the nations rage,
and the peoples plot in vain? (Ps 2:1)

This is a deliberate development between the two introductory psalms. Notably, the Hebrew word for “plot” in Psalm 2:1 is the exact same term as the word “meditates” in Psalm 1:2, this idea of musing on something, something that forms and shapes your imagination. The KJV translated this phrase, “the people imagine a vain thing.” Helpfully, the Legacy Standard Bible translates both as “meditates”—The righteous person meditates on God’s Law day and night…. “Why do the nations rage and the peoples meditate on a vain thing?” This is a picture of the wicked imagination of the good life. A righteous person’s imagination will reflect the Torah, but an ungodly person’s imagination will reflect a different vain image.

And what is that image? Notice what the ungodly nations say about the rule of the Lord in verses 2–3. A righteous person imagines the rule of God to be that which enables blessedness; how does a wicked person imagine life under the rule of God?

² The kings of the earth set themselves,
and the rulers take counsel together,
against the Lord and against his Anointed, saying,

³ “Let us burst their bonds apart
and cast away their cords from us.”

This is what the wicked imagine God to be like; this is not really about their theology, what they intellectually think in their minds. It’s not that they necessarily deny the power and rule of God. They acknowledge that rule, but they imagine that rule entirely differently than a righteous person does. Wicked people muse on different music. When they consider the rule of God, they conceive of his rule like bonds that must be broken, like cords that must be cast away for there to be true freedom. The ungodly image of the good life is a life of prosperity apart from God, with explicit rejection of his rule, because they imagine that rule to be oppressive.

Psalms 1 and 2 express two different images of life under God—as a flourishing tree, or as an oppressive bondage. Which image forms you will determine your path and your ultimate destiny.

And this is how the wicked have imagined the rule of God throughout history. Think about the serpent’s counsel to Eve: Did God really command that you not eat of the tree? That’s burdensome! He just knows you will become like him. Burst that bond apart and eat the fruit.

Or think about the Tower of Babel. God had commanded Noah and his sons to “be fruitful and multiply, increase greatly on the earth and multiply in it” (Gen 9:7). But their descendants migrated together east, and they said, That’s burdensome! Cast away that cord from us. “Come, let us build ourselves a city and a tower with its top in the heavens, and let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be dispersed over the face of the whole earth” (Gen 11:4). What God meant as a blessing for them, they imagined as restraining.

Or think about the Israelites. God gave them the law of Moses, and he said, “And if you faithfully obey the voice of the Lord your God, being careful to do all his commandments that I command you today, the Lord your God will set you high above all the nations of the earth. And all these blessings shall come upon you and overtake you, if you obey the voice of the Lord your God” (Deut 28:1–2). And the Hebrews said, That’s burdensome! If we want peace in the land, we need to intermarry with the Canaanites, contrary to God’s law. And if we want our crops to grow, we need to worship Baal, the god of the storm. And if we want to have children, we need to worship Ashteroth, the god of fertility. Let us burst those bonds apart and cast away the cords from us. They wanted the good life, but their wrong image of life under the rule of God—their imagining a vain thing—led them to cast off what they saw as restrictive bonds and cords, when actually the commands God gave them were the path toward true flourishing.

I could go on and on—this is the story of human history. In none of these examples did the wicked necessarily have a deficient knowledge of the fact that God is the Creator and Ruler of all—Romans 1 tells us that all people know God’s eternal power and divine nature; their deficiency—what formed their path—is what they imagined God to be like. And this is exactly the point of Psalm 2: these introductory psalms are presenting the structural framework for the entire Psalter that is meant to shape our imagination of reality in this world and lead us to blessedness and praise, even as we are surrounded by wicked people with an entirely different image.

In fact, this is exactly how Jesus’s apostles interpreted Psalm 2. In Acts 4, Peter and John experienced the first persecution by the Jews, and after they were released, they quoted Psalm 2, recognizing this paradigmatic psalm as a fundamental lens through which to interpret all of human history as a conflict in images of the good life, a life under the rule of God vs. a life that throws off the rule of God. And, in fact, they also recognized that their little part in the unfolding of the framework Psalm 2 lays out was nowhere near the most significant example of it. This kind of conflict happened in the garden, it happened at Babel, it happened with the children of Israel, and it was happening to the apostles; but the apostles knew that the ultimate example of Psalm 2 was the crucifixion of the Son of God. And it was no stretch for them to interpret Psalm 2 this way—this is exactly what Psalm 2:2 says:

The kings of the earth set themselves,
and the rulers take counsel together,
against the Lord and against his Anointed.

The apostles correctly identified the Anointed—this Messiah—as Jesus. In other words, Psalm 2 explains how the fundamental truths of Psalm 1 play out in world history, and as we will explore in the next chapter, the Messiah is at the center of it all. The apostles knew that; they had mused on God’s music—the Psalms had formed their imagination. And so they interpreted the conflict they were experiencing in light of that, which kept them on the right path toward true blessedness.

The Biblical Image of God

Psalm 2 also portrays a biblical image of God and his response to the imagination of the wicked. Again, this is setting up a paradigmatic set of images that are developed in the entirety of the Psalter and that form a God-inspired imagination of reality under God’s rule.

Consider the image Psalm 2:4 paints of God: It says, “He who sits in the heavens.” Now, that word “sits” is a bit misleading. The Hebrew word is actually much more metaphorical than just plain “sits.” Again, the Psalms use poetry to help to form our inner image of reality, and that’s what Psalm 2 is continuing to do. Elsewhere in the Psalms the translators often capture a fuller picture of what this Hebrew term is meant to portray with the English word “enthroned”:

The Lord sits enthroned over the flood,
the Lord sits enthroned as king forever. (Ps 29:10)

That’s the sense of this word. As Ross notes, the term “means that he sits enthroned or reigns.”¹Allen Ross, A Commentary on the Psalms (Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic, 2012), 1:205. We could translate Psalm 2:4, “He who sits enthroned in the heavens.” That is the image of God Psalm 2 is beginning to paint, and that’s clear when Psalm 2:6 refers to him as King. The Psalms use other images of God to shape our conception of him, but the overwhelmingly dominant image is of God as King. You’ll find him called king throughout the psalms, you’ll find references to his throne in heaven like we see here in 2:4, and you’ll find other images like scepter, kingdom, dominion, reign, and rule. Likewise, in the ancient near east a title like judge connoted the idea of a ruler, like in the Book of Judges, where judges were champion warrior rulers of the people.

From beginning to end of the Psalter, these songs lead us to muse on God as King. These concrete images form within our imaginations, what Alison Searle calls the “eyes of the heart,” an image of the good life under the rule of God.²Alison Searle, The Eyes of Your Heart: Literary and Theological Trajectories of Imagining Biblically (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2009).

God’s Response

And how does this King respond to the rage of the nations? How does he respond to their vain imagination of a good life apart from his rule? How does he respond when the kings of the earth set themselves against him and his Anointed One, and burst what they consider the bonds of his rule and cast away what they imagine to be the cords of his reign?

He laughs.

But his laughter is not at all humorous. It very quickly turns to derision (v 4). He will “speak to them in his wrath, and terrify them in his fury” (v 5). You break the “bonds” of my rule? I will break you with a rod of iron and dash you in pieces like a potter’s vessel (v 9). You set yourself against my Anointed One? You reject him and arrest him and accuse him falsely and strip him and beat him and mock his rule with a crown of thorns? You nail my Anointed One to a shameful cross? I have set my King on Zion, my holy hill (v 6).

This certainty of destruction for those who live according to a vain imagination of the good life is communicated throughout the Psalter, and particularly in the progression of the Psalter’s organization. If you trace the appearance of the wicked throughout the Psalms, especially pictures of the wicked flourishing, you’ll notice that there is an intensification of contrast between the wicked and the righteous in the first forty psalms that begins to thin out and give way as the book progresses to the last fifty psalms, which focus on praise. There is a movement in the book from conflict to blessing, from lament to praise. When you get to the last psalm in the book, Psalm 150, there is absolutely no mention of the wicked. They’re gone.

Which is exactly what Psalm 1 predicts. The wicked will be like chaff that the wind drives away (v 4). They’re here in force for forty psalms, and they continue through most of the psalms, but they start to dwindle, and by Psalm 150, they’re gone. The fact of the matter is this: the presence of wicked people is an unavoidable reality, but it is also an unavoidable reality that “the wicked will not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous” (Ps 1:5). They are here, and they will fight against us, and it will often look like they are prospering instead of us. But at the end, in the day of judgment, they will be blown away like chaff.

This is how we have hope in the midst of a dark world filled increasingly with ungodly paths and wicked imaginations. We don’t have hope by escaping the reality of wickedness around us or by ignoring that reality. Hope is formed in our hearts in the midst of all of this by musing on the Torah of David, by traveling along this path the psalm editors created for us from darkness, through adversity, to blessedness. We sing our way through the Psalms from songs of lament to songs of praise.

Torah’s Counsel

Psalms 1 and 2 portray two conflicting images of the good life that compete throughout world history: an image of a tree that flourishes under the rule of God, and an image of God’s rule as oppressive and tyrannical. The counsel of the ungodly is that the only way to flourish is to burst the bonds of God’s rule and cast off his cords. What is the righteous counsel? Psalm 2:10–12 tell us:

¹⁰ Now therefore, O kings, be wise;
be warned, O rulers of the earth.

¹¹ Serve the Lord with fear,
and rejoice with trembling.

¹² Kiss the Son,
lest he be angry, and you perish in the way,
for his wrath is quickly kindled.

Blessed are all who take refuge in him.

This is the counsel of the Torah. This is an accurate image of what it will be like if you resist the rule of God as King. The last line of Psalm 1 promised, “the way of the wicked will perish,” and so the Torah counsels, “Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and you perish in the way.” Acknowledge him as King, accept that image, or you will not stand in the judgment.

If your image of the rule of God is that it is a thing to be broken and cast off because he is terrifying, then that’s the image that will actually come to pass. If you resist his rule as something oppressive, then you will experience oppression. You break his bonds? He will break you. Your image of the blessed life and its relationship to the rule of God will determine how you live and will determine your ultimate destiny.

But if you kiss the Son—if you serve him with fear because you know that his commandments are not burdensome; you don’t imagine God as a tyrannical despot, you imagine him as a Shepherd-King, as your Redeemer—if that’s your image, then you will be blessed.

Blessed is the man, Psalm 1 tells us, whose imagination is shaped by delighting in the Torah rather than ungodly counsel. And the final phrase of Psalm 2 is put there intentionally by the editors of the Psalter to form a bookend with Psalm 1:1: “Blessed are all those take refuge in him.” If you imagine God correctly, as formed within you by his inspired songs, then you will fly to him for refuge; you will see him as the source of true blessedness and as the one who will provide safety, comfort, and protection in the midst of a wicked world.

This post is an excerpt from Musing on God’s Music: Forming Hearts of Praise with the Psalms.

James was an extraordinary leader who was not only humble but a man who truly walked in the footsteps of Christ. He was known as James the Just or James the Righteous. He was the half brother of our Lord Jesus Christ and served as the leader of the church at Jerusalem after the resurrection of Jesus.

According to the historical accounts of James, he was known for having knees like a camel due to his faithful prayer life. He was bold and willing to suffer for the sake of Christ. James was thrown down from the top of the Temple (about a 100 ft.) which did not kill him, so according to church tradition, the angry mob dragged him outside the city gate where they beat him to death with clubs.   

This is a man who understood what it was like to be a true Christian. I want to learn from men like James. In his short epistle that is packed with pithy statements, he writes the following:

James 1:19 – Know this, my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger

Consider the language of this powerful little verse. Arranged with parallelism, James delivers a punch with his proverbial statement. He’s obviously writing to Christians as noted by his use of the word “brother” and followed by the next phrase, “let every person” indicates that he’s not merely referencing leaders among the church. What follows is for every Christian within the church of Jesus Christ and should be examined carefully. It’s one thing to claim to be a follower of Jesus, but it’s quite a different thing to act like a Christian.

Quick to Hear: The Art of Listening

There is an art to listening. Many people appear to be listening when in reality they’re simply thinking of what they will say when the talking ceases. That’s really poor listening. Proper listening involves processing the information that’s being spoken with a desire to carefully consideration and respect of the individual who is speaking.

There is a need to recover the art of proper listening within the church today. This goes for normal conversation and the worship service as a whole. Listening to a sermon and listening to the singing (the actual words) is essential to a healthy church. However, as it pertains to conversations among friends, meetings, and confrontations—listening is essential to the pursuit of the truth and maintaining peace and unity among the body of Christ.

Due to the speed of information that comes our way through social media, we have become really poor listeners. Dopamine (a hormone in our brain) impacts us with specific reward and motivation functionality. Social media is designed to provide us with instant happiness in a short period of time through shallow information, likes, retweets, and follows. Cell phone companies create notification sounds and buzzes that create bursts of euphoria which communicates to the brain and encourages more usage for the pursuit of happiness and pleasure. In short, it’s like a drug, and like all other drugs—if not used properly it can adversely impact a person’s brain function. In this case, it hinders a person’s ability to focus on things that will not produce that instant high.

We want information quickly and we don’t like waiting on people to speak. We have been conditioned to listen poorly. Our attention spans have become woefully short and that hinders our ability to listen with patience and respect. Notice how James phrases this command, “be quick to hear.” We all know what it’s like to be around someone who is quick to speak, quick to tweet, quick to respond with words, but what James commands here is the opposite. The command is for the Christian to be quick to hear, to listen, to engage the other party with a listening ear. The church must recover the art of listening.

Slow to Speak: The Discipline of Silence

The great temptation is to be quick to speak. James understood this reality because later in his letter he provides a sobering warning regarding the power of the unbridled tongue (James 3:5-6). In the opening section of his letter as he unpacks pure religion, he directs the brothers and sisters in Christ to be slow to speak.

I recall my father teaching me to drive. He as a fireman and paramedic for 36 years in our community. His advice was for me to drive slower rather than faster. He once said, “Son, always remember this simple lesson. A slow wreck is always better than a fast wreck.” As a fireman and paramedic, he had pulled plenty of people out of wrecked automobiles. He understood the devastating results of wrecking at a high rate of speed. A person is more likely to walk away from a slow wreck than a fast wreck.

When it comes to speaking, the same principle is true. A tongue that is moving at a high rate of speed will eventually wreck and the results will not be good. A sharp tongue and unbridled speech is characteristic of a fool. This is why James points the Christians in the opposite direction. James certainly understood what Jesus said about the tongue:

Matthew 12:36–37 – I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak, for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.”

With this in mind, we need to approach conversations, meetings, social media, and cases of church discipline with careful thought before we open our mouths. We will give an account of how we use our tongues—for good or evil. James likewise built his teaching off of the wise words of Solomon who provided the following exhortation:

Proverbs 17:28 – Even a fool who keeps silent is considered wise; when he closes his lips, he is deemed intelligent.

When a fool opens his mouth, he reveals his folly to everyone. However, it’s much more respectable to remain silent than to open your mouth and reveal your ignorance with unrestrained speech that harms others and creates division. Beware of the person who is always setting blazes with the tongue—this person’s faith must be seriously questioned.

Slow to Anger: The Restraint Necessary for the Christian

Anger is not sinful if used properly. A passionate displeasure for the things that God hates is not wrong, but to not restrain your anger is sinful (Eph 4:26-27). When we consider the fact that our Lord Jesus Christ was angry, but he did not sin—this proves that anger is not sinful (Matt 21:12-13). However, we must likewise remember that not one of us within our local church is Jesus. We must be very cautious in our displays of anger because of the power, passion, and destruction that anger can bring about if left unrestrained.

James commands restraint. He says, “be slow to anger.” Once again, the guardrails must be set accordingly. A hot temper and outbursts of unrestrained passion can be destructive. Beware of the person who refuses to control his or her temper. This person is a dangerous individual who should be avoided. Jesus provided us with a sobering warning in his sermon in Matthew:

Matthew 5:22 – But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire.

Certainly James was building upon the teachings of the Proverbs that teach this same principle. We find these words in Proverbs 14:29 “Whoever is slow to anger has great understanding, but he who has a hasty temper exalts folly.” We all know what it’s like to be around a person who is quick tempered. Sometimes people excuse themselves by stating that they inherited a quick temper from a family member. The fact is, all of us inherited sin from Adam, but that’s no license to live in sin. We are to put off the old unsanctified person and put on the new person in Christ (Col 3:9; Eph 4:22-24).

Communication is key to all relationships in life. It involves listening, speaking, and emotion. In the Christian life, imagine how fruitful and healthy our local churches would be if we were all pursuing holiness and a life of self-discipline that resulted in being quick to hear, slow to speak, and slow to anger. Semper reformanda involves more than holding to reformed positions. It means we are to be always reforming in doctrine and life for the glory of God. The personalities of Hollywood and influences of social media glorify an unrestrained tongue and a hot temper, but the church needs to listen to the wisdom of James—a man who truly followed in the footsteps of our Lord Jesus Christ.

A courtroom stands as one of the few places our society still treats with respect. They refer to the judge as “your honor.” Those involved in the trial dress very formally. The court hands down life-changing verdicts of guilty and not-guilty. The court places witnesses under oath to ensure their truthfulness. The proceedings radiate an atmosphere of seriousness. 

In his letters, Paul places Timothy under oath to exhort him to persevere in faithful service, and the Apostle calls solemn witnesses to hold Timothy accountable to his task. This article is part of a series of blog posts aimed at encouraging pastors to persevere in their labor. The sense of gravity that accompanies being under oath should exhort us to continue in serving our judge—the Lord Jesus Christ. The weight of these oaths should spur us on to faithful endurance.   

The Purpose of an Oath 

Oaths heighten the urgency and seriousness of a commitment. One can find examples throughout Scripture of oaths being made at strategic times to highlight the significance of a promise or task. In Genesis 24, Abraham placed his servant under oath to find a wife for his son Isaac (a weighty responsibility to entrust to another). Biblical authors refer to covenants God makes with his people as “oaths” (Gen 26:3; Deut 7:8; Ps 132:11). God instructs his people to take oaths seriously and not utter them rashly (Lev 5:4; Num 30:2). Joshua places an oath in the form of a curse upon anyone who would rebuild Jericho—severe consequences would afflict anyone disregarding this oath (Josh 6:26). David spared Mephibosheth’s life because of an oath he had sworn to his friend Jonathan (2 Sam 21:7). Ezra uses an oath to ensure the faithfulness of the priests who returned with him to Jerusalem (Ezra 10:5). In a tragic scene, Peter reinforces his denial of Jesus Christ with an oath (Matt 26:72). Paul places the Thessalonians under oath to ensure their whole church hears his letter (1 Thess 5:27). 

The Structure of these Oaths 

Like faithful men before him, Paul uses an oath formula in 1 Timothy 5:21, 6:13–14, and 2 Timothy 4:1–2 to heighten the gravity of his commands to Timothy. He employs terminology from a legal proceeding and the structure of an oath in these examples.¹Mounce, William D. Pastoral Epistles. Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 46. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2000, 315. He begins each of these oaths with solemn charge or command. First Timothy 5:21 and 2 Timothy 4:1 both begin with the Greek word διαμαρτύρομαι, which the ESV renders, “I charge you.” According to William Mounce, this word can have the meaning of “testifying under oath.”²Ibid., 315 He employs the word παραγγέλλειν in First Timothy 6:13 also rendered, “I charge you” by the ESV. Paul uses this same term at the introduction of the letter where he commands Timothy to “charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine.” (1 Tim 1:3, emphasis mine). Both of these terms imply a strong and solemn command.   

Paul references two or three witnesses in each of these passages (as was common for oaths or vows). In 1 Timothy 5:21, he invokes the presence of God, Christ Jesus, and the elect angles. In 1 Timothy 6:13 and 2 Timothy 4:1, he references the presence of God and Christ Jesus. These divine and angelic witnesses add gravity to the commands which follow. After each of the charges in the presence of witnesses, Paul issues specific instructions for Timothy to follow. 

Rebuke a Sinning Elder

Practicing church discipline is difficult. It would be particularly challenging to publicly rebuke an elder. Paul provides instructions for addressing elders who commit sin in 1 Timothy 5:20–21. He uses an oath formula to highlight the importance of dealing with this difficult matter. Paul writes, “In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of the elect angels I charge you to keep these rules without prejudging, doing nothing from partiality” (1 Tim 5:21). “Keep” (φυλάξῃς) conveys the idea of preserving a law from being broken. “Prejudging” (προκρίματος) is a legal term for making up one’s mind before hearing the facts.³Ibid., 316) Protect the Commandment As highlighted in my last blog post, a concern for defending and teaching sound doctrine permeates the Pastoral Epistles. Paul regularly points to the … Continue reading Pastors must remember the gravity Paul attaches to the command, “Preach the Word” (2 Tim 4:2). I believe this command is the crescendo of the letter and the climax of all Paul’s commands in Second Timothy (perhaps that argument will be another blog post). The solemn oath which precedes this command stresses the significance of preaching.    

How these Oaths Encourage Perseverance 

As pastors, we should own the instructions, exhortations, and commands found in First and Second Timothy. We should apply them to ourselves and the churches we lead. These letters should help shape our philosophy and practice of ministry. Therefore, like Timothy, we are under oath—with God, Jesus, and the elect angels as witnesses. We should not take being under oath lightly. This should fuel our desire and determination to, “continue in what you have learned and firmly believed” (2 Tim 3:14). Recognizing these oaths encourages us to deal with challenges like the discipline of an elder, the protection of the commandment, and preaching the Word. Persevere—you’re under oath before the holy judge.

STANZA 1
All creatures of our God and King,
lift up your voice and with us sing
Alleluia! Alleluia!
Thou burning sun with golden beam,
thou silver moon with softer gleam,
O praise Him, O praise Him!
Alleluia! Alleluia! Alleluia! 

STANZA 2
Thou rushing wind that art so strong,
ye clouds that sail in heav’n along,
O praise Him! Alleluia!
Thou rising morn, in praise rejoice,
ye lights of ev’ning, find a voice!
O praise Him, O praise Him!
Alleluia! Alleluia! Alleluia! 

STANZA 3
And all ye men of tender heart,
forgiving others, take your part,
O sing ye! Alleluia!
Ye who long pain and sorrow bear,
praise God and on Him cast your care!
O praise Him, O praise Him!
Alleluia! Alleluia! Alleluia! 

STANZA 4
Let all things their Creator bless
and worship Him in humbleness,
O praise Him! Alleluia!
Praise, praise the Father, praise the Son,
and praise the Spirit, Three in One!
O praise Him, O praise Him!
Alleluia! Alleluia! Alleluia!

—Francis of Assisi, 1225

Welcome to G3 Weekly—a summary of this week’s top news stories on Christianity and the public square.

This week, retail corporation Target faced backlash over a “pride month” partnership with an artist who makes Satanic designs. Planned Parenthood released a nationwide strategic plan in response to the overturn of Roe v. Wade, which includes a mass layoff. Meanwhile, a Christian university fired two employees for using preferred pronouns in their email signatures.

“Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap” (Galatians 6:7).

Target is experiencing backlash from conservative consumers after the firm hired an artist who makes Satanic designs related to homosexuality, transgenderism, and abortion.

Erik Carnell, who identifies as transgender and runs a company called Abprallen, created three items for the retailer’s annual “pride month” collection. Some items featured on the artist’s online store, which were not marketed by Target, included a design of a skeleton wrapped in rainbow colors that said “Trans Witches For Abortion” and a shirt that said “Satan Respects Pronouns.”

“Satanists don’t actually believe in Satan, he is merely used as a symbol of passion, pride, and liberty,” Carnell said on the website, which is now closed because of runaway demand for the items. “He means to you what you need him to mean. So for me, Satan is hope, compassion, equality, and love. So, naturally, Satan respects pronouns. He loves all LGBT+ people.”

Share prices for Target fell considerably in the days after a conservative activist created a social media thread exposing the company’s association with the artist. Target, which also faced criticism for a female swimsuit described as “tuck-friendly” and “extra crotch coverage” for men who call themselves transgender, was forced to remove rainbow “pride month” displays from certain locations or move them toward the back of the stores.

California Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom and other leftists blasted Target for “selling out the LGBTQ+ community” as a result of the conservative backlash.

Planned Parenthood Downsizes and Unveils Nationwide Strategy

“Fret not yourself because of evildoers; be not envious of wrongdoers! For they will soon fade like the grass and wither like the green herb” (Psalm 37:1).

Planned Parenthood revealed forthcoming efforts to increase “abortion access” after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last year.

The abortion conglomerate will invest some $70 million into four dozen affiliates across the nation so that they can “increase access to abortion” and “build a powerful movement for abortion access at the local and state level.” Executives also announced increased efforts to promote abortion among members of the black community and utilize online platforms to encourage abortion in parts of the country with more severe restrictions.

Planned Parenthood will meanwhile eliminate between 10% and 20% of staff members next month, an effort decried by the labor unions which represent the organization’s employees.

The overturn of Roe v. Wade, a Supreme Court opinion which said that there exists a right to abortion in the Fourteenth Amendment, has rendered a deluge of state-level policies to either increase or decrease access to the lethal procedure. Even in conservative states where additional restrictions are now enacted, mothers can easily order abortion pills through the mail in order to murder their children, and no state has yet criminalized abortion as homicide.

Houghton University Dismisses Two Workers for Using Personal Pronouns

“No one who practices deceit shall dwell in my house; no one who utters lies shall continue before my eyes” (Psalm 101:7).

Two employees at Houghton University, a small Christian school in western New York, were dismissed from their positions after they included their preferred pronouns in their work emails.

Raegan Zelaya and Shua Wilmot, former residence hall directors who respectively described themselves in their work email signatures as “she/her” and “he/him,” were dismissed by Houghton University after they refused to comply with new policies regarding email signatures. Several hundred alumni of the school, which is controlled by the Wesleyan Church, signed a petition expressing outrage about the dismissals. 

“I think it boils down to: they want to be trans-exclusive and they want to communicate that to potential students and the parents of potential students,” Wilmot commented in an interview with The New York Times.

The Wesleyan Church affirms that “gender confusion and dysphoria are ultimately the biological, psychological, social, and spiritual consequences of the human race’s fallen condition” and notes that “adult gender nonconformity” violates the “sanctity of human life.”

Algumas semanas atrás nossa família foi até uma de nossas conferências, a conferência nacional da vida familiar. Além dos sermões e da comunhão, um dos pontos que mais nos encoraja é ver as famílias adorando a Deus juntas. Mães, pais e avós acomodam os bebês no colo e os pequeninos colorem no livro de colorir fornecido durante as sessões de pregação para elas “anotarem” o sermão.

Os quase 1.500 participantes estão lá porque acreditam, como nós, na reunião de adoração entre gerações de família. Acreditamos tanto nisso, de fato, que meu marido Scott escreveu um livro tratando os princípios bíblicos e os passos práticos para treinar as crianças a se sentarem no culto de adoração (e também no culto familiar em casa durante a semana). Chama-se: deixai vir a mim os pequeninos. (Breve em português).

Mas isso não é tarefa fácil. As crianças menores falam alto, se inquietam e podem ser desobedientes nos momentos mais inoportunos! Então, hoje eu gostaria de oferecer algumas dicas que ajudaram nossos filhos ao longo dos anos a ficarem quietinhos na igreja. Cada criança, família e igreja é diferente, então você precisa encontrar o que te ajuda mais, mas essas atividades são silenciosamente lúdicas e geralmente permitem que as crianças ouçam, mesmo que pareça que estão fazendo outra coisa. Elas são ideais para diversas idades.

Dicas:

1. Comidinha de feltro (prefiro comida a bonecas, animais ou veículos porque as crianças podem imitar o som deles durante a oração ou sermão.)
2. Livros de adesivos infantis e similares para crianças que estão no Pré I e II.
3. Livros de plástico/ pano ou livros para bebês/crianças dos tipos “Indestrutíveis” (Bebês podem puxar e mastigar, e esses livros finos cabem facilmente em um saco de fraldas.)
4. Brinquedos “pop it” coloridos.
5. Livros de material leve.
6. Caneta Esferográfica 10 Cores Multifuncional Multicolorida Gel (pode não ser a melhor opção se os cliques te incomodam, mas acho que, quando usado discretamente, não é tão alto a ponto de chamar a atenção das pessoas em outros bancos; são infinitamente preferíveis a um estojo de várias canetas ou lápis coloridos)
7. Cadernos de desenho.
8. Livro de colorir e giz de cera triangular lavável (que não rola). Você também pode trazer lenços umedecidos para tirar possíveis manchas se levar canetas ou giz de cera, especialmente se seus bancos forem de tecido leve.
9. Caderno de traço e desenho infantil.
10. Fio de tricô de dedo.
11. Apliques para laços pet papel.
12. Lousa mágica (pegue uma com a caneta amarrada a um barbante; confie em mim)

Eu também encorajo as igrejas a fornecer papéis de anotações de sermões ou livretos voltados especificamente para crianças. Se sua igreja não os fornece, você pode encontrar diversos modelos online.

Balançar seu filho para frente e para trás ou da esquerda para a direita estimula o sistema vestibular da criança e dá a sensação de atividade sem que ela mova seu próprio corpo.

Se o papai ou a mamãe acariciar os dedos do filho (ou esfregar as costas ou braços) proporcionará tranquilidade e relaxamento para a criança agitada.

Confie, você verá melhora na capacidade de seu filho de ficar sentado durante o sermão e praticar a quietude e a concentração em casa. A leitura de livros em voz alta e o culto familiar são ótimos momentos para desenvolver essas habilidades. Mas não desanime se levar algum tempo (mesmo anos) para seu filho sentar-se durante todo o sermão. Esta é o momento oportuno, e você está executando a tarefa importante de criar adoradores de Deus.

Paul Gerhardt was an eleven-year-old boy when war engulfed his homeland of Germany. What began as a political dispute over succession to the throne of Bohemia turned into a primarily religious conflict, as Catholic and Protestant troops battled across central Europe. War reached into France, Holland and Denmark, but Germany suffered the worst devastation of all. By the end of the Thirty Years’ War, the population was decimated, the countryside was destroyed, and the people were demoralized. 

Even in these difficult times, Gerhardt had a desire to serve the Lord. He enrolled at the University of Wittenberg, near his hometown, at the age of twenty-one. Here, one of his teachers, Paul Röber, frequently took his sermon texts from hymns. Gerhardt saw first-hand the pastoral value of hymnody. However, when Gerhardt graduated, he could find no position in a church. Instead, he took a job in Berlin tutoring children. During these years of waiting, he met hymn tune composer Johann Crüger, who was serving as choirmaster at St. Nicholas’s Church in Berlin. Crüger encouraged Gerhardt to write hymns, and when Crüger published a hymnal in 1648, it included several of Gerhardt’s hymns.

At the age of 44 or 45, Gerhardt was finally ordained and took his first church position, in the village of Mittenwalde, outside Berlin. Here he also married Anna Barthold and their first children were born; however, their firstborn died in infancy. Three more of their children would later die in childhood. But at Mittenwalde, Gerhardt also continued writing hymns, including “Give to the Winds Thy Fears.”¹The original hymn, “Befiehl du deine Wege,” following the beautiful translation by John Wesley, is typically divided in English hymnals into two separate hymns, “Commit Thou All Thy Griefs” … Continue reading

Gerhardt returned to Berlin in 1657, serving as an assistant pastor at the St. Nicholas Church alongside his mentor Johann Crüger. But Berlin was a city divided—religiously, rather than politically as in more recent times. Controversy between the Lutheran and Reformed Churches roiled the city, and Elector Friedrich Wilhelm I, an adherent of the Reformed tradition, sought to quell the controversy. The Elector arranged for meetings between the two sides in hopes of finding common ground, but his efforts had the opposite effect—perhaps because Friedrich Wilhelm obviously favored the Calvinist side. Eventually, the Elector forbade all discussion of the differences between the two systems. 

Though Gerhardt was well-respected for his fair treatment of people in both church systems, he found himself in an untenable position. Rather than avoid preaching about the Lutheran faith he held, he resigned from St. Nicholas in 1666. The people of the city successfully appealed to the authorities to make an exception for Gerhardt, but he declined reinstatement, believing that it would not be honest given the circumstances. He lived without steady employment for a year, during which time his wife died. Gerhardt was left alone with only one son. 

But Paul Gerhardt’s ministry was not over. Though he apparently wrote no more hymns after 1667, he took a church position in Lübben in 1668. He served faithfully, though perhaps more obscurely, until his death in 1676. After Gerhardt’s death, the church in Lübben commissioned a portrait of Gerhardt, with an inscription that reads, “A Divine Sifted in Satan’s Sieve.”

Gerhardt’s powerful hymn “Give to the Winds Thy Fears” may well represent his reflections on his time of hope deferred (Prov 13:12). What he wrote as a new pastor in Mittenwalde, however, could have served to sustain him in the trials he was yet to face. Paul Gerhardt, despite a life of disappointments and tragedies not of his own making, apparently still reached the end of life trusting in the One whose sovereign will governed and guided all these trials. 

Hymnals often set this text with a triumphant tune, such as DIADEMATA or FESTAL SONG. This is appropriate when one sings these words in a more defiant manner, refusing to let circumstances overwhelm the soul. But in more reflective or contemplative times, a tune such as TERRA BEATA (“This Is My Father’s World”) may fit the singer’s mood more appropriately.

This hymn also reflects Gerhardt’s role as a transitional figure in German hymnody, moving from the more overtly doctrinal texts of Luther and his successors toward the personal reflection of the Pietists. The text challenges us to make our fears like chaff, throwing them to the wind. God is well aware of what His children face (Ps 56:8). “Weeping may tarry for the night, but joy comes with the morning” (Ps 30:5).

The second stanza below encourages us to trust more fully in the sovereign God of all creation. What God has done is rightly done. The third stanza alludes to Isaiah 55:8–9—God’s thoughts are not our thoughts, and His ways not our ways. Because of this, we need not fear (Ps 56:3). Our only response is to wonder at the wisdom and strength of the God who loves us, our heavenly Father who gives us bread and fish, not stones and snakes (Mt 7:7–11).

Give to the winds thy fears,
Hope, and be undismayed;
God hears thy sighs and counts thy tears,
God shall lift up thy head,
Through waves and clouds and storms
He gently clears the way;
Wait thou His time, so shall the night
Soon end in joyous day.

Still heavy is thy heart?
Still sink thy spirits down?
Cast off the weight, let fear depart,
And every care be gone.
He everywhere has sway,
And all things serve His mind;
His every act pure blessing is,
His path unsullied light.

Far, far above thy thought
His counsel shall appear,
When fully He the work hath wrought
That caused thy needless fear.
Leave to His sovereign will
To choose and to command:
With wonder filled, thou then shalt own
How wise, how strong His hand.

— Paul Gerhardt, 1656
tr. John Wesley, 1739

From time to time, I get the opportunity to attend public worship with other church assemblies around the country. I am glad to observe how other churches “do worship” but also to participate in other services without the pressure of being the leader of it. One observation is the predominant use of projecting the words of congregational songs onto a wall or a screen. Sometimes this is accompanied by an invitation to use the hymnal, but many times it is not. Sometimes there is no hymnal to be used. After some thought, there are several observations I have about using screens for singing without even the option of a hymnal. 

DISCLAIMER: I am by no means saying that using a screen is sinful, but only saying that certain things need to be considered if/when screens are used for congregational singing.

Observation #1—Even if hymnals are available and acknowledged, hardly anyone (if anyone) in the congregation uses them.

Perhaps this is because of convenience. Perhaps it is because of unspoken peer pressure to not seem “old fashioned” by using a hymnal. Perhaps there are other reasons. Plus, let’s face it, there is just something enthralling about using a screen. However, it would be a mistake if a church communicates either overtly, or subliminally, that physical hymnals are no longer needed or desired.

Observation #2—Generally, there is very little to no harmony being sung by the congregation.

It is true that melody drives a song, and that unison singing can be edifying. However, harmonies are not unedifying, nor are they a detriment to hymn singing. Harmony is what helps give a song a certain flavor, character, and beauty. There is beauty in sung harmony that supports the melodic line. The great choral or orchestral works are not filled with every voice or instrument in unison for the entirety of the piece. Harmonic lines are introduced that enhance the beauty of the piece and make it more interesting. 

When a congregation cannot see harmonies written on the page, only those who know the hymn well and who have any kind of vocal ability and training will sing harmonies—maybe. Four-part hymn writing is not merely for the pianist to use but is for congregations to sing as well. Many congregations are missing out on the beauty of harmony in their singing, which I believe is at least partly due to the use of screens without hymnals. This, in turn, is producing churches that are more musically inept than previous generations.

Observation #3—It is much more difficult to teach through the stanza progression of hymns when only a screen is used.

One of the things I do sometimes with our congregation is talk through a hymn before singing it. I may ask a question about the meaning of a word or the poetic picture being portrayed. I may point out the connection between stanzas or highlight key ideas throughout the various stanzas. This is easy to do that when a person can glance at the entirety of the hymn on a single page.

For instance, the hymn “O for a Thousand Tongues to Sing” by Charles Wesley has connections from the end of each stanza to the beginning of the next. I can show that to my congregation very simply using a hymnal, but it is virtually impossible to do so on a screen in the same way. 

In other words, the hymnal is a teaching tool, not merely a catalog of songs. I want to teach my congregation about the nature of good hymn writing and poetry. I contend that this is much easier to do using a hymnal than only a screen.

Observation #4—Only those familiar with the hymn can sing it.

This is the most frustrating part of going to churches who use screens and not hymnals. If I do not know a hymn/song being sung, and there is no written music for me to read, I cannot sing. I am not even given the opportunity to sing. I am forced to be primarily an observer for those few minutes, listening to other people sing, but not able to join in myself. 

Corporate worship is meant to enable everyone to participate, not simply to watch. When I go to corporate worship, I want to participate in the singing. If there is a hymn I do not know, I want to see the music so I can sing it and participate more fully. I don’t want to simply listen.

Of the four observations, this is one that I think every church using screens needs to consider. If unbelievers attend your worship service, they may not sing anyway, but at least give them the opportunity to do so by providing hymnals. And if other believers attend, give them the opportunity to sing every hymn that you do. Your congregation may know all of them very well, but guests may not. This is where a hymnal will be helpful.

I believe it is unwise to purposefully inhibit people from at least having the opportunity to see the music of a hymn. It is a person’s choice whether they sing or not, but at least give them the chance.

Hymnals are wonderful tools, used to help people sing harmonic lines, and teaching them the nature of good poetry and hymn writing. You still may not get 100% participation, but there won’t be an excuse for not singing.

My advice—if you choose to use a screen for congregational singing, do not jettison your hymnals, but rather provide people the chance to use them, learn the harmonies, see the text in full, and participate in the singing, even if they don’t know the hymn. 

Se você dirigir pelas ruas de qualquer grande cidade da América (e do Brasil), você vai ver adesivos com frases nos para-choques dos veículos, frases sobre tolerância e inclusão. Na maior parte das vezes a inclusão é tolerância é somente para as outras religiões e não para o cristianismo. Nossa cultura perversa insiste que os cristãos devem tolerar e aceitar outras religiões do Mundo as custas de sua própria doutrina fundamental.

Qualquer estudo sério a respeito de Jesus demonstra que Ele não estava interessado em ecumenismo religioso. Jesus ensinou os seus seguidores que Ele é o único meio de reconciliação para Deus e que distante dEle todos perecerão. Em Lucas 13, Jesus fala aos judeus a respeito de dois desastres que haviam ocorrido em tempos recentes. Em uma cena, alguns galileus estavam em Jerusalém com o propósito de adoração e, enquanto realizavam seus sacrifícios, Pilatos deu ordem para que essas pessoas fossem brutalmente assassinadas. Como resultado, seu próprio sangue foi misturado em seus sacrifícios. Em outra cena, uma torre em Siloé caiu repentinamente, resultando na morte de várias pessoas. Na cultura judaica, a morte trágica repentina era comumente ligada a uma vida pecaminosa.

Jesus apontou para essas duas tragédias e fez uma séria declaração. Ele disse: “se não se arrependerem, todos vocês também perecerão” (Lucas 13.3,5). Jesus estava afirmando que aquelas pessoas que morreram em circunstâncias trágicas não eram, de alguma forma, mais merecedoras de morte do que o restante das pessoas da região. Uma vez que o pensamento cultural era associar essas tragédias com o julgamento, Jesus enfatizou o ponto de que a parte do arrependimento genuíno, todos os descrentes perecerão. Eles podem se orgulhar em guardar a Lei ou em um viver moralista, mas após a morte eles se encontrarão debaixo do juízo divino.

A declaração de Jesus foi abrangente e incluiu todos naquelas cidades durante os dias de Jesus, bem como todos que andam na calçada de Nova York ou dirigem pela rodovias de Los Angeles. Jesus negou completamente a ideia de que existem vários caminhos para Deus. Em entrevista à Oprah em 2012, Joel Osteen (pastor neopentecostal americano) afirmou que Jesus era o caminho para Deus, mas passou a sugerir que existem muitos caminhos para Jesus.

OPRAH: Bem. Outra pergunta. Existem muitos caminhos para Deus?

JOEL OSTEEN: Bem, eu acredito que sim Oprah. Eu acho que Jesus é o único caminho para Deus. Entretanto, eu acredito que existam muitos caminhos para Jesus. Sabe, nós nunca sabemos como Jesus se revela para alguém. Então eu não sou do time que exclui pessoas. Jesus se revela a todos.

Agora compare com o que ele disse a Larry King em uma entrevista de 2005, onde Joel Osteen afirmou que as pessoas de outras religiões amam a Deus e que ele não queria excluí-las do pacote da salvação.

KING: E se você for judeu ou muçulmano, e você não aceita a Cristo de jeito nenhum?

OSTEEN: Sabe, eu sou muito cuidadoso ao afirmar sobre quem iria ou não para o céu. Não sei…

KING: Você tem que acreditar em Cristo? Eles estão errados, não estão?

OSTEEN: Bem, não sei se acredito que eles estejam errados. Eu acredito que aqui está o que a Bíblia ensina e a fé cristã é a que eu acredito. Mas eu acho que só Deus pode julgar o coração de uma pessoa. Passei muito tempo na Índia com meu pai. Não sei tudo sobre a religião deles. Mas eu sei que eles amam a Deus. Eu vi a sinceridade deles. Então eu não sei. Eu posso falar de mim, e o que a Bíblia ensina, eu quero ter um relacionamento com Jesus.

Nosso mundo foi destruído por ideologias pós-modernas e despreza qualquer reivindicação de exclusividade e verdade absoluta – especialmente da Bíblia. Nosso mundo atual não tem nenhum problema em pincelar partes das declarações de Jesus que se encaixam perfeitamente em um adesivo de para-choque, mas as reivindicações de exclusividade de Jesus são rejeitadas de todo o seu coração. Nosso mundo está confortavelmente satisfeito com um “sincretismo fácil” como John Stott certa vez o rotulou, ou como Christian Smith definiu as visões religiosas da maioria dos adolescentes em nossos dias, “deísmo terapêutico moralista”. cultura saturada com humanismo secular e pensamento pós-moderno, mas o verdadeiro Jesus, conforme revelado nas Escrituras, exige total submissão de seus seguidores e condena todas as outras religiões do mundo.

Desde a queda de Adão e Eva, a grande questão sobre a salvação dos pecadores continua a perdurar em nossos dias: “Como pode o homem pecador se reconciliar com Deus?” Muitos caminhos falsos foram traçados ao longo dos tempos que apontam as pessoas para uma visão pluralista da religião que desvia de uma linha rígida de exclusividade. Nossa cultura é um caldeirão de várias religiões e visões espiritualistas da vida, mas Jesus tinha uma abordagem muito diferente. Ele deixou bem claro que só há uma maneira de se reconciliar com Deus.

Jesus assertivamente afirmou que Ele é o caminho da salvação. Em diversas passagens, Ele aponta que é o pão da vida (João 6:35), a luz do mundo (João 8:12), a porta das ovelhas (João 10:19), a videira (João 15:5 ), o Bom Pastor (João 10:11) e a ressurreição e a vida (João 11:25). Em cada uma dessas declarações com “EU SOU”, Jesus revela sua divindade e aponta para o fato de que Ele tem autoridade máxima para salvar os pecadores. Jesus não é um de muitos caminhos, Ele é o único caminho.

A medida que lemos os evangelhos, nós encontramos declarações definitivas da exclusividade de Jesus em sua pregação e ministério de ensino. Como no Sermão do Monte em Mateus 7 por exemplo, Jesus descreve duas portas e dois caminhos. Ele diz:

“Entrem pela porta estreita, pois larga é a porta e amplo o caminho que leva à perdição, e são muitos os que entram por ela. Como é estreita a porta, e apertado o caminho que leva à vida! São poucos os que a encontram” Mateus 7:13-14

Uma porta é estreita e a outra larga. Um caminho é apertado e o outro não. Um caminho leva a vida e o outro à destruição. À medida que Jesus prega este sermão, deve-se notar que Ele não apenas descreve esses dois caminhos, portas e destinos eternos em voz passiva. Ele usa um verbo imperativo ao ordenar a seus ouvintes que entrem na vida eterna. Ele deixa claro que só existe um caminho e nenhuma outra alternativa.

Observe a construção da frase por Jesus em João 14:6. Ele faz uso do artigo definido afirmando que ele é o caminho, a verdade e a vida. Em outras palavras, Jesus não é um dos muitos caminhos para Deus ou uma das muitas verdades à serem consideradas. Jesus é a porta singular para as ovelhas entrarem no descanso de Deus e serem salvas de seu estado de rebelião, marginalidade e julgamento final de Deus (João 10).

A exclusividade de Jesus Cristo é um forte lembrete de Sua autoridade incomparável sobre a morte, o pecado e a condenação eterna. Nenhuma outra figura religiosa fez uma afirmação tão incrível; somente Jesus detém o poder de trazer a salvação aos pecadores culpados. Ao examinarmos sua vida, pregação e, finalmente, sua ressurreição dentre os mortos, somos levados a confiar nessa grande afirmação de Jesus. Devemos reconhecê-Lo por quem Ele é – a única fonte verdadeira de esperança para toda a humanidade. Somente pela fé em Cristo podemos ser libertos do pecado e receber o dom da vida eterna.

Ao ser confrontado com esse claro ensino de Jesus, a pessoa deve ser levada ao arrependimento e confiar em Cristo como Salvador.

If you ride through the streets of any major city in America, you’re likely to see bumper stickers that signal a message of tolerance and religious inclusivity. In most cases the tolerance and inclusiveness is demanded for other religious views while not truly maintained for Christianity. Our perverse culture insists that Christians should tolerate and accept other world religions at the expense of their own foundational doctrines.

Any serious study of Jesus’ teachings makes it crystal clear that he was not interested in religious ecumenism. Jesus taught his followers that he is the singular means of reconciliation to God and that apart from him everyone would perish. In Luke 13, Jesus directs the Jews to two disasters that had occurred in recent days. In one scene, some Galileans were in Jerusalem for the purpose of worship, and as they were carrying out their sacrifices Pilate gave the order for these people to be brutally murdered. As a result, their own blood was mingled into their sacrifices. In another scene, a tower in Siloam had suddenly fallen without warning, resulting in the death of a number of people. In Jewish thought, sudden tragic death was commonly linked to sinful living.

Jesus pointed to those two tragedies and made a sobering statement. He said, “unless you repent, you will all likewise perish” (Luke 13:3, 5). Jesus was pointing out that these people who perished in these tragic circumstances were not somehow more deserving of death than the rest of the people in that region. Since the common thought was to associate such tragedies with judgement, Jesus emphasized his point that apart from genuine repentance all unbelievers will perish. They may pride themselves in law keeping or moral living, but upon death they will suddenly find themselves under the wrath of God.

The statement by Jesus was all encompassing and it included everyone in those cities during Jesus’ day as well as everyone who walks the sidewalk of New York or drives down I-5 in Los Angeles. Jesus completely denied the idea that there are multiple paths to God. In an interview with Oprah in 2012, Joel Osteen stated that Jesus was the way to God, but he went on to suggest that there are many paths to Jesus.

OPRAH: Okay, so here’s the big question. Are there many paths to get to the one God?

JOEL OSTEEN: Well, I believe Oprah that there, I believe that Jesus is the way to the one God. But, I believe there are many paths to Jesus. You know, you don’t know how Jesus would reveal himself to somebody. So, I’m not into excluding people. Jesus can reveal himself to anybody.

Compare that with what he said to Larry King back in his 2005 interview where Joel Osteen stated that people from other religions love God and that he didn’t want to exclude them from the equation of salvation.

KING: What if you’re Jewish or Muslim, you don’t accept Christ at all?

OSTEEN: You know, I’m very careful about saying who would and wouldn’t go to heaven. I don’t know …

KING: If you believe you have to believe in Christ? They’re wrong, aren’t they?

OSTEEN: Well, I don’t know if I believe they’re wrong. I believe here’s what the Bible teaches and from the Christian faith this is what I believe. But I just think that only God with judge a person’s heart. I spent a lot of time in India with my father. I don’t know all about their religion. But I know they love God. And I don’t know. I’ve seen their sincerity. So I don’t know. I know for me, and what the Bible teaches, I want to have a relationship with Jesus.¹CNN Larry King Live, Interview with Joel Osteen. [Aired June 20, 2005 – 21:00 ET]

Our world has been wrecked by postmodern ideologies and despises any claim to exclusivity and absolute truth—especially from the Bible. Our present world has no problem cherry picking parts of Jesus’ statements that fit nicely on a bumper sticker, but Jesus’ claims of exclusivity are wholeheartedly rejected. Our world is comfortably happy with an “easy-going syncretism”²John R. W. Stott, Christian Counter-Culture (Downer’s Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1978), 193. as John Stott once labeled it, or as Christian Smith coined the religious views of most teenagers in our day, “moralistic therapeutic deism.”³Christian Smith, Soul Searching: The Religious and Spiritual Lives of American Teenagers. With Lundquist Denton, Melina. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2005), 166. Such views may fit well within a culture saturated with secular humanism and postmodern thought, but the true Jesus as revealed in Scripture demands full submission from his followers and condemns all other world religions.

Since the Fall of Adam and Eve, the great question regarding salvation of sinners continues to linger in our day: “How can sinful man be reconciled to God?” Many false paths have been blazed through the ages that point people to a pluralistic view of religion that avoids a hard line of exclusivity. Our culture is a melting pot of various religions and approaches to life, but Jesus had a very different approach to this subject. He made it abundantly clear that there is only one way to be reconciled to God.

Jesus has rightly claimed that he is the way of salvation. In other places he points out that he is bread of life (John 6:35), the light of the world (John 8:12), the door to the sheep (John 10:19), the vine (John 15:5), the Good Shepherd (John 10:11), and resurrection and the life (John 11:25). In each of these “I AM” statements, Jesus reveals his deity and points to the fact that he has the ultimate authority to save sinners. Jesus is not one of many ways, he is the only way.

As we read through the Gospels, we find definitive statements of exclusivity from Jesus in his preaching and teaching ministry. For instance, in the Sermon on the Mount, in Matthew 7 Jesus describes two gates and two paths. He says:

Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few (Matthew 7:13-14).

One gate is narrow and the other gate is wide. One path is easy and the other is hard. One path leads to life while the other path leads to destruction. As Jesus preaches this sermon, it should be noted that he doesn’t merely describe these two paths, gates, and eternal destinies in a passive voice. He uses an imperative verb as he commands his listeners to enter into eternal life. He makes it clear that there is only one way and no other alternative.

Notice the construction of the sentence by Jesus in John 14:6. He makes use of the definite article stating that he is the way, the truth, and the life. In other words, Jesus is not one of many ways to God or one of many truths to consider. Jesus is the singular door for the sheep to enter into God’s rest and be saved from their state of rebellion, lawlessness, and ultimate judgment of God (John 10).

The exclusivity of Jesus Christ is a powerful reminder of His unmatched authority over death, sin, and eternal condemnation. No other religious figure has made such an incredible claim; only Jesus holds the power to bring salvation to guilty sinners. As we survey his life, preaching, and ultimately his resurrection from the dead—we are led to trust this bold claim of Jesus. We must recognize Him for who He is—the one true source of hope for all humanity. Only through faith in Christ can we be set free from sin and receive the gift of eternal life.  

When faced with this clear teaching from Jesus, it should lead a person to repent of their sin and trust Christ for their salvation.

One of the last short stories C. S. Lewis wrote was a revision of one of his first stories. It was a short story he called, “Light.” In the story a man named Robin, who was born blind, has recently had his sight restored through surgery. Robin finds himself quite disappointed with his restored sight, however, because he really wants to see that thing called “light” that he has heard so much about, and yet, while his wife and others insist that light is all around him, he can’t see light. Weeks of being able to see but not being able to see light leads Robin to despair and ultimately death. Of course, Robin’s problem, and even the problem of his wife and others who could not manage to help him, was that light is not something we see; light is something by which we see.

Lewis’s story is ultimately about the nature of human knowing, but it also illustrates well, I think, how we often approach the subject of beauty. In our post-Enlightenment era, beauty is something we look at; it is a subject we talk about; it is, perhaps, something we ought to learn to appreciate and enjoy.

However, as with light in Lewis’s story, beauty is not merely something to think about, to look at, and to simply recognize or even delight in, but rather beauty is what we come to know God and his world through. Or, to put it another way, beauty is not simply a category that stands alongside truth and goodness; rather, beauty is the means through which we come to really know what is true and good.

Transcendent Beauty

One of the most important, foundational principles of a robustly Christian philosophy is affirmation of absolute truth, goodness, and beauty and the fundamental part each of these principles play in truly knowing God and his world.

Belief in transcendent principles is rooted in a conviction that God is the source, sustainer, and end of all things. The Bible clearly proclaims that God is self-existent and self-sustaining, and all things come from him (Rom. 11:36). Everything that is true is so because God is Truth. Everything that is good is so because God is Good. And everything that is beautiful is so because God is Beauty. There are no such things as brute facts apart from God; they are facts because God determined them to be so. There are no such things as moral standards that are merely conceived out of convention apart from God; actions are moral or immoral because God says they are. And in the same way, beauty is not in the eye of the beholder; something is beautiful when it reflects God who is Beauty.

With this in mind, Christians as image-bearers of God must be committed to thinking God’s thoughts after him, to behaving in certain ways that conform to God’s moral will, and to loving those things that God calls lovely. Thoroughly Christian living is therefore concerned with orthodoxy—right belief, orthopraxy—right behavior, and orthopathy—right loves.

And yet the realm of orthopathy—right loving—is often missing from even the most theologically robust churches. We are all about rigorous theology, and we recognize our goal of cultivating thoroughly Christian values in every area of life, but do we recognize beauty as the essential means through which this will happen?

The Aesthetics of Scripture

The primary, fundamental reason we ought to recognize the significance of beauty as a central means through which our loves are shaped and through which we really come to know God and his world is that the Bible itself is God’s truth communicated in beautiful forms. God’s Word is “more than divine data.”¹Kevin J. Vanhoozer, The Drama of Doctrine: A Canonical-Linguistic Approach to Christian Theology (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2005), 5. Instead, God’s revelation of truth and goodness comes to us in various aesthetic forms such as “narratives, proverbs, poems, hymns, and oratory whose artistic tools include allegory, metaphor, symbolism, satire, and irony.”²James S. Spiegel, “Aesthetics and Worship,” Southern Baptist Journal of Theology 2, no. 4 (1998): 44.

These aesthetic forms are essential to the truth itself since God’s inspired Word is exactly the best way that truth could be presented. Clyde S. Kilby observes, “The Bible comes to us in an artistic form which is often sublime, rather than as a document of practical, expository prose, strict in outline like a textbook.” He asserts that these aesthetic forms are not merely decorative but part of the essential presentation of the Bible’s truth: “We do not have truth and beauty, or truth decorated with beauty, or truth illustrated by the beautiful phrase, or truth in a ‘beautiful setting.’ Truth and beauty are in the Scriptures, as indeed they must always be, an inseparable unity.”³Clyde S. Kilby, Christianity and Aesthetics (Chicago: Inter-varsity Press, 1961), 19, 21.

To put it another way—truth, goodness, and beauty, are three strands of a single cord that cannot be separated if we desire to truly know God and his world.

I am afraid that most Christians do not recognize this, and this is evidenced at very least by the fact that many Christians are afraid to affirm and defend absolute beauty in the same way we do absolute truth and morality. We have bought into the modernist idea that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and the postmodern multicultural agenda that argues art is merely neutral contextualization of a given civilization. We still view beauty and the arts as means to the end of making truth interesting instead of as ends in themselves. We view beauty as something to see rather than something by which we see.

Looking Through

I phrase it that way specifically because again, often when we consider aesthetics, it becomes something we talk about and think about. Talking about, thinking about, and looking at beauty are all good as far as they go, but what I am calling the tools of loving—that which shapes our loves and cultivates virtue in us—is not something to look at but rather what we see through.

By aesthetics, I am referring to the very broad idea that finds its roots in the Greek word aisthanomai, which means, “I perceive, feel, sense.” Aesthetics involves all that affects perception. It involves the how ideas are expressed and communicated. It certainly includes a consideration of beauty and art, but it is far more than that. Every way in which we learn, every way in which we encounter truth aesthetically shapes the way we perceive the truth. Even what we might consider the least artistic elements of your education had aesthetic aspects to them. A straightforward didactic lecture has a certain aesthetic that shapes perception just as much as a poem does. Aesthetic form is the container in which we perceive truth, and the truth takes the shape of the container such that perception of the truth is affected by the container.

So the power of aesthetics is that everything about the forms through which we perceive truth themselves form us to know and love God and his world through renewed eyes.

‌That Your Love May Abound

The apostle Paul prays for this very kind of renewal in Philippians 1:9–11, when he says,

‌And it is my prayer that your love may abound more and more, with knowledge and all discernment, so that you may approve what is excellent, and so be pure and blameless for the day of Christ, filled with the fruit of righteousness that comes through Jesus Christ, to the glory and praise of God.

Paul knows that what truly characterizes a Christian is love, what he describes in the previous verse as “the affection of Christ Jesus.” Jesus himself taught that the greatest commandment is to love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.

But this love is not the romanticized sentimentalism so characteristic of our day. Notice in particular how Paul characterizes this love— “love with knowledge and discernment.” Here, perhaps, is an apt description of the goal of Christian sanctification—that your love may abound more and more, with knowledge and discernment so that you may approve what is excellent, and so be pure and blameless for the day of Christ, filled with the fruit of righteousness that comes through Jesus Christ, to the glory and praise of God.

What Paul prays for here is a love characterized by “full knowledge,” knowledge of God and his world, knowledge of his works through history, knowledge of his Word.

But Christian love is not characterized by knowledge alone, and likewise the goal of Christian sanctification is not simply knowledge. What does Paul say: “And it is my prayer that your love may abound more and more, with knowledge, and all discernment.”

Discernment. There’s the other half of Christian love; there’s the other half of the goal of your sanctification, and indeed what you must pursue in the entirety of your life.

Discernment. This is the biblical virtue of wisdom, what Kevin Vanhoozer defines as “the ability to see what is right and fitting in a particular situation given our understanding of the larger whole of which we are a part.”⁴Kevin J. Vanhoozer, Pictures at a Theological Exhibition: Scenes of the Church’s Worship, Witness and Wisdom (Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2016), 137. Wisdom is “the virtue that orders all other virtues,” it is the ability to take all of the knowledge you have gleaned about God and his world and then discern how other elements fit into the larger whole, whether they be ways of life, personal experiences, events happening around us—wisdom is the ability to discern what fits in God’s design for the world and what does not fit.

My favorite illustration of the difference between knowledge and wisdom is that knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit, but wisdom is discerning that a tomato doesn’t fit in a fruit salad.

The cultivation of knowledge and discernment is the aim of Christian sanctification because it prepares you for a life of properly fitting together all of the particular information you will encounter around you into the larger whole as God intends. There are many people who have accumulated a lot of knowledge, but relatively few who truly know what to do with that knowledge, who have the ability to perceive how that knowledge fits together properly. As Paul continues to say in Philippians 1, “so that you may approve what is excellent.” That’s wisdom. That’s discernment.

Now here’s the fascinating thing thing about this little word “discernment” in Philippians 1:9. “Discernment” is a translation of the Greek word aisthanomai—from which we get the English word “aesthetics.”

This reveals the important, fundamental purpose behind of beauty in Christian sanctification. The aesthetic elements of our sanctification are not merely value-added; they are not included merely to make the acquisition of knowledge more engaging or interesting. The aesthetic elements of our sanctification are fundamentally moral because they help form discernment within us—they helped form wisdom. This is the formative power of beauty.

‌The Eyes of Your Heart

Now how, exactly, does beauty form wisdom? It does so through the imagination. If wisdom is the virtue that enables us to perceive fittingness, imagination is the human faculty through which we do so. As Vanhoozer notes, imagination is the “faculty for making or discovering connections and meaningful forms,” it is “the ability to create or perceive meaningful wholes and coherent forms.”⁵Vanhoozer, Pictures, 24. As we encounter true beauty, our capacity to perceive beauty ourselves is what cultivates the virtue of wisdom.

I’d like to highlight two ways that this ought to take place in a Christian’s life.

First, beautiful works of the imagination form your capacity to properly perceive fittingness in the world. Beauty is fittingness, and so when we immerse ourselves in beauty—in works of art and means of communication that manifest a profound fittingness in God’s world as he has intended, our moral imaginations are shaped as to what is fitting in the created order.

One of my favorite paintings on display at the national gallery in Washington D.C. is a work called “Fanny/Fingerpainting” by Chuck Close. If you turned the corner in the gallery and encountered the painting up close, all you would see would be a mess of fingerprints. Apparent randomness and disorder. But as you back away from the painting, you would behold a stunningly detailed portrait of an old women that looks photo-realistic. What appeared to be random disorder when viewed up close actually fits in much larger beautiful whole.

This kind of phenomenon characterizes all beautiful art to one degree or another in an almost endless variety of ways. A moment of musical dissonance frozen in time seems harsh and purposeless, but conceived as but a moment in a larger musical composition, we begin to understand how the parts fit into a beautiful whole. One gesture of the body alone may seem awkward, but together with other complementary gestures, it creates a beautifully graceful dance.

By studying and emerging ourselves in and especially performing truly beautiful works of art like these, we are developing wisdom, the ability to perceive a part—a moment frozen in time—and discern how that part fits in the whole of God’s all-wise and beautiful plan for his world.

And likewise, second, beauty in worship orients us to what is fitting in our relationship to God and his world. As Vanhoozer observes, “Both great art and worship awaken our senses and imaginations to the contours of the created order. Yet, unlike art, worship engrafts us into the drama of redemption, into that Trinitarian design for life in which beauty is a loving consent toward another.”⁶Vanhoozer, Pictures, 139. The beauty of gospel-shaped, covenant-renewal worship regularly orients us to the drama of redemption, enabling us with enlightened eyes to perceive God’s work in the world for his glory and the glory of his people. Beautiful liturgy and music orders our affections into what Lewis called “stable sentiments.” Worship that liturgically participates in the real worship of heaven realigns us with that true reality.

I do not need to tell you that our world is filled with ugliness, disorder, chaos, and pain. Considered as frozen moments in time, such realities might cause us to despair if we cannot perceive how these moment of ugliness fit into an ordered plan of a sovereign God. But having the eyes of our hearts enlightened, having gained through beautiful art “the ability to grasp meaningful patterns or conceive unified wholes out of apparently unrelated elements,” we are better able to “‘see’ God and the kingdom of God at work in the world.”⁷Vanhoozer, Pictures, 27.

‌Conclusion

Beauty is an essential part of your sanctification since it is what forms within us true love with knowledge and all discernment.

‌As you continue to pursue holiness and Christlikeness, don’t simply strive to acquire theological knowledge alone, but let your love abound more and more, with knowledge and discernment, so that you may approve what is excellent, and so be pure and blameless for the day of Christ, filled with the fruit of righteousness that comes through Jesus Christ, to the glory and praise of God.

A few weeks ago our family attended one of our favorite conferences, the Church and Family Life Annual Conference. Besides the excellent preaching and fellowship, one of the things that encourages us most is seeing all the families worshiping together. Moms and dads and grandparents bounce babies in the back and little ones color in the provided sermon notes coloring book during back to back (to back) sermon sessions. 

The around 1500 attendees are there because they believe, like we do, in family-integrated, intergenerational worship. We believe in this so much, in fact, that my husband Scott wrote a book looking at the biblical principles behind and practical steps toward training children to sit in the worship service (and doing weekday family worship at home also). It’s called Let the Little Children Come. 

But this is no easy task. Small children are vocal and wiggly and can be disobedient at the most inconvenient times! So today I’d like to offer a few resources that have helped our kids over the years to sit still in church. Every child, family, and church is different, so you need to find what helps you most, but these activities are quiet and generally allow children to listen, even if it seems like they’re doing something else. These resources cover a variety of ages.

Resources:

1. Felt food (I prefer food to dolls or animals or vehicles that might suddenly “find their voice” during the silent prayer or sermon.) 

2. Paint by Sticker or other sticker books (for the preschool ages)

3. Fabric books (Make sure you don’t get ones with crinkle pages! The one I linked to doesn’t have crinkle, but many, many fabric books do.) or “Indestructibles” baby/toddler books (Babies can pull and chew, and these thin books slip easily into a diaper bag.)

4. Silicone pop fidget toy 

5. Quiet book

6. Multi-color pens (may not be best if clicking bothers you, but I find that, when used reasonably, it’s not so loud that it bothers people in other pews; these are infinitely preferable to a pile of various colored pens or pencils)

7. Blank notebooks

8. Coloring book and washable, triangular crayons (that don’t roll) You may also want to bring your favorite stain remover if you bring pens or crayons, especially if your pews have light fabric.

9. Tracing book

10. Chunky yarn for finger knitting

11. Lacing cards

12. LCD drawing board (get one with the stylus tethered on a string; just trust me)

I also encourage churches to provide sermon notes papers or booklets geared specifically for children. If your church doesn’t provide these, you can find generic ones abundantly online.

A few additional tips:

Rocking back and forth from left to right stimulates a child’s vestibular system and gives them the sensation of activity without them actually moving their own bodies.

Mom or Dad tracing a child’s fingers with their own fingers (or rubbing the child’s arms or back) can divert wiggly, grabby hands and relax the child at the same time.

Teach children, as soon as they can talk, to whisper. Practice at home.

As always, you’ll see the most improvement in your child’s ability to sit through the sermon if you practice sitting still and listening at home. Reading books aloud and family worship are both great times to stretch these skills. But don’t be discouraged if it takes time (even years) for you child to sit through the entire sermon. This is a season, and you are doing the important work of rearing worshipers of God.

Many church members do not understand how their pastors work, how their pastors should be paid, or why their pastors might need time away from the ministry. The result is that churches often expect more than pastors can humanly deliver. Both the pastor and the church should discuss their expectations frankly. Well-written policies can be part of the solution.

Granted, some pastors are lazy. They need to learn that ministry is not a forty-hour-a-week job. These pastors should look at the business leaders in their communities. Corporate managers rarely work less than sixty hours per week. That number is even higher for small business owners. Church members have a right to expect their pastors to work as hard as they themselves do.

Ministry, however, is not like working on an assembly line or in an office. A pastor’s job falls into three main activities. One is his study, including but not limited to his sermon preparation. Another is the time that he spends administering the work of the church. The third component is the time that he spends with people, whether at hospitals and care facilities, in their homes, or just over coffee. Each of these activities could easily fill a work week in most churches, and many pastors struggle to hold them in balance. 

Compounding this pressure is the fact that every pastor knows about multiple organizational time bombs that are ticking away, any one of which could wreck the ministry. Some of them involve tense relationships, some center on differences of priority, some take the form of severe counseling problems, and at least a few involve genuine moral failures. Usually, a pastor knows more about these threats than anyone else in the church; he alone carries the burden of them all.

As if these pressures weren’t enough, every pastor comes under attack at some point in his ministry. He discovers that his sheep can bite, and some of them do. Some men can shrug off personal attacks, but for others, dealing with personal opposition can become overwhelming.

In short, pastoral ministry is joyful, but it is also stressful. It always has been. Even the apostle Paul felt daily pressures that arise from the “care of the churches” (2 Cor 11:24).

To be effective, then, a pastor needs to learn to handle stress. One of the most important ways to do this is occasionally to take time away from the work. Even Jesus recognized the need to set aside times when He and His disciples would leave the work for the sake of resting (Mark 6:31). Jesus also took time out from active ministry for solitude and prayer (Luke 5:16).

If the Master needed times like that, then why would His servants think that they did not? On the contrary, time away from active ministry is one of the most important tools for keeping one’s ministry fresh and effective. These times are important for physical renewal, for building family relationships, for allowing the mind to refocus, and for addressing personal spiritual needs. They are simply indispensable. 

A word of caution needs to be offered. Not all time away from a ministry’s location is time away from that ministry. A pastor’s work will sometimes pull him away from his own neighborhood. He is responsible to attend ordination and recognition councils. If his church is affiliated with some larger association or fellowship, then its annual meetings are not time off for him. His presence is necessary to ensure that his church’s voice is heard. Furthermore, ministers are responsible to continue their education as long as they are active, so some weeks out of every year will be spent on conferences and courses. If he is a respected Christian leader, a pastor may well be asked to conduct conferences and classes. All these activities take the minister out of his own community, but none of them helps him to deal with the stress of ministry. Indeed, they add to that stress.

Furthermore, pastors simply cannot take “staycations” in which they have time off while remaining quietly at home. As long as a pastor stays in his own community, he is working. The only way for him to get the rest he needs is to leave (preferably with his family) for some days or weeks.

Generally, it will be weeks. Pastoral ministry is so intense that most pastors cannot begin to lay its burdens aside, even temporarily, within a few days. Many will only begin to relax during the second week of their vacation. An extended time away is genuinely necessary.

How much vacation should a pastor receive? Even ordinary laborers rarely get less than two weeks. That figure can serve as a minimal starting point for pastors, but it should not be the ending point. Increases in vacation time are just as important as increases in pay—and they cost the church less. After two or three years, a pastor should receive at least three weeks of vacation. If he has been in ministry for ten years or more, he should have a month. More senior ministers should rightly be entitled to even more time away.

Incidentally, a church should calculate its pastor’s seniority according to his time in ministry, not his time in a particular, individual work. If a ministry calls a man who already has experience, then he brings his experience with him into that ministry. The whole ministry benefits. A church should count that experience when it decides what benefits it will offer its pastor. For example, if he has pastored one church for seven years and another for eight, then he has fifteen years of seniority in ministry. His present ministry should reckon upon this total number when calculating his compensation and his vacation time.

Part of a church’s responsibility is to make sure that its pastor has adequate resources to take a decent vacation. Travel and lodging can be expensive, and if his compensation is low, then a pastor may not be able to save much toward his time away. The church itself can help to correct this situation by offering the minister a financial bonus specifically for his vacation. If this bonus is a budgeted item, it can become a part of the church’s regular financial planning.

Spending time away from the ministry is neither laziness nor luxury. To think so is to make oneself more spiritual than Jesus. Pastors should plan time away for the sake of their ministries and of their own spiritual wellbeing. Furthermore, churches should take the initiative by insisting that their pastors take vacation time and by providing adequate resources for it. Doing this is good, not only because it is right, but it is also the best thing for the ministry itself.

This essay first appeared here and is used by permission.

STANZA 1
Wherefore do the nations rage
and the people vainly dream
that in triumph they can wage
war against the King supreme?
Christ His Son a scoff they make,
and the rulers, plotting, say:
“Their dominion let us break,
let us cast their yoke away.”

STANZA 2
But the Lord will scorn them all,
calm, He sits enthroned on high;
soon His wrath will on them fall,
sore displeased He will reply:
“Yet according to My will
I have set My King to reign,
and on Zion’s holy hill
my Anointed I maintain.”

STANZA 3
This His word shall be made known,
this Jehovah’s firm decree:
“Thou art My beloved Son,
yea, I have begotten Thee.
All the earth at Thy request
I will give Thee for Thy own;
then Thy might shall be confessed
and Thy foes be overthrown.”

STANZA 4
Therefore, kings, be wise, give ear;
hearken, judges of the earth;
learn to serve the Lord with fear,
mingle trembling with your mirth.
Kiss the Son, lest o’er your way
His consuming wrath should break;
but supremely blest are they
who in Christ their refuge take.

—The Psalter, 1912

Welcome to G3 Weekly—a summary of this week’s top news stories on Christianity and the public square.

This week, the State Department vowed to work with foreign governments to advance the LGBTQ movement around the world. Republican lawmakers in North Carolina overrode a veto to pass a twelve-week abortion ban. Meanwhile, a new survey showed that doctrines against homosexuality and transgenderism are a core reason why Americans switch faith affiliations.

State Department Advances the LGBTQ Movement

“For their vine comes from the vine of Sodom and from the fields of Gomorrah; their grapes are grapes of poison, their clusters are bitter” (Deuteronomy 32:32).

The State Department officially commemorated the International Day Against Homophobia, Biphobia, Interphobia, and Transphobia, contending that adherents to the LGBTQ movement are “entitled to recognition of their universal human rights.”

The most recent nod toward the movement comes one year after State Department officials provoked backlash for flying the rainbow pride flag at embassies in locations such as the Vatican City. President Joe Biden has directed the federal government to seek an end to so-called “conversion therapy” across the world, asserting that the practices can “cause significant physical and psychiatric harm.”

“We reaffirm the importance of ensuring access to evidence-based healthcare without discrimination or stigma regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or sex characteristics,” the State Department said in a press release. “We recommit to opposing the criminalization of LGBTQI+ status or conduct, which can drive the pathologizing of LGBTQI+ persons and the practice of so-called conversion therapy.”

While some so-called conversion therapy practices can indeed center on physical mistreatment, the term has been leveraged to oppose Christians who seek to peacefully call individuals in sexual sin to repentance and faith in Christ. Members of the Canadian Parliament unanimously passed a ban on “conversion therapy” last year, effectively threatening Christians with as many as five years in prison if they attempt to preach the gospel to those in sexual sin.

North Carolina Enacts New Abortion Regulation

“Open your mouth for the mute, for the rights of all who are destitute. Open your mouth, judge righteously, defend the rights of the poor and needy” (Proverbs 31:8–9).

Republican lawmakers in North Carolina overrode a veto which had attempted to prevent new restrictions on abortion beyond twelve weeks gestation.

North Carolina Democratic Governor Roy Cooper had vetoed the bill and contended that “Republicans are unified in their assault on women’s reproductive freedom” after supermajorities in both chambers of the state legislature overrode the veto. The new law prohibits abortion after twelve weeks, but allows abortion between twelve and twenty weeks in the cases of rape or incest, and permits abortion before twenty-four weeks in the case of a “life-limiting anomaly.”

Enactment of the bill, which did not introduce criminal penalties for mothers who knowingly seek to murder their preborn babies, comes two years after an amendment to the North Carolina Constitution failed to advance in the state legislature. The equal protection proposal filed by Abolish Abortion North Carolina noted that “a distinct and separate human life begins at the moment of fertilization” as a matter of “indisputable scientific fact.”

The measure would have therefore codified that “any person who willfully seeks to destroy the life of another person, by any means, at any stage of life, or succeeds in doing so, shall be held accountable for attempted murder or for first degree murder.”

Americans Leave Faith over Views on Sexual Ethics

“They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us” (1 John 2:19).

Many Americans who renounce their former religious convictions cite “negative religious teachings” about homosexuality and transgenderism as a core reason for their decision, according to a new survey from the Public Religion Research Institute.

While some 56% of respondents to the survey said they merely “stopped believing in the religion’s teachings,” some 30% said they disagreed with the religion’s doctrine with respect to sexual ethics. Those who are now religiously unaffiliated and non-Christian were the most likely to cite the latter scenario, which was more prevalent than factors such as growing up in families which were “never that religious” or “scandals involving leaders” in their former religions.

Roughly 20% of Protestants who belong to a racial minority group said they are “thinking about leaving their current religious tradition or denomination” while 15% of white evangelical Protestants and 14% of Hispanic Protestants said the same.

The survey from the Public Religion Research Institute noted that disruptions in church attendance from the lockdowns and social movements which swept through the nation over the past three years have had salient impacts on patterns of religious adherence.

How are we to worship God?

We should worship in all of life, but we have been told most explicitly to worship God corporately through the following:

• The reading of Scripture
• The preaching of Scripture
• The singing of psalms, hymns and spiritual songs
• The offering of public prayer
• The observance of the ordinances

How do we know which songs, what kind of music, what kind of sermons, what kind of prayers we should offer God?

We know this through exercising sound judgment.

What is sound judgment?

At the very least, it is the ability to discern between good and evil (Heb 5:14), to approve what is excellent (Phil 1:10), and to be able to recognise what is true, just, noble, pure, lovely, praiseworthy, commendable, and excellent (Phil 4:8)—and the opposites of these. Judgment can also be thought of as discernment, discrimination, prudence, taste, or more broadly, wisdom.

Why is judgment fundamental to worship?

1. To worship God for His excellence, we must be able to distinguish excellence from inferiority, beauty from ugliness, good from bad. We cannot admire God if we do not know what is admirable. We cannot see the beauty of God if we are poor at recognising beauty. To offer God what is worthy of Him, we must be able to judge the worth of our offerings. God is worth our very best offerings, but if we cannot tell tacky from elegant, we will end up offering him what is profane. We are required to discover what is excellent (Phil 1:10) and use it for God’s glory. Moreover, since God is true, we must never offer God what is false in any way: false in statement or false in sentiment.
2. To rightly respond to God from the heart, we must be able to distinguish between affections and judge what is appropriate for worship. To recognise inordinate joy from ordinate, to distinguish between familiarity and boldness, between joyful exuberance and impudent flippancy, or between shades of joy, fear, or sorrow, requires judgment. To understand how a song, prayer, sermon or other act of worship represents ordinate or inordinate affection, we need good judgment. We must understand the meaning of the prayer, song, music, or sermon and judge its worth for worship.

Isn’t it wrong to judge?

No, judgment is at the very heart of a mature Christian life (Heb 5:14). If you cannot judge good from bad, you will never worship meaningfully or be protected against profanity. In fact, good judgment is placed side-by-side with a holy and fruitful life (Rom 12:1–2; Eph 5:8–11; Phil 1:9–11; Col 1:9–11; 1 Thess 5:16–22).

Proud judgmentalism is what is forbidden to us, which is the same as ‘thinking evil’ of another, assuming the worst, or claiming to be able to perfectly read motives.

Won’t these judgments be subjective?

Yes, that does not mean they will not be true. Judgments made by subjects can still conform to the good, the true, and the beautiful.

Why can’t we just be given a list of approved hymns and songs?

If everyone does nothing more than submit to another’s list, then no one is learning to judge, discriminate, and sing with understanding. It is fine for children and beginners to trust the judgments of others, but a maturing conscience is meant to be formed with knowledge and judgment.

Do you have to be a literary or musical critic to worship properly?

No, because we are all commanded to worship, and that would mean everyone should be a literary or musical critic. We should not be afraid to learn from critics, though.

What about just giving simple offerings?

God loves simple offerings. He does not love cheap and tacky offerings. Discernment is learning to tell the difference.

How shall we go about learning judgment?

First, we should commit to living in the fear of the Lord, which is the beginning of sound wisdom and discretion. No judgment or discernment will come to irreverent, flippant people. We must determine that we wish to revere God, whatever that might mean.

Second, we should commit ourselves to godliness of life. Discernment comes by reason of use, as we seek to know the difference between good and evil for application to life (Rom 12:1–2; Eph 5:8–11; Phil 1:9–11; Col 1:9–11; 1 Thess 5:16–22).

Third, we must embrace the examined life. That is, we must seek a life in which we become thoughtful about the meaning of the various technologies, media, forms, and devices in our lives. We must become thoughtful and contemplative about meaning if we are to grow in discernment. This is the same as Proverbs’ instructions to pursue knowledge, wisdom, and understanding. We are to vigorously pursue an understanding of God, ourselves, and the world.

Fourth, we should root ourselves in the genuine Christian tradition, immersing ourselves in it so that it gives us a sense of its discerning judgment by example and exposure.

How can I fairly judge something that I already like or dislike?

First, we should make our prejudices explicit. If we like something, or dislike something, we should own that to be true.

Second, we should ask why we like what we like or dislike what we dislike. If we do not have reasons, we ought to seek them. Understanding why we love something is part of the way to learning what it means, and learning about our own hearts.

Third, we need to compare what we currently like, or dislike, with some standard of what is good, or true, or beautiful. What I like does not become good by virtue of my liking it; rather, I must learn to love what is good. What I dislike may not necessarily be bad; rather, my sinful heart may dislike things that are true. We should not defend our preferences because they are familiar; we should learn to like something because it really is good, and then make the good familiar. Sanctification is all about unlearning some loves, and learning new ones.

Where shall we get this standard of goodness or beauty?

The standard already exists in God. He is the source and standard of the True, the Good and the Beautiful. In God’s common grace, He has allowed both believers and unbelievers to produce works of imagination that conform, more or less, to God’s view of what is excellent. Therefore, we come to know this standard as we:

1. Consider what has been loved and cherished by God’s people for centuries.
2. Listen to people, who, by God’s common grace, have proven judgment—people who explain the meaning of works of imagination.
3. Compare and contrast different works, considering what they are trying to do, how they do it, and whether or not they achieve it.
4. Write poems, songs, prayers, and sermons that are true, good, and beautiful for God’s glory.

What shall we do with growing discernment?

We must weed out and reject offerings that trivialize God, humanity, or creation. We must choose the good and the true. We must learn to write our own apprehension of God’s glory in poems, songs, prayers, and sermons. We must worship God in our generation, in our words. And yet our words and works must also be true, good, and beautiful.

Wouldn’t it be great if every pastor could look back at his ministry and say as Paul did to the Ephesian elders, “You yourselves know how I lived among you the whole time from the first day . . . serving the Lord with all humility” (Acts 20:18–19). 

That’s amazing—serving with all humility. 

Paul commands humility of every Christian time and again: “In humility count others more significant than yourselves” (Phil 2:3); “Walk in a manner worthy of the calling to which you have been called, with all humility” (Eph 4:1–2); and “Put on . . . humility” (Col 3:12). Peter commands the same: “Clothe yourselves, all of you, with humility toward one another” (1 Pet 5:5). 

With this instruction, Scripture provides excellent examples of humility. Along with Paul above, John the Baptist expressed his humility in these words about Jesus and himself: “He must increase, but I must decrease” (John 3:30). 

Hebrews 13:7 commands, “Remember your leaders, those who spoke to you the word of God. Consider the outcome of their way of life, and imitate their faith.” Whether we remember Paul, John the Baptist, or any other humble Christian leader, we must recall how they spoke the Word of God (humbly pointing away from self to preach the Savior instead), consider the outcome of their lives (they are in heaven), and imitate their faith (we must preach with humility as well). Our role as pastors is to preach Christ with all humility in order to glorify Him and never ourselves (cf. Col 1:28–29). 

It also helps to remember that any glory we receive from men is only short-lived anyway. A great quote to go with this reminder comes from Mark Garcia, commenting on 1 Corinthians 3:5–23:

In the final order of things, when grace finds full expression in glory, there will be only one Pastor, One Shepherd, not many. All who are currently ministers and elders in the church will step back from their roles and find their place within the glorified body of Christ, the church [or, as others might put it, among the saints from every age], alongside their brothers and sisters in the holy household. This ‘recessive’ reality, in which leaders of the church will ‘recede’ into the background when Jesus’s shepherding is finally and fully visible, anchors a deep-running humility on our part in all our churchly endeavors.¹Mark A. Garcia, “The Church: The Well-Ordered Church in a World of Distrust,” in Theology for Ministry: How Doctrine Affects Pastoral Life and Practice (P&R, 2022), pp. 420–21.

“Leaders of the church will ‘recede’ into the background” for all to see the Chief Shepherd in His full and unveiled glory—this promise should produce in pastors “a deep-running humility . . . in all our churchly endeavors.” 

One last thought—if you’re looking for some glory, remember this—the greatest glory comes from Christ alone who lived with the greatest humility of all (cf. Phil 2:1–11). If we have made Him known so that others might see His face forever, He will reward us with an unfading crown of glory (1 Peter 5:1–4). And the dear saints who see His face will be our crown as well (1 Thess 2:19–20). What more glory must we seek?

Self-glorification is sinful, temporary at best, and finds no reward at Christ’s return. The glory is all His, always was, and shall always be. So, serve Christ with all humility, and as you do, you can know that He will share His glory with us all forevermore!

Qual a sua missão na sua família?

Todo negócio de sucesso tem uma declaração de missão que afirma claramente a visão central e os objetivos principais da empresa. No entanto, a declaração de missão não existe simplesmente para ser colocada no manual do funcionário ou em uma placa na sala de conferências. Ela existe para definir os parâmetros das estruturas e metodologias que a empresa emprega na execução da missão.

Igualmente, para determinar o que é melhor para nossos filhos, precisamos começar considerando nosso objetivo final. Toda família precisa de uma declaração de missão.

Todos os pais cristãos desejam criar filhos que confiam em Cristo para sua salvação e vivem comprometidos com ele. Toda igreja deseja discipular crianças que cresçam para serem servas fiéis de Cristo. No entanto, para estabelecer a melhor maneira de atingir esses objetivos, precisamos ter uma visão bíblica do que estamos tentando realizar.

Talvez o melhor lugar para começar seja com a principal confissão de fé que Deus deu ao seu povo no Antigo Testamento. Conhecido como ‘Shema’, a partir da primeira palavra em hebraico – “Ouça” – esta declaração resume um modelo valioso sobre o significado de ser um verdadeiro seguidor de Deus:

Ouve, Israel, o Senhor nosso Deus é o único Senhor.
Amarás, pois, o Senhor teu Deus de todo o teu coração, e de toda a tua alma, e de todas as tuas forças.
E estas palavras, que hoje te ordeno, estarão no teu coração;

Dt 6.4-6

A confissão judaica começa com a exigência de acreditar em algumas declarações. A primeira das afirmações é que o Senhor, o Deus da Escritura, é o nosso Deus. Nós acreditamos nele, nós o afirmamos como nosso Deus e confiamos nele. Mas então Moisés acrescenta uma qualificação adicional. O Senhor não é apenas nosso Deus, ele é o único Deus. Existe um e somente um Deus vivo e verdadeiro. Em outras palavras, apenas um ser em todo o universo merece ser adorado. O único Deus verdadeiro é o Senhor, o Deus da Bíblia.

A raiz de nossa vontade para a vida de nossos filhos é que eles realmente saibam disso. Queremos que eles conheçam a Deus, acreditem nele e confiem nele. Queremos que eles saibam que Ele os criou e o que fez ao longo da história. Queremos que saibam que Deus exige obediência perfeita e não tolera o pecado. Esse mesmo desejo transmite nossa intenção de dar-lhes ensino bíblico para que entendam a verdade de Deus.

O Novo Testamento, é claro, acrescenta a revelação completa essencial para a salvação, que é que Jesus Cristo: “o caminho, e a verdade, e a vida. Ninguém vem ao Pai senão por [ele]” (João 14:6). Jesus é Deus e homem e, portanto, conhecê-lo é a única maneira de conhecer verdadeiramente a Deus. Nossos filhos precisam ser ensinados que, uma vez que o pecado merece julgamento eterno e nos impede de ter comunhão com Deus, eles devem vir a Deus por meio de Cristo, que morreu para pagar a penalidade que o pecado merece. Precisamos ensiná-los que aqueles que se arrependem de seus pecados e confiam somente em Cristo para sua salvação serão perdoados de seus pecados e receberão a vida eterna.

É por isso que a Palavra de Deus deve ser a primazia na vida de nossos filhos desde a mais tenra idade. Isso aconteceu com Timóteo, sobre quem Paulo disse: “Desde a infância você conhece as sagradas letras, que podem torná-lo sábio para a salvação pela fé em Cristo Jesus” (2 Timóteo 3:15). A avó e a mãe de Timóteo haviam transmitido fielmente a verdade sobre o Deus das Escrituras para ele quando criança (1:5).

Os filhos precisam de ensino bíblico regular, assim como os adultos, e o fato é que as crianças muitas vezes podem compreender mais verdade do que pensamos. Certamente algumas verdades teológicas mais profundas podem ser desafiadoras para uma criança compreender, mas devemos ensinar as verdades centrais das Escrituras a nossos filhos desde a mais tenra idade, para que eles venham a conhecer verdadeiramente a Deus.

Obedecer a Deus

O contexto imediato da confissão missional judaica em Deuteronômio 6 é a entrega da Lei ao povo de Israel, os “estatutos e regras” que Deus deu a Moisés. Deus exigia algumas posturas de seu povo, e sua adesão a esses requisitos resultaria em bênção ou maldição. No versículo 3, Moisés disse a eles para serem cuidadosos em obedecer . Deus havia dito em Deuteronômio 28:1: “Se ouvires fielmente a voz do Senhor teu Deus, tendo o cuidado de cumprir todos os seus mandamentos que hoje te ordeno, o Senhor teu Deus te exaltará sobre todas as nações da terra.” “Mas”, advertiu-os, “se não obedecerdes à voz do Senhor vosso Deus, nem tiverdes cuidado de cumprir todos os seus mandamentos e estatutos que hoje vos ordeno, então todas estas maldições virão sobre vós e vos alcançarão”. (v. 15).

Igualmente, se queremos que nossos filhos obedeçam a Deus. Devemos demonstrar a eles o que significa viver para Cristo, ser santo, abandonar o pecado e viver em retidão. Sabemos que uma vida de pecado desagrada ao Senhor e trará consequências dolorosas até mesmo para um cristão. Precisamos ensinar nossos filhos que “o Senhor corrige a quem ama” (Hb 12:6) e as bênçãos vêm para aqueles que fazem o que foram chamados para fazer (1 Pedro 3:9).

Desde que nossos filhos tinham idade suficiente para falar, minha esposa e eu os ensinamos a responder a duas perguntas sobre o seu comportamento. “O que a obediência traz?” nós perguntávamos.

“Bençãos”, eles respondiam.

“O que a desobediÊncia traz?”

“Castigo”

As crianças precisam saber que toda atitude tem consequência.

Repetindo, a melhor maneira de ajudar nossos filhos a viver em obediência a Deus é dar-lhes a Sua Palavra. Nenhuma criança é jovem demais para uma exposição frequente das Escrituras.

Entretanto, conhecer e até mesmo acreditar em informações sobre Deus não é suficiente. O mandamento central da confissão judaica, citado pelo próprio Jesus como o maior mandamento, é “Amarás o Senhor teu Deus de todo o teu coração, de toda a tua alma, de todo o teu entendimento e de todas as tuas forças” (Marcos 12: 28–30).

Amar a Deus está no centro do que significa conhecer verdadeiramente a Deus. Muitas pessoas conhecem e até acreditam em fatos sobre Deus. “Até os demônios acreditam – e estremecem!” Tiago nos diz (2:19). O que diferencia uma pessoa que simplesmente conhece a Deus e outra que realmente conhece a Deus é o amor por ele.

Além disso, a obediência a Deus não vem simplesmente por meio do conhecimento da informação correta, ela flui de conhecer e amar a Deus. A Escritura ensina que o fruto do verdadeiro conhecimento de Deus e do amor por ele é a obediência aos seus mandamentos. Jesus disse: “Se me amais, guardareis os meus mandamentos” (João 14:15), e “Vós sois meus amigos, se fizerdes o que eu vos mando” (15:14).

O reconhecimento de que a direção de nosso coração – nossas afeições – é central para um verdadeiro relacionamento com Deus deve impactar significativamente o que desejamos em relação a formação espiritual de nossos filhos. Devemos querer que eles conheçam e obedeçam a Deus e, para que isso aconteça, precisamos ter certeza de que eles realmente amam a Deus.

Esses três fatores juntos – conhecer a Deus, amar a Deus e obedecer a Deus – são a essência do que significa adorar a Deus. A confissão de fé judaica é um chamado para adorar o único Deus vivo e verdadeiro exclusivamente. Fazendo com toda a mente de uma pessoa (crenças), vontade (obediência) e afeições (amor).

Em outras palavras, a maior missão do povo de Deus é a adoração.

A responsabílidade dos pais

Esse objetivo central da adoração é verdadeiro, é claro, para todos os discípulos de Cristo, não apenas para as crianças. Mas observe o que Moisés diz ao povo logo após fazer esta confissão básica:

E estas palavras, que hoje te ordeno, estarão no teu coração;
E as ensinarás a teus filhos e delas falarás assentado em tua casa, e andando pelo caminho, e deitando-te e levantando-te.
Também as atarás por sinal na tua mão, e te serão por frontais entre os teus olhos.
E as escreverás nos umbrais de tua casa, e nas tuas portas.

Dt 6.6-9

Deus ordenou a seu povo que transmitisse fervorosamente a seus filhos esse princípio central de seu relacionamento de aliança com Deus, incluindo crenças verdadeiras sobre Deus, um amor grandioso por Ele e uma vida de obediência a seus mandamentos. Isso não acontece sem propósito e intenção. Isso requer mais do que apenas períodos de instrução formal. Para criar filhos, para conhecer a Deus, amar a Deus e obedecer a Deus, os pais — e, de fato, toda a comunidade do povo de Deus — deve fazer dessas ênfases uma parte integral da vida cotidiana.

No Novo Testamento, o principal mandamento aos pais é: “Pais, não provoqueis vossos filhos à ira, mas criai-os na disciplina e admoestação do Senhor” (Efésios 6:4). O mandamento não é dado a pastores, professores de escola dominical ou líderes de jovens– é dado aos pais. Deus espera que os pais prestem muita atenção em criar o filho para conhecê-Lo, amá-Lo e obedecê-Lo — para adorá-Lo.

A responsabílidade comunitária

Deus dá essas responsabilidades para com os filhos em primeiro lugar aos pais, mas os pais cristãos não devem fazer isso sozinhos. Pelo contrário, os pais cristãos precisam de uma comunidade de outros cristãos para ajudar no discipulado de seus filhos. Isso não significa delegar sua responsabilidade ordenada por Deus a pastores ou professores “especializados”; significa que os pais discipularam seus filhos de maneira bem sucedida dentro do contexto da igreja local.

Tito discute especificamente como esse tipo de discipulado ocorre na comunidade – a igreja local. Os homens mais velhos devem ensinar os homens mais jovens, e as mulheres mais velhas devem treinar as mulheres mais jovens e as crianças (Tito 2:2–6). É assim que Cristo projetou sua igreja: um corpo diversificado de crentes dotados de uma variedade de habilidades para que toda a comunidade seja encorajada e edificada “até a maturidade, à medida da estatura da plenitude de Cristo” (Ef 4. 4). :13).

Esse tipo de discipulado cristão comunitário acontece melhor na reunião de adoração pública da igreja. Pessoalmente, não acredito que seja sempre errado ter horários de ensino específicos para a idade de vez em quando, mas transformar crianças em adoradores maduros acontece melhor no culto corporativo intergeracional. Na adoração coletiva, as crianças encontram Deus à medida que sua Palavra é lida e ensinada, passando a conhecê-lo. No culto da igreja, o coração das crianças é voltado para Deus quando elas testemunham seus pais e outras pessoas na congregação respondendo à Palavra de Deus com o coração por meio de oração e música. Nesse ambiente, elas podem crescer em maturidade espiritual e obediência aos mandamentos de Cristo por meio da exposição repetida a cristãos fiéis e maduros.

Alguns pais podem querer que seus filhos estejam com eles no culto principal, em vez de reuniões separadas, porque não querem que ninguém mais influencie seus filhos. A imagem bíblica é exatamente oposta: quero meus filhos comigo na adoração corporativa porque a melhor maneira de eles crescerem em maturidade cristã é estarem regularmente entre outros adultos cristãos maduros para adorarem o Santo Deus.

Nota: Esse artigo foi um trecho do livro de Scott Aniol: “Let the Little Children Come: Family Worship on Sunday, and the Other Six Days, Too”.-Deixai vir a mim as crianças no Domingo e nos outros seis dias também. (ainda indisponível em português).

Do you have a mission statement for your family?

Every successful business has a mission statement that carefully articulates the company’s central vision and primary objectives. Yet the mission statement does not exist simply to be placed in an employee manual or on a plaque in the conference room. It exists to set the parameters for the structures and methodologies the company employs in pursuit of that mission.

In a similar way, to determine what is best for our children, we need to begin with consideration of our end goal. Every family needs a mission statement.

All Christian parents want to rear children who trust Christ for their salvation and live lives committed to him. Every church wants to disciple children who grow to be faithful servants of Christ. Yet to establish the best way to accomplish these goals, we need to have a sound biblical picture of what we are trying to accomplish.

Perhaps the best place to start is with the core confession of faith God gave to his people in the Old Testament. Known as the Shema, from the first word of the confession in Hebrew—“Hear”—this statement encapsulates a valuable model for what it means to be a true follower of God:

Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. And these words that I command you today shall be on your heart.

(Deut. 6:4–6)

To Know God

The Jewish confession begins with a requirement to believe certain things. The first of these affirmations is that the Lord, the God of Scripture, is our God. We believe in him, we affirm him as our God, and we trust in him. But then Moses adds an additional qualification. Not only is the Lord our God, he is the only God. There is one and only one true and living God. In other words, only one being in the entire universe deserves to be worshiped. The one true God is the Lord, the God of the Bible.

At the core of our desire for our children is that they truly know this. We want them to know God, to believe in him, and to trust him. We want them to know that he created them and what he has done throughout history. We want them to know he requires perfect obedience and does not tolerate sin. This very desire informs our intent to give them biblical teaching so they can understand truth about God.

The New Testament, of course, adds the complete revelation essential to salvation, and that is that Jesus Christ is “the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through [him]” (John 14:6). Jesus is both God and man, and thus knowing him is the only way to truly know God. Our children need to be taught that since sin deserves everlasting judgment and prevents us from having fellowship with God, they must come to God through Christ, who died to pay the penalty that sin deserves. We need to teach them that those who repent of their sins and trust in Christ alone for their salvation will be forgiven of their sin and given everlasting life.

This is why the Word of God must be prominent in the lives of our children from the earliest of ages. This was true of Timothy, to whom Paul says, “From childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus” (2 Tim. 3:15). Timothy’s grandmother and mother had faithfully communicated truth about God from the Scriptures to him as a child (1:5).

Children need regular biblical teaching just like adults do, and the fact is that children can often grasp more truth than we give them credit for. Certainly some deeper theological truths may be challenging for a child to comprehend, but we must teach the core truths of Scripture to our children from the earliest ages so they will come to truly know God.

To Obey God

The immediate context of the Jewish confession in Deuteronomy 6 is the giving of the law to the people of Israel, the “statutes and the rules” God gave to Moses. God required certain things of his people, and their adherence to those requirements resulted in either blessing or curse. In verse 3, Moses told them to be careful to obey these things. God had said in Deuteronomy 28:1, “And if you faithfully obey the voice of the Lord your God, being careful to do all his commandments that I command you today, the Lord your God will set you high above all the nations of the earth.” “But,” he warned them, “if you will not obey the voice of the Lord your God or be careful to do all his commandments and his statutes that I command you today, then all these curses shall come upon you and overtake you” (v. 15).

Likewise, we want our children to obey God. We must demonstrate for them what it means to live for Christ, to be holy, to forsake sin, and to live righteously. We know that a life of sin displeases the Lord and even for a Christian will result in painful consequences. We need to teach our children that “the Lord disciplines the one he loves” (Heb. 12:6) and blessings come to those who do what they were called to do (1 Peter 3:9).

From the time our children were old enough to speak, my wife and I taught them to answer two questions about their behavior. “What does obedience bring?” we would ask.

“Blessing,” they responded.

“What does disobedience bring?”

“Punishment.”

Children need to learn that actions have consequences.

Once again, the best way to help our children live in obedience to God is to give them his Word. No child is too young for regular exposure to the Scriptures.

To Love God

Knowing and even believing information about God is not enough, however. The central command of the Jewish confession, cited by Jesus himself as the greatest commandment, is “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength” (Mark 12:28–30).

Loving God is at the center of what it means to truly know God. Plenty of people know and even believe facts about God. “Even the demons believe—and shudder!” James tells us (2:19). What differentiates a person who simply knows about God and one who truly knows God is love for him.

Furthermore, obedience to God comes not simply through knowing the right information, it flows from knowing and loving God. Scripture teaches that the fruit of true knowledge of God and love for him is obedience to his commands. Jesus said, “If you love me, you will keep my commandments” (John 14:15), and “You are my friends if you do what I command you” (15:14).

Recognition that our heart’s fundamental orientation—our affections—are central to a true relationship with God should significantly impact what we desire in terms of our children’s spiritual formation. We should want them to know and obey God, and for this to happen, we need to make sure they truly love God.

These three together—to know God, to love God, and to obey God—are the essence of what it means to worship God. This Jewish confession of faith is a call to worship the one true and living God exclusively with the entirety of a person’s mind (beliefs), will (obedience), and affections (love).

In other words, the ultimate goal for all God’s people is that they will worship.

The Responsibility of Parents

This core goal of worship is true, of course, for all disciples of Christ, not just children. But notice what Moses tells the people right after he has given them this core confession:

And these words that I command you today shall be on your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise. You shall bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes. You shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates.

(Deut. 6:6–9)

God commanded his people to fervently pass on to their children this central tenet of their covenantal relationship with God, including right beliefs about God, an all-pervasive love for him, and a life of obedience to his commands. This doesn’t happen without intentional planning. It requires more than just periodic times of formal instruction. To rear children to know God, love God, and obey God, parents—and indeed the whole community of God’s people—must make these emphases a pervasive part of everyday life.

In the New Testament, the principal command given to parents is this: “Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord” (Eph. 6:4). This command is not given to pastors, Sunday school teachers, or youth workers—it’s given to parents. God expects that parents will give careful attention to rearing their children to know God, love him, and obey him—to worship.

The Responsibility of the Whole Community

God gives these responsibilities toward children first and foremost to parents, but Christian parents should not attempt to do this on their own. Rather, Christian parents need a community of other Christians to help with the discipleship of their children. This does not mean relegating their God-ordained responsibility to pastors or “expert” teachers; it means that parents successfully disciple their children best within the context of the local church.

Titus specifically discusses how this kind of discipleship takes place in community—the local church. Older men should teach the younger men, and older women should train the younger women and children (Titus 2:2–6). This is how Christ designed his church: a diverse body of believers gifted with a variety of abilities so that the whole community is encouraged and built up “to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ” (Eph. 4:13).

Where this kind of discipleship in Christian community happens best is in the central worship gathering of the church. I do not personally believe it is always wrong to have age-specific teaching times on occasion, but discipling children into mature worshipers happens best in intergenerational corporate worship. In corporate worship, children encounter God as his Word is read and taught, thereby coming to know him. In the church’s worship, children’s hearts are oriented toward God as they witness their parents and others in the congregation responding to God’s Word with their hearts through prayer and song. Here, they can grow in spiritual maturity and obedience to Christ’s commands through repeated exposure to faithful, mature Christians.

Some parents might want their children to be with them in the main worship service instead of separate meetings because they don’t want anyone else influencing their children. The biblical picture is exactly opposite: I want my children with me in corporate worship because the best way for them to grow in Christian maturity is for them to regularly be among other mature Christian adults as they worship their holy God.

Note: This post was an excerpt from Scott Aniol’s book Let the Little Children Come: Family Worship on Sunday, and the Other Six Days, Too.

Ocasionalmente cristãos são encontrados em perigo por simplesmente serem seguidores de Cristo. Esse perigo pode ser psicológico, legal e até físico, ou até mesmo uma combinação de tudo isso. As escrituras estão repletas de exemplos de Cristãos que enfrentam seus dias de perigo, nesta ocasião porém vamos nos concentrar em um -Ananias.

Em Atos dos ápostolos9:10-19, o Senhor Jesus comissionou Ananias para curar Saulo (Paulo) e dar-lhe instruções sobre seu novo papel como apóstolo dos gentios. Lucas registra esse momento para mostrar em parte como o evangelho se espalharia em Jerusalém, Judéia e Samaria e iria até os confins da terra (At 1:8). Paulo lembrou-se de forma calorosa do papel de Ananias cerca de 20 anos depois em Atos 22:12-16.

Embora a maior preocupação de Lucas em Atos 9-22 fosse registrar a propagação do evangelho por meio de Paulo, algumas descrições dessas duas passagens nos dizem quem era Ananias e o que ele fez ,dando-nos um exemplo para imitar hoje. Como ele, cada um de nós deve ser um destemido seguidor de Cristo.

O crescimento constante de um cristão nos prepara para provações futuras. Várias características do caráter de Ananias o ajudaram a obedecer ao Senhor sem medo.

Devoto segundo a lei (Atos 22:12)

Paulo chamou Ananias de “homem piedoso segundo a lei” (NAA), um termo usado apenas por Lucas para descrever Simeão(Lc 2:25), os peregrinos que visitavam Jerusalém no dia de pentecostes (Atos 2:5) e os homens que sepultaram Estevão(Atos 8:2). Com base em seu conhecimento no Antigo Testamento, Ananias temia a Deus e era reverente para com Ele.

Bem falado pelos judeus de Damasco (At 22:12)

Paulo também descreveu Ananias como “bem falado”, traduzido de martureÿ, geralmente traduzido como “testemunha”. Nesse contexto, porém, essa testemunha carrega a noção de aprovação, o que significa que os seus companheiros judeus lhe deram “um bom relatório” (KJV). Como Timóteo, Ananias gozava da boa reputação de ser homem piedoso entre as pessoas ao seu redor (cf. Atos 16:2).

Um discípulo (Atos 9:10)

As frase acima se deixadas separadas, podem descrever uma pessoa piedosa que ainda não conheceu pessoalmente o Senhor Jesus Cristo(cf. At 10:22). No entanto, sabemos de Atos 9:10 que Ananias era “um discípulo” que viu e conversou com o Senhor Jesus em uma visão (cf. At 9:17). Ananias ara um Cristão judeu que via Jesus como seu Messias.

Apto para servir ao Senhor

Ao ser chamado pelo nome pelo Senhor, Ananias respondeu. “Eis-me aqui, Senhor” (At 9:10).Como os homens santos da antiguidade que responderam assim- Abraão, Moisés, Samuel, e Isaías (Gn 22:1; Êx 3:4; 1Sm 3:4; Is 6:8) -Ananias estava pronto para ouvir o Senhor e humildemente obedecer as Sua vontade.

Seu conflito (Atos 9:12-14)

Em uma visão , Cristo ordenou a Ananias que fizesse algo difícil -curar a cegueira de Saulo (At 9:11-12), Ananias falou livremente com o Senhor , objetando que Saulo era um conhecido perseguidor de cristãos que tinha autoridade para prender os santos em sua cidade (Atos 9:13-14). Como Ananias poderia curar alguém que feriu tantos?

Seu compromisso (Atos 9:15-19)

O Senhor não repreendeu Ananias, mas informou-o de que Saulo levaria Seu nome perante gentios, reis e israelitas, sofrendo muito ao longo do caminho (Atos 9:15-16).Em resposta, Ananias confiou e obedeceu. Ele curou Saulo, contou-lhe sobre seu enchimento com o Espirito e também o batizou (Atos 9:17-19; 22:13, 16). O senhor cumpriu sua promessa a Saulo por meio de Ananias: Será dito a você o que deve fazer” (Atos 9:6). Ananias disse a Saulo que ele foi designado para conhecer a vontade de Deus, para ver Jesus e ouvir Sua voz, e para ser testemunha a todos do que tinha visto e ouvido (Atos 22:14-15). O Senhor disse a Ananias o que ele precisava saber, ele acreditou e agiu de acordo com a palavra de Jesus.

Nossa resposta: Destemidos Seguidores de Jesus Cristo

Esse breve levantamento desses relatos de Ananias nos leva a uma série de questões. Você é uma pessoa devota de acordo com a palavra de Deus? Você é bem falado por seus irmãos Cristãos? Você é conhecido como discípulo de Jesus Cristo? Você está pronto para servir ao Senhor, qualquer que seja a tarefa? O Seu compromisso com Cristo é sincero, obedecendo a Ele mesmo quando surgem dúvidas terrenas? Um caráter piedoso nos ajudará a manter nosso compromisso com Cristo sempre que surgir um conflito.

Paulo nos diz para “manter os olhos naqueles que andam de acordo como exemplo que você tem em nós” (Fl 2:17), um exemplo que se parecia com Cristo(cf. 1Co 4:15-16). Se tivesse oportunidade, Paulo provavelmente apontaria Ananias como um desse exemplo, Que Deus nos ajude a ser como Ananias- Um Destemido Seguidor de Jesus Cristo.

Before making the case for why we should study theology, we should answer the question, “What is theology?” It’s made up of two words: Theos and logia, which subsequently means “God and word.” It literally means “a word about God.” Simply stated, theology is the study of God. In answering the question, “Why should we study theology?” this article will provide five compelling reasons to commit to theological studies in today’s world. My hope is that by the end of this article, you will have a better understanding of why theology is essential for the Christian and find yourself eager to engage in diligent pursuit of it.

The first reason—and arguably the most important reason—to study theology is that theology should be a way to experience the Word in the mind, heart, and life of the believer. It should never be merely an academic pursuit of knowledge about God, but rather a pursuit of knowledge whereby the average Christian in the pew seeks to understand the Christian faith and all that is in Scripture so that it changes his life, raises his affections for Christ, and promotes personal holiness. Any study of theology that does not accomplish these things, at least in part, is not a true study of theology but rather an intellectual activity void of any true meaning.

The Christian should open their Bible with the expectation that it molds, shapes, and changes them, conforming them in greater measure into the image of Christ as they learn and apply the Scriptures to their lives. Dr. Martyn Lloyd Jones once said, “If our so-called faith does not lead to any kind of experience, then I doubt whether it is Christian at all. Our faith must be living, real, and experimental.” We must approach theological studies with the same attitude. It must be living, real, and experimental. Learning theology should cause you to encounter the living God through His Word, over and over, to such a degree that your love for God, the church, fellow man, and Christ grows exponentially.

Second, Christians should study theology to understand God’s nature and character. If we want to know the God we call Heavenly Father, who adopted us into His family, then we need to learn His character and nature. The Bible is the only place to learn about who God is as He has revealed Himself to us.

For instance, how do we know that God is compassionate, loving, and just? We read in Exodus 34:6–7, where Moses meets with the Lord to replace the Ten Commandments, “Then the LORD passed by in front of him and proclaimed, ‘The Lord, the Lord God, compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in lovingkindness and truth; who keeps lovingkindness for thousands, who forgives iniquity, transgression, and sin; yet He will by no means leave the guilty unpunished, visiting the iniquity of fathers on the children and on the grandchildren to the third and fourth generations.’”

We know God is compassionate, loving, and just because that is what Scripture teaches us about God. Coming to learn these things about God through theological study should have an impact on the life of a Christian because now you know that when you pray to God, you can know with certainty that you are praying to a compassionate and just God.

The Bible is filled with God’s attributes and teaches us much about who God is, which should make us want to study theology.

Third, studying theology helps us delight in the Person and Work of God. Again, theology is not all about head knowledge, though it can never be less than that. It is about coming to know God and His works of creation in such a way that you find yourself in awe of such an incredible God. 

We read in Psalm 19:1, “The heavens are telling of the glory of God, and their expanse is declaring the work of His hands.” A true study of theology should cause us to consider who God is and what He has created, causing us to cry out as King David did in 2 Samuel, saying, “For this reason, You are great, O Lord God; for there is none like You, and there is no God besides You, according to all that we have heard with our ears.”

The more we learn about who God is and what He has done, the easier it is to recognize who we are in relation to who He is and live accordingly. If we are to have a deep affection for God, we must come to know Him truly.

Fourth, studying theology uncovers God’s plan for mankind. The only way to truly understand man is to hear what God has to say about him. For instance, Genesis tells us about the relationship we were meant to have, and the proto-evangelium in Genesis reveals God’s solution to man’s sin problem. The Apostle Paul helps us understand human depravity and the wickedness of Sin, and then we see God’s love and plan for redemption in the person and work of Christ. And in Revelation, we see the return of Christ, his response to mankind, and man’s final dwelling place with God.

From Genesis to Revelation, we get a full understanding of who mankind is in relationship to God as far as God has been pleased to reveal it. We see whom we were created to be and what God has done to deal with the issue of sin. We learn what the natural state of the heart is due to total depravity, and we learn what it means that we are given a new heart. 

We study theology so that we have God’s view on the heart and purpose of man before and after the fall and for eternity.

Lastly, the Christian should study theology to love and serve Christ as Lord and Savior faithfully. So few people truly know much about Jesus’s character and nature. We profess to love Christ, but do we really know Him? Many professing Christians know some details about Jesus. They know He was compassionate, they know He healed the sick, they know that He died for our salvation, but many professing believers couldn’t tell you what John means in 1 John 2:2 when he says of Christ, “And He is the propitiation for our sins.” They couldn’t tell you about Christ’s deity, His oneness with the Father, or talk to you about the fact that He is, in fact, God: the second person of the Trinity.

These aren’t just facts about Jesus; this is who He is as a person. Many believers know so little about the One they call Savior. Jesus was truly man and he was also truly God. These doctrines matter because if you serve a Jesus who was a man and not God, then you serve a different Jesus than the Jesus of the Bible. If you serve a Jesus who was God and not man, then you serve a different Jesus than the Jesus of the Bible. Every heresy known ultimately touches the person and work of Christ.

If we are to love Christ truly, then we must know Him, understand who He was and is, what He believes about sin and salvation, what He expects from those who follow Him, and how He views those who call Him Lord and Savior. The only place to learn these things is in the pages of Scripture.

There are things that prove we truly belong to Him—do we know what those things are? One of the most terrifying verses in the Bible demonstrates that there will be many who thought they knew Jesus when in fact, they did not. Jesus Himself says, “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is heaven will enter” (Matt 7:21). Do we understand how that could be? What did Jesus expect from them that they didn’t have? We study theology so that we may truly know Christ and what it means to be His disciple.

We also study theology so that we have such a view of Christ that when considering how majestic, loving, and full of grace He is, we can’t help but worship because we understand what it means that He is majestic, loving, and full of grace.

We study theology so that we can say with the Apostle Paul, “For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Rom 8:38–39).

At the end of the day, all of our learning of theology must cause us to look to Christ. If it doesn’t, then it is because our hearts are cold and we haven’t really learned anything at all. A true student of theology will become the greatest lover of Christ. John Calvin said, “All theology, when separated from Christ, is not only vain and confused but is also mad, deceitful and spurious.”

‌The faithful Christian must study theology, but as we study, we should be sure that we allow it to conform us to the image of Christ, that we not only have theology as head knowledge but that it becomes heart knowledge, which changes us.