Marzui Attacks Eurocentrism

In the old days in Europe the cultural exclusivity was religious. There was a time at Oxford university one had to subscribe to the articles of the Church of England to be academically eligible. Harvard University was named after a Puritan minister in the 1630’s, was a church sponsored institution for two centuries. The problem at that time was not not Eurocentrism, it was Christocentrism. Harvard was culturally exclusive, but in a religious sense.

The politics of the quota system at American universities was originally intended to restrict the number of Jews admitted in favor of Christians — Christocentrism gone mad. There is still a lot of Christocentrism left at American universities, but most of the university life has been secularized. However, as the 20th century is coming to an end, we have reached yet another cultural frontier. Just as Harvard once had to try and shed off Christocentrism, all American campuses now must shed off excessive Eurocentrism….

Ali Mazrui
Professor — State University New York
Round Table Discussion — circa 1990

Here is the cat is let out of the bag.

1.) Note the reason is all American campuses must now shed off excessive Eurocentrism is precisely because in Eurocentrism one finds the Christocentrism that was previously sloughed off and yet remains expressed slightly in the culture that is Eurocentrism. This quote, from one of the enemies of the West, ties together for us in the most tightly connected fashion the connection in the minds of our enemies between the Christian faith and the White Anglo Saxon Christian and the culture that they built.

What this means of course is that the war being waged against the white man is being waged precisely because the white man was the carrier of the Christian faith — and yet still retains the slumbering remnant of Christianity in its cultural code. What people like Mazrui, Obango, Holder, and other epistemologically self conscious minorities == as well as far more self hating white people understand == is that if Eurocentrism can be finally destroyed then their previous attack to kill Christ will be largely successful. (Though they know that Christ can never be killed so they will be vigilant in each generation to do what must be done in order to keep Christ at bay. They can not succeed.)

Our enemies positively must destroy the White Anglo Saxon Christian Eurocentrism. It is a threat to all that they desire to build on the grave of the West and Christianity.

As an aside it might be asked where the origin of the self hatred of whites lies. The answer is simple. Self hating whites hate Christ and hate God’s moral law and anything of Christ that remains yet in their culture. As such they will, by way of multiculturalism and political correctness, make league with pagan minorities (most often cultural Marxist in their ideology) by ginning up past real and perceived minority grievances, in order to overthrow what remains of Christo-centrism and Euro-centrism. The real irony is when this is pursued in the Church all in the name of Christ. The real Christ will be murdered by a false Christ by self hating whites who would prefer civilizaitonal death than being ruled by Christ.

2.) When the universities favored Christians over Jews there was obviously an understanding that these united States was to be for Christians and be a Christian nation. Was there a reason why the universities at one time were careful to restrict the number of Jews?

3.) When Mazrui mentions that the universities became secularized and so moved away from Christocentrism there is an absolute necessity to understand that this move to the secular was in actuality a move towards anthropocentrism in any number of faith forms. In other words the centrism of Christianity in the universities was exchanged for the centrism of some other faith system. The idea of the “secular” is a myth.

4.) Like it or not Christianity and Christocentrism has been identified with the European and his Eurocentrism by our enemies. It is a convenient identification because by making this identification our enemies can attack us as “racists” when we defend the Christianity that made Europe, Europe when in point of fact we are “Christianists.” Well, if Christianist equals racist then let the whole world be covered with the success of the Gospel turning all men into racists as they are converted to Christianity.

Uncleanness

Question 108. What does the seventh commandment teach us?

Answer: That all uncleanness is accursed of God: (a) and that therefore we must with all our hearts detest the same, (b) and live chastely and temperately, (c) whether in holy wedlock, or in single life. (d)

I.) God’s Disposition Towards “Uncleanness”

Adultery proper indicates that a man, either married or unmarried, has unlawful relations with a married (or betrothed) woman. He takes into possession what does not belong to him (Deut.22: 24).

Notice that while the commandment forbids “adultery” the Catechism includes in its teaching on the 7th commandment that which is forbidden includes all uncleanness.

Leviticus 18 gives a list of the uncleanness that is accursed by God. In the list includes the prohibition against marriage within family lines, and prohibition against un-natural acts. It is interesting that when one gets to the NT there is reiteration of how God finds several of the un-natural acts listed in Lev. 18 to be accursed.

9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals,[a] nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.

Scripture teaches that God visits the punishment of the uncleanness upon the land in the OT and so the land vomited the purveyors of such unseemliness out of the land.

(a) Lev.18:27 (For all these abominations have the men of the land done, which were before you, and the land is defiled;) 28 That the land spue not you out also, when ye defile it, as it spued out the nations that were before you.

The destruction of such civilizations that were practitioners of such uncleanness is not unique to OT times. Theodore Momsmen, in his book, “History of Rome,” writes of the breakdown of Greek and Roman civilizations,

“What ideas as to divorce prevailed in the circles of the aristocracy may be discerned in the conduct of their best and most moral hero, Marcus Cato, who did not hesitate to separate from his wife at the request of a friend desirous to marry her, and as little scrupled on the death of his friend to marry the same wife a second time. Celibacy and childlessness became more and more common, especially among the upper classes … we now encounter in Cato … the maxim which Polybius a century before traced the decay of Hellas, that it is the duty of the citizen to keep great wealth together and therefore not to be beget too many children…. In consequence of such a social condition the Latin stock in Italy underwent an alarming diminution, and its fair provinces were overstepped partly by parasitic immigration, partly by sheer desolation.”

We find here a number of social traits characteristics of civilizations in decline because of the uncleanness that is accursed by God of which the catechism speaks.

Playing off of Momsmen’s analysis Harvard Sociologist Zimmerman could write

What we find in families and civilizations in decline is increasing development of extra-family carnal relations, the decay of mores of the upper class families (which continually then move downward infiltrating the lower classes), the rise of unclean abnormalities, the increasing refusal of women to be sedate in an unsedate world; the decline in the seriousness with which adultery is considered, the purely formal adhesion to the moral code; the increased popularity and frequency of absolute divorce and separation; the rise of celibacy and aggravated birth control; … the replacement of the native populations by immigrants, slaves, and non-natives; and the development of an antagonism to the whole system of values upon which the society formerly operated.

So this uncleanness which was accursed by God in the OT record and which led to a removal of the former people from the land by God is an uncleanness that can be found elsewhere in recorded history and likewise was found to be accursed by God as seen in the eventual destruction of subsequent civilizations.

So we can see in Scripture and in history that all such uncleanness is accursed by God. And we would add that such uncleanness that the Catechism teaches, following Scripture remains accursed of God. Finally, on this point we would offer that if God finds such uncleanness accursed among those who made no claim upon Him as His people how much more accursed is this uncleanness when it is found among those who makes some kind of claim upon God’s name?

II.) Our Disposition Towards Uncleanness

therefore we must with all our hearts detest the same

The catechism instructs us that our disposition towards these sins ought not to be merely casual but that our whole being is to be set in opposition towards this kind of uncleanness.

Webster’s 1828 Dictionary defines

DETEST, v.t. [L., to affirm or bear witness. The primary sense of testor is to set, throw or thrust. To detest is to thrust away.] To abhor; to abominate; to hate extremely; as, to detest crimes or meanness.

The idea here is that because God finds such uncleanness accursed we should, as His people, detest what is accursed by God. In the old legal sense we are to bear witness against such uncleanness.

But of course our detesting of uncleanness are as those who would point to a God who does forgive all such uncleanness. We are reminded in the very NT passage that we cited earlier that speaks of God’s opposition to uncleanness that immediately thereafter the Apostle can say,

I Cor. 6:11 Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.

And so any detesting that we are called to is a detesting done so that people who are involved in various kinds of uncleanness, such as adultery, fornication, homosexuality, etc. may discover and know the joy of being clean again in Christ Jesus who alone can take our uncleanness away and by His animating Spirit give us a desire to go from cleanness to cleanness as we walk in newness of life.

Another thing we should say about this detesting is that this disposition towards these sins is not done in these sense that we are made of better dirt than others. We are sinners who ourselves have been and are continually forgiven of our sins and so there is to be no self-righteousness about our detesting of these sins that we are called to.

Jude teaches what our manner here should be,

Jude 1:23 And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh.

The whole purpose of our detesting is one of compassion. Those caught in adultery, or other uncleanness are caught in a lifestyle that is destructive to them. And so we oppose their uncleanness precisely because of compassion and sympathy for them.

Now let’s spend a moment speaking about the psychological end of this.

If one was to live in a culture that was characterized by this uncleanness and if one was to have the disposition that the Catechism calls for one could expect that the response might be that we will be detested by those who are involved in uncleanness. For example in 2008,

A Christian photographer in New Mexico was found guilty in 2008 of breaking state law for refusing to take pictures of a lesbian ceremony. Recently that decision was upheld by an appellate court. The appeals process continues.

Elaine Huguenin of Elane Photography was contacted in 2006 by a same-sex couple wanting pictures taken of their “commitment ceremony.”

After Huguenin told them she only photographed traditional marriages, the couple filed a complaint for discrimination against their sexual orientation.

The case was taken before the New Mexico Human Rights Commission, which heard the case in January.

On Wednesday, the state commission ruled that Huguenin violated the state’s Human Rights Act. An order was issued for the photographer to pay close to $7,000 for the couple’s attorney’s fees.

And so these Christian Photographers found out the price for detesting uncleanness and we may as well in the way of being unpopular, or losing friends, or even having other Christians break fellowship with us, or in other ways. We need to keep in mind here the words of Jesus here in John 15:18,

“If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you.”

III.) God’s Answer For Us To Uncleanness

live chastely and temperately

The word “chaste” has a similar meaning to the word “pure.” The word “temperate” means to exercise self control.

1 Thess.4:3 For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication: 1 Thess.4:4 That every one of you should know how to possess his own body in sanctification and honour; 1 Thess.4:5 Not in the lustful passion, even as the Gentiles which know not God:

In times where the world is spinning increasingly out of control when it comes to the issue of uncleanness an effective witness to the glory of Jesus Christ in his ability to freely save is to live in self control. Though it must be said even here that living in this way quite without saying a word can also earn the enmity of those who are convicted. I know of a person for example, many years ago who was relieved from her job simply because she would not join in the gutter talk at the work place with the other co-workers.

And here we can turn to speak to the Father’s for just a moment on this Father’s day. Fathers the ability of your family to live chastely and temperately will be largely reflective of your living chastely and temperately. You have the opportunity to set the standard, in the home, for the chaste and temperate lifestyle that the catechism calls for here.

Recently, I was encouraged in a conversation I had with one of the Dads here in his attempt to maintain a standard for the chaste and the temperate in an activity in which his children were involved. He had a sense of the chaste and the temperate and he desired that standard to be enforced. This is becoming a Christian father.

Fathers when you love your respective wives you are folding into your children, by way of living example, future families where adultery will most often be a stranger. Fathers your influence upon your children and their future families will either be an influence towards cleanness or uncleanness. There are plenty of influences in the broader culture upon them for uncleanness and so let your influence be towards cleanness.

IV.) This Lifestyle Is To Be Characteristic Of Us Regardless Of Our Marriage Status

The catechism speaks of the single life and we would admit how difficult it must be to live in this culture as a single person temperately and chastely. But we recall that the purpose of this section of the Catechism is to instruct us how we can live to the glory of God, and so, if single, by the Spirit’s aid, chaste and temperate lives are sought out.

One thing to keep in mind that might help to this end is all that uncleanness promises in way of allurement it can never deliver. Sin has its passing pleasure but it can never satisfy. This is perhaps nowhere more true than in relation to this issue.

Whether single or married we must keep in mind,

3 But fornication and all uncleanness or covetousness, let them not once be named among you, as becometh saints;
4 neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not befitting, but rather giving of thanks.
5 For this ye know: that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the Kingdom of Christ and of God.

Those that are married are likewise called to this chaste and temperate life. The State of marriage is honorable

Heb.13:4 Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.

Now what might we say to those who have slipped and fallen in the mire of uncleanness that is so prevalent in our culture. We would say that there is forgiveness in Christ Jesus. Following Scripture we would remind the believer that if we confess our sins God is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us of all unrighteousness. We would remind that all of us in Christ stand received by God only upon the basis of Christ’s cleanness put to our account.

To those outside of Christ who might be weary and heavy laden with assorted uncleanness you can be assured that if you will come to Christ in faith He will wash your sins clean in Baptism and will pour out His Spirit so that you can say no to the lifestyle that promised so much but delivered so little. There is no need to amend your life before you turn to Christ for forgiveness and healing. Regardless of your present uncleanness, Christ will not turn you away.

R2K & Sola Scriptura

Darryl keeps trying to wave his hand insisting that Stellman’s departure has no implications for R2K. He writes,

First, on the matter of sola scriptura, 2k theology does not pit ecclesiology against the word of God but in fact limits the ministry of the church precisely to what Scripture teaches.

But R2K does pit ecclesiology against the word of God every time R2K insists that God’s explicit word is not the norm that norms all norms in the common realm. When R2K introduces limits upon the ministry that the Scripture does not recognize, at that point R2K pits ecclesiology against the word of God. As such Stellman’s need for a high ecclesiology as found in R2K translates well in his move away from sola scriptura.

CRC Defeats Belhar As Confessional Document … Creates Remote Parking Area For Almost Confession

On the evening of 12 June, 2012 the CRC synod defeated the attempt by progressives within the denomination to foster upon the Denomination the Belhar Confession. The news agency of the CRC sought to spin the defeat of the Belhar by offering the headline, “Belhar Yes, Confession No.”

In what looks like a move that assuages the progressive conscience the denomination created a “Ecumenical Faith Declaration” category as a remote parking lot and pulled the Belhar into a parking space where it can be safely ignored and yet can be taken out for a short drive when necessary. Placing the Belhar in the remote parking area allows the denomination to say, “see, we allow all kinds of vehicles to park in our stadium.”

Envy & Murder On A Collective Scale

Subject — Envy
Theme — Collective Envy

Proposition — An examination of institutionalized envy in a culture will help us to understand why Proverbs 27:4 suggests that envy is something that is nigh unto impossible to stand up against.

Purpose — Therefore having looked at collective envy let us seek, by God’s grace, to not be swept up and be participants in this collective envy.

Introduction

We moved to this question of envy because of how it is connected to the sin of murder as mentioned by the Heidelberg catechism.

Question 106. But this commandment seems only to speak of murder?

Answer: In forbidding murder, God teaches us, that he abhors the causes thereof, such as envy, (a) hatred, (b) anger, (c) and desire of revenge; and that he accounts all these as murder. (d)

We pretty much understand hatred, anger, and the desire for revenge but it is my conviction that we don’t really understand envy, and that because it is in the air we breath, culturally speaking.

Last week we set the table for our discussion on envy. We considered some significant Scriptures that teach on envy. We briefly traced out how envy has been spoken about by some of the Early Church Fathers. And we spoke about envy on a personal and individual basis. And then concluded by looking at some solutions to envy.

As we continue now this week we return to the definition that we gave for envy.

Definition of Envy — Envy is the sin of jealousy over the blessings, prosperity, character, and achievements of others, but more than jealousy it is the positive anguish over the good of others and joy at the anguish and misery of others even if that anguish and misery does the envious no discernible positive good. While being indignant might find its roots in the injustice of the well being of evil persons, envy finds its roots in the happiness of good people. In brief envy is pain at the good in others, and it is most commonly found in those whom wish to lower others, even if that lowering of others does not mean that they will rise.

Well we can understand why God says in Proverbs that it is a rottenness to the bones.

Envy is wounded by our neighbors prosperity. Envy finds pleasure in the ruin or harm of those of whom we are envious. Envy is sickened at hearing praises of those of whom are envied and recoils at the virtues of those upon whom our envy is pointed. And the irony, which we will explore more next week, is that envy only grows more intense the more it is assuaged by those who are being envied. That is to say, that should the envied seek to practice charity towards the envious, with thoughts of reducing their reasons to be envious, the envious envy them all the more because of the their own sense that as being inferiors they had to be assisted by those they believe to be their superiors. The envious hate those who help them because it confirms, in their minds, their lower position. If the envious receive favor from the fortunate the envious suffers even more and the envy grows because the one in the favored position has the power to dispense favor while the envied does not. Envy is not concerned so much with reaching the happiness of others as it is in making everyone as miserable as the envious. Envy is complicated by the fact that it is slow to be self-diagnosed or confessed because of the shame involved in this vice.

Schadenfreude — taking joy or delight in another person’s misfortune.

What we want to ask this morning is what does envy look like when it becomes the norm among a people group and becomes institutionalized among a people and their culture.

Proverbs 27:4 asks rhetorically, “Who is able to stand before envy?”

This morning we want to see why the writer of proverbs views envy as being such a fearsome enemy.

And indeed Envy is a fearsome enemy. In Scripture we find envy stirred up against godliness in others

Daniel 6:3-5 Then this Daniel distinguished himself above the governors and satraps, because an excellent spirit was in him; and the king gave thought to setting him over the whole realm. 4 So the governors and satraps sought to find some charge against Daniel concerning the kingdom; but they could find no charge or fault, because he was faithful; nor was there any error or fault found in him. 5 Then these men said, “We shall not find any charge against this Daniel unless we find it against him concerning the law of his God.”

Envy stirred up against prosperity of others

Ps. 73:3 For I was envious of the boastful,
When I saw the prosperity of the wicked.

Envy stirred up against who are favored / successful

I Samuel 18:6 Now it had happened as they were coming home, when David was returning from the slaughter of the Philistine, that the women had come out of all the cities of Israel, singing and dancing, to meet King Saul, with tambourines, with joy, and with musical instruments. 7 So the women sang as they danced, and said:

“Saul has slain his thousands,
And David his ten thousands.”

8 Then Saul was very angry, and the saying displeased him; and he said, “They have ascribed to David ten thousands, and to me they have ascribed only thousands. Now what more can he have but the kingdom?” 9 So Saul eyed David from that day forward.

And so Proverbs 27:4 asks “Who can stand before envy,” and in the last few examples of envy we saw how it can work on a basis of a individual against another individual but we want to probe this morning what it looks like as a collective culture operates with envy as a foundational starting point for the culture. Surely, if Proverbs 27:4 is correct that envy is a powerful enemy on a personal basis how much more so if envy becomes part of the bowels of a culture?

Organized cultural envy produces two children that we are going to consider this morning. These two children, if nurtured by the allowance of envy to proliferate and spread end up going a long way towards creating a anti-Christian mindset among all who are members of the culture.

I.) Egalitarianism as one offspring of Envy

Since envy is concerned with bringing the successful, prosperous, and superior person down, the long range effect of envy on a culture as a whole is to produce a culture where all are equal — equal in the sense of nobody being allowed to distinguish themselves by way of ability.

A Envious culture will set cultural wide norms that are not to be exceeded. There will be a kind of cultural coercion toward mediocrity and the mediocre will be increasingly defined downward.

This most often reveals itself via the move to insure that all think alike, that all belong to one class only, and that all share a similar heritage and inheritance.

A.) Think Alike (Intellectual Envy)

1.) For example in our Educational Programs we have largely institutionalized envy so those who have the skills to excel in learning are held back in order to insure that those who are slower and perhaps are not as gifted are not left behind. While well intentioned such a program has the effect of doing what envy always does and that is it works to level achievement to the level of the under-achiever. The one who might academically distinguish themselves, if given the opportunity, is retarded in their advancement out of our desire to make sure that that all advance together.

2.) In our culture with its mass media owned by a comparative number of small outlets, what is moved towards is a mass communication that gives people the same information resulting in a group think. This group think makes for a egalitarianism in opinion and goes a long way towards achieving the goal of envy by insuring that there will be protection against originality in thinking, protection against free and unfettered intellectual exchange of ideas, and
protection against superiority in thinking of individuals.

Remember the goal of culturally institutionalized envy is to pull down the superior so that the result is a grand leveling effect. This results in the creation of Mass Man — the herd — where no one distinguishes themselves and all are the same. All think the same, look the same, act the same, and all have the same.

Illustration — Kurt Vonnegut’s “Harrison Bergeson”

“The year was 2081, and everybody was finally equal.”

So begins Vonnegut’s 1961 short story.

Vonnegut goes on to describe the conditions of this equality brought on by the cultural wide presence of envy:

They weren’t only equal before God and the law. They were equal every which way. Nobody was smarter than anybody else. Nobody was better looking than anybody else. Nobody was stronger or quicker than anybody else. All this equality was due to the 211th, 212th, and 213th Amendments to the Constitution, and to the unceasing vigilance of agents of the United States Handicapper General.

This government enforced equality was achieved by imposing prosthetic technologies on those who were above average; these prosthetics, however, were designed not to enhance, but to diminish. So, for example, ballerinas who might otherwise rise above their peers in grace, elegance and beauty, were burdened with sashweights and bags of birdshot, and their faces were masked, so that no one, seeing a free and graceful gesture or a pretty face, would feel like something the cat drug in.

Then there were those of above average intelligence like the title character’s father, George Bergeron.

[He] had a little mental handicap radio in his ear. He was required by law to wear it at all times. It was tuned to a government transmitter. Every twenty seconds or so, the transmitter would send out some sharp noise to keep people like George from taking unfair advantage of their intelligence.

Whenever George began to formulate a complex idea, which often involved questioning the status quo, a sharp, piercing noise would shoot in his ear distracting him and derailing his train of thought. Sometimes the noise was like a siren going off, other times “like somebody hitting a milk bottle with a ball peen hammer.” Regular and incessant, the distraction overwhelmed and undermined natural intelligence.

3.) Political Correctness

Conforming to a belief that language and practices which could offend political sensibilities should be eliminated.

Political correctness has as its goal this leveling conformity where all think alike. Thinking that leads to conclusions that one lifestyle should be preferred above another lifestyle because it is superior is not allowed because those who are living the inferior lifestyle use envy as a tool to make all lifestyles the same.

The envy of the intellectually mediocre establishes a conceptual standardization so that it may denounce and condemn those who don’t conform to the officially approved thinking mode.

B.) All Belong To One Class (Social Envy)

Roosevelt, in the 1936 campaign ran against the “Economic Royalists.” The incipient idea in casting one group of Americans as “Royalists,” over against another group who were not is a classic example of envy being used as a motivating tool. The idea was then to pull the Economic Royalists down so that economic egalitarianism, as fueled by envy, could be established.

But this applies to not only the moneyed but to any class of people who have developed some kind of superiority. Envy works to eliminate categories of superior and inferior so that all can be the same. We see this working itself out in children’s contests where it is insisted that everyone get a medal and that all are winners. Again, this is well intentioned but such a mindset reflects the work of envy which insists that all are the same. The refusal to recognize the achievers does not lift up those who tried but failed, but instead pulls down those who tried and succeeded.

C.) All similar patrimony (Familial Envy)

This is envy working to insure that no family rises above another. Estate taxation and death taxes are the way that our collective envy works to make sure that families which are inter-generationally gifted can not rise above other families.

If Abraham were alive in our time he would be severely faulted for sending his servant back to his own people to find a bride for Isaac. Because of familial envy it is thought that all families are equal and so no consideration should be given to a family background that a potential spouse may come from or that a potential adopted child might come from.

The end result of envy then when embraced collectively by a culture is to migrate ever downward to the lowest common denominator. Cultural envy when institutionalize leads to the constant integration into the void. Institutionalized envy leads to the flattening out of all distinctions and cuts at the roots any ability to distinguish oneself from the herd.

Culturally wide accepted envy forces those who are envied for some distinction that yet remains to avoid the eye of envy by insisting that they are not superior in any sense, that all others are equal to them, that they believe the catechism of envy and egalitarianism is true and that they join with the envious in condemning to exile all who not swear allegiance to the code of equality.

Now just a word about where all this culturally institutionalized envy leads eventually,

Envy intervenes with increasing negativity in several capacities. Envy shunts aside the intelligent, the strong, and the virtuous and does not encourage others to pursue and develop these abilities. Scholarly envy towards the best and most studious produces and promotes academic laziness and loss of interest in critical and analytical thinking skills. Social envy creates obstacles to the public recognition of the best.

In short … the more envy there is in a culture, the less the collective capacity to propel forth great men and women.

So, having considered all this we can better understand why the writer to Proverbs could say, “Who is able to stand before envy?”

And the ironic thing is that after all this work to achieve egalitarianism, the envious still do not have their envy lifted from them for envy poisons the sweetness of all the sources and streams of human enjoyment. Indeed, this is a sin that as the proverbs says rottens the bones.

By way of conclusion let us continue to probe some ways that we might cure envy in ourselves.

Emulation

In Hebrews 11 the writer is encouraging those with a less than adequate faith to emulate the heroes of the faith.

Emulation is a cure to envy. Instead of envying those who are gifted or talented in some way we ought to try and emulate them. I will never be the Theologian that G. K. Beale is but I can admire him and seek to emulate him and even if I never become as talented and gifted as he is I can be as talented and gifted as I can be.

Gratitude

We can be thankful for our betters. Instead of trying to pull them down via envy we can thank God that he has raised them up to be a gift to us.

Mind our own business

It is enough for each of us to seek to be the best that we can be for the Glory of God. This means we haven’t enough time to be envious of others because we are so busy honing the gifts that God has given us. There is no need to preoccupy ourselves with what we don’t have if we preoccupy ourselves w/ improving what God has given us.

Remember our guilt is taken away by Christ

Envy is born of feelings of inadequacy and the resultant guilt. It may be the case that in some endeavor one may be inadequate because they simply don’t have the abilities but there is no need to feel guilty and so use envy to pull down the qualified. Instead, because we know our guilt has been taken away we can acknowledge our inadequacy and be happy for those who are gifted and talented.

We Weep w/ those who Weep and Rejoice w/ those who rejoice

The Christian rejoices with his fellow Christian who is talented above him. He glorifies God that God sovereignly distributed His gifts as he deemed best. Are we willing to say with John the Baptist … “He must increase and I must decrease.”