Author: jetbrane

I am a Pastor of a small Church in Mid-Michigan who delights in my family, my congregation and my calling. I am postmillennial in my eschatology. Paedo-Calvinist Covenantal in my Christianity Reformed in my Soteriology Presuppositional in my apologetics Familialist in my family theology Agrarian in my regional community social order belief Christianity creates culture and so Christendom in my national social order belief Mythic-Poetic / Grammatical Historical in my Hermeneutic Pre-modern, Medieval, & Feudal before Enlightenment, modernity, & postmodern Reconstructionist / Theonomic in my Worldview One part paleo-conservative / one part micro Libertarian in my politics Systematic and Biblical theology need one another but Systematics has pride of place Some of my favorite authors, Augustine, Turretin, Calvin, Tolkien, Chesterton, Nock, Tozer, Dabney, Bavinck, Wodehouse, Rushdoony, Bahnsen, Schaeffer, C. Van Til, H. Van Til, G. H. Clark, C. Dawson, H. Berman, R. Nash, C. G. Singer, R. Kipling, G. North, J. Edwards, S. Foote, F. Hayek, O. Guiness, J. Witte, M. Rothbard, Clyde Wilson, Mencken, Lasch, Postman, Gatto, T. Boston, Thomas Brooks, Terry Brooks, C. Hodge, J. Calhoun, Llyod-Jones, T. Sowell, A. McClaren, M. Muggeridge, C. F. H. Henry, F. Swarz, M. Henry, G. Marten, P. Schaff, T. S. Elliott, K. Van Hoozer, K. Gentry, etc. My passion is to write in such a way that the Lord Christ might be pleased. It is my hope that people will be challenged to reconsider what are considered the givens of the current culture. Your biggest help to me dear reader will be to often remind me that God is Sovereign and that all that is, is because it pleases him.

Apparent Contradiction On Law Resolved

I John 5:3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome.

Romans 3:19 Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God. 20 For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.

The role of the law has been debated vigorously throughout Church history. As far back as the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15) there has been tension and conflict regarding the place of the law. That tension and conflict continues today.

In the passages above we find Paul making the law the minister of death. The apostle teaches elsewhere that the law is a minister of death and brings on us the wrath of God. Paul teaches that the law was given to increase sin, and that it lives in order to kill us. King David though can say of the Law that it is “sweeter than the honeycomb, and more desirable than gold” and John says that God’s commandments are not burdensome.

How do we reconcile these different statements regarding God’s law?

We must realize that St. Paul, King David, and St. John are looking at the law from different standpoints. St. Paul looks at the law as it comes to the man in Adam, speaking of the law as it condemns who we are as we lie in Adam. St. John and David look at the law as it is considered as who we are in Christ. As we struggle against the old Adamic nature we understand that the Law stands against us and convicts us and is impossible to satisfy. As we put off that old man and put on the new man created in Christ Jesus we understand that the law is to us a gracious guide to life that we esteem and desire and do not find burdensome.

The problem is that even in Christ we remain both men. Yes, we are in Christ and have died to sin and have been resurrected with Christ so that we delight in God’s commands and do not find them burdensome, and yet we continue to contend against the previous self and so we need to have God’s law come to us to remind us of our need for Christ.

Our theologies run into trouble when we fail to speak the truth about each side of the equation. When we fail emphasize to believers that God’s commands are not burdensome we take away motivation from God’s people to walk in God’s revelation. When we fail to emphasize to believers that God’s law never justified anybody we create the possibility of self-righteousness. Thus we must speak in both ways. We must continue to use the law as a means whereby we see that our only hope is found in Christ and His righteousness and we must continue to use the law as a means whereby we reveal or love to God.

We must remember that the law is said to be not burdensome by St. John as far as we are filled with the Spirit and so endued with heavenly power. For the believer, however much who we are in Adam may resist, it is the case that there is no real enjoyment except in following God.

Century Of The Self

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyPzGUsYyKM

If you want an aide in explaining the 20th century and how we have arrived at where we are today I would highly recommend the above link. It is my conviction that this or something like this should be ingested by every pastor in America worth their salt.

It is a four hour video that deals with how psychoanalysis has created and controlled consumerism by its manipulation of the sovereign self. It also delves in how pychobabble has become hegemonic in business and politics. The psychological has become hegemonic in business because the Corporate realm used the “insights” of pyscho-analysis to sell product and to manipulate the market. The psychological has become hegemonic in Politics because the same insights that were gleaned by Corporate America were used by the Political parties and consultants to create and manage coalitions and constituencies.

The reason that having a grip on this kind of material is so important is because the hegemony of the pagan psychological is not restricted to the business and political realm but now rules over education, family and church realms. As one views the video one begins to realize how much of the technique used by Corporate America to push product has been brought into the Church to sell Jesus. From focus groups (church small groups) to  the art of giving people what they want to the importation of the psychological into the Pastor’s ability to counsel, the Church has become a mirror of the satisfaction of the self.

The  documentary chronicles shifts in how the self  has been handled over the decades since the 1920’s but in each case the self is seen as being autonomous. At different periods the self has been seen as irrational and governed by primal desires,  to being basically good and so in need of being released, to being destructive and so in necessity of elites providing control. At no time however, in the last almost century, has there been any consideration of the self in relation to the God of the Bible. The self is autonomous and so needs to be either controlled by elites through mass consumption and political managing, or set free in a Dionysian frenzy to be channeled by clever marketing.

One comes away from the documentary firmly believing that it really is the case that the pagan is socially engineered. Apart from the God of the Bible and His Christ one easily become the “New Soviet Man,” or the “New Man” of whatever regime is in control. If there is no objective standard by which one can find a means by which the self can find identity then the self can only remain a subjective self always measuring itself against the larger cultural framework that is set up as a subjective (and so unreal) objective standard.

In the video you discover some important names that you’ve probably never heard of before. From Edward Bernays to Anna Freud to William Reich to Herbert Marcuse to many others one begins to discover some of the unseen hands behind the century of the self and the social engineering that has transpired.

The documentary underscores something else that I’ve been saying for several years now. The documentary makes the epistemologically self conscious realize that the way that much of the Church and its pastorate operates in the West today is  counter-productive to Biblical Christianity. The Church and its pastorate has largely made peace with the socially engineered paganism that is now characteristic of Western Christianity. That this is so is seen in the reality that the goal of the Church today is to help people adjust to this false reality that is called the “century of the self.” Pastors have redefined Christianity against this backdrop and use what they now call Christianity as a lever to have people conform and so get on in this alien world and life view. The Church and the Pastorate that is being the Church should instead be telling people that there is a problem if they are comfortable in the false paradigm that has been created and is known as the “century of the self.”

Pastors and Churches that go with the socially engineered self of the times will have the opportunity to advance far in this world, if that is their vision. Pastors and Churches who see through the shell game and lift their voices to announce the Emperor’s nakedness will likely struggle.

Choose ye this day whom you will serve.

Dr. David VanDrunen’s Silliness

#1 — “A two-kingdoms doctrine, distinguishes what is uniquely ‘Christian’ from what is simply ‘human’ [….] Generally speaking, to be ‘human’ here and now means living in the common kingdom under the Noahic covenant. Christians share the life and activities of the common kingdom with all human beings. What differentiates them from the rest of humanity is their identification with the redemptive kingdom and all that that entails.” (p.167)

#2 — “Learning, working, and voting are not uniquely Christian tasks, but common tasks. Christians should always be distinguished from unbelievers subjectively: they do all things by faith in Christ and for his glory. But as an objective matter, the standards of morality and excellence in the common kingdom are ordinarily the same for believers and unbelievers: they share these standards in common under God’s authority in the covenant with Noah.” (p.31)

#3 — “[T]he normative standards for cultural activities are, in general, not distinctively Christian. By this I mean that the moral requirements that we expect of Christians in cultural work are ordinarily the same moral requirements that we expect of non-Christians, and the standards of excellence for such work are the same for believers and unbelievers.” (p.168)

#4 — “[A] writer promotes a ‘contemporary Christian perspective on business,’ which promotes the principles of fair trading practices for workers, healthy local businesses, and Christian-run start-up businesses that ‘lovingly serve the needs of fellow citizens.’ [These] principles are admirable, but there is nothing distinctively ‘new creation’ or ‘Christian’ about […] them. All of these principles are grounded in the present created order and the terms of the Noahic covenant.” (p.193-4)

Living in God’s Two Kingdoms
David VanDrunen

#1 — Note how R2K aficionado VanDrunen abstracts Christian from human identity as if one can be human without at the same time being Christian or non-Christian. VanDrunen sets up a human identity that operates in his common realm that is undefined by that identities relation to or non relation to Jesus Christ.

Also note on this score that any thinking that suggests that the embrace of Christ makes one more truly “human” according to God’s original design must necessarily be seen as fatuous. To be human, according to VanDrunen, is to live in the common realm. Whether we are Christian or non Christian is irrelevant as it relates to identity as “human.”

Finally, we see on this quote that once again, Van Drunen has dualistically compartmentalized the common realm from the redemptive realm. In the redemptive realm we can call ourselves “Christian,” with all that that means but in the “common realm,” we are merely abstracted humans who engage along with those who hate Christ in common cultural endeavors and callings.

#2 / #3 — It is true that “as an objective matter, the standards of morality and excellence in the common kingdom are ordinarily the same for believers and unbelievers: they share these standards in common under God’s authority in the covenant with Noah,” but what is not true is that those who are Christ haters recognize and embrace these standards of morality and excellence. I very rarely use the language of a “self evident” truth, but I would think that VanDrunen would recognize that the very issue he insists Christians have in common with those who hate Christ are the issues that our current culture is tearing itself apart fighting over. The morality of the Ten Billion dollar a year porn industry and its standard for “excellence,” is quite a different morality and quite a different “excellent” than most Christian humans living in his common realm. The morality and excellence of outcome based education in the government schools is quite a different morality and excellence than most Christian humans have who are living in this common realm.

#4 — In VanDrunen’s common realm world who defines “fair” and what is the standard being used to define “fair?” In VanDrunen’s common realm where exactly do we find these principles grounded in the created order? I thought nature was red in tooth and claw? Does VanDrunen really believe that the evolutionary Capitalist or the Businessman who is seeking to advance the cause of Allah is going to have the same standards of fairness for their business as is the Biblical Christian?

It is difficult to believe at times that the R2K crowd is serious in all of this. Do they really believe that such a social order can be governed by their Christian dualism?