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.

Peter and Baptism

Scripture — I Peter 3:21f
Subject — Baptism
Theme — Peter’s explanation of Baptism
Proposition — … will cause us to appreciate the meaning of our Baptism.

Introduction

Re-cap

Main Body

This is a passage that makes most Christians sweat because of the intimate connection that it posits between Baptism and Salvation. It directly says that “Baptism Saves.”

What Peter is doing here by saying that Baptism saves is that he is suggesting that there is analogical relationship — a comparative touchstone — between the salvation of the 8 souls who were saved through water during the time of the Noahaic flood and the salvation of Christians who are saved through the water of Holy Baptism. This analogical relationship between the Nohaic flood and Baptism is the kind of relationship that exists between a person when they are three and a person when they are thirty-three. The former is an earlier and incomplete model of the latter so that by looking back through the latter we can understand the former more completely. Peter says the flood was an anti-type of Baptism. The flood was an incomplete picture of a fuller picture that would come later.

Now as we enter into this we must affirm that it was God who saved Noah and His family, but He did so through water as Peter says. As such it would be accurate for Noah to say He was saved by God or by the flood as long as it was understood that it was God who saved Him by the flood.

The same thing is true of Baptism. If we say we are saved by Baptism we never mean that we are saved by baptism apart from God’s saving work. And yet we can say with Peter that we are saved by Baptism through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Note in both Noah’s salvation and in our salvation it is God who is doing all the saving. In both the OT type and the NT anti-type (fulfillment) the emphasis is on God who is doing the work of saving His people.

Now the reason I spend time to point that out is to articulate again the Reformed and Biblical understanding that Baptism is not about our pledges to God. Baptism, as we see in this passage, is about God’s work of delivering His people.

Most of your Christian friends will not agree with this. Most of your Christian friends will insist that Baptism is about your making a commitment to Christ. That is a unworthy view of Baptism. Baptism is instead about what God is doing, promising and has done and not about what the Baptized person is doing or promising.

In Baptism we have the promise that God will be our God and we shall be His people and the command to repent and believe in light of that promise just as in the flood there was God’s promise to be the God of Noah and His family and the command to build an ark.

When we talk about Baptism we understand that it is a sign and a seal of God’s grace in Jesus Christ that has come to us. It is a sign of God’s promise to do all the saving. It is a seal that indicates we belong to God. The fact that Peter can come right out and say that “Baptism Saves Us” reveals the incredibly close relationship between the sign and what the sign indicates.

Because it is a sign and a seal of God’s gracious intentions towards us we must, in times of doubt, always remember our Baptism for in remembering our Baptism we are at the same time remembering God’s promise that He would be our God and we would be His people.

Now returning to the comparison between the Noahaic flood and Baptism we would say that Noah’s physical salvation through the waters of the flood through the waters of the flood was anticipatory of the fact that our Spiritual salvation is through the waters of Holy Baptism.

Just as Noah went through the destruction of the flood unto renewed life so God’s people are buried with Christ through the waters of Baptism into His death only to be resurrected with Him unto renewed life. (Romans 6:4) Noah and His family, as God’s people, were saved through the flood. The Church as God’s people are saved through Baptism. And it is God who used the flood and who uses Baptism as a means of Grace who does all the saving.

This idea of being saved through water repeats itself through Scripture. Not only is it Noah who is saved through Water but later it is the Children of Israel as they pass through the Red Sea who are saved by God through Water. In both cases the waters are at the same time judgment to God’s enemies and grace to God’s people. With the same waters God both condemns and gives life.

So it is with Baptism. The waters of Baptism are judgment to those who will not submit to a Christian Baptism that proclaims that God does all the saving while at the same time being grace to those who will embrace the promises of God found in Baptism.

Now from his emphasis on Baptism Peter turns to clarify the issue.

Baptism is not about the removal of physical filth from the body. The point here is that Baptism, as a means of Grace, is not about the performance of a misunderstood empty bathing ritual. In Baptism it is not the water itself, apart from Christ, that saves. The means of grace is not found in the water stripped away from the understanding that Baptism is the means of grace whereby we have union with Christ in His death and resurrection (Romans 6:4). In Baptism it is not the filth of the flesh that God removes but the filth of the soul.

It is because God has done all the doing in Baptism that Peter can say that the result of this is the answer of a good conscience towards God. Since God has claimed us through Baptism and has done all the saving we have a good conscience towards God.

The fact that Baptism is only to be understood in light of the work of Jesus Christ is seen by how Peter goes on to say that all of this is through the resurrection of Jesus Christ. In Baptism we die to sin and self and are resurrected with Christ.

Peter then reminds us that this Christ is not only resurrected but also ascended and ruling. By bringing this forward Peter gives great comfort to Christians that all that comes their way is through the hands of their sovereign King who has delivered them for His glory.
————-

Sundry unrelated observations on Baptism

In Baptistic thinking faith and the sacraments are not presuppositions but attainments. It is as if man were supposed to eat of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, the Tree of Knowledge and Ethics, before he can eat of the Tree of Life. Rationalistic and evidential apologetics, encourage men to approach faith by way of reason. Faith is not seen as the foundation of thought, but as an attainment. Naturally, the sacraments are seen the same way: men are to make a decision, and then be admitted to baptism (the Baptist view). The Bible, however, indicates that faith is presuppositional. The child is to be taught to believe from the beginning. It is not his initial decision which evidences his faith, but rather his perseverance to the end. He participates in the sacrament, in both its forms, from the beginning. The sacrament of God’s grace is not something he must attain by making a decision, walking an aisle, memorizing a catechism, or going through a rite of confirmation; but rather the sacrament of eating dinner with Jesus at His House is the presupposition of the child’s growth in grace. The difference between these two approaches, let me say it gently but straightforwardly, goes back to the Garden of Eden itself.

James Jordan

Baptists, and unfortunately the majority of Reformed folks, confuse being with doing. Faith is understood to be an act–trusting or believing for example–rather than the condition from which those actions proceed. Actions reflect a persons nature. Actions don’t cause a person’s nature. A proper understanding of God’s covenant promises requires that one give the judgment of charity to the regenerate condition of covenant children.

A Letter To The Editor From PCA Pastor Rev. Tom “Franken” Stein

What do we do with home-schoolers?

http://www.pal-item.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=201010010314

(1.)Some oversight seems reasonable compared to cost of lifetime dependency

(2.)Time to offend everyone. How can you write about education, and do otherwise?

(3.)The subject of the week is home-schooling. More and more people in Richmond are doing this — or claiming to do this. One result? Our graduation rate is improving, for when a student leaves the district for home-schooling, the departure does not count against the rate. Does this explain the whole increase? Maybe not. But it sure helps.

(4.) Let’s be real. Something is happening here, and one doubts it is a citywide divine revelation about the glories of home-schooling.

(5.)Are our local administrators quietly encouraging parents of troubled and troublesome kids to sign the form that promises home-schooling?

(6.) Are parents claiming to home-school, so they can dodge the law that now requires kids to be in school until they are 18?

(7.) I don’t know and I don’t know. But we do have a way of finding and using loopholes in laws, and this one is a mile wide.

(8.)Yet behind all that, is this: What do we do with home schools?

(9.)Leave them alone? Regulate them? Ban them?

(10.)I run in circles where home-schooling is often present, and sometimes popular. Home schools are like anything else: Some are good, and some are bad. Some parents are passionate, diligent and competent. Other parents are lukewarm, negligent and unqualified.

(11.)I admire those who do it well. My kids surpassed my home-schooling skills somewhere around first grade.

(12.)So I ask: is it in the interests of the state, to keep an eye on this? I say yes.

(13.) Let’s say the schools do happily say goodbye to frustrating and failing kids through this home-school loophole, and never see them again. Or let’s say exasperated parents do sign the form, then allow their children to enjoy a curriculum of potato chips and ESPN. What is the result? Uneducated, unskilled, unmotivated people who will barely survive in the work force and might eventually drop out altogether. Then, since we are so generous with our social programs, we will have another group of people who take far more than they give.

(14.)Is this what we want? I hope not. Some oversight and regulation seems reasonable. This might include submission of a curriculum, occasional visits and participation in the standardized tests. Yes, this addition to our bureaucracy will cost money, but how does that compare to what we pay for a lifetime of dependency?

(15.)As with many issues these days, we tend to run to the extremes.

(16.) One side might say, “Do not touch my home-schooling!” The other side might say, “Just outlaw it!”

(17.) But can we do better than that? Home-schooling is an excellent path for some. But it is not for everyone — especially those who merely sign a form to evade a law.

(18.)If we believe we need to help people who need help, we need to help them when they are kids, so we do not need to help them when they are adults.

(19.) Let’s not stick our heads in the sand about what is happening or what could happen. We can value freedom and urge responsibility.

(20.)Hello, legislators. Anybody … home?

Tom Stein is senior pastor of Christ Presbyterian Church (PCA) in Richmond Indiana
Letter To The Editor

You need to understand that as I write this response I am working on all cylinders to keep the river of rage between the banks of coherency. As such, I’m just going to bullet point my response.

1a.) Children have oversight Dr. T. Franken Stein. That oversight is called parents. You might have bumped into these folks occasionally Tom. God has given them the responsibility of oversight of their children in the realm of the family.

1b.) This lifetime of dependency your concerned about resulting from neglected home schooled children … is that the kind of dependency that currently finds 1 in 7 public school educated Americans on food stamps Tom? Is it the kind of life time dependency that finds millions of government educated adults voting for a party that is committed to creating a dependency under-class? I want to tell you Tom that even if parents of home schooled children assiduously schemed to enstupidfy their children into a life time of dependency they could not, labor as they might, match the enstupidification process that the Government schools have made a science. In short Tom, even if the larger percentage of home schooled children became life time dependents upon the government that percentage could not match the life time of dependents that are created by government schools.

1c.) You speak of the necessity for being reasonable. By what standard are you measuring “reasonable,” Tom? If we are looking to God’s word for the definition of reasonable I see no justification for advocating for the increased oversight by the state over home educators. The Scriptures nowhere allows the State to intrude upon the family realm, where education lies, except in the necessity of interposition. Are you really arguing Tom that things are so bad that there is a need for the State to do interposition into the Family sphere on this issue?

2.) Tom, the chief person you’ve offended is Jesus Christ in heaven above. You have advocated the State to usurp the prerogatives that God has given to the parents in order that the State might play God to the family. Your advocacy for increased State control is an advocacy that leads to the deterioration of the family and the enhancement of the State. A State, I might remind you, which is hostile to Biblical Christianity.

3a.) Who cares if the government schools graduation rate is increasing or decreasing? The government schools produce illiterate mindless slaves. The government schools raise generations to be anti-Christ in their thinking. Who cares anything about what these people do except to care that government education is destroying the citizenry? In terms of the government schools, “let the dead bury the dead.”

3b.) Why should it bother you if home schoolers only “claim” to educate? Why should it bother you since the government schools likewise only claim to educate? What difference does it make if a child is not really educated at home or if they are not really educated at government school? Why do you assume that all because a child attends a government school they are really being educated?

4a.) Yes indeed something doubtless is happening here, and what is happening is that people are increasingly awakening to the fact that they can’t screw up their own children any worse than the government schools are screwing up their children. Good night, even the pagans are realizing that the government schools are making morons out of their children and you write to suggest the morons should have oversight?

5.) I pray to God that school administrators are encouraging parents to home educate their children. Dear Jesus, let that be true please.

6.) Why shouldn’t parents try to dodge stupid laws that require their children to be in government schools until they are 18? Who is the State that it should dictate to parents how long it takes in order for their children to be adequately educated?

7.) Any loophole that can be found in current laws regarding education of our children should be taken full advantage of. The State has no Biblically ordained role to dictate to the family what it does with their God given children.

Remember Tom, this is a pagan State and pagan government schools we are talking about here. These are schools that are thoroughly anti-Christ from top to bottom. Shouldn’t this reality make you want to cheer whenever loopholes are taken advantage of?

8.) You ask, “What do we do with Homeschools.”

First, I wonder who is the “we” to which you make reference in that question. Is the “we” that have to do something with home-schools the “we” of the Christian church, or is the “we” the “we” of a pagan anti-Christ culture? I suspect that the “we” is the latter “we.”

You do realize, of course, that your concern as a Pastor should not be with those anti-Christ pagans who want to regulate the education of home schoolers.

9.) I have an answer to your question though, and my answer is leave them alone. It is none of your damn business as a lackey for the State on how parents raise their children. Keep in mind Tom that children belong to the parents and not the State.

10.) I agree that not all home schools are equally adept at home schooling? So what? A bad Christian home school is better than a “good” pagan government school. You don’t seem to have any comprehension Tom on how bad the government schools are. The government schools are so bad that even if a child were to grow up ignorant in a home schooled setting that child would be better served than attending government schools. You don’t seem to realize Tom that government schools are the engine of socialism in this country. You don’t seem to realize that government schools are not interested in educating but in creating a slave class. You don’t seem to realize that putting hundreds and thousands of adolescents in one setting with minimal adult oversight creates a “Lord of the flies” sub youth culture. You don’t seem to realize that government schools are committed to turning children into moral zombies. You don’t seem to realize that given the emphasis of egalitarianism in the government schools that the result is an even low intelligence that is produced. You don’t seem to realize that the average home school scores on standardized college tests blow the average government school scores out of the water. You don’t seem to realize that the government schools, with their dismissal of the Lordship of Christ in education are raising a generation of anti-Christs. You don’t seem to realize Tom that by sending our children to government schools we are destroying the family. 8 hours of school combined with 8 hours of sleep doesn’t leave much time for family life.

What kind of a minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ can you be if you are this totally unaware and stupid Tom?

11.) Given this letter I find this statement altogether believable. Still, if you are no smarter than a 6 year old, I might ask, “What in the world are you doing serving as a Pastor? If you are no more bright than your 6 year old, I advise you to turn your congregation over to your child when they turn 7.

12.) The interests of the State? What about the interests of the God you are supposed to be serving Tom? You say it is in the interests of the State to keep an eye on homeschooling. Who, might I ask, in your twisted world, is keeping an eye on the State who is keeping an eye on the homeschoolers? Given the magnificent ability of the State to screw up every thing it touches why would you want to charge the state with keeping an eye on Homeschoolers? This is like asking the Fox to keep an eye on the chicken coop.

Please tell me that you’ve never read a book on this subject Tom. Please tell me that you wrote out of complete and utter ignorance of this subject. Please tell me that you are unaware of the writings of Neil Postmen, or John Taylor Gatto, or Doug Wilson, or Peter Brimelow, or Samuel L Blumenfeld, or Thomas Sowell, or B. K. Eakman, or R. J. Rushdoony, or Gordon Clark, or Cornelius Van Til or Neal McCluskey, or Dorthy Sayers, or any number of other worthies who have written on the banality of our current government schools to whom you want to give oversight power. It boggles the mind that a Christian minister desires to give oversight of Christian children to people who are committed to training those children in the ways of a pagan christ-less covenant.

13.) This paragraph of yours and the question in it are laughable but if one must have an answer to your question concerning the result of a generation of home-schooled children growing up with a curriculum of potato chips and ESPN I would suggest the most likely result of a generation of home schooled children growing up on a curriculum of potato chips and ESPN is that we’ll have more people qualified to fill the pulpits of the PCA.

You’re wasting all the energy on the potential of home schooled children to become scofflaws while ignoring the actuality that millions and millions of those who were government schooled are scofflaws precisely because they were educated into their worthless societal contributions by the government schools they attended. Shouldn’t your effort, Tom, be more fruitful if you were to try and do something about the abysmal state of our government schools? Maybe you should advocate that home-schooler being given the responsibility to keep an eye on the government schools? Maybe home-schoolers should be empowered to regulate the government schools?

14.) You do realize that you are advocating here that those with a Christ hating worldview be in charge over those with a Christ loving worldview? You do realize that no curriculum that honors Christ will be accepted by those who hate Christ don’t you? Let’s say, I, as a home school parent, turn in a curriculum program that has as a class, “The failures of the American educational system,” do you think that such a worthy course would be approved by those you want to bring into the home to do oversight? Have you lost your mind man?

15.) Psst .. Tom … don’t tell anybody but you are the one advocating an extreme.

I would remind you Tom that even if those of us who desire to tell the State to butt out are extreme that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice!

16.) And one side might rightly say … The pagan State has not been given by God the commission to dictate to Christian parents how they raise and educate their children.

17.) I would contend that a law should be passed that makes it illegal for parents to send their children to government schools Tom. Yes … that is how bad it really is. I would also contend that parents be allowed to escape government schools by any loophole they can find.

18.) The most help you can be Tom is to understand how education is part of a Christian world and life view. You are advocating in your letter for something that is completely contrary to what you confess to believe is true. You are contradicting your confession of the Lordship of Jesus Christ by suggesting that the pagan State be in the position of Lord over children.

If we want to help children Tom we will pray God will destroy the government schools that are destroying our children. If we help them as children in this way our task will be less Herculean in helping them when they are adults. Your solution Rev. Stein in giving oversight abilities to the Pagan State serves as the final nails in the coffin of this culture.

19.) Your invoking of freedom and responsibility at the end of your letter is a joke given the reality that if we follow your advice it will lead to slavery and dependency on the State.

Become a Christian Tom and contend for the Crown Rights of King Jesus and not the Crown rights of the State.

Hello … Tom … Rev. Stein … are you listening.

Interested and outraged readers might want to continue exploring commentary on Tom’s idiocy by reading,

A Clueless Pastor Wants More State Control of Education

Render the Home-Schools unto Caesar? A Critique of Pastor Stein’s State-Worship

The Degradation of Women

“…[W]hen the mother shall have found another sphere than her home for her energies; when she shall have exchanged the sweet charities of domestic love and sympathy for the fierce passions of the hustings [politics]; when families shall be disrupted at the caprice of either party, and the children scattered as foundlings from their hearthstone, it requires no wisdom to see that a race of sons will be reared nearer akin to devils than to men. In the hands of such a bastard progeny, without discipline, without homes, without a God, the last remains of social order will speedily perish, and society will be overwhelmed in savage anarchy.…[T]he very traits which fit her to be the angel of a virtuous home unfit her to meet the agitations of political life, even as safely as does the more rugged man. The hot glare of publicity and passion will speedily deflower her delicacy and sweetness. Those temptations, which her Maker did not form her to bear, will debauch her heart, developing a character as much more repulsive than that of the debauched man as the fall has been greater. The politicating woman, unsexed and denaturalized, shorn of the true glory of her femininity, will appear to men as a feeble hybrid manikin dwarf, with all the defects and none of the strength of the male. Instead of being the dear object of his chivalrous affection, she becomes his importunate rival, despised without being feared!”

R. L. Dabney — 19th Century Reformed Theologian
Women’s Rights

From Dabney’s words we see that the Feminist movement, that has so sold itself as the champion of Women and the protector and keeper of all things female, is, in point of fact, a movement that is concerned with destroying women and with putting them in bondage.

There is a great deal that is done today in the name of “respecting women” which is merely a cover for degrading women. Giving just one example women are not esteemed and are only brought low when they people insist that they are equal to men in the sense of being the same as men. Women are not the same as men and any argument that argues of the equality of women that is really arguing for the sameness of women is an argument that degrades women.

Note also the point of the Dabney quote where he suggests that the degradation of women leads inevitably to the degradation of men. Women who are taught that they are the same as men yield men who believe that they are no different from women. At this point sexual identity is completely comprised and the social order perishes.

Kuyper vs. Schilder on Culture

“Even though Kuyper and Schilder begin w/ Jesus Christ when they speak of culture, they have different views of his significance for culture. Kuyper sees Jesus Christ as savior who pours out his special grace into Greek-Roman culture, that is to say, Jesus Christ is the savior of culture. But Schilder sees Jesus Christ as the Savior of man. He works salvation in many. This work includes making disobedient people into people who serve God again in their cultural work.”

~ N. H. Gootjes
Always Obedient; Essays on the teaching of Dr. Klass Schilder — pg. 39, 40, 41

It is interesting that despite all the Kuyper did for worldview thinking he did not believe that such a thing as Christian culture existed. Kuyper saw the whole idea of culture as anthropocentric and he wanted to think theocentric so he preferred to use the term “common grace” in reference to civilizational development. So, Kuyper refused the concept of Christian culture preferring instead to speak instead of Western culture influenced by Christianity. So it appears that for Kuyper differing cultures are static realities that can be developed by more or less common grace.

Schilder, on the other hand takes a more bottom up approach. Cultures are not entirely static realities that can be influenced by larger or smaller measures of common grace but rather they can be Christian as a tipping point is reached in a given culture by the work of special grace visiting increasing number of individuals. For Schilder Christians can be Christian and when they are not Christian it is the consequence of the work of redemption being left undone among people groups.

In summary, Kuyper sees the Kingship of Christ influencing cultures through common grace as Christianity visits and influences various already developed cultural instantiations. Schilder sees culture as the outgrowth of people who are either Redeemed or un-Redeemed. If Redemption visits individuals in large enough measures then whole cultures are not merely influenced by Christianity but can be legitimately referred to as “Christian culture.”

A Counter Argument To The Coming Demographic Islamic Hegemony In Europe

I have mentioned several times on this blog the crisis of Europe in regard to its Muslim immigration problem. One book I highly recommend on this subject is Christopher Caldwell’s, “Reflections on the Revolution in Europe.” Also, if one desires to think through this subject one should be familiar with Serge Trifkovic as well as Robert Spencer. Finally, it doesn’t take that much effort to read or listen to Enoch Powell’s “Rivers of Blood speech from 1968. This speech was both prophetic and the end of Powell’s hope to be Prime Minister of Britain. Powell’s speech is a great example of someone being ostracized and destroyed for being right.

Anyway, I am a firm believer that unless Europe takes some actions to both stem the tide of its Islamic immigration and reverse the Islamic demographics Europe will become Eurabia (Islamistan) by the end of this century (Maybe sooner).

In the link below the author gives a brief account of how things could be turned around. I don’t know if the political will exists to do some of these things but it at least is a thought experiment on how the Islamification of Europe is not yet inevitable.

If found it to be a short and interesting read on how the West might still be preserved. It is not the whole answer. The whole answer is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. But it at least posits some ways that the Muslim aspect of Europe’s paganization might be arrested.

http://tsarlazar.wordpress.com/2010/09/26/rejecting-the-eurabia-thesis/