Slave Master: How Pornography Drugs & Changes Your Brain

Salvo Magazine: Slave Master: How Pornography Drugs & Changes Your Brain - Salvo 13

This is a very interesting article on the topic of pornography and addiction. Though I am careful and reluctant to say that pornography is merely a physical addiction; I do agree with the studies which show that it does affect the brain in physical ways.

Drugs are coping mechanisms we use to fill a need only Christ can meet.

Porn is devastating to say the least. There are many who hate it, but can't seem to stay away from it. It imposes itself on our families - even our children. And to be rid of it takes more power and work than a simple, "Stop that!"

We must know the gospel. We must preach and share the gospel of Christ. There is simply no other remedy. And we must be there, with imposing lives, embracing broken us-like sinners, bearing with them, with forgiveness, patience and love.

Pornography provides a far inferior pleasure to knowing Christ our Lord.

Chickens, Sex and the Second Grade

I was speaking with a guy the other day who was telling me about his chickens.  "I got them to teach my children responsibility," he said with a grin.  Chickens have to be cared for, protected [from hawks!], and eventually plucked.  But his children have grown such an attachment to them that "frying them up" would cause more tragedy than traction in the parenting process.  They have therefore, decided to eat the eggs instead of the chickens themselves.

I asked how he liked the eggs.  He said he loved them, they tasted great and they give great opportunities to talk to his little boy about "the birds and the bees."  You see, when his boy asked him if the eggs that they harvested would eventually hatch, he was locked into the discussion about fertilization.  And to a second grader, a simple, "Well son...the mommy chicken just needs a daddy chicken to fertilize the egg..." just doesn't cut it.  You can see the puzzled little lad...and you can hear him too, "Why daddy?"

The guy then proceeded to tell me about how he started saying the word "sex" around his children in normal conversation.  He didn't want the newness of the word to spark their interest elsewhere.  Then he told the story.

His boy came home one day from school (2nd grade).  He walked over to his dad and said, "Hey dad, lets get on the computer and look at playboy.com.  In shock, he said something like, "Why do you want to go there?  Where did you hear about that?"  The boy replied, "My friends at school were talking about it today.  They said we could go there and see naked girls."  My friend was obviously startled by his son's interest, but he was also grateful that his son came to him first.  I would be too.

Used to, a person had to go find some pornography and then sneak it back to the house.  Now, pornography finds you.  Even in the second grade...even from second graders!

Here is a good article to read/watch about how to start talking to our children about sex.

Here is a reality check for every parent with an internet connection and kids.  I may have posted this before...not sure.


Would you buy your son a stack of pornographic magazines? from Randy Alcorn on Vimeo.

Knowing God Rightly Leads to Knowing Everything Else Rightly

I am taking the advise of one of my seminary professors and continuing my study in the “old books.”  Currently I am working through Richard Baxter’s, The Reformed Pastor.  I must say that I am more filled now by it than when I read it a few years ago.  I’m not sure why, but I praise God for it.

In today’s section, Baxter is writing about how we cannot detach our study of theology from our study of philosophy.  To put it more plainly, if we do not first know God [rightly], we cannot know anything rightly.  It is important to note that he wrote this book in 1656, at a time when human reason was presupposed to be dependent on God and not independent of Him.  These men followed in the footsteps of the church fathers; more particularly, Augustine, who wrote that one must first believe before he/she could ever understand.   Faith precedes understanding, not vise versa.

Enlightenment thinkers of the 18^th century abandoned this order.  As far as they were concerned, God was placed in the dock, while man (with his independent reason) was seated on the judicial bench.  They thought understanding preceded belief.  Their anthem, “Let us first understand the universe, and then we will believe in a god (or not).”  Little did they know that in claiming rationality, they became irrational.  In “claiming to be wise, they became fools…” (Rom 1:22).  And we are still drunk with this poison.

Baxter saw the danger in this and was not afraid to speak on the matter.  He writes, “A world of business they make themselves about nothing, while they are willful strangers to the primitive, independent, necessary Being, who is all in all.  Nothing can be rightly known, if God be not known; nor is any study well managed, nor to any great purpose, if God is not studied.  We know little of the creature, till we know it as it stands related to the Creator: single letters, and syllables uncomposed, are no better than nonsense.  He who overlooketh Him, who is the ‘Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending,’ and seeth not Him in all who is the All of all, doth see nothing at all.  All creatures, as such, are broken syllables; they signify nothing as separated from God.  Were they separated actually, they would cease to be, and the separation would be an annihilation; and when we separate them in our fancies, we make nothing of them to ourselves.  It is one thing to know the creatures as Aristotle, and another thing to know them as a Christian.  None but a Christian can read one line of his Physics so as to understand it rightly.  It is a high and excellent study, and of greater use than many apprehend; but it is the smallest part of it that Aristotle can teach us.”

And later he adds, “…that to see God in His creatures, and to love Him, and converse with Him, was the employment of man in his upright state…and therefore the most holy men are the most excellent students of God’s works, and none but the holy can rightly study them or know them…Your study of physics and other sciences is not worth a rush, if it be not God that you seek after in them.  To see and admire, to reverence and adore, to love and delight in God, as exhibited in His works – this is the true philosophy; the contrary is mere foolery, and is so called again and again by God Himself…they [fools] study the creature before the Redeemer, and set themselves to physics, and metaphysics, and mathematics, before they set themselves to theology; whereas, no man that hath not the vitals of theology, is capable of going beyond a fool in philosophy.  Theology must lay the foundation, and lead the way of all our studies.  If God must be searched after, in our search of the creature, (and we must affect no separated knowledge of them) then tutors must read God to their pupils in all; and divinity must be the beginning, the middle, the end, the life, the all, of their studies.  Our physics and metaphysics must be reduced to theology; and nature must be read as one of God’s books, which is purposely written for the revelation of Himself.”

Every human being was created for the glorification and enjoyment of God.  The mind was not and is not excluded from this marvelous purpose.  Therefore, to reject the Creator in order to embrace the creature (whatever creature that may be – mind, math, science, dogs, cats, jelly beans, or whatever) is the height of irrationality.  And when I say the height, that is what I mean.  There is no greater contradiction in human experience than to say and believe that there is no Triune God.  And to function in every day life with any sort of consistency is not indicative of man’s rationality (while holding this position), but every indication of God’s common grace.  

I say this to confront those who say that because an atheist can conduct physics correctly - that is, work the problem so that the right answer is produced - this is indicative that they can know the creature rightly without faith in God.  Again, I answer that just because the answer to the problem is correct, does not mean he is doing his physics correctly.  If it is not done unto the glory of God, it is not rightly done.  

We must all be diligent to guard ourselves from the “empty and deceitful philosophy of this age” (Col 2), and run to Christ, our Lord and our Master – the One in whom all things hold together, are consistent, orderly and rational.  God is best known, and the creation is best studied while we stand upon the Rock.  All other ground is sinking sand.  Reasoning while sinking is clumsy, hurried, polluted with fretting and riddled with fear.  When it is conducted on the Rock however, it is so under the umbrella of sovereign protection, divine instruction, with all knowledge at its disposal, and with glory as its goal.

Question 4: Does the Bible Contain Error?

A person does not have to be a Christian very long before they encounter the view that the Bible is ridden with error.  From college campuses to the Discovery Channel, we live in a modern world where Christians are constantly assaulted on every side by such assertions. Many walk away wrestling with tough questions, clouded by an inability to find immediate answers, while some walk away from the faith itself.[1]  Therefore, I feel that the answer to this question is essential for every Christian’s understanding.  We, as Christians, must know and understand why our answer is a confident, “No!”

The Vocabulary of Inerrancy.  Plummer begins by stating the fact that before the Enlightenment of the 18^th century, essentially all persons who claimed the name of Christian accepted that the Bible was completely truthful in all matters that it asserted.  But with the elevation of human reason (which is at least understandable given the condition of the Church at the time), more people became skeptical of “previously sacrosanct texts.”  Plummer writes, “People started to judge revelation (that is, the Bible) on the basis of their own human reason, rejecting and criticizing various portions, based on what seemed reasonable or probable to them…Of course, the historic witness of the church to the complete truthfulness of Scripture has continued in spite of challenges, but the critics of it also have continued until this day.”

Before proceeding further, Plummer clarifies some terms that have developed during the centuries of debate over the topic:

·      Inerrant/Inerrancy.  This means that the Bible is completely truthful in all things that the biblical authors assert – whether in geographic, chronological, or theological details. Every word of Scripture were divinely guarded from all error.  Plummer finds help from Grudem, “The inerrancy of Scripture means that Scripture in the original manuscripts does not affirm anything that is contrary to fact.”

·      Infallible/Infallibility.  To claim the Scriptures are infallible is to assert that they are error-free in matters of theology or faith.  The word is weaker in connotation and does not include within it the claim that the Bible is free from all error (intentional or unintentional, theological or nontheological).

·      Inspired/Inspiration.  See my post on Question 3: Who Wrote the Bible – Humans or God?

·      For the sake of brevity, I am leaving out Plummer’s definitions of Neo-Orthodoxy and Trustworthy/True/Authoritative. If you have an interest in these, please email me.

Scripture’s Claims About Itself.  I personally love the fact that Plummer includes this section.  Being a presuppositionalist, I firmly believe that the argument is not merely about facts, but about one’s interpretation of the facts.  We must be careful not to commit the errors aforementioned concerning the Enlightenment.  The Scriptures are not inerrant primarily because we have searched them and found no error in them (e.g. logical contradiction or whatever), but primarily because they themselves claim their own truthfulness and inerrancy.[2]  Here are some passages that attest to this fact (I will cite only 2 for brevity):

·      Numbers 23:19.  “God is not a man, that he should lie, or a son of man, that he should change his mind.  Does he speak and then not act?  Does he promise and not fulfill?” Plummer comments, “If God is completely truthful and the Bible is God’s communication to humanity (Heb 1:1-3), then it follows that the Bible, as God’s Word, is completely truthful.”

·      Psalm 12:6.  “And the words of the Lord are flawless, like silver refined in a furnace of clay, purified seven times.”  Plummer: “Psalms and Proverbs are filled with repeated praises of the perfections of God’s Word (esp. Ps 19 and 119).”

Qualifications of Inerrancy.  Plummer writes, “The doctrine of inerrancy must be properly explained and qualified to prevent misunderstanding.  A number of important qualifications are listed below”:

·      Inerrancy applies only to the autographs (original copies of Scripture).[3]  In other words, a person cannot come to us with a KJV Bible, point out a numerical error and say, “See, the Bible has errors!”  There are also copying errors in every Hebrew and Greek manuscript of the Bible.  However, our Lord, in His providence, has supplied us with such a vast number of Greek and Hebrew manuscripts and their careful transmission, we are able to reconstruct, with extreme accuracy, the original wording of the Old and New Testaments.  There will be more on this next week when we answer the question,  “Were the ancient manuscripts of the Bible transmitted accurately?

·      Inerrancy respects the authorial intent of the passage and the literary conventions under which the author wrote.  Plummer comments, If the author intended an assertion literally, we should understand it so…” and likewise figuratively.  We must also respect the level of precision intended.  For example:  When someone asks us what time it is and we say, “Five after,” is it exactly five minutes after?  Or, is it four minutes after and we simply round up?  Even if we do round up, no one would say we were in error.

·      We must not impose chronological accuracy/order where it is not intended (this is my summary of what Plummer is saying on this point).  The best place this is found is in the Gospel of John.  John is piecing together events from Christ’s life to get his intended point across.  The Apostle is not giving a chronological account of Jesus’ life.

·      Inerrancy allows for partial reporting, paraphrasing, and summarizing.  Watch the news and you will see reporters doing this all of the time.  All of reported history is biased in some way – that is, it has an agenda and reports accordingly.  It is simply impossible to report all of history at any given moment.

·      Inerrancy allows for phenomenological language (that is, the description of phenomena as they are observed and experienced).  For example, we do not charge the biblical author with error when speaking of the sun rising (Ps 19:6) any more than we would the meteorologist on channel four when he speaks of the time of tomorrow’s sunrise.  In other words, we all know that the sun itself does not rise, but we do not say someone is in error for saying “sunrise.”

·      Inerrancy allows for the reporting of speech without the endorsement of the truthfulness of that speech (or the implication that everything else said by that person is truthful – e.g. Ps 14:1). 

·      Inerrancy does not mean that the Bible provides definitive or exhaustive information on every topic.  Plummer writes, “No author in the Bible, for example, attempts a classification of mollusks or lessons in subatomic physics.  The Bible tangentially touches on these subjects in asserting that God is the creator of all things, marine and subatomic, but one must not press the Scriptures to say more than they offer.

·      Inerrancy is not invalidated by colloquial or nonstandard grammar or spelling.  This is an academic way of saying that just because a person may not be as learned as another does not mean that person is not as honest.  And when honest people communicate, we would be well served to listen, even if their grammar is bad.  There are a few statements in Scripture that are ungrammatical (according to current standards of proper grammar at that time) but still inerrant because they are completely true.

Recommendations for Dealing with Difficult Texts. 

·      Be sure that you are interacting with real texts. Plummer asserts, “Do not allow another person’s uninformed skepticism to poison your own intellect.”  I usually like to ask for a specific reference when someone tells me that the Scriptures are filled with errors.  Christians should not be disturbed by arbitrary arguments – especially ones that stem from ignorant conjecture.

·      Approach the text in trust, not as a skeptic.  We should be diligent to investigate the truthfulness of Christianity.  Christianity has nothing to fear.  See my post on "What to do with Doubt".

·      Pray about a difficult text.  Plummer writes, “God is a loving Father who cares for His children.”  The Puritans used to call difficult texts “Scripture knots.”  Prayer is a great way to untie them!

·      Keep in mind the qualifications of inerrancy when dealing with a difficult text (See above).  Don’t demand that ancient writers conform to your expected standards.

·      Seek counsel when dealing with difficult texts.  That is what the Body of Christ is for.  Read good books and commentaries.  Talk to good Christian friends and pastors. 

·      Be willing to set a text aside for further consideration rather than force harmonization.  Plummer quotes Augustine:  “I have learned to yield this respect and honor only to the canonical books of Scripture: of these alone do I most firmly believe that the authors were completely free from error.  And if in these writings I am perplexed by anything which appears to me opposed to truth, I do not hesitate to suppose that either the [manuscript] is faulty, or the translator has not caught the meaning of what was said, or I myself have failed to understand it.” 

Questions for Reflection.  1)  Has anyone ever presented you with an alleged error in the Bible as an argument as to why it is not true?  What was your response?  2)  Is there a puzzling text that you are dealing with now?  What methods are you employing to “untie” such a Scripture knot?

Due to the importance (and size) of this study, not to mention the trying week I am experiencing, we will forgo our study of specific Biblical texts.  Lord willing, we will resume next week!  Have a great day!

---

[1] I’d like to clarify this statement.  I do not believe a believer can fall away from a genuine faith in Christ.  However, I have personally encountered and conversed with those who (from a human perspective) have walked away from Christianity – and this because they could not reconcile what they thought to be errors in the Bible.

[2] I understand this may be a bit tricky; but it is true nonetheless.  A person does not understand and then proceed to belief.  Rather, a person must believe and then proceed to understand (Augustine).  We believe that the Scriptures are inerrant (b/c they say so), and then we can further understand them and their inerrancy.  But a person who believes that they are errant, will not be able (without belief/faith) to search them and then find reason to believe because he has found no error.  An unbeliever may perceive error in the Scriptures even though they are innocent of such claims.  The problem is with the person’s understanding, not with the Scriptures.

[3] For a greater explanation of this statement see the Chicago Statement of Biblical Inerrancy: Article X.

Daddy! Is That God???

My little girl, now five years old, was sitting with me when I started watching this video this morning.  I'm not sure who the guy is speaking in the video, but the gospel he brings is powerful to say the least.  Of course, we would expect nothing less from the preacher who brings Good News.

About a minute into the video, when Emma finally understood what the video was about, she started screaming, "Daddy!  Daddy!"  I put my index finger to my lips and said, "Shhh! Emma...I'm trying to listen."  But she kept on, this time shaking my shoulder, "Daddy!  Daddy!"  I said again, "Emma, be quiet. Daddy is trying to watch and hear this video."

Then, building with so much energy and excitement that almost shook the computer out of my lap, she screamed, "Daddy! Daddy! It's that God?!  Is that Jesus?  Is that really Him??!!!"

I had to pause for a second.  First, I had to sort through my unresolved (but reserved) beliefs on images of Jesus - just like any good Presbyterian would do... right?!  But then, I was immediately confounded, humbled, and touched when I took the time to see the excitement on my little girls face.  She thought she just saw God; and she was so excited about that.

With emotions already flowing from the video, this sent me over the edge.  I looked at her, trying to hold back my tears and said, "No sweetie, that's not Jesus, but an actor in a movie about Jesus.  One Day, Emma, we will see Him; and I imagine that all of God's people will be saying things like this man is saying.  Won't it be great?"  She agreed.

Oh! to have a child like faith.  I pray that as I grow in Christ I'd become as excited to see my Lord as she was today.

Enjoy the video.

Mixture of Grief and Wonder

I wasn’t prepared for the email I received this morning.  I’m not sure there is any way to prepare.  All I could do was read it to my wife, sit, and weep.  When a friend looses a child, the range of emotions is indescribable, uncomfortable, and unsettling; all while delivering a pain that screams for some type of escape…some type of future hope. 

The little girl, who tossed about in her mommy’s belly for nine months, didn’t take a single breath of this world’s air.  Our Lord saw fit to take her before that happened.  And we all fall back into the reality of depravity, this-world’s-fallenness, our finiteness, and our longing for redemption.  A day that began with so many going their own separate ways, ended with so many focused on a common mission of tangible faith, hope and love.  The Body of Christ is together through thick and thin – through life and death.

I was asked what I (as a minister) am to say to those who have lost a child.  I really didn’t have an answer.  Seminary cannot give such lessons.  My pastor gave me the greatest advice, undoubtedly from decades of experience.  He said, “You just have to be there.”  I believe the Spirit of Christ carries us during times like this.  He makes us feel our need of Him.  Yes, He makes us all feel our need of Him.

I do believe we are all jars of clay.  This is what Paul teaches the church in Corinth (2 Cor 4).  For some reason, God chooses to store His treasure there.  Having preached this passage a few times, I knew (intellectually) why.  But today I experienced it.  When you break clay jars, the Treasure falls out.  And that is why broken people make the best Christians. 

God, in His sovereign, mysterious, providence decided to break my friend and his family.  And through sorrow and grief, the Treasure flowed freely.  Here is the email that he sent just hours after his third daughter was stillborn:

It's with a mixture of great grief and awestruck wonder in the greatness of our God that I'm writing this morning to let you know that S delivered our 3rd girl during the night, but [she] was stillborn. We need your prayers, love, and support. I believe we're grieving well right now, but will obviously be faced with various challenges and opportunities in the days ahead. Feel free to check in with us as you have opportunity…

Holding my dead infant daughter was a stark reminder that we are fallen people living in a fallen world. But in experiencing that grief I am still able to praise God He has seen fit to take "our" girl to be with Him - and spare her the pain and sorrow this sin-filled world and our sin-filled hearts create. Jesus, the resurrection and the life, says whoever believes in Him, yet though he dies, will live again. Our hope is built on nothing less...

May He keep us all in the faith!

Dating or Adultery - Evangelism in Our Modern World

Do you remember the dating days?  I do.  When I was in ninth grade there was a girl that I liked very much.  I didn’t have the guts to ask her myself if she liked me, so, I did what most cowardly ninth graders do – I asked a friend to ask her for me. 

After a few days, my fried came to me with the news.  He said, “Man, she said no.”  I was devastated.  I asked, “Well, why did she say no?”  He replied something to the effect of, “She said that she didn’t really know you that well, and that she wants to keep her options open for the dance coming up.”  I walked away sulking and a little upset.  But I realized that she had every right to say no.

Over the years, I have seen and even embraced a view of evangelism that is very similar to the “dating” scene.  God wants to be in a relationship with a people.  He sends someone to tell the people.  And the people have the choice to say yes or no.  As an evangelist, we give them the facts about God and tell them that He is very much in love with them. 

The issue however, goes deeper.  We think that a person has the right to say no – and, that doing so is intelligible and reasonable.  We hear things from the unbeliever like, “I surveyed all of the religions and Christianity just didn’t cut it.”  Or, “I need to know more about this God before I make a decision.” 

Comments like this are not innocently neutral, but ethically rebellious.  

This “dating-game-evangelism” which says that a person who is single (or, without God) has every right to “play the field” or, to "choose God" like he/she chooses a partner in life, is completely foreign to the Biblical worldview.

The reality of the human condition is not that we are single until we choose a good mate; but rather, that we are married and we are presently committing adultery.  A person who is married has no right whatsoever to “play the field.”  A person who is married and who is in adultery has no grounds for “I’m trying to keep my options open” or "I need to know more" or whatever excuse they may have for not going home in repentance.

The message of the evangelist is therefore quite different.  We are not approaching an unbelieving person as someone who is “single,” but one who is married.  Every human was created by God and for God.  Every human has fallen into adultery (or, from the glorious relationship with their Maker).  Therefore, we do not say, “Hey, God loves you so much…will you consider a relationship with Him today?”  Rather, we say (in a humble, tactful, and truthful way), “Hey, you are running from your Maker.  Please repent.  He is willing to forgive your adultery, and take you back unto Himself in Christ Jesus.” 

And when the person says, “Ehhh…I need to know more about this God you speak of before I make a decision.”  We now see how sinful and unreasonable such a response really is, especially in light of the truth that every person knows God, and that they suppress the truth in unrighteousness (Rom 1:18ff).  Its like approaching a man caught in adultery, telling him to go home to his wife, and hearing him say, "tell me more about this girl (his wife!) and I might consider it."  Our response is not to tell him about her - but to point to his wedding ring!

The fact is, a person cannot suppress what they are not touching.  When you “suppress” a beach ball under the water, it may be out of sight, but you are actively applying force to it to keep it there.  There is no neutral ground.  A person either suppresses the truth or they embrace it - there is no in-between.  They are either in a right relationship with God or they are in adultery.  In essence, there are no true unbelievers - either they are believers who love God by faith in Christ, or they are believers who are in rebellion against Him.

Therefore, here is our gospel.  We all must repent and believe.  We must repent from our adultery, for we have chosen and loved other gods.  We are adulterers.  God, our Maker, because of the life, death and resurrection of Christ, is willing and ready to see us come home if we will repent of our adultery. 

In short, as evangelists, we approach our unbelieving friend not by saying, “Hey, I know this God who loves you and desires a relationship with you.”  That may be true - but, it is not the whole truth.  Rather we say, “Get your but back home.  God is waiting mercifully and with forgiveness for you.  The Gate will not be open forever.  Go now while there is still time!"

Question 3: Who Wrote the Bible - Humans or God?

The answer to this question separates the Christian Scriptures from every other written form of communication in human history.  For some, it is the reason they love the Word of God.  And for others, it is the reason they hate it.

The answer is clear, but it is not necessarily simple or easy.  Plummer notes, “If God wrote the Bible, why does Paul say in his letter to Philemon, “I, Paul, am writing this with my own hand” (Philem 19)?”  So, did God write the Bible or did man?

Theories of Inspiration.  Every Christian would agree that the Scriptures are inspired.  There are, however, many different definitions for the term “inspiration.”  Plummer gives five common ones used in academic circles:

1. The Intuition Theory. According to this view, the writers of the Bible exhibit a natural religious intuition that is also found in other great philosophical or religious thinkers.  We hear this a lot when skeptics use the similarities of the Scriptures with other religious texts as a means to diminish and dilute the uniqueness of the Bible’s message.
2. The Illumination Theory.  This view holds that the Spirit of God in some way did objectively impress himself upon the consciousness of the biblical writers but not in a way that is essentially different from the way the Spirit communicates with all humanity.   
3. The Dynamic Theory.  This view asserts that God gave definite, specific impressions or concepts to the biblical authors but allowed the writers to communicate those concepts in their own words.
4. The Dictation Theory.  This view holds that God dictated the exact words to human authors.  This is also called mechanical dictation. 
5. The Verbal Plenary Theory.  This is the Biblical view.  It asserts that there is a dual authorship to the Scriptures.  While the authors of the bible wrote as thinking, feeling human beings, God so mysteriously superintended the process that every word written was also the exact word he wanted to be written – free from all error.

The Dual Authorship of Scripture.  Because we believe that in verbal plenary (full, entire, complete) inspiration, we do not believe that the apostle Paul entered some trance when he wrote his letters/epistles.  Rather, we believe that Paul wrote them with God superintending the process.  As an apostle, therefore, Paul expected his teaching to be fully obeyed and believed – received as the very word of God (1Cor 7:40; 14:36-37; 2Cor 2:17; 4:2; Col 1:25; 1Thess 2:14).  Plummer also gives Psalm 95:1-2 as a great example of dual authorship.  The Psalm was written by an Israelite, but the writer of Hebrews attributes it to the Holy Spirit (Heb 3:7).  Plummer writes, “Each word in the Bible is the word of a conscious human author and at the same time the exact word that God intends fro the revelation of himself.”

Some Implications of Dual Authorship.  Plummer gives three helpful ways that the dual authorship of the Bible affects the way we approach it.

1.   The clear purpose of the human author is a good place to start when trying to understand the Bible.  In other words, the Scripture cannot mean less than the human authors consciously intended.  This is why study Bibles and Old/New Testament Introductions can be a great helps.  They give us historical, personal and other contexts for understanding the passage on a human level.  See Longman and Dillard (for OT) and Carson and Moo (for NT).

2.   Plummer continues, “God, as the Lord of history and revelation, included patterns or foreshadowing of which the human authors were not fully aware.  Under God’s sovereign hand, his prior historical interventions were in themselves prophetic – pointing forward to Christ.  About the OT regulations given to Israel, the author of Hebrews says, “The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming – not the realities themselves” (Heb 10:1).”  As one of my professors in Seminary (Dr. Knox Chamblin) says, “What is in the Old Testament concealed is in the New Testament revealed.”  Plummer says on this line, “We should seek explicit statements in later revelation to clarify any such divine intentionality.  One should be forewarned against finding symbolic or prophetic details in the OT when no NT author has provided authoritative interpretation of the text.”

3.   This is a long one – I will quote it: “Sometimes it is asserted that the Bible can never mean something of which the human author was not consciously aware as he was writing.  It is possible, however, to affirm a hermeneutical approach based on authorial intent without affirming the above statement.  The biblical authors were conscious of being used by God to convey his word and believed that their revelation was part of a grand scheme of history.  The OT authors knew they were somewhere along the stair steps of revelation, but few, if any, knew how close they were to the top of the stairs (i.e., Christ).  Though they could not know all the future events, the prophets certainly would not deny God’s providential control of history, which exceeded their conscious reflection.”

I love the final comment of this section.  One should note that the divine-human dimension of the Bible concerns its authorship, not its very nature.  We listen reverently to the Bible as the written Word of God.

Question for Reflection.  How can a letter from a dead man to dead people (Paul’s letter to the Galatians, for example) be of significance to modern people?

Purpose Statement and Important Facts for Leviticus.  So, we are making our way through the Torah (or the first five books of the Bible).  Understanding the message and purpose of these books is essential to our understanding of the Bible as a whole.  We have discussed Genesis and Exodus already.  You remember that these books are written by Moses to the second generation of Israelites as they are about to enter the Promised Land.  The first generation died off because of their unbelief (Heb 3:16-19).  These books serve to encourage the people to move forward in their walk under Yahweh.

Knowing the historical context helps us to understand the purpose of Leviticus.  Otherwise, it can be mistaken as a boring book (God forbid)!  But when we understand what happened at the end of Exodus – that the people, who were so blessed and delivered by God, forsook Him to worship a golden calf (Exodus 32) - the book of Leviticus totally makes sense.  

How can a Holy God dwell in the midst of such a sinful people???  This is the question that the book of Leviticus answers! 

Purpose Statement is Sinners Belong to a Holy God.

Outline for Leviticus:

Lev 1-7            Sacrificial System

Lev 8-10          Priesthood

Lev 11-15        Cleanliness Code

Lev 16             Atonement

Lev 17-27        Holiness Code

For Further Study.  Try and understand the reason for the book of Leviticus.  Look over the outline, memorize it, understand it.  Why is the Sacrificial system necessary?  What is significant about the priesthood (what is the job/role of a priest)?  Read Leviticus 16 and Hebrews 9.  What is the main thrust of these passages?  How do they help you to understand the Gospel of Christ better?

I hope these studies are helping you to know and love your Bible more.  The Old Testament is usually neglected and considered intimidating because of its size.  But with a few simple purpose statements and outlines, it begins to come alive. And with that, we feel more alive as well!

Please feel free to post any comments or questions that you have.  I am always looking for ways to make this study better.

My Mentor as a Preacher Revealed!

Thanks Zach for this nugget!  I think I will try and use his homiletic method (or, preaching style) the next time I have opportunity!  Enjoy!

Tug O' War and Wrinkles

We all know it too well - the tug o' war of life.  In marriage it is experienced all too often.  The wife is really good at cleaning, and the husband is not.  Or, one is really good at confronting, while the other is really good at waiting (both are needed).

In our house, Katie is really good at remembering very small details about our lives - like family birthdays, household chores that need to be done, doctor and dentist appointments, and so on.  I, on the other hand, am horrible with remembering small details.  If it were up to me, the kids wouldn't go to their checkups or the dentist!  I'm doing good just to feed them when Katie is not around!  I simply don't remember.  But, I think I do a decent job steering the family in the direction of God's will for our lives.  Big decisions are easier for me (I think) than for Katie.  We are a great team.

However, because one person's strength is the other's weakness, opportunity often arises to become frustrated.  Just think of it.  Because Katie is so good with remembering things, she cannot comprehend (unless she stops to think about it) how or why I am not.  So, when I forget to call my mom on her birthday (which I did last year!), she (Katie) gets a bit frustrated.  Let the tug o' war begin!

What we have hear is a wonderful situation, but one that could easily go bad.  This is the tug o' war of life in relationships.  And it happens in other arenas as well - not just marriage.  Sit back and think of the friends that God has given to you.  Are they strong in an area where you are particularly weak?  If so, isn't that a great gift?  Sure it is.  But like I said earlier, this gift is also fragile.  Your strong friend is gonna be quick to see your weaknesses.  And vise versa.  He/she is going to be quick to see the "wrinkles" in your life and character.  And when our wrinkles rub up against the wrinkles of another - again, let the tug o' war begin!

Every human experiences this - Christian and non-Christian alike.  It is the Christian, however, that has the only reasonable way of using such occasions (tug o' wars and wrinkles) for their God-ordained purposes.  The Gospel is our guide and help to use these for the edification, encouragement, and strengthening of our brother or sister.  The Gospel is the only way to take the "tug" out of the "war" as it shows us where our wrinkles can be dealt with properly and peacefully - namely, to the Prince of Peace who has already fought the war (by the way, a "wrinkle" is closely related to sin - it is that part of us that frustrates, offends, or hurts others).

C.S. Lewis said in one of his books (I can't remember which one) that "we all have wrinkles in our lives that God has no intention of ironing out."  In other words, God has decided to allow sin to linger in each and every one of our lives.  As John Owen said, "Sin still dwells, but it no long has dominion."

I am thankful for honest friends.  Last night one of them said something to the effect of, "It has been so encouraging learning the right way to relate to each other in our marriage, and how to handle arguments and such.  But it is so frustrating to be in the heat of an argument (which is another way of saying - a tug o' war caused by wrinkles rubbing together:), and not implementing what I have learned."  I totally understand what she was talking about.  Thank you AP for your honesty.

Well, why is that?  Why does it seem that as Christians we learn exactly how to deal with a situation, but when we get into it, we throw it out the window?  Why does sin still linger?  Why is it that we are so weak at those moments when we need to be so strong?  Where is God?

He is there.  Oh yes, He is there.  And He will gladly take our strength in order to bring us to confession of our weaknesses.  He will gladly show us the futility of tug o' war - where either you keep using all of your energy pulling your way, just to have the other pulling their way; getting weaker by the second to see the situation going nowhere - or to see the other fall flat on their face.  There is no victory in either case.  So why allow it God?

The answer is clear.  Drop the rope and look to Christ in faith and repentance.  Our goal in seeing the wrinkles in others is not to show them how strong we are by pulling the rope harder than they do.  That's not real strength.  Christ showed His superior strength, not in condemning us, but in saving us when He had every right to condemn us.  When He had every right to beat us for our sins, He took a beating for our sins.  When He had every right to fight us, He forgave us.  Think of it this way.  How much strength does it take to see and show someone that they are wrong?  None at all.  Anyone can do that (for the most part).  Now, think about how much strength it takes to forgive them...to help them in their weakness...to take their sins to the Cross.  It takes divine strength.

What lesson does the Gospel teach us?  When we play tug o' war, we can expect to get really tired and to fall flat on our face.  Wrinkles are no occasion for fighting - but they are great occasions for forgiving. And when we do fight and fall on our face (namely, by not implementing what we know we are supposed to do), we understand that this is a perfect opportunity to glorify Christ in repentance, forgiveness and faith.  It is a great opportunity to see just how strong our God is!

What is Faith Anyway?

I think we say the word so much that we often forget to really reflect on its meaning.  What is faith anyway?  Many believe that faith is merely believing in something that you can't prove.  Others think it is something  that we must create ourselves in order to be right with God.  Some believe faith requires not only trust in Christ, but daily Bible reading, constant prayer, hearing the audible voice of God, rigorous journaling, some Christian sticker on the back window of the car, a sinless life, and whatever other religious practice one can think of.

Allow a comment from Berkhof:

"Faith, first of all, is a receptive organ by which we lay hold on Christ and all the blessings of salvation.  This faith may not be a bare intellectual assent to the claims of Christ or a mere stirring of the emotions resulting from an impassioned plea or, finally, a momentary impulsive choice under high psychological pressure.  Rather, arising out of a deep consciousness of sin, it must be a deliberate response to the glorious offer of salvation in Christ; the "amen" of the soul, elicited by the Holy Spirit, to all the blessed promises of the gospel; the hearty and unqualified acceptance of all the covenant obligations.  It is not something of a momentary or evanescent character, but an abiding attitude of the soul in which it recognizes its own sinfulness and lost condition and ever anew embraces the righteousness of Jesus Christ."

Faith is simple.  It is the emptying of our spiritual hands of all idols - this is called repentance.  After which we embrace Christ alone by faith alone.  Salvation does not consist in Christ plus anything, no matter how great that "anything" might be.

The life of faith takes one day at a time, resting in the fact that it is Christ who has promised to never let us go.  Yes, we struggle.  Yes, we sin.  And yes, we doubt from time to time.  But our feet are on the Rock that can never be shaken.  We trust (by faith) that He sufficiently accomplished all that is needed for our pardon and righteous standing before God.  And we hope for that glorious Day when He returns in glory.  Until then, we walk by faith, loving Him and loving those who walk with us in our present wilderness.

Addendum to the Last Post on Education

Allow me to offer an addendum to my last post.  I understand that many reading this blog send their children to public schools.  This blog is for you as well as those who send their children to Christian schools and those who homeschool.   The post was not aimed at a particular method of education, but toward parents.

My aim was not to condemn those who choose to send their kids to public school; but rather to challenge and bring to light the fact that we, as parents, are the ones who must make sure our covenant children are indeed being educated in the Lord.  Secular education does not exempt the parents of its students from their duty to educate.

Tragically, secular education does not offer this.  I am not prepared to make an argument that one should not therefore send children to public schools.  But I will argue that the parents who do so, must spend a lot of time and energy (as well as every parent!) contextualizing and correcting what they have and have not learned in the public school setting.

I hope this helps.

2X2=4...This Is Not Just Math, It is Theology!

Many of you know that Katie and I have decided to homeschool our children.  There are many reasons for this - many which I may reserve for another post.  Because we feel this is God's will for our lives, I have been trying to read all I can on Christian Education.  The question I have constantly lingering in the back of my head is this: What makes a Christian education fundamentally different from a non-Christian education?

Well, I am learning that there are many major differences.  For a brief primer on some of the most foundational and fundamental differences, I highly recommend Foundations of Christian Education: Addresses to Christian Teachers by Louis Berkhof and Cornelius Van Til.

Some of the language in this book is a bit steep, but overall it is well worth the time pondering the concepts and looking new words up in a dictionary!

A simple prayer, memory verse, and/or a Christian ethic has very little to do with what distinguishes Christian education from secular education.  These things are important; but unless they are accompanied by a deep understanding of the Christian worldview, they will provide little ammunition for us and our little ones during this current cultural crisis.  Secular education realizes this, and has therefore formulated an assault that aimes at the depths of our being.  It does this behind the mask of neutrality, claiming that it has as its primary agenda to educate the child so that he may understand and encounter the world with an open mind.

As Christians, under the Lordship of Christ, we must call a spade a spade.  There is no such thing as neutrality.  And there is certainly no such thing as an open mind.  If the science teacher gives no praise to Jesus Christ when the experiment works, he/she is ultimately not telling the whole truth.  If the math teacher does not give praise to the faithfulness of God after teaching the multiplication table, he/she is robbing our children of the ultimate reason and substance of all education - a personal, absolute and faithful God.

The purpose of education is to bring our children face to face with the Triune God - not to help them understand that they can know this or that fact without Him!

Van Til puts it this way, "The whole point in dispute between a theistic and a non-theistic interpretation of reality is this question, whether "facts" can be facts without being theistic.  It follows then that to say that the facts are facts without saying anything further is to give yourself over soul and body to the mercy of your enemy, who likes nothing better than that you should give up the battle before the first blow has been given.  As theists our contention is that there are no facts but theistic facts, while the contention of our opponents, expressed or unexpressed, is that facts are facts whether God exists or does not exist.  For us to admit this at the outset would be complete admission of defeat and would spell utter bankruptcy as well as the uselessness of Christian education."

To teach a child (whether actively or passively) that God is not absolutely necessary in education, is to create arrogance and autonomy, not Lordship and humility.

Whether your kids are in public, Christian, or homeschool, our understanding and commitment, as parents, to raise our children in the discipline and instruction of the Lord is our Biblical duty (Deut 6; Eph 6:4).  It is simply not enough to know how to read, write and do math.  We and our children must know why.

Similarly, history is most essentially theology.  Science is most importantly a monumental lesson on the faithfulness of Yahweh!  And yes, as teachers, our aim is to bring our children to His throne of Grace, even by means of Algebra, so that they will respond to such an education with repentance and faith in Christ the Lord.

Question 2: How is the Bible Organized?

In the last Plummer study, we reviewed and answered the question “What is the Bible?”  In this section we will seek to answer the question “How is the Bible Organized?”  This question, very much like the first in nature, helps us gain a better [astronaut’s] view of our Bible.  We must first hold the Bible in order to read it.

Basic Division.  The first part of the Bible is called the Old Testament.  It includes thirty-nine books that were written between 1400 B.C. and 430 B.C.  Most of these books were written in the Hebrew language.  A few portions of Daniel and Ezra were written in a related Semitic language called Aramaic. 

The first person to call the two major portions of Scripture “testaments” was the Christian apologist Tertullian (A.D. 160-225).  The covenantal idea between God and man, however, was not new to the apologist, but is found in several Biblical texts.

My Note on Covenant Theology:  It is important to know and understand the covenantal idea of Scripture.  Identifying and understanding the covenants is essential for “wrapping one’s mind around” the Bible.  They are a wonderful guide, leading us along the redemptive historical path between God and man.  They are a great way to learn and memorize the basic time-line of Biblical history.  Dr. Ligon Duncan states it this way, “It [covenant theology] is both systematic and biblical theology in that it recognizes that the Bible itself structures the progress of redemptive history through the succession of covenants.

Here is a diagram that may be useful in simplifying:

Covenant of Redemption The agreement between the Father, giving the Son as Head and redeemer of the elect, and the Son, voluntarily taking the place of those whom the Father had given Him. – Berkhof (Eph. 1:4ff.; 3:11; II Thess. 2:13; II Tim. 1:9; Jas. 2:5; I Pet. 1:2, etc.)
Covenant of Works (Gen 2:15-17)	Covenant of Grace After the Fall of Man (Gen 3:14…Rev 22:21 – See Below)
Adamic		Noahic	Abrahamic	Mosaic	Davidic	New
Covenant of Commencement (Gen 6-9)		Covenant of Preservation (Gen 6-9; esp. 9:9)	Covenant of Promise (Gen 12-17)	Covenant of Law (Exodus 19-24)	Covenant of Kingship (Psalm 89)	Covenant of Consummation/Fulfillment (Jer 31; Ezek 37; Heb 9)

If you would like to know more about covenant theology, I recommend Robertson’s book Christ of the Covenants or Louis Berkhof’s Systematic Theology. 

Number and Order of the Old Testament Books.  The thirty-nine books of the Old Testament vary in literary genre from historical narrative to romantic poetry.  As they are arranged in our English Bible, they are organized somewhat topically. 

Law (Genesis – Deuteronomy):  These are called the Books of Moses or the Pentateuch.  Plummer continues, “These books describe the origin of the world, the beginnings of the nation of Israel, God’s choosing of Israel, the giving of his laws to them, and his bringing them to the border of the Promised Land.”  One should also understand that these books were written to the “second generation Israelites on the plains of Moab who were about to enter the Promised Land” (memorize this).  Imagine watching the generation that lived before you die off before they saw God’s promise fulfilled.  This second generation was a bit timid and needed a boost of faith.  That’s why Moses wrote these amazing books!

The Historical Books (Joshua – Esther):  Plummer writes, “These twelve books recount God’s dealings with Israel, primarily through historical narrative.”  A major thread that flows through these pages is the triumphs of Israel as they follow godly leadership (Joshua, Gideon, David, etc.) and the tragedies they experience as they follow ungodly leadership (Manasseh, Saul, and others) .  These books leave one aching for a godly leader who will lead the people of Israel.  Hence the significance of David and the Davidic Covenant. 

Wisdom and Songs (Job – Song of Solomon): Plummer, “These five books include proverbs, other ancient wisdom literature, and songs.”  I like to think of these books as the poetical, experiential expressions of the people of Israel as they go through the ups and downs of Redemptive History. 

The Major Prophets (Isaiah – Daniel):  Plummer, “These five books are called the major prophets b/c they are longer, not because they are more important.  These books witness to God’s many warnings, instructions, and promises that He sent to Israel through His divine spokesmen, the prophets.” 

The Minor Prophets (Hosea – Malachi):  Plummer, “These prophetic books are shorter and are thus called the minor ones.  In the ancient Jewish collection of Scriptures, they were counted as one book, called the Book of the Twelve…” 

Plummer then goes to comment on the order of the Jewish Scriptures, which have the same content as the Christian Old Testament, only they are arranged differently.  The Jews have always organized their holy writings in three main divisions – Law (Torah), Prophets, and Writings.  The first five books are the same as the Christian OT.  But after that the order changes – some books are grouped together, and the last book is 2 Chronicles.  He notes that as Hebrew Bible was translated into Greek and Latin, the books began to appear in a more topical arrangement, from which we ultimately derive our English Bible.   

Number and Order of the New Testament Books.  After Jesus’ resurrection and ascension, the Holy Spirit empowered His disciples and other eye-witnesses, to record His teachings, stories and His life.  Plummer writes, “Over time, authoritative collections of these stories were written and recognized by the church as having apostolic sanction – the four Gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.  Luke also wrote a second volume, Acts, explaining how the Holy Spirit came as predicted and propelled the early church outwards to testify about Jesus the Messiah.”

As the apostles started churches throughout the Roman empire, they wrote letters to give instruction to those communities in their absence.  Plummer comments, “From the earliest time, these apostolic letters were copied, circulated, and recognized as timelessly authoritative for the life of the church (Col. 4:16; 2 Peter 3:15-16).  Thirteen of the letters in the NT were written by the apostle Paul (Romans-Philemon).  The anonymous letter “to the Hebrews” (i.e., to Jewish Christians) was apparently included after Paul’s letters because some people in the early church believed Paul or a Pauline companion wrote the letter.  Other NT letters were written by James, Peter, John, and Jude…The final book of the NT, the Revelation or Apocalypse of John, is a mixed genre, including letters, prophecy, and apocalypse. 

Plummer ends this chapter with a brief history on chapter and verse divisions in the Bible.  Chapter divisions were added to the Old and New Testaments by Stephen Langton (1150-1228), while verse divisions in the Old Testament are based on the versification of the Ben Asher family (Jewish Scribes) around A.D. 900, and Robert Estienne’s versification of the New Testament in 1551.  The chapter and verse divisions are not divinely inspired, but were given (sometimes seemingly arbitrarily) to allow for greater accuracy when referencing particular passages of Scripture. 

Question for Reflection.  When you have spoken of the Old and New Testament, have you thought of the term testament  as meaning “covenant”?  How does viewing the Bible as based on covenants between God and humanity affect your reading?

Purpose Statement and Important Facts for Exodus. 

Author: Moses

Purpose Statement/Theme:  The people of Israel are “Saved to Worship.”  That is the phrase that I have written in my Bible.

Brief Outline:

1-18 The God who Delivers

19-24 The God who Demands

25-40 The God who Dwells

Key Truths: 

·      The people of Israel, now only 70 persons (Exodus 1:4) go to Egypt in order to survive the famine in the land, under the provision of Joseph. 

·      The new king over Egypt feels threatened by the growing number of Israelites and begins persecution. 

·      God delivers the people from Egypt (Exodus 14), gives them the Law and the book of the Covenant (chs.20-24), the blueprint for the tabernacle (ch.25-31). 

·      The people rebel against God by worshipping a golden calf (ch.32).

·      God renews covenant and allows building of tabernacle (chs.35-40).

For Further Study.  Read Genesis 15:5-6. What is significant about this passage?  Then compare these verses with Exodus 1:4, Num 1, and Deut 1:10.  What do these verses tell us about God? 

Death in Silence

Danger...be careful when listening to this.  I will mention, that we must know and understand the gospel.  It is messy.  It helps us to deal with the 'grossness' of sin.

These poets are not afraid to dive in and communicate our REAL Gospel, that addresses the real problems of life and culture.

Plummer Study Update

Ok - I must say that I was a little ambitious in attempting to do three questions per week.  This past week was hectic and abnormally busy for me.  Consequently, I was unable to post the next question in the study. I have taken a closer and more reasonable look at my limitations and abilities and have decided that I will now go over at least one question per week.  I will post them on Mondays.

Lord willing, you will have question two before you in roughly 48 hours :)

Impressions of Innocence and the Destruction of Christian Charity

We have all seen the commercials.  You know the ones...Sally Struthers (I think that was her name) or some other celebrity, walking the streets of a third world country, exposing and informing the masses, through television and mail, of the devastating effects of poverty, disease and oppression.  The commercials and mailers break our hearts for these people groups - especially for the children...for the orphans.  And rightly so.  We, the church, are called to help by giving ourselves and our resources.

Most of these organizations are promoting really good causes.  I do think, however, that most of them withhold vital information that deadens our charity and defuses our gospel.  Most of these organizations, leave out the most important expressions of the lives of the oppressed, that separate what we do as Christians from what some celebrity philanthropist does.

Sure, if they included the element, these big givers would soon fall to the way side.  Money would cease to flow.  And publicity would not be of the beneficial kind.

So what is it that is left out?  I'll tell you.  Sin.  Sin is left out.  What we are not told about the small orphan child is what he does after the picture is taken.  Consequently, when most see the word "orphan" we think of some small innocent child, whose picture we post on our refrigerator, who would love nothing more than to cuddle with us and who really deserves our help.  What we don't see is the same kid as he pick-pockets the tourist, as he punches the smaller kid to get his toy, and who has no moral compass whatsoever.

THIS is the tragedy!  Being parentless and without godly parental direction is the epitome of awful.  Have you ever seen or experienced a child who has not been parented?  Most of us like to whisper about the "bad kids" and talk about how we'd parent them differently.  They are the kids we never want to babysit!  Then, all the sudden, Angelina Jolle comes on the television, walking among orphans in Africa, and we comment, "I want to adopt one of them..."

Because we have been given half of the story, we have nothing more than impressions of innocence which have stolen every distinctively Christian motivation from our charitable movements in this life.  We must be careful.  We must understand that behind two very similar acts, there is a world of intrinsic difference.  As Christians we adopt for very different reasons.  We seek justice for different reasons.  And because of that we look very different to a watching world.

Yes, there is an innocence about the orphan's situation.  Justice must be sought on their behalf.  But it must come through the gospel.  We do not adopt because the orphan is cute.  We adopt because of Christ.  We understand that we are not adopting a small, teddy-bear type, innocent, good, kindhearted individual from a far off land.  No.  This child must be rescued, and it will be dirty, painful, disheartening, frustrating, and dangerous.  Within hours he will more than likely surpass the "bad-kid" on the list of kids you don't want your kid around.  He is the kid that celebrities pay nannies to parent.  We must be different!  Why?  Because He adopted us.

After all, before He saved us, we were not some small smiley picture on God's heavenly refrigerator.   Before He saved us, we would have been adopted by no one.  We were the ugly, cold-hearted, bully.  We were His hell-deserving enemy.  We hated Him, slandered Him, suppressed Him, cursed Him, rejected Him, and were more deserving of His wrath than His affection.   But He adopted us.  What kind of God are we dealing with!

He is no mere philanthropist, but the God-Man.  When the sickness of sin in our lives manifested itself against Him, He died for us.  He bore our sins.  He forgave us.  Money was of no value to change us.  Blood proved the only cure.  His blood.  His life for ours.

This is our Gospel.  This is our reason for social justice.  This is our reason for bearing with one another. This is our reason to adopt the less than perfect child.  This, Christian, is the reason we do not abort deformed babies.  This is the reason we are alive.  This is our Christ.