(Continued from part 1.)

Ministry myopia?

I don’t believe any Radical oversights are intentional. Instead, I wonder if any ministry myopia has accidentally come into play. That mindset happens quite often; I frequently fight it myself.

Here is what I mean. What if I wrote my own book about how (currently this is a favorite topic for me) many Christians have not applied a Biblical worldview to their normal day-to-day jobs? My theme: too many believers have this notion that some jobs are “sacred,” such as church work, and other jobs are “secular,” not worth as much commitment, and not as spiritual.

So in this hypothetical book, I strive very hard to be Biblical. While questioning the state of Christians’ thinking about work, I disclaim many times about how I don’t want to be legalistic. Going through passages such as Proverbs, Colossians 3, and 1 Thessalonians 4:11, I’m very careful to explain that God knows we can’t always do our absolute best at our jobs, doing everything as if for God and not for men. I also make it clear: some Christians truly are called to do overtly “spiritual” jobs, like Going into The Ministry, and all believers should support them.

But what if in this book, almost all the verses and anecdotes I cited were about Christians in secular jobs? What if, right up until the last, I only emphasized scenarios about people who were blessed by forsaking sacred/secular mindsets, and now living for God in their normal jobs?

Very often I felt that was what Platt has done, but only in reverse. Again I found nothing un-Biblical in his book. But he left unsaid too much that was Biblical.

Sure, it’s very hard to include every nuance, every disclaimer, every related truth, in any book or sermon about a particular subject. Platt did well including many related truths with his points to live radically for Jesus in all areas. I don’t question his commitment, his heart, or his effort. However, I do wonder whether any encouragements to be radical and dismiss American-dream  false teachings should also include truths from four essential and related Biblical doctrines.

(Tomorrow: Platt seems to overlook the truth that “radical” Christianity takes different forms.)

The book was a light read; and a tough read. It was short, yet seemed to take longer. I agreed with almost all of it, yet often grew frustrated. Its author reinforced truth, yet proved very challenging — and often not for the reasons one might assume.

After hearing about Radical by David Platt for so long, I was finally able to read it myself.

And I meant every word of the seeming paradoxical reactions I described above.

First, what did Platt get right? Much in every way! Radical may not be the first to call Christians to abandon materialistic assumptions (the “American dream,” as Platt references it), but it’s one of the few I’ve read that starts off grounding that call not in moralistic motives, but the Gospel.

Megachurch methods, program-driven pragmatism, topical sermons about how to Live Better, and pray-this-prayer-and-be-safe ideas are popular, but weaken the Gospel, Platt often repeats.

If we have been saved by this amazing God from our just fate under His wrath, Platt asks, why are we not responding out of gratitude to Him? Why do many Christians take God’s blessings as a means to their own end, substituting comfort for God’s call on all believers to take His Gospel into the world to others? And why, Platt asks, do many Christians who claim not to believe all people will be saved (universalism), in practice act as if it’s not necessary to preach the Gospel?

Platt bases his calls to action in solid Scriptural ground: Christian hedonism, not just (as others might say) We Must Build a Better World, or It’s the Right Thing. Those who give all they have to Jesus aren’t just doing their duty. They do so for the sake of Him as their reward:

You know that in the end you are not really giving away anything at all. Instead you are gaining. […] So with joy—with joy!—you sell it all, you abandon it all. Why? Because you have found something worth losing everything else for. [… Jesus] is something—someone—worth losing everything for. And if we walk away from the Jesus of the gospel, we walk away from eternal riches. (page 18)

That’s what I most appreciated about Radical: Platt’s Gospel basis. In many ways, yes, the rest was challenging to my own sin-shrapnel of practical universalism, or lack of care for the poor and those who haven’t heard the Gospel. Yet it was challenging in many other ways — not for anything Platt said, but for some truths and Biblical balance he could have also easily included.

(Tomorrow: might some who encourage “radical” Christianity forget “ministry myopia”?)

(Continued from yesterday’s excerpts from pastor/author Kevin DeYoung’s recent post …)

Earlier this year, DeYoung also went through seven common Scripture passages that are often used to support notions of “social justice” in secular society. He shows how such texts can’t be taken out of the context of God’s redemptive history and used for mere social improvement, and addresses many truths about what Scripture actually does say.

My contention is that these passages say more and less than we think, more about God’s heart for justice than some realize, and less about contemporary “social justice” than many imagine.

And my wish is that DeYoung will sometime adapt this series into a book.

Seven Passages on Social Justice (1)

Isaiah 1: Can we take God’s condemnation of Judah then and apply it to our society now?

Seven Passages on Social Justice (2)

Isaiah 58: Does Scripture support stopping perceive wealth inequities as “social justice”?

Seven Passages on Social Justice (3)

Jeremiah 22: Whom did God critique — Judah’s rulers, or all Judah’s people? If so, what for?

Seven Passages on Social Justice (4)

Matthew 25:31-46: When Jesus describes caring for “the least of these,” who does He mean?

(If you read any of these columns, read this one. It’s the first place I heard it clarified, with Biblical balance yet careful exegesis, that “the least of these” has a more-specific meaning.)

Seven Passages on Social Justice (5)

Amos 5: Back in the Old Testament — who defines real “justice,” God or modern-day activists?

Seven Passages on Social Justice (6)

Micah 6:8: Does Scripture here vaguely endorse improving society, or outline specific injustices?

Seven Passages on Social Justice (7)

Luke 4:16-21: Did Jesus claim He came to Earth to focus on “the materially destitute and the downtrodden […] to bring the year of jubilee to the oppressed […] to transform social structures and bring God’s creation back to shalom” (as opposed to that whole dying-on-the-Cross business)? Or did He mean something else here: not helping the downtrodden achieve justice in this world, but sinners to awake from their spiritual death and delight in Himself?

(Imagine fuzzy, crackling black-and-white fast-motion footage over the following process …)

1. Hosts of professing Christians get comfortable with their easy lives, satisfied with blessings and any benefits obtained from a stable country, and lifestyle, based on some Biblical truth.
2. The next generation of professing Christians, likely the children of the above generation, gets sick of the whole easy-living Christianity and its lack of emphasis on caring for the poor and destitute. Christ came to bring Social Justice! is their cry, and they talk a lot about this.
3. In reaction to them, more Christians get sick of that and dismiss Social Justice as just a bunch of liberal talk. For Gospel-driven reasons or not, they don’t help the poor and so on.
4. All sides get together, on the internet and sometimes even in person, and yell at each other.
5. People from either sides switch to either more “liberal” or “conservative” views. Each “side” has children, or other protégés, to teach their views.
6. (Repeat as many times as desired.)

Which of the two “sides” — or an overlapping viewpoint — do you fall?

Scripture doesn’t let Christians get away with either extreme view. Neither does pastor and author Kevin DeYoung, who last week concluded an ad-hoc series to encourage Christians not to fall off into one ditch or the other. Don’t base your view on what the Other Side is or isn’t saying or doing, DeYoung cautions. Instead, we must have Biblical balance:

#1: Don’t Undersell What the Bible Says About the Poor and Social Justice

In recent years there’s been so much talk about the poor and social justice that some conservative Christians, especially if that conservatism is political as well as theological, are tempted to tune out any time a well-intentioned evangelical chastises the church for neglecting “the least of these.”

[…] But there actually is a lot in the Bible about the poor, even more if you expand the category to include wealth, money, possessions, and justice.

[…] Because we have been given grace in Christ, we ought to extend grace to others in his name. Tim Keller is right: ministering to the poor is a crucial sign that we actually believe the gospel.¹

But now, for those closer to the the-church-hasn’t-done-enough-for-the-poor side of things:

#2: Don’t Oversell What the Bible Says About the Poor and Social Justice

Just as some Christians are in danger of over-reacting against social justice, other Christians, in an effort be prophetic, run the risk of making the Bible say more about the poor and social justice than it actually does.

[…] Some Christians talk […] as if the story from Genesis to Revelation is largely the story of God taking the side of the poor in an effort to raise the minimum wage and provide universal health care. As we tried to show earlier, the biblical narrative is chiefly concerned with how a holy God can dwell with an unholy people.[1.]

Moreover, the Bible’s references to “poor” are most often about those righteous people, God’s people, who are humble and waiting on Him, and may or may not be economically poor. Scripture encourages Church members to take care of their own poor first, DeYoung notes. After that comes seeking justice in the world — though knowing that only Jesus brings justice.

(Tomorrow: links to more resources from DeYoung. Social-justice myths are certainly not new.)

Some of these myths I’ve never heard about. Have you?

• Thinking that to this day, women have more ribs than men because God took a rib from Adam’s side to make Eve.
• Believing that archaeologists have found the bones of giants (a la Goliath’s race) in Saudi Arabia.

Regardless, Answers in Genesis is on the case, doing more iron-sharpening-iron and not just picking on the obvious Bad Guys (as some apologetics organizations are wont to do). As of this month, their new series Arguments Christians Shouldn’t Use has included quick rebuttals of the men-have-more-ribs and giant-bones-in-desert notions.

Explains Dr. Tommy Mitchell in the series’ introduction:

Why would we advise against using some arguments that appear to support creation? Simply put, some arguments are wrong, even if what they are arguing for is ultimately right. We would do a disservice to our witness for Christ by knowingly using bad argumentation—effectively bearing false witness—even if those arguments are used to support the truth of the Bible.

I happen to know AiG takes some hits for writing columns like this. You’re taking away all our favorite arguments! some people say. Yet as Mitchell later admonishes, ignoring real refutations of a favorite “evidence” or rhetorical point doesn’t help Biblical faith. If an argument is wrong, we must throw it out, and use only Scripture — the foundation of all good reasoning — as our basis.

No matter how attractive a “favorite” argument is—no matter how “perfectly” it seems to explain something in the Bible—if it does not hold up to scrutiny, it should be avoided. Casting aside a flawed model is not the same as casting away Scripture.

Some frequently used arguments are based on inaccurate historical data. Some are based on scientific models that were attractive at one time, but have been found to be unsupportable after further analysis. Some arguments are no more than mere speculation from the outset and should be avoided.

Further reading: Searching for the ‘Magic Bullet’ by Ken Ham, and AiG’s more-detailed inventory of Arguments We Don’t Use. Perhaps this new series will further address two poor arguments:

1. Evolution is just a theory. (“Theory” has a stronger meaning in scientific fields than in general usage; it is better to say that evolution is just a hypothesis or one model to explain the untestable past.)
2. Microevolution is true but not macroevolution. (People usually mean that we see changes within a kind but not between kinds; however, the important distinction is that we observe changes that do not increase the genetic information in an organism.)

The second one, especially, gets around a lot in Biblical-creation circles. But because of its vagueness, and implication that some kind of new-information-producing evolution does occur, Christian should retire it.

So what apologetics arguments would you retire, whether ones commonly used to advocate Biblical creation science or Christianity altogether?

Even James Taranto, a secular (though conservative) writer for the Wall Street Journal, can quickly show a certain question’s illogic.

Think about that old Philosophy 101 question: If God is omnipotent, can he make a rock so big that he can’t lift it? It seems like a puzzle, but the answer is clearly no. The premise that God is omnipotent leads to the conclusion that he can both make and lift a rock of any size. “A rock so big that he can’t lift it” is a logically incoherent construct, not a limitation on God’s power.¹

Taranto used that an anecdote about lawmakers who comically imply they can make a law so firm even they can’t themselves repeal it.

Yet I wonder what more-specific applications Christians might have for this truth, for encouragement and evangelism. …

(Continued from part 1, part 2, part 3 and part 4.)

The very act of writing this week’s series has taught me more about its theme.

For months since starting YeHaveHeard, I have had doubts. This site will never be another Challies.com or Gospel Coalition (and in fact, I don’t want it to be like that). Still it’s very difficult to avoid thinking: am I doing enough? Is this site Big enough?

Such a notion is more insidious than I thought. I’ve had it even while writing about how Christians often subtly believe they’re not doing enough Hard Things.

True, God saves His people for the purpose of spreading His Gospel and making disciples from all nations (Matthew 28: 18-20). His gospel is of unearned grace, yet will result in good works (Ephesians 2:10). Still, God’s redeemed saints so often ask more of themselves than He asks.

Millions of Godly Christians are not do-do-do-ing all the obvious Hard Things:

• We may not be sailing around the world, or raising a million dollars for charity before age 17, or publishing books, or being as spiritually impactful as this or that famous missionary.
• We may not be leading huge churches that pack out the pews, blogging to thousands or writing the next bestseller with endorsements from D.A. Carson, Mark Dever or J.I. Packer.
• We may not be charging into politics to Change the Nation and Preserve Societal Morals.
• And we may not have the widest-read blog in the world.

… But God only wants His people to be faithful to what He has given them to do. And He is clear throughout Scripture that any motivation to do, do, do, is in the Gospel, and nothing else.

So I’ve slowly come to realize: maybe I don’t need to turn out some complex and in-depth essay twice a week. Maybe instead I can work to be faithful in the little things — like putting up a short post, or long post, every day. Maybe that is how I can best glorify God in this way, and not keep building up projects in my own mind as if they must be Big, or else I shouldn’t try.

It seems this commitment has actually helped me do actual Big Things this week after all. I’ve not only blogged here every single day, but helped re-launch the co-op blog Speculative Faith, and blogged there four days out of this week. Do I say this to brag? Not at all — only to cross-promote.¹ Yet it also reminds to me, that God will in His own time bring us to do the Big Things, if He has them for us, only when we’re faithful in the small things.

Wrapping up: on ‘radicals’

Much of this series was inspired by Todd Friel’s monologue on Wretched Radio some weeks ago. He finally worked to a close by discussing something that’s been on my mind for weeks: institutionalized Do-do-do-ism. Some Christians, often with very good and even Gospel-based intentions, give direct voice to the notion that if you’re not doing Big Things, you may not be faithful at all. It’s not so much that they oppose small faithfulness. They just forget about it.

I don’t worry about Christians who truly need to hear such a message, or about those who already have solid foundations — about the Gospel and how it affects all of life, not just the obviously spiritual parts. Instead, what about those who could assume that if they are not doing clearly Big Things, such as writing books or being missionaries, they’re not doing enough?

This emphasis these days (is on the notion that everyone must do obviously hard things to be a truly serious Christian) — and it’s sneaky, I’m telling you, it’s sneaky.

There’s another pastor out there — and I want to do a little more research before we get into it a little bit deeper, but I suspect it’s the same thing. “Unless you are living —” well, what a coincidence — “like me, in this crazy radical way, you’re not doing the Big Thing, unless you’re living like me.” Well I’m sorry, sir. That’s a type of yoke and a type of legalism, and do, do, do system, I’m not interested in.

(The Duran Duran song starts up again …)

We are to be faithful where we are.

(“Do-do, do-do-do, do-do-do, do-do-do, doo-doo …”)

And if God calls you someplace, then go, if you’ve fulfilled your responsibilities at home. That’s the Big Thing. That’s the Hard Thing. That’s the difficult thing to do. And when people try to load up stay-at-home moms or pastors with d-do, do, do —

(And) young people has got to be the third group. … Really, it’s all of us, but I think even more on the young group. “Hey —” and it comes a lot from the parents, doesn’t it? “We’re gonna get into sports, we’re gonna get you into athletics, we’re gonna get you into ballet, we’re gonna get you into drama, and you’re gonna do something big!” — as the world defines it.

How’s about this as a Big Thing for a kid? You wake up every single morning, and you make your bed, and you get your room cleaned up, and you come downstairs, and you help with the dishes after you’ve made yourself some food, and then you say to your mom and dad, “Mom and Dad, I’m so grateful to be here. And I’m so grateful that you’ve grown me up in the fear and admonition of the Lord. And I would like to show my gratitude to God and to you. How can you plug me in? I would like to do that today.”

And let me tell you something: that’s Big. … That’s harder than becoming a celebrity, or becoming a famous person. We must resist the temptation to do that to each other.

(Another Duran Duran song begins; apparently, “Hungry Like the Wolf” …)

Watch out for the do-do-dos.

(Continued from part 1, part 2 and part 3.)

If I said, “We evangelicals better think long and hard about our continued infatuation with and endorsement of … Sarah Palin,” what might be the reactions?

1) Yeah, that woman’s a nutty conservative, doesn’t care for the poor, is surely racist, etc.

2) Have you bought into compromising Christianity? We need to save America from liberalism.

Well, I haven’t said that yet. Actually it was Todd Friel, host of Wretched Radio, who said it. But regarding this issue, I’m about to start agreeing with him.

Fighting feminism

Sometimes Friel seems to forget that feminism is not the only threat to Christians. Yes, feminism gets a lot more press; it is more prevalent than other wrongs. Yet the other extreme is out there: chauvinism, often called “patriarchy,” an un-Biblical and God-slandering notion that daughters belong to fathers (who are like “high priests” of their own homes), that working outside the home automatically makes a woman a feminist, and other things.¹

Thus I would not simply criticize Palin for having any kind of job outside her home. Scripture does not directly forbid this, so why should I?

But if a church elder/overseer is called to keep his family well-cared for, and such a person must be a man, how much more should a woman who professes to know Christ want to avoid going out to be a leader if her home is a mess? (And when Friel talked about this, a certain news story hadn’t even yet broken.)

I feel sorry for the Palins. My reaction is similar to my thoughts last year, when all manner of Christians were ready to support a certain beauty pageant contestant who’d given a close-to-Biblical answer to a gay-marriage question. Given her raunchy behavior, shouldn’t the Church want to love this young woman, and correct her, helping her grow closer to the Jesus she professes to know? No — instead, Christians used this person. It’s like we care more for popularity and getting in the press than loving and teaching those who claim to be our own.

Sarah Palin and her family are not characters in an evening drama. They are not larger-than-life figures who can “handle it” because they’re somehow different. Flaws and positive attributes and all, they are real people. They need real help, from a real and active church. They need to be loved, taken in and taught. And yes, I wonder if Sarah’s children need their mom.

What they do not need is to be placed on pedestals and asked to lead us. That doesn’t love them. It doesn’t respect the God who places such value on being glorified in a Christian family.

Meanwhile, do other wives and mothers who want to glorify Christ feel pressure to Do, do, do, more, more, more? Does getting into politics, being the latest greatest Articulate Conservative Spokeswoman Running for Office, sound more appealing and worthy of acclaim than simply staying home and taking care of your family, loving your husband, and mostly loving the Lord?

It certainly is not wrong to seek high office. But when those who are — or who can — are rising to the top and doing all these Big Things in America, what might other women be feeling like?

Do other women’s sacrifices mean nothing? Is God more pleased with the women who plan to Save the Country? Is it well-just-okay to stay at home and work full-time to help your husband educate and raise your children, while the Big People go out and do the Really Big Things?

Faithful things

I’ll close with another quote from Friel, the second-to-last in this Do, do, do series.

Friel had talked about how pastors are under many pressures from Christians. Sometimes, without even knowing it, Christians may imply their pastor isn’t doing enough, or needs to have more attenders, better sermons, bigger buildings, and all that. Then Friel went on to say that Christian women are under some very similar pressures.

Number Two group would have to be stay-at-home moms. Has to be — stay-at-home moms. Shellacked for, “ohhhh, living at home and letting that oppressive man control you.” You know what? Staying at home, and doing that with your kids — that’s plenty big, ‘cause that’s the faithful thing. And I gotta tell you — that is the hard thing.

I really felt bad for those women who thought that they to go leave their babies at home, in the care of somebody else, so that they could go rescue society.

And by the way, what a slap in the face of every single man in this country. You mean, there’s no men who’ve already raised their kids who couldn’t do this?

Sorry, I can’t help but throw this in. We evangelicals better think long and hard about our continued infatuation and endorsement of — sorry, you can send us emails if you like — Sarah Palin. Her kids need her. “Well, they seem to be doing all right.” Uhhh, have you read the papers? Are you kidding me?

… Aren’t we the stay-at-home-mom people? Aren’t we the ones who say, “Well done, madam! You did the faithful thing. … You did the big thing.” One family at a time.

… God is smart, and He says to each and every one of us: “You do not have to do the big thing. You need to do the hard thing, which is the faithful thing.”

Tomorrow: The true Big/Hard Things and Radical Lives often seem so small.

(Continued from Part 1 and Part 2.)

How often do you wish your pastor was one of the Big Pastors? Perhaps you don’t at all, and come to think of it, I’m not sure I have (that I can remember). Yet surely the hint of temptation is there. It’s a sort of covetousness: I really like my pastor, and thank God for him, but he’s so (insert flaw here) and doesn’t know about (insert favorite doctrine or Christian-practice issue here) and often doesn’t go as deep or isn’t as Big as (insert Big author/pastor’s name here.)

Maybe this is a habit for Christians. It’s the quiet, nagging, often subconscious notion that what we do — in church ministry, home ministry, work ministry or anywhere else God has called us — just isn’t as spiritual. The Bigger Christians, authors, musicians, more-popular pastors and Christian conference speakers, seem to be have much more influence for the Kingdom of Christ.

But according to one of those “bigger” guys himself, Wretched Radio host Todd Friel, Christians should stop that subtle implication. And it can be particularly hard on pastors.

[At the Do Hard Things conference], I ran into a woman. (And I apologized of course, because I almost knocked her over. Thank you.) … White woman, carrying a little black baby. Clearly adopted. I’m no geneticist, but I’m almost certain it was an adopted child.

Now that’s a big thing. That is not gonna make the history books. That is a hard thing. But it doesn’t need to be a spotlight thing. It doesn’t need to be a monstrous thing.

… There’s several groups of people that I think get hammered by this message more than anybody else.

… Let’s start with you, pastor. The pastor gets shellacked constantly with this message. “Hey, what are your numbers? What are your numbers, preacher? How many people you got at your church? How many square feet? How many does your worship center seat? Do, do, do! Get big, big, big!”

And there’s a huge amount of pressure on a pastor to be the biggest in town. And pastor, you feel it, don’t you? A lack of contentment. Just banging out that sermon, 20, 30 hours a week. And you think, “Oh, it seems so small.”

No no — that’s the world telling you it’s a small thing. Do a faithful thing. The hard thing is being faithful to God and growing in holiness.

And pastors are getting just the opposite message, not just from the world, but from the church too — not intentionally, I’m sure. But all the growth conferences: “Get bigger. Do more. How to get published. How to wear these clothes to attract that group. Put on those glasses, and they’ll think you’re nifty, and the numbers will go up.”

There’s huge pressure. Pastor, you resist it. And you do the faithful thing. Do the hard thing of growing in holiness, right where you are.

Tomorrow: For women especially — is political activism superior to being a mother?

(Continued from Part 1.)

Wretched Radio host Todd Friel continued with questioning why Christians imply (or say directly) that living for God in the best ways mean doing things for Him in the biggest ways.

I mentioned that I went to the conference this week, and a little bit of it — didn’t get to see the whole thing. What I saw was very nice and very good. But there is even a danger in a nice conference like Do Hard Things. That’s the name of the book by Alex and Brett Harris, encouraging teenagers: “do something hard. … Do something for God.”

But we gotta be careful that we don’t do Do Hard Things, and turn it into Do Big Things.

… We are so inclined to grab a story like — okay, pick your favorite missionary. “Look at what this missionary did and accomplished by the age of six. Do that.” And I’m afraid that we put a monstrously big burden on people, first of all, especially if it is not Gospel-centered. “Do this in response!” needs to be our do message, not just do it because — hey, do you want to be considered great?

(The Duran Duran song starts up again …)

Do you want to be in the history books?

(“Do-do, do-do-do, do-do-do, do-do-do, doo-doo …”)

We gotta get away from that message.

Fortunately, though I haven’t read the book, I understand the Harrises include a chapter about how it’s often hard to do small things. Yet I also know, based on human nature with supporting evidence from my own thought processes, that it’s very easy for those who’ve done the big Hard Things to rise to the top. And those who’ve attempted the Hard Things, but for whatever reasons failed, don’t get as much time to share their testimonies, do they?

To paraphrase Kevin DeYoung: sometimes we need to Do Plodding Things. Such tasks may not save the world, or be worth hosting a conference or writing a book, but they glorify our God.

Tomorrow: Pastors have many pressures to do more; but God only wants faithfulness.