Home » Search results for 'worship' (Page 10)
Search Results for: worship
Bifurcation in Beauty: Dualism of Spiritual/Sacred and Natural/Secular
You have heard, “Life imitating art or art imitating life.” In that vein, art imitates worldview.” Even when someone says, this is his worldview, his art may contradict what he says is his worldview. The art or his aesthetic is a better or more accurate expression of his worldview than other means of expressing it.
You could see what was important to Jesus by His reaction to the corrupting of the temple, His Father’s house. When someone blows his top because you dinged his car, that says something about the priority of his car, more than if you asked him. A person’s music has that way of explaining the meaning of a person’s life.
Worship of and Love for God
One biblical and historical element of worship of God is music. The Bible is full of music. Worship is an offering to God. God regulates the offering. It must be what God wants for Him to accept it.
Someone said, “You are what (or who) you worship.” Whatever you give God, that’s what you think about Him. If you give that to Him, then that expresses who you are, as much as it does who God is.
You can say you love God, like you can say you know God. If you don’t do what He says, you neither love Him or know Him, which overlap. The love shines through what you offer. It is like giving God the present you wanted, not what He did. You love yourself.
The “life imitating art” part of the equation says that art affects life. Life changes by the art influencing it. A person especially changes by the thoughts expressed about God through the music offered God.
The Meaning
What I have written assumes that art means something. It also says that art itself is not subjective and personal. Scripture says this, when it says that God is worshiped in the beauty of His holiness.
Beauty, which relates to aesthetics or art, is not in the eye of the beholder. It is objective in its meaning. Holiness is beautiful. That would mean that the unholy is not beautiful. Everything is not beautiful in its own way. Some is beautiful and some is not.
God separates from what falls short of the perfections of His attributes. That is the holiness of God. God will not receive as worship what falls short of His attributes. He separates from that as characteristic of His nature.
Bifurcation of Beauty
How is it that today churches do offer God the profane, that is, what conflicts with His attributes? Churches bifurcate beauty, just like they do with truth. They separated the spiritual or sacred from the natural or secular. Like there is total truth, one truth like one God, there is total beauty.
Churches and their leaders (or perhaps the leaders just pander to the people) went along with the split. They regarded and treated spiritual things as sentimental and emotional, not on the same plain as the natural and the secular. Church is an escape from the real world.
The music offers that escape and that feeling, which lifts someone emotionally, and is seen as a sacred or spiritual experience with God. That’s what church does as its most essential. People leave with a skip in their step, ready to go in the real world, the secular one, even thinking it was God.
Some churches and their leaders would disagree they do what I described in the previous paragraph. They explain it as something different, so removed from what occurred, because now that is the norm for a church. It’s been done so long, it’s just church now. It follows the trajectory of a revision of true worship, not true worship.
A church with corrupt music and worship doesn’t see its art as negative or corrupted. That is instead something profane to the extreme like a Mapplethorpe exhibit of a crucifix in a jar of urine, pushed by the National Endowment of Arts in the late 1980s. Certain extreme or exotic modern or even postmodern forms, those are wrong. Not the profanity churches now perform and consider worship.
Tell-Tale
Without the church doing much to anything to help it, the world’s culture has decayed. Churches veered off objective beauty, or one beauty. Something is either beautiful or it is not. Beauty is not related to secular or spiritual or even sacred.
Music isn’t sacred because it is used in the church; it is sacred because it is sacred. That also means it is beautiful, because, again, beauty relates to the glory of the Lord. A corruption of beauty, used in worship in the church, does not become beautiful by a church using it, what some today call, “redeeming” it.
The music someone plays and enjoys, and especially for someone who says he is a Christian, by that you can tell who he is. I know some of you readers hate that. You deny it sharply and often angrily. The reasons for the heat also help explain what is happening.
It is easy today for professing Christians to stand up against decadent culture. They can point out what’s very horrible in bad books in schools and their curriculum. Meanwhile, their churches are decaying at perhaps a little slower pace but a continuous one that isn’t far behind the world.
What is light and easy, sentimental and emotional, and entertaining also sells. Salzburg and Vienna and the rest of Europe went for Mozart’s music because of the former, the light and easy, etc. His dad Leopold, however, liked the selling part of it. It wasn’t lost on the religious leaders that Mozart also boosted their prominence and position.
Church Consumers
Entertainment, Not Worship
Church attenders become consumers, which is the opposite of worship. They also confuse that feeling from true spirituality. It doesn’t matter, because that feeling and spirituality are on the same plain. When the congregants leave their meeting, they take that experience as preparation for the real world. That’s also now constituted as God. The people think they’ve associated with God because it is indistinguishable from Him. It is actually more aligned with the world they enter after their assembling ends.
Even Baptist meetings have long encouraged the decadence of consumerism. They entertain a crowd. The feeling is an apparent sanctified one, which is a lie. The one who does this the best, a kind of circus-master, is a wanted commodity. It or he improves the spirit of the meeting, again this superficial, sentimental emotionalism. God is using his talent. Most cannot resist the popularity of it. It is its own pop music.
How could churches permit a philosophy in conflict with God? Some don’t judge music. Even though arts are full of meaning, they relegate it to meaninglessness. It is in this meaningless realm of spirituality, not like what occurs where there is meaning, eight to five, a real life. Many also judge against the extreme and deem themselves better by comparison.
Loss of Discernment
Young people in church often feel left out. If they get this music, it at least might connect them to the real world. This is the acquiescence to youth culture. Their hormones are raging and they chafe under parental authority. They look happier and parents think the church succeeds at keeping them. Its young people are happy. At least they can smile to the rhythm, the feeling, and the allurement.
Churches lose their discernment, described in a biblical way as unable to distinguish the holy from the profane. It occurs through incrementalism. Men won’t separate from it. They won’t say no to it. It gets worse and then doesn’t stop getting worse. To explain it requires something more than a thirty second sound byte. Even if you can, the Bible doesn’t have a play button to give the kind of proof necessary for such diminished discernment.
Country music or Country Western arose in church settings. It grew among church going young people in the Bible belt. They took the sentimentality and feelings that corresponded to the bifurcation of beauty in the church. Country western stars, who began in church, brought a more intense version of it to the world. It produced an even more extreme response.
Holy and Profane
Ryman Auditorium, the temple of country music, looks like a church building. It gives people, especially young ones, that feeling they had at church, making their experience in the world indistinguishable from church. The entertainers at church just do a lesser version of the same thing. This contrasts with Ezekiel 44:23:
And they shall teach my people the difference between the holy and profane, and cause them to discern between the unclean and the clean.
The country stars were good at country music. What started in church succeeded in the world. The success in the world, more excessive in its effect, travelled back to the church. The church accepts it, because that’s the domain of the spiritual.
To Be Continued
The Gospel Is the Power of God Unto Salvation, pt. 6
Part One Part Two Part Three Part Four Part Five
The Apostle Paul writes that “the gospel is the power of God unto salvation” (Romans 1:16). He uses those words to explain why in the first half of the same verse that he is “not ashamed of the gospel of Christ.” Maybe you might think that when Paul is saying that he is not ashamed of the gospel, that there was no way he would be. Paul ends Ephesians and Colossians asking for the churches to pray for boldness for him to preach the gospel.
Not Ashamed of the Gospel: Worship
Paul could be ashamed, but he wasn’t, because the gospel is the power of God unto salvation. If he was ashamed, that meant less gospel preaching and then less salvation. What occurs when shame for the gospel brings less gospel preaching?
Earlier in Romans 1, Paul writes, “For God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit in the gospel of his Son.” His word “serve” translates the Greek word latreuo, which is translated “worship” elsewhere (Philippians 3:3). As the word “serve” it is the priestly service, which enacts the offerings and the sacrifices. The priests presented these to God as prescribed by Him in His Word. This hearkens to the language of Paul in Romans 12:1, “present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.”
To “present” is to “offer.” “Service” in Romans 12:1 is latreia, the noun form of the verb latreuo. It is reasonable worship. Worship is giving God what He wants. Priests in the Old Testament sacrificial system served, but it was the priestly service of offerings. They presented to God what He said in His ceremonial law.
Jesus made New Testament believers “priests” (Rev 1:6). As Peter wrote, New Testament believers are a holy priesthood, offering up spiritual sacrifices unto God (1 Peter 2:5). This equals or surpasses what Old Testament priests did. It isn’t lesser.
In Romans 1:9 the Apostle Paul says his gospel preaching is to worship with his spirit. Worship must be acceptable to God. His preaching of the gospel is acceptable unto God. Worship glorifies God.
The Missionary Psalm
The glory of God corresponds to the perfections of God’s attributes. His attributes are revealed before men. Glorifying God exalts those attributes by showing them. Preaching the gospel shows forth the attributes of God. With regard to this, I think of Psalm 67, what Spurgeon and others called and call “the missionary psalm.”
1 <To the chief Musician on Neginoth, A Psalm or Song.> God be merciful unto us, and bless us; and cause his face to shine upon us; Selah. 2 That thy way may be known upon earth, thy saving health among all nations. 3 Let the people praise thee, O God; let all the people praise thee. 4 O let the nations be glad and sing for joy: for thou shalt judge the people righteously, and govern the nations upon earth. Selah. 5 Let the people praise thee, O God; let all the people praise thee. 6 Then shall the earth yield her increase; and God, even our own God, shall bless us. 7 God shall bless us; and all the ends of the earth shall fear him.
Spurgeon writes in his Treasury:
How admirably balanced are the parts of this missionary song! The people of God long to see all the nations participating in their privileges, “visited with God’s salvation, and gladdened with the gladness of his nation” (Ps 106:5). They long to hear all the nationalities giving thanks to the Lord, and hallowing his name; to see the face of the whole earth, which sin has darkened so long, smiling with the brightness of a second Eden.
Exalting God Before the Heathen
Evangelism makes God’s way “known upon the earth,” His “saving health among all nations” (verse 2). The point of this in the end (verse 7) is that “all the ends of the earth shall fear him.” Worship starts with knowing Who God is, which brings reverence of Him, respect of Him, lifting Him up to His rightful place in the imagination of men. The gospel shows who God is in all His attributes. This is worth consideration.
Believers can talk about the gospel among themselves. It’s worth it. However, God wants exaltation among the heathen, among the nations, and in the world. He made those people in His image. He created them for His pleasure. Even if they don’t believe the gospel, they should hear it. When believers preach it, the true gospel, they exalt God.
To be ashamed of the gospel is to be ashamed of the power of God, which is an attribute of God. However, salvation itself as told by the gospel also manifests attributes of God: His holiness, His righteousness, His love, His goodness. His justice, and more. Even if someone doesn’t receive the gospel. believers worship God by preaching it.
More to Come
Dialectics, Triangulation, and Triage as a Pattern for Biblical Belief and Practice, pt. 2
Early in my life, I often heard the term “balance” to describe a superior way to live as a Christian. I think there is a biblical concept of balance, but also an unbiblical one. For instance, we don’t come to an interpretation of scripture or a biblical belief and practice by using balance. Advocates say that the truth, the right interpretation, the actual text of scripture lies in the middle somewhere in between the extremes.
The concept that I’ve described in part one and in this second part finds itself in history at least with the terminology of dialectics, triangulation, and triage. Philosophers and others used these words to communicate the way to determine what’s right or wrong and what to believe and practice or not. Theologians at one time crafted the English word, “syncretism,” which means synthesizing pagan religion with biblical worship.
Let’s see. The world likes worldly country music. Let’s mix that with Christian lyrics. People will like it more. It gives them a feeling. Let’s just say that’s the Holy Spirit. Syncretism occurred. This is dialectics, triangulation, and triage very often found in people who say they’re opposed to what I’m writing here.
John Frame writes that triangulation was the method of liberal Yale theological seminary when he attended in the mid-1960s. The school urged its students to triangulate. He said that fundamentalism and orthodox Protestant theology provided the antithesis, a reference to Hegelian dialectics. They encouraged students to “develop their own distinctive brands of theology. He expressed concern that this method now characterizes evangelical theology.
Another metaphor I’ve heard through my life is that you as a Christian need to decide what hill or hills you’re going to die on. Someone else told me, “Kent, you don’t want to burn all of your bridges.” Leave the bridge open to something you don’t believe and practice. If you burn all those bridges, you’ll be left with a much smaller coalition of allies or friends.
Should you refuse to die on a hill because of a biblical belief or practice? You want to live. Perhaps you’ll live longer if you reduce the number of things for which you might die. Jesus addressed this concept. He said, fear man more than God. Man can destroy your body. God can destroy both body and soul in hell forever.
I understand that Christians grow and churches grow. Not everyone stands at the same position. I’ve changed through the years, but I would call the old position unbiblical, whether it was more or less strict than the former belief or practice.
Many truths of the Bible are embarrassing for professing Christians to the world, especially now. Could believers do better with the world if they shaved off the more unpopular teachings of the Bible or reinterpreted them to move closer to the world? God knows that you’re doing it and He exalts His Word above His own name. He doesn’t accept this dialectic, triangulation, and triage approach to His teachings and practices. If it’s the truth, you don’t move from it, but if it isn’t, then you can and do.
Sing the Psalms–A Free App for your Apple or Android Phone
Scripture commands: “[S]ing Psalms” (James 5:13). The Spirit-filled saint is singing “psalms” as well as hymns and spiritual songs (Ephesians 5:18-21). If you are a believer, you have the obligation to sing God’s inspired psalms. You have the blessed privilege to sing the inspired psalms. You have the glorious blessing to sing to the Father the same words that the Lord Jesus sang to His Father on earth. What a blessing this is!
I am very thankful that recently Bro David Cloud wrote a valuable article commending psalm singing. Our church has sung from the 1650 Scottish Psalter, a literal psalter, for many years. My wife and I have sung through the 1650 Psalter numbers of times in our family devotions–we sing the same psalm every day for a week, and then the next week go on to the next psalm. (We also sing hymns from the Trinity hymnal, Baptist edition–as does our church–and from the Metropolitan Tabernacle’s hymnbook.)
Unfortunately, the edition of the 1650 Psalter that our church and our family worships with–a version which includes conservative tunes, rather than being words-only, called the Comprehensive Psalter–is not in print. The people who have the copyright are planning to reprint it, I have heard, so feel free to reach out to them if you would like physical copies for your church and home. However, if you are not able to get a physical copy, I am delighted to let you know that a quality app has been designed which includes the text and tunes of the 1650 Scottish Psalter. The app also plays the tunes so people who do not know how to read music can easily learn to sing the entire psalter. I would definitely recommend that you download the app, add it to your electronic devices, and joyfully obeying God’s command to sing the songs Christ sung in worship, the inspired, infallible, inerrant Psalms.
There are other metrical psalters (versions of the psalms that can be sung), but, in my view, the 1650 Psalter is the best, because it is one of the most literal of the singable psalters. Probably, in my experience, The Book of Psalms for Singing is my second choice.
I added links to both the Apple and Android version of the 1650 Psalter app on my website here in the ecclesiology section, where you can also find other useful helps for psalm-singing. Here are direct links to the apps:
1650 Psalter App for Apple devices
1650 Psalter App for Android devices
The price is right for the apps–100% free. That also makes it a great price for people who wish to obey God’s command to sing the psalms in foreign lands. Anyone, anywhere in the world, can download the app and sing the psalms using his electronic device. Churches who want to get physical copies of the 1650 Psalter can have everyone sing from his phone until physical copies are in print again.
God commands you to sing the psalms. Why not start today?
If you do sing the psalms, how has it been a blessing in your life, in addition to glorifying the Lord? Feel free to explain in the comment section.
–TDR
35th Anniversary of the Church I Planted in California, pt. 1
Yesterday, October 18, was the day of the 35th anniversary of the church I planted in the San Francisco Bay Area. Some want to know how it occurred. Bethel Baptist Church now is a solid church in a very, very liberal area, hostile to Christianity, with 3 1/2 acres debt free in the most expensive housing market in the country and a K-12 school. How did this occur?
In 10th grade, I knew I wanted to preach. When I knew that and surrendered to it, it changed me. My priorities changed. I still played sports, still took my regular classes, had my friends, but the Bible, my preparations for that role, moved to the top. During study hall, I pulled out my Bible first. I studied for Bible classes first. I took Greek for my language in my jr and sr years. This allowed me to skip first year Greek in college, and take second year Greek my Freshman year. I majored in biblical languages.
I had already acquiesced to biblical evangelism. I preached the gospel the best I could in different ways. I started preaching door-to-door. I talked to competitors about the Lord after sporting activities. I preached sermons in high school when I had the opportunity and worked with children in church, while in high school.
At one point, someone preached in college chapel about preaching. I had never made it public in a service. I knew it in tenth grade. At that point, our “youth pastor” had young men preach. I signed up and preached. That’s when I knew. In college, I came forward at an invitation, as prodded by this revivalist, to say I was doing this. It is a marker for me at the most. I started arranging everything in my life to fit this future goal. It affected me every day. It still does.
Let me throw something into this story that’s important. My parents sacrificed a lot for me. They both worked to keep my brother, sister, and I in school for jr. high and high school. They allowed and contributed to many opportunities. When I started taking Greek, it was because my dad took Greek. I carried Greek cards on my belt loop and went over my alphabet and vocabulary. I knew that before I ever took first year Greek. No one made me do that. I did it because it emulated my dad taking Greek. It’s not popular to support and honor parents today. My parents did a lot. In whatever way someone opposes what I do, it challenges what they did too. My mom still mentions that to me. It’s personal to her.
I minored in speech in college. All the aspects of leading a church plant require communication. I agree with the Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 2 that it does not depend on excellency of communication. Being a part of a speech department meant dramatic productions and oral interpretation. I took advantage of almost every opportunity to communicate in front of people to where it became totally natural to me, when it wasn’t at the beginning of this journey.
I applied to counsel at a Christian camp the summer before my Freshman year in college. I counseled the whole summer at Camp Joy in Whitewater, Wisconsin under the leadership of the late Charlie Hatchett. That helped me. I’m not saying that it’s something someone should do, but I dealt with the salvation of young people under a very good philosophy held by Camp Joy. The camp wanted true conversions and Brother Hatchett emphasized that. Including winter retreats, I counseled 35 or so weeks of camp over three years. I worked with a lot of younger people during that time. It was a good experience for me then and for my future.
My Freshman and Sophomore years, I was voted president of those two classes, then my Junior year, the whole student body voted me Vice President of the student body. I was President my senior year. All that required a lot for leadership then and in preparation for the future.
The summer after my junior year, I traveled with a college team and we put on the lives of Adoniram Judson and Michael Sattler. We played instruments, me trumpet, and sang. I saw many churches in those travels, and I saw the Western United States, where we traveled. I had never been there. Now I witnessed the needs of the West, what was there and what wasn’t there. Something clear, the San Francisco Bay Area may be the neediest area of the entire United States.
During high school, I wrote an essay for the primary high school English teacher. She later became the Dean of Women for the college. She praised my essay. She said, “You can write.” Her positive reinforcement changed my life as a writer. I continued to work at writing the best I could. Fundamentalism was not doing a good job of preparing writers. They still don’t do that well. I didn’t know one person who wrote a book. It’s important to write in the work of the Lord. The Bible itself is writing. Paul wrote epistles.
I kept working at writing. Others noticed it. The Dean of Students, the late Terry Price, and his wife Colene, did Vacation Bible Schools in the summers, and they asked me to write their scripts for their puppet programs every summer. I wrote scripts for the summer groups, the Victory Players, the life of Balthasar Hubmaier and others. Obviously taking college and graduate classes, I wrote many papers. As much as I tried to do a good job, all that writing helped me. I learned how to research, read and comprehend large amounts of material very fast, document, and summarize. All this moved toward planting a church in the San Francisco Bay Area in 1987.
For twelve years, I was member of Calvary Baptist Church in Watertown, WI. I worked with teens. I produced programs for the Wisconsin state youth conclave. The church and its pastor, William Lincoln, and other pastoral staff, encouraged work for the Lord. No one impeded me. If I wanted it, they allowed it. I kept this up.
Growing into fundamentalism, I got a pretty decent music philosophy. The major musicians had an okay philosophy. I don’t go further than that, because it was still undeveloped and weak compared to biblical teaching on worship. I participated in a lot of good music. I sang in Handel’s Messiah seven straight years. I sang in many choirs. All of that aided future worship of God in the church. I’m glad for the impact of the late Monte Budahl and then Don Degraw.
Between my senior year and first year of graduate school, I worked in a so-called pastor-preacher boy program at Lehigh Valley Baptist Church under Tim Buck. This church was just a few years old, started by Calvary Baptist Church in Lansdale, PA. On staff was a former college graduate. My friend Dwayne Morris and I went there with the plan of attending Calvary Baptist Theological Seminary. We did much different work in that church, living with the assistant pastor on his second floor. They helped me develop organization. I started a filing system. I determined to have a huge tract rack like Lehigh Valley. All those would characterize our church in the future.
I didn’t stay in Pennsylvania and attend Calvary Baptist Theological Seminary. I attended a pastor-preacher boy conference at Calvary in Lansdale, where professors from the seminary attacked and mocked the King James Version and biblical standards of Christianity. The seminary doesn’t exist any more, perhaps because of this same reason. If I got one thing from those men, they did a thorough and credible job at breaking down and explaining a text of scripture, something I didn’t hear in person much while in college.
No one affected my theological development than Thomas Strouse. Dr. Strouse still pastors and trains pastors. He taught half my grad classes. I still consider him one of the most important teachers in the country. He put in tremendous amount of work to prepare one of his students.
I wanted to pastor a church in graduate school. I did. I became an intern pastor of Emmanuel Baptist Church in Elkhorn, Wisconsin. While I served as Student Activity Director of the college and finished my last year of graduate school, I pastored that church. I taught adult Sunday School every week and preached Sunday morning and evening services. I was doing three different series every week. Also, I sang solos for special music. I wasn’t a soloist, but my solos affected one elderly lady in the church to where she had me sing a solo at her 50th anniversary celebration. I think those were the final solos of my entire life.
To Be Continued
Two Approaches to Reality, One of Which Is True: Either Construing or Constructing Reality
Let’s say that I’m on vacation to Turkey. I want to look at Asia Minor and the geographical locations of the Apostle Paul’s churches there. In addition I’m interested in Istanbul and the history of the Eastern Roman Empire. While touring, I’m grabbed, a gunny sack pulled over my head, and thrown into the back of a dark cargo van. The next thing I’m sitting on a metal chair in a crumbling urban brick building with a camera pointed at my face.
Moslem terrorists rip the sack off my head and through very bright light I see several swarthy, angry men each with AK-47s. One of them puts a crumpled paper in my hand with English text, that says I must admit confess that as an American spy I reject the Republican form of government and pledge my allegiance to Allah.
I look up from the script my interrogators gave me and tell them that I can’t read this, because it isn’t true. One of them punches the side of my head with the butt of his rifle and I see a flash of bright lights. I shake out the cobwebs and everything looks blurry. As my brain starts to clear again, I feel a stream of blood down the side of my head. As everything starts to clear, I look at the script and reassess whether I might go ahead and read it.
What’s on the piece of paper isn’t true, even if the audience believes it. The kidnappers constructed a reality. It isn’t true. I don’t believe it. I reject it. Someone else wrote it. Saying it or writing it more doesn’t make it any more true. What they’ve constructed is not reality. The language on the paper means to construct a new reality.
Maybe you’ve heard that perception is reality. A person can create his own reality based on his perception, one which might not be true. A person with perceptions will call it reality, when it isn’t. This is a reality again of his own construction, perhaps based on his misconstruing his own reality. Perception is reality, is not reality. He could perceive reality, but his perception does not make it reality. Very often it is not. Even though it isn’t reality, he forms language to construct a reality as he perceives it.
Construct or Construe
A popular postmodern notion today is that people construct their own realities. Reality is what people want it to be. Therefore, they reject objective reality and/or objective meaning.
For the sake of discussion, I am saying that construing reality is describing reality as it is, as it really is. Constructing reality describes reality as we want it to be. God alone constructs reality outside of our own perception. At most, we construe it. If we truly construe reality, then we describe it as it is. If we don’t like the reality God constructed, out of rebellion against him we might construct our own reality. It still isn’t reality though.
Postmoderns say men constructed the patriarchy, that is, the patriarchy is a social construct. They constructed the patriarchy using language. They say language is powerful. Language constructs reality. Language also changes reality, so using language they construct a new reality, an egalitarian one. Construction of a new, different reality starts with deconstruction of the old. Then using language, they construct a new one.
The patriarchy is reality. People’s job is to construe reality. People might not like the patriarchy but that does not change the reality of patriarchy. Since God constructs reality, reality is objective and, therefore, meaning is objective. Our life only has meaning if it describes reality as it really is. Someone construes reality only when he describes it or understands it as it really is.
Is patriarchy construing reality or constructing reality? It construes reality. It construes what God constructed. Why do people then construct reality? Objective reality, what we should call “the truth,” contradicts people’s lusts. They then construct a reality that conforms to their lust and call it their own reality. Also, they call it their truth. They use language to construct their own reality. This is why language becomes so important in secular institutions. They reject God, leaving themselves to construct their own reality.
The Idolatry of Using Language to Construct a New Reality
In the beginning, God constructed reality out of language. John 1:1-3 read:
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
The Word made all things. With Him was not anything made that was made. God alone did this or does this. When a man constructs his own reality using language, it is a form of idolatry that proceeds from pride and lust. Therefore, he worships and serves the creature rather than the Creator (cf. Romans 1:25).
Rejecting reality, that is, not describing it as it really is, also rejects God. It is a more subtle and significant way to eliminate God or to dethrone Him. God created everything for pleasure. Man deconstructs reality and constructs his own reality for his own pleasure.
Scripture reveals the reality God constructed, using language. God spoke the world into existence. He upholds all things by the Word of His power. God’s Words construct reality.
Those God created are responsible to construe reality based upon scripture. No one is neutral. When they don’t receive what God said, they will construct a new reality with their own language in defiance of God.
More to Come
A Hot Thing Today in Evangelical Hermeneutics Is Now To See Social Justice All Over the Minor Prophets
Was God angry with Israel for its lack of social justice? No doubt God was angry with Israel and through His prophets He warned them. The Bible, including the Minor Prophets, doesn’t mention “social justice.” It mentions just “justice.” Those who point out social justice in the Minor Prophets, or “The Prophets” as the Hebrews referred to it, say that God punished Israel for its social injustice. What they most often don’t say is that social justice itself is injustice according to its definition:
Social justice refers to a fair and equitable division of resources, opportunities, and privileges in society. Originally a religious concept, it has come to be conceptualized more loosely as the just organization of social institutions that deliver access to economic benefits.
Many different factors change the economic and social outcome of individuals. Scripture and, therefore, God doesn’t guarantee equality of resources or privileges. God doesn’t ensure equal opportunity. Bringing social justice into the Minor Prophets alters the meaning of justice, reads something corrupt into scripture.
When I say, “justice,” I’m speaking of the Hebrew word mishpot, found 421 times in the Old Testament. Translators translate mishpot both “justice” and “judgment.”
Evangelical social justice warriors use a prophet like Amos, where in 5:7 he says,
Ye who turn judgment to wormwood, and leave off righteousness in the earth.
“Righteousness” (tsidaqa) in the second half relates to “judgment” (mishpot) in the first half. A warning occurs later in verse 15:
Hate the evil, and love the good, and establish judgment in the gate: it may be that the LORD God of hosts will be gracious unto the remnant of Joseph.
“Establish judgment” (mishpot) and the “LORD God of hosts will be gracious.” Same chapter, verse 25, was a common refrain from civil rights leaders, used according to what became called “liberation theology,” which spiritualizes these Old Testament passages with a form of amillennialism.
But let judgment run down as waters, and righteousness as a mighty stream.
Social justice advocates now use these verses in a wide ranging manner, that is hardly justice. The “judgment,” that is mishpot, is the judgment of God. How does God judge what occurs? Israel doesn’t follow God’s laws, which are His righteousness. Israel falls short of the glory of God.
Micah is another prophet who confronts the same theme as Amos in such verses like 3:9:
Hear this, I pray you, ye heads of the house of Jacob, and princes of the house of Israel, that abhor judgment, and pervert all equity.
“Equity” at the very end isn’t a contemporary understanding. The Hebrew word means “straight, right, level, or pleasing,” as in pleasing to God. Israel was making crooked what was straight. That’s injustice.
When some people get away with lawbreaking because they’re rich, that is injustice. It’s not judging like God does. When that occurs, the straight becomes crooked. It’s also allowing people to get away with such activity.
Today the social justice warriors are championed by the rich, who get off the hook for their injustice. They cover for criminal evidence on a laptop of the President’s son. They tear up public property in Seattle and Portland without arrest. Illegals flow across the border. A homeless man urinates on the street without justice. Yet, all of this is “social justice.”
A verse in Micah equal in fame to Amos 5:25 is Micah 6:8:
He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?
People “do justly” or they don’t. In other words, they characteristically do what pleases God or they don’t. Justice relates to God. Doing justice means no one gets away with unrighteousness, which is what God says it is. If he does break God’s law, he repents. When a boy dresses like a girl or a girl dresses like a boy, that’s not mishpot. Abortion violates mishpot too. I can keep going a long time with such examples of the transgression of God’s law.
Calling the contents of the preaching of the Minor Prophets “social justice” perverts the point and meaning of the Minor Prophets. It sounds like impressive exegesis to a woke audience. It panders to that group. However, it corrupts justice. It makes the straight crooked in contradiction to Micah 3:9. It promotes redistribution of wealth, taking from those who earned it and giving it to those who didn’t, a form of thievery. This corresponds to a now famous statement by President Obama when he ran for reelection in 2012, speaking of small business owners, “You didn’t build it.”
The prophets preach repentance too. Amos 5:4 says, “Seek ye me, and ye shall live.” 5:6, “Seek the LORD, and ye shall live.” 5:9, “Seek him that maketh the seven stars and Orion.” 5:14, “Seek good, and not evil, that ye may live: and so the LORD, the God of hosts, shall be with you, as ye have spoken.” The road to justice starts with personal repentance, seeking the LORD and, therefore, His ways.
Perhaps the greatest abuse of justice is idolatry, elevating man’s lust above God. False worship. Rather than loving God, loving your self. None of this is mishpot. This isn’t justice. This isn’t seeking after God.
Charles Spurgeon: My Conversion Testimony
Have you ever read the conversion testimony of the famous Baptist preacher Charles Spurgeon?
It is a blessing to read. Here it is:
I sometimes think I might have been in darkness and despair until now had it not been for the goodness of God in sending a snowstorm, one Sunday morning, while I was going to a certain place of worship. When I could go no further, I turned down a side street, and came to a little Primitive Methodist Chapel. In that chapel there may have been a dozen or fifteen people. I had heard of the Primitive Methodists, how they sang so loudly that they made people’s heads ache; but that did not matter to me. I wanted to know how I might be saved, and if they could tell me that, I did not care how much they made my head ache. The minister did not come that morning; he was snowed up, I suppose. At last, a very thin-looking man, a shoemaker, of tailor, or something of that sort, went up into the pulpit to preach. Now, it is well that preachers should be instructed; but this man was really stupid. He was obliged to stick to his text, for the simple reason that he had little else to say. The text was,—
“Look unto Me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth” [Isaiah 45:22]
He did not even pronounce the words rightly, but that did not matter. There was, I thought, a glimpse of hope for me in that text. The preacher began thus:—“My dear friends, this is a very simple text indeed. It says, ‘Look’. Now lookin’ don’t take a deal of pains. It ain’t liftin’ your foot or your finger; it is just, ‘Look.’ Well, a man needn’t go to College to learn to look. You may be the biggest fool, and yet you can look. A man needn’t be worth a thousand a year to be able to look. Anyone can look; even a child can look. But then the text says, ‘Look unto Me.’ Ay!” said he, in broad Essex, “many on ye are lookin’ to yourselves, but it’s no use lookin’ there. You’ll never find any comfort in yourselves. Some look to God the Father. No, look to Him by-and-by. Jesus Christ says, ‘Look unto Me’. Some on ye say, ‘We must wait for the Spirit’s workin’.’ You have no business with that just now. Look to Christ. The text says. ‘Look unto Me.’ ”
Then the good man followed up his text in this way:—“Look unto Me; I am sweatin’ great drops of blood. Look unto Me; I am hangin’ on the cross. Look unto Me; I am dead and buried. Look unto Me; I rise again. Look unto Me; I ascend to Heaven. Look unto Me; I am sittin’ at the Father’s right hand. O poor sinner, look unto Me! look unto Me!”
When he had gone to about that length, and managed to spin out ten minutes or so, he was at the end of his tether. Then he looked at me under the gallery, and I daresay, with so few present, he knew me to be a stranger. Just fixing his eyes on me, as if he knew all my heart, he said, “Young man, you look very miserable.” Well, I did; but I had not been accustomed to have remarks made from the pulpit on my personal appearance before. However, it was a good blow, struck right home. He continued, “and you always will be miserable—miserable in life, and miserable in death,—if you don’t obey my text; but if you obey now, this moment, you will be saved.” Then, lifting up his hands, he shouted, as only a Primitive Methodist could do, “Young man, look to Jesus Christ. Look! Look! Look! You have nothin’ to do but to look and live.” I saw at once the way of salvation. I know not what else he said,—I did not take much notice of it,—I was so possessed with that one thought. Like as when the brazen serpent was lifted up, the people only looked and were healed, so it was with me. I had been waiting to do fifty things, but when I heard that word, “Look!” what a charming word it seemed to me! Oh! I looked until I could almost have looked my eyes away. There and then the cloud was gone, the darkness had rolled away, and that moment I saw the sun; and I could have risen that instant, and sung with the most enthusiastic of them, of the precious blood of Christ, and the simple faith which looks alone to Him. Oh, that somebody had told me this before, “Trust Christ, and you shall be saved.” Yet it was, no doubt, all wisely ordered, and now I can say,—
“E’er since by faith I saw the stream
Thy flowing wounds supply,
Redeeming love has been my theme,
And shall be till I die.”
I do from my soul confess that I never was satisfied till I came to Christ; when I was yet a child, I had far more wretchedness than ever I have now; I will even add, more weariness, more care, more heart-ache, than I know at this day. I may be singular in this confession, but I make it, and know it to be the truth. Since that dear hour when my soul cast itself on Jesus, I have found solid joy and peace; but before that, all those supposed gaieties of early youth, all the imagined ease and joy of boyhood, were but vanity and vexation of spirit to me. That happy day, when I found the Saviour, and learned to cling to His dear feet, was a day never to be forgotten by me. An obscure child, unknown, unheard of, I listened to the Word of God; and that precious text led me to the cross of Christ. I can testify that the joy of that day was utterly indescribable. I could have leaped, I could have danced; there was no expression, however fanatical, which would have been out of keeping with the joy of my spirit at that hour. Many days of Christian experience have passed since then, but there has never been one which has had the full exhilaration, the sparkling delight which that first day had. I thought I could have sprung from the seat on which I sat, and have called out with the wildest of those Methodist brethren who were present, “I am forgiven! I am forgiven! A monument of grace! A sinner saved by blood!” My spirit saw its chains broken to pieces, I felt that I was an emancipated soul, an heir of Heaven, a forgiven one, accepted in Christ Jesus, plucked out of the miry clay and out of the horrible pit, with my feet set upon a rock, and my goings established. I thought I could dance all the way home. I could understand what John Bunyan meant, when he declared he wanted to tell the crows on the ploughed land all about his conversion. He was too full to hold, he felt he must tell somebody. (C. H. Spurgeon, C. H. Spurgeon’s Autobiography, Compiled from His Diary, Letters, and Records, by His Wife and His Private Secretary, 1834–1854, vol. 1 [Cincinatti; Chicago; St. Louis: Curts & Jennings, 1898], 105–108.
Note that Spurgeon was not told to come to the front of a church building and repeat a sinner’s prayer, or told to ask Christ to come into his heart–those methodologies did not yet exist, as Dr. Paul Chitwood demonstrates in his history of the sinner’s prayer. Spurgeon was directed to embrace Christ directly by repentant faith–the right thing sinners should be counseled to do today, and which, enabled by the Holy Spirit through the power of Scripture, will lead to multitudes of true conversions.
Note as well that in Isaiah 45:22 the word translated “Look” commonly means “turn.” One turns from his sin to look to Christ alone for salvation–repentance is implicit in saving faith.
Spurgeon directed people to embrace Christ directly by faith, rather than telling them that if they sincerely repeated the words of a prayer they would be saved, throughout his ministry. Here are some examples of the evangelistic counsel he gave to seeking sinners, from his book Around the Wicket Gate (cited from here):
When the Lord lifts His dear Son before a sinner, that sinner should take Him without hesitation. If you take Him, you have Him, and none can take Him from you. Out with your hand, man, and take Him at once! When inquirers accept the Bible as literally true and see that Jesus is really given to all who trust Him, all the difficulty about understanding the way of salvation vanishes like the morning’s frost at the rising of the sun.
Two inquiring ones came to me in my vestry. They had been hearing the Gospel from me for only a short time, but they had been deeply impressed by it. They expressed their regret that they were about to move far away, but they added their gratitude that they had heard me at all. I was cheered by their kind thanks, but felt anxious that a more effectual work should be brought about in them. Therefore I asked them, “Have you indeed believed in the Lord Jesus Christ? Are you saved?” One of them replied, “I have been trying hard to believe.” This statement I have often heard, but I will never let it go by me unchallenged. “No,” I said, “that will not do. Did you ever tell your father that you tried to believe him?” After I had dwelt a while upon the matter, they admitted that such language would have been an insult to their father.
I then set the Gospel very plainly before them in as simple language as I could, and begged them to believe Jesus, who is more worthy of faith than the best of fathers. One of them replied, “I cannot realize it: I cannot realize that I am saved.” Then I went on to say, “God bears testimony to His Son, that whosoever trusts in His Son is saved. Will you make Him a liar now, or will you believe His Word?” While I thus spoke, one of them started as if astonished. She startled us all as she cried, “O sir, I see it all; I am saved! Bless Jesus. He has shown me the way, and He has saved me! I see it all.” The esteemed sister who had brought these young friends to me knelt down with them while, with all our hearts, we blessed and magnified the Lord for a soul brought into light. One of the two sisters, however, could not see the Gospel as the other had, though I feel sure she will do so soon.
Did it not seem strange that, both hearing the same words, one should remain in the gloom? The change which comes over the heart when the understanding grasps the Gospel is often reflected in the face and shines like the light of heaven. Such newly enlightened souls often exclaim, “It is so plain; why is it I have not seen it before this? I understand all I have read in the Bible now, though I could not make it out before. It has all come in a minute, and now I see what I never understood before.”
The fact is, the truth was always plain, but they were looking for signs and wonders, and therefore did not see what was there for them. Old men often look for their spectacles when they are on their foreheads. It is commonly observed that we fail to see that which is straight before us. Christ Jesus is before our faces. We have only to look to Him and live, but we make all manner of bewilderment of it, and so manufacture a maze out of that which is straight as an arrow.
The little incident about the two sisters reminds me of another. A much-esteemed friend came to me one Sunday morning after service to shake hands with me. She said, “I was fifty years old on the same day as yourself. I am like you in that one thing, sir, but I am the very reverse of you in better things.” I remarked, “Then you must be a very good woman, for in many things I wish I also could be the reverse of what I am.” “No, no,” she said, “I did not mean anything of that sort. I am not right at all.” “What!” I cried, “Are you not a believer in the Lord Jesus?” “Well,” she said, with much emotion, “I, I will try to be.” I laid hold of her hand and said, “My dear soul, you are not going to tell me that you will try to believe my Lord Jesus! I cannot have such talk from you. It means blank unbelief. What has He done that you should talk of Him in that way? Would you tell me that you would try to believe me? I know that you would not treat me so rudely. You think me a true man, and so you believe me at once. Surely you cannot do less with my Lord Jesus.”
Then with tears she exclaimed, “Oh, sir, do pray for me!” To this I replied, “I do not feel that I can do anything of the kind. What can I ask the Lord Jesus to do for one who will not trust Him? I see nothing to pray about. If you will believe Him, you shall be saved. If you will not believe Him, I cannot ask Him to invent a new way to gratify your unbelief.” Then she said again, “I will try to believe.” But I told her solemnly I would have none of her trying; for the message from the Lord did not mention trying, but said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved” (Acts 16:31). I pressed upon her the great truth, that “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life” (John 3:36); and its terrible reverse: “He that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God” (John 3:18).
I urged her to full faith in the once crucified but now ascended Lord, and the Holy Spirit there and then enabled her to trust. She most tenderly said, “Oh sir, I have been looking to my feelings, and this has been my mistake! Now I trust my soul with Jesus, and I am saved.” She found immediate peace through believing. There is no other way.
There are numbers of resources that can help churches follow the Biblical evangelistic methodology of Spurgeon today, rather than the corrupt “1-2-3, pray after me, 4-5-6, hope it sticks” salesmanship of people like Jack Hyles. May the number of Baptist churches who counsel the lost Biblically increase greatly for God’s glory and for the multiplication of true conversions.
–TDR
The Judgmental Church: Apostolic, New Testament, and Seeker-Friendly?
The Judgmental Church!
Everyone knows that being judgmental is one of the greatest sins that a person can possibly commit. The sin of being “judgmental” is mentioned and condemned in the following verses in the Bible:
The sin of being judgmental is regularly mentioned in 1st and 2nd Opinions, books which most people are much more committed to living by than they are, say, the Pauline epistles and the Gospels.
While being “judgmental” is not mentioned in the canonical New Testament, only in the pseudepigraphical 1st and 2nd Opinions, and the passage in the Sermon on the Mount that people misuse to prove this position actually commands one to help one’s brother remove even a speck or smaller sin from his eye (that is, Christ commands one to judge) as long as one does not hypocritically have a beam in one’s own eye (Matthew 7:1ff.), there are plenty of memes and commonly supported cultural images for it, which, in the eyes of many, should be a sufficient substitute for the total lack of support in the inspired text of Scripture.
Were the New Testament Churches Judgmental?
Did the apostolic, New Testament churches judge? In addition to Matthew 7:1ff., Christ commanded: “Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment (John 7:24). So Christ commanded people to judge–it was not only not a sin, but it is a sin to fail to judge. Did the New Testament churches follow Christ’s command to judge? Consider 1 Corinthians 14:23-25:
23 If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad? 24 But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all: 25 And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on his face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth.
Wow! Not only did this New Testament church fail to recognize the (alleged) sin of judging, but Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, wanted every member of the congregation to be judging. In fact, if a new visitor comes to a church service, “all” are supposed to judge him, with the truth of Scripture, and by this means he will not be turned off by their being so “judgmental,” but on the contrary, he will fall down on his face and will worship God, recognizing that God is in them of a truth.
Consider also Isaiah 1:21:
How is the faithful city become an harlot! it was full of judgment; righteousness lodged in it; but now murderers.
It was good for God’s people to be “full of judgment.” That was being “faithful,” and was characteristic of “righteousness.” When that stopped it was unfaithfulness, spiritual harlotry.
The second greatest commmand is to love your neighbor as yourself–the only greater command is to love God with your whole being. What is involved in loving your neighbor? Note Leviticus 19:17-18:
17 Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him. 18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.
Rebuking others is showing your neighbor love–just like not hating him, not avenging, and not bearing grudges. Sin is the greatest evil, so rebuking your neighbor, so that he does not sin, is one of the kindest and most loving things you can possibly do.
The Apostolic, New Testament Way to Be Seeker-Friendly
Do you want visitors to your church to come to true conversion? Do you want your church to glorify God and follow the New Testament? Then start having lots of judging of others go on, so visitors can fall on their faces and confess God is in you of a truth. Exercise lots and lots of God-glorifying, loving, non-hypocritical, but Biblically accurate judgment. That is part of loving your neighbor as yourself. Reject the Satanic advice of the world, the flesh, and the devil that you are not supposed to judge anyone or anything. As in so many other situations, this idea is exactly the opposite of what the Bible actually says.
John 7:24; 1 Corinthians 14:23-25; Isaiah 1:21, and Leviticus 19:17-18 should be carefully expounded in every evangelical “church growth” book that actually cares about what God says about the church and that wants genuine growth, not cancerous pseudo-growth. So should the fact that “come as you are” is a lie-the Biblical advice is “sanctify yourselves.” But I’m not holding my breath–I suspect that, in the minds of many, the sin of being judgmental, as condemned in 1st and 2nd Opinions, will continue to greatly outweigh the evidence to the contrary from Christ, the apostle Paul, Moses, and Isaiah.
“You mean I am wrong in saying being ‘judgmental’ is a sin condemned in the Bible? How DARE you judge me about that!”
–TDR
It Won’t Do You Any Good to Apologize for Trump
Very often conservative support for President Donald Trump starts with an apology. It goes something like the following.
I know he writes mean tweets and makes nasty insults, calls people names like a jr. higher. He is badly flawed, foul, immoral, a lawbreaker, braggadocios, self-centered, divisive, petty, a liar, a con man, a flip flopper, a criminal, authoritarian, and banal. But, I still voted for him because, you know, I look at performance.
People who start with an apology, I believe, think they’re warding off the expected angry reaction. Or, they won’t be associated with the worst character traits of Trump, readying themselves to hear them. I’m writing to say that it won’t do you any good to apologize for Trump. Embrace him. Accept his 2016 victory and his presidency.
None of the other 16 candidates would have defeated Hillary Clinton. Trump did almost everything he said he would do. He stuck his thumb in the eye of the corrupt media. He battled and fought for conservatives against the greatest political opposition in my lifetime and maybe all of American history.
In 1836, Sir Henry Taylor wrote the classic book, The Statesman, the first modern book devoted to that subject. He wrote:
[A] statesman has already, in the commonwealth of his own nature, given to the nobler functions the higher place; and as a minister; therefore, he is one whom his country may be satisfied to trust, and its best men be glad to serve. He, on the other hand, who sees in the party he forms only the pedestal of his own statue, or the plinth of a column to be erected to his honour, may, by inferior means and lower service, accomplish his purposes, such as they are; but he must be content with vulgar admiration, and lay out of account the respect of those who will reserve that tribute from what is merely powerful, and render it only to what is great. “He that seeketh to be eminent amongst able men,” says Lord Bacon, “hath a great task; but that is ever good for the public. But he that plots to be the only figure amongst ciphers is the decay of a whole age.”
Professor at Notre Dame, Michael Zuckert, wrote in 2020, Lincoln and Democratic Statesmanship:
Our ideas of statesmanship are fraught with seeming contradictions: The democratic statesman is true to the peoples (sic) wishes and views—but also capable of standing against popular opinion when necessary. The statesman rises above conflicts and seeks compromise between parties—but also stands firmly for what is right.
And I quote all that material about statesmen and statesmanship to get to my subject of President Donald Trump. I’m not going to say whether I think he is one or not. As you scan through the annals of the history of government, who was a statesman and did it matter? Was Julius Caesar one? What about William the Conqueror? Was King George III? What kind of statesmen presided over the Roman Coliseum?
If you go to scripture, you can look at all the various leaders of nations in order to surmise the statesman. Old Testament Israel looks like a recent Marine Corps slogan, “A Few Good Men.” Very few. A statue of General George Patton sits outside the library at West Point some say because he didn’t spend much time in there. Even Patton wouldn’t survive the present environment of the United States.
Today some propose settling for nothing short of Burkean conservativism in the trajectory of Russell Kirk. They yearn for William F. Buckley at the National Review. Jonah Goldberg just today, as I write this post, attacked Trump again. These conservatives, including many professing Christians, now take on the chief identification of Anti-Trump. In his piece, Goldberg insulted Trump voters, showing again, as he and others have again and again, got Trump wrong. This is seen all over his post in the LA Times, which doesn’t publish true conservatives, where he wrote:
One of the paradoxes of charismatic leadership is that the leader’s illegitimacy — in legal, rational or traditional terms — can have the effect of strengthening their hold on their followers. This dynamic has been at the heart of Trump’s distortion of the right. If the man cannot measure up to the traditional, moral, rational or legal yardsticks that conservatives once ascribed to leadership, then it is the yardstick’s fault for not measuring up to the man.
That’s right. Through his charisma, Trump has a cult-like, worshipful loyalty on his voters, who are called followers. All of these 74 million voters, which was more than any presidential candidate had ever received in any presidential election, could not see the fraud that Trump was like the enlightened Goldbergian human being. Goldberg said concerning the Founder of Turning Point USA, “Charlie Kirk, a pliant priest in Trump’s personality cult.” On the other hand, the public intellectuals (if that is possible), who voted for and defend Trump, call Goldberg the subject of Trump derangement syndrome. Douglas Wilson wrote last week:
Whatever I might think, the brains behind the progressive left have decided to take a header into the maelstrom of “doing whatever they can to advance the narrative and person and prospects of Donald J. Trump.” This is what a derangement syndrome can do to you. It turns the quivering brains of high-powered political operatives into a soupy kind of jelly, with green mold on the surface.
I see the jelly with the green mold coming out of Goldberg’s ears.
To speak of Trump without apology, consider why you voted for him, support him, and would vote for him again as president, even though you’re a Christian. You don’t have to use the Russia hoax, even the Dobbs decision to overturn Roe v. Wade with all the conservative justices Trump appointed. Trump believes that something in the United States is of higher value than other nations worth protecting by securing the borders. Borders conserve something on the inside that is better than what is on the outside. That simple, basic conservative idea separated Trump from his competitors like the wall he aspired to build.
A long time ago the United States left the possibility of a Russell Kirk conservative. We are in much more desperate times. We have to look to principles much more basic than those outlined by Edmund Burke and Benjamin Disraeli. The Brexit vote in England recognized this too. What I’m describing, Jonah Goldberg calls “instrumentalism.” He wrote in another essay:
The least objectionable of them justified their decision in the name of instrumentalism—“Trump’s flawed, but we can use him.”
This isn’t using Trump until we can get somebody better. That’s still an argument for 2024. No, Trump is where we’re at. Maybe we will get somebody better, but that’s also the reasoning behind what led to Joe Biden in 2020.
Trump isn’t an instrument. He espouses necessary, rudimentary principles. His don’t go far enough. They don’t do as much as I would do. But they go further than what we would get from anyone else, such as names like Dole, McCain, and Romney. Even throw in George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush, and Gerald Ford. Trump truly raised the bar over these men.
I want to argue just a little. You say, Trump is authoritarian. He’s a fascist. By far. By far, the greatest threat of fascism is the progressive left, like Ronald Reagan said:
America stands on four main values: Faith in God, Freedom of Speech, Family and Economic Freedom. If fascism ever comes to America, it will come in the name of liberalism.
Trump in his presidency practiced the separation of powers. He picked federalist Supreme Court justices, who did more to decentralize the federal government than in decades. Trump supported that. You’re just swallowing a lie when you say he’s a fascist or an authoritarian. He gave freedom to become energy independent, turning loose the American people.
Maybe you say he’s a want-to-be dictator because of January 6, 2020. Nothing like that came close to happening on January 6, nothing even nearly as bad as what did occur in Seattle, Portland, and the Twin Cities of Minnesota in the previous summer. The Russia hoax disenfranchised Trump voters. Illegal ballot harvesting did too. The perpetrators walk free. Does anyone think that we live under a fair justice system today? Where is the abuse of power? Who has attempted to criminalize parents who speak up in school board meetings?
I don’t apologize for President Donald Trump any more than I do for the minutemen on the Lexington Green.
Recent Comments