Ryle’s Inadequate View of Revelation

In Holiness, Ryle has a chapter devoted to a warning for the visible church drawn on the letters to the churches in Revelation 2-3. In this chapter, Ryle remarks,

I never can believe, if a certain form of Church government was so very important as some say, that the great Head of the Church would have said nothing about it here. I should have expected to have found something said about it to Sardis and Laodicea. But I find nothing at all. And I think that silence is a great fact.*

It is no doubt an argument that persuades many. We know this because the same argument is trumpeted about by what are known as “Red-Letter Christians.” The idea is that if Jesus didn’t say something about it the words directly attributed to him, then it isn’t really Christianity. By this means people pick and choose what parts of Scripture they must follow and what parts they can disregard. It is essentially Marcionite in its approach.

The rebuttal to this is simple:

First, there is the teaching that all Scripture is God-breathed and profitable (2 Tim 3:16-17). We should not devalue some parts of Scripture because it isn’t repeated in other parts. If something is said then we should consider it authoritative when it is rightly understood and applied. It is the discipline of systematic theology to correlate the passages, not to discount them. And once is enough. If God said it, he doesn’t need to repeat it (though he might).

Secondly, there is the reality that much of Scripture is topical in nature, or what theologians call “occasional.” By “occasional,” we don’t mean “every now and then” but “written to address a particular occasion.” This reminds us that a message or a letter in Scripture need not address every single thing but only the things that were important for the recipients of the message at the time of the writing.

So with respect to Ryle’s particular argument, we must not devalue church government because it isn’t mentioned in Revelation 2-3. It may well be that church government wasn’t the problem. It is entirely credible that the churches in these seven cities were indeed in order when it came to their polity. The problem was something else.

Let us be careful not to discount a truth from God because it isn’t in every verse of Scripture.

All Scripture is God-breathed and profitable.

*J. C. Ryle, Holiness: Its Nature, Hindrances, Difficulties and Roots (London: William Hunt and Company, 1889), 326–327.

The Power of Parents in the Worship of Children

Everyone knows that parents have tremendous power and influence in the lives of children, particularly in their younger years. And everyone knows that children have tremendous power and influence in the lives of parents.

The first is what God intended. The second is moving toward the effects of the fall in the reversal of creation-based roles.

The irony of the title, “The Power of Parents in the Worship of Children” is that we parents have often become almost powerless because we worship children. They run our lives by commanding our responses that flow out of a heart unchecked by the worship of God.

It should be the other way around. That our power in the lives of our children is driven by our worship of God, and our children’s worship is instructed by our worship of God rather than our worship of children.

As Israel departed Egypt in the exodus, the Passover was instituted by God as a reminder of his powerful deliverance, a deliverance that their children and grandchildren would never see. Yet in the initial instruction concerning the Passover, God envisions a day when the children will ask “What does this ceremony mean to you?” (Exod 12:26). “Why are you doing this?” they will say.

Embedded in this anticipated question are several important things.

First, there is the assumption that the parents are continuing in the commanded worship of God through the observance of the Passover. They have not let the immediate, internal complacency, or the passing of time shove aside their commanded worship and remembrance.

Seccond, there is the assumption that parents are participating in the observance in a way that makes clear that there is a meaning to it beyond the mere passing observance of a religious ritual. There is the assumption that the meaning of the Passover has been internalized by the parent.

Third, there is the assumption that the children are involved in the observance, that this worship is not just for adults. It is a family observance.

Fourth, there is the assumption that parents are able to answer the questions of their children because of their own spiritual knowledge of the history and the meaning of God’s work among them. In fact, there is the assumption that the parents will give God’s answer, "that our God delivered us from Egypt’ (Exod 12:27).

Thus, when children see it and ask, parents can answer in way that instructs their children and brings about the worship of children, that is, children who worship because of the mighty acts of God that they never saw but have only heard about from their parents.

In an age where parents worship children, we are often tempted to avoid the hard things. It is often easier to put our children to bed than it is read the Bible with them and pray with them before bedtime. It is often easier to let the sports schedule dictate the church schedule rather than fight the fight of missing games rather than church. It is often easier to address sin issues with non-biblical or quasi-biblical instructions rather than address the matters of the heart.

Parents who have no internalized the worship of God will usually take the easy road. We just want them to be quiet, to stop fighting, to get their homework done, to get to bed, to win games, to clean their rooms. And we will say or do whatever it is necessary in that moment to satisfy our children enough to get them to do what we want.

And in that, we often miss a teaching opportunity, however brief it might be. It’s the opportunity to teach them that at that very moment, they are worshipping something. They are professing allegiance to something—their selfish desires that bring fighting, their sinful desire for the immediate gratification of laziness rather than the harder task of completing homework, their arrogance that convinces them they know more than the referee or the teacher.

What we should want is for them to see how all these things are connected to the worship of God and the  filling of their God-ordained roles at this stage in their lives. What we should strive for is to root all these responses to life in the mighty acts of God in creation, deliverance, and community.

Sure it’s hard. And if we worship children, we will do everything we can to make them happy and to appease them.

But if we will worship God, we will approach parenting with the goal of teaching and reminding our children constantly that we all—ourselves included—have someone greater to answer to and to worship—namely, the Creator and Deliverer, God himself.

And so when our children ask, “Why do you do that?” let us make sure that the “that” they are asking about is our counter-cultural and other-worldly worship of God and the radical approach to life that stems from it. And let us make sure that, when our children ask, we have an answer that can lift them above the pressing needs of this hour and direct them to the eternal values of God.

Ryle on the Importance of a Church That Teaches Hell and Judgment

“If you would ever be a healthy and Scriptural Christian, I entreat you to beware of any ministry which does not plainly teach the reality and eternity of hell. Such a ministry may be soothing and pleasant, but it is far more likely to lull you to sleep than to lead you to Christ, or build you up in the faith. It is impossible to leave out any portion of God’s truth without spoiling the whole. That preaching is sadly defective which dwells exclusively on the mercies of God and the joys of heaven, and never sets forth the terrors of the Lord and the miseries of hell. It may be popular, but it is not Scriptural: it may amuse and gratify, but it will not save. Give me the preaching which keeps back nothing that God has revealed. You may call it stern and harsh; you may tell us that to frighten people is not the way to do them good. But you are forgetting that the grand object of the Gospel is to persuade men to “flee from the wrath to come,” and that it is vain to expect men to flee unless they are afraid. Well would it be for many professing Christians if they were more afraid about their souls than they now are!”

J. C. Ryle, Holiness: Its Nature, Hindrances, Difficulties and Roots (London: William Hunt and Company, 1889), 252–253.

The Nashville Statement

Not long ago, some evangelicals published The Nashville Statement. Unfortunately, it is not about the tripe that parades about as country music these days. It is rather about sex, gender, and marriage.

Predictably, it drew a lot of praise for the great moral courage and clarity that it demonstrated as well as a lot of criticism for the narrow-minded hatefulness it delivered.

And that’s just what evangelicals said about it.

What should we make of the Nashville Statement?

As you might guess, I have a few thoughts.

First, it is good for Christians to have a voice in biblical and moral issues in society, even if, or perhaps especially if, it is a controversial topic on which the Bible is clear. There is nothing in and of itself that is wrong with a statement like the Nashville Statement. It might be appropriate on any number of topics. Letting Christian truth be known is a good thing and when a number of Christians band together to do it, it might be a better thing.

Second, it can be dangerous for Christians to make statements or participate in statements that are devoid of relationships. As with all brief statements (and many not-so-brief statements), it is difficult to communicate personal love, empathy, and grace toward others.

Third, Christians need to move past the idea that we can say biblically faithful things that will please people who have no desire to be biblically faithful, or who have a distorted view of what biblical faithfulness really is. As Christians, we need to brace ourselves that we are increasingly marginalized in American society, and American society may have been the last bastion for public Christianity on the globe. Those who do not believe Christ will reject our views.  Even fellow believers will object to some things that we judge to be biblically faithful. We must train our conscience by the Scriptures, follow it, and then let the chips fall where they may.

Fourth, Christians need to accept that public statements like the Nashville statement will have little to no positive effect in the society at large. It is doubtful that there is any significant number of people out there who are going to repent of their sins and embrace Christ because of the Nashville Statement. It is unlikely to lead to the next Great Awakening. It may, in fact, harden some. Even professing believers are hardened by the statement because they consider it harsh, too divisive, or even flat-out wrong. If we put our hope in public statements, however well-meaning they are, we will be greatly disappointed.

Fifth, Christians should recognize that very few of the people we are called to reach and minister to will know anything about the Nashville Statement. Which is to say, it really has no relevance at all for our local church ministries. Go love people, serve them, evangelize them, and disciple them. Chances are they won’t ask you about the Nashville Statement. They might ask you about their marriage, their kids, the relationship they want to get in, or the one they want to get out of. They might request prayer for a sick child or a new job. But they probably don’t care what Nashville thinks about anything.

Sixth, there are questions about whether or not signing the Nashville Statement involves a compromise of biblical commands about separation and fellowship.

I regret to inform you that my word count has just expired.

Around the Horn–10/6/17

At first is a longish article about the addictive nature of technology in smartphones. It is interesting because it talks about how the people who created the apps are now seeing the problems and refusing to participate. The guy who created the Facebook “Like” button has had his assistant setup parental controls on his iPhone so that he (the creator) can’t download apps. Beware the subtle (or not so subtle) power of connection and the ding of affirmation when someone likes your self-aggrandizing post or ridiculously-angled selfie.

I will be back to write more right after I check Facebook and Twitter.

Okay, I’m back.

How come no one has liked this yet?

I must go on anyway …

At second is an article about John Piper and LeCrae (a Christian hip hop artist). I warn you that if you like either of them, you probably won’t like this. Which means you should read it carefully and give it thought. I don’t keep up with John Piper, CHH, and LeCrae, but this article highlights how racial division is being fomented by those who are supposed to be against it. My experience of the past 19 years tells me this isn’t the way to go about it. Continually highlighting the very thing you say shouldn’t exist won’t make it go away.

At third is a good article about well-meaning Christians who participate in Angel Trees or other “Christmas-gifts-for-underprivileged-children” endeavors. I have long agreed with this and am glad someone wrote it to make up for my not writing it. Often, this reminds me of those who go and serve in a soup kitchen on Thanksgiving, or who go spend the night in a box on the street corner or in a rescue mission. It makes them feel better, but doesn’t actually help. In the gifting endeavors, it can actually make the problem worse.

Lastly, here is a link to a recent 9 Marks Conference with some worthy sessions. I commend it to you for encouragement and challenge regarding the church and leadership in the church.