Is the World’s Hatred a Guarantee That We Are Following Jesus?
Too many Christians behave and speak obnoxiously at times, and then when the world responds with hatred, we automatically attribute that hatred to our faithfulness to Christ.
There seems to be a common misconception among many Christians that if the world hates them, it’s incontrovertible proof that they must be doing something right. They must be faithfully following Jesus.
It is true that the world hates those whom Christ has chosen out of this world (John 15:18–25). It is true that the world hates Christians because it hates Christ.
What is the logical fallacy known as “affirming the consequent”?
The problem is that many Christians commit a logical fallacy when thinking about this issue. They assume that if the world hates them, then it must be the case that they are faithfully following Jesus. Let me lay out the statements to make this easier to see.
True Conditional Statement:
If you faithfully follow Jesus, then the world will hate you. (If P, therefore Q).
Logically Fallacious Conclusion:
The world hates me, therefore I must be faithfully following Jesus (Q, therefore P).
You Might also like
-
On The Chosen: Jesus Is Not the Law of Moses. He is Far Better.
Recently, The Chosen posted an image of the actor who plays Christ with a line from season 3 that is supposedly a “mic drop” moment for the show’s producers. It shows the character responding to one of the Pharisees by saying, “I am the Law of Moses.” While many flocked to the post in support of the “mic drop,” many others expressed how flatly unbiblical this is. They rightly said that Jesus is not the Law, but that the Law instead reveals the righteous standard of our thrice holy Lord. Likewise, they were right to say that Jesus came to fulfill the Law in His perfect, active obedience to it all His earthly life.
Contrary to the expression of infamous pastors like Steven Furtick, the active obedience of Christ means that He in no way “violated the Law” out of love. More importantly, the active obedience of Christ is a vicarious obedience. We think of the vicarious substitutionary atonement of Jesus Christ, meaning that He died in our place as our Substitute, and paid the wrath that we deserved. In the vicarious obedience of Christ, Jesus lived in perfect obedience, likewise, on our behalf. He fulfilled what we could not do: Jesus obeyed the Law, and due to His active obedience, and His passive obedience on the cross, we actually gain the benefit of being counted righteous before God. This is the doctrine of imputed righteousness, which is an alien righteousness—a righteousness not of our own, but Christ’s. This is important, so hang with me.
As we come back to the “mic drop” moment of season 3 in The Chosen, this becomes all the more nefarious. In fact, nowhere in Scripture does Jesus say to anyone, “I am the Law of Moses.” In the book of Mormon, however, you will find such a statement in 3 Nephi 15:9, “Behold, I am the Law, and the light. Look unto me, and endure to the end, and ye shall live; for unto him that endureth to the end will I give eternal life.” That alone should give people enough pause on the show, owing to the fact that Mormonism is a false religion that teaches a contrary gospel to the gospel of our Lord. In short, Mormon doctrine holds that it is your active obedience that will please God in the end, and earn your salvation.
2 Nephi 25:23 states, “For we labor diligently to write, to persuade our children, and also our brethren, to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God; for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do” (emphasis mine). Often this verse from 2 Nephi is used in conjunction with Moroni 10:32 to give clearer meaning, which says, “Yea, come unto Christ, and be perfected in him, and deny yourselves of all ungodliness; and if ye shall deny yourselves of all ungodliness, and love God with all your might, mind and strength, then is his grace sufficient for you, that by his grace ye may be perfect in Christ; and if by the grace of God ye are perfect in Christ, ye can in nowise deny the power of God” (emphasis mine). It is quite important to notice the all-important temporal modifiers to these Mormon scriptures, because they explicitly teach that grace is a commodity earned only after one has exhausted their own spiritual muster.
The LDS Bible Dictionary puts it like this:
“This grace is an enabling power that allows men and women to lay hold on eternal life and exaltation after they have expended their own best efforts. Divine grace is needed by every soul in consequence of the fall of Adam and also because of man’s weaknesses and shortcomings. However, grace cannot suffice without total effort on the part of the recipient. Hence the explanation, ‘It is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do’ (2 Ne. 25:23)” (p. 697).
But what does the Bible say of all of this? It is bupkis. Rubbish. Ultimately, it is damnable doctrine. Romans 3:10-20 lays out the plight of mankind so incredibly clearly that it leaves anyone without a source of comfort in their own ability to earn grace. Likewise, Ephesians 2:1-10 displays not only the hopelessness of those born under the dominating power of sin—but it lifts up the reality that we are saved “by grace through faith…and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast” (Eph. 2:8-9). The good works which we walk in were prepared beforehand for us by the Father (Eph. 2:10), meaning that even our good works are a production of this grace in us. In other words: even our active obedience to Christ is a display of the riches of God’s grace. They are not what produces salvation, but a production of salvation.
Read More -
A Letter to PCA Friends from England: Learn From Our Past
You need to be aware that is the trajectory. Many Side B proponents argue for using the language of the liberals in order to win them over. Many Side B proponents wrote books and articles criticizing evangelical churches for what they perceived to be their failures and sins in not accepting their outlook. Evangelical churches were challenged to review themselves on how welcoming of Side B outlooks they would be and warned that failure to do so would lead to suicides among gay teenagers or failure in mission to the next generation… The doctrinal outlook of Side B is such that it functions as a gateway for some, over time, to change sides and advance the Side A outlook. We have seen this in England, and I expect you will see the same in the PCA if this trend is not clearly and firmly resisted.
I share this letter to brethren in the PCA with some trepidation. With Prov. 26:17 in mind it is arguably foolhardy to get involved in another denomination’s ecclesial debates — especially one on the other side of the Atlantic! However, friends in the PCA have suggested it may be helpful to you if I share how things have played out in England over the past decade.
Why would you want to read about the recent history of English evangelicalism as you ponder important votes in the PCA?
In most matters, American culture leads the Western world. To be sure, any time my children get obsessed with some fad or new toy, I can bet my bottom pound (dollar?) that the toy or movement originated in the USA. However, in regard to the specific debates you today face in the PCA — Revoice, ‘Side B’ views on sexuality — England, rather than America, has led the way.
It was a good decade ago that evangelical leaders in England began speaking of their same sex attractions in public, and shortly after that a para-church organization was established that promotes the collection of views that you would identify as being of the ‘Side B’ family. The language of ‘Side B’ was not used over here back then, but the doctrine was the same. One reason English evangelicals got a jumpstart on Americans in this area is that the Christian scene here is shaped in a large measure by what happens in the Church of England. Since that Church is a state church, with deep ties to the secular establishment, it naturally reflects the culture’s views more speedily than those Churches that distance themselves from the secular establishment.
Back in 2010, I realized where the sexuality debates in the Church were headed. At that time people were talking about homosexuality, but I could see that the goalposts would rapidly shift, and that the challenge would in the future be how to respond to transgenderism. That is why back in 2010 I published one of the first books from a conservative on the intellectual background to our culture’s celebration of transgenderism (Plastic People, Latimer Press, 2010). I hope that goes some way towards reassuring you I have been following these debates closely and pondering where matters are headed.
I pray then that a letter from a supportive friend in England may be of help to you in the PCA. I can do what you cannot do — write with the benefit of hindsight. I can share to you observations of what has happened in England where to a great degree, Side B views on sexuality have carried the day in evangelical circles. Rarely in ecclesial debates can you have the benefit of hindsight. I hope it is of use to you now.
What has happened in English church circles as Side B views have been widely accepted and promoted?
Confessions Have Been Overwhelmed by Personal Stories
The Confession of the Church of England (The 39 Articles) is robustly Reformed, and was used in drafting the Westminster Confession. The Confessions of both the Church of England and the PCA reject the fundamental tenet of ‘Side B’ when they affirm that the desires for something sinful are themselves sinful, requiring repentance, mortification and the Spirit’s sanctifying power.
The 39 Articles used the word ‘concupiscence’ to make this point. Article 9 says, ‘The Apostle doth confess, that concupiscence and lust hath of itself the nature of sin.’ The claim is that the Bible itself teaches that the desire for sinful things has the ‘nature of sin.’
The Westminster Confession did not use the word ‘concupiscence’ but expanded and elucidated its meaning. So WCF 6,5 teaches, ‘This corruption of nature, during this life, doth remain in those that are regenerated; and although it be through Christ pardoned and mortified, yet both itself, and all the motions thereof, are truly and properly sin.’
Looking back over the past decade in England, the striking thing is that the Confessional resources we have to hand have been largely set aside and ignored in favour of moving, emotive personal stories from people willing to interpret their experiences through lenses foreign to Scripture. Side B views cannot root themselves in your Confession — instead, they seek to carry the day with emotive stories and personal experience. In so doing they resonate with the culture of the day.
One result of this in England has been that very few ministers are able or willing to teach a classical Reformed view on the nature of temptation in the realm of homosexuality. Personal stories are so valued by people that the duties of teaching are delegated out to parachurch organizations that can send into your church somebody who speaks from their personal experience. You can guess what happens — they promote a Side B view, and that outlook is embedded ever deeper in churches.
The Power of God Has Been Downplayed
The conservative movement in the Church of England was arguably susceptible to Side B type views, because it had for decades prior to that downplayed the supernatural work of God in conversion. For a long time, we favoured evangelistic training rather than evangelism, talks about the Bible rather than preaching, calls to sign-up to a course rather than to place one’s faith in Christ. Reacting against the Charismatic Movement since the 1970s, we warned people against the Holy Spirit and tried to settle for courses, clear teaching, and well managed churches. All this gave the wider movement a shallow, non-supernatural view of conversion and the Christian life.
There are echoes of relevant debates in American Christianity, such as Warfield contending for supernaturalism, or Edwards arguing for the New Birth.
If English evangelicals were primed to downplay the supernatural power of God in conversion and the Christian life, the problem was exacerbated by acceptance of Side B views. As leaders began telling their stories of how they became Christians but did not experience any deep spiritual change in their desires or outlook in important areas of life. Churches were primed to accept their stories and self-diagnosis because few had awareness of the Bible’s teaching about the radical supernatural impact of being born again.
Read More -
Why Are Wilson’s Children Warriors?
Modern America is now Gomorrah in the hands of Cultural Marxists. We tend to forget and ignore the fact that Marxism itself has a history, and its history always results in the shedding of the blood of millions of people. We must be pro-life, not pro-death, even beyond the womb. For non-cultural theologians, their hope may be in believing that persecution is the best way to heaven. For cultural theologians, persecution may be their calling, too, but in time to come, the Kingdom of God will come to earth in its fullness, and the glory of the Lord will cover the earth as the waters cover the sea, all before the second coming of Christ.
I have never met Doug Wilson personally. I have been present twice when he spoke, once at the Auburn Avenue Conference in 2002 in Monroe, Louisiana, and then twenty years later at the Fight, Laugh, Feast (FLF) Conference in 2022 in Knoxville, Tennessee. In his book on the Book of Revelation he cites two times from my book on the Book of Revelation, so I know he has read at least one of my books. When I was a local church pastor, I used his book on marriage (Reforming Marriage) often in marital counseling. It was, and maybe still is in my opinion, the best available. I listen to his YouTube presentations on occasion, but I find that he can be difficult to follow because his vocabulary and phraseology seem to be channeling either the genre of G. K. Chesterton or C. S. Lewis, two of his heroes. I find this frustrating. Yet, his impact on the modern evangelical and reformed church cannot be denied.
I am older than Doug Wilson, and I was probably reading Rev. Rousas Rushdoony and Dr. Gary North long before he was. I personally knew both Rushdoony and North. Thus, I am not one of Wilson’s warrior children as Mr. Gordon classifies in his article (See Wilson’s Warrior Children by Chris Gordon, December 11, 2023). I call myself one of Rushdoony’s warrior children. The main point of contention with Wilson from Rushdoony’s children is over the legitimacy of natural law in Stephen Wolfe’s book, The Case for Christian Nationalism published by Wilson’s Canon Press.
Mr. Gordon in the title of his article plays off Professor John Frame’s article Machen’s Warrior Children. However, I think he misses the mark because Frame deals in his presentation with all the controversies (21 of them) that divided those who followed Machen. Wilson’s children are not battling each other, at least not currently. The Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches (CREC), which originates in Moscow, Idaho, portrays an ecumenical spirit of unity which includes those from Reformed Baptist backgrounds. The Church as a denomination has its own identity and communion now apart from Wilson.
I do think, however, that Gordon gets to the important point about Wilson and his followers. Gordon deals more with substance than form, and I think he is right on target here. There is something missing in the modern Reformed world, and a multiplicity of young men are flocking to Wilson and others to fill that vacuum. It is more than just a mood.
As a balance, before I say anything else, I should mention several church leaders and conferences that add much to the discussion of reformed theology and piety today. They are godly men. These godly men are included in Gospel Reformation Network (GRN), Presbycast, Together for the Gospel (T4G), The Founder’s Ministry of the Sword and the Trowel (TS&TT), and the G3 Ministries (Gospel, Grace, and Glory), to name a few. These represent prominent pastors, many of large churches, and their numerous conferences, webpages, and podcasts. I call these non-cultural theologians. They indeed have much to offer, but the problem is that they are not dealing with the issues that are drawing young men like a magnet to Wilson and Moscow.
Actually, the theological engine that propels Wilson and Moscow includes a much broader family than Wilson and Moscow. Others include The Center for Cultural Leadership (CCL) headed by Dr. P. Andrew Sandlin, the Ezra Institute (Dr. Joe Boot), Apologia Ministries (Pastor Jeff Durbin), and Right Response Ministries (Pastor Joel Webbon). I would also include (without his permission) Apologist and Reformed Baptist Dr. James White, a postmillennialist who interviewed Doug Wilson on the topic of Federal Vision. I call these cultural theologians.
Many young men are not hearing from non-cultural theologians what they need in order to be good fathers and to be faithful in their callings in life outside of the church. The application of God’s law which challenges the modern culture is missing. Thus, they often go home after church and get their needed supplements (as in vitamins) from cultural theologians via various social media outlets. This might be a surprise to many non-cultural theologians, but it is happening. Cultural ministries like Canon Press and the Crosspolitic programs are quickly growing in popularity.
Most Reformed pastors avoid crucial and popular issues that are raging outside the church sanctuary. They are probably not going to be dragged off to jail. Their linear expository preaching somehow enables them to avoid certain important topics. They are comfortable still fighting the heretics from the Reformation period and the old liberalism of J. Gresham Machen’s time (which need to be fought). However, they are stuck in the past. They are so saturated in the New Testament period; they forget that Christendom has enjoyed centuries of blessings after the close of the New Testament Canon.
We are watching the end of American Christendom in our own day. There is a new enemy. It is called Cultural Marxism, and this demon is at the doorway of our churches. However, I fear that this new enemy is not even on the radar of most non-cultural theologians. I am not even sure they have the skills to fight this enemy. Their seminary training did not equip them to deal with this. The only way to gain the needed skills is to read outside the box. Dealing with Cultural Marxism publicly certainly might divide the church. As a former pastor, I know how important church unity is. However, I was never afraid to preach on topics like the Bible and inflation (Theology in a Reece’s Cup) or on Wokism (Are You Woke?).
What then are the substantive issues? Let me mention a few.Eschatology is one issue. Optimistic eschatology brings hope on earth, even in the most desperate times. As Isaac Watts wrote in “Joy to the World,” the blessings of the gospel will spread as far as the curse is found. This is no place to present the case for postmillennialism. All I need to do is mention that most professors at Old Princeton were postmillennialists. According to Professor John Frame in his article on “Machen’s Warrior Children,” J. Gresham Machen was a postmillennialist.
Covenantalism is another issue. This is why these men put so much emphasis on the family. Yes, it is better to be with Christ than live on in a world filled with so much pain, but many of us believe that the world is not coming to an end anytime soon. Abraham was a stranger in a foreign land, not because he was in the flesh, but because he was in a land full of idols. Any perspective without the hope of the blessings of the covenant to a thousand generations tends to slip into Neoplatonism and Escapism.We have a responsibility to our grandchildren and great-grandchildren (you can tell my age here), and we pray that they will become leaders in their own callings, including even those who serve from county commissioner to the highest posts in civil government. Politics is not the way to blessing. Covenant faithfulness over generations to our children and our children’s children is the way to bring the fullness of the Kingdom of God to earth before Christ returns in all his glory to reign on a purified and earthly earth. When training up your children, be sure to teach them Christian systematics and apologetics. Make certain they understand the doctrine of justification by faith alone.
Kingdom incarnation is another issue. Jesus came announcing the presence of the Kingdom and not the gospel. The gospel was the instrument to a realized (not over-realized) Kingdom, but not the Kingdom itself. Too, the Kingdom is greater than the church. Wherever the law of the King reigns, there is the Kingdom. This is why Jesus told us to pray, “Thy Kingdom come, Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.” Again, Machen was an example of this when he testified as a clergyman before a United States Senate and House Committee on the proposed Department of Education. He was being salt in the world.
Worship is another issue. Worship is a calling to focus on Christ and his work. It is the worship of the Triune God, especially on the Lord’s Day. However, it is also a call to battle as men exit the doors of the church—not just to fight sin in their own hearts but to tame sin in a world we see with our own eyes. Men want to fight for their families. They do not want to see them swallowed up with the wicked. The wicked will commit suicide and we do not want our children to go to the grave with them. Worship prepares them for this battle.The biggest opposition to Cultural Theologians is the Westminster West Seminary R2K proponents. They promote the idea that the Bible is for the Church only, and has nothing to say to the Civil Magistrate. The Civil Magistrate is bound to follow Natural Law only, and whatever the Civil Magistrate does is right because God has given him this authority apart from consulting the Holy Scriptures. One of them has even pushed the idea that if the Civil Magistrate decides to kill Christians, he is doing the right thing because, after all, he is the Civil Magistrate. Cultural Theologians find this appalling.
Non-cultural theologians are mission-minded. However, what some of us find puzzling is that as we put more and more missionaries on the field to disciple other nations, we are more and more in this country dying as a Christian nation. It is difficult to teach others to fly a plane when you have failed to fly one yourself. The Church has lost its ability to be salt and light in America. How then can we take the good news to the whole world when it seems that at home the Christian Faith is failing, and it is irrelevant outside the church sanctuary and personal devotions?
I have watched similar so-called movements as Wilson and Moscow in the past destroy themselves, whether it be the Tyler, Texas fiasco or the ministries of Mark Driscoll. However, things may now be different. Neither of these two failures resulted in a new denomination nor were accompanied by numerous other separate ministries headed in the same direction. Even if Moscow were to implode, the message will continue. So, non-cultural theologians need to realize that cultural theologians are not going away. The best way to deal with them is to recognize that they are legitimate and pursue a right relationship with them.
Cultural theologians are not in a panic mode. No, they do not believe the sky is falling tomorrow. We are not out to reclaim through politics the structure of America. Donald Trump is not the answer. God is sovereign. That is our hope. However, we do not swallow the dialectic of the cross verses glory. We believe in both, that because of the cross, Christ will be glorified not only in heaven but also upon earth as his people seek to bring every thought captive to his authority. Meekness in the heart granted by the Spirit of God is the way to the realization of this glorious kingdom, not for the glory of mere mortals like us, but for glory of our majestic God! The Kingdom is not from this world, but it is indeed in this world.
Modern America is now Gomorrah in the hands of Cultural Marxists. We tend to forget and ignore the fact that Marxism itself has a history, and its history always results in the shedding of the blood of millions of people. We must be pro-life, not pro-death, even beyond the womb. For non-cultural theologians, their hope may be in believing that persecution is the best way to heaven. For cultural theologians, persecution may be their calling, too, but in time to come, the Kingdom of God will come to earth in its fullness, and the glory of the Lord will cover the earth as the waters cover the sea, all before the second coming of Christ. Whether they see it in fruition or not, it gives them a purpose on earth, both in their families and in their callings. It is wonderful to think that you had a part, be it ever so small, in the long-term victory. We are in it for the long-haul. That is why Wilson’s children and others are fighting as warriors.
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts: