Heart sorrow is to drive the ones praying for lost children back to where they need to go, to their only hope. To the gospel, where they remember that Christ was separated and cursed by God so that His people could be brought back to Him. Surely each anguished tear of the grieving Christian parent, preserved in His bottle and recorded in His book by the Lord (Ps. 56:8), is a cry to that end.

How do Christian parents pray for straying covenant children? For those who know the faith but have long abandoned it?
The Apostle Paul gives us a model in the opening words of Romans 9:
I am speaking the truth in Christ—I am not lying; my conscience bears me witness in the Holy Spirit— that I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen according to the flesh.
Here Paul considers his kinsmen according to the flesh, meaning the Jewish people. As he looks upon the nation

whom God greatly favored above all others as recorded in the Old Testament;
those who were known as the “children of God;”
the people to whom God through the centuries sent His signs and prophets;
those from whom the Messiah came and to whom the Messiah was sent;
and sees that though their Messiah came to them as Jesus Christ, in large measure they rejected and spurned the Holy One of Israel;

what is his response? Paul expresses that he has a “mega sorrow” (what the Greek says) and an anguish in his heart that will not stop. By way of contrast, the Apostle John said that he had no greater joy than to hear of his children walking in the truth (3 John 4). Certainly then there is no greater, unrelenting sorrow for a parent than a child walking the other way.
And it is most fitting that Romans 9 begins with this expression of grief. For Romans 9 is perhaps one of the most difficult chapters in the Bible for people to receive, as it expounds upon the doctrine of predestination. This chapter of the Bible tells us that not only has God elected some to salvation, but deliberately passed over others. Thus, this expression of Paul here instructs in this manner: the only type of heart that can properly handle doctrines such as predestination is a broken one. A heart that, even when faced with seeing once-professing people exhibit reprobate behavior, still cries out for God to redeem.
Read More

Against Satan’s deceptions, we must stand firm in the revealed truth of God’s Word, the Bible (2 Cor. 10:1–5; Eph. 6:17; Col. 2:6–8. Against Satan’s temptations, we must stand firm in the power of the risen Christ, through whom we can resist the devil and walk worthy of the Lord (Eph. 6:10; Col. 1:9–12). Whatever we learn of our enemy’s efforts in the pages of God’s Word, we must look to Christ to counter them. Knowing we have a spiritual enemy who opposes us should enrich our prayer lives, causing us to seek the sufficiency of our Lord that we desperately need.

Grace to you and peace from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ, who gave Himself for our sins, that He might deliver us from this present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen. (Gal. 1:3–5, NKJV)
With these words, the Apostle Paul celebrates God’s deliverance of His people through the work of His Son on our behalf (Col. 1:13–14). He also reminds us that we live out our days in a fallen world, in which we contend with spiritual opposition in our walk with Christ and work for Him (Eph. 2:1–10).
The Context of Spiritual Warfare
In His High Priestly Prayer, our Lord Jesus prays for us as ones who are in the world (John 17:11) but not of the world (John 17:14). As such, He asks not that the Father would take us out of the world, but that He would keep us from the Evil One (John 17:15). The prayer He taught us to pray as His disciples mobilizes us to seek the kingdom of God into which we have been established and to serve His will, taking into account the opposition of a spiritual enemy (Matt. 6:10, 13).
The redemption God promised in Eden is framed in terms of conflict (Gen. 3:15). That Promised One would come in the fullness of time (Gal. 4:4–5) to do battle with him who is identified as “ruler of this world” (John 12:31) and “god of this age” (2 Cor. 4:4). Christ Jesus, the eternal Son of God, took on true and full humanity so that He might wage war for our deliverance and destroy the works of the devil (Heb. 2:14–18; 1 John 3:8).
Key to our engaging in spiritual warfare is recognition that the victory is Christ’s and is ours in Christ. We do not fight for victory but in victory. The prelude to Jesus sending us out to make disciples is the declaration of His accomplished mission: “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth” (Matt. 28:18; see Eph. 1:20–23).
Read More
Related Posts:

The economic rise of women represents a seismic shift in gender relations. It has broken the chains of dependency that held women down—but also held the nuclear family together. The traditional institution of fatherhood, based on a provider and protector role, has been almost completely deconstructed. Millions of men are being benched as a result. A new model of mature masculinity and fatherhood is desperately needed. 

In the span of just a few decades, an astonishing, epochal revolution in human relations has occurred. Since the widespread adoption of agriculture, patriarchy has been the norm in human societies. No longer. Patriarchy has been effectively demolished in advanced economies.
Women are no longer dependent on men for material resources. By tearing down barriers to education and the labor market, feminism has achieved a central goal of securing for women economic independence and power.
In 1970, when these changes began gaining steam, women were locked out of many educational and professional opportunities. On American campuses males dominated. In undergraduate enrollment they were 58 percent of students to females’ 42 percent. Men got more than 85 percent of PhDs. In law schools, about 90 percent of students were men.
Today, undergraduate enrollment has flipped—female enrollment is at 58 percent. Women are awarded 53 percent of PhDs, and they make up the majority of law students. Whole professions, like psychology and veterinary medicine, are becoming overwhelmingly female. Forty percent of American women now earn more than the average man, up from just 13 percent in 1979.
This rise of women has been accompanied by male decline. The statistics here are equally startling. There is the bad economic news: most American men earn less today (adjusted for inflation) than most men did in 1979. This is not because of the mass entry of women in the workplace, but because of the hollowing out of traditional male jobs—factory worker, steelworker, coal miner—as a result of free trade and automation.
But male troubles are not just economic. Almost one in four school boys are diagnosed as having a “developmental disability.” One in five fathers is not living with his children. Men are at three times greater risk than women from the epidemic of “deaths of despair,” from suicide, alcohol, and drugs.
There are now more young women than men with university degrees in every advanced economy. Male wage growth has been sluggish in these countries; and men’s employment rates have been dropping around the world.
Some hear all of this and come to the conclusion that the women’s movement has been a mistake and the solution is to wind back the clock. I disagree. The movement to liberate women has unleashed the power and talent of half of the global population—to the benefit of us all. But like all revolutions, it has generated real challenges, too. You don’t upend a 12,000-year-old social order without experiencing cultural side effects. In this case, it is the dislocation of many of our boys and men.
It is past time we recognized and started to address these problems. Doing so does not signal a retreat from feminism—or a belief that all misogyny and sexism have been eradicated. It is a recognition of our collective responsibility to deal with the downsides of radical change, as well as celebrate the upsides. For the longest time—pretty much all of history—the cause of gender equality has been synonymous with the cause of girls and women. No longer. It is now necessary to consider gender inequalities in both directions.
Doing this is in women’s economic self-interest. A world of floundering men is unlikely to be a world of flourishing women. If men struggle to find work or decent wages, that puts more pressure on women as breadwinners. Except in the richest U.S. families (i.e., the top fifth), all of the growth in household income since 1979 has resulted from the increased working hours and earnings of women.
Read More
Related Posts: