Jackals in the Ruins
There are Christian pastors and leaders who will never address the vital issues of the day, be it abortion, the assault on marriage and family, the violation of children by the trans agenda, and so on. They steer well clear of these issues, just feeding their flocks on happy and pleasant and non-threatening pep talks and feel-good messages. They too will be held to account for this. What they have done is left the walls of a city in ruins, allowing the enemy to get in at will.
Yes, an unusual title, so bear with me – but it is quite biblical. Let me explain. In Ezekiel 13:1-7 we read about how the false prophets are soundly condemned. Sadly, wherever there are prophets, there will be false prophets. The true ones will have to challenge the false ones. The true preachers will have to expose and rebuke the false preachers.
That was true in Ezekiel’s day, and it is true in ours. The Old Testament prophets were inspired by God, while the fakes were self-inspired. They spoke from their own imaginations, and offered people what they wanted to hear, not what they needed to hear.
While we all prefer good news to bad, if you go to a doctor to learn about a newly discovered cancer found in your body, you want your doc to be honest with you. You want him to level with you. While you hope he says something like, ‘It is benign and we will keep an eye on it,’ you would insist that he tells you the bad news if needed: ‘Yes, it is an aggressive cancer, and we must deal with it immediately.’
In those cases, it really is a matter of life and death, and you want to be given a true word, even if it is unpleasant to hear. In the spiritual realm we also have things that can be a matter of life and death. Simply sharing biblical truth with other persons – telling them that they are sinners heading to lost eternity unless they repent and come to Christ – will enrage many folks, but it is life and death we are dealing with here – even eternally.
The false preacher or teacher will NOT mention sin or hell or judgment to come or the need to repent. Some of the biggest churches in America are known for having preachers just like this. Their refusal to proclaim the whole counsel of God is a grievous sin.
And then there are Christian pastors and leaders who will never address the vital issues of the day, be it abortion, the assault on marriage and family, the violation of children by the trans agenda, and so on. They steer well clear of these issues, just feeding their flocks on happy and pleasant and non-threatening pep talks and feel-good messages. They too will be held to account for this.
What they have done is left the walls of a city in ruins, allowing the enemy to get in at will. They have not repaired the breaches and the city is fully exposed. Such a situation is simply not sustainable. That is how Ezekiel puts it in this portion of scripture. It goes like this:
The word of the Lord came to me: “Son of man, prophesy against the prophets of Israel, who are prophesying, and say to those who prophesy from their own hearts: ‘Hear the word of the Lord!’ Thus says the Lord God, Woe to the foolish prophets who follow their own spirit, and have seen nothing! Your prophets have been like jackals among ruins, O Israel. You have not gone up into the breaches, or built up a wall for the house of Israel, that it might stand in battle in the day of the Lord. They have seen false visions and lying divinations. They say, ‘Declares the Lord,’ when the Lord has not sent them, and yet they expect him to fulfill their word. Have you not seen a false vision and uttered a lying divination, whenever you have said, ‘Declares the Lord,’ although I have not spoken?”
This shows us the seriousness of the false prophets. They put the lives of everyone at risk. Jackals are known for inhabiting ruined and desolate places, tending to themselves. They do not contribute anything of use, but are just scavengers.
Of interest, some translations call them foxes (and Jesus spoke about ravenous wolves among the people). Just today I learned that I have a fox who has moved in under my house. That is no good. I have a small dog and cat and I would like them to live. Now I need to keep them inside until this matter is resolved.
Melbourne, like many Western cities, is really getting to have big problems with a growing and aggressive population of foxes. We have lost a cat or two and a rabbit over the years because of the predatory foxes.
-
For Thine Is the Kingdom
The Bible speaks of God’s glory in two ways. His intrinsic glory is the revelation of all that God is. It is the sum total of all His divine perfections and holy attributes. There is nothing that man can do to add to the intrinsic glory of God. He is who He is. Additionally, there is God’s ascribed glory, which is the glory that is given to Him. This is the praise and honor due His name. Such glory is to be ascribed to Him alone.
All things are for the glory of God! This driving passion was the very heartbeat of the Lord Jesus Christ, the highest aim He sought, the loftiest goal He pursued. All things in life and ministry, He taught, are to be solely for the glory of God.
Nowhere is this God-centered focus more clearly evidenced than in what Christ taught regarding prayer. To this end, all intercession before the throne of God must begin and end with resounding praise to Him. The Alpha and Omega of prayer must be for the glory of God.
Unfortunately, prayer today has often devolved into a self-centered pursuit that is fueled by the fulfilling of one’s indulgences. This “prosperity gospel” has denigrated prayer into nothing more than a “name it and claim it” shopping excursion. In this abuse of privileged access, God’s glory is all too forgotten.
But as Jesus Christ taught His disciples, the primary focus of prayer is for one to be riveted upon the supreme glory of God. As our Lord gave instruction regarding how to pray, He was unequivocal in teaching us to ascribe all glory to God. Everything must yield to the glory of God! In Matthew 6:13, Jesus stated our prayers should conclude: “For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen” (nkjv).
The above is quoted in the New King James Version, a translation based upon the Textus Receptus. In this passage, we encounter a textual problem, one that has been debated throughout the centuries. As such, many translations handle this portion of Scripture in varying ways. For example, the New American Standard Bible places these words in brackets. The English Standard Version and New International Version omit this part of the verse altogether. For our purposes, however, we will consider these concluding words to the Lord’s Prayer as a part of the biblical text.
This climactic doxology begins with a passionate declaration of God’s sovereignty. When a believer prays, Jesus said, he should conclude by affirming, “For Yours is the kingdom.”
Read More
Related Posts: -
The Biblical Foundations of Parliamentary Procedure
At its core, parliamentary procedure is a set of rules designed to guide us in our deliberations as a church. This is important since deliberation is central to the nature, purpose, and function of church courts. Fundamental to biblical polity, then, is that we enter the courts of the church with a determination to make our decisions there, in conversation with all the other presbyters of the church gathered there. As we listen to one another, God commands us to speak to one another with God’s own Word, “submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ” (Eph. 5:19–21).
“Behold, how good and pleasant it is when brothers dwell in unity!” (Ps. 133:1).
Life in Christ’s church can be hard, especially when we must deal with complicated, difficult, and controversial questions. Nevertheless, we purposefully close every General Assembly by singing Psalm 133 together as a prayer that God would continue to weave this unity into the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA).
Ours is not the first generation in which the church has struggled for unity. What, though, are we supposed to do when “no small dissension and debate” (Acts 15:2) arises within the church? What does the Bible teach us about resolving such dissensions and debate?
I want to argue a controversial idea: if we were to tease out all the principles that the Bible teaches for resolving our disagreements in the church, we would end up with a system that looks very much like what we call parliamentary procedure. Rather than seeing parliamentary procedure as arbitrary or arcane, and far from seeing parliamentary procedure as a hindrance to the work of the church, I want to argue that parliamentary procedure reflects the Bible’s own teaching for how to make decisions as a church.
The Bible teaches, then, that our church government should derive from the same principles of biblical wisdom that we use to structure our worship: “Let all things be done for building up….But all things should be done decently and in order.” (1 Cor. 14:26, 40; see WCF 1.6). In this article, I explore three major ways in which the main principles of parliamentary procedure follow the general rules of the Word, “which are always to be observed” (WCF 1.6).
1. Parliamentary Procedure Gathers an Assembly to Deliberate
Let’s start with a foundational principle: in order to make decisions, we must gather together in the same place, at the same time. Just as we recognize the importance of gathering together for worship, as suggested by the routine use of the words for “come together” (sunerchomai; sunagō) in passages about corporate worship (e.g., Acts 11:26; 13:44; 14:27; 16:13; 20:7–8; 1 Cor. 11:17, 18, 20, 33, 34; 14:23, 26), so too should we acknowledge the importance of gathering together for deliberation and decision-making.
When the Jerusalem Council had to consider the ongoing relevance of circumcision in the Church, we read that “[T]he apostles and the elders were gathered together (sunagō) to consider this matter” (Acts 15:6). We don’t make decisions from afar or by correspondence, but by gathering together at one place, and at one time, to talk together about the questions before us.
To some degree, this principle can be extended into virtual meetings; however, Robert’s Rules of Order requires “at a minimum, conditions of opportunity for simultaneous aural communication among all participating members equivalent to those of meetings held in one room or area” (RONR [12th ed.] 9:31). Even if we meet on a Zoom call, we can make decisions if and only if we can, at the very least, hear one another.
2. Parliamentary Procedure Prioritizes our Listening
The reason that the Bible requires us to be together at the same place, at the same time, is to prioritize listening. While we often overlook it, the centrality of silence and listening in both Acts 15 and 1 Corinthians 14 is astonishing:And all the assembly fell silent, and they listened to Barnabas and Paul as they related what signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles. (Acts 15:12)
After they finished speaking [lit., “fell silent”], James replied, “Brothers, listen to me.” (Acts 15:13)
But if there is no one to interpret, let each of them keep silent in church and speak to himself and to God. (1 Cor. 14:28)
If a revelation is made to another sitting there, let the first be silent. (1 Cor. 14:30)
As in all the churches of the saints, the women should keep silent in the churches. (1 Cor. 14:33b–34a)Read More
-
Children Need Their Parents, Not Big Government
Depending upon the State to instil these virtues of morality, self-reliance, personal responsibility, and respect for others is a pipe dream. Sure, not every parent will be an ideal role model in these areas, but I would far rather trust them to ‘train up a child in the way he should go’ than rely on government bureaucrats and politicians pushing radical ideological agendas to do so.
One thing that is now crystal clear is that the radicals and militants are fully and ferociously targeting our children. No wonder we hear so much today about grooming and the like: it is all part of the war on children – and parents. The aim is to separate kids from their mothers and fathers and let others with nefarious agendas take over.
These folks have made known their dislike of the traditional family, and how children must be ‘freed’ from the ‘harmful’ values, convictions and beliefs of their parents. They are quite open about all this. And this has been going on for quite some time. As Anthony Esolen wrote in Defending Marriage (Saint Benedict Press, 2014):
It is not the State that defines what marriage is; nature has done that. It is not the State that determines the good of the family; nature has done that, too. It is not even the State that creates the village or the parish. Households have done that. Before there was ever a gross national product, there was economy, the law of the good of the oikos, the household. The ancient Greeks, who bequeathed to us both the term and the reality of democracy, understood that the individual as such was something of an abstraction. You belonged to a family, a household, a clan….
Totalitarian regimes since Plato penned his Republic … have always been aimed against the family, and for good reason. The family is the single greatest bastion against the power of the State. That’s not because of ‘individual’ rights. It’s because the family claims precedence in being and in nature. It is itself a society anterior to the greater society.
We are aware of the old African proverb, “It takes a village to raise a child.” It means that the surrounding community has a role to play in the development of a child. In its context, it is quite true, and it refers, for example, to other male adults teaching a boy how to hunt. Obviously in a small African village such communal help in training and nurturing children makes perfect sense.
There are several problems when we seek to replicate that wisdom in contemporary Western society. One, we of course do not live in small, close-knit communities. Instead, we may be scattered many miles from extended family members and friends. Letting complete strangers have a role in raising our kids is just not a useful option.
But more importantly, those who most often use this mantra today have something much different in mind when it comes to the raising and socialising of our children. What they almost always mean is having the State take over the role of mum and dad in parenting, educating and training our children.
The classic example of this of course is found in the 1996 book It Takes a Village by Hilary Clinton. Unaware parents might have thought she was giving us some helpful parenting tips, but more savvy readers instantly knew what the real agenda was. For example, a year after the book appeared radio talk show host Dale O’Leary discussed the book.
In The Gender Agenda: Redefining Equality (Vital Issues Press, 1997) she looked at the feminist activism and those pushing the androgyny agenda (men and women are fully interchangeable) and warned of its consequences. Toward the end of her book, she asked what can be done to stop the gender agenda. She said this:
The first step is obviously exposure. Gender feminists have left a paper trail, and they must be made to eat their words. Gender feminists who hid behind family language need to be exposed. A perfect example of this kind of deception is Hillary Clinton’s book, It Takes a Village, which is full of wonderful, apparently profamily wisdom. Underneath, however, one finds the gender feminist ideology.
Read More
Related Posts:
