If you are weary today, and searching for a source of sustenance in the midst of searing circumstances, cling to God’s promises in Psalm 18. No matter the trial, Christ is where your hope must rest. He is your rock. He is your rescuer. He is your righteousness. He is your reward. He is your refuge. And He is your ruler.  

Are you in the middle of searing circumstances? Have you been searching for a source of sustenance in the midst of suffering? Do you need a safe shelter as you battle against sin? As you serve those around you, do you need strength? Psalm 18 reminds us that sustenance, shelter and strength are found in the Lord our God. As we study David’s song, he will point us to Christ, who is our rock, our rescuer, our righteousness, our reward, our refuge, and our ruler.
Our Rock
David had come to learn that our love for God is oftentimes forged in the hardships of life. In our weakness, we learn God is “my strength” (Ps. 18:1). When we are sinking in sand, we learn “the LORD is my rock” (v. 2). When we are fighting for our very life, we realize God is “my fortress” (v. 2). When we are in despair, we realize that God is “my deliverer” (v. 2). When we are facing our enemies, we fall to our knees and “call upon the LORD” (v. 3). Regardless of the answer to our prayers, He “is worthy to be praised” (v. 3). David didn’t praise the Lord based on his circumstances, but on his confession, and so should we. Whether hard pressed by his enemies on every side, or enjoying peace in his kingdom, David’s heart worshiped the Rock, and so should ours.
Our Rescuer
In David’s deep distress he turned to God and “cried for help,” and his cry “reached his ears” (Ps. 18:6). In words laced with allusions to God’s covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai, God fighting for Israel against the Canaanites, God delivering Israel from the Egyptians through the Red Sea, and God parting the waters of the Jordan for Israel to cross on dry ground (vv. 7-15), David declares that the Lord “rescued me from my strong enemy” and “was my support” (vv. 17-18). Don’t miss the reason why, “he rescued me, because he delighted in me” (18:19; italics mine).
Read More
Related Posts:

Any institution that potentially competes with the influence of the regime (e.g., families, churches, other private associations or subsidiary units of government) is opposed, usually through subversion rather than open hostility. Thus, the individual is made a fit subject of the regime by a process of emancipating the individual from any non-regime source of authority and alienating the individual from any competing human societies. Culture war flare-ups, like CRT, LGBTQ+ activism and COVID-19 are merely the most visible effects of the deeper tectonic project. 

Part 1: An Explainer
This is part 1 of a series explaining the concept of the regime, how it relates to Christians and their institutions, and how it should be opposed.
Why has the pace of social change increased so rapidly over the last 15 years? Why have all major institutions in society become intellectual monoliths committed to the same shibboleths in policy and practice? Why have the people who comprise these institutions become so cowed, apparently incapable of meaningful dissent or critical thought? How have facially absurd ideas, like COVID-19 hysteria, transgender transitions for minors and ESG investing criteria come to so thoroughly mainstream institutions and crush dissent? The best explanatory framework for these dizzying developments is the idea that a new regime has ascended.
You will encounter this term regime if you spend five minutes on right-wing Twitter or in the pages of New Right publications. The phrase may strike you as odd at first, especially since it is often used to refer to non-governmental actors. But the phrase is vital. It can be defined with precision. It names something real that might otherwise escape notice. And it has incredible explanatory power in deciphering why social “progress,” often facially insane and politically unpopular, has so quickly advanced.
If you want a quick and dirty heuristic for identifying the regime, just look for any institutions that fly its banner – the Progress Flag.
But if you want a more precise understanding of the regime, read on. I propose the following:
A set of public, quasi-public and private actors exercising coordinated power for the purposes of advancing a shared agenda for social and political control.
The definition includes actors typically considered to be part of any regime – i.e., governmental actors – but also much more. And crucially, the regime is not under the control of the electoral process. Now, to be fair, conservatives have long decried how the administrative state inevitably grows and is impervious to reform-minded presidential administrations. Even the most wildly successful conservative administrations succeed only in temporarily halting its growth.  And of course, substantive administrative law is laden with one-way ratchets that quickly facilitate progressive expansion but make rollback of progressive agenda items nearly impossible. So far, this may all sound like a traditional conservative account.
But we must next consider the interactions between formal government actors and quasi-public actors – actors that are technically private, but in fact function under administrative state control because of expansive financial or other regulatory controls. Some of these quasi-public actors are professional associations or other bodies with licensing functions who have de facto monopolies over certain regulatory functions and play a pivotal role in the work of the administrative state (i.e., regulatory rulemakings, adjudications and licensure). Examples include various licensing and accreditation agencies, the American Medical Association and bar associations.  In other cases, the administrative state commandeers quasi-public actors in order to further policy goals through expansive uses of existing statutory authority (e.g., higher education and Title IX, or DEI requirements amongst government contractors).
Finally, this regime expands outward even to actors traditionally considered to be entirely private. In some cases, the regulatory state is the explicit cause of such coordinated action – the SEC, for example, now requires companies to disclose certain ESG metrics and in some states, public companies are even subjected to DEI requirements for their boards or executive teams. In other cases, America’s security apparatus exerts pressure through means that we cannot entirely ascertain, but appear to be effective – the CIA and FBI, for example, now routinely coordinate with social media companies to suppress certain viewpoints and factual reporting. But in most cases, companies voluntarily participate in the social change agenda, walking in lockstep even in cases where doing so demonstrably imperils the bottom line.
Read More
Related Posts:

Scripture tells us we are to love the Lord with all our minds. Yes, we are to love God with more than the mind alone, but in our current culture, we quickly spend hours giving our minds to countless trivialities. The reason we do it is because it is easy. Everything tends toward the path of least resistance, including our mental faculties. If we allow ourselves to do so, we will continue to hand our hearts and minds to hours of TV binge-watching and social media. The more we do it, the more spiritually and mentally sluggish we will become.

In the same way our bodies can get out of shape, our minds can also grow sluggish. Our ability to concentrate can grow weaker, the level of reading we can retain can diminish, and even our ability to think quickly and logically can begin to falter. The mind is like a muscle. The more you use it, the stronger it grows, and we need to keep up our training. I am convicted of this because I have not been as diligent as I should be on this front.
This summer, I am teaching a class at the law school that will cover the core institutions and values of the Western legal system. The subject matter will include several theological and philosophical underpinnings. In preparation for this class, I must add a minimum of ten hours a week of study to my schedule. Whether or not I will succeed at this level of study remains to be seen.
To give it my best effort, I have scheduled two hours of study every Monday through Thursday evening—I lock myself in my study from 7 pm to 9 pm. I also include some weekend hours as well. This pattern will need to continue for the next 15 weeks.
The first week was difficult. Though I regularly read and write, it is usually not at this level of rigor. The first week of study is like the first week of a new workout regimen; your body is not used to it, it feels every exertion you make, and it is sore and tired afterward.
Read More
Related Posts: