When in Doubt
DISCLAIMER: The Aquila Report is a news and information resource. We welcome commentary from readers; for more information visit our Letters to the Editor link. All our content, including commentary and opinion, is intended to be information for our readers and does not necessarily indicate an endorsement by The Aquila Report or its governing board. In order to provide this website free of charge to our readers, Aquila Report uses a combination of donations, advertisements and affiliate marketing links to pay its operating costs.
You Might also like
-
The Many Parts of Restoration
We must recognize that there are many moving parts to being “restored” to our brother or sister. The origin point of the problem is conflating all the parts into one single concept, or boiling it down to a single transaction, such as “I’m sorry.”
We’ve all been there: someone has done something to deeply harm or offend us, and they’re standing in front of us having just spoken the words, “I’m sorry.” But something is off. You can’t quite put your finger on it. It doesn’t seem like there has been an adequate understanding of the damage done, nor does it seem like there is a genuine sorrow over the sin. Instead, they have spoken paltry words like a talisman aimed at making all things better, and there you are, forced to respond, feeling the pressure of Christ’s command to forgive, but not knowing how to formulate your next sentence. Do you say “It’s okay,” even though it’s far from okay? Do you say “I forgive you,” even though the person has not repented nor have they asked for forgiveness? And what does this mean moving forward? Is all just forgotten and now the relationship has to “go back to normal”—whatever that means?
This all-too-common illustration of our lives reveals that Christian circles have a long way to go in reclaiming a biblical understanding of relational restoration. Sadly, in the evangelical and reformed world, there is a troubling oversimplification of the reconciliation process. How do we begin to regain ground in walking through repentance and forgiveness in a Christ-honoring way?
In the first place, we must recognize that there are many moving parts to being “restored” to our brother or sister. The origin point of the problem is conflating all the parts into one single concept, or boiling it down to a single transaction, such as “I’m sorry”. That “sorry” is meant to bear the weight of confession, acknowledgement of wrong done, and asking for forgiveness—all in one fell swoop. Such a short sentence—nay, a single word—cannot possibly bear such a load. But in speaking of these components, we’ve already begun to tease-out some of the elements of what Christ would have us work through in the reconciliation process. The main aspects of biblical restoration are at least as follows:
Read More -
The Declaration of Independence Founded a Theistic Republic
Why does exploring the founders’ reliance on God in the Declaration matter today? Because it is the most fundamental matter at the root of every political question. Why are humans equal? Because God created them so. Why do all humans have dignity? Because they are created in the image of God. Why can government not solve every problem? Because it is not God.
Mike Johnson opened his tenure as Speaker of the House with a speech citing the creator God mentioned in the Declaration of Independence. The speech drew criticism from columnists in the Washington Post, Time, PBS, and the New York Times, among others. Much of it shifted between Johnson’s support of Trump, his church affiliations, and his penchant for employing biblical language.
Each of the columns raced to the accusation that Johnson is a Christian nationalist. Yet none of them offered a counterargument to the fact that the Declaration of Independence actually does reference God in the course of justifying America’s separation from the British. The Declaration in fact makes four references to God, using the parlance of the 18th century.
The first reference is in its opening paragraph, which appeals to “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,” thus grounding the legitimacy of the new “thirteen united States of America” in natural law and its divine author. This nation endeavors to conform to God’s moral order from its inception.
The second reference comes in the first sentence of the next paragraph and is the most famous: “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” The securing of these rights concisely expresses the American understanding of government’s purpose. Government derives its “just powers from the consent of the governed.” But both government and the people are subordinate to the Creator, who stands outside the material world and brought all things into existence.
Thomas Jefferson and the Second Continental Congress presumed a common (although not coerced) belief in God. Without God, the fight for independence was unjust. Without God, the new nation had no duty to protect life and liberty. Without God the people’s right to pursue happiness, understood by the founders as the classical pursuit of goodness and virtue, would deserve no mention. Without God, the Declaration’s claims become sophistry, because the very concepts of justice, goodness, and truth are subject to constant redefinition based on the whims of the moment.
Read More
Related Posts: -
When Christ is All in All
Where humility is lacking, disorder will reign; where humility is present, love, oneness of mind, and mutual agreement in the gospel will prevail. Humility is indispensable for unity. One of the implications of this is that a church marked by division and disorder is a church that, among other things, lacks humility. It is a church filled with members who have lost sight of the primacy of the gospel and the supremacy of Christ, and who are therefore left jostling for the fulfilment of their own private interests.
…complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind. Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves. Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others. (Philippians 2:2–4)
Wherever divisions (1 Cor. 11:18), strife (3:3), distinctions (Js. 2:4), or disorder (3:16) exist in a church, you can be sure that something somewhere has gone awry. As any used car owner will tell you, that cacophony of screeching, scraping, clunking, and bumping noises under the hood is not a sign of automotive well-being. To the contrary, such sounds are a dreaded indication that something (and probably many somethings) is not functioning as it should. Attention is required to set the broken parts to right.
But just as the proper state of a vehicle is for everything to be in working order, operating together in harmony and cooperation, so the proper state of a church is to do the same. Despite the inevitable pull the saints will feel toward decay and fragmentation, they must, as the apostle here says, strive to be “of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind” (v. 2). This, apparently, is not only possible for gospel-believing churches, but is in fact the normative pattern for them. The apostle stakes his joy on it, after all (v. 2).
So how are we to maintain this oneness? The means are given in verse 3: “Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves.” Selfish ambition and conceit, then, are the culprits that will disrupt and hinder unity. Humility, on the other hand — the attitude whereby you consider others and their interests more significant than your own —
Read More
Related Posts: