Musings of a Former Fundamentalist (IFB) Renewed by Reformed Theology
I had the privilege to fill in for our pastor this past Sunday, and deliver the Sunday sermon. It’s available now for free download or to listen online.
Place: Beacon of Hope Church, St. Paul
Date: July 24, 2011
Title: Rest for Your Souls
Text: Matthew 11:25-30
Theme: Jesus’ unbelievable promise to provide us true and lasting rest. (Includes a short biblical theology on rest.)
Listen online or download (right click and save it to your computer)
Today’s Church has been beset with numerous challenges. Few have been so distressing as the problem of depression. Good people are weighed down with their own depression or perplexed about that of friends and family members. In some sectors of the Church, this is complicated by a stigma associated with depression. Sin ultimately causes depression, it is assumed. And the conclusion follows that good Christians don’t get depressed.
To counter these notions about depression, David P. Murray has written an incredibly helpful book entitled, Christians Get Depressed Too. Murray, Professor of Old Testament and Practical Theology at Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary, has encountered depression in ministry and personal contexts enough to be both well versed on the topic and sensitive to the need for sound resources. The book he has written is intentionally short: since “depressed people cannot read hundreds of pages.” (pg. xi). It serves as a resource for caregivers as well as a source of hope for the depressed who consciously decide they want to get better.
Murray explains what depression is and what it signifies. He counters the approach which assumes as a default that behind most bouts of depression lie hidden sin problems. The picture is much more complex than that, he claims. He exposes the faulty thinking patterns which often contribute to depression, and finds examples of such thinking, and even the depression which results, in the lives of people in Scripture. In defense of the physiological nature of much of depression, Murray appeals to Puritans such as Richard Baxter.
On the role of medicine, Murray finds two unhelpful extremes: too much dependence on medicine, and the aversion of any use of it at all. Along these lines, he says:
Treating a depressed person with medication is often no different from giving my eight-year-old daughter one of her many daily injections of insulin for diabetes. I am not merely alleviating symptoms, but addressing the cause–depleted insulin due to dying or dead cells in her pancreas. And if she is lethargic, weepy, or irrational due to low sugar levels, I do not ask her what commandments she has broken or what “issues of meaning and relationship” she has in her life. I pity her, weep for her, and thank God for His gracious provision of medicine for her. (pg. 64-65).
This is not to say, Murray merely refers Christians suffering from depression to their local psychiatrist. Rather, he offers an abundance of help from the Scriptures on how to correct thinking patterns and learn to receive even depression as a gift from God’s very hand. He points to a little remembered passage where Scripture says, “God left” Hezekiah, “that he might know all that was in his heart” (2 Chron. 32:31). Murray elaborates:
This is not an objective leaving, but a subjective leaving. God withdrew Himself from Hezekiah’s spiritual feelings so that he lost his sense of God’s presence, protection, and favor… But God had a wise and loving purpose in this…. Sometimes… [God] may wisely, temporarily, and proportionately withdraw the sense of His favor and presence to remind us of our state without Him and to lead us to greater thankfulness and appreciation for Him. He may do this… by lovingly afflicting our brain, disrupting it’s chemistry and electricity, just as He does when He lovingly afflicts one of His dear children with epilepsy, or any other disease. (pg. 65).
This small book of 120 or so small-sized pages, will prove an immense help to both caregivers and those suffering from depression. It is a primer on depression and in it, Murray offers a careful list of recommended resources, for those looking to continue their study of this topic. The book’s attractive cover, and handy, almost “pocket” size, make it an ideal book to giveaway to friends dealing with this issue. I’ve already loaned or given out copies of this inexpensive book, and plan on using this as a resource for years to come.
You can read purchase a copy of this book from any of these fine retailers: Westminster Bookstore, Christianbook.com, Amazon.com or direct from Reformation Heritage Books.
Some friends of mine have been involved in putting Bible verses to music to help aid Bible memory. At my old church, Bethlehem Baptist Church, where Pastor John Piper ministers, they developed a Bible memory system called the Fighter Verse Program. Over the last several years, several church members have been writing songs to accompany the verses and the result has been a series of Bible memory song CDs.
I wanted to spread the word that they will be giving away five copies of their most recent CD. You can go to the Fighter Verse Songs blog for details on the giveaway. At their blog, you can listen to song samples, subscribe via RSS to the verses and songs, and learn more about the Fighter Verse Program.
Recently, I’ve explored the issues of homosexuality. I reviewed The Complete Christian Guide to Understanding Homosexuality edited by Joe Dallas and Nancy Heche (Harvest House) and Washed and Waiting: Reflections on Christian Faithfulness and Homosexuality by Wesley Hill (Zondervan). Both books demonstrate concern and awareness of the plight of people struggling with same-sex attractions yet still aiming to be committed to the Christian call for sexual chastity.
Yes, I do believe Christianity calls us to live a life devoted to holiness and that does mean no sex outside of heterosexual marriage. We are to live in light of God’s created intent for this world: one man, one woman together in mutual love and submission for life, as husband and wife. But this is a fallen world and we all battle sinful urges which compel us to violate God’s standards for a holy life. Innately, and biologically even, we are driven toward pride, dishonesty, sinful strife, jealousy, and yes we are drawn to fantasize sinfully over objectified people of either gender. Some struggle one way, others another, but just because we were born as sinners and have a bent toward sinning, doesn’t mean we are not called to “abstain from fleshly lusts which wage war against the soul.”
I wanted to point out a significant book review which brought up something I hadn’t truly considered before when it comes to this controversial topic. Dr. Peter Jones of Westminster Seminary, California, reviews a new book by Jenell Williams Paris, The End of Sexual Identity: Why Sex Is Too Important to Define Who We Are (IVP, 2011). His review is worth the long read as it covers where we are in evangelical Christianity today on this issue. One of the points in his review is “the worldview implications of sexuality”. Without further ado, I want to excerpt a good portion from his review here for your benefit. Please do read the whole review, however.
Such thinking not only ignores biblical morals but also denies biblical cosmology. Homosexuality and other forms of sexual blending have deep religious significance within pagan cults. Paris mentions the berdache, the he/she that appears in over one hundred tribes as a “two-spirit” man or woman who functions in the opposite gender, but she claims we know little about them, except that they perform spiritual rituals (67). She also mentions ethnic groups in Siberia, Borneo and the Philippines that “grant religious roles for those of ambiguous sexual biology or those of same sex attraction” (67-8). Never once does she inquire as to what those religious roles might be, nor the spirituality there practiced.
The End of Sexuality fails to recognize that homosexuals have functioned consistently, from the mists of time and all over the globe, as occultic shamans in all kinds of pagan religions. Mircea Eliade, a world-renowned authority on world religions, and one of the architects of the new spirituality, demonstrates that through time and space a commonplace figure in the pagan cultus is an emasculated priest. This common religious universal, or archetype, is identified with a particular kind of spirituality. We see the myth of a bisexual or androgynous god in ancient Mesopotamian and Indo-European nature religions, as well as in the myths of Australian Aborigines, African tribes, South American Indians and Pacific islanders, all still surviving today. In all these religions, observes Eliade, “ritual androgynisation” is a “symbolic restoration of Chaos, of the undifferentiated unity that preceded the Creation.” Homosexual androgyny, the joining of male and female in the same person, functions in these countless traditional religions as “an archaic and universal formula for the expression of wholeness, the co-existence of the contraries, or coincidentia oppositorum…symboliz[ing]…perfection…[and] ultimate being.”
Homosexuality is not limited here to morals or the lack thereof. It is employed as the attempt to define the very nature of the cosmos as inherently divine. It is for this reason that the Old Testament denounces homosexuality in such strong terms, since it is a sign of pagan religion. Paris’s dismissal of Scripture’s teaching on homosexuality as “the five or six passages” fails to see the injunctions as part of a major polemic against anti-creational paganism. The context of the much-cited prohibition against homosexuality states, “You shall not do as they do in the land of Egypt, where you lived, and you shall not do as they do in the land of Canaan” (Lev 18:3; see Lev 20:23). Leviticus presents sexual activity between two men as an example of the pagan religion of the Canaanites, which the people of Yahweh should avoid. In other words, it is the religion (implicit in the act, in its rejection of God the Creator), more than the morals, which is in view.
Certainly, not all homosexuals see these religious connotations, nor have they come to homosexuality for religious reasons. Nevertheless many contemporary homosexuals see this deep connection. It is what J. Michael Clark, professor at Emory University and Georgian State University, and a gay spokesman, understood about the berdache. Clark, once a Christian, could not find an adequate place for his sexuality in biblical faith, and turned to Native American animism for an acceptable spiritual model. He found in the berdache, this androgynous American Indian shaman, born as a male but choosing to live as a female, “a desirable gay spiritual model,” because the berdache achieves “the reunion of the cosmic, sexual and moral polarities,” that is, the classic pagan “joining of the opposites.” …
Other notable contemporary homosexuals understand their sexuality in occultic religious terms. Professor Emily Culpepper, an Ex-Southern Baptist and now a lesbian pagan witch, sees gays and lesbians, in her words, as “shamans for a future age.” She reserves a spiritual role for homosexuals, for a shaman is “…a charged, potent, awe-inspiring, and even fear-inspiring person who takes true risks by crossing over into other worlds.”
A contemporary gay theorist, Toby Johnson, inspired by the modern-day popularizer of pagan mythology, Joseph Campbell, believes that present-day gay consciousness represents a new religious paradigm, for:
- it undermines the authority and legitimacy of the institutions of traditional religion;
- it helps to see the world with a harmonious, non-dualistic vision;
- in its ecstatic pangs of longing inspired by same-sex beauty, it experiences reverberations and recollections of humanity’s common mystical oneness with Gaia; and
- it helps humanity to get over dualistic, polarized (male-dominant) thinking, and thus save the world in awareness of common planetary identity.
With the place of homosexuality firmly established as an essential component of cultic and religious nature worship, it was inevitable that a Jungian, June Singer, would give the ultimate expression of the deeply religious importance of homosexuality. She said already in 1977, “the archetype of androgyny appears in us as an innate sense of…and witness to …the primordial cosmic unity, that is, it is the sacrament of monism, functioning to erase distinction…[this understanding of sexuality was] nearly totally expunged from the Judeo-Christian tradition…and a patriarchal God-image.”
Clearly, Singer’s non-binary definition of sex does not fit “a Christian understanding” of creation (34). How powerfully, in its pagan self-understanding, it opposes what Paris also opposes, a “rigid sexual dimorphism” (32). Paris says that “viewing sex on a spectrum…male and female…positioned on the same line, not in two separate categories…makes a credible space for intersex people,” but, alas, such a view also makes an enormous space for occultic spirituality–once the connection of sex with spirituality is made (33).
The theological implications of this opposition to sexual binary categories are enormous. Such naiveté plays into the hands of the non-binary, or non-dual spirituality, which, in its Hindu form, is taking over much of the Western mind and soul. Philip Goldberg, author of American Veda: How Indian Spirituality Changed the West, calls this a spiritual “revival,” based on the Hindu term Advaita, meaning “not two.” The spiritual synthesis, to which progressives believe we are advancing, will be “non-dual,” non-binary. Goldberg declares that Advaita and “non-dual…oneness, unity around non-separation” are “the generic term[s] increasingly used to describe the present and coming spirituality in America””meaning that God and the world are not two.”
I apologize for the lengthy quote, but I wanted Dr. Jones’ case to be established here. This spiritual aspect of homosexuality needs to be understood as evangelicals grapple with the increasing prominence of this issue today. The “otherness” of the Bible’s teaching on this issue should make sense given this wholistic viewpoint. It really is a different spirit and a different religious perspective that fights against the Created order presented in Scripture.
For more on this check out my review of Washed and Waiting: Reflections on Christian Faithfulness and Homosexuality by Wesley Hill particularly. There I explain how I see Christianity impacting those who have homosexual tendencies.
[HT: Sharper Iron Filings]
For over 75 years, a small, independent newspaper has been the face of fundamentalism in America. John R. Rice founded The Sword of the Lord in 1934 and continued to manage the paper until his death in 1980. After Rice’s death the fundamentalist movement fragmented and the paper has lessened in influence, although it still represents an old-fashioned, fundamentalist faith.
In a new book released this week, one of John R. Rice’s grandsons, Andrew Himes, takes up his pen to tell the story of fundamentalism from an insider’s perspective. Himes grew up within a leading fundamentalist family in the hey day of American fundamentalism. His book The Sword of the Lord: The Roots of Fundamentalism in an American Family includes personal encounters with several big names widely known even outside of fundamentalism. Himes tells a story his mom related of Billy Graham moving a piano in their home when he was a sophomore at Wheaton College. On the occasion of John R. Rice’s death, Himes himeself attended the funeral and ate a meal afterward with Jerry Falwell, then just embarking on his dream of establishing the Moral Majority, soon to be known as the Religious Right.
Himes traces the roots of the Rice family back to the Revolutionary war, and interweaves personal accounts of his ancestors’ lives with an account of the historical background of fundamentalism. He explores the sociological elements of the Scots-Irish people and the Southern mindset during and after the Civil War. His family ended up in Texas where the Civil War lived on as the great lost cause. Himes also details the beginnings of American evangelicalism and the influence of the 18th century revivals on fundamentalism.
The book is more intriguing when John R. Rice comes on the scene and we hear of his mentor, J. Frank Norris. When William Jennings Bryan died suddenly after the conclusion of the Scopes trial, J. Frank Norris picked up the mantle of the leadership of the fundamentalist movement. Norris’ fights with the Southern Baptist Convention eventually included his young protege, who followed Norris out of the SBC. Himes traces the career of John R. Rice from his early days of evangelistic crusades in various towns in Texas to his national prominence as a leader in fundamentalism and even a member of the National Association of Evangelicals. Rice’s early days included numerous revival crusades in small towns throughout the South. It seems he often built a tabernacle for the meetings, and a few months later would leave behind a new Fundamentalist Baptist Church (they always had the same name), unaffiliated with the any convention. Rice eventually took to radio and various newspapers to help expand his reach. He moved to Wheaton soon after he broke with Norris (who seemed to get jealous of John R. Rice’s influence). Rice then became a mentor for Billy Graham, and the tale of Rice’s painful parting with Graham is told from Rice’s vantage point. We then learn of Rice’s conflict with Bob Jones in the 1970s.
The history itself is fascinating and the book is well documented. But Himes’ personal tale remains an enigma for most of the book. Has he lost his faith completely? What is his ultimate assessment of fundamentalism now? Why is he writing this book? These and other questions will fill the mind of any reader who views fundamentalism favorably — as standing for the truths of Scripture even if they may have gone awry in some respects. Himes seems to misunderstand much of what fundamentalism was about, particularly when with respect to theology. In the chapter on “The Fundamentals” he says: “However, before the end of the 18th century, few Christian theologians had claimed that the Bible as a whole was without internal contradictions, or textual and factual errors.” This is just not the case, as D.A. Carson and others have demonstrated. He also errs when in the same chapter he states that the “oldest extant texts of the Old and New Testaments were Greek manuscripts dating from the fourth century…”. We have numerous manuscripts that date earlier than this and we have Hebrew OT scrolls going back to 100 years before Christ.
Throughout the book, a critique is leveled at Rice himself, to an extent, and to fundamentalism in general. Himes points out the narrowness of fundamentalism, and the political aspirations the movement harbored. The issue of race, and the notoriety of the Ku Klux Klan which early fundamentalist leaders tolerated, is the biggest critique on the movement. The race issue plays a big role in the book. Particularly poignant is the description of the Sherman Riot in north Texas, where George Hughes, a black man, was murdered by an angry mob, who also destroyed most of the town’s black businesses. One year after that 1930 riot, John R. Rice came to town with his evangelistic crusade. He preached on a lot of sins but failed to bring up the bloody riot. Himes gives some explanation for why Rice failed to confront the topic of race in the chapter entitled “The Jim Crow Challenge”. First, he claims it would have been a deviation from Rice’s primary motivation of saving souls. Second, he “could not possibly offer a critique of racial oppression in the white South without destroying his own ministry and undercutting his movement’s support for The Sword of the Lord. Even if he had been opposed to racial injustice, his Texas audience was not.” Himes does share one family story where Rice was indignant that a southern establishment wouldn’t serve a black friend of his some ice cream. Rice was a product of his time, but it is a sad fact that fundamentalism as a whole turned a blind eye to the civil rights movement.
The fundamentalist inclination toward separation began to spiral out of control toward the end of Rice’s life. It got to the point where John R. Rice saw the need to stand up for a less strident fundamentalism. Himes shares the account of Rice’s last address at a Sword conference in August of 1980. Rice’s text was John 10:16, and he spoke of the other sheep that Christ has. In the chapter “Jesus Has Other Sheep”, Himes quotes Rice at some length from that sermon. I excerpt that quote below because it helps show where Himes is heading with his book.
Do you love the people of God who don’t see things like you do? How about Billy Graham? I love Billy Graham. I pray for him every day…. I read recently that Pope John XXIII wrote out a wonderful meditation, and he said, “Lord, I’m that prodigal son who said he wanted to come home from the hog farm to his father.” He said, “Lord, I’m that publican in the temple who prayed, Lord, be merciful to me a sinner.” And my heart went out to him and I said, “Amen!” When I get to Heaven I’m going to put my arm around him! Would you be glad to see someone saved who doesn’t agree with you?… In John chapter 13, Jesus said, “A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. By this shall all men know that you are my disciples, if you have love one to another.” Of course, Jesus meant you and your little buddy, didn’t he? No he didn’t! He meant the rest of ’em too. If you’re going to love like a Christian, you’ve got to love everybody Jesus loves….
The ironic twist to this sermon is that Rice had planned to end his message by having the audience sing Bill Gaither’s song, “The Family of God”. The lyrics start with, “I’m so glad I’m a part of the family of God.” Curtis Hutson who was Rice’s successor, made sure that didn’t happen.
At the conclusion of the book, Himes describes a meeting with his uncles and aunts where he asked them about fundamentalism. He was surprised when they didn’t claim to be fundamentalists. One of his aunts said it this way, “You know, those people who claim to be ‘fundamentalist’ nowadays wouldn’t want to be associated with us, either! They’re what Daddy (John R. Rice) would have called, ‘ultra-fundamentalists,’ arrogant and self-righteous, very sure of themselves.” Himes singles out “the lack of Christian love for others” by those claiming to be fundamentalists, as being the key reason why John R. Rice’s children eschew the fundamentalist label.
Himes doesn’t give us exactly where he lands with respect to religion, although he keys in on love as being of primary importance. He concludes the book with what he’s learned from his “post-fundamentalist” family: “Honor truth. Love well. Live your faith.” Wise advice, for sure, but something is lacking. Fundamentalism today is a many-headed, varied movement, but the uniting factor throughout fundamentalism is a passion for the truth of Scripture. There is a simple dedication to the Bible and the gospel of Jesus Christ that is truly commendable. Evangelical Christianity today shares a common lineage with fundamentalism, and many conservative evangelicals would be described as fundamentalists by the average American. So I’m not too keen on becoming “post-fundamentalist,” if that means shirking a high view of the fundamentals of the faith. I do agree that Christian love and the expansive spirit that John R. Rice exhibited is largely missing in today’s fundamentalism. Himes is right to push us on these points. But the truth of Scripture and the gospel of the substitutionary atonement of Jesus Christ, remains an essential “fundamental” in the life of any Christian.
I thoroughly enjoyed this book, even if at times some of the back-story seemed to take too long to develop. The topic was of great interest to me, and the more I got into the book the more intrigued I became. There are bits and pieces of history that will be new to almost any reader, and the personal stories from the recollection of the Rice family are fascinating. For fundamentalists, this book will challenge your perspective of the history of your movement, but it won’t be a slap in the face. Himes is not out to attack fundamentalists, he is simply sharing his family’s history. His historical account educates and informs those not familiar with the history of fundamentalism, and if anything ugly is uncovered, the fault is not his. Rather than ignoring the past, we can seek to learn from it. May we all redouble our efforts to be always reforming our church practice and our personal lives into greater conformity to the truth of God’s Word.
Disclaimer: This book was provided by the author for review. I was under no obligation to offer a favorable review.
You can pick up a copy of this book at Amazon.com or direct from SwordoftheLordBook.com.