Turning Neither to the Right or the Left

A Commentary on Christian Worldview Post 2012 Elections

Joshua 23:6-9

⁶Therefore, be very strong to keep and to do all that is written in the Book of the Law of Moses, turning aside from it neither to the right hand nor to the left, ⁷ that you may not mix with these nations remaining among you or make mention of the names of their gods or swear by them or serve them or bow down to them, ⁸ but you shall cling to the Lord your God just as you have done to this day.

It should be obvious from an exegetical interpretation of this passage that “right hand” and “left hand” do not stand for right or left political views. However, metaphorically, it is clear that the righteousness of God’s laws cut right down the middle when it comes to the temptation of turning either direction away from or straying from the way of the Lord. 

The recent elections have not only polarized a national population away from one another, but more critical the issues at the center of debate have prompted heated discussion within the Church, among Christians. As I review sample blog articles or scan a few facebook posts this certainly reveals a growing trend. I am wondering as Christians form their various views and opinions, in which they draw swords with each other, if anyone is consulting the Scriptures? I am all for the discussion and even debate, since it can help us clarify our understanding, but for Christians we must labor to bring forth positions that faithfully articulate a biblical worldview. Christians, as well as their leaders, and future church leaders have a responsibility to embed their worldview in a solid biblical understanding or at least do the hard work of studying the Scriptures, in order to come up with one that attempts to truly represents what the Bible says. By this I do not mean a few selected proof texts lifted from their redemptive historical application. 

This is critical since no one political party, either right or left, fully captures a biblical response to many of the major issues. For example, whether it is same sex marriage, immigration, abortion or redistribution of wealth, every Christian must formulate their position clearly on the Bible. Few are the writings out there that really work through this process. All of us must be uncompromisingly committed to the whole Bible. If you possess a negative view of the Old Testament Law and desire to construct your beliefs only from the New Testament you will lack a full redemptive picture of God's revelation on many of these challenges facing the modern culture. I say this not because I am hopeful that such positions will become national policy, but more importantly because such positions will faithfully represent God's word in the public discussion. 

In the next few days I will attempt to post a few questions and thoughts that must be considered when formulating a biblical worldview on many of these issues. I understand that formulating a faithful approach will not be easy and the space of a blog article will not provide sufficient room to exhaust the discussion. However, it could prove helpful and that would be my goal. 

Gary Finkbeiner
Commentary on Biblical Worldview and Issues 

Apostolic Ministry, Authority, and Spiritual Legacy: 
A Lesson from the Kings of Israel

There is an emerging challenge facing the wider body of Christ related to the idea surrounding the "restoration of apostolic ministry." The idea of a recovery of apostolic ministry primarily comes from various streams inside the Charismatic movement and related churches. Let me establish at the outset of this essay that I believe there are in some instances valid apostolic ministries in the church today. I also believe that this can be defended biblically. The focus and scope of such ministries must be defined biblically and understood within the limits of their God given function.

The emerging challenge however centers not on whether or not apostles exist today, but instead on a proper understanding of what constitutes authority in such ministries as well as other ministries which function in the church. Ideas on the issue of authority are covered in the popular literature of the day. Increasingly, as seen in this literature, there is a shift away from authority as given by Scripture to authority derived from position and gifting. Authority in this instance resides within the  individual. It may come originally from God through the gifting he imparts, but in the end it is in the possession of the individual after it is given. In this case the ministry, apostolic or other, carries authority almost by what one could refer to as a "spiritual birthright." Such a concept would constitute an intrinsic authority functioning inside the individual instead of an authority attached to an outside source. This difference is crucial since it places the individual at the center of authority and not the overarching outside source. Please note that gifting does provide for a functional capacity to do what God has called one to do, but this in itself does not give the individual ministry authority. So what is the source of authority and its function? Is there any biblical framework or guideline that can helps us?

In order to answer these critical questions we will draw some principles from the law of the Kings of Israel found in Deuteronomy 17. This provides a good starting place since the office of King in Israel is a type of Christ in his role as Messiah. Christ perfectly fulfills the office of King by his ruling authority. This ruling aspect is also passed on to the elders of the church as told to us by Paul in I Timothy 5:17. Ministries in the church do exercise authority, but it is the Messiah's authority they represent.

In 1644, Samuel Rutherford, in his classic work Lex Rex: The Law and the King, takes up the issue of the divine birthright of the kings of England as a source of divine unction or authority. Rutherford argued in Question 10 of Lex Rex that a king's birthright could not be confused with the "divine unction" or the authority to rule. The authority to rule instead came from an external source and in this case that source was the law of God as given in Scripture. Rutherford's exegesis of Deuteronomy 17 provided a proper understanding of the source of authority and its function. It was not possible, Rutherford protested, that a king's birthright gave him the authority to rule in Israel, but rather it was that he was called of God, "he was the Lord's choice," and he was required to copy, read, and govern according to the law of Moses (Deuteronomy 17:15&18).  Further, it was not a king's birthright that kept him in power after he refused to obey God. If he turned away from the Lord and his word he was soon removed from his throne. A king's birthright might have qualified him to come to the throne, but it did not keep him there. What kept a king on his throne was his commitment to honor God's word, teach it, rule by it, and obey it himself.

Therefore, Deuteronomy 17 provides three key components to the biblical exercise of authority if the individual exercising it desires to serve, honor, and glorify God. Consider the following three key components.

1. The individual placed into a position of authority is put their due to Divine election. The person in authority receives their calling and placement by God's choice (Deut. 17:15). Grace, humility, and accountability to God must be in place here. No individual with God ordained authority can take pride in their position and status as though they are special in and of themselves. God chooses whom he chooses by his sovereignty, not because of the internal worthiness of the vessel chosen. Therefore, the one chosen must serve God in humility, fear, and dependency. This dependency is underscored in Deuteronomy 17 by submission to the Word of God. The right to command and speak with authority does not come from gifting, it comes from Scripture alone. Authority defined in this crucial chapter has nothing to do with "birthright," but has everything to do with God's word. The Reformational principle of Scripture alone (sola Scriptura) is in force here.

2. In the case of Israel's kings they were required to copy and read the Scripture "all the days of his life" (Deut. 17:19). The passage continues to instruct us that he may learn to fear the Lord his God by keeping all the words ..." The word "keeping" here in the passage does not just mean mere acquaintance with biblical verses, but devotional commitment to reading and living the implication of Scripture.

3. The ability to continue in a position of authority was based on accountability to God and his Word (Deut. 17:20). The Scripture here tells us, "that he may continue long in his kingdom" (Hebrew = reign or rule). Submission to the Scripture prevented the king from lifting up his heart above his brothers.

Did the king in this passage have a responsibility to lead - yes. Did the king have the responsibility to exercise authority - yes. However the source and context of that authority was God's sovereign purpose and his Word.

It is through this that real spiritual legacy is given.   

Gary Finkbeiner

Heterodoxy: The Search for Something Other
The "Perennial" Problem of this Current Generation 

Defining Heterodoxy 

The term heterodoxy means basically to think differently about something. It is comprised of two Greek terms - hetero - meaning "other" and dokein - meaning to "think," have an "opinion," or to "suppose." The application of the term heterodoxy occupies the position somewhere between "error" or "heresy." One may be in error without being a heretic biblically thinking. However, when one moves into heterodoxy they slide closer and closer to entertaining heresy while at the same time not being officially a heretic. It is a dangerous position. The state of believing heterodox teaching means you have moved away from biblically and orthodox teaching while still confessing the truth when it comes to basic Christianity. In other words, a teacher may not be in denial of basic Christian truth (the virgin birth of Christ, redemption by his death and resurrection, etc.), but is more and more using Scripture to promote their own novel doctrines. These teachings may be influenced more by psychology, therapy, culture, personal ideas of the way things ought to be, or simply poor exegetical skills. The combination of these things can become the source of the teacher's own confusion in how to interpret and apply the Scriptures. The basic drive is that which is clearly established is not enough. We need something more or "other." With the increase in some Christian circles for novel doctrines and experiences, speakers come under mounting pressure to produce the goods. The temptation is very difficult to resist and often leads to more and more heterodoxy. 

It must be said that there is no substitute for good exegesis of the Bible both in consultation with historic Christianity, the original Hebrew and Greek, and the aid of the Holy Spirit. It must be underscored that the Holy Spirit has already spoken in the past as sound exegetes have faithfully interpreted the Bible. Therefore the "creeds" and "historic confessions" for instance can be good starting places along with the disciplines listed above.

Understanding the Biblical Term Hetero (Other)

One place the term appears is in Galatians 1:6 where the apostle Paul references the church's deviation from the one true gospel to "another gospel" or something "other." Paul concludes that this "other" is really no gospel at all, but nevertheless, still refers to it as "another gospel." It might sound like the gospel and even use gospel language, but at the end of the day it is "other."

The term also appears in Matthew's gospel (Matthew 11:3), as a questioning John the Baptist becomes confused over whether or not Jesus is truly the Messiah. John's question in Matthew is one of the premier questions in this gospel - "Should we look for another?" This might be understandable considering John's perilous state at the time. Behind John's question is; should we search for the "other." In the original Greek hetero is used.

Applying the Term To Today's Search for Something More or "Other" Than Christ!

Much of our questioning and search for something more or  "other" today is not driven by the same despair that John the Baptist faced when he raised his question about Jesus and his credentials. Much too often our search comes from a desire that misdirects its faith away from Christ to "other" things in addition to him often motivated by our desire to create Christianity after our own image.  

For example, Scripture is not enough, so we seek novel interpretations of the biblical text attempting to appeal to our audience thinking the basic meaning is not going to meet their needs. Far too many messages do not flow organically from the biblical text being used and far too often no text is used at all.

Equally, in our search for comfort and the assurance of our salvation we seek continual strange experiences with the Holy Spirit, while masking our own deep need to simply trust God and have faith in Christ. One of the main works of the Holy Spirit is to strengthen our faith in Christ (Ephesians 3:14-17).

Some Concluding Remarks 

Instead of this non-biblical quest to search for some "other," we need to understand that Christ is enough, the Scripture's faithfully taught are enough, the already given Holy Spirit is enough, the table of the Lord with all the grace that is offered is enough, the gospel as given in the Bible is enough, and the promises of God "that he who begin a good work in us will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ." (Philippians 1:6). In these things, and not the novel, strange, or "other" things we can at times seek, God is more than able to bring us safely to ever increasing places of growth and grace in Christ. He is enough.

Vindiciae Gratiae (The Vindication of Grace) 
Gary L. Finkbeiner

Restoring the Kingdom
A Look Back at Martin Bucer's "De Regno Christi"

During an election year many Christians are seeking answers to the problems of our current cultural climate. Disillusionment sets in when we think the answers to the challenges in our nation will come from a particular political party or candidate right or left. Recently while doing my morning reading of a section from Martin Bucer's, De Regno Christi, 1550 (The Kingdom of Christ) caught my attention. The section of Bucer's treatise to King Edward VI of England contained wise and valuable counsel. The subtitle of the section I was reading is, What the Kingdom of Christ Is and What is Necessary For Its Restoration, Bucer set out to both define what the kingdom of God is and provide clear instruction that would help reform the whole of Edward's realm thereby bringing restoration to the land. In Bucer's strategy restoring and renewing the church was first. Restoring the church for Bucer is what he meant by restoring the kingdom of Christ, not the political sphere. England as a nation would reap the benefits of a restored church. The church would function in its God ordained mission thereby bringing the rule of Christ to the nation without confusing the church and the civil spheres.

What Bucer gives us might challenge Christians in America who are committed to finding answers for today's problems in the political arena thinking that if we can find such solutions there will certainly come a recovery of some mythical Christian past. Before you react to this current statement I do believe that America's founding although not Christian, was influenced greatly by a Christian worldview. This is saying something different than America is a Christian nation. Time does not permit a treatment of this at this moment. Further we need to be wiser in our pronouncements of what constitutes something as being Christian, especially a form of government. However, Bucer's counsel was not for England to recover its Christian past, although it certainly had one, and it would be proper to appeal to any moment in a nations history that was affected by the gospel. His counsel was to set out a fuller strategy of restoration that included the proper role that the church and the gospel would contribute to England. This was indeed the very reason he was summoned to Edward's realm from the city of Strassburg arriving in April of 1549 in order to lecture at Cambridge University, while Peter Martyr Vermigli, the great Italian Reformer, went to do the same at Oxford. Both men had been called by Archbishop Thomas Cranmer to assist England in the Reformation.

Before providing Bucer's biblical strategy allow me to assert that the call to restore the church is not a call to political neutrality. Instead it is a call to properly focus the efforts of Christians as they rightly involve themselves in the political sphere. This will help those outside the redemptive kingdom of Christ that we are not calling for the church to replace the civil government. But, neither are we calling for a passive and neutral stance when it comes to Christians putting their voice in the public arena. Christians must contribute their voice and convictions, they must run for political office when called upon, and in America they must vote for candidates that reflect Christian convictions.

Bucer commends five biblical properties that constitute the restoring of the kingdom of Christ to England. There are five of them and they appear on pages 226-232 of the edition by Wilhelm Pauck in the Library of Christian Classics, volume 19. I now list them slightly paraphrased.

1. Everything done in the Church must be done for the "gaining" of salvation of peoples souls. People need to be "cleansed from sin and reconciled to God". Anything that is not focused on this should be "abolished and rejected."

2. The called of God (elect) "must be gathered from the nations of the world" through the preaching of God's word. The Reformation was a recovery of biblical preaching. It was a preaching movement according to a recent article in Christianity Today by Timothy George. Bucer reminds us in his treatise here that it is Christ who gave the church apostles, prophets, evangelist, pastors, and teachers (Ephesians 4:11-12). Bucer was not shy about preaching the biblical doctrine of predestination. He believed the church is greatly weakened as result of the neglect of this doctrine in preaching, not merely believing it! I might add the feminization of the American church is due in part to the neglect of such preaching.  

3. The kingdom of Christ is "governed and ruled" by Christ alone. Political authorities must not attempt to govern this redemptive kingdom and church leaders must submit to proper political authorities.

4. Membership into the kingdom of Christ must be allowed only as those seeking to enter agree to be "sufficiently instructed in the gospel."

5. All true citizens of the kingdom of Christ must offer themselves to "be ruled and governed" by Christ as they submit to the training in righteousness by the sacred ministry of the church. Here true believers learn to repent of sins, grow in grace, and conform their lives to holiness.

This strategy might not be what some modern American Christians are looking for. We would it seems to prefer concerts over preaching, mass rallies to church membership, and our leaders to be popular speakers at the expense of doctrine. Bucer might even seem a bit too strong for us in the current culture. However, Reformers like him and the gospel of justification by faith that he preached both shocked and reformed the world. They lived in a world that was being transformed by the gospel, while we live in a world that is becoming anything but at the moment.

Vindiciae Gratiae (The Vindication of Grace),
 Gary Finkbeiner

Faith in Christ is Vital!

 The renewal of faith in Christ is essential in a culture that is driven by hyper pragmatism and is marketed on the idea of what we lack and do not have. The media industry continually communicates to consumers how we do not measure up. According to this cultural model - we do not have the right status – the right looks – the right clothes – the right stuff – the right house, and most of the time, if we are not careful, we will not feel right about ourselves on the inside. If we are not alert to this media bombardment we can not only subtly begin to agree with its message, but even begin to transfer it to our relationship with God. The fact that we lack at times in our life keeps us dependent on God and this is where a vital faith in Christ is central. The fact that we lack is however, only part of the truth.

Remember, if we are a Christian we do not lack as far as the power of our redemption and spiritual inheritance accomplished in Christ (Ephesians 2:4-7).  The only real lack that is present in our life is due to the fact that we are in process and complete change is ongoing. If we lack or need provisions they are on the way. Our salvation is complete, but our growth in grace is not finished (II Peter 3:18). Scripture provides both of these realities in tension with each other.  It has been referred to by theologians as the already and not yet. Already you are redeemed and adopted, but not yet are you in a state of complete glorification. This is not to suggest that if you trust God for your life that you will be able to also obtain all the things the culture promises you. You will however, instead live in the good of God’s promises. 

Interacting within a culture that is always telling you what you do not have or how you lack takes reminding that your confidence and focus is on the greatness of God. 

 Gerald R. McDermott in an excellent book on how Jonathan Edwards, during the Colonial period of American history interacted with culture, provides some critical points on what it means to live by a vital faith.  In his book, Jonathan Edwards Against the gods, McDermott summarizes 3 aspects in one way or another of what it means to have faith in Christ as it is applied to a cultural context. I am providing a brief account of his general principles. When we struggle in unbelief concerning our life situation it is good to remember the following. 
 

1. "Jesus is the Object of our Faith." We pursue him by faith because he is the object of our longing and desire. Certainty in life can be gained in no other way. True biblical faith has nothing to do with a cold separate aloofness to knowing God.

2. "True Faith Keeps on Seeking, Knocking, and Asking." Our love for God and our cultural context requires this kind of biblical faith. Questions do not put off true biblical faith nor does leaving such things always to I guess we just have to belief satisfy faith. If we stop pursuing, the genuine-ness of our faith can be questioned. This does not mean we do not have to leave things from time to time and trust God, but we never stop seeking understanding.

3. "Faith also has a Situation and Cultural Context." This demands that we hunger after God’s truth in order to understand it for our times. Each generation of believers must apply the Scriptures and the Christian faith within their own time. The truth of Scripture never changes, but the cultural context in which we live does.

 So how do we return to a vital faith if the coals from the embers have grown somewhat cold? 

Turn to the Scripture and be reminded of God’s greatest to us in Christ and the things he has promised – Romans 4:20-23 

Turn to prayer in order to bring your request to God no matter how personal they are. God desires to be strong on behalf of his people. He receives glory by answering prayer – Jude 20

Turn to the Holy Spirit to strengthen your faith. This is one of the things he is committed to doing as a main part of his work – Ephesians 3:17

 The passages provided here are to be read. They underscore each point. They hold encouragement and promise. They will help to renew your faith in Christ. 

 Gary L. Finkbeiner