Doug Wilson on Why They Use Wine During Communion

Doug Wilson:

We do this because we are convinced that Jesus used wine when He first established the meal, and we believe that we do not have the authority to alter what He established. The Jews used wine in their Passover meals, and Jesus established this sacrament in the context of that meal. The “cup of blessing” that Paul refers to (1 Cor. 10:16) was the third cup in the Passover meal, and it was a cup of wine. Indeed, in an age without refrigeration, it would not have been possible to keep and maintain what we think of as grape juice.

One of the ways we know that the wine in the Bible was alcoholic is through the constant reminders not to drink too much of it (Eph. 5:18). If biblical wine were simply grape juice, these moral exhortations make no sense. The master of the wedding feast at Cana was not amazed that the best grape juice had been saved for last, after all the third rate grape juice had dulled everybody’s senses (John 2:10).

Some might feel that including alcoholic drink in a sacramental meal is somehow disrespectful. But this is actually a modern version of letting the traditions of men (which can exert a powerful influence) set aside the Word of God—which Jesus said not to do (Mark 7:9). In the Old Testament, tithe money was to be used to buy shekar or strong drink (Deut. 14:22-26). In the New, the word for wine is oinos, and is clearly alcoholic as multiple contexts make clear.

There is one more point worth emphasizing. The wine we use in communion should be like the gospel—and that is potent. As with anything potent, abuses are possible (e.g. “shall we sin that grace may abound?”), but the possibility of abuse should not be allowed to replace the authority of Scripture. We want in the first place to be biblical people. This means we do not want a grape juice gospel, but rather a gospel with a kick.

Driscoll: Preach the Gospel. Use Words.

Music Video of the Week: 116

116 - "Man Up Anthem" (ft. Lecrae, KB, Trip Lee, Tedashii, PRo, Andy Mineo, and Sho Baraka)

How Future Generations Will See Us

HT: The Thinklings

"There is no other stream."

Desiring God posted this today:

C. S. Lewis, The Chronicles of Narnia, on Jill's thirst and search for water:

The birds had ceased singing and there was perfect silence except for one small, persistent sound, which seemed to come from a good distance away. She listened carefully, and felt almost sure it was the sound of running water.

Jill got up and looked round her very carefully. There was no sign of the lion; but there were so many trees about that it might easily be quite close without her seeing it. . . . But her thirst was very bad now, and she plucked up her courage to go and look for that running water. . . .

The wood was so still that it was not difficult to decide where the sound was coming from. It grew clearer every moment and, sooner than she expected, she came to an open glade and saw the stream, bright as glass, running across the turf a stone's throw away from her. But although the sight of water made her feel ten times thirstier than before, she didn't rush forward to drink. She stood as still as if she had been turned to stone, with her mouth wide open. And she had a very good reason: Just on this side of the stream lay the Lion. . . .

How long this lasted, she could not be sure; it seemed like hours. And the thirst became so bad that she almost felt she would not mind being eaten by the lion if only she could be sure of getting a mouthful of water first.

"If you're thirsty, you may drink." . . .

For a second she stared here and there, wondering who had spoken. Then the voice said again,

"If you are thirsty, come and drink." . . .

It was deeper, wilder, and stronger; a sort of heavy, golden voice. . . .

"Are you thirsty?" said the Lion.

"I'm dying of thirst," said Jill.

"Then drink," said the Lion.

"May I — could I — would you mind going away while I do?" said Jill.

The Lion answered this only by a look and a very low growl. . . . The delicious rippling noise of the stream was driving her nearly frantic. . . .

"Do you eat girls?" she asked fearfully.

"I have swallowed up girls and boys, women and men, kings and emperors, cities and realms," said the Lion. It didn't say this as if it were boasting, nor as if it were sorry, nor as if it were angry. It just said it.

"I daren't come and drink," said Jill.

"Then you will die of thirst," said the Lion.

"Oh dear!" said Jill, coming another step nearer. "I suppose I must go and look for another stream then."

"There is no other stream," said the Lion.

The Silver Chair, (New York: Harper Collins, 1953), Kindle Edition, locations 219-238.

Music Video of the Week: Twenty One Pilots

Twenty One Pilots - "Car Radio"

Louis C.K. on Twitter and Jesus

A little poignant and insightful Friday humor. Couple mildly objectionable words, FYI.

Sojourn's New Christmas Album

Great as always from the peeps at Sojourn.

Some Helpful Clarifications on Misconceptions about Submission

Mary Kassian offers some helpful answers to misconceptions about biblical submission. She also answers how her marriage defies the stereotype of submission and what her marriage of 29 years looks like living out the biblical view.

These are the misconceptions she addresses:

1. Submission is universal—the directive applies to all women, even those outside of the faith community.
2. Submission is gender-exclusive—it’s just for women.
3. Submission is generic—every woman submits to every man.
4. Submission is a right—a husband has the right to demand his wife’s submission.
5. Submission is indiscriminate—it means mindless acquiescence.
6. Submission precludes mutuality—it creates lopsided, one-way relationships.
7. Submission promotes abuse—it encourages husbands to be domineering, self-centered boors.

I especially liked her answer to the question: “Why might some (think secular audience) be surprised to learn that you submit to your husband. In other words, how do you yourself defy the stereotype?

She says:

My husband takes his responsibility to love me as Christ loves the Church seriously. I take my responsibility to submit to him seriously. That means that I am cherished and have a voice. That means that he is respected and supported. I work with him, and pull in the same direction. Some might be surprised that I believe in submission because my marriage displays a unity, intimacy, and mutuality that is deep, profound and enviable. I am flourishing. I have what most women want. And it is a great paradox how it is has been achieved. The way of faith is the way of paradox: lose your life to live it, give to receive. It is also a great paradox that honoring God’s pattern for authority and submission in marriage fosters unity and mutuality.

An Ethical Dilemma

This is the question for my Ethics final with Dr. Russell Moore at Southern Seminary. How would you answer it? Just posting this for people to think about. Please don't post any comments addressing the situation at all since I'm not allowed to read the comments on Dr. Moore's blog either.

You find yourself far away from this ethics class, twenty years from now in your ministry, serving a church in south Florida. Pablo is a man you met, with his wife Hannah, after they attended a small-group Bible study in the home of a family in your church. Both of them, after hearing you explain the gospel, were convicted of sin and, after several weeks of conversation, both announced they were ready to confess Jesus as Lord and to follow him in baptism.

Before the baptism, though, Pablo approaches you to say that he’s not sure he meets the requirements for Christian baptism. He’s not sure he’s a repentant sinner. He sees himself as guilty, he is sorry for his sins against God and others, and he wants the forgiveness that comes through Jesus’ bloody cross, the new life that comes from Jesus’ empty tomb.

But there’s something that kindles fear in him.

Pablo tells you he is an undocumented worker, what some would call an “illegal immigrant.” Years ago he left conditions in El Salvador that, due to famine there, led him to near starvation. Moreover, he worked, like others in his village, for a multinational plantation where he was physically beaten and sexually abused. There were no other options for him, as the only employers in the country were made up of similarly exploitative companies. He slipped into this country undetected and has since lived with an artificial Social Security number he purchased on the black market, enabling him to work in this country.

Pablo’s employer knows his immigration status, but operates with a “don’t ask/don’t tell” policy when it comes to such questions about his workers. Indeed, several outside financial consultants say that, without such labor, this employer’s business would be financially unfeasible and would have to close, since there is not a sufficient employee base among native-born Americans willing to work in such a job.

The employer is Tyler Rogers, also a member of your church, one of your most Christlike people in the congregation, and he teaches the Bible in a large Tuesday night small group. It was at his family’s house that you met Pablo and Hannah, since he had been sharing the gospel with them for months and inviting them to hear more through your church.

The United States immigration policy is, if anything, more restrictive than it was when you were in ethics class at Southern Seminary. No longer can a green card be obtained by marrying a U.S. citizen, so Pablo’s marriage to Hannah is irrelevant to his immigration status. According to current law, if Pablo turns himself in, or is caught, he will face immediate deportation to El Salvador, along with a penalty making him ineligible to apply to entrance to the United States for no less than ten years.

Moreover, returning to El Salvador and applying for immigration is a process that takes, in the best of scenarios, ten years from start to finish. An admission of illegal status, plus a return to El Salvador, would mean crushing poverty, possible starvation, and almost certain bodily harm in dangerous working conditions. It would also mean being separated from Hannah for ten to twenty years.

Pablo and Hannah have three children: an eleven year-old girl, a six year-old boy, and a two year-old girl. Hannah is also pregnant with their fourth child, due next Spring.

Pablo has, since arriving in the United States, been sending a portion of his paycheck back to El Salvador, to his elderly mother who is caring for Pablo’s nieces and nephews since Pablo’s brother was killed due to the unsafe working conditions in the factory and his brother’s wife abandoned the children. Without this money, Pablo fears the children, two of whom are babies, and his mother would starve to death.

Pablo wants to do what Jesus would have him to do, to be a godly man. What do you advise him to do? If you advise him to turn himself in or to return to El Salvador, how do you square that with the biblical mandate that one who “does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever” (1 Tim. 5:8)? Can you really, from that point forward, consider yourself “pro-family” or “pro-orphan” or even “pro-life”?

If you advise him to stay with his family, how is he keeping the biblical mandate to “obey the governing authorities” (Rom. 13:1)? How also is he avoiding the sin of bearing false witness, about himself and his legal status? Can you baptize Pablo? After all, is he really showing repentance from sin?

What do you do or say, if anything, about Tyler and his employment practices? If nothing, then why not?

How do you equip the congregation to understand how to deal with this situation, and what implications does it have for how you respond to the mission field where God has placed you, with a large and growing community of undocumented Latin American workers, many of whom need to hear and believe the gospel, and are watching how you respond to this family.

Walk through each step of ethical reflection, showing why you reject some options and why you embrace others. Ground your answer in Scripture, the gospel, the Christian tradition, natural law, and common grace. Think through the implications of your answer in each situation for unintended consequences, and show how those can be ethically resolved.

Music Video of the Week: Switchfoot

Switchfoot - "Restless"

Get to Know: pureHOPE

1 Thessalonians 4:3

For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from sexual immorality;

________________________________________________

My wife and I attended a benefit for pureHOPE last night, an organization committed to fighting for purity and justice within a highly sexualized and immoral culture. They fight against human trafficking, prostitution, and pornography, all of which tend to be much more related and integrated than people think.

We've attended events with pureHOPE in the past, and I always come away overwhelmed by the problems we face in trying to fight against these injustices and threats to the purity of God's people. But I also come away motivated by the power of the gospel and the promise that one day Christ will return and these things will all be made right. In the meantime, there are ways to fight. I encourage you to check out what pureHOPE is doing.

Shai Linne - "Lord of Patience"

This is my favorite song off the new Shai Linne album, The Attributes of God. Seriously good stuff. Powerful lyrics and moving music.

Shai Linne - "Lord of Patience"

Verse 1

Heavenly Father, we come to You in the name of Jesus
It's because of His righteousness that we pray You receive this
Lord, you're holy, we shouldn't even be in Your presence
Due to our sin, we don't deserve the least of Your blessings
But through the cross and believing that Jesus is risen
Even the worst of sinners can be redeemed and forgiven
I'm living proof when I say this and these are truthful statements
You're beautiful when displaying Your unusual patience
You take the blasphemous- pridefully stuck in our blindness
Instead of smashing us, decided to love us with kindness
Even with unbelievers facing Your terror, You slow up
Like when You waited patiently in the era of Noah
We know that with You, a day is just like a thousand years
So does that mean for every sin, You cry a thousand tears?
Who can record Your graces? Adored through scores of ages
Your reward is the nations, for You are the Lord of patience

Chorus

Our Sovereign God, You are
The Lord of Patience, yeah
Your wrath, Oh God, we deserve
Christ has taken, yeah

Gracious God, You are
Slow to anger, yeah
You're Lord of patience and
You love us patiently

Verse 2

Lord, we worship You, we know that everything we owe You
And when we reflect on the time before we came to know You
How we were unbelievers committing tons of treason
We had a hundred reasons why we wouldn't come to Jesus
But they were all excuses because our thoughts were useless
That's what the dark produces, Father, You already knew this
We were foolish and clueless, just as ruthless as Judas
Who knew that You would choose to pursue us and move to woo us
So after waiting with patience as we would run from You
You activated our faith so that we would come to You
Your law exposed our sin so that we would know the danger
And take refuge in the Holy Savior who's slow to anger
And as our teary eyes beheld the cross of our King
We understood the true meaning of long-suffering
Who can record Your graces? Adored through scores of ages
Your reward is the nations, for You are the Lord of patience

Chorus

Verse 3

And now that we're in Christ, the thing that is amazing to us
Is that You still continue to display Your patience to us
Through all our stumbles and falls and our idolatry
Through all our grumbling and all of our hypocrisy
Our self-righteousness, with brothers and sisters we're hostile
Our unforgiveness- all because we're just missing the gospel
We should be slow to anger, but Your Word- we're slow to hear it
Oh Father, help us please! We truly need Your Holy Spirit!
He is the only Person who can shape this fruit within us
We praise the risen Savior who is able to present us
Without an ounce of blame, with zero doubt or shame
Lord Jesus, down You came from heaven to announce Your reign
In the hearts of Your people, and now we have the truth
And gladly choose to praise You for all of Your attributes
Who can record Your graces? Adored through scores of ages
Your reward is the nations, for You are the Lord of patience

Chorus

Penn State and Paterno: Needing Something We Think is Perfect

Ted Kluck:

One of the most natural things that most of us do with teams and sports figures is to ascribe a greater degree of moral value to them than they actually deserve. For years the Penn State program was upheld (somewhat rightly) as a beacon of everything that was good in the morally-compromised, seemingly God-forsaken world of Big Time College Football. Aside from the occasional bar fight or DUI, the football program remained mostly scandal-free and boasted above-average graduation rates and almost universally-decent kids. And they never messed with their uniforms (bonus).

For the Penn State fan who has probably papered his basement with team photographs, and adorned his body for decades with officially-licensed team gear, and who has probably talked for years about how We Do Things the Right Way Here, the Sandusky situation really is an occasion for grief. The Penn State posters and officially-licensed jerseys are looked at and worn differently in light of what has recently become public.

It should be added that almost all fans do this with their programs and individual heroes. Northwestern fans say, “At least we have our academic standards,” Auburn fans tried to defend Cam Newton’s honor (and naiveté) in last year’s scandal, and even fans of USC – perhaps the most successful pro football team in the Los Angeles media market – defended Reggie Bush’s actions (in his own scandal) as the natural reaction of a talented kid and his family being exploited by a cash-cow program.

This deep-seated drive to attach nobility to and defend the programs we love is probably in some weird way proof of our creation in God’s image. We want them to be more than football players, we want them to be Symbols of Something (see: Tebow, Timothy). Tebow’s actions have been debated and defended with scary, mouth-frothing intensity by media and fans alike (and the non-Christians are even worse…okay, not really).

As people ask me about the Penn State situation I’m reminded of the following, stated hopefully in the least-pious way possible:

One, I’m sad. Whenever something like this happens, it’s an occasion to put aside rooting interests and genuinely feel grieved for all of the people involved. But two, I’m reminded of something that we say a lot but I think rarely internalize and actually live: The idea that nothing good is possible apart from Christ. As proud and hopeful as Penn State football made us feel over the years, this story is an occasion to be reminded that Christ is our only comfort, and our only source of joy. It’s a chance to be reminded that God gives football and God, sometimes, in his sovereignty, takes it away.

And I think it’s an occasion to question our own tendency toward hero-worship. If we say that we worship the author and perfector of our faith, why then do we have an almost insatiable and semi-embarrassing drive to create heroes in other walks of life?

Panel Discussion at SBTS: Is a Historical Adam Necessary?

Politics, Christians, and "Unholy Alliances"

Interesting commentary from David Gushee over at USA Today:

Once again, a presidential race is becoming a piety contest.

As an American and also as an evangelical Christian, I can hardly bear to watch this nightmare unfolding all over again. It's bad for America. It's bad for Christianity. Here is my take on the sorry spectacle of Christian politics — and how to fix it.

Politicians continue to use and abuse the language and symbols of Christian faith in order to win political support. They speak of God, Jesus, Christian faith and Christian values. They bow their heads in prayer at a million chicken dinners. Then Christian voters — perhaps flattered, perhaps reassured — think that these evocations of holy Christian symbols and terms actually mean something...

...This version of Christian politics is inherently corrupting to Christian faith, ethics and witness. It encourages politicians to take God's name in vain, and to do so routinely. (That would be a violation of the Ten Commandments, if Christians still cared about such things.) It tempts church leaders to abuse their offices and abandon their core vocations as they entangle themselves with politics. It confuses the message of Christianity with that of the politician of the moment. It damages the moral witness of Christians in culture. It makes it harder for millions to even consider the claims of historic Christian faith. It drives many away from God altogether.

This kind of Christian politics is also corrupting of American politics. When a significant minority of the body politic votes mainly on the basis of what amounts to religious tribalism, it encourages everyone else to do the same thing. But tribal politics is toxic. It has destroyed nations from Yugoslavia to Lebanon. And it does nothing to bring to office leaders with the skills to actually solve our everyday problems. We need effective leaders, not religious symbols.

Christian politics also contributes to a weaker understanding of the purposes and limits of American government. The United States has one of the most brilliantly constructed political systems in the world. But fewer and fewer Americans understand either its structure or the reasons for that structure. Constitutionalism, majority rule with minority rights, checks and balances, federalism, the tripartite diffusion of power — not to mention religious liberty and the separation of church and state — these are treasures, admired and imitated all over the world. But when political allegiance is determined first and foremost by religious litmus tests, these treasures are put at risk.

Read the whole article here. What do you think? How should Christians engage political discussion?

Are You a Trader?

My father-in-law passed this on to me. Really good stuff.

Music Video of the Week: John Mark McMillan

John Mark McMillan - "Sheet of Night"

He Has Sent Redemption

Some Belated Parenting Advice for OWS

Thought this was funny in parts...

Call it an occupational hazard, but I can’t look at the Occupy Wall Street protesters without thinking, “Who parented these people?”

As a culture columnist, I’ve commented on the social and political ramifications of the “movement” - now known as “OWS” - whose fairyland agenda can be summarized by one of their placards: “Everything for everybody.”

Thanks to their pipe-dream platform, it’s clear there are people with serious designs on “transformational” change in America who are using the protesters like bedsprings in a brothel.

Yet it’s not my role as a commentator that prompts my parenting question, but rather the fact that I’m the mother of four teens and young adults. There are some crucial life lessons that the protesters’ moms clearly have not passed along.

Here, then, are five things the OWS protesters’ mothers should have taught their children but obviously didn’t, so I will:

Here are her points:

1. Life isn't fair.
2. Nothing is "free."
3. Your word is your bond.
4. A protest is not a party.
5. There are reasons you haven't found jobs.

I don't agree with all her points as stated, but some are pretty dead on. Read the whole article at The Washington Times.

Shai Linne's "Attributes of God" Out Today

Here's the trailer for the new album, out today.