Category Archives: Essays

Homeschooled and Humbled

Posted on September 25, 2010 by Andrew J. Nicewander| 646 Comments

3 of a Kind by Theodore Scott

Hello everyone. My name is Andrew and I was homeschooled.

It is true. For 10 years, through high school, I walked in those proud ranks.

And what a mighty force we were. Standing against the foes of cultural liberalism, the Democratic Party and the Public Educational System, we were a fell enemy to all things evil. Armed with our Latin, Logic and SAT scores we slew the ideas and perspectives we hated.

We measured ourselves against the ignorant horde of the Public Schooled and came out the Victors. It was we who were fair-minded. It was we who were free to think and reason. It was we who were preserved from State Controlled brain washing. It was we who had the best theology, the best philosophy and the best politics.

We bled republican red. We applied our proven grassroots ability and far-reaching networking to great success for our saviors in D.C. We fought to keep prayers public in the schools we shunned and we ached for our government to be run by Christians once again.

We spat upon the endless, mindless questioning of American-hating liberalism. We defended absolute Truth and repelled Mr. Darwin. We worked to keep our nation afloat in the seas of moral relativism. We were the sails and we were the rudder; predestined to put our Christian Country back on course.

We were the intellectual warriors, the fair-minded victors and the liberalism-squelching band of home-educated brothers. Ours was a proud tradition and we fought tooth and nail to defend it.

And yet.

I left the ranks of the Enlightened and upon entering the marketplace of ideas and results, I was humbled.

I found that I was not the conqueror and that there were scores of people educated differently than I who were far wiser and more intelligent than I.

I found that the Republican Party is just as nasty, spiteful and sin-filled than any political party anywhere in this sinning world.

I found that liberalism really does have some very searching questions, few of which I had developed any real solid answers for.

I found that my country is not really the greatest and that she will ultimately fall as all great countries have.

I found that I am just an ordinary guy relying on Jesus in a sinning, sorry world. I love myself too much. I love my mind too much. I love this world too much.

Home Education has much to offer. My parents did right by me in it. It took guts and gumption and they succeeded with flying colors. I know many more young men and women who have benefited from it as I have. My wife and I plan on homeschooling our own small children. Yet, it is still a human enterprise and as such, it is open to the same sin and vice as any activity engaged in by men.

→ 646 Comments

Posted in Culture, Essays

Tagged , , , ,

Christian Ethics and the New Media – The Local Church and the New Media

Posted on May 10, 2010 by Andrew J. Nicewander| 478 Comments

Christian Ethics and the New Media: Introduction and Media Defined

Christian Ethics and the New Media: Scripture and Communication

Christian Ethics and the New Media: The Christian and the New Media

 

The Local  Church and the New Media

Just as the individual Christian has responsibility for right, ethical living in the realm of social networking and the New Media, local churches also play pivotal roles of responsibility in such a plethora of media.

Over her history, the Church has been fairly consistent in her adoption of various new technologies and media.  Whether it was the use of scrolls, codexes, books, magazines, newspapers, radio or television, the Church has generally done a fair job of keeping up with societal and technological changes and paradigm shifts in the forms and mediums of communication.

According to the Barna Group,

“People within the Christian community are just as immersed in (and dependent upon) digital technologies and social networks as are those outside of it. Both evangelical Christians and other born again Christians emerged as statistically on par with national norms when it came to each of the 15 different areas that were studied. In other words, matters of faith played very little role in differentiating people’s technological habits.”[1]

In a world that is increasingly connected and compartmentalized, the Church is left with a pressing problem.  On the one hand, according to David Kinnaman, “Church leaders have to strike the delicate balance between the spiritual and cultural potential of tech tools without surrendering to the false promise of these tools. Having the means of reaching the masses – for instance, through podcasting – is a good thing.”[2] The New Media, as a paradigm-shifting, conversation changing form of information communication, is precisely poised to be used in powerfully productive ways.  “Yet, nothing matches the potency of life-on-life discipleship. In this respect, social networking and blogs can be effective tools to intimately connect with a small, natural network of relationships. The key is using the technology in a way that is consistent with your calling and purpose, not just an addictive self-indulgence.” [3]

This statement by Kinnaman reveals both the weakness and the power of the New Media.  On the one hand, for its ability to quickly, effectively, efficiently and economically communicate information, the New Media is unmatched and unparalleled in human history.  Yet, this strength is also the New Media’s greatest weakness, for in providing such volumes of information, facades of familiarity and community can be erected and these facades can in fact impede any real attempts at valid, human relationship-building interaction.  For the Church, this means quite simply that there is no replacement for face-to-face, human, organic relationship growth.  Humans are communal creatures.[4] The New Media does not, and cannot satisfy this basic need.

Furthermore, the Church has a moral and ethical responsibility to work through the issues that these New Media present.  Kinnaman goes on to say

“One recent study we completed among teenagers showed that just 9% of church-going teens had learned something helpful about technology in their church during the past year. As each new generation becomes increasingly enmeshed with technology, these discussions and choices cannot be left to chance. Control, image, relevance, immediacy, transparency, purity, truth, stewardship, and escapism are some of the many issues that technology brings to the surface, not always with benign consequences.”[5]

Finally, the Church must understand and engage with the reality of the New Media, namely that it is a two-way conversation:

“Young people, for instance, think of themselves as creators of content, not merely consumers of it. Technology, in essence, gives them a voice and fuels their search for calling. Whether or not you welcome it, technology creates an entirely new calculus of influence and independence. The stewardship of technology as a force for good in culture is an important role for technologists, entrepreneurs, educators, and Christian leaders.”[6]

Local Churches must be equipped to deal with the ethical issues that the New Media bring.  While Media are amoral, they do not exist in a vacuum.  The medium, the agent of transference, not only conveys the message, but it works to shape it.  Ideas are nameless, substance less notions until they are given shape and definition by language.  Language in some sense is modified by the medium through which it is expressed.  The Church, as Christ’s Bride and Witness must be wary of her message being unnecessarily warped by the media she uses to express it.  Just because media are amoral does not mean that they are always necessarily right to use.  Likewise, just because various media are used in terrible, awful and sinful ways does not mean it is wrong to use those same media in right ways.  But one thing is certain: the Church is most assuredly called to remove herself from any naïveté regarding the New Media.  She is called by Her Lord to communicate in a way that honors Him and brings Him renown.  Her use (or misuse) of media will directly affect her ability to do that.

 

Conclusion

In the world of the Information Age, where communication and the New Media are kings, ethical issues abound.  Questions of privacy, idolatry, predation, stewardship, slander and libel are daily conundrums for millions of bloggers, Facebookers and Twitterers every day.  In a world of rapid change, where a massive paradigm shift has occurred in the way people communicate with one another and process information, confusion and fear can often rule the day.

Yet, God has not left the Christian in the dark.  The light of Scriptural truth shines and the Christian is provided with clear teachings and encouragements for how to rightly, morally and ethically communicate to other Christians and to the world around.  Whether it’s in the local church or on in the world of tweets and posts, blogs and vlogs, the Christian is called to rightly live and communicate, making the best use of the time, for the good of all men and for the glory of God.

 

[1] Barna Group, May 26, 2008, “Barna Technology Study: Social Networking, Online Entertainment And Church Podcasts,” http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/14-media/36-barna-technology-study-social-networking-online-entertainment-and-church-podcasts/ (accessed April 27, 2010).

[2] Barna Group, May 26, 2008, “Barna Technology Study: Social Networking, Online Entertainment And Church Podcasts,” http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/14-media/36-barna-technology-study-social-networking-online-entertainment-and-church-podcasts/ (accessed April 27, 2010).

[3] Barna Group, May 26, 2008, “Barna Technology Study: Social Networking, Online Entertainment And Church Podcasts,” http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/14-media/36-barna-technology-study-social-networking-online-entertainment-and-church-podcasts/ (accessed April 27, 2010).

[4] M.K. Smith, “Community,” in the encyclopedia of informal education,  ed, http://www.infed.org/community/community.htm. (accessed April 27, 2010).

[5] Barna Group, May 26, 2008, “Barna Technology Study: Social Networking, Online Entertainment And Church Podcasts,” http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/14-media/36-barna-technology-study-social-networking-online-entertainment-and-church-podcasts/ (accessed April 27, 2010).

[6] Barna Group, May 26, 2008, “Barna Technology Study: Social Networking, Online Entertainment And Church Podcasts,” http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/14-media/36-barna-technology-study-social-networking-online-entertainment-and-church-podcasts/ (accessed April 27, 2010).

→ 478 Comments

Posted in Essays

Tagged , , , , ,

Christian Ethics and the New Media – The Christian and the New Media

Posted on May 8, 2010 by Andrew J. Nicewander| 2,056 Comments

Christian Ethics and the New Media: Introduction and Media Defined

Christian Ethics and the New Media: Scripture and Communication

 

The Christian and the New Media

This leaves the Christian with a series of questions.  First, the Christian must ask himself what he is communicating.  Is this blog post going to unfairly hurt somebody?  Is this comment on this friend’s Facebook page something that will edify the reader, or will it communicate hurt?  Is this YouTube video God-honoring, or man-honoring?  Is this particular Twitter post about the silly-bird-that-just-flew-past-my-window-for-the-10th-time-isn’t-that-cute intended to be an encouragement to one’s Twitter Followers, or is it simply an exercise in some rather pathetic narcissism?[1]

Secondly, the Christian must ask herself how she is communicating her information.  Does she post a hasty comment on a blog that has greatly angered her, or does she take her time to think (and maybe pray) about what she is close to saying?  Does she post on Twitter so often that her followers “un-follow” her because she has become so annoying?[2] Does she follow thousands of Twitter accounts to satisfy some problematic longing for the approval of complete strangers or to show that she really belongs?[3]

Third, the Christian must ask himself whom he is communicating to.  The openness of information in the New Media can be particularly problematic when it comes to issues of privacy[4], predation[5] and the sharing of sensitive information[6].  While social networks such as Facebook have championed the user’s right to privacy, such claims are often called into question.[7] The problems with predators alone are enough a possibility to cause parents to seriously consider some severe limitations on their children’s internet time.  The issue is a simple one, and is a weak spot for the New Media.  One often never really knows who one is communicating to or why they are receiving the communication.  Whether it’s a blog post that could be read by anybody from China (provided the site is not blocked by government censors[8]) to South Africa to Iceland to California or whether it’s a Facebook Note that “should” only be read by your friends, the question of exactly “who” is absorbing one’s communications is a vexing one.

Finally, the Christian is faced with the ever-slippery question of why.  Why is she is about to post this article or that video.  Why is she writing this blog post?  Why is she following this Twitter account?  Why is she viewing this YouTube clip, that Hulu movie or this message board?  This question cuts to the essence of what it is that she does and often reveals something of who she is.  Does she do it out of thanksgiving to God?  Is she in some small way seeking His honor?  Is she seeking the glory and fame of men?  Does she post this blog post so that she gains a readership so that she will be liked and subscribed to?  Does she comment on certain well-read blogs for the express purpose of people following the links back to her blog?  Does she come up with witty responses to friends’ Facebook posts so that they’ll see how clever she is?  Does she do it for attention?  For acceptance?  For some small measure of love?

These questions drive the Christian to pursue solution of the ethical quandaries that the New Media provides.  Christians are not given a Biblical roadmap showing how to particularly navigate through the Internet wilderness.  They are provided with some fairly clear principles dealing with communication, though, and in reality, communication of ideas and information is what the New Media is all about

[1] David Sarno, “Don’t fear invasion of the mindcasters,” LA Times, March 11 2009, http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2009/03/on-twitter-mind.html. (accessed April 26, 2010).

[2] Nitrozac and Snaggy, The Joy of Tech, Comic, Picture http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyarchives/1202.html. (accessed April 26, 2010).

[3] Wefollow.com, “Home Page,” http://wefollow.com// (accessed 26 April, 2010).

[4] Daniel J. Solove, “Do Social Networks Bring the End of Privacy?,” Scientific American, September, 2008,, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=do-social-networks-bring/ (accessed April 26, 2010).

[5] John Kreiser, “MySpace: Your Kids’ Danger?,” CBS News, February 6 2006, Video and Article http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/02/06/eveningnews/main1286130.shtml/ (accessed April 26, 2010).

[6] Liz Gannes, “U.s. Military Turns To Social Networking To Encourage Sharing Official And Sensitive Info,” Gigaom, January 22, 2010, http://gigaom.com/2010/01/22/u-s-military-turns-to-social-networking-to-encourage-sharing-official-and-sensitive-info// (accessed April 26, 2010).

[7] Doug Gross, “Sharing Vs. Your Privacy On Facebook,” CNN, April 1, 2010, http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/ptech/04/01/facebook.developers.privacy/index.html. (accessed April 26, 2010).

[8] Tania Branigan, “Google Raises Stakes In China Censorship Row,” Guardian, March 22, 2010, http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/mar/22/google-china-shut-down-censorships/ (accessed April 26, 2010).

→ 2,056 Comments

Posted in Essays

Tagged , , , ,

Christian Ethics and the New Media – Scripture and Communication

Posted on May 7, 2010 by Andrew J. Nicewander| 452 Comments

Christian Ethics and the New Media: Introduction and Media Defined

 

Scripture and Communication

“Walk in wisdom toward outsiders, making the best use of the time.  Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer each person.” (Colossians 4:5-6)

A primary, driving force behind any Christian’s ethic is going to be Christ’s dual command, to love God with all the faculties of one’s being and to love one’s neighbor as oneself (Matthew 22:37-40).  Furthermore, this command is given flesh for the Christian be remembering what Christ did for him on the Cross.  He shows His children much love and much patience.  As such, He expects their ethics to follow that same, Grace-driven trajectory.  The Christian is called in Colossians by Paul to be gracious in her speech.  His communication is to be seasoned with salt.  Her actions are to be wise and time-redemptive.

“Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear.  And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.  Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice.  Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you.” (Ephesians 4:29-32)

Secondly, the Christian is called to communicate in such a way that grace is given to those being communicated to.  Christ-followers are not to be causes of unbiblical division and strife.  They are called to be “kind”, “tenderhearted” and forgiving.  Blog Battles and Flame Wars[1] are to be “put away”.  Meanness and a harsh spirit have no place within the Christian community.  Christians have been redeemed by the Holy Spirit, in Christ and by God’s kind Grace.  To use the New Media to communicate in such an evil, wicked way is to grieve the Spirit.

“Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am being tempted by God,” for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one.  But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire.  Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death. Do not be deceived, my beloved brothers.  Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change.” (James 1:13-17)

Finally, the New Media is not wicked in and of itself.  Media of all types can be used for much good.  When Johann Gutenberg created his printing press, it created untold (and at that time, unparalleled) possibilities for spreading the Word of God to men and women all over the world.[2] Yet, that same technology has also been used for much evil over the centuries.  Likewise, the New Media, those vessels of that ever culturally-precious commodity, information, can be used for much good and much evil.  The rightness is not in the thing itself, but in the use of it.  It’s not the medium in which the ethical question lies but in the use of the media.  Such abilities to spread information should be viewed as gifts from God.  The problem lies within the human heart and its propensity towards evil and unethical actions.

[1] Stephen Leahy, “The Secret Cause of Flame Wars,” Wired, February 13, 2006,, Blog Post, http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006/02/70179.

[2] Heinrich Wallau, “Johann Gutenburg,” in The Catholic Encyclopedia, 7th ed, http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07090a.htm. (accessed April 26, 2010).

→ 452 Comments

Posted in Essays

Tagged , , , ,

Christian Ethics and the New Media – Media Defined

Posted on May 6, 2010 by Andrew J. Nicewander| 619 Comments

Introduction

The New Media presents the Christian with many interesting ethical questions.  The prevalence of social networks, blogs, micro-blogs, web videos, emails and video chats attest to the fact that the present world is a thoroughly technological one.  Information and the gathering of information rule the land.  Communication in many mediums is key.

In living through such a world, the Christian is faced with many ethical dilemmas.  The sharing and communication of so much information presents ethical quandaries in the realms of narcissism, privacy, predation, slander, libel and idolatry.  These problems are not easy.  Media, in its pure form, is amoral.  It can be used for good and it can be used for ill.

Media Defined

This essay is not intended to deal with ethics involved with the journalism and television industry, the so-called “Mainstream Media”[1].  It is not even directly involved with the New Journalism[2] that has emerged as a force within the New Media.  It is rather concerned with media as the plurality of mediums, a medium being “An agency by which something is accomplished, conveyed, or transferred”[3].  Specifically, this understanding of media is concerned with the communication (the transference) of ideas.  In the realm of the New Media, this communication occurs with a heretofore unparalleled ease and economy.  While mass communication has been around for millennia through audible or written means, and though the world has seen great advances in humanity’s ability to mass communicate through newspapers, radio and television, what is currently happening through the New Media is astonishing.  The emergence of the Internet and other networking technologies, specifically the recent emergence of Internet social networking has given anybody and everybody the means to communicate to the masses.

While books, newspapers, radio and television allowed those with the means to communicate to the world with relative ease, the conversation has always been one-dimensional.  With the advent of social networking and blogging, the conversation has become multi-directional.  Everybody can communicate information relatively simply and fairly cheaply.

This then brings up a rather vexing question: How are Christians to rightly and ethically communicate?  Thankfully, while the Bible does not provide the Christian with detailed instructions regarding the proper use of Facebook, it does provide God-given commands and encouragements regarding how Christians speak and communicate with one another and with the world.

[1] Noam Chomsky, Z Magazine, October, 1997, http://www.chomsky.info/articles/199710–.htm. (accessed 28 April, 2010).

[2] Jeff Bercovici, “Op-ed: The New Journalism,” The New York Observer, February 23, 2010, http://www.observer.com/2010/media/new-journalism/ (accessed April 28, 2010).

[3] The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 4th ed., s.v. “medium.”, Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/medium/ (accessed 26 Apr., 2010).

→ 619 Comments

Posted in Essays

Tagged , , , ,

The Pharisee and the Tax Collector, Part 2

Posted on December 18, 2009 by Andrew J. Nicewander| 1 Comment

The Pharisee and the Tax Collector, Part 1

The Pharisee, according to his own perception of righteousness, had every reason to expect that he was right before God.  He followed all of the rules, He kept away from all of the sins, and he was absolutely more righteous than sinners like the tax collector.  Everyone knew how moral the Pharisee was and how utterly wicked and depraved the Tax Collector was.  This reality was not to be questioned.

Yet, the tax collector went home justified and the Pharisee did not.  The Tax Collector understood something vital: that he was indeed a sinner!  The Pharisee was right!  There was nothing in the tax collector to commend him to God.  There was nothing in his soul or in his heart that would make him in any way desirable or attractive to the Holy Lord.  He was utterly without help and hope apart from God’s sovereign mercy.  The Pharisee missed this key point: that he too was without hope apart from God’s Grace!  No matter how righteous he was, no matter how holy he was, no matter how lovely his prayers were or how much he fasted or how much he prayed, all of those works were filthy menstrual rags in comparison to the holiness of God, the holiness that is required for salvation.

This was the hope that the Tax Collector had.  That someway, somehow, God would overlook the blatantly obvious sin and still have mercy.  The Pharisee did not need this mercy.  God had already given it to him by making him so moral and upstanding that it inspired awe in those around him.  He exalted himself above the Tax Collector and above the people around him and above even God himself and Christ states that he did not go away justified.  Those who exalt themselves will be brought low.  Without Christ’s mercy, the Pharisee was damned.

And why was the Tax Collector justified?  Was it because of his righteous and holy repentance?  Certainly not!  He went home righteous because God heard his cry for mercy and loved and saved him.  The Tax Collector knew that he was lost apart from God’s mercy.  The Pharisee knew he was saved.  Christ did not come to save the righteous, but He did come to save sinners.  The Pharisee did not understand this reality.

How easy it would be to hate the Pharisee like the Pharisee hated the tax-collecting sinner!  “Lord, thank you that I’m not like other religious men!  I humbly pray three times a week, I give to the poor twice per year, I mourn over my sins every chance I get.  I thank you that I’m not like self-righteous men who try to earn their own salvation or even like this Pharisee.”  God forgive us for praying such prayers!  May he grant the mercy to repent like the Tax Collector, praying simply “Lord have mercy on me, a sinner!”

Simply being a sinner is not enough to be saved.  A man can know he’s a sinner and that he is completely unrighteous, but if he is not humbled enough to cry for mercy like the Tax Collector, he will not find salvation.  There is really only one difference between the Pharisee and the Sinner.  The Sinner knows he is lost, whereas the Pharisee thinks he is saved.  Yet both are still lost.  It is not until a man cries for mercy and believes that that man finds the salvation he so desperately seeks and needs.

Religion is a very dangerous thing.  Having the understanding of salvation, or claiming to, can be an extremely powerful bargaining chip in the hands of wicked men.  People engage in all sorts of insanity to find salvation.  This is the beauty of Christ’s teachings, that only when one stops trying to be saved will he be in a position to attain it.  Christ did not come to save the righteous.  He came to save sinners.  He came to save men like the Tax Collector, who had nothing with which to commend himself to God.

Yet pharisaical men are not without hope.  The church’s greatest missionary, the Apostle Paul, described himself in his letter to the Philippians as being a man who had every reason to have confidence in and boast in his flesh by stating that he was “…circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee; as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to righteousness under the law, blameless.” (Philippians 3:5-6)  Paul put the Pharisee in Jesus’ story to absolute shame.  If that man was a good Pharisee, Paul was better.  According to the righteous under the law, Paul was blameless.  What was the difference then between Paul and this Pharisee?  The difference is found in verse 7 and 8, as Paul states: “But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ.  Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith— that I may know him and the power of his resurrection, and may share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death,  that by any means possible I may attain the resurrection from the dead.” (Philippians 3:7-8).  Paul understood the lesson of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector.  He knew that his righteousness was not enough.  If anyone had come close enough, it was Paul.  Paul’s heart beat with that of the penitent Tax Collector, not the Pharisee.  The self-proclaimed Chief of Sinners knew the wickedness of his heart and the hopelessness of trying to satisfy God’s righteousness apart from Jesus.  And that same humbled chief of sinners also knew something of the riches of the exaltation of being a son of God in Christ.

Perhaps one of the most poignant examples of Christ’s mercy to a man like the Tax Collector is the life of John Newton.  The author of the hymn “Amazing Grace” was a man who spent a great deal of time and exerted a great deal of effort to, like Jonah, run away from God.  After many years of fighting, this man was used of God in great and mighty ways (and through his hymns and his story, is still being used).  The inscription on his tombstone reads: “John Newton, Clerk, once an infidel and libertine, a servant of slaves in Africa, was, by the rich mercy of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, preserved, restored, pardoned, and appointed to preach the faith he had long labored to destroy.”  This is the mercy that God has for sinners.  This grace is initially unlooked for, subsequently begged for and finally granted to the sinner; unearned, unexpected and above and beyond all hope.  Amazing grace, indeed!

→ 1 Comment

Posted in Essays

Tagged , , , , , , ,

The Pharisee and the Tax Collector, Part 1

Posted on December 16, 2009 by Andrew J. Nicewander| 702 Comments

Religiosity devoid of Christ-enlivened spirituality always and without fail leads to damnation.  This is a sobering lesson of the Parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector.  Jesus made no secret of His detestation of the teachings and theology of the Pharisees.  When He was not teaching doctrines that ran contrary to the Pharisees (enraging them) or dining with sinners (deeply offending them) or teaching parables against them (confounding them), He was pronouncing woes upon them and calling them vipers and whitened sepulchers.  He even saw fit to use them as an object lesson in this parable in Luke 18:9-14.

The parable in question involves two characters: a Pharisee and a Tax Collector.  Pharisees were the religious leaders of their day.  They were renowned for their apparent righteousness and law-keeping.  They loved the honor of men and loved the sweet smell of money (Luke 16:14).  They were self-righteous and devious.  Jesus did not think very highly of the Pharisees.  In return, they hated Him.  The Gospels are filled with battles that Jesus had with these leading rulers and many of his teachings were teachings in direct opposition to the Pharisees.  In Matthew 21:33-40 Jesus likened them to tenants who beat and murdered the servants of the owner of a vineyard, even going so far to murder the owner’s son.  When asked what should be done to men such as those, the Pharisees ironic answer was “He will put to those wretches to a miserable death and let out the vineyard to other tenants who will give him the fruits in their seasons” (Matthew 21:41).  Jesus’ telling response was that they (the Pharisees) had rejected God’s chief cornerstone and that “…the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits.” (Matthew 21:43).  Furthermore, Jesus pronounced seven woes against them in Matthew 23:13-36, using perhaps his harshest language recorded in the Gospels.  In this chilling passage Jesus referred to the Pharisees as hypocrites, children of hell, blind guides, blind fools, blind men, whitewashed tombs, serpents, and a brood of vipers.  He pronounces woes on them for trying to keep people out of God’s kingdom, attempting to make proselytes into children of hell, making foolish oaths, neglecting the “…weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness” (Matthew 23:23), being men concerned only with their outer appearance, concerning themselves with external righteousness while being internally dead men of lawlessness and hypocrisy, and hypocritically distancing themselves from the murder of God’s prophets.  Again, Jesus did not think highly of the Pharisees.  Their doctrines were hateful to Him.  Their supposed worship was a stink to His nostrils.  He hated their wickedness and their hypocrisy.  Yet, the Pharisees were the “big leaguers” of the Jewish religious climate.  They were the professionals.  If they said to jump, everybody asked how high.  They were the Righteous.  They were the ones close to God.  They were the ones who were in and doing God’s will.

The tax collectors, on the other hand, were a despised lot.  After Levi the Tax Collector was called by Jesus to be a disciple he invited Jesus and his fellow Tax Collectors (and other sinners) over to his house.  The scribes of the Pharisees took offense to this and asked why Jesus would do such a thing, to eat with such a dirty group of people.  Jesus’ beautiful answer is telling: “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick.  I came not to call the righteous, but sinners.” (Mark 2:17)  Tax Collectors were a sinful lot and they knew it.  They were in the employ of the Roman Empire but were Jews.  They were cheats, snitches and were despised by everybody.  They and everybody else knew that righteousness was impossible for them.  They were not well.  That Jesus would eat with them was a scandal of the highest order.  Such men were worse than the Romans.  Yet Jesus, because of His gracious love, came to save such men.  The Pharisees knew that they were righteous.  The Tax Collectors knew that they were not.    

The parables of Jesus were more than quaint stories.  They always had a purpose and always had a particular message and audience in mind.  Quite handily, Luke very kindly interpreted this parable by mentioning the audience and purpose of this passage.  In Luke 18:9 he states: “[Jesus] also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and treated others with contempt”.  This parable was (and is) intended for men like the Pharisees, who thought themselves righteous and better than everybody around them.

In particular, the Pharisee of Jesus’ parable was a stellar example of perceived righteousness.  By his own loud, self-seeking, prayerful admission, he proclaimed his righteousness by thanking God for giving it to him.  “God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector.  I fast twice a week, I give tithes of all I get.”  (Luke 18:11).  This was a man convinced of his standing before God and of his own inherent righteousness.  He was fair with his money (even though he loved it too much), he was just (even if it was by his own depraved standard of righteousness), he was faithful to his wife (even if he was able to find a myriad of reasons to justly divorce her) and he was nowhere near as wicked as the nearby Tax Collector.  Furthermore, this man did not just fast once a year or once a month or even once a week, he fasted two times during a week and he was sure to let everybody see how much his devotion cost him.  Even more impressively, he gave tithes of all he that he got, even if it meant that he did not have enough to respectively give to his parents in their need.  This Pharisee in Jesus’ parable was the standard of holiness and God-likeness.

The Tax Collector, on the other hand, agreed with the Pharisees assessment of him.  He knew that he did not have the righteousness of the Pharisee.  He knew that he was an extortioner, that he was unjust and that he was adulterous.  He was a tax collector after all.  This man knew that he was sick and in dire need of a physician.  It was all he could do to fall on his face and cry to God for the simple grace of underserved, unearned, unjust and completely necessary mercy.  This man was at his end.  He knew that there was nothing that he could do and nothing that he could offer to God to make God love him.  He quite simply had nothing to give and was ready to take anything and everything that God might give to him.  This man, Jesus says, went home justified, rather than the Pharisee.  This man repented of the sins that the Pharisee would never admit he had committed.  This man, completely unacceptable to God was accepted and went home justified and the Pharisee who by God’s grace kept all the law was found wanting and went home condemned.  In exalting himself the Pharisee was humbled to the point of condemnation.  In humbling himself and simply asking for mercy, the sinful Tax Collector was exalted and justified before God.

→ 702 Comments

Posted in Essays

Tagged , , , , ,

Who Am I?

Posted on December 21, 2008 by Andrew J. Nicewander| 6 Comments

Who am I?

I am a Christian.  I am not a Nicewander.  I am not a Texan.  I am not an American.  I am a Christian.

I am not a Baptist.  I am not a Calvinist.  I am not Reformed.  I am a Christian.

But, what defines me as Christian?  What makes me a Christian?  What causes me to do what I do, to speak what I speak, to live as I live?

When I speak, what do people hear?  When I do, what do people see?  When I act, what do men say that I believe?

Would they say that I am a follower of Christ?  Would they say that my love is for Him?  Would they see a heart that yearns for Christ, that aches for Christ, that would give up all just to have Christ?

Do I follow Christ?  Do I live for Christ?  Do I love Him and do I strive with all of my being to make Him known?  Am I so reliant upon Christ that I am worthless and as nothing without Him?

Oh, may God give me the grace to be thus!  When men see me, may they see a Christian, a follower of Christ, and one who Loves Him!

May I know that no one can take His place!  My wife may love me, support and encourage me, but she will someday die and leave me.  My family, as loyal as they might be, will fail me.  Christ is all I need!  Men will fail me, Christ will not.

Though doctrine is vitally important to my spiritual well-being, it is but a means to know Christ.  As comforting as the Doctrines of Grace are to my soul, they are merely telling me about the love of my Wonderful Savior.  May my love be for Christ!  May my hope be in Him!

Oh, would that my love for Christ would overflow!  In Christ I can be the son to my parents that I ought to be.  In Christ I can seek their council, and enjoy their support, because I know that it is ultimately in Christ that I am truly comforted.  In Christ I can be the brother I should be, loyal and kind, for I know that as I do good to others I am really showing my love for Christ.  In Him I can be what I should be for my sweet wife, in Christ I can know how to lead and to care.  How cruel it would be to make her my hope!  How hateful it would be to put such a pressure on her, a pressure that only Christ can handle!  How spiteful I would be to her in trusting my heart and emotions to her!  Oh, but as my hope and trust is in Christ, I can truly be for her what I should!

Oh, would that in respect for Christ, and desire for Him, I would know doctrine!  Oh, would that I would study Him, and seek after His truth!  Would that His love would drive me to know the Word of God, and fight for the Truth within its pages!  Oh, that I would have a sound worldview, a proper metaphysics, and a sound systematic theology!  Without Christ these things mean nothing.  They are worthless to save me, and powerless to love.  Oh, but in Christ I have a basis for belief, and a foundation for life!

And I pray with all that is within me, with tears and groans that Christ would enable me to glorify Him.  What an indictment if I dishonor Him!  What an indictment if I am a source and encouragement for others to curse and deride Him!  Oh, I plead with Him to do whatever it takes, however it takes, whenever it takes to glorify Him!  As He is my all in all, my hope, and the only one I ever need, I am His to use as He sees fit.  His Will is good.  His Love is eternal.  His Grace is Astounding.  And He is worthy of all honor, glory, and praise.

If you read this, and don’t know Christ, I have one word for you:

Believe.

Believe in Christ.  Trust Him for your soul.  There is a Holy God who rules and reigns over all.  And you are a sinner.  The Righteous God will not and cannot permit sin and rebellion.  A price must and will be paid.  Would you like to pay it yourself?  You can try running from Him, you can try hiding from Him, but sooner or later your time will come, and the price WILL be paid.

What can be done?

Believe.

Believe in the One who has paid the price.  Believe in the One who has satisfied Justice.  Believe in the One who has provided Salvation in all righteousness and holiness.  Believe, and you will be saved.  Believe, and you will know the depths and the breadth of the love of God.  He does not promise an easy life.  He does not promise physical safety and well-being.  He does promise His Grace, He does promise His Love.  He does promise Himself, and that’s all you’ll ever need.

Come know the cool sweetness of the everlasting flow of the River of Christ’s love!  Come see the majestic might of the towering peaks of Christ’s grace!  Come rest in the arms of the King of Kings, sink into His sovereign mercy and cling to His eternal grace!  Again, I say: believe!  Trust not in yourself, trust not in your philosophy, metaphysics, or systematic theology!  Trust in Christ!  Believe in Him!  Flee from your sin, flee unto Christ, and find in Him the Love you seek, the Grace you Need, and the Hope that never fails nor fades!

Believe!

Who am I?

I am Christ’s, and He is all I need.

→ 6 Comments

Posted in Essays

Tagged , ,