Prophetic speech, prophetic lament

A very perceptive article here, which doesn't just apply to its target, but to all Christians on the media who are building their brands in partnership with the mistaken belief that their ungodly speech is actually some form of prophetic witness: https://mereorthodoxy.com/doug-wilson-is-not-a-prophet

On a related note: recently Douglas Wilson's son-in-law recently tweeted, in relation to a review of the development of his church's ministries over the years: "We do many wonderful things here. We make great tri-tip, we make viral videos, we make progressives lose their minds, and it's all just a lot of fun. All of that together is just a whole lot of fun. ..." (I had to look up "tri-tip"; it is "a triangular cut of beef from the lower part of the sirloin").

Watchers of Christ Church, Moscow, Idaho, and their associated ministries are accustomed to this rhetoric. It's consistent and uniform enough - without anything said to the contrary - that you eventually notice it. Whatever they're doing, it's a blast, they're having great fun (often in small or large part because they're provoking ideological opponents), and the Christian life in this age is a great party (preferably with good steak). The above is one example of a consistent pattern of output over the years.

God's servants in the Bible do not have anything like this pattern of speech, or presentation of the realities of their ministries.

God's servants in Scripture pen Psalm after Psalm after Psalm of lament, wrestle with the painful experience of God's mysterious (yet good) providence in trying to understand why the wicked enjoy the good life whilst the righteous struggle, say things like "I die daily" (1 Corinthians 15:31), teach that through many troubles we must enter God's kingdom (Acts 14:23), and rebuke and expose the poor understanding of those who think that it's already time to reign with Christ in this age, when in reality it's time to suffer with him (2 Corinthians 8).

They spoke of being lambs for the slaughter (Romans 8), of carrying the precious treasure in earthen vessels of weakness (2 Corinthians 4), and asserted against all outward appearance that the sufferings of the precious time were not worthy to be compared with the glory that would come at the appearance of Christ (Romans 8 again). They commended themselves as God's servants "in much patience, in tribulations, in needs, in distresses, in stripes, in imprisonments, in tumults, in labours, in sleeplessness, in fastings", amongst other things (2 Corinthians 6:4-5). They followed Jesus, who taught us that if we want to save our lives, we shall lose them: so, instead, we must consciously, continually, be counting the cost and then giving them away. Such references could be multiplied very many times over, so consistent and pervasive are they.

Yes, Jesus' apostles rejoiced - but not because it was fun to lampoon the follies of either unbelievers in their darkness, or other Christians. They rejoiced because as the crucified Christ dwelt in them, so did the resurrected Christ - they life that they lived, they lived by Christ living in them, having died to self. And they saw this in those they invested their lives for too: "so then death is working in us, but life in you" (2 Corinthians 4:12). The Spirit of the one who has met with death, died, and then beaten it and entered into endless life, was also in them at the same time. Great sorrow, and invincible joy, together. They served "by honour and dishonour, by evil report and good report; as deceivers, and yet true; as unknown, and yet well known; as dying, and behold we live; as chastened, and yet not killed; as sorrowful, yet always rejoicing; as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing, and yet possessing all things" (2 Corinthians 6:8-10).

I confess that for a long time after first encountering it I didn't reflect upon this consistent self-testimony of the ministers of Christ Church Moscow, that their ministry has always been a great ride, full of fun, with little to say on the other side of the ledger. (And probably I hadn't yet reached enough maturity of understanding to do so). Now I've come to the viewpoint that when people repeatedly tell us this in a way that makes clear that it's an important part of their self-identity and self-identification to the world, we should believe their self-testimony, and understand its implications. Frankly, the world, the flesh and the devil have made the ministries I've been involved in difficult in various ways for many years, and the thing that helps me to take up the cross and persevere in them is the knowledge that those who die with Christ will be raised with him, and the experience too of a harvest of joy as we see his life appearing in others too: this brings the conviction that he is worthy to be served despite the pains.

If someone else wants to say that their ministry runs, year after year, on quite different lines to that then, well, I'm at least grateful that they have been clear about this.

It is certainly not a coincidence that Christ Church, Moscow promotes theonomic post-millenialism (which the same author wrote a very good critique of around a couple of years ago). The implications of theonomic post-millenialism is that whilst in the Bible and generally subsequently, God's method of discipling people is through the way of the cross, yet in the future there will be a golden age before the return of Christ in which Christianity will be generally popular and accepted, and so suffering will fade into the past, as memory. God's people will then be discipled some other way, not described in Scripture (I've never yet read an explanation of what it will be). It seems to me that many adherents of these beliefs then manage to mentally confuse themselves into believing that this supposed coming age has already dawned, and that they personally are living in it. And that is understandable at some level: your eschatology drives how you live in the present. That's why it's important not to get it wrong (I wrote about the misplaced hope of post-millennialism here).

(Related piece written in 2024, with some similar concerns to those Jeremy Sexton raises). 

Theonomic postmillennialism: nail, meet head

Some weeks ago I wrote on the topic "Postmillennialism - a theology of hope? On the contrary, a theology of hope misplaced", writing about how the thought-world and motivations that postmillennial advocates recommend in our service differ fatally from the thought-world and motivations of the apostles.

Today I came across this related quote which is so succinct, so apposite and relevant, that I gladly share it. The nail meets the head, without a word out of place. Firstly, the writer quotes a theonomic postmillennilist (which Googling reveals is CREC minister Uriesou Brito), who wrote as follows:

Our postmillennialism is deeply embedded in our lives. This is more than a preference for historical optimism. Postmillennialism is how we see the Bible moving. It is far from a mere academic discussion. In fact, it would not be easy to function happily in the CREC without that eschatological predisposition. It impacts everything from our preaching/teaching to our education and interpretation of the times.

And here, in response, Jacob Gonzales nails it:

So much for catholicity. Postmillennialism, in this formulation, is a hermeneutic rather than an eschatology. It shapes and determines the meaning of the prophets, rather than being shaped and determined by them.

None of the Reformed confessions speak this way. Our hope is in the coming of the Lord and the resurrection of the dead. There is no way, as this makes clear, to function happily within one of these churches without presupposing a very peculiar modern formulation of postmillennialism. Everyday a new application of this hermeneutic reveals itself, whether it be masks veiling the glory of God or some other religious-political commitment. I don’t see how binding the consciences of the sheep to eschatology in this way does anything but create schism.

The next commentator is also apposite: 

And so much for Ben Merkle’s sermon at the CREC general assembly (or whatever they call it) about 10 years ago. He urged that those things must not become the shibboleths of the CREC. It was a very encouraging sermon. Sad to see it so blatantly rejected.

To see an example of that, see this, in which postmillennialism has become the only real motivation for Christian service or strategic thinking, and paedocommunion has become the sina qua non of authentic Christian child-rearing.

Beware of theonomic postmillennialism. As it works out its presuppositions and conclusions consistently throughout someone's system of thought and church life, the negative fruits will become more and more apparent, and the churches and believers embracing it will become more and more sectarian and political in outlook and strident in tone, and it will be increasingly difficult for other believers to find common ground with them in any practical endeavour. Note that that's not just me observing that - that's what those of that persuasion are saying themselves. I'd plead with those of this persuasion to notice what a mistaken place they've got themselves into, and return. The mainstream Reformed tradition is not something that was discovered (or recovered) in the 1970s in a particular North American cultural milieu. There is another way, and a better way, and one that is explicitly shaped and determined by reading and submitting to the New Testament and then reading the whole Bible chronology in the light of the authoritative interpretation given there.