God Hates Religion…?

“A religion is a set of beliefs and practices, often centered upon specific supernatural and moral claims about reality, the cosmos, and human nature, and often codified as prayer, ritual, or religious law. Religion also encompasses ancestral or cultural traditions, writings, history, and mythology, as well as personal faith and religious experience. The term “religion” refers to both the personal practices related to communal faith and to group rituals and communication stemming from shared conviction.” (Wikipedia)

If I had a nickel for every time I heard some young “cutting edge” Christian say things like “God hates religion” or talk about somebody being in “bondage of a religious spirit”, well I’d have a lot of nickels by now. At some point in the American church’s history, religion became some sort of a cuss word. I used to swim this way too in my Charismatic days. Churches that didn’t “move in the spirit” (like that old dry Presbyterian church I attend now…) is under the bondage of religion. I believe the cliché was, “Christianity isn’t a religion, it’s a relationship”. Yawn.

I have to wonder how much thought really goes into statements like these. In my studies, I found many scholarly men, none the least the Apostle Paul, refer to Christianity as a religion. John Calvin, John Owen, and Zwingli come to mind as men who openly referred to the Christian faith as religion. All of these men (and again, the Apostle Paul), simply judging from their writings and the way God used them throughout history, would seem to embrace the idea of having a relationship with Jesus Christ. In fact, I would be as bold to say that I could only ever dream to have a relationship so close to my Savior that these men seemed to have.

So what is it then about the term “religion” that people seem to despise or misunderstand? A few things from the definition above give some clues.

“A religion is a set of beliefs and practices, often centered upon specific supernatural and moral claims about reality, the cosmos, and human nature, and often codified as prayer, ritual, or religious law.”
In this first statement, the lines about ritual or religious law may be a huge turn off for many in the “anti religious Christian” club. What comes to their minds are things like extra-Biblical man made rules of faith that are really forms of legalism, not religion. However, we must admit that Christianity is one rich in ritual and religious law. What are the sacraments of baptism and communion if not ritual? They are God commanded rituals, but they are rituals none the less. Take them away, and we have a very weak Church. Take away the Law of God and we have anti-nomianism. Grace has not abolished the Law of God, rather it has fulfilled it in Christ. It does not mean that the Law has no use to the Christian. Christianity is indeed steeped in Law and Ritual. God given law, God given ritual, but take them away and we have a weak Church who neglects the commands of Christ and has no moral standards..

Religion also encompasses ancestral or cultural traditions, writings, history, and mythology, as well as personal faith and religious experience

Putting the issue of mythology aside, this section about ancestral or cultural traditions and history probably create a huge stumbling block for many Fundamentalist Protestants. The idea of “tradition” seems a bit too Roman for many people’s comfort. It’s important however to remember that we are not talking about tradition as being an authority the way a Roman Catholic would claim “Apostolic tradition” as authoritative. We are simply talking about the time honored treasures of our Christian faith. The creeds and confessions, the rich tapestry of music, the celebration of advent and the resurrection on given days of the calendar,* all of these are traditions that the Church has passed on to us, not to be cast aside but to be embraced joyously as a reminder of our history and heritage. Concerning our writings and history as the Church, I would go as far as to make this bold claim. Most Christians who are shouting “God hates religion” probably belong to churches who are neglecting the study of Church history and the Church’s writings. I could count on one hand the people I’ve met who make the proclamation of God’s hatred towards religion who have actually read the early Fathers, or Augustine, or Luther, Calvin, the Puritans, ect. I don’t mean to sound condescending. It’s a simple observation. These groups are usually more concerned with cultural engagement (not a bad thing at all, but men like Abraham Kuyper certainly taught us that the faith is large enough to embrace both!) or appearing to be “edgy” and “open” than they are studying the ways of God’s Church, testing their doctrines not only in Scripture (which should be our final authority) but also in what the Holy Spirit has done in history.

Again I apologize if I found condescending or nasty in this thread. It’s not my point (though I wonder what the point of those who proclaim “God hates religion!” so boldly is?) I do wish to show though that Christianity is indeed a religion and we have nothing to be ashamed of in such claims. The fact that Christianity is about a relationship (both personal and corporate) between God and Man does not exclude the fact that Christianity is also about law, ritual, history, and tradition. I may make this claim. God delights in religion! It is the “religious” Church that embraces the history of His people. It is the religious Church that keeps His sacraments. It is the religious Church that understands that Christianity isn’t just about saying a “sinner’s prayer” but is also about the sanctification of the Holy Spirit in us so that the Law does become helpful in instructing and guiding us under grace!

Many horrible acts have been done in the name of religion. The problem however is not with “religion” itself. It is with the men and women who practice it.

*I am aware that some, even within conservative Presbyterianism, do not view religious holidays or the singing of hymns as a tradition of the Church that is to be embraced, but even these groups would have their own traditions and practices that have been passed on throughout the generations. I was simply pointing out examples that most Christians can relate to.

Irish folk music and Calvinism

For a good part of the last decade I’ve spent serious time getting in touch with my Irish roots. Mostly through music. I’ve tried studying the politics of Ireland and her history, the folk legends and stories, all of which I find facinating, but nothing has taught me the story of Ireland more than her music. From drinking and folk songs to the Irish rebel songs of the early 20th century, I’ve found a string of music that somehow moves through my veins in ways rock and roll never could.

About a year ago, I started to try my hand at singing and playing Irish music. I even made a CD at one point in my recording studio where I played all the instruments myself (www.myspace.com/logueandthebanshee, a rather crude attempt) and have started playing live. I’ve found this all to bring a balance to my art that I didn’t expect. At some point with rock and roll, I think I was getting burned out. There is only so much creative energy I can get out by playing saxophone in a rock and roll band. However, playing folk music I found that, even though I’m not actually writing my own music, I’m able to satisfy my creative cravings.

I find that it’s easy to balance my folk music with rock and roll, probably because they’re two very different styles of music with very little over lap. I also think that I’m exploring an area of music that will stay with me much longer than rock and roll ever will. What I mean by this is, when my rock and roll days are long gone and I’m old and gray, I will still be able to pick up a guitar or mandolin and play the Irish folk music I play now. It’s also creating a rich heritage that I’ll be able to pass on to my children. My grandfather’s parents died when he was very young and my grandmother’s family have been in the country for so long that our Irish roots were all but forgotten. I feel like I’ve been able to dig a lot of my heritage back up and it’s something I’ll be proud to pass on to my children.

So what does this all have to do with Calvinism? Not a whole lot really other than the fact that many of my ancestors were Scots who were sent to Northern Ireland during the Ulster Plantation. Both the Ulster Scots and the Irish Catholics suffered under the Church of England, giving them a common bond and a common thread in which to take up arms against the English in Northern Ireland. It makes me smile a little bit to think of the Presbyterians and Catholics struggling together for once instead of against each other!

Revival

I’ve become vaguely familiar with the happenings in Lakeland Fl and one Todd Bently. For those completely unaware of such happenings, another great revival has sprung up in the Southlands of our fair country. The usual signs accompany this outbreak. Great movements of the Spirit have led many to bark like dogs, laugh uncontrollably, see angels walking around, and massive slayings of the Holy Spirit. The major claim to this particular revival is massive healings.

I don’t want to mock true workings of the Spirit, but this all seems most suspicious to me (as do most modern Pentecostal “revivals”). Several major elements see out of place.

First off, order and structure. We know our worship is to be orderly. We know our God is not a god of chaos. Yet we have these massive “services” of disorder. I’ve read the Bible and to quote Carl from Slingblade, “I reckon I don’t understand all of it but I understand a good bit of it” and I’ve never seen a single example of the movements of the Spirit leading to chaos. Even the day of Pentecost seems mild compared to what is going on in Lakeland. I don’t think I ever recollect a place in Scripture where the Holy Spirit caused uncontrollable laughter and I certainly never read any examples where worshipers are lead to bark like dogs or roar like lions. Of course this leads me to question the massive collapsing of people or as the Charismatics call it, “being slayed in the Spirit”. Again, no Biblical support for such actions. The only place I can think of in Scripture where people are slayed in the Spirit would be where the Spirit actually killed people (was it the story of the couple who sold all their belongings and claimed to be giving it all to the Church?). Certainly we see places in Scripture where people have fell prostate before God or have become prostate in the presence of God (mostly Old Testament examples), but never a massive collapsing of people. It all seems non orderly and chaotic.

My second observation is that the claims to healing have yet to be verified by anybody outside of the Lakeland church. As far as I know, no medical doctors have come forth and verified any of the healings that Bently and staff have claimed. When reading the gospel and seeing the healings that Christ and the Apostles have performed, there was never any question about such events. They had eye witnesses. Those witnesses not only included the disciples and families of those healed, but of every day bystanders that as far as we know had no connection w/ Christ’s ministry. They were also clear physical healings. Claims from Lakeland are usually unseen ailments like cancer. However, Christ’s healings were of things like paraplegia, blindness, regrowth and reattachments of body parts (I still find it amazing that Christ healed the ear of a Roman soldier). Some may say, “people will not verify the healings because they know it is evidence of Christ”. I say that I can not believe that there is not a single doctor, nurse, medical secretary, ect. in all of the Lakeland area that will not step forward and verify a healing claim.

Thirdly a true revival is based on the preaching of the Word of God and the massive repentance of people coming to Christ. This revival boasts of healings and it’s large crowds, but very little is said of massive conversions to Christ. Even less is said of the preaching of God’s word as being central to this revival. In studying America’s Great Awakening, it wasn’t outpourings of the Spirit that drew crowds. Rather it was the preaching of men like Jonathan Edwards and George Whitfield. Crowds gathered to hear the Word being preached. The preaching of the Word led to conviction which lead to countless numbers of people turning to Christ (a true outpouring of the Spirit indeed!) This movement also wasn’t confined to one area. Whitfield would travel up and down the East Coast drawing crowds wherever he preached. The preaching of the Word of God is central in all true revivals and has been since the days of the Apostles. The outpouring of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost was remarkable. However, the gift of tongues received on that day had evangelical purposes. It allowed the Apostles to preach the Word in the native tongues of many that day so that they could hear the good news of Christ and repent.

We are told to test the spirits. What test is given to us if not the Word of God? Whenever I see movements like Lakeland, I thank God first because I know that despite the works of men, God will use all things to accomplish His will. However I then start to ask serious questions and start to test the spirits to see if such movements fall in line with what the Bible and history tells us a revival should and will look like.

Time keeps moving forward…but do I?

Well I’m all but done in the studio now with my band. I wouldn’t mind redoing some of the horns and whatnot, but all the major work is finished (mixing and all that). I’m hoping to have a clearer mind now to work on some posts for this site. We’ve also got a group going on facebook now so if you’re a facebook user, look up The School of Hard Knox and join the group.

The band is still busy getting ready for a series of shows coming up. All this seems to preoccupy my mind. Hang with us here and we’ll get some threads going soon.
Thanks

Remembering John and Dot

Today is a hard day for my family. July 17th is the day my maternal grandparents John and Dot Logue died. Same day, 7 years apart. My grandpa John Marshall Logue died on July 17th, 1993 from a combination of emphysema and a ruptured aneurysm. My grandma Dorothy Gardner Caldwell Logue died on July 17th, 2000 from colon cancer.

My family was fortunate enough to have my grandparents live with us from 1987 through to their deaths. They were a major part our lives. A constant presence. Their deaths left a void in our house that is still felt there to this day. One can hardly visit my parents’ house and not be constantly reminded of them. Going to the cabin is much the same. The counter which my grandpa spent hours sitting at, drinking, smoking, and watching traffic out the window now makes its home at Camp Iroquois. I know Grandpa would be happy about that.

Growing up, much to my brother and my chagrin, it was like living with two sets of parents. When we did something wrong, not only did we get scolded by mom and dad, but many times Grandma and Grandpa would make their opinions known about our shenanigans. Looking back on it, I wouldn’t of had it any other way.

Grandpa Logue was a man that I must admit I spent many of my days being afraid of. He was a big strong bald man with a raspy voice and the trademark Logue grumpiness. Must be an Irish temper thing or something. He was constantly picking on me, constantly messing with us. I now see the humor in it all and long for those days of being teased by mean old Grandpa. That being said, he was also a loving man. He made it known daily that he loved my brother and me, even if he didn’t come right out and say it. Grandpa taught me how to play chess. He was a Red Rose Chess Club champion. My biggest regret in my time with him is that I never did manage to beat him in chess. After his death, I was honored to be given his chess set. It’s a set I still play with today.

The last day I saw grandpa was the day before he died. I had just gotten back from the cabin with my family. Walking through the downstairs of our house (where they lived), I stopped in at Grandpa’s room to see how he was feeling. He said he was feeling good that day. He asked me to stop in later to tell me about vacation. I never got the chance. I woke up the next morning to find out he was taken to the hospital (not an uncommon thing the last year of his life) and we got the call from my dad later that morning that he passed away. His last words to me the day before were, “I’ll see you later Andy”. I still look forward to that reunion. The last year of his life I watched my Grandpa become a man of God, becoming dedicated to the Lord in faith and practice, taking communion often w/ a local minister who made house calls and my grandmother. It was a great thing to watch. Though I must admit, my fondest memories of him are still seeing him sitting at the counter smoking and drinking and yelling at my grandmother (who had narcolepsy and would fall asleep at random times and would start talking in her sleep very loudly), “Dot, shut up! Shut up Dot!”
It’s been 15 years since he died.

My grandmother was kind of a polar opposite of my grandpa. She was rarely grumpy, didn’t smoke, didn’t drink, was nosy and intrusive, and a whole lot less scary than Grandpa was to a little kid! She was woman of faith as long as I remember, always talking of spiritual things. Apart from my parents, she was the biggest influence on my faith growing up. Grandma was a character all in her own. Her narcolepsy seemed to fit her personality. She could fall asleep anywhere anytime and it was a riot. I still remember times when she would have a “spell” and her dentures would start falling out of her mouth. Hilarious stuff. I don’t mean to make light of her disease, but it was part of what made her grandma. Grandma really came into her own after Grandpa died. After he died, Grandma made her first flight as she flew out to CA on her own to visit my Aunt Jackie, she would go to Virginia for months at a time to visit her mother and sisters, it was great to see. Of course it wasn’t all easy after Grandpa died. There were many times where our dinner was interrupted by her coming up to talk and you knew it was because it was dinner time and Grandpa wasn’t there anymore for her to talk to. I think we kind of forgot that after 50+years of marriage, she was really a lonely lady at times. We were not so gracious as we should have been sometimes I think. Grandma was always patient though. I remember getting my first electric guitar and Pete getting his first drum kit. A grandmother’s nightmare. Not my Grandma. Many summer days when Pete and I would be at home during the day alone while our parents were at work, Grandma would come upstairs and listen to us play our instruments. Imagine an 80 year old lady listening to a couple of really bad musicians trying to play Ramones songs! That’s how she was though. She was always interested in what all her grandkids were up to and she bragged constantly about us all! The last time I saw Grandma was after she was moved out of our home and into hospice. I drove up to see her and it happened to be a time when my cousin Erin and my Aunt Lynda were there as well. The minister of the home she was in was just coming in to give her communion (Protestant communion that is;). My time was spent with her that last day taking the Lord’s supper and talking for hours on eternal things.

I really miss them both. So much has happened in my life since their deaths. Grandpa missed me getting my first duck on a hunt. He missed me getting my driver’s license. He missed my graduation from high school. Grandma missed less because she died when I was 20 but my biggest wish would be that they could have met Heidi and would have been there for my marriage and for Pete’s. They would have loved Heidi and Melissa for sure. I would have loved to see how they would have reacted to a dog like Fleetwood or would have loved showing Grandpa my first house. Every milestone in my life since their death just hasn’t been quite what it would be if they were here to share it with. My family will never quite be complete until we’re united again in Eternity. Until then, we’ll keep remembering John and Dot and the impact they made on our lives.

Responding to the Papal Bull

Greetings all. Its been a while. I must apologize for my silence. I want to assure you , most especially some Roman Catholic brethren who have found their way onto my site, that I am not ignoring you. I am currently recording a project for my band and have been spending all my free time in my dank dark basement editing and mixing tracks. I logged something like 14 studio hours yesterday. I have a July 15th deadline and I’m just maxed out right now. Again, I apologize. I look forward to the challenge of responding to the dialog thats been going on here w/in the last several days!

So until life settles down a bit for me, you’ll have to continue on w/out me. Shouldn’t be too much longer. Thanks for your patience and interest in my threads.

Lyrical Theology

Last night my wife and I enjoyed a dinner at some friends’ house. During our visit, they introduced me to a Philadelphia hip hop artist, Shai Linne. Now I’m no hip hop fan nor am I much of a supporter of the “christian music” scene (that’s a topic for another post though), but this guy blew my mind lyrically. I’d like to share some lyrics off of his newest album, “The Atonement”. I am impressed at just how complete his theological case is in this song. I imagine it must be incredibly difficult to create such a solid theological argument in the time span of the average pop song.

Mission Accomplished
written by shai linne

Verse 1

Here’s a controversial subject that tends to divide
For years it’s had Christians lining up on both sides
By God’s grace, I’ll address this without pride
The question concerns those for whom Christ died
Was He trying to save everybody worldwide?
Was He trying to make the entire world His Bride?
Does man’s unbelief keep the Savior’s hands tied?
Biblically, each of these must be denied
It’s true, Jesus gave up His life for His Bride
But His Bride is the elect, to whom His death is applied
If on judgment day, you see that you can’t hide
And because of your sin, God’s wrath on you abides
And hell is the place you eternally reside
That means your wrath from God hasn’t been satisfied
But we believe His mission was accomplished when He died
But how the cross relates to those in hell?
Well, they be saying:

Lord knows He tried

Verse 2

Father, Son and Spirit: three and yet one
Working as a unit to get things done
Our salvation began in eternity past
God certainly has to bring all His purpose to pass
A triune, eternal bond no one could ever sever
When it comes to the church, peep how they work together
The Father foreknew first, the Son came to earth
To die- the Holy Spirit gives the new birth
The Father elects them, the Son pays their debt and protects them
The Spirit is the One who resurrects them
The Father chooses them, the Son gets bruised for them
The Spirit renews them and produces fruit in them
Everybody’s not elect, the Father decides
And it’s only the elect in whom the Spirit resides
The Father and the Spirit- completely unified
But when it comes to Christ and those in hell?
Well, they be saying:

Lord knows He tried

Verse 3

My third and final verse- here’s the situation
Just a couple more things for your consideration
If saving everybody was why Christ came in history
With so many in hell, we’d have to say He failed miserably
So many think He only came to make it possible
Let’s follow this solution to a conclusion that’s logical
What about those who were already in the grave?
The Old Testament wicked- condemned as depraved
Did He die for them? C’mon, behave
But worst of all, you’re saying the cross by itself doesn’t save
That we must do something to give the cross its power
That means, at the end of the day, the glory’s ours
That man-centered thinking is not recommended
The cross will save all for whom it was intended
Because for the elect, God’s wrath was satisfied
But still, when it comes to those in hell
Well, they be saying:

Lord knows He tried

Did the Cross save anybody?

While in the mountains, I touched a bit on John Owen’s “The Death of Death”. I’ve read a good chunk of it before but kind of rushed through the introductory essay by J.I.Packer. I went back and reread the introduction (which if it isn’t published on its own, it should be!) this week and found it profoundly deep and thorough. He makes a great point in the essay about just what the Cross accomplished and draws a clear line between the Calvinist view of the Cross and the Arminian view. I think I could sum up his argument with these two questions.

Did the Cross save anybody, or did it merely make salvation possible?

Was the atonement effective in achieving atonement for God’s people at the cross, or is it like an ointment with no special merit of its own sitting on a dresser waiting for a person to apply it to their wounds?

One can see, these two questions are really getting to the same point. Either the cross actually accomplished something or it just made something possible. Either the atonement was active and effective, or it was a passive act that relies on man’s choice. It’s a good thing to ponder for all theological camps. What exactly happened at the cross? Was salvation secured for all those who would call Christ “Lord”, or did it simply make salvation a possibility for those who might call Christ “Lord” (although…without election, is there any guarantee that ANYBODY would actually be saved? Without election, Packer points out, the possibility that no one would accept the gospel of Jesus Christ exists, making Christ’s atonement a vain act).

I don’t want to speculate what an Arminian would say about such arguments. The last thing I want is to misrepresent their theology. However, the logical conclusion of not believing in God’s sovereign election is that the Cross simply made salvation possible. It is the decision of man to accept the sacrifice at the Cross that makes it effective. I have a huge problem with this. It means that Christ was not effective in His death. It means that he suffered physically and spiritually a torment that none of us could ever imagine, all for a possibility. It means that the real power of the Cross is ultimately in the hands of man’s decision to apply the ointment of atonement to his wounds.

Does this thinking sit wrong with anyone else or am I alone with this? Does the idea of God electing people to believe and not others still bother some more than the idea that God came to Earth in the form of a man, “descended into Hell” as the ancient creed puts it, all for a possibility?

Is the power of the Cross effective in what it accomplished? Did it save anybody? Or did it create History’s biggest “Maybe”?