This was originally written as a letter but I’ve modified it slightly to post on here.

I first affirm the equal worth and value of all people. Men and women stand as equals before God. He does not favor one gender over another but has called all people to himself and he loves all of his children the same. We are equally precious in his sight.

But equality in terms of our value and worth as individuals does not mean we are equal in every way. In mathematics we can say that 5 = 5 and we mean these numbers are the same thing. Among humanity, however, we cannot say that man = woman. It is a simple biological fact that we are not the same and I believe our differences extend beyond biology.

God created men and women to be different and our differences are intended to work together. Men have strengths women do not have, women have strengths men do not have. The only way we can function well as a society is to recognize our differences and seek to use our strengths in ways that compensate for the other’s weaknesses.

One of the great tragedies of modern society is that we attempt to cover up the differences between men and women. The modern feminist movement claims to work for the advancement of women but what often ends up happening is women are made to act like men, thus obliterating the strengths uniquely given to women. There are many reasons why this distortion has taken place and much of the blame falls on men who have failed to live up to their responsibility. Men have ignored what God has called them to do, leaving a vacuum in society that women have sought to fill. The end result is a society turned upside down.

From the beginning of creation God has intended for men and women to augment one another. We see this in the garden of Eden where in Genesis 2:19-25 we read that something was lacking in man and God created woman to fill the need. We were created to work together.

In the creation of men and women God also reveals a certain hierarchy. When he created Adam and placed him in the garden he gave Adam dominion over all creation. He then created Eve as a helper to Adam in the garden. She was no beast, put under man’s authority like the rest of creation, for she was part of Adam, created from his rib, and given all the worth and dignity he had been given. Nonetheless, she was not given his authority. She was put in the garden as his helper. That is, as Adam ruled over the garden, Eve assisted him.

One of the great tragedies of history is that so many men have mangled what God established. Men have declared themselves lords of their own domains while women have been seen as little more than servants to serve the whims of men. Men who act in this way have committed a grave sin as they distort what God has done and deny the unique value of women.

Nonetheless, there is a right way to maintain the distinction between men and women with men serving as leaders and women serving under their leadership. Even in the New Testament we find this expectation that men and women will work together in complementary ways. Men and women continue to be shown to be equal in terms of worth and value and Christ’s work for men and women is the same, but we continue to have distinct strengths and weaknesses that should be used for the glory of Christ and the good of the church.

The New Testament also shows us something that was not revealed in the Old Testament: this relationship between men and women, particularly between husband and wife, has been given to paint a picture for the world of the relationship between Christ and the church. In Ephesians 5:22-33 we see that the husband stands as an image of Christ, leading his family in faithfulness and righteousness. The wife stands as an image of the church, submitting to her husband’s leadership even as the church is to submit to Christ.

This complementary relationship extends to our work within the church. Several times in the New Testament we find the writer addressing men and women in the church. It is always affirmed that just as leadership in the home is to be held by men, so too leadership in the church is to be held by men. Perhaps the clearest text on this is 1 Timothy 2:8-15 which contains some perplexing words but is fairly clear in verse 12 where Paul writes, I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. Paul shows that the work of preaching and serving as spiritual leader over the people of God is to be carried out by men in the church. But within the church men and women alike continue to serve in various ministries and tasks. It is simply a fact that in the history of the church women have quite often been more obedient than men to spread the gospel and serve the needy.

Much more can be said – indeed, many books have been written on both sides of this issue! – but this letter will be enough to show you my feelings on the subject. I respect and appreciate women who desire to serve God and feel their service should be through pastoral work. In seminary I had several lady friends who were preparing for pastoral ministry. They knew where I stood and I knew where they stood and somehow we managed to remain friends. But I believe that these women are misusing the gifts and abilities uniquely given to them as women and in the process are harming the church by distorting what God has intended.

In our egalitarian society my beliefs on this matter are not popular. But in all things we do not judge truth on the basis of popularity but on the basis of the timeless, unchanging revelation given to us by God in his Word.

We don’t do Santa Claus. Here is one of the many reasons:

Christian, do you follow the law?

On Sunday nights I am preaching through the Sermon on the Mount. This past Sunday our text was Matthew 5:17-20, dealing with Christ and the law (audio of the sermon available at the link).

I want to focus on one of the points brought up in the sermon. Christians often wrestle with the relationship between Christians and the law. We know we are not under the law (Romans 6:14) and that Christ has in some sense been the end of the law (Romans 10:4) but we also know that this does not release us from God’s moral commands and that Jesus taught the law would not pass away (Matthew 5:18).

It was this last verse that puzzled me as I prepared to preach. There are two things Jesus says in Matthew 5:18:

1. Not even the smallest part of the law will pass away, even if the world passes away.
2. Nothing in the law will change until everything is accomplished.

On the one hand Jesus says the law will not pass away. Then he immediately turns around with the caveat, “until all is accomplished.” Something will happen that will cause at least some change in the law.

To determine what Jesus meant it is helpful to take a closer look at the law. When we talk about the Old Testament law we usually refer to the covenantal law established through Moses. The commands of the Mosaic law can be grouped into three categories or three kinds of law:

1. The judicial law. This was the law governing the people of God as a political assembly or nation. God’s law did not just govern individual life, it also governed the political and judicial life of the people. These commands gave instructions for how to behave in war, how to punish various sins, etc.
2. The ceremonial law. This law guided the religious life of the people. In the ceremonial law the people learned about the feast days, rituals and sacrifices to be carried out before God. The centerpiece of the ceremonial law was first the tabernacle then the temple.
3. The moral law. Here we have the commands that governed individual life. Through the moral law God revealed to his people how he wanted them to live their lives and interact with one another. The moral law is generally summarized in the ten commandments.

Looking back at the words of Jesus, in what way does the law not pass away and in what way is it accomplished? I argue that the whole law is fulfilled in Christ (as he himself states in Matthew 5:17) but the first two types of law have been altogether accomplished while the third type, the moral law, will never pass away. Look at the three types again:

1. Through the judicial law God emphasized the seriousness of sin against a holy God and he taught that sin will be punished (these are also taught in the ceremonial law but from a different slant). It was also through the judicial law that God laid down the framework for life in his kingdom: his people would be obedient to him and his rule. The judicial law was fulfilled in Christ who by his death serves as the greatest demonstration of just how great an offense sin is. He has also transformed the judicial landscape. The people of God are no longer defined as a geopolitical entity but as a body, the church, the bride of Christ. The reign of God is no longer centered on a throne, whether the throne of God at the Ark of the Covenant or the throne of a king in a palace. The reign of God comes through human hearts by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Jesus did not just fulfill the judicial law, through Jesus the judicial law has accomplished its purpose. It was given as a pointer and when the One it pointed to arrived, its purpose was completed.
2. Through the ceremonial law God taught the people that sin must be paid for. Sin requires blood. Either your blood or the blood of someone else. The Old Testament sacrifices did not themselves accomplish any atoning work – the blood of bulls and goats will not cover our sins – but they served as a symbol of the One who would come, the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. Jesus fulfilled the ceremonial law by perfectly following every one of its precepts. And like the judicial law, through Jesus the ceremonial law was accomplished. It was no longer necessary once the eternal Lamb had come.
3. With the moral law we have something a bit different. The moral law existed before the judicial or ceremonial. Even in the garden Adam and Eve were guided by God’s expectations for how they should behave. Jesus fulfilled the moral law by living without sin. He was holy and righteous, never doing wrong. But the moral law was not accomplished with Jesus. The judicial and ceremonial laws were pointers to Christ but the moral law points not to Christ but to his expectations for us. These expectations did not end with the birth of Jesus or at his cross or resurrection or ascension or the giving of the Holy Spirit. God continues to expect all humans to live according to his moral commands.

The judicial and ceremonial laws have been accomplished and have passed away but the moral law remains binding on humanity. This is why in Matthew 5:19 Jesus says the people of God ought to be both doing and teaching the law of God. He does not mean we ought to do and teach that which has been accomplished but we should do and teach that which remains of the law.

Christians are not antinomian, anti-law. We believe that we are not made righteous by the law but we also believe we are still subject to the law’s commands. The law ought not be a burden. Whenever we find God’s commands burdensome it is not because of the command but because of our continuing sinfulness. We are not free to live life as we please but follow the instructions of our Master, knowing that only by his will and by his way and by his power will we live life to the full.

When did the rainbow come into being?

And God said, “This is the sign of the covenant that I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you, for all fut

ure generations: I have set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and the earth. When I bring clouds over the earth and the bow is seen in the clouds, I will remember my covenant that is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh. And the waters shall never again become a flood to destroy all flesh. When the bow is in the clouds, I will see it and remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is on the earth.”
Genesis 9:12-16

Growing up I was taught (or at least believed) that the rainbow did not exist until after the flood. Following the flood God created the rainbow as a sign of his covenant with Noah and the rest of humanity that God would never again destroy the earth by flood.

For those trying to find errors in the Bible, this interpretation provided an opportunity. Critics will say, “What, did God change the very physical laws and properties? A rainbow is just the refraction of light through water, presenting a spectrum of color. Did these properties of water and light not exist before the flood?” The very idea is put forth as ludicrous.

To the skeptic I would say that God can do with his creation what he will. If he decided tomorrow to invert the behavior of gravity so that anything not tied down would go flying into the heavens I would be sure to invest in rope.

That said, I do not think Genesis 9:13 teaches that God spontaneously created rainbows following the flood. What he did was take something he had already made and fill it with meaning. Notice the wording: I have set my bow in the cloud, a divine declaration that God is the one who created the rainbow. Then: and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and the earth. God created the rainbow – meaning God created water and light to interact in such a way during a storm that a rainbow would form. He could have done this after the flood but the text makes no such claim, it just recognizes God as the creator of the rainbow. What does happen after the flood is God assigns new meaning to the rainbow. Or rather, God reveals why he originally created the rainbow.

There is something amazing in this. Here we see the planning of God in creation. From the beginning he knew he would need a covenant-sign following the great deluge. When God said “let there be” to the rainbow he put it in place so that one day he could say to Noah, “This is a sign of my covenant.”

Looking at the rainbow itself, we can be further amazed at how much meaning is packed into one symbol. Here are some of the things signified by the rainbow:

1. As revealed in the text, the rainbow is a symbol of God’s mercy to man. God promised that he would never again destroy the world by flood. The promise was not dependent on man’s behavior, it was fixed on God’s character. Regardless of what man would do, God would not destroy the earth by flood. The rainbow would serve as a source of comfort to man and an unending reminder to God. So long as the earth remains we have this assurance of God’s mercy and faithfulness, his guarantee that he will not destroy the earth by flood. Even when heaven and earth are remade rainbows will continue to cross the skies. For the rest of eternity we will have this reminder of God’s grace.
2. It is quite possible that God had in mind a symbol of laying down a weapon of war. At the end of the flood his judgment had been completed and his weapons were put up. Genesis does not mention a rainbow, per se, it mentions a bow, the same word used of a bow and arrow. God has hung (set) his bow in the clouds, putting aside that weapon of war.
3. Another possible symbol of the bow is its bridging of Heaven and Earth. Reaching from Heaven and stretching down to Earth, it symbolizes God’s stooping, bending down to bring both justice and mercy to the earth.
4. The expanse of the rainbow showed the expanse of God’s love. Allen Ross says, “The covenant is cosmic and universal, as seen from the great sign, the rainbow. As it arched over the horizon after the rains, it formed an all-embracing sign of God’s faithfulness to his word of grace.” (Ross, Creation and Blessing, p206)

Someday the world will come to an end. Do you know how it will happen? Despite my recent tweet, my eschatology continues to be a work in progress. Presently, my beliefs about the end are characterized more by what I do not believe than what I do believe. I do believe Christ will someday return, but I’m still working on the details.

The most popular brand of eschatology today is pre-trib premillennialism. But in my list of things I do not believe, I do not believe the Bible teaches a pre-trib rapture.

This post is not an exhaustive argument against pre-trib rapture but against the frequent citing of 1 Thessalonians 1:10 by pre-trib proponents. Here is the verse:

…and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come.

Here is how the pre-trib argument goes. Jesus Christ was raised from the dead and ascended into Heaven. We await for his return. He will come back to deliver his people from the seven-year tribulation at the end during which God’s wrath is poured upon the earth. Thus in 1 Thessalonians 1:10 we have the promise that all Christians will be removed from the earth (raptured) before the tribulation takes place.

The problem with this view is 1 Thessalonians 1:10 has nothing to do with some period of judgment occurring on Earth just before the coming of Christ. Nothing in the context makes reference to rapture; wrath here does not refer to an end-times tribulation but to eternal judgment.

The natural meaning of this verse is that the believers in Thessalonica trusted that Jesus Christ was the one who delivered them from God’s eternal judgment. Believers were secure in the knowledge that they would be raised to life with Christ in Heaven rather than cast into Hell for eternal judgment.

This meaning becomes clear a few chapters later, 1 Thessalonians 5:9-10: For God has not destined us for wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, who died for us so that whether we are awake or asleep we might live with him. Note the contrast here. The people of God have not been destined for wrath but for salvation. Their deliverance is not from temporal suffering just before the end of time but deliverance from eternal judgment. We do not receive salvation so that we can avoid the tribulation, we receive salvation to be rescued from Hell.

Revelation also speaks of this. Revelation 11:9-10 tells us about the wrath faced by those who take the mark of the beast: And another angel, a third, followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and its image and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand, he also will drink the wine of God’s wrath, poured full strength into the cup of his anger, and he will be tormented with fire and sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb.

Note how it describes God’s wrath. It is not in terms of a tribulation period but eternal judgment.

Christians are in the world to shine the light of Christ even in the midst of great suffering. We labor no matter the cost knowing that this world is not our home. We wait patiently for our Lord Jesus Christ, knowing he has delivered us from the coming wrath: we need not fear the flames of judgment, we are secure in Christ. But there are many, many more who do not know God’s mercy. God will keep us here to share with them about his love and grace. When finally he returns, we (Christians) will still be around to see it.

Came across the following while reading D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones’ book Studies in the Sermon on the Mount. Given all the discussion recently about the Manhattan Declaration, I thought this a timely word:

We are all talking about ecumenicity, and the argument is put forward that, because of a certain common danger, it is not the time to be arguing about points of doctrine; rather we should all be friendly and pull together. Not at all, according to our Lord. The fact that the Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox churches are called Christian is no reason why we should not expose the corruptness and the dangerous errors of their systems.

My own position on the Declaration has shifted some. While I more or less agree with the concerns of the document (I would differ from the emphasis in the document that the purpose of marriage is procreation), I share the concern of others who believe it does us no good to stand arm-in-arm with Catholics and Orthodox and risk undermining clear gospel presentation. I also sympathize with the somewhat snarky tweets from Abraham Piper and Jared Wilson. Anyone can sign a document. Living it out is both the more vital and the more difficult task.