Let Justice Roll Down Like Waters

I remember hearing a talk radio host recently warn people that if their church spoke about social justice, they should leave because the church isn't Christian, it's communist. I understand that labels can mean all sorts of things, but I find it hard to be against social justice. If you're against it, are you for social injustice? The Bible does speak about social justice all the time - not necessarily in those words. In fact, maybe we should call it what the Bible calls it - righteousness.

Everyone talks about justice, Democrat and Republican, though they'll use different language to do so. Justice for the unborn. Justice for oppressed. Justice for the immigrant. Justice for those whose convictions go against the cultural tide. And all these groups deserve justice!

But, I don't hear many talking about intergenerational justice - and I think we need to start talking about that in earnest. In a 2011 statement, a group of evangelical thinkers (Evangelical for Social Action with Center for Public Justice) issued a Call for Intergenerational Justice, contending “Intergenerational justice demands that one generation must not benefit or suffer unfairly at the cost of another.”

The issue that sparked the petition was the mounting debt crisis. Unfortunately, this crisis has not gone away, though it is being ignored. The federal budget deficit was $984 billion in 2019 - a 26% increase from the year before. Our national debts is $23 trillion ($23,000,000,000,000).  Obviously, this is not sustainable. It's also unjust! To fix today's problems on tomorrow's dollar keeps snowballing...and the monstrous snowball will destroy our children's economic futures.

And I listen to debates where politicians promise new programs - free this, free that...with no viable way to pay for it - and I think we're selling our kids to the god of mammon, unwilling to sacrifice a modicum of our material prosperity today to help them in the future. Biblically, it is the parent's role to save for their children, not mortgage their children's future (2 Corinthians 12:14, and a lot of wisdom literature).

My small-government Republican friends may like this post so far. You won't if you keep reading...

As unjust as those who rack up massive debt for their children are those who use up all the earth's resources, leaving it polluted and stripped. Some will quibble over the science of climate change. Set it aside. Can we quibble over the loss of 3 billion birds in North America in the last few decades (or are bird watchers and ornithologists also just a tool of 'big solar' - ok, I'm getting a bit sarcastic)?  Shouldn't we all be able to agree that we want clean water (not like what my mom and dad lived with in PA where some of their neighbor's water was flammable)?  Shouldn't we be able to agree that we need clean air - not like people in the LA Basin suffered through a few decades ago? Shouldn't we agree that there are some places of such awe-inspiring beauty that we shouldn't befoul them with oil rigs or mines and ruin them for future generations?

Regulations (that were barely addressing the massive problems to begin with) are being rolled back to make energy cheaper, manufacturing more competitive, etc.  But it is unjust. Biblically, the land (and sea and sky) doesn't belong to us - we are stewards of it for God. And, it's a common good - not just ours to use, but everyone's, including future generations. The Bible has quite a bit to say to those who destroy the earth (i.e. Revelation 11:18, Proverbs 12:10, Deuteronomy 20:19-20).

I am sure there is a myriad of other applications of this concept of generational justice. Let's include this in our dialogue, expect it of our elected officials, and strive together to find solutions for everyone, even those who are yet to be born.

The Excellencies of Christ [and His Church]

This past week I was studying for my ACG class [topic is 'Mother Church'] and was reminded of my favorite sermon by Jonathan Edwards. No, it's not Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God (though that one is very good too). The sermon, titled 'The Excellency of Christ', is based on Revelation 5:5-6:

And one of the elders said to me, “Weep no more; behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has conquered, so that he can open the scroll and its seven seals.” And between the throne and the four living creatures and among the elders I saw a Lamb standing, as though it had been slain...

Edwards points out that John is told by the angel that the Lion of the tribe of Judah can open the scroll. In his vision, it would be quite natural for him to expect to see this Lion; instead, in his vision he sees a Lamb.  Edwards reasons,

He is called a Lion….He is called a Lamb. That which I would observe from the words…There is an admirable conjunction of diverse excellencies in Jesus Christ. The lion and the lamb, though very diverse kinds of creatures, yet have each their peculiar excellencies.

Throughout the sermon, he helps the reader consider the diverse excellencies that meet in Jesus - the strength of the Lion, the meekness of the Lamb, the infinite majesty of God Almighty and the infinite condescension of the Suffering Servant. This leads Edwards to his application or 'uses'. First, there is an evangelistic use. He contends,

Let the consideration of this wonderful meeting of diverse excellencies in Christ induce you to accept of him, and close with him as your Savior. As all manner of excellencies meet in him, so there are concurring in him all manner of arguments and motives, to move you to choose him for your Savior, and every thing that tends to encourage poor sinners to come and put their trust in him: his fullness and all-sufficiency as a Savior gloriously appear in that variety of excellencies that has been spoken of.

In other words, what could you possibly need in a Savior that can't be found in Jesus? He is all-sufficient for every need you have.  The second use of this truth is for the Christian.

Let what has been said be improved to induce you to love the Lord Jesus Christ, and choose him for your friend and portion. As there is such an admirable meeting of diverse excellencies in Christ, so there is every thing in him to render him worthy of your love and choice, and to win and engage it. Whatsoever there is or can be desirable in a friend, is in Christ, and that to the highest degree that can be desired.

I love this sermon. It's rich, Christo-centric, stirs my affections and makes me want more of Christ. But what drew my mind from my study of ecclesiology to this sermon?  For the six weeks, I have been leading my ACG (Adult Community Group) through a study of the different images of the church in the New Testament. There are many - Paul Minear describes ninety-six images related to the church!  We haven't considered all ninety-six, but the ones we have are very diverse. The church as the Kingdom of God is an image to be held alongside the church as the Body of Christ. The church as a building is to be held alongside the church as a vine. The church as the Bride of Christ is meant to be held together with the church as a sheep pen. Diverse images for sure!

So why so much diverse imagery from the pens of the New Testament authors to describe the church? Let me plagiarize Edwards,

"There is an admirable conjunction of diverse excellencies in the church of Jesus Christ. The building and the vine, though very diverse kinds of images, yet have each their peculiar excellencies." 

No one image would suffice to sum up the beauty and the mystery of the Chruch. My 'use' of this truth mirrors Edwards. Let the consideration of this wonderful meeting of diverse excellencies in Christ’s church induce you to accept it (not reject or eschew it), serve it (instead of consume it), and love it, as Christ does.

Don't use Dead Christians to Score Political/Rhetorical Points

Over the past few days, I have seen a few disturbing Facebook posts about Christian's slaughtered in Nigeria and the Philippines. Of course, as a Christian and, frankly as a human, I am deeply saddened by this. But, these posts have been rhetorically dishonest and so devalue and dishonor those who have died.

The reports are not usually posted with a simple "this is sad, we should pray and remember Christians who live in hard places and have their lives taken from them." No, instead it's, "the media is falling all over themselves to report the massacre in New Zealand, but nary a word about the slaughter of Christians in Nigeria and the Philippines."  It's a rhetorical trick attempting to demonstrate that the media ("the left wing media") doesn't care about the plight of Christians. Problem is, the facts are very wrong.

First, consider what is being spread regarding the bombing in the Philippines; the following post is an example. This was posted on March 15th, shortly after the New Zealand mosque killings.

Indeed ISIS terrorists did attack two Catholic churches in the Philippines and killing at least twenty, wounding dozens. But this attacked happened in late January (not, as the post implies, in mid-March). And, the tragedy was covered by media when it actually happened, including CNN, Fox, NYTimes, BBC, Reuters and many more.


The killings in Nigeria are different, more complicated. The posts that have been circulating, often referencing a Breitbart headline, claim that Muslim militants have killed more than 120 Christians in Nigeria. Again, this is a mixture of truth and error. The numbers vary from agency to agency, but 120 is very likely. However, this is part of a larger feud between farmers and herders that is raging in Nigeria currently. Muslim nomadic herders (Fulani) have been in conflict with the ethnically Christian Adara people in Nigeria. Many on both sides have been killed. In February, Adara gunmen, in response to an attack by Fulani, targetted Fulani settlements and killed at least 130. In March, yes 120 Christians, or more, were killed as a part of this conflict. It's ugly. It is war. Which makes it categorically different than a white supremacist walking into a mosque and killing fifty, wounding more.  

The Christland shooting has received more attention than either of the other two events. I don't doubt that, but it seems completely understandable too. There is a 'first world bias' to events we read about or hear about from the media. A factory fire that kills 20 in Bangladesh won't make the news. Same fire in Chicago or Londo will. And, this kind of violence isn't expected in New Zealand, but we have become somewhat calloused to it in other parts of the country. A gangland shootout killing three or four people won't make the news if it's in Chicago or LA. If it's on the streets of Cape Cod or in Disneyland it would.

Let me be blunt, misrepresenting these horrific events to make the point that Christians are ignored by the media is dishonest. It is, in terms of the Ten Commandments, bearing false witness. And, it dishonors the dead - they aren't tools to be used in your war against the media. Shaping public opinion by using false data is, at best, manipulative. It feeds the "us vs. them" mentality that is doing so much harm in our nation and across the globe. Please stop.