Bible and Beeswax

Thoughts and products about theology and culture.

Author: bibleandbeeswax

  • When Helping Hurts

    When Helping Hurts: How to Alleviate Poverty Without Hurting the Poor . . . and YourselfWhen Helping Hurts: How to Alleviate Poverty Without Hurting the Poor . . . and Yourself by Steve Corbett
    My rating: 4 of 5 stars

    A solid re-definition of poverty with a number of practical ways to apply its teachings. The majority of this book was paradigm-shifting for me in terms of how to view and address poverty. However, my main qualm with this book is that I disagree with its criticism of the doctrine of the spirituality of the Church, and its embrace of the neo-Kuyperian transformational approach. While the spirituality of the Church has sometimes been abused in order to remain aloof from the issues of poverty, the proper solution isn’t to reject the doctrine as a whole. Instead, we ought to correct the misguided use of the spirituality of the Church.

    View all my reviews

  • The Prayer Saturated Family

    The Prayer Saturated Family: How to Change the Atmosphere in Your Home Through PrayerThe Prayer Saturated Family: How to Change the Atmosphere in Your Home Through Prayer by Cheryl Sacks
    My rating: 2 of 5 stars

    This book was given to me by a friend, and I in no way mean to disparage the gift.  There are a number of useful things that can be wrestled out of this book.  However, while I agree with the premise that prayer is necessary for the Christian family, I find the arguments in this book to be exegetically lacking or even manipulative of Scripture, the theology mushy at best (“The Spirit told me…”; “I heard the Lord say”; “Take communion as a family”?!), and the God & Country motive for prayer to be disheartening.  Overall, I don’t recommend it as a guide for why you ought to pray, or even for a method for prayer.

    View all my reviews

  • Let the Children Worship

    Let the Children WorshipLet the Children Worship by Jason Helopoulos
    My rating: 5 of 5 stars

    This is a solid and brief argument for the importance of worshipping with your family at home, and with the congregation through the entire service of worship. I highly recommend it.

    View all my reviews

  • Your Guide to the Children’s Catechism




    So, you’re considering the children’s catechism.  Good!  But I’m sure you’ve got some questions about it:  where does it come from? Which version should I use? Why do catechism and not just sheer bible memorization?  Never fear!  This is your guide to the children’s catechism.  In this post I will attempt to summarize this history of catechesis in the Church, the development of the children’s catechism in Presbyterian branches of the Church, and the current state of the catechism.  In the end I will also include a number of resources for studying the catechism this year, and in the future.

    The History of the Catechism

    Catechesis means “instruction”.  Teaching, or instruction, has been a vital part of the Church since the inception of the Church.  To prove this point, I first have to prove that the Church has existed since the beginning of the world.

    Adam and Eve

    Bluntly put, the Church began not in 30ish AD, but with Adam.  After the fall of Adam and Eve, God makes promises to save humanity by means of a serpent-crusher (Gn. 3:15).  Those who believe in this promise, and their children, are constituted the Church!  But each Believer necessary feels compelled to teach their children the promise that God has given to them: one is coming who will crush the serpent who tempted us, hates us, and causes us to be guilty before God.  If you believe in Him, God will cover over you, just as He covered over us with the animal-skins (Gn. 3:21).  Obviously, I infer this thought, as opposed to seeing it explicitly taught in Scripture, however there must have been a normal means of passing on information about God’s work prior to the written Word, and that means was catechesis (teaching).

    Cain v. Abel

    The distinction between the plural seed of the woman (the Church), and the plural seed of the serpent (the World) begins to be manifest within the very first family.  While Abel believes the promises of God (Heb. 11:4), and enjoys worshipping God, Cain gives offerings out of lip-service, and never comes to believe the promises of God.  In fact, he shows that he is “of his father the devil” by murdering his brother, “for the devil was a murderer from the beginning” (Gn. 4:10; Jn. 8:44; 1 Jn. 3:15).

    Seth to Noah

    The distinction between the Church and the world is picked up again in the line of Seth, which is eventually corrupted when his descendants begin intermarrying with unbelievers (Gn. 6:1-3).  Rather than resisting temptation by calling to mind the promises of God (hopefully taught to them by their parents), they apostatize from the faith.  Meanwhile, God graciously chooses to save and covenant with Noah, a descendant of Seth, as well as his family (Gn. 6:8, 18).  Now there are at least two additional promises for parents in the Church to teach their children: 1. The Savior will be God’s chosen way of salvation in the midst of a greater flood (Heb. 11:7). 2. God won’t bring destruction upon the entire world by means of a flood ever again.  Even with these new promises, Ham, one of Noah’s three sons, ends up getting covenant curses called down upon his son, Canaan, for being wicked (Gn. 9:22, 25).  Meanwhile, Noah’s other sons, Japheth and Ham, are given blessings: Japheth is given penultimate blessings, and Shem is given ultimate blessings (Gn. 9:27).

    Shem to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob

    Shem’s lineage is then traced all the way to Terah, who we know to be an unbeliever.  Abram, his son, becomes a follower of the LORD when God reveals himself to Abram, and calls him out of his unbelieving household (Heb. 11:8).  God then makes more promises: the promise of an inheritance of land, of a child who will be a blessing to the whole world, and of innumerable descendants.  While Abraham yearns for these promises to be taught to his child, Ishmael, the Lord says that these covenant blessings rightly belong only to Isaac’s lineage (Gn. 17:18-21).  As such, Abraham doubtlessly instructs Isaac as to the promises inherited from their forefathers, as well as the promises God had directly given their family (Gn. 22:7-8).  Isaac then ought to have taught his child, Jacob, about how the covenant promises have passed on to his family (Gn. 25:23).  It appears, however, that Isaac ignored much of this, and wanted the blessings to go to his other son, Esau, instead.  Nonetheless, it is apparent that it was the duty of Isaac and Rachel to teach their children about God’s promises.  The lack of instruction may have contributed to Jacob and Esau’s serious brotherly disputes about the inheritance, the birthright, and the promises of God.

    From Jacob/Israel to the nation, Israel

    After arriving in Egypt during a famine, Jacob (whose name is also Israel), and his family settle down and grow.  They are eventually enslaved by the government of Egypt, and spend four-hundred years as slaves.  By the time of the exodus from Egypt, the large family of Israel has grown into a large nation with roughly 600,000 men alone (Ex. 12:37-38).  God now extends the covenant to the entire nation at Sinai, adding extended laws and regulations for a variety of reasons.  For one, God now has a new promise: to dwell in the midst of His people (Ex. 25:8).  Because God is holy, and the people are born in Adam as sinners, therefore the people must have a yearly reminder of their need of a Savior from sin (Heb. 10:3).  Secondly, God intends to give the people of Israel temporary and additional promises of land (Gal. 3:1-4:9) as they await the coming Savior and new heavens and earth (Is. 65:17; 66:22; 2 Pt. 3:13). Because of this they need to have a regulated and ordered society.  Last, God gives the people of Israel additional laws because it will show the nations around them how just and righteous the LORD is, and will stand as both a condemnation of wicked practices as well as a call to follow the God of Israel.

    It is no wonder, then, that God’s first explicit demand for catechesis comes during this period of time (Deut. 6:6-9)!  The number and quality of God’s promises have increased greatly, and so have the stipulations required of God’s people.  Further, it’s not surprising that it is with the nation of Israel that we receive commandments about the manner in which to teach our children.  After all, prior to this point God’s Word had not been written down.  Instruction about God was dependent upon an oral history about His mighty deeds.  Now that we have the Holy Scriptures, however, catechesis is based in the Bible.  With the composition of the Pentateuch, we are told to instruct children from the written Word of God.  As such, catechesis is a summary of important doctrines and ideas in the Bible.  It has never held equal authority to the Scriptures, but has always derived its authority from the Bible as it seeks to explain and apply the main points of the Bible.

    Within Israel: King David

    Moses predicts that the nation of Israel will grow restless with having the LORD alone as King.  He argues that Israel will appoint a human monarch, and therefore gives commands for how to regulate the Kingship (Deut. 17:14-20).  When the second monarch of Israel, David, desires to replace the LORD’s tent with a permanent home, the LORD responds by making additional covenant promises to David (2 Sam. 7:12, 16). Along with these promises, the LORD himself promises to teach David’s descendant like a father teaches a son (2 Sam. 7:14-15).  It is vital for David to teach his children both the Kingship laws and the promises of God, and so catechesis is obviously important to him.  This is clearly vital to David in one major way: he develops the manner of tabernacle-worship.  Prior to the work of David, we don’t know if singing is a regular aspect of tabernacle-worship, though we do know that Moses writes a Psalm (Ps. 90), and was taught a song by God, which are both meant to be sung (Deut. 31-32).  But with David, singing becomes an organized and regular activity that accompanies the worship at the tabernacle.  This is significant because if one examines the content of the Psalms that Israel sings at the temple, you see that they are catechetical!  This is especially true of a “genre” of Psalm called Remembrance or Historical Psalms, which recount the mighty deeds of God, and call future generations to serve the Lord instead of rebel.  I include in this genre the Psalms that refer specifically to events in David’s life (Ps. 3, 7, 18, 34, 51, 52, 54, 56, 57, 59, 60, 63, 142), but it extends to prior events in Israel’s history as well (Ps. 78, 105, 106, 135, 136).

    Exile, the Return, and the Second Temple

    Moses not only predicts Israel’s desire for a human king, he also predicts their rebellious attitude and coming exile from their temporary promised land (Deut. 10:16; 30:1-10; 31:20-21; 32:15-30).  During the Southern Kingdom’s seventy-year exile to Babylon, the people of Israel continue to teach their children the Scriptures.  But the Scriptures have grown!  By this point we have the books of Moses, a number of historical books, many of the prophetic writings, and a large number of Psalms.  It’s possible that during this time Israel develops the synagogue (Greek for “assembly”) as a means of praying, studying, singing, and teaching these Scriptures among multiple families.  Without a temple or central location of worship, Israel relies on pragmatic means to assemble and teach the words of God (Ps. 74:8).  After the Medo-Persian conquest of Babylon (539BC), God’s people are allowed to return to the land, and to rebuild the temple.  But the synagogue tradition likely continues at this point under the work of Ezra and Nehemiah.  Both of them assemble all of the people (about 42,000) to study God’s word (Neh. 8:2, 17-18).  During this time the remaining historical books, and arrangement of the canon, are likely completed by the scribes established by Ezra.  The Persian Empire is conquered by Alexander (330ish BC).  After Alexander’s death (323 BC), his Kingdom is split into four smaller Kingdoms, ruled by four kings named Cassander, Seleucus, Antigonus, Ptolemy.  The Seleucid Empire controls the interests of the people of God until it is conquered by the Roman Empire (63BC).  In all likelihood, during these times the people of God continue to worship by teaching their children at home as Moses instructed, as well as assembling regularly at the synagogues, and visiting the temple in Jerusalem at least once a year.

    Jesus, the Christ

    Prior to the birth of Jesus, and for a number of years following his birth, Mary and Joseph are given special revelation concerning His identity and mission.  This information is necessary for them to teach to their son, along with the prior revelation of God in the Scriptures.  Consider all of the information they need to teach Jesus:  An angel tells them that Jesus’ paternal lineage is not from man, by but the work of the Holy Ghost (Mt. 1:20).  They are told that they are to name their child “Jesus” (Yahweh is Salvation) because, “He will save His people from their sins” (Mt. 1:21).  Elizabeth, Mary’s cousin, says that the child in her womb is “blessed” because, “When the sound of your greeting came to my ears, the baby in my womb leapt for joy” (Lk. 1:44).  After the birth of Jesus, an angelic chorus appears before shepherds, heralding the birth of Jesus, calling him “A Savior, Christ, the Lord” (Lk. 2:11).  Mary and Joseph depart from Bethlehem for Jerusalem after the time of Mary’s purification (33 days).  When they enter the temple to offer the redemption price for a son, Simeon declares, “My eyes have seen your salvation…a light for revelation to the Gentiles, and for glory to your people Israel” (Lk. 2:30, 32).  Even though they have already been informed about Jesus’ identity, they still marvel at Simeon’s words (Lk. 2:33)! They return to Nazareth.  They then travel back to Jerusalem, and perhaps turn aside in Bethlehem to visit family.  Wise men arrive from the east to offer tribute to the King of the Jews (Mt. 2:2).  After Herod’s murderous campaign to destroy all the male infants in the region, Mary and Joseph flee to Egypt after God’s direct revelation to them.  Undoubtedly they would need to teach Jesus that He is the prophet like Moses, who was spared from the intent of a wicked king by hiding in Egypt, as well as True Israel, who was called out of Egypt into the promised land (Dt. 18:15; Hos. 11:1; Mt. 2:13-23).  Surely, if Jesus was taught these things by his human parents, shouldn’t we teach our children about the mighty works of God?

    The Church in the New Covenant: Apostolic

    Jesus Himself commissions His disciples,

    All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age (Mt. 28:18-20).

    There are two vital things for the nature of catechesis contained within this commission.  First, because Jesus has all authority, we therefore ought to and are capable of making disciples of all nations.  We ought to view ourselves as raiders of hell, who plunder it of its victims by means of disciple-making (Mt. 16:18).  This means that catechesis is evangelistic.  We catechize our children, summarizing the Scriptures, because they teach our children a simple but thorough explanation of the gospel!  In prior times in the Church, catechesis was still evangelistic, but in seed form only.  Now that Jesus has risen from the dead, teaching our children about God’s promises is crystal-clear: you may be saved by faith in Jesus.  Secondly, though, Jesus’ commission also shows us that disciple-making involves two things: baptizing and teaching…observance.  If you want your child to be a disciple of Jesus then these two things are necessary. Is it any wonder, then, that after Peter’s initial speech after Pentecost the earliest believers in Jesus’ resurrection are baptized, and then “devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (Acts 2:38, 42)?

    The Church in the New Covenant: Patristic and Medieval

    After the death of the apostles, the Church continues to carry on Jesus’ commission. Written catechisms are drawn up, which mainly consist of things like the Lord’s Prayer, the Apostles’ Creed, and instruction in sacraments.  These catechisms are mainly given to new converts, as they prepare to be baptized.  The time-period required to prepare for baptism eventually increases, however, as the Church begins to require catechetical lessons or sermons, as well as various other rites.  At this point, though, preaching falls into great disuse or abuse in various areas, and catechesis stops as well.  Eventually, catechesis is revived, but is applied to children who have already been baptized.

    The Church in the New Covenant: Renaissance, Reformation, and Post-Reformation

    At the advent of the printing press we see a continued concern for the catechesis of children.  Hughes Old (link to his book above) points out that Jean Gerson, Basel Christoph von Utenheim, and Johann Geiler von Kaisersberg are three vivid examples of catechizers worth considering.  This concern for catechesis is taken up by Luther, Calvin, and various other reformers, and is reflected in their particular catechisms.  Following these men, the concern for catechizing our children has continued.  See this article and this article for a much more detailed explanation of Reformation and Post-Reformation catechetical work.  The point here, however, is that by this point in the history of the Church, the work of catechesis is viewed as primarily the work of parents for their children.  During and after the Reformation, many ministers draw up their own catechisms, and hand them out to church members for memorization.  Other ministers believe it is helpful to preach catechetical sermons (summaries or explanation of the catechism), assuming that the children have already memorized one version of catechism.

    The Catechism Today

    Why should I go through a catechism with my child and not just do Bible memorization?  In short, because a catechism is both a form of Bible memorization (especially the Ten Commandments and Lord’s Prayer) as well as a way of categorizing/summarizing important doctrines that sheer Bible passage memorization won’t categorize for your child.  A good solution is to use a catechism, and include passages of Scripture to memorize as well.

    But which catechism should I use? There are a significant number of catechisms in existence today.  Not only do we have new catechisms, but we have the option of choosing between old catechisms, or of choosing between updated versions of old catechisms!  The number of options is truly dizzying.  Instead of listing out all of the options here (which I’ll do later), I’ll just say that our congregation has traditionally used the Catechism for Young Children, which was composed in 1840.  This catechism is a summary of the Westminster Shorter Catechism.  Historically, children memorized the WSC as a summary of the Westminster Larger Catechism.  I suppose that around 1840 the shorter catechism was deemed too wordy or difficult for children.  Indeed, as this article notes, the use of the catechism in Presbyterianism has significantly diminished throughout the years.  This is likely true throughout all churches in the United States of America, but I’m just guessing.  Surprisingly, I’ve noticed a revival of concern for catechism-memorization among pastors, especially among those who would consider themselves part of the Young, Restless, and Reformed movement.  I think this is because after an intense introduction to Calvinism, along with an ardent zeal for the doctrines of grace, they have calmed down slightly, and have looked for scholarly, historic, and deep-rooted means of sharing their faith.  Anyway, I generally recommend that children memorize the Westminster Shorter Catechism or some children’s catechism version based off of the WSC.  Often, once a family has finished memorizing the children’s version, they’ll move on to memorize the Shorter Catechism, or to memorize the Heidelberg Catechism.

    Resources

    There are a number of resources that are helpful to parents who want to teach their children a catechism.  For one, I’ll include information on the various catechisms that are in use today (among Presbyterians).  Second, I’ll also add a pdf of the 1840 Catechism for Young Children, and a schedule for memorizing it.  Third, I will make sure to include some audio and links to works on teaching our children.

    Various Catechisms

    While I do recommend some version of the Westminster Shorter Catechism for children, there are plenty in existence!  The Westminster Shorter catechism is available here, and as an app here.  The first simplification of this catechism is the 1840 Catechism for Young Children.  I have personally typed up and formatted the 1840 edition of the Catechism for Young Children, and am posting it here for all to use:  Catechism for Young Children, Questions and Answers.  It is also available online here. In addition, here is a 2-year, weekly schedule (starting 2017) for memorizing the catechism: Family Catechism Schedule.  Even the children’s catechism is theologically structured! Check it out: Children’s Catechism Structure Imaged.

    The last printing of an unrevised Catechism for Young Children is by Christian Education and Publications, and is available here.  But the Catechism for Young Children has gone through a variety of updates and revisions through the years.  Great Commission Publications has a 1996 edition, some of which is available here, as well as its most recent 2003 edition, available here or here.  Most of the churches I’ve interacted with currently use the 2003 edition, which has been retitled as First Catechism: Teaching Children Bible Truths.

    In addition to these catechisms, there is also the Heidelberg Catechism, which you can find here, or here as an app.  Last, several members of TGC edited a mixed Catechism from the Westminster and Heidelberg Catechisms, which is located here.  If you, kind reader, should know of any additional catechisms in the Reformed tradition, do tell me, and I’ll attempt to add them!

    In addition to these, I’ve found that listening to song versions of the catechism really improves my memorization.  I memorized the Westminster Shorter Catechism using Holly Dutton‘s and Bruce Benedict‘s recordings.  For the children’s catechism, there are excellent songs by Diana Beach Batersah from the new 2003 edition, which you can listen to or purchase here.  She also has page that includes all of the words, as well as the Bible verses that they quote at the end of each song here.  Unfortunately, I haven’t been able to find any songs for the original edition of the Catechism for Young Children.  If any of you find one, let me know!  Also, if you want an interactive catechism, this website allows you to order the Catechism for Young Children with cartoons or as a coloring book!  Last, I’ve added a comparsion of catechism differences between the 1840 Catechism for Young Children with the 2003 First Truths updated version, in case you are thinking about singing along to the new one, but still want to memorize the old one.

    Sermons, Books, Etc.

    I highly recommend at least two books.  The first is JC Ryle’s, Duties of Parents, which is available as a pdf here, or for purchase here.  Second, I recommend Don Whitney’s Family Worship, a brief yet excellent explanation of why we ought to, and how to do, family worship.  Family Worship is available for purchase here.  There are countless other books that I could recommend about the nature of the family, the importance of catechism, etc., but these two are at the top of the list.  Last, how many sermons have you heard about the responsibilities of parents?  Well, here is an excellent sermon by Hensworth Jones on the responsibility of parents to teach their children.  In addition, there are numerous catechetical sermons that I think are useful expositions.  William Still has a whole series here.  You’ll get to the right sermons more quickly if you hit command+f and  type “Westminster”.  Last, here is a resource for a number of catechetical sermons, which I recommend investigating if you’re interested in listening to catechetical sermons.

    If any more information is desired, or if you think I ought to include something that I didn’t mention, feel free to comment below.  I hope this is helpful for us all as we desire to raise our children in the fear and admonition of the Lord.

    Creative Commons License
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

  • Study Guide Questions for “Just Do Something” by Kevin DeYoung

    Creative Commons License
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

    Purchase a copy! (affiliate link)

         If you’ve never read Kevin DeYoung’s, “Just Do Something”, I highly recommend it.  It is an easy-to-read, short, and extremely helpful book that explains how to “find God’s will” in a biblical way.  While there are two or three study guide questions available online, I found that they weren’t necessarily aimed at helping shape a relationship among the people studying the book.  While they have good questions about information, my goal in a book study is to go deeper than facts about a topic, and to get to how these facts relate our lives.  Because of this, I prepared questions for each chapter, and am putting them up here for anyone to use.  If you are considering leading a group through this book, I recommend doing two chapters at a time.  They are all fairly short, and if you take ten weeks to do the study I think some people will become tired of the topic.

    Chapter 1

    1. What is DeYoung’s main illustration in chapter 1?

    2. Do you think DeYoung is right to suggest that most of us are tinkerers?

    3. As a follow-up: DeYoung says that most of us aren’t consistent, or stable; we are worried about decisions, constantly engaging in self-exploration.  Do you either know someone like that or think that it’s true about yourself?

    4. He then argues that we pass off this worry and indecisiveness as “looking for God’s will.”  Have you ever done this, yourself? Do you currently do this?  You don’t need to share this out loud, but it’s worth thinking about.

    Chapter 2

    1. When we say “God’s will”, what are the three different ways we use that term?  Just list them out.

    2. What is God’s will of decree?  Do you think this is Biblical?  Look at the passages that DeYoung cites.  Which ones does he use to explain God’s will of decree?

    3. What is God’s will of desire?   What is the main passage that puts God’s will of decree and God’s will of desire side-by-side?

    4. What is God’s will of direction?

    5. DeYoung asks, “Does God have a secret will of direction that He expects us to figure out before we do anything?”  What is his answer?  Do you agree? Disagree? Why or why not?

    6. Consider DeYoung’s statement on page 25, “Many of us fear we’ll take the wrong job, or marry the wrong person, and suddenly our lives will blow up.  We’ll be out of God’s will, doomed to spiritual, relational, and physical failure.”  If DeYoung is right in arguing that the Bible doesn’t tell us that God has a secret will of direction we must discern, then what does that do for these fears?

    7.  End by considering these three statements on page 26,

    “Trusting in God’s will of decree is good. Following His will of desire is obedient. Waiting for God’s will of direction is a mess.”  How do you think we should make decisions about what to do in our lives if DeYoung is right about this?

    Chapter 3

    1. DeYoung argues that Christians want to know God’s will of direction for at least five reasons.  Off the top of your head, can you think of any reasons you yourself have been interested in finding God’s will of direction?

    2. List the five reasons that DeYoung says we want to know God’s will of direction:

    3. Of all of the reasons, which ones resonate with you?

    4.  DeYoung says, “I’m not against people leaving their unhappy jobs to take a shot at what they really love…but we need a firm reminder that many of us expect too much out of life.”  Do you think it’s true that we want perfect fulfillment, and that this is one of the motivations to “seek God’s will”?

    5. Which “one question” out of the many does DeYoung say is the most important option to consider?

    6. DeYoung ends the chapter by considering cowardice.  He says, “We want God to tell us what to do so everything will turn out pleasant for us.”  What are the downfalls of thinking this way?

    Chapter 4

    1. What are some of the pitfalls to the “conventional” approach to the will of God?

    2. Does the Bible focus more on moral or nonmoral decisions?  If this is the case, then why do you think we focus so much on finding God’s will for which job we should take, etc?

    3. Do you think the conventional approach to the will of God makes God into a sneaky God?  Does it make us preoccupied with the future?

    4. How many of you have personally used or seen examples of people using “God’s will” to avoid personal responsibility?

    5. Have you personally become anxious because of this approach to God’s will?

    Chapter 5

    1. If you had to summarize DeYoung’s argument in chapter 5, what does he say is “the better way” to seeking God’s will?

    2. Kevin DeYoung analyzes the apostle Paul’s teaching on the will of God, and says that there are 4 different things that Paul means when he uses that idea.  What are those 4 things?

    3. Holy, set apart lives, “He wants you to buy a house that will make you holy.  If you marry, He wants you to get married so you can be holy.  He wants you to have a job that will help you grow in holiness.”  How does this idea change the way you think about work and family?

    4. To rejoice, pray, and give thanks, “Are you joyful always? Are you praying continually? Are you giving thanks in all circumstances?”

    5. Bearing fruit and knowing God better, “Do you think you’ve grown in your knowledge of God? Have you seen spiritual fruit in your life?”

    6. Be filled with the Holy Spirit (singing and thanking and submitting).  Do you enjoy singing?

    7. “Simply put, God’s will is your growth in Christlikeness.”  While this doesn’t necessarily help you make a decision between a blue or red shirt today, how is this idea helpful?

    Chapter 6

    1. How has God guided his people in the past, according to DeYoung?

    2. Did the apostles regularly have special revelation?  What sort of revelation did they have?  Did they seek this revelation before making decisions?

    3. How does God guide us today?

    4. He ends it saying, “God can use extraordinary means, but they are, by definition, out of the ordinary and not to be expected.”  Do you think that’s true?

    Chapter 7

    1. How can the idea of the “open door” be both a bad and a good thing?

    2. What is the difference between prudence and “laying out a fleece”? What is the problem of “laying out a fleece”?

    3. Is there danger in the approach of flipping to random Bible verses to make a decision?

    4. What’s the problem with impressions? Does prayer make impressions “correct” or “perfect”?

    Chapter 8

    1. What is the difference between information and wisdom?

    2. What is wisdom?

    3. What should our attitude be towards wisdom?

    4. How do we get wisdom (three ways)?

    5. How do we develop a “taste” for godliness?

    6. What is the role of “counsel” in getting wisdom?

    7. What do we pray for if we aren’t asking God to show us what to do?

    8. Is wisdom a one-time thing?

    Chapter 9

    Work

    1. What principles from the Bible influence the type of job we take, and where we take a job?

    2. Based off of the things we learned last week—what are the next two ways to think through taking a job?

    3. What sort of prayers should we make about taking a job?

    4. How have we turned the idea of calling upside-down?

    5. What’s the difference between complacency and contentment?

    Marriage

    1. While many of us may be married, what are some things you found helpful about DeYoung’s discussion of marriage?  If you are unmarried, what have you found helpful?

    2. What do you think of his discussion of “the one”/ “soul mate”?

    Chapter 10

    1. What do you think the “lesson” is from the story of Grandpa Van?

    2. DeYoung says that if we’re going to be anxious about anything, what is it we ought to be anxious about?


    Don’t forget to purchase a copy! Any purchase through this affiliate link is helpful 🙂

  • A Sample of My Research

    I’ve been working on assembling a “definitive” biography of Franciscus Junius in order to aid my Phd work.  This is a small example of what I’m hoping to accomplish!  All this chart shows you is the frequency of Junius’ departures from and entries into various cities.  Obviously, he probably left and entered more cities, but this is the amount that I have deduced from his own biography as well as others’ biographies of Junius.

  • Drooling

     

    I know, I know, it’s weird to salivate over books, but I can’t help it.  Vos’ Reformed Dogmatics is finally published in English, and one day I’ll read it! I’m excited to trace the development of Reformed Dogmatics from early orthodoxy to the beginning of “modern” orthodoxy.

  • Why Would an Artist Become a Pastor?

    I asked myself this question perpetually throughout College (and Seminary): why would an artist become a pastor?  My answer, in short, is because of Jesus.

    My father is a pastor in the PCA (a conservative Presbyterian denomination), but as a child I never envisioned myself as a pastor.  In fact, I wouldn’t have considered myself an excessively, or even mildly, pious child.  By the time I was in High School I did tell others that I was a Christian, but I didn’t provide a good defense of the gospel, and I didn’t really pursue understanding it as objective truth.  But, when I went to College to pursue Fine Art, everything changed.  As I started learning about philosophy, literature, and art, I felt a great desire to understand what is true.  Because of this, I read the Bible, the Qur’an, the Upanishads, and the works of various atheists and social theorists.  I became overwhelmingly convinced of the truth of the Bible.  In a paraphrase of one of Flannery O’Connor’s characters–if Jesus is who He says He is, then there’s nothing else that you can do but give your life for Him.  I decided that I’d do whatever I was capable of doing to serve Him, and promote the well-being of His Church.  It took a few years, but I sensed a call to the ministry as a pastor, and followed up on this by going to Seminary.

    What exactly is the “call to ministry”?  Some people talk about it like a voice cries out from the heavens, “Go, be a pastor,” but I never experienced anything like that.  While there are debates about the exact nature of “the call”, I will say that my call to ministry included an overwhelming conviction to preach.  “If I do not preach Christ,” I thought, “I will die.”  It was like a fire was pent-up in my bones, and unless I proclaimed the works of Jesus I would be entirely burned.  This in itself, however, is not a proper way of discerning whether or not one is called to ministry.  Someone can have this desire but be entirely unsuitable for the role of pastor.  Rather, this desire must be accompanied by the both the necessary gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as godly character.  If one is incapable of understanding the Bible, or of living a godly life, then they shouldn’t go into the ministry.  But it takes time to figure out if you fit these requirements, and so for about two years I weighed and discussed whether or not I was properly called to the ministry.  I eventually accepted that I was, in fact, called to preach and pastor, and so after graduating from Belhaven, I started school at Reformed Theological Seminary.

    Seminary was a difficult time.  Looking back, I think there were three main things that made Seminary a difficult time.  First, the transition from reading styles.  Second, the transition from general lifestyle (roommates to wife/family).  Third, the transition from fine art as a vocation to pastoral ministry as a vocation.  While my Undergraduate degree was academic, Seminary was a whole other level of academia.  My primary issue was actually with the amount of reading.  As a creative writing minor, I had a love of words, the odd turn of phrase, the peculiar in writing.  But in Seminary I was told: the goal of reading is general conceptual understanding, not complete knowledge of the book you read.  This absolutely infuriated me, not because I believed it was wrong, but because I simply wasn’t used to the idea.  I think I finally got the hang of this style of reading after about a year.

    Second, I had a hard time managing the transition from living with a bunch of roommates to being married to my wife.  Marriage has been both wonderful and challenging.  We were married in the middle of my first semester in Seminary, and both found it a trying time for our marriage.  I’ve talked to friends about it, and basically summarize Seminary as “the pressure cooker.”  The time invested at the school and the church, the unavoidable financial tension, and the strain of study all pressurize whatever marital issues you are already undergoing.  Because of our experiences, I recommend taking a year to two off from school before re-entering school, especially if you are planning on marrying someone right around your first year of Seminary.  Thankfully, though, if the pressure cooker doesn’t blow up–it does a great job cooking some undercooked food!  We both are grateful for what we learned in Seminary, and we now feel like we’re able to take a breath of fresh air after a deep dive into the ocean.

    Third, I struggled with the transition from fine art to pastoral ministry.  Anyone who switches vocations knows the difficulties associated with it.  As a person without much development in my particular field, I only experienced a flavor of what a full-blown vocational transition can give you.  I have friends from Seminary who had been called to pastoral ministry after 20 years of work in their previous fields, and my own experience will never quite match up to their own.  At the same time, it was still hard on me.  Where I once held a sketchbook, I now hold a notebook.  I once read poetry and essays on art, and now I read tomes related to Systematic Theology.

    But the difficulties were worth it.  I now feel prepared to preach and teach, as well as to counsel and comfort the Church that I’m called to shepherd.  The greatest privilege a person can be offered in this life is to serve the Lord Jesus, and I am so happy to serve by bringing the Word of God to bear upon my friends in Tunica.  I’m a pastor first and foremost, and would never do anything to impede this high-calling of God.   That said, fine art has provided me an abundance of resources:  I feel like I have a grasp on world history through the study of art history; aesthetics opened a door for me into philosophy; and thinking imaginatively has been extremely helpful for apologetics and sermon preparation.  The worth of Jesus compelled me to transition from fine art as a main vocation to pastoral ministry, and the worth of Jesus compels me to shepherd and to reach out to the fine arts community.

  • An Interview with an Artist: Jacob Rowan

    In my first series of interviews, I’m discussing the work and history of some of my good friends and fellow artists.  My hope is that this will be informative for many, and also show that Christians have a variety of ways of making/thinking about engaging in fine art.  The first interviewee is Jacob Rowan, an art teacher in Jackson, MS.  You can visit his website at Jacob Rowan Studios or check out his art history/personal blog at Art as Illumination.  Thanks, Jacob, for discussing this with me.

    Where do you live, and how long have you lived there?

    I live in Jackson, MS. I started at Belhaven University in 2008 and have been here ever since.

    How long have you been an artist?

    I made what I consider to be my first real work of art during my junior year at Belhaven. That was the beginning of a slow process for me of becoming confident enough to introduce myself as an artist (as opposed to an art student). That process had nothing to do with me feeling like I had learned enough or “made it.” It was more about being confident that art was something I wanted to do for the rest of my life and not just something I was trying in college.

    What first peaked your interest in art?

    Print
    Chorus by Jacob Rowan

    When I was in 11th grade I purchased the Lord of the Rings Sketchbook, a collection of concept drawings by Alan Lee and decided after one look through that I wanted to be able to draw like that. There’s not an obvious connection between the work I do now and those fantasy drawings, but that book is what inspired me to pursue art. In college it was reading all the history and theory of art and realizing that art was a form of visual philosophy that renewed my interest.

    How would you describe or summarize the impact that Belhaven had on you as an artist?

    I think if I had gone anywhere other than Belhaven I would have given up on art. The entire art department was so patient and encouraging despite my total lack of experience or natural affinity to drawing. They knew when to give tough love and when to encourage me with hope for the future. I could not have asked for a better foundation in the skill of lifelong learning and what it means to be an artist.

    Who are your major influences?

    The contemporary artist Makoto Fujimura has been a major influence for me. While his paintings are vastly different from my drawings, I have been inspired by the way his faith is made manifest through his professional life and the subject matter of his paintings. Recently I’ve also become fascinated with the artists Julie Mehretu and Peter Halley, reading everything I can find about or by them. There’s also a lot I admire about the modern artists Rothko, Newman, Mondrian, Bontecou, and Gottlieb. The writings of T.S. Eliot have provided a constant source of inspiration and ideas for my work. I’ve always loved comic books and science-fiction and I think my ideas and aesthetics have been shaped by that in a lot of subliminal ways.

    What made you decide to go in this direction with your art?

    There wasn’t really ever a conscious decision or vision for the direction my art would take. I try to make each piece to the best of my ability and to learn from mistakes while responding to what works. I view making art almost as a form of research. It’s a process of discovery and response and because I’m constantly adapting the final direction is impossible to foresee.

    the-plains-of-shinar
    The Plains of Shinar by Jacob Rowan

    Could you pick one piece and describe the process that went into making it?

    The Plains of Shinar: Construction, Theophany, and Desolation triptych took over a year to arrive at its final form. I was working on a series of drawings exploring the imagery of the Tower of Babel with a composer friend, Andy Sauerwein, and this was one of the culminations of that project. The third piece, Desolation, was made first as part of a different triptych, which I was ultimately unsatisfied with. I felt that Desolation represented a new direction for my work and since it was much stronger than the other two original pieces I decided to make two new drawings to go with it. The design of all 3 pieces is almost identical and was decided on before I started working. I had a rough idea of the colors and patterns I would use, but a lot of the final decisions were made by working. I drew each design on 40”x10” pieces of watercolor board. Then, I then laid down the black (a mixture of hand-ground sumi ink). The silvery lines are made with a mechanical pencil over the ink. The bottom sections were made with different mixtures of ink, acrylic ink, tea, and coffee to create the varied textures. Some of the effects were a result of happy accidents I have since tried in vain to duplicate. The Plains of Shinar represented a significant turning point in my work as I started juxtaposing more painterly textures and techniques with the mechanical lines of my previous drawings.

    Could you pick another piece and explain what you think it means, and why?

    Nimrod’s Blueprints was also born out of the Tower of Babel collaboration. Nimrod was the presumed architect of Babel and this drawing represents a collection of symbols, plans, and textures I imagine the designer of that building would see. It is full of tower like symbols, references to the heavens, maps, bricks, technology, and fire. Babel, in part, was a result of new technology.

    nimrods-blueprint
    Nimrod’s Blueprint by Jacob Rowan

    The ability to make bricks represented a significant advancement in man’s ability to build. The idea of a common language also appears in the small areas of binary code, a modern day type of universal code. In several areas tower forms reach upward or towards circular shapes. Through it all a gold circle weaves over and under the vignettes. For me that represents the divine presence, sovereign in both allowing the plan and in destroying it before it could be completed. Babel was a blow to a unified humanity, but one positive result was the diversity of cultures the followed. It is a fascinating story and in this piece I wanted to collect in one place many of the symbols and textures inspired by the narrative that had been appearing in my previous drawings.

    Last, what direction do you see yourself going as an artist (i.e. do you want to pursue a Masters degree or use different materials or subject matter)?

    I am currently working on my MFA in Studio Art at the Maryland Institute College of Art. It’s a low-residency program which means I spend my summers in Baltimore and work from Jackson for the rest of the year. I want the MFA both for the potential teaching jobs it would open up and for my own growth as an artist. I’ve completed one summer and already my work is starting to branch out in some different directions. I’m experimenting with a lot of new materials. Dura-Lar, a type of polyester film, is one I’m particularly excited about. I’ve just started working on a new series exploring the idea of cities and utopian goals connected to geometry and city planning.

    Thanks, for the interview, Jacob.  I’m excited to see the direction that you’re heading with this MFA program.  
  • Why Look at Complicated Art?

    The last article that I wrote covered the artists and movements that have influenced my thought as an artist.  Now, I’m going to attempt to explain why I think my chosen medium/style is acceptable for a Christian and a pastor.  In short, my artwork is non-representational.  Its meaning is complicated or ambiguous. This post then seeks to answer two questions: Is art that has ambiguous or complicated content acceptable for the Christian to make or view? If it is acceptable, then why should a Christian make or view art that has ambiguous or complicated content?


    Question 1: Is art that has ambiguous or complicated content acceptable for the Christian to make or view?

    First, I’ll begin by considering the alternative to non-representational art.  Why is representation an acceptable way for a Christian to paint? Of all the possible ways to make art, representation initially seems like the most problematic for the Christian.  The Decalogue expressly states, “You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.” The bluntness of the phraseology is perhaps what caused hesitation towards, nay, even rejection of, the creation of representational images on the part of intertestamental Jews.  While images of non-animal objects, such as shrubbery, are clearly permitted (having been used in the Solomonic temple), the representation of humans, animals, and heavenly bodies was viewed with suspicion or scorn.  Of course, this suspicion and scorn of all human/animal/celestial representation is due to scribal tendency to “fence” the law.  If the meaning of a command was difficult to understand, they assumed that the safest bet was to add laws around it to prevent any possible way of violating it.  So, though it is rather clear that this prohibition of images was meant specifically in regards to idol-making (note the phrase, “for yourself”–as in, “don’t pay someone to make an idol for you to worship in your home”), an abiding fear of violation lurks around this particular commandment.

    Second, though it’s entirely acceptable for a Christian to make representational images, what do we make of the Western history of representation?  I immediately think of two particularly disturbing aspects of representation: images of God and pornography.  If anything, the command not to make idols directly prohibits the making of an image “of Yahweh”.  The Lord was specifically forbidding the making of images to be used to worship HIM.  While most venerators-of-icons would never say they worship the image itself, neither did Israel worship the golden calf itself.  When the people cried out, “these are your gods who lead you out of Egypt,” they bowed to a singular image.  Idols served as totems of the invisible deities to whom the nations bowed.  Israel bowed to a singular image, but sought to reverence a plurality of deities.  Sure, the Lord could have said, “don’t make images to worship false deities through them,” but He didn’t.  He didn’t want images attached to His own reverence or worship.  There are all sorts of reasons why God made a command like this, but one basic argument is that image-making necessarily multiplies deities.  Just ask a Christologically orthodox professor to draw a symbol of the Trinity, and you’ll hear an audible grunt of angst.  Any image will play into a form of heresy–modalism, partialism, or tri-theism.  Remember Patrick’s bad analogies.  Last, in addition to images of the Lord, the history of Western representation has been riddled with pornography.  This isn’t something that I wish to go into in detail, but let’s just say that non-representational art doesn’t carry this issue along with it.arch_of_titus_menorah-copy

    Third, while I think representational art can be used in a God-glorifying way, I just wanted to show that the burden doesn’t really rest upon me to prove the validity of non-representational art.  It was Kandinsky, a theosophist, who once pointedly argued that music is not representational, and yet we value it.  Similarly, writing is non-representational.  Does someone really need to argue that writing is an acceptable endeavor for a Christian to pursue? The meaning of a novel is complicated, and while it may be summarized, a good novel’s meaning “grows” or is “unearthed” over time.

    Fourth, I don’t need to defend “non-represenationalism,” or whatever you want to call it,  but I need to defend an aspect of it.  To what extent is this type artwork communicative of an idea?  If it doesn’t communicate anything, then what is the use of it for a Christian?  If it communicates an idea, but a complex or ambiguous idea, then is it worth making or viewing?  This is where, I believe, contemporary Christian artists split ways.  If I had to create categories, I’d say that there are heirs of aestheticists on one side, and heirs of the symbolists on another side.  The former group are also influenced by postmodern reader-response theories, poststructuralism, and perhaps what I’d call a revival of romanticism.  The latter group are influenced by structuralism and occasionally by revivals in Platonic theories of aesthetics.  Of course, I’m making a dichotomy to distinguish the two thoughts from one another, but more realistically this is a spectrum that Christians traverse.  Basically, along poststructuralist lines, many non-representational artists would argue that knowledge doesn’t work as cleanly or plainly as a symbolist would like to imagine.  Brute facts don’t exist, and symbols are complex.  Color, texture, and form can all be their own “language” which a mind can “read” at an intuitive level by thinking about what it sees, much like it “reads” musical compositions by meditating on what it hears.  This is all very well, but what is actually “communicated” in a way more than just feeling? Is it necessary to communicate something more than an impression or feeling? Many Christians believe that it is sufficient to make something beautiful that communicates feeling.  Other Christians believe that the role of visual art in general is meant to communicate more than feeling.  They might argue that non-representational art ought to be made to communicate through a kind of symbol-system.  They would reject the idea of merely intuitive meaning, and argue that though complex, meaning is notional/conceptual and rises above bare intuition.   Both of these thoughts, though, can only be reasoned on a cultural level.  That is, there is no biblical warrant to suggest that a Christian ought only paint aesthetically pleasing things, or that a Christian ought only paint symbolic things.  This being the case, the manner of painting then comes down to Christian liberty.

    Last, my own artwork contains elements of both the symbolic as well as the aesthetic.  I’ve never been comfortable with attempting to evoke sheer feeling from a viewer.  While I perhaps sacrifice specificity of meaning by not using representation, I think that I gain complexity as well as aesthetic.  Is art that has ambiguous or complicated content acceptable for the Christian to make or view?  I hope you see that the answer is, “Yes.”  The next question, though, is, “But is it worth making it or looking at it?”


    Question 2: Why should a Christian make or view art that has ambiguous or complicated meaning?

    I answer this by an analogous statement:  A Christian should read a novel with complicated meaning.  If that statement is true, then I would argue, “Therefore a Christian should look at a work of art with complicated meaning.”  To me it is almost absurd to suggest that a Christian (or any person) shouldn’t read a novel with complicated meaning, but I suppose it is worth addressing this statement in our day-and-age.  In my last post I argued that meaning is complicated.  It isn’t old-stack-of-booksnecessary to say “where” it resides: in the viewer/reader, the artist/author, or the painting/book.  It probably exists somewhere “in dialogue” between these things, but who am I to know the answer to this question? The fact is that meaning exists, and must be found in the thing itself that you seek to understand.  But why pursue this meaning?  I have several reasons why we ought to seek to understand complicated or seemingly ambiguous works:  1. For the enjoyment of a quest. 2. For the sake of personal knowledge/growth.  3. For the purification and edification of imagination.  4. For love/charity (growth in sympathy) of others and ourselves.  5. For enlargement of personal experiences.  There’s a strange association of sympathetic people with the amount of quality fiction that a person reads.  I’d assume that the same is true of people who imbibe a good amount of quality fine art.  This might say more about the person (they want to read/look at these things), or it might say more about the art (it changes you), or both perhaps.  The point is that seeking to understand artwork can refresh the mind, and provide other benefits that accompany this.  Just as an example–this morning I was reading through some of Wendell Berry’s poems on “rest”, and found that the verses refreshed or freshened my understanding of a subject that I’ve already studied.  They provided a breath of fresh air in a stale area of the mind.  In the end, there are dozens of reasons to invest your time in thinking about complicated art.  Most importantly, though, good artwork provides a challenge to its viewers, urging them to stop and consider the relation of its parts with the goal of providing a new “angle” on reality.  Investigating artwork is worth the endeavor.