Review of Young, Restless, Reformed

Mike Leake 1 Comment

Except for that time I went 3-5 with a couple RBI’s for my American Legion baseball team at a State championship game I have never read an article about me.  In 2008 Collin Hansen wrote a book about me:  Young, Restless, Reformed.  It’s a shame I did not pick it up until recently.   

Actually the book is not about me.  But it just as easily could have been.  I think that was one of Hansen’s hopes with this book.  There is a growing movement of “New Calvinists” and Hansen explores the in’s and out’s of the movement. 

Inside you will find interviews with “everyday folk” (broke seminary students like myself), as well as interviews with the “guys in lights” like Piper, Dever, Driscoll, Mahaney, Mohler, and Joshua Harris.  Hansen does not limit himself to only the T4G crowd, though.  He also goes to Yale and explores the Calvinism in that climate. 

It is an interesting journey; one that probably could have been a couple of years longer.  It would be interesting to see how Calvinism in England influences the Calvinism in the States.  There are neat anecdotal tales that really gets at the heart of this growing movement.  But there are also cautions for the newer Calvinists. 

As one within the movement I would be interested to read a review from someone that knows the “doctrines of grace” but disagrees with them.  It is obvious from reading where Hansen’s loyalties are.  He is part of the movement himself—I would almost like to see another similar book from an outsiders perspective.  At times I think Hansen may be overstate his case a little, or be a little harsh with the non-Reformed church culture, but overall it is straight-forward journalism.

Hansen does offer some occasional critique for those of us within the movement.  So, in that regard it is helpful to read it even if you are Young, Restless, and Reformed.  It will also be encouraging for many to know that they are not alone in their theological leanings. 

But this book may be most helpful for those outside the movement.  It may even be a good read for those that are critical of the Young, Restless, and Reformed crowd.  This book will certainly show a good part of what “we” believe and many of the reasons why. 

It’s an easy read and a relatively fun journey through the Young, Restless, and Reformed movement.  I would heartily suggest this book to anyone interested in the growing movement towards Reformed theology and Calvinism. 

Rating 4.5 out of 5 Stars

Buy It: 10.49 (hardcopy) 7.99 (e-book)

More Amazing than Walking on Water

Mike Leake

[47] And when evening came, the boat was out on the sea, and he was alone on the land. [48] And he saw that they were making headway painfully, for the wind was against them. And about the fourth watch of the night he came to them, walking on the sea. He meant to pass by them, [49] but when they saw him walking on the sea they thought it was a ghost, and cried out, [50] for they all saw him and were terrified. But immediately he spoke to them and said, “Take heart; it is I. Do not be afraid.” [51] And he got into the boat with them, and the wind ceased. And they were utterly astounded, [52] for they did not understand about the loaves, but their hearts were hardened. (Mark 6:47-52 ESV)

The above passage was one that was the subject of intense debate in 20th century quest for the historical Jesus.  Some considered this story an optical illusion caused by Jesus walking on the shore, or perhaps a deception—in that he was really only walking on a sandbar.  It was impossible in the minds of many of these scholars that the laws of nature could be broken by a man walking on the water. 

But I think they missed something.  Verse 48 really is not the most astonishing verse in this passage.  The most astonishing verse in this entire passage is verse 51, “And he got in the boat with them…”  THAT is what is mind-boggling about this passage. 

Let me explain. 

The Deity of Christ is all over this passage.  His intent to “pass them by” is more than likely a reference to Exodus 33 (the glory of God “passing by” Moses) or more likely even a reference to Job 9.  As James Edwards has pointed out, “The Job quotation summarizes a passage that begins in 9:1ff by recounting the awesome separation between God and humanity”. 

The astonishing thing in this passage is that the transcendent God, the wholly Other, the eternal I AM, has now become Emmanuel.  The majestic God that had to cover Moses’ eyes is now getting in a boat with His ragtag band of followers at 4 in the morning.  THAT is what is unbelievable about this text. 

God walking on water is not so hard for me to grasp.  After all He is God.  What is hard for me to grasp, though, is that this transcendent God bridged the gap of separation and could be found in a boat.  The I AM has become Emmanuel that is astonishing!

The Vapid Wasteland of Contemporary Worship Songs?

Mike Leake 3 Comments

Yesterday Christianity Today posted a question to stir up some discussion:  Should churches ban Christmas carols with questionable theology?  The title of the post brings up some fond memories for me: Away with ‘Away in a Manger’? 

The discussion has been thoughtful at times, but what I found really interesting is the myriad of comments like these:

Hahaha- what a nonsensical article. What they should do away with are all those evangelical songs that focus like a laser on ME ME ME. Oh Jesus, I feel this, and my life has changed, I’m a better person, blah, blah, blah.

I wouldn’t mind passing on the questionable lyrics in “Away in a Manger”, provided that we also take a harder look at the theological mush that often passes as Sunday morning worship lyrics throughout the rest of the year.

Maybe we should go the praise-chorus route and only sing songs so utterly devoid of meaning that no one could possibly be offended.

So much (not all) of the current contemporary worship music is junk – literal, theological, musical, overly repetitive, shallow junk. Why not start cleaning the Lord’s House from some of those first.

There is one sense in which I agree with some of these comments.  We should take a hard look at many of the lyrics in the things that we sing.  But where I disagree is in saying that this is only the “praise-chorus” songs.  There are just as many beloved and precious hymns that are theologically vapid. 

And such blanket statements about contemporary worship music is irresponsible.  I’ll take many of my Crowder and Tomlin songs over Fanny Crosby’s Keswick-laced songs any day.

I say the solution is to not give any genre of music a free pass, nor to demonize any genre, but to consider how all of them stack up theologically.  Of course, it is also wise to consider the medium as well; leaving room for poetic license and not being a stubborn doctrinal Pharisee. 

Thoughts?

Sinners at the Table

Mike Leake 1 Comment

If I am struggling in my faith, where my love for Christ is faint, my love for other believers is hardening, and I’m having a hard time seeing the gospel should I take the Lord’s Supper when it is offered? 

Allow me to make that question concrete.  Many pastors have us “examine ourselves” before we partake of the Lord’s Supper.  Typically we are urged to look at our hearts and see if there is a breach of fellowship between ourselves and another believer.  If so, we should make that right before we partake.  We are further urged to look at our life and our heart.  Is there known sin that we are refusing to give up?  If so, we need a serious time of confession before we partake. 

But what do I do if I look into my heart and see some of those really deep and tangled sins?  What if I am struggling in a relationship with another person, but it’s not just as simple as—“make things right”?  What if I find myself much like the man in Mark 9—“Lord I believe, help my unbelief”?  Should I take the Lord’s Supper when my faith is weak, I’m struggling with bitterness, and I’m having a hard time giving myself fully to the Lord? 

Some of those reading this are perhaps by default saying that I should not take the Lord’s Supper.  Fair enough.  But I want to expose you to what John Calvin said on this particular topic—as I found it helpful. 

He is speaking against a belief that said “that those who were in a state of grace at worthily”.  And they defined this “state of grace” as those who are “pure and purged of all sin”.  Calvin responds by saying, “Such a dogma would debar all the men who ever were or are on earth from the use of this Sacrament”.

This doctrine (very similar to the scenario I mentioned above) Calvin says “deprives and despoils sinners, miserable and afflicted with trembling and grief, of the consolation of this Sacrament”. 

He then goes on to define what it really means to be “worthy” to take the Lord’s Supper. 

Therefore, this is the worthiness—the best and only kind we can bring to God—to offer vileness and (so to speak) our unworthiness to him so that his mercy may make us worthy of him; to despair in ourselves so that we may be comforted in him; to abase ourselves so that we may be comforted in him; to abase ourselves so that we may be lifted up by him; to accuse ourselves so that we may be justified by him; moreover, to aspire to that unity which he commends to us in his Supper…

Calvin continues…

How could we, needy and bare of all good, befouled with sins, half-dead, eat the Lord’s body worthily?  Rather, we shall think that we, as being poor, come to a kindly giver; as sick, to a physician; as sinners to the Author of righteousness; finally, as dead, to him who gives us life. 

Now, I do not agree with everything Calvin says on the Lord’s Supper.  But I do appreciate the pastoral sensitivity here.  For those reading this that are pastors, be careful in how you speak to these weak and feeble souls that may cut themselves off from this ordinance. 

For those that are reading this that are those weak and feeble souls, I want to encourage you that when you look into your heart and see darkness, sin, despair, bitterness, and a whole host of other things—your best response is not to run away from the table and try to go fix it.  Your best response is to run to Christ as represented in the Lord’s Supper. 

Thoughts?