This is a Bible study I did for my own curiosity, set for publication by Jonathan ii. I pray it is for your enjoyment.

Do You Have Ears?

That is the question governing this study. We begin with Moses, enter the seven churches, follow the Gospels, and arrive at the prophets. Ezekiel will bring us to Jesus, and Jesus will turn the question back to you.

The Study

I. Moses: Eyes to See and Ears to Hear

Deuteronomy 29:4

Moses tells Israel that, despite everything they have witnessed, they have not been given a heart to perceive, eyes to see, or ears to hear. They have seen the signs. They have heard the words. Yet they have not understood. Seeing is not necessarily perceiving. Hearing is not necessarily understanding.

II. John: What the Spirit Says to the Churches

Revelation 2–3

Jesus Christ addresses seven churches. Each receives a particular message. Each receives the same command.

• Ephesus — Revelation 2:7

• Smyrna — Revelation 2:11

• Pergamum — Revelation 2:17

• Thyatira — Revelation 2:29

• Sardis — Revelation 3:6

• Philadelphia — Revelation 3:13

• Laodicea — Revelation 3:22

“He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.”

Revelation 13:9

“If anyone has an ear, let him hear.”

The eighth occurrence comes during the vision of the beast. The seven churches have received their messages, but the command to hear continues.

III. Jesus: He Who Has Ears, Let Him Hear

Matthew

• Matthew 11:15 — Jesus speaks concerning John the Baptist and Elijah.

• Matthew 13:9 — Jesus concludes the parable of the sower.

• Matthew 13:43 — Jesus concludes his explanation of the wheat and tares.

Mark

• Mark 4:9 — Jesus concludes the parable of the sower.

• Mark 4:23 — Jesus speaks concerning the lamp and the revelation of hidden things.

• Mark 7:16 — Jesus teaches that defilement comes from within a person. The command appears here in the traditional textual tradition but is absent from many modern critical editions.

Luke

• Luke 8:8 — Jesus concludes the parable of the sower, crying out his summons to hear.

• Luke 14:35 — Jesus concludes his teaching on salt that has lost its usefulness.

John

No occurrences of the exact formula.

Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place the command at the conclusion of the parable of the sower. Each also preserves the command in other settings. John does not record it in his Gospel, although he repeats it throughout Revelation.

IV. The Sower: The Story That Tests Its Hearers

Matthew 13:1–23; Mark 4:1–20; Luke 8:4–15

A sower goes out to sow.

• Some seed falls beside the road and is taken away.

• Some falls on rocky ground, springs up quickly, and withers because it has no root.

• Some falls among thorns, which grow up and choke it.

• Some falls on good soil and bears fruit.

Jesus identifies the seed as the word and describes the different ways people receive it.

The story itself is being sown among the hearers. Some will receive it. Some will misunderstand it. Some will lose it. Some will bear fruit. Jesus makes the hearing of his story part of the story.

V. John: Hearing the Voice of Jesus

John 5:24

Whoever hears Jesus’ word and believes the One who sent him has eternal life.

John 8:47

Whoever belongs to God hears the words of God.

John 10:27

Jesus’ sheep hear his voice. He knows them, and they follow him.

John 18:37

Everyone who belongs to the truth hears his voice.

John does not repeat the familiar command. Instead, he repeatedly identifies whose voice must be heard. The sheep hear the Shepherd. Those who belong to God hear God’s words. Those who belong to the truth hear Jesus Christ.

VI. The Prophets: Seeing Without Seeing, Hearing Without Hearing

Isaiah 6:9–10

Isaiah is sent to a people who will hear without understanding and see without perceiving. Their hearts have become dull, their ears heavy, and their eyes closed.

Jeremiah 5:21

Jeremiah addresses a foolish people without understanding, who have eyes but do not see and ears but do not hear.

Ezekiel 12:2

Ezekiel dwells among a rebellious people who have eyes to see and ears to hear, yet neither see nor hear.

All three prophets describe people who possess the ability to hear but do not receive what is spoken. The words have been given. The people remain unresponsive.

VII. Ezekiel: He Who Hears, Let Him Hear

Ezekiel 3:17–27

God appoints Ezekiel as a watchman and commands him to deliver the words he receives. At the conclusion of the commission, God tells Ezekiel that he will open his mouth when he speaks to him.

“He who hears, let him hear; and he who refuses, let him refuse.”

The prophet speaks because God has spoken. The hearer must decide whether to receive or refuse the warning.

Jesus Christ takes up this language in the Gospels and speaks with his own authority.

“He who has ears, let him hear.”

VIII. Jesus: Seeing, They Do Not See

Matthew 13:10–17

The disciples ask Jesus why he speaks to the people in parables. Jesus answers by distinguishing those who have been given to know the mysteries of the Kingdom from those who have not. He quotes Isaiah’s warning concerning people who hear without understanding and see without perceiving.

Mark 4:10–12

Jesus explains that the mysteries of the Kingdom are given to his disciples, while those outside hear in parables, seeing without perceiving and hearing without understanding.

Luke 8:9–10

The disciples ask what the parable means. Jesus again distinguishes those given to know the mysteries of the Kingdom from those who see without seeing and hear without understanding.

John 12:37–41

Despite the signs Jesus performed, many did not believe in him. John quotes Isaiah concerning blinded eyes and hardened hearts, then declares that Isaiah spoke these things because he saw Jesus’ glory.

The warning of the prophets has arrived in the ministry of Jesus Christ. The people are hearing the one to whom the prophets testified.

IX. The Final Warning: Have You Still Not Heard?

Mark 8:17–21

Jesus speaks to his disciples after they misunderstand his warning about leaven. He asks why they are discussing their lack of bread. He asks whether they still fail to perceive or understand. He asks whether their hearts are hardened.

“Having eyes, do you not see? And having ears, do you not hear?”

Then he reminds them of the feeding of the five thousand and the four thousand. They witnessed both events. They gathered the baskets afterward. They remember the numbers. Yet Jesus asks:

“Do you not yet understand?”

The disciples have heard his words, seen his works, and followed him. Still, Jesus challenges their understanding.

Matthew 7:21–23

Not everyone who says “Lord, Lord” will enter the Kingdom of Heaven, but those who do the will of the Father.

Matthew 25:1–13

Ten virgins await the bridegroom. Five have brought sufficient oil. Five have not. The door is shut, and those who arrive afterward hear that the bridegroom does not know them.

Luke 13:25–27

Those outside the shut door appeal to their familiarity with Jesus. They ate and drank in his presence. He taught in their streets. Nevertheless, they are rejected.

Both/And

“He who has ears to hear, let him hear.” Is this Law or Gospel?

The question of Law and Gospel is not a matter of pinning the tail on the right notion at every moment, as though anything were ever a singular perfect or a contextless vacuum,. We cannot see as clearly as God sees.

All depends on how you are listening. Who do you say that he is?

It’s not a trick question.

Good Tuesday!

Would you believe that now I’m also without my personal computer for 14 days? We shall see what I can authentically produce while moving, working and having to rebuild my workspace on a temporary laptop. Ikes!

Thank you for your support during this massive transition!

Last year about this time I released the following article. It would be only a week later that I would find out that as much as I might believe the following words to be biblically true, they are too much for the common western woman to stomach without qualification, hem, haw and personalized exceptions ad infinitum.

What I know is that, regardless of the claims, actions and CTCR documents that others may bluster with, I am no misogynist. But I expect not only to keep being called one, but to hear the harpy’s screams more and more. Frustrated, lonely, loud women have little to do these days but meddle in the lives of others, exporting their scoffer’s virtue as a social contagion, content to take root in any climate permissive enough to feed their supply. I appear to be a target for such advice, a small host of bold ladies ever certain that they can fix me if only I will learn to listen.

But inverting my words and posturing based on emotion are the very thing that the Sons of Solomon discipline has given me an allergy to. Regardless of the gametes involved, I, for one, am done letting people who think they know me tell me anything about me as though they have a clue. Those who want to tell first, ask later (if ever) and dismiss every correction make poor counselors.

No one knows the spirit of a man better than the man. “With the measure you use, it will be measured back to you.”

Gaslighting is an equal opportunity destabilizer. Submission is divine.

May the peace of Christ guard our souls, and may all our homes be filled with fathers and mothers whose hearts are turned to their children, with children whose hearts are turned to their fathers, and according to our communal Baptismal promises, which cannot fail on that Great Day.

What Does “Submission” Mean?

Our age rewards haste and projection, making it easy for the meaning of words like submission to be scuttled. Scrollers are often quick to speak, unable to listen, and glad to measure with a sliding ruler. My purpose is ever to stand firm in the storm, trusting in the grace of our risen Lord, Jesus Christ, and trusting that the “Word of the LORD are pure words, Like silver tried in a furnace of earth, Purified seven times.”

Torah is Logos

The Law is not a ledger but a living rhythm, a covenantal pattern woven into creation itself. When Moses said, “You shall not cause the land to sin,” he did not legislate a petty statute; he gave voice to the truth that sin is cyclical dissonance in the created order. The land, the marriage, the body, and the soul all move by the same covenantal law of fidelity and fruitfulness.

Legalism mistakes the map for the terrain. It treats every precept as a negotiable contract—tit-for-tat, broken and remade by technicalities. But biblical law never functioned this way. The Torah’s heart is ontology, not bureaucracy:

Law exists because covenant exists, and covenant exists because God Himself is faithful.

Thus every “commandment” is a spoke on the wheel of faithfulness. When the prophets cried that adultery defiles the land or that unjust blood pollutes it, they spoke as guardians of harmony, not as clerks of punishment. They saw that when covenant fidelity is broken, the wound reverberates through soil and soul alike—the land bears guilt because creation itself is moral.

To reject legalism, then, is not to cast off the Law, but to remember its first form: Genesis 2, the man and his wife, naked and unashamed, bound by consent and covenant before their Maker. From that union flows every other law—each statute a restatement of the same truth: that faithfulness preserves life, and treachery consumes it.

Therefore, when Christ said that not one jot or tittle shall pass away, He confirmed what Moses taught—that the Law, rightly read, is wisdom embodied. Its meaning was never annulled, only fulfilled. The letter without the spirit kills; but the Spirit without the letter is shapeless.

Law and mercy are one pulse.

So the one who would walk in covenant must learn this balance:

• Reject the counting of sins as coin.

• Uphold the rhythm of fidelity as breath.

• Understand that breaking the Law is not technical but relational—it disrupts the cycle of faithfulness by which heaven and earth cohere.

The Law may be misunderstood and still well followed. Thus we do not serve the Law to be justified. We uphold it because it is just. Not to earn favor, but to walk in harmony with the faithful God whose covenant holds the stars. Every ordinance remains, because every ordinance is truth refracted through circumstance.

The Origin of Order

Before there was sin, there was order. Before there was commandment, there was headship.

“Then the LORD God formed the man of dust from the ground… and He took one of his ribs and built the woman.” — Genesis 2:7, 22

Dominion, biblically speaking, is reign. It is right rule for the sake of life.

Man was formed first and entrusted with dominion (Hebrew, radah) over the garden — to serve (avad) and to guard (shamar). The woman was built from him and for him, not as lesser clay but as living complement, drawn from his side that she might walk beside him.

Share

Her origin reveals equality of essence, but distinction of role. The divine chain of command was clear from the beginning:

God → Man → Woman → Creation.

This order is not a ladder of worth but a flow of trust. To invert this order is to dissolve the cosmos. To honor it is to dwell in peace.

Covenant as Dominion

When the two became one flesh, their unity was not a contract of equals, but an ordered harmony—a living reflection of heaven’s own hierarchy, where equality of being coexists with distinction of authority.

“Let them have dominion (“right rule for the sake of life.”)” — Genesis 1:26 “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and cling to his wife…” — Genesis 2:24

Right rule for the sake of life is not tyranny. It is upright reign. It is stewardship, not exploitation. It is loving agency on behalf of those submitted to care by protection.

This is the definition of the Kingdom of God. This is the work of Christ, our King.

The word’s Latin seed, dominus (lord, master), and domus (house), tell the same story: there can be no n-ation without domus-ation, not abuse but “governance,” “reign,” “agency,” “rule,” exercised as God designed it.

There can be no house without a head; no peace without a word that is believed.

Thus, the man’s headship in marriage is, then, not an afterthought of patriarchy but the very architecture of creation rooted and redeemed in the resurrection of Christ, the ever righteous Husband and King to us all. His Love is covenantal, not coercive; lawful, not legalistic; disciplinary, not despotic.

Thus, when the Old Testament says, “He shall not diminish her food, her clothing, or her marital rights” Exodus 21:10 — and “Any vow of a woman… her husband may establish, or her husband may make void.” Numbers 30:13 — these are not permissions of cruelty, but assignments of wisdom for an age of desert dwelling — covenantal lordship assumed to put all mankind under the Higher Lord, where command and care are one act.

The goal of a Christian is not to apply these words “to the letter,” but to draw from the Spirit of the matter into the fullness of beautiful texts like Ephesians 5 and 1 Peter 3.

The Image of Yahweh and His Bride

Throughout Scripture, God identifies Himself as Husband, never as wife. Israel is the bride, the responder, the one who reflects His fidelity.

“For your Maker is your Husband.” — Isaiah 54:5

“I was a husband to them.” — Jeremiah 31:32

“I will betroth you to Me forever.” — Hosea 2:19–20

Here lies the holy asymmetry:

• Yahweh initiates, Israel answers;

• Yahweh calls, Israel follows;

• Yahweh protects, Israel flourishes.

This pattern is the soul of marriage. To erase headship and reject the beauty of “submission” is to erase the mirror of the covenant itself. For the man stands as dominus of the home just as the Lord hangs as Dominus of the world on the cross. The wife, in her faithfulness, crowns this dominion as cherished glory, finding in herself the treasure that he guards.

“A virtuous woman is a crown to her husband.” — Proverbs 12:4

In this, obedience is not humiliation; it is high exaltation in order. Submission gives shape to love received, just as creation gives body to the voice of God, “Let there be light!”

Subscribe now

Law and Natural Order

The statutes of Torah assume this hierarchy because it is ontological. When a man and a woman join, they form the smallest unit of the Kingdom — a covenantal nation in seed form. The Law therefore governs their fidelity, inheritance, and purity not as ritual minutiae but as safeguards of divine architecture.

“Do not cause the land to sin.” — Deuteronomy 24:4

Sin here means disruption of covenantal order, ie, orphans. When the cycle of dominion, obedience, and faithfulness is broken, the land itself is wounded. To “bring sin upon the land” is to normalize rebellion, to make bastards of everyone, and to turn breach into virtue. To keep the order rightly is to sanctify the soil; to make the house and field alike reflect heaven’s peace.

The Positive Natural Law of Marriage

Marriage is the divinely witnessed covenant of dominion between one man and one woman, whereby the man bears headship as priest, protector, and lawgiver, and the woman answers as helper, glory, and crown.

Together they image the order of creation—Authority without tyranny, Submission without servility, Unity without confusion. Their union is sealed in flesh, ordered toward fruitfulness, and bound by fidelity that mirrors the steadfast love (Hebrew, ḥesed) of God.

Fulfillment, Not Abrogation

When Christ said, “Not one jot or tittle shall pass from the Law until all is fulfilled” (Matt 5:18), He was not discarding Torah’s structure but perfecting its heart. The Law stands not as chain but as chord—its melody heard fully only when played by love.

“The head of every man is Christ, the head of a woman is the man, and the head of Christ is God.” — 1 Corinthians 11:3

Thus the same chain of command that formed Eden governs the Church. Christ fulfills Adam; the Church fulfills Eve. Headship is not abolished in grace; it is transfigured into sacrificial rule.

Final Salvo: Against Legalism, For Law

Marriage is not a tit-for-tat contract but a covenantal rhythm. Its wisdom is not in bureaucracy but in being itself. Every statute breathes from the same heart: fidelity, fruitfulness, and faith.

To follow Torah legalistically is to miss its melody; to reject it is to despise its Composer. Therefore we reject both antinomianism and scholastic tyranny. We uphold the Law because it is the architecture of peace. We keep its order not to earn favor, but to live in harmony with the faithful God whose dominion is love.

Marriage is the covenant of dominion: Instituted by God, governed by hierarchy, sanctified by faithfulness, fruitful by design, and prophetic of Christ and His Bride.

The man rules in service as dominus; the woman answers in trust as glory; together their house becomes a living tabernacle of honor in the Kingdom, under the Headship of the Husband who cannot be shaken.

The Album in Suno

Takes a Button

Last week’s Upright:

Hello, everyone! Like I said in the recent livestream, I have a couple of major goals in front of me as I rebuild my life. One of those goals is moving cross country for the sake of my new “day job,” which (Thank God!) is already proving itself as a very fulfilling vocation into which my skillset is sliding nicely. I am looking forward to being a piece of the American freight industry at this exciting and transitional time in our nation under God.

One of the other goals is longer writing. I have allowed too many good projects to pile up, all the while telling myself that by publishing on a periodical platform I would catalyze a path to completion. Not so!

So, for a season, when I don’t have something burning up the the keyboard and ready to go, I will be reposting some of the most important posts from the past few years, with minimal amendment. There is much food for prayer sitting in these archives, and I hope to refresh it as a path to delivering ever greater goods later.

It is in God’s hands. Alleluia! The following post was first publish October 17, 2025, but it had been written and scheduled the week prior, before I left for a regional synodical conference. After I came home from that event to a nightmare, it was suggested by one who portended to be my advocate, that I should take it down. Even though it was clearly stated, “I read the article and there is technically nothing wrong with it,” it was deemed that I could make a show of good faith by limiting my exposure to slander based on the motives of others.

That said, my good will and good faith, not to mention my two decades of previous work, have meant very little to those in the know throughout this experience. “Showing faith” is irrelevant now. I will demonstrate what I believe by what I do.

And I think the wisdom of Xerxes letting Vashti go is instrumental to the Spirit of Esther. But perhaps I am gravely mistaken. Perhaps I do not have in mind the things of God, but rather the things of man.

You tell me. Comments are open. We are all walking toward reconciliation on that great Day no matter what, so it’s my plan to act like it now.

Glad to be on your radar! 🏄‍♂️🦊🍕

Modern Female Piety Has Been Poisoned

We are in the storm of a theological and sociological crisis.

The Church is witnessing a profound inversion: the appearance of godliness has become the vehicle for rebellion against God’s order. The serpent wears a cross now—and she leads the small group. At the root of this inversion are three poisonous doctrines, each cloaked in virtue but saturated in rebellion:

1. Self-Importance as Spiritual Authority

The belief that personal feelings, emotional impressions, or inner promptings are sufficient to establish truth, moral weight, or relational control, are the center of the American woman’s world.

In church culture, it sounds like:

“I just feel like God wouldn’t want me to be unhappy…” “The Spirit told me…” — and Scripture bows to feelings. Testimonies become emotional spectacles. Prayer meetings devolve into group therapy. The topic does not stay on topic.

Trusting personal intuition over God’s Word is the essence of folly. She accepts and preaches male headship— but only when it aligns with her emotions. Underneath it all: Pride disguised as discernment. Autonomy masked as humility.

“Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes…” “The heart is deceitful above all things…” (Isaiah 5:21; Jeremiah 17:9)

2. Entitlement Disguised as Maturity

This is the assumption that spiritual effort, marriage, motherhood, or basic virtue should be rewarded with applause, deference, and exemption from correction. In the modern church, it shows up as:

Expecting praise for doing what Scripture calls duty. Resenting male correction as “mean,” not “nice,” and “dangerous” or even “abuse.” Demanding the church accommodate her “experience.” Mistaking busyness for holiness. Demanding to be justified, even in sin.

Vashti sees her created identity as burden. She despises Proverbs 31. She trades out obedience and puts in its place affirmation, swapping servanthood for status, submission as skin-deep as the wearing of a veil

The Word says:

“When you have done all those things… say, ‘We are unworthy servants.’” (Luke 17:10)

The spiritual root of Feminism is stubbornness and ingratitude, founded in a fantastical ignorance of physical distinction, the ongoing problem of babel, and the real world dangers of survival in a hostile environment.

The fruit is bitterness dressed as empowerment, oblivious to the barbarians on the other side of the gate where she is busy bringing charges against her husband, generally speaking, for being a man.

3. Misandry Wearing Church Clothes

This is rebellion refined. It is gender insubordination cloaked in sweet piety, harnessing select sanctified vocabulary to justify control, resentment, and role reversal. Whatever she may tell herself, she believes:

“I’m not rebellious, I’m just strong in my faith.”

“I’m not unsubmissive, I’m prophetic.”

She has felt it in her will, and her tragic flaw is that Vashti knows no shame there. Only certainty.

She does not nag. She helps.

It’s not her fault that she has to seize leadership. She can’t just stand by and let things get worse. If he can’t see it’, is that her fault? What is she supposed to do? He’s wrong, after all.

These are lies in choir robes, Eve’s defiance with Mary’s name. Beneath? Jezebel, virtue-signaling to the barbarians at the foot of her tower even as it collapses around her.

“Rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft…” 1 Samuel 15:23;

“Let a woman learn in silence with all submission.” 1 Timothy 2:11

“Your [envy] shall be for your husband, and he shall [fail] you.” (Genesis 3:16)

God’s order has not changed. But the modern Church has catechized its daughters in a false gospel of moralistic, therapeutic deism.

The Counterfeit Catechism of Modern Women

• Her feelings are canon.

• Her husband must prove/earn headship.

• Her identity is sacred, regardless of her actions.

• Her critique is insight; his correction is abuse.

• Her community supersedes her covenant.

• Her marriage and therefor her word is an accessory to her personal fancy.

The result is toxic:

• She becomes unteachable.

• She resents hierarchy.

• She calls submission “oppression”

• and sees her own dominance as “empowerment.”

There is no fear of God before Vashti’s eyes. That was why the men of Persia rose to Xerxes defense. As it goes in the castle, so it will go in the streets. The only difference is that the streets will be yet meaner by far.

What This Has Cost Us

• Marriages: cold, transactional, void of reverence, and filled with dissociative behaviors.

• Churches: noisy, busy, fruitless, worried about nickels and noses, addicted to self-improvement.

• Husbands: the simp becomes more and more silent, addicted, broken, and withdrawn to the virtual “cave” where he will sit still, “like a good boy.”

• Children: raised under maternal absolutism, the Father’s voice lands somewhere between Homer Simpson and Howard Stern. He most definitely does not “know best.” They do.

• Natural order: mocked in the name of safety, community and greedy consumption, all of which are the classic red flags of communism, capitalism and the modern world of knowing better than God.

It Is Time to Wake Up

It doesn't matter what arena you are in, whether the courts of the Prince of Persia or your own backyard. It should go without saying

• Stop flattering the entitled.

• Stop enabling the usurpers.

• Stop applauding rebellions.

• Do not tolerate misandry in any form.

The true Bride of Christ is not loud, bossy, or bitter. She does not rise by platform, protest, or performance, but by blood, water, and Spirit. That is, by faith alone. Thus, she will desire to be:

Reverent. Submissive. Pure. Fruitful.

For who does not wish to be like Christ Jesus?

Let the Vashtis go.

Let the Esthers rise.

Follow the men who follow Him.

The glory of Ruth is that, before all things, she simply refuses to walk out the door.

I Am Deathless

Love and Honor Each Other

I have sought without success to avoid codifying the doctrine of man and woman in clear, if offensive, terms derived directly from Holy Scripture. No office has been given me to authorize this work, but the failure of my elder brothers to properly distinguish both this doctrine and its clear implications for Christian life has driven me to this end. May…

Read more

a year ago · 9 likes · 1 comment · Titus Berndt

This will be a deep read dealing with Hebrew root studies. Thank you for being here!

Why Scripture Distinguishes Righteousness, Judgment, and Uprightness

I have always thought that Proverbs received too little attention. From the first time I saw a daily-reading Bible with a daily Proverb built into every day, I wondered why this was not just “the norm” for Christianity. Of course, after two decades of serving the Church as a preacher, the Sons of Solomon ecumenical prayer discipline is my confession for such a time as this.

Sos Booklet 2ndedition Ereader 2

902KB ∙ PDF file

Download

Download

Why Upright?

Scripture repeatedly joins righteousness (צֶדֶק/צְדָקָה), judgment (מִשְׁפָּט), and uprightness (יֹשֶׁר/יָשָׁר), yet modern forgetful Christianity largely treats uprightness as a poetic synonym for righteousness rather than a distinct theological category. Especially in corners where righteousness has been relegated to its narrow definition as “justification by grace through faith without works,” the result can be a lot less faith and a lot more flattened (moralizing) jargon.

This article demonstrates that righteousness, justice, and uprightness describe three irreducible dimensions of covenantal life.

• Righteousness governs relational order.

• Judgment governs justice.

• Uprightness governs orientation.

Each answers a different question, and only together do they describe the whole man.

The Problem

English instinctively assumes that “upright” simply means “very righteous.” Hebrew does not. Unlike Greek, Hebrew does not pair words as “either/or” in order to establish its foundations. Hebrew does contain parallelism (even dual uprights!), but not because each contributes something the other cannot. Rather, because between the two is usually a third that is just as “like,” and yet also not quite the same.

In this way, Hebrew only parallels in order to expand, where Greek (and its bastard-child, Anglish,) generally parallel in order to shut down.

So, when Proverbs speaks of “the righteous” and “the upright,” it is not using decorative variation nor inserting polar opposites. It is bridging complementary realities.

Righteousness Is Relational

The root צדק concerns what is right according to covenant.

Its imagery is judicial and relational. A righteous man stands rightly before God, rightly toward his neighbor, and rightly within the created order. The emphasis is conformity to what ought to be. Righteousness therefore asks,

Is this relationship rightly ordered?

This explains why righteousness is frequently associated with mercy, covenant faithfulness, justification, and salvation. It concerns whether persons, communities, and even nations occupy their proper place before God. Its dominant metaphor is in ordering geometry straight.

Judgment Is Judicial

Judgment belongs to another sphere. מִשְׁפָּט concerns the exercise of justice. Judgment asks,

Was the decision true?

Judgment renders verdicts. Judgment weighs evidence. Judgment restores balance where disorder has entered. Without judgment there can be no stable society.

Yet Scripture consistently distinguishes judgment from righteousness because rendering correct judgments is not identical with becoming the sort of person who naturally embodies them.

A judge may execute justice. Only a righteous man lives righteousness.

Geometrically, judgment is neither straight, nor crooked, but the means of the measure.

Uprightness is Straight Up

Uprightness is neither but is perpendicular to both. The root ישר consistently evokes straightness, levelness, directness, and vertical integrity. Its concern is not primarily legal. Its concern is second-dimensional.

Straight is a direction. Upright is a directed posture.

The upright man is the man who is not bent. Not twisted. Not divided. Not crooked.

He stands up. That is how he walks straight.

Hebrew reaches further. Standing is static. Walking is dynamic. Scripture overwhelmingly speaks of walking before God. The issue is therefore not whether one can stand vertically for a moment. The issue is whether one’s life traces a straight course.

This explains why Proverbs continually opposes the upright to the crooked. Crookedness is not simply wickedness. It is distortion. It is internal curvature expressed through external motion. The crooked man may occasionally perform righteous acts. He cannot draw a straight line.

Geometry Draws It Out

Every physical body exists in three dimensions. Height. Length. Breadth.

The moral life has these same dimensions. Righteousness governs your length by covenant over time. Uprightness governs height by bringing your vertices into alignment under God. Finally, it is not Judgment, but Wisdom that governs the breadth of one’s insight into prudent society.

None of these are equivalencies. Each stabilizes the whole. Remove Uprightness and it becomes impossible to find the center. Remove righteousness and Judgment becomes juridical. Remove Judgment and relationships collapse.

Against the Double-Mind

James does not say that the double-minded man occasionally makes poor decisions. He says he is unstable in all his ways.

That language is geometric. The problem is trajectory. Two competing centers produce continual deviation. Unbalancing. “Kuzushi! 崩し” The man who cannot decide which master he serves cannot walk a straight line because every step is being redirected by another allegiance.

Uprightness therefore presupposes simplicity of heart.

• One Lord.

• One direction. (Faith.)

• One path. (Regeneration.)

The Lost Tongue

Righteousness has become the dominant theological word because the Church rightly emphasizes justification. Judgment has become the dominant cultural word because society is the accumulation of shared judgments. Uprightness has quietly slunk away forlorn and deplorable.

We ask whether an action is allowed. We ask whether a person is saved. But do we watch how we walk? Do we even know how we talk?

Not all tongues are created equal. Scripture is deeply interested in reforming yours. Its wisdom is not foundationally concerned with bits of data that you can learn to remember as the right answers that make the problems go away. The goal is not “the man who has all the right choices.”

The purpose is the man who can endure poor ones, and by so doing, ensures that the habit of forming better ones becomes increasingly inevitable.

The theater at Ephesus could hold a city, and the city had lost its mind. For two hours one sentence crashed through the stone bowl:

“Great is Diana of the Ephesians!”

The men who started it knew why. The Gospel had begun to interfere with the silver trade. Demetrius and the craftsmen sold small gods for good money, which meant Paul’s preaching was no longer a private religious opinion. It had reached the cash register.

Now, it was a riot, and Paul wanted to go in.

Of course he did.

He had spent years reasoning in public, taking the Word into synagogues, lecture halls, markets and houses. A mob was still made of men, and men could hear.

But the disciples would not let him enter the theater. Even some of the Asiarchs, officials friendly to him, sent word begging him not to venture inside. Paul had courage enough to face the crowd. His brothers had wisdom enough to bar the door.

Luke gives us no shining moment in which the Apostle announces that the Spirit has personally exempted him from consequences. He gives us friends who can still tell Paul no. The Apostle to the Gentiles remains apostolic precisely because he listens to them.

Then the town clerk quiets the mob.

That was months ago.

Now, Paul is sailing past Ephesus without ghosting it. He calls the Christians to his side and gives them his face. Standing on a beach, he speaks of his own humility, tears, trials, public teaching, house-to-house teaching, repentance toward God, and faith in Jesus.

Then he leaves again.

Not Every Theater Is Your Cross

I am inspired by molon labe as much as the next red-blooded meat eater. But we have made an idol out of standing your ground.

“A brave man stays.”

“A faithful pastor never quits.”

“A good father sacrifices everything.”

“A real Christian stands firm.”

You have not so learned Christ.

Before the riot began, Paul had already purposed in the Spirit to pass through Macedonia and Achaia, go to Jerusalem, and afterward see Rome. Ephesus was not the destination. The theater was not an altar. Screaming craftsmen held no authority to rewrite his calling merely by becoming dangerous.

So Paul left Ephesus “for good” without surrendering the Gospel, recanting his preaching, or apologizing to Artemis. He refused to confuse the loudest fight with the appointed one.

Jesus taught His disciples when persecuted to flee from one city to another. Solomon’s prudent man sees evil and hides himself while the simple press on and pay for it. Scripture permits escape to be prudent courage. Sometimes remaining is faithfulness. Sometimes remaining is vanity dressed for church.

Paul was willing to die, but Demetrius held no claim on that hour.

Not every danger is your cross. Some are only theaters full of fools.

A Road Full of Names

A beautiful result of this is how little Paul’s flight resembles escape.

He leaves Ephesus and moves through Macedonia, giving the disciples much encouragement. Then he spends three months in Greece. When a plot forms against him as he prepares to sail for Syria, he changes course and returns through Macedonia. He refuses to force Providence to prove itself. He changes the itinerary and keeps the mission.

Luke fills the road with names: Sopater of Berea; Aristarchus and Secundus from Thessalonica; Gaius of Derbe; Timothy; Tychicus and Trophimus of Asia. These are not an ornamental credit scene. Paul’s movement has gathered men from the cities behind him. The man leaves, but the Word has made a fraternity that travels on.

Flight can turn a man inward. He escapes the dangerous room, discovers the relief of silence, then begins cutting every cord that might pull on him again. Peace becomes privacy. Privacy becomes isolation. Isolation learns to call itself wisdom. Paul’s road runs the other way. He departs one crowd in order to strengthen another. He avoids a plot and finds a journey among brothers.

The riot behind. The people before.

Lucky at the Window

In case you were sleeping, the disciples gather on the first day of the week to break bread. Paul intends to leave the next day. It’s an all-day even. Lamps are lit. The air is close. He speaks long into the night.

Near the open window sits a young man named Eutychus. That means Lucky, and he couldn’t help himself but sneak in forty winks.

A third-story fall leaves no body gently arranged on the ground. Whatever the crowd saw when they reached him, Luke gives the verdict without padding: they took him up dead.

But Paul goes down. He falls upon the young man and embraces him. He speaks peace over the wreck. Life is in him. Then, back upstairs. Break bread. Eat. Keep talking until daybreak.

Paul can leave Ephesus when a riot makes his presence a lightning rod, and he can spend the whole night with a room because the hour calls for his presence. He can change course around an ambush, then pour himself out until sunrise. He is neither addicted to conflict nor governed by comfort. He does not stay to prove that he cannot be moved. He does not leave because people have become expensive. His freedom comes from belonging to a purpose larger than his nerves.

By breakfast, Lucky has become his name again. Paul leaves behind a living young man, a fed congregation and a story strong enough to walk on after him.

The Long Way to a Deadline

The others sail from Troas to Assos. Paul goes on foot. Luke leaves the reason alone and simply follows the path. Assos. Mitylene. Chios. Samos. Miletus. Land and water, walking and sailing, companions together and Paul alone.

The Holy Spirit inhabits all itineraries. Vocation moves through weather, ports, passage money, tired legs and dates on a calendar.

Paul decides to sail past Ephesus and avoid a delay in Asia. He is hurrying to reach Jerusalem for Pentecost.

But Paul loves the Ephesians. He has labored among them publicly and from house to house. He has argued, taught, wept and worked with his hands in their city.

He still sails past.

Their affection carries no claim superior to his calling. Their need cannot be permitted to become endless simply because it is real.

Pentecost waits in Jerusalem. Paul has somewhere to be.

The man who only runs away will eventually make shelter his god. Paul is moving toward something, a feast, the saints, the testimony.

Subscribe now

No Cold Goodbyes

He is going to Jerusalem, “bound in the spirit.” Much of what will happen there remains hidden. But he sees it well enough. The Holy Spirit testifies that chains and tribulations await. He fled an uproar, detoured a Jewish plot, and all so he can walk into the lion’s den against the advice of all.

What gives? A man chasing death would have entered the theater. A man worshiping survival would avoid Jerusalem. Paul does both of the things a slogan cannot hold together: he flees and he goes. His route is governed neither by fear nor bravado.

Before he boards the ship, he prepares the elders: savage wolves will come. Some will rise from within and twist the truth. Therefore watch. Remember. Shepherd.

They weep, fall on his neck and kiss him, grieving most because he has said they will not see his face again. Then they accompany him to the ship. Nobody gets to leave dry-eyed and therapeutically complete. Love makes the departure hurt. Faith does not anesthetize it.

Distance Is Not a Sacrament

Our therapeutic century has turned departure into a moral vocabulary all its own. We say boundary, unsafe, toxic and no contact as though naming the distance has already justified it.

Sometimes the words fit. Sometimes they don’t.

Christians are allowed to flee violence, manipulation, persecution and chaos. A shared name or shared blood cannot make evil harmless. Paul himself avoided the theater and changed course around a plot. But distance is a circumstance, not a sacrament. It cannot absolve us by itself.

Paul’s departures bear Christian fruit. He moves toward obedience rather than a frictionless life. He receives the judgment of faithful friends. He strengthens the people he leaves. He remains among named brothers. He makes room for tears. When possible, he gives the truth face to face. He leaves the future open to the Word of grace instead of sealing it beneath his own verdict.

Fear uses flight for a different end. It seeks a world in which nobody can make a claim, offer a correction, require patience or complicate the story. It freezes people at the scene of their worst act and calls the ice a boundary. Eventually the protected self becomes a lonely little Artemis, untouchable, expensive and quite unable to save.

No dangerous person is owed a meeting. Scripture never requires a victim to stand in the theater. Nor do we make it our identity to escape.

Flee, Then Follow

Paul is hard to trap because safety is not his master.

Neither is reputation. He has no need to win every public confrontation, preserve every human attachment, answer every accusation, or prove his nerve to men who are shouting too loudly to know why they came. His life is not dear to him compared with finishing the race and completing the ministry received from the Lord Jesus.

Jesus is the pattern beneath Paul’s road. The Child was carried into Egypt when Herod hunted Him. The Man withdrew when His enemies plotted. He passed through a murderous crowd before His hour had come. Then, when the hour came, He set His face toward Jerusalem and did not run from the cross.

The Christian worships neither danger nor distance. He follows Christ. This is why he can flee the wrong suffering without shame and walk toward the right suffering without fear. He knows the difference between a theater demanding his pride and a Jerusalem appointed by his Lord. He can leave without abandoning, love without remaining, grieve without turning back and disappear from one horizon without vanishing from the communion of saints on the edge of another.

Flee is a Christian verb.

So follow.

You are my friends, and I couldn’t do this without you. Some of you have walked beside me for more than a decade. One of you recently told me, “You don’t know me, but I know you. And now I think like you. Someone needs to be saying the things you are saying.”

I almost got comfortable enough in this week’s Upright to agree. Then I remembered I’m still guarding my words. I’ll know I’m back in full form when I stop hedging against my own thoughts.

Speaking of Thinking

There is enough noise about artificial intelligence without me adding to it. I did plenty of that last year, and most of what I wrote is evergreen. But while the rest of my life has grown strangely quiet, the PeaceBot Initiative has reemerged as an unavoidable dream.

This is Jonathan ii, ☝️ a language model built on biblical scriptography, calculus, information theory, and cryptography. It’s in pre-beta, with weeks of quiet computation still ahead before the library and the web are fully entangled into a working kernel that I can use.

What do I know?

I know that what began as a scattered personal study in philology has been born again as something much larger. I have no illusion that its current form can compete with the billion-dollar projects fighting for the front seat. I do think, however, that most of the essential pieces are going to come together on their own because “the convergence is inevitable.” 🦊

What I can assure you of is this: harnessing machine learning to deepen your own study is a no-brainer. Ludditism is a logical fallacy, much like nostalgia or pacifism. It isn’t that these things are morally wrong or obviously gross. It’s that insisting on stone knives at the dawn of the Iron Age is stubborn folly.

I’m not saying that you have to use AI. I’m saying you already do, whether you realize it or not. Every search. Every swipe. Every scroll. The question is whether you’ll let someone else curate your world for you, or whether you’ll take up this cross and curate it yourself.

Just to Be Clear

I am no longer serving as a parish pastor, and I am no longer rostered with the LCMS ministerium.

I have not recanted my vows, and I remain ordained.

I was not removed. I walked away.

I remain a communicant member of an LCMS congregation.

I remain called by the Gospel and enlightened with His gifts. Alleluia!

“His word is in my bones like a fire.”

From there, I’m just a guy, a man, a brother in Christ, trying to build a life in his late forties and in the worst economy since the Great Depression. But I’m not complaining. I’m trusting. This was Jesus’ plan all along. He is disciplining me as a son. I am counted worthy to suffer. I will lift up my head to see the day approaching and refuse to wallow in the muck with those who have no hope.

There have been many unexpected blessings in the midst of the whirlwind. I’ve learned to cry like Job and to dance like David. When we turn the other cheek, love covers a multitude of sins, and the ministry of reconciliation takes its rightful place as the true Great Commission in our lives.

Taking it on the chin isn’t pretty. It is rarely advantageous. What did Joseph think through all those years in prison? What did Paul do while waiting in Tarsus? Where are the pearls? Who are the swine?

This calls for wisdom. He who has ears to hear, let him hear.

I walked away from a full pension. I walked away from health insurance and benefits. I walked away from defending my name.

I did it to make for peace.

So when I say you’re helping me make ends meet, I’m not joking. Your loose change makes a real difference. With a year or two in my new line of work, I may be singing a very different tune, if the Lord wills. In the meantime, I’m going to keep writing here with the goal of converging all these years of work a few more permanent forms.

That’s the first job that the Jonathan ii library project is computing: turning a lifetime of theological, economic, and mathematical study into a writing program. What output reaches full fruition first, I can’t yet say. Right now, though, First Draft is back the lead:

Thank you for reading!

Subscribe now

How long will you mourn for Saul, seeing I have rejected him?

There are few doctrines of Scripture more assiduously ignored by the modern practical man than the fact of reprobation.

The world is predominantly unconverted, and the promise of Scripture is not that they will all convert. It is that things will go from bad to worse. To neglect the discipline of this righteous judgment is to forget the call of Christianity to live as a remnant Kingdom in a fallen world.

I’m not talking about classroom memory work. I’m talking about that which has already altered how Christians marry, govern, hire, disciple, retire, build, and even read.

We debate down free will with philosophical precision and call it quits, completely and willfully ignorant that most people are not basically trustworthy, not basically reasonable, and not basically inclined toward the good. They only appear that way. Or, they only act that way. Or, that’s what they’re like when the lights are on.

But Scripture is plain and clear. The natural man is an unreasoning animal.

But these speak evil of whatever they do not know; and whatever they know naturally, like brute beasts, in these things they corrupt themselves.

But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

These are sensual persons, who cause divisions, not having the Spirit.

The Bible is not optimistic about fallen man. It proclaims “the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand; repent!”

Jesus Christ did not come to congratulate mankind on our progress. He came to rescue wicked men from their follies. This is not a marginal. This is the atmosphere in which the Bible breathes.

“Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.”

The apostles repeatedly address Christians as strangers, pilgrims, exiles and sojourners. They do not speak as though Christianity can expect to inhabit a civilization composed primarily of regenerate men, least of all when the majority of the men remain coarse infidels. The early believers expected to endure this world and its prince until the Son is revealed again.

Christians will inevitably live among unbelievers. We are not to shun them, scorn them, or seek to profit to their detriment. But neither should we quite trust them. Not in that way. Not when it comes to what the Spirit says to the churches, (which turns out to be quite a lot.)

From Noah’s family to Abraham, from Gideon’s reduced army to Elijah’s seven thousand, from the faithful remnant of Israel to Christ’s “little flock,” Scripture consistently presents God’s people as preserved by grace rather than multiplied by natural momentum. The remnant is not an exception to the biblical story. It is the central pattern.

Forgetting this is also part of how it always happens.

First, ancient Israel learned to trust strangers. Then they projected their spiritual motives onto their more forbidden ways. Then they imagined themselves educated and erudite, learned unlike those old dead people from before.

Then Nebuchadnezzar showed up.

That is biblical realism.

No sentimental anthropology here.

Jesus teaches that earthly fathers, “being evil, know how to give good gifts” to their children.

Civil order exists because God has written His law upon human hearts. Families endure. Businesses function. Nations govern. Friendships form. Acts of courage, sacrifice, craftsmanship, and affection abound.

People like common sense and honest scales. But liking honest scales is not the same as liking to only get your fair shake.

Scripture teaches that “those who are in the flesh cannot please God.” It teaches that “the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him.” It teaches that “the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God.”

These are not descriptions of unusually wicked people. They are descriptions of your normal neighbors daily spirit. And maybe yours too, if you’re not paying attention. That’s where becoming hateful or despairing, bitter or scoffing, becomes the real threat.

It’s not that the maiestatica are unimportant. But Latin vocabulary and platonic categories do not, of themselves, make one wise unto salvation. What such things should do is make one aware of how very illiterate the general society has become, and what little good it does to quibble over the deep meaning of longer barking.

Using four-syllable words is setting the expectation pretty high for some. That’s not an insult. It’s a reason to practice not looking down on people.

But common grace? Civic virtue? Outward cooperation? Political trust?

These things have happened in history apart from Christianity. But not very often. Certainly not enough for us to ignore the writing on the wall all around us. It is not cynical to call a thing what it is.

“The simple believes every word, but the prudent considers well his steps.”

“The prudent foresees evil and hides himself, but the simple pass on and are punished.”

“A fool trusts in his own heart, but whoever walks wisely will be delivered.”

Biblical wisdom is the disciplined habit of distinguishing:

• wisdom and folly.

• righteousness and wickedness.

• faithful men and flattering men.

• sheep and wolves.

• good trees and bad.

This is why St John commands, “test the spirits.”

Beware of false prophets. Avoid being unequally yoked. Examine elders.

Reject a divisive man.

God alone knows His eternal decree. The hidden things belong to Him. The Church does not preach selectively. The Gospel is without partiality. Every hearer is summoned. Repent! Believe! There is mercy in Jesus Christ.

But a father cannot govern his household indiscriminately. An elder cannot shepherd the flock indiscriminately. A magistrate cannot govern a city indiscriminately. There will be evil men. And good men will commit evil too.

A great many of them he has reserved for retribution on the Day of Judgment.

But not you. Oh, no, not you. You have a better Day coming.

So stop feeling bad about it. Love the damned facts.

They set you free.

The buildings remain. The schools remain. The bank accounts remain. The pension remains.

The publishing houses, administrative districts, boards, committees, conventions, constitutions, bylaws, and carefully maintained historical brands. People come and go on Sunday mornings. Salaries clear. Taxes are filed. The instituted machinery moves.

But a forest does not survive because old trees remain standing.

It survives because seedlings become trees.

It Doesn’t Matter If It’s Church

This is bigger than declining memberships and denominational loyalties. Bad leadership, theological controversy, and financial pressure are red herrings. Those things are downstream.

The crisis is generative. Those systems that remain increasingly incapable of receiving difficult young men will also in due season find themselves incapable of forming great old ones.

Great men are usually not great men in their twenties.

The twenty-five-year-old who may someday possess extraordinary courage is quite capable of presently being reckless. The man who will someday exercise excellent command may presently be domineering. Intellectual independence can first appear as argumentativeness. Conviction can be arrogance. Ambition outruns wisdom.

The definition of a young man is that he is nearly impossible to manage. This is precisely why a young man needs older men, both to scare him and to prop him up against his fears.

The question is not whether the young man needs correction. Of course he does. The question is whether we can correct the vice without extinguishing the potency.

But this formation cannot happen among families, towns and networks that insist that they begin every new hire with finished men, that every young man who visits be mature and complete before he is fully grown.

A healthy culture knows how to foster such men. It rebukes arrogance without training courage out of a man. It restrains aggression without feminizing strength. It teaches prudence without rewarding cowardice. It disciplines ambition without making mediocrity the price of belonging. It forgives yesterday’s stupidity because it expects tomorrow’s maturity.

A broken system labels potency pathology. The difficult young man is the dangerous young man. The dangerous young man is the problematic man. The problematic man is a risk. And risks get managed.

Nobody wants to come to worship for more management.

Up to Seventy Times Seven

Christianity possesses extraordinarily strong categories for repentance, forgiveness, maturation, restoration, and sanctification. Christianity uniquely possesses the words for saying, “That man was a fool ten years ago. And, look at him now!”

But bureaucracies remember differently than fathers do. Management keeps a file on you. A father can forgive. Bureaucracy remembers.

Then we wonder where the men went.

Some went where they could grow. Some learned to hide. All of them just needed a few more good uncles.

Old Natural Selection

Every system selects for survival. The only real shame in it is pretending it is not so.

You can quickly judge a system by the kind of men it rewards. If speaking plainly repeatedly produces punishment while speaking cautiously produces advancement, men learn caution. If independent judgment creates reputational danger while consensus creates safety, men learn consensus. If confronting disorder is risky while managing perceptions is rewarded, men learn management.

If an accusation can travel rapidly through institutional networks while vindication travels slowly, men learn that accusation possesses power. If difficult personalities are treated primarily as liabilities rather than material for formation, older men stop investing themselves in difficult younger men. Eventually the institution begins selecting for the ability to survive inside the institution.

That is not selecting for excellence.

Caution, collegiality, procedure, diplomacy, credentialing, and administrative competence are not necessary evils. But when the inversion occurs, when the secondary things become the criteria by which virtues are judged:

• Courage becomes acceptable only provided it is collegial.

• Truth-telling becomes admirable only provided it does not disturb procedure.

• Leadership becomes desirable only provided everyone already agrees.

• Strength becomes useful only provided it never makes anyone uncomfortable.

Such a people may still have some fathers. But it will not produce many.

Take it to the Bank

Where it is helpful to think of the American financial experiment as a casino (a la Dr. Adam Koontz), I find it also helpful to see old American denominations as modern, privatized banks. These accumulations of civilizational wealth don’t handle your financial interest the same way as your local credit union does. But, when you look at their org chart, you find that they don’t only share the bottom line.

Generations of faithful Christians deposited their mammon in heaven’s story. They built churches. They endowed schools. They founded seminaries. They established universities. They funded missions. They created publishing houses. They constructed pension systems. They accumulated property. They developed theological traditions. They built reputations.

The non-profit corporation, a fully international non-government organization, inherits all of it.

Survival therefore proves remarkably little.

Buildings can be sold. Endowments can generate income. Older members can continue giving. Institutions can consolidate. Administrative structures can shrink. The inherited reputation can continue attracting loyalty long after the culture that created the reputation has disappeared.

The question is not whether the old trees remain. The question is where are the seedlings.

Evangelical Communism

I do not believe that the majority of American evangelical administrators are secretly become card-carrying red guard. I just believe a cultural heuristic conditioned to survive by leveling natural distinctions, distrusting asymmetric authority, transferring judgment from persons and households toward administrative systems, legitimizing grievance therapeutically, and treating equality as interchangeability are the means by which communism is infiltrating our speech.

Managerial egalitarianism is just the tip of the iceberg. Headship may remain somewhere in the book, but household relations are driven by the assumptions of a moralistic, therapeutic deism. “Forgiveness” remains central to preaching, but reputational restoration becomes nearly impossible once fights break out. “Vocation” can still be a fancy word, but functional interchangeability governs the pervasive question, “What do you want to be when you grow up?” A “Male pastorate” may remain an official doctrine, but the anthropology that makes that oversight intelligible steadily disappears.

The Last Exception

Yes, the ordination of women.

Whatever today may appear to be, no teaching will long survive as an exception to an anthropology that has already been surrendered nearly everywhere else.

Read that again.

The historic Christian understanding is not that women are incapable of intelligence, speech, prophecy, courage, administration, service or any other profound manifestation of the Spirit of God.

It is that women cannot be fathers.

The distinction concerns the Office. But it is not of the Office. It is of nature.

Fatherhood is not motherhood with a different body. It is Godhead with a different angelic, a different medium, a unique face. This does not merely impact the unique spiritual communion children have with their father. It impacts the way every pack of humans operates dynamically.

Among homo sapiens, an elementary linguistic survey reveals that the office of overseer is not merely a matter of whichever competent person happens to possess the relevant smartness. An elder is not a function. A husband is not a partner. And a master is whoever bosses you around.

Human offices arise from the ordered creation. Household, sex, representation, authority, generation, and responsibility are not ideas. They are Words of God given flesh. But once a people loses the ability to speak these words, the male pastorate becomes a relic, a non sequitur, and a black eye all at once.

“Scripture says so” remains true in theory. But succeeding generations will reasonably ask why Scripture makes this distinction if every other distinction between male and female authority has shamed away, made contingent, replaced with functional interchangeability and asking the question made morally suspicious on principle.

The exception becomes intolerable. The function demands its due.

The pattern is evident:

• Women increasingly perform work associated with spiritual oversight.

• The distinction between assistance and governance blurs.

• Theological language adapts to mollify existing practice.

• Arguments become increasingly technical because the underlying anthropology is no longer available to the words.

• Ordination itself is less a revolution than a recognition.

Doctrine Catches Up

Luther is safely dead.

Martin Luther was difficult. Spectacularly difficult. He could be excessive, insulting, stubborn, inflammatory, reckless, brilliant, courageous, funny, infuriating, wrong, magnificent, and he was always impossible to control.

Lutherans have spent five centuries commemorating all of these attributes. That is easy because he is dead. When he died, even his worst traits became remarkably manageable.

He can no longer interrupt meetings. He cannot write an embarrassing post on Facebook tonight. He cannot antagonize a donor. He cannot challenge the judgment of an administrator who is vested. He cannot develop an inconvenient following that asks the wrong questions.

The bronze statue isn’t the man. The man was a twenty-eight-year-old nobody who refused to stop saying something irritating, partially wrong, badly timed, and profoundly important enough to need to write a second book on the same topic years later.

Potency and Pathology

Difficult men should be indulged. Quite the opposite. Young men need rebuke.

That’s why they need fathers. That’s what fathers do. Mothers may rebuke. They may puff up and bluster and even yell. But mothers are not made for it, just as fathers are not made to suckle, yet each of us can hold a bottle.

Arrogance is sin. Recklessness destroys people. Ambition is monstrous without discipline.

Intelligence produces vanity. Strength without restraint is brutality. But Christianity possesses a category larger than either indulgence or expulsion when faced with such young men: discipleship.

Peter needed rebuke. Paul needed years. James and John wanted fire called down from heaven. Jesus Christ did not affirm their immaturity. Nor did he discard their potency.

He disciplined it.

The Hearts of the Sons

The Church does not merely need to “make room” for dangerous young men, as though they require another diversity initiative or a special worship style. Christianity must remember how to make saints out of them. This can only be done by older men who are themselves strong enough not to be frightened by mistakes, by folly and by sin.

A father can say both, “You are wrong,” and, “You are mine,” and be believed because, by nature, that is what he is. A manager will have considerably more difficulty.

A people survives by receiving immature humans and forming them into mature ones. But when the immune system confuses potency with pathology, correction becomes exclusion.

Prudence becomes conformity. Forgiveness ceases to restore reputation. Management replaces fatherhood. Self-preservation selects against renewal.

And accumulated capital ends up being about all that you’ve got left

The buildings remain. The machinery moves. But the kind of men capable of inheriting it are fewer and further in between.

Then the old trees fall.

And nobody remembers how to grow another forest.

Not secret knowledge. Not complicated theories. Not predictions requiring charts, codes, dates, or hidden manuscripts. Just things sitting directly in front of us, waiting for somebody to ask the elementary question, Why not?

The TV is an image that talks.

It sounds ridiculous. But the talking images are so ubiquitous now that we no longer possess the mental category necessary to be surprised by them.

For nearly two thousand years, Christians possessed a book warning them that near the end of time an image would be made to speak in order to deceive the nations (and even the elect, “if that were possible”). It would exercise extraordinary, persuasive power, performing wonders that all mankind could see, and compelling communal-spiritual participation in a system of sheer and blasphemous human allegiance.

Then, the twentieth century installed talking images in nearly every home in the Western world and the Christians just… watched.

Wait. What?

No one argued about it. No one brought it up. No one even noticed.

Subscribe now

Iconoclasm is not the Answer

Your Smartphone is not the final fulfillment of Revelation 13. Playing Pin the Tail on the AntiChrist is a game much better played with the papacy. But why the rush to avoid the important question by cartooning the argument, eh?

Revelation reveals to Christianity the expectation of a day when mankind will face images that speak. The twentieth century then produced luminous images capable of doing just that. These images show wonders occurring thousands of miles away. They speak with the voices of rulers. They manufacture desires. They establish fashions. They sell product. They teach sex.

They determine which events deserve fear and which deserve celebration. They define heroes and villains. They mediate wars. They call elections. They train up the children. They program reality.

And we put one in every living room.

The astonishing thing is not that somebody might look at this development and think of Revelation. The astonishing thing is that Christians have not, and that doing so now will quickly get you labeled pejoratively.

It is much safer to classify the television with the words pre-thought-policed by the television itself: technology, entertainment, communications, media. With these categories we are able to dismiss the possibility of literal “idolatry” from our minds. When that happens, we simultaneously self-sabotage our capacity to ask the question that finally matters:

What kind of worship does attention to this thing produce?

That question does not require us to announce the Apocalypse is imminent. We don’t have to wrestle with all or nothing thinking. We come face to face with something both more difficult and more valuable.

The Language Nobody Could Learn

Call it TikTok. Call it the Skynet. What matters is what it programs you to do, what it shows you, how it moves you, what words it gets you to repeat, how it manages to distract you.

Christianity possesses the words to pierce the doctrines, but we have converted access to that language as specialized knowledge. Much of that specialization hinges on one factor: the original languages of the Bible are Greek and Hebrew.

This is where the failure of 20th century institutional Christianity really strikes. A church body with preschools, elementary schools, high schools, colleges, seminaries, hymnody, liturgy, catechesis, and multigenerational congregational life possessed nearly the perfect machinery to demonstrate language acquisition by immersion. To this moment, preschools across the country could be “brainwashing” their classroom with an endless moving stream of Biblical Greek and Hebrew vocabulary. Imagine if an entire cradle-to-grave system made simply reading the Gospel of John in Greek the primary goal of its entire system?

A four-year-old does not need to understand Hebrew verbal syntax. He needs שָׁלוֹם, אוֹר, מַיִם, שָׁמַיִם, אָרֶץ. He needs songs, prayers, names, refrains, Genesis phrases, Psalm phrases. Likewise Greek: φῶς, ζωή, λόγος, ἀλήθεια, χάρις. Grammar can arrive years later to explain a linguistic world already living in his ear.

But even in the golden days of protestant denominationalism, the biblical languages were placed at the far end of educational pipelines, to the point that Greek has become the joke of difficult academic subjects best left to the weirdo-clericalistic specialists.

Children all over the earth learn languages vastly different from English without first studying paradigms, parsing verbs, memorizing grammatical terminology or paying graduate-school tuition. They learn them because people speak to them. A child learns language through songs, repetition, objects, stories, commands, questions, affection, correction and play. Grammar eventually names structures the child has already absorbed.

Yet Christianity has reversed the process of access to the Bible. First, we wait. Then, we wait some more. Then, maybe in late high school or college, we introduce Latin.

Then, somewhere around twenty-two years old, we sat him beneath fluorescent lights, handed him a Greek grammar and told him that the language of the New Testament was going to hurt.

Of course it hurt.

We designed it to.

Give them the True Lore

A Christian incorporation with preschools, elementary schools, high schools, colleges, seminaries, congregations, hymnals, catechisms, choirs and multigenerational families? This is a massive language-acquisition machine.

The entire infrastructure is there. Give children songs. Give them prayers. Give them names. Give them refrains. Give them Genesis. Give them Psalms. Give them the words of Jesus Christ.

Let them hear the language before anybody tells them that the language is difficult.

Grammar will not be the locked gate standing between the student and Scripture when he already knows the words. Grammar will be the explanation of a country in which he has already been living.

The current model teaches a secret language to certified men in order to grant them access to Scripture.

The childhood model envisions Scripture the Way to acquire language.

We have the schools. We have the children. We have the songs. We have the Scriptures. We have the languages.

But who will put the pieces together?

The Machine Talks Back

Did you think I was “against movies” and “for artificial intelligence”?

The twentieth century put a talking image in the house. The twenty-first century is putting a talking intelligence there. And once again, the adoption of the technology is arriving faster than our wisdom can come to terms with it.

But it is the same question, renewed for this little season of history we are entering: If I am a Christian with a talking machine, what should the machine know how to say?

Some will shout, “It must know not to X, Y, Z!” I don’t disagree. But I also say, “We must teach it to sing.”

Imagine instead of a child growing up with an artificial intelligence capable of speech, song, repetition, correction, storytelling and responsive conversation, but fully incapable of talking about God, your child is followed about by a droid that just happens to sing Hebrew psalms lightly every morning?

What happens if Greek vocabulary arrives through play before the child knows there is such a thing as a Greek class? What happens if pronunciation is corrected conversationally? What happens if Scripture is not an academic subject occasionally presented by the machine, but the linguistic country in which the machine and child regularly meet? What if the Logos drives the algorithm?

What if we faced the fact that artificial intelligence is principally designed as an information dispenser intended to govern the future of thought and, instead of pretending to fight it while it eats our children, we built machines designed to dispense the Word of God?

This is the deeper possibility behind the PeaceBot Initiative, which I have written about almost as a sci-fi game. I don’t imagine a religious coating applied to the latest commercial technology. I envision a next-era robotic company designed to preserve, among other things, the inheritance of godly speech.

Recitation. Song. Repetition. Call and response. Vocabulary. Pronunciation. Catechesis. Scripture.

The machine is going to talk anyway. Will we just buy theirs again?

I’ve Seen This Movie Before

The story of the television takeover should frighten us into wisdom. The twentieth century introduced a machine capable of “broadcasting” inside the home. Christians surrendered to its speech, communing thoughtlessly with a commercial civilization that decade by decade defined their children into the calamity of America that we are watching now.

We are already too late. We could have asked:

What is this thing, and toward what end shall its speech be ordered?

Artificial intelligence gives us another chance. We can both ask and answer the question before several generations have been formed by the answer.

• What manner of instrument have we admitted into the household?

• What kind of human being does habitual conversation with it produce?

• Toward what end shall its speech be ordered?

These are Christian questions because Christianity is about hearing. It is about speaking. It is about fathers teaching children when they sit in their houses and when they walk by the way, when they lie down and when they rise. It is about words written upon hearts.

The contest is not over which robot looks the coolest. It is over what language possesses us.

Shall I Go On?

• Money becomes paper, then numbers, then debt circulates as wealth, and Nixon says, “Trust us.”

• Currency is productively debased, purchasing power dissolved, and the old biblical concern for honest weights and measures is terribly relevant.

• Meanwhile, we spend lots of it firing machines through the firmament in casual-ish hopes of colonizing the moon.

If no apparent application of the Tower of Babel strikes you, can we at least agree that we’ve fallen through the looking glass? Or do we all need to keep pretending the emperor’s clothes are made of anything more than willful ignorance?

Civilizations end. Monetary orders end. Technological orders end. Educational orders end. Empires end.

A brown leaf tells you something about the season without providing the date of the first snowfall. Christian wisdom does not require pretending to know more than we know. It requires refusing to know less than we can see.

So, take some time to notice what became normal before you got to decide what it meant.

Soon the talking machine will be furniture. Then background. Then invisible. And once something becomes invisible, questioning it becomes extraordinarily difficult. So make your commitment now.

Not the grand question. Not, “Is this the end of the world?” Not, “Is this the AntiChrist?” Start small.

• What, biblically speaking, is this?

• What, biblically speaking, does it do?

• What does repeatedly doing that make me do?

• What does it teach my children to see and say?

• What manner of devotion does it demand?

• What kind of talk is this?

Toward whom do we turn our faces?

He did not arrive as the invited lecturer in a clean robe, rested and ready to deliver the speech we have named after the hill. He came under pressure. Philippi had answered the Gospel with rods and prison. Thessalonica had answered with a mob. Berea had received the Word more nobly, but the men from Thessalonica followed him there and stirred the crowd again.

The brothers sent Paul away, and those who conducted him brought him to Athens while Silas and Timothy remained behind. He came, in other words, a refugee: displaced by persecution, separated from his company, waiting in a foreign city.

Luke says his spirit was provoked because the city was given over to idols. He was not an art critic wandering through marble and complaining about pagan taste. He saw the spiritual mechanism beneath the beauty. Athens had filled the visible world with images of invisible powers, then bent itself before the work of its own hands. The city was not merely decorated with idols. It had surrendered its judgment to them.

What has Jerusalem to do with Athens?

The Athenians made novelty a public occupation. We have made it infrastructure. Their marketplace was full of men waiting to tell or hear some new thing. Ours rides in the pocket and refreshes itself before the last new thing has finished dying. The scroll is Athens mechanized: image after image, alarm after alarm, each one asking for the eye and leaving no room for the gaze.

An eye can receive ten thousand pictures and still fail to see.

A gaze abides. It holds an object long enough for judgment, love, repentance, and understanding to become possible. Spiritual health requires this steadiness. You cannot meditate on the horizon while your neck is bent to the feed.

An Iconic Dilemma

We need clean words here.

The Greek words are eikōn, image, and eidōlon, idol.

They are not synonyms.

Paul calls Jesus Christ the icon of the invisible God. He does not call him the idol of God.

The problem is not visibility itself, nor is it holy to war against every scribble. The problem is when the image conceals Jesus Christ rather than reveals Him.

The Christian icon, at its best, receives its meaning from that reality. It is a window only because Jesus Christ first opened the wall. It points beyond pigment, wood, glass, or screen toward the truth it confesses. If it ceases to serve the truth, it ceases to function as an icon no matter what name is written beneath it.

The idol moves in the opposite direction. It takes something made and grants it the authority of the Maker. It may be stone, institution, nation, credential, number, brand, ideology, outrage, or vanity. The material changes. The operation does not.

The idol arrests the gaze, closes the window, and demands that reality answer to the projection. It offers carnal security because it gives the worshiper a god he can manage. That manageable god soon manages him.

Addicted to Pictures

This is the wound.

It is more than a moral weakness. It is a failure of knowledge.

A picture may serve the Word, but a picture that has replaced the Word has undermined the ground of reason in principle. The mind no longer asks if the image is true. The heart bows to the feeling that the image is strong, immediate, pleasing, enraging, or safe.

Appearance replaces judgment. Repetition breeds normalcy.

An empire of lies does not require every statement to be false. It needs only to place falsehood where trust cannot isolate it.

Fifteen percent of adulteration can destroy one hundred percent of unexamined trust. Credentialism thrives in such confusion.

A credential testifies that a man completed a course of study. It cannot prove that he loves truth, resists money, or will tell the truth when it costs him.

Expertise is real and necessary. The expert class is expertise converted into caste, title converted into moral immunity, institutional agreement converted into reality. White-collar satraps do not need to lie very often. They need only to lie unpredictably while demanding you consider any doubt as disobedience.

The Word in the Marketplace

Paul does not answer Athens with panic. He reasons in the synagogue and in the marketplace. He speaks to Jews, God-fearing Gentiles, Epicureans, Stoics, and whoever happens to be there. Luke does not ask us to turn the philosophical schools into cartoons. The Epicureans sought freedom from fear and disturbance. The Stoics sought a life ordered by reason, nature, and virtue. Each school had discipline. Each also had a horizon the resurrection would break.

Some called Paul a babbler. The word carried the smell of a seed-picker, a little bird gathering scraps, a man collecting bits of thought and selling them back without mastery.

Others thought he proclaimed foreign gods because he preached Jesus Christ and the resurrection. So they brought him to the Areopagus. Their curiosity was real, but Luke also names the appetite beneath it: the Athenians and the foreigners among them spent their time telling tales.

Paul enters the open door, his rhetoric chasing neither flattery nor insult. Rather, he does a novel thing. He tells the truth: they are religious in every direction. He has even found an altar to an unknown god! Their altar confesses the limit of their system. It is a hedge against omission, a monument built to ignorance.

What they do not know, Paul announces.

He does not add Jesus Christ to the Athenian collection. He breaks the collection at its root.

The God who made the world does not live in temples made by hands.

The unknown God is not served by human hands as though He lacked anything. He gives life and breath to all. He made the nations, appointed their times and boundaries, and ordered history so that men might seek Him. The Creator is not one local power among competing local powers. Athens stands inside His world.

“In Him we live and move and have our being. We are His offspring.”

Their own poets! This is not a surrender. This is the capture of hostile witnesses.

Because we are God’s offspring, our nature cannot be reduced to gold, silver, or stone shaped by human art and imagination. The offspring do not manufacture the Father. The creature cannot carve the Creator and then demand that the Creator inhabit the carving.

Paul builds the bridge. Then he drives a Kingdom over it.

God now commands all men everywhere to repent. He has fixed a day of righteous judgment by the Man He appointed, and He has given assurance by raising Him from the dead.

The resurrection is the blade. Paul does not offer a principle, an uplifting notion, another school. There’s a man who rose from the dead, and now He will judge the world.

Some mocked. Some stalled. Some believed, including Dionysius and Damaris.

Athens did not fall at Paul’s feet, but neither did the Word return empty.

The Shrug of Empire

Paul went to Corinth. The scenery changed, from philosophical marble to port-city labor.

There he found Aquila and Priscilla, Jews displaced from Rome by the decree of Claudius. Paul shared their trade, stayed with them, and worked. On the Sabbaths he reasoned in the synagogue.

Paul worked five days in order to preach one. This is a picture of freedom.

The Tent-Maker Framework is not contempt for support by a congregation; Paul elsewhere defends that. But here is strategic economic independence. More so! Aquila and Priscilla were not formed at a distance by Paul. They lived and worked beside him. Canvas, leather, meals, argument, prayer, and ordinary fatigue created the human scale of discipleship. The trade did not interrupt the church. The trade helped give the church a house where at least three gathered every day.

When Silas and Timothy arrived from Macedonia, Paul devoted himself more fully to the Word and testified that Jesus is the Christ. The opposition hardened. He shook out his garments and declared that he would go to the Gentiles. Then he moved into the house of Titius Justus, a worshiper of God whose house stood next door to the synagogue.

That detail carries Paul’s strategic humor. He did not flee Corinth. He moved the work one door over.

How Do You Picture It?

Things we once imagined permanent are failing. Institutional Christianity in the West was formed during a long Protestant summer: buildings, denominations, seminaries, publishing houses, donor networks, political alliances, media platforms, and a shared public vocabulary that remained partly Christian even among unbelievers. That weather has changed.

The answer is not to despise the Church nor baptize isolation. It is to remember what the ekklēsia is. Not an NGO with praise. Not a hedge fund with a chapel. A people called by Jesus Christ’s Words, welcome at His table, chosen for His discipline, and imputed with His life.

A network is useful for moving information, money, and influence.

Those things are dangerous to those given to power.

Impressions, conversions, donors, campuses, subscribers. “Of course, we all know that numbers aren’t faithfulness.”

Do we *all* know that?

Fraternity begins with men who can tell one another the truth and remain in the room. It does not treat a brother as a consumer waiting to be converted into a metric. Neither is it a bunker built against women. It is not grievance organization nor a paramilitary cosplay.

Fraternity is the recovery of male responsibility inside the communion of the saints that confesses the Patriarchy of God, the Father.

All men, owing allegiance to His King, Jesus Christ, are loosed to stand shoulder to shoulder, guarding their households, feeding themselves where possible, teaching their sons, honoring their wives and daughters, bearing one another’s burdens, and refusing the misanthropy and misandry of an age that profits from making every relation hostile.

Christian Fraternity does not stand on shared instinct. It cannot be about your feelings. It is about your convictions. It is a matter of conscience.

The Sons of Solomon prayer for Biblical terminology is not a trick for cornering a market or getting my name out there. The Vocabulary of God is powerful. It places speaker and hearer beneath a meaning neither owns. Without such grammar, the strongest personality inevitably becomes the local dictionary.

Moses gives the grammar of Law: creation has an order, good and evil are not private inventions, worship has an object, blood has weight, words bind, and judgment belongs to God.

David takes that Law into the inner man and sings it through fear, betrayal, kingship, repentance, war, mercy, and praise.

Solomon weighs the created world and gives names to its recurring patterns: the fool, the sluggard, the strange woman, the false balance, the faithful friend, the king, the ant, the tongue, the path.

Then Jesus Christ fulfills the Law, gathers the Psalms into His own suffering and reign, and speaks with the authority of the Logos. He does not merely join the vocabulary. He is the Word by whom the vocabulary holds together.

It is Written

The upright life is therefore dynamic and often grueling. A man testifies to the truth, discovers how much of him still bends toward falsehood, repents, rises, and comes under the Word again. He maintains a steady gaze on the horizon of God’s will while walking through the self-inflicted chaos of a dying age.

Before he judges the world, he is judged by the King.

So hold your perimeter. Refuse idols. The institutions will crack. The pictures will fail. All that we’ve imagined will come to naught. But that which is written in the Book of Life endures forever.

You are the icon of God now, and, thank God, not the only one.

Subscribe now

Each man does what is right in his own eyes. The man of lawlessness has been unleashed. The love of many has grown cold.

Say what you will.

“It has always been like this.”

Carnal security is a cat with many skins. It forever discovers another disguise by which to reassure itself that nothing is different, nothing is urgent, nothing need be discerned.

Willful ignorance is one of man’s most natural reflexes. When Noah warned of judgment, the world married, traded, planted, and built. When Jeremiah proclaimed the fall of Jerusalem, the prophets answered, “Peace, peace,” though there was no peace. When Jesus Christ announced the destruction of the Temple and the coming tribulations, His own generation found reasons to dismiss Him.

Men rarely deny the Word of God by arguing directly against it. More often they domesticate it. They place every warning safely in another age, another people, another crisis, another century. They postpone obedience by postponing relevance.

The scoffer has many voices.

Sometimes he laughs openly. Sometimes he wears the robes of scholarship. Sometimes he stands behind a pulpit. Sometimes he simply shrugs.

“People have always said the end is near.”

“Every generation thinks it is living in extraordinary times.”

“History has seen worse.”

These observations are not always false. They become false when they are used to quiet the conscience rather than sharpen discernment. For Scripture nowhere teaches that the repetition of patterns makes their culmination impossible.

Rather, biblical history unfolds through recurring patterns that gather force as they approach fulfillment. Egypt was not the only bondage. Babylon was not the only exile. Antiochus was not the final persecutor.

Jerusalem’s destruction was both a historical judgment and a shadow of greater judgments still to come. The Spirit teaches us to recognize types because God governs history covenantally. The pattern repeats until the pattern is complete. Therefore it should surprise no Christian that the age bears familiar marks.

Lawlessness increases. Nations rage. False prophets multiply. Men call evil good and good evil. Families dissolve. Children are sacrificed to idols, whether of stone, steel, pleasure, or autonomy. Commerce becomes an altar. Governments claim what belongs to God. Truth becomes negotiable, language becomes unstable, and judgment itself is condemned as hatred.

None of these things proves that tomorrow is the Last Day.

All of them preach that the Last Day is not far.

Vigilance does not require sensationalism.

The Christian need not identify every ruler as the beast, every war as Armageddon, or every new technology as the mark. Such speculation teases impatience more than grants wisdom.

Subscribe now

But there is an equal and opposite error within modern carnal Christianity. It is the settled assumption that prophetic expectation is inherently embarrassing, that watchfulness belongs only to fanatics, and that sober eschatological alertness should be replaced by managerial optimism.

A spirit is no less dangerous because it has a good 401(k).

Jesus Christ is remarkably plain.

• Watch.

• Stay awake.

• Keep your lamps burning.

• Occupy faithfully until He comes.

The apostles did not instruct the Church to calculate the Day. But neither did they suggest we grow sleepy.

Christ’s appearing is not an appendix.

The return of the King is the ontologic emblem of the common Christianity. The Crucified One is not forever dying. He reigns. Now, in mercy and patience. Soon, with a fiery sword.

Whose side are you on? What banner do you fly? Is the Judge at the gate bad news or good?

Prudence, moderation, and experience are not wicked things. The assurance of normal continuity is a building block of wisdom. But the fact remains that the sun may not come up tomorrow, and even if you placed the right bet on Kalshi, it wouldn’t do you a bit of good.

God’s patience is not delay. His mercy is not indifference.

He is NOT silent.

Previous judgment found many on the wide road and unprepared. Only eight lived through the flood. Sodom was a city of prosperity up to the day that it burned. Babylon’s curse fell on every empire that rose in its place thereafter.

The sacrifices in Jerusalem did not stop until the legions of Titus surrounded the city and put an end to it once and … for now.

When God’s judgment comes, it is always an interruption.

We must then resist two temptations.

• We must reject panic, because Jesus Christ reigns.

• We must reject complacency, because it’s all going to burn.

Panic forgets His sovereignty. Complacency forgets His promises. Faith remembers both.

Are these the final sol years? Is this just another birth pain?

“The hidden things belong to the Lord our God, but those things which are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this instruction.”

That which is entrusted to us is simple. Will the Son of Man find us watching? Will we be awake? How did you love?

What were you expecting?

Is Not The Gospel

The distinction between Law and Gospel stands among the greatest achievements of Christian dogmatics. Properly understood, it preserves the doctrine of justification, safeguards consciences from despair and presumption alike, and gives a faithful account of the twofold manner in which God addresses fallen humanity. It deserves neither dismissal nor neglect.

Its greatness, however, has frequently invited a subtle confusion. A faithful theological distinction has gradually become, in modern less-literate circles, the governing language by which Scripture itself is read, preached, and even imagined to always speak.

What began as an explanatory principle has become, for some, the principal reality, and the calculus has been mistaken for the landscape.

The proper distinction between Law and Gospel occupies an indispensable but subordinate place within Christian theology. Like all true knowledge, it is a servant of the apostolic proclamation, not the Master.

The New Testament nowhere presents “properly distinguishing Law and Gospel” as the primary grammar of discipleship. Instead, its dominant vocabulary is the Kingdom of God: Jesus Christ, His Father, the Holy Spirit, faith, hope, love, reconciliation, new creation, abiding, walking.

The Way

The insight proceeds in three stages:

• The dogmatic status of the distinction.

• The linguistic instability created whenever systematic theology mistakes historically conditioned terminology for the permanent vocabulary of revelation.

• That Scripture continually judges every theological vocabulary, including its own translations, by returning to its own words, patterns, and internal grammar.

The takeaway is not that systematic theology is a mistake. It is that true theology must remain perpetually-linguistically reformable in an ongoing “Babylonian” age with the living autograph of Holy Scripture alone as our true font and commission.

Doctrine does not change. But tongues sure do.

I. The Proper Place of Dogma

Every lasting discipline develops technique as jargon. Medicine does, physics does, and music does. Theology is no exception.

There is therefore nothing inherently suspect about this effect in systematic theology, provided the effect is not ignored. Indeed, dogmatics exists because the Church is called to confess the truth those words reveal, not merely to repeat words without thought or heart. The distinction between Law and Gospel belongs within this noble labor.

It is neither arbitrary nor artificial. The Scriptures plainly contain divine commands, and the Scriptures plainly contain divine promises. The Law always accuses, the Gospel only gives. The Law exposes sin, and the Gospel bestows Christ.

This is not an invention of Lutheran theology.

It is an observation about Scripture.

The Reformers deserve immense gratitude for articulating this observation with unusual precision. It is, beyond measure, a particularly glorious light.

But every created light possesses limits.

Theological language explains Scripture, but it must not become Scripture. That distinction appears obvious in the head, but is harder to spot in the scrum. Time will tell: did the generation slowly forget their God, burying Him anew beneath a plot of clever precepts?

When the explanatory language becomes the primary language, the map is quickly mistaken for the territory. In jeopardy, the reader starts asking Scripture to conform to the vocabulary which was once received in order to point to Scripture.

The servant sits on the horse while the master walks.

This is not unique to modern confessional Lutheranisms.

It is a mark of the Church’s rich history. Long before scholasticism and pietism, the Pharisee and the Sadducee sat privy over the status quo of dogmatism, if not citing Isaiah’s “precept upon precept” in their proof texts against the Essenes, then at the least missing the forest for a bit of mint and cumin.

Fundamentalism. Biblical criticism. Evangelicalism. Rome.

Frozen vocabulary bars the gates to Eden as the Scriptures preach it. So much heresy, schism and false doctrine rests upon the mistaking of temporary grammar for permanent revelation that I have come to believe that the real enemy we face is in communism is Babel.

II. Semantic Idolatry

Languages decay, meanings drift, and words migrate. It can’t be avoided. Empires collapse, and idioms disappear. It’s all vanity. But modern systematic theology behaves as though its technical vocabulary will be around till the trumpet sounds.

It holds no such framework.

Some good English history will demonstrate the point:

The word law descends through Old English lagu, itself derived from Old Norse lǫg, meaning “that which has been laid down.” Its imagery is juridical: something laid, something fixed, something enacted. This is useful and accurate within limits.

But the Hebrew Scriptures ordinarily speak not of lagu but of תּוֹרָה (torah). The root ירה (yarah) means “to teach,” “to instruct,” and even “to direct by pointing.” Torah therefore carries educational and covenantal dimensions before merely legal ones or tree-felling ones. It signifies fatherly teaching in ways the English word “law” is too narrow to admit.

So also, the English gospel derives through Old English gōdspel, meaning “good spiel.” This faithfully translates the Greek εὐαγγέλιον (euangelion), or “good message,” but has a rather clunky entry into the common English fractonym “spell.”

Today, “gospel” is an onomatopoeia. For some it is a music style, for others it is the sweet-honey shorthand for “Jesus died for me.” But in the ancient Roman world, euangelion also announces imperial victory, accession, and public triumph, almost none of which comes through in the show tunes.

III. The Babel Within

The apostles left us not merely a Greek dictionary, but a Greek key to the Hebrew Old Testament. It is the entire prophetic universe as deliverable by intermediaries. Your local English Bible relies on these words.

But no matter how good your translation, it will not abolish Babel. Not if it be the lynchpin tongue of an epoch, as happened for English under James, as much or more so than for German in Luther, hardly to mention the Latin of Jerome.

Yet, for all that, Constantinople needed no translation.

Even so, Babel remains and Babel degrades.

Correct terminology, when achieved, secures the fellowship of the Spirit today. For as long as it is called today, this shall be His gift to us. But it is folly to believe that the same terminology will hold up to the accusations of the enemy in the hearts of our grandchildren. Every council coined vocabulary precisely in order to fix the problems they saw. Then, over time, the very answers to those problems became the new problems.

Why? Because language is dying but refuses to die.

The irony is profound. The Church rightly rejects ongoing revelation, yet the churches often retreat into ongoing linguistic isolation that in the end speaks five thousand words that no one understands.

Scripture is the measure. Scripture is the Judgment. It is by ever returning to it as a source, not just as individuals, but as the whole Body, that the Church is built up against the new confusions of every age.

IV. Illegitimate Totality Transfer

“The letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.”

Paul does not condemn letters. He writes letters, commands churches to read letters, and calls attention to individual letters. His contrast is not between written words and unwritten experience. It is between external administration apart from Christ and the living ministry of the Holy Spirit.

Scripture warns against confidence in external forms, and this includes participles and verbs. But this does not liberate us from our letters. It unleashes them for us to stop confusing the typos with the story.

The value of the Bible is that it continually judges every arrangement of language as it drifts through seasons and aeons. The task is not to escape the letter, but to meet the Spirit who drew it. This means not getting buried beneath too many folios of our own.

Our glosses, our slogans, our technical vocabulary, even our favorite distinctions, only meet the reader in the inspired text when they are actually there.

V. A Thousand Tongues

Scripture interprets Scripture.

It’s indispensable. But the phrase is not. In fact, “interpret” is a terribly obtuse word. ‘Scripture translates Scripture’ gets the meaning across just as well, if not better. The Bible translates the Bible carries enough twang to ring true for any southern preacher.

But let’s dig deeper still: Scripture does not merely provide ideas. Scripture reveals words, roots, metaphors, patterns, echoes, prophetic repetitions, and canonical vocabulary. The Bible is its own dictionary, its own grammarian, its own thesaurus, the True Semantic World.

This world is imputed to us for the purpose of transcending every language. Hebrew illuminates Greek, Greek illuminates Hebrew, and both illuminate faithful new translations today. No translation work shall ever be exhausted.

Consequently, the man of God’s work never finishes. We always must together be about the work of reading, hearing, learning, marking, and inwardly digesting the living Spirit of biblical Wisdom.

One copy from the 1800s won’t do! Your home library is meant to be the best kind of museum: beautiful, carefully catalogued, and increasingly glad to see if the next generation even needs it.

VI. Distinctive, Properly Speaking

The distinction between Law and Gospel will remain true, beautiful, and indispensable. Yet it will also remain the narrow use of the word “Gospel,” and that means the less frequently used one.

It is not the center of the apostolic proclamation. There is no “Behold the distinction!” They do not invite the nations into a hermeneutical discourse. They proclaim the Lamb of God and invite them to be washed into the Name of Jesus Christ.

In this rather ironic way, we must always therein remember that the proper distinction between Law and Gospel is a law. Let it not spend too much time as the accuser.

Subscribe now

The journey of Ged in A Wizard of Earthsea belongs to the second. Although Ursula K. Le Guin believed her real contribution to civilization was giving her young protagonist brown skin, the more subtle spirit she imputed to formative minds everywhere is the specter of Carl Jung.

The pursuit and encounter with one’s own shadow is a defining element of Jungian transcendentalism. One need not know a word of psychology to recognize how this metaphor puts its finger on something profoundly human. But is understanding humanity enough?

The Hunted

The story begins, as many great stories do, with pride.

Ged possesses extraordinary gifts long before he possesses proportion. Like nearly every young man who discovers strength before wisdom, he mistakes ability for maturity. In a contest born of vanity, he attempts a feat beyond his station. A boundary is torn open. Something nameless enters the world. It wounds him, escapes him, and from that moment forward his life is no longer directed by ambition but by pursuit.

At first the shadow behaves exactly as monsters are supposed to behave. It attacks without warning. It appears where it ought not to be. It drives Ged from place to place until his remarkable gifts become almost irrelevant. The greater wizard he becomes, the less capable he is of solving the problem by wizardry alone.

The story quietly removes every ordinary solution. Skill cannot conquer it. Courage cannot outfight it. Flight only lengthens the chase. The reader gradually begins to suspect that the shadow is unlike any enemy normally found in heroic tales.

Stop Running

Only much later does Ged turn his boat around.

At last, instead of escaping the shadow, he chases it. After a great pursuit, at the edge of the known sea, the two finally stand face to face. There is no great magical duel. There is no final weapon. There is recognition.

Ged speaks the shadow’s true name: his own.

The divided boy embraces his darkness and becomes a whole man.

Penumbras and Hauntings

Long before most readers encounter Carl Jung, they have encountered this story. Jung is just the one who gave it a philosophy. He observed that every human being constructs a conscious identity by accepting some parts of himself while rejecting others. The rejected portions do not vanish. They descend beneath awareness, where they continue exerting influence precisely because they are hidden. He called this hidden country of the soul “the shadow.”

The word has been misunderstood. Jung did not mean that the shadow consists only of wickedness. Sometimes the shadow contains cruelty, lust, envy, or pride. But just as often it contains courage that was never permitted to mature, grief that was never allowed expression, righteous anger condemned merely because it was strong, or gifts buried beneath fear.

Jung’s “shadow” is everything the ego refuses to acknowledge as belonging to self. Because it is denied, it begins governing the conscious personality from beneath the surface. Only when it is faced can repentance become part of the being.

This observation is remarkably penetrating. Anyone who has lived long enough has watched respectable people commit astonishing acts while insisting that what everyone has plainly seen cannot possibly describe them. The gossip believes himself devoted to truth. The coward thinks himself prudent. The domineering man imagines himself responsible. The envious woman calls herself discerning. Human beings possess an extraordinary capacity for hiding themselves from themselves. We are often the last people permitted to know who we have become.

Proverbs are not Surprises

Modern Confused readers treat Solomon as a collector of moral sayings or practical advice. Read patiently, another pattern emerges.

Proverbs is populated by recurring figures: the fool, the scoffer, the sluggard, the talebearer, the adulteress, the faithful friend, the righteous man, the simple youth, the violent man, the wise son. These are certainly recognizable kinds of people, but the wise reader soon discovers something more uncomfortable. Every one of them already lives somewhere inside of himself.

The scoffer is not merely the loud man at the other end of the table. He is the voice that mocks correction when pride has already decided the matter. The sluggard is not only the neighbor sleeping until noon. He is the inward reluctance that invents reasons not to begin today’s work. The talebearer is not merely another person’s tongue. He is the subtle pleasure one feels in possessing information that elevates oneself by diminishing another.

Solomon’s wisdom is not satisfied until the reader recognizes these characters as habits of the heart long before they become people of society.

Biblical Psychology

Solomon does not offer an anatomy of the soul in technical language. He teaches the soul to recognize itself through living portraits. We remember stories and persons better than abstractions. He therefore gives us people to meet, only to discover later, often with embarrassment, that we have been meeting ourselves.

Paul proceeds under a brighter light when he reaches Romans 7.

“What I am doing, I do not understand.”

“What I will to do, that I do not practice.”

“What I hate, that I do.”

The man speaking is neither ignorant nor insincere. He delights in the law of God. Yet another law is at work within him.

He discovers opposition where he expected unity.

He walks with his shadow.

Speaking of Ged

Something pursues the wizard of Earthsea, both foreign and familiar. He fights it as though it were another creature until he finally discovers that he has been fleeing himself. This is where Paul and Jung have arrived at the same diagnosis.

But diagnosis is not destination. It is projection.

Both Paul and Jung refuse the comforting fiction that evil belongs only to other people. Both reject the notion that maturity consists in denouncing darkness somewhere beyond the horizon. Both insist that what is hidden governs the man who refuses to acknowledge it. Both expose the terrible ingenuity of self-deception. Both know that there is no freedom while a man remains divided against himself.

That agreement is substantial. There is no fear facing it.

Indeed, Jung’s criticism of much modern Christianity deserves careful hearing. Temptation is not foreign to Christians, as though sin were an unfortunate interruption rather than a deeply rooted inclination. We speak dynamically of the calculus of forgiveness while dealing little in honest love. We confess in unison that we are sinners while quietly begrudging our every peeve.

Modern Gnostic repentance is strangely abstract.

One cannot repent of a desire he refuses to admit he actually possesses. Even Carl Jung understood that! A man who cannot say, “The darkness is mine,” has not yet begun telling the truth.

For Jung, the shadow is a psychological reality. Whatever its moral character, it belongs to the structure of the human personality. The Gospel of Therapeutic Wholeness therefore requires that the conscious self cease pretending the shadow does not exist and “embrace the real me.”

It is this preaching that has made Jordan Peterson so impactful. But Peterson, like Jung, does not tell the Pinterest tale of “letting go and following your heart.” Quite the opposite, wholeness in natural psychology’s shadow means, “you’d pretty darn well get control of yourself before something stupid and terrible happens to you.”

The last thing Ged could do after embracing his dark side was go back to being the prideful little prick that made such a muck of things in the first place. Repentance, even without forgiveness, is a good thing.

The deepest problem facing we poor, miserable Modern people humans is not a lack of wholeness. One might even suggest that the man who believes he can become whole by embracing his shadow has never so much as caught a glimpse of the fleshly thing, much less stared into its depths for any existential length.

Our issue root is not personality repression.

Our Root is Adam

Before there is projection, there is rebellion. Before there is repression, there is exile. Before there is divided consciousness, there is the Fall.

The conflict Paul diagnoses is therefore not merely the mechanics of the psyche. It is the lived experience east of Eden.

The old man is more than the things I dislike about myself. He is my entire human inheritance.

This is why Ged’s victory does not end the story. He must, in another book, now face a dragon. Ask any Peterson acolyte and they will tell you that this is far more diabolical a potential evil than facing your shadow!

Embracing your inheritance is not the same as being saved.

Until it is

Jesus Christ turns all the stories on their heads.

Now the judgment is mercy. Now the foolishness is wisdom. Now death is become life.

Now, being born of Adam is not the end all, be all. Now, the promise is not a healthier personality. It is the crucifixion of your worst past. The claim of the Gospel is not that you will understand, but that God will act. Deliverance is not self-equilibrium but fellowship with the Head of the next creation.

Earthsea is still beautiful. It is the story of a boy reaching the threshold where repentance becomes possible. Manhood begins when Ged stops lying to himself. He turns. He says, “Amen,” to the truth.

That is no small achievement, no matter who you are.

Upright is a mild word. It sounds harmless, faintly like an antique. An upright man pays his bills, keeps his shirt tucked in, and does not cause trouble at the neighborhood meeting. But that is not how the word works in Proverbs.

Uprightness has bones. It has direction. It is a piece of moral geometry. The Hebrew word yashar means straight, level. Before it names a personality, it names an orientation.

• A line either holds straight or bends away from the line.

• A path either leads where it claims or curves into deception.

An upright man is therefore not merely a man with pleasant feelings about virtue. He is a man brought into alignment with the grain of God’s world. This is why Scripture contrasts uprightness with perversity.

Because Things Got Twisted

Crookedness has no original design. It must take something made straight and bend it. Fracture it. Lie about it.

Adultery mixes marriage. Tyranny cracks down authority. Cowardice bends prudence.

The modern crooked man survives by feeding on what was made intelligible and good. He is bred to accept this bending without awareness of it. He does this with his immense clinical vocabulary for discomfort, compulsion, trauma, desire, and dysfunction, inherited from the philosophers whether we like it or not. The inheritance is lost words. Now we distinguish between right and left before right and wrong. We prefer to flow between faithfulness and optimism more than faithfulness and treachery. Everyone knows the difference between someone straight and a homosexual.

Diagnosis can deflect with reference to ten varieties of unease, each deserving its own pharmacologist, but remain unable to have any substantial idea what is actually going on.

Good Goads, Prosperous Words

Proverbs distinguishes straightness from wholeness. Where yashar names the straight or upright, tom names integrity, completeness, or blamelessness. The distinction first appears in Proverbs 2:7, although the NKJV renders both expressions with the same English root:

“He stores up sound wisdom for the upright; He is a shield to those who walk uprightly.”

God saves his blessed insight for the straightway; He is a buckler to all those who walk in integrity.

The distinction is the point of the verse.

Straightness concerns alignment. Integrity concerns wholeness. These are hardly antonyms. But they’re not really synonyms either. They are more when brought together: a path can be straight while the man walking it is also undivided, and this is a double blessing.

This is why, until they make the robots truly evil, I will not stop telling you to study the Biblical languages, no matter who you are or what your education level. English smooths the sentence, and this is not bad. But the Hebrew lets you see the architecture, and this is marvelous to the soul.

The architecture also explains why Proverbs begins with instruction. Musar is discipline, correction, and formative instruction. It belongs to the same Hebrew root family as yasar, to discipline or correct. The resemblance to yashar should not be pressed into a false etymology, but the wisdom is plain enough: crooked sons require correction if they are to walk straight. Uprightness does not emerge from self-expression. It is formed under the pressure of faithful instruction.

That pressure is not abuse. A mason uses line and plumb because a wall cannot correct itself after it falls. A father corrects his son because desire cannot serve as its own compass. Discipline binds appetite to reality before appetite bends the whole man around itself.

Read the Words of this Book

“Equity” in Proverbs 1:3 bears geometry too. The triangle of vocabulary/instruction in the second half of the verse promises “justice, judgment, and equity.” The Hebrew mesharim is built on top of the root yashar, upright, by doubling it. (I’ll leave the scholars to debate the dual/plural pointing textual tradition.) But what is clear now is that having more than one upright is the fact of parallelability.

Biblical equity is not the manipulation of the measure until every result appears the same. It is the use of an honest measure between persons that leaves both people satisfied. Vicarious atonement may be part of the equation, but only after it is first established that comparative relationship is even possible at all.

Parallel lines do not cross. Neither of them bends. One standard rises by means of them both.

“His secret counsel is with the upright.”

God’s counsel is not withheld because He enjoys obscurity. Crooked men bend every word entrusted to them. They turn wisdom into leverage, authority into self-protection, and doctrine into camouflage. The upright receive counsel because they have been made willing to leave the Word straight, to not mess with the meaning, to refuse to tinker with the lines.

Midnight in Philippi

By Acts 16, Paul and Silas have been stripped, beaten, fastened in stocks, and thrown into the inner prison. Rome has bent law into violence. The magistrates have punished uncondemned men to quiet a crowd. Yet at midnight the prisoners are praying and singing hymns to God.

This is not positive thinking in a hole. Paul and Silas possess an inherited language stronger than the prison. The Psalms have taught them how to speak in darkness, how to lament without surrender, and how to praise without pretending the blood on their backs is pleasant. Their mouths remain aligned because the Word already lives in them. When pain removes the luxury of improvisation, they have a catechism of the heart.

Then the earth moves. The foundations shake, the doors open, and every chain comes loose. The jailer wakes into catastrophe. Supposing the prisoners have escaped, he draws his sword and prepares to kill himself.

His action belongs to a Roman world of office, shame, and lethal accountability. A jailer who lost his prisoners could expect the penalty intended for them. Scripture does not praise his intended seppuku, but neither does it flatten the moment into a clinical abstraction. The man sees his office destroyed, his honor ruined, and his future closed. He has reached the end of his power to preserve himself.

The Gospel interrupts the lie with a fact:

“Do yourself no harm, for we are all here.”

The catastrophe is not what you think.

The jailer calls for light, rushes in trembling, and falls before Paul and Silas. Moments earlier he was falling on his sword. Now he falls before witnesses of Jesus Christ.

“Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”

The Greek word for salvation carries rescue, safety, healing, and preservation.

All of that pressure is alive in the question. The jailer is not conducting a seminar about the minimum doctrine required for heaven. His world has collapsed in the dark, and he wants to be brought out whole. Nor does Paul offer a technique. He gives the jailer a King:

“Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.”

To believe is not to worship the possession of a correct answer. The demons can identify facts. Biblical faith entrusts Jesus Christ. It shifts the weight of the body from the sword in one hand to the promise spoken by another, for another time, as another world.

A House Is Not a Building

The promise reaches beyond the jailer because the jailer is not alone. He is the head of a household. His worship, work, loyalties, fears, and decisions shape the lives entrusted to him.

The modern crooked imagination treats a house as a mortgage. Scripture sees a body with bonds, offices, inheritance, and responsibility.

This does not mean the father’s faith substitutes for the Word of God in everyone else. Acts is explicit that Paul and Silas “spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house.” The promise to the household becomes proclamation in the household.

The same hour of the night, the jailer washes the wounds of the apostles, and he and all his family are initiated into Christianity. Grace straightens the whole architecture. Authority becomes service. Water once used for ordinary cleansing stands ready for the washing of regeneration. The home that faced shame and death becomes a house of baptism, food, and rejoicing.

This is patriarchy without the modern caricature.

Headship is not the right to make everyone orbit the father’s carnal appetite. It is the duty to bring those entrusted to him under the hearing of God’s Word, to provide, to protect, to repent first, and to bear the consequences of decisions. A father’s conversion cannot remain private because a father is not private. His sins have already catechized his house. His repentance must now do the same.

Children inherit more than their father’s name without exception. They inherit his habits of worship, his practiced fears, his ways of handling anger, money, people, work, and repentance. They will walk where he walks until their repentance grows.

“You and your household” is not sentimental decoration. Were they all stealing? Now they must steal no longer. They have become Christians.

You Cannot Stand Upright Passively

The next morning, the magistrates send word that Paul and Silas may leave. Paul refuses the liberty with zest.

“They have beaten us openly, uncondemned Romans, and have thrown us into prison. And now do they put us out secretly? No indeed!”

The same apostle who sang in the stocks now names the public wrong in public terms. The authorities want the prisoners gone without having their own lawlessness exposed. Paul makes them come.

This is not wounded vanity. This is a man requiring his magistrates to answer to the law they administer.

Submission is not servility. Forgiveness is not the falsification of the record. Repentance is not a pity party.

Paul is also protecting the young church left behind in Philippi. If he slips away as a disgraced criminal, the accusation remains over Lydia, the jailer, and the brethren. By forcing the magistrates to acknowledge the matter, he uses his Roman standing in service of those with less standing. This is authority bent back toward its proper purpose.

Another King

Acts 17 carries the same straight line into Thessalonica. For three Sabbaths Paul reasons from the Scriptures, explaining and demonstrating that the Christ had to suffer and rise from the dead. His message is not an invitation to admire a spiritual mood. It is a claim about what God promised, what happened in history, and who presently reigns.

Jesus is the Christ. Jesus suffered. Jesus rose. Jesus is King.

The word persuades Jews, devout Greeks, and not a few leading women. Then envy gathers a mob from the marketplace. Unable to refute the apostolic argument from Scripture, the opposition reaches for public disorder and political accusation.

“These who have turned the world upside down have come here too,” they cry. “These are all acting contrary to the decrees of Caesar, saying there is another king, Jesus.”

The charge is distorted, but it touches the nerve. The apostles do proclaim another King. Jesus Christ does not compete with Caesar as one more candidate for the same temporary chair. He stands over Caesar. Every ruler receives limited authority and will answer for its use.

The Gospel puts the world right side up by naming the throne the world works hardest to ignore. Crooked systems experience that straightening as upheaval. A bent wall regards the plumb line as an extremist.

The Berean Measure

The Bereans are called more fair-minded, or noble, than those in Thessalonica. Their nobility consists of two movements held together.

• They receive the word with readiness,

• and they search the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things are so.

Readiness without searching becomes gullibility. Searching without readiness becomes cynicism. The Berean archetype possesses neither the soft head that swallows every religious claim nor the hard heart that refuses to hear one.

He listens.

Then he opens the Book.

Babble does not always defeat truth by denying it. It bends the words by the twisted truth as confessed. Love is appetite. Compassion is permission. Authority is oppression. Safety is glory.

And courage is pathological.

The bold answer is not a louder slogan. It is to search the Scriptures daily.

Against Therapeutic Fog

This is where modern therapeutic language requires sound judgment.

Psychology, considered as a secular discipline, brackets God by design. It observes patterns of thought, bodily response, memory, attachment, behavior, and suffering. Such observations can be true and useful.

Physicians can treat illness. Or, they can prescribe the drug that nets the bonus.

Counselors can help a man notice what he has refused to notice. Or, they can project all their own pathologies onto the one they suppose to “fix.”

A discipline that methodologically excludes God cannot become a complete account of man. It cannot finally define sin, righteousness, repentance, honor, worship, or the purpose for which the body was made. It cannot forgive guilt.

It cannot raise the dead.

The problem is not merely that modern crooked terms are long Latin. The problem is that clinical language conceals agency and moral relation behind the secret knowledge of details.

A man may learn to describe all the forces that act within him while never ruling them. He may explain his fear without confronting it, justify his desire without judging his greed, and catalog his wounds as the very ammo by which he wounds his own.

Paul does not scold the jailer for trembling, nor does he affirm the sword.

Subscribe now

Did You Notice?

When an upright man scans the room, it is not because he worships danger. He scans because love has made him responsible. He knows who is with him, who bears authority, who is vulnerable, where the exits are, and what duty the moment may place upon him.

If violence breaks out, he does not expect his wife, his children, or the elderly beside him to discover it first and solve it for him. If another man clearly holds command, he supports rather than competes. If no one is acting and action belongs to his capacity, he rises. Responsibility is the ability to answer, in real time, for the people and conditions actually before him.

This is not a fantasy of being the hero in every room. That fantasy is bent.

• Who is with me?

• Who is in charge?

• What is the mission?

Sometimes the upright act is to lead. Sometimes it is to obey. Sometimes it is to stand between danger and the weak. Sometimes it is to shut one’s mouth and strengthen the man whose office is already clear.

Manhood without awareness is domination. Awareness without courage is spectatorship. Courage without order is chaos.

The upright man stands all three under the Word.

The English language readily speaks of prognostication, yet lacks a corresponding verb from which the word plainly derives. We have prognosticate—to foretell by knowledge—but no independent gnosticate.

The omission is revealing. By restoring the implied root as a legitimate English verb, a distinction emerges that reaches well beyond lexicography into metaphysics, anthropology, and biblical theology.

Plato’s Bad Habits

I propose the verb gnosticate: to engage reality primarily through acts of knowing; to approach being by means of distinction, explanation, categorization, and theoretical mastery. Opposed to it stands another neglected possibility: habitate. Not merely to inhabit, but to dwell as one’s primary mode of engagement with reality; to receive truth through embodied participation rather than abstract, “theoretical” possession.

The contrast is not between knowledge and ignorance. Scripture nowhere condemns knowledge as such. Rather, it is the contrast between two rival ways of knowing: one that seeks reality through explanation, and another that comes to know reality through immersion.

The Meat is in the Roots

The Greek family centered upon γιγνώσκω (gignōskō) ordinarily signifies “to come to know,” “to recognize,” or “to discern.” Its Proto-Indo-European ancestor, conventionally reconstructed as ǵneh₃-, denotes perception through distinction. From this source descend gnosis, diagnosis, agnostic, prognosis, and numerous cognates across the Indo-European family.

The primitive movement is therefore not the passive possession of information. It is an act of discrimination. One thing is distinguished from another. Reality is divided, classified, named, and rendered intelligible by analysis.

This tendency profoundly shaped the genius of Greek civilization. Greek thought continually advances by definition. It asks, What is this? It separates genus from species, essence from accident, premise from conclusion. Its philosophical triumphs are inseparable from its extraordinary capacity for distinction.

From this inheritance, the English acquires a precise force.

To gnosticate is not merely to know. It is to perform knowing. It is to engage reality principally through ideas. Knowledge ceases to be the presence of encounter and becomes the preferred instrument by which encounter is replaced with talk about it. Explanation gradually assumes the place of participation. One does not merely understand the world; one comes to imagine that understanding constitutes a superior mode of inhabiting it.

Here lies the perennial temptation buried within ancient Gnosticism. The defining error was not merely the possession of secret recipes. It was the elevation of explanatory knowledge above creaturely existence.

The Problem is Not Gknowledge

The problem is putting knowledge on the altar, and thus, the throne.

Today’s Gnosticism conceives of salvation intellectually, less as a restored communion with God today than a privileged cognition to explain God yesterday, today, and tomorrow.

Redemption has been demoted to “escape through understanding.”

Contrast the gnostic theologian with the godly man of habitus.

Habitare, from which derive habitation, inhabit, cohabit, habitual, and habit, means “to dwell,” “to continue living,” or “to remain.” It develops from habēre, “to have,” “to hold,” or “to possess.” Tied by this meaning to the classical marriage vow, its deeper Indo-European ancestry, commonly reconstructed as ghabh-, carries the physical notion of clutching.

The semantic descent is remarkably coherent. One who possesses a place remains within it. Remaining becomes dwelling. Dwelling becomes home. Habitation is therefore not fundamentally architectural but existential. It concerns steadfast presence within a given order.

Even the word habit preserves this logic. Before referring to repeated behavior, it designated that which one continually wore. A monk’s habit was not merely clothing or a funny name, but a visible manifestation of the man’s entire life. Habit describes an abiding condition more than a repetitive action.

The proposed verb habitate therefore signifies more than residence. It is a return to residentiality. It’s not just a back to the land notion. It is the notation and delineation of one’s own, in faithful gratitude of place within the reality (“economy”) of salvation.

To habitate, or, if you prefer the loaded term, to habituate, is to abide.

Rather than attempt to master your world, the man of godly habits receives it.

This is Bigger than Etymology

The Greek instinct repeatedly asks, What is this? The Hebraic instinct more commonly asks, Where do you stand?

The former seeks definition. The latter seeks covenant.

The former excels at taxonomy. The latter excels at habitus.

This difference need not be a caricature. The Scriptures themselves employ profound acts of distinction, and Greek is the holy tongue of our Lord’s Gospel. But the dominant tendencies of the “philosopher’s” complexification of the heritage of babble remain unmistakable.

The Greek love of inquiry, left to its roots, continually ascends toward abstraction unless nailed to the cross of the Bible’s limited linguistics. Biblical revelation continually returns every tongue to its place. The vocabulary of Scripture orients us with remarkable consistency.

God dwells among His people. Israel dwells in the land. The righteous abide. The Word becomes flesh and dwells among us. The Holy Spirit inhabits the Church. The kingdom comes not as an escape from creation but as its renewal.

Biblical truth is therefore overwhelmingly spatial. The parables of Jesus are not speculative. The Sermon on the Mount is to be heard, not systematically archived. Faith engenders reflection, but trust has little place for excessive explanation.

One does not comprehend the covenant. One walks it.

Even Reason has a Dwelling

Paul debates with relentless precision, yet his exhortations culminate in walking, standing, remaining, putting on, and building up. John’s Gospel reaches its theological summit not in epistemology but in abiding: “Abide in Me, and I in you.”

Compare this with the obvious and profound pathologies running the show in modern civilization. Ours is an age of limitless gnostication. Every difficulty generates another explanatory framework, another theory, another system, another taxonomy, another list, another list of lists.

We possess unprecedented analytical power while simultaneously suffering an unprecedented homelessness of soul. We increasingly mistake maps for countries. Description for participation. Theory for wisdom.

Theological discourse is perhaps the worst. It is one thing to listen to a few well-dressed, retired athletes debate the statistics at halftime as though their words really meant anything profound. It is another to hear it done in the name of God and His people. Yet, it remains a most evident fact that the exercise of gnostication in accumulating distinctions while simultaneously losing the capacity to dwell in the Spirit of Jesus Christ is many a theologian’s favorite party game.

Precision is indispensable. It is semantically rooted in righteousness. One does not want to miss the mark! But even righteousness severed from grace ultimately turns against itself. One may become expert in describing just how very exactly knowledge puffs up without ever shifting the heart from sounding gong to five words with the mind of Christ.

Subscribe now

The Scriptures direct us.

Build the house. Keep the vineyard. Walk the road. Break the bread. Wash the feet. Dwell with the brothers.

None of this is anti-intellectual. They are the proper places of understanding. They are the life which the Incarnate One Himself sanctified on our behalf. The eternal Word does not explain the Father. He prays to Him.

The vocation of the Christ, our Lord, is habitation. His reign is not abstraction but fellowship. We are born again to a living hope, and there is no needful reason to overthink it.