Christian Living

E-Mail Newsletters

Peter Beck
Assistant Professor of Religion, Charleston Southern University
RSS This Blog
About the Author
Recent Posts by Peter Beck
  1 2 3 4 5 6   next page >
About the Author

Peter serves as assistant professor of religion at Charleston Southern University where he teaches church history and theology. While serving as senior pastor in Louisville, Ky., he completed his PhD in historic theology at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. His dissertation, The Voice of Faith: Jonathan Edwards's Theology of Prayer, is soon to be published. He, his wife Melanie, and their two kids, Alex (12) and Karis (7), live near Charleston, SC. Peter's goal for his teaching and writing ministries is "love from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith" (1 Tim 1:5).

  • Friday, November 6, 2009 | 09:33 AM
    • Print

    Like so many kids, I never liked math as a subject. I didn't get it. I couldn't understand it. I failed to see the value in it. Math and I weren't friends.

     

    In spite of my stubborn reluctance to imbibe in the beauty of raw numbers, I learned enough to know that one plus one equals two. Yet, when we look at the math of biblical marriage, we are reminded over and over again that one plus equals one. One man. One woman. One life. (see Genesis 2:24-25; Matthew 19:4-6; Ephesians 5:31)

     

    The oneness of the marital union is based upon the two individuals brought together by covenant. They are unique. They bring various gifts, strengths, and weaknesses to their marriage. That is just as God intended.

     

    As Genesis 1:27 tells us, God created humanity in His image. That image is displayed mysteriously and marvelously in the two genders: male and female. Seeing that God created both genders and both possess His image, we must acknowledge two powerful facts. First, the genders and their associated distinctions are part of God's glorious plan for humanity and our sexuality. Two, both genders are of equal value as both reflect God's glory in His image.

     

    Likewise, Genesis 2:18 illustrates the fact that both genders have unique roles. God created Eve as the "suitable helper," the perfect helpmeet, the right complement for Adam. As everyone knows from anecdotal evidence, men and women are different. The sexes display differing natures, emotions, and abilities. Yet, together the two make one whole.

     

    My wife and I are living proof of this principle. She's tender-hearted and quick to share her emotions. I'm more stoic and reluctant to share my feelings. I'm decisive. She's contemplative. She's mellow. I'm wired. These contrasting traits don't cause friction. They bring harmony as they bring balance to our familial universe.

     

    Now, every man doesn't possess the same traits nor does every woman. We've all been fearfully and wonderfully made according to God's plan for our lives. Yet, in spite of the prevalence of and the imperfections caused by sin, certain characteristics mark the two genders in remarkable ways that still reflect God's intent all those years ago.

     

    We must admit, though, theologically-speaking things are not as they were intended to be. We can see shadows and hints of God's original prototypes. But, the world we live in is far from perfect. This applies to people and to relationships. Some things just aren't supposed to be this way.

     

    In the Garden, when Adam and Eve sinned and fell, we see the broken paradigm of sinful humanity and the impact of their decision on all later male/female relationships. Whereas God created man first and then woman and both were to exercise dominion over the creation, in Genesis 3 we see all ontological and gender roles reversed.

     

    The created order, the serpent, is telling Eve what to do. Eve is telling Adam what do. Neither human balks at this reversal. Neither screamed, "Time out! This isn't what God wanted." Instead, everything was backwards and no one seemed to care. Adam and Eve fall because things weren't as they were supposed to be. In the process, they fell and they dragged us down with them.

     

    The punishments issued to the three involved parties in the Garden echo this inverted order. The serpent is cursed first. Then Eve is told that her failure would now cause her greater pain in childbirth and increased difficulties in her relationship with man. Adam is told that his dominion over the creation would now be all the more difficult.

     

    Into that world and those skewed relationships we have been born. We now bear the brunt of those curses. The world is a dangerous place. Women die in childbirth. Husbands exert forceful authority over their spouses and fruitless dominion over the creation. Clearly things aren't the way they're supposed to be.

     

    This, too, is resolved in Christ's sacrificial death. In His death, God was reconciling all things to Himself (Colossians 1:19) Among the many things implied, we can see in the Bible that the atonement provides for those who believe a restoration in relationships. Sinners will be restored to God. Marriages should be restored to their intended pattern.

     

    Christian marriages should not look like the world. God's salvific plan and the resultant new heart given to believers impact every area of our lives. In salvation, everything the curse is reversed. Our marriages should look like the first family before the Fall. Following the biblical pattern for marriage and gender roles established in Genesis. Husband and wife should be one, one in purpose and one in passion - both spiritual and physical - for the two shall become one just as God had intended (Ephesians 5:31).

  • Tuesday, November 3, 2009 | 17:02 PM
    • Print

    We all crave acceptance. We long for love. While we enjoy moments of solitude, we seek the company of others who will accept us for who we are. As humans we have an innate need for relationship.

     

    As I've argued previously, this desire for relationship, this emptiness that we feel when alone, can be explained by resorting to the doctrine of the imago Dei (Genesis 1:26-28). Just as God in the Trinity is love and expresses love, humans created in His image must love and be loved.

     

    Taken at face value the image of God in man explains why we surround ourselves with those we like and those who like us. It explains the urge to shower our affections on our pets. It's part of who we are. It also explains, however, why my German Shepherd Luther can never replace the relationship I enjoy with my wife. The image of God in me draws me to the image of God in her.

     

    To better understand this phenomenon, we can turn again to the book of Genesis to see how this relates to the biblical construct for marriage.

     

    After the creation of the apex creature, humanity, we find Adam at work in the Garden of Eden. He busily exercises dominion over the creation by sovereignly choosing the names of all the animals. As he surveys his domain, however, Adam longs for something more. He is not satisfied with the relationship he has with the animals. He is alone. God says that's not good (Genesis 2:18).

     

    To rectify the situation, God determines to make a "helper suitable for him." God could have created a German Shepherd but He didn't. He could have created a golfing buddy but He didn't. No, the helper that Adam needed was a complementary being, one that fit the hole in his heart, one that provided what he lacked. God gave Adam Eve.

     

    Here, too, we see God's plan for human relationships. Here we see God giving Adam a help-mate, a partner suitable to Adam's role in life. He gave him a woman. He gave him the real missing link, not a heretofore undiscovered biological primate, but the perfect human being to enable Adam to find fulfillment in relationship and to fulfill his place in the created order - be fruitful and multiply. Without Eve Adam was incomplete and incompetent. That, says God, was not good.

     

    The account of the creation of Eve in Genesis 2 becomes paradigmatic, then, for our understanding of God's plan for our sexual beings. God provided the suitable helper, a woman, not women and not man. While men need male companionship in various seasons of their lives, while women long for an intimate friend to share their experience, only the male/female relationship satisfies our deepest longings. That's why God gave Adam the perfect mate, his perfect match - Eve.

     

    Genesis 2 goes one step further. In Moses' account of the gift of the perfect mate, lasting union necessarily follows the initial encounter. The relationship between Adam and Eve does not stall at the level of simple co-workers. They didn't engage in casual sex to scratch some carnal itch. They united in primeval marriage. As it was intended to be Adam became joined to his Eve and the two became one - one flesh, one mind, one purpose (Genesis 2:24-25). As the passage explains, this was how things "ought" to be.

     

    Jesus interpreted this passage in the same way. In Matthew 19 he speaks of the male/female bond. He reminds his apostles of the union of one flesh. And, then, Jesus explained the profound implication of this oneness. The relationship is not only physical, it is spiritual. "What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate" (Matthew 19:4-6).

     

    Biblically-speaking, marriage is not a social construct. Marriage is not a constitutional right. Marriage is the first human institution ordained by God, designed by God, and fulfilled by God. We can choose to marry or remain single but we cannot choose to redefine marriage as we see fit. As God has revealed, marriage is: one man, one woman, one life.

  • Monday, November 2, 2009 | 10:22 AM
    • Print

    There's a lot of discussion going on these days about the nature of marriage. The citizens of Maine will be voting on this crucial issue very soon. They have been asked to decide whether marriage will be legally limited to man and woman or if the institution applies equally to homosexual relationships as well. Many in the nation are watching this vote carefully to determine the next steps in the defense of traditional marriage or the advancement of so-called "gay marriage."

     

    Rather than testing the political winds to see which way they are blowing or casting our vote to determine the definition of marriage, Christians must turn to God's word for his view. God has a view. It is clearly defined and spiritually charged.

     

    The place to begin when considering the biblical view of marriage is in the beginning. In Genesis 1, God creates. He creates the world. He creates the animals. He creates man. He creates the male/female relationship.

     

    As we see in Genesis 1, the theological doctrine of the imago Dei, the image of God, relates directly to the question of marriage. Genesis 1:26 says that God determined to create man, adam, in His image, in His likeness. While there is much debate as to the exact meaning of the image of God, this much is clear according to the text at hand: all humans possess the image of God, the image of God is connected to mankind's dominion over the creation, and the image of God bears on male/female relationships. As Moses recounts, God created man in His image, male and female He created them.

     

    In the image of God, man and woman reflect God's image as they share dominion over the created world. Their limited sovereignty is to resemble His perfect sovereignty. Likewise, they are relate to each other in a way that mirrors the loving relationship within the Trinity. Just as the Father relates to the Son and the Spirit, so too does humanity relate to one another.

     

    Relationship and the need for it is basic to human nature because it is basic to God's nature. In fact, Genesis 1:28 says that God created man and woman specifically for the purpose of relationship. "Be fruitful and multiply," He commanded them. The fulfillment of this first and seminal biblical command would have been impossible outside of male/female relationship.

     

    Only together can Adam and Eve exercise dominion as described in Genesis 1 and fulfill the Creation Ordinance - be fruitful and multiply. They cannot adequately live up to their potential as beings created in the image of God without the relational aspect. The two cannot be divided.

     

    God's plan for filling the earth and moving towards Christ's incarnation and the ultimate consummation of all things under His reign depended upon Adam and Eve relating to each other in a fashion unlike their relationship with anything else in creation, including subsequent people of the same gender. Thus, just twenty-eight verses into the Bible, God reveals His plan for human sexuality and the centrality of the marriage relationship between man and woman.
  • Friday, October 23, 2009 | 09:47 AM
    • Print

    As I survey the landscape of the church, I see some encouraging things.

    I see a generation of young people who are tired are tired of the status quo for the sake of the status quo. They want to know what's right. They want to know what's wrong. They want to know why. They want to know what the Bible says we ought to do and they want to do it. That's encouraging.

    I see American Protestantism's bull in the china shop, the SBC, finally admitting that things aren't necessarily what they appear to be. They're acknowledging that they have 8+ million members that don't act like members. They're searching for biblical rather than programmatic answers for all that ails the denomination. They're embracing open conversation instead of straw man argumentation on the questions that nag the Convention. That's encouraging.

    On the other hand, I see some things that are very discouraging. Twenty-first century Christians are a people living in a strange land and that land is called "fear." And, as we consider the desolate landscape of this foreign soil, we need to ask ourselves, "What are we so afraid of?"

    Why are we so afraid to stand up and acknowledge that we are Christians? Why is it that so many of us are more afraid of the cultural elite's ridicule of our message than we are of God's displeasure for withholding it?

    Why are we so afraid to stand apart from that world? Why do we so desparately want to be like the world when the world, biblically-speaking, so desparately needs to be like us?

    Why are we so afraid of being labeled evangelicals, or Baptists, or Calvinists, or what ever "ist" we belong to? If these are positions that we believe to be true to the Bible, why are we afraid to publicly announce our allegiance?

    Why are we so afraid to stand up for the truth and defend it? If it is the truth, isn't it worth defending?

    Why are we so afraid to admit our sinfulness? Do we seriously think no one else has noticed?

    Why are we so afraid to acknowledge our past so that we can get beyond it? Has anyone been fooled into thinking that we've done everything right over these last 2000 years?

    Why are we so afraid to face the future? Wasn't our past someone else's future?

    Why are we so afraid to change? Does change necessarily imply failure?

    Why are we so afraid of the next generation? If we've done our job in teaching our children the way in which they should go, shouldn't we trust them to walk in that direction?

    Why are we so afraid of confrontation? Aren't there some things worth dying for?

    Why are we so afraid of … being afraid?

    Fear comes easy. Ask any soldier or sailor who's done some combat time. When bullets start to fly, fear is a natural reaction. But, a time comes when one has to decide if he's going to continue to be afraid or if he's going to stand up and do something about it. Eventually you get tired of being afraid and decide to do something about it. You ignore the fear and you attack the cause. That's the real difference between cowards and heroes.

    How do we do that? The Bible has the answer. "Be strong and courageous." That's what God told Joshua three times in Deuteronomy 31 and three more times in Joshua 1. The phrase appears thirteen times in the Old Testament. You see, back then, as today, fear was a common ailment.

    Yet, God didn't let his people cower in their wilderness foxhole. He commanded them to "be strong and courageous." How? David offered the answer to that question to Solomon, and to us, in 1 Chronicles. "Be strong and courageous, and act; do not fear nor be dismayed, for the Lord God, my God, is with you. He will not fail you nor forsake you until all the work for the service of the house of the LORD is finished" (1 Chr 28:20).

    Thank God, he's not done with us yet. So, it's time for Christians to stop being afraid. I for one am tired of it. I'm ready to stand up and do something. To charge the hill. To defend the flag. To confront the enemy. To be "strong and courageous." Who's going with me?

  • Wednesday, October 21, 2009 | 13:00 PM
    • Print

    One year ago I went over to the darkside. I joined the club. I've entered the 21st century. I became trendy. I went on facebook.

    How I found myself on facebook is more complicated than actually finding me on facebook. It's kind of a long story, a story of cultural rebellion and anti-cool defiance. But, I caved. I caved in to peer pressure and I caved in to convenience. It's easier to tell someone to look you up on facebook than it is to give them one of my three different email addresses and the URL for this site.

    But, it's more than that. I think facebook might be biblical. After all, John predicts the rise of this Internet giant in his third epistle:

    "I had many things to write to you, but I am not willing to write them to you with pen and ink; … we will speak face to face" (3 John 13-14).

    Okay, I am taking some liberties with the text and I certainly wouldn't preach this text as a predictive affirmation of the facebook phenomena. However, John's desire to see someone face to face does speak to the ever-increasing interest in facebook as a social networking site.

    I've been told repeatedly since I became a friend on facebook, more times than I can remember already, that the whole thing is addictive. I can certainly see how someone could spend untold hours chatting, twitting, and generally yucking it up with long lost friends and newly found friends. We do it, as John says, that we might see someone face to face.

    Facebook puts a face on the faceless Internet. You can post photos of yourself, your family, your fanaticism. And, as you respond and place your mark on someone's "wall," you have a face to put with the "person" with whom you're "talking," albeit in short sentences. That's the attraction, I think. That's the basis of the addiction. As humans, we long for relationship. Facebook feeds that need.

    Biblically-speaking, we were created for relationship. Part of the imago Dei, the image of God, in man must be the ability and desire for fellowship with others. God in His Trinitarian essence enjoys eternal relationship with the other Persons in the Trinity (see John 17:5 for example). On the human side, Adam without Eve was incomplete (Genesis 2:18). Adam with Eve was made whole and together they made one (Genesis 2:24). A key part of being human, therefore, is communication, the sharing of company with others. Facebook fits the bill for many folks.

    For all the good that it does, for the all the fulfillment that it brings, facebook and social networking websites like it also bring the potential for communal failure. To that end, we must conclude with a few words of caution.

    Electronic communication must never be allowed to take the place of John's face to face conversation. In sensitive matters of affection or rebuke, we must speak face to face. In love, what kind of love is it if we can't tell those we love what we mean to their face? In rebuke, what kind of spineless jellyfish exercises discipline or correction via information superhighway? Some things must be done face to face. If they can't be, they shouldn't be done at all.

    Remember, it is not good for man to be alone. To that end, let facebook serve its purpose. Use it to keep you in touch over the miles and years. However, don't let it take the place of face to face conversation. As John says, a letter is good. Being there in person is lightyears better.