How about this for some modern logic:
1. Families are a massive blessing to society and to individuals
2. Families are facing extraordinary pressures, obstacles, and burdens.
3. This is an ideal time to redefine what a family is.
The first two premises are taken from Michael Wear’s article in The Atlantic, The American Family Is Making A Comeback and, as Wear’s article demonstrates, almost everyone agrees with them. The fallacious conclusion is what we see going on all around us, especially in politics, the media, the judiciary, and education, but also in the business world too.
Using only Wear’s piece, let’s take a closer look at the facts and quotes supporting the first two premises in order to feel more deeply the fallacy of the conclusion.
1. Families are a massive blessing to society and to individuals
“Our current policies have failed to address this new landscape, and because of it we are inhibiting one of our nation’s greatest contributors to the public good, and Americans’ most personal aspirations: family.”
“It can be easy to miss the value of family to our nation because its contributions are so ingrained into our lives.”
“Its value can be partly calculated by estimating the cost of broken families because when Americans don’t have family to care for them, government must step in to provide those services.”
- State and federal governments spend billions of dollars each year to care for children in foster care ($9 billion through Title IV-E of the Social Security Act alone.)
- There are longer-term costs for children who grow up outside of safe, permanent families as well, including the $5.1 billion the government spends incarcerating former foster-care youth each year.
- Familial bonds help defray the costs of caring for the elderly.
- In 2009, 61.6 million Americans gave uncompensated care to an adult “with limitations in daily activities” at some point during the year—an economic value of $450 billion in unpaid services.
“From cradle to grave, the social and personal benefits of a healthy family, and the costs of its absence, are evident.”
“Every family in America is a little business … in fact, the word economy comes from the Greek word ‘oikos,’ which means home. Every home is a little economy. And when those little economies struggle and suffer … then America fails.”
“In 2009, the Brookings Institute released a study that, among other things, said if you graduate from high school, get a job, get married and then have children (in that order), your chance of being in poverty is just 2 percent.”
2. Families are facing extraordinary pressures, obstacles, and burdens.
“Marriage is on the decline, birthrates are down, and divorce rates are high.”
“The strains on families and family formation are real, rational, and profound.”
“The old-fashioned family plan of stably married parents residing with their children remains a source of considerable power in America—but one that is increasingly seen as out of reach to all but the educated elite.”
“The average American family is poorer than it was 10 years ago.”
“Over the last 40 years changes in the workforce and growing socioeconomic inequality have conspired to stoke familial instability.”
Student loan debt is causing many to delay marriage.
“Today, it is harder and harder to be good parents and good workers for many working families. That’s a tradeoff that is neither good for our country or our families.”
“Our country—whether through tax policy or through the rhetoric of our current president—does very little to support the institution of marriage.”
“The popular conception of the American Dream is a spouse, two and a half kids, and your own house with a car in the garage and a picket fence around the yard. When we talk about the American Dream slipping away, we tend to focus on the possessions: the house, the car, the picket fence. At a time when the income of American families is declining, this makes some sense…. [But] it is a more fundamental hope that is challenged today. The people that make up the American Dream—the spouse, the children, our dearest relationships—seem out of reach for millions of Americans.”
3. This is an ideal time to redefine what a family is.
Given these two premises, we would expect some moves to support families better and some of these are highlighted in the article.
We should consider options—tax credits, interest-rate incentives, family-friendly zoning and city planning—that align America’s interest in marriage as a public good, and stability as an important factor in a child’s educational and social development, with our housing policies.
Wear commends some British moves and calls for something similar in the USA:
British Prime Minister David Cameron has recognized the new burdens families face. He recently announced that policies in the U.K. must pass a “family test,” which means “every single domestic policy that government comes up with will be examined for its impact on the family.”
However, there’s a massive elephant stampeding round the room, and it’s the utter refusal to define family in the same way as its Inventor, and also to reject all counterfeit substitutes. As even Wear notes:
For all the “pro-family” policies that progressives are putting forward none of them explicitly value stable, two-parent families over other family types
Democrats continue to show no interest in meeting Ross Douthat and Reihan Salam’s call to “stigmatize illegitimacy indirectly” through tax benefits available only to married parents.
As the costs of family breakdown become even more apparent, Democrats’ no-judgment approach may seem insufficient in the face of a demographic and sociological tidal wave.
Glimmers of hope
Wear does highlight a few conservative republican efforts to support traditional families while also helping families that face different and less-than-ideal realities. But after summarizing the American dream with a focus on the people who make the dream a dream, he concludes:
Politics alone cannot restore this hope, but it will only further fuel Americans’ cynicism if Washington does nothing to address it.
Let’s not give up the fight for biblical marriage and the biblical family. We may have lost the argument based on Bible verses. But there are going to be plenty of shocking statistics to build arguments upon in the coming years. It’s just sad and cruel to think of the many millions who will be damaged as a result of the biggest and most dangerous social experiment ever conducted.
In Why I Hope To Die At 75 Ezekiel Emmanuel, one of the primary architects of Obamacare, argues that we, our families, and society would be better off if we all died about age 75.
Needless to say (and thankfully), his family don’t share with his desire and have pointed him to numerous people aged 75 and older who are doing quite well. They think that when he gets nearer 75, he’ll push the desired age back to 80, then 85, and so on. But Emmanuel’s not budging. “I’m sure of my position, ” he insists.
He accepts that death produces loss.
Doubtless, death is a loss. It deprives us of experiences and milestones, of time spent with our spouse and children. In short, it deprives us of all the things we value.
But he says that “living too long is also a loss.”
It renders many of us, if not disabled, then faltering and declining, a state that may not be worse than death but is nonetheless deprived. It robs us of our creativity and ability to contribute to work, society, the world. It transforms how people experience us, relate to us, and, most important, remember us. We are no longer remembered as vibrant and engaged but as feeble, ineffectual, even pathetic.
Reassuringly, he’s not planning suicide 18 years from now, nor does he support euthanasia. He just wishes that when he reaches 75 his life would end. He’s already planning his own memorial service to be held before he dies, along the usual lines of many modern funerals: no crying, lots of funny stories, a celebration of life, and so on.
The American Immortal
Throughout the article, Emmanuel contrasts himself with “the American immortal.” He writes:
Americans seem to be obsessed with exercising, doing mental puzzles, consuming various juice and protein concoctions, sticking to strict diets, and popping vitamins and supplements, all in a valiant effort to cheat death and prolong life as long as possible. This has become so pervasive that it now defines a cultural type: what I call the American immortal.
I reject this aspiration. I think this manic desperation to endlessly extend life is misguided and potentially destructive. For many reasons, 75 is a pretty good age to aim to stop.
If I had to choose between Emmanuel’s “75-and-no-more model” and the “American immortal” model I think I’d go with the former. Because, while there’s something bizarre about Emmanuel’s desire, in some ways it’s more realistic than the “I’m going to live forever” mentality that never really faces up to personal mortality and the need to prepare for the end of life.
A Modern Problem
Large proportions of the population living into their seventies and eighties is, of course, a relatively recent “problem.” In 1900, the life expectancy of an average American was 47; it took until the 1930′s to reach 60; and today a newborn can expect to live an average of about 79 years (76 for men and 81 for women).
Emmanuel recognizes that on the whole this has been a wonderful blessing to society, to families, and to individuals. The increased productivity has also been the main factor in driving the economic boom of the last 65 years.
As Christians, we thank God for His common grace that has produced the knowledge, medicines, environment, and technology that has not only lengthened so many lives, but also improved their quality. But there’s still much for the church to do in adapting to this new reality of so many living so long and how to minister better this increasingly large group of people.
A Confirmation of the Bible
Emmanuel cites oodles of statistics to prove his argument that living past 75 produces more loss than gain. Apart from the obvious physical losses, there are huge mental, social, and productivity losses that impose burdens on others. The Bible agrees with Emmanuel’s observations, although it sets the “turning point” at 70:
The days of our lives are seventy years;
And if by reason of strength they are eighty years,
Yet their boast is only labor and sorrow;
For it is soon cut off, and we fly away (Ps. 90:10).
But the Bible disagrees with Emmanuel’s conclusion: die healthy. We are to submit to God’s timetable, and we’re to do so with the faith that every single day God gives us has a purpose and a meaning, even when every sense in our bodies may be saying, “My life is pointless and worthless.” No, we are to glorify God in our weakness, demonstrate that we trust Him in sickness and health, in old age and youth, when weak and when strong, and so on.
But as for me, I trust in You, O Lord; I say, “You are my God.” My times are in Your hand (Ps. 31:14-15).
The Best Memory
Unlike Emmanuel who expresses the wish to be remembered by his children and grandchildren as “active, vigorous, engaged, animated, astute, enthusiastic, funny, warm, loving” and “not stooped and sluggish, forgetful and repetitive,” Christians want to be remembered for their faith in Christ whatever their physical or mental abilities.
Emmanuel wants to be “remembered as independent, not experienced as a burden.” Christians want to be remembered as dependent on God and casting all their burdens upon Him.
Emmanuel says that leaving our family “with memories framed not by our vivacity but by our frailty is the ultimate tragedy.” No, no, no! The ultimate tragedy is to leave our family without the example of a Christ-like life and without a well-grounded hope for our eternal life.
I’m sure many of us remember with fondness the beautiful example of a godly grandfather or grandmother who despite physical and mental weakness demonstrated strong and steady faith in the face of years of sickness and eventually death. The memory is not of an ultimate tragedy but of an ultimate triumph.
If Emmanuel would come to know the One who bore his own name 2000 years ago, he’d be able to face his days of aging, weakness, illness, and death with a hope-filled spirit, knowing God was with him.
I do agree with Emmanuel that having a set age to die might focus the mind better on spiritual and eternal realities. As he said:
75 defines a clear point in time: for me, 2032. It removes the fuzziness of trying to live as long as possible. Its specificity forces us to think about the end of our lives and engage with the deepest existential questions and ponder what we want to leave our children and grandchildren, our community, our fellow Americans, the world.
The Bible, though, calls us to consider existential questions not in our latter years but in our earliest years. We are to seek Christ and His salvation in our childhood and youth. And when we find Him it transforms our life and our death. “For to me, to live is Christ, and to die is gain.”
Where’s the loss there? However long we live, there’s gain. And whenever we die, there’s gain.
That’s Christcare, not Obamacare.
I and my fellow elders at Grand Rapids Free Reformed Church have been focusing on elder training over the past couple of months. Part of that involved preaching on 1 Timothy 3v1-7, a sermon that ended up with 10 points (not usually recommended!):
1. The vital importance of these verses: This saying is trustworthy
This passage is the second “faithful saying” and is introduced with the same words as the amazing statement of soteriology in 1 Tim. 1:15, emphasizing the importance of ecclesiology.
2. The huge responsibility in these verses: the position of an overseer
Paul uses “shepherd,” “elder,” and “bishop/overseer” interchangeably indicating that they are three different words for the one office. To “oversee” includes observation, analysis, discernment, guiding, guarding, etc.
3. The powerful and pure desire in these verses: If anyone aspires to the office…
This is a strong desire but also a commended desire because it is not motivated by selfishness and pride but by a desire to serve Christ and His church.
4. The worthy work in these verses: a noble task
It is work; it involves labor, sweat, toil, and effort. But it is noble (lit. “beautiful”) work.
5. The uncompromising imperative in these verses: the elder must be
Given the importance and worth of this work, there are rigorous qualifications to be imposed. It’s not “Ideally…If possible…We’d prefer…” It’s a “must.” An imperative. An uncompromising standard.
6. The beautiful self-control in these verses: blameless
After insisting that the elder must be “above-reproach,” “blameless (lit“unassailable”) Paul moves to Christian morality in general with a strong emphasis on Spirit-given self-control or self-discipline:
- Self controlled in sexual matters: husband of one wife
- Self-controlled in behavior: vigilant, temperate:
- Self-controlled in thinking: sober-minded
- Self-controlled with money: not covetous
- Self-controlled in the use of addictive substances: not given to much wine:
- Self-controlled in conflict: not violent
7. The useful service in these verses: hospitable, able to teach
His holy character comes out in holy service of others:
- The elder is hospitable: warm, welcoming to others, invites people to enjoy food and fellowship in his home
- The elder is able to teach: able to communicate appropriate information in an appropriate way and at an appropriate time
8. The testing ground in these verses: manage his own household well
Due to parallels, a man’s home is a testing place for his role in the church. One indicates suitability for the other.
9. The fearful danger in these verses: not a recent convert
Choosing elders is a serious business with serious consequences if we get it wrong – both for the church and the person. That’s why we must avoid electing new converts or any with limited spiritual maturity.
10. The evangelistic impact of these verses: well-thought of by outsiders
Who we elect to office communicates so much to the world about what the church and the Gospel is all about, that it should be considered a major part of our evangelistic message to the world. The list of elders’ qualifications have two similar bookends: “above reproach” and “well-thought of by outsiders” underlining that electing elders is an evangelistic act.
Which of these happinesses did Jesus experience and enjoy?
- Nature happiness: Enjoying the creation
- Social happiness: Enjoying friends and family
- Vocational happiness: Enjoying our jobs
- Physical happiness: Enjoying health and strength
- Intellectual happiness: Enjoying study and learning
- Humor happiness: Enjoying jokes and funny stories.
- Spiritual happiness: Enjoying God through His Word and Spirit
I recently wrote about the seven kinds of happiness God has left for us to enjoy in the world, concluding with the question: Which of these happinesses did Jesus experience and enjoy?
My answer: All of them! He’s the only one who experienced them all in perfect proportion and place.
Perhaps the one we might choke on a bit is the idea of Jesus having a sense of humor, laughing with friends and family, etc.
This really all comes down to one question: Was humor part of perfect pre-fall humanity?
If not, then not only did Jesus not experience it, neither should we. Humor is a consequence of sin, part of the post-fall world, and therefore should be shunned and avoided.
But if it was part of perfect pre-fall humanity, then there’s no reason why Jesus would not enjoy or even tell a funny story, especially in his childhood and youth. We’re on fairly safe ground there. I do question whether that would continue as he aged and matured. As He grew in knowledge of His work, as He entered upon public ministry, and especially as His sufferings increased exponentially throughout the following three years, He would increasingly become “a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief.” The Gospels reveal him to be a deeply serious man, and no wonder.
Christ’s Supreme Joy
Having said that, there’s no question that Christ’s supreme joy among the seven was spiritual joy: His delight in His Father’s will, His Father’s Word, and His father’s presence. Without totally excluding the other six kinds of happiness, that’s the joy that He was especially speaking of when He prayed to His Father: “These things I speak in the world, that they may have My joy fulfilled in themselves” (John 17:13).
But what specifically was the source of His happiness at that time? When we come across a happy person, a person who’s smiling, we ask them, “What’s so funny?” or “Why are you so happy?” and they’ll tell you about something that had just happened or that they’d just heard or thought about. So what was there in the run up to John 17:13 that made Jesus so happy that he spoke of “my joy”? There were multiple ingredients:
- The joy of God’s presence – communing with God in prayer (v. 1)
- The joy of God’s sovereignty (2)
- The joy of God’s salvation (v. 2, 8 )
- The joy of knowing God (v. 3)
- The joy of glorifying God on the earth (v. 4)
- The joy of doing God’s work (v. 4; John 4:32)
- The joy of God’s heavenly glory (v. 5)
- The joy of communicating God’s Word (v. 6, 8, 13, 14)
- The joy of God being obeyed (v. 6)
- The joy of God’s election (9, 10)
- The joy of God’s preservation (11, 12)
- The joy of a returning to God with the ransom price (13)
This is a multi-dimensional, super-abundant, over-flowing spiritual happiness that Jesus identified in Himself, and was enjoying so much that He looked at His disciples and prayed, “Father, give them this too. Transfer my joy to them. Share my happiness with them.”
And perhaps even more amazingly, this is a prayer Jesus is still praying for His people. Every Christian’s every smile, joy, and pleasure, is an answer to this prayer. Every Christian who is dejected and depressed is being prayed for in this way by their great High Priest.
As Arthur Pink wrote: “The Savior would not only have His people safe in eternity, but He desires them to be happy here and now.”