Who's the Boss

I probably shouldn’t tell you this, but in my younger years, when I worked at a retail store, I once arrived to work late. Shocking I know, but it is true. I arrived late. The boss wasn’t happy. When I arrived, he met me at the door. “Dave,” he said, “the Bible has a saying. It goes something like this: Give to God what is God’s, and give to man what is man’s.” He went on. “I hired you to be here at the opening time, and I expect you to be here on time.” I agreed.

When it comes to work, we have a duty to show up when we are supposed to, to show up on time, to work all day, and to earn our wages. The boss has the right to tell us when to be there, when to go home, and what to do while we are there. The boss is the boss. But how far does the boss’ authority extend? Can the boss tell us to miss church?

God demands that we set aside one day to worship (Ex. 20:8). On that day, God commands us to lay aside all servile work (Ex. 20:9-10). God commands us to assemble together and worship on that day, and we must not forsake that assembling. But Christians sometimes make exceptions. “I have to work on Sunday.” Says who?

Can the boss tell you to miss church? Can the boss tell you to disobey God? Does the boss have that power? Yet believers sometimes cave on that point. In their mind, the boss can tell them to skip church, but God cannot tell them to miss work on Sunday. I beg to differ. Who is the boss?

If the boss can command you to forsake the assembling, then God is not the boss. What right does the boss have to demand that you work on the Lord’s Day? Before you answer, I’ve heard a few already. Like this one for instance: “The boss has the right because he writes my paycheck. God isn’t the one writing the checks.”

But of course, God does write the check. God does feed us. God does clothe us. God does provide for our needs according to his riches. The fact that you can’t see God writing the checks does not mean that He doesn’t. Not only does God give you the paycheck, God also ensures that you get the pay that you earned. God gives you the ability to get the paycheck. God gives your employer the ability to pay you. So, God does “write the checks”. Since God is writing the checks, God is the boss. And God commands us to remember the Sabbath Day, to keep it holy.

Christians rationalize when they need to salve a guilty conscience. They come up with an exception. There are exceptions when you can miss church. Like if you work in a hospital or something.

Get ready to be offended, folks. You will not like what I am about to say. There are no exceptions. There is lawful work that can be done on the Sabbath, like rescuing your donkey or healing the sick (as Christ showed us), but there are no exceptions to the prohibitions of the fourth commandment. God forbids any servile work on the Sabbath day. That means there is no exception for McDonald’s employees. Gas station attendants get no pass. The grocery store gets no exemption. The Sabbath is to be kept. Christ came not to destroy the law, but to fulfill it. And for those who cry foul because “that is Old Testament”, remember that not one jot or tittle of the law will pass away until all is fulfilled.

God is the boss.

Keep the Foxhole Promise

Psalm 66:13 I will go into thy house with burnt offerings: I will pay thee my vows,
14 Which my lips have uttered, and my mouth hath spoken, when I was in trouble.
15 I will offer unto thee burnt sacrifices of fatlings, with the incense of rams; I will offer bullocks with goats.

The offering is a very important part of worship. When we come before God’s throne, we must not come empty-handed. In worship we bring an offering; in gratitude, we bring a fat offering. The offering is an act of worship.

God loves a cheerful giver. He loves a joyful offering. He loves the offering given with reckless abandon. If we set our eyes on the Lord, we will give, and give generously. But when we set our eyes on circumstances, we tend to hold back. What if…? (we say)

When we try to avoid trouble, our offering becomes stingy. Don’t give what you’d give if you were trying to avoid trouble. Follow David’s example. Give what you promised to give when you were in trouble. Keep the foxhole promise. Remember that one? You made it when you hit rock bottom. You promised to give everything. Your whole life. Give that.

Do we miser out our offering? Are we stingy with our gifts? Offer the fatlings, not the scrawny. Offer the healthiest, not the sickest. Offer the best ram, not the diseased sheep. Give of your best. Your best praise, your best attention, the best time of your day, the best day of your week, the first and best of your money, the best of your talents, all must be offered up to the Lord your God.

The Cowardly Lion

Some who have been following this blog might be confused about several posts. Who is this Bob fella, and what is our problem with him? One anonymous commenter, using the handle “Hiding Behind the Keyboard”, asked some pointed questions about one particular post What I learned from Bob. His questions were legitimate, and seemed to be asked in a good spirit, and so it seems I have some ‘splainin’ to do.

It isn’t that I dislike Bob. I dislike the way Bob has attacked certain churches and institutions. I dislike some of the slanders he has leveled against those institutions. But I don’t know that I like or dislike him personally. That really isn’t the issue. Nor is the issue merely doctrinal difference.

The problem alluded to in previous posts is a problem of cowardice and slander that characterize Bob’s attacks against the churches he named in his story. Bob was a member of both churches at one time. When he left those churches, he expressed that he was in agreement with them. After joining a third church, Bob changed. After leaving the third church, an Independent, Fundamental Baptist church, Bob began to attend a Reformed church. He changed doctrinally. He found himself in direct disagreement with the former churches. But instead of addressing his disagreement to those former churches, Bob put the disagreements up on the Internet for everyone else to read. He could have done this without naming the actual churches, but he didn’t. In his story, Bob named those churches. He named their pastors. But he never contacted either pastor, either before or after. He should have gone to them first. He should have gone to them privately. But he didn’t. And instead, he put it all on the Internet, of all places.

The Internet is a very public forum. It seems indecent to air out your differences on the Internet, especially when you haven’t addressed your differences privately. No pastor at either of the two churches named in Bob’s story was contacted. Bob put it on the Internet, and they just happened to stumble across it. That, to me, is cowardice.

It is not cowardly because Bob disagrees with these two churches. It is not cowardly because he questions things or because he has an “inquisitive mind”. It is cowardly because he never talked to either of these pastors about his differences. It is cowardly because the World Wide Web knew about it before these pastors knew about it.

The point about hiding behind the keyboard had nothing to do with the anonymity that is inherent to the Internet. Bob clearly did not make himself anonymous. Bob did not leave his former churches anonymous either. He put it all out there for everyone to see. But he did it from the safety of his computer. That way he could attack first, and put his former churches on the defensive. That way he wouldn’t need to deal with them directly. That way he could get his knocks in. He left them only one option – “come on my blog if you want to answer me”. This is unscriptural (Matt 18, James 3). And it is cowardly.

Courage would involve actually talking over disagreements with those you disagree with, especially if you intend to name names on the Internet. Sniping from the bushes, or in this case, from behind the keyboard, is anything but courageous. Any coward can do that.

Ironically, Bob says that he wishes he could still fellowship with these two churches. After he sniped at them from behind his keyboard! It seems disingenuous to make such a claim. It reminds me of the fox who asked the farmer, “why can’t we all just get along?” Bob called them shallow, mocked all they stand for, attacked their pastors, and then claims to long for fellowship with their people. He wants to fellowship with them like a wolf wants to fellowship with a flock of sheep.

The cowardice is inexcusable, but the slander Bob levied against these two places is deplorable. Bob attempted to lump them with the Hyles’ crowd and their ilk. That is a slander. There simply is no comparison between them and the “IFBx” crowd Bob is so fond of attacking. They differ in their philosophy, in their preaching styles, in their view of the gospel. They differ in nearly every way. But Bob attempted to paint these good churches as if they were all in the same crowd.

Interestingly, Bob has backed way off those attacks in his later posts. This is good. But there needs to be a full retraction. Did Bob use these church names to gain readers? Did he use them because they are well known among fundamentalists? Did he purposely paint them blacker than they are in order to score points with his targeted audience? I don’t know, though many of us feel that he did. But regardless, Bob slandered their good names, and did it in the most cowardly of ways.

That being said, this is not all bad. As David said when he was cursed, “God told him to curse and he has cursed”. We should count it all joy that he has done this. It is a blessing from God. And we must pray for him. God commands it. When he reviles, we must not revile again. When he curses, we must not curse. We must bless him, and pray that he would be blessed, and that God would turn his heart. God calls us to be peacemakers. We must be peacemakers. But woe to any Christian who believes that peace can be made without war.

We love our enemies, and we will not give way, no not for a moment.

Is Rhetoric Christian?

Should Christians be studying rhetoric? After all, most of the books about rhetoric were written by idolatrous pagans, like Aristotle, Cicero, and Quintillian. Why would we study such men? Shouldn’t we just be reading our Bibles? Is the Bible not good enough for us?

This is a legitimate question, and deserves consideration. If we can’t give a biblical defense, then we shouldn’t do it, no matter how scholarly or noble it sounds. We live by every word that proceeds from God’s mouth, and we must submit to the authority of Scripture in everything. So, we should be asking whether we should study rhetoric or not. Should we follow the advice of pagans in our approach to discourse? Is rhetoric Christian or pagan?

First, we should note that not all rhetoric is Christian. In fact, much of the rhetoric of our day is very pagan. That includes much of the rhetoric of modern Christianity, which amounts to nothing more than relativistic drivel. The modern Christian should stop and listen to himself talk from time to time. Does he find himself saying things like, “who’s to say that we are right and they are wrong?” Does he chafe at the “absolutism” of Christianity? Does he assume neutrality when he deals with the world and seeks to persuade men of Christ? Then he has joined up with the pagans in his use of rhetoric.

Rhetoric, you see, is inescapable. All men use rhetoric. The question is not whether you should use rhetoric, but rather, how should we use rhetoric. Should it be Christian or should it be pagan? But we have no choice about whether or not we will use rhetoric. Imagine someone arguing that we shouldn’t use rhetoric. How would he explain it? How would he persuade us? Would he avoid using rhetoric in his arguments? All men use rhetoric. The rhetoric we use must be Christian. And in order for our rhetoric to be Christian, in order to speak like Christians, we must first think like Christians, for out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaketh.

When did rhetoric begin? Did Aristotle or Socrates or the Sophists “invent” rhetoric? They discovered it, they observed it, they structured it, they organized it, but they did not invent it. Rhetoric has been around since the foundations of the world. Adam spoke artfully, even poetically, when God brought him Eve and he said, This is now bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman because she was taken out of Man.

But Adam did not invent Rhetoric either. God created the world with rhetoric. We see the power of words in the story of Creation. God spoke, and it was done. He spoke the universe into existence. He spoke and the flowers appeared. He spoke and the mountains were fashioned. He spoke and birds flew, fish swam, and stars sang. But Creation is not the beginning of rhetoric.

Before God formed the earth, in eternity past, the Godhead took counsel together. Before time began, God decreed all that would happen, all that would be. Long before Creation, there was rhetoric.

Is rhetoric Christian? God used rhetoric, uses rhetoric, and demands that we his people use rhetoric. The gift of speech must not be taken lightly. God gave us speech, and promised to empower it. The preaching of the cross is the power of God to us that are saved. It pleases God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. How shall they hear without a preacher? God manifests his word through preaching. And God sends us to persuade men.

For rhetoric to be Christian, Christians must reclaim it. It is theirs by divine right. Christians must study it, learn it, subdue it and have dominion over it, to the glory of God. When we learn to submit our words to the Lord, and when we seek his glory in everything, including our speech, then rhetoric can once again be truly Christian. Rhetoric must be to the glory of God.

Thank you, Mr. HBK

Finally, someone called me on it. I was waiting for it. I was refreshed to see it. And since I wouldn’t want my thanks to be relegated to some hidden comment on a past post, I will come right out and say it publicly. Thank you, Mr. HBK. You are welcome on my blog anytime, anonymous or not. And no, I’m not being sarcastic.

We bloggers should be concerned when we blog along like so many dufflepuds, always saying what everyone agrees with, then loudly applauding ourselves for saying it. Must we always be so confounded agreeable all the time? If I mess up, say so, for crying out loud!

That isn’t to say that disagreeableness is a virtue. Nor does it mean that I will always agree with you. I won’t. Especially if it is plain that you jes don’ git it. In that case, I might even get smart with you. In love, of course. But you might not think so.

About this time, I’m supposed to say something along the lines of, “I can take it”. And I’d like to think so. But the truth is, I can’t always take it. I don’t always take criticism well. Actually (the modern word for I really mean this), I hate to be criticized. Plain and simple. I wish it were otherwise. But it isn’t. And that is exactly why I need to be criticized. I need to have my flaws and foibles pointed out. And that is why I say to Mr. HBK, a hearty thank you. You didn’t just come in with an “atta-boy”. You had something to say, and you said it. I like that. Kinda.

An answer to your comment will be forth-coming. You obviously are acquainted with the case, more than you let on, so I should not hesitate to answer. For now, suffice it to say, you have a point, otherwise, I would leave it be.

On the other hand, let me quickly interject that I don’t intend to shoot down my supporters either. To those who encourage and agree, feel free to comment as well. I won’t call you a dufflepud. I promise. Only an obstinate fool would shoot down his backers and egg on his foes. This blogger appreciates all the encouragement he has received on this blog. Really, he does! He was somewhat overwhelmed by all the attention it received almost from the start, probably due in a large part to having some well-known friends. To those who care, thank you.

So, what’s the point? Why waste a whole post discussing a comment that I’m not even answering? Well for one thing, now is as good a time as any to acquaint you the reader with a few of the goals and desires of this attempt at blogging. So, here goes.

First, I have no desire to be relevant. Relevance is highly overrated. In fact, relevance is irrelevant. My first desire is to bring glory to the Savior. I will fall short of that goal. And when I do, please point that out. Second, I strive to love the Word of God above all else, including my own opinion. That in itself is a tall order for anyone, especially for one as opinionated as myself. I want to be consistent with the Word, to promote the Word, to contend for the Word. Third, if you like what you read, feel free to say so. If you wish to add to my thoughts, I won’t stand in your way (for the most part). The only comments I have removed so far have been my own, or double-entries, though that may not always be the case.

And finally, if you don’t like what I said, or consider it to be “ill-witted” humor, go right ahead and poke holes in it. If my “ill-witted humor” inspires you to start a blog in its honor, go right ahead. But if you do, please please please give credit where credit is due! At least you could put my name on the new blog. In fact, you could make it a team blog. Me and you. You could still be anonymous. It would be fun. Of course, if you want to let us in on your identity, we are all fine with that too. We admire courage, but we aren’t afraid of cowards either. Do what you want, but by all means, keep it coming!

What Gentleness Makes Me

Psalm 18:35 …thy gentleness hath made me great.

No Christian is great in his own right. But God makes His people a great people. And that means Christians are great, because God makes them great. His gentleness makes them great.

What an amazing truth! Almighty God makes His people great by His gentleness. He uses His power for us, not against us. The hand that should destroy us for our sin instead reaches out to us in kindness. God is good, so He makes us great. God is benevolent, so He makes us great. God is compassionate. His mercies are new every morning. Gently, he provides from His bounty. And it is the helping hand of God that makes us great.

Consider how His gentleness has made us great. God humbled Himself so that we might be lifted up. God abased Himself so that we might abound. God made himself lower than the angels so He could elevate us to heaven. He condescended to us, so that we could ascend to Him. He decreased, so that I might increase.

No wonder God highly exalted Christ, and gave him a name that is above every name. He must increase, and I must decrease. I must be abased, and He must abound. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, God will not despise. Gratitude makes the humble heart forever loyal to God. Are you thankful, believer? The goodness of God leads us to repentance. And God’s gentleness makes us great!

The shield of God's favor

But let all those that put their trust in thee rejoice: let them ever shout for joy, because thou defendest them: let them also that love thy name be joyful in thee.
For thou, LORD, wilt bless the righteous; with favour wilt thou compass him as with a shield. Psalm 5:11-12

God our shield places a hedge of protection around his children. He is a bulwark never failing. And the hedge of protection God places around us is a shield of favor.

God surrounds us with His favor. He protects us with His favor. We find it on every side. Every place that we look, we see that all things work together for good to them that love the Lord.

Consider some of the favors that God surrounds us with. We are troubled on every side, but not perplexed; cast down but not forsaken. God blesses us with trials and troubles. These troubles humble us and keep us dependent on God. Were it not for these trials, we would soon forget God, and stop thanking and praising.

God surrounds us with enemies, and then prepares us a table in their presence. He fills the earth with good things. We eat and are satisfied, and our youth is renewed like the eagle’s. God surrounds us with lovingkindness and tender mercies. God covers us with his wings. We find the hand of God surrounding us, enclosing us, keeping us. The Spirit of God seals us until the day of redemption.

Do we see how God compasses us with favor? Then we must put our trust in him. Trust the shield. And as we trust, we rejoice, we shout for joy, our hearts overflow, because our shield and defender, the ancient of days, defends us with His favor.

Against Blogging

Satisfying his occassional urge to go long, SI writer Dave once again decides to make you read for a while. And he gets smart with you at the same time. Hope you enjoy!

People blog. Lots of people blog. Experts blog, idiots blog, smart people blog, stupid people blog. People blog about cats. People blog about cars. People blog about theology, about politics, about their friends, about their enemies, about their former church, about those blogging about their former church. People blog. Some blog and blog and blog. Some blogs are informative, and some give way too much information. Some blogs are helpful, and some need help. Some blogs add to our lives, and some add to our annoyance.

I blog. And I am against blogging. Already. Maybe I’ll change. Your blog might change my mind. But then some other blog will re-confirm my opinion.

There are good reasons to be against blogging. One reason is that people talk too much. In the multitude of words, there wanteth not sin. Ecclesiastes 5:2 gives good advice to budding bloggers: let thy words be few.

Another reason to oppose blogging is that blogging is vain. What do we accomplish with all this blogging? We are like the boy sitting on the back porch blowing bubbles with all his might, blowing big bubbles, and little bubbles, and middle-sized bubbles. He blows and blows, and he hardly notices how quickly the bubbles pop, because he already started on the next batch.

To the vanity of the exercise, we add our own opinion. Opinion is vain. Now, Americans think opinion is pretty important stuff. Of all the American idols, opinion might be our greatest. But opinion is vain. Opinion adds as much to our mental diets as jet-puffed marshmallows. And considering the amount of opinion we devour, we shouldn’t wander that so many are mentally obese.

Blogging is vain, and blogging makes people vain. Readers become vain, but bloggers become vain as well. We set up our blogs, write our posts, post our writings, sit back and watch it all happen. Look at all those readers! Look at all those comments! These people think I’m great! I should write a book or something.

And it gets worse. We start believing the things we write about ourselves. We start believing the things people say about us in the comments. We get impressed with our last post, or the one before that. Our heads swell, jet-puffed style.

A related reason to oppose blogging has to do with how little we know compared to how much we write. Some people write more than they have read, and it shows. They insist on proving it to us. They blog us down, they blog us to death. And they ran out of good ideas right before their second post. They told us everything they know the post before. The river of treacle might overflow its banks, but Bob will insist on adding more blog.

And that brings up another point. Blogging gives a new venue to cowards everywhere. Not that all bloggers are cowards. But many cowards blog. You can be pretty big man with a keyboard. You can hide there and snipe at people. You can thump your chest and toot your horn and rattle your saber. But that doesn’t mean you are courageous, just because you hide behind your keyboard. If you don’t have the courage to discuss the matter when you could, you are a coward. No matter how brave you sound.

Blogging gives a voice to the slanderer. Church members become disgruntled, leave the church, and start a blog about it. It would be sin to send e-mails to a few select members against the pastor. But to blog about it, so the whole world can get in on the issue? That is worse. But bloggers do this. They are doing it now.

Matthew 18 applies to the blog world. James 3 applies to the blog world. Gossip, slander, deceit, and malicious lies are sins in the blog world, just the same as anywhere else. For that matter, the World Wide Web would do well to remember that God rules and reigns everywhere. His laws apply, even to your blog.

Blogging has much potential for good. Through it, we can attack the wickedness and idolatry of this world. We believers have an opportunity like never before in the history of the world to get the message out. We have the power of the pen like our Puritan fathers never had. But what do we do with all that power? They (the Puritans) wrote magnificent works that we still find relevant and useful today. And they wrote it by hand. We write drivel, long rivers of treacle, hundreds of miles wide, but only about a half-inch deep. We must consider our ways. I am not for blogging. I am for repentance. Judgement must begin at the house of God. We must blog for the glory of God, or we must blog off.

What I Learned From Bob

Not long ago, I came across a blog written by a person I know. His name is Bob. Bob likes to blog. Bob’s blog teaches us things about unity. Bob’s blog taught me a lot about blogging. It literally revolutionized my understanding of unity, of courage, of slander, and of many other things. In this feeble attempt at blogging, I would like to share with you all, my faithful readers, My Story © (thanks to both of you for reading it).

First, I learned from Bob that you can say anything when you are hiding behind a keyboard. Before, I had always thought that courage consisted of talking to people directly when you had a disagreement with them. But then I saw Bob. I saw that Bob had a controversy with his college. But his college never knew. That is, they never knew until they stumbled across his blog. Then, paraded out in front of the world wide web, they saw that Bob didn’t agree with them. See, I learned from Bob the courage of conviction. When you could talk to all those you disagree with, don’t do it! Instead, hide behind your keyboard.

I also found out what excellent hiding places keyboards are. Like Joseph Smith, I can say whatever I want, because No Man Knows My History. If I sound intelligent, I must be godly. No man knows my history. No man knows about my troubled past. No man knows how many times I have had to hit the reset button of life. No man knows the trail of tears I have left behind me. In the blog world, I am anonymous, yet well known. Because I can blog.

I also learned that Matthew 18 and James 2 don’t apply to the blog world. They aren’t necessary when I’m trying to slander one of God’s churches, or a group of God’s men. I can say what I want. I'm unhappy. I can say so. I don’t need to go talk to the Pastor or Assistants at the church and college I am criticizing. I can just boldly use their name, cut them down, criticize them, mock their stand, all from the safety of my keyboard. And there are no consequences either! No church discipline in the blog world! It’s great.

I’m excited. I look forward to sharing more of these lessons from Bob with you all, as I discover them. Meanwhile, I’ll be hiding behind my keyboard, promoting unity through slander, escape from past actions through intelligent sounding nonsense, and in general trying to follow the pattern of my good friend Bob. Thanks Bob. You’re really special to me.

God Prepared for Jonah

Jonah 1:17 Now the LORD had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah. And Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights.
Jonah 4:6 And the LORD God prepared a gourd, and made it to come up over Jonah, that it might be a shadow over his head, to deliver him from his grief. So Jonah was exceeding glad of the gourd.
7 But God prepared a worm when the morning rose the next day, and it smote the gourd that it withered.
8 And it came to pass, when the sun did arise, that God prepared a vehement east wind; and the sun beat upon the head of Jonah, that he fainted, and wished in himself to die, and said, It is better for me to die than to live.

Sometimes the great men of the Bible show us our own reflection. Certainly we should follow the faith of Abraham and Moses and Peter and Paul. But we also find that we have much in common with ole’ Jonah. And in the verses above, we see exactly how God deals with his finicky and unfaithful people.

In the verses listed above, we see four things that God prepared for Jonah: a great fish, a gourd, a worm, and a vehement east wind. They were a mixed bag of cursing and blessing. They teach us about God, and they teach us about ourselves as well.

When Jonah tried to escape God’s will, God prepared a great fish to spare his life, to bring him safely to the place God prepared for him, and to cause him to do the work that God had prepared him for. The great fish prepared Jonah for the work God had. It also teaches us about the Sovereignty of Almighty God. We can neither hide from God, nor escape His will for our lives. When God intends to use us for His purpose, He will use us, willingly or not. We will do His will happily, or He will drag us kicking and screaming.

The second thing God prepared for Jonah was a gourd. God prepared it because Jonah became a little cranky when God spared the Ninevites. Rather than rejoicing, Jonah asked God to kill him. Instead, God prepared the gourd, a gourd to shelter Jonah. And, crabby as Jonah was, he was glad of the gourd. Here, God shows us the other side of Sovereignty – Providence. As Sovereign, God causes all that comes to pass. As Providence, God graciously provides out of His own abundance. The great fish was Providence. The gourd was also Providence.

The next day, God prepared a worm to eat the gourd. In a day Jonah lost that thing that delighted him. God prepared the worm as an object lesson (see v. 10). Often, we are more concerned about the material and temporal than we are with the souls of men. Men who may burn in hell one day. Sadly, some Christians mourn longer over a lost watch or a spilled glass of milk than they would over a perishing soul.

When the worm had destroyed the gourd, then God prepared a vehement east wind. As the sun beat on his head and the hot wind blew, God gave Jonah a little taste of hell. The hell that many Ninevites were headed for just two days earlier. It was only a taste, only a drop from the lake of fire. It was only to remind Jonah that his preaching had saved many. Resentment is a temptation for Christian workers. We may resent God’s work in hearts. But it is more likely that we resent the struggles we face personally in God’s service. Those who work the hardest for God may grow the weariest in the work. Some resent the burdens they must bear. They lose sight of the glory of the work of God, of the great things He does and is doing through them. They forget that they are merely vessels for his use. They resent the way God uses them.

Christian worker, do not let this be your case. Be not weary in well-doing, for in due season ye shall reap, if ye faint not.

Rhetoric on Itself

So, what is rhetoric? when we think of rhetoric in this day and age, we think of politicians, thirty-second sound bites, “that depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is”, and so on. Because rhetoric has fallen on hard times, we typically associate it with overblown bombast. But while propaganda and bombast may be forms of rhetoric, they actually abuse it. Propaganda and bombast are pretend rhetoric, an imitation of the true art.

So, what is rhetoric? Gorgias called it the art of persuasion. Socrates called it a form of flattery. When Aristotle wrote his monumental work on Rhetoric, he attempted to avoid the criticisms of Plato and Socrates, calling rhetoric the counterpart to dialectic. All men use dialectic (logic), and all men use rhetoric (the expression of logic). Thus, Aristotle defined Rhetoric as the faculty of observing in any given case the available means of persuasion.

Aristotle’s definition seems to describe rhetoric in a theoretical sense. A rhetorician (student of rhetoric) learns to observe the available means of persuasion. He learns to examine his audience to know how he should approach them on the given topic. He learns to pay attention to himself, and how his audience will perceive him. He wants to be credible. He wants his audience to listen to what he has to say. He learns to find the arguments that can and will persuade his audience, and he uses them. He learns how to present those arguments clearly and effectively. In other words, Rhetoric as a formal subject teaches exactly what Aristotle described in his definition.

Practically speaking, there is a sense in which all men are rhetors (users of rhetoric). All men speak, all men seek to persuade. Rhetoric then, in a practical sense, is the art of speaking clearly and effectively (For a thorough discussion of this definition, see Douglas Wilson, Repairing the Ruins (Moscow, ID: Canon Press, 1996), p.177ff).

The truth is, both definitions correctly identify the true art of rhetoric. All men speak. All men attempt to persuade. All men look for the available means of persuasion. In other words, all men look at the situation and try to find the best way to get their point across. Is Aristotle’s definition correct? Is Wilson’s definition correct? The answer is yes, and both are useful as well.

Would it be correct then to say that rhetoric is persuasion? No, rhetoric does its best to persuade, but it may or may not. A rhetor observes all the available means of persuasion, and then employs the approach that seems best, the approach that gives him the better chance to persuade his audience. He then uses that approach to present his ideas clearly and effectively.

In other words, rhetoric improves your chances at persuasion, just as the right golf club might improve your chances at a hole-in-one. Rhetoric used rightly will improve your ability to persuade, will help you speak clearly and effectively, and will improve your ability to listen and discern arguments.