Full Contact Christianity

Simply Believe

22 July 2025

Belief is simple the way language is simple. If there’s a bunch of different sized and colored buckets in the corner of the garage, and you send me over there to get the big red one, you say it exactly like that: “big red bucket.” You never say “red big bucket.” Do you know why? Probably not; that’s just how it’s said. Simple, right?

Well…not exactly. When you start examining the order of English adjectives, you’ll discover that there’s a very strong, nearly inviolate rule. Linguists have mapped it, and use the acronym OSASCOMP (opinion, size, age, shape, color, origin, material, purpose). Size comes before color; there ya go. That’s pretty complicated, isn’t it? Who thinks about that? Nobody but linguists, and people learning the language as adults. If you’re a native speaker of English, you can live your whole life without ever being consciously aware of the rule — all the while keeping it.

Thus also with belief. We can get deep in the philosophical weeds on what belief is and how it all works — it’s complex the way everything in God’s world, especially everything human, is complex. But you don’t need to grasp all the deep philosophy to just believe something. We do it every day. Wake up, there’s light streaming in the window — you believe it’s morning. You glance at the clock, which reads 5:45 am — you just believe it’s true. Check the weather for the day and see that there’s an 80% chance it’ll rain this afternoon — you trust them enough to take a jacket with you when you leave the house. Of course you’re not sure it will rain (and the weather guy isn’t either), but you believe that it’s likely enough to be worth taking a jacket. And so on….

And that’s not even to speak of all the things you’re just assuming: the reality of the physical world, personal existence, causality…somewhere in the aether, the spirit of David Hume seethes with envy. (Not really. He admitted he assumed those things too — couldn’t seem to stop himself.)

The places where the gospel is presented in Scripture also don’t get deep into the philosophical weeds. The biblical accounts of human nature will stand up to deep and rigorous examination, but most people never go there, and never need to. So whether we look at a particular evangelistic encounter between Jesus and Matthew, say, or Nathaniel, or Nicodemus, or whether we’re looking at a work like John’s Gospel as a whole, we see a pretty commonsense presentation of belief.

That’s because the biblical accounts focus the reader on Jesus, not on the reader himself. The goal is not to gaze at yourself in the mirror as you believe in something. The goal is to look to Jesus. Focus on Him, not on your own belief.

As we encounter people who need to meet Jesus, that’s what we want for them, too. So again, we don’t get deep in the weeds over what believing is; we don’t need to. What we do need to do is live like Christians, which provokes the questions to which Jesus is the answer (1 Peter 3:15). Then we tell them who He is and what He did.

When you’re telling people about Jesus, don’t soften it with “I believe that…” In polite secular society, “I believe that…” is code for “you don’t need to agree.” We reserve that expression for matters of opinion, not matters of fact. When you’re announcing a fact, you just say it; you don’t lead off with “I believe.” Try it: “I believe that gravity works.” “I believe the sky is blue.” “I believe 2+2=4.”

Sound funny, right? Of course it does — because when you’re mentioning that 2+2=4, your belief is not important. Nobody cares if you believe it; they care if it’s true. So if you wouldn’t say “I believe” there, don’t say “I believe” when you’re announcing facts about Jesus either. Just announce the truth:

“Every evil thing you’ve ever done, every character flaw, every failing, was nailed to the cross with Jesus; died on the cross with Jesus; was buried in the earth with Jesus; and when God raised Him from the dead on the third day, He didn’t come out of the grave dragging a Hefty bag of your crap! It’s all done; He took care of it, and He offers you a new, clean, resurrected life that starts right now. You could quit wallowing in all that right now and be free for the rest of your life! What do you say?”

You don’t need them to say “I believe.” You just want them to believe. Too often, we focus our message on the act of believing. Don’t. Focus your message the way Jesus did: on Jesus Himself. We don’t want this person looking in the mirror watching themselves believe in Jesus. We want them looking at Jesus and believing in Him. Let the focus be on Jesus, not on their belief.

(For the record, I’m not against getting into the philosophical weeds in order to look more closely at how belief works — it’s fascinating, and it’s part of the world God made. We’ll learn good things from the examination if we conduct it well. But that’s a whole other layer, and we don’t need to drag unbelievers through it.)

Comments Off on Simply Believe | Bare Minimum Gospel Foolishness | Permalink
Posted by Tim Nichols

Utterly Ordinary Men

15 July 2025

Becoming a good man absolutely requires input from both men and women. Not everybody’s blessed with a mom and a dad, and fewer still are blessed with functioning examples in both of them, but we need to find that input somewhere if we’re going to grow well. Think Proverbs: literally a dad writing a manual for his sons, and it repeatedly exhorts them to heed their father’s advice, and not to forsake the law of their mother. It presents Wisdom as a woman throughout, and all the things that are true of Wisdom early in the book are true of an excellent wife later — a good woman is Wisdom incarnate, and that’s essential to making a good man. And there’s Dad, writing the book that says so, imparting a pile of his own masculine direction in the process.

Our culture has absolutely failed to embrace this dynamic of older men teaching younger men how to be. Men have contributed to that failure by refusing to step up and exercise a measure of moral authority, preferring to mind their own business and let the “experts” take the stage. Dunno if you noticed, gents, but the experts are how we got where we are. It’s time we quit leaving a vacuum for them to fill.

It’s not all on the men, either. Too frequently, otherwise decent women have contributed by privately loving, but publicly disrespecting their husbands. “They never do grow up, do they?” “He’s the only one of my kids that didn’t move out!” Ladies, the culture has given you these tropes to play with; do not be conformed to the world. When you indulge in these tropes…well, let me put it like this: do you want more men to be like your husband? Then stop running him down. No young man listens to a wife insult her husband and thinks “I really want to be him when I grow up.” If you want your daughters to have good men to date and marry, then quit driving the young men away from good men.

Young men will seek advice, and if we insist on leaving a vacuum, various toxic idiots — pickup artists, professional athletes, influencers and the like — will fill it. Even for the young men who have the sense to steer clear of those folks and seek a better class of podcaster, there are hard limits on what mass media can teach. You can’t get wise counsel tailored to your specific situation from a podcast. So what are we to do?

The answer is actually simple. Not easy, but simple enough. We don’t need a Christian Joe Rogan or Jordan Peterson or whoever. We need an army of utterly ordinary men willing to care for the young men within their reach. Not one influencer that can reach 50,000 young men at a time, but 25,000 ordinary, admirable, salt-of-the-earth guys that can reach 2. Which is to say that the answer is the Kingdom of God, and the Kingdom of God is like leaven….

Comments Off on Utterly Ordinary Men | Equality and Difference of Man and Woman | Permalink
Posted by Tim Nichols

How Important is Theology?

8 July 2025

I was corresponding with a fella about practical ministry and seeking Christian fellowship. In passing, he asserted that soteriology is really the heart of it all. I had an intense, visceral reaction to that line, and it made me stop and interrogate it. Soteriology really is important, after all. Different Christians focus on different aspects of theology, and that’s as it should be; if soteriology is his focus, why is that bothering me so much?

Upon reflection, here’s where I’m coming from: Soteriology is not the heart of it all. Jesus Himself is the heart of it all, which I hope is what he meant, but the language matters here, so bear with me in a little folly! The distinction is not trivial: soteriology is an ever-more-detailed set of ideas and convictions; Jesus is a Person. People who prioritize Jesus will work at getting along with other people who prioritize Jesus; they find ways to handle their differences charitably for the sake of serving their mutual Friend and realizing His righteousness in the world. People who prioritize soteriology will turn on their fellow believers over a series of ever-smaller distinctions, all the while congratulating themselves loudly on their keen discernment. I could name names here — I certainly have some in mind — but what for? You can probably think of your own examples, and if you’d recognize the names I would mention, then you can see what I’m talking about anyway. The temptations may be subtle in the moment, but the results are visible from orbit.

I’m easy friends with people who put Jesus at the heart of it all. Whatever their foibles, I got mine too, and we get along all right. Folks who put soteriology at the heart of it all, on the other hand…no. Not even if we agree on the soteriology. They need to repent, hard. I pray that they do. If they won’t, then they can’t backstab their way into irrelevance fast enough to suit me, and I certainly don’t wanna be standing within reach while they do it.

Comments Off on How Important is Theology? | Bare Minimum Gospel Foolishness, Controversies, Ecclesiology, Shadow Ecclesiology, The Free Grace Food Fight | Permalink
Posted by Tim Nichols

The Anatomy of Apostasy

1 July 2025

When someone has–as far as we can tell–come into the faith, but then walked away again, it can be hard to tell exactly what happened. Three things are possible:

1) This person was hanging out with us, being a social chameleon to ‘try on’ Christianity, and never believed any of it. That’s certainly possible–it’s been a time-honored way to access a Christian dating pool, for example. (It’s also a little dangerous; people who start out like this have a way of meeting Jesus if they hang out for long enough.)

2) This person did not understand the gospel and was trying to work their way into being a Christian. Your group may present the gospel clearly, but as every preacher knows, people hear very selectively, and it can be hard to overcome their prior programming. The ‘folk Christian’ idea that good boys go to heaven and bad boys go to hell is very, very strong, and some people will hear absolutely everything you say through that filter. These folks leave because nobody can actually live the life they’re trying to live. They’re exhausted — of course they are! — and they don’t want to keep up the pretense anymore. Who could blame them?

3) This person understood and believed the gospel, and then left the faith for whatever reason. Often this is because Scripture told them a hard truth they didn’t want to hear. Sometimes it’s a costly moral demand, and they’d rather retreat from the faith than grow into obedience. For more status-conscious people, it’s often a realization of just how much their faith — if they take it seriously — will separate them from the cool kids. For prophetically gifted people, it’s often a preference for demonic lies over the hard truths of the Spirit. But then, sometimes it’s none of those things. Sometimes it’s exhaustion from faithfulness, as the readers of Hebrews were experiencing.

Happily, we don’t actually have to know which of these things happened to know what to do. Where this person belongs is back in the fold, walking with Jesus. No matter whether that will be a prodigal son returning or a fake believer becoming a real one, we preach the gospel to them and the goodness of God that calls them to repentance. Paul preached the gospel to the Romans (Rom.1:1-17) even when they were faithful. We can certainly preach it to the faithless, confident that it’s what they need to hear.

If it turns out this person actually grasped the gospel all along, great! This is an opportunity to help them see how the same truths they’ve already grasped work out in daily life. For MANY Christians, their honest answer to Paul’s question in Gal. 3:3 (“Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh?”) would be “Yes, of course! How else would you do it?”

Anytime someone says “I just couldn’t do it anymore,” I always ask them what it was they were doing that they could no longer stand to do. Because, mark it down, they didn’t get sick of all the Spirit-produced love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, gentleness, faithfulness, and self-control that was overflowing in their life, and wish instead for hatred, misery, conflict, short-temper, cruelty, evil, coarseness, betrayal, and impulsiveness.

But something happened. Listen. Find out what, if you can. But even if you never figure out what happened, bring them to Jesus. That’s always the answer.

Comments Off on The Anatomy of Apostasy | Apologetics, Mentoring/Disciple-Making | Permalink
Posted by Tim Nichols

A Wish List

24 June 2025

I’d like to commend to your attention Peter Leithart’s Wish List for a reformational catholicism. I think it’s worth contemplating in some depth. Ask yourself, as you read each item on the list: if God gave us this, would we be better off than we are now? Are there reasons why we don’t want this? What are they? Would those costs outweigh the benefits?

(Full disclosure: I’d make a few edits to the list, myself. But only a few.)

Comments Off on A Wish List | Ecclesiology | Permalink
Posted by Tim Nichols

As Ideology, Useless

17 June 2025

As an ideology, an arrangement of mental furniture, Christianity is absolute trash. If all you’re after is a way to arrange your head, an “I like to think of things like this…” kind of thing, then save yourself a pile of trouble and just go Buddhist-lite. You’ll be a lot happier. Your ideology won’t comport with reality in spots, but you can always blame that on residual Western dualistic thinking, and just try to transcend the contradiction.

Christianity doesn’t claim to be an arrangement of mental furniture that will make you happier, more satisfied with life, or a better person somehow. That’s not the claim. The claim is that it’s actually true. God incarnate walked the earth in the Man, Jesus Christ. He lived in perfect harmony with the Holy Spirit, and empowered by the Spirit, He healed the sick, preached freedom to the captives, cast out demons, and was murdered by a coalition of the respectable people. When He died on the cross, every sin, every dark thing, every character flaw and sickness, everything that stands between you and God — it was all nailed to the cross with Jesus, died on the cross with Jesus, was buried in the heart of the earth with Jesus. And when God raised Him from the dead three days later, He did not come out of the grave dragging a Hefty bag of your crap. It’s all done, it’s gone, it’s taken care of.

Now as an ideology, that’s pretty useless. You can think of your unfortunate actions as sins, and your sins as forgiven, but that doesn’t really change anything much if it’s just a way of thinking about it. But if it’s true, then it’s a truth that remakes the entire moral and physical universe. If it’s true, then all the things you’ve ever done that make you just sick to think of them? There’s a medicine that cures that sickness. You need only accept the reality of what Jesus has done for you; you could be free today, and stay free for the rest of your life.

And it is true.

People often object at this point: “I did those things. If someone has to suffer for them, it should be me.” Sure. If God had consulted with you beforehand, you would be morally obligated to object, wouldn’t you? But He didn’t consult you. He just did it. He loves you that much, so He just conspired to pay all the costs on your behalf and set you free forever. And now it’s too late to object; it’s done.

You can either pretend He didn’t do it, or say “Thank you.”

Comments Off on As Ideology, Useless | Apologetics, Preaching | Permalink
Posted by Tim Nichols

Guest Essay: Be Fruitful and Multiply

14 June 2025

Today I’m pleased to present a guest essay by a young friend, considering the practicality of applying the creation mandate in today’s world. I think you’ll find it helpful.

Be Fruitful and Multiply: Genesis 1:28 in the 21^st Century

by Jael Anderson

“South Korea has a fertility rate of 0.7” (Lewis-Kraus). This means that every person is being replaced by one third of a person, or for every three people in this generation there is one in the next generation. “This is the lowest rate of any nation in the world. It may be the lowest in recorded history… The country is an outlier, but it may not be one for long” (Lewis-Kraus). A school in South Korea that once had over a thousand students now only has five. They know no other children except those in their school. What will this do to our world? Will things actually be easier and better with fewer people?

When God created Adam and Eve, he told them to “Be fruitful and multiply” (Gen. 1.28), which obviously means to have children. During their 800-some-year-lives, Adam and Eve had many sons and daughters. The next part of God’s command to them was, “Fill the earth and subdue it” (Gen. 1.28). One meaning of subdue is, “To bring (land) under cultivation” (Merriam-Webster’s 1242). It can also mean to bring under dominion, and God told Adam and Eve, “Have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth” (Gen. 1.28). Adam and Eve’s mission was to subdue the earth and bring its animals under dominion.

Dominion over the world is not the only reason to have children; they are also a blessing. As Psalm 127 says, “Behold, children are a heritage from the LORD, the fruit of the womb is a reward. Like arrows in the hand of a warrior, are the children of one’s youth. Happy is the man who has his quiver full of them” (Ps. 127.3-5) Solomon wrote this psalm, and his quiver was most certainly full of children. Psalm 128 lists the blessings of those who fear the LORD, and a large portion of the psalm talks about children: “Your wife shall be like a fruitful vine in the very heart of your house, your children like olive plants around your table… Yes, may you see your children’s children” (Ps. 128.3,6). David wrote Psalm 144 as a song to God who blesses his people, and one thing he mentions is, “Our sons may be as plants grown up in their youth… our daughters may be as pillars sculpted in palace style” (Ps, 144.12). These psalms depict children as one of God’s main blessings to his people.

Why are children depicted as a blessing? First of all, “Children are a heritage from the LORD” (Ps. 127.3). Children are an inheritance – a good thing to have. Little kids give purpose and joy to their parents. Older children also help their parents with many other things, such as in business and managing the home. Children are also a legacy, a meaningful and lasting gift to their parents and the world. Children who obey the sixth commandment – “Honor your father and your mother” (Deut. 5.16) – are definitely a blessing to their parents. Kids give joy to their parents because they are cute and fun; raising godly children is a high calling that gives purpose to their parents. Having children can “carry on the family legacy” (Stone), which is a reason many people have children.

Siblings are a blessing to each other when they are young and when they are adults. When asked why someone should have children, an eight-year-old “stopped punching his little brother long enough to say, ‘We’re excellent company’” (Lewis-Kraus). When children are not able to spend time with friends outside of their family, they can play with each other and learn and grow together.[3] As adults, their siblings can become intimate friends to turn to in a time of trouble. As Solomon writes in Ecclesiastes,“Two are better than one, because they have a good reward for their labor… Though one may be overpowered by another, two can withstand him. And a threefold cord is not quickly broken.” (Eccles. 4.9,12) For example, it was easier for my grandma to care for her father in his old age with her three siblings than if she had been an only child.

Although many may think the main reason people don’t have kids is simply because they don’t want to, one of the main objections to raising children is that it is too expensive. If someone says, “having a child in the US is notably not cheap” (Valko), they think they need to spend a lot more on their kids than they actually do. For example, each child does not need to have his or her own room. In fact, it can be a lot more fun to share a room with four siblings than to sleep alone. Other things people spend too much money on for their children are phones and sports. America is currently the richest country in the world, possibly the richest in history. This does make it more expensive to live here, but it also gives us modern conveniences (which can make child-raising easier) including electric services, heating and cooling, and transportation. People have been raising children forever, even during the Great Depression, which was one of the poorest times in America’s history. We are rich and not having children, but when we were poor we had lots. Raising children is not as much of a financial problem as people think.

Another objection to children is that “Giving birth takes a huge toll on your body” (Valko). Upon interviewing mothers of five and six children, I found that many women say that the toll on your body is worth it. Kids are just so fun that people want more. “The last will be first and the first last” (Matt. 20.16). Giving your life for your child is a way of putting yourself last, and ultimately, this sacrifice is rewarded. People also say that they want to do what they like with their life, and say, “Children aren’t a necessary part of the good life” (Lewis-Kraus). Traveling is hard with children. It is harder to have time for hobbies with children. Having a dog or cat is much easier than children. However, these do not give lasting satisfaction, and the people who pursue these things often later regret not having children. Psychotherapist Dr. Barton Goldsmith says, “Deciding not to have children was the biggest mistake I ever made…I believe the effort, the pain and tears, the fear and the financial burden, all the difficult parts that I missed out on—along with the many joys of parenthood—would have been worth it… A trip around the world, or any great experience, cannot match the love of your child” (Goldsmith).

The first command God gave to Adam and Eve was to have children, and “for most of human history, having children was something the majority of people simply did without thinking too much about it. Now it is one competing alternative among many” (Lewis-Kraus). People are worried that there will not be enough food in the world, and that animals will go extinct. (They don’t seem to be worried that humans will go extinct.) People also say that with fewer people, there will be “a society with less competition – a smaller, gentler world with a greater share of resources for all” (Lewis-Kraus). But this really isn’t true. With fewer people, there will be less of a labor force to “produce and distribute basic goods” (Lewis-Kraus). This labor force may be an even smaller percentage than it is now, so instead of there being “a greater share of resources” to go around, the “inequality will increase” (Lewis-Kraus).

Another thing people say is that “not having children is the single most impactful decision that a person can make to reverse the climate change” (Lewis-Kraus). Why do they think children make the world warmer? Today is not the first time the world has experienced global warming. Temperatures during the medieval warm period were higher than they are now, and this was not because a bunch of Vikings were driving race cars. The earth is pretty full, but we need to continue to obey God’s command. Has the world been subdued? No. We most certainly do not have dominion over all the animals. We know very little about the creatures that inhabit the ocean’s floor. There are thick jungles full of undiscovered animals. The world is not subdued. The world is in need of more humans to fulfill God’s command of dominion.

Children are a blessing to their family and the world. It is good and fun to have many children. “People who do not believe in a good human future and a deep sense of purpose for the future will not have children” (Yenor). We Christians do have a good hope for the future. Many objections to children are based on fear, but as Christians, we can trust God to provide for our needs. To obey God’s command we need to “Be fruitful and multiply.”

Works Cited

Douthat, Ross. “The Case for One More Child: Why Large Families Will Save Humanity.” Plough.com, Plough Publishing House, 18 Nov. 2020, http://www.plough.com/en/topics/life/parenting/the-case-for-one-more-child.

Goldsmith, Barton. “Why I Regret Not Having Children: Deciding not to have children was the biggest mistake I ever made.” Psychologytoday.com, Psychology Today, 28 July 2021, http://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/emotional-fitness/202107/why-i-regret-not-   having- children.

Lewis-Kraus, Gideon. “The End of Children.” Newyorker.com, The New Yorker, 24 Feb. 2025, http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2025/03/03/the-population-implosion.

Stone, Lyman. “A Family-Friendly Pronatalism.” Ifstudies.com, Institute for Family Studies, 20 June 2024, ifstudies.org/blog/a-family-friendly-pronatalism.

Valko, Alana. “A 29-Year-Old Just Gave The Best Explanation As To Why Millennials Aren’t Having Kids.” Buzzfeed.com, BuzzFeed, 15 Aug. 2024, http://www.buzzfeed.com/alanavalko/why- millennials- dont-have-kids.

Yenor, Scott. “Fertility Shows Why Christians Must Be Concerned About Political Greatness.” americanreformer.org, American Reformer, 27 Nov. 2024, americanreformer.org/2024/11/fertility-shows-why-christians-must-be-concerned-about-political-greatness/.

“Subdue.” Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, edited by Fredrick C. Mish, Eleventh edition, Merriam-Webster, Incorporated, 2014, p. 1242.

Holy Bible. New King James Version. Nashville TN: Thomas Nelson, 1982.

Comments Off on Guest Essay: Be Fruitful and Multiply | Hammersmith | Permalink
Posted by Tim Nichols

So You Don’t Quit

10 June 2025

Really grasping the doctrine of heavenly rewards is an important tidbit in the Christian life. I’ve noticed that some people really like to believe in some version of a democratic socialist heaven, where everybody is rewarded the same regardless. The notion of different rewards for different investments of devotion and service really offends them. But the Bible speaks of this regularly, so it would behoove us all to get our heads around it. (See the Personal Eschatology section of my Free Grace Theology page for a little more on this.)

Once you’ve grasped the idea, though, there are still some pitfalls to avoid. One of them is developing a calculator mentality, where you’re constantly keeping score in your head, thinking about all the heavenly rewards you’re racking up. Jesus does encourage us to lay up treasures in heaven “where moth and rust do not corrupt, and where thieves do not break in and steal,” but He discourages keeping score. When Peter asked Him “What do we get for all we’ve left behind to follow you?” Jesus told the parable of the workers in the vineyard, a tale wherein nobody gets cheated, but a lot of folks get surprised.

Another pitfall is to keep score in the opposite direction: constantly mindful of your sins, failures, missed opportunities, and keeping track of all the reward you’re losing as a result. Obviously, that’s a miserable way to live.

So what are we to do with this doctrine, once we grasp it?

Use it to fuel the mission, that’s what. God didn’t put you on earth so you could daydream about heavenly rewards, or so you could be paralyzed by the thought of losing them. God put you on earth for a purpose. Focus on the purpose. If you’re driving to a friend’s birthday party and you want to actually get there, you don’t daydream about how good the party’s going to be, nor do you spend all your time staring at the ditch you don’t want to accidentally drive into. You keep your eyes on the road, right? Now obviously, you’re motivated by the party; that’s why you’re driving there to start with. But on the trip, you focus on the task at hand.

Be about the mission. God in Christ is reconciling the world (that means you, too!) to Himself, and has committed to us the ministry of reconciliation. Quit thinking about the hoard of goodies that awaits you in heaven, and focus on helping the people around you become fully reconciled to God, whether that means leading unbelievers to Christ or helping believers grow in maturity or helping unbelievers inch their way closer to the cross, even if they’re not going to convert this year. Or just being the hands and feet of Jesus to the people who are around you, loving the hurt and lost and broken because God loves them, whether they love Him or not. You don’t need some higher purpose to feed a hungry man or dress a homeless woman’s foot wound; it’s enough that this person is the image of God and He loves them. Love them. (Wear gloves when you dress the wound; I’m not saying you should be stupid!)

When you join in the dirty, dangerous, soul-harrowing work of being present to the people God loves (that would be all of them), the doctrine of rewards will help you — not because you’re keeping some kind of running tally in your head, but because the work is hard, and the results are not always visible. It gets discouraging. I tell my disciples “If you don’t wanna quit every couple months, you’re probably not playing hard enough.” Sometimes it’s really helpful to remind yourself that every good thing you do, every ziploc bag of Clif bars and tampons you give away, every wound you dress, every ounce of love and attention you share — none of it is for nothing. God is telling a magnificent story; you get to be part of it. Every little detail matters; He isn’t wasting any of it. Everything you do is seen in the halls of heaven, and you have never given so much as a cup of water unnoticed — you’ll see a reward for that some day.

You don’t reflect on that so you can rub your hands together like Scrooge McDuck; you reflect on that so you don’t quit.

When an angry girl throws her entire plate of food across the room because you won’t give her a second cinnamon roll, you don’t quit.
When you have to turn a haggard man with holes in his shoes out into 10-degree snowy weather because your shelter is out of space, you don’t quit.
When a guy you loved and counseled gets his life turned around, then relapses and dies of an overdose, you don’t quit.
When the lady you just fed turns around and chucks a hammer through your window for some meth-induced reason, you don’t quit.
When a dear friend drinks herself to death rather than face the hard work of healing, you don’t quit.

You remind yourself that God never wastes anything, that everything good, even if it “failed” as far as we can see, is rewarded. You shrug off your crippling self-pity, get your head back in the game, and love the next person God puts in front of you. God in Christ is reconciling the world to Himself, and He has committed to us the ministry of reconciliation. (And by the way, none of the examples above are invented, and I still feed the lady with the hammer. Had a good little conversation with her just last Saturday, in fact. God brings some rewards here, too, if we have eyes to see.)

Comments Off on So You Don’t Quit | Ecclesiology, Kingdom of God | Tagged: heavenly rewards, misthology, practical ministry, rewards | Permalink
Posted by Tim Nichols

Guest Essay: School of Play

7 June 2025

The essay below is a guest post by a young friend of mine. In our reflections on Christian physicality, we frequently forget to think specifically about the implications of the fact that schoolchildren have bodies. Owen weighs in with a message we’d do well to reflect on.

School of Play

by Owen Coffman

Angela Browning, founder of Recess for All Florida Students, said her kids started coming home from school in tears a few years ago, complaining that the day had been too long and that they’d had no time to play with friends. At the time, they were getting 10 minutes of recess twice a week, she said. This year, with 20 minutes of recess each day, their response has been different. Health organizations including the American Academy of Pediatrics recommend that children should be given at least 60 minutes of recess per day. Why do kids get such a minimal amount of time to do what they want? Nobody questions the fact that adults need breaks during a work day. Kids have far more energy, less developed brains, and haven’t yet built the social skills they will need to thrive as adults. It is intuitive that they would need free time to move, think, play, and interact with their peers. School is very structured. Kids have to sit quietly, take notes, and keep their bodies still. In most classes, they are spending their time listening, not contributing. Interacting with friends is discouraged. Obviously these rules are in place for a reason, intending to help students learn. Teachers are urged to give their students all the information needed to pass their standardized tests, keep their schools open, and measure up to students in other countries academically. This in turn puts pressure on students to keep their grades up, remember everything, and ultimately succeed. However, kids are only able to keep these difficult behaviors up for a time before they need a break to move their bodies, interact with friends, or even just sit alone and think. Many school officials and administrators downplay the importance of recess for kids because they assume it is a waste of time and kids would be better employed studying. They often feel that a few extra minutes spent teaching a subject will improve academic outcomes more than the same amount of time spent in unstructured play. However, this is not actually what the research has shown. Children get higher grades, solve personal problems better, improve their fitness, and develop confidence and independence, all as direct benefits of longer recess.

Maybe the most obvious to spot are the physical benefits of recess. According to US News and World Report, “The average (American) child sits for 8.5 hours a day. Combine that with high-calorie foods, and weight gain is inevitable, researchers say. But studies show that at least 20 minutes of recess daily, along with 150 minutes of physical education a week, make a measurable difference in children’s weight.” In a country where children’s obesity rates are growing, implementing recess could have a big impact. In the same article, author Kate Rix points out “Letting kids run fast will help them develop coordination. Running up the slide may not be as unsafe as it looks. And even falling… is something kids need to practice to avoid getting badly hurt.” Challenging their physical abilities makes kids stronger, faster, more coordinated, and improves stamina. Recess isn’t the only way to reap all of these benefits, but it is a good place to start. Students will feel motivated to improve in an environment with friends. Most boys and many girls are naturally competitive with each other and physical activities are a better place for kids to compete than on video game scores, social media followers, or test results. Pull up competitions, jump rope high score, or a game of capture the flag are all appropriate outlets for competitive spirit. Aside from being a channel for kids to burn energy and compete, games at recess are an opportunity to try out new things. Children often lack space, time, or friends after school which leaves recess as their only time to be introduced to new things and expand what they are able to do. A child who throws a frisbee with a friend for 20 minutes will find he can throw more accurately and catch more consistently than when he began. A kid who sets herself a goal of getting across the monkey bars without dropping will get stronger arms and be able to complete the monkey bars, climb a rope swing, or in my brother’s case, climb up the underside of the stairs using only his arms. When kids get home from school, without motivation, they may just pick up a screen. Many parents don’t require or encourage their children to be active when they get home from school, which means it is often up to schools to provide them with a place to be active and grow in physical ability.

“Quality physical education along with daily recess are necessary components of the school curriculum that enable students to develop physical competence, health-related fitness, self responsibility, and enjoyment of physical activity so that they can be physically active for a lifetime,” the groups wrote in a position paper about elementary school recess in 2001.(Time Magazine) Not only do schools enforce activity in PE class, they can be the place where kids find movement fun during recess. There is something inherently more exciting about playing and competing with people your age. Classmates can build each other up, have friendly competition, and enable games that can’t be played at home due to lack of space, equipment, or teammates.

Learning a skill at a young age and enjoying it will build a foundation for wanting to do it for the rest of life. A young kid whose dad takes him golfing will be more likely to golf as an older adult to stay in shape and have fun. Kids who play tennis in middle school might as a fifty year old pick up pickleball.

The physical benefits of recess are all pretty obvious, but what about the social upshots of a longer unstructured time for children during a normal school day? Everything about school is precisely structured. Kids aren’t able to interact with each other except for during recess. Children will grow in independence and toughness, learn how to regulate themselves emotionally, solve conflicts with peers, socialize, and develop teamwork skills during recess. Knowing how to socialize is important for all kids and it is impossible to learn in a class.

Recess helps kids develop independence and toughness. Inevitably, kids get minor injuries like scrapes and bruises playing outside during recess and have to learn how to get back up. Kids don’t want to miss recess and most will want to keep playing even if they are in pain, so they have an incentive to get back up and keep playing. Kids often encourage each other to push through minor pain so they can finish a game. During recess, children are supervised but less closely than indoors. They usually get to make choices about what to play and are allowed to devise their own rules for a game. This might be the only time in a weekday that kids get to choose what they want to do, and practicing these skills at recess leads to greater confidence and independence. Kids will also gain confidence when they discover that they are growing in a particular skill. A kid who doubled the length of his frisbee throw can feel elated and proud of his accomplishment. The girl who jumps ropes at recess and learns how to touch the ground between jumps and retain her balance will feel more confident to try other tricks with her rope.

Independence and toughness are not the only social benefits of longer recess. Students also learn how to interact with their peers, practice getting along, and regulate their own emotions during recess. This is the time that kids are free to choose something they want to do in their time. Without a teacher hovering over them to make sure everyone follows the rules, they have the chance to learn to cooperate and compromise. There is an incentive to do so because very few kids would have fun spending time sitting alone. When you want someone to play with you or do something with you, you normally try to find common ground that suits both. Kids might try to be nice to someone to encourage them to play. For all these same reasons, kids have a motivation to learn to control their temper. It’s not fun to play with someone who will blow up at the slightest problem. Kids instinctively understand that and will try to maintain calm in order to have fun with their classmates or finish a game.

“Asking other kids to play, explaining the rules of a complex game and hashing out disputes are all important life lessons that kids can only learn if they’re given time to play. Recess also offers the chance for children to strengthen their leadership and negotiation skills, and it can prevent bullying. Kids love playing—and when a conflict arises, it pushes children to practice these vital social skills so they can get back to having fun.” (Rasmussen University) Teamwork is a vital part of adult life and it is a skill best learned at a young age. According to Robert Murray, the former chairman of the American Academy of Pediatrics Council on School Health “Recess is the only place in school, maybe the only place in their social life, where kids have the opportunity to develop social skills with their peers,” These social skills are of utmost importance at every stage of life from getting along at work, making new friends, and being part of a community. “When you think about adults, we value and treasure those social skills in our coworkers – things like negotiation and the ability to communicate and have peer-to-peer interaction as a team member,” he also said. “All of those things are really worked out on the playground peer-to-peer, not teacher-to-child, not parent-to-child, but child-to-child.” Loosely supervised play time might be the only time for kids to develop lifelong skills relevant throughout their entire adult lives. In other words, you hope your coworkers had recess growing up.

When kids get to move their bodies, another result is better attention in the classroom. “After recess for children, or after a corresponding break time for adolescents, students are more attentive and better able to perform cognitively,” says the American Academy of Pediatrics. When students get a break from staring at a textbook or listening to a teacher, they will come back to the subject with improved attention. This actually allows them to accomplish more than if they had studied the whole time. The AAP policy statement goes on to state “The science shows pretty clearly that taking those breaks in the day makes students better able to encode memory and learn and perform academically.” Students will not only be able to focus better in the classroom, but will be able to remember and recall what they have learned. If encoding memory, learning, and academic performance are the fundamental goals of education in America, recess is a critical tool to help educators achieve their purpose. The strange thing is, one of the reasons recess is getting cut from many schools across America is because of government regulations. Recess times across the country began to decline rapidly after the No Child Left Behind Act, which was designed to help American kids keep up academically with those of other nations. In this policy, the government installed achievement goals in standardized tests. If a school’s test scores were poor, they would be subject to a series of penalties, including loss of funding. It is no wonder that schools began to question whether recess was a waste of time. Yet, research shows that kids who get more recess perform at a higher level in school. Statistics aside, be honest, would you feel mentally refreshed if you spent hours sitting in a classroom without a break? American kids simply do not get enough time for recess, which is critical for their improvement in fitness and coordination, development of social skills, and success in school. The physical benefits of recess are immense. Kids will gain endurance, strength, and coordination while learning to enjoy new activities. While socializing and developing teamwork, they will build independence and toughness. Kids need a mental break, and when they don’t get it, they lose their attention span, forget their lessons, have difficulty concentrating resulting in lower grades. By giving students the opportunity to use their bodies and change their focus, teachers actually improve memory, recall, and attention in the classroom. Following the recommendations for recess will improve student outcomes and allow schools to meet the standards necessary to succeed. Perhaps most importantly, recess is vital for kids because they will learn skills that they are not learning anywhere else. In short, recess is the necessary preparation for successful life as an adult. It helps people grow into all the skills needed to live a productive, happy life later on. Teamwork, cooperation, and compromise are necessary skills for working with others. Enjoyment of a variety of physical activities will develop hobbies and fitness for later in life. And intellectual achievement will lay the groundwork for success in college, on-the-job training, and the continued education needed to make an enjoyable career. So come on you all, give ‘em some RECESS.

Works Cited

Reilly, Katie “Is Recess Important for Kids or a Waste of Time? Here’s What the Research Says” Time Magazine 23 October 2017 time.com/4982061/recess-benefits-research-debate Date Accessed 13 April 2025

Rix, Kate. “How Much Recess Should Kids Get?” US News World Report 14 October 2022. www.usnews.com/education/k12/articles/how-much-recess-should-kids-get Date Accessed 15 April 2025

“10 Reasons Kids Should Have Longer Recess at School” Recess Guardians 25 March 2022 www.recessguardians.org/post/design-a-stunning-blog Date Accessed 15 April 2025

Potts, Monica “Recess is Good for Kids. Why Don’t More States Require It?” Five Thirty Eight 23 March 2023 fivethirtyeight.com/features/recess-is-good-for-kids-why-dont-more-states-require-it Date Accessed 16 April 2025

Thompson, Hannah R. and London, Rebecca A. “Not All Fun and Games: Disparities in School Recess Persist, and Must Be Addressed” National Library of Medicine pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10319329 Date Accessed 9 April 2025

Murray, Robert et All. “The Crucial Role of Recess in School” American Academy of Pediatrics Volume 131, Issue 1. 1 January 2013. publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/131/1/183/30893/The-Crucial-Role-of-Recess-in-School? Date Accessed 13 April 2025

Brooks, Ashley. “The Importance of Recess: Why Schools Need More Playtime” Rasmussen University 20 June 2022 www..rasmussen.edu/degrees/education/blog/importance-of-recess Date Accessed 14 April 2025

“Recess Helps Kids Learn Better in School” American Heart Association 29 January 2016 www.heart.org/en/news/2018/05/01/recess-helps-kids-learn-better-in-school Date Accessed 12 April 2025

Comments Off on Guest Essay: School of Play | Hammersmith, Physicality | Tagged: education, family, parenting, recess, teaching, writing | Permalink
Posted by Tim Nichols

Cessationism 101

1 June 2025

If you’re new to this discussion, the claim under consideration is that certain of the spiritual gifts (generally known to their foes under the heading “sign gifts,” e.g., tongues, healing, prophecy, etc.) ceased early on in the history of the church, around the close of the first century. Generally people will identify the cessation of these gifts with the fall of Jerusalem, the death of the apostles, the closure of the canon, or some such. This belief is known as cessationism. The belief that all the biblically attested gifts have continued is known as continuationism. Continuationists don’t typically see “the sign gifts” as a biblical classification; the gift of teaching in operation is just as much a sign of the Spirit at work as the gift of prophecy. (“Charismatic” implies some additional cultural markers that are beyond the scope of this discussion. For our purposes today, just know that anybody who describes themselves as “charismatic” will be a continuationist, but not all continuationists would call themselves charismatic.)

We’ve discussed this issue here before (and here), but I don’t know that I’ve ever summarized the defects of cessationism all in one place. To be clear, this is not my affirmative case for continuationism; that’s another conversation. This is my rebuttal to cessationism; the claim I’m making here is that the biblical case for cessationism makes Swiss cheese look substantial. In order to make my case, I need to clearly articulate the arguments I’m rebutting. To that end, here are the core biblical arguments cessationists will make (if I missed one, put it in the comments!):

The gift of tongues was a temporary sign for (unbelieving) Israel, and is no longer relevant for today. This line of argument points out the connection between 1 Corinthians 14:21-22 and Isaiah 28:11-12, and argues that once Jerusalem was destroyed, the purpose for the sign had ended, and so the gift ceased to be given.
The sign gifts were part of the historically unrepeatable foundation of the Christian faith, and now that the foundation is laid, there’s no further need for them. This argument will cite Ephesians 2:20, Hebrews 2:3-4, 2 Corinthians 12:12 and similar passages that describe the work of the apostles and New Testament prophets as foundational for our faith, and connect the signs to the apostles.
Biblical tongues were discernible languages, not what we know today as ecstatic glossolalia. Here they’ll argue that every biblical occurrence of the gift of tongues was a known language, and argue that the gift of tongues was the ability to speak a language unknown to the speaker (as in Acts 2). They’ll point out (correctly) that Corinth was a busy port city with a ton of languages drifting through it, and argue that 1 Corinthians 14 is addressing how to handle a multilingual church body and the spiritual gifts God gave them to cope with their situation. Modern tongues, by contrast, are ecstatic glossolalia, a learned babbling that has no linguistic content, and also has no New Testament precedent.
1 Corinthians 13 says that the sign gifts ceased with the closure of the canon of Scripture. The claim here is that 13:8 says that certain gifts will fail/cease/vanish (which it does), and that “the perfect” in 13:10 is the canon of Scripture, so now that we have God’s full revelation, the partial revelation embodied in the sign gifts no longer continues.
Continuing revelation would mean that Scripture is still being added to today. The line of argument here is that if you think modern-day prophecy is really a word from God, shouldn’t you be writing this down? And wouldn’t that be adding an additional book to the New Testament?

Thus far the arguments for cessationism. How do they stand up on examination? Let’s take them in order:

1. “The gift of tongues was a temporary sign for (unbelieving) Israel, and is no longer relevant for today.”

in 1 Corinthians 14:21-22, Paul quotes Isaiah 28 in order to justify his claim that tongues are a sign to unbelievers. In the original context of Isaiah, the sign under discussion is for Israel specifically. We can see that sign play out, for example, in Acts 2, where where the Spirit is speaking through Gentile languages in the heart of Jerusalem. Getting from there to “tongues have ceased,” though, presents some problems. First, work through the logic: Holy Spirit-given Gentile tongues as a sign to unbelieving Jews doesn’t in itself mean the sign is no longer happening. Do we still got unbelieving Jews? Do we believe Israel has a future? Then how does it follow that the sign to them no longer has a purpose?

Second, the fact that it’s a sign to Jews doesn’t mean it has no other purpose. Paul’s commentary doesn’t say that tongues are a sign to Jews only; he says they are a sign to unbelievers, and this in the context of the Gentile city of Corinth. Do we still got unbelievers? Well, tongues are a sign to them. That’s what this text tells us. Logically speaking, it could be the case that the sign ceased after the first century, but that’s something you bring to this text, not something you get from it.

2. The sign gifts were part of the historically unrepeatable foundation of the Christian faith, and now that the foundation is laid, there’s no further need for them.

Ephesians 2:20 does indeed say that the apostles and prophets laid the foundation. It goes on to say that Christ Himself is the chief cornerstone of that foundation. We all believe that Christ both laid the foundation and has a continuing ministry. The two simply are not mutually exclusive; why should we believe that apostles and prophets have no continuing ministry just because they were part of laying the foundation?

Certainly various miraculous signs were associated with the apostles; in 2 Cor. 12, for example, Paul calls the works he did “the signs of an apostle.” There are only two interpretive possibilities here: either he is, or he is not, referring to works done by other people (such as the works mentioned in 1 Corinthians 12-14). If he’s speaking of miracles only done by the apostles (and not to miraculous works done by others), well and good; that’s got nothing to do with what the rest of us do. If he does have in mind the sort of signs mentioned in 1 Corinthians 12-14, then we all agree that people other than the apostles did them. In that case, “signs of an apostle” means the kinds of things an apostle did, but doesn’t mean that only apostles did them. That being the case, there’s no obvious reason to believe that people today could not do the sort of thing an apostle did, even if you don’t believe in contemporary apostles.

3. Biblical tongues were discernible languages, not what we know today as ecstatic speech.

First of all, these two things are not mutually exclusive. Acts 2 tongues certainly are discernible languages, but that doesn’t mean it was not an ecstatic event – read the description. (About which more below.) Second, the context of 1 Corinthians 14:9 is precisely that the genuine gift of tongues is being used and people are not understanding the utterance; hence the exhortation! Paul is making the case that prophecy is superior, because it can be understood. For the public use of a tongue, he requires interpretation (14:5, 27-28) so that the rest of the Body might be built up. He also gives testimony that he has this gift “more than you all,” and that when he uses it, “my spirit prays, but my understanding is unfruitful.” That certainly seems to leave the door open to ecstatic speech that he does not himself understand. (Other interpretations are possible, but I don’t think we can rule this one out.)

Tongues in Acts 2 are described as languages comprehensible by various people present, but whether this occasion would meet modern church criteria for “orderly” is very much in question. They spilled out into the street all talking at once. Some people thought they were drunk – how did that happen? The point is not to advocate for that kind of ruckus in every public meeting, but to point out that ruckus does not mean the gifts of the Spirit are not present.

In fact, the very occasion for Paul writing 1 Cor. 12-14 was that tongues were not being interpreted or used in an orderly manner; his (Holy Spirit-inspired) diagnosis is not “this is not real tongues,” but that the real gift is being abused. The abuse is real, is sin, and absolutely needs to be repented of and corrected. There are present-day churches that very much have the problems the passage describes. Paul offers a diagnosis; “this is not the real thing” ain’t it.

4. 1 Corinthians 13 says that the sign gifts ceased with the closure of the canon of Scripture.

Various theological and practical arguments get offered in support of cessationism – arguments from dispensational consistency and the like (which are beyond the scope of this post; we’re talking about biblical arguments here). But when we set all the theological constructions aside and just focus on what the text says – when I ask a cessationist “Okay, but where does the Bible actually say that these gifts are no longer in operation?” – this is invariably the passage they come to. At least among the cessationists I know, if they’re going to bring (what they think of as) a knock-down exegetical argument, this is it.

Which is really ironic, because the passage simply doesn’t say what it’s claimed to say. It certainly does say that prophecies will fail, tongues will cease, and [words of] knowledge will vanish away. The claim is that this happens with the completion of the canon of Scripture, but in fact Scripture is not mentioned anywhere in the passage. Rather, the point at which these gifts cease, according to the passage, is when our knowledge is complete rather than partial, when we are fully grown, when we see with complete clarity, and know as we are also known. Anybody think the Church has reached that point? Me neither.

5. Continuing revelation would mean that Scripture is still being added to today.

This objection confuses prophecy with inscripturation. If we examine the biblical record, we see prophets who never wrote a word of Scripture, from the 100 prophets Obadiah saved, 50 to a cave (1 Kings 18:4), to Philip’s four virgin daughters who prophesied (Acts 21:8-9). We see prophets who were already known to be prophets before they ever said the thing they’re known for in Scripture (1 Kings 20:35-43, 2 Kings 22;14-20, Acts 11:28, 21:10). We see instructions for regulating the exercise of prophecy in the local church (1 Corinthians 12-14) with not a word about writing anything down. If “shouldn’t we be writing this down?” was not a major concern to anybody at times when we all agree that prophecy was active, then it’s not obvious why it should suddenly become a concern to us now.

Rather, the biblical picture of prophecy is that the vast majority of it seems to have been timely words given to God’s people for their moment. Only a tiny fraction of it was ever recorded in Scripture; there’s no reason to expect that finishing the process of inscripturation would automatically end all prophetic revelation forever. Practically speaking, ongoing divine guidance speaks to our lives in ways Scripture can’t and wasn’t intended to: Scripture tells us to do good and to share, but the nudge to take time out to buy lunch for this particular homeless guy at this particular intersection and tell him God hasn’t forgotten him – you can’t get that from Scripture. Or the nudge to text that long-lost friend right now. Or a sudden impulse to deliver the groceries you just bought to a family you happen to know in the neighborhood. Or…but the daily life of Our People is full of such things. All the examples I just gave came from my experience (the first led to a friendship that seems to have gotten a homeless man of the street; the second to a comforting text that “just happened” to arrive in a moment of extreme grief; the third fed my family when we had no grocery money). I expect you can supply more examples of your own.

Conclusion

In summary, the biblical case for cessationism simply doesn’t stand up to close examination. The passages either don’t say what they are claimed to say, or there’s a huge leap in logic between what the passage says and the conclusion it’s supposed to justify.

That said, I recognize that my summary of the biblical arguments for cessationism is my summary. While a summary will never express every nuance or variation, it’s a position I used to hold, and I do understand the arguments. I hope I’ve summarized them fairly. How about it? If you’re a cessationist and you think I’ve left out a passage or mischaracterized an argument, add it in the comments! Let’s talk!

2 Comments | Cessationism Or Not | Tagged: Bible, cessationism, charismata, charismatic-gifts, Christianity, holy-spirit, prophecy, spiritual-gifts | Permalink
Posted by Tim Nichols