Doctrine is necessary for strengthening Christian living.
Watch our Truth in Two to find out why (full text below).
Support MarkEckel.com (here). Find the MarkEckel.com YouTube Channel (here). Mark is President of The Comenius Institute (website). Dr. Eckel spends time with Christian young people in public university (1 minute video), teaching at Indiana University Purdue University at Indianapolis, and interprets culture from a Christian vantage point (1 minute video). Consider becoming a Comenius patron (here).
Picture Credit: Luke Renoe, Snappy Goat
FULL TEXT
Cement, by itself, is not enough. A strong foundation needs rebar. Concrete columns holding up highway overpasses use it. Sidewalk masonry depends on the stability it brings. The “it” is something called “rebar.”
I remember working with cement as a teenager, pouring driveways and house foundations, always making sure that steel rods and wire mesh were embedded in the cement before it dried. You see, cement by itself can crumble under severe compression. Steel rebar – or reinforcing rod – is necessary to withstand the stress and strain of wind for columns and the weight of 18-wheelers on the roads. Materials, such as concrete, that can become brittle in extreme cold or hot environments, need the sustaining concentration of rebar. Concrete structures depend on the strength steel rebar provides.
Rebar illustrates the structure of belief. The steel reinforcement rods for a well lived Christian life are the rebar of biblical doctrine. Paul in the fourth chapter of Ephesians gives the reason for a believer’s structural stability saying we should not be “blown about by every wind of doctrine.” Doctrinal doubt is the concern of James who says the person who doubts is “tossed by the wind.” And Jude says that contending for The Faith necessitates not being “swept along by winds.” The teaching of Scripture supplies the doctrinal core strength for a believer’s life. My belief in the reality of a supernatural world, created and governed by The Personal Eternal Triune Creator, is the poured footer of my foundation, supplied by the rebar of biblical doctrine.
The next time you see a high rise, a skyscraper, a highway overpass, or a business tower, remember rebar. And then remember, that the strength of your beliefs depends on strong doctrine.
For Truth in Two, this is Dr. Mark Eckel, president of the Comenius Institute, personally thankful for the foundation supplied by God’s Word, the Bible.
Watch our Truth in Two to find out why waiting is so hard (full text below).
Subscribe to MarkEckel.com (here). Find the MarkEckel.com YouTube Channel (here). Mark is President of The Comenius Institute (website). Dr. Eckel spends time with Christian young people in public university (1 minute video), teaching at Indiana University Purdue University at Indianapolis, and interprets culture from a Christian vantage point (1 minute video). Consider becoming a Comenius patron (here).
Picture Credit: Luke Renoe, Snappygoat.com
FULL TEXT
You have heard the cries of children, in fact, you may have made the cry yourself! “How much longer?!” For kids, it might be arriving somewhere after a lengthy car trip. For teenagers, it might be having the supposed freedom of adulthood. For adults, it might be longing for rest from work. Whatever the case, whatever the group, waiting is hard. Why is it so hard to wait for holidays, birthdays, or special days of any kind? Some mathematicians suggest that time seems to go slower when we are young because, to that point, we have had a shorter experience with time. But as we age, we realize that time is short; and we don’t want to spend time waiting for anything.
But consider this: our waiting is nothing in comparison to God’s people waiting for Messiah. The time between the prophecy of Malachi and Jesus’ birth was about 400 years. The Hebrews had to wait 400 years to hear from God again! Psalm 74 summarizes the waiting,
“We do not see our signs, there is no longer any prophet, there is none among us who knows how long”
But Luke 2 records an old man named Simeon and an old woman named Anna who were promised that their waiting for Messiah would be rewarded. Doctor Luke says about Anna and Simeon, that they were “waiting for the redemption of Israel” causing Simeon to exclaim
“My eyes have seen your salvation, a light for revelation to the Gentiles and for glory to your people Israel”
So, whenever I hear myself say, “How much longer do I have to wait?!” I think, “If Simeon and Anna can do it, so can I.” For Truth in Two, this is Dr. Mark Eckel, president of the Comenius Institute, personally waiting for Jesus’ second coming based on the fulfillment of his first coming.
Why do I say that? Watch our Truth in Two to find out (full text below).
Subscribe to MarkEckel.com (here). Find the MarkEckel.com YouTube Channel (here). Mark is President of The Comenius Institute (website). Dr. Eckel spends time with Christian young people in public university (1 minute video), teaching at Indiana University Purdue University at Indianapolis, and interprets culture from a Christian vantage point (1 minute video). Consider becoming a Comenius patron (here).
Picture Credit: Luke Renoe, Snappygoat.com
FULL TEXT
We do it once a year. Decorations go up. Trees are sold. Families gather. Schools close. Carols are sung. Gifts are given. Christmas is a season that sparks great joy. Each person, each group may celebrate the season for different reasons, but our Hebraic-Christian view of Christmas looks in two directions.
Initially, we look back at all the First Testament prophets who looked ahead. Hundreds of prophecies anticipating a prophet, a priest, a king, a messiah, a savior, were all fulfilled at Jesus’ birth. Additionally, we look ahead with the First and Second Testament prophets and apostles to the promise of a renovated world; a world where suffering and sin will cease, a world where Jesus rules eternally.
Both the history and the hope of Jesus’ first and second arrivals is well summarized by Charles Wesley’s hymn “Come Thou Long Expected Jesus.” I believe the hymn expresses our earnest hope based on the facts of history: the surety of Jesus and His soon return.
Come thou long-expected Jesus, / Born to set Thy people free;
From our fears and sins release us, / Let us find our rest in Thee.
Israel’s strength and consolation, / Hope of all the earth Thou art;
Dear Desire of every nation, / Joy of every longing heart.
Born Thy people to deliver, / Born a Child and yet a King.
Born to reign in us forever, / Now Thy gracious kingdom bring.
By Thine own eternal Spirit / Rule in all our hearts alone;
By Thine all-sufficient merit / Raise us to Thy glorious throne.
At the Comenius Institute we believe in both history and hope, in Jesus’ first and second arrivals to earth. All the decorations, presents, meals, singing, and gifts during Christmas look back to Jesus’ first coming while we anticipate His coming again. For all of us at the Comenius Institute, I am Dr. Mark Eckel, personally wishing everyone a joyous Christmas.
I was transported back to the 1980’s and 90’s on my drive to university this morning listening to a podcast.
I could hear myself making the same arguments to my high school students then. Kate Cohen in a Washington Post editorial was pushing back on “religious exemptions” used by some to exclude themselves from the mandate of law. Ms. Cohen then suggested as someone who is “not a believer” she would like exemptions from “religious laws.” Cohen’s basis for her belief? It is “in contravention of reason and morality.”
Now those who follow me on social media, my websites, and teaching videos know that I have deep respect for other points of view. But everyone who knows me also realizes that my first response will always be to ask straightforward questions. So here are the questions I would ask Kate Cohen.
“How do you define ‘reason’ and ‘morality’?” “What is the source or origin of those concepts, ‘reason’ and ‘morality’?” And most important of all “Who gets to answer these questions, and then, apply them?” Again, those who know me know that these are questions I ask everyone all the time, whether in high school, undergraduate, PhD studies, or casual conversation.
And my answer will always be the same: the standard for ‘reason’ and ‘morality’ must have a TRANSCENDENT source. If there is no outside, supernatural origin for decision making about right and wrong, then we are left with human definitions, sources, and decision makers. And if we are left solely with humans at the helm we are left with a haunting question, “Who will decide which humans decide and how will those decisions be made?”
[The picture is of a Catholic cathedral in France taken by my nephew Luke Renoe: Visual Art which hangs in our home, a marker of TRANSCENDENCE. Kate Cohen’s article can be found here.]
Here is the original post I made about the news item (see below). A person where I posted this material asked questions (the indentations marked with “J____”). My responses follow.
I was reminded again this week that background to a situation should superintend journalistic reporting on a matter. Many may have read or read about the NYTs Harvard chaplain story circulating late this past week. Jordan Gandhi has done us a great service by providing the background to the situation from Harvard Christian Alumni; I hope all will read it.
The context to any story necessitates the hard work of careful research. Reposting tweets, memes, articles, and stories that trumpet one perspective without thoughtful engagement with other sources is wrong. Yes, we should display our differences but without casting aspersions. And, no, this does not mean some soft middle ground on which we sing Kumbaya.
Community is sustained by variant perspectives. I echo the call again for “viewpoint diversity” from the Heterodox Academy (where I am a member). But what we can be is honest with each other, careful in our verbiage, patient in our thinking, and not posting on social media just what makes our point. I am again reminded of and recommitting myself to the practice of care in social media communication.
[Addendum. I will be using this situation and these articles as an assignment I will create for my “Argumentative Writing” course that I teach at public university here in Indianapolis.]
J__________Mark, from the Christian perspective, how do you deal with the conflict between the ecumenical approach, and the contrary portions of Scripture?
I’m referring to things like Paul advising believers not to be unequally yoked with unbelievers, or the warnings of Paul and Peter and John against false teachers.
J_________, thank you for your good question! The 2 Corinthians 6 separation passage has everything to do with partnership: marriage and business are two obvious commitments. The injunction is a clear connection to First Testament teaching: do not worship other gods (Deut 4.17-19) and sustain a worldview distinctiveness from the surrounding nations (Lev 18:1-5).
Nothing has changed from one testament to the other: YHWH demands obeisance to His Truth for His people. Heresy ensues (your good question about false teaching) when we break from declarative Scriptural teaching, bowing the knee instead to some other ruler (e.g. Exodus where the English words for “serve” and “worship” are the same in Hebrew, appearing over 100 times in the book; the only choice is binary between YHWH and pharaoh.)
In the case of Harvard, we have a public university – broken from its biblical moorings since at least the 19th century – whose mission is very different from any kind of “Christian” commitment. So, within the public sphere, the Harvard Christian Alumni well stated the specific working relationship. Like any kind of community – Ricochet included – we find alliances within a peaceful pluralism.
I work at a public university. I commit to teach my classes as a professor in my discipline. My vocational work does not cross the line of heresy, since I am working in the public sphere. If a church, however, hires a humanist to be their chaplain, pastor, or counselor that organization can no longer be called a “church” since the connection to Christ as the bridegroom is sacrosanct (Eph 5:25-33); the difference between being “in the world but not of it.” I hope I have satisfactorily answered your question. 🙂
J___________: Thanks, Mark. That is a good response.
I would counter with a couple of concerns. Might it be the pluralist approach that you advocate which led to Harvard breaking from its original Biblical moorings? If the Biblical view is correct, doesn’t Romans 1 indicate that rejection of the Biblical view is going to lead inevitably to moral collapse?
The second concern is where a Christian should draw the line. We are supposed to be in the world but not of the world, so complete separation is not in accordance with the faith, I think. But it does teach that the world is our enemy, and those in the world are our enemies, doesn’t it? They are our mission field, and we are commanded to love them, but we are not to make alliances with them. I think that I’ve heard John MacArthur suggest that the place to draw the line is in religious matters. So you can do business with an unbeliever, but you shouldn’t engage in religious activities with them. If correct, this undermines the support that the Harvard Christian Alumni expressed for the atheist chaplain, doesn’t it?
Gratitude to you, J____________, for your good questions! How I function in the pluralistic public sphere is “before outsiders” (Col 4:5-6, 1 Thess 4:11-12; 1 Tim 3:7; etc.) I just wrote an essay published in the book The Good, The True, The Beautifulbased on this very concept. My responsibility before unbelievers is that of apologetic-evangelism through not only what I say but how I live. There is much to say about that couplet.
What happened at Harvard was pure mission-drift which is true about all individuals (i.e., Demas 2 Tim 4.10) or institutions (Rev 3:15-18); a drift away from “holding fast to the confession of our hope without wavering” (Heb 10.23) which has awful results (10:26-31). Mission within a Christian group, organization, or church is distinctive from how I live and work in the world around me. Romans 1 is a compendium of results of a society whose response to God’s embedded wisdom in the world (Prov 8:12ff) is rejection where God “gives them up” (3 times in Romans 1:22ff).
To your second concern, I have written extensively, unfortunately for this discussion my writing is behind a paywall, a three-part series on forming personal convictions. I would parse my response differently than “support … expressed for the humanist chaplain.” The Harvard Christian Alumni are one organization among many on a pagan campus. In that way, just as military chaplains work with each other (Muslim, Jewish, Catholic, Protestant) under the aegis of a public entity, so I can see no reason why that Christian group cannot work with others in the public sphere.Drawing the line would happen at the leadership structure of that group: all should be committed believers.
I write about sundry ideas on various digital platforms. This exchange was on Ricochet this past week. I am always glad for questions; they compel my best teaching because the queries are specific, personal and relevant to the person.
In a culture where there is no basis for forgiveness.
Watch our Truth in Two to find out why (full text and hyperlink below)
Subscribe to MarkEckel.com (here). Find the MarkEckel.com YouTube Channel (here). Mark is President of The Comenius Institute (website). Dr. Eckel spends time with Christian young people in public university (1 minute video), teaching at Indiana University Purdue University at Indianapolis, and interprets culture from a Christian vantage point (1 minute video). Consider becoming a Comenius patron (here).
“I forgive you every day for what you did to me.” This is a statement I uttered to a man who had done me wrong. It was his responsibility to ask for my forgiveness, it was, and is, my responsibility to forgive, even if there is no repentance. Humanly speaking, “forgiveness” is not about “forgetting.” We are not God, who, Scripture says, “separates our sin as far as the east is from the west.” In case you’re wondering, “east” and “west” have no poles, no objective standard of measure. Scripture says, once repentance happens, the expanse of God’s forgiveness is infinite.
Our culture views forgiveness as infinite too; as in, you will never be forgiven. Hank Azaria apologized for being the voice of Apu on the long running cartoon comedy The Simpsons. You can be sure of two things: Mr. Azaria’s participation will never be forgiven, or forgotten, and The Simpsons will continue to run episodes with Apu, not out of defiance to the arbitrary cultural standard, but because of money. You see, true repentance and forgiveness necessitate two things: a turning away from wrongdoing and a perfect person to offer forgiveness. Our culture sets and then continually moves its standards.
The classic biblical passage that exactly explains God’s forgiveness is Matthew 18. A man owes a huge debt to a king. The king takes pity on the man, forgiving or canceling the bill. The forgiven man then turns around, forgetting his own cancelled debt, requiring payment from a man who owes him very little. The man who had been given mercy showed no mercy. Certain cultural sins will never be forgiven. The standard will always shift. But the Christian view of forgiveness does not move the standard of transgression. Jesus’ sacrifice on our behalf, wipes out our debt of sin. And, in turn, I continue to offer forgiveness to those who have sinned against me. For Truth in Two, this is Dr. Mark Eckel, president of the Comenius Institute, personally relying on God’s forgiveness.
Why? Watch our Truth in Two to find out (full text below, with link).
Subscribe to MarkEckel.com (here). Find the MarkEckel.com YouTube Channel (here). Mark is President of The Comenius Institute (website). Dr. Eckel spends time with Christian young people in public university (1 minute video), teaching at Indiana University Purdue University at Indianapolis, and interprets culture from a Christian vantage point (1 minute video). Consider becoming a Comenius patron (here).
Picture Credit: Luke Renoe, Snappy Goat
FULL TEXT
Shawshank Redemption. Uttering those two words brings an immediate reaction among movie fans. In almost every single listing of best movies, Shawshank is ranked number one. I am in full agreement. I never tire of that exceptional film. Yet, I wonder how many folks know what “redemption” means.
“A story of redemption” is a line peddled to advertise movies and TV series. And for good reason. Everyone loves a redemption story even if they are unsure of where the word “redemption” originates. In the Bible, “redemption” means that I have been purchased off the slave market of sin. That is exactly the metaphor in Romans chapter six. You see, throughout human history, people have been placed on an auction block to be sold as slaves. Paul uses that picture for humans in sin, our separation from God. To be redeemed in the Bible means to be set free from the shackles of sin, free now to freely serve the one who has bought our release, namely, Jesus.
Being “slaves to sin” is not the starting point in our culture. No. “I’m a good person” is where most folks begin. I have lost count of the number of times I have heard that line from neighbors, associates, acquaintances, or from characters in a movie. The statement, “I’m a good person,” does four things for me. One, I get to say what is good. Two, I will evaluate myself by my own standard. Three, my goodness assumes that bad must exist, though I’m not bad. And, four, others outside cannot judge me.
Take for example, a Psychology Today article entitled, “How to Know if You’re a Good Person.” The suggestion is made to “define what a good person is in 3-5 words and rate yourself on this continuum.” Again, humans set the standard and get to evaluate whether or not they measure up, by their own standard. There is no redemption, no release from sin, guilt, and shame; because if we are guilty, we cannot redeem ourselves. I love a good redemption story in movies. But there is no true redemption in this life apart from the saving grace of Jesus. For Truth in Two, this is Dr. Mark Eckel, president of the Comenius Institute, whose redemption is found in the person and work of Jesus.
Neither identity politics nor social structures can save.
My salvation is not constructed by humans.
Find out why by watching our Truth in Two (full text below).
#10 in our series on how culture appropriates Hebraic-Christian words.
Subscribe to MarkEckel.com (here). Find the MarkEckel.com YouTube Channel (here). Mark is President of The Comenius Institute (website). Dr. Eckel spends time with Christian young people in public university (1 minute video), teaching at Indiana University Purdue University at Indianapolis, and interprets culture from a Christian vantage point (1 minute video). Consider becoming a Comenius patron (here).
Picture Credit: Luke Renoe, Snappy Goat
FULL TEXT
I was in trouble. Again. When you teach the Bible, no matter the setting, someone is bound to be upset. This time, folks were upset by my drawing on the board. I drew a coffin with a stick figure that had x’d out eyes, indicating death. Above the coffin I drew a cloud, my general representation of God. I was explaining regeneration, what Christians call a second birth, to be made alive again. My biblical text was familiar to many: Ephesians 2:1-10. God in His Word explains that we are dead in our sins and can only be made alive by the one-time gifts of faith and grace given by God for our salvation, our sin eradicated. Well, some pastors in the community took issue. They said we exercise faith to believe, God’s grace is then given. But my diagram indicated what the text explains. Two arrows came from the cloud, one labeled faith, the other, grace. Our ability to believe (faith) and the overcoming of our sin (grace) are both from God.
Now, in the third decade of the 21st century, I am in trouble again. My culture dictates that my regeneration, my new life, is dependent upon not grace, but works. I must confess to new orthodoxies, new teachings, new belief systems. My culture now wants me to bow before other altars. Some say, I must bow before the belief of identity politics. Others might want me to confess the sin of my ethnicity. Still more say I must accept communism as an acceptable system of government, ignoring communism’s historic failures. No identity, ethnicity, nor political structure can provide regeneration.
God’s regeneration is being made new, or as Jesus said in John 3, being born again. Only God through Jesus can make alive a person who is spiritually dead. Next to that coffin on the board, I drew a smiling person. And you are looking at him now. For Truth in Two, this is Dr. Mark Eckel, president of the Comenius Institute, no longer dead in my sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus.
God’s Outlaw, Jephthah (Judges 10:6 – 12:7; Hebrews 11:32) Sometimes the best cure for lawlessness is an outlaw. [These are my sermon notes from 27 June 2021 delivered at Crossroads Community Church. The YouTube video can be found here, beginning at minute 31, ending at 1.07 (35 minutes)] I walk for exercise. I split my...
Everyone, everywhere devotes themselves to something.
Why is this important? Unbelievers use the word “faith” when it suits them, when it benefits their point of view. “Trust the science” is acceptable. “Trust in Jesus,” is not. In this Truth in Two I explain the biblical view of faith, the reliability of a Christian view of life and things.
Subscribe to MarkEckel.com (here). Find the MarkEckel.com YouTube Channel (here). Mark is President of The Comenius Institute (website). Dr. Eckel spends time with Christian young people in public university (1 minute video), teaching at Indiana University Purdue University at Indianapolis, and interprets culture from a Christian vantage point (1 minute video). Consider becoming a Comenius patron (here).
Picture Credit: Luke Renoe, Snappy Goat
FULL TEXT
“I have faith in government!” “I have faith in my group!” “I have faith in science!” I don’t know how many times I have countered such statements. My response? “Government agencies create laws that create more problems.” “What is your group based on and how can I trust it more than another group?” “And do you realize that science is simply an observation of the natural world? Science changes all the time.” Faith is not hoping that someone will change the things we don’t like, to the things we do.
In Scripture the word “faith” has three meanings: “Content,” “credibility,” and “commitment.” Hebrews 11 sets the standard for what “faith” is. The word “what” – the content of our Christian belief – appears five times in three verses. Our faith has a factual base. It is objective, reliable belief based on factual data, the credibility of our Christian belief Some mistakenly believe faith is a “blind leap” or a “well-I-can’t-prove-it-but-I-know-it’s-true” mentality. Paul maintained that God offered “proof to all men” by raising Jesus from the dead. Christians believe in someone who did something—a real person, Jesus, who came in real space and time, died a real, physical death, and literally, historically rose again from the grave.
So the words “debated,” “argued,” “proved,” “disputed,” “explained,” persuaded,” and “confuted” shows the credibility of Christian content. You see, the Christian worldview is reasonable; but, it is also something beyond reason. Clearly the work of The Holy Spirit is necessary to change an individual’s thinking from a human-centered to a God-centered perspective. And here is the Hebrews 11 response: “by faith Abram, by faith Noah” all the way through the chapter. Faith is credible content; but there must be a “by faith” commitment to it.
Do not be fooled by those who say Christians are the only ones with faith. Atheists, scientists, politicians, indeed everyone, has faith in something. And this Truth in Two is based on the content, credibility and personal commitment of faith that allows me, Dr. Mark Eckel, president of the Comenius Institute, to say, I am a Christian.
I was transported back to the 1980’s and 90’s on my drive to university this morning listening to a podcast. 
