Here is some sound thinking on the real implications of government spending.
D’Souza, Darwin and God
Dinesh D’Souza, a writer and thinker for whom I normally have a good deal of respect, got the relationship between evolution and Christianity exactly backward, and effectively, though inadvertently, demonstrated an important point I have tried to make many times in the past.
D’Souza’s point about Charles Darwin is that his theory of evolution did not cause him to lose his faith, though he does assert that it has caused others to lose their faith. D’Souza bases this on the fact that Darwin was already angry at God for the death of his daughter at age 10, and also Darwin’s refusal to believe that good men such as his grandfather who were unbelievers could be in hell. Darwin therefore was already moving away from Christianity when he started to formulate the theory of evolution. Therefore, says D’Souza, Darwin’s loss of his faith and his belief in evolution are unrelated events.
I would posit instead that they are closely related, as Darwin himself said, though D’Souza has the proposed cause and effect backward. Many Christians who believe in evolution make this same mistake, and think that we creationists are just blindly holding onto ignorance out of fear of losing our faith if we realize the truth of science. No, instead we recognize that evolution was simply intellectual cover for what logically did indeed come prior, the rejection of the God of the Bible. If one rejects the God of the Bible then one must find a way around one of the most common and compelling arguments for the existence of that God, which is the nature and existence of the things we see around us. So Darwin is rejecting God, and being of a scientific mindset, he must answer the question of how everything came to be, and he hits on this idea, the theory of evolution. As some of D’Souza’s own quotes of Darwin shows, he regarded any divine involvement in science as the death knell of his theory:
When Darwin’s co-discoverer of evolution, Alfred Russel Wallace, wrote him to say that evolution could not account for man’s moral and spiritual nature, Darwin accused him of jeopardizing the whole theory. “I hope you have not murdered too completely your own and my child.” Darwin’s ultimate position was that it was disastrous for evolution to, at any point, permit a divine foot in the door.
So Darwin certainly saw a connection between the two. But D’Souza merely says that it was “complicated”, like the way people talk about their relationships on Facebook when they don’t want to explain it more clearly. D’Souza likewise says that we have to distinguish between Darwin the unbeliever and Darwin the scientist. Why? Darwin didn’t distinguish. To him, evolution was necessary to avoid the God of the Bible, and evolution serves this same purpose for many other scientists, as D’Souza’s own quotes again demonstrate:
According to Richard Dawkins in The Blind Watchmaker, “Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist.”
and
Biologist E.O. Wilson writes, “If humankind evolved by Darwinian natural selection, genetic chance and environmental necessity, not God, made the species.” Douglas Futuyma asserts in his textbook Evolutionary Biology, “By coupling undirected, purposeless variation to the blind, uncaring process of natural selection, Darwin made theological or spiritual explanations of life superfluous.” Biologist William Provine boasts that in the modern era, “evolution is the greatest engine of atheism.”
and
Darwin’s most ardent champion, Thomas Henry Huxley, took a different view. Huxley was vehemently anti-Christian, and he was attracted to Darwin’s theory precisely because they saw it as helping to overthrow the Christian case for divine creation. Huxley noted that evolution’s “complete and irreconcilable antagonism” to Christianity constituted “one of its greatest merits in my eyes.”
Christians or theists who believe in evolution are very anxious not to see this point, as some of my own interactions with them in the past demonstrate. They want to believe that they’re just separate issues, but they’re not. Evolution is one of the many tools, and one of the handiest tools for the scientifically minded, to avoid the truth about God. And those quotes above just demonstrate that without the theory of Darwin, one has little choice but to believe in a God who created everything. None of D’Souza’s handwaving can change the fact that there was the very closest of relationships between Darwin’s unbelief and his science. D’Souza never even attempts to examine whether the event that came before (anger at God over the death of his daughter) had any influence on the event that came after (the formulation of the theory of evolution). He simply assumes the wrong cause-and-effect relationship is what we theists believe and then disproves an argument that we don’t make.
Now this doesn’t mean that everyone who believes in evolution is trying to avoid the truth of the Bible. But this is the purpose of the theory, and the way it functions in most of our secular world. Peter didn’t recognize that the Judaizers were trying to steal the faith, and he was led astray. Many Christians are likewise led astray by those trying to destroy the faith. Belief in evolution doesn’t necessarily turn one into an atheist. But it sure helps a lot if becoming an atheist is what you’re trying to do anyway.
So the point is not that we creationists are afraid of being turned into atheists if we believe in evolution. It’s just that we recognize that the major engine promoting evolution is the atheistic impulse, the desire to avoid the truth of God’s word, and we see no reason to go along. I see no reason to carry water for people who hate God and the Bible. I see no reason to justify their attacks against my Lord and Savior and call the theory something other than what it is. I see no reason to disbelieve Scripture’s clear teachings in favor of this atheistic attack on God. And I see every reason to warn other Christians, like Paul warned Peter, not to fall prey to these deceptions. The evidence may seem compelling and the arguments may seem overwhelming. Satan has always been good at what he does. But their real intention is clear. And God’s word is clear. He made all things by the word of His power in six days, some six to ten thousand years ago. Let God be true and every man a liar.
Not under law but grace
Romans 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.
Why is it the fact that being under grace instead of law has the effect that sin no longer has dominion over us?
Because, as Paul makes so clear in chapter 1 of Romans, sin is the consequence of our rebellion against God and our refusal to worship Him as God. We are “given over” to sin as a consequence. So far from being able to work our way out from under the covenant of law, the very sins we commit, part of the consequence for Adam’s rejection of that covenant, continue to condemn us under the terms of that covenant, resulting in more punishment, which includes more sin. So it’s hopeless.
We recognize then that grace, forgiveness in the blood of Jesus Christ, is the only way to get out from under that. And part of the result then of accepting the grace of Jesus Christ is that we will be released from the penalty of the covenant of Law, which means that sin will have no more dominion over us.
The believer continues to struggle with sin all of his life, as he realizes and lays hold of the effects of this salvation. The Holy Spirit applies the results of this salvation to us and the result is sanctification. Sin no longer has dominion over us.
And this shows the great foolishness of any that would say that the doctrine of justification by faith alone results in more sin; that statement demonstrates a complete failure to understand what sin is. On the contrary, any attempt to accomplish righteousness by works will result in more sin, since trying to accomplish righteousness by works is to operate according to the covenant of works, which requires perfection. And the failure to keep the covenant of works results in the penalty of that covenant being applied, part of which is being given over to vile affections.
Paul goes on to make this point in Romans 6. We are the servants of whom we obey, either of righteousness unto life, or of sin unto death. Being bought out of the covenant relationship of law, we are freed from obedience to that cruel taskmaster, which because of our failure would have destroyed us in sin and death. We are now bought into the relationship of grace, enabling us to begin to live righteously as we move toward eternal life in that covenant, which is characterized by perfect righteousness. Obeying our new master, grace and forgiveness, results in righteousness and life.
Gay marriage and the media
I stumbled across this excellent article reacting to a Newsweek piece on gay marriage and the Biblical witness. I really have nothing to say against it. I think that we Christians are going to have to deal with an increasingly hostile media and popular culture on this and many subjects. This article is a good example of how to do it.
Obama and Religion
My good fried Lee has written a post about Obama on his blog that is for the most part correct. But he says something that I don’t believe is quite accurate-
Thus, I was right earlier about his new language just being a new attempt to keep religion out of politics. I did fail to see that he wants to keep religion out of everything. Now I know.
Obama, however, is not against religion. He is against competing religions.
From Liberal Fascism, p. 336-337:
…It is the progressive priesthood- not churches or synagogues- that must sanctify the quest for meaning and spirituality. Independent sources of moral faith are “divisive” and need to be undermined, walled off, excluded from our “common project.” This means that liberal churches are fine because they are perceived- rightly or wrongly- to have subordinated religious doctrine to political doctrine. As John Dewey put it in his brief for a secular religion of the state: “If our nominally religious institutions learn how to use their synmbols and rites to express and enhance such a faith, they may become useful allies of a conception of life that is in harmony with knowledge and social needs.” Hitler was more succinct: “Against a Church that identifies itself with the State… I have nothing to say.”
Conservatives are fond of scoring liberals for their cafeteria Christianty, picking those things they like from the religious menu and eschewing the hard stuff. But there’s more than mere hypocrisy at work. What appears to be inconsistency is in fact the continued unfolding of the Social Gospel tapestry to reveal a religion without God. Cafeteria liberals aren’t so much inconsistent Christians as they are consistent progressives.
Jonah Goldberg is very perceptive politically. But his religious understanding doesn’t go far enough. Fortunately, we have an even deeper analysis available to us:
Revelation 13:11 Then I saw another beast coming up out of the earth, and he had two horns like a lamb and spoke like a dragon.
12 And he exercises all the authority of the first beast in his presence, and causes the earth and those who dwell in it to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.
13 He performs great signs, so that he even makes fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men.
14 And he deceives those who dwell on the earth by those signs which he was granted to do in the sight of the beast, telling those who dwell on the earth to make an image to the beast who was wounded by the sword and lived.
Obama is not against religion. He surrounds himself with the trappings of religion constantly. I remember getting into a discussion with a fellow conservative about whether or not Obama was a secret Muslim. My argument was that it didn’t matter. Whether his external trappings were Muslim or Christian, his true religion was the religion of the state, the worship of the beast. He does false signs and wonders to convince people to worship the power of man, which ultimately is the power of the dragon, the power of Satan.
Therefore, religion which serves the interest of the state is just fine with him- a useful ally. And it won’t matter at all whether it’s Christian, Muslim, Jewish, or Wiccan in outward appearance. The only thing that really matters is that it not compete with the ultimate power of the beast. Any religion can be an instrument of deceiving man to worship the state. Obama chooses to use the trappings of Christianity since most people in this country identify themselves nominally as Christian. But it is deceptive.
The various religious leaders who were used by Obama to prop up this image of himself as Christian then are just being used. When Obama said he never really heard Jeremiah Wright say these racist, anti-white, anti-American things in his sermons despite sitting in his church for 20 years, I happen to think that might just be true, because Obama was not there to listen to sermons. He was simply using Wright to further the power of the state, the power of his own political ambitions, just as he used Rick Warren and Gene Robinson and the rest. The false prophet in Revelation, just like the great Whore, use their deceptive powers to convince men to worship the beast.
Am I saying that Obama is the AntiChrist? No, but he is an antichrist, which means a substitute Christ. He is one of the manifestations of that belief that only the power of the state can solve our problems, and that all must be in allegiance to the state. All interests must be subordinated to the public interest, the needs of government, since only government can save us. Which is to say, that we must all worship the power of the state. When Obama attacks divisiveness, says that we all must unite in this time of crisis, that we must put politics aside and our petty personal interests aside to further the common good, this is what he is saying- that we must subordinate all, including our religious beliefs, to the needs of the state.
We worship Christ. He is our only king. He is our only hope. And therefore we will always be a threat to those like Obama, and they will exclude us as much as possible because we will always have a higher allegiance than our allegiance to the state, to the power of the beast. It’s not because we’re religious that he will exclude us from the body politic- it’s because we’re of the wrong religion. Ultimately then there are only two religions, and everybody belongs to one or the other. We are either sealed to Christ and worship Him alone, or we are sealed to the beast, and fall under the sway of the false prophets. I believe that in the coming years this choice will become all the more stark and obvious to the faithful Christian.
Prolong the King’s Life
From Psalm 61:
“You will prolong the king’s life,
His years as many generations.
He shall abide before God forever.
Oh, prepare mercy and truth, which may preserve him!”
This passage jumped out at me in Psalm 61. It seems like a non sequitur; doesn’t really seem to fit. David was a king; was he talking about himself? Perhaps, but he has been talking about himself in the first person, “me, my”, etc, and now he suddenly switches to the third person.
The Psalm has been a cry for help, for defense and preservation by God. It is also an acknowledgement and thanksgiving from David that God has truly been there for him, has been a shelter and a “strong tower” for David against his enemies.
The New Geneva Study Bible makes the point that a strong and good king was certainly a source of stability and safety for a people. When the old king died and a new king began to rule, it would be a time of uncertainty and fear. So the idea that the king would rule forever would be very comforting.
But David died. He did not rule forever. He was followed by Solomon who was a good king in some respects but allowed idolatry to proliferate in Jerusalem. And Solomon’s son Rehoboam was a fool, whose oppression divided the nation.
God had given David a promise in 2 Samuel 7 that his son would sit on the throne of Israel forever. Solomon of course was not this son. It is Jesus who is the son of David, the king who sits on the throne forever. And now the passage makes sense in the context- David is not talking about himself; he is talking about the promised king, the seed of the woman, the Anointed one who would come and inaugurate an eternal kingdom of peace.
What should we take comfort in amid the difficulties of this life? We have a good and righteous king who rules in heaven, protecting us from all our enemies. We have a high priest mediating for us and reconciling us to God. We have a brilliant and effective teacher showing us the truth and teaching us the right way. All three of these offices are held by one perfect Man, Jesus Christ, and He will never die.
In a political era crying for change, crying for something new, so many look for some transcendent figure who will arise and solve all our problems for us. But change was precisely what David was worried about. He knew the turmoil and instability of this life could bring great danger and disaster. But with God’s promises, he knew he was on a rock, on a high tower, from which he could not be budged. With Jesus enthroned in the heavens, we likewise can be confident that all of our needs will be met and nothing that we fear can ever touch us, because nothing can ever touch him.
“So I will sing praise to your name forever,
That I may daily perform my vows.”
Truth
2008 was a tough year for me. My last note, which was a year ago, referred to the problems I had had in my church. Those problems only became more severe in 2008. A few individuals tried to have me removed from the ministry. Their attempt failed, but the conflict just escalated. The elders of my church took actions that we believed were necessary and right for the health of our church and the good of the people involved. The conflict just continued to escalate, going to the regional government of our church, which took certain actions that were a great disappointment to me. In the course of this conflict, many things were said about me and about my elders which were just false and very hurtful.
The result of it now is that all of the people who were so antagonistic to me and to the leadership of my church are out of my church and my denomination. Some of them are in a sister denomination. Others, I don’t know if they’re going to church at all. Looking back, I remembered how very hurtful it was to me, how disappointed I was when we suffered for doing what I believed at the time and still believe was the right thing to do. My father gave me a plaque for my ordination which is a quote from John Calvin which said, “By watching, and by patiently enduring afflictions, and by constant teaching, the pastor will succeed in having the truth of his ministry established, because from such marks all will acknowledge him to be a good and faithful minister of Christ.” At many points, it was all I could do to “patiently endure afflictions.” But the other result of it was that there is now a sense of unity, peace and joy in the church that exceeds anything I have ever personally experienced.
—
For the new year, I decided to read through the whole Bible, cover to cover. I’m using M’Cheyne’s system, and I have subscribed to an RSS feed so the new reading comes to me automatically every day. M’Cheyne’s system has you read four chapters a day, from different books of the Bible. It starts you out in Genesis, Ezra, Matthew and Acts. A few days ago, I had gotten a little behind and sat down to catch up on my reading. The reading in Genesis covered the murder of Abel by Cain. The reading in Ezra talked about the wicked people that slandered the Jews to try to prevent them from rebuilding the temple. The reading in Matthew was the first part of the Sermon on the Mount, where Jesus says, among other things, “Blessed are you when men revile you and persecute you for my sake.” All of this was really speaking to me. But it was the passage in Acts that really got me.
In Acts 5, the Sanhedrin tries to stop the Apostles from preaching the gospel. They of course refuse, and Peter is thrown into jail. An angel of God comes and frees him, and Peter continues preaching. The Sanhedrin goes and gets him again, and now they’re talking about killing him. But Gamaliel makes the (very good) point that if it’s of men, nothing will come of it, but if it’s of God, then they don’t want to be opposing God. So they beat the Apostles and release them. And it says that the Apostles left, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for the name of Christ.
Reading that, I felt a great sorrow at my own lack of faith. We firmly believed at the time, and still believe, that we did the right thing through this controversy. We lovingly called people to repentance and were ignored. When the conflict escalated and the decisions went against us, we “patiently endured”. And I don’t want to speak for anyone else, but I know now I should have done more than that. I should have rejoiced, as the Apostles did. Instead I was downcast, depressed, at times feeling very much like Elijah must have felt when he prayed to God for death, because the trials he was experiencing were too great for him.
Why are we surprised as Christians to suffer for doing what’s right? The expectation that doing the right thing will result in everyone loving you is a worldly assumption. Jesus told us the world would hate us, because they hated Him. And it jumps off of practically every page of Scripture; Godly men and women suffering because they stood by the truth. Abel; Noah; Abraham; Joseph; David; Daniel; the Jewish youths in Daniel; Esther; Ezekiel; Ezra; Mary; Peter; Paul; John. And above all, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. We are told again and again that suffering for the truth of Christ is an absolutely expected part of the Christian life. It is one of the defining qualities of the Christian life. Paul says in 2 Timothy 3:12 that all who desire to live Godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution.
And certainly the Lord has done so many good things for me. He has surrounded me with good people, people who have stood up for what’s true and right. He has blessed me with a wonderful family. I was reading in Psalm 48 this morning and the psalmist is talking about the glorious city of Zion, the city of God. And he exhorts us, “Walk about Zion, and go all around her. Count her towers; mark well her bulwarks. Consider her palaces; that you may tell it to the generation following.” Zion is the city of God, a symbol pointing us to the living temple built on living stones, the church. And when I start to get angry or down again about the events of this last year, I am going to do what the Psalmist exhorts here. I’m going to walk around the walls, count the towers, consider the palaces. I’m going to meditate on the glories of God’s church, and how He has protected me and defended me by His truth. The walls, the towers, the bulwarks of God’s spiritual city are the people, the saints of God.
And I have an encouragement for you, dear reader. Always stand on the truth. Never compromise it; never back down; never shade or cloud the truth. You might think it will make things easier. You might think it will reduce conflict. But it never does. It just makes it worse; prolongs it. Through all of this conflict, the protection I had was the truth. I never had to worry about certain aspects of the story getting out, or certain people talking to certain other people, or anything like that. I never had to make sure that we had our story straight, or remembered what we’d told one person so we would tell someone else the same story. “Always tell the truth; it’s the easiest to remember.” I made mistakes, no question. I didn’t handle everything right. I had to apologize for some things, and I did. But I never lied. We stood on the truth, and so at the end of the day we were safe. When you start shading the truth, start pretending things are different than what they really are, you take the solid ground right out from under your own feet, and now you’re just standing on swamp. Stand on the rock. Stand on the truth. You’ll never have to wonder where you are. And you’ll find yourself in the best company in the world, in the company of other people who do likewise.
The Value of the Church
We have had some fair amount of turmoil at our church here over the last year or so. It’s been painful, and I think that may be one of the reasons I’ve been absent from my blog for so long. But we know of course that God’s hand is in all things, and He is working His will in all things. I’ve seen this doctrine very much fleshed out through these turmoils, as I have seen the good things that God has worked in my life through them.
One of the things I have learned is the value of the visible church. God has put us in this institution, and sometimes people struggle to know what value it has in their lives. We know we’re not saved by works but by faith; we know the sacraments do not work remission of sins; we know the church does not stand between me and God as mediator.
But for all those who understand and value sanctification in the life of the believer, the value of the church soon becomes apparent. In the church, the necessity of sacrificial love simply cannot be overstated. As we form relationships with other believers we are naturally drawn to people with whom we are compatible, and when relationships get to be difficult we often simply pull back for a while or end those relationships entirely. But the church doesn’t allow us to do that. The church keeps us in close proximity with those that sometimes irritate us, sometimes hurt us, sometimes don’t understand us, and sometimes take more work to maintain the relationship than we would really like. It brings us into contact with people that God has chosen for us, rather than just people that we chose ourselves, and God sanctifies us with those people.
It’s like a marriage in a lot of ways. At first everything is lovey-dovey and tons of fun. But inevitably hard times come. Your spouse starts to irritate you, disappoints you and fails to live up to the fantasy version of him or her that you constructed in your mind. This is often a very difficult time to live through, but those who have stuck with it and made it through recognize those times as the growing pains necessary to get to the even better parts of marriage.
There’s a reason why marriage is used in Scripture as an analogy for the church. Because, like marriage, the best times come with those that you’ve stuck with through the hard times, when you’ve laughed and cried together, when you’ve hurt each other and forgiven each other, when you’ve learned the truths of Scripture together and have been sanctified together. Marriage has been a very humbling thing for me. I’ve learned a lot of my own faults that I’m sure I never would have faced had I remained single. And my life in the church has been humbling as well. I’ve learned a lot of painful things about myself, that I wouldn’t likely have faced about myself unless I’d been forced to, like I have this last year. When everything is going well and everyone loves you, it’s easy to fool yourself and only think about your strengths. But to get through the hard times intact, you have to take a hard look at those unpleasant truths about yourself, and that’s how we grow.
God didn’t just send Christ to save us from the penalty of our sins; He sent Christ to save us from the sins themselves. The gospel isn’t just justification by faith alone, but the sanctification and glorification that must inevitably follow justification. So if we believe that sanctification is a necessary part of the good news of our salvation, and we see that the church is a wonderful means of our sanctification, then we’ll see just how much of an essential part of our salvation the church is. And not just when it’s fun and enjoyable; but even more so when it’s painful and difficult.
Christ, His Church and Modern Dating [Andrea]
I’ve read a lot on courtship in the past. Obviously, once I married my interest in it waned. The subject has been brought back to my mind by discussions with parents whose children are of marriage age, and by this article at the web site Domestic Felicity LAF (Ladies Against Feminism) linked to:
http://ccostello.blogspot.com/2007/04/wasting-time-in-relationships-that-lead.html
While I agree with everything in this article, the author doesn’t deal with the argument I feel is really compelling. The author admits there is a lot she could discuss on the matter, so I don’t mean to imply she isn’t aware of the argument. Having said this, the fundamental reason for my rejection of the modern view of dating is that the Bible uses marriage as a picture of Christ and His church. I’ve read in more than one article on marriage that the state of our marriage is about more than being happier, but the bigger implication is that we tell a lie about the gospel when the husband fails to live sacrificially in terms of his wife and when the wife fails to submit to the authority of her husband. We undermine our witness to the world when we live our marriages outside of the gospel.
As the church is preparing for the great wedding feast day, so a young woman ought to be adorning herself for her great wedding day. She ought to be cultivating the gifts God has given her trusting those gifts were given to her for a man God is preparing for her. The modern practice of dating, of giving oneself intimately (either emotionally or physically) to several partners before settling for the boring reality of monogomy, seems a horrible defilement of the picture the Bible paints of Christ and His church.
As Christ is preparing a place for his bride, so a young man ought to be busy preparing for manhood and the responsibilities of providing for a family, not out proving his virility in partying and conquests.
Domestic Felicity does a great job of dealing with the practical reasons for rejecting the modern view of dating, but I believe all those reasons can be handled in one fell swoop by embracing the Biblical picture of marriage. When we handle relationships lightly and with self-centered motivations, we are handling the gospel with profane hands. We bring idols into the temple.
We do our young people a disservice by failing to prepare them for the realities of life before they get to adulthood. Do we believe that the God who created us knows what will bring true happiness and fulfillment, or do we think we know better? Is happiness found in pursuing our own lusts and desires, or in striving to be what God has created us to be? Are we teaching our children to bear witness to the gospel in word and deed always, or do we believe that stuff is a drag and they ought to be pursuing fleshly pleasures for right now? Do we want to be like the nations around us who “get” to follow other gods?
I think Christians who understand God’s sovereignty have even less excuse. If we believe that God has prepared our spouse for us, how can we engage in intimacy with someone we know we could never marry, either because they are an unbeliever, or because we know we are not suited for one another? How can we give to another what only belongs to our spouse?
Movie Review: The 400 Blows
We watched The 400 Blows last night, by Francois Truffaut. It’s a French film in subtitles, made in 1959. It’s about a 13-year-old boy, Antoine Doinel who seems to live a relatively normal life in Paris, but is constantly getting into trouble. He gets terrible grades at school, he is a liar and he steals. It’s clear from the beginning that his parents are self-absorbed, and their parental discipline leaves a lot to be desired. They smack him if he does something really bad, but mostly just ignore him. He starts to run away from home to avoid trouble, and with the help of another delinquent friend begins to engage in more serious crime. The title comes from a French expression meaning “raising hell”, and this is just what the boy starts to do.
The movie is a brilliant portrayal of how a person would grow up not just with the fact of nobody caring much at all about him, but with the awareness that this was so. Antoine has an interview with a psychologist in a juvenile detention facility where we learn the circumstances of his early childhood that reveal just this awareness. Nobody wants Antoine around and he knows it. His parents are just as amoral as he is. One might be tempted to say he needs examples of right and wrong. But he actually has that, from his authoritarian schoolteachers. What he needs is love.
My wife commented after the film, “There’s a huge obvious hole in the film- God.” Looking at it from our Christian perspective, it’s clear that the boy’s real problem is that he as absolutely no sense of why he is even alive, or why it matters at all what he does. The only thing his parents want from him is to not be bothered. Early in the film, the mother discusses how awful it is that some other woman she knows keeps having babies- “Like rabbits. Disgusting.” And then they discuss how to get rid of Antoine for the summer- sending him away to camp is better than having him around the place doing nothing.
And so Antoine acts in whatever way suits him at the time, whatever will get what he wants and avoids trouble. So he lies, forges notes from his parents and makes up stories about why he wasn’t in school. The only thing motivating him are brief, little pleasures. He goes out to the movies with his parents and has a wonderful evening in the bright lights of the city, laughing about the movie. One of the most touching scenes is when he is being driven away in a police truck to the detention facility, through the city, and he looks out at the bright lights and cries.
The 400 Blows does a beautiful job of portraying this hopelessness and pointlessness of a self-centered life, as well as showing the damage this kind of life does to those around us. Antoine hurt everyone around him, but everyone in Antoine’s life had only ever hurt him too. How could he be expected to act out of love for others when he’d never seen it himself? How could he even know what that kind of behavior would look like?
This is why there is no hope outside of Christ. Christ is the great example for all of us what truly sacrificial love looks like. We can look at his example and learn how we ought to treat others. He is much more than just an example of course- His satisfaction for sins, besides being a wonderful example, also reconciles us to God giving us the ability to actually begin to change. And then, following His example, we can begin to live lives centered on love for others, lives with purpose.
The 400 Blows is not a light, fun, entertaining movie. It’s a bleak portrayal of nihilism and despair. But it’s masterfully done, a forceful picture of life without purpose, life without God.
